Putting an End to Bad Talent Management: A Call to Action for the Field of Industrial and Organizational Psychology

Abstract

Organizations are undergoing unprecedented transformation in the area of talent management (TM). Companies are rapidly adopting new tools and approaches in a variety of what has traditionally been core areas of industrial and organizational (I-O) psychology such as performance management, employee attitudes, recruiting, testing and assessment, and career development. Increasingly, however, these new approaches have little to no research backing behind them, and they do not tend to be the focus of I-O psychology theory and research. We call this trend anti-industrial and organizational psychology (AIO), as we believe these forces to do not advance the field for long-term strategic impact. We present a framework that describes how AIO practices are adopted by organizations, and how I-O psychologists often gravitate away from these practices rather than actively help to separate the wheat from the chaff. We found support for our hypothesis through a brief analysis of Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, the peer-reviewed journal of the Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP). In this analysis, we found that only 10% of the focal articles from 2008 to 2016 represented topics that we call frontier—emerging areas in organizations but where there is no research support for them. We propose a set of recommendations for the field of I-O psychology and call for a more strategic approach to identifying and vetting new TM trends in order to increase the relevancy and impact of I-O psychology for our key stakeholders.

I-O Psychologists Can Help Make Sure Your HiPos Aren't NoPos

“…The basic premise behind our efforts is that there is an important and largely ignored distinction between a person having potential and a person being designated as a HiPo. In line with what Rotolo et al (2018) describe, those responsible for the HiPo designation process in organizations often ignore our long I-O psychology history, in particular the importance of valid assessment tools and methods to identify those who actually have potential.…”

“…Organizations that are willing to work in partnership with outside I-O psychology researchers in the spirit of action research to design, test, and evaluate different methods of HiPo designation could go a long way to contribute to strong science that is actionable and can stand up against the AIO forces. Rotolo et al (2018) speculated that readers may be critical of the generality of their suggestions for changing what is broken with talent management and go on to suggest a Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) taskforce so that we can use our own talents systematically to fix this practice. This may be a worthwhile pursuit at a macro level and may be one valuable path toward systematic change.…”

A Systems View of the Scientist–Practitioner Gap

“…In addition to differing incentive systems, the scientist-practitioner gap is exacerbated by two characteristics of academia that we believe Rotolo et al (2018) underemphasize: (a) an overreliance on theory and theoretical contribution and (b) a mismatch between publication timelines and organizational interests. These factors often prevent scientists from doing the research on emerging and frontier topics that Rotolo et al espouse.…”

“…Allowing rigorous but atheoretical research into our established literature may allow a more rapid response to the needs of practitioners and provide the basis for the development of future theory. Rotolo et al (2018) lament a difference in the speed of science and practice. Namely, academia progresses at a much slower rate than practice demands, and we echo this concern.…”

“…These changes are not easy, but we agree with Rotolo and colleagues that if any field can address such foundational problems, it is ours. Rotolo et al (2018) characterize organizational psychologists as "scientistpractitioners." This popular term represents a specific location on a research-practice continuum at which attention to research and application are carefully balanced.…”