Talk:Managing Groups and Teams/Working in International Teams

--- I really enjoyed this topic. I felt that the authors presented the material in a logical, linear matter that made it an easy read. They set the table by defining cultural diversity and emphasized the importance in today’s business environment. I liked how they spoke to both the advantages and disadvantages of diversified teams. They outlined how to overcome and address challenge areas and ended with a well written section on CQ. There was a little inconsistency in the format between sections and there were some minor grammatical errors. Overall this was a good chapter. ---

A well done piece. Nicely executed with figures and links. In terms of areas to improve, the references should be linked to the bottom of the page, and some (such as the links to wikipedia) should be added directly into the text. Also, the chapter needs to have a bit more consistency in the writing across sections.

-- Interesting topic, but this article needs some help. There are basic spelling/grammar and formatting issues that should be modified (for example AT@T, noun/pronoun agreement, CQ became CI toward the end, etc.) Tone is also an issue in this article. A general rule of thumb is that academic papers should be in the third person (no "we" and no "you") to maintain a professional tone. Phrases like "bad for business" do not seem to belong in an academic paper. Also, quotes were not used correctly. Sentences that could have easily been paraphrased and then expanded upon were directly quoted, giving the article a sort of "cut-and-paste" feeling.

The article did not really address the juxtaposition of international versus diversified. Do those two things necessarily mean the same thing?

Overall, I think that this is a fairly good article. The author(s) obviously have a good grasp on many OB topics and these concepts are integrated throughout. However, the article definitely needs some help as far as writing goes. --

I found the article to be informative. The only drawback may be the length. I agree with the above statement that the book could be broken up with some visuals. Another possible suggestion would be to highlight one of the well recognized companies that was mentioned in the book by giving supporting statistics and company insight into how diversity helped their organization. ---
 * Regarding the question of "tone", I think it is open to the author(s) to fit the style of presentation to the intended audience. Textbooks can be written for the general reader or even children. Wikibooks would hardly have policies banning original research if it was intended for academic papers. Recent Runes (talk) 21:22, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

--- The chapter was an interesting topic. A few things I noticed were the basic gramatical/spelling errors. Also, on the paragraph headings in bold, possibly make those a shorter statement and then go on to tell the scentence that you had before. In a few parts there would be statements that would say "the book also suggests..." but there is no reference to what book you are talking about. Finally I would try to make it flow a little bit better. It sort of sounds like different people wrote the sections and then just pasted them together. Other than that it was a good piece.