Industrial and organizational psychology

Industrial and organizational psychology (also knownas I–O psychology, occupational psychology, workpsychology, WO psychology, IWO psychology andbusiness psychology) is the scientific study of humanbehavior in the workplace and applies psychological the-ories and principles to organizations and individuals intheir workplace.I-O psychologists are trained in the scientist–practitionermodel. I-O psychologists contribute to an organization’ssuccess by improving the performance, motivation, jobsatisfaction, occupational safety and health as well as theoverall health and well-being of its employees. An I–O psychologist conducts research on employee behaviorsand attitudes, and how these can be improved throughhiring practices, training programs, feedback, and man-agement systems.[1] I–O psychologists also help organi-zations and their employees transition during periods ofchange and organization development.I-O psychology is one of the 14 recognized special-ties and proficiencies in professional psychology in theUnited States[2] and is represented by Division 14 of theAmerican Psychological Association (APA), known for-mally as the Society for Industrial and OrganizationalPsychology (SIOP).In the UK, industrial and organizational psychologists arereferred to as occupational psychologists and one of 7'protected titles’ and specializations in psychology regu-lated by the Health and Care Professions Council.[3]

In Australia, the title organizational psychologist is alsoprotected by law and is regulated by the Australian HealthPractitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA). Organiza-tional psychology is one of nine areas of specialist en-dorsement for psychology practice in Australia.[4] Grad-uate programs at both theMasters and Doctorate level areoffered worldwide.In the UK graduate degrees are accredited by the BritishPsychological Society and required as part of the processto become an occupational psychologist.[5]

In Europe someone with a specialist EuroPsy Certificatein Work and Organisational Psychology is a fully quali-fied psychologist and an expert in the work psychologyfield with further advanced education and training.[6] In-dustrial and organizational psychologists reaching the Eu-roPsy standard are recorded in the Register of EuropeanPsychologists and industrial and organizational psychol-ogy is one of the three main psychology specializations inEurope.

1 Historical overview

The historical development of I–O psychology hadparallel developments in the United States and othercountries, such as the UK,[7] Australia, Germany, theNetherlands,[8] and eastern European countries such asRomania.[9] However, many foreign countries do not havea published English language account of their develop-ment of I–O psychology. The roots of I-O psychologytrace back nearly to the beginning of psychology as ascience, when Wilhelm Wundt founded one of the firstpsychological laboratories in 1876 in Leipzig, Germany.In the mid 1880s, Wundt trained two psychologists whohad a major influence on the eventual emergence of I–OPsychology: Hugo Münsterberg and James McKeen Cat-tell.[10] Instead of viewing differences as “errors”, Cattellwas one of the first to recognize the importance of thesedifferences among individuals as a way of predicting andbetter understanding their behavior. Walter Dill Scott,who was a contemporary of Cattell, was elected Presi-dent of the American Psychological Association (APA)in 1919, was arguably the most prominent I–O psychol-ogist of his time. Scott, along with Walter Van DykeBingham worked at the Carnegie Institute of Technol-ogy, developing methods for selecting and training salespersonnel[11]

The “industrial” side of I–O psychology has its historicalorigins in research on individual differences, assessment,and the prediction of work performance. This branchcrystallized during World War I, in response to the needto rapidly assign new troops to duty stations. Scottand Bingham volunteered to help with the testing andplacement of more than a million army recruits. In1917, together, along with other prominent psychologists,adapted a well-known intelligence test, (the Stanford-Binet test, designed for testing one individual at a time)to make it suitable for mass group testing. This newtest form was called the Army Alpha. After the War,the growing industrial base in the US added impetus toI–O psychology. The private industry set out to emu-late the successful testing of army personnel, and mentalability testing soon became a commonplace in the worksetting. Industrial psychology began to gain prominencewhen EltonMayo arrived in the United States in 1924.[12]Mayo was fascinated by not the efficiency of workers, buttheir emotions and how work may cause workers to actin particular pathological ways. These observations ofworkers’ thoughts and emotions were studied to see howprone employees would be to resist management attempts

1

2 2 RESEARCH METHODS

to increase productivity and how sympathetic to laborunions they would become. These studies are known asHawthorne studies. The results of these studies usheredin a radically new movement known as the Human Re-lations Movement. This movement was interested in themore complicated theories of motivation, the emotionalworld of the worker, job satisfaction, and interviews withworkers.World War II brought in new problems that led to I–OPsychology’s continued development. The war broughtrenewed interest in ability testing (to accurately placerecruits in these new technologically advanced militaryjobs), the introduction of the assessment center, concernwith morale and fatigue of war industry workers, and mil-itary intelligence. Post-Second World War years were aboom time for industry with many jobs to be filled andapplicants to be tested. Interestingly, however, when thewar ended and the soldiers came back to work, therewas an increasing trend towards labor unrest with risingnumbers of authorized and unauthorized work stoppagesstaged by unions and workers. This caused managementto grow concern about work productivity and worker atti-tude surveys became ofmuch interest in the field. Follow-ing Industrial Organizational Psychology’s admission intoDivision 14 of the American Psychological Association,there continued to be an influx of new tests for selection,productivity, and workforce stability. This influx contin-ued unabated until the passage of the Civil Rights Actof 1964. Section, Title VII dealt with employment dis-crimination and required employers to justify and showrelevance for the use of tests for selection.The mid-1960s seemed to mark a line of demarcationbetween “classic” and “modern” thinking. During thisperiod, the name changed from just industrial psychol-ogy to industrial and organizational psychology. The ear-lier periods addressed work behavior from the individualperspective, examining performance and attitudes of in-dividual workers. Although this was a valuable approach,it became clear that there were other, broader influencesnot only on individual, but also on group behavior in thework place. Thus, in 1973, “organizational” was addedto the name to emphasize the fact that when an individ-ual joins an organization (e.g., the organization that hiredhim or her), he or she will be exposed to a common goaland a common set of operating procedures.In the 1970s in the United Kingdom, references to oc-cupational psychology became more common than I-Opsychology. Rigor and methods of psychology are ap-plied to issues of critical relevance to business, includ-ing talent management, coaching, assessment, selection,training, organizational development, performance, well-being and work-life balance. During the 1990s referencesto “business psychology” became increasingly common.Business psychology is defined as the study and practiceof improving working life. It combines an understandingof the science of human behavior with experience of theworld of work to attain effective and sustainable perfor-

mance for both individuals and organizations.

2 Research methods

See also: Psychometrics and Statistics

As described above, I–O psychologists are trained inthe scientist–practitioner model. I–O psychologists relyon a variety of methods to conduct organizational re-search. Study designs employed by I–O psychologistsinclude surveys, experiments, quasi-experiments, andobservational studies. I–O psychologists rely on di-verse data sources including human judgments, historicaldatabases, objective measures of work performance (e.g.,sales volume), and questionnaires and surveys.I–O researchers employ both quantitative and qualita-tive research methods. Quantitative methods used inI–O psychology include both descriptive statistics andinferential statistics (e.g., correlation, multiple regres-sion, and analysis of variance). More advanced statis-tical methods employed by some I–O psychologists in-clude logistic regression, multivariate analysis of vari-ance, structural equation modeling,[13] and hierarchicallinear modeling (HLM; also known as multilevel mod-eling).[14] HLM is particularly applicable to research onteam- and organization-level effects on individuals. I–O psychologists also employ psychometric methods in-cluding methods associated with classical test theory(CTT),[15] generalizability theory, and item response the-ory (IRT).[16] In the 1990s, a growing body of empiri-cal research in I–O psychology was influential in the ap-plication of meta-analysis, particularly in the area of thestability of research findings across contexts. The mostwell-known meta-analytic approaches are those associ-ated with Hunter & Schmidt,[17][18][19] Rosenthal,[20][21]and Hedges & Olkin.[22] With the help of meta-analysis,Hunter & Schmidt[23][24] advanced the idea of valid-ity generalization, which suggests that some perfor-mance predictors, specifically cognitive ability tests (seeespecially Hunter [1986][25] and Hunter & Schmidt[1996][26]) have a relatively stable and positive relationto job performance across all jobs. Although not unchal-lenged, validity generalization has broad acceptance withregard to many selection instruments (e.g. cognitive abil-ity tests, job knowledge tests, work samples, and struc-tured interviews) across a broad range of jobs.Qualitative methods employed in I–O psychology includecontent analysis, focus groups, interviews, case stud-ies, and several other observational techniques. I–O re-search on organizational culture research has employedethnographic techniques and participant observation tocollect data. One well-known qualitative technique em-ployed in I–O psychology is John Flanagan’s Critical Inci-dent Technique,[27] which requires “qualified observers”(e.g., pilots in studies of aviation, construction workers in

3.2 Personnel recruitment and selection 3

studies of construction projects) to describe a work situ-ation that resulted in a good or bad outcome. Objectiv-ity is ensured when multiple observers identify the sameincidents. The observers are also asked to provide infor-mation about what the actor in the situation could havedone differently to influence the outcome. This techniqueis then used to describe the critical elements of perfor-mance in certain jobs and how worker behavior relatesto outcomes. Most notably, this technique has been em-ployed to improve performance among aircraft crews andsurgical teams, literally saving thousands of lives sinceits introduction. An application of the technique in re-search on coping with job stress comes from O'Driscoll& Cooper.[28] The resistance to qualitative research re-sulted from viewing it too excessively subjective. Thisconcern, however, is misplaced due to all methods of re-search, either qualitative or quantitative, ultimately re-quiring some sort of interpretation. When a researcheris developing and researching a phenomenon, all infor-mation available should be used, regardless of its form.The key is triangulation, which is an approach looking forconverging information from different sources to developthat theory.[29]

I–O psychologists sometimes use quantitative and qual-itative methods in concert. The two are not mu-tually exclusive.[29] For example, when constructingbehaviorally-anchored rating scales (BARS), a job ana-lyst may use qualitative methods, such as critical incidentsinterviews and focus groups to collect data bearing on per-formance. Then the analyst would have SMEs rate thoseexamples on a Likert scale and compute inter-rater agree-ment statistics to judge the adequacy of each item. Eachpotential item would additionally be correlated with anexternal criterion in order to evaluate its usefulness if itwere to be selected to be included in a BARS metric. Asa simpler example, consider an extended observation of aworker, which might include videotaped episodes of per-formance – a qualitative measure. The qualitative videocould easily be used to develop a frequency count of aparticular behavior – a quantitative measure.

3 Topics

3.1 Job analysis

Main article: Job analysis

Job analysis has a few different methods but it primarilyinvolves the systematic collection of information about ajob. The task-oriented job analysis, involves an examina-tion of the duties, tasks, and/or competencies required bya job, whereas a worker-oriented job analysis, involvesan examination of the knowledge, skills, abilities, andother characteristics (KSAOs) required to successfullyperform the work. Job analysis information is used formany purposes, including the creation of job-relevant se-

lection procedures, performance appraisals and criteria,or training programs. Position analysis questionnaire is aparticular analysis that is used to determine an individ-ual’s job characteristics and relates them to human char-acteristics.

3.2 Personnel recruitment and selection

Main article: Personnel selection

I–O psychologists typically work with HR specialists todesign (a) recruitment processes and (b) personnel se-lection systems. Personnel recruitment is the process ofidentifying qualified candidates in the workforce and get-ting them to apply for jobs within an organization. Per-sonnel recruitment processes include developing job an-nouncements, placing ads, defining key qualifications forapplicants, and screening out unqualified applicants.Personnel selection is the systematic process of hiringand promoting personnel. Personnel selection systemsemploy evidence-based practices to determine the mostqualified candidates. Personnel selection involves boththe newly hired and individuals who can be promotedfrom within the organization. Common selection toolsinclude ability tests (e.g., cognitive, physical, or psycho-motor), knowledge tests, personality tests, structuredinterviews, the systematic collection of biographical data,and work samples. I–O psychologists must evaluate ev-idence regarding the extent to which selection tools pre-dict job performance, evidence that bears on the validityof selection tools.Personnel selection procedures are usually validated, i.e.,shown to be job relevant, using one or more of the fol-lowing types of validity: content validity, construct valid-ity, and/or criterion-related validity. I–O psychologistsadhere to professional standards, such as the Society forIndustrial and Organizational Psychology's (SIOP) Prin-ciples for Validation and Use of Personnel Selection Pro-cedures[30] and the Standards for Educational and Psycho-logical Testing.[31] The Equal Employment OpportunityCommission's Uniform Guidelines[32] are also influentialin guiding personnel selection although they have beencriticized as outdated when compared to the current stateof knowledge in I–O psychology.I–O psychologists not only help in the selection and as-sessment of personnel for jobs, but also assist in the se-lection of students for admission to colleges, universities,and graduate and professional schools as well as the as-sessment of student achievement, student aptitude, andthe performance of teachers and K–12 schools. Increas-ingly, I–O psychologists are working for educational as-sessment and testing organizations and divisions.A meta-analysis of selection methods in personnelpsychology found that general mental ability was thebest overall predictor of job performance and training

4 3 TOPICS

performance.[33]

3.3 Performance appraisal/management

Main articles: Performance appraisal and Performancemanagement

Performance appraisal or performance evaluation is theprocess of measuring an individual’s or a group’s workbehaviors and outcomes against the expectations of thejob.[34] Performance appraisal is frequently used in pro-motion and compensation decisions, to help design andvalidate personnel selection procedures, and for perfor-mance management. Performance management is theprocess of providing performance feedback relative to ex-pectations and improvement information (e.g., coaching,mentoring). Performance management may also includedocumenting and tracking performance information fororganization-level evaluation purposes.An I–O psychologist would typically use informationfrom the job analysis to determine a job’s performancedimensions, and then construct a rating scale to describeeach level of performance for the job. Often, the I–Opsychologist would be responsible for training organiza-tional personnel how to use the performance appraisal in-strument, including ways to minimize bias when using therating scale, and how to provide effective performancefeedback. Additionally, the I–O psychologist may con-sult with the organization on ways to use the performanceappraisal information for broader performance manage-ment initiatives.

