What is I-O?

The e-Business Devolution

No, this one is not a song titlethough I considered You say you want a devolution. Rather, it is my way of saying that though I feel strongly that e-business and e-commerce are clearly going to stay with us as alternative means of purchasing goods over the Internet (and perhaps the sooner-to-be marketed PDA Finger-Pilot models), I never was nor am I still convinced that e-business is the be-all-end-all that many people have claimed it is (Church, 2000).

Ok, there are without a doubt serious sums of money to be made in the online industry in general and connecting individual purchases (e.g., B2B, E2B, E2E, or eBay2me) to certain types of goods and services. Moreover, many I-O and OD applications (e.g., surveys, 360-feedback, competency assessments, job postings, and applications, etc.) already have and are likely to have even more Web-based counterparts in the future. However, lets face it folksnot everyone wants to do EVERYTHING online. We are social animals (yes, even us card carrying introverts) and that means we need to connect face-to-face sometimes with real peoplenot an interactive streaming video feed and pop-up real-time chat box. Moreover, given that at least 50% (and probably moreIm being kind) of all I-O, OD and HRD theory and research, and psychology in general for that matter, has been based on real-life exchanges with PEOPLE, it seems clear to me that this element of our work cannot go away. While we might enhance our services and contribution to the world of work (and life at work) through fantastic technological applications, the fundamentals are still based on human beings. And for those who dont agree with me on this, perhaps you should consider renaming SIOP the Society for Information Overloading Processes instead.

Aside from the social-psychological argument, however (which, by the way, is the one of the central reasons that I feel that the related field of OD will always be meaningful as well), there are other reasons to consider not adopting the e-word with vim and vigor. Lets start with the fun parts of technology: carpel tunnel syndrome, computer viruses, credit card scamming, global protection faults, crashing operating systems, disk full messages, processor upgrades, eye strain, and potential sterility or brain tumors (your choice of which is worse) from exposure to intense magnetic fields. No, I would say we are not quite yet in a world ready for Generation D (for digital), despite what you might see in trendy television advertising. We are just a society enamored with finally being able to buy things, talk to people, and find information (much of it wrong, too, I might add), without getting out of our chairs.

I know that some firms, including a few specializing in I-O areas, are focused on this arena (and perhaps even banking on it for their survival in a competitive consulting marketplace), and I am sure that the truly competent and strong will indeed survive and thrive; however, a few simple truths about the current e-world might shed some light on the virtual reality.

Advertising from dot.coms (or dot.bombs as some are being called) was reportedly down 20% in the fourth quarter of 2000 (Silicon Culture 2001) and being replaced by such unheard of firms (hah) as Disney and DeBeers!

Big name e-commerce mainstays like Amazon have finally slammed on the breaks and changed their expectations with respect to continued growth, even to the point of announcing massive downsizing and layoff actions (e.g., Amazons go-go growth? Gone, 2001).

Every day in the news it seems another once-promising dot.com goes belly-up. In fact, many of those e-businesses that advertised heavily in the 2000 Superbowl advertising frenzy are now penniless and sock-puppet-less.

The online greeting card business experienced a serious hiccup this past December when companies reported more than 1,000 virus infections were introduced from holiday online greetings that originated from people that were indeed known to the recipients (so much for the advice about only opening files sent from people you know). Many firms totally blocked these programs from coming through due to the viruses themselves, not to mention the fact that the resulting animation, even among clean online greetings, overtaxing networks and crashing entire corporate systems (E-greetings spread viruses, 2000).

Even in March of 2000, when people were more optimistic about e-business and the stock market had not had its first correction, the number one pornographic Web site boasted more unique visitors than ESPN, CDNow or Barnesandnoble (Koerner, 2000). In fact, porn accounted for 8% of the $18 billion e-business pie in 1999 (more than books or airplane tickets) and has the highest margins of almost any e-business at 30% or more.

Was that another technology stock plummeting, or did someone just step on a duck (in the co-opted immortal words of Rodney Dangerfield)?

