1 / 63

PSY 6450 Psychology of Work

PSY 6450 Psychology of Work. PSY 6450 Unit 1. Some facts and a little history of I/O Differences between I/O psychology and OBM Bucklin et al. (2000) Written essential material into SOs History of OBM Dickinson (2000) 20th anniversary issue of JOBM Article by Quilitch. schizophrenic.

xiujuan
Download Presentation

PSY 6450 Psychology of Work

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. PSY 6450 Psychology of Work

  2. PSY 6450 Unit 1 • Some facts and a little history of I/O • Differences between I/O psychology and OBM • Bucklin et al. (2000) • Written essential material into SOs • History of OBM • Dickinson (2000) • 20th anniversary issue of JOBM • Article by Quilitch schizophrenic

  3. Four basic areas of I/O psychology (NFE) • Personnel Selection and Placement • Main area of emphasis for I/O • Not emphasized in OBM • Training and Instructional Design • Largest area of employment for MAs • Performance Management • Focus of this course • Systems Analysis - Organizational Development (not counseling or clinical. EAP programs - counseling/clinical/social work degrees)

  4. SO1: Primary professional organization for I/O psychology Facts about I/O psychology Society for Industrial/Organizational Psychology Web site: www.siop.org • SO2: Percentage of PhD psychologists who are I/O psychologists 4%

  5. SO4: Where do I/O psychologists work? • 4A: Ph.D.s (learn top two for exam) • Universities 39% • Consulting firms 35% • Industry 20% • Government 6% • 4B: MAs (learn top two for exam) • Industry 67% • Consulting firms 14% • Government 11% • Universities 8% note difference PhD industry vs. universities and consulting/note difference MAs: CLG

  6. SO5: $$ Salaries - SIOP Survey 2006 (NFE) $ PhD median starting same for applied & profs $ Profs significantly lower than applied $ PhD female median income is 15% lower than males - no change in % since 1982! (about 50% of students are now female, 14% when I got my I/O degree 1977)l

  7. SO7: Licensing (NFE) • Very different than clinical • Varies from state to state • Some require it, most don’t (contrary to what Muchinsky said) • Some states preclude it - i.e., MI • Educational and experiential requirements focus on clinical/counseling courses and internships

  8. SO8: SIOP opposes licensing - why? • SIOP maintains that I/O psychologists • Should be able to be licensed • But should not be required to be licensed • Main reason why (SO8) • I/O psychologists do not deal with vulnerable populations and are not health care providers, licensing is not needed. • Licensing differs from certification - Board Certified Behavior Analyst or BCABA (click no, licensing originally to protect public - vulnerable populations, health care areas)

  9. First area of application in I/O • SO10A: The oldest area of application and the one that still dominates today is Personnel Selection & Placement. • Main difference between I/O programs and OBM programs. • SO10B: Personnel Selection got started by selection and placement of military personnel in WWI & WWII • Clinical tests, typically intelligence and personality tests, and used them to test recruits (emphasis influences other aspects of training - statistical methods used to determine reliability and validity of tests - job relatedness)

  10. Personnel Selection, cont. (NFE) • I/O expanded greatly when Congress passed Title VII Civil Rights Act, 1964 • Banned unfair discrimination against minorities and females • I/O has a “lock” on personnel selection as a profession Other EEO Laws: • Age Discrimination • Vietnam/Disabled • Veterans • Americans with • DisabilitiesAct (quite a bit of overlap between I/O and OBM and other areas: mgt, human resources, industrial Engineer - selection remains I/O. don’t deal with laws and issues here, personnel selection)

  11. SO11: Main journal for I/O psychology • I/O main journal: Journal of Applied Psychology • Other top journals (NFE) • Personnel Journal • Academy of Management Journal • Academy of Management Review • Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes • Administrative Science Quarterly • Journal of Management • Journal of Organizational Behavior • Organizational Research Methods • Journal of Vocational Behavior (very little cross-fertilization OBM/IO, JOBM missing from top ten journals - recognized; rankings in IO)

  12. SO12: Greatest episode in formation I/O • The greatest single episode in the formation of I/O according to many: Hawthorne Studies • Heretofore restricted to selection • Expanded to: • Satisfaction • Group morale and group norms • Importance of a “sympathetic, understanding supervisor”

  13. Some Major Differences Between I/O and OBM Bucklin et al., 2000 (only highlight some important differences - embedded those in sos)

  14. Purpose of study To identify similarities and differences with respect to topics and research methods used in OBM and traditional I/O psychology

  15. Method • JAP • Authors reviewed every article in JAP between 1987 & 1997 (N = 997) • Classifications were primarily derived from Nolan et al. (1999) who previously analyzed articles in JOBM for the same years (N=119) • JOBM • JAP classification results were compared to JOBM data collected by Nolan et al. (1999)

