History of Psychology Applied to Employee Selection

¶ … History of Psychology Applied to Employee Selection" appears in Historical Perspectives in Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Although it is a chapter in the book, it provides detailed information and can be used as a stand-alone text in an analysis of the subject. Vinchur (2007) divides the subject into chronological time periods, which is unusual for most essays in the field of organizational psychology. The first section is on the origins and early years of the application of psychological principles to employee selection. Surprisingly, this section covers the Industrial Age until 1930, an era in which psychology was barely recognized as a science let alone human resources being recognized as a field. The next section in the article is about Depression, World War II, and immediate postwar period employee psychology practices. Basically, this section covers 1930 until 1963. Finally, the civil rights era and "beyond" is the section that includes developments leading up to the current day.

A chronological analysis allows the author to trace trends in the field, linking those trends to the field of organizational psychology. Thus, the field as a whole is placed in its historical context. It is important to place personnel psychology in context because current and future managers will need to be aware of their own biases and assumptions, shaped by cultural and temporal factors. As a scholarly article, "A History of Psychology Applied to Employee Selection" relies on research and when possible, primary source evidence.

The author finds that the earliest era in question, that is, until 1930, provides the foundation for all further research in the field of personnel psychology and employee selection. I found this surprising, because I would have assumed that the 1960s and its burgeoning psychological research foundation would have been more applicable to organizational psychology. It turns out that the practices and procedures used by 1930 remain firmly entrenched. Technologies and other specific features of employee selection procedures have changed, but the underlying paradigm has not, according to Vinchur (2007). Whether or not this is a good thing is not within the author's province; this is a dry research article rather than a strong persuasive piece. A detached tone adds, rather than detracts from the material because the level of objectivity used to describe issues in the history of organizational psychology is impressive. Although the author asserts that the foundation for all future personnel psychology practices was laid by 1930, Vinchur (2007) does also thoroughly explicate the core differences in approaches to organizational psychology during the early years of pre-Depression era America vs. today.

For example, the nature of the workforce was profoundly different in 1910 than it was in 2010. More than a third of all American laborers were farmers; life expectancy was only 47 years and child labor was common. None of these things are even remotely close to reality just a few generations later. Such dramatic changes are attributable to several core elements, which Vinchur (2007) presents as being scientific advancements, the fusion of Darwin's theories with functionalist views in psychology; a burgeoning faith in capitalism, nearly religious in scope; and of course, industrialization. According to the author, early and pioneering psychological research had its immediate practical application in the workforce. Not all psychologists agreed that industrial/organizational psychology was a valid output for research, and yet it was the most obvious arena in which to test hypotheses related to human behavior and witness real and practical results. From the perspective of business, the principles and practice of psychology proved to be a tremendous boon.

Darwinian theory suggested that the organization was like any other ecosystem. Organisms within the organization thrive and survive, or they perish and leave. Vinchur (2007) notes that in addition to Darwin's theory, the theory of functionalism in psychology predominated in industrial and organizational psychology. Functionalism stresses individual differences, a paradigm that still holds sway in personnel psychology today. Utilitarian ethics likewise underwrote early business practices and remain extant now. Individual differences allow personnel managers to choose employees that meet specific requirements or needs in the organization. Thus, the most qualified person for the job was deemed the most useful to the company. It was believed that this method of employee selection was far superior to prior models, which might have relied on nepotism and similar methods more than on anything as pragmatic as functionalism. Skills testing and other assessments were used early on in the Industrial Age, especially in sectors requiring specific skills. A culture that championed democracy and equal rights was particularly favorable to a science of employee selection, because it suggested that America was indeed a meritocracy. Not all managers, let alone psychologists, agreed that the new psychological methods were valid or useful, but they have remained integral to organizational behavior ever since.

One of the most important developments in employee selection methods has been the use of psychological tests and assessments in the workplace. Tests were not always developed specifically for their applications in industrial and organizational psychology or in employee selection, but it is easy to see how intelligence and personality testing seemed ideal for human resources managers in seeking to hire the best possible person for the job. As Furnham, Dissou, Sloan * Chamorro-Premu (2007) point out, personality and intelligence testing are often used in conjunction with one another regardless of the potential controversies surrounding the use of such assessments. Employee selection depends on other factors, too, and the tests are rarely if ever used as the singular determination for hiring.