Again, personally I really enjoy technology and the Internetyou might even say Im a Net-head. I rely heavily on e-mail for everything I do professionally. People seek me out for help with their Windows applications. I use eBay as if I were an original stock owner...and I have a habit of searching the IMD (the Internet movie database) every time a bizarre casting question from an obscure movie arises at home. However, even I get tired of all the hoopla and hype about the e-business revolution. If it were up to me, Id say, Lets try to keep this whole thing in perspective and remember that as psychologists at heart, the P2P (people-to-people) dimension is kind of important too. Ok, end of the latest Church sermon. 

The Show Must Go On

Well, its a sad day at black rock, but this is truly the last bit that I am writing for this my final issue as TIP Editor (For those of you who didnt know, this section was always the last to be written after everything else came in, and therefore, technically, always late too! Hows that for everyone I have given a hard time about deadlines over these years).

Serving the Society these last 7 years through my contributions to TIP (yes, 74 as a crazy columnist and 3 as editor) has been a wonderful learning experience. In that time I have written about such nutball notions as ending tenure, performance appraisalspolitical tools or effective measures, teamworkfact or fiction, organizational learning, publishing in the social sciences, change management, leadership, and yes, even the future of I-O (Remember that piece about the three types of I-O psychologistsinsular anachronistic noodlers, moderately useful technocrats, or fully integral professionals? If not, you have much to learn, young Jedi.). Believe it or not, some of these pieces have actually had a significantly and fruitful life beyond the initial publication of TIP as well. In fact, many of the various columns and features printed in these pages are frequently used for class lectures and even reprinted in their entirety in other outlets. So for you prospective authors remembera publication in TIP may not be the last time your article is read!

As a contributor and editor over the years, I have met many excellent I-O psychologists, practitioners and academics alike (including those who are not sure which camp they fall into), and made many new friends. I have achieved even greater perspective on a construct that I thought I already had well in hand from working while at graduate schoolworklife balance, and I have enjoyed the fruits of putting together 12 issues of sweat and blood, averaging 188 pages apiece, that sit nicely together when stacked against a wall. Of course, Ive made some enemies toobut Ive found that this comes with any (every?) editing job! And besides, you know what they say 

You can please some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but you cant please all of the people all of the time. (Lydgate, 1430) 

More seriously though, as someone who is a 5^th generation member of one of the few remaining family-owned and operated newspapers in America today, The Meriden Record Journal, and in deference to my late grandfather who will always be the publisher Mr. White in my eyes (and the only person I have known who would challenge anyone to a lobster, red meat, or oyster eating contest and win every time), I feel it is important to say that I gave it my all these past few years and tried to shape TIP the way I thought it needed to be for our collective SIOP membership. I have tried my best to offer content that would appeal to all types of readersthat is, practitioners, academics, students, consultants, and even nontraditional I-O types (such as those in related fields like OD and HRD). I have also tried to maintain a balance of material that was focused alternatively on theory, humor, positioning, entertainment, research, challenging the status quo, and just plain gung-ho about the field in general. Finally, I have tried to encourage as many people to contribute to TIP as possible, whether through new columns, publishing e-mails in TIP Missives, doing special features or writing news items. While some people may not have appreciated the level of diversity, in content, inclusivity, or the ever-expanding length of each issue, the SIOP member survey results have suggested that the membership feels otherwise (Waclawski & Church, 2000). In any case, suffice it to say that as a strong Freedom of Information Act and First Amendment advocate for the State of Connecticut back in the 1960s and 1970s, all in all, I think that if my grandfather understood psychology at all and knew what in the world I-O ever meant, hed have been proud of my efforts.

