Gedrag & Organisatie - Volume 25, Issue 3, 2012

Summary

This editorial offers an introduction to the current issue.

A critical review of research and publication trends in the field of Industrial and Organizational psychology

The aim of this article consists of critically reviewing research and publication trends in the field of industrial and organizational psychology. The focus is on four trends: (1) the extreme importance of theory, (2) the loss of the identity of industrial and organizational psychology, (3) the cumbersome nature of the review process, and (4) the deficient reporting of methodology and results in light of replication research. After each trend recommendations are made to turn the situation around. We also hope that this article might generate the necessary discussion about these four trends.

A plea for the utilization of organizational psychology

This article is a plea for the utilization of organizational psychology. Knowledge utilization is the process of creating value from knowledge, by making knowledge suitable and/or available for economic and/or societal use, and translating knowledge into competitive products, services, processes and new businesses. We describe two forms of knowledge utilization – knowledge dissemination and knowledge use – and illustrate how organizational psychologists working at universities are already engaged in spreading their academic knowledge and collaborating with practitioners, as to put organizational psychological knowledge into practice. However, utilization could be improved, by making deals that benefit both practice and academia (so-called integrative or ‘win-win’ deals). Knowledge utilization is not only a means to tap new funding sources in economically tough times, but also an ideal way to contribute to society and (people in) organizations.

What are our objectives as Work and Organizational psychologists?

In the nineteen seventies Work and Organizational psychologists fiercely debated issues, like who should benefit from research: employers or employees. It is evident that these groups have often conflicting interests. W&O psychologists were requested to make explicit what their position was and what objectives their research had, and indicate who would benefit. This debate seems to have disappeared. Academics seem to be mostly preoccupied with getting yet another paper published. As a consequence the discipline seems to have lost some of its societal relevance. In order to survive as a discipline, Work and Organizational psychologists should again focus on the societal relevance of their work, and take a position. Current developments in the field of work and organization indicate that work has become more complex and difficult. So, there is work to do for Work and Organizational psychologists. We should help to increase participation in the labor market of various groups and be concerned again with the well-being of employees.

The turning academic tide: Chances for personnel selection research

The psychology of personnel selection is one of the oldest and most important applied domains within psychology. After a period of little academic interest in the Netherlands for this domain, the present age offers new chances for selection research. The Dutch governmental research organization NWO requests submitted research proposals to deliver results which are societally useful. Selection research without any doubt fulfills this requirement. Results from 82 meta-analyses of psychological research (Mitchell, 2012) demonstrate the significance of research valorization as well: the tenability in practice of psychological lab research was best for work and organizational psychology, specifically in the area of selection, training, personnel management and organizational behavior. Selection research needs to make use of the favorable impression it makes by conducting more and innovative research, such as studying technologically advanced selection methods and the usefulness of social media for selection. Such research will promote an evidence-based selection practice.

The importance of context in research on organizational behavior

This article emphasizes the need to pay more attention to the context in field studies of organizational behavior. The context refers to factors external to the individual, which include organizational characteristics and societal and cultural factors. The context may offer additional explanations for research findings and may improve insights in underlying processes. In addition, a focus on contextual factors in a study may increase the fit between research and practice. This article describes the potential effects of contextual factors and offers possible reasons for the lack of attention to context in many studies. Finally, several recommendations are presented in order to bring contextual factors back into the study of behavior in organizations.

The comeback of the interview in organizational behavior research

Organizational behavior, as a theory-developing field of research, is highly questionnaire-based and highly dependent on quantitative methods. In its dominant methodology tradition, variables are measured in a sample of respondents or other units of observation and the calculated relationships between the variables subsequently serve as the input for theory building or theory testing. This state of affairs generates restrictions regarding the domain of phenomena that can be studied. A plea is made for using of the interview as a tool for collecting data that permit theory building like questionnaire data, yet without the restrictions of these data. Quality requirements that apply to interviews used for theory building are very different from the ones that apply to questionnaires. Rather than relating to the validity and reliability of the measures, they relate to the valid elicitation of relevant facts. In short: it is a matter of fact-finding.

Models in the psychology of work and health: Objectivity and realism through qualitative methods?

This article focuses on the extent to which three influential psychosocial work stress models are related to organizational reality. In addition, the question is answered to what extent these models provide insight into the interplay of personal and situational determinants of well-being, health and work-related performance. The models are found to differ in their connection with reality, by means of the presence or absence of ‘qualitative’ methods (De Groot, 1961). Both research and practice are supposed to benefit from the combination of the unique positive points in the respective models, like the distinction of subjective and objective aspects in the Michigan Person-Environment Fit model and the interplay of demands, resources, engagement, burnout and performance as proposed in the Job Demands-Resources model. Furthermore, it is recommended to combine quantitative and qualitative methods in short ‘empirical cycles’ and to employ insights and techniques from neighbouring disciplines, especially with regard to the acquisition and measurement of job-related knowledge.

Who and what determines the definition of groups? A relevant issue in the psychology of personnel selection

In this article we start a discussion on the following issue. If knowledge and insights regarding personnel selection issues are not applicable to all people equally, but apply to certain (sub) groups, who and what determines the definition of groups? Is this mainly a research-driven issue or is the answer to this question also (partly) determined by personnel selection practitioners? We discuss the usefulness of grouping, and describe two examples: one in which research suggests the importance of group differences, and a second example in which the differences between groups are thought to be of importance according to employers and practitioners. We observe that there are different approaches available in dealing with the generalization issue. Obviously, the question who determines to which group a person belongs deserves more attention from both theory and practice in personnel selection.

Where is the organization in Organizational Behavior?

This article discusses why it is of increasing importance for researchers to pay attention to the organization as context factor. It is described what context is, how the context can influence results, and how attention can be paid to the influence of the organization context.

Gedrag & Organisatie: Professionalization of Work and Organizational psychology

A short history is presented of the journal Gedrag & Organisatie. Moreover, it is described how the journal and its editors may contribute to the professionalization of work and organizational psychology in the Netherlands and in Belgium. The proposed professionalization is partly based on the objectives of the European Federation of Psychologists’ Associations (EFPA).

Social and I&O psychologists working at business schools: A sin or sane?

Over the last years, more and more social and industrial and organizational psychologists in The Netherlands started to work at business schools. This article describes the causes of this trend. Moreover, it outlines the differences in research between social psychology, I&O psychology and organizational behavior (at the business schools). The paper concludes with two possible scenarios for the future. In a pessimistic scenario, driven by budget cuts and to some extent based on current trends in the United States, one of the three disciplines disappears. In a more optimistic scenario, the borders between the three fields fade away. In this scenario, interdisciplinarity is a key issue. This last scenario calls for a clear positioning of the three disciplines, and also for strong cooperation between them.

Reflections on current developments in Work and Organizational psychology

In this article, I address the reflections and concerns about current developments in Work and Organizational (W&O) psychology as raised by the other authors in this special issue of Gedrag & Organisatie. W&O psychology is productive and performs well in both lab and field research. However, she struggles with her identity and place in the academic landscape. W&O psychology focuses on the functioning of individuals in the context of organizations and is strong in her multi-method and multi-level approach. Her research questions are both fundamental and relevant for society. By introducing new international publication rules, research findings could become more available and attractive for professionals. This will open doors for high quality research in organizations.