3.4 Individual assessment and psychomet-rics

Main articles: Individual assessment and Psychometrics

Individual assessment involves the measurement ofindividual differences. I–O psychologists perform indi-vidual assessments in order to evaluate differences amongcandidates for employment as well as differences amongemployees.[35] The constructs measured pertain to jobperformance. With candidates for employment, indi-vidual assessment is often part of the personnel selec-tion process. These assessments can include writtentests, aptitude tests, physical tests, psycho-motor tests,personality tests, integrity and reliability tests, work sam-ples, simulation and assessment centres.[35]

Psychometrics is the science of measuring psychologicalvariables, such as knowledge, skills, and abilities. I–Opsychologists are generally well-trained in psychometricpsychology.

3.5 Occupational health and wellbeing

I/O psychologists and researchers are also concerned withoccupational health and wellbeing. Researchers have ex-amined the effect of physical exercise, and staying vig-orous at work. Sonnentag and Niessen (2008) found thatstaying vigorous during working hours is important forwork-related behaviour, subjective well-being, and foreffective functioning in the family domain. Individu-als high on their general level of vigour at work, ben-efited most from recovery experienced over the courseof several days.[36] A 2010 study found positive relation-ships between job satisfaction and life satisfaction, hap-piness, positive affect, and the absence of negative affectand feelings of positive wellbeing.[37] Other researchershave looked at the negative health impacts of mature-aged unemployment.[38] Another recent study conductedby Potocnik & Sonnentag (2013) examined the impactof engaging in seven types of activities on depression andquality of life in older workers over a period of 2 years,using a sample from the Survey of Health, Ageing andRetirement in Europe. Results indicated that I/O psy-chologists should make attempts to reduce physical de-mands over older employees at work, to help improvetheir health and well-being. Practitioners should also de-sign intervention programmes and preventive measuresthat focus on how to stimulate older employees’ engage-ment in community activities.[39] I/O research has alsoexamined effects of job mobility and negative health ef-fects, including burnout in workers.[40]

3.6 Workplace bullying, aggression and vi-olence

Main articles: Workplace bullying, Workplace aggres-sion and Workplace violence

I/O psychology and I/O psychologists are also concernedwith the related topics of workplace bullying, aggressionand violence.[41] This 2010 study investigated the impactof the larger organizational context on bullying as well asthe group-level processes that impact on the incidence,and maintenance of bullying behaviour.[42] The impactof engaging in certain thought patterns after exposureto workplace violence has also been examined.[43] This2011 research examines the detrimental effect that inter-personal aggressive behaviours may have on dimensionsof team effectiveness particularly team performance andteam viability.[44]

3.7 Remuneration and compensation

Main article: Remuneration

Compensation includes wages or salary, bonuses, pen-sion/retirement contributions, and perquisites that can

3.8 Training and training evaluation 5

be converted to cash or replace living expenses. I–Opsychologists may be asked to conduct a job evaluationfor the purpose of determining compensation levels andranges. I–O psychologists may also serve as expert wit-nesses in pay discrimination cases when disparities in payfor similar work are alleged.

3.8 Training and training evaluation

Main article: Training

Training is the systematic acquisition of skills, concepts,or attitudes that results in improved performance in an-other environment.[45] Most people hired for a job arenot already versed in all the tasks required to perform thejob effectively. Evidence indicates that training is effec-tive and that these training expenditures are paying offin terms of higher net sales and gross profitability peremployee.[46] Training can be beneficial for the organiza-tion and for employees in terms of increasing their valueto their organization as well as their employability in thebroader marketplace. Many organizations are using train-ing and development as a way to attract and retain theirmost successful employees.Similar to performance management (see above), an I–O psychologist would employ a job analysis in concertwith principles of instructional design to create an effec-tive training program. A training program is likely to in-clude a summative evaluation at its conclusion in order toensure that trainees have met the training objectives andcan perform the target work tasks at an acceptable level.Training programs often include formative evaluations toassess the impact of the training as the training proceeds.Formative evaluations can be used to locate problems intraining procedures and help I–O psychologists make cor-rective adjustments while the training is ongoing.The basic foundation for training programs is learning.Learning outcomes can be organized into threebroad categories: cognitive, skill-based, and affectiveoutcomes.[47] Cognitive is a type of learning outcomethat includes declarative knowledge or the knowledgeof rules, facts, and principles. An example is policeofficers acquire declarative knowledge about laws andcourt procedures. Skill-based is a learning outcome thatconcerns procedural knowledge and the development ofmotor and technical skills. An example is motor skillsthat involve the coordination of physical movementssuch as using a special tool or flying a certain aircraft,whereas technical skills might include understandinga certain software program, or exhibiting effectivecustomer relations behaviors. Affective is a type oflearning outcome that includes attitudes or beliefsthat predispose a person to behave in a certain way.Attitudes can be developed or changed through trainingprograms. Examples of these attitudes are organizationalcommitment and appreciation of diversity.[48]

Before training design issues are considered, a carefulneeds analysis is required to develop a systematic under-standing of where training is needed, what needs to betaught or trained, and who will be trained.[45] Trainingneeds analysis typically involves a three-step process thatincludes organizational analysis, task analysis and personanalysis.[49] Organizational analysis examines organiza-tional goals, available resources, and the organizationalenvironment to determine where training should be di-rected. This analysis identifies the training needs of dif-ferent departments or subunits and systematically assess-ing manager, peer, and technological support for transferof training. Organizational analysis also takes into ac-count the climate of the organization and its subunits. Forexample, if a climate for safety is emphasized through-out the organization or in particular parts of the organiza-tion (e.g., production), then training needs will likely re-flect this emphasis.[50] Task analysis uses the results fromjob analysis on determining what is needed for successfuljob performance and then determines what the content oftraining should be. Task analysis can consist of develop-ing task statements, determining homogeneous task clus-ters, and identifying KSAOs (knowledge, skills, abilities,other characteristics) required for the job. With organiza-tions increasingly trying to identify “core competencies”that are required for all jobs, task analysis can also in-clude an assessment of competencies.[51] Person analysisidentifies which individuals within an organization shouldreceive training and what kind of instruction they need.Employee needs can be assessed using a variety of meth-ods that identify weaknesses that training and develop-ment can address. The needs analysis makes it possible toidentify the training program’s objectives, which in turn,represents the information for both the trainer and traineeabout what is to be learned for the benefit of the organi-zation.Therefore, with any training program it is key to estab-lish specify training objectives. Schultz & Schultz (2010)states that need assessment is an analysis of corporate andindividual goals undertaken before designing a trainingprogram. Examples of need assessment are based on or-ganizational, task, and work analysis is conducted usingjob analysis critical incidents, performance appraisal, andself-assessment techniques.[52](p164)

But with any training there are always challenges that onefaces. Challenges which I–O psychologists face:[52](p185)

• To identify the abilities required to perform increas-ingly complex jobs.

• To provide job opportunities for unskilled workers.

• To assist supervisors in the management of an eth-nically diverse workforce.

• To retain workers displaced by changing economic,technological, and political forces.

6 3 TOPICS

• To help organizations remain competitive in the in-ternational marketplace.

• To conduct the necessary research to determine theeffectiveness of training programs.

3.9 Motivation in the workplace

Main article: Work motivation

Work motivation “is a set of energetic forces that orig-inate both within as well as beyond an individual’s be-ing, to initiate work-related behavior, and to determine itsform, direction, intensity, and duration”[53] Understand-ing what motivates an organization’s employees is centralto the study of I–O psychology. Motivation is a person’sinternal disposition to be concerned with and approachpositive incentives and avoid negative incentives. To fur-ther this, an incentive is the anticipated reward or aversiveevent available in the environment.[54] While motivationcan often be used as a tool to help predict behavior, itvaries greatly among individuals and must often be com-bined with ability and environmental factors to actuallyinfluence behavior and performance. Because of moti-vation’s role in influencing workplace behavior and per-formance, it is key for organizations to understand and tostructure the work environment to encourage productivebehaviors and discourage those that are unproductive.[55][56]

There is general consensus that motivation involves threepsychological processes: arousal, direction, and intensity.Arousal is what initiates action. It is fueled by a person’sneed or desire for something that is missing from theirlives at a given moment, either totally or partially. Di-rection refers to the path employees take in accomplish-ing the goals they set for themselves. Finally, intensity isthe vigor and amount of energy employees put into thisgoal-directed work performance. The level of intensity isbased on the importance and difficulty of the goal. Thesepsychological processes result in four outcomes. First,motivation serves to direct attention, focusing on partic-ular issues, people, tasks, etc. It also serves to stimulatean employee to put forth effort. Next, motivation re-sults in persistence, preventing one from deviating fromthe goal-seeking behavior. Finally, motivation results intask strategies, which as defined by Mitchell & Daniels,are “patterns of behavior produced to reach a particulargoal.”[56]

3.10 Occupational stress

Main article: Occupational stress

I/O psychologists are involved in the research and thepractice of occupational stress and design of individualand organizational interventions to manage and reduce

the stress levels and increase productivity, performance,health and wellbeing.[57][58][59] Occupational stress isconcerned with physical and psychosocial working condi-tions (termed stressors) that can elicit negative responses(termed strains) from employees.[60][61] Occupationalstress can have implications for organizational perfor-mance because of the emotions job stress evokes. For ex-ample, a job stressor such as conflict with a supervisor canprecipitate anger that in turn motivates counterproductiveworkplace behaviors.[62] Job-related hindrance stressorsare directly (and challenge stressors inversely) related toturnover and turnover intentions.[63] I/O research has ex-amined the relations among work stressors and workplaceaggression, withdrawal, theft, and substance abuse,[64]strategies that individuals use to cope with work stressand prevent occupational burnout,[65] and the relation ofwork stress to depressive symptoms.[66]

A number of models have been developed to explainthe job stress process. Examples of models that haveinfluenced research include the person-environment fitmodel[67] and the demand-control model.[68] Researchhas also examined the interaction among personalityvariables and stressors and their effects on employeestrains.[69] I/O psychology is also concerned with thephysical health outcomes caused by occupational stress.For instance, researchers at the institute of work psychol-ogy (IWP) examined the mediating role of psychologicalstrain in relation to musculoskeletal disorders.[70]

Research has also examined occupational stress in spe-cific occupations. For example, there has been re-search on job stress in police,[71] teachers,[72] gen-eral practitioners,[73] and dentists.[74] Another concernhas been the relation of occupational stress to familylife.[75][76] Other research has examined gender differ-ences in leadership style and job stress and strain inthe context of male- and female-dominated industries,[77]burnout in the human services and other occupations,[78]and unemployment-related distress.[79][80][81] I/O psy-chology is also concerned with the relation of occupa-tional stress to career advancement.[82]

3.11 Occupational health and safety

Main article: Occupational health and safety

Occupational health and safety is concerned with howthe work environment contributes to illness and injuryof workers. Of particular importance are psychosocialhazards or risk factors that include fatigue, workplaceviolence, workplace bullying. Other factors impor-tant to employee health and well-being include workschedules (e.g., night shifts), work/family conflict, andburnout.[83][84] Tools have been developed by I/O re-searchers and psychologists to measure these psychoso-cial risk factors in the workplace and “stress audits” canbe used to help organizations remain compliant with vari-

3.13 Group behavior 7

ous occupational health and safety regulations around theworld.[85]

Another area of concern is the high rate of occupa-tional fatalities and injuries due to accidents.[86] Thereis also research interest in how psychosocial hazards af-fect physical ailments like musculoskeletal disorder.[70]A contributing psychosocial factor to accidents is safetyclimate, that concerns organizational policies and prac-tices concerning safe behavior at work.[87] A related con-cept that has to do with psychological well-being as op-posed to accidents is psychosocial safety climate (PSC).PSC refers to policies, practices, and procedures for theprotection of worker psychological health and safety.[88]Safety leadership is another area of occupational healthand safety I/O psychology is concerned with, where spe-cific leadership styles affect safety compliance and safetyparticipation.[89][90]

3.12 Organizational culture

Main article: Organizational culture

Organizational culture can be described as a set of as-sumptions shared by the individuals in an organizationthat directs interpretation and action by defining appro-priate behavior for various situations. There are threelevels of organizational culture: artifacts, shared values,and basic beliefs and assumptions. Artifacts comprisethe physical components of the organization that relaycultural meaning. Shared values are individuals’ prefer-ences regarding certain aspects of the organization’s cul-ture (e.g., loyalty, customer service). Basic beliefs andassumptions include individuals’ impressions about thetrustworthiness and supportiveness of an organization,and are often deeply ingrained within the organization’sculture.In addition to an overall culture, organizations also havesubcultures. Examples of subcultures include corporateculture, departmental culture, local culture, and issue-related culture. While there is no single “type” of organi-zational culture, some researchers have developed modelsto describe different organizational cultures.Organizational culture has been shown to have an im-pact on important organizational outcomes such as per-formance, attraction, recruitment, retention, employeesatisfaction, and employee well-being. Also, organiza-tions with an adaptive culture tend to perform better thanorganizations with an maladaptive culture.

