Developmental History: Organizational Psychology - Research Paper Example

Developmental History: Organizational Psychology I. Introduction.  Organizational psychology is perhaps one of the most recent branches of psychologyto gain a rare momentum and attention from different spheres of interest. Besides scholarly participation in the development of organizational psychology, the industrial sector is the other most crucial stakeholder of the topic. This branch generally deals with the intricacies of psychological impact that workforce management and organization make to the productivity of individual employees as well as the overall organizational productivity. It therefore follows that modern human resource management finds it useful to apply psychological cues outlined in the information gathered by this field of study, in order to facilitate maximization of productivity within an organization. According to Argosy University (2009), organizations ought to try out organizational psychology in order to realize the benefits of human resource empowerment form an informed perspective. In a world experiencing huge departures from industrial practices that yester years’ work relations and employee organization, the central role of psychology cannot be overemphasized. For this reason, this paper devotes attention to the topic and follows major developments that characterize its maturity over time. Scholarly contributions made at different instances have also been visited in the text. In view of this scope, major contributors and proponents of the topic have been highlighted for furtherance of understanding appropriate affiliations to the topic. At the end of the paper, I shall have illustrated how organizational psychology has evolved to be one of the leading applied psychology in the commercial sector as Marv Dunnette once reckoned (Landy, 2005). II. Historical Overview Several issues crop up when an attempt of visiting the history of organizational psychology is made. As discussed briefly below, the field has been marred by controversy concerning the scope of involvement with wide topics initially looking incoherent and irreconcilable. On the other hand, bearing in mind the fact that the discipline of psychology was inexistent or indiscreet until 1879, organizational psychology seems to be a very young field. Locating the exact origin and development could appear to be within a very short time, yet the huge implication of wide and unspecific scope would seem to be overwhelming to the time duration of its existence. Major controversies have arisen as to when the specific field of organizational psychology began, but earliest indications reveal it was at the beginning of the twentieth century. The possible time of birth of this sub-branch field of psychology is said to be between 1903 and 1910 (Aarmodt,). The author reports that Dill Scott first presented a business paper in 1903 that made application of psychology principles to resolve advertising challenges. Later in 1910, Hugo Munsterberg is said to have made a similar research presentation but on a different topic. Dill Scot was at it again in 1911 when he published a book titled increasing Human Efficiency in Business. Furthers to the uncertainties mentioned above touching on the field of industrial psychology, the initial name allocated to denote the field was also problematic. Before the World War I (WWI), uncertainty surrounded the appropriate usage of names to define the field. While some preferred to use Economic Psychology, others dubbed it Business Psychology or Employment Psychology. Interestingly, among the areas of involvement that the field made its initial contribution to was in the military during WWI. Recruiting process was well elaborated in the armies and later became applied in business like the one Thomas Edison used in 1920. At around 1915, vital contributions were made by the couple Frank and Lillian Gilbreth by reducing productivity impediment brought about by employee movement stress. Their extensive experience in management both at the business arena and family level facilitated formulation of their insights concerning employee stress and reduced productivity. Characterization of the field of organizational psychology in 1900 marked the most defining moment for the entire branch of psychology. Earlier uncertainties concerning the scope and the specific direction of study and research were resolved for a more focused approach by scholars and researchers in the field. The history of organizational psychology cannot be done independently due to its wide scope and numerous topics that have so far built it as a distinct concept. Industrial organization has since been studied under indiscreetly related topics whose research was made independently and from a long time ago. According to Kelley (1992), organizational psychology has been characterized by different theoretical approaches and in topics that are independent of each other. To reconcile the contribution of the various studies input for the topic, it is appropriate to independently visit the topics and highlighting common perspectives. It is therefore imperative to appreciate the fact that the scope of the discipline is extensive and relies on a context-centered approach to underlying issues. Kelley (1992) identifies several reference topics of organizational psychology that range from employee selection to working conditions and stress psychology. Industrial or organizational psychology design as a professional field was formulated by staff of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) after a long period of unspecified structure. Several topics of interest were highlighted and identified for consideration in the structure. Among the about 56 topics of involvement that relate to organizational psychology as identified by SIOP, the most frequently visited topics were identified as the most weighty and visited differently. It is after average linking technique that SIOP came about the possible structure of industrial psychology. Five clusters were formulated in this design to include individual evaluation, training, organizational behavior, organizational development and employee development. However, even upon clusterization of the incidental topics, there was a marked differentiation of the field into industrial and organization specialties in the field. According to Kelley (1992), the definition of the field through a consultative and interactive questionnaire used by SIOP gave the first clear definition of scope and order of content in the structure of Organizational psychology. By around 1930, the scope of application of organizational psychology had been restricted to personnel management, primarily regarding recruitment (Aamodt, 2009). Soon, researcher and scholars were exploring the possibility of introducing psychological principles into organizational psychology with regard to the quality of working atmosphere. The most important factor that the researchers targeted was attitudes possessed by the workers in the development of their work experiences. Initial studies on employee attitude and productivity were carried out at the Hawthorne Electricity Company targeting the employees and managers in terms of their working environment. 1960s witnessed introduction of law into the facilitation of employee protection with regard to job satisfaction as directed by the management. The human resource management was under increased scrutiny for cases of mistreatment of employees, on the premise that reducing harsh recruitment and job relations would increase productivity. Employment theories touching on productivity within the context of employee satisfaction and commitment were then developed in the 1970’s. Behavior modification techniques became increasingly important with contributions being forwarded by scholars such as Skinner. The last two decades of the century witnessed four major intellectual contributions appear with regard organizational psychology. First, thanks to the establishment and development of more advanced technical base, research could by this time make use of better tools. Education curriculum had been shaped to encompass the most sophisticated and accurate statistical tools for unraveling of organizational psychology. Secondly, adoption of other more advanced and established fields of psychology was being done to enhance applicability of the new field. Thirdly, introduction of family life context to industrial productivity made huge contributions to organizational psychology. Work life balance and wellness hit the industrial arena and management was to be approached from their consideration. Finally, employee selection was a major focus area in the 1980-1990 duration of time. Interviews and ability tests were to be formulated within the context of performance psychology. It was after the realization of the fact that principles of psychology can be applied in behavior influence, that attention was drawn to workplace setting. According to Tsui et al (2006), there are several issues of management that require a special link between the executive leadership and the employees with an interest of objective achievement. Professor Tsui has made several contributions to organizational psychology and facilitated similar research since 1970s. Her insights can be demonstrated in her current role as a senior human resource administrator at Motorola Corporation. One of her historical contributions that changed the development of the field of organizational psychology came in 1987 when she presented her human resource management study results at a symposium. A common perspective that is held by all theorists and scholars of organizational psychology is perhaps compensation concept. Compensation in the industrial sense entails the aspect of compromise or bargain that employers facilitate to capture employees sense of appreciation for their input. To balance compensation, individual growth and organization objectives, individual contribution must be approached from different perspectives. One of the most important approaches is the introduction of psychological intervention to create a winning industrial mindset among the players. According to Cooper and Locke (2000), compensation practices guided pioneers of organizational psychology to devise applicable procedures and interventions to achieve maximization of productivity. An individual’s behavior determines the attributes that the individual presents to the organization during the employment engagement period. It became necessary to understand how behavior can be used in intervention of workplace practices to deliver the desired results. Principles of psychology provide for the possibility of altering human behavior were then center of focus for creation of appropriate work culture and practices. Several theories have therefore been formulated over the years as part of the research work that has linked psychology and winning practices at the place of work. Employee motivation and commitment have particularly extensively been studied in the unraveling of applied psychology in industrial setting. III. Review of Related Literature  One of the earliest theoretical contributions regarding compensation was made in 1963 by John Stacey Adams (Chapman, 2010). Adams concentrated on the impact of employee motivation in an organization’s overall performance. Psychological analysis reveals that the employee is responsive to job issues that impact on motivation. Adam’s theory relied on similar studies conducted on workplace psychology to demonstrate the crucial role of motivation in employee productivity. Similar indiscreet studies had been carried out by some major pioneers of employee management and administration who include such scholars as; Maslow and Dill Scott. Apparently, there was reluctance for major contributions from psychology scholars towards the creation of a meaningful interaction between the commercial sector and psychology. The first momentous contribution came in 1970, but not after marked intervention and persuasion of the main contributor by concerned psychologists. This ground breaking input was made by Marv Dunnette, an experienced employee research official at 3M Corporation and scholar in business administration. Although Dunnette’s earlier academic specialization and qualification were in chemistry and law, his desire for research in counseling gradually brought out the psychology skills he needed. His role at 3M was after attaining relevant training at the University of Minnesota. According to Landy (2005), massive wealth of research in psychology and counseling prepared Dunnette to lay the ground for future studies and practices in organizational psychology. IV. Major Theories Adams’ Equity Theory (1963) Equity theory on employee motivation was formulated by John Stacey Adams where factors affecting an employee’s performance are linked to perceptions held about the job. If an employee-employer relationship is analyzed, several conclusions can be drawn on the relative productivity (Latham and Seijts, 2003). Employees will feel appreciated when the management adopts deliberate mechanisms to ensure that the overall productivity is not compromised. Application of psychological intervention takes advantage of benefits of a good relationship that recognizes appreciation among the employees and employers. Motivation is impacted upon by the apparent display of appreciation that the employer shows to the employee. According to Dubinsky and Levy (1989), gestures of fairness in the treatment that employers give towards their employees translate to immediate influence on the outcome. The authors demonstrate that the equity theory can be extrapolated to interpret fairness perception among employees, which impacts on their output. McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y A manager’s perceptions about the group of employees