INTRODUCTION TO ORGANIZATION PSYCHOLOGY

Psychology is the scientific study of the human mind and behavior. Industrial/organizational
(I/O) psychologists focus the lens of psychological science on a key aspect of human life,
namely, their work lives. In general, the goals of I/O psychology are to better understand and
optimize the effectiveness, health, and well-being of both individuals and organizations. The
specific topics of study in I/O psychology include but are not limited to the following:

Team and organizational effectiveness—organization culture and climate, group

dynamics, cross-cultural issues, customer service, labour relations, Employee recruitment,
selection, and promotion— recruitment practices, selection strategies and systems,
assessment centres, selection process fairness, hiring, consultation and expert testimony on
Equal Employment Opportunity and Affirmative Action (EEO/AA), Individual differences,
measurement and testing— human cognitive abilities, physical abilities, personality
dispositions, vocational interests, test theory and scale construction, validity and validation
strategies, Employee motivation—fact, Training and development—executive coaching,
management development, training , Performance management—design of job performance
measurement systems for feedback and performance improvement, performance appraisal
and management, Workplace health—ergonomics, human factors, and safety; overcoming
stress; Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Employee attitudes and
satisfaction—empowerment, retention, job satisfaction, conflict and stress management,
aging and retirement, turnover, organizational commitment, Compensation and benefits—
pay, perks, rewards, recognition, Communication effectiveness—organizational
communication design, processes, and effectiveness; technology-facilitated or that motivate
employees, job design and evaluation, Change management—mergers and acquisitions,
process reengineering, productivity and quality improvement, downsizing, Employee
citizenship and deviance—harassment, bullying, prosaically behavior, violence

Given that I/O psychology is both a science and a practice, enhanced understanding of
the foregoing topics leads to applications and interventions that benefit individuals,
organizations, and the communities in which people live and work. The field is experiencing
tremendous growth. Take, for example, the following data. Over the 18-year span from 1986
to 2004, there has been a nearly 50% increase in I/O doctoral programs and a greater than
200% increase in I/O master’s programs. Membership in the Society for Industrial and
Organizational Psychology (SIOP), the principal professional organizational of I/O
psychologists, has increased more than 65% since 1991. Attendance at the annual SIOP
conference has increased 400% in the last 20 years and is now approaching 4,000 attendees.
Arguably, I/O is the fastest growing area of psychology.

This growth has been spurred in part by the steadily increasing demand for the
services of I/O psychologists. Employment surveys have been taken for many years by SIOP.
For the last 25 years, these surveys have consistently indicated near zero unemployment for
the society’s membership, a clear indicator of the need for I/O psychologists. The

American Psychological Association’s Report of the Employment Status of 1997

Graduates and the follow-up Report of the Employment Status of 2001 Graduates show that
I/O psychologists composed the highest proportion of individuals employed full-time (lowest
unemployment rates), compared with other fields of specialization (health service provider,
social/personality, developmental/educational, physiological/ experimental).

ORGANIZATION PSYCHOLOGY

The field of organizational psychology is concerned with the study of organizations. Since
organizational psychology is part of the larger field of psychology and Psychology is the
scientific study of individual human behavior and mental processes. Two things are important
to note from this. First, organizational psychologists use methods of scientific inquiry to
both study and intervene in organizations. The other important part is that psychology
focuses on individual behavior.

Organizational psychology is a field that utilizes scientific methodology to better

understand the behavior of individuals working in organizational settings. This
knowledge is also used, in a variety of ways, to help make organizations more effective.
Effective organizations are typically more productive; often provide higher-quality services
to customers. For private organizations, financial success often results in greater job security
for employees, and increased shareholder wealth for investors. For public organizations, such
as police departments, municipal governments, and public universities, success means higher-
quality services and cost savings to tax payers. Organizational psychology also considers
how work environments and management styles influence worker motivation,
satisfaction, and productivity.
BRIEF HISTORY

The historical development of I–O psychology had parallel developments in the United States
and other countries, such as the UK, Australia, Germany, the Netherlands, and eastern
European countries such as Romania. However, many foreign countries do not have a
published English language account of their development of I–O psychology. The roots of I-
O psychology trace back nearly to the beginning of psychology as a science, when Wilhelm
Wundt founded one of the first psychological laboratories in 1876 in Leipzig, Germany. In
the mid-1880s, Wundt trained two psychologists who had a major influence on the eventual
emergence of I–Psychology: Hugo Munsterberg and James McKeen Cattell. Instead of
viewing differences as “errors”, Cattell was one of the first to recognize the importance of
these differences among individuals as a way of predicting and better understanding their
behavior. Walter Dill Scott, who was a contemporary of Cattell, was elected President of the
American Psychological Association (APA) in 1919, was arguably the most prominent I–O
psychologist of his time. Scott, along with Walter Van Dyke Bingham worked at the
Carnegie Institute of Technology, developing methods for selecting and training sales
personnel.

The “industrial” side of I–O psychology has its historical origins in research on
individual differences, assessment, and the prediction of work performance. This branch
crystallized during World War I, in response to the need to rapidly assign new troops to duty
stations. Scott and Bingham volunteered to help with the testing and placement of more than
a million army recruits. In 1917, together, along with other prominent psychologists, adapted
a well-known intelligence test, (the Stanford Binet test, designed for testing one individual at
a time) to make it suitable for mass group testing. This new test form was called the Army
Alpha. After the War, the growing industrial base in the US added impetus to I–O
psychology. The private industry set out to emulate the successful testing of army personnel,
and mental ability testing soon became a commonplace in the work setting. Industrial
psychology began to gain prominence when Elton Mayo arrived in the United States in 1924.

