From the Editor: Things That Make You Go Hmm TIP October 1999

Fall is here once again and so too is the October issue of TIP. That's Volume 37, number 2, for anyone who might be counting. While for some readers this issue might represent just one more publication in a long-line of jam-packed read-by-the-seat-of-your-pants I-O information, for me this issue is particularly notable for two reasons: (a) It represents the halfway point in my tenure as editor, and (b) It is the very last issue to be published in 1999, and therefore my last chance to be heard (or at least read) in this millenium! So sit back and savor the last issue of your favorite SIOP publication before the known world comes to an end. That is, assuming you believe all the media hype and predictions about Y2K horrors that are waiting for us just around the bend. Actually, there's more on the subject of Y2K elsewhere in this issue (see The Real World). In the meantime, I'll do my best to provide you with some interesting but totally unrelated comments about something or other before moving into my mini-overview of the contents of the October TIP.

Lovely Rita

One of the other projects I worked on this summer, besides the normal deluge of practitionering and editing and conference attending and book proposaling and teaching and article writing (and even buying a house), was a book chapter on job satisfaction with Tim Judge. Sure, some of you might be saying to yourselves "all we need is another book chapter on job satisfaction," but this one is probably quite different. We combined theory and practice in a true scientist-practitioner approach vis-à-vis a little data collection which consisted of conducting an email survey of practitioners—a methodology by the way that is becoming more and more common these days (see for example this issue's Informed Decisions column, as well as several others. A hearty round of thanks again to those who responded to the survey). Anyway, the chapter is part of an interesting book being edited by Cary Cooper and Ed Locke for Oxford Press entitled I-O Psychology: What We Know About Theory and Practice. Because I have always been interested in the split-half reliability of our field (as well as overlaps with others fields like Organization Development and Human Resource Development, for that matter), I found this to be a very interesting project on which to work. Although I will leave an exploration of the
S-P subject to others (see the TipTopics column for an excellent overview on the subject), and the book chapter to those interested in the book itself, I guess the point is that job satisfaction has been on my mind of late. Not so much mine, mind you, but that of our local meter-reading lady.

Let's call her Rita. Seeing her perform her duties day in and day out makes me wonder whether job satisfaction is, in fact, at all related to life satisfaction (i.e., happiness) in general. While this type of activity would not normally be of much interest to me beyond some typical grumblings about tax dollars at work , and so forth, it does present an interesting little case study for a job-satisfaction analysis. More specifically, while there may be some factors that might contribute to her having high levels of satisfaction in her work, I wonder if she is truly satisfied and the extent to which she is happy beyond that, and if these are even related?

If one subscribes to the spillover relationship between these variables as research and meta-analyses have indicated (e.g., Judge & Watanabe, 1994; Tait, Padgett, & Baldwin, 1989) then the answer would be yes. On the other hand she could reflect a rarer case of the segmentation relationship where the two realms are unrelated. This would be sort of like the automaton worker who is able to discretely segment work life from home life. Of course she could reflect the even rarer compensation relationship where job satisfaction is used to compensate for life dissatisfaction (or the inverse). Let's look at the details.

Her entire job, as far as I can tell, is to walk around outside all day, come rain, shine, or snow, and give people parking tickets. She has a nice working environment—in the spring and fall anyway—and she controls her own work space (several streets worth). She also has task variety. She gives four kinds of tickets: One for parking past the time on the meter (hence the standard job title), one for parking in the same spot for too long regardless of the time on the meter (she uses a white chalkstick on the tire to check for this), one for parking too far from the curb (again with the multifunction chalkstick), and one for parking in non-parking spaces. She is empowered to make decisions that affect her work—she can give a ticket, or not give a ticket depending on her mood and/or the quality of someone's excuse. She has a long history with the same organization and would appear to have lifetime employment secured as well. She's been doing this work for at least the last 9 years and as long as there are stores, delis, travel agencies, antique dealers, and nail places with meters in front of their doors, there will be a need for a Ticket Master. Moreover, the quality of her worklife balance is probably quite positive—she works the same hours everyday and gets a number of them off. No overtime ticketing here. When you add it all up, there should be at least some positive effect on job satisfaction here.

Yet, even with all these positive job attributes, and what might appear to be the ultimate need fulfillment (for someone with a personally sadistic internal tendency) from doling out $40 fines to visitors and locals—she does not seem to be a happy person. Perhaps it is the voodoo dolls of her likeness stored under desk counters by store owners in the area, or the persistent arguments of angry motorists who feel unjustly ticketed for running in just to drop off their mail. Or perhaps it's the fact that customers and sales staff alike race to their cars to check the meter the moment they see her amble by with her chalkstick. I'm sure that people's perceptions and descriptions of her at cash registers as a truly evil person have not helped either. Whatever the reason, despite all the seeming positives inherent in her job, it would seem (at least based on my well- honed observational skills as a psychologist and a motorist) that this is not a happy person; in general or at work.

Perhaps my perceptions are incorrect. Perhaps inside an introverted shell (something with which I am familiar) lives a contented person performing her civic duties with aplomb. Or perhaps at home she is a effervescent bundle of joy. In the absence of a formal coaching setting with a personality measure and some multisource feedback, however, I will truly never know. (Though I certainly would not ask her customers to assess her behavior in this case given the potential for serious ratings bias).

The point is that seeing Rita sometimes makes me wonder about the impact of I-O in general. Can't we do something here? I guess it also makes me wonder how far psychology as a whole has truly come in our collective understanding of human behavior and whether we will ever really understand it all including a concept as seemingly simple as job satisfaction (life satisfaction is probably way beyond us). In short, it's one of the reasons I was drawn to the field in the first place, but I'm not sure how far we've really come. Anyway, give it some thought the next time you see your own version of Rita somewhere, even if happens to be yourself.

The Postman Always Rings Twice

I don't know about anyone else but I really think that the latest trend in direct mail marketing has simply gone too far. I'm tired and I'm not going to take it anymore. Several weeks ago I received what appeared to be a personally addressed envelope to my attention. They actually had my name spelled correctly. (I realize that it's not that hard to spell, but you'd be surprised how butchered even a simple name can be. For example, just yesterday I received a mailing addressed to "Man Church" from a bank offering me a new credit card. You'd think where money was involved they'd at least get the name right). Inside the first-class envelope was a page apparently torn from a magazine, with a hand-written yellow Post-It pad note on the corner saying in blue ink (and not the greatest penpersonship mind you):

Allan,

Try this.

It works!

Since I do actually know a number of colleagues with the first initial J (was the selection of this letter determined through some form of market research regarding the impact of various capital letters on the recipient's acceptance of the message?), and I do tend to receive bizarre and unsolicited mailings at times (for TIP and other publications I work on, not to mention the occasional irate employee that's been asked to complete a survey and chooses to send a Dilbert strip back instead), I examined the page underneath further. At first glance, the printed "article" looked quite legitimate. It actually had a torn edge, red printed borders on the top and bottom, a page number on both sides (17_18) and black and white news photo of people clapping with a byline and a footer that identified the title of publication as Executive Focus, July, 1999. The title of the two-page mini-article was "Applause, applause. Anyone can win over a tough audience, says hailed speechwriter. Just ask Lee Iaccocca." Of course at the end of the article on the second side was a coupon for a specific publication (which costs $300, by the way) and makes it clear that this is in fact a promotion rather than something legitimate. Nonetheless, I was somewhat unnerved that marketing firms would go such lengths of personalization and reliance on my implicit understanding of "professional courtesy" with respect to something a colleague might send me to attempt to catch my interest. After all, why target me for this thing?

Well, 2 minutes later I realized that I had been rather loosely targeted after all. Yes indeed, further down in the mail pile for that same day was another letter no doubt derived from another mailing list on which a slightly different version of my name resides (I could tell it was a different list because the degree letters were listed on this one). Although very similar in overall approach, this piece had different handwriting and a slightly different note:

Allan,

Try this.

It's really good!

Different note; same author J. The teaser title of this article was even better that the first, though: "Sharpen your leadership skills, or kiss your career goodbye!" with a subheader italicized for emphasis "it's no longer an option." Once again, Executive Focus (pp. 31_32) was the publication source. This marketing piece, which was actually advertising another type of publication for only $99 a month, even had a mini-survey imbedded in the piece regarding the four key characteristics of a leader. Not surprisingly, however, no matter how you scored on their mini-assessment, the claim was that their publication "can help keep you on the fast track to success."