None of this would have been possible, however, without youthe SIOP membership. Your input, ideas, reactions, and suggestions have all played an important part in shaping this publication. Of course, the regular columnists helped too (you all get thanked later in the Editorial Departments section), but I think its important to recognize that TIP would truly not have been possible without the dedication and immeasurable efforts of the SIOP Office team. Lee Hakel has been incredible at playing the roles of sounding board, confidant, layout expert, advertising guru, and countless other functions in putting these issues together (not to mention running SIOP itself). Gail Nader and Jen Hakel were both wonderful to work with on the nuts and bolts of each issue, and of course Larry Nader, who put each issue of TIP online for the world to see [By the way, do people realize that back issues of TIP all the way to July 1995 are still available online at the SIOP Web site and that some of the older columns and features have significant weekly hit rates?]. I know that Esther Benitez, Lori Peake, and of course Milt Hakel joined in on Team SIOP as well. I was very pleased to see these folks receive recognition in the October 2000 issue (Koppes, 2000). If you have not read Laura Koppes article, I strongly suggest you do so that you can thank these folks when you see them at the SIOP Conference this year! As anyone who has ever done any significant volunteer work for SIOP knows (and thats a bunch of us), this team keeps the society running like a well-oiled machine.

I leave TIP in good hands though. Debbie Major from Old Dominion University will be taking over with the very next issue and I am sure she has many great plans for TIP! You can reach Debbie with all your TIP-related content (articles, IOTAS, calls, column ideas and news items) at dmajor@odu.edu.

And remember, as with any changing of the guard there are always opportunities for new columns (hint, hint). Despite the fact that you need NOT e-mail me with future items for TIP, by all means please feel free to continue to keep me posted regarding your thoughts and comments about TIP, SIOP, OD, publishing, the scientist-practitioner issue, or whatever; by all means e-mail me at (allanhc@aol.com). As I have said here before, my e-mail door is always open! 

Put One Foot in Front of the Other

Listed below is the usual rundown of the contents of this issue of TIP. As an aside, while I have always had my suspicions that the only people who read this segment are the authors and columnists being mentioned here themselves (in some cases just to see if I gave them any jabs), I found out recently that at least two SIOP Members actually use this little descriptive inventory to determine what items might be worth reading. At least I have not been writing this for my own entertainment these last 3 years okay, maybe a little. In any case, as Monty Hall used to say, Lets see whats behind door number #1. 

Featured articles. SIOP President Nancy Tippins opens the issue with her final set (at least in print) of official comments about the state of the Society. Dont forget to attend Nancys address in San Diego, and look for incoming President Bill Macey to fill this space beginning with the July issue.

Next we have an interesting research article from Michael Zickar and Scott Highhouse that explores the prestige of 23 well-known journals in I-O psychology. Although the results are what might be expected, it is interesting to note that they did not rely primarily on SCSI measures as is typically done but instead used survey research methods of academic readers. Moreover, they use multiple measures (reported rejection rates, survey data, SCSI rankings, and so forth) in their results which makes the study that much more interesting. Now if we could only get them to do a comparable study of the reading habits of us practitioners!

Speaking of surveys, Allen I. Kraut offers up an informal and interesting response to a friend regarding the different effects of using different methods of data collection for an employee survey effort. Although more research is needed in this area as more and more organizations pursue online applications of I-O tools (as noted above), the trend so far is toward only minor differences. Now if we could only test the same methodological implications of other techniques (e.g., online versus phone versus in-person coaching; virtual team building methods, etc.) wed be all set.

Evaluation (of impact or success) is another topic to which organizational practitioners in particular really need to attend as Dale Rose, Jane Davidson, Jeanne Carsten, and Jennifer Martineau highlight in their article. Focusing on the notion of strategic evaluation, they provide an approachable overview of this critical stage of the intervention process and some of the benefits (and pitfalls) associated with its implementation. Considering that one of the biggest criticisms of I-O and OD in general is the lack of impact of our field, its time practitioners wrestled this one to the ground and started building evaluation into their work as a core competency.

Next, we see the results of another survey research study that explores the awareness of the field of I-O psychology in general and the potential impact of advertising through the mail. Following-up on their prior study from 1998, Michael Gasser, Adam Butler, Kelly Anderson, Dave Whitsett and Rowena Tan offer some interesting but unfortunately somewhat depressing results regarding how we as a field might pursue raising the general populations awareness of that amorphous creature known as I-O psychology.

