TIP-1506.Pdf

Welcome to the online version of The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist.

Editor: Morrie Mullins, [email protected] SIOP Publications Manager: Jen Baker,[email protected] Editorial Board: Alexander Alonso Milt Hakel Rob Silzer William Becker Ashley Hoffman Steven Toaddy Nikki Blacksmith Marianna Horn Richard Tonowski Jeff Cucina Seth Kaplan M. K. Ward Marcus Dickson Tiffany Poeppelman Lynda Zugec Allison Gabriel Mark Poteet The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist (TIP) is an official publication of the Society for Industri- al and Organizational Psychology, Inc. and is published quarterly by the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Inc., 440 East Poe Road, Suite 101, Bowling Green, OH 43402-1355. Opinions expressed are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, the American Psychological Association, or the Association for Psychological Sciences, unless so stated. Mission Statement: The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist (TIP) is an official publication of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Inc., Division 14 of the American Psy- chological Association and an Organizational Affiliate of the American Psychological Society. The purpose of TIP is to provide news, reports, and noncommercial information related to the fundamental practice, science, and teaching issues in industrial and organizational psychology.

Advertising Advertising Policy Back issues and Archives (Please note, SIOP is currently not accepting donations of TIP collections.) Board How to contribute to TIP Photographers Needed for TIP Cover

Please send suggestions and comments via e-mail to Morrie Mullins, TIP editor, or to Jenny Baker in the SIOP Administrative Office.

President’s Column 6 Steve W. J. Kozlowski

The Editor’s Out-Box: On Inclusion 11 Morrie Mullins

Letter to the Editor: Goal-Setting Theory Gets Complicated in Practice 16 George Graen

Editorial Columns

Spotlight on Humanitarian Work Psychology: Incorporating HWP Into 19 Your Classroom: Lessons Learned Ashley Hoffman

TIP-TOPics: Prosocial I-O Psychology: Having an Impact Beyond Traditional 24 Research and Practice Alexa Garcia, MacKenna Perry, Allison Ellis, and Jennifer Rineer

Practice Perspectives:Trends in Professional Membership, Activities, 32 Development, and Representation (2008-2015) Rob Silzer and Chad Parson

Practitioners’ Forum:Overview of the 2015 Practitioner Needs Survey 49 Joy Oliver, Meredith Ferro, Cole Napper, and Ben Porr

History Corner: A Historical Look at Theory in Industrial-Organizational 57 Psychology Journals Jeffrey M. Cucina and Karen O. Moriarty

The SIOP Living History Series: An Interview With Frank L. Schmidt 71 Jeffrey M. Cucina, Karen O. Moriarty, and Kim Johnson

The Modern App: A Year in Review: #SIOP15 Technology and 74 Social Media Highlights Nikki Blacksmith and Tiffany Poeppelman

2 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 The I-Opener: Would You Believe That We Even Fought Over 83 Authorship Order for This Article? Bharati Belwalkar and Steven Toaddy

International Practice Forum:Aiyo! The State of I-O Psychology in 90 Malaysia, Lah. Lynda Zugec, with Daniel Russell and Mei-Hua Lin

SIOP in Washington: Expanding the Impact of I-O Across the 97 Federal Government Seth Kaplan and Laura Uttley

Organizational Neuroscience: Emotion in Work, From Brain to 101 Organizational Levels of Analysis: A TIP Interview with Professor Neal Ashkanasy M.K. Ward and William Becker

The Academics’ Forum: Making the Most of Your Pre-Academic Summer 108 Allison Gabriel

Max. Classroom Capacity 113 Marcus W. Dickson and Loren Naidoo

Foundation Spotlight:Promoting Diversity in Thinking About “Diversity” 118 Milt Hakel

On the Legal Front: Legal Summertime Reading 120 Richard Tonowski

Practitioners’ Ponderings 127 Richard M. Vosburgh

Feature Articles

Where Are the I-O Psychologists in Southeast Asia? 133 Allen I. Kraut

Convenience Samples and Teaching Organizational Research Methods 137 David Costanza, Nikki Blacksmith, and Meredith Coats

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 3 Who Bought Who II? The M&A History of Corporate 141 Executive Board and Korn Ferry Logan J. Michels, Courtney C. Gear, Daniel Sachau, and Richard Olson

Identifying the Competencies, Critical Experiences, and Career 142 Paths of I-O Psychologists: Industry Alexandra I. Zelin, Joy Oliver, Samantha Chau, Bethany Bynum, Gary Carter, Mark L. Poteet, and Dennis Doverspike

Reports

Philadelphia 2015: A Declaration of SIOP’s 30th Anniversary 152 Eden King, Kristen Shockley, and Evan Sinar

Conference Highlights! 157

2015 Frank Landy SIOP 5k Fun Run Results 159 Paul Sackett

SIOP Program 2016: Anaheim 161 Scott Tonidandel and Eden King

Membership Committee Update 162 Satoris S. Culbertson

Under New System, Bridges Build You 164 Steven Toaddy and Joseph A. Allen

Revision of SIOP’s Guidelines for Education and Training Is Underway 167 Stephanie C. Payne, Whitney Botsford Morgan, and Laura Koppes Bryan

Science Funding Speed Mentoring Event Report 169 Jessica L. Wildman, James A. Grand, and the Scientific Affairs Committee

Improving the Visibility of I-O Psychology and SIOP 170 Mark Rose and Stephanie Klein

News from the SIOP-United Nations Team: Exploring Work Experiences 172 of Informal Workers and Promoting Decent Work for All Mahima Saxena, English Sall, John C. Scott, Deborah E. Rupp, Lise Saari, Lori Foster Thompson, Mathian Osicki, and Drew Mallory 4 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Notes from the APA Council of Representatives Meeting 176 Deidre J. Knapp

IOTAs 178 Lauren Kenney

SIOP Members in the News 179 Clif Boutelle

Conferences & Meetings 183 Marianna Horn

SIOP Information 185

The photo for this month‘s TIP was taken by Nathan Iverson of Seattle Pacific University.

This photo was taken from the ship canal that connects Lake Union to the Puget Sound, approaching the proximal Fremont draw bridge and distal Aurora Bridge. For more PNW images like this one look up @nathan.iverson on Instagram.

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 5 As I write this column, I’m reflecting on the energy, excitement, and resounding success of our SIOP Conference in Philly, which marked our third highest registration ever! There were 4,325 registrants and more than 800 program events. The 30th annual conference can be compared to the 1st conference in 1986 when about 600 people came together in Chicago to launch SIOP. We all owe many thanks to the legions of members acting in a wide range of capacities who made our conference a success. Special thanks go to Eden King, Conference Chair; Kristen Shockley, Program Chair; and Erica Desrosiers, Workshops Chair for putting together a range of intellectually stimulating programs. I also want to thank Dave Nershi and the entire SIOP Administrative Office for their hard work in making the conference operate smoothly. The annual conference is the pinnacle event for many SIOP committees, so all committee chairs and members deserve recognition and thanks for their contributions.

Thanks to all!

These reflections are timely because I’m attending the Eu- ropean Association of Work and Organizational Psychology (EAWOP) Conference in Oslo, Norway, and meeting with international representatives of the Alliance for Organizational Psychology (AOP). AOP is a collaboration among SIOP, EAWOP, and the International Association of Applied Psychology (IAAP) Division 1 that is designed to advocate for I-O psychology globally. For the last several years, SIOP presidents and members of the Executive Board (EB) have been working diligently Steve W. J. Kozlowski to enhance the national and international visibility, reach, and Michigan State impact of our Society. To augment our national efforts, we University are working to strengthen our linkages with other industrial and organizational psychology associations around the world. SIOP’s work with the United Nations (Chair, John Scott), the International Affairs Committee (Chair,Soo Min Toh), and AOP (Milt Hakel, Jeff McHenry, and Donald Truxillo) amplify SIOP’s efforts to enhance the influence of I-O psychology science and practice on organizational effectiveness, workforce productivity and well-being, and societal benefits.

6 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 With respect to SIOP’s national advocacy who help to shape public and private efforts with Lewis-Burke, we have en- policy play a vital role in enhancing the gaged in several activities this past year scientific, applied, and societal impact of that have substantially improved SIOP’s I-O psychology. This is critical because, as a visibility to policy makers. Here I highlight multilevel theorist and as highlighted in my a small sampling of activities. Steve Zacca- presidential goals, having impact necessi- ro and Tara Behrend represented SIOP at tates both top-down (SIOP leadership) and the annual exhibition for the Coalition for bottom-up (SIOP members) efforts. National Science Funding, which was an opportunity to brief policy makers on the Enhancing Impact: A Multilevel Approach important capabilities of I-O psychological As I highlighted above, over the last several science. Past-President Jose Cortina has years SIOP presidents, the Executive Board, been in contact with representatives of the and Committee chairs and members have Congressional Management Foundation been working tirelessly to increase our (CMF) exploring ways to incorporate I-O external visibility, strengthen relationships, psychology in CMF training and materials and enhance the societal impact of indus- (for congressional office staffers), which is a trial and organizational psychology. We direct way to raise the visibility of SIOP on have streamlined and sharpened the I-O Capitol Hill. Lisa Finkelstein, Ruth Kanfer, brand. We are building and strengthening and Mo Wang held a congressional briefing, ties with external professional organiza- organized by Lewis-Burke, timed to coincide tions and tightening linkages with local I-O with the release of their SIOP Frontiers Se- associations. We are actively connecting ries book, Facing the Challenges of a Multi- with policy makers in the federal govern- Age Workforce: A Use-Inspired Approach. ment to advocate for I-O science and prac- Beyond activities initiated by SIOP leader- tice. We have an ongoing white paper se- ship and Lewis-Burke, many SIOP members ries to make I-O expertise and applications contribute to our visibility and advocacy widely accessible. We continue to dis- (e.g., Science Officer, Fred Oswald; Seth seminate knowledge on grant getting and Kaplan, Chair of the Government Relations research funding opportunities—at the Advocacy Team; External Relations Officer, SIOP conference, via TIP, and using other Milt Hakel; Janet Barnes-Farrell, Chair of modalities—to the SIOP membership. This the External Relations Committee; and is just the tip of the iceberg of our visibility Mark Rose, Chair of the Visibility Commit- and advocacy efforts; SIOP leadership has tee), and by virtue of the policy roles they been exceptionally proactive. play. Members such as Lori Foster Thomp- Although these many initiatives have been son (who serves on the White House effective for advancing SIOP’s strategic Social and Behavioral Sciences Team), Mo goals, they only address half of the system. Wang (who serves as the program officer These leadership-driven initiatives repre- for NSF’s Science of Organizations Pro- sent “top down” or macro effects. They gram), and the many other SIOP members The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 7 can facilitate and “kick start” change, but Allen’s term as president, her initiative to lasting systemic change is emergent, from map I-O psychological science (Allen, 2015) the “bottom-up.” Thus, we need to com- shows that we tend to be insular (publish- plement these—and other—macro efforts ing primarily for ourselves). That is, we with “bottom up,” emergent, self-organiz- cite other areas of psychology and other ing initiatives that better link SIOP mem- disciplines, but most of our work is not bers with each other, with SIOP leadership, cited outside of our area. The effect of this and with opportunities to have an impact behavior is that I-O psychological science and make a meaningful difference to our has a diminishing impact on psychology science, practice, and society. and other disciplines in the behavioral and physical sciences. This is truly unfortunate During my term as your president, the EB because there is an extraordinary opportu- and I will pursue three overarching initia- nity for I-O psychology science and prac- tives designed to better connect, support, tice to have impact—not just in our usual and energize macro SIOP leadership efforts areas of human resources, management, to enhance I-O impact with the CRITICAL and organizational behavior, and strate- bottom-up, emergent, and self-organiz- gy—but also in the areas of education, ing communities of SIOP members who healthcare, and the STEM (science, tech- are prepared to act. The three initiatives nology, engineering, medicine) disciplines. focus on (a) pushing the boundaries of our As a field, we need to expand our horizons community to embrace more multidiscipli- of the disciplines where I-O psychological narity, (b) doing a better job of translating science and practice can have meaningful science to practice and linking practical impact and societal benefits. problems to scientific inquiry, and (c) developing mechanisms to support the advocacy Promote Translational Science and and impact efforts of SIOP members. Evidence-Based Practice

Expand Our Horizons to Enhance Impact In addition to broadening our disciplinary horizons, we also need to do a better job Science is increasingly cross-, multi-, inter-, of translating our basic scientific findings and transdisciplinary (Wuchty, Jones, & that are relevant to improving organiza- Uzzi, 2007). Moreover, the evidence is tional and workforce effectiveness into compelling that multidisciplinary science practical applications that connect to that has the biggest impact (Uzzi, Mukher- evidentiary base. The primary journals are jee, Stringer, & Jones, 2013). This shift in largely academic and science oriented. the model of scientific impact from solo That is their established role and that is not investigators to science teams is reflected likely to change without redesigning the in federal agency funding policies (science entire ecosystem that surrounds academic and applied) that emphasize multidisci- publishing. Nonetheless, we need to better plinary teams to research important soci- fuse I-O psychological science findings etal problems. In contrast, during Tammy and evidence-based practice. To do so, we

8 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 will need to develop new mechanisms to communicate via my.siop. An initial effort translate relevant research findings into is being spearheaded by Cris Banks, Profes- actionable knowledge, advice, and tools sional Practice officer, to develop a national that can be readily adapted and applied registry for those SIOP members interest- by I-O psychology practitioners. In addi- ed in wellness and healthy organizations. tion, we need to develop practice-based This initial effort may serve as a model for “sensing mechanisms” that feed forward expanding and elaborating an infrastructure to I-O researchers to better facilitate “use to promote self-organization. This is a “work inspired” I-O psychological science. I use the in progress”; the mechanism is not yet fully term “use inspired” in the sense popularized mapped but the goal is to have a model by by Donald Stokes (1997) and elaborated by the end of my term. We will also engage Steve Fiore (with Ed Salas, 2007), not pure local SIOP groups as points of contact and research (e.g., Einstein) or pure pragmatics engagement. In turn, those “self-organiz- (e.g., Edison), but useful applied research ing” communities will then become the that makes a meaningful societal (e.g., Pas- talent pools from which SIOP leadership teur) or organizational difference. This trans- can draw on motivated expertise to fulfill lation will necessitate the creation of new specific, emergent advocacy objectives. book series, journals, databases, websites, Moreover, self-organized communities will or other translational mechanisms. Among serve as barometers to help shape advoca- other things on her agenda, as your new cy and impact. Well organized communities Publication Officer Deb Rupp is conducting of interest communicate to leadership a strategic review of SIOP’s publication port- where members’ interests lie. SIOP leader- folio, and this is one of the targets. ship can advocate most effectively when we have engaged member communities who Leverage Self-Organization to Amplify are prepared to have impact when SIOP Advocacy by SIOP Members leadership creates and connects them with an opportunity to make a difference! SIOP members engaged in having an impact and making a difference locally, nationally, These initiatives are designed to “pull the and internationally are the “pointy end of system” together so we can collectively the stick” for promoting emergent change. advance SIOP strategic goals and enhance SIOP leadership will continue to promote the impact of I-O psychological science and training, skill building, and information practice. I think it will be an interesting year, sharing on advocacy issues and funding with advances on many fronts. Stay tuned! opportunities but, as a society, we need to do more. SIOP needs to develop an infra- References structure that enables motivated members to connect with like-minded others and to Allen, T. D. (2015). Connections past and present: The self-organize into science–practice commu- Bringing our scientific influence into focus. Industrial Psychologist, 52(3), 126–133. nities of interest. We are developing mech- Fiore, S. M., & Salas, E. (2007). Problems and anisms to help members to organize and possibilities: Strategically pursuing a science The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 9 of learning in distributed environments. In Uzzi, B., Mukherjee, S., Stringer, M., & Jones, B. S. M. Fiore and E. Salas (Editors), Towards a (2013). Atypical combinations and scientific science of distributed learning (pp. 237–264). impact. Science, 342, 468–472. Washington, DC: American Psychological Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., Uzzi, B. (2007). The Association. increasing dominance of teams in production Stokes, D. (1997) Pasteur’s quadrant: Basic sci- of knowledge. Science, 316, 1036–1039. ence and technological innovation. Washing- ton, DC: The Brookings Institution.

10 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 On Inclusion

A lot gets said in the I-O literature about diversity and inclusion. We’re pretty good, as a field, about recognizing the value that comes from having employees who bring multiple and diverse sets of experiences and perspectives to the organization. Heck, in this issue, Milt Hakel tells us about the Outtz Fund and the James L. Outtz Grant for Student Research on Diversity. This is wonderful! It’s also another example of how SIOP has done such a great job championing the message that diversity and inclusion matter.

That makes the recent bylaws votes even sweeter, from where I’m sitting. You see, I’ve been teaching in an I-O master’s program for the past 13 years. One of the things that’s evolved, in our program’s culture, is that our students tend to attend the SIOP conference at least one (and sometimes both) of their years in the program. We emphasize it as an important professional development and networking opportunity, a chance to see what all is going on in our field, a chance to pick up new ideas and to interview for jobs, all of which are true.

For a long time, though, our students would attend those one or two conferences, and then I would almost never see them at another SIOP. They would go from student member to… nothing. Oh, they would keep doing I-O work, for the most part, but the SIOP conference, and SIOP itself, fell off their professional radar. Morrie Mullins Xavier University As someone training I-O professionals, this bothered the hell out of me.

I mean, is it some kind of personal failure, where I work with these folks for 2 years, and then their identity in the field isn’t strong enough to feel like SIOP is an organization that they need to be connected to? I’m the type who tends toward internal attributions for things like this and who personalizes things that are not even remotely personal. It took me a while to see that the problem was, at least in part, that they didn’t see people like themselves reflected in SIOP’s membership or leadership. Voting to allow a path to full membership for I-Os with an MA/

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 11 MS degree is one of a long series of steps It’s one thing to read articles that say, “Hey, SIOP has taken to be more inclusive. I’ve I-O is one of the fastest-growing fields!” watched with heightened interest as the It’s another to look at the numbers, as I’m pre-conference consortia expanded to sure the EB has been doing for a while now, include a Master’s Consortium, with the first and see where that growth is happening. happening at SIOP’s New York conference back in 2007. MA and MS students have Everything that SIOP has done to promote taken part in the mentoring events and diversity and inclusion has been import- programs organized by SIOP’s Professional ant. I suppose that it’s mainly the per- Practice Committee, have increasingly ben- sonal stake I have in master’s education efited from SIOP’s Placement Center, and that makes the recent bylaws changes have been a much more visible presence at so salient to me. Plus, the beginning of the conference as a whole. summer is when I watch my students walk across the stage and out into the world, The vote to allow a formal path to mem- and as any academic can attest, that’s both bership represents a recognition of the the best and worst time of the year. nature of our field. We are about science and practice, but whatever the proportional One of the things I love about going to the representation is of academics versus prac- SIOP conference is getting to reconnect titioners in SIOP proper, the true distribu- with friends and colleagues from graduate tion of those two groups is dramatically dif- school or from the other great places I’ve ferent than what SIOP’s member numbers worked or visited. One of the things I love would indicate. One estimate is that there that I now get to look forward to, as SIOP are around 1,850 new I-O master’s gradu- continues to practice the inclusivity it’s ates every year (Kottke, Shoenfelt, & Stone, done such a good job espousing, is getting 2014), and I don’t think it is unreasonable to reconnect with even more of my former to suggest that most of these graduates will students at the conference each spring. end up engaged in some form of practice. (Kottke et al. also note that the number of I’m starting to get close to something new doctoral I-O graduates is around 520/ maudlin, though. So how about we move year, for comparison purposes.) along to the content before that happens!

Now, let’s put that 1,850 number in per- This issue, as it happens, has a wonderful spective: Per the most recent numbers diversity of topics for your reading plea- I could find, SIOP has a little over 8,200 sure. We begin with Steve Kozlowski’s members (inclusive of all membership first president’s column, in which he offers categories, including student members). a multilevel approach to enhancing SIOP’s That means that over the next 5 years, the impact. Next, Ashley Hoffman offers her number of people who graduate with an I-O first “Spotlight on Humanitarian Work master’s degree will be larger than the total Psychology,” and leads with something I’m membership of SIOP today. Let that sink in. going to find very useful when it comes 12 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 time to revise my classes for fall: how to at how the importance of “theory” has incorporate HWP into the classroom. changed over time in two major I-O journals. Coming as this does on the heels of Alexa Garcia, MacKenna Perry, Allison El- the 2015 conference and the many import- lis, and Jennifer Rineer then offer the final ant discussions deriving from Past-Presi- (can it be? So soon!) TIP-TOPics column dent Jose Cortina’s platform, this piece is a from the team at Portland State University. timely and relevant view of where we are For their last topic, they offer up some- as a field. Anyone who is concerned about thing that ties in quite well with HWP and where our science is, and where it’s going, focus on prosocial I-O. I’d like to thank all ought to read this article. Jeff and Karen the members of the PSU team for the work are then joined by Kim Johnson to present they’ve done over the past 2 years. Their an interview with Frank Schmidt as part of work continues to show just how import- SIOP’s Living History Series. ant graduate students are to SIOP as a whole. I’m pretty happy knowing that the Nikki Blacksmith and Tiffany Poeppelman, future of our field is in hands like these! in The Modern App, provide a great “year in review” piece by thoroughly examining Oh, by the way, we’re accepting applica- the treatment of technology and social tions for the next TIP-TOPics author(s) until media at the most recent SIOP conference. early July, so if you are a graduate student Their summary is comprehensive, and who might be interested, or know some- their reference list will be a great time sav- one who might be interested, email me er for anyone who doesn’t want to access ([email protected]) for more information! and search the conference program! (Or, you know, see the ad immediately following this issue’s TIP-TOPics column.) In this issue’s I-Opener, Bharati Belwalkar joins Steven Toaddy for a spirited dis- Shifting to Practice Perspectives, Rob Silzer cussion of issues related to authorship and Chad Parson provide a thought-pro- order. We then move to the International voking summary of 7 years of detailed work Practice Forum, in which Lynda Zugec is supporting SIOP’s practitioner community. joined by Daniel Russell and Mei-Hua Their message of inclusion is an important Lin for a discussion of the state of I-O in one. Fittingly enough, this is followed by the Malaysia. In the, “Wow, I-O sure is a small first report of the 2015 Practitioner Needs world” category, one of the first people Survey, from PPC members Joy Oliver, from Xavier’s I-O program who went on to Meredith Ferro, Cole Napper, and Ben Porr. get her doctorate now teaches in Malay- Data from the 2015 survey will continue sia. She recently sat on a panel with—you to be presented by the PPC over the next guessed it!—Daniel Russell and Mei-Hua several issues, so watch your inbox. Lin. Sometimes, I wonder if our students understand exactly how small the I-O In the History Corner, Jeff Cucina and world can be… Karen Moriarty provide a fascinating look The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 13 Seth Kaplan and Laura Uttley provide us broadly about what “diversity” means. with a SIOP in Washington update related Issues of diversity and inclusion make to I-O’s expanding impact across the fed- frequent appearances On the Legal Front, eral government, which aligns nicely with and this issue’s offering from Rich Tonows- Steve Kozlowski’s platform. Also in align- ki is no exception. Rich describes recent ment is the multilevel title for M. K. Ward cases relating to pregnancy discrimination, and Bill Becker’s most recent Organization- sex discrimination, religious discrimina- al Neuroscience column, which goes “from tion, and employment selection that all Brain to Organizational Levels of Analysis” have the potential to affect I-O work. in their interview with Neal Ashkanasy about emotion in work. We wrap up the columns with Richard Vosburgh’s Practitioners’ Ponderings. In Allison Gabriel continues to provide her this issue, Richard tackles the thorny and unique perspective in The Academics’ always-good-for-an-argument topic of Forum, this time offering advice to all performance appraisals. those students just finishing their degrees and trying to decide how to manage that In our features, we start by circling back last summer before they start an academ- around to Southeast Asia. A recent trip to ic appointment. I would say that a lot of Vietnam prompted Allen Kraut to seek out her advice continues to be good summer some local I-Os, and what he found may advice throughout the academic career, surprise you. though, especially her admonition to take a break every now and then! (Hope you David Costanza, Nikki Blacksmith, and had a good vacation, Allie!) Meredith Coats provide a nice teaching-focused piece on convenience samples and Sticking with the academic theme, this crowd-source data in research methods issue’s Max. Classroom Capacity features a classes. Having just taught a graduate-lev- spirited dialogue between authors Marcus el research methods course in which sam- Dickson and Loren Naidoo on the topic of pling (especially from sources like MTurk) lecture and discussion-based instruction came up on multiple occasions, I found techniques. Although their focus is mainly this a very helpful read. on PhD classes, they make really good general points about finding the “right” Logan Michels, Courtney Gear, Dan Sachau, structure for any given course that I found and Richard Olson return with another to be pretty broadly applicable. mergers and acquisitions map, this one presenting the history of Corporate Execu- As I mentioned at the beginning of this col- tive Board and Korn Ferry. Remember that umn, in this issue’s Foundation Spotlight, “small world” comment from earlier? See- Milt Hakel shares information about the ing the M&A history of some of I-O’s major James L. Outtz Grant for Student Research players helps put that into perspective. on Diversity and encourages us to think 14 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Finally, Alexandra Zelin, Joy Oliver, Saman- and master’s levels, followed by an update tha Chau, Bethany Bynum, Gary Carter, on the “Science Funding Speed Mentor- Mark Poteet, and Dennis Doverspike ing Event” from Jessica Wildman, James return with the next piece of the “Career Grand, and the Scientific Affairs Committee. Paths” series, this time focusing on career paths in industry. Having sat on a SIOP pan- The Visibility Committee continues to be el about career paths in Philadelphia, I can hard at work (as are all of SIOP’s commit- say just how important the information this tees!), and a report from Mark Rose and team has been presenting is, and how well Stephanie Klein shares some updates on they’re capturing the diversity of paths indi- what they’ve been doing and what they viduals in our field take, in building careers. have planned.

The reports for this issue of TIP are many The always-interesting and polyauthorial and varied! Starting with the recently SIOP UN team (Mahima Saxena, English completed (and highly successful—this Sall, John Scott, Deborah Rupp, Lise Saari, was my 21st SIOP conference, and I have Lori Foster Thompson, Mathian Osicki, a hard time thinking of one where I had and Drew Mallory) provide an excellent more trouble choosing between high-qual- piece on the work experiences of informal ity presentations in almost every session workers and the need to promote decent slot!), Eden King, Kristen Shockley, and work environments for everyone. Very Evan Sinar provide a review of much of important reading! what went on at the conference. Again, congratulations and thank you to everyone Deidre Knapp provides notes from the APA involved in the conference! Paul Sackett Council of Representatives meeting, and provides the annual results of the Frank we wrap up with IOTAs from Lauren Ken- Landy SIOP 5k Fun Run, and because it’s ney, SIOP Members in the News courtesy about that time,Scott Tonidandel and of Clif Boutelle, and upcoming conferences Eden King give us a teaser for next year’s and meetings from Marianna Horn. conference in Anaheim! #SIOP16 So, there you have it. Enjoy! Tori Culbertson returns to TIP’s pages with a report from the Membership Commit- Reference tee, then Steven Toaddy and Joseph Allen offer an update on SIOP’s “Bridge Builders” Kottke, J. L., Shoenfelt, E. L., & Stone, N. J. initiative. We then have a report from (2014). Educating industrial-organizational Stephanie Payne, Whitney Botsford Mor- psychologists: Lessons learned from master’s gan, and Laura Koppes Bryan on the work programs. Industrial and Organizational Psy- chology, 7, 26–31. doi:10.1111/iops.12099 being done to update SIOP’s Guidelines for Education and Training at both the doctoral

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 15 Goal-Setting Theory Gets Complicated in Practice

The recent note in TIP by Ed Locke and his associates (Locke, Williams, & Masuda, 2015) reminds me of my only experience with the idea that employees will work as hard as they are ordered to earn a few more dollars. The trick is to make a manager’s orders S.M.A.R.T. (goals must be specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time targeted). Many company incentive systems are based on these ideas. In practice, the incentive system (bonus by order) tends to be taken as a Las Vegas game in which only the house wins over time. The trick is to not inform the house when you have figured out how to beat its system.

My friend, Professor Jay Kim of the Ohio State University, came to me with the complicated findings of his investigation of a large, multistore retail-clothing corporation (Kim, 1984). He investigated the retail sales incentive system that set the minimum expected rate (no bonus) at the 3-years moving average of $ sales (adjusted for location and department). Each year the moving average would be adjusted based on an individual’s performance. In this study, salespeople and their department managers would set the performance goals together at the beginning of the fiscal year, and at the end of the year the piecework performance bonuses were given and a new expected rate was calculated.

The results were interpreted to support the goal-setting theory (GS) but in a strange manner. Salespeople did achieve the sales performance that they had set as goals at the beginning of the year. Surprisingly, about half of the long-term, highest performers set unusually low goals and barely met them. What was even more puzzling was that those who set low performance goals were those with the highest leader–member exchange (LMX) scores. My reading of Jay’s results was that given the incentive system (accepted throughout the retail industry) only the high LMX salespeople (team partners with their manager) were permitted to set low goals every other year to beat the incentive system. Those who were allowed by

16 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 their manager to lower their 3-year mov- may find that management by collabora- ing average in this way could get a sizeable tion (MBC) with direct reports produces bonus every other year. Clearly, depart- far better performance. ment managers knew how to retain their star performers, and star performers knew I hope that my experience with the solu- how to maximize their bonuses over time. tion that LMX partners found for the problem of the disappearing chances for any In terms of the respective theories, both bonus will alert our colleagues. After a few GS and LMX predicted some outcomes. GS years under this system, all salespeople’s predicted that salespeople would be true expected rate (no bonus) will equal their to their set goals. LMX predicted that the maximum sales performance. But by almost talented salespeople would develop lowing partners to set low goals every oth- LMX partnerships with their immediate er year and instead do other needed duties manager. What GS failed to predict was for the team, the expected rate would nev- that LMX partners would cooperate to er reach the maximum performance. This increase the total 2-year bonus, whereas practice makes all parties winners. Clearly, LMX would predict that sales managers performance goals may be influenced in would make arrangements to retain their practice by many more variables than have most talented salespeople. Finally, as GS been researched in practice. predicted, salespeople who reached their performance goals (whether low or high) George Graen were more satisfied with their job experi- APA Fellow 1976 ence than those who failed. References This experience suggested to me that star performers tend to be active problem solv- Graen, G. B. & Grace, M. (2015). New talent ers and in time will find ways to beat any strategy: Attract, process, educate, empow- incentive system. The solution I suggested er, engage and retain the best. SHRM-SIOP to managers was to form LMX partnerships White Paper, April. http://www.SHRM.org, https://www.siop.org. with their direct reports and share their Kim, J. S. (1984). Effects of behavior plus out- active problem solvers talents with the come goal setting and feedback on employee department (Graen & Grace, 2015). This is satisfaction and performance. Academy of the process of proactive leadership sharing Management Journal, 27(1), 139–149. by all LMX partners on a team. The big Locke, E. A., Williams, K. J. & Masuda, A. data analyses are overwhelmingly positive (2015). The virtue of persistence. The Indus- for the LMX partners based on several me- trial and Organizational Psychologist, 52(4), ta-analyses. Finally, managers at all levels 104–105.

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 17 PREDICTS PERFORMANCE THE SCIENCE OF PERSONALITY Incorporating HWP Into Your Classroom: Lessons Learned

Hello, TIP readers! I am pleased to begin this term as the editor of a column devoted to humanitarian work psychology and look forward to engaging in further discussion with each of you as the journey proceeds. I would be remiss if I didn’t thank Morrie Mullins, Lori Foster Thompson, and Alexander Gloss for their support and kind words in the previous column, and I am excited to build on the momentum of their work, and the resounding energy from SIOP members at the recent conference in Philadelphia.

I took over the role of chair of the Global Organisation for Humanitarian Work Psychology (GOHWP) in November 2014 and presented strategic goals at that time, and I have continued to refine the priorities of the organization. For example, as I have additional conversations with members, I have begun to recognize the need for networking and connection within our field. In that way, GOHWP can serve as an umbrella organization, under which members can find like-minded researchers and practitioners for collaboration and mentoring. In addition, I’ve seen the increased request for information about projects and practical applications of the work GOHWP members are doing, as well as avenues for members to get involved. Perhaps the nearest to my heart, however, is the resonant interest in incorporating HWP into both existing I-O curriculum, including Ashley Hoffman undergraduate and graduate courses. Elon University For those of us who have spent any time engaging in course preparation, we recognize that much of the difficulty is determining how to provide relevant information in an engaging manner (as well as finding the time to read new materials more than 10 minutes before class starts, of course). Indeed, educational psychology provides a theoretical framework indicating that active learning, specifically going beyond the behavioral objectives (Freiberg, 1999) and cognitive psychological perspectives (Donlosky, Rawson, Marsh, Nathan, & Willingham, 2013), can provide a positive and meaningful experience for students. It is this challenge that has kept many of us working to provide

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 19 the resources necessary for other like-mind- manitarian Work Psychology.” This course ed individuals to provide educational and was a graduate seminar and included pri- exciting course and project development marily students who had some familiarity resources to interested academicians. with the topic at large. Deborah began the course by examining foundational liter- When preparing for a course focused on ature in the field of I-O, including justice the incorporation or application of human- literature (e.g., Cropanzano, Rupp, Mohler, itarian perspectives on work psychology, & Schminke, 2001), morality (e.g., Haidt & the dearth of available resources quickly Kesebir, 2010), behavioral ethics (e.g., Trev- becomes evident. Certainly, this is being iño, Weaver, & Reynolds, 2006), and pieces addressed, with the recent publication of related to the changing landscape of I-O a variety of textbooks on the topic (e.g., psychology (e.g., Lefkowitz, 2013). From Carr, MacLachlan, & Furnham, 2012; that base, she continued to build in specific Olson-Buchanan, Koppes Bryan, & Thomp- topics related to HWP, such as corporate son, 2013). However, as one accustomed social responsibility (e.g., Rupp, Williams, to teaching courses with vast amounts & Aguilera, 2010), environmental sustain- of literature, and endless possibilities in ability (e.g., Ones & Dilchert, 2012), and terms of focus and scope, the mantle falls poverty reduction (e.g., Berry, et al., 2011). heavy on the shoulders of the instructor. As with any course, we know there are I’ll take this opportunity to highlight the two things that are “wins” and things that go in known courses devoted entirely to the psy- the category of “never doing that again!” chology of humanitarian aid: one, a gradu- From Deborah’s experience, the real win in ate level seminar taught by Deborah Rupp her course was filtering everything through at Purdue University in Indiana, and the traditional I-O concepts. This approach other, an undergraduate level short-course, allowed students to capitalize on their exist- taught by me at Elon University here in ing familiarity with established theoretical North Carolina. In addition, I will provide perspectives in order to fully incorporate feedback from students in both Deborah’s the emerging topics into their paradigm of class and my own, as well as graduate stu- I-O psychology. The real challenge came dent perspectives where students have not simply from the comparative lack of litera- had explicit instruction on the topic. Finally, ture devoted to HWP topics and the even I’ll conclude with some tips for the interest- greater need for precourse preparation. ed scholar and additional resources for the motivated reader to peruse. I also have had the pleasure of teaching a course related to the psychology of I had the pleasure of meeting with Debo- humanitarian aid and development. My rah at the 2015 SIOP conference, and we institution, Elon University, gives instruc- spoke about her recent course, entitled tors the opportunity to propose a course “Organizational Justice/Behavioral Ethics, for our 3-week intensive, and this class Corporate Social Responsibility, and Hu- has now been delivered to undergradu- 20 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 ate students three times, with continued Sheppard spoke to their own experiences, positive review. The structure of my course both as researchers and as practitioners differs from Deborah’s course in that I and humanitarian aid professionals in the focused more on a survey of humanitarian field. The students responded in a resound- aid and development from a psychological ingly positive way, and I appreciated the perspective and focused on the disparate ability to not only highlight the work of the topics that encompass many of the areas speaker but also to help the students to un- in which GOHWP members are working derstand the process of getting involved in and researching. I typically have begun my this area of work. I also found that it was so course by facilitating discussion around valuable to remind students that research- the more philosophical issue of whether ers and practitioners are real people and we should be engaging in humanitarian not just faceless names on an article. aid and development at all, followed by the seeming ignorance of extant resources Like Deborah, I also experienced “wins” available to those who are engaging in the and “things I’d never do again.” The biggest field, such as the United Nations’ Millen- win for me was the incorporation of the nium Development Goals (United Nations, guest lecture structure and the inclusion 2013) or the Paris Declaration (OECD, of a final project that required students to 2012). From there, we move into the more consider the implementation of a responsi- specific topics related to the disbursement ble aid or development project within their of responsible aid and development, such own community. It is inspiring to see the as the experiences of women and children kinds of projects that students believe are (e.g., Schein, 1999), the expatriate/local important, based on their own experiences relationship (e.g., McWha, 2011), and the in the community and interactions with more traditional I-O concern of recruit- local citizens. The biggest drawback I find ment and selection of aid workers and in the course echoes Deborah’s sentiment: volunteers (e.g., MacLachlan & Carr, 1999) There is just a lack of breadth in terms of the research articles and books available One unique aspect of the course I taught for incorporation. To that end, I will make this past January was the incorporation of the plea to those of you who work in the video chatting via Skype into the frame- area of HWP: Keep researching, and please work of the course. I asked experts from continue to publish quality articles! around the globe to call into our class period in order to provide a short guest I have spoken with many undergraduate lecture summarizing their work, offering students and graduate students about the explanations of how they each got involved incorporation of HWP into their course- in their research or practice, and answering work—both those who have had some questions from the students. Experts such sort of introduction and those who have as Stuart Carr, Lori Foster Thompson, Vir- not. For those undergraduate students ginia Schein, Kristen Kirkland, Ines Meyer, who have had some exposure, I find that Alexander Gloss, Herco Fonteijn, and Linda the most common responses speak to the The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 21 value of such a class within the structure of So how does the interested academician a liberal arts education. For example, many incorporate HWP into courses? There are students engage in some sort of communi- certainly many ways to do so, especially ty service activity, as well as other related ways that are in alignment with a main- activities (e.g., alternative break programs) stream I-O education. For example, you as required by the programmatic require- might incorporate a discussion of nonprof- ments of their universities. These students it leadership into your leadership module. indicate the course allowed for an easy Or, you may find some literature about the application of responsible aid principles recruitment and selection of volunteers to and have requested additional courses that fit into that portion of your course. We do highlight the multidisciplinary nature of not have to look far to find examples of be- humanitarian aid and development. These havioral ethics, justice, and motivation as a desires tend to be specifically directed to- bridge between the work of I-O and those ward majors like psychology, public health, of us focused on HWP perspectives. and international development, and also come from students who wish to continue In addition, I have found that incorporating their careers serving in organizations such video lecturing into one’s course can be as the Peace Corps or Teach for America. an engaging and dynamic way of providing alternative perspectives for your students. Graduate students often recount very dif- I also discovered that my university has a ferent experiences and needs. For example, phenomenal department devoted to vol- those graduate students who have not had unteering, sustainability, and community a course explicitly devoted to HWP discuss engagement, and these professionals are the relative lack of familiarity that their more than happy to come speak to classes faculty has with the HWP perspective and in order to promote the work they are do- the difficulty graduate students might have ing in the local and international commu- in carving their own research trajectory in nity. Finally, I’d point you in the direction an area of comparable unknown. However, of the GOHWP website (www.gohwp.org). these same graduate students also report We have a growing number of HWP-relat- fairly amicable reception from peers and ed resources available to help you, either speak optimistically about the future likeli- in the development of an entire course of hood of engaging in HWP research and prac- HWP or to incorporate HWP into a small- tice. Graduate students who have had more er portion of your existing course. We formal training in HWP topics speak to the are hopeful that as more academicians need to incorporate this type of curriculum discover the relative ease of incorporating into more courses as well as the necessity of HWP ideas into mainstream I-O courses, highlighting the work that is already being we will see collaborative opportunities and completed in the field of I-O that might not resource repositories continue to grow. be recognized as HWP work, for example, sustainable ventures by organizations or I’d like to thank Deborah Rupp for her corporate social responsibility applications. willingness to speak with me about her 22 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 experiences as well as for the contribution MacLachlan, M., & Carr, S. C. (1999). The selec- of her course materials for publication on tion of international assignees for develop- the GOHWP website. I’m also sincerely ment work. The Irish Journal of Psychology, grateful for the candid feedback from HWP 20, 39–57. students, Astrid Callegaro, Drew Mallory, McWha, I. (2011). The roles of, and relationships between, expatriates, volunteers, and Elizabeth Pears, and Simone Royal. local development workers. Development in Practice, 21, 29–40. References OECD. (2012), Aid effectiveness 2011: Progress in implementing the Paris Declaration. Better Berry, M. O’Neill, Reichman, W., Klobas, J., Aid. Paris, France: OECD Publishing. MacLachlan, M., Hui, H.C., & Carr, S. C. Olson-Buchanan, J. B., Koppes Bryan, L. L., & (2011). Humanitarian work psychology: The Thompson, L. F. (2013). Using industrial-or- contributions of organizational psychology ganizational psychology for the greater to poverty reduction. Journal of Economic good: Helping those who help others. New Psychology, 32, 240–247. York, NY: Routledge. Carr, S.C., MacLachlan, M., & Furnham, A. Ones, D. S., & Dilchert, S. (2012). Employee (2012). Humanitarian work psychology. New green behaviors. In S. E. Jackson, D. S. Ones, York, NY: Palgrave-Macmillan. & S. Dilchert (Eds.), Managing human re- Cropanzano, R., Rupp, D. E., Mohler, C. J., & sources for environmental sustainability (pp. Schminke, M. (2001). Three roads to organi- 85–116). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. zational justice. Research in Personnel and Rupp, D. E., Williams, C. A., & Aguilera, R. V. Human Resource Management, 20, 1–113. (2010). Increasing corporate social respon- Donlosky, Rawson, Marsh, Nathan, & Willing- sibility through stakeholder value internal- ham (2013). Improving students’ learning ization (and the catalyzing effect of new with effective learning techniques: Promising governance): An application of organiza- directions from cognitive and educational tional justice, self-determination, and social psychology. Psychological Science in the influence theories. In M. Schminke (Ed.), Public Interest. 14(1), 4–58. Managerial ethics (pp. 69–88). Orlando, FL: Freiberg, J. (1999). Beyond behaviorism: University of Central Florida. Changing the classroom management para- Schein, V.E. (1999). Poor women and work digm. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. in the Third World: A research agenda for Haidt, J., & Kesebir, S. (2010). Morality. In organizational psychologists. Psychology and S. Fiske, D. Gilbert & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Developing Societies, 11, 105-17. th Handbook of social psychology (5 ed., pp. Treviño, L. K., Weaver, G. R., & Reynolds, S. J. 797–832). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. (2006). Behavioral ethics in organizations: Lefkowitz, J. (2013). Values and ethics of a A review. Journal of Management, 32(6), changing I-O psychology: A call to (future) 951–990. action. In J. Olson-Buchanan, L. K. Bryan, & United Nations. (2013). The Millennium Devel- L. F. Thompson (Eds.), Using industrial-orga- opment Goals Report 2013. July 1. nizational psychology for the greater good. New York, NY: Routledge.

