Organizational Psychology 1

Running head: ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY

Organizational Psychology

Michelle Hancock

PSYCH/570

February 28, 2011

Edward Garrido
 Organizational Psychology 2

Organizational Psychology

Among the most significant problems plaguing organizations today is considerable

reduction of employee retention (US Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2009). Subsequently, it comes

as no surprise, today’s workers also report the lowest level of job satisfaction in two decades (US

Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2009). Organizational psychology provides executive leaders with

insight into how employee behaviors and attitudes directly affect performance, quality, and

productivity, all of which contribute to employee satisfaction and retention. This added insight is

afforded through statistical data via research conducted on the company’s employees. Although

interest in individual behaviors and attitudes dates back to ancient times, studying these

behaviors within the workplace setting (organizational psychology) is among the youngest

disciplines of psychology (Britt & Jex, 2008). Organizational psychology shares many

similarities to other psychology disciplines like occupational psychology and social psychology;

however, further review identifies unique characteristics distinguishable only to this field.

Organizational Psychology Defined

Historically, organizational interest in incorporating psychological theories and principles

was within the context of job analysis, employee selection and training, and performance

measures, as defined in industrial psychology (Levy, 2010). However, the increasing awareness

of the importance that human relations skills haves in influencing employee behaviors prompted

the development of organizational psychology. Organizational psychology explores and offers

scientific study of individual behaviors that affect motivation, leadership, work attitudes, and the

structure, processes, and culture of organizations. Although industrial and organizational

psychology are separate disciplines, they are also very interdependent. For example, a company
 Organizational Psychology 3

struggling with performance issues (industrial psychology), is likely to have motivational or

attitudinal problems as well (Levy, 2010).

Evolution of Organizational Psychology

As previously mentioned, interest in individual behaviors dates back to the Biblical days

of Moses (Britt & Jex, 2008). However, it was not until the early twentieth century that

organizational psychology began evolving into a separate discipline when Harvard University

and Western-Electric Company published the Hawthorne studies (Britt & Jex, 2008). The

Hawthorne studies unexpectedly revealed a causal relationship between employees’ positive

behaviors and novel modifications in the work environment, later termed the Hawthorne Effect

(Britt & Jex, 2008). Around this same time, American companies were facing employee

unionization (Britt & Jex, 2008). Workplace democracy, participative decision-making, and

employees’ quality of work life were issues that up until that point, most organizations had not

considered (Britt & Jex, 2008).

Another factor in the evolution of organizational psychology was the immigration of

social psychologist, Kurt Lewin, to the United States (Britt & Jex, 2008). Lewin approach

solving organizational problems through collaborated efforts of researchers of organizations as

defined in the action research model (Britt & Jex, 2008). During World War II, women filled

vacated soldiers’ positions in companies throughout the United States (Britt & Jex, 2008). This,

coupled with racial integration in the military, created increased awareness of the effects of

workplace diversity (Britt & Jex, 2008). Following World War II, studies into the significance of

human relations increased substantially (Britt & Jex, 2008). The Vietnam War sparked a

rebellious attitude in many young Americans in that blind trust for authority was less common
 Organizational Psychology 4

(Britt & Jex, 2008). Consequently, companies were required to seek alternative methods of

motivating employees (Britt & Jex, 2008).

Occupational Health Psychology v. Organizational Psychology

The primary objectives of occupational health psychology are to create, preserve, and

promote employees’ and their families’ health and well-being (Cooper, Schabracq, Travers, &

Van Maanen, 2001). Prevention of illness and injury are accomplished by providing employees a

healthy and safe working environment (Cooper et al., 2001). Unlike organizational psychology,

occupational health psychology does not necessarily concentrate on individual behaviors, but

rather focuses attention on the environment through workplace design to help employees

maintain their focus on their jobs (Cooper et al., 2001). However, like organizational

psychology, occupational health psychology offers organizations insight that significantly affects

its bottom line. For instance, in creating a healthy work environment, employees experience

increased job satisfaction, motivation, and personal and professional development. This

translates into better productivity and product or service quality (Cooper et al., 2001).