3.13 Group behavior

Main article: Group behavior

Group behavior is the interaction between individuals ofa collective and the processes such as opinions, attitudes,

growth, feedback loops, and adaptations that occur andchange as a result of this interaction.[91] The interactionsserve to fulfill some need satisfaction of an individual whois part of the collective and helps to provide a basis for hisinteraction with specific members of the group.[55]

A specific area of research in group behavior is the dy-namics of teams. Team effectiveness refers to the systemof getting people in a company or institution to work to-gether effectively. The idea behind team effectiveness isthat a group of people working together can achievemuchmore than if the individuals of the team were working ontheir own.

3.13.1 Team effectiveness

Main article: Team effectiveness

Organizations support the use of teams, because teamscan accomplish a much greater amount of work in ashort period of time than can be accomplished by an in-dividual contributor, and because the collective resultsof a group of contributors can produce higher qualitydeliverables.[55] Five elements that are contributors toteam effectiveness include:[55]

1. team composition

2. task design

3. organizational resources

4. team rewards

5. team goals.

I/O research has looked at the negative impacts of work-place aggression on team performance and particularlyteam effectiveness as was evidenced in a recent study byAube and Rousseau.[92]

3.13.2 Team composition

The composition of teams is initially decided during theselection of individual contributors that are to be assignedto specific teams and has a direct bearing on the resultingeffectiveness of those teams. Aspects of team compo-sition that should be considered during the team selec-tion process include team member: knowledge, skills andabilities (KSAs), personalities, and attitudes.[55]

As previously stated, one of the reasons organizationssupport the use of teams is the expectation of the deliv-ery of higher quality results. To achieve these types ofresults, highly skilled members are more effective thanteams built around those with lesser skills, and teamsthat include a diversity of skills have improved teamperformance (Guzzo & Shea, 1992). Additionally, in-creased average cognitive ability of team members has

8 3 TOPICS

been shown to consistently correlate to increased workgroup effectiveness (Sundstrom et al., 2000). There-fore, organizations should seek to assign teams with teammembers that have a mix of KSAs. Teams that are com-posed of members that have the same KSAs may prove tobe ineffective in meeting the team goals, no matter howtalented the individual members are.The personalities and attitudes of the individuals that areselected as team members are other aspects that shouldbe taken into consideration when composing teams, sincethese individual traits have been found to be good in-dicators of team effectiveness. For example, a positiverelationship between the team-level traits of agreeable-ness and conscientiousness and the team performance hasbeen shown to exist (Van Vianen & De Dreu, 2001).Differing personalities of individual team members canaffect the team climate in a negative way as membersmay clash and reduce team performance (Barrick, et al.,1998).

3.13.3 Task design

Main article: Job design

A fundamental question in team task design is whetheror not a task is even appropriate for a team. Those tasksthat require predominantly independent work are best leftto individuals, and team tasks should include those tasksthat consist primarily of interdependent work.[55] When agiven task is appropriate for a team, task design can playa key role in team effectiveness (Sundstrom, et al., 2000).The Job Characteristics Theory of motivation identifiescore job dimensions that provide motivation for individ-uals and include: skill variety, task identity, task signif-icance, autonomy and feedback (Hackman & Oldham,1980). These dimensions map well to the team environ-ment. Individual contributors that perform team tasksthat are challenging, interesting, and engaging are morelikely to be motivated to exert greater effort and performbetter than those teammembers that are working on thosetasks that do not have these characteristics.[55]

Interrelated to the design of various tasks is the imple-mentation method for the tasks themselves. For example,certain team members may find it challenging to crosstrain with other team members that have subject matterexpertise in areas in which they are not familiar. In uti-lizing this approach, greater motivation is likely to resultfor both parties as the expert becomes the mentor andtrainer and the cross-training teammember finds learningnew tasks to be an interesting change of pace. Such ex-pansions of team task assignments can make teams moreeffective and require teams to spend greater amounts oftime discussing and planning strategies and approachesfor completing assigned tasks (Hackman, et al., 1976).

3.13.4 Organizational resources

Organizational support systems impact the effectivenessof teams (Sundstrum, et al., 1990) and provide resourcesfor teams operating in the multi-team environment. Inthis case, the provided resources include various resourcetypes that teams require to be effective. During the char-tering of new teams, organizational enabling resourcesare first identified. Examples of enabling resources in-clude facilities, equipment, information, training andleadership.[55] Also identified during team chartering areteam-specific resources (e.g., budgetary resources, hu-man resources). Team-specific human resources repre-sent the individual contributors that are selected for eachteam as team members. Intra-team processes (e.g., taskdesign, task assignment) are sufficient for effective uti-lization of these team-specific resources.Teams also function in multi-team environments that aredynamic in nature and require teams to respond to shift-ing organizational contingencies (Salas, et al., 2004). Inregards to resources, such contingencies include the con-straints imposed by organizational resources that are notspecifically earmarked for the exclusive use of certainteams. These types of resources are scarce in nature andmust be shared by multiple teams. Examples of thesescarce resources include subject matter experts, simula-tion and testing facilities, and limited amounts of time forthe completion of multi-team goals. For these types ofshared resources inter-team management processes (e.g.:constraint resource scheduling) must be provided to en-able effective multi-team utilization.

3.13.5 Team rewards

Organizational reward systems are a driver for strength-ening and enhancing individual team member effortsthat contribute towards reaching collective team goals(Luthans & Kreitner, 1985). In other words, rewardsthat are given to individual team members should be con-tingent upon the performance of the entire team (Sund-strom, et al., 1990).Several design elements of organizational reward systemsare needed to meet this objective. The first elementfor reward systems design is the concept that for a col-lective assessment to be appropriate for individual teammembers, the group’s tasks must be highly interdepen-dent. If this is not the case, individual assessment is moreappropriate than team assessment (Wageman & Baker,1997). A second design element is the compatibility be-tween individual-level reward systems and team-level re-ward systems (DeMatteo, Eby, & Sundstrom, 1998). Forexample, it would be an unfair situation to reward the en-tire team for a job well done if only one team memberdid the great majority of the work. That team memberwould most likely view teams and teamwork in a nega-tive fashion and not want to participate in a team settingin the future. A final design element is the creation of

3.15 Productive behavior 9

an organizational culture that supports and rewards em-ployees who believe in the value of teamwork and whomaintain a positive mental attitude towards team-basedrewards (Haines and Taggar, 2006).

3.13.6 Team goals

Goals for individual contributors have been shown tobe motivating when they contain three elements: (1)difficulty, (2) acceptance, and (3) specificity (Lock &Latham, 1990). In the team setting, goal difficulty is re-lated to group belief that the team can accomplish thetasks required to meet the assigned goal (Whitney, 1994).This belief (collective efficacy) is somewhat counterintu-itive, but rests on team member perception that they nowview themselves as more competent than others in the or-ganization who were not chosen to complete such difficultgoals. This in turn, can lead to higher levels of perfor-mance. Goal acceptance and specificity is also applicableto the team setting. When team members individuallyand collectively commit to team goals, team effectivenessis increased and is a function of increased supportive teambehaviors (Aube & Rousseau, 2005).As related to the team setting, it is also important to beaware of the interplay between the goals of individualcontributors that participate on teams and the goals ofthe teams themselves. The selection of team goals mustbe done in coordination with the selection of goals forindividuals. Individual goals must be in line with teamgoals (or not exist at all) to be effective (Mitchell & Sil-ver, 1990). For example, a professional ball player thatdoes well in his/her sport is rewarded individually for ex-cellent performance. This individual performance gen-erally contributes to improved team performance whichcan, in turn, lead to team recognition, such as a leaguechampionship.

3.14 Job satisfaction and commitment

Main article: Job satisfaction

Job satisfaction reflects an employee’s overall assess-ment of their job, particularly their emotions, behav-iors, and attitudes about their work experience. It isone of the most heavily researched topics in industrial–organizational psychology with several thousand pub-lished studies. Job satisfaction has theoretical and practi-cal utility for the field of psychology and has been linkedto important job outcomes including attitudinal variables,absenteeism, employee turnover, and job performance.For instance, job satisfaction is strongly correlated withattitudinal variables such as job involvement, organiza-tional commitment, job tensions, frustration, and feelingsof anxiety. A 2010 meta-analyses found positive rela-tionships between job satisfaction and life satisfaction,happiness, positive affect, and the absence of negative

affect.[93] Job satisfaction also has a weak correlation withemployee’s absentee behaviors and turnover from an or-ganization with employees more likely to miss work orfind other jobs if they are not satisfied. Finally, researchhas found that although a positive relationship exists be-tween job satisfaction and performance, it is moderatedby the use of rewards at an organization and the strengthof employee’s attitudes about their job.

3.15 Productive behavior

Productive behavior is defined as employee behavior thatcontributes positively to the goals and objectives of anorganization.[55] When an employee begins a new job,there is a transition period during which he or she is notcontributing positively to the organization. To success-fully transition from being an outsider to a full-fledgedmember of an organization, an employee typically needsjob-related training as well as more general informa-tion about the culture of the organization. In financialterms, productive behavior represents the point at whichan organization begins to achieve some return on the in-vestment it has made in a new employee.[55] Industrial–organizational psychologists are typically more focusedon productive behavior rather than simple job or task per-formance because of the ability to account for extra-roleperformance in addition to in-role performance. Whilein-role performance tells managers or researchers howwell the employee performs the required technical as-pects of the job, extra-role performance includes be-haviors not necessarily required as part of the job butstill contribute to organizational effectiveness. By tak-ing both in-role and extra-role performance into account,industrial–organizational psychologists are able to assessemployees’ effectiveness (how well they do what theywere hired to do), efficiency (their relative outputs to rel-ative inputs), and their productivity (how much they helpthe organization reach its goals). Jex & Britt outline threedifferent forms of productive behavior that industrial–organizational psychologists frequently evaluate in orga-nizations: job performance; organizational citizenshipbehavior; and innovation.[55]

3.15.1 Job performance

Main article: Job performance

Job performance represents behaviors employees en-gage in while at work which contribute to organizationalgoals.[94] These behaviors are formally evaluated by anorganization as part of an employee’s responsibilities.[94]In order to understand and ultimately predict job perfor-mance, it is important to be precise when defining theterm. Job performance is about behaviors that are withinthe control of the employee and not about results (effec-tiveness), the costs involved in achieving results (produc-

10 3 TOPICS

tivity), the results that can be achieved in a period of time(efficiency), or the value an organization places on a givenlevel of performance, effectiveness, productivity or effi-ciency (utility).[55]

To model job performance, researchers have attemptedto define a set of dimensions that are common to alljobs. Using a common set of dimensions provides aconsistent basis for assessing performance and enablesthe comparison of performance across jobs. Perfor-mance is commonly broken into two major categories:in-role (technical aspects of a job) and extra-role (non-technical abilities such as communication skills and be-ing a good team member). While this distinction in be-havior has been challenged[95] it is commonly made byboth employees and management.[96] A model of per-formance by Campbell breaks performance into in-roleand extra-role categories.[94][97] Campbell labeled job-specific task proficiency and non-job-specific task profi-ciency as in-role dimensions, while written and oral com-munication, demonstrating effort, maintaining personaldiscipline, facilitating peer and team performance, su-pervision and leadership and management and admin-istration are labeled as extra-role dimensions.[55] Mur-phy’s model of job performance also broke job perfor-mance into in-role and extra-role categories.[98] However,task-orientated behaviors composed the in-role cate-gory and the extra-role category included interpersonally-oriented behaviors, down-time behaviors and destruc-tive and hazardous behaviors.[55] However, it has beenchallenged as to whether the measurement of job per-formance is usually done through pencil/paper tests, jobskills tests, on-site hands-on tests, off-site hands-on tests,high-fidelity simulations, symbolic simulations, task rat-ings and global ratings.[99] These various tools are oftenused to evaluate performance on specific tasks and over-all job performance.[55] Van Dyne and LePine developeda measurement model in which overall job performancewas evaluated using Campbell’s in-role and extra-rolecategories.[96] Here, in-role performance was reflectedthrough how well “employees met their performance ex-pectations and performed well at the tasks that made upthe employees’ job.”[100] Dimensions regarding how wellthe employee assists others with their work for the benefitof the group, if the employee voices new ideas for projectsor changes to procedure and whether the employee at-tends functions that help the group composed the extra-role category.To assess job performance, reliable and valid measuresmust be established. While there are many sourcesof error with performance ratings, error can be re-duced through rater training[101] and through the use ofbehaviorally-anchored rating scales. Such scales can beused to clearly define the behaviors that constitute poor,average, and superior performance.[94] Additional factorsthat complicate the measurement of job performance in-clude the instability of job performance over time due toforces such as changing performance criteria, the struc-

ture of the job itself[98] and the restriction of variation inindividual performance by organizational forces. Thesefactors include errors in job measurement techniques, ac-ceptance and the justification of poor performance andlack of importance of individual performance.The determinants of job performance consist of fac-tors having to do with the individual worker as wellas environmental factors in the workplace. Accord-ing to Campbell’s Model of The Determinants of JobPerformance,[94][97] job performance is a result of theinteraction between declarative knowledge (knowledgeof facts or things), procedural knowledge (knowledge ofwhat needs to be done and how to do it), and motivation(reflective of an employee’s choices regarding whether toexpend effort, the level of effort to expend, and whetherto persist with the level of effort chosen).[55] The interplaybetween these factors show that an employee may, for ex-ample, have a low level of declarative knowledge, but maystill have a high level of performance if the employee hashigh levels of procedural knowledge and motivation.Regardless of the job, three determinants stand out aspredictors of performance: (1) general mental ability (es-pecially for jobs higher in complexity); (2) job expe-rience (although there is a law of diminishing returns);and (3) the personality trait of conscientiousness (peoplewho are dependable and achievement-oriented, who planwell).[55] These determinants appear to influence perfor-mance largely through the acquisition and usage of jobknowledge and the motivation to do well. Further, anexpanding area of research in job performance determi-nants includes emotional intelligence.[102][103]

3.16 Organizational citizenship behavior

Main article: Organizational citizenship behavior

Organizational citizenship behaviors (“OCBs”) are an-other form of productive behavior, having been shown tobe beneficial to both organization and team effectiveness.Dennis Organ is often thought of as the father of OCBresearch and defines OCBs as “individual behavior thatis discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized bythe formal reward system, and that in the aggregate pro-motes the effective functioning of the organization.”[104]Behaviors that qualify as OCBs can fall into one of thefollowing five categories: altruism, courtesy, sportsman-ship, conscientiousness, and civic virtue.[104][105][106]

Researchers have adapted, elaborated, or otherwisechanged Organ’s (1988) five OCB categories, but they re-main popular today. The categories and their descriptionsare as follows:

• AltruismSometimes referred to as “prosocial behavior” altru-istic OCBs include helping behaviors in the work-place such as volunteering to assist a coworker on a

3.17 Innovation 11

project.