Ok. I may be in favor of sending out surveys to collect data, and I do understand the need to market aggressively and stand above the competition, but this is just a bit too much. This approach really preyed on my professional interests. Rather than my finding these intriguing and being interested in finding out more as some marketing specialist no doubt anticipated, they instead left me more irritated than the usual slew of junk professional (or is it professional junk?) mailings. Even if they are typically torn in half even before being opened most of the time at least these advertisers are honest about the fact that it is a pitch (and therefore should be pitched).

Anyway, if this is my reaction, I really wonder what others think of these types of ploys. What would "Man Church" think? Moreover, I wonder what would be the impact of a message like this is on non-I-O or OD savvy types? Would some people actually believe that this is coming from someone they know? The answer is probably yes. Further, do some people base their entire perceptions of the value ofour field on these types of solicitations (i.e., it's all garbage and hype)? The answer is also probably yes. Finally, it also makes me wonder which organizations sold my name for these mailings?

Any comments from other recipients of such exciting junk? I'd like to hear from you out there on this. Maybe someday I'll do a study that investigates the impact of this type of mailing on people's cynicism regarding the field in general. With banners like "change your life," "become a superstar," and "transform your management style" it can make an I-O professional nervous.

You've Got Mail

Of course the plethora of direct marketing via the postal service is nothing in comparison to the exciting and often embarrassing world of internet solicitations. Every morning, for example, my email account is replete with a deluge of enticing emails with headers that range from the seemingly real "Question," "This is the information you requested" and even "Urgent: Report needed" all of which could easily be real subject lines, to the far more disturbing and often hilariously bluntly worded solicitations for various people and places to have "a good time." Decorum prevents me from giving examples of the latter. Granted, there may be something to the notion that these types of emails follow from those places you have visited on the Net (ahem), but the fact that my other accounts with which I have never surfed the Net also receive plentiful numbers of these same "spam" email messages makes me think that it's not just me they're after.

Apparently software companies agree. Believe it or not the problem is so common that PC Magazine was actually able to print a review (Randall, 1999) this summer of 11 "spam filter programs" specifically designed to lock these types of messages out before they hit your email inbox. With names like Interceptor, Spam Buster, Spam Killer, Spam Eater, Spamicide, and SpammerSlammer Pro you'd got to admit that that friendly and familiar phrase "you've got mail" has taken on a whole new meaning. All of this activity really makes me wonder—is the Net a good thing or a bad thing, and when is an abundance of information too much? (As an aside, I also wonder whether the Spam meat product that some of us actually consumed as kids has benefited from all this as well. Please drop me an email if you have any information on this).

Yes, people use email every day for all kinds of correspondence and document transfers with students, clients, family, friends, and so on, not to mention research on various topics. Yes, the Net makes communicating with people elsewhere in the world (and even as far away as the SIOP Administrative Office in Ohio) far easier at times that trying to connect via the phone. Yes, about 95% of all TIP material comes in to me via email attachments making the publication process far easier than in prior years. In fact, some members read the contents on the Net long before the hard copy is even mailed. And yes, I do use the Net for mail order.

Nonetheless, there are some pretty scary things out there. Did you know, for example, that you can actually locate someone's complete address and phone number in any state in U.S. through one of several different search engines? What's more, did you know that you can actually get door-to-door driving directions from your location to theirs in a flash with zoomable maps, distances, turn by turn detail, and estimated time of travel between points A and point B down to the minute? You can also find out how much every house on a given block actually sold for—something professional criminals are sure to enjoy. And, if you are really skilled, you can watch where other people go on the Net. You can order airline tickets, stock trades, wine, prescription drugs, and other nice tidbits that someone might be interested in. In short, the internet boom has made internet security an important issue as well (Roberts-Witt, 1999).