  16. SO14: No unifying theory in I/O (NFE) • I/O Psychology • No unifying theory historically • No unifying theory today • 7 main motivational theories: Muchinsky • 6 main leadership theories: Muchinsky • Motivational theories and Leadership theories (already 13 different theories) • Leads to research and articles about who is right

  17. SO14: Unifying theory of OBM (NFE) • OBM (emerged in the early 1960s) • Unifying theory of behavior analysis • Emerged from other areas within behavior analysis - programmed instruction (Brethower) - clinical psychology (Daniels, Gilbert) - experimental (Anderson, Brown) - general applied (Hopkins) - education (Sulzer-Azaroff) • Behavior analysis is unique - apply the same principles across all specializations (not only for topics within OBM)

  18. Selection & Placement Statistical Analysis Procedures Performance Appraisal Productivity & Quality Customer Satisfaction Training and Development SO16: Topics in JAP & JOBM 16A: Rank order top 3 in JAP JAP JOBM

  19. SO16B: Of top 12 topics, commonalities Only three!! • Productivity & Quality • Training & Development • Health & Safety

  20. Differences (NFE) • Ranking : (most OBM articles dealth with productivity & quality issues, 5-10 measures; more breadth I/O)

  21. SO17: Primary research strategy • Percentage of research articles that were experimental vs correlational (NFE) JOBM JAP Experimental 95% 40% Correlational 5% 60% • Primary research strategy (for exam) • JOBM: Experimental • JAP: Correlational • What is the problem with correlational research?

  22. SO18: Field vs. Laboratory Exp. (NFE) (NFE, but using this to make a point later, % reversed)

  23. SO19: Research studies: Applied vs. theoretical What percentage of research studies in JOBM and JAP were designed to solve an organizational problem vs to answer a theoretical question? • Applied Conducted to solve an organizational problem • Theoretical Conducted to examine a theoretical, conceptual or “bridge” question (included some field studies)

  24. Results: Applied vs. Theoretical

  25. SO 20: OBM vs. I/O (NFE) • The percentage of experimental studies conducted in the field was much higher in JOBM JOBM = 80% JAP = 20% • The percentage of applied experimental studies was much higher in JOBM JOBM = 45% JAP = 6% • OBM is more applied and the gap between research and practice appears to be larger in I/O than in OBM

  26. SO20: Why is I/O less applied? (for exam) • Multiple theories • Testing hypotheses in the theory • Comparing one theory against another - who is right? • Experimental design issues • Rigorous experimental methodologists who adhere only to between group designs, rejecting single-subject designs as legitimate designs (Hard for our students to get I/O faculty positions;Nicki’s feedback from CMU; small N research would not permit publication in I/O journals, which would not help them increase their status among I/O programs)

  27. SO21: Why do BG designs restrict applied research? (NFE) • Between group designs • Usually not feasible in applied settings because they require random assignment of participants to groups • In organizations, in-tact groups • Do lab studies where Ps can be randomly assigned • Within subject designs • Do not require random assignment • I/O psychologists have yet to view small N within subject designs as “legitimate” experimental designs

  28. SO 22: Independent variables in studies • 22A Bucklin et al. identified the top 9 IVs that were examined. Of those how many were the same for JOBM & JAP? • 22B Describe the major differences between the IVs that were examined

  29. Antecedents/ 71% Information 2. Training 15% 3. Goals 10% 4. Feedback 8% 5. Monetaryconsequences 5% 6. Non-monetaryconsequences 1% 7. Praise .3% Feedback 75% Training 63% Monetary 33%consequences Antecedents/ 32%Information Non-monetary 28%consequences Goals 25% Praise 18% Punishment 5% System design 2% Independent Variables JAP (N=308) JOBM (N=60) (top 7 were the same, but proportion very different. JAP antecedents/JOBM consq, pack; Combined goals, feedback, consq.; not surprising I am covering the topics I am in this class)

  30. Dependent Variables (NFE) • JAP • Self-report measures were used in 50% of experimental studies and 76% of correlational studies; • Behaviors in only 5% of studies • JOBM • Products of behaviors (accomplishments) were used in 78% of experimental studies • Behaviors in 43%

  31. SO23: JOBM weakness, social validity • Social validity (NFE) • JAP researchers assessed social validity to a much greater degree than JOBM researchers JAP = 51% JOBM = 27% • Interesting given that a much larger proportion of JOBM experimental studies were conducted in applied settings (45% vs. 5%) • JOBM researchers appear to be ignoring social validity, probably due to our discomfort with self-report measures.

  32. SO23, cont: Social validity (NFE) • Three aspects of social validity • Goals: are the goals of the intervention important and socially significant? • Procedures/interventions: do managers and employees consider the interventions acceptable (i.e., are they satisfied with the interventions) • Effects/results of study: are managers and employees satisfied with the results of the study - all of the results, even perhaps unintended ones?