While information about who we are as a field may not always be generally accessible or easy to come by, the reverse situation is far from true as the resource laden article by Travis Tubr, Paul Bly, Bryan Edwards, Robert Pritchard, and Sharon Simoneaux demonstrates. Offering a plethora of article and literature search methods aimed at novice and experienced authors alike, they clearly show that it can be quite easy to be overloaded with references if one truly knows where to look.

The remaining feature in this issue tackles an entirely different aspect of I-O psychology altogether and is one that I quite honesty had never heard of until nowpsychofortology. Authors Sanet Coetzee and Frans Cilliers provide an informative overview of the subject which focuses on the science of psychological strengths and well-being and offer some potential areas for future practice and research. 

Editorial departments. Before describing this issues columns, I want to make two quick points. First, I want to formally say thank you to all of my TIP columnists over the last 3 years. Your contributions have raised the bar in terms of quality (and for some of you, quantity too!) for the future of TIP. The Society and I greatly appreciate your contributions! Second, I hope that SIOP members will take the time to thank you as well when they see you in April (or whenever) for all of the hard work and dedication it takes to produce excellent material for SIOPs collective consumption on a consistent and reliable basis. Nuff said. Now, onto the contents of this issue.

Mike Harris takes a stab at predicting the future in this edition of Practice Network with help from four generations of I-O folks including Amy Bladen, Elliot Lasson, John Scott, and Joel Wiesen. Interestingly enough, the issues raised regarding the evolution and change in I-Osuch as demonstrating relevancy, the I-O label, a focus on marketing over substance, issues of regulation, and the rise of global consulting firmsmirror almost exactly those voiced about the field of organization development in recent years (e.g., Church, 1996, 1999, in press; Gottlieb, 1998; Weidner & Kulick, 1999). In addition to his excellent list of KSAs for early career I-O psychologists, I would also include the following essentials: superb presentation skills, the ability to think systemically about organizations, and perhaps most important of allhaving a realistic and relatively thick skin.

Speaking of early careers, Kim Hoffman and Tom King conclude their tireless efforts as editors of TIP-Topics for Students in this issue with an interesting foray into the benefits of teaching others (whether a future practitioner or academic). Next, they emphasize the importance of networking via making connections across professional boundaries including those strangers from the fields of OB, OD, HRD and even Training and Developmenta point which I personally believe very strongly in as well. After a plug for the upcoming 2002 IO-OB graduate student conference to be held in South Florida, they conclude with some final suggestions for achieving that ever elusive balance in ones lifesomething Ill hopefully get closer to myself now that TIP is no longer on my calendar.

The final installment of Janine Waclawskis column The Real World offers simply a short and heartfelt thanks and goodbye. Although some folks will no doubt be sad to see the end of her personable and often satirical critiques on many of the inane aspects of life, as the single biggest generator of positive TIP Missives from SIOP members, at least future issues of TIP are bound to be shorter with her absence!

Next we have yet another compelling presentation of legal cases and their implications from Art Gutman in his latest installment of On the Legal Front. Here he covers some complexities surrounding the significance of the role of walking in the game of golfyes, really.

The final edition of Dirk Steiners International Forum begins with a very handy index to all of the interesting articles and countries that he has managed to cover in his column over the last 4 years. After a brief update on I-O in France, he also introduces us to (or reminds some of us of) the International Association of Applied Psychology (IAAP). Having been a member myself for several years now, I also heartily recommend the organization for a truly international perspective on I-O and OB.

It seems that the use of surveys in organizations these days is as ubiquitous as beer and chips for sport-watching coach potatoes. To help us improve our efforts in this area, however, along comes Steven Rogelbergs latest Informed Decisions column. With the help of his colleagues Janine Waclawski, Jeffrey Stanton, and myself, we tackle two particularly nagging contemporary practices in survey research and reportingthat is, the over-reliance on external norming and percent favorables.