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 23 Prosocial I-O Psychology: Having an Impact Beyond Traditional Research and Practice

The field of I-O psychology may not be first on the list when we think of helping professions, but research suggests that when we are connected to the outcome of our work and understand its impact on the well-being of others, we are more motivated and perform better at work. In fact, SIOP has become increasingly interested in promoting the research and application of I-O psychology principles to contexts and issues outside the traditional organizational setting. Prosocial I-O psychology is defined as “the application of Industrial and Organizational (I-O) psychology for the purpose of improving societal well-being” (SIOP website, 2015). The study of prosocial I-O psychol- Alexa ogy extends our research to not only employee well-being Garcia outcomes, but to the well-being of society as a whole. This growing area of I-O psychology involves research in both the nonprofit sector (e. g., focusing on the retention of nonprofit volunteers) and the for-profit sector (e. g., focusing on corporate social responsibility). At Portland State University, a variety of I-O psychology research focuses on the health and MacKenna well-being of employees from a variety of understudied popu- Perry lations and professions, ranging from construction workers to correctional officers to veterans. The following provides a brief summary of some of the areas within which I-O psychology has contributed to prosocial issues, including specific projects here at Portland State University (PSU). We also discuss several Allison ways students and others can get involved. Ellis Applying I-O Psychology to Prosocial Issues

In a recent commentary in the book Using Industrial-Orga- nizational Psychology for the Greater Good(2013), Douglas Jennifer Reynolds recalled his experience attending a SIOP session Rineer focused on humanitarian work psychology. He stated, “something important was being discovered that ha[d] been in front of us all along” (p. 572). Indeed, in the few years since there has been tremendous energy and effort devoted to addressing Portland State University issues important to our society. However, even in the early 24 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 2000s, a few organizational psychologists actively supporting employee health already saw the value of applying I-O psy- and wellness, and developing corporate chology principles and practices to address philanthropy and volunteer programs (Ol- environmental, societal, and global issues son-Buchanan et al., 2013). Diversity and (e.g., Galindo-Kuhn & Guzley, 2001; Hutch- inclusion efforts can include ensuring that ings, 2002). By the late 2000s and into organizations actively recruit from diverse the next decade, I-O psychologists were sources and that employees of various enthusiastically mobilizing their resourc- demographic groups (e.g., gender, age, es in the form of task forces (e.g., Global race) are given equal access to advance- Task Force on Organisational Psychology ment opportunities. Employee health and for Poverty Reduction, 2008), organized wellness efforts may involve improving academic research (e.g., Musa, & Hamid, the physical work environment (such as 2008), and on-the-ground work within and improved ergonomics) or intervening to outside the U.S. (e.g., Foster, McWha, & decrease employee stress. Development Gloss, 2013). In a recent commentary in of corporate philanthropy and volunteer Industrial and Organizational Psycholo- programs refers to allotting organizational gy, Rupp and colleagues acknowledged a resources (e.g., money, time) to make a shift in the field toward a concerted focus positive societal impact. Externally, CSR on the “greater good” by stating, “What efforts refer to balancing the organization’s might have in the past been considered goals with its impact on other countries, on the periphery of I-O psychology is people, and the environment. It refers to now the mainstream” (Rupp, Skarlicki, & an organization holding itself accountable Shao, 2013, p. 361). Following the sche- for its actions and striving, through ethi- ma utilized by Olson-Buchanan, Koppes cal and moral actions, to have a positive Bryan, and Foster Thompson (2013) in impact on society. their recent book, the following provides a summary of three areas within which I-O Applying I-O Practices to Volunteer psychologists have been active in address- Management and Nonprofit-Based ing issues important to our society, envi- Organizations ronment, and the human experience. A second major area in which I-O psychol- Supporting Corporate Responsibility ogists have a prosocial impact is by working with nonprofit organizations and volun- A major way in which I-O psychologists teer groups. Just as I-O professionals are have been actively applying their knowl- needed in the corporate world to manage edge and skills to help the greater good the recruitment, retention, and motivation is through corporate social responsibility of employees, so too are they needed in (CSR) efforts. CSR-related activities can the nonprofit sector. For example, just as refer to both internal and external en- in the corporate world, I-O psychologists deavors. Internal CSR-related activities can can help retain nonprofit volunteers by include promoting diversity and inclusion, providing realistic job previews and imple- The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 25 menting effective socialization programs profit organizations run more efficiently, (Lopina & Rogelberg, 2013). Retaining we can directly improve nonprofit organi- effective and committed volunteers is in- zations’ ability to achieve their missions, valuable to many nonprofits because they thus helping the greater good. often rely on volunteers to execute their programs and activities. Taking I-O Psychology Abroad

Virtually every I-O psychology area (selec- Another emerging area that has immense tion, performance management, training, promise for making an impact is the appli- etc.) that helps improve the functioning of cation of I-O psychology practices to issues businesses in the corporate world is also of poverty, equality, and humanitarian needed in the nonprofit sector. In fact, struggles in developing countries. Berry and nonprofit organizations (at least those that colleagues (2011) argued that I-O psychol- are the most effective) are run similarly ogists are uniquely equipped to provide to for-profit companies. The main differ- assistance on a number of fronts related to ence is that in the case of nonprofits the poverty reduction, including the develop- end goal is not usually to sell a product ment of policy and mandates as well as the for profit but, instead, to provide a ser- implementation and evaluation of programs vice. Those services can vary greatly, but in the field. Others have argued that I-O they often aim to improve society in some psychologists should have a role in helping way—for example, helping to reintegrate to facilitate the success of microfinance veterans into civilian life, offering educa- initiatives and programs aimed at building tional after-school programs to underpriv- entrepreneurship abroad (Gielnik & Frese, ileged children, or raising funds and aware- 2013), which has also been expanded to di- ness to cure a debilitating disease. rectly understand and address implications for female entrepreneurs (Akpalu, Alnaa, There are also some unique challenges— & Aglobitse, 2012). Together, researchers and associated opportunities—related and practitioners have demonstrated the to nonprofit work. Because pay in the myriad ways that I-O psychology can be nonprofit sector is often lower than in the creatively applied to address issues that for-profit sector, recruiting and maintain- extend well beyond the traditional bound- ing top talent require particularly thought- aries, both conceptual and physical. ful strategies. Relatedly, it is important that managers understand and implement Getting Involved means of motivating employees aside from those that are financial in nature. Further, Opportunities to get involved in prosocial many employees in nonprofit organiza- I-O psychology can take on many different tions occupy multiple roles, increasing the forms. Depending on which areas you feel risk of role ambiguity and role conflict. By most drawn to, involvement can include utilizing our I-O psychology knowledge and everything from volunteering through skills to address these issues and help non- professional organizations, to researching 26 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 topics meant to improve the workplace Opportunities in Research for all types of employees (like veterans), to participating in or starting new policies Other opportunities to get involved may and programs at existing organizations. include both research and practical applications. Indeed, these opportunities may even Opportunities in Professional Organizations come from your own department, college, or university. For example, at Portland State There are many helpful resources to get University, ongoing research projects such involved in prosocial I-O initiatives and as the Study for Employment Retention of opportunities. SIOP maintains a list of pro- Veterans (SERVe) allow faculty and students social programs on the website (www.siop. to collaborate on efforts to improve soci- org/prosocial/), and new programs con- etal well-being. SERVe is a project focused ducted by SIOP members can be submitted on transforming the workplace to better for inclusion at any time. If you know of support health, well-being, and reintegra- prosocial I-O psychology programs or vol- tion-related experiences of veterans and unteer opportunities, sharing information their families. Specifically, SERVe is designed through the SIOP website can help build to develop and test a supervisor training in- collective support for initiatives and assist tervention to improve support for veterans’ in recruiting volunteers. Current programs needs in the workplace. Dr. Leslie Hammer, listed include (a) the Veteran Transition the lead investigator of SERVe, says, “I be- Project, which seeks to reduce veteran came involved in prosocial research because unemployment through application of I-O I had a deep interest in understanding how psychology expertise in areas like coach- the workplace could help to improve the ing, culture integration, and translation of health and well-being of workers and their military skills into the civilian workforce; families. We want to have the broadest (b) the Global Organisation of Humani- impact we can have. We have expertise tarian Work Psychology, which consists of that extends so far and can have such broad members devoted to humanitarian efforts applied value. Back in 2010 to 2011, I was through practice and study of I-O psychol- seeing military service members returning ogy (see www.gohwp.org for membership home, and the U.S. president was imple- details); and (c) Project INCUBATE, which is menting policies regarding hiring veterans. I a project devoted to collecting and widely was concerned that the workplace wasn’t distributing ideas for research on pover- prepared to support veterans, and I saw an ty reduction. Although financial support opportunity to directly apply my expertise in of prosocial I-O psychology goals is also training supervisors. I feel we have a respon- beneficial, direct participation in these sibility to support our service members, and other occupation-based volunteering and this is a chance for us to help make that opportunities helps meet the need for broad impact.” By creatively applying our contributions of professional skills (Rizzuto own research interests to benefit societal & Vandaveer, 2013). well-being, we too can further support the growth of prosocial I-O psychology. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 27 Opportunities in Practice are several professional organizations that can help facilitate this participation. For Within organizations, there are additional research experience in this area, you may opportunities to work toward prosocial not have to look further than your depart- goals, including environmental sustainabil- ment, college, or university. By shifting ity initiatives, volunteering opportunities, our focus to such issues, we are able to not and contributing to other CSR efforts. only impact the well-being of individuals Many companies offer support for employ- and organizations but also the well-being ees’ volunteer efforts through corporate of society as a whole. volunteer programs, ranging from informal support to direct provision of paid time off Close to PSU’s TIP-TOPics for volunteering individually or collectively during work hours (Henning & Jones, On behalf of our team of graduate stu- 2013). Other companies may be able to dents at Portland State University, we build environmental interest teams, and want to say thank you for the opportunity I-O psychologists can contribute through to contribute to the development and support of policies and practices such as education of our fellow graduate students telecommuting, environmentally conscious and readers of our column. We hope the recruiting, selection and training strate- information contained in our columns has gies, and motivating workers to support been helpful and has inspired our readers sustainability goals (Campbell, Provolt, to get involved in making our field of I-O & Campbell, 2013). By calling for, imple- psychology more visible and impactful. We menting, and utilizing these programs offer our best wishes to the next team of in organizations, I-O psychologists can students and look forward to continuing to help meet prosocial goals both internally, learn and grow from their unique perspec- within existing companies, and externally, tives and advice. through broader societal change. To correspond with the authors about this Conclusion topic, please e-mail portlandstatetiptop- [email protected]. Also, to learn more about An expanding field, prosocial I-O psychol- the graduate students at Portland State ogy allows us to apply our knowledge University as well as the writers of our col- of I-O psychology to contexts, such as umn, you may view our graduate student nonprofit organizations, and issues, such website at http://www.pdx.edu/psy/grad- as the struggles of poverty in developing uate-students. countries, where traditional I-O psychology has not been applied. The application of References I-O psychology research and principles to novel contexts and issues allows us to have Akpalu, W., Alnaa, S. E., & Aglobitse, P. B. a far greater impact than ever before. For (2012). Access to microfinance and in- those interested in getting involved, there tra household business decision making: 28 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Implication for efficiency of female owned son (Eds.), Using industrial-organizational enterprises in Ghana. The Journal of So- psychology for the greater good: Helping cio-Economics, 41(5), 513–518. doi:http:// those who help others (pp. 110–147). Hobo- dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2012.04.020 ken, NJ: Taylor and Francis. Berry, M. O. N., Reichman, W., Klobas, J., Hutchings, K. (2002). Improving selection MacLachlan, M., Hui, H. C., & Carr, S. C. processes but providing marginal support: A (2011). Humanitarian work psychology: The review of cross-cultural difficulties for expa- contributions of organizational psychology triates in Australian organizations in China. to poverty reduction. Journal of Economic Cross Cultural Management, 9, 32–57. Psychology, 32(2), 240–247. Lopina, E. C., & Rogelberg, S. G. (2013). Recruit- Campbell, D. E., Provolt, L., & Campbell, J. E. ment, retention, and motivation of volun- (2013). Going green: Eco-industrial and orga- teers in the nonprofit sector: A volunteer so- nizational psychology. In J. B. Olson-Buchan- cialization perspective. In J. Olson-Buchanan, an, L. L. K. Bryan, & L. F. Thompson (Eds.), L. K. Bryan, & L. F. Thompson (Eds.). Using Using industrial-organizational psychology industrial-organizational psychology for the for the greater good: Helping those who help greater good: Helping those who help others. others (pp. 45–74). Hoboken, NJ: Taylor and (pp. 239–264). New York, NY: Routledge. Francis. Musa, S. A., & Hamid, A. A. R. M. (2008). Foster, L., McWha, I., & Gloss, A. E., (2013). Psychological problems among aid workers Using I-O psychology to enhance maternal operating in Darfur. Social Behavior and health and child healthcare in India. The Personality, 36, 407–416. Industrial and Organizational Psychologist, Olson-Buchanan, J., Koppes Bryan, Laura L, 51, 99–105. & Thompson, Lori Foster. (2013). Using Galindo-Kuhn, R., & Guzley, R M. (2001). The industrial organizational psychology for the volunteer satisfaction index: Construct greater good. SIOP Organizational Frontiers definition, measurement, development, and Series. Hoboken, NJ: Taylor and Francis. validation. Journal of Social Service Research, Reynolds, D. (2013). Commentary: Answering 28, 45–68. the call: Advancing a prosocial organizational Gielnik, M. M., & Frese, M., (2013). Entrepre- psychology. In J. Olson-Buchanan, L. K. Bry- neurship and poverty reduction: Applying I-O an, & L. F. Thompson (Eds.). Using industri- psychology to microbusiness and entre- al-organizational psychology for the greater preneurship in developing countries. In J. good: Helping those who help others. (pp. Olson-Buchanan, L. K. Bryan, & L. F. Thomp- 572–579). New York, NY: Routledge. son (Eds.). Using industrial-organizational Rizzuto, T. E., & Vandaveer, V. V. (2013). Mobi- psychology for the greater good: helping lizing action through professional societies. those who help others (pp. 394–438). New In J. B. Olson-Buchanan, L. L. K. Bryan, & L. F. York, NY: Routledge. Thompson (Eds.), Using industrial-organiza- Global Task Force on Organisational Psychology tional psychology for the greater good: Help- for Poverty Reduction (2008). Organizational ing those who help others (pp. 529–555). psychology and poverty reduction: Where Hoboken, NJ: Taylor and Francis. supply meets demand. Journal of Organiza- Rupp, D. E., Skarlicki, D., & Shao, R. (2013). The tional Behavior, 29,843–851. psychology of corporate social responsibility Henning, J. B., & Jones, D. A. (2013). Volunteer and humanitarian work: A person‐centric programs in the corporate world. In J. B. Ol- perspective. Industrial and Organizational son-Buchanan, L. L. K. Bryan, & L. F. Thomp- Psychology, 6(4), 361–368. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 29 ANNOUNCING

TIP-TOPics Call for Graduate Student Columnist(s)

TIP-TOPics is a graduate student editorial least 2 years from graduation. Columns are column published in The Industrial-Orga- approximately 2,000 words, due four times nizational Psychologist (TIP)on a quarterly a year (August 15, November 15, February basis. The column provides information 15, and May 15), and written according to and advice relevant to SIOP’s student APA guidelines. membership and has historically been very popular. Submission Information

The editorial columnist(s) can be an indi- Statement of interest and one letter of vidual or group, and the groups may be recommendation (from a faculty mem- made up of students from the same school ber who is familiar with the work of the or different schools; however, you must be potential columnist/s) should be sent via current Student Affiliates of SIOP in good e-mail to Morrie Mullins (mullins@xavier. standing. edu) by July 10, 2015. The statement of interest should at a minimum address the The TIPTOPics columnist(s) will have a following: (a) all potential columnist names 2-year tenure beginning with the Octo- and school affiliation and (b) how you will ber 2015 issue and ending with the July approach the content, style, and structure 2017 issue. Columnists must be graduate of the column, including a few potential students throughout this time period, thus column topics. all prospective columnists should be at

30 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1

Practice in I-O Psychology: Trends in Professional Membership, Activities, Development and Representation (2008–2015)

Over the last 8 years, this Practice Perspectives column has reported on a range of professional and practice issues in industrial-organizational psychology. We have used available data or collected new data when needed to identify, document, and communicate the views and professional needs of I-O practice and I-O practitioners on critical professional issues. The issues we have reported on have included:

SIOP membership • SIOP membership trends (see references 16, 23, 25, 26)

Professional activities, job titles and careers • I-O practice activities, job titles, and career stages (1, 9, 10, 28)

Education and development • Graduate education (19, 20, 21, 23) • Practitioners professional development and professional Rob Silzer needs (1, 2, 4, 9, 30, 31) HR Assessment and Development Inc. Practitioner satisfaction, licensing and representation Baruch College, • Practitioner satisfaction in SIOP (1, 3, 9, 23) Graduate Center, • Professional licensing (1, 5, 9) City University of New York • SIOP membership representation in SIOP officers, Fellows, chairs, appointments and awards (16, 17, 20, 24, 26, 29)

Communications and publications • I-O journals, SIOP books, and the Leading Edge Consortium (9, 18, 27, 29)

Science–practice gaps Chad Parson • Science–practice gaps in I-O psychology (1, 7, 8, 11) AON Hewitt Baruch College, Future directions Graduate Center, • Promotion of I-O psychology (1, 6, 9) City University of New York • Future of I-O psychology (12, 13, 14, 15, 22)

32 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 In 2007, Rob Silzer, Rich Cober, Anna Erick- In this article we provide an overview of the son, and Greg Robinson were all serving results and conclusions from past articles on the SIOP Professional Practice Commit- and presentations and outline some future tee (Rob as committee chair). All four of us directions for: SIOP membership; profes- are I-O practitioners who were committed sional activities, job titles, and careers; ed- to advancing I-O practice. The field of I-O ucation and development; and practitioner psychology was growing, particularly for satisfaction, licensing, and representation. Practitioners, but SIOP seemed to be stuck in the past. At the time SIOP members SIOP Membership were considered either an academic or a nonacademic. The professional title of I-O It has been evident that the membership psychology practitioner was not used and of SIOP has been changing and is likely to in some academic/researcher circles was further evolve. We did a thorough analysis considered personally offensive. of the 2011 SIOP membership. Our key findings on SIOP membership (16, 23, 25, We decided to find out what I-O practi- 26) included: tioners identified as their professional needs and how well SIOP was serving their General Membership professional interests. To meet that goal the Practitioner Needs Survey (1) was devel- • There has been a steady increase in oped and distributed to all SIOP members the number of full members over the and over 1000 members responded. We last 40 years, but there are recent have worked hard to be databased in our declines. findings and conclusions. The core au- • The number of Fellows in SIOP has thors—Rob Silzer, Rich Cober, Chad Parson, remained almost unchanged for the and Anna Erickson (with some help from last 40 years despite a 538% increase Greg Robinson)—have produced 29 TIP in full membership. The percentage articles so far (see reference list), two SIOP of Fellows in the full membership has conference presentations (2, 22), a major dropped from 29% to 9%. SIOP membership survey and final report • The number of Student Affiliates in (1), and a letter to the TIP editor (24). We SIOP has more than doubled in the last think these articles have made an import- 10 years and now is larger than the ant contribution to I-O psychology and SIOP, number of full members. and have had some impact on the direction • The number of members working in of the profession. As the three primary each of the primary work settings has authors, Rob Silzer, Rich Cober, and Chad significantly increased over the years, Parson, we have made a huge commitment particularly in consulting firms. Of the to insuring that the work represented in recent graduates (graduating 2000– these articles is well grounded and relevant 2009) who are SIOP members, 55% to I-O psychology and I-O practice. We hope hold positions in consulting firms or in that is evident to readers. organizations. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 33 • Full members with I-O and OP (Organi- • The largest group of international zational Psychology) degrees represent members is in Canada, whereas Eu- 68% of the membership, up from 50% rope and Asia have equal numbers of in 1985. members. • 17% of the members are self-em- • The overwhelming majority of interna- ployed or are in independent practice. tional members are academics. • More academic members work in business schools (n = 660) than in psychol- Likely Future Membership Trends ogy departments (n = 590). • Membership is evenly split between • The number of full members is likely to members who have a primary research not increase much unless SIOP is more work focus (academics and research- successful in recruiting new graduates ers; 48.6%) versus members who have and international members and in a primary I-O practice work focus capitalizing on the large number of (49.3%). student affiliates. • It is unclear how much the recent deci- Member Location sion to allow individuals with a MS/MA degree to join SIOP as full members af- • Most SIOP members are located in the ter 5 years as an associate member will Eastern half of the U.S., with particular affect SIOP. It will depend on how many concentrations along the Northeast of these individuals stay through the 5 Corridor. years and then convert to a full mem- • There are substantial numbers of ber. Those that join are most likely to be members in cities of Minneapolis, practitioners (rather than academics or Pittsburgh, St. Louis, and Seattle as researchers) because that is where they well as larger states along with Florida are most likely to find employment, and Georgia. and therefore they will likely increase • I-O consultants are concentrated in the portion of full members who are the New York, Washington DC, Atlanta, practitioners. But their inclusion in large Minneapolis, and Chicago areas. numbers may impact the identity of • Members in organizations are concen- SIOP as a professional association of I-O trated in the New York area and larger psychologists, because master’s level states. members are not allowed to be called • Academic members are primarily lo- “psychologists” by professional guide- cated in nonmetropolitan areas. lines and state regulations. • Researchers are heavily concentrated • Member growth will be the strongest in the Washington DC area. among members working consulting • There are 242 international members (many self-employed) and in organiza- (2011), 60% hold non-U.S. graduate tions; particularly among those with degrees and 40% hold U.S. degrees; I-O or OP (Organizational Psychology) 60% hold I-O degrees. degrees. 34 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 • Academic members increasingly work manager, partner, principal, associate, in business schools and the trend will consultant. continue and likely become more pro- • Job titles for independent and self-em- nounced in the future. ployed I-O practitioners were presi- • The U.S. geographic distribution of dent, principal, consultant, psycholo- members is not likely to change much, gist, executive coach. with I-O practitioners in larger cities • Job titles in research consulting firms and states and academics primarily in usually include “research” or “scientist.” nonmetropolitan areas. • Job titles in government organizations • There may be some increase in inter- are typically psychologist, social scien- national members as more U.S.-based tist, director, manager, analyst. members take international positions • Academic job titles are overwhelming- and more internationally trained pro- ly assistant professor, associate professionals join SIOP. fessor, or full professor with a heavy concentration of full and assistant Professional Activities, Job Titles, professors in business schools. and Careers Work Activities Most seasoned I-O practitioners have noticed a change over their careers in the job • The work activities rated as most titles and professional work activities for important in consulting work are I-O practice. We have identified the most consulting and advising clients; common titles and professional activities building relationships; implementing for I-O psychologists in different I-O careers and delivering programs; making and differences in work activities across the presentations; developing and career stages of I-O practice (1, 9, 10, 28). designing systems, methods, programs; managing work projects Job Titles and administrative tasks. • The work activities rated as most • There are 1,110 unique job titles important in organizations are among the 3,057 job titles listed by consulting and advising clients; SIOP members. building relationships; managing work • The most common job titles in orga- projects and administrative tasks; nizations (nonconsulting) are director making presentations; implementing and consultant; personnel research and delivering programs. and management development titles • The work activities rated as most have largely disappeared but talent important in academic settings are management is the top content area making presentations; conducting listed in job titles. primary research and data analysis; • Job titles in consulting firms (nonre- building relationships; teaching search) were primarily director, VP, courses or training programs. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 35 • There are many significant difference • Work activities in consulting firms in the importance of various work (nonresearch) and in organizations will activities between practitioners and continue to overlap as the roles are academics/researchers. considered internal and external con- • The activities rated least important by sultants; I-O practitioners will increas- practitioners are writing for a scientific ingly move back and forth across these journal; teaching courses; writing work settings. reports, articles, chapters; conducting • Job titles and work activities are un- primary research and data analysis. likely to change much for I-O consultants in research and academic roles. Important Activities by Practitioner • Career stages in I-O practice will be- Career Stage come more distinct and better understood as the career paths become • The importance of various work activ- more standardized. ities varied by the career stage of the Practitioner. Education and Development o Advanced career practitioners give higher importance to: managing In recent years there has been a lot of a business; coaching others and discussion in the profession about the providing feedback; writing reports, education and professional development articles, chapters (nonresearch) of I-O psychologists, including the graduate school curriculums, professional o Early career practitioners give higher importance to conducting primary workshops and conferences, and SIOP research and data analysis; manag- sponsored professional development ing work projects and administrative activities. It is a particularly important area activities for I-O psychologists who want to be well trained and developed as I-O practitioners. Likely Future Career and Activity Trends We have surveyed SIOP members and explored the trends and member perspec- • Job titles are not likely to change much tives on graduate education (19, 20, 21, in the near future, however the trend 23) and professional development (1, 2, 4, in organizations for including “talent 9, 30, 31) in I-O psychology. management” in the title will increase. • The use of organizational psychologist Graduate Programs as a job title will also likely increase because it is increasingly being used by • The graduate programs that produce I-O practitioners to identify themselves the most graduates (who join SIOP) to others. New titles may emerge for have been fairly stable over the last full members with MA/MS degrees 40 years. A few programs have folded because they are not allowed to be while others have emerged. called “psychologists.” 36 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 • The top five graduate degree institu- Akron, U of Maryland, Purdue U tions for SIOP members and Fellows o Researchers: U of Minnesota, U are U of Akron, U of Minnesota, U of of South Florida, U of Georgia, U South Florida, Michigan State, and of Oklahoma, U of Illinois (Urba- Bowling Green State U. The University na-Champaign) of Minnesota has been in the 10 grad- • Graduate programs that have pro- uate producing programs (based on duced the most SIOP Fellows are U of SIOP membership) across all 5 recent Illinois (Urbana-Champaign), U of Min- decades. Other programs have been nesota, Purdue U, Michigan State U, in that group in 4 of the last 5 decades and Ohio State U. The U of Minnesota are U of Houston, U of Akron, U of is distinguished is this group for being South Florida, U of Tennessee-Knox- the only graduate program that has ville, and Ohio State University. produced Fellows in all four I-O career • The number of graduates (who are SIOP tracks. The overwhelming majority of members) produced by the top gradu- SIOP Fellows are in academic/research ate I-O programs has greatly increased positions (83%). each decade from 28 (in pre-1970) to 294 (in 2000–2009). There has been a Graduate Degrees steady increase across the decades in the number of graduates joining SIOP. • I-O psychology was the field of grad- • The number of different graduate uate study for 67% of the SIOP mem- programs contributing graduates to our bership; other fields include organi- field and membership is expanding. zational behavior, social psychology, From 1986 to 2011 the number of I-O and organizational psychology. Of the PhD/PsyD graduate programs went from members holding I-O graduate de- 40 to 125 programs (member self-re- grees, 38% are academics, 33% are in port) while the number of business consulting (nonresearch), 23% are in school graduate programs (OB/HR/OD) organizations, and 6% are researchers. went from 0 to 103 (member self-re- • Of the 1,357 members who are port) during the same time period. academics, only 60% hold I-O or OP • The universities with the most SIOP degrees and 40% hold other degrees. members and Fellows in each employ- New I-O or OP graduates who take ac- ment category are: ademic positions are more likely to be o Consultants: U of Akron, U of Min- employed in psychology departments nesota, U of Georgia, Bowling Green (60%) than in business schools (40%). State U, U of Tennessee-Knoxville • The number of members who hold de- o In organizations: U of South Florida, grees in OB and OP has been doubling U of Houston, Alliant/CSPP, U of every decade, but they still represent Akron, Wayne State U modest groups in the SIOP membership. o Academics: Michigan State U, U of • SIOP members with graduate de- Illinois (Urbana-Champaign), U of grees in I-O and OP tend to pursue a The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 37 broad range of career tracks, whereas o Make I-O research and reference members with graduate degrees in OB, materials more readily available social psychology, and human resourc- o Provide more online resources (an- es strongly tend to be academics. notated literature, Q&A on practice areas) Professional Development o Provide a practitioner journal or newsletter • Full-time practitioners value additional o Provide article and book summaries education and training activities more (research and professional press) and are more likely to find practice-spe- o Provide advanced practice workshops cific information more valuable (e.g., a o Provide practice benchmark surveys practice related publications, online re- and opportunities to share best sources, and educational opportunities) practices than other SIOP member groups. o Organize more workshops, seminars, • Advanced and midcareer practitioners retreats (not conference-based) on have expressed interest in getting specific topics additional training in consulting skills, organizational assessment/program SIOP Workshops evaluation, leadership skills, strategic skills, and communication skills, and Attendance rate as more important those topics • Over the recent 15 year period there that are most closely associated with has been a decline in overall workshop their work. attendance (1016 to 404) and in the • Seasoned practitioners primarily gain average attendance per workshop (64 professional proficiency (knowledge to 40 for two sessions). This is partially and skills) through on the job learning due to the 2008 SIOP conference pro- and structured learning. Only a few gram expansion to 3 days (workshops proficiency areas are seen as primarily moved to Wednesday) and the 2008 gained during graduate school: con- economic collapse. ducting primary research and data • In the same period there has been a analysis; writing in scientific journals. decline in the number of workshops • Practitioners use a range of profession- offered each year (16 to 10) and the al resources for their development, percent of workshops that were sold out particularly online resources, confer- each year (from a high of 69% to 10%). ences, articles, books, and networks. • Full-time practitioners indicate they Frequency would find the following SIOP profes- • Across the last 30 years the most sional development activities the most frequently offered topics were em- valuable to them: ployment law/litigation/EEOC, talent o Summarize the state of practice and management/high potential, con- science on specific practice topics 38 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 sulting, selection/staffing, leadership SIOP could help with their professional development, and employee surveys. development. Their suggestions are fully • In most recent decade (2006–2015), outlined in several TIP articles (1, 2, 4, 9). the most frequently offered topics were Here is a high level summary. talent management/high potential and employment law/litigation/EEOC. • Provide research summaries, practice • The top five most frequent workshop benchmarks presenters across last 30 years (9–13 • Improve communications to practi- workshops each, with a total of 52 tioners such as a practitioner journal workshops) were Wayne Cascio, Rob or newsletter Silzer, Ben Schneider, David Peterson, • Provide training and development in and Nancy Tippins. some specific development topics • Across the 34 most frequent workshop • Improve graduate training and early presenters (4–13 workshops each), 59% career development of I-O practitioners are practitioners, 32% are academics/ • Provide more workshops, seminars, researchers, 9% are nonmembers. forums • Strengthen the practice orientation in Sold Out Workshops SIOP • Best attended workshop topics were • Better facilitate networking and men- talent management and high poten- toring opportunities tial talent (17 sold out workshops) • Improve the SIOP conference to focus and selection & staffing (11 sold out more on practice related issues workshops). • Provide more online education and • Presenters whose workshops were development programs most frequently sold out included Keith Pyburn, Wayne Cascio, William General Suggestions by the Membership Ruch, Ben Dowell, Kathleen Lund- • Development and training: provide quist, Lawrence Ashe, Rob Silzer, and more Practice related professional de- Frank Landy. velopment and training opportunities • Workshops that were frequently • Focus on practice: give more attention offered but poorly attended include in SIOP to practice-related issues testing, development & use; research • Career education: consider establish- methods; and performance appraisal ing graduate training and development & management. There also seems to guidelines be a softening of interest in selection, • Further research: better understand teams, testing, and job analysis topics. practice jobs and careers

Reader Recommendations

In addition to the above findings, practitioners had many suggestions on ways that The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 39 Likely Future Education and Development Perspectives TIP column was the percep- Trends tion of widespread practitioner discontent with SIOP’s lack of support and attention • SIOP will likely continue to give more to I-O Practice. Given that such discontent attention to I-O practitioner professional was leading to at least some discussions of development needs. There have already finding another professional organization been successful initiatives in mentoring that would better support practitioner programs, access to research literature, needs and interests, the original authors increased SIOP conference focus on prac- (Silzer, Cober, Erickson, and Robinson) tice issues, and the Practitioner Career set out to determine the actual level of Study. A business acumen competency discontent by developing and distributing model is also currently being developed. the Practitioner Needs Survey (1). Here The Practitioner Needs Survey has re- we report the general findings from that cently been readministered, and we are survey and other studies related to Prac- waiting on hearing the survey results. titioner satisfaction (1, 3, 23) professional • There still is work to do such as re- licensing (1, 5) and representation in SIOP energizing and rebuilding the SIOP (16, 17, 20, 24, 26, 29). workshops, initiating a practitioner journal, increasing the focus on the Practitioner Satisfaction in SIOP development of practitioner skills and knowledge through expanded gradu- • The level of member satisfaction with ate program curriculums, early career SIOP varies considerably based on development, and advanced workshops work career track. Students and mem- and providing more online resources. bers in academic/researcher positions • Future success in the professional de- report high levels of satisfaction, while velopment of SIOP members will likely full-time practitioners who work in depend on two key factors: (a) an indi- applied settings report high levels of vidual or team that will champion and dissatisfaction with SIOP. actively pursue the initiative and (b) the • I-O practitioners have expressed support of the SIOP Executive Board, dissatisfaction with which still is dominated by academ- o Opportunity for practitioners to ics and researchers. As practitioners influence SIOP decisions and future become more prevalent and influential directions in SIOP there is some hope that both of o SIOP’s efforts to provide a clear these conditions will be met. vision of the future of I-O psychology and practice Practitioner Satisfaction, Licensing, o SIOP’s support for advancing I-O and Representation practice careers o SIOP’s understanding of practice The primary reason for initiating the issues Practitioner Needs Survey and the Practice o Practitioner Fellow status in SIOP 40 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 o Recognizing practitioner awards, key appointments, committee contributions chairs, and Executive Board membership o SIOP’s support of advancing I-O (16, 17, 20, 24, 26, 29). The initial analy- practice sis was based on 2011 SIOP membership o The lack of election of practitioners data. Here we provide some highlights of to SIOP positions those findings. o SIOP’s support for practitioners who want to get licensed • SIOP Membership can be sorted into employment categories: Professional Licensing o 49.3% were consultants/professionals in organizations • A strong majority of full-time practi- o Consultants (nonresearch) - 30.3% tioners (87%) consider themselves to o Organizational-based professionals be psychologists. - 19.0% • A minority of full-time practitioners o 48.6% were academics/researchers (24%) are licensed psychologists o Academics - 43.5% and only 8% of nonpractitioners are o Researchers - 5.1% licensed. o Of those members who hold PhDs in • 30% of full-time practitioners think I-O psychology – their graduate program prepared them o 56% are consultants (non-research) to a moderate extent or to a great and professionals in organizations extent to meet licensure requirements, o 44% are academics/researchers whereas 32% indicated to no extent or to a little extent. Awards and Fellow Designations • 71% of full-time practitioners indicate that individuals or their employer • The overwhelming number of SIOP organizations could potentially be members awarded SIOP Fellow status harmed if someone without advanced have been Academics. training in behavioral science tried to o From 1957–2009, 83% of all Fellows do your work. were academics/researchers • 64% of full-time practitioners indicate o In the most recent five years, 84% of that they would apply to be licensed the new Fellows (on average) have if licensing requirements were more been academics/researchers (see appropriate for I-O psychologists. Table 1). o Limited progress has been made in Membership Representation and equitably recognizing practitioners Recognition for Fellow status even though they are now 50% of the membership. We have provided data documenting • The number of Fellows in SIOP has an apparent bias in favor of academics/ remained almost unchanged for the researchers in Fellow designations, SIOP last 40 years despite a 538% increase The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 41

Table 1 SIOP Progress Dashboard of Member Representation Consultants/professionals Members Academics/researchers (1) in organizations (2) Membership (2011) 48.60% 49.30% Members with I‐O PhDs (2011) 44% 56% Fellows (3) Past (1957–2009) 83% 17% 2010–2011 91% 9% 2011–2012 83% 17% 2012–2013 83% 17% 2013–2014 88% 12% 2014–2015 73% 27% Conclusions Little progress Awards (4) All past awards 84% 16% 2011–2012 88% 12% 2012–2013 69% 31% 2013–2014 64% 36% 2014–2015 81% 19% Conclusions Negative progress Key appointments (5) 2010–2011 80% 20% 2011–2012 79% 21% 2012–2013 74% 26% 2013–2014 70% 30% 2014–2015 70% 30% Conclusions Little progress

1 = Academics in universities and colleges, and researchers in research consulting firms & government research positions) 2 = Consultants in consulting firms and nonresearch consulting positions and organizational‐based professionals in organizations & in government positions with a practice focus) 3 = SIOP Fellow designation 4 = SIOP awards, 2014–2015 awards include 8 Distinguished and traditional awards (78% of awards were given to academics/researchers and 22% were given to practitioners) and 7 newer awards, such as the Dunnette, Hogan, and Jeanneret (86% of these awards were given to went to academics/researchers and 22% were given to practitioners). 5 = 2014–2015 key appointments included 33 Committee Chairs (70% are academics/researchers and 30% are practitioners) and 49 other key appointments (69% are academics/researchers and 31% are practitioners) and include SIOP Foundation Bd., AOP representatives, LEC chairs, Publication Bd, editors, Professional Practice Editorial Bd, Organizational Frontiers Editorial Board, Fellowship Committee, and Strategic Planning Committee (n = 5)

42 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1

in full membership. The percentage this SIOP needs to develop and award of Fellows in the full membership has several new distinguished Awards that dropped from 29% to 9%. are focused on I-O practice and I-O • SIOP has overwhelmingly given the practitioners. SIOP awards to academics/researchers o Academics/researchers have been Key Appointments awarded 84% of all past SIOP awards. o In the most recent four years aca- • Each year SIOP makes numerous demics/Researchers were given 76% appointments of members to serve as of all SIOP awards (on average) (see Committee Chairs, special SIOP repre- Table 1). sentatives, special taskforce members, o In 2014–2015 practitioners were and so on. These appointments are an only awarded 22% of the nine Dis- important opportunity to get a wide tinguished Awards and only 14% of range of members involved in SIOP the six more recently added awards affairs and to provide some recogni- (Dunnette, Katzell, Jeanneret, Ho- tion to members. These appointments gan, Wiley, etc.). are completely at the discretion of the o It seems very clear that SIOP con- Executive Committee. tinues to hugely favor rewarding re- • Practitioners continue to be sig- search and journal publications and nificantly underrepresented in key gives little attention or recognition appointments made by the Executive to the professional contributions of Board. I-O practitioners. o In the most recent 5 years academ- • Many of the SIOP awards have built ics/researchers were given 75% of all in criteria that emphasizes full-time SIOP key appointments (on average; teaching or research (Myers, Owens, see Table 1), even though practi- Distinguished Teaching, Distinguished tioners volunteer for SIOP commit- Scientific Contribution) and therefore tees about as much as academics/ are off limits to practitioners who are researchers (44% vs. 56% of commit- not publishing research or teaching full- tee volunteers). time (five of the top eight awards). Even o In 2014–2015, practitioners were the Distinguished Service Award, given only awarded 30% of all key appoint- to members who have held SIOP po- ments including only 30% of com- sitions or key appointments, has been mittee chairs and 31% of other key given to academics/researchers 73% of appointments (Foundation Board, the time in the past (100% in 2015). editorial boards, AOP reps, Fellow- • That leaves only two Distinguished ship Committee, etc.). Awards that Practitioners might be o Practitioners were most significantly considered for (Distinguished Profes- underrepresented on the Organiza- sional Contributions and Distinguished tional Frontiers Editorial Board (0% Early Career in Practice). To rectify practitioners), the SIOP Founda- The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 43 tion Board (17% practitioners), the practitioners. In our opinion it demon- Fellowship Committee (33% practi- strates a lack of commitment by the tioners), Strategic Planning Commit- Executive Board to being fair and eq- tee (25% practitioners). It is worth uitable in fully recognizing the talent noting that in each of these cases and the contributions of I-O practi- the primary person influencing the tioners. The SIOP decision makers decisions is an academic. seem to not accept that their broad o It is hard to understand why the leadership responsibility is to all SIOP SIOP Executive Board continues members across all member groups. to show this apparent bias against

Table 2 Member Representation Among SIOP Officers

Consultants/professionals Members Academics/researchers (1) in organizations (2) Membership (2011) 48.60% 49.30% Members with I‐O PhDs (2011) 44% 56% Presidents Past 30 years (1982–2012) 83% 17% Past 10 years (2002–2012) 80% 20% 2011–2012 

2012–2013  2013–2014 

2014–2015 

Conclusions No progress

SIOP Officers (Executive Board) 2011–2012 75% 25%

2012–2013 69% 31%

2013–2014 68% 32% 2014–2015 75% 25% Conclusions No progress

44 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 SIOP Officers and Executive Board This may also include more MA/MS level full members. Among academic • For the past 30 years (1982–2012) members, the shift will continue to the presidents of SIOP have been toward being employed by business overwhelmingly academics/research- schools and the percentage of academic ers (83%) and only 17% have been members who hold I-O PhDs may con- practitioners (see Table 2). Even in tinue to decline with the rise of business recent years (2011–2015) 75% of the school graduate degrees (OB, OD, HR, last four presidents have been aca- etc.). This may also shift their primarily demics/researchers. Unfortunately professional allegiance to Academy of many of these past presidents show Management and away from SIOP. • Table 2 their strong bias for other academics/ SIOP awards, Fellow designations, and researchers (see key appointments, key appointments will continue to Member Representation Among SIOP Officers Fellows and awards). A president who strongly favor academics and research- Consultants/professionals supports “equitable recognition” of ers, until two things happen: (a) SIOP Members Academics/researchers (1) in organizations (2) practitioners in SIOP could significantly elects presidents and Executive Boards Membership (2011) 48.60% 49.30% alter this in their term as president. who support “equitable treatment” and • Similarly the Executive Board has been work to insure that it happens and (b) Members with I‐O PhDs (2011) 44% 56% and continues to be dominated by the membership, and particularly the Presidents academics/researchers. Over the last growing practitioner membership, insist Past 30 years (1982–2012) 83% 17% 4 years (2011–2015) academics/re- that SIOP more strongly support the Past 10 years (2002–2012) 80% 20% searchers have held 72% (on average) professional needs and interests of I-O 2011–2012  of the Executive Board positions. They practitioners. Key appointments would continue to be significantly overrepre- the easiest to change by just requiring 2012–2013  sented while practitioners are signifi- that all appointments going forward are 2013–2014  cantly underrepresented. made with the goal of achieving parity. • The Executive Board and the officers 2014–2015  Likely Future Representation Trends will likely continue to be dominat- Conclusions No progress ed by academics/researchers until SIOP Officers (Executive Board) • The SIOP membership will likely grow practitioners leverage their growing 2011–2012 75% 25% only modestly, provided that SIOP membership in SIOP and insist that 2012–2013 69% 31% can attract a sizeable number of new 50% of the Executive Board and SIOP 2013–2014 68% 32% PhD graduates to be members. It will presidents represent their needs and 2014–2015 75% 25% depend on whether SIOP can provide interests. Unfortunately that has not Conclusions No progress clear value to these graduates. happened, and recent presidents seem 1 = Academics in universities and colleges, and researchers in research consulting firms & government research • The membership will continue to shift, to continue to focus primarily on the positions) and greater percentages of the mem- needs of academics and researchers. 2 = Consultants in consulting firms and nonresearch consulting positions and organizational‐based professionals in bership will be I-O practitioners. Among • There are some immediate things organizations & in government positions with a practice focus) I-O PhDs the shift will be even more that the SIOP Executive Board could evident as larger percentages of I-O PhD do in this area: (a) equitably appreci- graduates go into I-O practice careers. ate and recognize the contributions The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 45 of I-O practice and I-O practitioners, 4. Silzer, R. F., Erickson, A. R., Robinson, G. & (b) engage and involve practitioners Cober, R. T. (2008). Practitioner profession- in all committees, boards and ap- al development. The Industrial-Organiza- tional Psychologist, 46 (2), 39–56. pointments, and (c) ensure that I-O practitioners are involved in all SIOP 2009 decisions and in setting the future 5. Silzer, R. F., Erickson, A. R., & Cober, R. T. direction of the profession. (January). Licensing and industrial-organizational psychologists.The Industrial-Orga- Conclusions nizational Psychologist, 46(3), 89–99. 6. Erickson, A. R., Silzer, R. F., Robinson, G. & In the areas covered in this article the Cober, R. T. (2009). Promoting industrial-or- trends in SIOP are often clear. We have pro- ganizational psychology. The Industrial-Or- vided data and support for why SIOP needs ganizational Psychologist, 46(4), 45–56. 7. Cober, R. T., Silzer, R. F., & Erickson, A. R. to do more to support the professional (2009). Science–practice gaps in industrial– needs and interests of members who are in organizational psychology: Part I—member I-O Practice. Although some progress has data and perspectives. The Industrial-Orga- been made (access to research literature, nizational Psychologist, 47(1), 97–105. mentoring programs, LEC, etc.) more needs 8. Cober, R. T., Silzer, R. F., & Erickson, A. R. to be done to ensure that I-O practitioners (2009). Science–practice gaps in industri- are treated equitably in SIOP recognitions, al–organizational psychology: Part II—perspectives of experienced I-O practitioners SIOP awards, SIOP Fellow designations, and researchers. The Industrial-Organiza- SIOP key appointments, and Executive tional Psychologist, 47(2), 103–113. Board membership. Practitioners are gaining in SIOP membership, and that needs to 2010 be converted into equitable treatment. 9. Silzer, R. F., Erickson, A. R., & Cober, R. T. (2010). Practitioner cohort differences: References Different career stages or changing views? The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 2008 47(3), 57–70. 1. Silzer, R. F., Cober, R. T., Erickson, A.R., 10. Silzer, R. F., Cober, R. & Erickson, A. (2010). Robinson, G. (2008). Practitioner Needs Where I-O worlds collide: The nature of Survey: Final survey report. Bowling Green, I-O practice. The Industrial-Organizational OH: SIOP. Psychologist, 47(4), 95–106. 2. Silzer, R. F. & Cober, R.T. (2008). I-O psy- 11. Silzer, R.F. & Cober, R. (2010). The science– chology practitioners–What do they want practice gap in I-O psychology: A fish bowl from the profession? Executive Committee exercise. The Industrial-Organizational Invited Session at the Annual Conference Psychologist, 48(1), 95–103. of the Society of Industrial and Organiza- 12. Silzer, R.F. & Cober, R. (2010). The future tional Psychology. San Francisco, CA. of I-O psychology practice: Part I: Future 3. Silzer, R.F., Cober, R.T., Erickson, A. R. & directions for I-O practice identified by Robinson, G. (2008). Practitioner satisfac- leading practitioners. The Industrial-Orga- tion with SIOP. The Industrial- Organiza- nizational Psychologist, 48(2), 67–79. tional Psychologist, 46(1), 43–58.

