What If Industrial–Organizational Psychology Decided to Take Workplace Decisions Seriously?

2010 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 386-405 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reeshad S. Dalal ◽  
Silvia Bonaccio ◽  
Scott Highhouse ◽  
Daniel R. Ilgen ◽  
Susan Mohammed ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Organizational Behavior ◽  
Organizational Psychology ◽  
Research Literature ◽  
Judgment And Decision Making ◽  
Major Premise ◽  
Industrial Organizational Psychology ◽  
The Future ◽  
Cross Fertilization

The major premise of this article is that increased exposure to—and increased application of—theories, methods, and findings from the judgment and decision-making (JDM) field will aid industrial–organizational psychology and organizational behavior (IOOB) researchers and practitioners in studying workplace decisions. To this end, we first provide evidence of the lack of cross-fertilization between JDM and IOOB and then provide an overview of the JDM research literature. Next, with the aid of a panel of prominent IOOB scholars who share JDM interests, we discuss the philosophical and methodological traditions in IOOB and JDM, the areas in which IOOB has already been enriched by JDM as well as the areas in which it might be further enriched in the future, ways of increasing cross-fertilization from JDM to IOOB, and ways in which IOOB can in turn contribute to JDM. Through this focal article, we hope to spark conversation and ultimately engender more cross-fertilization between JDM and IOOB.

Taking Workplace Decisions Seriously: This Conversation Has Been Fruitful!

2010 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 455-464 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvia Bonaccio ◽  
Reeshad S. Dalal ◽  
Scott Highhouse ◽  
Daniel R. Ilgen ◽  
Susan Mohammed ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Organizational Behavior ◽  
External Validity ◽  
Laboratory Experiments ◽  
Internal Validity ◽  
Basic Research ◽  
Judgment And Decision Making ◽  
Practical Applications ◽  
Industrial Organizational Psychology ◽  
Cross Fertilization

We are gratified by the large number of commentaries to our focal article (Dalal, Bonaccio, et al., 2010) that advocated greater integration of industrial–organizational psychology and organizational behavior (IOOB) with the field of judgment and decision making (JDM). The commentaries were uniformly constructive and civil. Our disagreements with the commentaries are mild and are limited primarily to the roles of external validity, internal validity, and laboratory experiments in IOOB. For the majority of our response, we attempt to build on the views expressed in the commentaries and to articulate some thoughts regarding the future. We structure our response according to the following themes: barriers to cross-fertilization between IOOB and JDM, areas of existing and potential JDM-to-IOOB cross-fertilization, areas of potential IOOB-to-JDM cross-fertilization, and ways to increase (and ideally institutionalize) cross-fertilization. We hope our focal article and our response to the commentaries will help to ignite exciting basic research and important practical applications associated with decision making in the workplace.

scholarly journals Perspectives of a Practitioner-Scientist on Organizational Psychology/Organizational Behavior

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary P. Latham
Keyword(s):  
Organizational Behavior ◽  
Doctoral Programs ◽  
Organizational Psychology ◽  
Theory Building ◽  
The Future ◽  
Journal Editorial ◽  
Deductive Theory ◽  
Qualitative Analyses

In this article I comment on areas where I agree/disagree with the five previous perspectives on organizational psychology/organizational behavior (OP/OB). This is followed by a dire prediction of the future for OP doctoral programs, criticisms of the journal editorial processes and the overemphasis on deductive theory building, the value of qualitative analyses and enumerative reviews, the importance of mentors for advancing one's career, and the strengths and weaknesses of our scholarly societies. The article ends with a call for improving the balance currently in favor of scientists at the expense of practitioners.

Industrial-Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior Management

2000 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 27-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara R. Bucklin ◽  
Alicia M. Alvero ◽  
Alyce M. Dickinson ◽  
John Austin ◽  
Austin K. Jackson
Keyword(s):  
Organizational Behavior ◽  
Behavior Management ◽  
Organizational Psychology ◽  
Organizational Behavior Management ◽  
Industrial Organizational Psychology

The role of decision making in industrial-organizational psychology

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reeshad S. Dalal ◽  
Silvia Bonaccio ◽  
Scott Highhouse ◽  
Daniel R. Ilgen ◽  
Susan Mohammed ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Organizational Psychology ◽  
Industrial Organizational Psychology

Multiple Dimensions of Organizational Commitment: Implications for Future Accounting Research

2001 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 221-251 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alice A. Ketchand ◽  
Jerry R. Strawser
Keyword(s):  
Organizational Commitment ◽  
Organizational Behavior ◽  
Organizational Psychology ◽  
Public Accounting ◽  
Accounting Firms ◽  
Accounting Research ◽  
Multiple Dimensions ◽  
Industrial Organizational Psychology ◽  
Organizational Consequences

Organizational commitment (OC) is a concept that seeks to capture the nature of the attachments formed by individuals to their employing organizations. Beginning with Porter et al. (1974), prior researchers have attempted to identify what factors influence the formation of OC in individuals and how OC (once formed) influences important organizational consequences. Recent research in the industrial/organizational psychology and organizational behavior literature has identified the existence of multiple dimensions of OC and found different relationships between these dimensions and important organizational consequences. However, with some isolated exceptions (Ketchand and Strawser 1998; Kalbers and Fogarty 1995; Caldwell et al. 1990), accounting research has examined only one dimension of OC. This manuscript summarizes previous research in the industrial/organizational psychology, organizational behavior, and particularly accounting literature regarding the identification of various dimensions and subdimensions of OC and the relationships of these dimensions and subdimensions with important antecedents, correlates, and consequences. In light of these findings, suggestions are provided for accounting researchers to evaluate: (1) the role of multiple dimensions of OC in influencing attachment to the organization, (2) how changes in the public accounting work environment affect the role of OC, and (3) how OC research can provide practical results for public accounting firms.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document