From the Editor:
Pirates of the CaribbeanYo-Ho-Ho and a Bottle of Rum
Allan H. Church
W. Warner Burke Associates, Inc.
Welcome to the April 2000 issue of TIP. As I think you will see, this
issue is full of interesting, insightful, and hopefully even some entertaining
items for your perusal, so I will try to keep my introductory musings short and
to the point (assuming that's possible, of course). Whatever your reactions to
this installment of TIP (positive, negative, or perhaps simply
indifferent), I would appreciate hearing from you! You can email me at allanhc@aol.com,
or stop by in person at the "Meet the TIP Board" conversation hour we
are having at the SIOP conference in New Orleans on Friday, April 14th
at 2:00 p.m. I hope to see hear from you or perhaps see you there (assuming
those infamous Hurricanes don't get to me first!).
I've Become Comfortably Numb
Speaking of being in New Orleans in April, I would be lying if I said that I
am enjoying the winter weather this year in the NY Metro region. While having a
snow day at home from school was fun when I was a kid, it's not so fun when you
have to drag your bones outside in the wee a.m. darkness, shovel yourself a
tunnel through the snow bank plowed by the tow trucks over your driveway so that
you can ram your car through it, and then drive in blurry, slippery erratic
traffic to get to work while SUVs cruise by at higher-than-appropriate speeds
and then proceed to cause bumper-to-bumper rubbernecking situations after they
slide off the highway entirely. Of course, I am sure that the winter weather
problem in other parts of the country is far worse, but that doesn't make it any
more enticing here.
What can be enticing, however, is the chance to get away from it all to a
sun-filled island in the B.V.I. (British Virgin Islands) during the very worst
of it, which is exactly what I was fortunate enough to be able to do last week.
Of course, my intentions in taking this developmental opportunity were entirely
professional in nature: (a) to prepare my body, mind, and tolerance levels for
the upcoming activities and rigors associated with the SIOP conference in New
Orleans, and (b) to try snorkeling for the first time at Norman (a.k.a.
Treasure) Island so that I could properly understand the multifaceted
motivational and job satisfaction components that Blackbeard and the other
pirates of the Caribbean must have felt in their days of plundering hapless
ships. Actually, in all honesty, the trip was a necessary (and opportunistic)
means for recharging some very low mental batteries (yes, I know my capacity is
sorely limited anyway) which, in turn, facilitated the completion of this
exciting issue of TIP that you now hold in your hands. How some people
can survive without ever taking their vacation time, I will never know (though
from a work perspective I can appreciate the vector forces in opposition to such
actions). Clearly, this is grist for the job-life satisfaction and work-life
balance arena.
What I Did on My Winter Vacation
At any rate, the main reason I brought this subject up is that, believe it or
not, it reminds me of some of the complexities of doing applied research. Let me
explain. On the final day of our journey, my wife and I had some time to kill
before we could leave for the tiny Tortola airport. We were sitting at a small
table in the marina watching the boats go idly by with our luggage stashed
behind us waiting for yet another order of fish and chips at Pussersthe
local yet branded touristy hangoutwhen we were stuck by the odd tendency for
some people to go up to a shop door five feet away from us and pull (sometimes
quite strenuously) on its door handle. This seemed particularly odd at the time
given the fact that there was a large eye-level sign which clearly read PUSH in
big letters. Using our keen psychological training we quickly surmised that this
was a true phenomenon worthy of a juicy government research grantthe
push/pull factoror, at least something that two cynical consultant types
could attend to for a few minutes while munching away.
After several more initial observations (and an occasional remark or two as
to any given shopper's IQ, EQ, GQ or any other Q for that matter), I declared
that I would formally code the behavior and determine a percentage of push
verses pull responses. Since my wife was first to observe a potential gender
effect emerging from the raw data, even before recording actually began, I
quickly sketched a 2 2 grid on my trusty applied research toolthe paper
napkinand began the data collection process. After about 30 minutes of this
(yes, this actually went on longer than you might thinkbut what would you
expect from two I-O psychologists after a week in the sun?) we had the following
counts:
| |
|
|
| |
Male |
Female |
| Push (incorrect) |
1 |
4 |
| Pull (correct) |
2 |
4 |
While this may seem like small numbers, many a dissertation in other fields
has been completed on significantly fewer numbers of cases. Anyway, although one
might initially construe a significant relationship by gender, as we continued
to observe, however, it quickly became apparent that there may have been other
potential variables involved in the push/pull factor that we had not initially
considered, all of which might be important confounds. After some reflection, we
decided that the following contextual variables also needed study before our
results could be considered meaningful:
- native language (while the sign was clearly in English due to the island's
British heritage, the visitors were mostly Americansmany of whom
obviously have serious problems with the English languageand a few
Europeans)
- prior experiencewith this specific door, and perhaps equally
importantly, other doors which may have helped shape a contradictory door
schema in the more successful individuals
- level of intoxication from Caribbean rum drinks (including Pusser's
famous Pain Killers which, not that I am familiar with them, come in level
2, 3, and 4 strengths) which have been found to impair judgment and
decision-making abilities, or
- differential levels in inherent ability to decode complex competing visual
stimuli (e.g., there were many different signs and ads on the doorone of
which said "braids inside" and resulted in a comment from one
already-braided passerby "brains inside?"; also, the door handle
was jutting out clearly looking to be pulled).