46 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 2011 psychology. In Shull, A.C. (chair) Back to 13. Silzer, R. F. & Cober, R. (2011). The future the future: Applied research in the I-O field. of I-O psychology practice: Part 2: What Symposium conducted at the 28th Annual can practitioners do? The Industrial-Orga- Conference of the Society of Industrial and nizational Psychologist, 48(3), 75–88. Organizational Psychology, Houston, TX. 14. Silzer, R. F. & Cober, R. (2011). The future 23. Silzer, R. F. & Parson, C. (2013). Trends in of I-O psychology practice: Part 3, What SIOP membership, graduate education and should SIOP do? The Industrial-Organiza- member satisfaction. The Industrial-Orga- tional Psychologist, 48(4), 93–108. nizational Psychologist, 50(4), 135–149. 15. Silzer, R. F. & Cober, R. (2011). Shaping the 24. Silzer, R. F. & Parson, C. (2013). Letter to future of industrial-organizational psychol- the editor. The Industrial-Organizational ogy practice. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 50(4), 29–31. Psychologist, 49(1), 81–88. 25. Silzer, R. F. & Parson, C. (2013). The United 16. Silzer, R. F. & Parson, C. (2011). SIOP mem- States of SIOP: Geographic locations of SIOP bership and representation. The Industri- professional members. The Industrial-Orga- al-Organizational Psychologist, 49(2), 85–96. nizational Psychologist, 51(1), 101–113. 26. Silzer, R. F. & Parson, C. (2013). International 2012 SIOP members; Recognition equity—Does 17. Silzer, R. F. & Parson, C. (2012). Is SIOP inclu- SIOP value practitioners? The Industrial-Or- sive? A review of the membership composi- ganizational Psychologist, 51(2), 167–179. tion of Fellows, awards, appointments, and volunteer committees. The Industrial-Orga- 2014 nizational Psychologist, 49(3), 57–71. 27. Silzer, R. F. & Parson, C. (2014). The Lead- 18. Silzer, R. F. & Parson, C. (2012). Industri- ing Edge Consortium: Realigning for future al-organizational psychology journals and success. The Industrial-Organizational the science–practice gap. The Industrial-Or- Psychologist, 51(3), 99–111. ganizational Psychologist, 49(4), 97–117. 28. Silzer, R. F. & Parson, C. (2014). Profession- 19. Silzer, R. F. & Parson, C. (2012). SIOP mem- al labels and job titles of SIOP members. bers, graduate education and employment The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, focus. The Industrial-Organizational Psy- 51(4), 87–99. chologist, 50(1), 119–129. 29. Silzer, R. F. & Parson, C. (2014). Best-selling 20. Silzer, R. F. & Parson, C. (2012). Changes SIOP books; A call for “recognition equity” over time in members’ graduate educa- for practitioners. The Industrial-Organiza- tion, employment focus and recognition tional Psychologist, 52(1), 89–104. by SIOP. The Industrial-Organizational 30. Silzer, R. F. & Parson, C. (2014). SIOP work- Psychologist, 50(2), 65–75. shops: Thirty years of professional development for SIOP members. The Industrial-Or- 2013 ganizational Psychologist, 52(2), 37–46. 21. Silzer, R. F. & Parson, C. (2013). Changes over time in members’ graduate institu- 2015 tion. Letter to the editor. The Industrial-Or- 31. Parson, C. & Silzer, R. F. (2015). SIOP work- ganizational Psychologist, 50(3), 103–107. shop attendance: Trends and popular work- 22. Silzer, R. F. & Parson, C. C. (2013, April). shops from 1999–2014. The Industrial-Or- Current and future state of practice in I-O ganizational Psychologist, 51(4), 87–99.

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 47

Overview of the 2015 Practitioner Needs Survey Executive Summary

This article is an introduction to a series of TIP articles reporting on the results of the 2015 Practitioner Needs Survey that the Professional Practice Committee (PPC) conducted in March/April 2015. In this overview, we present the content of the survey and its purpose, as well as deliver information about the survey participants and the results of one of the primary questions comprising the survey.

We intend to present the results in a series of articles focusing on: (a) efforts SIOP has made or could make to aid practitioners in their professional development; (b) research priorities for practitioners; and, (c) licensing issues. In each of the subsequent articles, we will present the quantitative results Joy Oliver from the survey, as well as some qualitative feedback on spe- SRA International, INC. cific questions where we feel it will provide additional insight into the survey responses. Meredith Ferro PDRI, a CEB Company We intend these articles to provide information to SIOP on practitioner needs, as well as highlight progress that SIOP has Cole Napper made in addressing practitioner needs since the 2008 survey. CenturyLink In addition, we hope that in identifying high priority areas of practice requiring additional research, we can improve collab- Ben Porr oration between I-Os working in different practice areas. Federal Management Partners Introduction

Recently, the PPC fielded a survey to the SIOP professional membership on practitioner needs. This survey was a follow-up to the 2008 survey, which focused primarily on: (a) practitioner satisfaction with SIOP, (b) professional development of practitioners, (c) promotion of I-O psychology, and (d) licensing issues.

Silzer and colleagues (see references for a complete list of studies that specifically reference the 2008 practitioner needs survey data) presented the results of the 2008 survey in a The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 49 series of TIP articles between 2008 and • Careers Study: In partnership with the 2011. As a result of the 2008 survey find- Center for Organizational Research ings, the PPC identified multiple projects (COR) at the University of Akron, the to pursue to support professional practice PPC collected data via focus groups and practitioners. These projects include and surveys on the competencies and the following efforts: the critical experiences that describe career levels within four largest prac- • Speed Mentoring/Group Mentoring: tice areas in I-O psychology. The fol- Members of the PPC conduct a speed low-on work in this project will include mentoring event at the annual SIOP additional practice areas, as well as conference and support virtual group identifying developmental experiences mentoring throughout the year. that best prepare I-O psychologists for • Practitioner Reviewer Database: In co- the next step in their career. operation with the SIOP administrative • Business Acumen Competency Model office, the PPC is designing a database Project: Members of the PPC are of practitioners interested in serving developing and validating a model of as reviewers for journals. The PPC will nontechnical competencies related to survey members and gather informa- business acumen (e.g., sales, market- tion about the credentials of interested ing, financial concepts) required for practitioners and will assemble this in- success by practitioners. The results formation into a searchable database. of this study will be presented to SIOP • Webinars project: The PPC recruited membership in various educational SIOP members to record a series of we- formats (e.g., pre-conference work- binars to educate practitioners on “hot” shop, practitioner consortium, confer- topics for I-O professionals. More webi- ence sessions). nars are planned for future recording. • EBSCO Research Access: Members of • SIOP–SHRM Educational Series: The the PPC will design and administer a PPC provides support for the SIOP/ survey on satisfaction with SIOP’s -Re SHRM collaboration to highlight evi- search Access to determine potential dence-based management practices for resources and actions needed to en- the SHRM community, including a white hance utilization from SIOP members. paper series in which SHRM suggests topics of interest to HR professionals, The 2008 survey was groundbreaking for SIOP recruits authors to write papers on SIOP and for the PPC in many ways, as it given topics, and SIOP and SHRM work focused our committee’s outreach agenda collaboratively to review and publish for many years subsequent to the fielding white papers; and, an article series of the survey. In an effort to continue to called the Research Insight Series, which respond to the needs of the practice com- is aligned with SHRM content areas, of munity, we conducted the 2015 Practitioner research findings that have been impact- Needs Survey. The objective of this survey ful and relevant to the practice of I-O. was to gather information for comparison 50 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 with the 2008 survey, as well as to provide SIOP research community with a prioritized to SIOP, the PPC, and related committees list of research areas. We made this change (e.g., Licensure and Visibility to name a few) specifically to provide information to the with information about practitioner needs. research community of SIOP to improve collaboration among SIOP membership. Survey Design and Administration With respect to the differences between A core survey development team, led by the 2015 and 2008 survey, the primary Mark Poteet (current chair of PPC) and weakness of the 2015 survey is the re- Joy Oliver including Meredith Ferro, Cole sponse rate. The 2008 survey reported Napper, and Ben Porr, worked on the a 36% response rate; the 2015 survey development of items for the 2015 survey received only 469 valid responses, for a in consultation with members of the 2008 response rate of 10%. We understand that survey development team. the messaging around the 2015 survey was confusing to some potential partic- We made some small changes to the 2008 ipants regarding whether they should survey. We changed content in the fol- participate, and that the timing (the survey lowing areas: (a) we adjusted questions launched right before the SIOP annual informed by other projects in progress (e.g., conference) was not ideal. The PPC will the Careers Study of 2013 collected infor- improve the advertisement and timing of mation on competencies and experiences future surveys by working with the SIOP of different I-O practice areas, so we elim- Administrative Office so that the results inated the set of questions from the 2008 of future Practitioner Needs Surveys are survey); (b) we removed potential develop- representative of the SIOP population. ment activities that SIOP could offer if they are currently being offered through the PPC Survey Respondents (e.g., the webinars project is currently in its second year, so we removed it as a poten- Table 1 depicts the characteristics of the tial resource SIOP could offer); and (c) we study participants. As evident, the survey refocused the questions on science–prac- respondents were primarily SIOP members tice gaps to address whether the practice (n = 279; 59.5%). More than 70 participants area needed more research and whether did not report their membership status, it was a priority so that we can provide the indicating that these individuals opted out of

Table 1 SIOP Practitioner Needs Survey Respondents by SIOP Membership Status Frequency Percent of 2015 sample 2015 response rate 2008 response rate Associate Member 71 15% 8% 44% Fellow 31 7% 10% 31% International Affiliate 9 2% 2% 17% Member 279 60% 10% 35% Did not report 79 17% N/A N/A Total (Associates, Members, & Fellows) 469 100% 10% 36%

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 51 completing the survey, as this item required in which 26% of respondents worked in a response in order to progress in the survey. consulting firms. The largest difference in employment setting between the 2008 Of the survey respondents, more than 60% and 2015 survey was for academic insti- had PhDs (n = 306; 65.2%). This percent- tutions; 25% of respondents to the 2008 age is far lower than reported in 2008, in survey worked in academic institutions, which 84% of respondents reported PhD while only 8% of the 2015 survey partic- as their highest degree. We are unable to ipants worked in academic institutions. determine whether this is due to changing We are unsure whether this change in membership status within SIOP or to the response rate is due to the timing of the differing response rates between the 2008 survey or the name of the survey (i.e., the and 2015 survey. title, Practitioners Needs, may have led some academics to believe that this survey The most common degree indicated by was not relevant to them). participants was in I-O psychology (n = 348; 74.2%), with 7% indicating their degree in Similar to 2008, the largest proportion other psychology, and 17% indicating no of respondents worked in large organiza- response. Similar to the question on mem- tions of over 10,000 employees n( = 129; bership status, participants were required 27.5%) and worked in organizations with to answer this question before advancing in between 2-5 I-O psychologists (n = 108; the survey. Thus, the missing respondents 23.0%). Of the reported positions within terminated their participation in this survey organizations, more than 35% of respon- prior to receiving this question. dents indicated that they were individual contributors. However, only 6% of respon- The largest percent of respondents worked dents listed their position as professor (see in consulting firms (n = 125; 27%; see Table Table 3). 2). This percentage is similar to 2008,

Table 2 SIOP Practitioner Needs Survey Respondents by Employment Setting Frequency 2008 Percent 2015 Percent Academic institution 38 25% 8% Consulting firm 125 26% 27% Independent practice 52 11% 11% Military service 1 N/A <1% Non‐profit organization 26 4% 6% Private sector business 112 19% 24% Public sector organization (e.g., government agency) 35 11% 8% Did not report 80 4% 17% Total 469

52 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Table 3 their satisfaction using a Likert scale (5 = SIOP Practitioner Needs Survey Respondents by Position in Organization strongly satisfied, 4 = satisfied, 3 = neither Position in organization satisfied nor dissatisfied, 2 = dissatisfied, 1 Frequency 2015 Percent = strongly dissatisfied). Executive, officer 74 15.8% Individual contributor 162 34.5% Based on the results of the 2008 survey, Manager, director, department head 101 21.5% Silzer and colleagues noted some troubling Professor 28 6.0% trends for practitioner satisfaction with Supervisor 24 5.1% SIOP. The results of the 2008 survey found Did not report 80 17.1% Total 469 100 that practitioners expressed high levels of dissatisfaction (35–40 %) and low levels of Finally, Table 4 depicts information satisfaction (12–30%) in five areas: about the percentage of work time that respondents indicated that they spend • SIOP leadership understanding of key conducting different types of activities. practice issues The median response for time spent being • SIOP support for practitioners who an educator (md = 0%) was driven by the want to get licensed (test prep, etc.) large number of respondents (n = 165) • SIOP support for advancing your I-O indicating they spent 0% of their time as practice career an educator. • Opportunity for practitioners to influence SIOP decisions and future direc- Satisfaction With SIOP tion • Providing a clear vision of the future of We specifically retained the same ques- I-O psychology and practice tions from the 2008 survey regarding satisfaction with SIOP in support of prac- In contrast to Silzer and colleagues, who titioners in order to identify any changes looked at satisfaction with SIOP by prac- in satisfaction between 2008 and 2015. titioner status (e.g., full time versus part Respondents were asked, “How satisfied time), we compared mean satisfaction are you with SIOP in these practitioner ratings across employment settings in areas?” with respondents asked to indicate order to determine satisfaction within the

Table 4 SIOP Practitioner Needs Survey Respondents Time Spent by Practice Area Percentage of Percentage of Percentage of Percentage of work work time: work time: work time: time: Internal External Scientist/ Educator practitioner practitioner researcher N 276 307 341 274 Median 0% 55% 80% 10% Mean 15% 52% 58% 19%

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 53 Table 5 Mean Satisfaction Ratings by Employment Setting Public sector Nonprofit Private sector Independent Consulting Academic Recognition of practitioners for Fellow status* 2.766 3.00 2.57 2.626 2.96 3.501,4 Recognition of practitioners for contributions to I‐O practice* 2.83 3.223 2.542,6 2.756 2.906 3.433,4,5 Opportunity for practitioners to influence SIOP decisions and future direction* 2.712,6 3.471,3,4 2.702,5,6 2.662,6 3.093 3.431,3,4 Opportunity to elect I‐O practitioners to SIOP Executive Board positions 2.96 3.47 2.94 3.03 3.16 3.60 SIOP leadership understanding of key practice issues* 2.89 3.393 2.682,6 2.88 3.00 3.453 SIOP efforts in advancing and promoting I‐O practice 3.07 3.62 3.08 2.93 3.10 3.3 Efforts to make SIOP the “first choice” organization for I‐O practitioners 3.41 3.9 3.41 3.46 3.41 3.16 SIOP support for advancing your I‐O practice career 2.86 3.25 2.73 2.90 2.65 3.03 SIOP support for practitioners who want to get licensed (test prep, etc.) 2.29 2.80 2.58 2.56 2.36 3.00 SIOP support for practice‐oriented research and projects 2.60 3.16 2.81 2.94 2.81 2.94 SIOP opportunities for professional networking (in‐person or online) 3.31 3.48 3.17 3.60 3.42 3.50 Providing a clear vision of the future of I‐O psychology and practice 3.03 3.08 3.07 2.90 3.17 2.97 Note. Values with superscripts indicate significant mean differences between satisfaction ratings from respondents from different employment settings, where 1=public sector; 2=Non profit; 3=Private sector; 4=Independent; 5=Consulting; 6=Academic

different employment sectors within which • Independent and public sector: SIOP I-O psychologists work. We focused on committee chairs could recruit more employment setting so that SIOP can tailor independent and public sector practi- efforts at improving satisfaction with SIOP tioners for SIOP committee membership. specifically at members working within • Private sector: Current SIOP Fellows different environments. could continue to nominate more SIOP members working in the private sector The results of this question appear in Table as SIOP Fellows. Relevant SIOP commit- 5. In general, few questions indicated tees and/or the SIOP Foundation may significant mean differences in satisfaction consider developing awards for contri- between the employment settings: Only 4 butions to I-O practice, perhaps on the of the 12 areas demonstrated significant dif- basis of SIOP conference submissions. ferences in mean satisfaction ratings across • Consulting and nonprofit: Relevant employment settings. Where there were SIOP Committees could develop re- significant differences, respondents working sources (e.g., job aids) for practitioners in academic and nonprofit settings were who want to get licensed and recruit generally more satisfied with SIOP support licensed I-Os to develop a Q&A panel in practitioner areas than were respondents for the annual SIOP conference on fre- working in other employment settings. The quently asked questions about licen- lowest ratings for satisfaction were generally sure and the pros and cons of pursuing from respondents working in the private sec- licensure. tor, most notably in the area of SIOP leadership’s understanding of key practice issues. In addition to the satisfaction ratings by support area, there was a range of write-in Based on the satisfaction ratings, SIOP may comments on the “satisfaction with SIOP” want to consider the following efforts to question. Some perception issues regard- improve member satisfaction for I-Os in ing the value of practitioners within SIOP different employment settings: appear to remain.

54 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 • I think a lot of practitioners feel pretty the opportunity to learn more through disillusioned at this point. seminars. • While I value the research tremen- • Provide opportunities for midcareer dously, SIOP is heavily skewed towards (5–7 years) professionals. the academic teaching and research • Continue to add practitioner related with very little focus on application, sessions to SIOP conferences with ma- which is our true value as a science. jor businesses being the presenter(s). This allows for real life knowledge of However, there were also some positive what other companies are doing and comments regarding progress SIOP has how as it relates to all things talent made since 2008 in support of practi- management. tioners: The PPC will review these results and work • Good things have been happening with with SIOP and related SIOP committees to SIOP over the last 4 decades. (a) It has continue to develop projects and resourc- grown. (b) [Its] journal has increased es to meet the needs of SIOP practitioners, its visibility. (c) I’ve missed attending regardless of the employment setting in annual meetings, but colleagues report which they practice. satisfaction. • I see more panels at SIOP with I-O Conclusions [practitioners]. That is good! • I am thrilled to see this survey; it gives The PPC created and fielded the 2015 me hope that SIOP cares about my Practitioner Needs Survey to identify and needs as a practitioner. gather data on a number of areas related to professional practice. As is evident, Finally, many respondents made specific there are some areas for improving sat- requests for support from respondents that isfaction with practitioner support areas. SIOP may choose to address in the future. Both SIOP and the PPC have demonstrated a willingness to develop strategies • Strengthen the networks and career and resources to improve practitioners’ development opportunities; better satisfaction with SIOP in support areas. define career paths; create marketing We recommend that SIOP and the PPC collateral that can be used to differen- continue to focus their efforts on meeting tiate/highlight the advantages of the the specific needs of practitioners in the I-O training compared with traditional environments in which they work. HR (MLR / MHRM) or business man- Next Steps agement (MBA) education. • More short seminars via teleconfer- ence would be helpful. As an educa- We intend to use the results of this survey tor I do not make enough to attend in a similar fashion to how the 2008 survey conferences but would very much like results were used by the PPC in setting the The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 55 committee’s agenda for the near term. For trial-organizational psychology. The Industri- instance, this study interfaces directly with al-Organizational Psychologist, 46(4), 45–56. recent efforts of SIOP’s Professional Prac- Silzer, R. F. & Cober, R. T. (2008, April). Practi- tice Committee, such as the Careers Study, tioner Needs Survey: 2008 results overview. the Webinars Project, the Business Acu- Executive Committee invited presentation at the 23rd Annual Conference of the Society of men Competency project, and the White Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Paper Series just to name a few. Further- Francisco, CA. more, both the ratings and open-ended Silzer, R. F., Cober, R. T., & Erikson, A. R. (2010, feedback provide the PPC with a wealth of April). Practice perspectives: Where I-O resources to consider developing to meet worlds collide: The nature of I-O practice. practitioner needs. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist (TIP), 47(4), 95–103. In subsequent TIP articles, we will address Silzer, R. F., Cober, R. T., Erickson, A. R., & other results from this survey in a more in- Robinson, G. (2008). Practitioner needs survey: Final survey report depth manner, including making compar- . Bowling Green, OH: Society for Industrial and Organizational isons to the 2008 survey where possible. Psychology. In the interim, we welcome any questions Silzer, R. F., Cober, R. T., Erickson, A. R., & Rob- you may have about the results, and we inson, G. (2008, July). Practitioner satisfac- thank you for your participation and con- tion with SIOP. The Industrial-Organizational tinued support of the work of the PPC. Psychologist (TIP), 46(1), 43–58. Silzer, R. F., Erickson, A. R., & Cober, R. T. (2009, January). Practice perspectives: Licensing References and industrial-organizational psychologists. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, Cober, R. T., Silzer, R. F., Erickson, A. R. (2009). 46(3), 90–99. Science–practice gaps in industrial–organiza- Silzer, R. F., Erickson, A. R., & Cober, R. T. (2011, tional psychology: Part I–Member data and January). Practice perspectives: Practitioner perspectives. The Industrial-Organizational cohort differences: Different career stages or Psychologist (TIP), 47(1), 97–105. changing views. The Industrial-Organization- Cober, R. T., Silzer, R. F., & Erickson, A. R. al Psychologist (TIP), 47(3), 57–70. (2009, October). Practice perspectives: Sci- Silzer, R. F., Erickson, A. R., Robinson, G., & ence-practice gaps in industrial-organization- Cober, R. (2008, October). Practice perspec- al psychology: Part II. The Industrial-Organi- tives: Practitioner professional development. zational Psychologist (TIP), 46(2), 103–110. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist Erickson, A. R., Silzer, R. F., Robinson, G. & (TIP), 46(2), 39–56. Cober, R. T. (2009, April). Promoting indus-

56 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 A Historical Look at Theory in Industrial-Organizational Psychology Journals

One of SIOP President Jose Cortina’s initiatives involved reex- amining the requirement that journal articles make a theoretical contribution as a prerequisite for publication. If you attended the recent SIOP conferences, you likely saw several sessions related to Cortina’s initiatives in plenary sessions (Cortina, 2014a, 2015a) the theme track (Cucina & Tonidandel, 2015; Köhler, et al., 2015; Tonidandel, 2015), and elsewhere in the program (Cucina, et al., 2015). Cortina also discussed the role of theoretical contributions in I-O research in several of his TIP columns. He suggested that Eden’s (1990) field research on Pygmalion effects would be desk rejected by most editors today as it does not have a “theoretical contribution” (Cortina, 2015b, p. 9). Although Cortina (2014b) admitted that he “ha[s] been as much a part of the problem as anyone” (p. 8), he came to realize that requiring authors to make theoretical contributions was a mistake leading authors to publish theories “that are just plain incorrect” (Cortina, 2014c, p.9). Now his “wrong-dar is going off like crazy” (Cortina, 2015b, p. 9), and he believes that the current state of affairs is “kind of a bizarre way to conduct a scientific field” (Cortina, 2013, p. 11).

Other authors have begun to reexamine the emphasis on Jeffrey M. Cucina theoretical contributions. Some have noted a trend in our U.S. Customs and academic journals whereby there is more emphasis on theory Border Protection and less emphasis on “atheoretical” and “empirical” findings, which the personnel selection literature has especially Karen O. Moriarty been accused of containing (Aguinis, Bradley, & Broderson, IBM 2014; Ryan & Ployhart 2014). The first author has stated that I-O psychologists have begun to define “theory” differently Note. The views from other scientists and that the field needs to return to the expressed in this paper scientific method (Cucina, Hayes, Walmsley, & Martin, 2014). are those of the author and do not necessarily Gupta and Beehr (2014) also criticized the role of theory in I-O reflect the views of U.S. research, pointing out that by not allowing researchers to pub- Customs and Border lish more than one test of a theory, I-O’s newer theories have Protection or the U.S. become nonfalsifiable (and falsifiability is one of the hallmarks federal government. of scientific theory). Other researchers have made similar comments about the management and intelligence literatures.

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 57 For instance, Hambrick (2007) wrote that the copies manually by visiting the “stacks” management’s “theory fetish” actually “re- at the University of Maryland, College tards” understanding (p. 1346) and Deary Park. We also used the article search tools (2014) recently stated the he has “never on each journal’s website to identify edito- lost [his] nausea in response to ‘big theory’ rials (which often expound upon the jour- in intelligence” research. nals’ scopes and criteria), and we obtained copies of the editorials. Next, we read the In this issue’s History Corner, we document materials and noted the trends in role of the rise of theory in I-O psychology’s two theory in the scope and criteria for JAP and most prominent journals: the Journal of PPsych, which are described below. Applied Psychology (JAP) and Personnel Psychology (PPsych). Twenty years ago, Journal of Applied Psychology Sutton and Staw (1995) observed that these two journals focused on empiri- The initial volume of JAP was published in cal research at the expense of “theory.” 1917. At that time the published scope of However, Kepes and McDaniel (2013) the journal made no mention of the word have noted that this is no longer the case “theory.” Instead, the scope of JAP was today; they noted a dramatic increase in “the application of psychology to vocation- the emphasis on theory in JAP from the al activities…[and]…everyday activities, editorships of Schmitt (1989) to Kozlowski such as reading, writing, speaking…” (In- (2009). This issue’s column builds on Kepes troduction, 1917, p. 1–2). The scope also and McDaniel’s observations by first con- encompassed individual differences and ducting a historical qualitative review of the influence of “environmental condi- the scope and criteria for JAP and PPsych, tions, such as climate, weather, [etc.].” The and then conducting a quantitative review journal set an “extreme limit” of 20 pages of the focus on theory over the history in for manuscript length and asked authors to these two journals as well as other I-O and focus on “practical applications of psychol- non-I-O journals. ogy” (p. 2). In the foreword for the journal, editors Hall, Baird, and Geissler (1917) Qualitative Review of Journal Scope and stated that in addition to being concerned Publication Criteria with “theoretical problems” of psychology, every psychologist has an interest in mak- We begin by qualitatively reviewing the ing the world a better place by enhancing scope and publication criteria of JAP and “human efficiency” and “human happi- PPsych from their initial issues to the ness” (p. 6). They stated that the purpose present time. To perform this review, we of JAP was to focus on “practical prob- obtained copies of the inside covers of the lems,” and “applied” psychological science first issue in each year’s volume of JAP and as opposed to “pure” science (p. 6-7). PPsych. Surprisingly, the inside covers do not appear in online archives of these jour- The scope of JAP remained largely un- nals’ articles; therefore, we had to obtain changed for nearly 30 years. By 1948, the 58 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 scope was rewritten to become slightly for contributors” (1971). Fleishman’s ed- broader. The scope, published on the itorial now mentioned that JAP preferred inside cover, stated that JAP preferred “conceptually based research—studies articles “in any field of applied Psychology which emerge from concepts or theories” (except clinical and consulting psycholo- (p. 1). However, he seemed to imply that gy)” that dealt with “quantitative investiga- an article did not need to develop a new tions” in a variety of areas (e.g., personnel theory; instead theories that were already selection, secondary school- [or higher-] developed, or being developed, could level prediction, training, job analysis, em- suffice for a conceptual basis. Fleishman ployee morale). JAP accepted articles that complained that the typical JAP’s manu- ranged from 500 to 16,000 words (with an script submission “provides no explanation average of around 4,000 words). of what has been learned to serve as a basis for generalization” (p. 2). However, Of particular note is the role of theory in the criteria for manuscript evaluation did the scope of JAP in 1948. JAP stated that not mention theory. Instead, the criteria “an occasional descriptive or theoretical included “(a) significance in contributing article, however, will be accepted if it deals new knowledge to the field, (b) tech- with some phase of applied psychology in nical adequacy, (c) appropriateness for a distinctive manner.” Thus, JAP focused [JAP], and (d) clarity of presentation” (p. primarily on empirical reports with theo- 2). Fleishman also stated that JAP would retical contributions being published only accept short notes for replication studies, occasionally. Less than 10 years later, the methodological issues, and “presentation statement concerning the role of theory in of ideas or theoretical discussion” (p. 2). JAP articles was slightly modified. In 1955, Later in Fleishman’s tenure, authors were the journal switched editors from to Don- instructed to be concise, to use good ald Paterson to John Darley (both of whom vocabulary, to conform to JAP’s writing were at the University of Minnesota). At style, and to make conclusions based on this time, the role of theory was changed the evidence in the article (Instructions to slightly. The scope of the journal (printed authors, 1974). In addition, the sentence on the inside front cover) stated “although indicating that theoretical and review arti- a descriptive or theoretical article may be cles would only be accepted if they made a accepted if it represents a special contri- special contribution remained in the inside bution in an applied field.” Thus, it was still front cover throughout Fleishman’s tenure. quite clear that a theoretical article was more of an exception rather than a rule. In 1977, John Campbell became editor of JAP. The scope of the journal and criteria By 1971, Edwin Fleishman became editor for publication remained largely unchanged of JAP; at this time the scope in the inside (with the exception of a few changes in front cover was shortened and readers wording). In his outgoing editorial, Camp- were referred to Fleishman’s editorial and bell (1982) mentioned the role of theory. a one-page article entitled “information For instance, he mentioned that his edito- The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 59 rial team desk rejected empirical studies need to make a “special contribution” to of the variables associated with response be accepted remained largely unchanged rates of surveys, “unless the studies were from Fleishman’s tenure as editor. In terms set in some larger theoretical context” (p. of theory, there were no notable changes 692). He also mentioned that some the- in JAP’s scope or evaluation criteria under oretical and conceptual submissions had the three subsequent editors (i.e., Neal been rejected because the idea or theory Schmitt, Philip Bobko,and Kevin Murphy). was already well described in the litera- However, in his outgoing editorial, Murphy ture. Campbell also discussed the “deduc- (2002) addressed the “stereotype” that tive”1 procedure of theory development, “theory doesn’t count all that much” for hypothesis writing, and empirical testing. JAP submissions, stating that “the idea He stated that although this procedure that theory is unimportant is absolutely is sometimes too idealistic, more theory wrong” (p. 1019). At this point in JAP’s testing would help applied psychology history, the best submissions took con- progress more quickly and that “more and cepts and theories from basic research better theories” were needed. Campbell and applied them to real-world problems. moderated his enthusiasm for theory by Many papers were rejected because due emphasizing that the ultimate goal of to a failure to tie a good idea with existing research should be to increase knowledge theories and findings from other areas of and to develop valid measures and import- basic and applied research. ant techniques rather than to test theory. In 2003, the scope of the journal became When Bob Guion became editor of JAP, more “theoretical” as the inside front cov- he furthered increased the role of theory er indicated that JAP “primarily considers in the journal. Guion (1988) noted that in empirical and theoretical investigations” 1961 almost half of all JAP articles were and that articles should be “empirical, written by non-academics and that most conceptual, or theoretical.” In his editorial, articles focused on methods and results Sheldon Zedeck (2003) mentioned the with only a brief introduction. This even- string “theor*” 13 times. He stated that tually led to what Guion characterized research published in JAP should generate as “a cry…against ‘raw empiricism’ and “theoretical insights” and that the edi- urging more theoretical understanding” torial team was “particularly interested (p. 693). Earlier, Guion (1983) defined in publishing theoretical and conceptual “theory as the coherence of a body of cognitive models” that relate to organiza- knowledge” and stated that JAP was not tional behavior and applied psychology (p. an “atheoretical” journal and that most 4). In fact, JAP issued a call for theoretical articles in JAP would “be tied to theory” and conceptual papers, leading a special with “clear implications for theory or for section with an introduction paper that practice” (p. 547). Nevertheless, the four clarified what the editorial team viewed criteria for publication and the statement as a good theory (Klein & Zedeck, 2004). that theoretical and review articles would Zedeck did not desire theoretical papers 60 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 that just reviewed the existing research encouraged (both on the website and in literature; instead he stated that theoreti- Chen’s 2015 editorial), which is contrast to cal papers should “go beyond the current previous statements that those types of literature” and “offer new theoretical in- articles “may” be accepted if they made a sights” and “propos[e] new explanations.” “special” contribution. Accordingly, the sentence indicating that a theoretical article “may be accepted if it Personnel Psychology represents a special contribution in an applied field” was removed from the inside The first issue of PPsych was published in front cover of JAP. The evaluation criteria 1948. In their editorial, Taylor and Mosier were also changed; now articles would be (1948) stated that the journal’s aim was to evaluated on the “significance of the theo- present empirical findings that could be retical and methodological contributions” read and understood by managers with- (Instructions to authors, 2004, p. 178). in an organization. The editors indicated that the journal should be heavily focused As noted by other authors (e.g., Kepes and on practical and applied issues related to McDaniel, 2013), JAP has become more personnel and that answers to research theoretically oriented in the past decade. questions would be based on facts “not Kozlowski’s (2009) editorial, which contains upon hunches” (p. 4). They also alluded to the string “theor*” 54 times, stated that a the scientific method when they stated that primary emphasis of JAP would be publish- knowledge about personnel psychology ing “empirical research and conceptual arti- would be incremental with “no earth-shak- cles” “that advance theoretical understanding discoveries” (p. 4). The inside of the first ing” (p. 1). He wrote that articles “first and front cover of PPsych indicated that the foremost” must make a “unique theoretical journal would publish “empirical research contribution” to be published (p. 1) and studies,” reviews “summarizing known that most manuscripts were rejected for facts and principles based on completed a failure to build and extend theory. The research,” reviews of important publica- most recent editorial, by Chen (2015) con- tions, discussions of applied problems (to tinues to emphasize the role of theory (the guide future research), and shorter research string “theor*” appears 20 times).2 notes. Instead of beginning each article with a theoretical contribution, the guidelines To this day, JAP continues to emphasize instructed authors to begin with a short the role of theory in the articles it publish- overview of the paper that could be under- es. The website for the journal indicates stood by a lay audience. The guidelines also that it still “primarily considers empiri- mentioned that readability of manuscripts cal and theoretical investigations” and was a key criterion for acceptance. that the type of articles is publishes are “theoretically driven” (American Psycho- Just 3 years after the inaugural issue, the logical Association, 2010, 2015). Theory inside front cover of the journal was mod- development and review articles appear ified. The journal continued to focus on The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 61 100%

90% P-Psych

80%

70% JAP

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0% 1869 1879 1889 1899 1909 1919 1929 1939 1949 1959 1969 1979 1989 1999 2009 Figure 1. Use of the string “theor*” in JAP and PPsych

100%

90%

80%

70%

JBP 60% HP IJSA

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0% 1980 1990 2000 2010 Figure 2. Use of the string “theor*” in Journal of Business and Psychology (JBP), Hu- man Performance (HP), and International Journal of Selection and Assessment (IJSA).

62 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 research (including methods, results, and terion. The second criterion was changed application) as well as literature reviews. to “empirical contribution,” which focused However, at this point, three criteria (i.e., on whether the data documented the hy- technical soundness, readability, and prac- potheses and assertions in the manuscript. ticality) were used as the basis for judging The practical contribution of a manuscript manuscripts. To be published, an article served as the third criterion. In addition, needed to be methodological sound but potential authors were referred to a check- also readable to both psychologists and list of criteria used by reviewers. “personnel executives.” Most pertinent here is the statement that “while articles Using an empirical approach to solicit dealing with basic research problems will input from reviewers, Campion (1993) be given consideration, priority will be compiled a checklist of criteria for evaluat- afforded to papers whose implications ing manuscripts. Theory took a prominent are for immediate and general problems.” role as the first criterion in the checklist Thus, practical implications were deemed was “theoretical importance,” which more important than theoretical implica- encouraged authors to take I-O psychology tions (although the inside front cover did in a “new direction” and to “change future not explicitly mention “theory”). research” (p. 707). The checklist also included a section on “conceptual develop- The criteria for publication in PPsych re- ment,” which focused on the design of the mained largely unchanged for decades. In study as well as theory. Although theory 1985, Paul Sackett became editor and the was clearly encouraged, one criterion in inside front cover was changed slightly to the checklist suggested that it was not indicate that the journal published “em- mandatory: “does not force a theoretical pirical applied research.” Ten years later, framework when the study is essentially theory began to creep into the journal’s exploratory” (p. 708). This criterion is in scope. Partway through Michael Cam- stark contrast to more recent observations pion’s editorship, the inside front cover by Cortina (2013, 2014a, 2014b, 2014c, mentioned that “theory development and 2015a, 2015b) and Locke, Williams, and other conceptual articles” were acceptable Masuda (2015). However, there were also for publication. However, it was still clear criteria indicating that manuscripts should that the journal would “mainly report “[go] beyond simply applying theory, and original empirical research.” In addition, instead [improve] theory” (p. 709) and the criteria for publication were also should “[make] a theoretical contribu- changed. Technical soundness, readability, tion” (p. 718). In fact, the string “theor*” and practicality no longer served as the appeared 28 times in the checklist.3 primary basis for judging a manuscript’s publishability. Instead, “conceptual con- The new criteria for publication lasted for tribution,” which covered “new ideas and several subsequent editorialships. In his insights” and whether the article would incoming editorial, John Hollenbeck (1997) “add to theory,” was added as the first cri- wrote that PPsych’s “mission will not change The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 63 100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

AMR 40% AMJ LQ IOP 30%

20%

10%

0% 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Figure 3. Use of the string “theor*” in Academy of Management Review (AMR), Academy of Management Journal (AMJ), Leadership Quarterly (LQ), and Industrial and Organiza- tional Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice (IOP).

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

PsychBull 40%

Am. Psyc. 30% JPSP 20%

10%

0% 1869 1879 1889 1899 1909 1919 1929 1939 1949 1959 1969 1979 1989 1999 2009 Figure 4. Use of the string “theor*” in Psychological Bulletin( PsychBull), American Psy- chologist (Am. Psyc.), and the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (JPSP).

64 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 100%

90%

80%

70%

Br. J. of 60% Soc. Psy.

50% Br. J. of Psy. 40%

30% JOOP

20%

10%

0% 1869 1879 1889 1899 1909 1919 1929 1939 1949 1959 1969 1979 1989 1999 2009 Figure 5. Use of the string “theor*” in British Journal of Social Psychology (Br. J. of Soc. Psy.), British Journal of Psychology (Br. J. of Psy.), and Journal of Organizational and Oc- cupational Psychology (JOOP). 100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

PNAS 30% Science Nature 20%

10%

0% 1869 1879 1889 1899 1909 1919 1929 1939 1949 1959 1969 1979 1989 1999 2009 Figure 6. Use of the string “theor*” in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), Science, and Nature.

