Donald L. Grant
SIOP President 1974-1975
If, when I graduated from high school, I had been informed that I would become an
industrial-organizational psychologist, I would have asked "What is an
industrial-organizational psychologist?" It is true, moreover, that my decision to
become an industrial-organizational psychologist evolved over many years. While an
undergraduate at Princeton (1937-41) I had vague notions of becoming a lawyer.
Consequently, I majored in Public Affairs, an interdisciplinary program in what is now the
Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. I took a few psychology courses
and was favorably impressed with some, especially Social Psychology with the late Hadley
Cantril. For that matter, my prime academic interests focused on human problems. The
majority of my undergraduate courses were in such fields as history, economics, political
science, and psychology. To illustrate more specifically, my A.B. thesis dealt with the
relations between a carpet company and its union. The data gathering involved interviewing
many company and union officials plus the local newspaper editor. The files of the
latter's newspaper provided most of the "hard" data obtained.
While in college I had my first job experiences. These included clerking in men's
clothing stores during Christmas vacations and risking my neck climbing elm trees for the
U. S. Department of Agriculture at .50 per hour during summer vacations.
Extracurricularly, I devoted my major efforts to soliciting advertising for The Daily
World War II was in progress, though the U. S. was not yet involved when I graduated in
1941. With the draft staring me in the face it was no time to start law school!
was whether to volunteer for the armed services, or to postpone the fateful day and let
the draft catch up with me. The latter course prevailed. Following interviews with a few
prospective employers in the Spring of my senior year, I accepted an offer to become a
management trainee with Sharp & Dohme (now Merck Sharp & Dohme), which then had
its headquarters in Philadelphia.
Prior to joining Sharp & Dohme, however, I took advantage of a special course
offered jointly by the Wharton School of Business and the Engineering School of the
University of Pennsylvania. The objective of the course, which crammed what normally would
have been one year of academic training into three months, was that of preparing people to
be supervisors in the rapidly growing war industry. The program covered a variety of
subjects, e.g., cost accounting, time and motion study, drafting, supervisory principles,
and included periodic tours of local plants. I found the latter most interesting.
Following completion of the program I began my tour as a management trainee with Sharp
& Dohme. The training was a bore! It consisted primarily of listening to people
explain their job functions. Ironically, Pearl Harbor relieved me of the tedium. Expecting
me to leave for the military shortly, the Personnel Director assigned me to his
department, hoping, I presume, to gain some productive effort out of me before Uncle Sam
sent me his greetings. While in Personnel I made a preliminary study for a prospective job
evaluation plan. Then I was assigned to taking fingerprints of all employees in the
Philadelphia and Glenolden offices and plants. I held nearly 2000 hands!
With the draft a daily possibility I volunteered for both the Navy and the Army Air
Force, and was rejected by both. Taking the advice of an older brother, an Army captain, I
traveled to Fort Sill, Oklahoma and volunteered for the Field Artillery. I was accepted,
went through basic training, then to officer candidate school, emerging as a 2nd
lieutenant in November of 1942.
I was assigned to a new division, the 86th "Black Hawk" Division, located at
Camp Howse, Texas. Being short of experienced officers, I was appointed assistant training
and operations officer, normally a captain's position, of the 404th Field Artillery
Battalion. In three months I was made training and operations officer of the battalion,
succeeding a major, and subsequently promoted to lst lieutenant. Six months later I was
sent back to Fort Sill for advanced training. While there I was promoted to captain, thus
getting my first lesson in " opportunity" factors.
Returning to the 404th, relocated to Camp Livingston, Louisiana, I was assigned as
reconnaissance officer, my assignment finally catching up to my rank. I spent the
remainder of World War II in this capacity, doing a lot of travelling and seeing only a
few months of combat in Europe. Soon after VE Day I returned to the United States and was
sent with my division to the Philippines, where I remained till returned to the States and
released from active duty.
In addition to broadening my view of the world, the Army experience left me with
several memories which were to be pertinent to my later career. I gained my first
impressions of "leadership", both superior and mediocre. The systematic approach
to training, i.e., transforming raw recruits into an efficient field artillery battalion,
impressed me favorably. The term "red tape" also took on meaning.
Following my release from active duty I rejoined Sharp & Dohme and was assigned the
position of employment manager for the entire company. My responsibilities included
general employment, personally recruiting and screening candidates for managerial
positions, advising line managers on company personnel policies and dealing with union
representatives on matters involving grievances or potential ones. I gained my first
experience at using psychological tests for employment purposes, being guided by the late
Howard Maher. At the time Howard had a Master's degree in psychology from Temple
University, later a Ph.D. from Ohio State, and had worked for Atlantic Refining prior to
joining Sharp & Dohme. We became close friends. Howard stimulated my rapidly
developing interest in Industrial-Organizational Psychology - then, of course, Industrial
Psychology - and introduced me to Herman Copeland, Elliott Danzig and Carl Kujawski. With
his encouragement I enrolled in evening courses in psychology at Temple, where I was
introduced to such subjects as statistics, applied psychology, abnormal psychology and the
history of psychology.
Early in 1947 I was promoted to Chief Job Analyst with responsibility for wage
administration. This involved managing two job evaluation plans, one covering factory, the
other office workers. The combined experiences at Sharp & Dohme and Temple had several
consequences for me. I became convinced that I wanted to become an
industrial-organizational psychologist and that I should seek a full-time graduate
program. Consequently, following advice from Howard and others, I applied to the
Psychology Department at Ohio State, was accepted, resigned from Sharp & Dohme and
enrolled at OSU in the Fall of 1947.
Graduate work at Ohio State was one of the most rewarding experiences of my life. Not
only was it intellectually stimulating but also socially very pleasant. During my first
year I was graduate assistant to my major advisor, Harold Burtt, who aided me in many ways
during my years as a graduate student. In addition, I had the privilege and pleasure of
sharing an office with Donald Campbell, who had just received his Ph.D. from Berkley and
was in his first academic position. I thoroughly enjoyed getting to know Don and, also,
his wife and two sons. I became acquainted with a number of graduate students, including
Bernard Bass, John Barry, Ralph Canter, John Denton, Jack Parrish and the late James
Trump. I enjoyed my courses, especially courses in statistics with the late Herbert Toops.
Though I worked very hard at my studies, or so it seemed, I did find time during my first
summer at OSU to improve my golf game playing with Robert Good and other high
As research assistant to the late Herbert Toops during my second year I came to
appreciate his many fine talents, especially his ability to approach problems creatively.
It was during this year that I became good friends with the Perloffs, Evelyn and Robert,
and with Joel Campbell and had my first courses with Robert Wherry. I completed my
Master's thesis, which consisted of factorial analyses of the two job evaluation plans I
had managed for Sharp & Dohme. Subsequently, the thesis became my first professional
In my third and final year on the OSU campus I gained my first teaching experience by
instructing an undergraduate course. I also completed course requirements, preliminary
examinations and the language requirement. During this year I was graduate student
representative to the Psychology Department faculty. My acquaintance with future I-O
psychologists expanded through meeting Edwin Fleishman, Albert Glickman and Norman
Throughout my years at Ohio State I enjoyed my contacts with the faculty, both in and
out of class. I made many good friends with fellow graduate students, a few of whom I have
mentioned. While demanding, the academic work was enjoyable. Overall, I developed a strong
identification with psychology as a science and a profession.
During the Winter of 1950 I accepted an offer of employment from The Prudential
Insurance Company. In March of that year I became a Research Analyst in their Personnel
Research Division. Robert Selover was Director of the Division with Reign Bittner,to whom
I reported, as Associate Director. While with The Prudential I worked on a variety of
projects, involving selection, training, job evaluation, performance evaluation and
turnover. I worked closely with Bob and Reign and with Philip Kriedt, Robert Schaffer,
Mary Skula and many others on the personnel research staff. While there, also, I became
aware of the work of Rensis Likert and his associates at the University of Michigan.
Pioneering studies at The Prudential were among the first carried out by these early
"organizational behaviorists". The late Gilbert David was among this group. He
joined The Prudential organization for a few years, and I became acquainted with him
Having accepted a position with The Prudential sans dissertation, one of my early
objectives was to undertake an appropriate study and to complete the requirement. My first
proposal was that of developing a questionnaire that would permit describing jobs
objectively and, through the application of factor analysis to the data, provide a means
of classifying jobs. I saw this as a possible replacement for or supplement to the more
subjective methods of evaluating jobs. Despite my dream of thus upstaging Ernest
McCormick's Position Analysis Questionnaire, the project didn't materialize. I settled for
a less ambitious study, which involved analyzing a large amount of rating data to gain
insights into halo effect in rating processes. In carrying out my dissertation research I
was not only aided by my major adviser, Harold Burtt, but received much useful advice from
Robert Wherry, who at the time was working on developing a theory of rater bias. Following
completion of my dissertation, I received the Ph.D. degree in December, 1952.
Following what turned out to be my final assignment at The Prudential, i.e., assisting
in the establishment of a regional home office in Minneapolis, where I had the good
fortune to meet the late Donald Patterson, I left the company to try my hand at teaching.
I accepted an offer as Assistant Professor of Psychology at Western Reserve University,
now Case Western Reserve University. At Western Reserve I became reacquainted with Joel
Campbell and his family and established particularly close relationships with Calvin Hall,
Jay Otis, and the late Erwin Taylor. Jack Denton and family came to Cleveland during this
period, and we socialized frequently.