While I have no doubt that many I-O psychologists (and particularly those
that serve as journal reviewers) could provide a much more comprehensive list of
possible confounds, the point to all this is simple: Applied research (or any
social science-related research for that matter) is a complex, multifaceted, and
inherently flawed entity. While it sure beats a student-populated lab study with
respect to generalizability, it lacks most of the subtle controls that such an
environment affords. Neither one provides all the answers and both are flawed in
their own ways. All we can do as trained researchers is to simply quest for that
superior dataset with most (or at least some) of the right contextual conditions
and hope that the data make sense when all is said and done.
Please don't misunderstand. I certainly enjoy conducting and publishing
research myself (assuming that is, that anyone will want my articles after
seeing how sloppy my methods were here), and reading and reviewing the work of
colleagues and friends. I am also employed by a firm that believes strongly in
data-driven (i.e., research) methods for organizational change. Nonetheless,
this simple research experience over fish and chips at Pussers, makes me
truly skeptical that we will ever find THE true answer to most of the nagging
research and theoretical questions that drive our field. Why else would
different meta-analyses of the same set of studies yield inconsistent findings?
Of course, please feel free to disagree! I'd be happy to hear from you.
And in This Corner
Now onto the good stuff. As always, listed below is a brief summary of what's
in store for you in this issue.
Featured Articles
In his LAST column (his emphasis) as SIOP President, Angelo DeNisi
provides us once again with an interesting overview of some of the major issues
facing the Society. He covers a number of topics including student membership
concerns, the new Expanded Tutorials offerings at this year's conference, future
conference plans and hotel problems due to ever increasing levels of attendance,
the future of I-O psychology, and the lack of charm at the Crystal City
Marriott.
In preparation for this year's SIOPen in New Orleans, Mick "The
Quick" Kavanagh (and past TIP Editor) provides a summary of
the highlights of last year's event in Atlanta, Georgia. Let's hope there are no
dark and stormy days this year! Wait, I do enjoy a good Dark and Stormy (the
local rum drink from Bermuda, that is) now and then. But that's another
story.
I guess I am not the only one with research on the brain. Deniz Ones
and Chockalingam Viswesvaran provide the results of their research on I-O
researchers. More specifically, their article focuses on the most-published
authors (and some interesting gender differences) among the last 10 years of two
of the most well-respected research outlets for our field: the Journal of
Applied Psychology and Personnel Psychology.
Next, swinging to the humorous side, Michael McDaniel provides some
entertaining examples of new ways to fake your test results. As an aside, we
felt it was important to run this piece after the SIOP member survey was
complete, just to be sure that Michael's suggestions would not unduly influence
the results. Actually, I think I can add one additional example here regarding a
response to the question "Have you ever pushed on a door that was clearly
marked PULL in big letters?"
Speaking once again of results, have you ever wondered how one might go about
advertising and/or promoting I-O psychology among the general public? Well, Adam
Butler, Kelly Anderson, David Whitsett, and Rowena Tan have and they provide
here the results of their research on the subject. Their findings, though
perhaps not surprising, are disconcerting nonetheless regarding the extent to
which we (do not) get the word out about I-O psychology. This is certainly an
issue related to the future of I-O.
Next, we have a slightly different perspective on the importance of
networking and connectivity from Nasha London-Vargas in her article "Living
King's Dream: The Student Support NetworkA 21st Century
Concept." She makes a call for changes in the undergraduate university
setting which would open the door for greater student involvement and
enrichment.
The final feature for this issue is somewhat of a historical piece on one of
the original applied psychologists, John B. Watson (1878-1958). Using content
taken from many of Watson's original writings from the Watson files in the
Library of Congress, Diane DiClemente and Donald Hantula provide
an interesting retrospective look at his largely unknown contributions to the
field of I-O psychology.
Editorial Departments
As many of you have come to expect by now, Mike Harris once again
offers up an intriguing title (and accompanying content) for his latest Practice
Network column. This time around he explores why any I-O psychologist in
their right mind would choose to actually enter the Evil Catbert's
dreaded realm of the HR. Indeed, you may find what he found to be quite a
finding. On a more personal note, I was quite pleased to read that "no one
indicated that their training as I-O psychologists had been a waste of
time" though I did find his comments about e-tomatoes or e-eggs somewhat
disconcerting.
