Talk:Effectiveness

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology 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.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Economics

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics 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.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Business

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[group action#Types of action|acts ''effectively'']]

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Unsupported distinction between effective vs efficacious

The paragraph towards the end making a distinction between the meanings of "Effective" vs "Efficacious" does not seem to be substantiated; not least from the reference cited, which, if anything, seems to claim the exact opposite! It reads more like an unfounded assertion from a person with a strong opinion on the definition, but which is contrary to any real use of the term. While the notion that the word "Effective" could in theory involve a negative effect as well as a positive one is somewhat plausible from an etymological point of view, this is most certainly not compatible with how anyone would use this term in practice, and in any case you could claim the same about 'Efficacious' with an equal absence of evidence. If you say "the swordsman dealt an effective blow to his opponent", I doubt that there would be a single person that might think "Yes but I can't tell if the effect was harmful or beneficial; he should have said 'efficacious blow'.". Plus, in this particular case, 'effective blow' is such an ingrained phrase, it would sound wrong to say 'efficacious blow' in the first place, it's just not used as a phrase. 'Efficacious' instead tends to be more used when talking in pharmaceutical contexts etc. So my own personal impression is that the two are mostly equivalent, but simply tend to be associated with different phrases or contexts, and that no good evidence has been presented for the extraordinary assertion that they differ in meaning in such a stark and specific manner. Tpapastylianou (talk) 14:36, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Improvement Drive

Time management is currently a candidate on WP:IDRIVE. Support it with your vote if you want to see this article improved to featured status.--Fenice 07:51, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong definitions

It seems that the explanation at the bottom of the article about efficiency and effectiveness is just the other way around, is it not? -- Hulten 14:21, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

what about effective in economics? what does that mean? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.107.166.2 (talk) 02:03, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The distinction between efficiency and efectiveness is not helpful at all! They both seem to mean the same thing according to the definitions in the article, if they can be interpreted at all. 'Setting the "right" targets' implies choosing means to an end, i.e. an 'end goal'. This seems to be the same as 'having a good input/output ratio'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.225.93.26 (talk) 20:00, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not a disambiguation page

This is not a disambiguation page, as it merely describes different kinds of the same basic concept. bd2412 T 18:40, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Denial is not a river in egypt. There's nothing significant in common between these things other than the term. It looks to me that this is a disambiguation page. There's no evident way this can become a well rounded encyclopedia article.Rememberway (talk) 18:04, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]