While at Western Reserve, where I was the only full-time faculty member in the
Industrial Psychology program at the time, I focused my efforts on teaching, supervising
dissertations and advising students. I had little time for research and/or consulting.
While there, I taught eleven courses or seminars, both at the undergraduate and graduate
levels. The subjects taught included not only several in industrial psychology but also
statistics, measurement, applied psychology and, one summer, a course in the history of
psychology. I was the major advisor on dissertations for Robert Gunn, Arthur Kellner and
Henry Brenner, the latter completing his work with Joel Campbell. There were a good many
outstanding graduate students majoring in Industrial Psychology at Western Reserve during
my relatively short stay. I became well acquainted with several who subsequentially have
had illustrious careers in the profession, including, along with my advisees, Richard
Barrett, Stanley Bolin, John Drake, William Flynn, Andrew Hilton, Theodore Kunin and
During my last year at Western Reserve I decided to seek a position offering more
opportunities for applied research. Therefore, while at Yale University being interviewed
for a possible position there, I was asked by the late Carl Hovland whether I would be
interested in being considered for a position with the American Telephone and Telegraph
Company. My agreement led to interviews and then a position in June, 1956 with the
recently-formed Personnel Research Section at AT&T.
Up to this time my experience had been largely that of an "apprentice"
industrial-organizational psychologist. I had joined the American Psychological
Association, published a few articles, participated in a number of research projects and
taught courses, but at AT&T I began to function as a full-fledged
My first assignment at AT&T was that of being a member of an assessment center
staff for the Management Progress Study. The Management Progress Study was initiated in
1956 with Douglas Bray as its director. The study subsequently has become well known and
is continuing under Bray's direction. The assessment center was set up as a means of
obtaining data on the personal characteristics of the managers in the study sample. I had
read about assessment centers, but had never participated in one. The first center was
located in St. Clair, Michigan. At the center I worked very closely with John Hemphill who
made many contributions to the methods used at the center, especially the group exercises
and the in-basket exercise. Doug Bray directed the staff of eight psychologists. I look
back on participating with this staff as one of my most stimulating learning experiences.
Subsequently, I contributed to the Management Progress Study by directing analyses of
data and preparing reports, several of which were published with Bray and others as
coauthors, including the book, Formative Years in Business: A Long-Term AT&T Study
of Managerial Lives. In addition, I participated on several assessment center staffs
and during the summer of 1975 directed a middle-management center for one of the Bell
System telephone companies.
Experience with assessment centers shaped my views considerably regarding ways of
measuring human behavior and also regarding the relative importance of various aspects of
human behavior. Limitations of paper-and pencil tests and questionnaires became apparent
to me. Furthermore, the importance of human functioning of interpersonal and other kinds
of skills, which can't be measured adequately by means of conventional measuring
instruments, impressed me. Though assessment centers have limitations, they make it
possible to evaluate aspects of human behavior which play a major role in the lives of all
Another of my major activities at AT&T was research on and with employee attitude
surveys. The principal study I directed was one made of the periodic survey of management
employees conducted by AT&T for the Bell System telephone companies. Both interviews
and a questionnaire were employed in carrying out the study. The results provided much
information about the impact of attitude surveys on large organizations. I believe that it
may be the only attitude survey of an attitude survey to have been conducted! Though the
findings bore on many aspects of conducting attitude surveys, the major finding of the
study was a clear indication of employee disappointment over the apparent absence of
actions taken to correct conditions revealed by the survey results. I also directed
studies, using interviews, of lesser scope which focused on specific problems.
In addition to such studies, I was closely involved with the methodology of attitude
surveys. Much of this effort was directed at improving the questionnaires then being used.
It also led to the publication with Ann Clarke of an article describing the use of
factorial methods in selecting questions for an attitude survey questionnaire.
Undoubtedly, however, psychological testing dominated my activities while with
AT&T. It included both research and administrative responsibilities. Initially, my
research focused on the testing of college graduates employed as management trainees for
the Bell System telephone companies. Subsequently, I directed test studies for both the
Engineering and Marketing departments of AT&T. In addition, I annually directed the
construction of a "contemporary affairs" test, which was used in the Management
Progress Study and operating assessment centers.
Looking back, however, the most crucial of my activities was involvement in the use of
psychological tests for the employment of personnel for nonmanagement jobs in the Bell
System telephone companies. This activity started in 1963 when AT&T and the telephone
companies accepted commitments under Plans for Progress for employing minorities for such
occupations as telephone operators, clerks, installation and maintenance personnel, and
Business Office service representatives. When asked to help, I recommended that the first
step be one of ascertaining the impact of test batteries then in use on the hiring of
minorities. As a consequence, much data was collected from the employment offices of
several telephone companies. Comparisons of test scores by ethnic group showed that
minority applicants, especially black males, were much less likely than were nonminority
applicants to meet employment test standards.
These findings led to recommendations for immediate revisions in the current test
batteries and for test validation studies designed to permit comparisons between
minorities and nonminorities with respect to both the predictive validities of tests and
their prospective use in telephone company employment offices. In essence, these
recommendation anticipated both the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the later decision of the
U.S. Supreme Court in Griggs v. Duke Power.
In addition to these recommendations and in light of the initial finding in Myart v.
Motorola, it was decided to evaluate the "cultural bias" of tests then being
used or recommended by AT&T for use by the telephone companies. I directed a study
which involved large samples of minority and nonminority job applicants. Average scores
for both samples on three tests were compared, i.e., the School and College Ability Test,
the Bennett Mechanical Aptitude Test and Cattell's "Culture Fair" Test. The
resulting comparisons showed that the differences in average scores between ethnic groups
for all three tests were nearly identical, i.e., approximately one standard deviation.
These findings indicated that the content of the test had little effect on group
Planning and conducting the proposed test validation studies spanned several years.
Several minor and four major studies were carried out under my immediate direction or
under my overall supervision. In this connection, I was fortunate in 1967 to have employed
Sidney Gael, who carried the burden for several of the studies. The criterion problem was,
of course, a major consideration. Following Doug Bray's advice, based on his experience as
a psychologist with the U.S. Army Air Force in World War II, we opted for work sample
criteria. These were constructed to directly measure proficiency in performing the
required work following a period of training, or for simple tasks following instructions.
Needless to say, constructing the work samples was time-consuming and expensive. The major
studies have been published in the Journal of Applied Psychology and have been
republished in a book by Mary and John Miner (Employee Selection Within the Law,
Washington, D.C.: The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., 1978).
In addition to research on psychological tests, I undertook reshaping test
administration policies and practices for the Bell System telephone companies. This became
a major responsibility which involved me in frequent contact with representatives of the
telephone companies and with test publishers. Furthermore, I directed a number of special
studies ancillary to the major studies - for example:
- A test validation study for selecting programmers.
- Development of new tests for Bell System use.
- Revisions of test norms.
- Comparisons of tests previously used with more recently introduced tests.
While the above conveys the scope of activities in which I was involved, it fails to
reflect the huge amount of time required for consulting on testing matters, holding
conferences, preparing reports and administering the mass of detail involved. Fortunately,
the support of sympathetic supervisors, including Doug Bray during many years, and
excellent cooperation from AT&T and Bell System telephone company personnel made it
possible to carry out what at times seemed to be more than a small staff could possibly
Involvement with employment testing invariably led to involvement in the legal aspects
of using tests. Included were:
- Conducting correspondence and holding meetings with representatives of federal agencies
(EEOC, OFCC) and of state and local human rights commissions regarding Bell System test
studies, policies, and procedures.
- Advising telephone company personnel on dealing with complaints concerning test
- Serving as an expert witness in a court case (Parham v. Southwestern Bell) and in
hearings before the Federal Communications Commission.
The FCC hearings, arising from charges by the EEOC regarding alleged discriminatory
practices by AT&T and the Bell System telephone companies, proved to be enormously
time-consuming. Testing was only a minor aspect of the total case. Nevertheless,
preparation of the case took an estimated year of my time. Without going into exhaustive
detail I shall simply enumerate the most salient activities:
- Working with attorneys having little or no knowledge of psychological testing.
- Working with "outside" expert witnesses for the Bell System -Brent Baxter and
- Preparing written testimony, approximately 400 pages, which had to be rewritten several
- Appearing at the hearings, both during cross-examination of EEOC witnesses (Phillip
Ash, William Ennels, Felix Lopez) and during cross-examination of the AT&T witnesses,
As history records, the hearings were settled with a consent decree which didn't
resolve all of the issues regarding the use of tests for employment and other purposes,
but did provide that each Bell Company may continue to utilize test scores on
validated tests along with other job-related considerations in assessing individual
qualifications. (Wallace, P.A. Equal Employment Opportunity and the AT&T Case.
Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press, 1976, p. 288)
Each Bell Company may continue to utilize test scores on validated tests
along with other job-related considerations in assessing individual
qualifications. However, no Bell Company shall rely upon the
minimum scores required or preferred on its preemployment aptitude test batteries as
justification for its failure to meet its intermediate targets for any job classification.
While research on psychological tests consumed a major portion of my time and energies
from 1960 through 1972 I did manage to participate in a number of other projects and
activities. The Management Progress Study and assessment center activities studies have
been mentioned. In addition, briefly,
- I directed evaluations of three management development programs.
- I directed several opinion questionnaire studies aimed at specific employee groups
(e.g., recent college graduate hires).
- I directed a survey of Bell System telephone company appraisal practices.
- I participated in a task force studying turnover of personnel responsible for the
installation and maintenance of telephone equipment.