Mayo was fascinated by not the efficiency of workers, but their emotions and how
work may cause workers to act in particular pathological ways. These observations of
workers’ thoughts and emotions were studied to see how prone employees would be to resist
management attempts to increase productivity and how sympathetic to labour unions they
would become. These studies are known as Hawthorne studies. The results of these studies
ushered in a radically new movement known as the Human Relations Movement. This
movement was interested in the more complicated theories of motivation, the emotional
world of the worker, job satisfaction, and interviews with workers.

World War II brought in new problems that led to I–O Psychology’s continued
development. The war brought renewed interest in ability testing (to accurately place recruits
in these new technologically advanced military jobs), the introduction of the assessment
centre, concern with morale and fatigue of war industry workers, and military intelligence.
Post-Second World War years were a boom time for industry with many jobs to be filled and
applicants to be tested. Interestingly, however, when the war ended and the soldiers came
back to work, there was an increasing trend towards labour unrest with rising numbers of
authorized and unauthorized work stoppages staged by unions and workers. This caused
management to grow concern about work productivity and worker attitude surveys became of
much interest in the field. Following Industrial Organizational Psychology’s admission into
Division 14 of the American Psychological Association, there continued to be an influx of
new tests for selection, productivity, and workforce stability. This influx continued unabated
until the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Section, Title VII dealt with employment
discrimination and required employers to justify and show relevance for the use of tests for
selection.

The mid-1960s seemed to mark a line of demarcation between “classic” and

“modern” thinking. During this period, the name changed from just industrial psychology to
industrial and organizational psychology. The earlier periods addressed work behavior from
the individual perspective, examining performance and attitudes of individual workers.
Although this was a valuable approach, it became clear that there were other, broader
influences not only on individual, but also on group behavior in the work place. Thus, in
1973, “organizational” was added to the name to emphasize the fact that when an individual
joins an organization (e.g., the organization that hired him or her), he or she will be exposed
to a common goal and a common set of operating procedures.

In the 1970s in the United Kingdom, references to occupational psychology became

more common than I-O psychology. Rigor and methods of psychology are applied to issues
of critical relevance to business, including talent management, coaching, assessment,
selection, training, organizational development, performance, wellbeing and work-life
balance. During the 1990s references to “business psychology” became increasingly
common. Business psychology is defined as the study and practice of improving working life.
It combines an understanding of the science of human behavior with experience of the world
of work to attain effective and sustainable performance for both individuals and
organizations.

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR MODELS

Organisations differ in the quality of the systems they develop and maintain and in the results
they achieve. Varying results are substantially caused by different models of organisational
behavior. These models constitute the belief system that dominates management’s thought
and affects management’s actions in each organisation. Hence, there are different types of
organisational behavior models. These are as follows:

1) Autocratic
2) Custodial
3) Supportive
4) Collegial

1. The Autocratic Model.

Might is right” is the motto of the theory. Employees are to follow their boss. Management
thinks that employees are passive and resistant to organisational needs.

The autocratic model has existed for thousands of years. During the Industrial
Revolution, it was the prominent model of organisational function. The model depends on
power with a managerial orientation of authority- those who are in power act autocratically.
In an autocratic environment the managerial orientation is formal, official authority. This
authority is delegated by right of command over the people to it applies. The employees in
turn are oriented towards obedience to a boss, not respect for a manager. The psychological
result for employees is dependence on their boss, whose power to hire, fire, and “perspire”
them is almost absolute. When an autocratic model of organisational behaviour exists, the
measure of an employee’s morale is usually his compliance with rules and orders.
Compliance is “unprotesting assent without enthusiasm” (Hicks, 1971). The autocratic model
uses one way downward communication emanating from the top down to the workers.
Although modern writers have an inherent tendency to condemn this model, it is actually
very effective in some settings, for example organisations throughout the world are based on
this model.

This model however, also has a number of disadvantages. Workers are often in the best
position to identify shortcomings in the structure and technology of the organisational
system, but downward communication prevents feedback to management. The model fails to
generate commitment among workers to accomplish organisational goals. Lastly, the model
fails to motivate workers to further develop their skills- skills that might even help the
employer. It often has disturbing side effects- employees feel insecure, frustrated, and may
even have feelings of aggression towards the management. Since employees could not vent
these feelings directly, sometimes they vented them on their families, friends and neighbours,
leading to the suffering of the entire community.

2. The Custodial Model

The custodial model provides for employees’ dependence on organisation rather than
dependence on their boss. The model emphasizes economic reward, security, organisational
dependence, and maintenance factors. The custodial approach leads to employee dependence
on the organisation for their security and welfare, rather than being dependent on their boss
for their weekly bread.
Employees working in a custodial environment become psychologically preoccupied
with their economic rewards and benefits. As a result of their treatment, they are well
maintained and contented. However, contentment may produce only passive cooperation.
Hence, they are still not motivated enough to advance to higher capacities the result tends to
be that employees do not perform much more effectively than under the old autocratic model.
Managers holding the custodial model believe that if the insecurities, frustrations, and
aggressions of employees could be dispelled, they might feel like working. Development of
the custodial model was aided by psychologists, industrial relations specialists, and
economists.
The custodial model of organisational behaviour takes into consideration the security needs
of employees. A custodial environment gives a psychological reassurance of economic
rewards and benefits. The basis of this model is economic resources with a managerial
orientation toward money to pay wages and benefits. Clearly, if an organisation does not have
the wealth to provide pensions and pay other benefits, it cannot follow a custodial approach.
 A successful custodial approach depends on economic resources. Since employees’
physical needs are already reasonably met, the employer looks to security needs as a
motivating force. To satisfy employees’ security needs, many companies began to provide
welfare programs, such as pension plans, child-care centres at the workplace, health and life
insurance.
However, researchers found that the custodial approach leads to employee dependence on the
organisation.
Employees working in a custodial environment become psychologically preoccupied
with their economic rewards and benefits and tend to focus on economic rewards and
benefits. As a result of their treatment, they are certainly happier and more content than under
the autocratic model, but they do not have a high commitment in helping the organisation
meet its goals.
3. The Supportive Model

