Value of Industrial Psychology in Human Resources - Essay Example

? Value of Industrial Organizational Psychology in Human Resources Human Resources or HR departments exist in most organizations. Even in smaller and non-profit organizations, there is at least one individual who is responsible for activities involved with maintaining the workforce of the organization. A Human Resources employee may be concerned with activities related to hiring, training and managing employees (Ryan, & Ford, 2010). They also assess employee productivity at regular intervals, and help employees adjust to requirements, and provide them with feedback and resources that would help the employees improve performance. HR personnel are also responsible for providing constructive criticism and warnings to employees who do not reach designated goals; and dealing with lay-offs and attrition (Ryan, & Ford, 2010). Thus, an HR employee is responsible for the selection and maintenance of a workforce such that both the employee and the organization benefit maximally. Industrial and Organizational psychology is a branch of psychology that attempts to explore and understand human behavior in context to the work place and its influence on other parts of life (Avedon, & Grabow, 2010). Industrial and organizational psychologists carry out research in factors that affect employment and effective performance in the workplace. They are interested in topics related to employee motivation; performance and performance assessment; recruitment and person – job fit; factors affecting employee satisfaction and the effect of work on non-work life and vice-versa. A tremendous amount of research has been carried out in all these areas by I/O psychologists, and theories have been developed that explain the different ways in which employees behave in different situations; and ways in which this behavior may be influenced (Avedon, & Grabow, 2010). These descriptions of an HR professional and an I/O psychologist would allow one to believe that their fields of work are deeply inter-linked. This may be intuitively true; but does not show in actual functioning as much as it would seem it should. Although the workplace has been studied and continues to be studied in great detail by psychologists; very little of this research gets used in HR practices (Avedon, & Grabow, 2010). Psychologists in an HR department often experience a feeling of ambiguity and a lack of surety about their roles (Ryan, & Ford, 2010). In an attempt to become a part of the department, the individual may experience a loss of their identity as a psychologist and may attempt to adapt to their workplace by placing greater emphasis on other aspects like marketing, finance or production (Ryan, & Ford, 2010). Although it is essential that the I/O psychologist understands the value of these perspectives and is able to incorporate them into practice; it is equally important that they remember the tenets of psychology and how these tenets apply to the workplace (Avedon, & Grabow, 2010). As discussed by Avedon & Grabow (2010), the I/O psychologist brings a unique set of skills to the workplace that allow for the application of theory to regularly used practices. An I/O psychologist is trained in scientific processes, and as a result of that training, possess the abilities to understand the value of a particular study or set of studies and apply their findings to the way in which people work in an organization (Avedon, & Grabow, 2010). The I/O psychologist is able to use scientific information to design and effect changes in the way organizations recruit, train and maintain employees so that the employees as well as the organization gain from the process of work (Avedon, & Grabow, 2010). They are also able to contact researchers in the field when in need of expert opinion; and are also able to provide feedback to academic organizations about the need for formal training that would allow an individual to excel in the workforce (Avedon, & Grabow, 2010). They are the best people to study the need for inter-disciplinary education, and thus help academic institutions to develop courses of education and training that will allow a student to be better equipped for a particular type of job or work environment (Avedon, & Grabow, 2010). Part of the reason why the research conducted in I/O psychology does not get translated into industrial practice is that the process of incorporating the recommendations that arise from research may be expensive (Boudreau, 2012). It is also possible that the advantage gained through the use of research based applications may be too little for the organization to consider it seriously; or that the process may take too long or too many resources that may affect the organization’s profit margins(Boudreau, 2012), at least in the short term. This of course does not discount the value to the research findings; but understanding the reasons for the reluctance of organizations in making policy changes based of empirical evidence alone may help I/O psychologists to understand the challenges that they face in being a part of the workplace. Thus, it is important that an I/O psychologist has a multi-disciplinary perspective when making recommendations for practice (Boudreau, 2012). When the I/O psychologist is able to discuss psychological factors while including information about the financial and logistical implications of these recommendations; they are better able to understand policy decisions that are made; and are also able to make recommendations that are more appropriate for the organization (Boudreau, 2012). For example, when an I/O psychologist studies an organization’s recruitment policies, and suggests changes; it is important to compare the cost of implementing these suggestions to the consequent profits to the organization in terms of output or employee satisfaction. It is also important at this point to understand that different organizations may have different priorities; and that suggestions that affect costs or increase effort significantly but do not affect the profit margins may not be welcome. Industry leaders are not incapable of understanding the results of psychological research on industrial and organizational settings (Boudreau, 2012); nor are they averse to the adaptation of these results if they will help in improving profits and reducing turnover or employees. Industry leaders understand the value of practices and structures that will allow an organization ton survive difficult times and will retain quality employees (Boudreau, 2012). They are interested in suggestions that will allow them to increase productivity and profit without increasing costs beyond reason. For example, employers understand the value of recruiting staff with better cognitive skills; but will not use complex recruitment procedures for employees if these procedures will increase the time and cost of recruitment beyond the profits that the ‘more able’ employees are capable of bringing in. similarly, employers are interested in having happy employees since happy employees are more likely to work better and more consistently. They understand the value of the family experiences of the employees; but would not like to bear the burden of each concern of each employee that does not pertain to the workplace. Major and Morganson (2011) believe that similar factors affect the implementation of research in work – family balance findings to practice. According to them, it is not adequate or appropriate to have generic policies that address or attempt to enhance the work-life balance of an individual; as different factors play a role in different types of work. An office employee and a factory employee work in very different conditions; and thus, need different resources to help them balance their work and family lives. Thus, a one-size-fits-all attitude to achieving a work-family balance for employees is often inadequate in addressing the needs of employees (Major and Morganson, 2011). Organizations are often at a loss for how to cope with this situation; and thus, may choose against the application of research to practice. According to Major and Morganson (2011), the answer lies in keeping flexible policies and allowing for interpretation of these policies as per the constraints and needs of a particular department. In order to do so, it is necessary that the organization allows the supervisors or departments the authority to take decisions and provide solutions that meet the needs of particular employees without affecting the said employees’ productivity (Major and Morganson, 2011). This elegant solution brings the use of research to the micro level as against the macro level of the organization; and allows best – alternative practices to be developed as they apply to the particular context in which the employee functions. Similar application of research in other areas of organizational functioning and Human Resources may be possible; allowing for the I/O psychologist to function in the organization effectively, and without losing their unique identity. Thus, the I/O psychologist is an individual who is the link between psychological research about individuals and groups in the workplace and the workplace itself. This individual is capable of helping an organization develop using scientific data and generalizable results; and thus can prove invaluable to the survival and growth of an organization. It is thus important to understand the role of the I/O psychologist and allow it to flourish within the Human Resources paradigm to which he/she has the capacity to contribute to significantly. References Avedon, M. & Grabow, K. (2010). Professional Identity: Organizational Psychologists as Chief Human Resource Executives. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 3, 266–268. Boudreau, J. W. (2012). Strategic Industrial–Organizational Psychology Lies Beyond HR. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 5: 86–91. Major, D.A & Morganson, V.J. (2011). Applying Industrial–Organizational Psychology to Help Organizations and Individuals Balance Work and Family. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 4, 398–401. 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. Read More