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 65 under my editorship” and that manuscripts gone from taking a backseat role to serving would continue to be “evaluated in terms as the driver of whether articles are deemed of the conceptual, empirical, and practical sufficient for publication (according to pub- contribution they make…” (p. i). The criteria lication criteria and the journals’ scopes). were left unchanged by the subsequent edi- However, the question remains: How much tors, Ann Marie Ryan and Michael Burke. theory is being published today in these journals compared to previous years? To In 2010, the criteria were changed to answer this question, we conducted full-text require a theoretical contribution (instead literature searches for the string “theor*,” of a conceptual contribution). A theoreti- which searches for all permutations of the cal contribution was defined as “new and term “theory” including words such as innovative ideas and insights” that “mean- “theoretical,” “theories,” and “theorize.” We ingfully extending existing theory.” Fred- conducted our searches separately for each erick Morgeson (2011) elaborated on the year the journals were published. (As men- new criterion, stating that typical articles tioned previously, the inside covers of jour- should make a contribution to the three nals are not included in full-text databases, areas (theoretical, empirical, and practi- therefore our searches did not identify cal); however, articles that focused pri- these materials.) For each year, we recorded marily on theoretical contributions would the number of entries that contained the also be acceptable. The second criterion, string “theor*” and the total number of en- empirical contribution, was retained but tries in the journal. Next, we computed the reworded, and the third criterion, prac- percentage of articles containing the search tical contribution, was left unchanged. string for each year of publication. Morgeson encouraged the submission of theory development articles and men- For comparison purposes, we decided to tioned the string “theor*” eight times. In conduct similar reviews for other scientif- his editorial, Bradford Bell (2014) reiter- ic journals. We selected a number of I-O ated many of the themes in Morgeson’s psychology journals (i.e., Human Per- editorial. Bell also mentioned that the formance, Industrial and Organizational editorial team was interested in “theo- Psychology: Perspectives on Science and ry development” articles (among other Practice, International Journal of Selection types) and that most articles would be and Assessment, Journal of Business and expected to make theoretical, empirical, Psychology, Journal of Organizational and and practical contributions. He mentioned Occupational Psychology, and Leadership the string “theor*” six times. Quarterly). In addition, we also included journals from other domains of psychology Quantitative Review of the Prominence of (American Psychologist, British Journal of Theory in Journal Articles Psychology, British Journal of Social Psy- chology, Journal of Personality and Social So far we have shown that over the course Psychology, and Psychological Bulletin,) of JAP and PPsych’s histories, theory has as well as management (i.e., Academy 66 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 of Management Journal and Academy of The remainder of Figure 3 presents plots Management Review). Finally, we includ- for the two Academy of Management ed the three most prominent multidisci- journals and Leadership Quarterly. His- plinary scientific journals in our review: torically, articles in these journals have Proceedings of the National Academy of mentioned theory quite often. Interesting- Sciences (PNAS), Nature, and Science. ly, the Academy of Management Journal began mentioning theory in about 60% of The percentage of articles in the JAP and entries; now, it mentions theory almost all PPsych that mention theory are plotted in of the entries. Figure 1. In the inaugural issues of these journals, theory was mentioned in 11% and In Figure 4, we present plots for other 30% of the entries, respectively. In con- domains of American psychology. Psycho- trast, the results for 2015 indicate that 79% logical Bulletin has increased its use of and 100% of the entries mention theory, the string “theor*” moving from 33% in respectively. PPsych’s use of theory has 1904 to 77% today. In contrast, the Journal been steadily increasing since the inaugural of Personality and Social Psychology and issue (in fact the Spearman rho correlation American Psychologist have maintained between year of publication and the per- relatively lower use of the string “theor*.” centage of articles mentioning theory is .86). Figure 5 presents plots for three British In contrast, JAP’s use of theory was relatively journals. The British Journal of Psychology flat before taking off in 2003, which is con- and the British Journal of Social Psychology sistent with the qualitative review described have maintained very high rates of the use above. Clearly, our field’s researchers are of the string “theor*” over the years, with mentioning theory a lot more today than in the exception of a temporary dip occurring the past in the two most prominent journals. in the early 2000s. In contrast, the Jour- nal of Organizational and Occupational Surprisingly, we noticed that the trend for Psychology has had an increase in the use an increase in “theory” was not as marked of the string “theor*” but is still at lower in other publications. We will first turn our levels than other I-O psychology journals. attention to the remaining I-O psychology journals in Figures 2 and 3. Figure 2 depicts Most notably, there has been little in- the Journal of Business and Psychology, crease in the emphasis on “theory” in Sci- Human Performance, and the International ence, Nature, and PNAS in recent years. As Journal of Selection and Assessment. The shown in Figure 6, these journals contain first journal has had a high rate of the use far fewer entries that contain the search of the term theory since its inception and string “theor*” than I-O and management has been steadily increasing. In contrast, journals. Although there was a period of the latter two journals and Industrial and time in the first half of the 20th century Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on when PNAS articles mentioned theory a Science and Practice (shown in Figure 3) lot, use of the string “theor*” is now only have mentioned theory far less. slightly higher than in Science and Nature. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 67 Conclusion clusion is true with a probability that is less than 100%) instead of than moving from a Our results are clear, I-O psychology began specific statement to a general conclusion. as an applied field that focused primarily Note that both deduction and induction can on empirical and practical contributions, involve reasoning from the particular to the general and from the general to the particu- much like other areas of psychology and lar (Colberg, 1985). science in general. However, today there 2 In comparison, Hall, Baird, and Geissler’s ed- is a significant emphasis on theory in our itorial (1917) mentioned the string “theor*” two most prominent journals’ scope/publi- once, Fleishman (1971) 5 times, Campbell’s cation criteria and articles. With respect to (1982) 26 times, Guion’s (1983) 10 times, theory, it appears that JAP and PPsych are Schmitt’s (1989) 7 times, Bobko’s (1995) 4 becoming less similar to other American times, Murphy’s (1997) 5 times, and Zedeck’s psychology journals and more like man- (2003) 13 times. Prior to Fleishman, editori- agement and British journals. We find the als were much less frequent and tended to results for Science, Nature, and PNAS to be focus on introducing special sections. 3 In comparison, the original editorial by the most interesting. These three journals Taylor and Mosier (1947) did not include the are the gold standard for research publica- string “theor*” at all, nor did editorials by tions in all areas of the sciences (especially Hakel (1976, 1996), Campion (1991), Hol- in the “hard sciences”), yet theory plays lenbeck (1997), and Morgeson (2013). The a lesser role in these basic science jour- editorial by Campion (1997) contained four nals than in applied psychology journals. references to “theor*.” Ideally, basic research journals would focus on establishing and testing theories and References applied research journals would focus on implementing theoretical findings in the Aguinis, H., Bradley, K. J., & Broderson, A. real world. It is somewhat ironic that we (2014). Industrial-organizational psychol- are in an applied field that is now placing a ogists in business schools: Brain drain or Industrial and Organizational great emphasis on theory. eye opener? Psychology, 7(3), 284–303. American Psychological Association. (2010). Notes Journal of Applied Psychology: Description. 1 Colberg, Nester, and Trattner (1985) pointed Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/ out that I-O psychologists often use incorrect web/20100418210622/http://www.apa.org/ conceptualizations of deduction and induc- pubs/journals/apl tion; they traced this misconception to Thur- American Psychological Association. (2015). stone (1938). Philosophers define deduction Journal of Applied Psychology: Description. as reasoning with absolute certainty (i.e., Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/pubs/ provided the premises are true, the con- journals/apl/ clusion must be true with 100% certainty) Bell, B. S. (2014). Rigor and relevance. Person- instead of moving from a general statement nel Psychology, 67(1), 1–4. to a specific conclusion. Induction is properly Bobko, P. (1995). Editorial. Journal of Applied defined as reasoning with uncertainty (i.e., Psychology, 80(1), 3–5. provided the premises are true, the con- 68 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Campbell, J. P. (1982). Editorial: Some remarks the Society for Industrial and Organizational from the outgoing editor. Journal of Applied Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. Psychology, 67(6), 691–700. Cortina, J. M. (2015b). A message from your Campion, M. A. (1991). Editorial. Personnel president. The Industrial-Organizational Psychology, 44(1), i. Psychologist, 52(3), 7–9. Campion, M. A. (1993). Editorial: Article review Cucina, J. M., Nicklin, J. M., Ashkanasy, N., checklist: A criterion checklist for reviewing Cortina, J. M., Mathieu, J. E., & McDaniel, M. research articles in applied psychology. Per- A. (2015). The role of theory in industrial-or- sonnel Psychology, 46, 705–718. ganizational psychology research and prac- Campion, M. A. (1997). Editorial: Rules for tice. Debate presented at the 30th Annual references: Suggested guidelines for choos- Conference of the Society for Industrial and ing literary citations for research articles in Organizational Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. applied psychology. Personnel Psychology, Cucina, J. M., & Tonidandel, S. (2015). Meth- 50, 165–167. ods, madness, and truth: Tensions among Chen, G. (2015). Editorial. Journal of Applied publishing, theory, and replication. Com- Psychology, 100(1), 1–4. munity of Interest session presented at the Colberg, M. (1985). Logic‐based measurement 30th Annual Conference of the Society for of verbal reasoning: A key to increased Industrial and Organizational Psychology, validity and economy. Personnel Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. 38(2), 347–359. Cucina, J. M., Hayes, T. L., Walmsley, P. T., & Colberg, M., Nester, M. A., & Trattner, M. H. Martin, N. R. (2014). It is time to get medie- (1985). Convergence of the inductive and val on the overproduction of pseudotheory: deductive models in the measurement of How Bacon (1267) and Alhazen (1021) can reasoning abilities. Journal of Applied Psy- save I-O psychology. Industrial and Organi- chology, 70(4), 681. zational Psychology: Perspectives on Science Cortina, J. M. (2013). In Z. Sheng (Interviewer). and Practice, (3)7 , 356–364. An interview with SIOP’s newly elected pres- Deary, I. (2014, December 14). Interview for ident, Dr. Jose Cortina. The I/ON: The Official 2014 Lifetime Achievement Award, Inter- Newsletter of the Industrial/Organizational national Society for Intelligence Research. Psychology Program at George Mason Uni- Retrieved from http://www.isironline. versity. Fairfax, VA: George Mason University. org/2014lifetimeachievmentawardiandeary/ Retrieved from http://www.gmu.edu/org/ Eden, D. (1990). Pygmalion in management: iopsa/Fall2013ION_updatedFINALpdf.pdf Productivity as a self-fulfilling prophecy. Cortina, J. M. (2014a). Presidential address. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books/DC Heath Speech presented at the 29th Annual Confer- and Com. ence of the Society for Industrial and Organi- Fleishman, E. A. (1971). Editorial. Journal of zational Psychology, Honolulu, HI. Applied Psychology, 55(1), 1–2. Cortina, J. M. (2014b). A message from your Guion, R. M. (1983). Editorial: Comments from president. The Industrial-Organizational the new editor. Journal of Applied Psycholo- Psychologist, 52(2), 7–12. gy, 68(4), 547–551 Cortina, J. M. (2014c). A message from your Guion, R. M. (1988). Special section: From psy- president. The Industrial-Organizational chologists in organizations. [Editorial]. Jour- Psychologist, 52(1), 7–11. nal of Applied Psychology, 73(4), 693–694. Cortina, J. M. (2015a). Presidential address. Gupta, N., & Beehr, T. A. (2014). Industri- Speech presented at the 30th meeting of al–organizational psychologists moving to The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 69 business schools: Potholes in the road to Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. migration? Industrial and Organizational Kozlowski, S. W. J. (2009). Editorial. Journal of Psychology, 7(03), 320–324. Applied Psychology, 94, 1–4. Hakel, M. D. (1976). Editorial. Personnel Psy- Locke, E. A., Williams, K. J., & Masuda, A. chology, 29(2), ii. (2015). The virtue of persistence. The In- Hakel, M. D. (1996). A note from the publisher. dustrial-Organizational Psychologist, 52(4), Personnel Psychology, 49(2), i. 104–106. Hall, G. S., Baird, J. W., & Geissler, L. R. (1917). Morgeson, F. P. (2011). Editorial: “Personnel Foreword. Journal of Applied Psychology, are people!” Personnel Psychology, 64, 1–5. 1(1), 5–7. Morgeson, F. P. (2013). Editorial: 1,278 days, Hambrick, D. C. (2007). The field of manage- but who’s counting? A note from the ment’s devotion to theory: too much of a outgoing editor. Personnel Psychology, 66, good thing? Academy of Management Jour- 803–804. nal, 50(6), 1346–1352. Murphy, K. R. (1997). Editorial. Journal of Ap- Hollenbeck, J. R. (1997). Editorial. Personnel plied Psychology, 82(1), 3–5. Psychology, 50(1), ii. Murphy, K. R. (2002). Editorial. Journal of Ap- Information for contributors. [Editorial]. (1971). plied Psychology, 87(6), 1019. Journal of Applied Psychology, 55(5), ii. Ryan, A. M., & Ployhart, R. E. (2014). A century Instructions to authors. [Editorial]. (1974). of selection. Annual Review of Psychology, Journal of Applied Psychology, 59(6), ii. 65(20), 1–25. Instructions to authors. [Editorial]. (2004). Schmitt, N. (1989). Editorial. Journal of Applied Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(1), 178. Psychology, 74(6), 843–845. Introduction. [Editorial]. (1917). Journal of Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. (1995). What theory Applied Psychology, 1(1), 1–3. is not. Administrative Science Quarterly, Kepes, S. & McDaniel, M. A. (2013). How 40(3), 371–384. trustworthy is the scientific literature in I-O Taylor, E. K., & Mosier, C. I. (1948). Editorial: psychology? Industrial and Organizational Personnel psychology–the methods of sci- Psychology: Perspectives on Science and ence applied to the problems of personnel. Practice, 6, 252–268. Personnel Psychology, 1(1), 1–6. Klein, K. J., & Zedeck, S. (2004). Introduction Thurstone, L. L. (1938). Primary mental abili- to the special section on theoretical models ties. Psychometric Monographs, (No. 1). and conceptual analyses: Theory in applied Tonidandel, S. (Chair, 2015). Rethinking our psychology: Lessons (re)learned. Journal of approach to organizational science.Theme Applied Psychology, 89(6), 931–933. Track presented at the 30th Annual Confer- Köhler, T. (Chair), Vandenburg, R. J., Aguinis, H., ence of the Society for Industrial and Organi- Rogelberg, S. G., Cortina, J. M., & Landis, R. zational Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. S. (2015). Pursuing better science in orga- Zedeck, S. (2003). Editorial. Journal of Applied nizational psychology. Theme Track session Psychology, 88(1), 3–5. presented at the 30th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational

70 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 The SIOP Living History Series: An Interview With Frank L. Schmidt

In April, the SIOP History Committee conducted its third installment of the SIOP Living History Series at the annual SIOP conference. The goal of this series is to interview individuals who have made historic contributions to research or practice in I-O psychology. There is perhaps no better way to learn about the early activities of SIOP than by listening to our early contributors’ experiences.

This year’s interviewee was Dr. Frank L. Schmidt. In the personnel selection literature, there is perhaps no greater luminary than Dr. Schmidt and his coauthor Dr. John E. Hunter. As shown in Table 1, popular personnel selection textbooks cite the pair more frequently than any other set of authors. The various editions of their meta-analysis textbook (Schmidt & Jeffrey M. Cucina Hunter, 2014) and Psychological Bulletin U.S. Customs and Border article on 98 years of personnel selection research (Schmidt Protection & Hunter, 1998) have been cited 4,702 and 2,792 times, respectively. As one research psychologist recently opined, “if Karen O. Moriarty you need a cite for something in selection, it’s likely Schmidt IBM and Hunter” (Chihwei Su, personal communication July 15, 2014). Dr. Schmidt’s career has spanned both academia and practice serving as a psychologist in the federal government and as a professor at three universities. He is the winner of numerous awards and honors (e.g., SIOP’s inaugural Dunnette Prize, SIOP’s 1995 Distinguished Scientific Contributions Award, SIOP’s 1974 Cattell Research Design Award, APS’s

2007–2008 James McKeen Cattell Fellow SIOPAward, Living Historythe AmericanSeries 3 Kim Johnson University of South Florida Table 1 Schmidt and Hunter Appear in Personnel Selection Textbooks More Than Any Other Author Textbook Number of times appears in index Note. The views expressed in this Author Title Schmidt Hunter Next highest paper are those of the author and do Cook Personnel selection: Adding 52 51 33 Michael A. McDaniel not necessarily reflect the views of (2009) value through people (one of Schmidt’s students) Whetzel & Wheaton Applied measurement: 50 43 37 Neal Schmitt U.S. Customs and Border Protection (2007) Industrial psychology in human or the U.S. federal government. resources management Gatewood & Feild Human resource selection 54 43 37 Wayne F. Cascio (2001)

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 71

Psychological Foundation’s 2013 Gold published memoir (Schmidt, 2015). Medal Lifetime Achievement Award References for Applications of Psychology) and has authored over 200 publications. His work Cook, M. (2009). Personnel selection: Adding has been cited 36,213 times, and he value through people. (5th ed.). Malden, MA: was identified by Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Wiley-Blackwell. Podsakoff, & Barchrach (2008) as being Gatewood, R. D., & Feild, H. S. (2001). Human in the 99th percentile for citations within resource selection. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt management. College Publishers. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, N. P., & Barchrach, D. G. (2008). Scholarly During the session, Dr. Schmidt discussed influence in the field of management: A his career in I-O psychology and his bibliometric analysis of the determinants pioneering work on validity generalization of university and author impact in the and meta-analysis. He covered his management literature in the past quarter work at Michigan State University, the century. Journal of Management, 34, 641– U.S. Civil Service Commission/Office 720. of Personnel Management, George Schmidt, F. L. (2003). John E. Hunter (1939– Washington University, and the University 2002). American Psychologist, 58, 238. of Iowa. He also spoke of his longstanding Schmidt, F. L. (2015). The importance of being professional relationship with John Hunter Frank: My life in stories and anecdotes. Iowa City, IA: Frank Schmidt Consulting. who passed away in 2002 (Schmidt, Schmidt, F. L, & Hunter, J. E. (1998). The validity 2003). Dr. Schmidt closed the interview and utility of selection methods in personnel by discussing his thoughts on the I-O psychology: Practical and theoretical psychology field and his activities in implications of 85 years of research findings. retirement. The SIOP Administrative Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 262–274. Office arranged to record the interview, Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (2014). Methods which has been uploaded to SIOP’s of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias official YouTube channel: https://www. in research findings (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, youtube.com/watch?v=YmvbREPK0kE. In CA: SAGE. addition, a detailed narrative response Whetzel, D. L., & Wheaton, G. R. (2007). Applied measurement: Industrial psychology to the interview questions has been in human resources management. Mahwah, uploaded onto SIOP’s website (www.SIOP. NJ: Erlbaum. org/LivingHistory/Schmidt.pdf). More information about Dr. Schmidt’s life and work can also be found in his recently

72 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1

A Year in Review: #SIOP15 Technology & Social Media Highlights!

Over the past year, we’ve seen technology enhancements impact and shape our workplace practices and research topics. In 2013 alone, over $600 million dollars in funding was given to start-up human resource technology companies to build out new capabilities such as applicant tracking tools, video interview capabilities, and other employee development software (Lanik et al., 2015).

The integration of technology and social media in the work- Application of Modern place has brought both positive effects such as improvement Technology and Social in efficiency and cost savings as well as negative effects includ- Media in the Workplace ing the introduction of new legal, ethical, and validity concerns. Given these rapid changes, we’ve dedicated our 2-year anniversary issue of The Modern App to summarizing the influence technology has had on our field by discussing trends in current research. Although these themes and topics are not exhaustive, they should help I-O psychologists understand how technology is changing our work for better and worse.

In order to identify current hot topics, we examined the research and sessions from our recent Society for Industri- Nikki Blacksmith al-Organizational Psychology (SIOP) conference. Across 865 The George sessions at SIOP, approximately 11% of topics were related to Washington University technology and social media. Below we have categorized the trends within broad areas of I-O psychology, including recruitment and selection, virtual workplaces, training, and big data.

Recruitment and Selection

It is now the norm to include technology and social media in the recruitment and selection process. However, I-O psychologists are just beginning to understand the effects of these new workplace practices. Below are three themes that emerged from the SIOP 2015 conference. Tiffany Poeppelman Google (via Adecco)

74 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Legal Implications of Leveraging Social Validity and Utility of Technology- Media in the Recruiting and Hiring Process Enhanced Assessments

Many organizations leverage information Traditional paper and pencil tests are found on social media and/or integrate new being transformed and delivered through social networking tools into their systems computers and mobile devices with vid- without thinking about the legal and ethical eo-based items and within virtual reality implications and the lack of empirical sup- scenarios. With changes in the way these port for usage (Mills et al., 2015). Research assessments are traditionally delivered, has shown that invasive employer requests I-O psychologists are recognizing a need to to access applicant Facebook pages tend to ensure equivalence across measures. This decrease applicant perceptions of organi- is due to the fact that several features of zational justice and job pursuit intentions, technology-enhanced assessments could making these organizations less attractive impact the validity or usefulness of assess- (Menzies & Bartles, 2015). Another study ments and how applicants perform. For investigated issues of weight discrimination example, mobile delivery mode screens based on employers evaluating social media are smaller, candidates are more likely to information and determining whether be on the go as well as distracted during applicants engage in healthy or unhealthy the assessment, and navigation options behaviors (McHugh & Joseph, 2015). may change depending on the device being used (Boyce et al., 2015). Other issues such Optimizing User Experience in Technology- as development algorithms, determining Enhanced Assessment item exposure frequencies in computer adaptive testing, and protecting integrity Technology is changing the testing envi- of the test are also huge concerns being ronment and organizations need to ensure investigated within the research (Moclaire, candidates are having a good experience. Olson, Drollinger, Vorm, & Foster, 2015). Over the past year, more researchers are investigating innovative delivery modes Although I-O psychologists are beginning (Payne et al., 2015) and other character- to increase their understanding of these istics that influence user experience such selection and recruiting impacts, there as test length, ATS integration, and much are still gaps that need to be addressed in more (Tafero, Granger, Lux, Steffensmeier, future research. We imagine this area will & Glatzhofer, 2015). Studies have shown continue to evolve in the coming years. that applicants in technology-mediated interviews (Blacksmith, Willford, & Behrend, Virtual Workplaces 2015) and unproctored Internet settings (Wasko, Lawrence, & O’Connell, 2015) Approximately 64 million workers telecom- were found to be less favorable in online muted in 2012, according to Global Work- settings than traditional settings. place Analytics (2013), an increase of 58% since 1997 (Jackson, 1997). This theme is The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 75 likely of no surprise because virtual work Computer-Mediated Communication in still continues to increase each year and Virtual Teams new technologies mitigate the associated challenges (Poeppelman & Blacksmith, Although technology continues to change 2015). Some of the most immediate re- virtual working conditions, it cannot replace search trends include balancing work and the value of face-to-face time. In face-to- life in virtual settings, effects of commu- face situations, group members share the nication methods, and virtual methods of same physical location, see and hear one performance management. another, receive facial indicators, and engage in camaraderie. Recent research con- Balancing Work and Life in Virtual Settings tinues to examine teamwork, communication, and methods of communication such Virtual workplaces are rapidly changing as mobile devices, text, and email messages our understanding and implementation to determine if the positive benefits of face- of work–life balance. This is due to the to-face can be replicated in virtual settings. realities of merging one’s home with work, which makes for longer workdays and For instance, research has shown com- weeks given everything is blended togeth- munication channels affect the type of er under one roof. Managing boundaries persuasive information readers attend to is critical. This can be done through strat- (Larson, Lipani, Zhu, & Kern, 2015) and egies such as recreating an office environ- emotional reactions (e.g., emotional -rec ment by having separate, designated areas ognition or emotional contagion process- for work activities; mimicking routines that es; Doerr, Clark, & Svyantek, 2015). Other are found in offices; and other behavioral research examined the moderating effect tactics (Basile & Beauregard, 2015). Other that virtuality has on the relationship research found frequent social cell phone between communication and performance use can buffer against harmful effects (Marlow, Lacerenza, Petruzzelli, & Salas, such as emotional exhaustion and poor 2015). Seely and DeChurch (2015) also sleep quality (Ragsdale & Hoover, 2015). developed and validated a psychometric Researchers suggest this might be due to measure of process sociomateriality which an increase in social support. Employees describes how member interactions are can experience positive affective benefits enabled, augmented, or impaired by the from teleworking but these benefits vary use of technology during task work. depending on several individual differences such as openness to experience, trait Performance Management rumination, and social connectedness outside of the workplace (Anderson, Kaplan, Managing virtual workers also requires a & Vega, 2015). new understanding of performance management within organizations. Predictors of con- textual performance such as organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs) differ in virtual 76 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 settings. Recent research identified two me- certainly includes the learning environment diating processes that can help explain the that encompasses training and develop- relationship between the frequency of tele- ment methods. Unlike before, training work and OCBs, which includes teleworkers’ can now be implemented through virtual perceptions of professional isolation and reality such as head-mounted display units their social identification with their work and computer-based methods. However, group (Kane & Sommer, 2015). Other recent recent research demonstrated that learn- research investigated the conceptual space ers with head-mounted displays performed of performance constructs and determined worse on posttests than those who used a that negative social networking behav- traditional computer-based method as me- iors are conceptually distinct from other diated by cognitive engagement (Howard counterproductive work behaviors (CWBs) et al., 2015). Learning environments are but share many of the same antecedents also being gamified (Armstrong & Landers, (Brown, Weidner, Wynne, & O’Brien, 2015). 2015; Broadfoot & Chambers, 2015), and These results also highlight that only some discussion channels are being leveraged to of the previous research investigating CWBs increase learner engagement (Cavanaugh, can be translated to our understanding of Landers, & Landers, 2015). For instance, re- negative social media postings. search by Broadfoot and Chambers (2015) found that employees who participated in Last, organizations are introducing new per- gamified training learned key facts and felt formance management practices with the more comfortable at work when applying advent of sophisticated technology. Exam- training knowledge. ples include methods of monitoring employee behavior electronically (Willford, Howard, Researchers are still striving to understand Cox, Badger, & Behrend, 2015), which can the best environments for virtual team be done through email and Internet usage, training (Horn et al., 2015) and effects computer and phone use, and workplace on learning attrition for online learning surveillance techniques that utilize video (Bauer, Cavanaugh, & Cameron, 2015). smartcard technology. As you might imag- Bauer et al. (2015) showed that self-ef- ine, electronic performance monitoring rais- ficacy increased the odds of a learner es issues of ethics and impacts on employee dropping out, whereas pretraining expe- attitudes. Future research will need to riences can have the opposite effect on examine additional effects of these monitor- attrition. Another study examined whether ing practices on employees. and to what degree video game and flight simulator experience contributed to the Training and Development prediction of psychomotor-based selection test scores and subsequent flight training New Approaches to Learning performance for a sample of student naval pilots (Drollinger et al., 2015). In addition, As technology has completely changed text-based peer discussions during lectures most organizational practices, this most were implemented to increase learner The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 77 engagement but may be harmful due to of I-O psychologists developing a tool that cognitive load increasing over time (Cava- assists in synthesis, analysis, and dissem- naugh et al., 2015). ination of more than a million scientific research findings. Upon completion, this Technology-Enhanced Training Delivery tool will be available to all researchers for meta-analytic analyses and to translate Training classrooms are continuously being research into practice instantaneously. enhanced with technology and new tools. Congrats to this team for winning the 2013 There are now readily accessible tools that Digging into Data Challenge! are aiding teaching including Skype, Black- board’s blog platform, PowerPoint’s record- Conclusion ing function, and Twitter (Bachiochi, Bulger, Everton, Bunk, & Giumetti, 2015). Research- The “HR technology renaissance” is not ers at this year’s event also highlighted only changing how organizations manage advances in technology-based training and their human capital (Lanik et al., 2015), but implications for understanding the psycho- there is a growing understanding among logical processes relevant in training. In the the community that to truly understand future, we will likely see increased learner and measure this rapid technological control as a function of new training tech- change, we as I-O psychologists must work nology (Behrend et al., 2015). together and with other fields and disciplines. Below are key themes from presen- Big Data tations at this year’s event:

Applicants and employees are leaving a • I-O psychology as a field must take an “digital footprint” and I-O psychologists introspective, critical look at how its are studying how to best utilize such data research methods and applied prac- with new tools such as MongoDB, Hadoop, tices are keeping pace with or falling and Python (Lee & Drown, 2015). Sessions behind the technological curve (Boyd, this year discussed issues such as populat- Morelli, Doverspike, Handler, & Illing- ed data matrices, data visualization, text worth, 2015). data mining, computers to score candi- • I-O psychology has only had a minor dates’ narrative essays and more (Meade, role in understanding how technol- Sinar, Bokhari, and Villanes, 2015). Of ogy-related efficacy judgments are particular concern is defining parameters formed and what their effects might for legal and ethical conduct when using be (Howardson et al., 2015). big data (Biga et al., 2015). • I-O psychologists need to build their technological skillsets (Aude et al., One particularly interesting session dis- 2015). There are common barriers cussed a new I-O big data project, called present in this cross-disciplinary field, metaBUS (Bosco, Uggerslev, Steel, & Field, and in order to continue to shed value 2015). This effort consists of a large team on our I-O skillset, we must be able to 78 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 communicate with other fields. Aude, S., Brusso, R., Barnieu, J., Johnston, J., • New technologies are commonplace in Landers, R., Mulvaney, R., & Zachary, W. today’s workplace environment. Ensur- (2015, April). I-Os as technologists: To start, press any key. Panel discussion resented at ing that the technology is successfully th transitioned remains an important the 30 Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, priority for I-O psychologists to ensure Philadelphia, PA. our interventions can improve the Bachiochi, P., Bulger, C., Everton, W., Bunk, J., workplace (Hedge et al., 2015). & Giumetti, G. (2015, April). Using teaching technology in the I-O classroom. Symposium There are specific technology and social presented at the 30th Annual Conference of media trends that continue to show up the Society for Industrial and Organizational each year at SIOP. Although some areas Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. have progressed and evolved, other areas Basile, K., & Beauregard, A. (2015, April). Mind still need to be examined. Hopefully, this the gap: Negotiating boundaries between work and home. article might also inspire some ideas for ses- Poster presented at the 30th Annual Conference of the Society for sions we need to see next year in Anaheim. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, We’d like to hear from you! What trends Philadelphia, PA. do you expect to see at #SIOP16? Bauer, K., Cavanaugh, K., & Cameron, H. (2015, April). Pre-training predictors of attrition from voluntary online training. Poster Email us at th [email protected] presented at the 30 Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. Tweet at us @themodernapp Behrend, T., Kraiger, K., Young, C., Beier, M., Fisher, S., Howardson, G.,…Weinhardt, J. Contact the authors on LinkedIn: (2015, April). Integrating technology and Nikki Blacksmith and training: New developments and frontiers. Tiffany Poeppelman Symposium presented at the 30th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and References Organizational Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. Biga, A., Weiner, S., Guzzo, R., Kloeckner, R., Rutigliano, P., Saari, L., & Scherbaum, C. Anderson, A., Kaplan, S., & Vega, R. (2015, (2015, April). Big data and identified employ- April). Who benefits from telework? Individu- ee surveys: Ethical issues and actions. Panel al differences and telework outcomes. Poster discussion presented at the 30th Annual presented at the 30th Annual Conference of Conference of the Society for Industrial and the Society for Industrial and Organizational Organizational Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. Blacksmith, N., & Poeppelman, T. (2014). Vid- Armstrong, M., & Landers, R. (2015, April). eo-based technology: The next generation of Enhancing training outcomes with gamifi- recruitment and hiring. The Industrial-Orga- cation. Poster presented at the 30th Annual nizational Psychologist, 52(2), 84–88. Conference of the Society for Industrial and Blacksmith, N., Willford, J.C., & Behrend, Organizational Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. T.S. (2015). Technology mediation lowers The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 79 interview ratings and applicant reactions: Doerr, A., Clark, M., & Svyantek, D. (2015, A meta-analysis. Poster presented at the April). Spreading like wildfire: Impact of 30th Annual Conference of the Society for communication channel on emotional con- Industrial and Organizational Psychology, tagion. Poster presented at the 30th Annual Philadelphia, PA. Conference of the Society for Industrial and Boyce, A., Morelli, N, Dages, K., Fursman, P., Organizational Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. Gray, C., Gutierrez, S., … Parker, B. (2015). Drollinger, S., Cox, B., Moclaire, C., Olson, T., Mobile devices in talent assessment: The Vorm, E., & Foster, F. (2015, April). Impact next chapter. Symposium presented at the of gaming and simulator experience on 30th Annual Conference of the Society for flight performance.Poster presented at the Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 30th Annual Conference of the Society for Philadelphia, PA. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Boyd, S., Morelli, N., Doverspike, D., Handler, Philadelphia, PA. C., & Illingworth, J. A. (2015, April). Linear GlobalWorkplaceAnalytics.com (2013). Latest I-O in an exponential world: Keeping pace telecommuting statistics. Retrieved from with technology. Panel discussion presented http://globalworkplaceanalytics.com/ at the 30th Annual Conference of the Society tele-commuting-statistics for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Hedge, J., Alonso, A., Cohen, D., Martineau, J., Philadelphia, PA. Kurtessis, J., Rizzuto, T., … Ohse, D. (2015, Bosco, F., Uggerslev, K., Steel, P., & Field, J. April). Exploring pathways and roadblocks (2015, April). Generating instant meta-anal- to successful workplace technology imple- yses using the metaBUS database and con- mentation. Symposium presented at the struct taxonomy. Master Tutorial presented 30th Annual Conference of the Society for at the 30th Annual Conference of the Society Industrial and Organizational Psychology, for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia, PA. Horn, Z., Marlow, S., Koehler, T., Lacerenza, C., Broadfoot, A., & Chambers, C. (2015, April). Hughes, A., Cooper, T., … Fischlmayr, I. (2015, Gamification wins! creating a customer ori- April). Virtual team development: Applying ented mindset for utility employees.Poster the science. Symposium presented at the presented at the 30th Annual Conference of 30th Annual Conference of the Society for the Society for Industrial and Organizational Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia, PA. Brown, A., Weidner, N., Wynne, K., & O’Brien, Howard, M., Resnick, T., Kutz, N., Mahla, K. (2015, April). Social networking use as E., Nestor, L., & Bet, J. (2015, April). Are a counterproductive work behavior.Poster head-mounted virtual reality systems useful presented at the 30th Annual Conference of for training and education? Poster presented the Society for Industrial and Organizational at the 30th Annual Conference of the Society Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cavanaugh, K., Landers, R., & Landers, A. Philadelphia, PA. (2015, April). Backchannel communication: Howardson, G., Foster Thompson, L., Yu, Can text messaging improve traditional P., Behrend, T., Kaminsky, S., Horn, R., … classroom learning? Poster presented at the Willford, J. (2015, April). Putting the “e” in 30th Annual Conference of the Society for efficacy: Understanding technology-related Industrial and Organizational Psychology, efficacy judgments. Symposium presented Philadelphia, PA. at the 30th Annual Conference of the Society 80 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Organizational Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia, PA. Menzies, T., & Bartles, L. (2015). Applicant Jackson, M. (1997). Telecommuters love staying reactions to employers’ requests to access away, new survey shows. The Denver Post, 4C. their Facebook pages. Poster presented at Kane, L., & Sommer, K. (2015, April). Telework, the 30th Annual Conference of the Society professional isolation, social identity, and for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, organizational citizenship behaviors. Poster Philadelphia, PA. presented at the 30th Annual Conference of Mills, M., Salute, C., Roulin, N., Shahani-Den- the Society for Industrial and Organizational ning, C., Zickar, M., & Zide, J. (2015). Se- Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. lection in the digital age: Social media’s Lanik, M., Barney, M., Baumgartner, N., Moran, challenges and opportunities. Panel discus- G., Smith, C., & Udom, I. (2015, April). Invited sion presented at the 30th Annual conference session: Future of HR from the perspective of for Society for Industrial and Organizational technology startups. Special event presented Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. at the 30th Annual Conference of the Society Moclaire, C., Olson, T., Drollinger, S., Vorm, for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, E, & Foster, C. (2015). Computer adaptive Philadelphia, PA. testing algorithm performance in simulated Larson, E., Lipani, L., Zhu, Z., & Kern, M. (2015, and applicant samples. Poster presented at April). The elaborated negotiation: Persua- the 30th Annual Conference of the Society sion and communication medium in negoti- for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, ations. Poster presented at the 30th Annual Philadelphia, PA. Conference of the Society for Industrial and Payne, H., Abraham, J., Lustenberger, D., Rice, Organizational Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. C., Roland, D., & Tafero, T. (2015). Everything Lee, W., & Drown, D. (2015, April). Tools for changes: Best practices for combining tests big data: MongoDB, Hadoop, and Python. with innovative contexts. Panel discussion Roundtable presented at the 30th Annual presented at the 30th Annual conference Conference of the Society for Industrial and for Society for Industrial and Organizational Organizational Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. Marlow, S., Lacerenza, C., Petruzzelli, A., & Poeppelman, T. & Blacksmith, N. (2015). Virtual Salas, E. (2015, April). The effect of virtuality workplaces: Technological functions can ad- on team communication: A meta-analysis. dress common challenges. The Industrial-Or- Poster presented at the 30th Annual Confer- ganizational Psychologist, 52(3), 108–112. ence of the Society for Industrial and Organi- Ragsdale, J. & Hoover, C. (2015, April). Using zational Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. cell phones for work and play during nonwork McHugh, B. & Joseph, D., (2015). Weight Time. Poster presented at the 30th Annual discrimination via SNS: Perceptions of over- Conference of the Society for Industrial and weight applicants’ Facebook profiles. Poster Organizational Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. presented at the 30th Annual Conference of Seely, P., & DeChurch, L. (2015, April). Embod- the Society for Industrial and Organizational ied teamwork: Development and validation Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. of the process sociomateriality scale. Poster Meade, A., Sinar, E., Bokhari, E., & Villanes, A. presented at the 30th Annual Conference of (2015, April). Theme track: Big data advanc- the Society for Industrial and Organizational es from computer science and statistics. Psychology, Philadelphia, PA. Special event presented at the 30th Annual Tafero, T., Grager, B., Lux, D., Steggensmeier, K., Conference of the Society for Industrial and & Glatzhofer, P. (2015). 20 years of changes The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 81 in pre-employment testing: Experiences and Willford, J., Howard, R., Cox, M., Badger, J., challenges. Panel discussion presented at & Behrend, T. (2015, April). A latent class the 30th Annual conference for Society for analysis of electronic performance moni- Industrial and Organizational Psychology, toring practices.Poster presented at the Philadelphia, PA. 30th Annual Conference of the Society for Wasko, L., Lawrence, A., & O’Connell, M. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, (2015). What matters in test environment? Philadelphia, PA. Poster presented at the 30th Annual Confer- ence of the Society for Industrial and Organi- zational Psychology, Philadelphia, PA.

82 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Would You Believe That We Even Fought Over Authorship Order for This Article?

Hey, have you ever had any concerns about authorship—order, rights, how to have such conversations? Yeah, so have we. We thought it’d be cool to have a better way to have these conversations, so we set out on a noble threefold path to address this:

1. What have people said about authorship before? 2. What do people say about it now? 3. What can we do about the difficulties that linger?

Here’s a report of how that went. We would like to hear what you think but let’s talk about that in a moment.

Part the First: The Past Is Behind Us With special emphasis on the issue of authorship in scholarly research, much has been published and discussed (e.g., Fine & Kurdek, 1993; Winston, 1985). One of the reasons for this abundance of publication/discussion could be that there are very few guidelines for working on scholarly projects (Fine & Kurdek, 1993). Most guidelines are drawn from either the APA Ethics guidelines (APA, 2010; Geelhoed, Phillips, Fischer, Bharati Belwalkar Shpungin, & Gong, 2007) or institution-specific guidelines on Louisiana Tech University “best practices in research” (Bebeau & Monson, 2011). De- spite their usefulness, they are limited in their scope.

Considering how important the issue of authorship is, you will be surprised to know that APA, in comparison to some other professional organizations, lacks comprehensive guidelines on authorship order and agreement of contribution (Osborne & Holland, 2009). Gauging limitations of existing guidelines, Winston (1985) came up with a scheme for evaluating author contributions using relative weights of research activities. Later (in 2002), the APA revised its Ethical Principles and Code of Conduct to add guidelines on publication credit. These Steven Toaddy resources have been helpful but, by their own admission, Louisiana Tech University leave a great deal to be decided by individuals, from weighing contributions to determining when and how to have authorship conversations.

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 83 More recent efforts (e.g., a few TIP articles als who have earned doctorates in indus- and SIOP sessions [DuVernet et al., 2008; trial and organizational psychology: Matt Highhouse 2014; Lefkowitz, 2005; Mac- Barney, Patrick Converse, Amy DuVernet, ey, 2003; McGinnis et al., 2008]) raised Sean Gasperson, Marne Pomerance, and further awareness of authorship issues an anonymous contributor. Senior panel- and attempted to provide solutions; how- ists provided us with insight into how au- ever, they also have left a great deal up thorship is typically determined, whereas in the air. With this article, we decided to some junior panelists offered their unique take it upon ourselves to find answers for perspectives as they are in a somewhat long-standing authorship questions. We liminal state between graduate school and do not claim to change the status quo but professional life. This informal “meeting hope that you give serious thought to the of minds” helped us achieve some clarity points we—with the assistance of others on authorship issues across academia and in our field—raise here. applied settings; we hope it does the same for you. To help put a framework around Part the Second: Current Affairs our discussions, we have developed a model (see Figure 1). The questions we We solicited a panel of individuals consist- asked were used to flesh out our under- ing of a fairly balanced mix of academi- standing of issues that may arise between cians and practitioners with varied levels power levels and within academia and of experience to discuss authorship and re- practice; that said, we don’t want you to lated issues. Our panel comprised individu- take the model too seriously.

Figure 1. Power and Academia/Practice Framework

84 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1

Page 3 of 8

Yes, Yet Again the Academia–Practice run most of the business. We wondered Gap! how these differences play out when one makes authorship decisions. All panelists agreed that publishing is sometimes valued in both worlds: always Intellectual Contribution Versus in academia and more variably in that of Relationship Building practice. A senior practitioner on the panel –Barney – said, for instance, that some firms We witnessed a general consensus among “abhor” publishing, some “tolerate” it, and panelists that intellectual contribution very few “celebrate” it. A senior faculty warrants authorship; however, notions member on the panel—Converse—agreed about what constitutes intellectual con- that publishing is highly encouraged in aca- tribution were different. We noticed that demia. However, a “dark side” of academic the standards for authorship seemed research—the publish-or-perish policy—apt- more lenient in the world of practice than ly describes the pressures to publish that that of academia. The anonymous junior are placed on junior academicians. Most faculty member stated that generating a business schools have algorithms to eval- research idea or design is the most valu- uate a faculty member’s publication rate; able intellectual contribution; generating a psychology departments are more variable method or analytical plan would be lower in their approaches, said the anonymous on this list. Agreeing with this, Converse junior faculty member. It is common knowl- added that manuscript writing also war- edge that publication is an academic cur- rants authorship. rency: the more you publish the better your chances of climbing the academic hierarchy Practitioners on the panel agreed with (I bet all academicians are nodding!). academicians on this but added that there is more to authorship in an applied setting Irrespective of the variability in attitudes than just intellectual contribution. DuVer- towards publishing in the applied setting, net stated that completing menial tasks differences between academia and prac- (e.g., collecting and preparing data)—even tice are evident. Barney mentioned that those involving no true intellectual contri- the politics in business are comparatively bution—can sometimes earn one author- thicker and that it is tougher to get re- ship. Barney prefers viewing authorship search published. Most practitioners do in the context of long-term relationships. not publish. DuVernet—a junior practi- He thinks that it is important to foster a tioner—agreed that publishing is much feeling of collegiality so that collaborators tougher in the applied setting—although desire to work together in future. That it is still valued. We agree that applied may be the reason why practitioners em- research is tougher to publish because one phasize collaboration over credit,added has to “jump through a lot of hoops” to get DuVernet. For other junior practitioners on it done unless one is in an organization like the panel—Gasperson and Pomerance —it PDRI or HumRRO where I-O psychologists is the good work itself rather than receiv- The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 85 ing first billing on the manuscript that is that such a role does not necessarily earn of utmost importance. In this situation, one authorship; however, it was not a big building relationships and being known as issue for Gasperson and Pomerance; as a team player who can complete high-level Pomerance pointed it out that sometimes work are most important, and authorship a senior researcher is required to be on order takes a back seat. Practitioners often all manuscripts to obtain organizational work in more informal settings and deter- approval. Converse and the anonymous mine authorship on a case-by-case basis, contributor added that the nature of mostly with a general consensus. We won- edits should dictate authorship; one can dered whether such a discrepancy gives be offered authorship in case of serious rise to issues peculiar to each context; we revisions to the manuscript. Eventually, all discussed this with our panelists. of them agreed that principle contributors should decide whether to use suggested Ghost Versus Gift Authorship edits and whether to offer authorship. In the academic context, assigning tasks relative to students’ skill sets is perfectly There has been controversy over author- acceptable; however, assigning menial ship of individuals who are remunerated tasks to avoid awarding authorship on the for scholarly work (Fine & Kurdek, 1993). project is unethical, stated both Converse Panelists unanimously agreed that such in- and the anonymous contributor. In fact, dividuals should be considered for author- menial tasks may be developmental in ship based on their contribution; denying nature and should be practiced before authorship just because they are paid students assume more significant work is unethical. On thesis and dissertation but indeed would be less valuable to more publications, Converse and an anonymous advanced students, added Converse. As contributor agreed that students should a graduate student, Gasperson experi- typically take the first authorship and their enced mild authorship issues; however, he chairs take the second. There could be confessed that research projects morph exceptions to this rule. over time, which may blur boundaries of authorship. Contrary to that, sometimes Part the Third: Bringing Order to Chaos undeserving contributors get “tacked on” as authors for reasons including recogni- We think that written pieces on authorship tion and career prospects. Hence, consid- (like this one) most often (if not always) eration to having a right (and fair) balance are notorious for raising more questions of number of authors is important too, than they answer. When we discussed with said DuVernet. panelists what we could do to improve the situation for ourselves and for others, The opinions were divided on a situation some recommendations resulted. in which a senior researcher demands authorship for an editorial role on a Talking about best practices in authorship manuscript. Barney and DuVernet agreed determination, our panelists unanimous- 86 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 ly agreed that there is no rule of thumb. and/or some may get added to the team. In Their rules ranged from a very systematic such cases, our panelists recommended: to a reasonably open-ended approach. They suggested: • Getting a general idea of where everyone stands in terms of their contribu- • Providing authorship guidelines to tion at various points in the project fellow researchers on the project (Converse) (anonymous) • Having prompt conversations about • Determining authorship order based the change in authorship order, if ap- on mutual agreement wherein per- plicable (anonymous). haps “it is better to err on the side of inclusion” (Converse) Sometimes despite these conversations, • Having conversations with contributors people misremember or do not remember about what constitutes an author- at all what was decided. As a safeguard ship-worthy contribution to get every- against such circumstances, panelists one on the same page (DuVernet) suggested: • Viewing publishing as more like an ongoing relationship; having a general • Documenting research activities and discussion about “who wants to lead revisiting those documents periodical- and who wants to follow?” with fellow ly (Gasperson) contributors (Barney). • Maintaining a centralized log of research activities as one keeps a “code These recommendations would definitely book” for statistical analyses (Pomer- provide a shared understanding of au- ance) thorship. In our doctoral I-O program at • Maintaining the level of work that sup- Louisiana Tech, we developed an author- ports one’s authorship order (Gasper- ship checklist based on a needs analysis son)— this may be the most important and several literary sources including APA element. ethical guidelines, Fine and Kurdek’s (1993) reflective interpretation of those guidelines, In applied settings, the flavor of ambigu- APA Student Council guidelines, Winston’s ity is somewhat different partly because (1985) procedure of authorship determi- practitioners sometimes have to work with nation, and others. Interested readers can nonresearchers who are new to the pub- access documents explaining the process lishing culture. Barney believes that the we adopted and the checklists resulting onus of responsibility for ethical author- from that process here. We recommend de- ship, in such cases, lies with senior practi- veloping a checklist suiting your academic tioners on the project. He recommended program or applied context and using it on that senior practitioners should: a continuous basis throughout the project because research projects evolve over a pe- • Proactively bring up authorship-relat- riod of time; some members may drop off ed discussions and make sure every- The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 87 one’s needs are met victory if some of you ponder over poten- • Mentor novices on the basics of tial authorship issues more seriously when publication and on sound authorship you work on your next manuscript. We practices would like to end with a note that au- • Use power for beneficence; “When we thorship is a form of recognition for one’s are in the position of power, we should scholarship; be cognizant to whom it is or be extra careful.” is not offered. • In case of ambiguity or disagreement, “bend over backwards” by ceding first References authorship to the other party. American Psychological Association. (2002). We absolutely loved the ideas everyone on Ethical principles of psychologists and code the panel bounced around; however, our of conduct. American Psychologist, 57(12), fear was that discrepant practices at the 1060–1073. Retrieved from http://www.apa. org/ethics/code/code-1992.aspx micro level with no unified understanding American Psychological Association. (2010). at the macro level could pose some prob- Ethical principles of psychologists and code lems. We communicated this to our panel- of conduct including 2010 amendments. ists and solicited some broader initiatives. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ethics/ The anonymous contributor mentioned code/index.aspx that a few of the journals have started en- Bebeau, M. J., & Monson, V. (2011). Authorship couraging authors to indicate their contri- and publication practices in the social scienc- butions. Undoubtedly this may keep tabs es: Historical reflections on current practic- on authorship practices, but such “ethical es. Science and Engineering Ethics, 17(2), policing” may not be perceived favorably, 365–388. doi:10.1007/s11948-011-9280-4 DuVernet, A. D., Poncheri, R. M., Hess, C. E., said DuVernet. Barney recommended “us- Lindberg, J. T., Vignovic, J. A., & Behrend, T. ing our own science” to encourage ethical S. (2008, April). TIP-TOPics for students pres- authorship practices. There is a movement ents: Sticky situations in graduate school. in positive psychology of catching people Roundtable/conversation hour presented at doing the right things and celebrating the 23rd Annual Conference of the Society them. SIOP can take an active role in for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, recognizing “I-O citizens” serving as role San Francisco, CA. models for research collaborations. We Fine, M. A., & Kurdek, L. A. (1993). Reflec- solicit your opinions on what more we can tions on determining authorship credit and do to resolve authorship related issues. authorship order on faculty-student collaborations. American Psychologist, 48(11), If you have any ideas or opinions, please 1141–1147. Retrieved from http://psycnet. share them here. apa.org/journals/amp Geelhoed, R. J., Phillips, J. C., Fischer, A. R., At the end of this wonderful discussion, Shpungin, E., & Gong, Y. (2007). Author- we realized that there is much to be done ship decision making: An empirical inves- to improve authorship practices in I-O tigation. Ethics & Behavior, 17(2), 95–115. psychology. We would consider it as our doi:10.1080/10508420701378057 88 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Highhouse, S. (2014). Guest editorial: Do we of professional ethics. The Industrial-Organi- need all these words? The need for new pub- zational Psychologist, 46(2), 93–99. lishing norms in I-O psychology. The Industri- Osborne, J. W., & Holland, A. (2009). What is al-Organizational Psychologist, 51(3), 83–84. authorship, and what should it be? A survey Lefkowitz, J. (2005). The values of industrial-or- of prominent guidelines for determining ganizational psychology: Who are we? The authorship in scientific publications. Practical Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 43(2), Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 14(15), 13–20. 1–19. Retrieved from http://pareonline.net Macey, B. (2003). The I-O ethicist. The Indus- Winston, R. B. (1985). A suggested proce- trial and Organizational Psychologist, 41(2), dure for determining order of authorship 73–77. in research publications. Journal of Coun- McGinnis, J. L., Vignovic, J., DuVernet, A., Beh- seling & Development, 63(8), 515–518. rend, T., Poncheri, R., & Hess, C. E. (2008). doi:10.1002/j.1556-6676.1985.tb02749.x TIP-Topics: All aboard! Navigating the waters

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 89 Wondering what is happening within industrial-organizational psychology in Malaysia? Turns out, you’re not the only one asking! There is an increased interest in finding out what our colleagues are doing in Southeast Asia. Our presence may not be as large as it is in other parts of the globe, but we seek to change that. In this column, we asked Daniel Russell, Director, Deloitte Consulting Southeast Asia, and Mei-Hua Lin, PhD, Se- nior Lecturer, Sunway University (Malaysia), about the current state of affairs in Malaysia. Their thoughts provide direction for how we, as academics and practitioners, can get involved. Read on for their insights!

