Editorial Policy | teambuilding.com

Publishing Principles

Our commitment to accuracy, fairness, and integrity guides everything we publish. We strive to:

Verify all information before publication. We fact-check all content through reliable sources before publishing. Reliable sources include primary research, peer-reviewed studies, government and academic data, established trade publications, and on-record expert interviews. Our editorial team follows a rigorous verification process that includes expert consultation when necessary. For example, if an article includes legal information about employee relations we consult an attorney; for HR and team building topics we consult with both internal and external subject matter experts.
Present balanced perspectives on complex issues. We actively seek diverse viewpoints and ensure our coverage reflects the full spectrum of perspectives on any given topic, avoiding bias in our reporting.
No pay to play. We do not accept money, link-swaps, or any other type of barter or payment to be included in a teambuilding.com article. All content is 100% organic and earned. We do not use affiliate links.
Transparent self-promotion. Occasionally we reference our own products and services within our content. When we do, it must be both relevant to the topic and genuinely useful to readers.
Uphold journalistic standards. We adhere to established journalistic practices including accuracy, fairness, independence, and accountability in everything we publish.

We use technology to support our editorial team, not replace it:

AI-assisted drafting. We use generative AI tools to help produce outlines and initial drafts for some content. AI-generated content is never published without human review.
Human-led throughout. Every article is planned, guided, fact-checked, substantially edited, and approved by a member of our editorial team before publication. The final voice, judgement, and responsibility for accuracy rests with our people.
Disclosed where material. Where AI has played a significant role in shaping a piece, we note this in the article. Routine use of AI writing assistance (spell-check, grammar suggestions) is not individually disclosed.

We value input from our audience and have established clear channels for receiving and addressing feedback:

How to submit feedback. You can contact us by writing a comment on any article, or by reaching us directly via our contact page.
What happens to your feedback. All submissions are reviewed by our audience engagement team and routed to the appropriate department. Content corrections are verified by editors, product suggestions are sent to our development team, and policy concerns are escalated to management.
Timeline for response. We acknowledge all feedback within 48 hours. For factual correction requests, we aim to investigate and respond within 3 business days. More complex inquiries may take longer, but we will keep you updated on our progress.

We are committed to accuracy, but we recognize that mistakes happen. When they do:

We promptly correct factual errors. Upon verification of an error, we update the content as quickly as possible. Corrections are made within 24 hours of confirmation, with urgent matters addressed immediately.
We clearly mark corrections on the original content. All substantive corrections include an editor’s note explaining what was changed and when. Minor spelling or grammatical corrections may be made without notation.
We thank readers who bring errors to our attention. We value the role our community plays in maintaining accuracy and acknowledge those who help us improve our content.

Questions or concerns about our editorial standards, a specific article, or a correction request? Reach out directly.