The basic idea behind this theory is that leadership motivates the people to work and not the
power of money as in custodial model. Under the supportive model, the workers feel a sense
of participation and task involvement in the organisation.it also seeks to create supportive
work environment and motivate employees to perform well on their job .The manager’s role
is one of helping employee solve their problems and accomplish their work. This model has
been found to be effective in affluent countries where workers are more concerned about their
higher level needs affiliation and esteem. The basis of this model is leadership with a
managerial orientation of support. The supportive model depends on leadership instead of
power or money.
In fact, this model has its roots in Likert’s principle of supportive relationships:
“The leadership and other processes of the organisation must be such as to ensure a
maximum probability that in all interactions and all relationships with the organisation each
member will, in the light of his background, values, and expectations, view the experience as
supportive and one which builds and maintains his sense of personal worth and importance”
(Likert, 1961).
Through leadership, management provides a climate to help employees grow and
accomplish in the interests of the organisation the things of which they are capable.it is
believed that work is as natural to employees as play. Workers are not by nature passive and
resistant to organisational needs, but that they are made so by an inadequately supportive
climate at work. Given the right conditions, employees will seek achievement and
responsibility and will work hard, without being pushed. They will take responsibility,
develop a drive to contribute, and even try to improve themselves if management will give
them half a chance. Management orientation, therefore, is to support the employee’s job
performance rather than to simply support employee benefit payments as in the custodial
approach. The employees in turn are oriented towards job performance and participation. The
employee need that is met is status and recognition. Since management supports employees
in their work, the psychological result is a feeling of participation and task involvement in the
organisation. Employee may say “we” instead of “they” when referring to their organisation.
The supportive model works well with both employees and managers, and has been widely
accepted at least in principle.
One advantage of this model as you can see is that, supportive behaviour is not the
kind of behaviour that requires money. It is a part of management’s lifestyle at work, that
reflects in the way that it deals with other people. This model tends to be very effective
particularly in developed nations because it awakens employee drives toward a wide array of
needs. It is less applicable in developing nations like ours, because employees might still be
trying to meet their sustenance needs. As their needs for material rewards and security
become satisfied, employees here might also demand a more supportive approach, as has
already started to happen.

4. The Collegial Model

The term Collegial relates to a body of persons having a common purpose. The collegial
model, which embodies a term concept, first achieved widespread applications in research
laboratories and similar work environments. The collegial model traditionally was based on
the principle of mutual contribution by employer and employees. Each employee should
develop a feeling that he is a part of the whole and contributing something to the whole and
recognizes the others contribution. Management is supported to be joint contribution and not
the boss. The managerial orientation is toward teamwork. Management is the coach that
builds a better team. Managers are seen as joint contributors rather than as bosses. Since the
management nurtures a feeling of partnership with its employees, the employees feel
themselves as an asset to the organisation. They feel needed and useful. The employee’s
response to this situation is responsibility. They feel that managers are contributing also, so it
is easy to accept and respect their roles in their organisation. For example employees produce
quality work not because management tells them to do so or because the supervisor will
reprimand them or worse even fire them if they do not, but because they feel inside
themselves an obligation to provide others with high quality. They also feel an obligation to
uphold quality standards that will bring credit to their jobs and company. The collegial
approach for the employee is self-discipline. In this kind of environment employees normally
feel some degree of fulfilment, worthwhile contribution, and self-actualisation, even though
the amount may be modest in some situations. This self -actualisation will lead to moderate
enthusiasm in performance. Some organisations, for e.g., most human service organisations
have a goal of creating a collegial atmosphere to facilitate achieving their purposes. The
psychological result of the collegial approach for the employee is self-discipline. Feeling
responsible, employees discipline themselves for performance on the team much in a similar
same way that the members of a football team discipline themselves to training standards and
the rules of the game. The employee need that is met is self-actualisation. The performance
result is moderate enthusiasm. If the sense of partnership is established, employees produce
quality work and seek to cooperate with co-workers, not because management directs them to
do so, but because of their internal obligation to produce high quality work.

THEORIES OF MANAGEMENT

 Bureaucracy
Max Weber (1964-1920) a German sociologist introduced the theory of bureaucracy. His
major contribution to the theory is the concept of authority (legal, traditional,
charismatic), structure and its inter-se relationship. In bureaucratic model, rule of law
exists that lead to impersonal behaviour employees. Relations are based on position in the
hierarchy. Weber suggests standardization of methods, systems, processes, job contents
and tools for smooth operation. Selection and promotion of employees should be based on
competence. But the theory is based on rigid rules and regulations having no
consideration for interpersonal relationship based on emotions and human qualities.
 Scientific management
Fredrick Winslow Taylor (1856-1915), Frank Gilberth his wife Lillan Gilberth and Henry
Gantt have done pioneering work in the field of management. They evolved methods and
techniques and transformed the field of management in which all works were to be done
in the scientific way. Taylor’s work was so unique that he eventually came to be known
as the father of scientific management. He further defined managing as ‘knowing exactly
what you want men to do and then see that they do it the best and the cheapest way’.
Some of the features of scientific management are separation of planning and doing,
 functional foremanship, job analysis standardization, scientific selection and training of
workers financial incentives, economies and mental revolution. But Taylor considered
human resources as component of large productive system. Man was literally equated
with machine and his motives and desires had no place in the b scientific management.
The theory was not people oriented.