These concerns are not limited to e-commerce and personal information only, however. How would you feel, for example, about the possibility of finding a copy of some article you've written in someone else's directory via a search engine with no attributions to source? Or how about a condensed version of your article lifted from some reputable source (like JAP) and pseudo-reprinted (without contacting you or giving you any credit) in an online magazine? Both have happened to me. Hey, if your stuff is out there on a webpage somewhere or in electronic form on the Net, chances are that someone somewhere has an edited copy of it on their own machine and they are using it for their own ends. On the bright side, this could make research replications easier if someone else has the entire text available to them—all they have to do is change the samples and the values in the results section. I'll bet the Net also makes getting term papers from other places easier as well. Not that I didn't rely on Cliff's Notes to help out every once and a while myself.

And of course dare I neglect to mention the prevalence of other unsavory sites that are definitely NC17 or better? Hey, some of these sites are so intense that I wouldn't want my parents to see them, let alone any kids I might have one day! I don't know, maybe too much information can be a bad thing.

No wonder they call it the web. It seems to me there must be a really big spider out there somewhere (perhaps with a dot-gov extension) that's just waiting to be allowed to sting. I can't honestly see the Net staying unregulated for that much longer. I predict that within 10 years, the internet as we know it will have changed entirely. But until then, it probably pays to be careful where you go, what you buy, and who you email on the Net.

Give the People What They Want

Moving right along, it's time to discuss what's really important—the contents of this issue of TIP. As always, there are a number of interesting articles to bend your mind and stimulate your thoughts. Here's the lowdown on what's covered this issue.

Featured Articles

SIOP President Angelo DeNisi kicks off this issue's features with an update on some of the important issues facing SIOP and the field of I-O in general. In particular, he discusses the implications of the recent Lanning v. SEPTA court case. Trust me when I tell you that there is more to come on this issue. See the news and reports section for details. He also raises the specter of SIOP clinicians. I am really curious to hear people's reactions to some of these topics.

Remember that SIOP member survey we all received, many completed, and some even returned a few months back? Well, Jeff Schneider and Kristin Smith provide an overview of the highlights of this project which was sponsored by the Executive Committee in an effort to provide some input into the society's long-range planning efforts. Although many of the "hot topics" identified reflect more traditional I-O content areas, I was pleased to see organization development and change as an interest area rated so highly among respondents. There are a number of other interesting surprises in these results as well.

Next we have a thoughtful piece by Craig Lundberg on the nature and process of finding research agendas. As Craig notes, there is little advice in the literature on how one actually goes about identifying an area, problem, or topic on which to concentrate. He then goes on to explore several methods of stepping back and doing just that via the work of Karl Weick. What I want to know is why didn't anyone tell me this before?

It seems to me that someone ought to be focusing on the evolution of the field itself these days. A case in point: Bill Verdi's short piece raises the question of the presence of yet another group—MBAs—in the realm of I-O psychology. Who ever said clinicians were the only other set of practitioners that SIOP members had to worry about?

Our final feature for this issue is from Nasha London-Vargas. She focuses on some of the issues involved when working with employees and building teams in the new organizational reality.

Editorial Departments

Here, we have more of what you have come to know and appreciate from our TIP columnists.

Starting off once again is Mike Harris with Practice Network. This time Mike explores the ways and means by which I-O professionals practice life-long learning. Naturally, TIP was universally mentioned as the single most important source of cutting edge information regarding theory and practice in I-O.... Ok, so people said yeah, they read it when asked—that's close enough for me!

This issue's edition of the student column, Tip-Topics by Kim Hoffman and Suzanne Vu, takes us on a detailed discussion of a topic that hits close to home, for me anyway—the scientist-practitioner balance in I-O. With contri butions from Wally Borman, Mike Campion, Ann Howard, Ed Levine, Robert and Joyce Hogan, and yours truly, I think this article might open the door to some interesting discussions on an important topic for the future of our field.

Next, Janine Waclawski asks why about Y2K in this installment of The Real World column. After tackling our obsessions with killer asteroids, time capsules, and gourmet mail order survival food, she gets a little help from Wayne J. Camara and Kim Hoffmaster in bringing this whole Y2K thing back down to earth.

Dirk Steiner's International Forum for this issue presents a report from Ma. Regina Hechanova-Alampay and Elena L. Samonte on I-O psychology in the Philippines. As these authors point out, despite an uphill battle, I-O psychology is making some significant headway as a productive and vital area of research and practice in the Philippines and the demand for I-O training and enrollment in I-O graduate programs has increased steadily.