- I supervised varying numbers of personnel, clerical and professional.
In 1972 AT&T reorganized its Personnel Relations Department and my responsibilities
were changed. I was given a choice of continuing research on and utilization of
psychological tests in the employment of nonmanagement personnel or of working on the
selection and development of managerial personnel. I chose the latter. In addition I
continued to work with Douglas Bray on the Management Progress Study, was assigned
responsibility for research on the selection of sales personnel, and was given
administrative responsibility for the data processing staff. Further more, my past did not
entirely escape me. Frequent inquiries came to me regarding studies involving
psychological tests and other matters involving tests for which I had been responsible.
With respect to management development, I provided overall supervision to a staff of
three people in developing and implementing a program aimed at the development of persons
employed for or promoted to managerial positions. The program was designed to train the
supervisors of new managers to provide their subordinates with challenging job
assignments, insure effective communications between the new manager and his or her
supervisor, evaluate the performance of the new manager in fulfilling work objectives, and
to appraise the potential of the new manager for advancing to higher level management
In connection with management employment, I proposed but did not obtain the necessary
financial support to develop and validate a comprehensive management selection program.
With regards to sales selection, I developed plans for and directed coordination of
studies to validate sales selection procedures, which included a general ability test, a
"sales interest" interview and assessment center exercises. For a variety of
reasons, data collection for these studies was delayed until a further reorganization of
AT&T in 1976 relieved me of responsibility for this project.
I will not discuss the 1976 reorganization because I had decided to retire from
AT&T at about the time the plans for reorganization, previously announced, were
implemented. Instead, I will briefly introduce psychologists at AT&T with whom I
worked and have mostly alighted, review my professional activities, and finally, take up
my current status.
It was my good fortune while at AT&T to be associated with many fine psychologists
as well as with a number of very able AT&T and Bell System telephone company
executives. I won't attempt to name the latter, of whom there were literally hundreds, but
would like to mention Robert Greenleaf. Bob organized and directed the Personnel Research
Section at AT&T. He provided the necessary influence and support during a period when
we psychologists, new to the organization, were referred to as "head-shrinkers."
Douglas Bray joined AT&T a few months prior to my employment. Throughout my twenty
years he was, and still is, a fine friend, colleague, and for many years my supervisor.
Incidentally, I helped Doug found the New York chapter of the Duke Ellington Jazz Society,
which continues to thrive.
Though omitting the names of many other professional colleagues who contributed to my
career at AT&T, I would like to recognize the following: H. Weston Clarke, Ann
Vermillion Clarke, H. Oliver Holt, John Hopkins, Richard Campbell, Joseph Moses, Loren
Appelbaum, Mary Tenopyr, Richard Peterson, Harry Shoemaker, Paul C. Ross, and Sheila
My professional activities commenced while still a graduate student at Ohio State. I
attended my first APA meeting in 1948 and joined the Psychometric Society during this
period. Several years later I resigned from the Psychometric Society when the mathematical
sophistication of the articles in Psychometrika exceeded my own. I became an
Associate of APA in 1951 and a Member in 1958. I joined Division 14 as soon as possible
after becoming an Associate of APA.
While with The Prudential Insurance Company I became a member of the New Jersey
Psychological Association and attended their meetings. My first responsible professional
role, however, came in 1953 when I chaired a Division 14 symposium at the APA meetings in
While at Western Reserve I joined and attended meetings of the Midwestern Psychological
Association and of the Ohio Psychological Association. I was particularly active, however,
in a local group, the Northeastern Ohio Personnel Research Association, which consisted
primarily of industrial-organizational psychologists in Cleveland, though included some
from Akron and other nearby cities.
My prime professional contribution while at Western Reserve was that of Validity
Information Exchange Editor for Personnel Psychology. During my tenure in this
capacity I reviewed over 400 validity studies, many submitted by the United States
Employment Service. Our publication policy, instigated by the journal's editor, the late
Erwin Taylor, was to publish all submitted reports. When I resigned the editorship in
1959, I proposed to Frederic Kuder, who had assumed the editorship of the journal, that
standards for VIE reports be established and that Paul F. Ross succeed me as VIE editor.
Paul accepted the appointment and established reasonable standards, which contributed to
the demise of the Exchange. During this period I also edited the Normative Data Exchange,
which was discontinued subsequently as being too costly. I remained on the editorial board
of the journal, continued to review manuscripts regularly and to write occasional book
Following employment by AT&T I became active in the Metropolitan New York
Association for Applied Psychology, an association founded during the 1930's. The
association became dominated by industrial-organizational psychologists and remains so
today. I also joined the Eastern Psychological Association.
Under a law passed in 1956 I was certified as a Psychologist in New York State in 1958.
Shortly thereafter I applied for examination by the American Board of Examiners in
Professional Psychology (now APPP), receiving the diploma as a specialist in Industrial
Psychology (now Industrial-Organizational) in 1959. I shall always remember being
administered the "field" portion of the examination by Robert Thorndike.