 Process management theory

The real father of modern management theory is the French industrialist Henry Fayol. His
contribution is generally termed as process management and administrative management.
Fayol looked at the problem from the top management point of view however he has
emphasise that principles of management are flexible and not absolute he developed
principles from management namely, division of labour, parity of authority and
responsibility , disciple , unity of command, unity of direction, subordination of
individual to general interest , fair remuneration to employees , centralization and
decentralization, scalar chain, equity, order, initiative, stability of tenure of personal and
spirit de corps

NEO-CLASSICAL THEORIES

 Human Relations Era

It started in 1927 onwards, it was a moment spear headed by Elton Myer. The essence of
the movement was the belief that the key to higher productivity was employee
satisfaction.

Hawthorne Studies

Hawthorne Studies were initially sponsored by national research council at the

western electric companies Hawthorne works in Cicero, Illions in the year 1924. The
study envisaged to formation of control group and experimental group. Control group
members worked under constant illumination intensity while the experiment group
was subjected to wary intensity level. It was expected that the individual output be
directly related to intensity of light.
 Conduct and findings of the study: As the illumination was increased in the
experiment group, output increased in both the group. As the light level was dropped
in the experimental group, productivity continued to increase in both the groups.
Productivity decrease was observed in the experimental group only when the light
intensity has been reduced to that of moonlight. Elton Mayo who at that time was
working at Harvard University as professor, joined the study group along with his
team. Following studies were undertaken by him, which started on the year 1927 and
lasted up to 1932. Elton Mayo and his colleagues carried out the studies where
number of variables were tested. These were place of work, place and length of rest
pause, length of working days, length of work, method of payment, free mid- morning
lunch etc. in relation to productivity.

Elton Mayo made a new beginning on human factor in functioning of the

organization and attainment of organizational goals. Hawthorne studies have proved
that experiment and behavioural research can play a vital role in management and
decision making. Thus, the study of management shifted from a stimulus – response
notion to understanding the stimulus – the worker’s feelings and reactions. Thus, the
concept the” Rational Man” to “Social man”.

 Need Hierarchy Theory :

Abraham Maslow’s original work of needs theories were undertaken with the
rehabilitation of people in mind. Today’s the need hierarchy theory of Maslow is used in
management to motivate workers. Maslow’s theory generally state five needs of human
beings Viz, Physiological , safety , belonging,(Social)’ esteem and self- actualization .
one thing that must be remembered is that the original hierarchy needs theory has six
needs Maslow called them Meta needs , comprising a range of different needs such as ‘
cognitive ‘ and ‘aesthetic’ which exist s between esteem and self –actualization needs. He
further stated \ that needs do not disappear but its potency is reduced and the next higher
order needs takes precedence.
Theory x and theory y-McGregor
Theory x and theory y were introduced by Douglas McGregor based on two diagonally
opposite views of human behavior.
Theory X: McGregor assumed that average human being dislikes work and will try to
avoid it if possible. Employees are lazy, they must be controlled, coerced and even
punished to achieve organizational goals. Average employee do not accept responsibility
 and seek direction from their superiors. They lack ambition. McGregor therefore
recommend organizations so structured that enable close supervision, tight control and
managed must exert energy to achieve organizational objective.
Theory Y: theory Y suggest that average human being likes work and takes it as natural
as play. Employee can exercise can exercise self-direction and self-control and given the
proper working conditions, average person seeks responsibilities. McGregor felt that
wisdom is widely spread among the employees and they are innovative and can take
quality decisions. Management must appreciate the individual and organizational goals
and create such environment, which is conductive for its attainment. Reward system,
recognition and facilities for creativity should be provided.
McGregor in his theory displayed a total recognition of humanistic approach. He laid
stress on delegation of authority, setting organizational objective and leaving it to the
employees to attain the same. He carried forward the behavior approach proposed by
mayo, Maslow in mid-20th century. McGregor’s theory y is as valid today as it was 50
years ago.

MODERN MANAGEMENT THEORY

 Systems approach to management

Kast and Riosenzwing, “defines system as an organized unitary whole composed of two
or more interdependent parts, components, or sub-systems and delineated by identifiable
boundaries from its environment super-system.” A system has several parts. These
dynamics in nature and therefore interact with each other. The parts or systems are
interdependent and interrelated. The interdependence is required due to specialized nature
of job, division of labor, sharing of limited resources and scheduling of activities.
Creating various departments that carries out the work in the organization s, sub-
departments and sections. Work is carried out by teams and groups who performed
specialized task to accomplish overall organizational objective. Change is one department
affect the other departmental work.
 Contingency Theory of management
According to Kast and Rosenzweing” the contingency view seeks to understand the inter-
relationship within and among sub-system as well as between organizations and its
environment and to define patterns of relationship and configuration of variables. It
emphasizes the multivariate conditions and in specific circumstances. Hence, a
 contingency approach is an approach where the behavior of one sub-unit is dependent on
its environment relationship to other units that have control over the consequences desired
by that sub-unit.

COMMON ORGANIZATIONAL DESIGNS

Three of the more common organizational designs : the simple structure , the
bureaucracy, and the matrix structure .

1. The Simple Structure

The simple structure is most widely adopted in small businesses in which the manager and
owner are one and the same. Consider a retail men’s store owned and managed by Jack Gold.
He employs five full-time salespeople, a cashier, and extra personnel for weekends and
holidays, but Jack “runs the show.” Though he is typical, large companies in times of crisis,
often simplify their structures as a means of focusing their resources. The strength of the
simple structure lies in its simplicity. It’s fast, flexible, and inexpensive to operate, and
accountability is clear. One major weakness is that it becomes increasingly inadequate as an
organization grows, because its low formalization and high centralization tend to create
information overload at the top. As size increases, decision making typically becomes slower
and can eventually come to a standstill as the single executive tries to continue making all the
decisions. This proves the undoing of many small businesses. If the structure isn’t changed
and made more elaborate, the firm often loses momentum and can eventually fail. The simple
structure’s other weakness is that it’s risky—everything depends on one person. One illness
can literally destroy the organization’s information and decision-making centre.