• CourtesyThese behaviors can be seen when an employee ex-hibits basic consideration for others. Examples ofcourteous OCBs include “checking up” on cowork-ers to see how they are doing and notifying cowork-ers of commitments that may cause you to be absentfrom work.

• SportsmanshipUnlike other forms of OCBs, sportsmanship in-volves not engaging in certain behaviors, such aswhining and complaining about minor issues ortough work assignments.

• ConscientiousnessConscientiousness is basically defined as self-discipline and performing tasks beyond the mini-mum requirements. Conscientious OCBs involveplanning ahead, cleanliness, not “slacking off,” ad-hering to the rules, punctuality, and being an overallgood citizen in the workplace.

• Civic virtueCivic virtue differs from other OCBs because thetarget of the behavior is the group or organization asa whole, rather than an individual coworker. Civicvirtue OCBs include being a good representative ofthe organization and supporting the organization, es-pecially in its efforts outside of its major businessobjectives. Examples of civic virtue OCBs are par-ticipating in charitable functions held by the organi-zation and defending or otherwise speaking well ofthe organization.[104]

OCBs are also categorized using other methods. For ex-ample, Williams and Anderson categorize OCBs by theirintended target, separating them into those targeted at in-dividuals (“OCBIs”), supervisors (“OCBSs”), and thosetargeted at the organization as a whole (“OCBOs”).[107]Additionally, Vigoda-Gadot uses a sub-category of OCBscalled CCBs, or “compulsory OCBs” which is used to de-scribe OCBs that are done under the influence of coer-cive persuasion or peer pressure rather than out of goodwill.[108] This theory stems from debates concerning thereasons for conducting OCBs and whether or not they aretruly voluntary in nature.Jex & Britt offer three explanations as to why employeesengage in organizational citizenship behavior.[55] One re-lates to positive affect; for example, an overall positivemood tends to change the frequency of helping behav-ior to a higher rate. This theory stems from a history ofnumerous studies indicating that positive mood increasesthe frequency of helping and prosocial behaviors.[109]

A second explanation, which stems from equity theory,is that employees reciprocate fair treatment that they re-ceived from the organization. Equity theory researchersfound that certain forms of fairness or justice predict

OCB better than others. For example, Jex & Britt men-tion research that indicates that interactional justice is abetter predictor than procedural justice, which is in turna better predictor than distributive justice.A third explanation Jex & Britt offer is that, on the onehand, some employees hold personal values that tend toskew their behavior positively to participate in organiza-tional citizenship activities. On the other hand, Jex &Britt’s interpretation of research results suggest that otheremployees will tend to perform organizational citizenshipbehavior merely to influence how they are viewed withinthe organization, not because it reflects their personallyheld values. While these behaviors are not formally partof the job description, performing them can certainlyinfluence performance appraisals.[55] In contrast to thisview, some I–O psychologists believe that employees en-gage in OCBs as a form of “impression management,” aterm coined by Erving Goffman in his 1959 book ThePresentation of Self in Everyday Life. Goffman definesimpression management as “the way in which the individ-ual ... presents himself and his activity to others, the waysin which he guides and controls the impression they formof him, and the kinds of things he may and may not dowhile sustaining his performance before them.”[110] Re-searchers such as Bolino have hypothesized that the actof performing OCBs is not done out of goodwill, positiveaffect, etc., but instead as a way of being noticed by su-periors and looking good in the eyes of others.[111] Thekey difference between this view and those mentioned byJex & Britt is that the intended beneficiary of the behav-ior is the individual who engages in it, rather than anotherindividual, the organization, or the supervisor.[55]

With this research on why employees engage in OCBscomes the debate among I–O psychologists about thevoluntary or involuntary nature of engaging in OCBs.Many researchers, including the “father of OCB re-search,” Dennis Organ have consistently portrayed OCBsas voluntary behaviors done at the discretion of theindividual.[104] However, more recently researchers havebrought attention to potential underlying causes of OCBs,including social pressure, coercion, and other externalforces. For example, Eran Vigoda-Gadot suggests thatsome, but not all, OCBs may be performed voluntarilyout of goodwill, but many may be more involuntary in na-ture and “may arise from coercive managerial strategiesor coercive social pressure by powerful peers.”[108] Asmentioned previously, Vigoda-Gadot categorizes thesebehaviors in a separate category of OCBs as “compulsoryOCBs” or CCBs, which he suggests are a form of “abusivesupervision” and will result in poorer organizational per-formance, similar to what has been seen in other researchon abusive supervision and coercive persuasion.[108]

3.17 Innovation

Main article: Innovation

12 3 TOPICS

Industrial and Organizational Psychologists considerinnovation, more often than not, a variable of less im-portance and often a counter-productive one to includein conducting job performance appraisals when irrele-vant to the major job functions for which a given job ex-ists. Nonetheless, Industrial and Organizational Psychol-ogists see the value of that variable where its consider-ation would, were its reliability and validity questioned,achieve a statistically significant probability that its re-sults are not due to chance, and that it can be replicatedreliably with a statistically significant ratio of reliability,and that were a court to raise a question on its reliabil-ity and validity testing, the Industrial and OrganizationalPsychologist behind its use would be able to defend it be-fore a court of justice with the belief that it will standbefore such a court as reliable, and valid.With the above in mind, innovation is often considered aform of productive behavior that employees exhibit whenthey come up with novel ideas that further the goals of theorganization.[55] This section will discuss three topics ofinterest: research on innovation; characteristics of an in-dividual that may predict innovation; and how organiza-tions may be structured to promote innovation. Accord-ing to Jex & Britt, individual and organization researchcan be divided into four unique research focuses.[55]

• Focus One: The examination of the process bywhich an employee develops innovations and theunique characteristics of an individuals which en-ables them to be highly innovative.[55] This streamof thought focuses primarily on the employee or theindividual contributor.

• Focus Two: The macro perspective which focusesupon the process that innovation is diffused withina specific organization. In short, this is the processof communicating an innovation to members of anorganization.[112]

• Focus Three: The process by which an organizationadopts an innovation.[55]

• Focus Four: A shared perspective of the role of theindividual and the organization’s culture which con-tribute to innovation.[55]

As indicated above, the first focus looks specifically tofind certain attributes of an individual that may lead toinnovation, therefore, one must ask, “Are there quantifi-able predictors that an individual will be innovative?" Re-search indicates if various skills, knowledge, and abilitiesare present then an individual will be more apt to innova-tion. These qualities are generally linked to creativity.[55]A brief overview of these characteristics are listed below.

• Task-relevant skills (general mental ability and jobspecific knowledge). Task specific and subject spe-cific knowledge is most often gained through higher

education; however, it may also be gained by men-toring and experience in a given field.[55]

• Creativity-relevant skills (ability to concentrate on aproblem for long periods of time, to abandon unpro-ductive searches, and to temporarily put aside stub-born problems). The ability to put aside stubbornproblems is referred to by Jex & Britt as produc-tive forgetting.[55] Creativity-relevant skills also re-quire the individual contributor to evaluate a prob-lem from multiple vantage points. One must be ableto take on the perspective of various users. For ex-ample, an Operation Manager analyzing a reportingissue and developing an innovative solution wouldconsider the perspective of a sales person, assistant,finance, compensation, and compliance officer.

• Task motivation (internal desire to perform task andlevel of enjoyment).[55]

In addition to the role and characteristics of the indi-vidual, one must consider what it is that may be doneon an organizational level to develop and reward in-novation. A study by Damanpour identified four spe-cific characteristics that may predict innovation within anorganization.[113] They are the following ones:

1. A population with high levels of technical knowl-edge

2. The organization’s level of specialization

3. The level an organization communicates externally

4. Functional Differentiation.[55]

Additionally, organizations could use and institutionalizemany participatory system-processes, which could breedinnovation in the workplace. Some of these items includeproviding creativity training, having leaders encourageand model innovation, allowing employees to questioncurrent procedures and rules, seeing that the implementa-tion of innovations had real consequences, documentinginnovations in a professional manner, allowing employ-ees to have autonomy and freedom in their job roles, re-ducing the number of obstacles that may be in the wayof innovation, and giving employees access to resources(whether these are monetary, informational, or access tokey people inside or outside of the organization).[55]

According to the American Productivity & Quality Cen-ter (“APQC”) there are basic principles an organizationcan develop to encourage and reward innovation.

• The creation of a design team.

• Acknowledging those who contribute time, effort,and ideas. This recognition may come from seniorleaders or through peer recognition.

3.19 Leadership 13

• Provide special recognition to innovators whilekeeping names associated with contributors.

• Disseminate success stories concerning invention.

• Make innovation self-rewarding, such as the percep-tion of being a subject matter expert.

• Linking innovation to the cultural values of the or-ganization.

• Creating a committee of business leaders from var-ious lines of business and human resources focusedon developing guidelines and suggestions to encour-age

innovation.[114]

In discussing innovation for a Best-Practice report,APQC Knowledge Management expert, KimberlyLopez, stated, “It requires a blending of creativity withinbusiness processes to ensure good ideas become of valueto the company ... Supporting a creative environmentrequires innovation to be recognized, nurtured, andrewarded.”[114]

3.18 Counterproductive work behavior

Main article: Counterproductive work behavior

Counterproductive work behavior (CWB) can be definedas employee behavior that goes against the goals of anorganization. These behaviors can be intentional or un-intentional and result from a wide range of underlyingcauses and motivations. Some CWBs have instrumentalmotivations (e.g., theft).[62] It has been proposed that aperson-by-environment interaction can be utilized to ex-plain a variety of counterproductive behaviors (Fox andSpector, 1999). For instance, an employee who sabotagesanother employee’s work may do so because of lax su-pervision (environment) and underlying psychopathology(person) that work in concert to result in the counterpro-ductive behavior. There is evidence that an emotional re-sponse (e.g., anger) to job stress (e.g., unfair treatment)can motivate CWBs.[62]

The forms of counterproductive behavior with the mostempirical examination are ineffective job performance,absenteeism, job turnover, and accidents. Less commonbut potentially more detrimental forms of counterproduc-tive behavior have also been investigated including vio-lence and sexual harassment.

3.19 Leadership

Main article: Leadership

In I–O psychology, leadership can be defined as a processof influencing others to agree on a shared purpose, and to

work towards shared objectives.[115] A distinction shouldbe made between leadership and management. Managersprocess administrative tasks and organize work environ-ments. Although leaders may be required to undertakemanagerial duties as well, leaders typically focus on in-spiring followers and creating a shared organizational cul-ture and values. Managers deal with complexity, whileleaders deal with initiating and adapting to change. Man-agers undertake the tasks of planning, budgeting, orga-nizing, staffing, controlling and problem solving. In con-trast, leaders undertake the tasks of setting a direction orvision, aligning people to shared goals, communicating,and motivating.[116]

Approaches to studying leadership in I–O psychologycan be broadly classified into three categories: Leader-focused approaches, Contingency-focused approaches,and Follower-focused approaches.