During the APA meetings in Cincinnati in 1959 I was invited to join an informal group
of industrial-organizational psychologists which took the name of CINCON. The initial
membership included Marvin Dunnette, William Mollenkopf, John Rapparlie, the late Joseph
Weitz, Robert Dugan, Phillip Ash, Wayne Kirchner, Jerome Kornreich and Edwin Fleishman. I
was very active in this compatible group for many years. The group continues its
semi-annual meetings, though the membership has changed considerably.
For a few years I was a member of the New York State Psychological Association. Being a
resident of New Jersey and working for a national organization limited my interest in the
state association. A sharp increase in dues stimulated my resignation.
Though not strictly a professional organization, much of my growth as an
industrial-organizational psychologist came from an active role in what initially was the
Executive Study and later the Executive Study Conference. The Executive Study was
initiated by Educational Testing Service as a mechanism for stimulating and coordinating
research on executive selection. AT&T was a charter member of the Executive Study,
which included a number of large business organizations. John Hemphill and Lewis Ward
represented ETS and took responsibility for planning and coordinating relevant studies.
I was asked to represent AT&T to the Executive Study, so attended semi-annual
meetings at which many topics of pertinence to the selection of executives were discussed.
Unfortunately, progress on research languished, though proved very costly to ETS.
Consequently, the Executive Study was abandoned. The meetings had been so rewarding,
however, that the representatives of several companies involved in the project put their
heads together and founded the Executive Study Conference, which ETS agreed to sponsor.
The Conference maintained the semi-annual meetings, which continue today. I was active in
the organization for many years. This involved chairing meetings, presenting papers at
meetings, and for two years (1965-67) chairing the Conference. The reports of these
meetings, incidentally, contain much material of considerable current as well as
historical interest. Though nonpsychologists represented some companies to the Conference,
it was dominated during the 1960's by such industrial-organizational psychologists as
Herbert Meyer, Wa1ter McNamara, Felix Lopez, Robert Dawson, George Yoxall, Henry Meyer,
William Mollenkopf, and Forrest Fryer.
Additional professional activities during the 1960's included membership on the program
committee for EPA, including chairman for one year. For Division 14 I served on the Public
Relations Connittee and was chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee on Coordinated College
Testing during Orlo Crissey's term as Division President. The report of this committee
appeared in the American Psychologist in 1963 (pp. 674-5). I attended APA
meetings regularly, participating in a number of symposia in various capacities, as
chairman, speaker, and discussant. For three years I served on the APA Insurance Trust,
which included Paul Thayer and Benjamin Shimberg, the latter being its chairman at the
Outside the "establishment" I appeared as a lecturer and workshop leader for
the American Management Association and the American Association for Industrial
Management. The topics for these sessions usually involved psychological testing or
assessment centers. In addition, I taught a graduate industrial-organization psychology
course at New York University and an introductory undergraduate course on the subject at
Though active professionally throughout the 1960's, the pace began to really accelerate
in 1968. During that year I was elected to the Board of Trustees of the American Board of
Professional Psychology (ABPP). For eight years I was to have the pleasure of serving with
the late Alfred Marrow, President of the Board, the late Edwin Henry and other
professional psychologists, including Noble Kelley, its Executive Officer since its
founding in 1947. Board duties were quite demanding and occupied much of my
"free" time. With appointment to the Board of the National Academy of
Professional Psychologists (NAPP) in 1972, at the request of Alfred Marrow who founded
NAPP, came additional responsibilities.
1969 brought me a major surprise. Despite my conviction that I didn't stand a prayer of
winning, I was elected Secretary-Treasurer and Representative to Council for Division 14.
With William Owens, Herbert Meyer and Douglas Bray as Presidents of the Division, serving
as SecretaryTreasurer was a pleasure. Furthermore, despite the relatively heavy work load,
the Secretary-Treasurer has considerable involvement in practically all Division
activities. Through this activity I became acquainted with many fine
industrial-organizational psychologists and was convinced that Division 14 is a dynamic
organization. Serving on APA Council was an educational experience, though at times
bewildering. This was my first experience with political processes, and I was not
impressed with the rationality of many of my professional, other than Division 14,
In 1971 I was honored by being elected a Fellow of Division 14 and of APA. Shortly,
thereafter, the American Association for the Advancement of Science conferred the same
honor on me.
In 1973 I was again honored, this time by being elected President-Elect of Division 14,
serving in that capacity with Edwin Fleishman as President. This year and continuing into
my term as Division President was a year of considerable political activity. Most of it
involved the efforts of the Equal Employment Opportunity Coordinating Council to produce
guidelines on employee selection which would be acceptable to all Federal Government
agencies. The Division, through its Professional Affairs and Executive committees, took a
very active role in seeking to guide the EEOCC toward professionally acceptable
guidelines, without much initial success. At the APA meetings in 1974 The Executive
Committee of the Division instructed me to establish an ad hoc committee that would draft
guidelines which, we hoped, would serve as a model to the EEOCC in its efforts.