2. The Bureaucracy
The bureaucracy is characterized by highly routine operating tasks achieved through
specialization, strictly formalized rules and regulations, tasks grouped into functional
departments, centralized authority, narrow spans of control, and decision making that follows
the chain of command. Bureaucracy is a dirty word in many people’s minds.

However, it does have advantages. Its primary strength is its ability to perform
standardized activities in a highly efficient manner. Putting like specialties together in
functional departments results in economies of scale, minimum duplication of people and
equipment, and employees who can speak “the same language” among their peers.
Bureaucracies can get by with less talented—and hence less costly—middle- and lower-level
managers because rules and regulations substitute for managerial discretion. Standardized
operations and high formalization allow decision making to be centralized. There is little
need for innovative and experienced decision makers below the level of senior executives.

The major weakness of a bureaucracy is: (a) bureaucratic specialization can create
conflicts in which functional-unit goals override the overall goals of the organization. (b)
Obsessive concern with following the rules. When cases don’t precisely fit the rules, the
simple structure has a low degree of departmentalization, wide spans of control, authority
centralized in a single person, and little fit the rules. There is no room for modification. The
bureaucracy is efficient only as long as employees confront familiar problems with
programmed decision rules.

3. The Matrix Structure

Matrix structure combines two forms of departmentalization: functional and product.

Companies that use matrix like structures include ABB, Boeing, BMW, IBM, and P&G.

The strength of functional departmentalization is putting like specialists together,

which minimizes the number necessary while allowing the pooling and sharing of specialized
resources across products. Its major disadvantage is the difficulty of coordinating the tasks of
diverse functional specialists on time and within budget.

Product departmentalization has exactly the opposite benefits and disadvantages. It

facilitates coordination among specialties to achieve on-time completion and meet budget
targets. It provides clear responsibility for all activities related to a product, but with
duplication of activities and costs. The matrix attempts to gain the strengths of each while
avoiding their weaknesses.
 The most obvious structural characteristic of the matrix is that it breaks the unity-of
command concept. Employees in the matrix have two bosses: their functional department
managers and their product managers. Exhibit 1 shows the matrix form in a college of
business administration. The academic departments of accounting, decision and information
systems, marketing, and so forth are functional units. Overlaid on them are specific programs
(that is, products). Thus, members in a matrix structure have a dual chain of command: to
their functional department and to their product groups. A professor of accounting teaching
an undergraduate course may report to the director of undergraduate programs as well as to
the chairperson of the accounting department.

Exhibit 1: Matrix Structure for a College Of Business Administration

The strength of the matrix is its ability to facilitate coordination when the organization has a
number of complex and interdependent activities. Direct and frequent contacts between
different specialties in the matrix can let information permeate the organization and more
quickly reach the people who need it. The matrix reduces “bureau pathologies”—the dual
lines of authority reduce people’s tendency to become so busy protecting their little worlds
that the organization’s goals become secondary. A matrix also achieves economies of scale
and facilitates the allocation of specialists by providing both the best resources and an
effective way of ensuring their efficient deployment.

The major disadvantages of the matrix lie in the confusion it creates, its tendency to
foster power struggles, and the stress it places on individuals. Without the unity-of command
concept, ambiguity about who reports to whom is significantly increased and often leads to
conflict. It’s not unusual for product managers to fight over getting the best specialists
assigned to their products. In a matrix, power struggles between functional and product
managers result. For individuals who desire security and absence from ambiguity, this work
climate can be stressful. Reporting to more than one boss introduces role conflict, and unclear
expectations introduce role ambiguity.

NEW DESIGN OPTIONS

Senior managers in a number of organizations have been developing new structural options
with fewer layers of hierarchy and more emphasis on opening the boundaries of the
organization. Two such designs are: the virtual organization and the boundary less
organization.

1. The Virtual Organization

In structural terms, the virtual organization is highly centralized, with little or no

departmentalization. The prototype of the virtual structure is today’s movie-making
organization. Today, most movies are made by a collection of individuals and small
companies who come together and make films project by project. This structural form allows
each project to be staffed with the talent best suited to its demands, rather than just with the
people employed by the studio. It minimizes bureaucratic overhead because there is no
lasting organization to maintain. And it lessens long-term risks and their costs because there
is no long term—a team is assembled for a finite period and then disbanded.
EXHIBIT 2: A Virtual Organization

Exhibit 2 shows a virtual organization in which management outsources all the

primary functions of the business. The core of the organization is a small group of executives
whose job is to oversee directly any activities done in-house and to coordinate relationships
with the other organizations that manufacture, distribute, and perform other crucial functions
for the virtual organization. The dotted lines represent the relationships typically maintained
under contracts. In essence, managers in virtual structures spend most of their time
coordinating and controlling external relations, typically by way of computer network links.

The major advantage of the virtual organization is its flexibility, which allows
individuals with an innovative idea and little money to successfully compete against larger,
more established organizations. Virtual organizations also save a great deal of money by
eliminating permanent offices and hierarchical roles.

Virtual organizations’ drawbacks have become increasingly clear as their popularity

has grown. They are in a state of perpetual flux and reorganization, which means roles, goals,
and responsibilities are unclear, setting the stage for political behavior. Cultural alignment
and shared goals can be lost because of the low degree of interaction among members. Team
members who are geographically dispersed and communicate infrequently find it difficult to
share information and knowledge, which can limit innovation and slow response time.
Ironically, some virtual organizations are less adaptable and innovative than those with well-
established communication and collaboration networks.

