Industrial-Organizational Psychology: Roles, History, and Career Guide

Introduction to I/O Psychology

The content of industrial-organizational (I/O) psychology, as a subfield of psychology, is very broad. It ranges from the study of basic human abilities important for task performance, to the investigation of managerial problem-solving behavior, to a consideration of how work motivation is influenced by characteristics of the organization versus characteristics outside the organization (University of Minnesota, 2008).

Industrial-organizational psychology is concerned with people at work. It is also called personnel psychology. A closely related field is known as organizational psychology. Traditionally, industrial psychologists have assessed differences among individual workers and have evaluated individual jobs. Organizational psychologists generally seek to understand how workers function in an organization, and how the organization functions in society (Industrial psychology, n.d.).

The distinctions between industrial psychology and organizational psychology are not always clear. Thus, the two areas are often referred to jointly as industrial/organizational psychology, or I/O psychology. I/O psychologists work for businesses, consulting firms, government departments, and colleges and universities (Industrial psychology, n.d.).

Both industrial and organizational psychologists help determine fair pay scales, generally based on the levels of skill and education a job requires and any hazards it poses. I/O psychologists also research the causes of industrial accidents and ways to reduce them.

Organizational psychologists devote much time to job satisfaction. They investigate factors found to relate to satisfaction, including employee turnover, absenteeism, age, pay, and attitudes toward unions. Organizational psychologists also study motivation because evidence suggests that both motivation and ability are necessary for employees to succeed in their jobs. As a result, psychologists develop systems for rewarding good performance and redesign jobs for greater interest and challenge (Industrial psychology, n.d.).

History of Industrial-Organizational Psychology

Organizational psychologists also help maximize efficiency by redesigning the lines of authority or communication within an organization. They may also work to improve efficiency by addressing physical factors such as work schedules, layout, the design of tools and equipment, and levels of heat, light, and noise (Industrial psychology, n.d.).

I/O practitioners conduct a wide range of research and studies designed to provide information about all phases of the workplace. Topics include stigmas in organizations (related to weight, physical attractiveness, sexual orientation, disability, religious beliefs, and race), sexual harassment, the role of personality traits in hiring, barriers to employment for workers with disabilities, workplace culture during company mergers, selection of law enforcement officers, reduction of absenteeism, workplace aggression, what attracts individuals to certain organizations, and the leadership behaviors of women as managers (SIOP, 2006).

Industrial and organizational psychologists direct consulting and executive search firms, work for leadership centers, corporations, and universities. At this juncture in U.S. economic history — with highly qualified people, from hourly wage earners to executive boardrooms, being vital to business success — I/O psychologists are positioned to play major roles in helping corporations manage their workforces (SIOP, 2006).

Hugo Münsterberg, considered by many to be "the father of industrial psychology," pioneered the application of psychological findings from laboratory experiments to practical matters. In 1911 he cautioned managers to be concerned with "all the questions of the mind … like fatigue, monotony, interest, learning, work satisfaction, and rewards." He was also the first to encourage government-funded research in the area of industrial psychology. In 1913, his book Psychology and Industrial Efficiency addressed topics such as personnel selection and equipment design (McCarthy, 2002).

Münsterberg's early I/O psychology remained influential well into the 1950s. It assumed that people need to fit the organization, and thus applied behavioral science largely consisted of helping organizations shape people to serve as interchangeable parts in an organizational machine.

In 1911, Frederick Taylor's book The Principles of Scientific Management introduced his key principles: the scientific design of work methods to increase efficiency, the selection of the best workers, and training them in the best methods (McCarthy, 2002).

In 1924, the famous Hawthorne experiments began — studies that truly initiated industrial psychology — and led to the discovery of the "Hawthorne effect." Based on a room lighting versus worker efficiency experiment, researchers found that efficiency improved as lights were turned up. The striking finding, however, was that worker efficiency continued to improve even as the lights were dimmed again. This was attributed to workers wanting to "please" the Harvard scientists and impress them (McCarthy, 2002).

The Hawthorne effect stated that a positive change in behavior occurred following the onset of a novel treatment — typically new or increased attention — but that the effect eventually wore off and behavior returned to its original state as the novelty dissipated.

A Typical Day for an I/O Psychologist

I/O psychology is a relatively recent subfield of psychology; it did not become fully productive until the late 1920s. Several precursor movements had attempted to improve the workplace before then. Differential psychology, which became popular during World War I, focused on how people differ from one another but was not very successful in improving job performance. Experimental psychology, the second major approach, treated everyone as the same and attempted to establish universal laws about human similarity — it too fell short. Scientific management, the third approach, held that there is only "one best way" to perform a job; it relied on money as a motivator and excluded the concept of job satisfaction. The fourth and final precursor was the human relations movement, which sought to keep workers satisfied through motivation and job satisfaction (Morris, 2000).

The Hawthorne Studies continued until approximately 1932. Among their lasting conclusions were that a workplace must be viewed as a social system, not merely a productive one; that including workers in decision-making can reduce resistance to change; and that individual work behavior is determined by a complex set of factors (Morris, 2000).

In 1939, Kurt Lewin led the first empirical study of the effects of leadership styles, initiating arguments for the use of participative management techniques. During the late 1940s and early 1950s, clinical psychologists Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow developed theories of motivation that supported the human relations movement (McCarthy, 2002).

During the mid-1960s into the early 1970s, significant advances in job analysis techniques emerged: the "task inventory" approach was developed from research with the U.S. Air Force; the Dictionary of Occupational Titles was published in its third edition in 1965; research at Purdue's Occupational Research Center led to publication of the Position Analysis Questionnaire in 1972; and Edwin Fleishman developed his "ability requirements" approach (McCarthy, 2002).