Aiyo! The State of I-O Psychology in Malaysia, Lah.

Malaysia is a very culturally diverse country in Southeast Asia as it sits strategically on a global sea lane, which has exposed it to global influences over many centuries. The country was under British control for over 200 years before achieving its in- dependence in 1957. Although the official language is Bahasa Malaysia, English is widely spoken, and the government, education, and businesses are heavily influenced by the systems and processes left behind by the British.

Today, Malaysia is truly a cultural melting pot with Indian, Lynda Zugec Chinese, Thai, Indonesian, and Malay fusion food common and The Workforce Consultants multiple languages being used in a single sentence. Our title with is a representation of that diversity with “aiyo” coming from Chinese as a statement of surprise, and “lah” typically used to Daniel Russell compliment any sentence and uniquely used in Malaysia and Deloitte Singapore. Although I-O is pronounced the same as “aiyo,” it Consulting enjoys nowhere near the same recognition. In fact, at a recent Southeast Asia conference with HR and talent management professionals from large government agencies and multinational corporations, several confided that they had never heard of I-O Mei-Hua Lin psychology before. They had at least heard about the British Sunway and Australian occupational psychology, but they didn’t have University a clear understanding of what it was all about. Clearly, the (Malaysia) I-O community has work ahead to become better known in Malaysia.

90 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Although best known recently for airline Given rapid growth, the relatively young tragedies, Malaysia is a critical part of the retirement age (55 recently raised to 60), emerging Association for Southeast Asian and later entry into the workforce, Malay- Nations (ASEAN) economic powerhouse. sian organizations have an acute need to The International Monetary Fund’s Re- develop more leaders faster than coun- gional Economic Outlook Update: APAC terparts in other parts of the world. Thus, (2012) reported that, “several Associa- high quality leadership development is a tion of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) critical need. Unfortunately, leadership de- economies, led by Indonesia, Malaysia, velopment here is largely operationalized the Philippines, and Thailand, have bucked as ad hoc training classes. Some com- regional trends [of slowed growth] with panies are starting to look at succession growth remaining close to potential, in planning, but those plans have not been part supported by public investment.” translated into developmental actions for McKinsey (2014) recently noted ASEAN’s leaders identified in the plans. Executive “immense growth potential” as well as its coaches and coaching are beginning to place as a global hub for manufacturing, become known and utilized in Malaysia. trade, and fast growing consumer mar- Again, unfortunately most of these practi- kets. Deloitte’s 2015 Southeast Asia report tioners are ill trained and practice pseudo- on human capital trends found that over science (e.g., neurolinguistic programming) 60% of respondents are looking forward and extremely unsophisticated approaches to moderate to strong growth in 2015. to leadership assessment and individual Focusing on Malaysia, the World Bank developmental planning. (2015) reports an estimated 5.7% growth for Malaysia in 2014 and a trend of growth The assessment testing marketplace in around 5% for the next 3 years. Econo- Malaysia is not large and is primarily my Watch (2015) also predicts sustained focused on leadership assessment. Given growth for Malaysia with only a slight in- Malaysia’s employment discrimination crease in inflation and low unemployment legislation, Malaysia is focused on unlaw- (i.e., 4.1% inflation and unemployment ful terminations, the low unemployment steady at 3%). rate (of 3%), and the relative high cost of assessments, which are rarely used for Given such rapid, sustained growth, Malay- preemployment decisions. Assessments sia is experiencing critical needs in human are commonly used to select applicants capital development, particularly in the into competitive special training programs areas of leadership, workforce capability, (management trainee programs), for engagement and retention, and learning promotion, and for leadership assessment. and development. Although these chal- Although most of the major assessment lenges are not new, recent research by firms are represented regionally (usually Deloitte (2015) found that the capability from Singapore), low quality (and patently gaps to address these problems are getting unethical) assessment tools are frequently wider. used. Due to lack of knowledge and train- The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 91 ing among buyers, assessments with little traditional classroom style. The HRDF or no validation evidence are sold based approves training providers (often small on outrageous claims of “deep insights” freelancers) under the program, thereby into “unconscious attitudes and motives.” allowing the sponsoring employer to claim It is important to note that price point is reimbursement for training conducted by not the major barrier to adoption. Often that vendor. Because that type of program these low (or no) quality assessments is the most straightforward for learners, command prices at or above those offered employers, providers, and HRDF, most by the premier global firms. training is conducted in that mode. Unfor- tunately, technology tools and nontradi- Given Malaysia’s (and the region’s) tre- tional training models do not fit well under mendous need for skilled talent, training is HRDF’s procedures and, as a result, are an extremely important part of our human not frequently used. In addition, training capital agenda. As a result, training has needs analyses are typically not conduct- become a very large business with wide ed to ensure the right training classes are variances in the quality and effectiveness chosen to address the right organizational of offerings. The Human Resources Devel- challenges. Most of the time, the HR or opment Fund (HRDF) was created in 2001 training managers just ask for the vendor’s as an agency under the Ministry of Human list of courses and choose what looks ap- Resources via the Pembangunan Sumber plicable. Furthermore, training evaluation Manusia Berhad Act. HRDF was created to in this model is rare beyond certification ensure workers’ access to ongoing train- testing and learner reactions (aka, “smile ing and development, promoting a highly sheets”). Thus, organizations are unable skilled workforce for the country. Generally to tell if the training actually transfers to speaking, the HRDF operates by enforcing on the job performance. Finally, although a levy of 1% of payroll on most employers HRDF has been successful at ensuring with over 50 employees. That levy is held greater access to training for all workers, by HRDF and paid out as reimbursement the quality and effectiveness of that train- for approved training expenditures. Based ing is unknown. Given the region’s con- on a presentation made by the HRDF in tinued struggle with workforce capability, March 2013, there were nearly 13,000 em- more work is needed. ployers registered. In 2011, US$108.46M was collected under the scheme; for 2012 How Practitioners Can Help PSMB projected collecting US$133.3M. Obviously, government intervention at this Practitioners can play a great role in edu- scale has a tremendous influence on how cating the market on best practices in lead- training is conducted in Malaysia. ership, assessment, and training using I-O research and principles. By educating peers Interestingly, much of the world has and buyers on applied research in I-O, prac- moved to online “e-learning,” but most titioners will raise the bar on HR practices of the training conducted in Malaysia is within Malaysia and across the region. 92 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Consulting firms play a particularly import- tioners network with colleagues from local ant role in improving the understanding firms (or move to local firms), they will be and adoption of global best practices in taking knowledge of global best practices emerging markets. Often, consulting firms with them. Furthermore, internal practi- see emerging markets as “distributorships” tioners should avail themselves of global for product sales and hire “consultants” conferences and/or training opportunities. who are not at all qualified to sell, train, They should learn about the innovative and service clients using sophisticated practices of global companies and which I-O tools. Many global firms with offic- vendors they use to support these ser- es in Malaysia have consultants (even vices. Moreover, they should seek to un- managing directors) with no education in derstand what makes them good vendors psychology (much less I-O or occupational (i.e., the right criteria to use). As internal psychology), psychometrics, or related practitioners and buyers become better fields. Oftentimes, these consultants have educated, they will make more informed backgrounds in accounting, finance, or choices. Thus, higher quality providers will economics. In one extreme case, individu- be rewarded and those offering substan- als who would not be qualified to be test dard products and services will shrink. users in the U.S. are training and certifying test users in Malaysia. Finding qualified The interest in “Big Data” is a bright spot talent in any technical area in Malaysia is in Malaysia as it has the potential to help very difficult. However, it is irresponsible companies take a more objective, data-driv- for large firms to propagate miseducation en look at all HR practices. Although there and the undereducation of users simply to is some risk in those who take a “dustbowl maximize profits. empirical” approach to big data, the overall effect will likely be positive as organizations, Internal practitioners also have an im- vendors, and practitioners will be forced to portant role to play. Those practitioners demonstrate measurable impact of their working for large multinational corpora- programs, tools, and services. tions (MNCs) should ensure they are using products and services approved by their How Academicians Can Help headquarters unit or center of excellence. Furthermore, they should seek to learn One of the way academics can help is from colleagues in more mature markets to create awareness among students on about how things are done and why. Rath- the importance of industrial and orga- er than dismissing certain practices be- nizational psychology for organizational cause “they will never work in Malaysia,” effectiveness. In creating a curriculum for they should strive to understand why it’s undergraduate programs, academicians a global best practice and to think about should include industrial-organizational how core aspects of that practice will fit psychology or related courses as part of and how the cultural challenging aspects their curriculum, as some already do. can be adapted locally. As these practi- To strengthen this, some undergraduate The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 93 programs have built in either a compulsory psychometrics and quantitative research or optional internship training where stu- focus. More emphasis is given to the “O” dents intern with industry partners before part of I-O with the objectives of produc- completing their program of study. Here, ing graduates with enhanced knowledge students may further explore their interest in managerial psychology, but they may in I-O psychology related work. Neverthe- lack in other areas such as psychometrics, less, their exposure and application may assessment, advanced research methods, be limited by the current HR practices in and advanced statistics. Again, this seems organizations. Programs should increase to be an industry-driven need. Both I-O their partnerships with consulting firms practitioners and academicians need to that emphasize I-O research and principles continually work together on this issue to driven practices to align undergraduates’ educate organizations on the best global understanding and application of psycho- practices and to improve the focus of I-O logical principles in the work environment. graduate programs to be more skill based. This is an important seed that must be planted as they will be part of the future In Malaysia, graduate programs (mostly workforce and leadership. called postgraduate programs) could take on four modes: by coursework (complet- Although the exposure at the under- ing courses); by mixed mode (courses and graduate level may spark interest in I-O a dissertation); by research (completing psychology, it is also essential to create dissertation); or by coursework (applied) a clear pathway for students to become (courses, research project, and practicum/ I-O psychologists or I-O practitioners. This internship). The introduction of the Ma- means that there should be adequate laysian Qualifications Agency Psychology options for progression of students into Standards (2013) provided a guideline to graduate programs in I-O psychology. In stakeholders for developing programs in Malaysia, the first master’s degree was psychology from certificate to doctoral introduced in 1994 (Taib & Alias, 2012). In degrees. The consistent application of comparison to the long history of I-O psy- these guidelines would ensure the quality chology as a discipline in other parts of the of psychology programs offered in Ma- globe, I-O psychology is considered a new laysia. For example, the standard in the field in Malaysia. Even with several mas- guidelines stipulates that applied graduate ter programs introduced, the academia/ programs should require a completion of research-industry gap is quite wide (Taib & 1,000 practicum/internship hours. This Alias, 2012). This seems to be the “chick- is a potential area of growth in graduate en-or-egg” situation: Should the need and programs in Malaysia as currently there demand come from industry or should are no applied graduate programs in I-O academia/researchers communicate the psychology. Hence, for applied programs need for I-O driven practices? Although to be implemented, there is a need for there are existing graduate programs in more qualified I-O professors as well as I-O I-O psychology, they are often light on the practitioners. 94 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Currently, there is no governance (i.e. help us advance the quality of I-O training licensure) in Malaysia even for clinical in our universities. There is a great need psychologists. There is a professional body for I-O based products and services here in (PSIMA), however, it is focused on aca- Malaysia. Given our vast natural resourc- demics from public universities rather than es and bright, young workforce, we have from private universities (of which there a very optimistic future ahead. Learning are many). Several years back, an unofficial from I-O can help the country reach its head of Psychology council (from private high aspirations more rapidly! universities) started the first Malaysian Psychology Conference (MPC). The confer- References ence ran for 3 years and drew large crowds Deloitte. (2015). Leading in the new world of (reaching 500-700 participants, which is work: Human capital trends 2015 Southeast quite big by Malaysian standards). One of Asia report. Retrieved from www2.deloitte. the goals for the next MPC is for I-O psy- com/my. Economy Watch. (2015). Malaysia economic chologists to form a local I-O psychologist statistics and indicators. Retrieved from community in Malaysia. economywatch.com. International Monetary Fund. (2012). Regional Clearly, both practitioners and academi- economic outlook update. Retrieved from cians here and abroad can play an active www.imf.org. role in raising awareness of I-O psychology Malaysian Qualifications Agency. (2013). in Malaysia (and throughout Southeast Programme standards: Psychology. Re- Asia). Although we have discussed many trieved from http://www.mqa.gov.my/QAD/ concerns about the lack of I-O capabili- garispanduan/2013/2013%2010%2028%20 ties in Malaysia, there are tremendous PS_Psy_BI.pdf McKinsey. (2014). Understanding ASEAN: Sev- opportunities for the field to positively en things you need to know. Retrieved from impact the country’s rapid development www.mckinsey.com. and growth. We would like to encourage Taib, M. M., & Alias, A. (2012). Industrial and practitioners in global consulting firms and organisational psychology in Malaysia: multinational corporations to model high A review of research areas and research standards of practice and ethics within variables. In N. M. Noor, & M. A. Dzulkifli Malaysia—even in the absence of local (Eds.), Psychology in Malaysia: Current laws and regulations. We also encourage research and future directions. (pp. 75–110). academicians globally to partner with Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Pearson. Malaysian academicians in research to The World Bank. (2015). Data: Malaysia. Re- trieved from data.worldbank.org.

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 95 Personality Insights You Can Trust SIOP in Washington: Expanding the Impact of I-O Across the Federal Government

We are excited to share with you information about SIOP’s efforts to build its identity in Washington, DC to support federal funding for I-O research and use our research to help guide policy discussions. Each quarter we will report to you on new advocacy activities as well as our analysis of the role of I-O psychology in significant federal or congressional initiatives, such as the annual appropriations process and emerging national initiatives. We are excited about our progress and look forward to working with you as we pursue these important goals!

Introduction

Over the past few months, several SIOP members engaged in advocacy activities in Washington, DC, ranging from participating in the Coalition for National Science Funding’s (CNSF) annual exhibition and reception to SIOP’s congressional briefing, “The Challenges of Workforce Aging.” These events com- plement ongoing government relations initiatives that SIOP launched in 2014. In addition, at the 2015 Annual Conference, SIOP also hosted a symposium and panel on best practices to Seth Kaplan earn federal funding for research. Below is more information George Mason about recent advocacy activities. University Coalition for National Science Funding 2015 Exhibition and Reception

On April 29, SIOP members Steve Zaccaro and Tara Behrend represented the Society at the annual Coalition for National Science Funding (CNSF) Exhibition and Reception in Washing- ton, DC. The SIOP booth presented ongoing research conducted by Zacarro and SIOP members Leslie DeChurch and Ruth Kanfer that focuses on innovative communication and leader- Laura Uttley ship patterns for multiteam systems (MTSs). Lewis-Burke Associates LLC The exhibition was an opportunity for SIOP and CNSF members to display and discuss National Science Foundation (NSF)-funded research directly with congressional policymak-

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 97 ers and federal agency officials, highlight- 2016, as well as continuous efforts to build ing the importance of continued federal and maintain relationships with congressio- investment in NSF and basic scientific nal and federal agency officials. Through research. Participating in this annual event SIOP’s government relations activities, like further elevated SIOP’s profile within in the CNSF Exhibition, the Society is able to the science community and its visibility to highlight the value of I-O research to federal key decision makers in Washington, DC. agency program managers and policymakers and promote SIOP as a prominent and cred- CNSF is an alliance of over 140 organiza- ible stakeholder in the science community’s tions that support the goal of increasing the government relations priorities. national investment in NSF research and education programs. SIOP joined CNSF in SIOP 2015 Annual Conference Events the fall of 2014 per a recommendation from Dr. Amber Story, deputy division director of Government Relations Advocacy Team Behavioral and Cognitive Sciences at NSF. (GREAT) members Andrea Sinclair and Dr. Story spoke with Zaccaro and Behrend at David Costanza organized back-to-back the event and expressed her appreciation sessions at this year’s annual SIOP confer- for the Society’s willingness to advocate for ence aimed at increasing SIOP members’ social and behavioral science research at awareness and understanding of federal NSF. The booth was also visited by Dr. Fay funding opportunities for I-O related re- Lomax Cook, assistant director for NSF’s search. At the first session, federal agency Directorate for Social, Behavioral, and representatives from the National Science Economic Sciences (SBE), who oversees the Foundation (NSF), the U.S. Army Research agency’s social science research portfolio Institute for the Behavioral and Social and sponsors many projects that support Sciences (ARI), and NASA provided informa- SIOP researchers and practitioners. Dr. Cook tion about their agency’s primary research was very interested in MSTs and appreciat- areas/funding opportunities, an overview ed SBE representation at the event. Other of the process for submitting grant appli- visitors included a representative from the cations, and advice on how to submit a National Aeronautics and Space Admin- winning application. Tips from the federal istration (NASA) headquarters, staff from agency representatives included submit- Senator Kirsten Gillibrand’s (D-NY) office, ting proposals that consider the topic from Representative Jerry McNerny (D-CA), and multiple viewpoints, applying new methods many others within the science community. to unsolved or partially solved problems, identifying constraints of the proposed Participation in the CNSF Exhibition comple- research, and highlighting the contribution ments SIOP’s ongoing NSF outreach strategy, of the research to some desired societal which has included submitting written tes- outcome, among many others. timony to the House and Senate Appropria- tions Committees, advocating for sustained In a follow-up session, SIOP members who federal investment in NSF in fiscal year successfully have obtained grants from 98 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 these and other federal agencies shared The event helped to raise the profile of their lessons learned and strategies for I-O psychology research while promoting running a successful grant. Their sugges- SIOP’s Frontiers Series publication, Facing tions included reviewing winning propos- the Challenges of a Multi-Age Workforce: als before submitting your own proposal, A Use Inspired Approach. The briefing asking questions of the agency’s program also coincided with the Administration officer and incorporating that feedback for Community Living’s Older Americans into your proposal, making realistic time Month, which celebrates the 50th anniver- projections, and being flexible/adaptable sary of the Older Americans Act. Over the throughout the grant. The slides from these last year, SIOP has actively engaged with sessions can be downloaded from http:// federal and congressional policy makers my.siop.org/Resources/SIOP-Docs?folde- on retirement security and the challenges rId=2872&view=gridview&pageSize=10. facing older Americans in the workforce as part of the 2015 White House Confer- In another, related SIOP session, three re- ence on Aging (WHCOA) policy dialogue, cently published National Research Council including submitting official comments to (NRC) reports—Enhancing the Effective- WHCOA on retirement security and the ness of Team Science, Measuring Human value and impact of I-O considerations in Capabilities, and the Influence of Context federal policy decisions. on Behavior—were discussed in terms of their relevance to the science and practice With older adults representing a growing of I-O psychology. These reports identi- proportion of the workforce and expe- fy needs for future research and have a riencing more negative reemployment substantial impact on the allotment of outcomes following job loss, the U.S. federal funds for research. These reports congressional and federal agency policy are a valuable resource to I-Os who are makers must grapple with how to incentiv- interested in pursuing federal funding for ize workers to remain active in the work- their research and can be downloaded or force longer, continue working following purchased from the National Academies retirement, and overcome barriers to Press website at http://www.nap.edu/top- reemployment. ic/277/behavioral-and-social-sciences. During the event, Lisa Finkelstein, pro- “The Challenges of Workforce Aging” fessor of Psychology at Northern Illinois Congressional Briefing University; Ruth Kanfer, professor of Psy- chology at Georgia Institute of Technology; On May 12, SIOP hosted a congressional and Mo Wang, director of the Human Re- briefing, “The Challenges of Workforce source Research Center at the University Aging,” in Washington, DC, to promote of Florida, represented SIOP by presenting SIOP as a resource for federal agencies, research on the aging workforce, retire- congressional policy makers, and related ment, and human resource management stakeholders on workforce aging matters. practices. The panel was moderated by The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 99 Jose Cortina, past president of SIOP and Some of these include work redesign professor of Psychology at George Mason studies, mentoring programs, intergen- University. erational relations best practices, and health promotion approaches. Specifically, Specifically, the panelists overviewed that they mentioned the Senior Community aging workers have different employment Service Employment Program, a program and retirement motivations, off-the-job housed within the Department of Labor demands, person-to-job compatibility, and authorized through the Older Ameri- and needs for skill updating. Also, older cans Act. Overall, the panelists showcased workers have harder times finding new the impactful and real-world applications jobs. These complexities require new of I-O in ensuring a productive economy strategies for hiring, training, job search- and demonstrated the need for continued ing, and managing, as well as transitioning financial support for I-O research. to retirement. The hearing was well attended by mem- In addition, the speakers emphasized the bers of the social science community. In importance of I-O psychologists partnering addition, there were representatives from with public agencies and policy makers to the Senate Special Committee on Aging, design, implement, and evaluate interven- the House Committee on Education and tion studies to maximize the effectiveness Workforce, and Senator Mark Kirk’s (R-IL) of workplace practices and programs. office.

• www.SIOP.org/conferences/16con/

100 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Emotion in Work, From Brain to Organizational Levels of Analysis: A TIP Interview With Professor Neal Ashkanasy

We go international in this issue to discuss the importance of considering emotion, interactions, and multiple levels of analysis for both management scholars and consultants. Professor Neal Ash- kanasy at the University of Queensland describes his work relating to organizational neuroscience and his perspective on this interdisciplinary domain.

Professor Neal Ashkanasy spent several years in professional engineering before entering academic life. He has worked in psychology, management, business, commerce, and engineering. He earned a PhD in Social and Organizational Psychology from the University of Queensland. He is a leading scholar in the area of emotion in the workplace. Prof. Ashkanasy has an extensive publishing history in journals such as the Academy of Management Journal and Review, the Journal of Applied Psychology, the Journal of Management, and the Journal of Organizational Behavior. He serves on several editorial M. K. Ward boards, is series coeditor of Research on Emotion in Organi- North Carolina zations, and served as associate editor for the Academy of State University Management Review and editor-in-chief of the Journal of Organizational Behavior. He is a Fellow in multiple academic societies including SIOP. He is now a chaired professor in the UQ Business School at the University of Queensland, Australia

During our conversation with Neal Ashkanasy, we discussed the multilevel nature of emotion, the importance of looking at interactions, and the similarity between Stephen Hawking and organizational scholars (yes, believe it or not, it seems to be true).

Bill Becker When did you first become interested in emotion research? Texas Christian Universty It was when I was on sabbatical at the University of Calgary. This is my second career, and in my first career I was an engi- The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 101 neer for 20 years. I was studying leadership How are you incorporating neuroscience and organizational culture and I attended into your current projects? a presentation by Peter Frost from the University of British Columbia, who sadly Incorporating basic neuroscience into proj- passed away a few years ago. He was the ects is something I leave for other people guy who introduced me to this idea of the to do. Basically it sits in the background of emotions in the workplace. While there, projects I’m doing at the moment. The UQ I worked with a colleague named Wilfred Psychology School has always had a strong Zerbe. I went up to him and I said, “This is cognitive neuroscience unit, so I’ve always really interesting. I never heard of the role had a lot of contact with them but not of emotions in the workplace.” And Wilf a lot of direct involvement with actually said, “Hey! Well, talk to me because Peter doing the neurobiology. Frost was my dissertation chair and this is the kind of work that I do.” So that triggered I have a lot of projects that are using expe- my interest, and off we went. I took my rience sampling that enables you capture next sabbatical leave at Penn State, where emotions in real-time. Another thing my I “became the full bottle” on emotions, as students have been doing is measuring we Australians would say. The result of my stress with cortisol, which is a whole other reading was later published in Research in side effect of brain activity. So that’s about Multi-level Issues (Ashkanasy, 2003). as far as I go.

I started to incorporate neuroscience right Which of those projects are you most from the start. I should also say that shortly excited about? after I came back from Calgary I went to a meeting of the Australian psychologists. I’m excited about all my projects! I think There I met Mark Frank, a student of Paul that collecting emotion data in real-time is Ekman’s. Mark spoke about the recognition a really exciting thing to do. I would really of facial emotions in the brain, which is like to be able to combine that with some quite closely tied to neurobiology as well. sort of biological or physiological measures on the spot, but that’s really difficult to do I also got involved in the International in the field at the moment. You can do it in Society for Research on Emotions (ISRE) at the laboratory however. that time. There is now a semiannual conference of ISRE, and the next conference One my students, Jemma King, is getting will be at the University of Geneva led by excellent results using cortisol mea- Klaus Scherer, who will be talking about surements. Jemma has been measuring the work the work of the Swiss National emotional intelligence using the May- Center for Affective Sciences. That’s a er-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence group that has had a big influence on me. Test (MSCEIT; Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2003). It’s an IQ-like ability-based EQ test. So Jemma’s been measuring emo- 102 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 tional intelligence using that test. And (4) to manage and regulate emotions in we’ve been conducting laboratory studies yourself and others. In terms of the dimen- involving various sources of stressors and sionality in Jemma’s study with the cortisol, most lately we’ve been measuring abusive it is indeed the regulation branch involving supervision and cortisol levels. In the two the management of emotions that seems studies that we’ve done, we got about a to have the largest effect. -.40 correlation between the scores on the MSCEIT test in the cortisol stress levels. That’s really interesting because on the People with higher emotional intelligence biological side each of those branches has experience less stress as measured objec- very unique neural systems. tively from the cortisol tests. Yes, the understanding branch is more of a Wow, so what are the implications for cognitive dimension than emotional. That practice? How do you see I-O psychologist also taps into the fact that emotions and practitioners using that? cognitions very closely interact with each other. Richard Lazarus and Robert Zajonc There’s been a lot of criticism of the con- engaged in a debate as to whether cogni- struct of emotional intelligence. There’s a tions or emotional responses come first. In huge amount of confusion about the mea- some situations emotions come first, and surement of emotional intelligence that in others, cognitions come first. Today, the persists even though I’ve written several consensus is that cognition and emotions articles in an attempt to resolve that conform a reciprocal whole (e.g., Leventhal & fusion. As with some of the more popular Scherer, 1987). applications of neuroscience, there’s still a lot of pseudoscience out there. There’re Which brings me to the broader point and still a lot of people using measures that back to the five-level model: it’s really a aren’t really valid. Go ahead and employ strongly intertwined interaction of context, measures of emotional intelligence, but be environment, personality, and brain func- careful what measures you use. tions. They all interact with each other.

Is the MSCEIT multidimensional? Does it I think we can make the mistake of getting have the four dimensions? carried away with thinking that everything can be explained from biological sources. I Yes, well they call it branches. It has four went to the movies last night and watched branches and they subsequently have been a movie about Stephen Hawking and his cast into a “cascading model” in a Journal pursuit of a theory of everything. In the of Applied Psychology article by Joseph and movie he is presenting to his committee Newman (2010). The four branches are: and they ask him what he really wants, (1) the ability to perceive emotion, (2) to and he says that he would like one theory incorporate your perceptions and thinking that explains everything. And his commit- processes, (3) to understand emotions, and tee chair said, “Yes, that would be nice The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 103 wouldn’t it.” For biologists and scientists, it Well I wrote an article with Bill Becker would be wonderful if the brain and the bi- and Dave Waldman (Ashkanasy, Becker, ology that could explain all behavior. Well, & Waldman, 2014) where I explain the guess what: We are never going to un- need to take care. I draw an analogy in the derstand behavior that way. On the other emotional intelligence literature and Dan hand, we can’t fully understand behavior Goleman’s book, Emotional Intelligence. without an understanding of the neurobi- The book sparked a lot of interest. Sudden- ological substrates and their roles in terms ly there were seriously outrageous claims of interactions. about emotional intelligence. Goleman is quoted as saying in his book that 20% Gerard Hodgkinson and Mark Healey over of our successes in life can be attributed in the UK have been writing some excel- to cognitive intelligence; ipso facto, the lent stuff about the interaction of context, remaining 80% must be attributed to emo- environment, and cognition (e.g., Hodgk- tional intelligence. For people like myself inson & Healey, 2008). They are accumu- working in emotions and emotional intelli- lating evidence that goes back to support gence, this has continued to haunt us. Kurt Lewin in his statement that behavior is a function of the person and the envi- Outlandish claims like that tend to stick ronment. We seem to have to learn that because they strike an intuitive cord. And lesson over and over again. I think the same is true among people who are proposing somehow that narrow What do you do to conduct research and biological measurements are some kind of communicate your research findings such magic bullet; like Steven Hawking and his that you guard against the reductionist search for the Theory of Everything, you criticism? just need to find the right measure and it will solve all your problems. Organizational Yes, people feel quite strongly about trying scientists are looking for the magic bullet to reduce behavior down to the level of that’s going to identify effective leaders neurons. The fact is that neurons alone and employees, as well as how to maxi- cannot manage. Management is much mize overall performance. So you’ve got to more than the functioning of individual really look out for neuro-bunk because it’s neurons. And personality also involves the very popular to propose neuroscience as functioning of much more than individual the answer to everything. neurons. It involves teams, and of course the organization as a whole. So I think What’s the next big project for organiza- those five levels of emotions that I put tional neuroscience and pushing this field forward is the way to look at it. forward?

What tips do you have for readers who Well, it will take a combination of active don’t have training in neuroscience and projects and research that is directly rel- want to be able to identify neuro bunk? evant to this field. I really respect people 104 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 who are using fMRI and EEG. David Wald- neural level picture to build a complete man’s research is really exciting to me. understanding of work behavior. Jemma King is keen on looking at positive emotional states using objective measures, Do you see any editorial challenges for such as oxytocin. There’s a lot that can be getting good interdisciplinary research done with hormonal indicators as direct into journals? biological correlates of emotion activity. In general, editors have been very The truth is we really have no clue what open-minded in organizational journals. is around the corner. So it is an exciting Many editors have not taken a stance one future, and that’s why I attend these con- way or another, which is of benefit to us ferences and sit in on presentations. As we and our discipline. In other disciplines test different methods, certain procedures editors have become strong gatekeepers. will end up at the bottom of the trash bin, I don’t think that’s the proper role of an and there’ll also be diamonds that will editor; rather, given the test of time good emerge that we can use going forward. research will emerge. That’s what makes organizational neuroscience so exciting. In terms of practitioners, I recommend -at tending conferences but not getting carried Any closing comments for TIP readers? away with some of the extreme claims that are made by some people. When peo- In terms of closing comments, what draws ple are making extreme claims, don’t get me is curiosity. I came from my original carried away in the opposite direction and engineering career with lots of questions throw it all out. There needs to be an effort going around in my head. I was working to separate the diamonds from the crud. for an organization that was badly man- aged, and making serious errors as a result In general, what advice do you have for of the poor management. I began to ask TIP readers interested in conducting inter- questions and study at University. I came disciplinary research? across this thing called psychology and took Introductory Psychology 101. And I I’ve done a lot of interdisciplinary projects said, “Ah, this is the answer!” I had no idea and have also published in marketing and that you could study organizational behav- accounting journals (e.g., Accounting, Or- ior in a scientific way. That triggered my ganizations and Society; European Journal curiosity, and I have remained as curious of Marketing). In our school, we don’t today as I did when I started out. actually have departments; instead we have “discipline clusters” and encourage I restricted my consulting activities scholars to mix across boundaries. Much throughout the years to devote the bulk of interdisciplinary work is interaction, and of my time to that curiosity for getting at we need to mix the macro picture with that deeper understanding of phenome- the micro picture, all the way down to the na. Going deeper and deeper to try and The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 105 understand behavior brought me to the References neuronal level. Ashkanasy, N. M. (2003). Emotions in or- Like I said earlier, we will take a lot of ganizations: A multilevel perspective. In wrong turns, but occasionally we will F. Dansereau and F. J. Yammarino (Eds.), unearth these little diamonds that will Research in multi-level issues, volume 2: Multi-level issues in organizational behavior enable us to enrich our decision making, and strategy (pp. 9–54). Oxford, UK: Elsevier not only for consultants but for manag- Science. ers in general. That will eventually to the Ashkanasy, N. M., Becker, W. J., & Waldman, D. economic development and sustainability A. (2014). Neuroscience and organizational of the human race. behavior: Avoiding both neuro-euphoria and neuro-phobia. Journal of Organizational Conclusions Behavior, 35, 909–919. Hodgkinson , G. P., & Healey, M. P. (2008). An international thank you to Neal Ash- Cognition in organizations. Annual Review of kanasy for sharing his curiosity, emotions, Psychology, 59, 387–417. Joseph, D. L., & Newman, D. A. (2010). Emo- and cognitions with us. We are confident tional intelligence: An integrative meta-anal- that organizational neuroscience will move ysis and cascading model. Journal of Applied forward thanks to his work and projects Psychology, 95, 54–78. that it inspires. Levanthal, H. L., & Scherer, K. (1987). The relationship of emotion to cognition: a func- tional approach to a semantic controversy. Cognition and Emotion, 1, 2–38. Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., Caruso, D. R., & Sitarenios, G. (2003). Measuring emotional intelligence with the MSCEIT V2. 0. Emotion, 3, 97.

106 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 107 Making the Most of Your Pre-Academic Summer

Upon graduating in May of 2013, I immediately set my sights on my transition to VCU. The notion of “publish or perish” can set in fairly quickly for junior faculty members, and whether this is explicitly set by one’s institution or self-derived, using the summer before your first full year as a professor for research can be incredibly fruitful. For me, the summer of 2013 helped me make early progress in not only developing my research pipeline but helping me finish several projects that I started while still a graduate student. Many things I chose to do were recommended by seasoned scholars, and given that summer break is upon us, I felt that this edition of The Academics’ Fo- rum was the perfect platform to share what I was told.

Turn That Dissertation Into a Publication

After 2 years of writing, planning, collecting data, analyzing, and writing some more, when I defended my dissertation, the last thing I wanted to do was open that Word document ever again. In fact, it was not until I was past graduation that I actually willed myself to go back to my dissertation and attempt to figure out what I would be able to publish. Several individuals told me to plan a paper from my dissertation sooner rather than later while the ideas were still fresh, and I could not agree more. During my defense, my committee shared several Allison S. Gabriel ideas related to the theoretical contributions of my work, pos- Virginia sible extensions warranting future research, and framing that Commonwealth all benefited me as I started trimming a 250-page manuscript University down to a 50-page document all inclusive. Taking a larger lull between defending and starting the publication process— especially knowing how long the publication process can take—can be challenging, and I did not want to have any strain related to trying to get back into the ideas I had developed.

Not only does getting a paper from your dissertation out early benefit you in the form of having a new manuscript submission early in your tenure process, but it can allow for conference presentations and applications for several dissertation awards. For instance, SIOP offers the S. Rains Wallace Award (see: www.siop.org/siopawards/rains_wallace.aspx) recogniz- 108 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 ing the best dissertation in I-O psychology. For example, after a preliminary project Chosen annually, this award deadline is the meeting with one of my coauthors at SIOP end of June, and thinking about publish- 2013, during the summer that followed ing your dissertation early in the summer we identified our organizational partner- makes the deadline feasible. ship, developed our theoretical model and corresponding measures, and began to Finish Lingering Manuscripts in compile documents that were necessary the Review Process for the IRB process. This planning during the summer was really helpful for a few In the last edition of The Academics’ reasons. First, the start of the school year Forum, Serge da Motta Veiga and I recom- for a new academic involves lots of train- mended not neglecting research during ings and meetings, which can take up a the job search. The same advice holds for fairly significant portion of time. Second, the summer transition between graduate the transition to teaching a new course can school and academia. As I have quickly present challenges; for me, this involved learned, summer for many academics prepping a course I had not taught previ- becomes a time to move several projects ously, and although I loved the course, it through the pipeline given that teaching was quite the learning curve at first. Final- demands tend to be low or nonexistent. ly, figuring out a new school’s IRB protocol I was fortunate in that I had a couple of can be tough! Given that my coauthor papers that were already in revision status, and I were at separate institutions, we and the summer allowed me uninter- had to file two separate IRB applications, rupted time to finish them up, with my each taking roughly 3 weeks to process coauthors experiencing similar amounts of (we were lucky—I know other individuals “free time” to make such efforts possible. who have waited much longer than that!). Moreover, it was a fun time to reconnect Because of these factors, having our study with my coauthors on these endeavors as “ready to go” by the end of the summer I had lost touch with many of them during allowed us to launch a data collection by my time on the job market and as my dis- October of 2013, giving us enough data to sertation was concluding. submit work to a journal and SIOP at the end of our first year. Identify New Data Collections Interestingly, I had gotten some advice to Because I had papers that were nearing not collect data during my first year and to the end of the review process, I knew I use what I had left from graduate school wanted to try and collect a new round of instead. For me, I wouldn’t change a thing. data as soon as I could during the academ- Thinking about the project I highlighted ic year. By collaborating with other junior above during the summer was incredi- scholars who were in transition and eager bly interesting and refreshing. Moreover, to start new work, I was able to plan a given that it was my first data collection few data collections from start to finish. post-graduate school, it helped me “break The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 109 away” from my graduate student identity the graduate students at VCU. By thinking to my new identity as an assistant professor. about what the students seemed to be interested in, I was able to think about pos- Think About Projects for sible projects that may be of interest and Graduate Students could be further developed one on one with a student. For instance, knowing that When I accepted my offer at VCU, I was one of our doctoral students had an inter- simultaneously excited and terrified at the est in recovery at work sparked an intrinsic thought of conducting research with grad- interest with me. By coming up with a uate students. I owe so much to the great document of possible research ideas, I was mentors I worked with at Penn State and able to meet with this student early in my The University of Akron, and the thought first year to chat about a project, develop of paying it back and helping guide grad- the data collection procedure, and actually uate students was an incredibly rewarding run a study during the spring and fall 2014 idea. However, it was also coupled with semesters. Combined with the projects the sense that I could—you know—ruin I already had running prior to starting at the lives of graduate students as they try VCU, having ways to work with doctoral to make their way through the graduate students early on allowed me to further school process and into academia. No my identity as a professor in addition to pressure, really. starting really rewarding mentor–mentee relationships with students. Because I was acutely aware of the fact that I wanted students involved in my And, Finally, Please Take a Break research, I spent time during my transition summer looking at projects I already had That summer before starting your tenure in the works to identify places where grad- track job is pandemonium. In my case, uate students could truly make a contribu- there was a house to sell, family to see, a tion and join the project team. I also used rental to find, (too) many pets to move, this time to double check with coauthors and a lot of uncertainty in terms of when to make sure that individuals were accept- the move was actually going to happen. ing of having another person on board Beyond all the work that needs to get under my supervision. This allowed me done, the move that needs to happen, to get one graduate student involved in a and the other stressors that may emerge, methodological review I was writing and taking time off that summer is so benefi- another student involved in data analysis cial. Mike (the husband) and I took short for a daily diary study all during my first weekend trips before and after we moved year on the tenure clock. to Richmond to savor time when I was still “off the clock” and make sure I didn’t start the job already in a state of burnout (this I also spent time that summer finding out is going to be a theme of my column—I who I would likely be working with among research how to minimize stress, yet tend 110 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 to always induce it in myself! Hmm…). VCU savor that limbo period between being a was wonderful during this period of transi- graduate student and being an assistant tion; I had no pressure to show up before professor. With that, I’m off to leave on my contract start date, but I still had an vacation… office ready and waiting if I needed it. So, be happy, healthy, and productive, and

Don’t Miss This Great Lineup! Dr. Sharon Arad, Director, Cargill Dr. Gene Johnson, Working Matters Ltd. Dr. Mariangela Battista, XL Group Allen Kamin, General Electric John Boudreau, USC Marshall School of Business Don Moretti, Sears Holding Corporation Dr. Allan Church, PepsiCo Rob Ollander-Krane, The Gap Alan Colquitt, Eli Lilly Cheryl Paullin, HumRRO Dr. Erica Desrosiers, Walmart Dr. Elaine Pulakos, PDRI, a CEB Company Michelle Donovan, Google David Rock, NeuroLeadership Institute Eric Dunleavy, DCI Consulting Kim Stepanski, Pfizer Ashley Goodall, Deloitte Adam Massman, Rockwell Collins Amy Grubb, FBI Register today! Visit www.SIOP.org/LEC for more information

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 111 Innovative. Responsive. Impactful. HumRRO is a nonproﬁ t organization dedicated to improving performance of individuals, teams,eams, and ororganizations.ganizations.

Visit www.humrro.org for additional information about our services. LJN: Hi Marcus. So recently I heard from a colleague who mentioned that her PhD students wanted to have more lecture-based instruction in their first year. They seemed to feel that learning from each other via traditional discussion-based methods left them wondering whether they had actually learned anything. At first I was surprised that anyone would want MORE lecture. I try to incorporate discussion into all of my classes, even large undergrad sections, and I always feel that if I lecture a lot it’s a kind of failure on my part. Plus, after years of being subjected to lectures as undergrads, aren’t grad students yearning to share their thoughts and opinions, to be treated more as peers by their professors, and to have a greater voice in the process?

Then I reflected some more and realized that I felt EXACTLY the same way after my first semester as a PhD student at Akron. THEN I started thinking about why I had assumed that discussion-based instruction is the “traditional” form in PhD programs (and by extension, NOT in undergrad or MS programs) and why I assumed it’s more effective than lecturing. So, (a) I thought this would be an interesting idea for a column, and (b) I’m simply curious about this and would like to hear someone else’s thoughts (and you, Marcus, are the first person I would ask anyway)! Let me start by posing two questions:

Marcus W. Dickson To your knowledge, is discussion-based instruction the norm Wayne State University in PhD education in I-O psychology? By this I mean some vari- ant of the following: articles or other readings are assigned, students are expected to read them, the instructor poses questions to guide the discussion, perhaps students are responsible for guiding the discussion for some articles or some class periods, and there are no overhead slides or notes filled with “information to be learned.” Was this the norm in your PhD program at Maryland?

Loren Naidoo What do you think about the use of discussion-based instruc- Baruch College and The tion at the PhD (and other) levels? Did the concerns of the Graduate Center, CUNY students mentioned above illuminate a bona fide limitation of this teaching method?

