SIOP and the Federation: A Strategic Alliance

Our relationship with the Federation of Behavioral, Psychological, and Cognitive Sciences has become more valuable. Not only is SIOP a member of the Federation, one of SIOP’s members is now president-elect of the Federation. Yes, I agreed to run for the office, and amazingly, I was elected. Why would I do such thing?

Two of SIOP’s strategic objectives are visibility and advocacy. We strive to be the visible and trusted authority on work-related psychology, which means (a) lay, business, scientific, and government communities know and value I-O psychology; (b) policy makers, the public, and the media know and value I-O psychology; and (c) I-O is strongly connected to the broader field of psychology and related disciplines. We also strive to be the advocate and champion of I-O psychology to policy makers, which means (a) more federal funding for I-O research, (b) more influence on policy and legislation affecting human behavior at work, and (c) more influence with business leaders.

SIOP’s strategic objectives of visibility and advocacy are perfectly in synch with the mission of the Federation and its foundation, FABBS (Foundation for the Advancement of Behavioral and Brain Sciences). The Federation’s goals are to advocate for legislation and policy in the federal arena (Congress, White House, funding agencies) that (a) are important to its members; (b) enhance research and training on behavioral, psychological, psychobiological, and cognitive processes; and (c) promote the sound use of science in the creation of public policy. FABB’s goals are to increase the visibility of the contributions of the behavioral and cognitive sciences to the betterment of individuals and society through programming and educational events. Clearly, our alliance with the Federation and FABBS promotes two of our strategic goals—visibility and advocacy.

These are important, yet there is another dimension to the value of our alliance with the Federation and FABBS. Although SIOP, in general, is vital and growing, not all of our constituencies are. Many of our academics in psychology departments tell us they are concerned about their future and ours. They cite lack of respect for our field among their psychology colleagues as well as a minimal amount of federal agency grants for their research. They also note that business schools with their higher paying positions provide a very attractive alternative. I-O psychologists in psychology departments now constitute only about half of our academic members. Only about 20% of our members are in psychology department settings, and we are at risk of losing our presence in psychology departments. It is important for our field to have I-O psychologists housed in both business schools and psychology departments.

One of SIOP’s core values is science-driven results, which means we are dedicated to the scientific method and psychology as the foundation for the practice, education, and research of I-O psychology. Our heritage is psychology. Our name includes psychology. We need a substantial presence in psychology departments.

One measure of respect within psychology departments is funding from NSF, NIH, and other federal agencies. The Federation advocates on Capitol Hill to increase funding for the psychological, behavioral, and cognitive sciences. We are now a part of a community that is advocating for more funding and more recognition of the contributions of our science. An important benefit of SIOP’s involvement with the Federation is greater respect and alignment with academic psychologists around the country.

Here are some recent examples of Federation and FABBS activities:

Federation Executive Director Barbara Wanchisen participated in an all-day special meeting at NIH of the “Center for Scientific Review” (CSR), which was seeking feedback and input about (a) whether or not CSR appropriately evaluates the sciences and (b) important issues over the next 10 years. Dan Ilgen, a SIOP Federation Council Representative, provided Barb with several items important to I-O. Barb used that information during the day and, to their credit, CSR responded positively. For example, Barb pointed out that I-O is missing from their review panels. CSR’s Anita Sostek identified an area where I-O fits and during a break, the program officer, Kathy Salita, talked with Barb about setting up conversations with I-O folks.
Executive Director Wanchisen, met with the NSF Director of Social Behavioral Sciences and asked what they do for I-O. Barb learned that last year NSF was given responsibility for Innovation and Organizational Change, and it had been assigned to the Engineering Directorate, a placement that has not produced the desired result. It is now the responsibility of Jacqueline Meszaros, NSF’s program director for the Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences. This fall’s Leading eEdge Consortium, “Enabling Innovation in Organizations,” has potential for informing Dr. Meszaro and her colleagues of the importance of I-O research and practice to innovation and organizational change.
Executive Director Wanchisen and FABBS President-Elect Susan Fiske (professor of Psychology at Princeton) participated in a retreat in Arizona with high-level federal agency folks to envision the future of the behavioral sciences 10 years from now. Much of the meeting was confidential to allow the federal agency people freedom of speech, and many of the side conversations were especially confidential. Both Barb and Susan left the event concerned about future funding for the behavioral sciences. As a result Barb and Susan envision an event, a “roundtable” of very carefully selected, high-level federal folks (who are behavioral scientists) and researchers, to discuss “Break-Through Science” and “Big Science” that funding agencies cannot ignore.
The Federation responded to the NIH director of National Institute of General Medical Sciences Jeremy Berg’s request for input into their strategic planning process. John Campbell, a SIOP Federation Council Representative, provided Federation Executive Director Barbara Wanchisen with several ideas for I-O research that involve the process of diagnosis, healthcare delivery, and patient health decision making.
Dan Ilgen, SIOP Federation Council Representative, and Gilad Chen, SIOP Scientific Affairs Committee chair, have discussed ideas with Barb for a SIOP/Federation science forum. SIOP’s Executive Committee approved funding for such an event and new SIOP Scientific Affairs Committee Chair Steve Kozlowski will be working with his committee and SIOP members to identify a topic in the news about which I-O has made important contributions.
The FABBS book project (a companion book to introductory psychology text books) is about three-quarters done. The purpose of the book is to inform college students about the real-world contributions of the behavioral sciences. I-O members, Ben Schneider, John Campbell, and Paul Sackett have each contributed a chapter. Morton Ann Gernsbacher (APS president and professor of Psychology at University of Wisconsin-Madison), Dick Pew (principal scientist at BBN Technologies), Jim Pomerantz (professor of Psychology at Rice University), and I are the editors.
The Federation publishes an electronic newsletter. For access to this newsletter, see the link at http://www.siop.org/default_science.aspx.

Our alliance with the Federation and FABBS is propelling us forward!

More About the Federation

The Federation, an association of scientific societies with interests in research on problems of behavior, is a dues-supported coalition of member organizations, science divisions of APA, university departments of psychology, research centers, regional psychological associations, and schools of education. Some of the Federation’s 22 member societies include Cognitive Science Society, Society for Experimental Social Psychology, Society for Personality and Social Psychology, International Behavioral Neuroscience Society, Society for Mathematical Psychology, Society of Multivariate Experimental Psychology, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Psychonomic Society, Society for Psychophysiological Research, AERA, and APA. Some of the Federation’s 10 APA Division Affiliates include Division 3: Experimental Psychology; Division 5: Evaluation, Measurement and Statistics; Division 6: Behavioral Neuroscience and Comparative Psychology; Division 8: Society for Personality and Social Psychology; and Division 21: Division of Applied Experimental and Engineering Psychology. In addition there are 27 university affiliates.