  33. SO23, cont. Why is social validity important? (for exam) • It tells us whether our consumers are satisfied with both the intervention and results and if they are, they are more likely to continue PM. • It could increase the acceptance of PM in business and industry • It could mitigate complaints that our technology is manipulative and coercive

  34. History of OBM in the Private Sector1950s - 1980s Dickinson, 2000

  35. SO24: When did OBM become visible? OBM started in the mid to late 1960s

  36. AubreyDaniels Thomas Gilbert Edward Feeney Beth Sulzer-Azaroff Thomas Mawhinney Dale Brethower William Redmon Alyce Dickinson Paul Brown Geary Rummler 11. Chevron Chemical Corp (CLG) 12. Terry McSween 13. Jon Bailey 14. Maria Malott 15. D. Chris Anderson William Abernathy Scott Geller John Austin Dwight Harshbarger Table 1: Lifetime Achievement or Outstanding Contributions Awards (NFE) (red: wmu connection, 7 of 19; No other institution has come close: FSU, 2: Notre Dame, 2)

  37. OBM Precursors: 1950s • SO25: Who is responsible for programmed instruction? • Skinner • The science of learning and the art of teaching, 1954 • Teaching machines, 1958 • Holland & Skinner, Analysis of Behavior, 1961 • SO26: First organized application of behavioral principles in business & industry • Programmed instruction (more on this later)

  38. SO27: OBM precursors, cont. (NFE) • Applications in other areas in behavior analysis began before OBM • Authors who published the first applied article in the field • Ayllon & Michael: The psychiatric nurse as a behavioral engineer, JEAB, 1959 • Who is the father and thus grandfather of OBM? (according to Hopkins) • Jack Michael • Family tree: Bailey (Wolf) -- Austin, Carr, Wilder • and Iwata, for those of you who work in human services • Bailey retired; graduating 100 Ph.D. students

  39. Michael and Ayllon (2007)

  40. Jack Michael and friends The family tree: Wilder, Carr, Bailey, Michael

  41. The 1960s: OBM gets started • Articles & books - fewer than 10 during the whole decade (NFE) • SO28: First professional organization • National Society for Programmed Instruction: 1962, 12 years before ABA • Now, International Society for Performance Improvement (applied vs academic) • Dale Brethower, Geary Rummler, Don Tosti, Susan Meyer Markle, Tom Gilbert • www.ispi.org (great resource for jobs)

  42. University of Michigan workshops (NFE) • U of M workshops, 1961-1969 • Center of Programmed Instruction • Brethower, Rummler, Gilbert, (& Malott) hooked up (B&R actually published first applied OBM article in Personnel in 1966) • There, programmed instruction led to performance-based instruction, which led to behavioral systems analysis • Brethower, Center for PI • Rummler, College of Business

  43. SO29: Brethower’s accomplishments • Three main accomplishments • Programmed instruction • Performance-based instruction • Behavioral systems analysis • Other interesting things to know • Published first behavioral systems book in 1972. The book was published by a publishing firm called “Behaviordelia” - run by Dr. Dick Malott. • Was my advisor here at WMU!

  44. SO30: How did PI lead to PBI then BSA? • Programmed Instruction • Very skilled at getting people to learn what they taught, but often the training did not transfer to the job • Performance-based instruction • Did training actually transfer to job? • Led to performance management - it wasn’t the training that was the problem, but the management system • Behavioral Systems Analysis (the BIG picture) • PBI and PM got transfer to the job, but… • Was the performance contributing to the mission/goals of the organization?

  45. PM vs BSA conflict (NFE) • Sales vs manufacturing: classic problem Implement a sales incentive program so your sales representatives sell a lot of cars, but manufacturing can’t keep up. That creates a long delay for the consumer who then buys a car from someone else. Your PM program for sales has worked, but to the detriment of the entire organization.

  46. SO32: Gilbert’s book and date • Human Competence, 1978 • Introduced the concept of “worthy performance” and focusing on accomplishments vs. behavior - very controversial in the field. • Behavior Engineering Model was one of the first comprehensive performance diagnostic tools for the field. • Austin’s PDC and Binder’s six boxes based on this model: Austin’s PDC, next unit • PIP: potential for improving performance • Exemplar performance minus average performance = PIP. • Many consultants use some variant of this today. (define accomplishments)

  47. Tom Gilbert Og Lindsley Rich O’Brien Tom Gilbert

  48. SO33: Aubrey Daniels • Formed Behavior Systems, Inc., 1971 • With Larry Miller & Fran Tarkenton • First editor of JOBM, 1977 • Practitioner journal, BSI • Published one of the first books in OBM (written for supervisors) • Performance Management, now in its 4th edition (can’t be in the field, Minnesota Vikings, “got divorced,” ADI founded in 1978)

  49. Aubrey Daniels

  50. SO34: Where did the name of our field come from? • JOBM, 1977 (note date, SO36) • Aubrey Daniels • Problem with name • Not distinctive within business - OB vs. OBM • Business people don’t understand it • Their kids behave (misbehave); their workers perform • Performance Management - still a problem

More Related