Talk:Kearney (consulting firm)

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Business Low‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chicago Low‑importance

	Chicago portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Companies Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Conflict of Interest

It seems like much of this article may be written by someone who has an affiliation with Kearney. This is most explicitly seen in the 'Awards and Recognition' section where, when describing the treatment of working mothers at Kearney, the author explicitly writes "our many working mothers". Some other points of concern:

Several awards are missing citations, or appear to make grander statements than can be verified by the citation. For example, the 'Excellence in Social & Community Investment', 'Top 25 Consultants', 'Best places to work for LGBT Equality', and 'Top 100 Firms for Working Families and Women' do not have any citations. The company is also described as a 'perennial' on the Vault Guide, but only one year of Vault's awards are cited as evidence.
A quick Google search for 'Global Business Policy Council' reveals no sources except for Kearney's own website on the first page. Is this council significant? Pereneph (talk) 09:16, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Pereneph: Yes - most likely insiders. But if you look at the edit history, you'll see that several WP:SPA IP editors made many of the inside edits, but none recently. In this case, it's easier to remove the inside info than to tag the article. The tag discourages others from editing it anymore. If the insider contributions were more recent and prevalent, then the tag would be more appropriate. The article was actually tagged for inside editing years ago but the tag was removed when there was no discussion started on the talk page. You'll also see a lot of history and info about notable alumni was removed. There's some minor coverage for the Global Business Policy Council. [[1]][[2]] I'd remove the unsourced awards, and trim the GBPC info, but leave a sentence about it - maybe not a whole section. I'd also remove the repetitive inline external links per WP:EL. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 23:33, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Timtempleton: This makes sense. I have removed the COI tag for now and may work on your other suggestions in the future. I appreciate your advice but have to ask if you are following my account somehow? I believe you also commented on my Oliver Wyman edits Pereneph (talk) 01:45, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Pereneph: when I saw your hundreds of edits of Oliver Wyman, I asked if you had a conflict of interest, which you answered. I was curious to see what other edits you were making and offered my advice accordingly. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 06:32, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong Founding Date

Most sources I read seem to point to Tom Kearney splitting from McKinsey in 1939. https://www.atkearney.com/about-us/our-story/a.t.-kearney-story — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:301:77A3:8810:3D5B:92FF:7850:B60B (talk) 17:50, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong title

The name of the page should be changed to "Kearney," per company website - https://www.kearney.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chulsey85 (talk • contribs) 14:10, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Advertizing?

While the article looked like advertizement in the past, I think now it is as objective as the respective articles of those companies listed as competitors. Boris 'pi' Piwinger (talk) 22:54, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alumni list

Is there any reference to this anywhere? I didn't find it with some meager poking around on the AT Kearney site. Once someone has challenged a specific bit of information in an article, it is up to the person restoring it to provide a source. We're not talking about simple 'everybody knows this' kind of things. To take it to ludicrous extremes, if we don't actually have to reference this what is to keep me from putting in Steve Jobs or Isambard Kingdom Brunel? Syrthiss (talk) 13:41, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Primary sources

Taking a quick look at the sources it seems to me that only 5 or the 15 are primary. I am therefore taking down the tag.191.101.244.1 (talk) 10:11, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Kearney

With the new name finalized, should a page titled Kearney be created and this page should redirect to that one?

Thoughts?

Kaisertalk (talk) 01:17, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]