MWD: What an interesting question to consider! At first, I was surprised, as you initially were, that the students wanted more The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 113 lecture-based instruction early on. Then I being around for a while, and especial- remembered from years long past being ly from serving on SIOP’s Education and at West Virginia Wesleyan College as a Training Committee (which any reader junior. I was taking a Psychology of Reli- of this column should consider doing!), gion special topics course. The enrollment I learned that there is a lot less “norm” was limited (which means something when than we might expect. Some of that varies you’re at a place as small as Wesleyan!). by topic—certainly our quant courses are On our first day of class, we met outside not generally seminar-style classes as you on a beautiful September day (Wesleyan is describe. But even in content courses, the the sort of small liberal arts college where range of presentation styles varies dramat- that actually happens), and the professor, ically, from the very structured (instructor Dr. Ed Piper, sat down in the grass with us, chooses all readings and takes the lead and said “So... what do you want to learn in guiding all discussion) to the much less about?” so (e.g., students choose at least some of the readings and perhaps even the topics, We were a bit taken aback. Wasn’t he the and students are responsible for guiding professor? Wasn’t he the one who was all discussion; students may have input on supposed to KNOW what we should learn the grades of other students, especially on about? Why on earth was he asking us to group projects). My Maryland experience structure the class when that was sup- covered the range of those options. posed to be his job? When we very tenta- tively suggested that we had no idea what My own teaching has also covered a we wanted to learn about because we wide range of structure styles. When I’ve didn’t yet know anything about the topic taught courses on which I am supposed to and that we’d appreciate his guidance, he have some expertise, I probably provide was a bit frustrated with us. How could more structure and have clear, predefined we not eagerly embrace the opportunity learning objectives prior to the start of the to structure our own learning experience, semester. But (for example), one year we after all? I think I remember hearing the did a special topics seminar called “The word “spoon feed” somewhere in his re- zeitgeist of the future.” It was about the sponse to us. trends and developments that would absolutely shape the workplace 15 years in the So, like you, I have some sense of both sur- future and for which we as I-O folks should prise at the request for more structure and prepare. We started with about 3 weeks on also a memory of wanting more structure the concept of futuring, then students rec- at some prior point in my education. ommended topics, and we voted (I had one vote, same as anyone else) on the topics Looking at both of your questions, let me we’d cover. We ended up with things like take them in order. First, you asked what nanotechnology, genetic engineering, ubiq- “the norm” is in doctoral education (and uitous networking, the rise of China and In- what my own experience was). Both from dia, and a few others. Students absolutely 114 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 drove the course, and I was a learner along LJN: That’s a great anecdote! My under- with them (and coordinator, to keep things grad education was about as far from that on schedule, etc.). So in a course where model as you can get. In my first year at I’m not “the expert,” I probably lean more McGill University in Montreal my smallest towards the discussion/exploration side. class was about 120 students, and my largest was about 800! Nobody ever asked me Your second question was what I think what I wanted to learn! Despite the large about discussion-based instruction. I guess classes, there was very much a culture in I have a couple of reactions. First is that which students asked questions and even you should always be growing, but also challenged professors, so students’ voices playing to your strengths. If the instructor were heard. I also remember one large isn’t comfortable with student-led dis- class with “dyadic discussions” (students cussions, or just feels like it doesn’t “fit” pair off to discuss something). At the time for them personally, or for the topic at I thought it was pretty lame. Now I use hand, then don’t do it. There’s nothing dyadic discussions to boost engagement in magical about student-led discussions my large classes, and my students prob- that makes them “right” even when they ably think it’s pretty lame. But anyway, aren’t well-executed because of instructor overall, I had very little discussion as an discomfort with the approach. undergrad, which might be why I appreciated it so much as a PhD student and why I My second thought is that the structure of a value it now as an instructor. class should flow from the learning objectives for the class: Given this topic, these I completely agree that instruction meth- students (and their preparation), and this in- ods should follow from learning objectives. structor, what will best facilitate an effective I have taught mostly first-year doctoral stu- learning experience? I don’t think it’s always dents, and I have some learning objectives the same answer, because the students for them that are independent of course change, the topic changes, and the instruc- content. There are far fewer facts and a lot tor ought to be changing and growing, too. more nuance and interpretation in almost every field of study than what tends to be So what are the learning objectives for conveyed in undergraduate classes. So my first-year PhD courses in I-O? Are they objectives are for doctoral students to take foundational—providing content knowl- greater ownership over their learning; to edge that other courses will build on? Are understand that their own thoughts, ideas, they supposed to move students out of an and opinions are valued; and where neces- undergrad mentality into a grad student sary to break down habits of passivity they mindset? Other? What do you think the may have formed as undergrads. I think purpose of those courses would be, and discussion is a great means of achieving then we should generate a style from these objectives. Also, like you, I learn a there. I’d love to hear your thoughts. lot from my PhD students, and if I’m being honest, I find it a lot more interesting to The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 115 listen to THEM than to lecture! So, yes, for es compare with mine? me a big part of early doctoral classes is MWD: Hey Loren, really interesting stuff to help transition students into a graduate here. I love that we each have learning school mentality. objectives that are both content driven, and also “mindset driven.” Graduate edu- With rare exceptions (your futuring class cation isn’t just “more of undergrad”; it is sounds like a really cool one!) I bet that qualitatively different. I think my students content is the primary design consider- have heard me say it enough times that ation for any doctoral class. I spend a lot they can repeat it with me: “It’s a PhD; of time thinking about what readings to it’s supposed to be hard.” When I teach assign. But it’s a challenge. There’s an Research Methods, I repeatedly emphasize incredible and growing amount of rele- that students ought to be able to read an vant, interesting content “out there” for article on a topic they aren’t interested in all but the most specialized courses. It’s at all—or even just look at events happen- tempting to try to cover as much content ing on a regular day in a workplace—and as possible, and lecture is an easy way identify interesting research questions and to do that as you can control the pace of ways that those research questions might delivery. For me, rather than getting too be approached. I’m not sure how I would concerned with content, I try to develop measure that in terms of assessment of expert information processors. I can’t student learning outcomes, but I think it is possibly assign every reading that might be a critical mindset to develop, and helping relevant, and there’s a limit to how much students get there is definitely one of my students can read each week. Instead I learning objectives for class. can try to develop in my PhD students the skills they need to be able to find, read, I also agree that there’s always plenty of and interpret whatever they are interest- content to be covered, and lecture is one ed in. Part of this is rethinking content in way for that to happen and to cover a lot terms of skill-building opportunities rather of material in a shorter period of time. than simple knowledge acquisition. For ex- At the same time, there’s truth to the old ample, with first year PhD students I assign saying (that I wish I knew the origin of) a few somewhat theoretically or method- that “lecture is process of moving informa- ologically shoddy articles early on to build tion from one person’s notes to another their critiquing skills and efficacy. I assign person’s notes without intruding on the another article because I know that most thought process of either person.” When- students will dislike it, and I want them to ever I would lean toward a lecture in a learn that it’s OK to disagree and argue grad class, I would want to ask myself: with me. The content of these articles is “Would this be just as effective if I just also valuable, but my main goal is to use wrote this out and gave them my notes?” them to build info-processing skills. If the answer is yes, then perhaps this isn’t the best way to promote the learning goal How does your approach to doctoral class- and use precious and limited class time. So 116 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 even in a “lecture” format, I would argue in the water and having to figure it out. for lecture with questions and discussion. It is less stressful to do the first approach Oftentimes my class sessions will start off but may also be slower. Discussion-based with me doing a 20–25 minute overview classes for first years is a bit like throwing to set the stage for the discussion to come them in the water and letting them figure it and then gradually shift from me driving out. The difference is that you know when the process to a shared process. I also tend you’ve figured out how to swim because to approach assigned articles by just ask- you don’t drown. But as your students have ing “What struck you in this article? Where mentioned, they don’t know when they’ve do you want to spend time discussing this learned what they need to learn in grad article?” I’ll have some points that I want school classes. So I would say that what- to be sure get made about the article, and ever our style of class leadership is, it’s im- about the broader topic, but I’m just as portant to highlight for students what the happy—or happier—if those points get learning objectives are, how you’re helping made by the students rather than by me. them meet them, and then helping them see when they DID meet them. I absolutely agree that, while content coverage is important, we need to remember So that’s a bit of a ramble, I know. Have that our content has a relatively short half- we made any progress in our discussion? life. Theories evolve, new topics of study emerge, and others come to be seen as LJN: Well, here’s what I got out of this: First, less important. The basic thought process discussion is a nice tool, but like any tool, is recognizing a problem, converting that its usefulness depends on the skill of the problem into a research question, figuring person using it and on what you are trying out what data are needed to answer the to build. Second, there’s a lot more variabil- question and how to get those data, how to ity in instruction methods at the PhD level analyze and interpret the data, and deter- than I appreciated. You’ve given me some mine the answer to the question. Helping really interesting ideas along those lines. students develop a way of thinking about Third, we agree that learning objectives for answering questions in the world is at least PhD courses should go beyond acquiring as important as the focus on content. knowledge. Fourth, as a professor, don’t be afraid to do the same things that drove you One last thought to help circle back to the crazy when you were a student! question that started our conversation. You can learn to swim by dipping your toe As always, if you have any questions or in the water and then gradually moving comments, we’d love to hear them! mar- deeper in the water and learning new skills, [email protected] and or you can learn to swim by being thrown [email protected].

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 117 Promoting Diversity in Thinking About “Diversity”

I am delighted to announce the endowment of the Outtz Fund within the SIOP Foundation. The Outtz Fund will support the James L. Outtz Grant for Student Research on Diversity.

Grant applications will be received for the first time in 2016, with the first award to be made in 2017. If you will still be a graduate student in I-O in 2017 and working on a thesis or dissertation that investigates some facet of diversity, be sure to apply. If your graduate student days are behind you, contribute to the Outtz Fund—you will be promoting diversity in thinking about “diversity.”

As scientist–practitioners, we place high value on the quality of the evidence martialed in support of various institutional practices and policies. As practitioners, we strive to provide effective and efficient resolutions to practical dilemmas. As scientists, we question everything.

Take “diversity” as a case in point. When I entered this field in 1963, diversity was solely a matter of race, and the term itself Milton D. Hakel had not come into general use as a descriptor for the com- SIOP Foundation position of a workforce. Today in America it still has much of President that initial connotation, but the term is evolving into a much broader array of attributes.

Most of us think of diversity in terms of demographics almost exclusively. Jim Outtz thinks about it more broadly, more in keeping with its primary definition as the state or quality of having many different ideas, forms, or types—in short, variety. I talked with Jim to learn about his inspiration for taking the lead to create this endowment.

Jim began by noting that practice works best when it is based on scientific research. He pointed out that the scientific enter- prise consists of intensive analysis of constructs, their mean-

118 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 ings and inter-relationships. He asserted OK, now here’s the pitch: The Outtz Fund that “diversity of thought is a necessity in has just been established, and its principal the refinement of constructs.” is $50,000. It needs to grow; demand for research support is far larger than can be What I was expecting from Jim was a ratio- met by an annual 4% yield, $2,000. nale for diversity built around humanitarian values and outcomes; what I got was a ratio- Pitch in your tax-deductible contribution. nale built on hard-core science: demograph- Let’s double this endowment by the time Jim ic diversity provides an entrance for diverse begins his presidential year at the next SIOP thoughts about constructs. I was surprised, Conference in Anaheim, April 14–16, 2016. pleasantly, but surprised nevertheless. Contribute or make a pledge at http:// I asked Jim about why the endowment is to www.siop.org/foundation/donate.aspx. be directed to grants for student research on diversity, instead of awards. I got anoth- Your calls and questions to the SIOP er surprising answer: poster sessions! Foundation are always welcome. Join us in building the Outtz Fund or any of the It turns out that Jim’s favorite feature of the endowments. SIOP Conference is the poster sessions because that is where one sees the full diversi- Milt Hakel, President ty of research in our field; that is where one [email protected], (419) 819 0936 is most likely to encounter creative refine- Rich Klimoski, Vice-President ments to our field’s constructs. Awards go [email protected] (703) 993 1828 to people who are already on their way, so grants for student research provide recogni- Nancy Tippins, Secretary tion and support very early in a career, at a [email protected] point where there is much diversity. (864) 527 5956 Lyman Porter, Treasurer Jim’s answers thus provide replies to my di- [email protected] (949) 644 5358 rect questions (What inspired you to create Paul Thayer the endowment? Why grants for student [email protected] (919) 467 2880 research?). Just as importantly, they pro- Leaetta Hough vide excellent examples of how diversity in [email protected] (651) 227 4888 thinking promotes better understanding.

None of us alone has all the answers to The SIOP Foundation the problems of organization nor to the 440 E Poe Rd Ste. 101 problems of diversity. We need to look Bowling Green, OH 43402-1355 beyond what’s visible on the surface. By 419-353-0032 Fax: 419-352-2645 promoting diversity in thinking, we can E-mail: [email protected] better discover the needed refinements. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 119 Legal Summertime Reading

It’s summer, and so decisions on cases the U.S. Supreme Court has been hearing since last October have been coming in, including some important ones regarding EEO law and enforcement agency authority. Also on the Front are two employment testing cases and a set of legal interpretations from the Fourth Circuit.

Young v. UPS (2015) was an attention grabber. Young was a delivery driver who had to stop working due to her pregnancy. There was no provision for alternate duty, which the company provided to those needing accommodation under the Ameri- cans with Disabilities Act (ADA) or collective bargaining provi- sions covering on-the-job injury or temporary loss of commer- cial driving privileges. Young fit under none of these. (UPS has since revised its policy regarding pregnant women. Although pregnancy is not a disability per se, the Amendments Act to the ADA, coming after this case was filed, may provide coverage under temporary disabilities. The Court noted that this may make a difference in the future, but declined to comment further.) Young made her claim the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA). As Justice Bryer wrote in the opinion of the Court:

The Pregnancy Discrimination Act makes clear that Title VII’s Rich Tonowski prohibition against sex discrimination applies to discrimination U.S. Equal based on pregnancy. It also says that employers must treat Employment “women affected by pregnancy . . . the same for all employ- Opportunity ment-related purposes . . . as other persons not so affected Commission but similar in their ability or inability to work.” 42 U. S. C. §2000e (k). We must decide how this latter provision applies in the context of an employer’s policy that accommodates many, but not all, workers with nonpregnancy-related disabilities.

As UPS (and lower courts) interpreted the law, there was there was no discrimination because the company treated all off-the-job incapacity not covered by the above policy in the same way: no accommodation. Young’s argument went to the phrase that seemed to say that pregnant women should be treated just on their ability or inability to work not the distinctions on how the incapacity occurred. That seemed to give

120 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 pregnancy the best of whatever the em- prong where the plaintiff shows that the ployer offered to other categories affected nondiscriminatory reason offered by the by inability to work. defendant was pretext. The pregnant plaintiff can argue that the policy puts a “signif- The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity icant burden” on female workers, and the Commission (EEOC) had issued pregnan- policy rationale is “not sufficiently strong” cy discrimination enforcement guidance to justify that burden. This seems to be while the case was pending with the Court, indicating that the employer is in trouble if which was in line with Young’s position. numerous workers are accommodated for The Court did not find those guidelines incapacity but pregnant workers are not persuasive (Section II B) for, among other included. It also introduces a quantitative things, no explanation why the agency was calculation into who gets accommodated taking a position contrary to a previous rather than simply being a matter of intent government argument. This discussion to discriminate. Justice Alito concurred may tie back to what seemed an open in the judgment but not in the majori- issue in another recent decision, Perez ty opinion. The dissent (Justices Scalia, (2015), involving the U.S. Department Thomas, and Kennedy) thought that the of Labor’s authority to change its mind. cited phrase simply reinforced pregnancy’s The Court held that agency interpretive inclusion under Title VII without conferring guidance that was issued without formal additional rights. They were disturbed with hearing and rulemaking does not require the majority’s crafting of a new position such when the agency decides to take a that seemed to blur the distinction be- new position. That was clear; what was tween disparate treatment and disparate not was how much deference the courts impact. Justice Kennedy filed a personal should give these changes. The comments dissent emphasizing the latter point. The on EEOC’s guidance might be addressing case now goes back to district court. this issue. But given the Court’s suggestion that the ADA may now apply and sever- More abstract in its issues, but with more al commentators taking this up as likely, potential to influence an array of cases, is EEOC may have gotten the substance right the Court’s unanimous decision in Mach for the future despite the criticism. Mining v. EEOC (2015). This is a sex discrimination case that took a detour (for- A 6–3 Court offered a middle ground mally, an interlocutory appeal) to resolve between Young and UPS. The PDA did not a legal interpretive issue: What is EEOC’s create a status that conferred best ac- obligation to conciliate with the employer commodation rights on pregnant women. before filing suit? EEOC was conciliating But that phrase from the PDA that Justice from its establishment in 1965; but in Breyer cited was not without force. The 1972 it got authority to sue employers in Court envisioned the traditional McDonnell its own name. How much conciliation is Douglas (1973) scenario to establish dispa- needed when EEOC has decided that the rate treatment, with a new twist on the last courts need to get involved? The subtext is The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 121 concern by employers of take-it-or-leave-it EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch, a religious conciliation proposals, perhaps with the discrimination case involving a Muslim dimensions of the case not fully defined. job applicant’s wearing a hijab (Arabic, From the agency’s perspective, the pros- “cover,” a head scarf) to the job interview pect of having a mini-trial on conciliation and subsequently being turned down, was whenever it files a discrimination suit is an important agency win with yet-unclear appalling. Several appellate courts had consequences. The company wants its previously decided that there is some salespeople to model “The Look” project- degree of judicial oversight on EEOC’s ed by the type of clothing being sold. The conciliation; what degree was not univer- scarf, and any “cap” worn on the head, is sal across circuits. Then the Seventh Circuit considered inconsistent with that image. backed the agency against Mach Mining. But the applicant did not specifically ask Both sides urged the Supreme Court to for a religious accommodation when resolve the matter. interviewed; a head scarf could be just a personal fashion statement that is contrary Again, there was a splitting of the differ- to the employer’s fashion statement. So ence between the parties’ positions. EEOC the underlying dilemma: What information was not entirely free of court review. But are applicant and employer expected to the Court held that review was to be min- share about religious observance in the imal. Some commentators have hailed the workplace? In the 8–1 decision written decision as a victory for employers. Mach by Justice Scalia (Justice Alito concurred in Mining prevailed. However, the Court’s de- the judgment but not the theory; Justice cision was a substantive win for the agency. Thomas mostly dissented), the Court held Although the Seventh Circuit’s hands-off that (a) disparate treatment and disparate policy was overturned, so was the inclina- impact are the only causes for action un- tion in any other circuit to apply more than der Title VII; (b) for a disparate treatment “bare bones” review. Failure of the agency claim, the plaintiff need only show that the to conciliate just gets a court order to go need for accommodation was a motivating and do it; it does not toss the case. factor in the employer’s decision, not that the employer had knowledge of the need; Defendants have already staked out the and (c) Title VII gives favored treatment to next battleground in stopping suits be- religious practices rather than requiring fore they go to trial: sufficiency of EEOC’s them to be treated no worse than other investigations. One possible argument is practices. Because Title VII includes under that the investigation was not extensive “religion” all aspects of observance, prac- enough to support a major suit. But a tice, and belief, failure to accommodate counterargument is that the purpose of a is disparate treatment; it is not confined trial is to determine the sufficiency of the to disparate impact, where Abercrombie allegations; this should not be short cir- had argued that its ban on headware was cuited in pretrial motions to kill the case. not specifically aimed at religion. The 10th Circuit win on summary judgment for 122 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Abercrombie was overturned and the case same test. Issues regarding determination sent back for further proceedings. Watch of adverse impact and validity make this for more discussion on how the distinction case unusual. First, the proceedings are a between motive and knowledge plays out consolidation of separate suits involving for other Title VII cases. several Massachusetts jurisdictions using the same test (Boston was authorized to Two employment selection testing cases use some jurisdiction-specific questions also are in the news. Both involve police. not in the test versions used by the other jurisdictions) and operating under the The City of Pittsburgh announced a same state civil service rules; other than $1.6M settlement of litigation against its Boston, they have small police forces, few entry-level police selection procedures promotions to make, and so not much (Foster v. City of Pittsburgh, 2015). The adverse impact. District court was not recommendations underlying the set- convinced that adverse impact should be tlement were produced in a study by Dr. pooled across jurisdictions; the jurisdic- Leaetta Hough (2014). An announced goal tions are, after all, different entities. The of the revised process is a police force that case is not a class action or some other reflects the city’s demographics; the city’s action against the jurisdictions collectively. population is 66% White, but the police force is 85% White (Dorrian, 2015). Plain- Also, they have different applicant pools; tiffs had charged both pattern-or-practice within these separate pools are possible disparate treatment as well as adverse repeat test takers, thus complicating aggre- impact from the tests, alleging that the gation across years. Second, regarding Bos- selection process was infected with sub- ton, which had conceded adverse impact, jectivity, nepotism, and cronyism. The new the district court endorsed the notion of procedures are to be introduced within “minimal validity“ in these circumstances. the next 2 years and will cover job analysis, Presumably better than minimal results applicant preparation, a construct-oriented could be provided by a more comprehen- measurement plan, and improvement in sive testing mechanism, such as an assess- the tests and oral board ratings. Details are ment center. But the court, noting Boston’s in the report, which is available online. previous experience with a more elaborate process, seemed to be questioning whether On its way to the First Circuit (New En- it was worth the effort when there was no gland) U.S. Court of Appeals is another po- assurance that the impact would be less- lice case, this one involving promotion to ened and validity maintained or enhanced sergeant (Lopez v. City of Lawrence et al., despite the time and expense. 2015). The selection procedure involves a multiple-choice job knowledge test and a The case echoes an issue in Ricci v. Deste- rating of education and experience. The fano (2011) and an amicus curiae (Latin, knowledge test was administered between “friend of the court”) brief submitted by 2005 and 2008; for any given year, it is the five I-O psychologists (Drs. Aguinis, Cascio, The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 123 Goldstein, Outtz, and Zedeck). The issue respondents indicating that they would was identification of the flaw in the fire count each application within occurrence. promotion tests run by New Haven that Dunleavy, Mueller, Buonasera, Kuang, and would justify canceling the test results Dunleavy (2008) provided a discussion of with consequent racial repercussions. The the consequences of frequent applicants first flaw, according to the I-Os, was lack of and options for handling these situations. coverage on the leadership competencies It was not apparent that the court had that distinguished lieutenants and captains considered the extent of the problem or from journeymen firefighters. This issue what to do about it, short of not aggregat- itself, plus matters such as testing memo- ing across years. rized knowledge when memorization was not required, goes back to promotion tests Dr. Art Gutman (2015), who kept a legal of the 1980s. A test that is convenient to watch for many years, called attention to administer but has adverse impact and a decision that might be of interest to the questionable validity is problematic. defendants. Johnson v. City of Memphis (2015) presents a complicated situation of EEOC and the U.S Department of Justice a police promotion test procedure alleged- (DOJ) filed an amicus brief, as did several ly “done right” (although not perfectly) in civil rights organizations, supporting the 1996, done wrong with the security of test plaintiffs. material compromised in 2000, and done again in 2002. The latter situation was Had the defendants constituted one orga- the subject of this suit. District court had nization, objections to combining the re- found the 2002 test to be valid but that sults might not be an absolute bar against there were valid alternatives with less ad- some form of aggregating across units. So verse impact. The Sixth Circuit (Michigan, the question now is whether in this situa- Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee) disagreed tion a jurisdiction can be liable for adverse on appeal. The plaintiffs had not proven because other jurisdictions use the same that high-fidelity, role-playing assessment test for the same job, and individually of integrity and conscientiousness or use or collectively for these others there is of panel interview methodology from the adverse impact. There is also the question Chicago Police Department were viable of remedy if, as some of the defendants’ alternatives. District court had not taken analyses indicate, the shortfall due to into account test security concerns, par- adverse impact for the plaintiffs’ demo- ticularly with the high-fidelity simulation; graphic groups is less than a whole person it had taken nearly 3 months to evaluate for some jurisdictions. Cohen, Aamodt, 400 applicants in 1996, aggravating the and Dunleavy (2010) reported differenc- security problem. It was not enough for es in professional opinion regarding how plaintiffs to argue that such alternatives to count repeat applicants across multi- existed; they had to take into account ple occasions for the same jurisdiction, factors such as cost, security, and subjec- with a fairly narrow majority of survey tivity introduced by simulation evaluators. 124 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Integrity testing was shot down because for harassment. This seemed to strengthen the Uniform Guidelines “generally disfavor the claim for commonality to establish the tests that measure abstract character traits promotion class; discrimination on promo- by making inferences about candidates’ tions could reflect a common imposition of mental processes;” the court found that a hostile work environment. plaintiffs had only offered “vague support” for such testing via their expert. The entire Fourth Circuit got involved in a racial hostile environment and retaliation The point that Gutman emphasized was case that overturned summary judg- that this case was a “pure” situation in- ment for the defendant in Boyer-Liberto volving the alternatives issue where defen- v. Fountainebleau (2015). The plaintiff dants had produced a test acknowledged was a cocktail waitress who claimed that as valid by the court, initially lost because she was subjected to racial slurs and was of alternatives, but ultimately won be- threatened with firing. She was fired sub- cause plaintiffs had not sustained their sequently, allegedly for poor performance. burden to show practicality. The underly- The en banc court supported the plaintiff ing issues seem similar to those regarding 12–3 on the hostile environment charge validity raised in Lopez. But is minimally and 14–1 on retaliation. This does not give valid in this new case valid enough? her a win on her claims, but it does give her a day (or more) in court. The court’s There are two recent cases from the opinion held that an isolated incident of Fourth Circuit (Maryland to South Caro- harassment can establish a hostile work lina) Court of Appeals that are shaping environment, and reporting an incident EEO litigation. Brown v. Nucor (2015) that is physically threatening or humiliat- showed that the EEO class action is not ing is a protected activity. The first part dead. Holding that the district court had regarding a severe single act is important “fundamentally misapprehended” the but not new; the ruling on retaliation was Supreme Court’s decision in Wal-Mart v. getting attention because it overturned Dukes (2011), the appellate court in a 2–1 the court’s precedent. The new ruling decision reinstated class certification for closed a loophole wherein an aggrieved about 100 African-American employees employee would have no protection from (represented by seven named plaintiffs) retaliation unless hostility had persisted. who had charged racial discrimination in If the victim remained silent for fear of re- promotions. Charges also included racial taliation, management could then respond discrimination in hiring and racial harass- (accurately) that it did not know about ment. In contrast to the massive Wal-Mart the situation. The new standard recog- litigation, here there was a relatively small nized that a single severe incident could number for the class, in one plant, with give rise to the reasonable belief that an a central allegedly discriminatory policy. unlawful hostile environment existed or Helping the plaintiffs was the fact that the was forming, and so a complaint would district court had upheld class certification be protected for opposing discrimination. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 125 Will this set off a new wave of litigation? EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, No. 14-86. The dissenting judge fears it will happen. (U.S., June 1, 2015). Commentators thought this unlikely but Foster v. City of Pittsburgh, No. 2:12-cv-01207 saw a possible shift away from employers’ (W.D. Pa., proposed settlement 5/7/2015). 6th Circuit’s strategy to dispute whether the plaintiff’s Gutman, A. (2014, December 12). ruling in Johnson v. City of Memphis: End activity was actually protected (and so win of the line for alternatives with less (or no) the case on summary judgment) to arguing adverse impact. Retrieved from http:// the substance of the alleged retaliation. dciconsult.com/6th-circuits-ruling-johnson- v-city-memphis-end-line-alternatives-less- References adverse-impact/ Hough, L. (2014). Review of and Recommenda- Boyer-Liberto v. Fountainebleau, No. 13-1473 tions Regarding Pittsburgh Bureau of Police (4th Cir. 5/7/2015). Entry-Level Hiring Practices. Retrieved from Brown v. Nucor, No. 13-1779 (4th Cir. http://www.aclupa.org/download_file/ 5/11/2015). view_inline/2301/681/ Cohen, D. B, Aamodt, M. G., & Dunleavy, E. M. Johnson v. City of Memphis, Nos. 13–5452, (2010). Technical advisory committee report 13–5454 (6th Cir. 10/27/2014). on best practices in adverse impact analy- Lopez v. City of Lawrence et al., No. 14-1952 sis. Washington, DC: Center for Corporate (1st. Cir. 2015). The district court opinion Equality. Retrieved from http://www.cceq. under appeal is No. 07-11693 (D. Mass. Sept. org/pdfs/2010tacai.pdf 5, 2014). Retrieved from http://www.justice. Dorrian, P. (2015, May 8). Pittsburgh will pay gov/crt/about/app/briefs/lopezlawrence- $1.6 million, overhaul police hiring to settle brief.pdf class bias case. Bloomberg BNA Daily Labor Mach Mining, LLC v. EEOC, No. 13-1019 (April Report. Retrieved from http://laborandem- 29, 2015). ploymentlaw.bna.com. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. Dunleavy, E. M., Mueller, L. M., Buonasera, A. 792 (1973). K., Kuang, D. C., & Dunleavy, D. G. (2008). On Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association, No. 13- the consequences of frequent applicants in 1041 (U.S. 3/9/2015). adverse impact analyses: A demonstration Ricci v. Destefano, 557 U.S. 557 (2009). study. International Journal of Selection and Wal-Mart v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011). Assessment, 16, 333–344. Young v. United Parcel Service, No. 12-1226 (U.S. 3/25/2015).

126 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 By continuing to explore how we can apply science to practice, this column will focus on the role that an I-O Psychologist can play in the redesign and implementation of performance management systems within organizations. We will challenge the traditional assumptions and designs that have been monop- olistic in organizations for the last 70+ years, and offer both science and applications that could lead us in a more positive direction for both individuals and organizations. File under: Blow Up Your Performance Management System.

The Conundrum

There is something happening when the Harvard Business Re- view April 2015 cover screams “Reinventing Performance Rank- ings: A Radical New Way to Evaluate Talent”; and the Harvard Business Review special offer for April 2014 is a Performance Management Collection consisting of the following three books:

• How to Be Good at Performance Appraisals: Simple, Effec- tive, Done Right • Guide to Giving Effective Feedback • Shine: Using Brain Science to Get the Best From Your People

For this column we are going to explore performance management and the role that an I-O psychologist can play. We will address this in two parts: In the latter part we will provide the already written “How Can I-O Psychologists Help,” which addresses Richard M. Vosburgh many important topics in today’s status quo environment. For RMV Solutions LLC that segment we will reference the SIOP.org website, which provides a special section that specifically describes how an I-O psychologist can contribute to the practice of Human Resources in organizations. On the SIOP.org website, click on “Profession- als” and look under the “For Organizations” column. Useful stuff.

Before doing that, I would like to have much more fun describing how an I-O psychologist can help “change the conversation” to explore and cocreate completely newly designed processes that better meet the individual’s need for meaningful work and the modern organization’s need for speed and agility, and that is predicated on what we already know (the science) about individual and group motivation and engagement. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 127 The Science Performance management is a great process to start this conversation because the tradi- Let’s explore how the science of I-O psy- tional design is universally disliked and avoid- chology can inform the creative redesign ed by both employees and managers—given of performance management systems. that fact, there is something wrong with Here is some of what the research shows. pushing ahead with I-O psychologists trying to make the old system more efficient or the In research published by Scullen, Mount, endless quest to minimize rating errors and and Goff in the Journal of Applied Psychol- bias. It is also interesting to observe that ogy (2000), 4,492 managers were rated on even the most current online systems tend performance dimensions by two bosses, to simply emulate the same design of the two peers, and two subordinates. The old paper system. The paper version of the surprising finding was that actual perfor- same old process was put online, with bells mance only accounted for 21% of the vari- and whistles to allow cascading of goals, and ance and that individual raters’ differences 360 inputs, and employee input; but in the in perception accounted for 62% of the end it does not change the stale paradigm variance! We tend to assume that ratings that makes the manager the judge and jury measure the performance of the ratee, and sets up a situation that is more likely to but what this shows is that what is being undercut relationships rather than have a measured is often the tendencies of the process that builds up the relationship with rater. Bottom line, “ratings reveal more the manager and with the organization. about the rater than they do about the rate.” It should also be noted that many A 2013 Society for Human Resource Man- other JAP articles through the years have agement survey asked HR professionals explored many psychometric issues and about the quality of their performance showed that a wide range “rating errors management systems, and only 23% said and biases” exist, even after training. their company was above average in the way it conducted them. In addition, Cor- The aforementioned study is strongly cited porate Executive Board surveys have found in Marcus Buckingham and Ashley Goodall’s that 95% of managers are dissatisfied with April 2015 article in the Harvard Business their performance management systems, Review, where they lay out the myriad and 90% of HR heads believe they do not of problems with performance appraisal yield accurate information. processes but more importantly provides an alternative process that Deloitte now What follows is only a small slice of “the embraces and others are quickly exploring. science” and “the practice” to simply pro- The solution involves simplifying and focus- vide a few examples; many more exist. ing on strengths and the quality of ongoing feedback, and is built on the strengths research from The Marcus Buckingham Group and The Gallup Organization.

128 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 David Rock’s neuroscience team recently Microsoft, Adobe, Cargill, ConAgra, Gap, published an article in Strategy + Business Intel, Juniper Networks, Medtronic, and (August 2014) reviewing research that Sears. Let’s look at a few examples. showed that labeling people with a rating or ranking generates an overwhelming Deloitte Services LP left the old perfor- “fight or flight” response that impairs mance rating process behind and created judgment. According to the authors, “This three new processes: the annual compen- neural response is the same type of ‘brain sation decision, the quarterly or per-proj- hijack’ that occurs when there is an immi- ect performance snapshot, and the nent physical threat like a confrontation” weekly check in. They also “shifted from with a dangerous animal. This uncon- a batched focus on the past to a continual scious response prepares people for “rapid focus on the future, through regular evalu- reaction and aggressive movement” but ations and frequent check-ins.” is not well-suited for the kind of conversations that allow people to learn from a Microsoft now focuses evaluation on performance review. results that people deliver together, emphasizing learning and growth. Traditional Dr. Bob Eichinger, Lominger founder and performance management tactics (ratings, recently the Korn Ferry Institute leadership distributions, and annual reviews) were development researcher, showed that the completely retired. ability to “grow talent” is ranked last out of 67 competencies for managers, despite Juniper Networks threw out performance decades of performance management ratings and they simply determine if some- systems and training. This led Rock and one is a fit with the company’s culture—ei- colleagues to suggest that overall, manag- ther being a “J-Player” or a “Non-J Player.” ers may be worse at developing their em- J-Players generally behave according to ployees than at almost anything else they Juniper’s values and deliver reasonable do. So why do we continue to position the performance. Juniper clearly explains manager as the person solely responsible which behavior categories result in Non-J for developing subordinates? Player status and helps Non-J Players fit in if they elect to stay. More than 80% of The Practice Non-J Players have chosen to leave the company and did so understanding why Over the last several years many com- they would never succeed there. panies have dropped the old approach to performance management and have Medtronic has instituted a quarterly “per- adopted completely new practices. I-O formance acceleration” process that focus- psychologists would be well advised to get es on a small number of forward-looking familiar with the logic and design of these goals, lacks numbers and ratings, and new processes. Examples of organizations offers a one-page summary sheet. taking a different approach are Deloitte, The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 129 The Best Practice Institute is introducing provide coaching and feedback to employ- a fascinating new software product called ees in ways that increase motivation and Skill Rater that uses a simple, intuitive, so- facilitate performance enhancement. cial media type platform to provide a method for constantly getting feedback based Set performance objectives. I-O psychol- on appreciative inquiry and positive dialog ogists can set specific performance ob- so that employees get comfortable both jectives and goals for employees based giving and receiving feedback. People give on scientific evidence that map to the each other both appreciation and advice. It organizations’ strategic goals and maximize works well when the organization wants to employee motivation. symbolically reinforce an open, nondefen- sive, agile learning environment. Develop compensation systems. I-O Supporting Current Systems psychologists can create and implement compensation systems that are aligned That ends the section exploring new, with the organizations’ strategic goals and creative approaches that an I-O psychol- are supportive of organizational values and ogist can build on to create systems for culture, as well as identify other types of the future. Now, let’s briefly review how incentives that are valued by employees. I-O psychologists can help make current systems more efficient (from http://www. Conduct legal audits and provide expert siop.org/business/performance.aspx). witness testimony. I-O psychologists are uniquely qualified to audit an organiza- Develop performance appraisal tools. I-O tion’s performance management program psychologists can analyze jobs and develop and identify potential legal risks; they can performance appraisal tools that ensure all also serve as expert witnesses in perfor- supervisors are calibrated to have the same mance management cases. understanding of how poor, average, and above average performance is identified. Develop and administer 360 surveys. I-O psychologists can develop, implement, Develop structured rating processes. I-O and coach to 360-degree feedback surveys psychologists can develop performance that provide participants with detailed management systems that facilitate ongo- feedback regarding how their performance ing performance monitoring and incentiv- is viewed by supervisors, peers, direct ize regular feedback to employees. reports, clients and customers.

Train performance raters. I-O psychologists I invite dialog; if you know of either “sci- can train performance raters to identify and ence” or “practice” that gives additional avoid common ratings biases so that ratings examples in this area then I’d love to hear are as fair and accurate as possible; they from you at [email protected]. can also train performance raters on how to 130 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 References ness. Retrieved from http://www.strategy-business.com/article/00275?gko=c442b. Buckingham, M., & Goodall, A. (2015, April). Scullen, S. E., Mount, M. K., & Goff, M. (2000). Reinventing performance management. Understanding the latent structure of job Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from performance ratings. Journal of Applied https://hbr.org/2015/04/reinventing-perfor- Psychology, 85, 956–970. mance-management. SIOP. (n.d.) Performance management. Re- Rock, D., Davis, J., & Jones, B. (2014, August). trieved from http://www.siop.org/business/ Kill your performance ratings. Strategy+Busi - performance.aspx.

SIOP 2015-2016 dues are due by June 30!

As of July 1, unpaid memberships will be deactivated.

Renew TODAY!

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 131

Where Are the I-O Psychologists in Southeast Asia?

Allen I. Kraut Baruch College/Kraut Associates I recently took a vacation in Vietnam, and Malaysia has six. Singapore clearly has the before I left the U.S., I thought it might be most, with 62 members. That equals 14.71 fun to meet with an I-O psychologist while SIOP members per million population. I was there. On past trips to other coun- (By comparison, the U.S. has about the tries, I have enjoyed meeting colleagues, same, with 15.3 SIOP members per million especially from SIOP. Just last year, passing population.) Hong Kong is in second place through Singapore, I was invited to give a in Southeast Asia with 3.86 SIOP members talk to the Community of Organisational per million population. None of the other Psychologists in Singapore (COPS) and liked countries even come close. meeting the 25 people who came. Causes and Effects? No problem, I thought, as Vietnam is a country with more than 90 million in- This left me wondering what accounts for habitants. So I went to the SIOP member these huge differences. An “eyeball analysis” directory and found—are you ready? —that shows a negative correlation between coun- there is not a single SIOP professional mem- try population size and prevalence of SIOP ber in Vietnam. (There is however one stu- members. Indonesia and the Philippines dent affiliate.) Wow, how important are we, are the largest countries with only two SIOP really? That got me wondering how many members between them. Hong Kong and SIOP members there are in all of South- Singapore have the bulk of SIOP members in east Asia. In addition to the nine countries Southeast Asia and are the smallest coun- usually listed in Southeast Asia, I added two tries. But I cannot imagine any reason for a other small nations on the littoral to my causal relationship with country size. inquiry. These were Taiwan and Hong Kong. Instead, I suspect that SIOP member prev- So again I went to the SIOP member direc- alence is related to the economic level of tory. The results, along with country pop- development and also to the proportion of ulation figures, are shown in Chart 1. (The English speakers in the country. Indeed, a data in this report does not include student previous study showed that most non-U.S. affiliates.) Countries range in size from 5.5 members of SIOP come from countries million people in Singapore to 255.4 million where English is widely spoken (Kraut & in Indonesia. Of the 11 countries, there Mondo, 2009). are no SIOP members at all in five nations (Burma, Cambodia, Laos, Philippines, and Chart 2 shows the 11 countries on these Vietnam). Indonesia and Thailand have two two scales.1 The horizontal scale shows the SIOP members each, Taiwan has five, and percent of English speakers and the verti-

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 133 Chart 1: SIOP Members in South East Asia cal scale shows GDP per capita, to repre- Being high on one scale but not the other sent the level of economic development in isn’t good enough. For example the Philip- a country. The results are very straightfor- pines, with more than half of its population ward. Countries that are relatively unde- speaking English, has a very low GDP and no veloped and have few English speakers are SIOP members. Taiwan with a relatively high all in the lower left-hand corner. All these GDP per capita but a low proportion of En- countries have few or no SIOP members. glish speakers has very few SIOP members.

Singapore ranks highest on both scales and So, Where Does This Leave Us? has the largest proportion of SIOP members. People who know Singapore are well aware We know from current SIOP data and that it is the home of several fine universities earlier research (Kraut & Mondo, 2009) where SIOP members are on the faculty, that SIOP’s membership (including student and it is also the home of headquarters or affiliates) is increasingly from outside the regional headquarters of several global firms. United States and is now about 13% of the total. Over the last year, nearly one of every To a lesser degree, Hong Kong is in a simi- four (23.2%) new professional members lar position. was from outside the U.S. Most of them are coming from developed countries where 134 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Chart 2: SIOP Members in South East Asia English is widely spoken. The recognition of sia has 9, and Taiwan and Thailand have increased internationalization in our field 8 members each. Smaller numbers come has even led to a new textbook to train I-O from the Philippines (7), Vietnam (1), and students in a global perspective (Griffith, Cambodia (1), none from Laos or Burma. In Thompson, & Armon, 2014). all, I-O practitioners seem more widespread across Southeast Asia than the SIOP mem- Overseas, industrial-organizational psychol- ber numbers suggested. ogists may be members of other professional associations such as Division 1, Work & SIOP members who care about overseas Organizational Psychology, of IAAP (Interna- I-O activities will be greatly helped by tional Association of Applied Psychology). the Society’s participation in the recently Of the 896 Division 1 members in March formed Alliance for Organizational Psychol- 2015, U.S. members (the largest subgroup ogy, where SIOP is partnering with Division after Australia) were only 8.3% of the total.2 1 (Work & Organizational Psychology) of A review of the membership from South- IAAP and with EAWOP (European Asso- east Asia generally supports our conclusions ciation of Work and Organizational Psy- above but offers a few surprises. Although chology). As Lynda Zugec and colleagues the memberships are still relatively high (2014) reported in last October’s TIP, some from Singapore (14) and Hong Kong (14), fascinating developments in this arena are Indonesia leads with 17 members; Malay- being done by SIOP’s International Affairs

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 135 Committee. (See their International Prac- writing to a SIOP member. Still, one ought tice Forum here.) to keep such possibilities in mind. Some colleagues I know who have done this Traditionally, most SIOP members have have even been offered accommodations, found employment in economically de- meals, or small honorariums in return for veloped countries, in their universities, their talks or seminars. In any case, the governments, and consulting and business SIOP member’s reception is likely to be firms. This is likely to continue in the fu- genuinely warm. So, consider it, and here’s ture. Could Third World countries bene- wishing you safe and exciting travels! fit from our expertise? Certainly. Many people and organizations in less developed Notes nations could, but it seems unlikely they 1 All data are 2015 data from Wikipedia sourc- will get such expertise without changes in es. For some countries, the proportion of En- the way I-O practice reaches them. glish speakers was unavailable or described as “low.” The proportion of English speakers Fortunately some efforts by SIOP are un- in those countries was arbitrarily set to a derway. Through its work with the UN, and value of 10%. (Of course, in those countries its connection to the Global Organisation English speakers tend to be concentrated in the hospitality industry and among the coun- for Humanitarian Work Psychology (http:// tries’ elite.) It is quite amazing what data are gohwp.org), SIOP may help less developed available through Wikipedia! countries to get our expertise in the near 2 Personal communication from Milt Hakel, future. Over the last few years, regular April 15, 2015. reports in TIP from the SIOP-UN team and References the Spotlight on Humanitarian Work Psy- chology column have shown a lot of effort Kraut, A. I., & Mondo, L. (2009). SIOP goes glob- to reach out to less developed parts of the al. Or is it the other way around? The Industri- world. Even now, there have been some al-Organizational Psychologist, 47(1), 33–40. positive experiences, such as those de- Griffith, R. L., Thompson, L. F., & Armon, B. K. (Eds.). (2014). Internationalizing the curricu- scribed in Walter Reichman’s recent collec- lum in organizational psychology.New York, tion about I-O psychologists working with NY: Springer. vulnerable and underserved groups, often Reichman, W. (Ed.) (2014). Industrial and on a pro bono basis (Reichman, 2014). organizational psychology help the vulnerable: Serving the underserved. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. In less developed countries, visiting SIOP Zugec, L., Eyring, A., Kozusznik, B., Searle, R., members may find an eager audience in Hakel, M., & Farmer, B. (2014, October). universities, business schools especially, International practice forum: Local work and and other groups. But the visitor will have organizational psychology communities out- to take the initiative to make such contacts, side the USA. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 52 as it is not likely to be as easy as simply (2), 26–29.

