The nature of work and organizations is changing. Over three decades ago, Terreberry (1968) observed that future organizational environments would evolve to become increasingly turbulent and unpredictable. As we prepare to enter the next millennium, that future is upon us. The dynamics and uncertainty associated with the constellation of external forces that impact organizations create pressures for innovation, flexibility, and adaptability. Adaptability as an individual, team, and organizational capability is increasingly critical to effectiveness.The increasing rate of technological innovation, and the penetration of technology into all aspects of organizational operations, is changing the nature of work (Howell & Cooke, 1989). Work is increasingly complex, placing a high emphasis on cognitive skills and specialized expertise. It is increasingly mediated by computerized systems that link distributed experts together. From air travel, to medical diagnostics, emergency response, engineering design, and command and control, among many others, organizational functions that range from the mundane to esoteric are all dependent on teams of distributed experts operating via complex systems. Although teams are often co-located in time and space, the increasing connectivity of technology systems facilitates the creation of far-flung virtual teams that interact dynamically, but never actually meet face to face (Bell & Kozlowski, 1998).There are economic pressures for improved efficiency, cost-control, and effectiveness. Traditional training is typically conducted off-site. A substantial portion of training costs --upwards of 80% --is devoted to simply getting trainees to the site, maintaining them while there, and absorbing their lost productivity. Because off-site training is often decontextualized --that is, abstracted from the work setting --it also incurs potential problems of skill transfer that impede effectiveness.This convergence of forces --environmental, technological, and economic --is driving a reconceptualization of the nature of training systems. Training is shifting from an inefficient, time consuming, and expensive enterprise to one that can be delivered efficiently, as needed, and just-in-time. It is shifting from an off-site single episode to a systematic series of learning experiences that are integrated in the workplace and embedded in work technology. It is shifting from a primary emphasis on retention and reproduction to a broader emphasis that also includes the development of adaptive knowledge and skills (Kozlowski, 1998). Training will not be a separate activity, but a continuous activity that is an integral part of the workplace and its systems. This reconceptualization of training systems is highlighted by three key terms in our title which constitute the theoretical and application focus of this chapter:$ Integrate --to form, coordinate, or blend into a functioning or unified whole; $ Embed --to enclose closely; to make something an integral part of; $ Adapt --to make fit; implies a modificati...

No abstract

A procedure for developing alternate test forms that are parallel in the sense that scores on the different forms have similar means, standard deviations, and factor structures is described and applied to a bio‐data inventory and a situational judgment test. Careful consideration of item‐by‐item parallelism during development resulted in alternate forms that were parallel at the item level. Further, comparison with a biodata test form comprised of items randomly selected from a pool of biodata items revealed that for the types of measures described here it may be necessary to produce parallel forms of each item to create alternate forms that are parallel in the way in which Cronbach (1947) originally defined parallelism.

Research on mentoring outcomes and characteristics of various types of mentoring programs in different settings is limited. The present study sampled 39 graduate students at a small Midwestern university to evaluate peer mentoring in a graduate school setting. Mentoring function and outcome relationships as well as program characteristics were explored. As expected, mentoring functions were highly correlated with various outcomes. Results indicated psychosocial assistance, networking help, and relational outcomes were reported most among participants. Interestingly, pair compatibility and mentor preparation were not found to be essential program characteristics. Program recommendations and future research are discussed.

No abstract