As President of the Division (1974-75) I named Robert Guion and Mary Tenopyr as
co-chairpersons of a very large committee which proceeded to draft, using the APA Standards
as a model, a suitable document. Following four drafts the ad hoc committee was authorized
by the Executive Committee to publish the Principles for the Validation and Use of
Personnel Selection Procedures. Though my role in the production of this document was
limited, Bob and Mary having done the essential labor, I took great pride in the
publication of this document.
As President it was my responsibility to coordinate the activities of the standing
committees of the Division. This was a very pleasant task because of the interest in and
efforts by the committee chairpersons and their members to accomplish the objectives they
set for themselves or were asked to meet by the Executive Committee. The accomplishments
of the committees are too numerous to recount, though I should note that the Membership
Committee continued its vigorous drive to increase the membership of the Division.
During my term as President I joined the Association for the Advancement of Psychology
and the American Society for Personnel Administration. The latter membership was
instigated by the President of ASPA and came about during successful efforts by the two
societies, Division 14 and ASPA, to establish relations on matters of mutual interest. It
was also my pleasure during that year to serve on the planning committee for the Hawthorne
Studies Symposium "Man and Work in Society" which was jointly sponsored by the
Western Electric Company and the Harvard University School of Business Administration. The
symposium was created to celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of the beginning of the
Hawthorne studies. I had the pleasure of attending the symposium in November, 1976, at
which there were many fine presentations, a large proportion by Division 14 members. Paul
Patinka, incidentally, can be given much credit for the success of the conference.
As Past-President I chaired the Ad Hoc Committee on Legal Issues with Milton Blood and
Robert Heckman as members. We worked with a firm of Atlanta attorneys in preparing a
Division 14 amicus curiae brief which was submitted to the U.S. Supreme Court, along with
many other such briefs, in the case of Washington vs. Davis.
My service on the Division 14 Executive Committee impressed me greatly with the quality
of people serving the Division in various capacities and their dedication in so doing. I
can't begin to name all of the people who rendered valuable service during this period. I
was also most favorably impressed with the support given the Division by its members.
Shortly after completing my service on the Executive Committee, I was appointed to the
APA Task Force on Legal Action. The Task Force, which had three lawyer-psychologists among
its members, was charged with advising the APA Board of Directors regarding the provisions
it should make to cope with the multiplicity of legal problems involving psychology as a
science and a profession. The Board asked for guidance with respect to issues requiring
reaction by APA and those on which the Association should take a proactive stance. After
considering the many aspects of what might be done, the Task Force recommended that the
Board appoint a Commission on Legal Issues, reporting directly to the Board with authority
to continually review matters of legal import and recommend appropriate actions to the
Toward the end of 1976 my career changed rather abruptly. Looking back, I now realize
that the seeds for the change occurred in 1962. In June of that year I attended a meeting
of the Executive Study in Princeton. While there I made an appointment with Dr. Scarvia
Anderson of the ETS staff In order to discuss a new form of the School and College Ability
Test. AT&T had used "SCAT" for several years, and we were interested in
obtaining information on a higher-level form of the test recently developed by ETS. I had
been forewarned that Dr. Anderson was a lovely and charming young lady, which she is
today, but being a hardened bachelor, I was unconcerned. My interest was in SCAT. We had a
leisurely and delightful lunch on that day in June, 1962; and were married a year later.
We lived in Princeton till 1973. In that year Scarvia was asked to become director of a
new ETS regional office in Atlanta. She was appointed Vice-President, the first woman in
the history of ETS to achieve this distinction, and we moved to Atlanta in September. For
the next three years I spent my weekends in Atlanta and the days between, when not
travelling on AT&T business, in New York.
The ensuing life-style, which included "early-bird" flights on Monday
mornings, was not very satisfying. Consequently, with eligibility for retirement coming up
I searched for an appropriate position in the Atlanta area. The search led to my becoming
Professor of Psychology and Chairman of the Measurement and Human Differences Program at
the University of Georgia. AT&T rewarded my retirement with a truly fine luncheon, and
I assumed my new position in January, 1977. My "commute" was thus reduced from
eight hundred to sixty-five miles.
The Measurement and Human Differences Program had been established by William Owens in
the latter part of the 1960's, at a time when Joseph Hammock was Head of the Psychology
Department. My functions include administering the program, teaching, and research. My
objective is to build an industrial-organizational psychology curriculum at the University
Though the change from AT&T to academe was somewhat traumatic, I quickly resumed my
professional activities. I became licensed to practice psychology in Georgia and was
elected a Fellow of the Georgia Psychological Association. I published an article, which
Scarvia Anderson co-authored, on evaluation of training. With a prod from her, I edited an
issue of a new journal titled New Directions in Program Evaluation, of which she
is the general editor. I continued my interest in ABPP by chairing an examining committee.