136 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Convenience Samples and Teaching Organizational Research Methods

David P. Costanza, Nikki Blacksmith, and Meredith Coats The George Washington University There has been an ongoing discussion in I-O have revealed that most students think psychology about the appropriateness of research is just that, reporting what others using convenience samples in research and have found. Few considered the possibility the advantages and disadvantages of using that research was supposed to generate crowd-sourcing to collect data (e.g., Landers new knowledge and even fewer still had & Behrend, 2015; Sackett & Larson, 1990). any idea how to go about doing so. Landers and Behrend reviewed the argu- ments about convenience sampling and Given this lack of awareness and the chal- crowd-sourcing in research but the utility lenges of teaching research methods to of such techniques in educational settings students with no background in the area, has not been thoroughly explored. Drawing the focus of organizational research meth- on our experience teaching undergraduate ods courses has to be on the basics of the organizational research methods classes, research process. Although issues about we suggest that convenience samples and generalizability and external validity are crowd-sourced data are particularly valu- important and should certainly be covered in able and useful for those teaching organi- a research methods class, the main objec- zational research methods to undergradu- tives of such courses are necessarily going to ate (and sometimes graduate) students. focus more on the fundamentals: literature reviews, hypotheses, research designs, and A Focus on the Research Process research in an organizational context. One of the primary techniques used to teach Teaching organizational research methods is the basics of research is providing realis- extremely challenging in the best of circum- tic, hands-on experiences. A common way stances. There are many abstract concepts to provide such experiences is to require and complex and varied skills to be taught students to design and execute their own and most undergraduate students have independent research project. The main goal little experience with, or even awareness of such a project is not to obtain publishable about, conducting research. For example, and generalizable results, which are not like- when asked to define “research,” many ly, but rather to teach students the research students likely hearken back to their days in process by having them actually do research. high school, going on-line to look up what other people have written about some top- Providing Clarity to Abstract Concepts ic, and writing a report summarizing their findings. Informal polls in our undergradu- Most students’ first exposure to the ate organizational research methods classes research process is in an undergraduate The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 137 research methods course where they apply their statistics knowledge. Collecting are faced with learning a large number actual data from convenience samples of abstract concepts in a short period of provides students the opportunity to apply time. Many of these concepts are second this knowledge, including how to deal with nature to seasoned researchers but new to missing data, interpret significance and students: topics such as sampling, reliabili- effect sizes, and the challenges of working ty, validity, scales and indices, quasi-exper- with real data. Given this benefit, consider- imentation, and grounded theory among ation of whether the results are generaliz- many others.1 Students often struggle able or not is at best a secondary concern. with these concepts, and professors may struggle to find ways to explain them in Exposure to the Messiness of a clear and effective manner. Providing Data Collection students the opportunity to design a study and execute it can bring clarity to what Undergraduate organizational research were previously only abstract concepts. methods textbooks (and even many gradu- We have seen many “ah-ha” moments ate textbooks) often do not provide realistic from students concerning such abstract previews of the challenges of data collection, concepts when they are defining their con- skipping over many of the logistical difficul- structs of interest, developing measures, ties inherent in conducting research. By de- identifying samples, and analyzing data for signing a study and collecting data, students their projects. These insights and realiza- encounter and begin to understand the tions would not have occurred if not for many difficulties of organizational research. having actually carried out the research. They experience first hand the challenges The type of sample or source of the data is of identifying the appropriate population, not terribly germane. developing a sampling frame, and recruiting participants. After data collection, students Application of Statistical Knowledge have a dataset that they must clean and prepare for analysis, another step that is also As Landers and Behrend (2015) noted, often given short shrift in textbooks. When statistical concerns can arise when using working with actual data, students learn convenience samples. However, in under- how scores are developed, how recoding graduate research, the aim is not for the works, and how important data preparation student to uncover the “truth” about the and management skills are. To accomplish all relationship between variables (though it this, students need data and whether they is nice when they do) but rather to learn are convenient, crowdsourced, or otherwise how to collect, manage, and analyze data. does not really matter. Though all of our students who take organizational research methods have taken a Realistic School/Job Preview prerequisite statistics course, they often have forgotten most of what they learned Providing undergraduates the opportunity because they never had the opportunity to to develop a study, collect data, and write 138 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 up the results can provide a realistic pre- sentative? Of course, this is stated with view of graduate school, research-intensive the caveat that student researchers are jobs, and organizations in general. We have aware of and note in their reports that (a) seen cases where students did not know the results are not generalizable because much about research but, given the oppor- the sample is not representative and/or tunity to do it themselves, discovered they (b) the results can only be generalized to loved it and changed their educational and a population that is represented by the professional goals as a result. We have also convenience sample obtained. seen cases where students thought they wanted to go to graduate school until they Example: A student is interested in inves- actually conducted research themselves, tigating whether current organizational which helped them realize they did not theories can be used to understand social enjoy or were not cut out for a research-ori- movements like Occupy Wall Street and ented graduate program. When students the Tea Party. The student collects data have access to data, they gain the opportu- from a convenience sample of students nity to experience first hand what research who participated in OWS protests and is like and to use that information to make a interviews local Tea Party members found more informed career decision. Once again, online. The student concludes that current the availability of data supersedes many of theories do not fully explain these social the worries about using convenience sam- movements. In the process, the student ples and crowdsourcing. learns about the challenges of studying new organizational forms. Potential Concerns Concern #2: Convenience samples may not As previously mentioned, there are numer- include variance on the variable of interest. ous benefits to using convenience samples that allow students to actually carry out a Response: If one of the objectives is to have research project. Below, we review several of the students conduct their own research, the concerns associated with such samples the emphasis needs to be on finding a as discussed in Landers and Behrend (2015) sample that has some variance in it (so they and respond to them in terms of teaching at least find something) rather than finding organizational research methods. Each the ideal sample with every appropriate concern is followed by illustrative examples variable and data distributions. from actual student research projects. Example: A student wants to study wheth- Concern #1: Convenience samples do not er individuals or groups of friends are represent the population of interest more successful when starting high tech Response: If the goal of the research is companies. An initial review of recent not generalizability but rather educating startups suggests that almost all were students about the research process, why started by groups of friends so the sample does it matter if the data are nonrepre- is extended until there are an equal num- The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 139 ber founded by individuals. The student is logistical research skills. By no means do we still able to explore an area of interest to intend to minimize the importance of good them even though an ideal, generalizable and appropriate sampling and the criti- sample might have shown little variance in cality of external validity in organizational the main variable of interest. research. Nor are we arguing that these topics should not be included in a research Concern #3: Convenience samples like methods class, although the complexities college students, online panels, and and intricacies are best saved for a graduate crowdsourcing have numerous represen- seminar when the students already have tativeness limitations. the basic grounding necessary. Professors should also emphasize the importance of Response: As with concern #2, the learn- good sampling and external validity. That ing objective is to help students learn the said, those teaching organizational research research process by designing a study, methods should take advantage of all collecting data, running analyses, and available resources to help students learn reporting results. College students, online about the research process, its rewards, panels, and crowdsourcing all provide data and its challenges. Convenience samples that would otherwise be unavailable to and crowd-sourced data can be a valuable student researchers. Access matters. and highly useful tool for doing so.

Example: One undergraduate wanted to Note study the effect of recruiting materials on prospective job applicants. By using Me- 1 All actual weekly topics in the lead chanical Turk, the student was able to gain author’s undergraduate organizational access to hundreds of individuals in organi- research methods class. zations in a matter of days rather than weeks or months. It is unlikely that an undergradu- References ate would otherwise have access to thou- sands of willing organizational participants. Landers, R. N., & Behrend, T. S. (2015). An Without a convenience sample, it would not inconvenient truth: Arbitrary distinctions have been possible to collect such data. between organizational, Mechanical Turk, and other convenience samples. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives Conclusion on Science and Practice. Forthcoming. Sackett, P. R., & Larson, J. (1990). Research Convenience samples and crowd-sourced strategies and tactics in I/O psychology. In M. data provide access and availability of data, D. Dunnette and L. Hough (Eds.), Handbook assist in demonstrating the challenges of of industrial and organizational psychology, data collection, and help students to learn (2nd ed., pp. 435-466). Palo Alto, CA: Con- and apply their analytical, statistical, and sulting Psychologists Press.

140 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Who Bought Who II? The M & A History of Corporate Executive Board and Korn Ferry

Logan J. Michels, Courtney C. Gear, and Daniel Sachau, Minnesota State University, Mankato

Dick Olson Olson Consulting In the last Issue of TIP we mapped the The map is a visual representation of mergers, acquisitions, and name changes merger histories for firms that are relevant for IBM Consulting. In this issue, we focus to I-O psychology and human resource on Korn Ferry and Corporate Executive management. Notice that Minneapo- Board (CEB). lis-based PDI is literally and figuratively at the center of merger activity for Korn Our research began by combing the inves- Ferry and CEB. PDI split into PDRI and PDI tor relations pages and SEC filings of both in 1997. PDRI was eventually purchased companies. We would like to thank Laurie by SHL Group Holdings and later CEB. PDI Zelesnikar, director of Corporate Services took a different route. It was acquired by and Communications at CEB, for her help Ninth House and later Korn Ferry. CEB rep- with the project. resents 14 letterhead changes, Korn Ferry 26 changes.

Before 1992 1992-1994 1994-1996 1996-1998 1998-2000 2000-2002 2002-2004 2004-2006 2006-2008 2008-2010 2010-2012 2012-2014 2014-2016 Talent Neuron Platform (from Zinnov LLC) Knowledge Advisors, Inc. Valtera Corporation Baumgartner & Partner GmbH Iconoculture Tower Group, Inc. Information Technology Toolbox, Inc. Executive Performance Group CEB SHL Group Holdings Qwiz Holdings → Previsor ePredix Talent Technologies PDRI (1997) PDI (2008) Ninth House  PDI Ninth House Korn Ferry Didier Vuchot & Associates Lominger International Ray and Berndtson SA Leadersource Crist Partners The Newman Group Levy-Kerson Lore International Helstrom, Turner & Associates Whitehead Mann Pearson, Caldwell and Farnsworth SENSA Solutions, Inc Amrop International (Australian branch) Webb Johnson Global Novations, LLC Westgate Group Pivot Leadership JobDirect.com, Inc. Illsley Bourbonnais Inc. Pratzer & Partners, Inc. PA Consulting Group (ES&S Branch) O’Callaghan Honey Mckay Hoffman Herbold & Partner

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 141 Identifying the Competencies, Critical Experiences, and Career Paths of I-O Psychologists: Industry

Alexandra I. Zelin University of Akron

Joy Oliver SRA International, Inc.

Samantha Chau Novo Nordisk Inc.

Bethany Bynum HumRRO

Gary Carter PDRI a CEB Company

Mark L. Poteet Organizational Research & Solutions, Inc.

Dennis Doverspike University of Akron As the fourth article in a series on the en career level), are discussed. For more SIOP Careers Study, this article focuses information on the study’s background and on the career paths of people working in methodology, refer to previous Careers industry, classified as: working inside an Study articles within TIP (e.g., Zelin, Dover- organization’s HR department, working as spike, Oliver, Kantrowitz, & Trusty, 2014; a consultant within one organization, or Zelin, Oliver, Doverspike, Chau, Bynum, & working as an I-O psychologist within one Poteet, 2015) and the project’s technical organization, where the focus is provid- report which will be posted on the SIOP ing professional service to the employing website when it becomes available. organization. Results from the quantitative survey and the qualitative subject matter SME Interviews expert (SME) interviews are presented. The typical industry career path, including Participants competencies (i.e., a skill necessary for success on the job) and critical experiences Fifteen SIOP members working within (i.e., on-the-job experiences that outline industry were interviewed. Background in- the requirements for success within a giv- formation was provided by 10 of the SMEs, 142 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 indicating an average of 10.2 years of move to another organization to better experience working within industry with a meet their career aspirations. Internal I-O range of 1–20 years. Sample job titles held psychologists often took one of two tracks: by participants include: senior consultant, (a) specialist roles (typically located within director, vice president, senior analytics an HR department) where one worked analyst, manager of talent assessment, mainly within one specific I-O related area senior specialist, and research manager. (e.g., selection, training, or talent manage- Interviewers talked with SMEs from a ment) with either external departments wide range of organizations and positions. or internal HR colleagues; or (b) generalist Workplaces captured within the interview roles (often located outside of HR depart- included those where I-O psychologists ments in organizations that typically em- could hold management positions and ploy few I-O psychologists overall) where those where the highest position an I-O one worked across multiple I-O related psychologist could hold was an expert indi- areas (e.g., selection, training, and talent vidual contributor level (as positions above management), most often with multiple that level spanned a broader base than I-O departments or client groups external to psychology). In addition, members who HR (e.g., finance). worked in specialist or generalist roles, as well as within and external to HR depart- Within both generalist and specialist roles ments, were interviewed. there were a few different tracks one could take within an organization. Some Methodology organizations were large enough that I-O psychologists could progress up the career Structured interviews were conducted to ladder from individual contributor →ex- identify competencies and critical experi- pert individual contributor →manager → ences necessary for success. See the ap- manager of managers → executive. How- pendix for sample interview questions. The ever, many organizations did not employ initial job-level structure used to examine enough I-O psychologists to have a man- the career paths contained five levels for agement career ladder solely for I-O psy- competencies and critical experiences: chologists. Thus, many I-O psychologists individual contributor, expert individual were limited to reaching expert individual contributor, manager, manager of manag- contributor or managerial levels, as many ers, and executive. of the manager of manager and executive positions, and sometimes even managerial Results positions, were filled by individuals with business backgrounds and did not involve Interviewees indicated that there were I-O-related work. In addition, especially many different career paths that an I-O for generalist roles, many of their direct psychologist in industry could take. Many supervisors were not I-O psychologists. paths depended on what the organization These I-O psychologists were often limited offered, and/or if I-O psychologists could to potentially becoming managers, but of- The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 143 ten became expert individual contributors the management positions in their former and did not manage others. organization were only filled by non-I-O psychologists. Organizations that employed many I-O psychologists often allowed them to choose Some organizations were large enough to whether they wanted to take the tradition- have I-O psychologists in both generalist al management route or grow as an expert and specialist roles. Within these organi- individual contributor working mainly in zations, I-O psychologists could fluctuate I-O-related areas. However, many partici- between jobs, especially early in their pants from organizations that employed a tenure, to gain broader experience. These small number of I-O psychologists noted organizations often encouraged employees that their organizations preferred to keep to take a less-traditional career path of them performing I-O-related work rather moving horizontally during their first few than move them into general management years. For instance, one could move from positions. This occurred because once in compensation to general HR to training management positions, I-O psychologists to selection and back to general HR while would be responsible for managing non- maintaining the same job level and often- I-O psychologists rather than doing I-O times the same job title. work. Thus, unless they wanted to focus less on I-O work and branch into manage- Roughly 20% of the interviewees worked ment, I-O psychologists tended to stay in in external consulting firms prior to obtain- expert individual contributor roles. ing an industry position. Many mentioned that this helped them progress more It is important to note that not all Industry quickly up the industry career path be- positions allowed for I-O psychologists cause they had a great deal of prior experi- to remain in specialized expert individ- ence in a wide range of areas (e.g., selec- ual contributor roles; a few individuals tion, performance appraisal, organizational reported moving to a different company change) in various organizations. These because they wanted to continue perform interviewees recommended a similar path I-O work but would have been required to for students who wanted to make a similar move to a management position at their move, noting that learning what worked previous organization if they wanted to and did not work in other companies advance their career. In fact, many people helped in presenting new directions and interviewed mentioned changing organiza- ideas to their current organizations. Work- tions to further their desired career path. ing in external consulting firms helped the Some moved to a different organization interviewees to: because they wanted to become expert individual contributors and did not want a 1. Think through problems more quickly management role. Others moved between because they had experienced how organizations because they wanted to different problems were solved in oth- advance up the management ladder, but er organizations; 144 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 2. Have the opportunity to do projects Whereas some competencies were seen as earlier in their careers than if they had important for all job levels (e.g., business gone straight to working within an acumen; political savvy), as I-O psycholo- industry; gists moved up a managerial career path 3. Know what questions to ask their they often became more organization fo- internal clients when discussing proj- cused rather than specialty focused in that ects; and with each successive managerial level they 4. Develop specialty skills that may not supervised broader functions. When in an have developed in a small internal individual contributor position, an individ- company that doesn’t have specialist ual was responsible for more specialty-fo- roles. cused projects (e.g., selection or compensation). These projects grew in scope as one One salient topic that emerged from the moved up to include multiple sectors within Industry SME interviews included the hiring I-O or HR positions (e.g., projects spanning process. Industries hiring for individual con- both selection and compensation). tributor roles often looked for applicants who had participated in many extracurric- Careers Study Survey ular activities, presented at conferences, published articles, and had interests and Methodology experiences across the board. Some organizations preferred applicants with both an Graduate students from the University of I-O degree and an MBA because it showed Akron’s Center for Organizational Research they also understood how businesses (COR) used the interview results to com- operate. Industries hiring expert individual pile a master list of competencies and criti- contributors looked for someone who had cal experiences essential to working within a specialization in a certain area of I-O psy- Industry. All survey respondents rated the chology, depending on the organization’s same competencies and critical experienc- needs (e.g., expertise in selection if needing es to facilitate comparisons across levels to change selection processes). (e.g., self-identified individual contributors rated the same set of competences as Most learning happened on the job; em- other participants who self-identified into ployers expected that individual contrib- different job levels). utors would enter needing a significant degree of development. Managers and Participants expert individual contributors often acted as mentors for individual contributors. A total of 351 industry I-O psychologists Managers were instrumental in helping completed the survey. Average age of the find projects and opportunities to help participants was 41.07 years (SD = 11.0), their subordinates grow and demonstrate and slightly more than half of the partici- competencies. pants were women (56%). The majority of participants self-identified their ethnicity The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 145 as White (86.7%), with the next highest instance, some organizations did not have participation group being Asian/Pacific the opportunity for an I-O psychologist to Islander (6.1%). Three participants indicated move into a management track as such a that they had previously worked within a track focused on a larger breadth of mate- consulting firm, and one indicated that they rial than just I-O. previously worked within academia. Only 2.1% of participants noted having top-se- Competencies cret, government-issued security clear- ances. A few participants had additional The top-10 competencies necessary for certifications or licensures, most commonly success within each of the five job levels through the Society for Human Resource and the top-five competencies aggregated Management. Approximately 65.8% of across all levels are presented in Tables participants indicated receiving a PhD, and 1 and 2, respectively. Mean importance 34.2% received a master’s degree. ratings, standard deviations, and information about the career stage in which the Results competencies were learned can be found in the project’s technical report, which will After reviewing the both the qualitative be posted on the SIOP website when it and quantitative results, we determined becomes available. that the Industry career path model was accurately represented using the five Participants rated many of the competen- initial job levels separated into two routes: cies as important across all levels of the expert individual contributor or manageri- Industry sector, with most competencies al. Some individuals chose to move across rated 3.00 or higher and critical thinking multiple organizations in order to achieve rated as the most important competen- their career goals. Others were placed cy for all levels except for manager of into a career track based upon the needs managers. As shown in Table 1, many of and structure of their organization. For the competencies shared across all or

Figure 1. Industry career path. 146 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Table 1 Top Ten Competencies for Each Level Within Industry Top Competencies

Individual Contributor Expert Individual Contributor Manager

1. Critical Thinkinga 1. Critical Thinkinga 1. Critical Thinkinga 2. Accountabilityab 2. Communication: Verbala 2. Communication: Verbala 3. Professionalisma 3. Professionalisma 3. Problem Solvinga 4. Communication: Verbala 4T. Ethical Behaviora 4. Accountabilityab 5T. Ethical Behaviora 4T. Interpersonal Skillsa 5. Interpersonal Skillsa 5T. Interpersonal Skillsa 6. Adaptabilitya 6. Ethical Behaviora 5T. Planning 7. Collaborationa 7. Adaptabilitya 8. Communication: Writtena 8. Problem Solvinga 8. Collaborationa 9. Data Analysis 9. Accountabilitya 9. Flexibility 10. Problem Solvinga 10T. Communication: Writtena 10. Professionalisma 10T. Presentation Skills

Note : T indicates same means within level. Superscripts reflect mean differences for the same competencies across levels. Th not differ from one another (e.g., Critical Thinking compared across Individual Contributor, Expert Individual Contributor, Man with a different superscript reflected a significant mean difference (e.g., Accountability between Expert Individual Contributor Expert Individual Contributor or Executive as it shares the same superscript with both). example, data analysis, presentation skills, Table 2 and communication (written) were ranked Top Five Industry Competencies Across within the top 10 for individual contributor Levels and expert individual contributor levels Overall Top Five Competencies yet not for higher level manager, manager Competency M SD of managers, and executive levels. On the 1. Critical Thinking 4.49 .62 other hand, executing strategy and leader- 2. Communication: Verbal 4.40 .66 ship were among the top 10 for manager 3. Ethical Behavior 4.38 .82 of managers and executive levels. Also, the 4. Interpersonal Skills 4.36 .67 rank-order of importance ratings for some 5. Accountability 4.35 .69 shared competencies varied between levels. For instance, professionalism was multiple job levels (e.g., critical thinking; ranked third for individual-level positions communication: verbal; ethical behavior; compared to tenth for the manager level. interpersonal skills) showed no significant differences in mean importance ratings A further examination into the entire set between job levels. However, there were of 62 rated competencies (available in the a few differences in the rankings of top- technical report) noted some interesting 10 competencies between job levels, for trends. Specifically, for individual-level po-

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 147 sitions, no ratings of importance exceeded However, in general, the data indicate that 4.50, compared to five for manager of the higher one progresses through levels, managers and six for executives. In addi- the greater the degree of learning from tion, the range of importance ratings was on-the-job experience compared to struc- a bit lower for individual contributor and tured training or formal education. expert individual contributor levels (2.17 to 4.48 and 2.28 to 4.41, respectively) Critical Experiences relative to executives (2.97 to 4.71). Also, of the 62 total competencies, several more The top-10 critical experiences for success were rated less than 3.00 for individual in Industry at each level and the top-five contributor (n = 15) and expert individual critical experiences for success across contributor (n = 13) than for manager of all levels are presented in Tables 3 and managers (n = 0) and executives (N = 1). 4, respectively. All means and standard Finally, greater mean importance rat- deviations of each of the experiences by ings differences between job levels were level can be found in the project’s techni- observed for competencies not ranked cal report which will be posted on the SIOP within the top 10. Overall, these findings website when it becomes available. suggest that movement into management positions may require a broader range of A review of Table 3 indicates that some competencies for job success. experiences ranked highly for all job levels; specifically, create relationships Participants showed an interesting trend with various organizational stakeholders, when noting where the proficiency for the work through ambiguity and uncertainty, competency developed. Individual contrib- and manage relationships and networks utors noted that they learned certain com- with others in the organization. Although petencies to a large degree in graduate relative rank and/or importance ratings school. However, participants in manage- differed across job levels, results indicate ment positions were more likely to learn that no matter the job level, these are the same competencies on the job rather important critical experiences for industry than in graduate school. Accountability, I-O psychologists. achievement orientation, and collaboration represent a few of the competencies On the other hand, some critical experienc- where this trend was found. Across most es varied by job level. For example, being or all levels, some competencies (e.g., able to work independently with minimal decision making, executing strategy, finan- supervision was within the top 10 for cial acumen) were learned primarily on individual contributor and expert individual the job or in structured training and some contributor levels but not managerial levels. competencies (e.g., data analysis, knowl- Likewise, maintain high visibility with exec- edge of affirmative action/adverse impact/ utives was ranked highly by executives yet diversity/inclusion, I-O content knowledge) not in the top 10 for the other job levels. were learned primarily in graduate school. Serving as a subject matter expert was a 148 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Table 3 Top Ten Critical Experiences for Each Level Within Industry Top Critical Experiences Individual Contributor Expert Individual Contributor Manager Manager of Managers Executive 1. Execute and deliver on resultsa 1. Serve as a subject matter expert in a 1T. Serve as a subject matter expert in 1. Earn and maintain trust of 1. Complete high visibility given areaa a given areaa leadership teamb assignmentsb 2. Work independently with minimal 2. Execute and deliver on resultsa 1T. Earn and maintain trust of 2. Manage relationships and networks 2. Earn and maintain trust of supervisiona leadership teamab with others in the organizationb leadership teamab

3. Create relationships with various 3. Work independently with minimal 3. Work through ambiguity and 3. Execute and deliver on resultsa 3. Work through ambiguity and organizational stakeholdersa supervisiona uncertaintybc uncertaintyb 4. Manage relationships and networks 4. Earn and maintain trust of 4. Maintain composure under 4. Create relationships with various 4. Manage relationships and networks with others in the organizationab leadership teama pressurea organizational stakeholdersa with others in the organizationb

5. Facilitate meetings with stakeholders in 5. Collaborate with people from 5. Manage large portions of projects 5. Deliver presentations to 5. Maintain composure under the organization different teams on various projectsab stakeholders in the organizationa pressurea

6T. Adapt and embrace organizational 6. Maintain composure under 6. Lead long‐term projects 6T. Collaborate with people from 6. Create relationships with various culture pressurea different teams on various projectsb organizational stakeholdersa

6T. Deliver presentations to stakeholders 7. Work through ambiguity and 7T. Collaborate with people from 6T. Demonstrate ability to effectively 7. Deliver presentations to in the organizationa uncertaintyac different teams on various projectsab handle ambiguous situationsa stakeholders in the organizationa

6T. Work through ambiguity and 8. Create relationships with various 7T. Complete high visibility 8. Work through ambiguity and 8. Maintain high visibility with uncertaintya organizational stakeholdersa assignmentsab uncertaintybc executives

9T. Complete high visibility assignmentsa 9T. Manage relationships and networks 9T. Create and administer own projects 9. Maintain composure under 9. Execute and deliver on resultsa with others in the organizationa from start to finish pressurea

9T. Collaborate with people from different 9T. Demonstrate ability to effectively 9T. Manage relationships and networks 10. Lead people through change 10. Demonstrate ability to effectively teams on various projectsa handle ambiguous situationsa with others in the organizationab handle ambiguous situationsa

9T. Create relationships with various organizational stakeholdersa

Note : T indicates same means within level. Superscripts indicate mean differences, if any, for the same experiences that appeared across the levels (e.g., Mean ratings for “Execute and deliver on results” compared across Individual Contributor, Expert Individual Contributor, and Executive did not differ from one another as they share the same superscript). The same experiences across levels with a different superscript reflected a significant mean difference (e.g., Means ratings for “Earn and maintain trust of leadership team” differed between Expert Individual Contributor and Manager of Managers as they had different superscripts).

agers and executive-level critical experi- Table 4 Top Five Industry Critical Experiences Across Levels ences for success were rated above a 4.50 level. This trend could be due to what we Overall Top Critical Experiences learned during the interviews; specifically, Competency M SD as industry I-O psychologists could work 1. Execute and deliver on results 4.66 .62 2. Earn and maintain trust of in different tracks/roles, different critical 4.55 .68 leadership team experiences may be important depending 3. Serve as a subject matter expert 4.49 .74 4. Work through ambiguity and on the job into which one is hired. For 4.48 .68 uncertainty instance, if one was hired in as a selection 5. Collaborate with people from 4.47 .70 different teams on various projects specialist, the critical experiences necessary for success would be different than if one was hired into an HR position work- top-10 critical experience for only expert ing with compensation. However, once individual contributor and manager levels, people get to manager of managers and reflecting the degree to which these groups executive-level roles, their experiences are likely to leverage their expertise. for success would be similar because they operate at a broader scope (e.g., oversee Similar to the competency results, only internal consultants in selection, training, one critical experience (i.e., execute and and performance appraisal). However, as deliver on results) for individual contrib- we did not ask about individuals’ specific utors was rated at or above a 4.50 level. role, these potential reasons should be However, all 10 of the manager of man- further investigated. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 149 Final Career Path Models and In terms of how and where these compe- Future Directions tencies are developed, results indicated that learning for most competencies took The SME interviews and Career Study place on the job for all job levels. Compe- Survey results indicated that industry tencies where graduate school tended to careers are best captured in five overar- provide most learning tended to be more ching levels: individual contributor, expert technical in nature. The job-level differ- individual contributor, manager, manager ences that occurred tended to follow the of managers, and executive. As mentioned pattern of individual contributors learning often within the SME interviews, the track more from graduate school than on the in which one is placed within their organi- job experience. Structured training, com- zation is often dependent upon how many paratively, had little impact on the learning people with I-O degrees are employed and of competencies. There might be more the responsibilities across management opportunities for graduate schools and/or positions. Some SMEs reported switching structured training to have a greater role organizations often as their organizations in developing a range of skills that are cur- did not have the desired career path open- rently learned primarily on the job, for ex- ings. Others stayed with their organization ample, adaptability, business acumen, and for longer periods because they enjoyed decision making. Given the importance of being the only, or one of a few, I-O psy- experience for development, employers chologists. and graduate programs could continue to find meaningful assignments for its practi- Many of the top-10 rated competencies tioners/applied-oriented students. were the same across all or most job levels, with relatively few mean differenc- Results also point to specific types of es. The few top-rated competencies that career experiences that employers, pro- differed across job levels tended to logi- fessional organizations, and/or graduate cally reflect the nature of the work (e.g., schools could provide to help develop executives requiring strategic thinking and Industry practitioners. Some experiences, executing strategy, individual contributors such as creating relationships with stake- requiring data analysis skills). However, holders, could start early and be used it was noted that a broader number of throughout one’s career span, whereas competencies became important the other experiences that were less import- higher the job level, suggesting that when ant for individual contributor and expert an individual contributor is career planning individual contributor roles (e.g., mentor for higher level positions, gaining breadth and coach subordinates, manage projects of experience across a greater number through delegation of work, maintain of competencies may be more important high visibility with executives) could be than acquiring depth of experience in the leveraged to prepare I-O psychologists for competencies shared across levels. higher-level positions.

150 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Finally, these results can help I-O psycholo- Note gists determine whether an industry sector role is an appropriate fit for their com- The authors would like to recognize and thank petencies and work interests. The results the efforts of previous committee members may also help employees within industry who contributed to this effort, including but not limited to Michael Trusty and Tracy Kan- to chart their potential career moves by trowitz. allowing them to examine the type of work performed, critical experiences at different References levels, and the competencies required for success. Zelin, A. I., Oliver, J., Chau, S., Bynum, B., Car- ter, G., Poteet, M. L., & Doverspike, D. (2015, We recognize that the current study April). Identifying the competencies, critical highlights the basic career path of I-O experiences, and career paths of I-O psychol- psychologists working within an industry; ogists: Consulting. The Industrial-Organiza- future research may want to expand on tional Psychologist, 52(4), 122–130. the present study by evaluating career Zelin, A. I., Oliver, J., Doverspike, D., Chau, S., path moves specifically within organiza- Bynum, B., & Poteet, M. L. (2015, January). tions that do (and do not) have managerial Identifying the competencies, critical experi- positions that incorporate I-O responsi- ences, and career paths of I-O psychologists: Academia. The Industrial-Organizational bilities. Furthermore, investigating more Psychologist, 52(3), 149–157. fully the differences in competencies and Zelin, A. I., Doverspike, D., Oliver, J., Kantrowitz, critical experiences necessary for success T, & Trusty, M. (2014, October). Developing for generalist versus specialist Industry career paths for I-O psychologists: Project roles would be beneficial for employee plans and updates. The Industrial-Organiza- development. tional Psychologist 52(2), 31–35.

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 151 Philadelphia 2015: A Declaration of SIOP’s 30th Anniversary Eden King Conference Chair George Mason University

Kristen Shockley Program Chair Baruch College

Evan Sinar Past Program Chair and Conferences and Programs Officer Development Dimensions International We hold this truth to be self-evident: SIOP Thanks to all attendees who participated in 2015 was awesome!! Attendance was the the inaugural Daily Session Feedback Study third highest ever at 4,325! We want to via mobile phones. It was a great success, take this opportunity to share some of the with over 1,200 responses throughout highlights from the scholarly program as the 3 conference days! The committee well as the special events that made this (Kristen Shockley, Rebecca Bryant, Richard conference particularly enjoyable, infor- Landers, and Joel Nadler) is busy analyzing mative, and inspirational. results and will present the data in the next TIP publication. Scholarly Program! The program committee, Kristen Shockley Much of what makes the SIOP conference (2015 Program chair), Scott Tonidandel so spectacular is the quality of submis- (Incoming Program chair/2015 Theme sions. This year’s program included 270 Track chair), and Evan Sinar (Past Program peer-reviewed sessions in addition to over chair), thank all submitters, presenters, 500 posters and several invited sessions reviewers, and attendees for their part in and communities of interest. Many of this keeping the scholarly program top notch! year’s sessions were standing room only, a true testament to their high caliber and Theme Track relevance to the SIOP community. From a content perspective, the topic areas most Implementing Past President Jose Corti- highly represented on the program includ- na’s theme of “Rethinking Our Approach ed leadership, occupational health/safety/ to Organizational Science,” Scott Tonidan- stress/aging, and testing/assessment. del and his team pulled off an impressive We continued to have several innovative feat in keeping discussions about research format types presented as alternative methodology and statistics exciting! The sessions, including IGNITE sessions and Thursday Theme Track featured discussions TED-style talks. of the review and publication process, an 152 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 IGNITE session (it is possible to learn about Kristen Shockley and Tori Culbertson sandwich estimators in 5 minutes!), TED- (Membership chair) hosted a welcome style talks, and Big Data presentations. reception for attendees who were new to What an energizing way to kick off the I-O the SIOP conference. After a lively intro- psychology methodological revolution! duction to the wonderful events planned for the conference and a few pointers on Top Posters the nuts and bolts, networking opportunities facilitated meaningful new contacts We were also pleased to highlight the among new and seasoned members. top-rated posters during the Thursday evening all-conference reception. These Opening Plenary posters received outstanding ratings from all of their reviewers and are remarkable After an enthusiastic welcome to Philadel- examples of the science and practice of I-O phia, Awards Committee Chair David Baker psychology. recognized the award, grant, and scholar- ships winners, and Fellowship Chair Ron Special Events! Landis introduced 26 new SIOP Fellows. Next, our SIOP Foundation president, Milt PreConference Activities Hakel, provided a report on the SIOP Erica Desrosier’s Workshop Commit- Foundation. President-Elect Steve Kozlowski tee developed and delivered a set of 11 delighted the group with an appropriately cutting-edge workshops on topics ranging embarrassing introduction of our presi- from Big Data to succession and perfor- dent, Jose Cortina, who then took the stage mance management. After the workshops, to honor his family (and wish his mother registrants and presenters were treated to happy birthday) before sharing progress and the can’t-be-missed workshop reception plans that pertain to his goals of revolutioniz- (mojitos included). ing our science. New SIOP Fellow Jeff Cucina also unveiled the official SIOP time capsule! The integrated consortia experience, led capably by Consortia Chair Mark Frame, Placement was similarly outstanding. Mike Sliter Anne Hansen coordinated another suc- chaired a fantastic set of sessions for cessful job placement service that sup- new faculty members at the 10th Annual ported recruitment and selection for Junior Faculty Consortium. Wendy Bed- employers and job-seekers alike. A total of well hosted an outstanding set of sessions 59 employers and 357 job seekers partici- for advanced doctoral students nominated pated in this opportunity. from around the world at the Lee Hakel In- dustrial-Organizational Psychology Doctor- Fun Run al Consortium. Similarly, Melanie Coleman facilitated the stimulating and informative This year, our Frank Landy fun run took Master’s Student Consortium. place on Friday morning. A beautiful and well-organized course more than made up The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 153 for colder-than-preferred morning tem- be your first reminder. It is not too early peratures. Big thanks to Paul Sackett for to start thinking about submitting for the continuing to coordinate this event! 2016 conference in sunny Anaheim!

Closing Plenary and Reception Attendance Trends

The closing plenary was visually stunning. Alongside SIOP’s excellent attendance this Amanda Cox from the New York Times year, we wanted to take a closer look at graphics team blended incredible interac- the “Who” and “Where” of the attendees tive and static images to demonstrate key in Philadelphia—that is, based on affilia- features of compelling data visualization. tion and geography. First, we used a slope- We hope that her ideas and images further graph to compare the 2015 conference to inspire SIOP members to revolutionize the the Houston 2013 conference to see the art of communicating our findings in jour- 2-year trend in attendee affiliations. See nals and client meetings. Figure 1.

The closing American Bandstand-themed Proportionally, student attendance reception was equally engaging! (Thanks dropped from 38% of 2013 attendees to Robin Cohen, Local Arrangements Chair, to 33% in 2015. Conversely, external for the Philadelphia insights!) Philly chees- practitioner (26% to 28%), internal prac- esteaks and desserts on fire were definite titioner (12% to 14%), and government highlights. The dance floor was overflow- practitioner (3% to 5%) attendee groups ing with I-O psychologists, so you can be all increased. Academic professional and sure it was a good time. other (for example, associations) groups stayed approximately the same. Overall, We write this article a mere week after attendees were almost perfectly balanced returning from the conference, not nearly between academic (51%) and practitioner recovered from the incredible and exhaust- (47%) affiliations. ing week we spent in Philadelphia. We are thrilled with how it all came together Next, we looked at the geographic distribu- and so thankful to all of you who worked tion of 2015 attendees using a worldwide so hard with us on this event (including heatmap view (Figure 2). This showed the dozens of student volunteers kindly notable clusters in Australia, Singapore, coordinated by Adam Hilliard) and those China, and Northern Europe in addition of you who shared your excitement about to the large number of U.S. and Canadian it with us. We are grateful for the opportu- attendees. nity we had to serve the SIOP community. Believe it or not, by the time you read Here we see a U.S./Canada view show- this, the 2016 planning team will already ing where the largest concentrations of have California on our minds. We welcome attendees originated within these two Scott Tonidandel and wish him the best of countries. luck on this exciting endeavor. And let this 154 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Figure 1: Two-Year Trend in Attendee Affiliations

Figure 2: Geographic Distribution of 2015 SIOP Conference Attendees

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 155 Figure 3: Concentrations of 2015 SIOP Conference Attendees

Finally, we again compared 2013 to 2015 Special Thanks attendees, this time for countries aside from the U.S. or Canada with at least 10 We cannot conclude this piece, or pretty attendees in one of the 2 years. The largest much do anything that we do, without the proportionate attendee increases were extraordinary efforts of the SIOP Admin- from Germany, Sweden, China, and Hong istrative team. Let this note represent our Kong, whereas attendance from Singa- very public, very genuine heartfelt thanks pore, Australia, Switzerland, and Denmark to SIOP Executive Director Dave Nershi and decreased slightly. Attendance levels his fantastic team for all of their hard work from the UK, Netherlands, and Belgium in making the conference a huge success! remained similar between 2013 and 2015. In total, SIOP 2015 drew attendees from 43 different countries!

•

156 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Tiffany Poeppleman of the Electronic Communications Committee approves of Paul Thoresen signing the Digital Declaration!

Conference Highlights!

Ben Franklin took time out from his busy schedule to meet with SIOP attendees.

SIOP Time Capsule!

Student volunteer Student volunteer Ryan Rosiello models Catalina Flores the conference bag greeted attendees with a smile.

Steven Katzman and Pete Hudson catch up at the welcome reception

Incoming President Steve Kozlowski at the Opening Plenary Session.

University of New Haven students

Lee Hakel and Paul W. Thayer at the Foundation Dessert Reception The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 157 Outgoing President Jose Cortina addresses SIOP.

Anna Marie Valerio, Lorraine Stomski, and Sara Guediri, Laura Fruhen, Mikki Hebl address the latest Top Minds and Sue Orchard at the and Bottom Lines Series event, “Developing International Reception. Women Leaders: Evidence-Based Approach- New SIOP Fellows. For a es From Academia, Consulting, and Corpo- complete list of award winners rate Experts” and new Fellows, click HERE.

Standing (sitting?) room only at the performance reviews debate Conference exhibitor Cambridge spotlighted SIOP’s journal at their booth.

Dancing the night away at the Another successful practitioner American Bandstand closing reception speed mentoring event!

Andrew Loignon explains his poster

2014 Katzell Winner Ben Dattner presents a session 158 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 2015 Frank Landy SIOP 5k Fun Run Results Philadelphia, PA, April 24, 2015

Paul Sackett Development Dimensions International A cold and windy morning led a number of entrants to change their minds and remain curled up snug in their beds. But an intrepid group of 114 runners toughed it out and discovered a spectacularly beautiful course along the Schuylkill River. Runners cursed the race director as they headed out into the wind, but all was forgiven as the sun came out and the wind was at our backs for the return portion of the journey. Top finishers are listed below. Join us next year in Anaheim.

Top 10 Men Top 10 Women Name Place Time Name Place Time Filip Lievens 1 18:17 Alexandra Henderson 1 20:04 Eric Day 2 18:20 Deborah Powell 2 20:27 W. Robert Lewis 3 18:59 Renee Payne 3 21:10 Kevin Reindl 4 19:37 Christine Nittrouer 4 21:19 Robbie Brusso 5 19:39 Chelsea Jenson 5 22:27 Andrew Bond 6 20:18 Jamie Donsbach 6 22:47 Fred Macoukji 7 20:58 Natalie Wright 7 23:36 Aaron Kraus 8 21:28 Liberty Munson 8 23:58 Jason Randall 9 21:30 Erica Barto 9 25:06 Nathan Kuncel 10 21:31 Julianne Brown 10 25:11 Age Group Winners Men 20-29 Women 20-29 Aaron Kraus 21:28 Alexandra Henderson 20:04 Jason Randall 21:30 Renee Payne 21:10 Kevin Walters 22:21 Christine Nittrouer 21:19

Men 30-39 Women 30-39 W. Robert Lewis 18:59 Deborah Powell 20:27 Robbie Brusso 19:39 Jamie Donsbach 22:47 Andrew Bond 20:18 Julianne Brown 25:11

Men 40-49 Women 40-49 Filip Lievens 18:17 Liberty Munson 23:58 Eric Day 18:20 Shane Connelly 25:45 Kevin Reindl 19:37 Lynn Kalnbach 25:52 The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 159 Men 50-59 Women 50-59 Michael Russiello 22:13 Joey Collins 23:01 Richard Himmer 24:04

Men 60-69 Women 60-69 Paul Sackett 26:24 Pat Sackett 37:22 M. Peter Scontrino 32:36

Four-Person Teams Scientist/Practitioner University of Minnesota 91:16 Filip Lievens/Herlinde Pieters 45:30 HumRRO 108:54 Jason Randall/Katherine O’Brien 54:08 AON 108:54 Pepsi 1 110:39 UIPUI 118:45 Pepsi 2 135:30

Advisor/Advisee Mixed Doubles Filip Lievens/Jan Corstjens 41:48 Filip Lievens/Herlinde Pieters 45:30 Nathan Kuncel/Jack Kostal 46:38 Erica Barto/Miguel Gonzalez 48:24 Paul Sackett/Chelsea Jensen 48:51 Paul Sackett/Pat Sackett 63:46

Need stellar employees? Need a great job?

160 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 SIOP Program 2016: Anaheim

Scott Tonidandel Davidson College

Eden King George Mason University Although I am sure many of you are still • Early July 2015: Members will receive an feeling the love from the 2015 SIOP Annual e-mail message with a web link to the Conference in the city of brotherly love, Call for Proposals. planning is already well underway for the • Mid July 2015: Please look for an email 2016 conference in Anaheim. With plenty message requesting that you participate of sun, citrus, and of course Disneyland, on the Conference Program Commit- Anaheim promises to be an outstanding tee as a reviewer. All SIOP professional conference destination. members (Fellows, Members, Associ- ates, International Affiliates, and Retired The conference will take place April 14–16. statuses) are eligible. SIOP Student Af- As always, the program committee’s goal is filiates who have successfully defended to incorporate a diversity of topics, present- their dissertation proposal and presenters, and session types that aim to advance ed at a SIOP conference as a first author the science and practice of I-O psychology. are eligible. The review process is critical We will continue to offer Friday seminars, to the quality and success of the pro- communities of interest, invited sessions, gram. PLEASE SIGN UP! The program is keynote speakers, an all-day theme track, only as good as its peer-review process! along with the peer-reviewed submissions, • September 9, 2015: Submission dead- including the recently introduced alterna- line. The submission process is entirely tive sessions. This year’s theme track, fol- electronic. See the Call for Proposals for lowing the vision of President Steve Kozlo- submission details. wski and led by chair Zack Horn, is focused • Early October 2015: Submissions sent on how each and every SIOP member can out for review. expand their impact in meaningful ways. • Late October 2015: Reviews due back. Sessions will offer inspiration and practical • Early December 2015: Decision emails will takeaways for using I-O psychology to make be sent. Submitters will receive informa- a difference locally, in organizations, within tion on how to access the decision portal. SIOP, nationally, and globally. • March 2016: Program published. The conference program will continue to be Below is a high-level timeline to help you published both in a hardcopy booklet and plan for the 2016 conference. September on the web. REMEMBER: Only those who will be here before you know it, so start register by the early registration deadline planning your submissions now! will receive their programs in the mail.

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 161 Membership Committee Update Satoris S. Culbertson Kansas State University SIOP has had some exciting changes re- • Have attended three official meetings cently, and we wanted to make sure that (includes the SIOP Annual Conference everybody was aware of these and how and SIOP Leading Edge Consortium) of they are impacting membership. the Society in the last 5 years.

One recent change was a SIOP bylaws If you are an Associate who meets these amendment approved by the SIOP Exec- criteria, we encourage you to apply for the utive Board in May 2014 and by vote of upgrade to Member status. Please visit the SIOP membership in March 2015 that http://www.siop.org/associatetomember. established the opportunity for qualified aspx for more details on how to apply. Associates to apply for an upgrade to Member status. (The entire revised bylaws Another change that has taken effect can be found at http://www.siop.org/re- was also a result of a recent SIOP bylaws portsandminutes/bylaws.pdf.) This amend- amendment. As of May 13, 2015, appli- ment gives long-term, engaged Associates cants for Member or Associate status in access to Member status and its benefits, SIOP are no longer required to hold a pre- including the ability to vote in SIOP elec- requisite professional membership in the tions and to hold positions on the Execu- American Psychological Association (APA), tive Board and as Committee Chair. Association for Psychological Science (APS), Canadian Psychological Association Society Associates who meet the follow- (CPA), or European Association of Work ing eligibility requirements may apply to and Organizational Psychology (EAWOP). become a Society Member: The intent of this amendment was to open the doors of SIOP professional member- • Society Associate status for a period of ship more widely, removing barriers to at least the past 5 consecutive years. entry for individuals who may be a good • Be engaged in professional activities fit for SIOP membership but not for APA, as described in Article II, 2a2 of the APS, CPA, or EAWOP membership. Because Society Bylaws. of the unique nature of the field of I-O • Submit a letter of nomination from a psychology, there are professionals work- Society Member or Society Fellow who ing in this field for whom APA, APS, CPA, or can attest to your professional activ- EAWOP membership is not essential. ities as described in Article II, 2a2 of the Society Bylaws. We are excited to see these changes • Have obtained a master’s degree that implemented and would appreciate your meets criteria as established in policy help in spreading the word regarding these by the Executive Board. changes. 162 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Any questions about any of this can be addressed to:

Jayne Tegge, Tracy Vanneman, Membership Services Specialist Membership Services and Continuing Edu- [email protected] cation Manager [email protected].

Professional Practice Series

Ideal for industrial and organizational psychologists, organizational scientists and practitioners, human resources professionals, managers, executives, and those interested in organizational behavior and performance, these volumes are informative and relevant guides to organizational practice. You’ll find guidance, insights, and advice on how to apply the concepts, findings, methods and tools derived from organizational psychology to organizational problems.

Get all the latest research today at the SIOP Store

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 163 Under New System, Bridges Build You

Steven Toaddy Louisiana Tech University

Joseph A. Allen University of Nebraska at Omaha Let’s take a page from the lessons that to—and get comfortable with this phrase public-speaking classes convey, viz. “tell in its many instantiations—build bridges. them what you’re going to tell them, tell This phrase has been interpreted widely them, and then tell them what you’ve told by those who joined the initiative, and I them.” Thus: hasten to add that wide interpretation is and was supported. I’ll convey some of • In response to calls from SIOP’s the efforts that those individuals have put past leadership, the Bridge Build- forth in just a moment. For now, back to ers group—one designed to spread the objectives of Bridge Builders. awareness and understanding of I-O psychology to many different audienc- What we are attempting to accomplish es—was developed and counts among is to use the many voices of SIOP’s mem- its members many of us from SIOP. bership to help proclaim our science for a President Steve Kozlowski’s vision for smarter workplace. The subject matter? the organization in the coming years Our existence, our utility, our dashing good dovetails well with the objectives of looks. The targets? In short, anyone and Bridge Builders. everyone—from school children to military • Bridge Builders have been doing some organizations to governments to university really cool things recently; these were colleagues and, if those polarities are ad- showcased in a session at SIOP this year. equately broad, everyone in between. We • Want to get involved in this exciting have noticed that we have more to offer initiative? You should. We’ll show you than we are being asked by the world to how to get started. offer and we are endeavoring to set things right on this front by increasing awareness, Bridge Builders: What Is It? attractiveness, and utilization of our field.

Look, real talk: Spreading the word of President Kozlowski has articulated a I-O psychology has been a priority of our vision focusing on broadening our view, Society over at least the past few years. forwarding digestible science, and en- Tammy Allen galvanized Scott Tonidan- gaging in bottom-up initiatives. Bridge del (then SIOP president and Education Builders is positioned and is maneuvering & Training Committee chair, respectively) superbly to hit on all of these foci at once. to assemble a subcommittee to explicitly We build awareness on the part of and col- support the efforts of SIOP’s membership laborations with non-I-O bodies. We turn 164 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 what we do into something comprehen- was that the approach for presenting sible to congress and to school children. to each of these (quite different) audi- We, the members of bridge builders, do ences is similar, though the resultant this individually and authentically with our presentations are not. own voices and in our own words—with • Lauren McEntire (Frito-Lay) continued the support of the success and wisdom of the school-children-and-some-other- those who have gone before us. Don’t take audience trend by describing her ef- my word for it, though, take a look at what forts to sell I-O to high-school students they, bridge builders, have done! (much more proximate to their “hey let’s see what we want to be when we Bridge Builders: What Have They Done? grow up” stages in life) and at postsec- ondary institutions that are not host Well this is necessarily going to be a very to an I-O presence (thus substantially small subset of the actual efforts that bridge expanding the raw material—err, builders have put forth of late but as a dual applicants—to I-O graduate programs). service of recapitulating a SIOP session that As far as I could tell her three guide- you may not have been able to attend we’ll lines for such presentations were all focus on those efforts described therein— “give them chips.” Frito-Lay people got viz. in the noon-on-Saturday IGNITE + Panel some corporate culture. session about sharing I-O with the commu- • Rob McKenna (Seattle Pacific)—and nity. The session, at the delightfully frenetic hold on to your hat here—broke the pace with which IGNITE sessions are associ- pattern by showing us how the pro- ated, captured the diverse efforts of: gram at SPU has become the unlikely nexus of social activism, film-screening, • Dan Putka (HumRRO) described his and outreach efforts since its advent in cunning approach to explaining I-O 2010. Dr. McKenna admits that these psychology to 4th-grade students. efforts stand at right angles to many of Superheroes featured prominently. Dr. the other initiatives about which we Putka was motivated to perform well heard and is (in my opinion deserv- and innovatively by the entreaty of his edly) unperturbed about this—these child (a 4th grader in the audience) to are all, in one way or another, means resist giving a presentation that would of accomplishing this same agenda of embarrass the child. bringing prominence to I-O psychology. • David Costanza (GWU) carried the ball forward into the 7th-grade class- Ah, we can’t capture the energy and the room (the theme here, by the way, is quality of the presentations given—nor planting the seed of I-O psychology as the excellence of the initiatives them- a field and as a career option in the selves. We also fail to capture the richness notoriously pliable minds of minors), of the conversation that ensued as facili- congress, and the United States Army. tated by Suzanne Bell (DePaul) and one of One of Dr. Costanza’s takeaway points us, Joseph Allen (University of Nebraska The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 165 at Omaha), leaders of the Bridge Builders outreach is habit forming; we’ll work group. The panelists answered questions towards giving members a nudge and engaged in conversation about mat- towards an organization/group ripe for ters practical to the bridge-building efforts introduction to I-O psychology. of audience members; tips and tricks and • Turn more of SIOP into bridge builders opinions and caveats were shared. (through our initiative). Ideally, everyone in SIOP would be a member of the All in attendance—including both of us— group (at which point we suppose the learned a good deal from these presenta- separate group would be obviated, tions and from the ensuing conversations; but that’s a ways away). We all have we were also invigorated and inspired by stories to tell; we can all successfully the tales of success and optimism that were bring I-O more into the awareness of shared in this session. With the guidance those around us. And we’re going to. of E&T chair Whitney Botsford Morgan (University of Houston-Downtown) and the Telling You What I Told You two authors—Joe Allen as outgoing chair and Steven Toaddy as incoming chair—we Let’s close by hitting the key points briefly: know where the Bridge Builders team shall be spending our efforts in the coming year. • Bridge Builders is a group dedicated to In short, Bridge Builders will be ensuring building bridges between SIOP and ev- that more success stories such as these are ery other imaginable non-SIOP entity. ready to be told at SIOP 2016 in Anaheim. The desirableness of such an activity has been glaringly clear for the last Bridge Builders: What Lies Ahead? several years and remains on the fore- front of SIOP’s leadership’s agendas. We’re grateful for all of the work that • The success stories conveyed at SIOP’s those before us have done—in building 2015 Annual Conference were varied bridges and in building Bridge Builders. and inspiring. More lies ahead, though. Here are some of • We’ve raised steam well over the last the things on the horizon: while; we’re going to get underway in earnest now. Resources will be ag- • Build an accessible resource base— gregated and made plainly available. presentations, tips, etc.—for use by all Additional individuals will be recruited SIOP members in building bridges. into our ranks. We will begin to active- • Start breaking down barriers to start- ly recommend connections between ing conversations by helping connect Bridge Builders and target audiences. bridge builders directly to potential We will be heard. recipients of presentations. If Dr. McKenna taught us anything, it’s that Stay, as it were, tuned.

166 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Revision of SIOP’s Guidelines for Education and Training Is Underway

Stephanie C. Payne Texas A&M University

Whitney Botsford Morgan University of Houston-Downtown

Laura Koppes Bryan Transylvania University The time has come to revise SIOP’s Guide- about the need for separate guidelines at lines for Education and Training at the the master’s and PhD levels, intentional master’s and doctoral levels. The Guide- versus unintentional differences between lines were last updated in 1999 so there is the two sets of guidelines, and the overall little doubt that it is time to update them. accessibility of the current guidelines. A In fact, the American Psychological As- number resources have been consulted sociation (2004) recommends education including reports from SIOP’s career study and training guidelines should be revised (e.g., Zelin, Doverspike, Oliver, Kantrowitz, every 10 years. Correspondingly, SIOP’s & Trusty, 2014), a number of articles in Education and Training committee has SIOP’s journal Industrial and Organiza- assembled a subcommittee comprising tional Psychology: Perspectives on Science academicians and practitioners repre- and Practice (e.g., Byrne, Hayes, McPhail, senting both MA and PhD paths (Kristina Hakel, Cortina, & McHenry, 2014, and Bauer, Mitzi Desselles, Rhonda DeZeeuw, commentaries), as well as The Industri- Camille Drake-Brassfield, Julia Fullick, Jane al-Organizational Psychologist articles Halpert, Michael Horvath, Tim Huelsman, (e.g., Tett, Walser, Brown, Simonet, & Ludmila Praslova, Sylvia Roch, Amber Tonidandel, 2013). Schroeder, Marissa Shuffler, Stephen Stark, Steven Toaddy, Anton Villado, and The current guidelines include 25 compe- Christopher Wiese) to review the current tencies for the PhD and 16 “core” compe- guidelines, gather data on suggestions for tencies at the master’s level. The commit- revisions, and propose changes. A summa- tee has proposed moving the following ry of work to date was presented at the competencies to an optional category: 2015 SIOP conference at both the Program Consumer Behavior, History & Systems, Director’s meeting and at an Executive Human Factors, Job Evaluation & Compen- Board special session on Saturday morning. sation (currently appears only in the PhD Guidelines), and Compensation & Benefits In addition to close scrutiny of the current (currently appears only in the master’s guidelines, questions have been raised Guidelines). The committee has also

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 167 proposed adding competencies related to References technology, diversity/multicultural issues, teaching, and proposal writing. In addi- American Psychological Association, Board of tion, the names and descriptions of some Educational Affairs. (2004). Developing and competencies are likely to be revised. For evaluating standards and guidelines related to example, “Ethical, Legal, and Profession- education and training in psychology: Context, procedures, criteria, and format. Washington, al Contexts of I-O Psychology” may be DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.apa. changed to “Ethical, Legal, Professional, org/about/policy/bea-guidelines.pdf and Global Contexts of I-O Psychology.” Byrne, Z. S., Hayes, T. L., McPhail, S. M., Hakel, M. D., Cortina, J. M., & McHenry, J. J. (2014). A survey of the directors of Industri- Educating I-O psychologists for science and al-Organizational Psychology and related practice: Where do we go from here? Indus- graduate programs will be conducted this trial and Organizational Psychology: Perspec- summer to gather additional data about tives on Science and Practice, 7(1), 2–14. the retention of each competency and sug- Tett, R. P., Walser, B., Brown, C., Simonet, D. V., gestions for further revisions. We welcome & Tonidandel, S. (2013). 2011 SIOP program benchmarking survey: Part 3: Curriculum and additional feedback from any SIOP mem- competencies. The Industrial-Organizational ber via e-mail to Stephanie Payne at scp@ Psychologist, 50(4), 69–90. tamu.edu. A draft of the revised guidelines Zelin, A., Doverspike, D., Oliver, J., Kantrowitz, will be presented to the membership for T., & Trusty, M. (2014). Developing career comment and reaction in the spring of paths for I-O psychologists: Project plans 2016 before presenting the guidelines to and updates. The Industrial-Organizational the Executive Board for approval. Psychologist, 52(2), 31–35.

Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice

Now published by Cambridge Publishing, a world leader in journal production.

Get current research, back issues, and content notifications at www.siop.org/journal/siopjournal.aspx

168 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Science Funding Speed Mentoring Event Report

Jessica L. Wildman, James A. Grand, and the Scientific Affairs Committee The SIOP Scientific Affairs Committee is excited to say that the 2nd annual Science Funding Speed Mentoring event held on Friday, April 24th at SIOP 2015 in Philadelphia, PA, was quite a success! With the generous help of our 10 fabulously experienced mentors (another huge thanks to Drs. Lillian Eby, Eduardo Salas, Mark Schmit, Jay Goodwin, Michele Gelfand, Michael again in the future and recommending Rosen, John Hollenbeck, Paul Bliese, Dai- the event to others. Some of the remarks sy Chang, and Shawn Burke) we were able made by our protégés: to increase the science funding knowledge and skills of 52 of our motivated • Terrific event! So helpful. and passionate SIOP members! Program • Great event! This was the best I’ve evaluation results revealed that partici- attended at SIOP! pants’ comfort, knowledge, and familiarity • [This event provided] great insights of practices related to securing scientific from seasoned sources. funding all benefited from attending the mentoring event. The event was also rated We also received many great suggestions as “good” or “very good” by all but one of for how to improve the session in the the attendees, and almost all attendees future and look forward to providing this also expressed interest in participating service for our membership again in 2016!

What Did Participants Learn From Attending the 2015 Science Funding Speed Mentoring Event? 5.00

4.50

4.00 * * 3.50 * * * 3.00

2.50

2.00

1.50

1.00

0.50

0.00 Comfort applying for Knowledge of strategies Knowledge of grant Familiarity with Familiarity with Belief in importance of grant as PI for preparing proposals review criteria & emerging fundable strategies for funding for I-O standards trends/topics interdisciplinary grants Pre-event Post-event

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 169 Improving the Visibility of I-O Psychology and SIOP

Mark Rose U.S. Air Force

Stephanie Klein Pennsylvania State University The SIOP Visibility Committee is dedicated 2. Branding. Building on the work of to helping I-O psychologists (and SIOP) be the Branding Task Force led by Chris recognized as the premier professionals Rotolo and Doug Reynolds along with committed to advancing the science and a team of talented SIOP members, practice of the psychology of work. As SIOP the Branding subcommittee (chaired moves into FY 2016, this report provides by Oksana Drogan) updated and a snapshot of select Visibility Committee distributed materials reflecting the work that’s been done this past year and new SIOP brand. The HR/Business being planned for next. In the future, subcommittee, in partnership with the we’ll highlight additional efforts, progress SIOP AO, SIOP Scientific Affairs, and toward objectives, and new goals. We also SHRM, also rolled out a new template encourage members outside the Visibil- for the SIOP/HR White Papers Series, ity Committee and members from other and new papers on the SIOP web- committees to submit ideas for improving site. Check out the outstanding work visibility that we can utilize and share here. that’s being done, covering a range of topics including learning agility among FY 15 Visibility Initiatives managers, employee engagement, and workplace bullying, here. 1. Top 10 Workplace Trends List. SIOP’s Media subcommittee, chaired by Liberty 3. Outreach to Non I-O Professionals and Munson, generated the second annual Students. The HR/Business subcom- top 10 list of emerging workplace trends, mittee (chaired by Jolene Skinner), based on SIOP member input, with over in partnership with Stephany Below 800 responses from SIOP members. A and Clif Boutelle from the AO, hosted press release of the trends was sent to two events, one at the annual LEC and 100+ reporters by Stephany Below from another at the annual SIOP conference. the SIOP Administrative Office (AO), The first event showcased the impact appearing in outlets such as Fox Busi- of I-O psychology at Pepsi, Google, and ness News and Business News Daily. As Intel for an audience of 120 business a brief recap, the top three trends were students. The second event had three (1) mobile assessments, (2) continued speakers that presented to a targeted use of HR analytics and big data, and (3) non I-O business audience of directors, integration of work and nonwork life. executives, and other organizational de- You can access the full list here. cision makers on the topic of Developing 170 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Women Leaders. The events featured an allow evaluation and tracking of SIOP outstanding lineup of speakers including visibility in the media. This tracking Allan Church, Michelle Donovan, Alexis will allow for insights about the reach Fink, Miki Hebl, Lorraine Stomski, Anna and impact of visibility efforts, as well Marie Valerio, and Jennifer Weiss. as understanding of which SIOP/I-O topics are generating media attention. Coming soon… 3. More Emphasis on Driving Traffic to 1. Smarter Workplace Awareness Month. SIOP Website and Resources. SIOP After an exploratory initiative in FY members and committees have gener- 2015, SIOP’s commemorative month to ated many outstanding resources that highlight the science and practice of I-O can be used as part of visibility efforts. psychology is set to fully launch in Sep- These include, for example, research tember FY 16, coinciding with Labor Day. articles and papers, best practice -ma The month will highlight SIOP’s tagline terials such as the Whitepaper Series, (Science for a Smarter Workplace) and and webinars for students developed brand, and focus on generating visibility by the Student/Academia subcommit- for SIOP members’ research through the tee (chaired by Ryan Johnson; check SIOP website and press releases. out I-O webinars, including some from the Professional Practice Committee, The Advocacy/Prosocial Committee here.). Driving traffic to these materi- (chaired by Amy DuVernet) also is als will continue to be a focus of the planning several events to highlight the Visibility Committee, using expanded science and practice of I-O psychology, channels such as the new SIOP You- with specific focus on prosocial research Tube channel (https://www.youtube. and activities of SIOP members. Forums com/user/SIOPofficial), and through for distributing noteworthy findings are partnerships with internal (e.g., SIOP likely to include the Prosocial SIOP web- External Communications, Govern- site (http://www.siop.org/prosocial/), ment Relations Advocacy Team) and Smarter Workplace Awareness Month external (e.g., SHRM) organizations. and the annual SIOP conference. Reach out to us if you’d like more informa- 2. Advanced Tracking of SIOP and I-O in tion about the Visibility Committee and the News. The Metrics subcommittee its initiatives or if you have some ideas (chaired by Erica Spencer) and SIOP on increasing the visibility of I-O. You can AO have been collaborating with Melt- contact the authors via e-mail; Mark Rose’s water, a media intelligence and public address is [email protected], and relations company, and have devised Stephanie Klein’s e-mail is srklein42@ a classification scheme around media hotmail.com. mentions of SIOP and I-O that will

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 171 News From the SIOP-United Nations Team: Exploring Work Experiences of Informal Workers and Promoting Decent Work for All

SIOP Representatives to the United Nations: Mahima Saxena (Guest Lead Author), Illinois Institute of Technology English Sall, North Carolina State University John C. Scott, APTMetrics Deborah E. Rupp, Purdue University Lise Saari, New York University Lori Foster Thompson, North Carolina State University Mathian Osicki, IBM Drew Mallory, Purdue University For the first time, the Society for Industrial rooted in I-O science and methods, we and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) has hope to provide empirical answers to funded a humanitarian work psychology questions that are fundamental to im- research project under the SIOP Foun- proving psychological experiences for the dation’s Grants and Awards program this poorest workers around the world. year. The project is led by Mahima Saxena SIOP has made significant efforts to align from the Illinois Institute of Technology itself with the UN. As part of this initiative, and John Scott from APTMetrics, and is SIOP was awarded nongovernmental orga- titled, “I-O Psychology and ILO: Exploring nization (NGO) special consultative status Work Experiences of Informal Workers and with the United Nations’ Economic and Promoting Decent Work for All.” Social Council (ECOSOC) to create policy This is an exciting time for us for many recommendations for international eco- reasons! First, this funding will allow us to nomic and social issues and “drive positive pursue research focused squarely within societal change on a global basis” through industrial and organizational psychology advocacy, research, and policy develop- (I-O) theory and methods while asking ment (United Nations, 2010; Scott, 2014). questions and seeking answers that are The creation of the Global Organization of in line with the United Nations (UN) and Humanitarian Work Psychology is in similar International Labor Organization’s (ILO) spirit of enhancing human welfare and global development agenda, specifically as international development by using work they relate to the world of work. Second, psychology (Carr, 2007). Similarly, we are it shows SIOP’s continued commitment to witnessing increased presence of our field developing links with the UN and the ILO in the UN Millennium Development Goals to leverage skills and competencies that (MDGs), the forthcoming Sustainable are possessed by its members in order to Development Goals (SDGs), and activi- drive positive social change for the global ties within the UN Global Compact. This working poor. Third, by asking questions project is in the same spirit and hopes to contribute towards aforesaid initiatives. 172 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Motivation for Current Project Women are more likely to be self-employed in the informal economic sec- Informal Economy tor. Charmes (2012) found that women outnumber men in sub-Saharan Africa Work and employment outside govern- in the informal sector by 51.1%; 64.2% ment taxation, regulation, and observation of the workforce in MENA (Middle East is known as the informal or undeclared and North Africa) countries and 88.6% in economy (World Bank, 2002). Hart (2008, sub-Saharan South Africa are composed of p.145–146) noted that it is “a set of eco- female workers. nomic activities that take place outside the framework of bureaucratic public and Not surprisingly, most research and ap- private sector establishments and do not plied work in this area has been conducted comply with government regulations.” Ac- by economists and labor statisticians. Yet, cording to the World Bank, over half of the empirical research exploring these issues world’s population lives and works within within the context of I-O psychology is fair- the informal employment sector (World ly limited. Despite the centrality of work Bank, 2002). Informal work is a pervasive within various international mandates, and persistent feature all over the world there is no research that falls squarely and is known to be associated with a vari- within the theoretical purview and empiri- ety of negative features: poor and unsafe cal methods of industrial and organization- working conditions, low levels of choice for al psychology. Indeed, we were surprised workers, low or irregular income, absence by how scantily this discourse is inhabited of social and medical benefits, compulso- by scholarly work conducted by I-O psy- ry overtime, extra shifts, inequitable pay, chologists. ill-health, and high rates of poverty (ILO, 2014; World Bank, 2002). The disorganized Our Research Questions and Anticipated nature of work may lead to lack of protec- Outcomes tion for those operating in this economy, oftentimes further exacerbated by poor Various aspects of this project are salient infrastructure, exposure to crime and vio- to understanding and improving the condi- lence, physical and psychological exploita- tions of work in the informal economy and tion, and unfair treatment. Although the deserve special attention. The main aspect largest proportions of informal workers is the unique juxtaposition of highly skilled tend to work as laborers in agriculture, work within the context of the disorga- nonagricultural work that includes excep- nized sector in informal economies. This tional forms of craftsmanship such as in influenced the questions we are asking. weaving, pottery, goldsmithery, as well as Mahima and John are curious about the manufacturing and construction are other very nature of such work and will examine examples of work conducted in this sector. it as such in its natural social–ecological context.

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 173 It is important to understand the nature of Our hope and distal goal is that practi- work and working in the informal econo- tioners who are involved in the promo- my in order to promote decent work and tion of social justice and decent work at well-being. Because the nature of work is organizations such as the UN and ILO will fundamentally different in the occupations benefit from this project. Findings will and contexts highlighted above, we will provide suggestions for targeted interven- explore the subjective experience of work- tions grounded in scientific research for ing in the informal sector (Weiss & Rupp, international toolkits and highlight the role 2012). Next we will evaluate the meaning of I-O psychology in global social welfare of work, hindrances, and evaluations of and policy issues. By contributing to the subjective well-being as they relate to UN’s mandate for improving work and the work and overall health for workers in the employment context and by enhancing our informal economy. The project will make understanding of work experiences across use of a mixed-method approach to data heretofore unexplored domains, this study collection, employing a combination of hopes to contribute to both academic as qualitative and quantitative techniques. well as practitioner-oriented I-O psycholo- With regard to the latter, we are excited gy. The recent devastating earthquakes in that this study will utilize the ecological South Asia have presented multiple chal- momentary assessment (EMA), also known lenges, but we are hopeful that the project as experience sampling method (ESM), to and the situation there will soon be on the get at the immediate felt experience of road to recovery. informal workers as their reality unfolds in real time, within their natural context. This is an important milestone! Watch this This will ensure that data collection is free space in the months to come for more on from retrospective biases and the nature this! of participants’ experiences is captured as it occurs! References

And Finally…. Carr, S. C. (2007, July). I-O psychology and poverty reduction: Past, present, and future? The Industrial-Organizational Psycholo- This study will mark a key entry for our field gist, 45(1), 43–50. into a domain so far dominated by econo- Charmes, J. (2012). The informal economy mists, yet ripe for us to provide important worldwide: Trends and characteristics. contributions to SIOP’s UN initiatives and Margin: The Journal of Applied Economic the subdisciplines of humanitarian work Research, 6, 103–32. psychology. In the time to come, we hope Hart, K. (2008). Informal economy. In S. N. that our empirically driven scholarly pur- Durlauf and L. E. Blume (Eds.), The new Pal- suits will lead to practical outcomes that grave dictionary of economics (pp. 845–846). can feed into broader policy statements New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. governing decent work mandates. International Labor Organization (2014). Infor- mal Economy. Retrieved from http://ilo.org/

174 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 global/topics/employment-promotion/infor- Weiss, H. M., & Rupp, D. E. (2011). Experienc- mal-economy/lang--en/index.htm ing work: An essay on a person-centric work Scott, J. C. (2014). SIOP granted NGO consulta- psychology. Industrial and Organizational tive status with the United Nations. Society Psychology: Perspectives on Science and for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Practice, ,4 83–97. Retrieved from http://www.siop.org/tip/ World Bank. (2002). WDR’s—World develop- oct11/19un.aspx ment report. Retrieved from http://go.world- United Nations. (2010). Economic and Social bank.org/JX5Z4AZ0A0 Council. Retrieved from http://esango. un.org/irene/index.html?page=viewCon- tent&nr=121&type=13§ion=13&index=0.

The SIOP Organizational Frontiers Series

Launched in 1983 to make scientific contributions to the field, this series publishes books on cutting edge theory and research derived from practice in industrial and organizational psychology, and related organizational science disciplines. The goal of the series is to inform and stimulate research for SIOP members (students, practitioners and researchers) and people in related disciplines including other subdisciplines of psychology, organizational behavior, human resource management, and labor and industrial relations.

The newest volume in this series is Facing the Challenges of a Multi-Age Workforce, which examines the shifting economic, cultural, and technological trends in the modern workplace that are taking place as a result of the aging global workforce. Taking an international perspective, contributors address workforce aging issues around the world, allowing for productive cross-cultural comparisons.

Get your copy today from the SIOP Store!

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 175 Notes From the APA Council of Representatives Meeting

Deirdre J. Knapp Human Resources Research Organization Rodney Lowman, Lori Foster Thompson, Deb Whetzel, and Deirdre Knapp attended the 2 ½ day session of the APA Council of Rodney Lowman Representatives (COR) meeting in Wash- ington DC in February. This was the first meeting under a new governance structure that is being tried experimentally pending a bylaws vote by the membership to solidify the change. To allow the full COR to spend more time crafting APA’s strategic direction, the Board of Directors is handling administrative matters and a new Council Leader- and psychologist Dr. Brian Baird. His talk was ship Team (CLT) is managing the agenda and well-targeted and included points that would work of the COR. These changes require a serve SIOP well in our own efforts related to lot of rethinking of how things get done on this topic. For example, when talking with Council and are hard for some members of policymakers, he noted that many do not Council to swallow. So there was consider- even understand what true research (as op- able effort during our opening plenary ses- posed to searching the Internet) really is and sion to directly address concerns that were that they have tons of information that is being expressed in advance of the meeting. thrown their way. So anything we try to add Our own Rodney Lowman is the inaugural to the mix must be relevant and expressed in chair of the CLT. His fellow Division 14 Coun- a way that will be understood. cil Reps agree that he performed exceptionally well in this role in this first meeting. He The same can be said for the four Council began in the opening session with a hu- representatives who spoke the next day morous account of how he happened upon to share their experiences working in the this role and then gave a mock quiz that realm of public policy. In another exception- reminded everyone how the reorganization al showing for I-O psychology, one of the came to be and the large margins of votes speakers was Lori Foster Thompson, who that were cast in favor. Clearly Rodney has talked about her work with the United Na- OD talents that are serving APA well. tions. APA’s chief counsel (Natalie Gilfoyle) also spoke about how the amicus briefs APA The strategic topic to which we devoted a issues are highly regarded by the courts day of discussion was Translating Science and bring high-level visibility and respect into Public Policy. The plenary keynote to APA. The collective advice offered by all speaker was former five-term Congressman these speakers included the following:

176 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Lori Foster Thompson In other action, Council adopted an in- terorganizational document that outlines competencies for psychology practice in primary care that will serve as a resource for graduate-level psychology programs, students, and practitioners (www.apa.org/ ed/resources/competencies-practice.pdf). Relatedly, Council also approved new Stan- • Speak from the science; if you dards of Accreditation for Health Service don’t have anything unique to add Psychology. to the debate stay out of it • Humanize the issue by telling On the research side, Council approved the story of how a certain policy endorsement of the 2012 San Francisco initiative can help solve (or create) Declaration on Research Assessment, a problem which calls for improvements in the ways • Engage all stakeholders; listen to that the impact of scientific research is all sides measured. • Find allies including reaching beyond psychology As a final note, APA’s financial health con- • Disseminate findings in accessible tinues to be strong despite the fact that language and formats the 2015 budget has a projected deficit. Net assets are $67M, which reflects huge The actual strategic discussion was a little growth in recent years that can be largely chaotic, but it was a trial process and was tied to the stock market. Importantly, this a welcome change from the usual COR net worth does not include the two fully deliberations. Participants volunteered for leased office buildings in DC that contin- one of three groups: Research, Advocacy, ue to grow in value. In an effort to start and Educating the Public. A facilitated putting some of the net assets to good process was used to quickly generate ideas use, APA plans to start investing 3% of its and then specific suggested actions for long-term investment funds each year in addressing two major questions posed actions that advance strategic goals. to each group. Results of this work were fed back to the entire Council and will be triaged for assignment to the applicable boards, committees, or other groups for follow-up action.

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 177 IOTAs

Lauren Kenney Xavier University

Transitions, New Affiliations, Honors and Awards Appointments Lynda Zugec received the “2015 Entre- The Department of Management and preneur of the Year” Award from the Marketing in the School of Business Canadian-Croatian Chamber of Commerce. Administration at Oakland University is This award was given at the “13th Annual pleased to announce that Caitlin Demsky Business Excellence Awards Gala: Recog- (Portland State University, I-O Psychology) nizing Excellence in the Croatian-Canadian will be joining the department as an as- Community” on April 17th, 2015. The Ca- sistant professor in Management begin- nadian-Croatian Chamber of Commerce’s ning August 15, 2015. Other members of Annual Business Excellence Awards recog- the ORG/HRM area are Lizabeth Barclay nize leadership, innovation and excellence (Wayne State, I-O Psychology), Kenneth within the Croatian-Canadian community. York (Bowling Green, I-O Psychology), and The Entrepreneur of the Year Award is pre- Mihaela Dimitrova (UW-Milwaukee, Org. sented to the Croatian-Canadian entrepre- Behavior/International Business). neur who has achieved business success through vision, innovation, creativity and The Department of Management and risk-taking. Lynda received her MA in I-O Organizations at University of Arizona is Psychology from the University of Guelph thrilled to welcome SIOP member Allison and is currently the managing director of Gabriel, who will join the department as The Workforce Consultants in Ontario, a new faculty member in Fall 2015. Allie Canada. studies emotions, job demands and work- er resources, and employee well-being. Good luck and congratulations! She has been working at Virginia Common- wealth University since earning her PhD Keep your colleagues at SIOP up to date. at University of Akron in 2013. Allie joins Send items for IOTAS to Morrie Mullins at SIOP Fellow Stephen Gilliland and SIOP [email protected]. members Aleks Ellis, Nathan Podsakoff, and Jerel Slaughter at Arizona.

178 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 SIOP Members in the News

Clif Boutelle Media coverage is one of the most wide- chairman—a move that was rejected at ly used avenues to promote the field of the shareholder meeting—Jones said Wal- industrial and organizational psychology. Mart’s sluggish sales may have heightened SIOP members contribute to many stories concerns. The benefit of family steward- in the mainstream media as well as a wide ship is the long-term perspective, Jones range of Internet news sources and help said. Family members can provide “stabil- spread the word about I-O and its impact ity and the sense that there’s an intergen- upon the business community through erational relationship” running the compa- their contact with editors and reporters. ny, he added.

As always, presentations at the annual Randy Cheloha of Cheloha Consulting conference are a rich source of story ideas Group authored an article in the May/June for the media. At the recent Philadelphia issue of Corporate Board Magazine titled, conference, reporters from the Wall Street “Why Boards Fail at CEO Succession.” CEO Journal and Philadelphia Inquirer attended succession is not a one-time reaction to some of the sessions and talked with SIOP a problem but a continuous process and members for future stories. The Adminis- responsibility, he wrote. Boards need to trative Office also develops stories based be realistic about the many hidden chal- upon the presentations and sends them to lenges in CEO succession planning and reporters. manage them. It is often less a question of what to do but “how” to do it. Otherwise Every mention of a SIOP member and his boards will find themselves with a resis- or her work or comments in the media tant CEO, interpersonal frictions that could is helpful to our mission to gain greater affect performance, and senior executives visibility for I-O psychology. heading for the exits, ultimately undermin- Following are just some of the media men- ing the entire process despite their best tions from the past several months. intentions, he said.

When Wal-Mart named a member of the The May 13 issue of Workforce Magazine founding Walton family as its next chair- had an article noting that increasingly, man, Bloomberg News ran a June 5 story work–life balance is among the top char- about nepotism concerns as the world’s acteristics employees look for in a job largest retailer. Robert Jones of Missouri opportunity. Lynda Zugec of The Workforce State University and editor of SIOP’s 2011 Consultants said that employee benefit Frontier Series book, Nepotism in Orga- offerings can make organizations more nizations contributed to the story. When competitive, and benefits that promote activist investors pushed for an outside work–life balance in particular are of high

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 179 value to today’s employees. She added The May issue of HR Magazine included an that organizations providing benefits such interview with Wayne Cascio of the Univer- as flexible hours, employer-provided child sity of Colorado-Denver School of Business care, and the ability to telecommute are about the competency-based certifications more likely to attract and retain employees. that SHRM is implementing for HR professionals. Cascio is chair of SHRM’s Certifica- Zugec also contributed to a February 18 tion Commission. He noted that certification U.S. Veterans Magazine story about traits is becoming common in many professions that managers look for when hiring. She and HR management is no exception. SHRM cited an example of an applicant who is emphasizing HR competencies in its certi- researched the organization, was well- fication process and focusing on the ability versed in the business, and knew what the “to do” and not just “to know,” he said. “It’s job required. But he went a step further not just that people know the technical and prepared a report listing the actions aspects of the field but also that they can that might be taken to increase efficiencies use that information to solve and address and competitiveness. That showed strong important business issues.” leadership skills and a drive to succeed. Debra Major of Old Dominion University The annual SIOP Conference usually contributed to an April 21 story for Connec- attracts workplace reporters, and the tions.Mic about special relationships, some- most recent one was no exception. Jane times called “work spouses” that develop Von Bergen of the Philadelphia Inquirer in the workplace between coworkers who attended several sessions and wrote a have chemistry between them, “whether story on the debate about performance that’s shared values, compatible personali- reviews that drew a large crowd. Her story ties or shared interests.” It’s not a romantic appeared during the conference and was relationship and isn’t confined to male/ good publicity for I-O and the SIOP Confer- female relationships, she added. It’s trust ence. Elaine Pulakos of PDRI, Amy Daw- that really cements a relationship. “There gert Grubb of the FBI, Kevin Murphy of are plenty of coworkers we have that we’re Colorado State University, Alan Colquitt of sharing the same experience with, but we Eli Lilly, and Seymour Adler of Aon Hewitt don’t develop that sort of trust bond and were quoted in the story. that’s what makes the relationship special.”

SIOP’s Top Ten Workplace Trends appeared The April 15 Wall Street Journal had a on the Minnesota State Colleges and Uni- front page story describing the increasing versities’ “ISeek” website in May. The top use of assessments to screen personality trend according to SIOP members: mobile and performance of job applicants that assessments, the result of expanding and included comments from SIOP members new technology being used for assessments, Jay Dorio of IBM, Brian Stern of Shaker selection, performance management, and Consulting Group, and Charles Handler of training and development decisions. Rocket-Hire. The surge in prehire assess- 180 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 ments is due to powerful data tools and Ingrid Fulmer and Patrick McKay of Rut- relatively inexpensive online software that gers University and Derek Avery of Temple enable employers to sharpen their search University and reported in the April 10 for applicants who stand out in ability and issue of Diversity Management Magazine. workplace fit. Raising the standards yields They collected data from sales associates greater retention and higher productivity. at more than 700 retail stores. One cause Employers are figuring out how their top for stronger sales performance-pay rela- employees are doing their jobs and using tionships for white than black and Hispanic that information to screen new hires, employees is that managers may have said Dorio. “That’s where the future is,” different attributions of performance for he added. The shift to online job applica- whites than minorities, they found. tions enables employers to streamline the process. Taking stock of “candidates’ data The March 17 issue of the Wall Street Jour- now takes minutes or seconds instead nal quoted Matt Paese of Development of months,” said Stern. Handler said that Dimensions International for a story about predicting what humans will do is difficult, how managers’ heavy travel schedules of- but “tests are a predictor and better than ten interfere with necessary face time with a coin toss.” Tests designed and vetted by subordinates. Traveling frequently for work industrial and organizational psychologists can leave employees without adequate have proved to be valid and solid predic- feedback or a boss wondering if the man- tors of applicants’ potential. ager is managing well. “Few executives can deliver business results quickly and engage In the April 13 Talent Management Mag- their people at the same time,” said Paese. azine, an article on leadership characteris- “But increasingly, our corporate clients try tics that can help leaders find success cited to hire or grow ones who can,” because research by Scott DeRue of the University they recognize “they can’t sustain business of Michigan. One of the key leadership growth without a healthy culture.” skills cited in the article is agility, a trait considered critical to business success in a When a German pilot intentionally flew volatile and complex world. DeRue said in a Gemanwings jet into the French Alps in a 2012 article that certain internal charac- March, killing all aboard, aviation psycholo- teristics foster learning agility in leaders, gist Diane Damos was contacted by the me- including general cognitive ability, having a dia to offer her views on pilot screening and “goal orientation,” and being high in open- selection. Her comments appeared in more ness in experience. than 25 media outlets, including NBC News, CNN, New York Times, Tampa Bay Times, Are employees of various races paid and Cleveland Plain Dealer. She said it was differently? The answer is “yes” within “impractical” for airlines to require serious organizations with less supportive diversity psychological testing in addition to man- climates. That was a key finding of a study dated annual physicals because of the high conducted by Yan Chen and colleagues costs associated with that kind of testing. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 181 A confession from Adam Grant of the Uni- lead not only to a sale but to a long-term versity of Pennsylvania: early in his career relationship.” Studies in self-motivation he was not an advocate for women. He point to the “how” of a better approach, just never thought there was a need to be he wrote. concerned about women in the workplace. Having two daughters and looking at gen- For a January/February story in Human der issues more closely changed his mind. Resource Executive about millennials, the He wrote about his enlightenment in the author cited Development Dimensions March 8 issue of Government Executive. International’s Global Leadership Forecast Even though there are more similarities study, which among other results found than differences between the sexes, that millennials wanting more formal leader- doesn’t mean the world is fair to women, ship development opportunities than their he wrote. His naivete shattered, he is now older colleagues and wanting things clearly an active writer, teacher, and speaker on explained to them as well as needing to equality for women. “As an organizational see a clear road map for moving up within psychologist, I feel a responsibility to shed the organization. DDI’s Evan Sinar said light on what the data say about half of whether they are ready for expanded the population. And as a man, I don’t feel responsibilities is another question, saying that this is just a woman’s issue: it’s a so- “millennials are a bit behind the prior cial issue. I wish I hadn’t waited to become generation in competencies such as work an advocate for women until I became a standards and planning and organizing. At dad to daughters and the evidence was the same time, he added, they are slightly staring me in the face. But it’s better late ahead in areas such as adaptability and than never.” customer focus.

Paul Baard of Fordham University au- Please let us know if you, or a SIOP col- thored an article in the March 8 New league, have contributed to a news story. Hampshire Union Leader on the role of We would like to include that mention in motivation in salesmanship. “Psychological SIOP Members in the News. research in the field of motivation and -per suasion reveals there are better ways to Send copies of the article to SIOP at come to a mutually satisfying conclusion in [email protected] or fax to 419-352-2645. the selling process” than some commonly used hard sell techniques. These “ways can

182 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 Conferences and Meetings

Please submit additional entries to Marianna Horn at [email protected].

2015 September 16–19 International Association for HR July 2–July 4 Information Management (IHRIM). The 11th Industrial and Organisational Atlanta, GA. Contact: IHRIM, http://ihrim. Psychology Conference of the Australian org/Events/2015Annual/ Psychological Society. Melbourne, Australia. Contact: APS September 21–25 http://www.iopconference.com.au/ Annual Conference of the International Military Testing Association. Stockholm, July 19–22 Sweden. Contact: http://www.imta.info/ Annual Conference of the International Home.aspx Personnel Assessment Council (IPAC). Atlanta, GA. Contact: IPAC, October 2–3 http://www.ipacweb.org/ SIOP Leading Edge Consortium. Boston, MA. Contact: www.siop.org (CE credit August 6–9 offered.) Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association. Toronto, October 23–24 Ontario, Canada. Contact: APA, Annual River Cities I-O Psychology www.apa.org (CE credit offered.) Conference. Chattanooga, TN. Contact: http://www.utc.edu/psychology/rcio/ August 7–11 Annual Meeting of the Academy of October 26–30 Management (AoM). Vancouver, BC, Annual Conference of the Human Factors Canada. Contact: AOM www.aom.org. and Ergonomics Society. Los Angeles, CA. Contact: The Human Factors and August 8–13 Ergonomics Society: Annual Convention of the American http://www.hfes.org/web/HFESMeetings/ Statistical Association. Seattle, WA. meetings.html (CE credit offered.) Contact: ASA, www.amstat.org (CE credit offered.) November 9–14 Annual Conference of the American Evaluation Association. Chicago, IL. Contact: AEA, www.eval.org

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 183 2016 June 9–11 February 24–28 Annual Conference of the Canadian Annual Conference of the Society of Psychological Association. Victoria, British Psychologists in Management (SPIM). Columbia. Contact: APS, Atlanta, GA. Contact: www.spim.org. http://csiop-scpio.ca/ (CE credit offered.) June 28–July 1 April 8–12 Annual Conference of the Society Annual Convention, American Educational for Human Resource Management. Research Association. Washington, DC. Washington, DC. Contact: SHRM, Contact: AERA, www.aera.net www.shrm.org. (CE credit offered.)

April 14–16 August 4–7 Annual Conference of the Society for Annual Convention of the American Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Psychological Association. Denver, Anaheim, CA. Contact: SIOP, Colorado. Contact: APA, www.apa.org www.siop.org. (CE credit offered.) (CE credit offered.)

May 22–25 August 5–9 Annual Conference of the Association for Annual Meeting of the Academy of Talent Development. Denver, CO. Contact: Management (AoM). Anaheim, CA. ATD (Formerly ASTD), https://www.td.org/ Contact: AoM, http://aom.org/

May 26–27 18th International Conference on Applied Psychology. Tokyo, Japan. Contact: https://www.waset.org/ conference/2016/05/tokyo/ICAP

May 26–29 Annual Convention of the Association for Psychological Science. Chicago, IL. Contact: APS, www.psychologicalscience.org. (CE credit offered.)

184 July 2015, Volume 53, Number 1 TIP Calls and Back Issues Announcements Submit an Article Calls for Nominations Advertise Calls for Papers Announcements My.SIOP Officer Roster Annual Conference IOP Leading Edge Consortium White Papers

JobNet Member/Salary Surveys Foundation Student Page External Awards Graduate Training SIOP Store Program Database

The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 185