Keeping in the vein of understanding the link between science in practice, James Conway, Michael Piotrowski, and Steven Rogelberg ask and attempt to answer the question, "What are we doing about selection systems in practice?" in this issue's Informed Decisions column. Interestingly enough, they used email as their survey methodology. Ok, so maybe the Net isn't so bad after all. What I'm curious about, however, is how they content-coded some of the more racy responses they must have received.

Next, Charmine Härtel's Global Vision column focuses on the topic of work psychology and its influences on occupational health and safety management. Her contributor, Phil Bohle from the School of Industrial Relations and Organisational Behaviour at the University of New South Wales in Sydney, provides an interesting overview and historical analysis of the development of this area of theory and research.

Our final column for this issue is really more of a conceptual overview and enhanced teaser for the new Early Careers column by Dawn Riddle and Lori Foster that will start in 2000. The column will be targeted at academics and practitioners who have recently entered their initial positions (although many of the tips will no doubt be interesting to people at all levels in their professional careers) and will feature, among other things, in-depth interviews of your favorite SIOP personalities.

News and Reports

Denise Bane starts off this issue's news and reports section with the her new column Building Bridges. The column, a new forum for the SIOP Committee on Ethnic Minority Affairs (CEMA), will serve as a useful tool for anyone interested in improving networking skills in general.

This year's newest SIOP Fellows are then announced and receive the official recognition they deserve. Congratulations to all!

Next, Peter Bachiochi and Debra Major provide an overview of their efforts as part of SIOP's Education and Training Committee (E&T) to develop a means by which I-O could receive greater attention and focus in college and perhaps even high school settings. Hey, maybe if we can change people's perceptions about I-O at the source....

There are a number of other interesting items and calls here as well, such as Karen Paul's overview of the SIOP 2000 workshops; a reminder regarding the 15^th Annual I-O Doctoral Student Consortium from Michelle Marks; a photo of the winners of the 1999 SIOPen Golf outing held this year in Atlanta; a request for Fellowship nominations from Bill Macey; and a call for APA 2000 program proposals from Janis Cannon-Bowers.

In another interesting turn of events, what follows are five different and very important slants on a series of recent official documents and legal decisions, all of which could significantly affect the practice of I-O. First, Wayne Camara provides us with the details on the OCR Draft guide on Disparate Impact in educational testing. Next, Heather Roberts Fox tackles the latest from the EEOC on reasonable accommodation and undue hardship. Then the implications of two recent court cases are discussed by Maureen Toner and David Arnold and Emily Demonte and David Toner, and last but not least, Jim Sharf explores in greater detail the Lanning v. SEPTA case that Angelo mentioned in his opening comments.

As always, this issue also features David Pollack's informative list of upcoming conference dates and locations for next year, along with the usual
IOTAS, announcements and job postings. There are also some interesting and entertaining Missives to enjoy as well.

Well, I guess that brings this edition of my column to a close. As always, I look forward to hearing from you about this issue of TIP, the field of I-O in general, or any ideas or comments you might want to share. Please send your musings to Allanhc@aol.com (note the email change—I finally dropped the 96 in my account ID, but that's another story). And, for those of you who actually managed to read my comments all the way through to the end, what more can I say but thanks.

References

Randall, N. (1999). Stop junk mail. PC Magazine, 18(15), 127_136.

Judge, T. A., & Church, A. H. (2000). Job satisfaction: Research and practice. In C. L. Cooper & E. A. Locke (Eds.). I-O Psychology: What we know about theory and practice, in press, Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Judge, T. A., & Watanabe, S. (1994). Individual differences in the nature of the relationship between job and life satisfaction. Journal of Occupational &Organizational Psychology, 67, 101_107.

Roberts-Witt., S. L. (1999). Protect your business. PC Magazine, 18(15), 151_166

Tait, M., Padgett, M. Y., & Baldwin, T. T. (1989). Job and life satisfaction: A reevaluation of the strength of the relationship and gender effects as a function of the date of the study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 502_507.

October 1999 Table of Contents | TIP Home | SIOP Home