A Snapshot in Time: Industrial–Organizational Psychology Today

Abstract

I" VERSUS "O" TENSION 3 PSYCHOLOGY VERSUS BUSINESS TENSION 4 SCIENCE VERSUS PRACTICE TENSION 5 CONCLUSION 12 REFERENCES 12As we write this chapter, the field of industrialorganizational psychology in the United States has survived its third attempt at a name change. To provide a little perspective, the moniker industrial psychology became popular after World War I, and described a field that was characterized by ability testing and vocational assessment (Koppes, 2003). The current label, industrialorganizational (I-O) psychology, was made official in 1973. The addition of organizational reflected the growing influence of social psychologists and organizational development consultants, as well as the intellectual and social milieu of the period (see Highhouse, 2007). The change to I-O psychology was more of a compromise than a solution-which may have succeeded only to the extent that everyone was equally dissatisfied. The first attempt to change this clunky label, therefore, occurred in 1976. Popular alternatives at the time were personnel psychology, business psychology, and psychology of work . The leading contender, however, was organizational psychology because, according to then-future APA Division 14 president Arthur MacKinney, "all of the Division's work is grounded in organizational contexts" (MacKinney 1976, p. 2). The issue stalled before ever making it Author Note: We are very grateful to the following people who took the time to provide their thoughtful contributions to this chapter:

Systematic Subjectivity: How Subtle Biases Infect the Scholarship Review Process

“…It is clear that the lack of such publications is not because of a lack of interest. For perspective, a topical examination of presentations at the 2011 Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology annual conference (Highhouse & Schmitt, 2012) revealed that diversity was third (tied with personality) behind only testing/assessment and leadership. Likewise, a similar examination of organizational behavior-related submissions to the Academy of Management Journal (AMJ) from 2007 to 2009 (Morrison, 2010) revealed that diversity was third behind only leadership and teams, suggesting any underrepresentation in top journals is probably not simply a "pipeline" issue.…”

Promoting productive collaborations to advance the psychology of work.

“…These issues will likely never get addressed if I/o psychologists address concerns only directly relevant to organizations. A similar more extended discussion of this concern is available in Highhouse and Schmitt (2012). The next section of this chapter details some of these issues.…”

Desafiando la formación de psicólogos organizacionales desde una perspectiva de aprendizajes situados en el ámbito micro-empresarial peruano

“…Esta alineación de la formación en psicología al campo administrativo tradicional, conlleva una dicultad para interpelar a los profesionales de la psicología organizacional a buscar un equilibrio para atender los intereses productivos de la organización, sin olvidar que las personas que la componen también tienen necesidades de bienestar y no son meros recursos humanos (Highhouse & Schmitt, 2013). La interpelación a fomentar prácticas organizacionales más humanas y críticas exige que la formación universitaria en psicología organizacional brinde una visión de carácter crítico y socialmente responsable, para que los psicólogos integren dos roles o escenarios, aparentemente separados, que suelen confrontar la integridad de su ejercicio profesional: por un lado, el rol cientíco enfocado en el desarrollo de teorías que básicamente se queda en los alcances del ámbito académico; por otro lado, se reconoce el rol profesional práctico, dedicado a la solución de problemas de la vida real organizacional que, en muchos casos, opera desde el sentido común (Carvajal, Ulloa, & Morales, 2007;Pulido-Martínez, 2004;Pulido-Martinez & Jaraba, 2017).…”