3.19.1 Leader-focused approaches

Leader-focused approaches look to organizational leadersto determine the characteristics of effective leadership.According to the trait approach, more effective leaderspossess certain traits that less effective leaders lack. Morerecently, this approach is being used to predict leaderemergence. The following traits have been identifiedas those that predict leader emergence when there is noformal leader: high intelligence, high needs for domi-nance, high self-motivation, and socially perceptive.[117]Another leader-focused approached is the behavioralapproachwhich focuses on the behaviors that distinguisheffective from ineffective leaders. There are two cate-gories of leadership behaviors: (1) consideration; and (2)initiating structure. Behaviors associated with the cate-gory of consideration include showing subordinates theyare valued and that the leader cares about them. An ex-ample of a consideration behavior is showing compassionwhen problems arise in or out of the office. Behaviors as-sociated with the category of initiating structure includefacilitating the task performance of groups. One exampleof an initiating structure behavior is meeting one-on-onewith subordinates to explain expectations and goals. Thefinal leader-focused approach is power and influence.To be most effective a leader should be able to influenceothers to behave in ways that are in line with the orga-nization’s mission and goals. How influential a leadercan be depends on their social power or their potentialto influence their subordinates. There are six bases ofpower: coercive power, reward power, legitimate power,expert power, referent power, and informational power.A leader can use several different tactics to influence oth-ers within an organization. These common tactics in-clude: rational persuasion, inspirational appeal, consul-tation, ingratiation, exchange, personal appeal, coalition,legitimating, and pressure.[118]

14 3 TOPICS

3.19.2 Contingency-focused approaches

Of the 3 approaches to leadership, contingency-focusedapproaches have been the most prevalent over the past30 years. Contingency-focused theories base a leader’seffectiveness on their ability to assess a situation andadapt their behavior accordingly.[118] These theories as-sume that an effective leader can accurately “read” a sit-uation and skillfully employ a leadership style that meetsthe needs of the individuals involved and the task at hand.A brief introduction to the most prominent contingency-focused theories will follow.Fiedler’s Contingency Theory holds that a leader’s effec-tiveness depends on the interaction between their char-acteristics and the characteristics of the situation. Path–Goal Theory asserts that the role of the leader is to helphis or her subordinates achieve their goals. To effectivelydo this, leaders must skillfully select from four differ-ent leadership styles to meet the situational factors. Thesituational factors are a product of the characteristics ofsubordinates and the characteristics of the environment.The Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Model focuseson how leader–subordinate relationships develop. Gener-ally speaking, when a subordinate performs well or whenthere are positive exchanges between a leader and a sub-ordinate, their relationship is strengthened, performanceand job satisfaction are enhanced, and the subordinatewill feel more commitment to the leader and the organi-zation as a whole.[119] Vroom-Yetton-JagoModel focuseson decision making with respect to a feasibility set[118]which is composed of the situational attributes.In addition to the contingency-focused approaches men-tioned, there has been a high degree of interest paidto three novel approaches that have recently emerged.The first is transformational leadership, which posits thatthere are certain leadership traits that inspire subordi-nates to perform beyond their capabilities. The secondis transactional leadership, which is most concerned withkeeping subordinates in-line with deadlines and organiza-tional policy. This type of leader fills more of a manage-rial role and lacks qualities necessary to inspire subordi-nates and induce meaningful change. And the third is au-thentic leadership which is centered around empathy anda leader’s values or character. If the leader understandstheir followers, they can inspire subordinates by cultivat-ing a personal connection and leading them to share in thevision and goals of the team. Although there has been alimited amount of research conducted on these theories,they are sure to receive continued attention as the field ofI–O psychology matures.

3.19.3 Follower-focused approaches

Follower-focused approaches look at the processes bywhich leaders motivate followers, and lead teams toachieve shared goals. Understandably, the area of leader-ship motivation draws heavily from the abundant research

literature in the domain of motivation in I–O psychol-ogy. Because leaders are held responsible for their fol-lowers’ ability to achieve the organization’s goals, theirability to motivate their followers is a critical factor ofleadership effectiveness. Similarly, the area of team lead-ership draws heavily from the research in teams and teameffectiveness in I–O psychology. Because organizationalemployees are frequently structured in the form of teams,leaders need to be aware of the potential benefits and pit-falls of working in teams, how teams develop, how to sat-isfy team members’ needs, and ultimately how to bringabout team effectiveness and performance. An emerg-ing area of research in the area of team leadership isin leading virtual teams, where people in the team aregeographically-distributed across various distances andsometimes even countries. While technological advanceshave enabled the leadership process to take place in suchvirtual contexts, they present new challenges for leadersas well, such as the need to use technology to build rela-tionships with followers, and influencing followers whenfaced with limited (or no) face-to-face interaction.

3.20 Organizational change/development

3.20.1 Organizational development

Main article: Organization development

Industrial-organizational psychologists have displayed agreat deal of consideration for the problems of total or-ganizational change and systematic ways to bring aboutplanned change. This effort, called organizational devel-opment (OD), involves techniques such as:

• sensitivity training

• role playing

• group discussion

• job enrichment

• survey feedback

• team building[52]

Within the survey feedback technique, surveys after be-ing answered by employees periodically, are assessed fortheir emotions and attitudes which are then communi-cated to various members within the organization. Theteam building technique was created due to realizationthat most tasks within the organization are completedby small groups and/or teams. In order to further en-hance a team’s or group’s morale and problem-solvingskills, OD consultants (called change agents) help thegroups to build their self-confidence, group cohesiveness,and working effectiveness. A change agent’s impartiality,gives the managers within the organization a new outlook

4.2 Job outlook 15

of the organization’s structure, functions, and culture. Achange agent’s first task is diagnosis, where questionnairesand interviews are used to assess the problems and needsof the organization. Once analyzed, the strengths andweaknesses of the organization are presented and usedto create strategies for solving problems and coping withfuture changes.[52](pp216–217)

Flexibility and adaptability are some strengths of the ODprocess, as it possesses the ability to conform to the needsof the situation. Regardless of the specific techniquesapplied, the OD process helps to free the typical bu-reaucratic organization from its rigidity and formality,hereby allowing more responsiveness and open partici-pation. Public and private organizations both have em-ployed OD techniques, despite their varied results in re-search conducted. However, the use of the techniques arejustified by the significant increases in productivity thatwas proven by various studies.[52](p217)

3.21 Relation to organizational behavior

The i/o psychology and organizational behavior havemanifested some overlap.[120] The overlap has led to someconfusion regarding how the two disciplines differ.[121]

4 Training and outlook

4.1 Graduate programs

Schultz and Schultz (2010) states that modern I–O Psy-chology is a complex and intricate position. It requiresintense university training, and hands on experience. In-dividuals who choose I–O psychology as a professionshould also be aware that they will be constantly studyingto learn about new developments that may emerge. Theminimum requirement for working as an I–O psycholo-gist is a master’s degree. Normally, this degree requires42 semester hours and takes about 2–3 years to complete.Most master’s degree students work, either full-time orpart-time, while studying to become an I–O psychologist.Of all the degrees granted in I–O psychology, each yearapproximately two thirds are at the master’s level.[52](p18)

A comprehensive list of US and Canadian master’s anddoctoral programs can be found at the web site of theSociety for Industrial and Organizational Psychology(SIOP).[122] Some helpful ways to learn about graduateprograms include visiting the web sites on the SIOP listand speaking to I–O faculty at the institutions listed. Ad-mission into I–O psychology PhD programs is highlycompetitive given that many programs accept a smallnumber of applicants every year.There are graduate degree programs in I–O psychologyoutside of the US and Canada. The SIOP web site[122]also provides a comprehensive list of I–O programs inmany other countries.

4.2 Job outlook

According to the United States Department of Labor’sBureau of Labor Statistics, I-O psychology is the fastestgrowing occupation in the United States, based on pro-jections between 2012 and 2022.[123][124]

According to recent salary and employment surveys con-ducted by SIOP,[125] the median salary for a PhD in I–Opsychology was $98,000; for a master’s level I–O psy-chologist was $72,000. The highest paid PhD I–O psy-chologists in private industry worked in pharmaceuticalsand averaged approximately $151,000 per year; the me-dian salary for self-employed consultants was $150,000;those employed in retail, energy, and manufacturing fol-lowed closely behind, averaging approximately $133,000.The lowest earners were found in state and local govern-ment positions, averaging approximately $77,000. I–Opsychologists whose primary responsibility is teaching atprivate and public colleges and universities often earnadditional income from consulting with government andindustry.[126]

4.3 Pros and cons of an industrial and or-ganizational psychology career

Pros of a Career in I–O Psychology:

• Many career opportunities with a Master’s-level de-gree.

• Diverse career paths (i.e. private sector, consulting,government, education.)

• Opportunities for self-employment.

Cons of a Career in I–O Psychology:

• Clients and projects change often.

• Research can often be tedious and burnout can oc-cur.

• Many positions require doctoral degrees.[127]

4.4 Ethics

In the consulting field, it is important for the consultant tomaintain high ethical standards in all aspects of relation-ships: consultant to client, consultant to consultant, andclient to consultant.[128] After all, all decisions made andactions taken by the consultant will reflect what kind ofconsultant he or she is. Although ethical situations can bemore intricate in the business world, American Psychol-ogy Association (APA)’s Ethical Principles of Psychol-ogists and Code of Conduct can be applied to I–O con-sultants as well. For example, the consultant should only

16 5 INDUSTRIAL/ORGANIZATIONAL CONSULTANCY

accept projects for which he or she is qualified; the con-sultant should also avoid all conflicts of interest and beingin multiple relationships with those he or she is workingwith. On the other hand, somemight disagree that it is theconsultant’s responsibility to actively promote the appli-cation of moral and ethical standards in the consultationand examine ethical issues in organizational decisions andpolicies. It is an ongoing controversial issue in the con-sulting field.[129] In addition, as more and more organiza-tions are becoming global, it is imperative for consultantsworking abroad to quickly become aware of rules, reg-ulations, and cultures of the organizations and countriesthey are in as well as not to ignore ethical standards andcodes just because they are abroad.[130]

5 Industrial/organizational consul-tancy

5.1 Definition

An industrial/organizational (I–O) consultant helpsclients and organizations improve productivity andcreate an optimal working environment through humancapital consulting and strategies. Areas of consultinginclude but are not limited to selection and recruiting,training, leadership, and development, compensation andbenefits, employee relations, performance management,succession planning, and executive coaching.[131]

5.2 Types

Consultants can be categorized as internal or external toan organization. An internal consultant is someone whois working specifically for an organization that he or sheis a part of whereas an external consultant can be either asole proprietor or an employee of a consulting firm whois hired by another organization on a project basis or fora certain period of time. There are different types of I–Oconsultants:[132]

1. internal corporate consultant

2. independent external consultant

3. external consultant in a small firm

4. external consultant in a large firm

5. external consultant in a research group

6. internal consultant in a research unit within a largefirm

7. internal consultant in a large government organiza-tion.

5.3 Services offered

Kurpius (1978; as cited in Hedge & Borman, 2009)[133]gave four general types of consultation:

1. services and products (e.g., selection tools)

2. collecting information and helping the organizationidentify and solve the problem

3. collaborating with the client to design and planchanges in the organization

4. helping the client implement the changes and incor-porate them into the organizational culture.

Consultants offer these consulting services to all kinds oforganizations, such as profit and nonprofit sectors, publicand private sectors, and a government organization.

5.4 Pros and cons

Like any other careers, there are many benefits and down-sides of consulting.[134] Some advantages are substan-tial material rewards, trust and respect from clients, andpersonal satisfaction. Some disadvantages are traveling(the number one complaint of all I/O consultants), un-certainty in business especially for external consultants,and marginality which is not belonging to any group ororganization that the consultant works for.

5.5 Competencies

There are many different sets of competencies for differ-ent specializations within I–O psychology and I–O psy-chologists are versatile behavioral scientists. For exam-ple, an I–O psychologist specializing in selection and re-cruiting should have expertise in finding the best talentfor the organization and getting everyone on board whilehe or she might not need to know much about execu-tive coaching. Some consultants tend to specialize in spe-cific areas of consulting whereas others tend to generalizetheir areas of expertise. However, Cummings and Wor-ley (2009) claimed that there are basic skills and knowl-edge, which most consultants agree, needed to be effec-tive consultants:[134]

1. intrapersonal skills, which include knowing con-sultants’ own values and goals, integrity to work re-sponsibly and ethically, and active as well as contin-uous learning.

2. interpersonal skills, which include listening skills,facilitating skills, and building and maintaining re-lationships. These interpersonal skills are especiallyimportant because regardless of how innovative theconsultant’s idea is, if the client does not understandit or does not trust the consultant, the client is notgoing to accept that idea.

5.7 Future trends 17

3. general consultation skills, those skills being ableto execute different stages of consulting which willbe discussed in the following section titled “Stages”.

5.6 Stages

Block (2011)[135] identified the following five stages ofconsulting.

5.6.1 Entry and contracting

This stage is where the consultant makes the initial con-tact with the client about the project, and it includessetting up the first meeting, exploring more about theproject and the client, roles, responsibilities, and expec-tations about the consultant, the client, and the project,and whether the consultant’s expertise and experience fitwith what the client wants out of the project. This is themost important part of the consulting, and most consul-tants agree that most mistakes in the project can essen-tially be traced back to the faulty contracting stage.[135]

5.6.2 Discovery and diagnosis

This stage is where the consultant makes his or her ownjudgment about the problem identified by the client andabout the project. Sometimes, the problem presented bythe client is not the actual problem but a symptom of atrue cause. Then, the consultant collects more informa-tion about the situation.[135]

5.6.3 Analysis and planning

This stage is where the consultant analyzes the data andpresents the results to the client. The consultant needsto reduce a large amount of data into a manageable sizeand present them to the client in a clear and simple way.After presenting the results, the consultant helps the clientmake plans and goals for actions to be taken as a next stepto solve the identified problem.[135]

5.6.4 Engagement and implementation

This stage sometimes falls entirely on the client or the or-ganization, and the consultant’s job might be completedat the end of third stage. However, it is important forthe consultant to be present at the fourth stage since with-out implementing the changes suggested by the consul-tant, the problem is not likely to be solved. Moreover,despite how good the consultant’s advice might be, em-ployees are actually the ones who need to live the changes.So, in this fourth stage, the consultant needs to get every-one on board with the changes and help implement thechanges.[135]

5.6.5 Extension or termination

This final stage is where the consultant and the client eval-uate the project, and it is usually the most neglected yetimportant stage. Then, the project is completed or ex-tended depending on the client’s needs.[135]

5.7 Future trends

Teachout and Vequist (2008) identified driving forces af-fecting future trends in the business consulting:[136]

1. changes in the market conditions

2. competition for market share and talent

3. changes in customer demands

4. changes in technology and innovation

5. increase in costs, especially in energy and health sec-tors

6. globalization.