Social Psychology v. Organizational Psychology

Very similar to organizational psychology, Gordon Allport (1968) (as cited in Duncan &

Ratele, 2003 ) defined social psychology as, “an attempt to understand and explain how the

thoughts, feelings and behaviors of individuals are influenced by the actual, imagined or implied

presence of others” (p. 10). Both disciplines study individuals’ behaviors within his or hertheir

normal environments; however, organizational psychology extends the scope to include non-

human external influences. For example, a plummeting economy potentially threatens an

employee’s feeling of job security. The consequences; however can negatively affect the social

dynamics of workgroups within the organization.

 Organizational Psychology 5

Research and Statistics Role

The types of psychological research conducted in the workplace are significantly

influenced by the needs of the organization and the individual allowing access to its employees

(Chmiel, 2000). Although their interests may be similar, psychologists’ study objectives are

often different. For example, an industrial organization under escalating pressure to increase

productivity and quality while decreasing costs. Accordingly, an organization may seek means of

diversifying its services within its existing resources (Chmiel, 2000). Organizational

psychologists, however, are more interested in understanding individual behaviors in which to

base advice (Chmiel, 2000). In the previous example, for instance, organizational psychology

researchers are likely to be more interested in how the added strain impacts employees’

behaviors. Subsequently, it is difficult for organizational psychologists to be uninfluenced by

these added pressures (Chmiel, 2000). Consequently, it is vital to choose the most effective and

accurate research design and methods pertinent to each organization.

Research Scope

Non-scientific analysis of an organizational concern is descriptive; whereas, scientific

analysis delves deeper to identify an explanation about why the situation exists and what caused

it to occur (Levy, 2010). Once an explanation is identified, researchers develop a theory or

prediction to anticipate similar situations before they happen (Levy, 2010). The benefits of an

organizational study are significantly limited if prediction of future occurrences is unavailable

(Levy, 2010). Following the description, explanation, and prediction, organizational psychology

research defines means of controlling (manipulating) precursors leading to the event (Levy,

2010).

Methods and Statistical Analysis

 Organizational Psychology 6

Organizational psychology research often incorporates four methods of collecting data.

These include 1) surveys, 2) observation, 3) quasi-experimentation, and 4) experimentation (Britt

& Jex, 2008). Each method contains its own unique advantages and disadvantages.

Observational biases and cost deem some qualitative research methods, like observation, less

feasible to use. Quantitative methods like experimentation and quasi-experimentation; however,

are used in organizational psychology studies, albeit because of artificiality of laboratory settings

(experimentation) and difficulty in finding real-world settings conducive to manipulation and

random selection (quasi-experimentation), neither are used as often as surveys (Levy, 2010).

Employee surveys offer valuable insight into employees’ beliefs and attitudes about their

superiors, coworkers, and overall organization (Levy, 2010).

After data is collected, it is important to identify the best method to describe and

summarize the findings. Since the relationship among predictions and variables is most pertinent,

correlation and regression are often the most useful (Levy, 2010). However, when conducting

analysis of a substantial number of different resources, meta-analysis would offer a more

practical means of quantifying variable relationships (Levy, 2010).

Conclusion

As today’s multigenerational and multicultural workforce continues to grow,

organizational leaders must strive to enhance communication, motivation, and socialization of

their employees. Improving performance and fostering employee well-being are two vital factors

that directly impact an organization’s success. Therefore, the insight provided through

organizational psychology research will ultimately prove to be among the most valuable

resources available.
 Organizational Psychology 7

References

Alexander-Stamatios, G., Cooper, A, & Cooper, C.L. (2005). Research Companion to

occupational health psychology. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc.

Britt, T.W. & Jex, S.M. (2008). Organizational psychology: A scientist-practitioner approach

(2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Chmiel, N. (2000). Introduction to work and organizational psychology: A European

perspective. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers, Inc.

Cooper, C., Schabracq, M., Travers, C., & Van Maanen, D. (2001). Occupational health

psychology: The challenge of workplace stress. Leicester, UK: The British Psychological

Society.

Duncan, N. & Ratele, K. (2003). Social psychology: Identities and relationships. Lansdowne,

South Africa: UCT Press.

Levy, P.E. (2010). Industrial organizational psychology: Understanding the workplace (3rd ed.).

New York, NY: Worth Publishers.

US Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2009). American time use survey. Retrieved February 23, 2011,

from http://www.bls.gov/tus/charts/

Content = 68/70

Readability and style = 13/15 (some issues with grammar and sentence structure)

Mechanics/formatting = 15/15

Total grade = 96/100 (paper 1 day late) = 76/100 = 7.6/10