below him guide his management approach. According to Falk, Kopelman and Prottas (2010), the manager’s opinion held about the fitness of his or her employees determines the level of productivity of the overall organization. Theory X and Theory Y present situational options that the manager makes of his perception regarding the employees. It follows that both the psychological perspectives of the management are as important as those of the employees. McGregor’s presentation illustrates the impact of motivation to employees and the reverse influence it have on the management. Organizational psychology will therefore be useful if various stakeholders are dedicated to the overall productivity of the organization. Maslow Hierarchy Theory Maslow presents the postulate to the effect that employee’s motivation is led by the marked target of achieving needs on a certain order of priority. When employees understand the psychological implication of the targeted needs, they can incorporate them on the rewards and compensation of employee input for higher motivation. It follows that organizational psychology plays an important role in creation of the relevant motivation as well as work attitude and behavior change (Smith, 2010). McClelland’s Motivational Theory Employees alternatively are said to target three other important needs that human resource management ought to be aware of to trigger desired behavior. Affiliation is one of the needs where some form of identity must be created for the employee to feel secure. Power complemented by achievement is the other motivational yardsticks that assist employees to come to terms with in their employment work environment and deliver good results (Kleiner, 1983). V. Assessing the current direction of cognitive development psychology  Current developments within the field are experiencing rapid changes due to the swift realities availed by the information age. Employment relations have grown dramatically to incorporate such changes that amount to a huge departure from what the pioneers of the field envisioned. Creativity and information have poured into the information age such that new revelations arise every second of existence of the field (Latham and Seijts, 2003). In fact, it is difficult to predict the exact developments in the distance future amid the revelations of the information age. If employee selection can be facilitated remotely online, for instance, it is likewise possible that employee instructions and inspections developments will be uncertain until we experience the changes. Training and meetings can now be held at the convenience of all the players using sophisticated technology at the present day. What the future holds is a topic of suspense and anticipation for everybody. However, certain features of the organizational psychology will determine the actual level of developments currently and in to the future. Demographic changes of the industrial sector will experience some impact never before experienced, with information and technology levels changing perceptions at all levels of work engagements. One important feature of the current workforce is increased gender balance in almost all levels of participation. Women for instance continue to penetrate the labor market to make impact in areas where only men’s presence was felt before. Diversity at the workplace will therefore present different employee choices at different levels. Development of the organizational psychology will also be altered by the fluctuations in the global economic fortunes. The roles of the field will be changed the extent of jobs shifting to from certain economies to the others. For instance, labor intensive and technology intensive economies are differently distributed across developed and developing worlds. Service economies predominant in developed states will require different psychological approach from the technical economies predominant in developing states. Training and movements of employees across these areas as dictated by economic fortunes will significantly change the role of psychology in industrial setting. Work life balance issues in the changing lifestyles of the modern information age will be vocal in the shaping of organizational psychology needs. Conclusions The development of the field of organizational psychology is a very complex encounter but having identified the various distinct topics that constitute it, an accurate account or its evolution can be traced. It is appropriate to identify the various categories of motivation and commitment boosters in an organization. The wide scope of the field of organizational psychology makes it one of the most relevant fields in industrial psychology. The future of organizational psychology seems to benefit from the rapid developments in information technology and innovations that assist to develop it as its demand increases. References Aamodt, M. G. (2009) Industrial/ organizational psychology: an applied approach. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning Argosy University (2009) Helping Psychology: What is Organizational Psychology? Retrieved form: http://helpingpsychology.com/organizational-psychology Chapman, A., (2010) Adam’s Equity Theory on job motivation. Retrieved from: http://www.businessballs.com/adamsequitytheory.htm Cooper, C. L. & Locke, E. A. (2000) Industrial and organizational psychology: linking theory and practice. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell Dubinsky, A. & Levy, M., (1989) “Influence of Organizational Fairness on Work Outcomes of Retail Salespeople,” Journal of Retailing, 65(2):221-252 Falk, D. W., Kopelman, R. E., sn, D. J. (2010) “Construct Validation of a Theory X/Y Behavior Scale,” Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 31(2):120-135 Kelley, K. (1992) Issues, theory and research in industrial/ organizational psychology. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier Science Publishers Kleiner, B. H. (1983) “Integrating Major Motivational Theories,” Journal of Systems Management, 34(2):26-29 Landy, F. J. (2005) “What I Learned Along the Way,” Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Inc. Retrieved from: http://www.siop.org/TIP/backissues/Jan05/08landy.aspx Latham, B. W. & Seijts, G. H. (2003) “Creativity through Applying Ideas from Fields Other Than Ones Own: Transferring Knowledge from Social Psychology to Industrial/Organizational Psychology,” Canadian Psychology, 44(3):232 Smith, K. T. (2010) “Work-Life Balance Perspectives of Marketing Professionals in Generation Y,” Services Marketing Quarterly, 31(4):434-442 Society for Industrial and Organizational psychology (SIOP) (2009) “Industrial and Organizational Psychology,” siop.org. Retrieved form: http://www.siop.org/history/crsppp.aspx Tsui, A. S., Wang, H., Wu, B., Xin, K., & Zhang, Z. X. (2006) “Unpacking the Relationship between Executive Leadership Behavior and Organizational Culture”. Leadership Quarterly, 17: 113-137 Read More