They also discussed three trends in the field as a result ofthese forces – people, process, and technology.

5.7.1 Human capital or people

In terms of human capital or people consulting, there aremajor forces for future trends:

1. lack of competencies in STEM and communicationfields,

2. aging of workforce, resulting in the loss of experi-ence and expertise in organizations,

3. increasing and aggressive competition for talent,

4. increase in project- or contract-based workforce in-stead of hiring permanent employees, and

5. globalization.

As a result, trends, such as major talent management, se-lection and recruiting, workplace education and training,and planning for next generation, have emerged. In addi-tion, change management also becomes important in or-ganizations in order to innovate and implement new tech-nology, tools, and systems to cope with changes in thebusiness.[136]

5.7.2 Process

In terms of process consulting, because of an increasein competition, it becomes important to identify and im-prove key processes that meet customer values and de-mands as well as that are faster and cheaper.[136]

18 7 REFERENCES

5.7.3 Technology

In terms of technology consulting, there is an increasedneed to automate processes or data so that employees canfocus on actually doing work rather than doing themanuallabor. The consultant can add value to these technologiesby providing training, communication plans, and changemanagement as well as to incorporate these technologiesinto organizational culture. So, regardless of how ad-vanced technology is, consultants are still needed to makesure that these advanced technologies have positive ef-fects on employees and organizations in both technicaland social aspects.[136]

Aside from technology consulting, there is a futuretrend for the interaction that comes with technology.This includes human-technology interaction, technology-technology interaction, and human-human interactionthrough technology. Due to evolving technologies, com-munication and relationships in the workplace are dra-matically changing. Technology consultants help orga-nizations cope with the interjection of technology in thework place. However, their job descriptions will even-tually expand to include proper technology communica-tion styles and when technology does or does not have aplace in an interaction. This delicate subject alters themeanings and interpretations behind social interactionsand creating concise guidelines to technological interac-tions is essential.

6 See also• Applied psychology

• Association of Business Psychologists

• Behavioral risk management

• Educational psychology

• Employment law

• Human resources development

• Human resource management

• Individual psychological assessment

• Industrial sociology

• Kick the cat

• Kiss up kick down

• Machiavellianism in the workplace

• Narcissism in the workplace

• Occupational stress

• Occupational safety and health

• Occupational health psychology

• Organizational socialization

• Outline of psychology

• Personnel psychology

• Psychopathy in the workplace

• Quality of working life

• Systems psychology

7 ReferencesFootnotes

[1] 'Building Better Organizations’ Brochure published by theSociety for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Re-trieved from SIOP.org

[2] http://www.apa.org/ed/graduate/specialize/recognized.aspx

[3] HPC – Health Professions Council – Protected titles.Hpc-uk.org. Retrieved on 2013-09-01.

[4] “Psychology Board of Australia – Endorsement”. Psy-chologyboard.gov.au. 2010-07-01. Retrieved 2013-09-01.

[5] http://www.bps.org.uk/bpslegacy/ac

[6] http://www.europsy-efpa.eu/

[7] Chimiel, N. (2000). History and context for work andorganizational psychology. In N. Chmiel (Ed.), Introduc-tion to work and organizational psychology :A EuropeanPerspective. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

[8] Shimmin, S., & van Strien, P. J. (1998). History of thepsychology of work and organization. In P. J. D. Drenth,H. Thierry, & C. J. de Wolff (Eds.), Handbook of workand organizational psychology (pp. 71–99). Hove, U.K.:Psychology Press.

[9] Pitariu, H. D. (19912). I/O psychology in Romania: Past,present and intentions. The Industrial-Organizational Psy-chologist, 29(4), 29–33.

[10] Landy, F. J. (1997). Early influences on the developmentof industrial and organizational psychology. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 82, 467–477.

[11] Feruson, L. (1965). The heritage of industrial psychology.Hartford, CT: Finlay Press.

[12] Griffin, M. A., Landy, F. J., &Mayocchi, L. (2002). Aus-tralian influences on Elton Mayo: The construct of reveryin industrial society. History of Psychology, 5(4), 356–375.

[13] Hayduk, L.A. (1987). Structural equations modeling withLISREL. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

[14] Raudenbush, S.W. & Bryk, A.S. (2001). Hierarchical lin-ear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nded.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

19

[15] Nunnally, J. & Bernstein, I. (1994). Psychometric theory(3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

[16] Du Toit, M. (2003) IRT from SSI.Mooresville, IN: Scien-tific Software.

[17] Hunter, J.E. & Schmidt, F.L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings.Thousand Oaks, CA.

[18] Hunter, J.E. & Schmidt, F.L. (1994). Estimation ofsampling error variance in the meta-analysis of correla-tions: Use of average correlation in the homogeneouscase. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 171–77.

[19] Law, K.S.; Schmidt, F.L. & Hunter, J.E. (1994). A test oftwo refinements in procedures for meta-analysis. Journalof Applied Psychology, 79, 978–86.

[20] Rosenthal, R. (1995). Writing meta-analytic reviews.Psychological Bulletin, 118, 183–92.

[21] Rosenthal, R. & DiMatteo, M.R. (2002). Meta-analysis.In H. Pashler & J. Wixted (Eds.). Stevens’ handbook ofexperimental psychology (3rd ed.), Vol. 4: Methodologyin experimental psychology, pp. 391–428. Hoboken, NJ,US: Wiley.

[22] Hedges, L.V. & Olkin, I. (1984). Nonparametric estima-tors of effect size in meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin,96, 573–80.

[23] Hunter, J.E.; Schmidt, F.L. & Pearlman, K. (1981). Taskdifferences as moderators of aptitude test validity in se-lection: A red herring. Journal of Applied Psychology,66, 166–85.

[24] Schmidt, F.L.; Law, K.; Hunter, J.E.; Rothstein, H.R.;Pearlman, K.; McDaniel, M. (1993). Refinements in va-lidity generalization methods: Implications for the situa-tional specificity hypothesis. Journal of Applied Psychol-ogy, 78, 3–12.

[25] Hunter, J.E. (1986). Cognitive ability, cognitive aptitude,job knowledge, and job performance. Journal of Voca-tional Behavior, 29, 340–62.

[26] Hunter, J.E. & Schmidt, F.L. (1996). Intelligence and jobperformance: Economic and social implications. Psychol-ogy, Public Policy, and Law, 2, 447–72.

[27] Flanagan, J.C. (1954). The Critical Incident Technique.Psychological Bulletin, 51, 327–58.

[28] O'Driscoll, M.P. & Cooper, C.L. (1994). Coping withwork-related stress: A critique of existing measures andproposal for an alternative methodology. Journal of Oc-cupational and Organizational Psychology, 67, 343–54.

[29] Rogelberg, S. G., & Brooks-Laber, M. E. (2002). Secur-ing our collective duture: Challenges facing those design-ing and doing research in industrial and organization psy-chology. In S. G. Rogelberg (Ed.). Handbook of researchmethods in industrial and organizational psychology (pp.479 – 485). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.

[30] The SIOP Principles

[31] The Standards, jointly published by the American Psycho-logical Association, the American Educational ResearchAssociation, and the National Council on Measurement inEducation.

[32] Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures

[33] Schmidt, Frank L.; Hunter, John E. (September 1998).The validity and utility of selection methods in personnelpsychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124(2),262–74.

[34] Miner, J.B. (1992). Industrial-organizational psychology.New York: McGraw-Hill.

[35] Anastasi, A., & Urbina, S. (1997). Psychological testing.7th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

[36] Sonnentag, S., & Niessen, C (2008). Staying vigorous un-til work is over: The role of trait vigour, day-specific workexperiences and recoveryJournal of Occupational and Or-ganizational Psychology, 81(3), 435–458.

[37] Bowling, K., Eschleman, J., & Wang, Q (2010). A meta-analytic examination of the relationship between job sat-isfaction and subjective well-being. Journal of Occupa-tional and Organizational Psychology, 83(4), 915–934.

[38] Price, D., Winefield, A & Carson, E. (2006). On thescrap-heap at 45: The human impact of mature-aged un-employment Journal of Occupational and OrganizationalPsychology, 79, 467–479

[39] Potocnik, K & Sabine Sonnentag, S. (2013). A longitudi-nal study of well-being in older workers and retirees: Therole of engaging in different types of activities Journal ofOccupational and Organizational Psychology, 86(4), 497–521.

[40] Liljegren, M., & Ekberg, K. (2009). Job mobility as pre-dictor of health and burnout. Journal of Occupational andOrganizational Psychology, 82(2), 317–329.

[41] Coyne, I., Garvin, F. (2013). Employee relations and mo-tivation. In Lewis, R., & Zibarris, R. (Eds.), Work andOccupational Psychology: Integrating Theory and Prac-tice. Sage

[42] Ramsay, S., Troth, A & Branch, S . (2010). Work-placebullying: A group processes framework Journal of Occu-pational and Organizational Psychology, 84(4), 799–816.

[43] Niven, K., Sprigg, C., Armitage, J., & Satchwell, A .(2013). Ruminative thinking exacerbates the negative ef-fects of workplace violence Journal of Occupational andOrganizational Psychology, 86(1), 67–84.

[44] Aube, C, & Rousseau, V . (2011). Interpersonal aggres-sion and team effectiveness: The mediating role of teamgoal commitmentJournal of Occupational and Organiza-tional Psychology, 84(3), 565–580.

[45] Goldstein, I. L., & Ford, J. K. (2002). Training in organi-zations: Needs assessment, development, and evaluation(4th ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

20 7 REFERENCES

[46] Arthur, W., Bennett, W., Edens, P.S., & Bell, S.T.(2003). Effectiveness of training in organizations: Ameta-analysis of design and evaluation features. Journalof Applied Psychology, 88, 234–245.

[47] Kraiger, K., Ford, J. K., & Salas, E. (1993). Applicationof cognitive, skill-based, and affective theories of learningoutcomes to new methods of training evaluation. Journalof Applied Psychology, 78, 311 – 328.

[48] Campbell, J. P., McCloy, R. A., Oppler, S.H., & Sager,C. E. (1993). A theory of performance. In N. Schmitt &W. C. Borman (Eds.), Personnel selection in organizations(pp. 35–70). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

[49] Dierdorff, E. C., & Surface, E. A. (2008). Assessingtraining needs: Do work experience and capability mat-ter? Human Performance, 21, 28–48.

[50] Zohar, D. (2002a). Modifying supervisory practices toimprove subunit safety: A leadership-based interventionmodel Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 587–596.

[51] Shippmann, J. S., Ash, R. A., Battista, M., Carr, L., Eyde,L. D., Hesketh, B., et al. (2000). The practice of compe-tency modeling. Personnel Psychology, 53, 703–740.

[52] Schultz, Duane P. Schultz, Sydney Ellen (2010). Psychol-ogy and work today : an introduction to industrial and or-ganizational psychology (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River,N.J.: Prentice Hall. ISBN 0-205-68358-4.

[53] Pinder, C. C.(2008). Work motivation in organizationalbehavior (2nd edition). New York: Psychology Press

[54] Deckers, L. (2010). Motivation; Biological, Psychologicaland Environmental. (3rd ed., pp. 2–3). Boston, MA:Pearson.

[55] Jex, S.M. & Britt, T.W. (2008). Organizational Psychol-ogy. Hoboke, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

[56] Mitchell, T.R.; Daniels, D. 2003. Motivation. Handbookof Psychology, Vol. 12. Industrial Organizational Psy-chology, ed. W.C. Borman, D.R. Ilgen, R.J. Klimoski,pp. 225–54. New York: Wiley.

[57] Vinchur, A.J, & Koppes, L.L. (2010). A historical surveyof research and practice in industrial and organizationalpsychology. In S. Zedeck (Ed.), APA handbook of in-dustrial and organizational psychology. Washington, DC:American Psychological Association.

[58] Griffin, M.A, & Clarke, S. (2010). Stress and well-beingat work. In S. Zedeck (Ed.), APA handbook of industrialand organizational psychology. Washington, DC: Ameri-can Psychological Association.

[59] Hart, P.M & Cooper, C.L. (2002). Occupational stress:Toward a more integrated framework, In D.S. Anderson,N. Ones, and H.K. Sinangil, (Eds.), Handbook of indus-trial, work and organizational psychology, Vol. 2, Orga-nizational Psychology (pp.93–115). Thousand Oaks, CA,Sage.