Just in case you thought that TIP was the last possible place that you might find useful information on theory building in I-O psychology, along comes the latest edition of Paul Muchinskys High Society. In this issue the closest thing SIOP has to Dave Barry presents a poetic and prophetic recipe that even readers of AMR will find enticing, brought to us from the psychic vibes of one very well-known and respected individual from the real world. As a practitioner, I always wondered what I should do with those pesky moderator variables; now I know.

Next, Lori Foster Thompson and Dawn Riddle provide an annual review of the first volume of their Early Careers column. After playing the highlights reel from their star I-O interviews, they summarize best of their career gear tips which include being organizationally smart, double-dipping professionally, walking the line between HR and I-O, and that pesky notion of work-life balance again. Do any of these sound the slightest bit familiar to anyone? The column concludes with some insightful and interesting scenarios for consideration where the themes of over-commitment, realism, time management, and learning the ropes are evident.

Global Vision by Mark Griffin and Boris Kabanoff returns this issue with an interesting review of work being done internationally on the psychology of safety. Interestingly enough, much of this research dovetails nicely with the area highlighted in the feature in this issue from Coetzee and Cilliers on Psychofortology (see above). Although only based on an N of 2, I wonder if there is an Australian connection here?

Another long-standing TIP column, Traveling in Cyberspace, returns and makes its last hurrah this issue with an informative (and somewhat unnerving) look at computer security from Philip Craiger and Blaine Burnham.

Finally, this issue contains the eagerly anticipated solution to the second edition of the TIP Crossword by Steven Katzman. Dont forget to send him your ideas for future puzzles! 

News and reports. Since TIP is first and foremost the official newsletter of the Society and APA Division 14 (You knew that, right?), it should be no surprise that this issue, like all those before it, contains useful and informative items in the News and Reports section. The highlights of this edition include the latest SIOP Secretarys report from Janet Barnes-Farrell, an update from Linda Sawin on the new SIOP job placement services including information on the newly launched JobNet, information from SIOP Historian Laura Koppes on why and how to send archival materials for preservation, a report from Bev Dugan on the International Affairs Subcommittee, two reports from Dianne Maranto from the APA Science Directorate, and the call and criteria for SIOP awards for 2002. Of course, there are a few Missives, IOTAS, Calls and Announcements, Conference listings (dont forget to look here to see David Pollacks photo) and the latest job postings as well. I hope you enjoy the issue. 

***

Well, this is it! If you would like to e-mail me any final comments or reactions to this specific issue, the last 3 years of TIP, or the last 7 years of my cantankerous contributions, by all means e-mail me at allanhc@aol.com. For all those with new ideas and suggestions, however, be sure to send them instead to our new incoming editor Debbie Major at dmajor@odu.edu.

So long!

--ac

References

Amazons go-go growth? Gone. (February 12, 2001). BusinessWeek, 39.

Church, A. H. (1996). Values and the wayward profession: An exploration of the changing nature of OD. Vision-Action, 15(4), 36.

Church, A. H. (1999). Challenges for the future of OD. Performance in Practice, (Fall), 910.

Church, A. H. (2000). Managing change in the New Millennium: Old dog or new tricks? Performance in Practice, (Fall), 910.

Church, A. H., (in press) The professionalization of organization development: The next step in an evolving field. In W. A. Pasmore and R. W. Woodman (Eds.), Research in organizational change and development, (Vol. 13, in press). Greenwich CT: JAI Press

E-greetings spread viruses, tax networks (December 21, 2000), USA Today, A1.

Gottlieb, J. Z. (1998). Understanding the role of organization development practitioners. In R. W. Woodman and W. A. Pasmore (Eds.), Research in organizational change and development, (Vol. 11, 117158). Greenwich CT: JAI Press.

Koerner, B. I. (March 27, 2000). A lust for profits. U.S. News & World Report, 3644.

Koppes, L. L. (2000). A history of the SIOP Administrative office. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 38(2), 4854.

Silicon Culture: A sign of the timesis blank (February 12, 2001). BusinessWeek, 12.

Waclawski, J., & Church, A. H. (2000). The 2000 SIOP member survey results are in! The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 38(1), 5968.