I am continuing the editing of manuscripts for Personnel Psychology and,
occasionally, for the Journal of Applied Psychology. In addition, I am producing
occasional book reviews. I continue to serve on Division 14 committees, attend APA
meetings, and have joined the Academy of Management.
My consulting activities, some for fees and others gratis, have been varied and
stimulating. They include the Macon Branch of Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation,
the Marketing Department of AT&T, the City of Athens (Georgia), Souza Cruz (which
occasioned a trip to Rio de Janeiro), and Alverno College.
My functions at the University of Georgia also have been varied and stimulating. They
have included teaching graduate courses and seminars, advising on theses and
dissertations, serving on committees, and handling much administrative detail.
Associations with my faculty colleagues and graduate students have been most enjoyable.
If asked how I have contributed and expect to continue contributing to
industrial-organizational psychology, my answer would have to be "in multiple
ways." For that matter, most of my efforts have been shared with others. Thus it is
difficult for me to point to specific activities which have had or may have a lasting
impact. Despite many frustrations along the way, I have found my career as an
industrial-organizational psychologist challenging and enjoyable. If I were to identify a
possible lasting "monument," however, I would select the publications with
Douglas Bray and others emanating from the Management Progress Study. These publications
have been referenced frequently, and I believe will become "classics" in the
literature an management selection and development and on the evolution of assessment
center methodology. What the future will hold is, of course, obscure, but I have no
intention of rusticating. I hope and expect to continue making whatever contributions to
our profession that time and fate permit.
An analysis of a point rating job evaluation plan. Journal of Applied Psychology,
1951, 35, 236-240.
Validity Information Exchange Report No. 7-085. Personnel Psychology, 1954, 7,
Validity Information Exchange Report No. 7-086. Personnel Psychology. 1954, 7,
A factor analysis of managers' ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1955,
Studies in the reliability of the short-answer essay examination. Journal of
Educational Research, 1957, 51, 109-116.
Application of a factorial method in selecting questions for an employee attitude
survey (with A. V. Clarke). Personnel Psychology, 1961, 14, 131-139.
Situational tests in assessment of managers (with D. W. Bray). In Management Games
in Selection and Development, The Executive Study Conference, May 5 & 6, 1964.
Princeton, N. J., Educational Testing Service, 1964, 121-128.
The assessment center in the measurement of potential for business management (with D.
W. Bray). Psychological Monographs. 1966, 80, (17, Whole No. 625).
Influence of motivation on progress in management, retention and development. In Motivation
of Managers, The Executive Study Conference, Nov. 15 & 16, 1966. Princeton, N.
J., Educational Testing Service, 1967, 61-73.
Contributions of projective techniques to assessment of management potential (with W.
Katkovsky and D. W. Bray). Journal of Applied Psychology, 1967, 519 226-232.
Contributions of the interview to assessment of management potential (with D. W. Bray).
Journal of Applied Psychology, 1969, 53, 24-34.
Validation of employment tests for telephone company installation and repair
occupations (with D. W. Bray). Journal of Applied Psychology, 19709 54, 7-14.
Relevance of education to organizational requirements. In Proceedings of the
Western Regional Conference on Testing Problems. Berkeley, Calif., Educational
Testing Service, 1970, 14-21.
Validation of a general learning ability test for selecting telephone operators (with
S. Gael). Experimental Publication System, 1971, 10 Ms. No. 351-2.
Employment test validation for minority and nonminority telephone company service
representatives (with S. Gael). Journal of Applied Psychology, 1972, 56, 135-139.
Studying careers and assessing ability (with D. W. Bray and R. J. Campbell). In Marrow,
A. J. (Ed.), The Failure of Success. New York, American Management Association,
Formative Years in Business: A Long-Term AT&T Study of Managerial Lives (with
D. W. Bray and R. J. Campbell). New York, Wiley, 1974.
Utilizing the disadvantaged. Personnel Psychology, 1974, 27, 445-448.
Employment test validation for minority and nonminority telephone operators (with S.
Gael and R. J. Ritchie). Journal of Applied Psychology, 1975, 60, 411-419.
Employment test validation for minority and nonminority clerks with work sample
criteria (with S. Gael and R. J. Ritchie). Journal of Applied Psychology, 1975,
Issues in the evaluation of training (with S. B. Anderson). Professional Psychology,
1977, 8, 659-673.
Monitoring ongoing programs (Guest Ed.) New Directions for Program Evaluation.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1978 (No. 3).
Past Presidents TOC | SIOP Home