[60] Liu, C, Spector, P, Jex, S. (2005). The relation of jobcontrol with job strains: A comparison of multiple datasources Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psy-chology, 78, 325–336

[61] Beehr, T. A., & Glazer, S. (2005). Organizational rolestress. In J. Barling, E. K. Kelloway&M. R. Frone (Eds.),Handbook of work stress. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

[62] Spector, P.E., & Fox, S. (2005). The stressor-emotionmodel of counterproductive work behavior. In S. Fox andP.E. Spector (Eds.). Counterproductive workplace behav-ior: Investigations of actors and targets (pp. 151–174).Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

[63] Podsakoff, N. P., LePine, J. A., & LePine, M. A. (2007).Differential challenge stressor-hindrance stressor rela-tionships with job attitudes, turnover intentions, turnover,and withdrawal behavior: A meta-analysis. JournalOf Applied Psychology, 92(2), 438–454. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.2.438

[64] Chen, P., & Spector, P. (1992). Relationships of workstressors with workplace aggression, withdrawal, theft andsubstance use: An exploratory study Journal of Occupa-tional and Organizational Psychology, 83, 177–184.

[65] de Rijk, A. E., Le Blanc, P. M., Schaufeli, W. B., & DeJonge, J. (1998). Active coping and need for control asmoderators of the job demand-control model: Effects onburnout. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psy-chology, 71, 1–18.

[66] Dormann, C., &Zapf, D. (2002). Social stressors at work,irritation, and depressive symptoms: Accounting for un-measured third variables in a multi-wave study. Journal ofOccupational and Organizational Psychology, 75(1), 33–58.

[67] Caplan, R.D., Cobb, S. French, J.R.P., Jr., Harrison,R.V., & Pinneau, S.R., Jr. (1975). Job demands andworker health: Main effects and occupational differences.U.S. Dept. of Health, Education, and Welfare, Publica-tion No. (NIOSH) 75–160. Washington, DC: U.S. Gov-ernment Printing Office.

[68] Karasek, R. A. (1979). Job demands, job decision lat-itude, and mental strain: Implications for job redesign.Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 285–307.

[69] Spector, P, O’connell, B. (1994). The contribution of per-sonality traits, negative affectivity, locus of control andType A to the subsequent reports of job stressors and jobstrains Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psy-chology, 67, 1–12

[70] Sprigg, C. A., Stride, C. B., Wall, T. D., Holman, D.J., & Smith, P. R. (2007). Work characteristics, muscu-loskeletal disorders, and the mediating role of psycholog-ical strain: A study of call center employees. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 92(5), 1456–1466.

[71] Hart, P,Wearing, A&Heady, B. (1995). Police stress andwell-being: Integrating personality, coping and daily workexperiences Journal of Occupational and OrganizationalPsychology, 68, 133–156

[72] Byrne, B. (1993). The Maslach Burnout Inventory: Test-ing for factorial validity and invariance across elementary,intermediate and secondary teachersJournal of Occupa-tional and Organizational Psychology, 66, 197–212

21

[73] Twellaar, M, Winnants, H & Houkes, I . (2008). Spe-cific determinants of burnout amongmale and female gen-eral practitioners: A cross-lagged panel analysis Journalof Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 81, 249–276

[74] Demattio, M, Shuggars, D & Hays, R. (1993). Occupa-tional stress, life stress and mental health among dentistsJournal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology,66, 153–162

[75] Swanson, V, Power, K & Simpson, R. (1998). Occupa-tional stress and family life: A comparison of male and fe-male doctors Journal of Occupational and OrganizationalPsychology, 71, 237–260

[76] Vinokur A.D., Pierce P.F., Buck C.L. (1999). Work-family conflicts of women in the Air Force: their influenceon mental health and functioning. Journal of Organiza-tional Behaviour, 20, 865–878.

[77] Gardiner, M., & Tiggemann, M. (1999). Gender differ-ences in leadership style, job stress and mental health inmale- and female-dominated industries Journal of Occu-pational and Organizational Psychology, 72(3), 301–315.

[78] Fischer, D., & Evans, B. (1993). The nature of burnout:A study of the three-factor model of burnout in humanservice and non-human service samples. Journal of Oc-cupational and Organizational Psychology, 66, 29–38.

[79] Paul, K., & Moser, K. (2006). Incongruence as an ex-planation for the negative mental health effects of un-employment: Meta-analytic evidence. Journal Of Occu-pational and Organizational Psychology, 79(4), 595–621.doi:10.1348/096317905X70823

[80] Ullah, K. (1990). The association between income, fi-nancial strain and psychological well-being among unem-ployed youths. Journal of Occupational and Organiza-tional Psychology, 82, 317–330.

[81] VanYperen, M., & Schaufeli, K. (1992). Unemploymentand psychological distress among graduates: A longitu-dinal study. Journal of Occupational and OrganizationalPsychology, 65, 291–305.

[82] Yang, L, Che, H, & Spector, P. (2008). Job stress andwell-being: An examination from the view of person-environment fit Journal of Occupational and Organiza-tional Psychology, 81, 567–587.

[83] Spector, P.E (2011). ‘’Industrial and organizational psy-chology: Research and practice (6th Edition)’’. Hoboken,NJ: Wiley.

[84] http://www.comcare.gov.au/preventing/hazards/psychosocial_hazards

[85] Munir, F., & McDermott, H. (2013). Design of environ-ments and work: Health, safety and wellbeing. In Lewis,R., & Zibarris, L. (Eds.),Work and occupational psychol-ogy: Integrating theory and practice(pp. 217–257). Thou-sand Oaks, CA: Sage

[86] Barling, J., & Frone, M. R. (2010). Occupational injuries:Setting the stage. In J. Barling & M. R. Frone (Eds.), Thepsychology of workplace safety (pp. 3–12). Washington,DC: American Psychological Association.

[87] Neal, A., & Griffin, M. A. (2010). Safety climate andsafety at work. In J. Barling & M. R. Frone (Eds.). Thepsychology of workplace safety (pp. 15–34). Washington,DC: American Psychological Association.

[88] Dollard, M., Bakker, A. (2010). Psychosocial safety cli-mate as a precursor to conducive work environments, psy-chological health problems, and employee engagement.Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology,83, 579–599.

[89] Clarke, S. (2013). Safety leadership: A meta-analyticreview of transformational and transactional leadershipstyles as antecedents of safety behavioursJournal of Oc-cupational and Organizational Psychology, 86, 22–49.

[90] Mullen, J., & Kelloway, E. (2009). Safety leadership: Alongitudinal study of the effects of transformational lead-ership on safety outcomes 'Journal of Occupational andOrganizational Psychology, 82, 253–272.

[91] Goldstone, R.; Roberts, M. &Gureckis, T. (2008). Emer-gent processes of group behavior. Group Behavior, 17,1–15.

[92] Rousseau, V. & Aube, C. (2011). Interpersonal aggres-sion and team effectiveness: The mediating role of teamgoal commitment Journal of Occupational and Organiza-tional Psychology, 84(3)., 565–580

[93] Bowling, K., Eschleman, J., & Wang, Q (2010). A meta-analytic examination of the relationship between job sat-isfaction and subjective well-being. Journal of Occupa-tional and Organizational Psychology, 83(4), 915–934.

[94] Campbell, J.P. (1990). Modeling the performance predic-tion problem in industrial and organizational psychology.In M.D. Dunnette & L.M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook ofindustrial and organizational psychology (2nd ed., Vol 1,pp. 687–732). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting PsychologistsPress.

[95] Morrison, E.W. (1994). Role definitions and organiza-tional citizenship behavior: The importance of the em-ployee’s perspective. Academy of Management Journal,37, 1543–67.

[96] Van Dyne & LePine (1998). Helping and Voice Extra-role Behaviors: Evidence of Construct and Predictive Va-lidity, The Academy ofManagement Journal, Vol. 41, No.1 (Feb. 1998, pp. 108–19).

[97] Campbell, J.P. (1994). Alternative models of job perfor-mance and their implications for selection and classifica-tion. In M.G. Rumsey; C.B. Walker & J.H. Harris (Eds.),Personnel selection and classification (pp. 33–51). Hills-dale, NJ: Erlbaum.

[98] Murphy, K.R. (1994). Toward a broad conceptualizationof jobs and job performance: Impact of changes in themilitary environment on the structure, assessment, andprediction of job performance. In M.G. Rumsey; C.B.

22 7 REFERENCES

Walker & J.H. Harris (Eds.), Personnel selection and clas-sification (pp. 85–102), Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

[99] Murphy, K.R. (1989). Dimensions of job performance.In R. Dillon & J.W. Pelligrino (Eds.), Testing: Theoret-ical and applied perspectives (pp. 218–47). New York:Praeger

[100] Jex, S.M. & Britt, T.W. (2008). Organizational Psychol-ogy. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

[101] Pulakos, E.D. (1984). A comparison of rater training pro-grams: Error training and accuracy training. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 69, 581–88)

[102] Baron, R.; Handley R. & Fund S. (2006). The impact ofemotional intelligence on performance. In V.U. Druskat;F. Sala & G. Mount (Eds.), Linking emotional intelli-gence and performance at work: Current research evidencewith individuals and groups (pp. 3–19). Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

[103] Goleman, D. (1998). Workingwith Emotional Intelligence.New York: Bantam Books.

[104] Organ, D.W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behav-ior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA England:Lexington Books/D.C. Heath and Com.

[105] Organ, D.W. (1977). Inferences about trends in la-bor force satisfaction: A causal-correlational analy-sis. Academy of Management Journal, 20(4), 510–19.doi:10.2307/255353

[106] Organ, D.W. (1994). Organizational citizenship behav-ior and the good soldier. In M.G. Rumsey; C.B. Walker;J. Harris (Eds.), Personnel selection and classification (pp.53–67). Hillsdale, NJ England: Lawrence Erlbaum Asso-ciates, Inc.

[107] Williams, L.J. & Anderson, S.E. (1994). Job satisfactionand organizational commitment as predictors of organiza-tional citizenship and in-role behavior. Journal of Man-agement, 17, 601–17

[108] Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2006). Compulsory Citizenship Be-havior: Theorizing Some Dark Sides of the Good Sol-dier Syndrome in Organizations. Journal for the Theoryof Social Behaviour, 36(1), 77–93. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5914.2006.00297.

[109] George, J.M. & Brief, A.P. (1992). Somewhat like theidea that “feeling good” leads to “doing good.” A concep-tual analysis of themood at work-organizational spontane-ity relationship. Psychological Bulletin, 112(2), 310–29.doi:10.1037/0033-2909.112.2.310

[110] Goffman, E. (2006). The Presentation of Self. In D. Bris-sett; C. Edgley (Eds.), Life as Theater: A DramaturgicalSourcebook (2nd ed.) (pp. 129–39). New Brunswick, NJUS: AldineTransaction.

[111] Bolino, M.C. (1999). Citizenship and impression man-agement: Good soldiers or good actors? Academy ofManagement Review, 24(1), 82–98. doi:10.2307/259038

[112] Frank, K.; Zhao, Y.; Borman, K. (2004) Social Capitaland the Diffusion of Innovations within Organizations:The Case of Computer Technology in Schools. Sociologyof Education 2004, Vol 77 (April): 148–71.

[113] Damanpour, F. (1991). Organizational innovation: Ameta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators.Academy of Management Journal, 34, 555–90.

[114] Leavitt, Paige (2002). Rewarding Innovation. Ameri-can Productivity &Quality Center. Copyright 1994–2002APQC

[115] Yukl, G. (2010). Leadership in organizations (7th Ed.).New Jersey: Pearson

[116] Daft, R.L. (2011). Leadership (5th Ed.). Australia: Cen-gage.

[117] Hughes, R.L.; Ginnett, R.C. & Curphy, G.J. (2009).Leadership: Enhancing the lessons of experience (6th Ed.).Boston: McGraw-Hill.

[118] Jex, S.M. & Britt, T.W. (2008). Organizational Psychol-ogy: A scientist-practitioner approach (2nd Ed.). New Jer-sey: John Wiley & Sons.

[119] Goleman, Daniel (2002). Primal Leadership. USA: Har-vard Business School Press.

[120] Miner, J.(2006) Organizational behavior 3: Historical ori-gins, theoretical foundations and the future. Wiley.

[121] Jex, S.M., & Britt, T.W. (2008). Organizational psychol-ogy: A scientist-practitioner approach (2nd ed.). Hoboken,NJ: Wiley.

[122] Graduate Training Programs (visited web site on March22, 2009)

[123] http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecopro.t04.htm

[124] http://www.businessinsider.com.au/fastest-growing-jobs-2013-12?op=1#1-industrial-organizational-psychologists-30

[125] Khanna, C., & Medsker, G. J. (2007). 2006 Income andemployment survey results for the Society for Industrialand Organizational Psychology. Bowling Green, OH: So-ciety for Industrial and Organizational Psychology.

[126] Medsker, G. J., Katkowski, D. A., & Furr, D. (2005).2003 employment survey results for the Society Societyfor Industrial and Organizational Psychology. BowlingGreen, OH: Society for Industrial and Organizational Psy-chology.

[127] Cherry, Kendra. “Industrial-Organization Psy-chology Careers.” About.com. N.p., n.d. Web.1 May 2013<http://psychology.about.com/od/psychologycareerprofiles/p/iopsychcareers.htm>.

[128] Biech, E. (Ed.) (2007). The ethics of the business. Thebusiness of consulting: The basics and beyond (pp. 231–244). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.

