To view this page ensure that Adobe Flash Player version 11.1.0 or greater is installed.

Does SIOP Work for Practitioners? Evidence, Accomplishments, and Plans In the October issue of The Industrial-Organizational Psychol- ogist (TIP), Silzer and Parson (2015) reviewed information they and their colleagues have assembled in the Practitioner Per- spectives column, covering 30 articles and reports from 2008 to 2015. They present a summary of practitioner-related issues identified and initiatives taken since 2008. They note issues with respect to a myriad of topics including communication, publica- tion, and gaps between science and practice. They also identify 10 critical issues for I-O psychology practice and practitioners. Silzer and Church augment the critique of SIOP’s attention to practitioner needs and issues specifically focusing on the results of the 2015 Practitioner Needs Survey (Oliver, Ferro, Napper, & Porr, 2015) in their Letter to the Editor in this issue of TIP. Alexander Alonso Society for Human Resource Management Cristina G. Banks Lamorinda Consulting, LLC Mark L. Poteet Organizational Research & Solutions, Inc. 1 Authors’ names are listed alphabetically. 1 The purpose of this article is to discuss initiatives and progress SIOP has made in recent years in addressing practitioners’ needs while outlining possible reasons for continued practitioner dissatisfaction. We offer ideas for creating new opportunities for practitioners by describing current initiatives and plans under- way within the SIOP Professional Practice Committee (PPC). Silzer and colleagues raise a valid concern about practitioners’ continuing dissatisfaction as revealed in the latest Practitioner Need Survey (see Silzer & Parson, 2015, for a comparison of 2008 vs. 2015 results). Several areas continue to be a concern: practi- tioner recognition through awards and election to Fellow status, support for practitioner career advancement, support for prac- tice-oriented research and projects, election to leadership roles, support for obtaining licensure, and overall influence on the fu- ture of SIOP. We agree that SIOP needs to do more in these areas. When setting the practitioner agenda for the future, it is import- ant to review and acknowledge the work that SIOP leadership, committees, and volunteers have accomplished over the last several years to address practitioners’ needs. Many actions and programs initiated by volunteer committees and leadership have yielded positive results and, in our view, have closed gaps in ser- vice to practitioners. However, other gaps exist, some of which The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist 23