2. The Boundary less Organization

General Electric’s former chairman, Jack Welch, coined the term boundary less organization
to describe what he wanted GE to become: a “family grocery store.”

The boundary less organization seeks to eliminate the chain of command, have
limitless spans of control, and replace departments with empowered teams. By removing
vertical boundaries, management flattens the hierarchy and minimizes status and rank. Cross-
hierarchical teams (which include top executives, middle managers, supervisors, and
operative employees), participative decision-making practices, and the use of 360-degree
performance appraisals (in which peers and others above and below the employee evaluate
performance) are examples of what GE is doing to break down vertical boundaries. At Oticon
A/S, a $160 million-per-year Danish hearing aid manufacturer, all traces of hierarchy have
disappeared. Everyone works at uniform mobile workstations, and project teams, not
functions or departments, coordinate work.

Functional departments create horizontal boundaries that stifle interaction among

functions, product lines, and units. The way to reduce them is to replace functional
departments with cross-functional teams and organize activities around processes. When fully
operational, the boundary less organization also breaks down geographic barriers. Today,
most large U.S. companies see themselves as global corporations; many, like Coca-Cola and
McDonald’s, do as much business overseas as in the United States.

The boundary less organization provides one solution because it considers geography
more of a tactical, logistical issue than a structural one. In short, the goal is to break down
cultural barriers. One way to do so is through strategic alliances. These alliances blur the
distinction between one organization and another as employees work on joint projects. And
some companies allow customers to perform functions previously done by management.
Finally, telecommuting is blurring organizational boundaries. Here, workers operating
outside the physical boundaries of their employers’ premises. The most common example of
such work is freelancing

GOALS OF INDUSTRIAL/ ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY

OB is an action-oriented and goal-directed discipline. Its purpose is to understand, explain

and predict human behavior in the organizational context so that it may be moulded into
result-yielding situations so as to improve organizational effectiveness. It provides a rational
thinking about people and their behavior.

The major goal of I/O is as follows:

1) Analysis of human behavior: OB involves three levels of analysis of behavior (a)

individual behavior, (b) group behavior, (c) behavior of the organization itself. It
helps in demolishing incorrect assumptions one may hold about people in
organizations and thus, it leads to rational thinking.

2) Prediction of Human Behavior: OB helps in predicting the behavior of individuals.

It provides generalizations that managers can use to anticipate the effects of certain
actions and thereby avoid the costly mistakes of trial and error learning. OB has got a
 practical value also. Understanding of theories and research experiences of
organizations provides us education needed for creative thinking to solve human
problems in organizations.

3) Satisfaction of individual and organizational needs: OB seeks to fulfill both

employees’ needs and organizational objectives. Every employee in the organization
wants to fulfill his needs through organizational activities and the organizations
responsibility is to provide congenial climate in the organization so that people may
get need satisfaction and the organization may attain its objective. Thus, both
organization and individuals are benefited by each other.

4) Synthesis of knowledge: OB seeks to synthesis knowledge drawn from different

disciplines like psychology, sociology, anthropology, economics and political science
for the understanding of human behavior in organizations.

5) Training of managers: OB has emerged as a discipline which can be taught and

learn formally. The managers can be given training in the application of OB
concepts, approaches and techniques so as to lead their groups effectively.

JOB SATISFACTION

Job satisfaction is traditionally defined as a pleasurable or positive emotional state that results
from one’s appraisal of one’s job or job aspects. This definition includes both one’s affective
reactions to one’s job (feelings) and one’s cognitive evaluation of the job (thoughts). There is
controversy about whether job satisfaction should be considered as the interplay of both one’s
thoughts and feelings, as implied in this definition, or whether the cognitive and affective
aspects should be separated into distinct dimensions.

Those advocating the latter approach cite studies showing that cognitively oriented
measures of job satisfaction predict different behaviours to affect-based measures of job
satisfaction. Although the definition of job satisfaction is in some dispute, both sides agree on
the need to align the measurement of job satisfaction with the definition.

Defining job satisfaction as, say, an effective response but assessing it as an

evaluation leads to confusion. A further issue to consider when measuring job satisfaction is
its focus. One can assess how satisfied one is with one’s job as a whole, or one’s global
feeling about the job. A typical question would be: “Overall, how much enjoyment do you
find in your work?” An alternative to this global approach is to assess and sum up satisfaction
with facets of the job, such as satisfaction with one’s pay, one’s colleagues, the nature of the
work, and the supervision. Research shows that overall global satisfaction is something
different from a combination of facet satisfactions. Moreover, satisfactions with different
facets are often not highly related.

For example, one can be very satisfied with colleagues but highly dissatisfied with
promotion prospects. If one is trying to understand the overall effect of jobs, then global
ratings are usually the best choice. However, a facet approach is more diagnostic if the
assessor wants to know how to improve satisfaction in a particular situation.

ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT

In organizational commitment, an employee identifies with a particular organization and

its goals and wishes to remain a member. Or, we can also state that organizational
commitment, is the extent to which an employee feels a sense of allegiance to his or her
employer.

Allen and Meyer (1990) proposed three components to this construct. The affective
component refers to the employee’s emotional attachment to, and identification with, the
organization.

 The continuance component refers to commitment based on the costs that the
employee associates with leaving the organization.
 The normative component refers to the employee’s feelings of obligation to remain
with the organization.

Meyer (1997) asserted that in general organizational commitment reflects the employee’s
relationship with the organization and that it has implications for his or her decision to
continue membership in the organization. Committed employees are more likely to remain in
the organization than are uncommitted employees.