23

[129] Newman, J. L., Robinson-Kurpius, S. E., & Fuqua, D. R.(2002). Issues in the ethical practice of consulting psy-chology. In R. L. Lowman (Ed.), Handbook of organi-zational consulting psychology (pp. 733–758). San Fran-cisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

[130] Mobley, W. H. (2008). Rules of thumb for internationalconsultants. In J. W. Hedge, &W. C. Borman (Eds.), TheI–O consultant: Advice and insights for building a suc-cessful career (pp. 309–314). Washington, DC: Ameri-can Psychological Association.

[131] Block, P. (Ed.) (2011). A consultant by any other name.Flawless consulting: A guide to getting your expertise used(pp. 1–11). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.

[132] Hedge, J.W., &Borman,W. C. (Eds.). (2008). Overviewof I/O consulting. The I/O consultant: Advice and insightsfor building a successful career (pp. 11–16). Washington,DC: American Psychological Association.

[133] Hedge, J. W., & Borman, W. C. (Eds.). (2008). Servicesconsultants provide. The I/O consultant: Advice and in-sights for building a successful career (pp. 29–34). Wash-ington, DC: American Psychological Association.

[134] Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (Eds.). (2009). Theorganization development practitioner. Organization de-velopment and change (pp. 46–73). Mason, OH: South-Western.

[135] Block, P.(Ed.) (2011). A consultant by any other name.Flawless consulting: A guide to getting your expertiseused (pp. 1–11). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.

[136] Teachout, M. S., & Vequist, D. G. IV. (2008). Trends inbusiness consulting. In J. W. Hedge, & W. C. Borman(Eds.), The I/O consultant: Advice and insights for build-ing a successful career (pp. 335–343). Washington, DC:American Psychological Association.

Sources

• Aube, C. & Rousseau, V. (2005). Team goal com-mitment and team effectiveness: The role of taskinterdependence and supportive behaviors. GroupDynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 9, 189–204.

• Barrick, M.R.; Stewart, S.L.; Neubert, M.J. &Mount, M.K. (1998). Relating member ability andpersonality to Work-team processes and team effec-tiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 377–91.

• Dematteo, J.S.; Eby, L.T. & Sundstrom, E. (1998).Team-based rewards: Current empirical evidenceand directions for future research. Research in Or-ganizational Behavior, 20, 141–83.

• Guzzo, R.A. & Shea, G.P. (1992). Group Per-formance and intergroup relations in organizations.Handbook of industrial and organizational psychol-ogy (Vol. 3, pp. 269–313).

• Hackman, J.R.; Brousseau, K.R. & Weiss, J.A.(1976). The interaction of task design and groupperformance strategies in determining group effec-tiveness. Organizational Behavior and Human Per-formance, 16, 350–65.

• Hackman, J.R. & Oldham, G.R. (1980). Work re-design. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

• Haines, V.Y. & Taggar, S. (2006). Antecedents ofteam reward attitude. Group Dynamics: Theory, Re-search, and Practice, 10, 194–205.

• Lock, E.A.&Latham, G.P. (1990). A theory of goalsetting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice-Hall.

• Luthans, F., & Kreitner, R. (1985). Organizationalbehavior modification and beyond: An operant andsocial learning approach (2nd ed.). Glenview, IL:Scott, Foresman.

• Mitchell, T.R. & Silver, W.R. (1990). Individualand group goals when workers are interdependent.Effects on task strategy and performance. Journalof Applied Psychology, 75, 185–193.

• Salas, E.; Stagl, K. & Burke, C. (2004). 25 yearsof team effectiveness in organizations: Researchthemes and emerging needs, in C. Cooper & I.Robertson (eds), International Review of Industrialand Organizational Psychology, Vol. 19 (pp. 47–91). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.

• Sundstrom, E.; De Meuse, K.P. & Futrell, D.(1990). Work teams: applications and effective-ness. American Psychologist, 45(2), 120–33.

• Sundstrom, E.; McIntyre, M.; Halfhill, T. &Richards, H. (2000). Work Groups: From theHawthorne Studies toWork Teams of the 1990s andBeyond. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, andPractice (Vol 4, No 1. 44–47).

• Van Vianen, A.E.M. & De Dreu, C.K.W. (2001).Personality in teams: Its relationship to social cohe-sion, task cohesion, and team performance. Euro-pean Journal of Work and Organizational Psychol-ogy, 10(2), 97–120.

• Wageman, R. & Baker, G. (1997). Incentives andcooperation: The joint effects of task and rewardinterdependence on group performance. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 18, 139–58.

• Whitney, K. (1994). Improving group task perfor-mance: The role of group goals and group efficacy.Human Performance, 7, 55–78.

24 9 EXTERNAL LINKS

8 Further reading• Anderson, N.; Ones, D.S.; Sinangil, H.K. &Viswes-varan, C. (Eds.). (2002). Handbook of industrial,work and organizational psychology, Volume 1: Per-sonnel psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Pub-lications Ltd.

• Anderson, N.; Ones, D.S.; Sinangil, H.K. &Viswes-varan, C. (Eds.). (2002). Handbook of industrial,work and organizational psychology, Volume 2: Or-ganizational psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: SagePublications Ltd.

• Borman, W.C.; Ilgen, D.R. & Klimoski, R.J. (Eds.).(2003). Handbook of psychology: Vol 12 Industrialand organizational psychology. Hoboken, NJ: JohnWiley & Sons.

• Borman, W.C. & Motowidlo, S.J. (1993). Expand-ing the criterion domain to include elements of con-textual performance. Chapter in N. Schmitt andW.C. Borman (Eds.), Personnel Selection. San Fran-cisco: Josey-Bass (pp. 71–98).

• Campbell, J.P.; Gasser, M.B. & Oswald, F.L.(1996). The substantive nature of job performancevariability. In K.R. Murphy (Ed.), Individual differ-ences and behavior in organizations (pp. 258–99).San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

• Copley, F.B. (1923). Frederick W. Taylor father ofscientific management, Vols. I and II. New York:Taylor Society.

• Dunnette, M.D. (Ed.). (1976). Handbook of indus-trial and organizational psychology. Chicago: RandMcNally.

• Dunnette, M.D. & Hough, L.M. (Eds.). (1991).Handbook of industrial/organizational psychology (4Volumes). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting PsychologistsPress.

• Guion, R.M. (1998). Assessment, measurement andprediction for personnel decisions. Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.

• Hunter, J.E. & Schmidt, F.L. (1990). Methods ofmeta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in researchfindings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

• Jones, Ishmael (2008). The Human Factor: Insidethe CIA’s Dysfunctional Intelligence Culture. NewYork: Encounter Books.

• Koppes, L.L. (Ed.). (2007). Historical perspectivesin industrial and organizational psychology. Mah-wah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

• Lant, T.K. “Organizational Cognition and Interpre-tation,” in Baum, (Ed)., The Blackwell Companionto Organizations. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

• Lowman, R.L. (Ed.). (2002). The California Schoolof Organizational Studies handbook of organiza-tional consulting psychology: A comprehensive guideto theory, skills and techniques. San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass.

• Rogelberg, S.G. (Ed.). (2002). Handbook of re-search methods in industrial and organizational psy-chology. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

• Sackett, P.R. & Wilk, S.L. (1994). Within groupnorming and other forms of score adjustment inpre-employment testing. American Psychologist, 49,929–54.

• Schmidt, F.L. & Hunter, J.E. (1998). The validityand utility of selection methods in personnel psy-chology: Practical and theoretical implications of85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin,124, 262–74.

9 External links• Canadian Society for Industrial and OrganizationalPsychology

• British Psychological Society’s Division of Occupa-tional Psychology’s (DOP) website

• Society for Industrial & Organisational Psychologyof South Africa

• European Association of Work and OrganizationalPsychology

• Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychol-ogy

25

10 Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses

10.1 Text• Industrial and organizational psychology Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_and_organizational_psychology?oldid=

691412201 Contributors: Tobias Hoevekamp, William Avery, Renata, Edward, Vaughan, Lexor, Kku, Rl, Thseamon, Mydogategod-shat, Hyacinth, David Shay, Topbanana, Fifelfoo, Romanm, Amead, Skagedal, APH, Chris Howard, Discospinster, Rich Farmbrough,Vsmith, Mani1, Thu, Causa sui, Johnkarp, Dungodung, Maurreen, Giraffedata, Zetawoof, Mdd, Philthecow, Woohookitty, Tabletop, Ziji,Wikiklrsc, BD2412, Kevinfox, Wikix, Rjwilmsi, Nonymous-raz, Richdiesal, Truman Burbank, Windharp, DVdm, YurikBot, Wavelength,RobotE, Bhny, Cswrye, Nesbit, NawlinWiki, Welsh, 2over0, Closedmouth, Extraordinary, JoanneB, Höyhens, Iismepeter, FrozenPurple-Cube, Sardanaphalus, SmackBot, Reedy, KnowledgeOfSelf, DuncanBCS, Frédérick Lacasse, Chris the speller, Apeloverage, DoctorW,Muboshgu, Jmlk17, Cybercobra, EPM, Amtiss, Kuru, General Ization, Joshua Scott, Ckatz, Ldirwin, Doczilla, Ryulong, Hu12, Light-head, Sampi Europa, Penbat, Myscrnnm, Ward3001, After Midnight, Scarpy, Iss246, ChrisTW, Thijs!bot, Kkraiger, Vertium, DmitriLytov, Edhubbard, Matthew Proctor, Deipnosophista, Endymionspilos, JAnDbot, TigerK 69, Skomorokh, Instinct, Shumdw, Magiola-ditis, AtticusX, TARBOT, Larsonsc, ChoumX, WhatamIdoing, Allstarecho, R'n'B, Carmaz, Smokizzy, Mike.lifeguard, Extransit, Sino-tara, Soczyczi, Iulus Ascanius, Kenneth M Burke, Gregory S. Waddell, Psykhosis, Funandtrvl, Signalhead, Philip Trueman, TXiKiBoT,SueHay, PhilipDSullivan, Johatton, Andrewaskew, Falcon8765, Enviroboy, Qworty, Ntcarter, Kaly99, Jean-Louis Swiners, Romullous,Anna.erickson, Neptune99, Correogsk, Martarius, ClueBot, Dr. Stephanie Morgan, Taroaldo, Der Golem, Jacob Friedland, Ciloh, Excirial,Vladliv~enwiki, Nuiloa, Tyler, FantajiFan, KarolineShef, Eustress, VsevolodKrolikov, SchreiberBike, Xme, Aleksd, Rui Gabriel Correia,Thingg, Jimjmc, DumZiBoT, XLinkBot, Dthomsen8, DrAllison, Oboylej, EEng, Jhendin, M4390116, Addbot, Fluffernutter, Brentdeezee,H92Bot, JRR006, Legobot, Yobot, AnakngAraw, Trevithj, Jim1138, Materialscientist, Nraimond, Mredterp, LilHelpa, Xqbot, City-panes89, GPJohnson, Erikj09, Seeker79, Omnipaedista, Lorinm, Amaury, Joxemai, Aaron Kauppi, Milnehouse, A.amitkumar, FrescoBot,Superkala78, Lhamil2, Wsbecker, Kiefer.Wolfowitz, LittleWink, Diomedea Exulans, Phearson, AHeneen, Vrenator, Michaelprintingstu-dent, Suffusion of Yellow, RjwilmsiBot, Noie9683, Akbarilisa, EmausBot, Golfandme, Emortiz, Mbs25141425, JGraser, Tommy2010,Winner 42, ThisIsLaurrison, Co7462, Pbuschang, Josve05a, Laoch1, Csu-io, Empty Buffer, Vinu2710, Anders7187, Fred.oswald, Erianna,Zbigniew99, ChuispastonBot, 28bot, ClueBot NG, Mrobillard, Antiqueight, Savantas83, Melissalynndaniel, Casicielo, Hail2550, Irk1999,Ioparty, Sthenson620, JPAteam, Jaysonandrew, Lgilles11, Babank, Darafsh, Pramodbhekat, Sndenny1234, Danyeol, Winston Trechane,Bakennedy2, Sydactive, BattyBot, Jastha08, ChrisGualtieri, Chhotuyadav, Abiliocesar, Cerabot~enwiki, Frosty, Mattbrown69, Lmthoma,Hmehta0120, Trinirebel, Xyzbb1253, Kyiphyunyein, Mrm7171, Downunder medstu, Braceyourselfwinteriscoming, Zinoural, Psyc12,Mikalmadsen, CourtCelts1988, KierraA., Oplmnq3, Devika Singh, Clodaghinlondon, Ghlowman, Hkwike913, Atcepssp17, Ramshahstruggle, Nathanpuls, Charlotte135 and Anonymous: 260

10.2 Images• File:Ambox_PR.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b3/Ambox_PR.svg License: Public domain Contribu-tors: self-made in Adobe Illustrator and Inkscape Original artist: penubag

• File:Ambox_globe_content.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bd/Ambox_globe_content.svg License:Public domain Contributors: Own work, using File:Information icon3.svg and File:Earth clip art.svg Original artist: penubag

• File:Psi2.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6c/Psi2.svg License: Public domain Contributors: No machine-readable source provided. Own work assumed (based on copyright claims). Original artist: No machine-readable author provided.Gdh~commonswiki assumed (based on copyright claims).

• File:Symbol_template_class.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5c/Symbol_template_class.svg License: Publicdomain Contributors: ? Original artist: ?

• File:Unbalanced_scales.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fe/Unbalanced_scales.svg License: Public do-main Contributors: ? Original artist: ?

10.3 Content license• Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0