Next, in this issue's TIP-TOPICS for Students, Kim Hoffman goes
it alone as she tackles yet another aspect of the scientist-practitioner role.
This time, she explores the central questionwho are the
"customers" of I-O Psychology? And perhaps the even more poignant
issueare the customers of scientists and practitioners truly different? Without
a doubt, this topic is becoming increasingly significant for the future of SIOP
and I-O psychology. Her final section provides an informative look at the
Student Development Programs at IUPUI. Did they read Nasha's article (see above)
before this issue went to press?
Kim's not the only TIP Editorial Board Member with an opinion, as Janine
Waclawski demonstrates in this issue's edition of The Real World. In
one fell swoop she tackles the peeks and valleys of corporate transitions from
downsizing to megamergers, with an unusual stop for some quick cash and a Venti
double mocha cappuccino at the newly formed Starbanks on the way.
Ever wonder about the state of industrial and organizational psychology in
Austria? Dirk Steiner did and he found the answer from K. Wolfgang Kallus
in this edition's International Forum. As you will see, I-O encompasses
some pretty interesting content areas in this region of the world including
ambulatory psychophysiology, research in mobbing and leadership, traffic
psychology, risk behavior, and risk personality.
The topic of Steven Rogelberg's Informed Decisions column this
issue is competency modeling. Contrary to the normal type of review provided,
however, his contributors Margaret Laber and Jimmie O'Connor highlight
what they found to be a significant lack of sound research in this area despite
its widespread usage in organizations. They raise a number of interesting
questions for the future and point to some interesting ambiguities in the
competency modeling field today.
Next, I am pleased to announce the introduction of a new department (so to
speak) from a very familiar face (and another past TIP Editorit seems
you can't ever shake these people!) Paul Muchinsky. In this first edition
of his satirical column The High Society, he takes I-O psychology to the
movies with reviews of his favorite I-O inspired films.
With every beginning there must eventually come an end. This issue marks the
final contribution from two of our long-standing TIP columnists and
familiar contributors to many. In her final Work in the 21st
Century piece, Karen May provides a nice reflective summary of her
nine years with TIP and some of the changes she has experienced.
Similarly, Charmine Hrtel also concludes her 8-year tenure with TIP in
her Global Vision column for this issue. We thank Karen and Charmine for
their many years of interesting and insightful contributions to TIP and
the Society, and wish them all the best in their future endeavors.
Last but not least, this issue's Early Careers column by Dawn
Riddle and Lori Foster focuses on an in-depth interview with Shelly
Zedeck. In reading about his passion for travel, I wondered if Shelly has
ever examined the push/pull factor in any of his adventures. Next, in their
Career Gear section, Dawn and Lori focus on the advantages, disadvantages, and
advice believed to be important for the early career psychologist with
scientist-practitioner ambitions. For this segment they rely on a wonderful set
of comments from extremely knowledgeable individuals including Ed Levine,
Dave Day, George Thornton III, Karen Paul, Sandra Davis, and, oh
yeah, me (I know for sure that they hadn't read the above study description when
they asked me).
News and Reports
Besides the features and columns, what would TIP be without the usual
plethora of interesting and informative news items, calls, and committee reports
to keep you up to the minute (ok, up to the month) with what is happening in
SIOP.
This issue is no exception, with updates from CEMA representative Denise
Bane on meeting plans for New Orleans, and Jan Cannon-Bowers and Danielle
Merket on highlights of the Division 14 program at this year's American
Psychological Association Convention. There are also reports from SIOP Secretary
Janet Barnes-Farrell and Kalen Pieper, Chair of the State Affairs
Committee, not to mention some important Proposed SIOP Bylaws Amendments, and
this year's call for SIOP 2001 Awards Nominations. Emily Demonte and David
Arnold provide yet another informative review of a recent Business Necessity
Defense case involving Southwestern Bell. There is also an interesting response
from Division 13 by Andy Garman, Ann O'Roark, and Rodney Lowman to
some of Angelo DeNisi's comments from his February 2000 presidential column that
may spark some interesting discussions in New Orleans.
Aside from the usual section of Calls and Announcements later in the
issue, John Hollenbeck sent in a short article to formally announce and
provide his rationale for an upcoming special issue of Personnel Psychology
on Quasi-Experimentation. Do I sense scientist-practitioner issues being raised
again?
As always, this issue has David Pollack's very useful list of upcoming
conference dates and locations for next year, along with the usual IOTAS,
announcements, and job postings. Our Missives for this issue starts out
with a serious question posed regarding the current state of TIP itself.
For reasons that should be quite apparent, I would be very interested to hear
reactions to the issues being raised here, as well as anything you might have to
say about TIP, SIOP, or I-O in general. As always, email your thoughts,
suggestions, ideas, comments to Allanhc@aol.com.
I look forward to hearing from you. See you in New Orleans!
April 2000 Table of Contents |
TIP Home | SIOP Home