Morrow (1993) proposed that an individual can be committed to different focal points in
work—one’s job, one’s organization, and one’s occupation. Morrow developed a model that
illustra.tes the various forms of commitment through a series of concentric circles At the
centre of the model is one’s work ethic, a personality dimension reflecting how important and
central work is to one’s life. Working outward from the centre of the model is occupational
commitment, followed by the continuance dimension of organizational commitment,
followed by the affective dimension of organizational commitment, and lastly job
involvement.

According to Morrow, the innermost forms of commitment are more dispositional in

nature, whereas those in the outer circles are determined more by situational factors.
Although Cohen (2003) questioned the accuracy of Morrow’s conception of work
commitment (particularly the relationships among the circles), Lee, Carswell, and Allen
(2000) supported the importance of occupational commitment for understanding various
aspects of organizational behavior.
 Meyer and Allen (1997) concluded that employees can feel varying levels of commitment
to the different identifications with work (job, organization, occupation), and we must gain a
better understanding of what is meant by “work commitment.”

Most research has focused on emotional attachment to an organization and belief in its
values as the “gold standard” for employee commitment. A positive relationship appears to
exist between organizational commitment and job productivity, but it is a modest one. A
review of 27 studies suggested the relationship between commitment and performance is
strongest for new employees, and considerably weaker for more experienced employees.
Interestingly, research indicates that employees who feel their employers fail to keep
promises to them feel less committed, and these reductions in commitment, in turn, lead to
lower levels of creative performance. And, as with job involvement, the research evidence
demonstrates negative relationships between organizational commitment and both
absenteeism and turnover.

Theoretical models propose that employees who are committed will be less likely to
engage in work withdrawal even if they are dissatisfied, because they have a sense of
organizational loyalty or attachment. On the other hand, employees who are not committed,
who feel less loyal to the organization, will tend to show lower levels of attendance at work
across the board. Research confirms this theoretical proposition. It does appear that even if
employees are not currently happy with their work, they are willing to make sacrifices for the
organization if they are committed enough.

Based on a meta-analysis by Brown (1996), the average correlations between

organizational Commitment and other work-related constructs are similar to the pattern found
for job involvement, only stronger. The average correlations were .53 with overall job
satisfaction, _.28 with turnover, and .67 with a personality construct similar to
conscientiousness.

Brown also estimated a correlation of .50 between job involvement and organizational
commitment. Riketta (2002) estimated a correlation of .20 between organizational
commitment and job performance based on a meta-analytic study. The general pattern of
results reveals that job satisfaction, job involvement, and organizational commitment are
substantially correlated with each other but only modestly correlated with performance and
turnover. Thus organizational attitudes tend to be substantially inter-correlated. Performance
is determined by ability, motivation, and situational constraints, whereas turnover is
determined in part by external economic variables. The linkage between organizational
attitudes and behavior is thus moderated by factors beyond the control of the individual.

ORGANIZATION CITIZEN BEHAVIOR

Although the origin of what is called organizational citizenship behavior, contextual

performance, or prosocial organizational behavior can be traced back to classic management
and organizational science treatises, serious theoretical and empirical research in the area did
not begin until the late 1970s. Researchers Dennis Organ, Walter Borman, Stephen
Motowidlo, Phillip Podsakoff, and Scott MacKenzie have been instrumental in the
development and popularization of this construct.

The relevance of organizational citizenship behavior rests primarily on the persuasive

contention that job performance should encompass not only behavior that contributes to the
technical core of the organization, referred to here task performance, but also behavior that
contributes to organizational performance by shaping the organization’s social and
psychological environment, known as organizational citizenship behavior. The former
category includes duties that are listed in the employee’s job description (e.g., an industrial
truck or tractor operator operates a machine that transports, lifts, stacks, loads, packages, or
cuts products), whereas the latter category includes behaviours such as volunteering for tasks
that are not required, helping other employees with their work, and praising the organization
to outsiders.

Relative to task performance, employees perceive that organizational citizenship

behavior is required by the job less frequently, and supervisors and other organizational
authorities recognize and reward its expression less frequently. Thus, employees are believed
to have more latitude in performing (or not performing) organizational citizenship behavior
than they have in task performance.

Consequently, Organ proposed a variant of the happy/productive worker hypothesis:

In his version, job satisfaction is posited to predict organizational citizenship behavior rather
than (task) performance. Borman and Motowidlo proposed that organizational citizenship
behavior (which they termed contextual performance) should be better predicted by
personality, whereas task performance should be better predicted by general mental ability
(i.e., intelligence).

These predictions are consistent with the idea of situational strength. To the extent
they are mentally and physically able to do so, individuals will exhibit behavior (i.e., task
performance) that is prescribed by the situation. However, the extent to which individuals
exhibit behavior (i.e., organizational citizenship behavior) that is not explicitly prescribed by
the situation depends on volition.

STRUCTURE OF ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR

There are different types or facets of citizenship that are important in their own right.
According to Organ’s taxonomy, there are five facets of citizenship:

(a) Altruism, helping others;

(b) Conscientiousness, or engaging in role-required behavior, but doing so beyond minimum

required levels;

(c) Sportsmanship, or refraining from complaining about trivial matters;

(d) Courtesy, or providing others with advance notice, reminders, and information; and

(e) Civic virtue, or contributing in a responsible fashion to the corporate governance of the
organization.

Borman and Motowidlo, in contrast, proposed the following five types of

citizenship:

(a) Persisting with enthusiasm and extra effort as necessary to complete one’s own task
activities successfully;

(b) Volunteering to carry out task activities that are not formally part of one’s own job;

(c) Helping and cooperating with others;

(d) Following organizational rules and procedures;

(e) Endorsing, supporting, and defending organizational objectives.

 Other taxonomies have been proved moot. Yet the most consistent distinction is
between citizenship behavior that is directed toward the organization and behavior that is
directed toward other employees in the organization. Behavior that is directed toward the
organization includes actions such as displaying loyalty to the organization and following
informal rules designed to maintain order, whereas behavior that is directed toward other
employees includes being considerate to others and helping them with their work.

