Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T16:53:06.625Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Industrial-Organizational Psychology's Recurring Identity Crises: It's a Values Issue!

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2015

Joel Lefkowitz
Joel Lefkowitz*
Affiliation:
Bernard M. Baruch College, The City University Of New York
*
E-mail: joel.lefkowitz@baruch.cuny.edu, Address: 46 Landfall Road, East Hampton, NY 11937.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It's important to place the issues expressed by Ryan and Ford (2010) in historical perspective. Although they acknowledge some earlier expressions of concern, especially with respect to professional training (Naylor, 1971), I think it's fair to characterize the overall tenor of their essay as one of sounding the alarm: a new and unique impending identity crisis. However, as previously noted, “industrial-organizational psychology seems to be subject to recurring identity threats” (Lefkowitz, 2005, p. 18).

Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 3 , Issue 3 , September 2010 , pp. 293 - 299
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2010 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Psychological Association. (2003). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 57, 1060–1073.Google Scholar
Baritz, L. (1960). The servants of power: A history of social science in American industry. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
Carr, S. C. (2007). I-O psychology and poverty reduction: Past, present, and future? The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 45, 43–50.Google Scholar
Donaldson, T. (1982). Corporations and morality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Gasser, M., Butler, A., Waddilove, L., & Tan, R. (2004). Defining the profession of industrial-organizational psychology. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 42, 15–20.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. (2009). Everybody talks about organizational justice but nobody does anything about it. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 2(2), 181–195.Google Scholar
Kimble, G. A. (1989). Psychology's two cultures. American Psychologist, 39, 833–839.Google Scholar
Kornhauser, A. (1947). Industrial psychology as management technique and as social science. American Psychologist, 2, 224–229.Google Scholar
Lefkowitz, J. (in press). Ethics in industrial-organizational psychology. In Knapp, S., VandeCreek, L., Gottlieb, M., & Handelsman, M. (Eds.). APA Handbook of Ethics in Psychology. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Lefkowitz, J. (1990). The scientist–practitioner model is not enough. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 28, 47–52.Google Scholar
Lefkowitz, J. (2003). Ethics and values in industrial-organizational psychology. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Lefkowitz, J. (2005). The values of industrial-organizational psychology: Who are we? The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 43, 13–20.Google Scholar
Lefkowitz, J. (2006). The constancy of ethics amidst the changing world of work. Human Resource Management Review, 16, 245–268.Google Scholar
Lefkowitz, J. (2008). To prosper, organizational psychology should … expand its values to match the quality of its ethics. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29, 439–453.Google Scholar
Lefkowitz, J. (2009). Promoting employee justice: It's even worse than that! Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 2, 221–225.Google Scholar
Miner, J. B. (1992). Industrial-organizational psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Muchinsky, P. M. (2006). Enhancing industrial/organizational psychology: A challenging mandate at the dawn of the 21st century. Japanese Association of Industrial/Organizational Psychology Journal, 20, 1–27.Google Scholar
Naylor, J. C. (1971). Hickory, dickory, dock! Let's turn back the clock! Professional Psychology, 2, 217–234.Google Scholar
Ryan, A. M. (2003). Defining ourselves: I-O psychology's identity quest. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 41, 21–33.Google Scholar
Ryan, A. M., & Ford, J. K. (2010). Organizational psychology and the tipping point of professional identity. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 3, 241–258.Google Scholar
Sikula, A., Olmosk, K., Kim, C. W., & Cupps, S. (2001). A “new” theory of management. Ethics and Behavior, 11, 3–21.Google Scholar
Stagner, R. (1982). Past and future of industrial/organizational psychology. Professional Psychology, 13, 892–903.Google Scholar
Thompson, L. F. (2009). Humanitarian work psychology: Examining work and organizational psychology's role in global poverty reduction. International Association of Applied Psychology (IAAP). Division 1. Work and Organizational Psychology. Newsletter #2, December, 27–31.Google Scholar
Zickar, M. J., & Gibby, R. E. (2007). Four persistent themes throughout the history of I-O psychology in the United States. In Koppes, L. (Ed.), Historical perspectives in industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 61–80). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar