The "Goods" and "Betters" of Graduate-Level Industrial/Organizational Psychology Training

Let’s face it: I’m an outlier. Until about three years ago, I’d never even heard of industrial and organizational (I/O) psychology. And you can bet that I never would’ve imagined that someday I’d be pursuing my Ph.D. in organizational science and that I’d earn a master’s degree in I/O psychology en route. I’d never even taken a psychology class until I was in graduate school.

How I ended up where I am today is a long story best told over single-malt scotch (on your tab). But suffice it to say that I’ve had a relatively diverse array of experiences—as an undergrad political science and communication double major, as an officer in the U.S. Navy, and as a public-relations professional. Now, one month after attending the annual meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) and a few days away from being an official holder of my master’s degree in I/O psychology, I’m offering a few reflections about both the strengths of I/O psychology training—its “goods”—and areas in which it could improve—its “betters.”

The Goods: Strengths of Graduate-Level I/O Psychology Training

My graduate program, presumably like many others, featured specific core areas of competence that it covered very well. These competencies closely align with those delineated by SIOP: research methods, statistical methods, data analysis, measurement, job analysis, performance management, selection, work motivation, and others. Of these competencies, I’ve come to realize that the most useful ones—and the ones that are the field’s most robust differentiators—are in the areas of psychometrics, research methods, data analysis, and statistics.

Human resource professionals and many people working in related fields often acquire a baseline of knowledge about other areas within I/O psychology, but there’s something about multiple regression and correlation that you can’t pick up through osmosis. Furthermore, an understanding of the scientific method helps I/O professionals solve human-capital issues through evidence-based methods, leading to better outcomes for both the organizational and employees. So the focus on measurement, statistics, and research methods is a substantial strength of graduate-level training in I/O psychology.

The Betters: Areas in which Graduate-Level I/O Psychology Training Could Improve

My concerns with graduate-level I/O psychology training are not regarding the teaching of its core competencies. Instead, my concern is that a few core competencies that don’t appear on this list might be areas that could greatly benefit new I/O psychology graduates. In particular, I think of two general areas: (a) business acumen and (b) project management.

First, many practitioners with whom I’ve talked have discussed a need for I/O psychology training to include some measure of business training. Certainly, none would argue that a baseline level of knowledge in finance, economics, and strategy would hurt a recent master’s- or doctoral-level graduate working in an applied setting. At the very least, perhaps some business training could help I/O psychology professionals talk about what they do in ways that others in business might understand.

Second, much of the work performed by I/O psychologists revolves around projects. These projects might include, for example, designing selection systems or integrating performance appraisal tools with leadership development programs. Even for project-team members who are not in charge of the overall team (such as a new graduate), it seems that having an understanding of the basics of how to manage large projects involving numerous people sometimes across multiple lines of business, would be beneficial. An entire field of training in project management exists in almost total isolation from the training of I/O psychology.

So I may be an outlier in the field of I/O psychology, but I think that because of that experience I have slightly different perspective on both the outstanding benefits and some of the areas for growth within I/O psychology. Certainly, I’m not the first to raise these questions and many others about the field (see the SIOP exchange). But while I journey onward toward earning my Ph.D. in 2011, I’m interested to see how I/O psychology as a science and practice will continue to evolve.