In general, theoretical attempts to distinguish between facets or types of

organizational citizenship behavior have not been overly convincing. Perhaps more crucially,
findings from meta-analyses indicate that the facets are strongly interrelated and that their
relationships with a variety of other constructs are relatively similar in strength.

In other words, the case for disaggregating organizational citizenship behavior into
more specific facets has not yet been made. It is unsurprising, therefore, that many
researchers continue to use overall measures rather than facet measures of the construct.

SELECTION

Human resource selection is the process of choosing qualified individuals who are available
to fill positions in an organization. In the ideal personnel situation, selection involves
choosing the best applicant to fill a position. Selection is the process of choosing people by
obtaining and assessing information about the applicants with a view to matching these with
the job requirements. It involves a careful screening and testing of candidates who have put in
their applications for any job in the enterprise. It is the process of choosing the most suitable
persons out of all the applicants. The purpose of selection is to pick up the right person for
every job.

It can be conceptualised in terms of either choosing the fit candidates, or rejecting the
unfit candidates, or combination of both. Selection involves both because it picks up the fits
and rejects the unfit. In fact, in Indian context, there are more candidates who are rejected
than those who are selected in most of the selection processes. Therefore, sometimes, it is
called a negative process in contrast to positive programme of recruitment.

According to Dale Yoder, “Selection is the process in which candidates for

employment are divided into two classes-those who are to be offered employment and those
who are not”.
 According to Keith Davis, “Selection is the process by which an organisation
chooses from a list of screened applicants, the person or persons who best meet the selection
criteria for the position available.”

According to Judith Gordon (1989), defines selection as a “process of identifying

those recruited individuals who will best be able to assist in achieving organizational goals.”

Thus, it can be concluded that industrial psychologist approach to selection is that it is

scientific, objective, process based on constant research and improvement of techniques and
procedures of selection.

SELECTION PROCEDURE

The selection procedure consists of a series of steps. Each step must be successfully cleared
before the applicant proceeds to the next. The selection process is a series of successive
hurdles or barriers which an applicant must cross. These hurdles are designed to eliminate a
“Successive Hurdles Technique”. In practice, the process differs among organisations and
between two different jobs within the same organisation. Selection procedure for the senior
managers will be long drawn and rigorous, but it is simple and short while hiring lower level
employees.

STEPS INVOLVED IN SELECTION

Although selection procedures change from one organization to other in terms of size
location organizational working pattern level of jobs being filled. The selection process thus
depends upon effective job analysis and recruitment.

Many techniques of selection have been used, some of which are traditionally like
those of application blanks in interview and others are recent and more sophisticated and
recurrent. Thus they benefit the organization in the process of selection. These steps are:
 JOB ANALYSIS

SELECTION OF TESTING
METHOD

TEST VALIDATION

RECRUITMENT

SCREENING

TESTING

SELECTING

REJECTING/HIRING

JOB ANALYSIS

Harvey (1991) defined job analysis as “the collection of data describing (a) observable (or
otherwise verifiable) job behaviours performed by workers, including both what is
accomplished as well as what technologies are employed to accomplish the end results, and
(b) verifiable characteristics of the job environment with which workers interact, including
physical, mechanical, social, and informational elements”. A thorough job analysis
documents the tasks that are performed on the job, the situation in which the work is
performed (for example, tools and equipment present, working conditions), and the human
attributes needed to perform the work. These data are the basic information needed to make
many personnel decisions. Their use is mandated by legal requirements, and estimated annual
costs for job analyses have ranged from $150,000 to $4,000,000 in a large organization
(Levine et al., 1988). It is one of the most widely used organizational data collection
techniques and forms the foundation on which virtually all other human resource
management systems are built. Finally, its use is essential to meet legal requirements. Despite
changes in the work environment, job analysis remains an essential tool for industrial and
organizational psychologists.

As a process, job analysis involves a series of choices, including the type of

information to collect, the method by which the data will be collected, and the source of the
data. The specific choices made, however, will depend on the purpose of the job analysis (or
the reason it is being conducted). Job analyses can be conducted for a number of purposes,
including the following:

• Developing job descriptions that describe the essential nature of the job

• Classifying jobs into clusters or families of related Jobs

 Developing selection systems, in which the job analysis is used to describe the
knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics needed for successful task
performance

• Developing performance appraisal systems, in which the job analysis is used to

identify the key tasks and work behaviours performed on the job

• Evaluating the worth of different jobs for compensation purposes

• Designing or redesigning jobs to make them more interesting or efficient to perform

• Developing training programs, in which the job analysis is used to identify the key
tasks that workers must be able to perform

PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

Performance appraisal is the process of identifying criteria or standards for determining how
well employees are performing their jobs. I /O psychologists who work in this field are also
concerned with determining the utility or value of job performance to the organization. They
may be involved with measuring the performance of work teams, units within the
organization, or the organization itself. There are many definitions of performance appraisal
According to Edwin Flippo, Performance appraisal is the systematic, periodic and an
impartial rating of an employee‘s excellence in matters pertaining to his present job and his
potential for a better job.
Cummings refer to performance appraisal as “The overall objective of performance
appraisal is to improve the efficiency of an enterprise by attempting to mobilise the best
possible efforts from individuals employed in it. Such appraisals achieve our objectives
including the salary reviews the development and training of individuals, planning job
rotation and assistance promotions.”
According to Wendell French, Performance appraisal and review in the formal,
systematic assessment of how well employees are performing their jobs in relations to
establish standards and the communication of that assessment to employees.
Characteristics of Performance Appraisal:
The following are the characteristics of Performance Appraisal
1. A Process: Performance appraisal is not a one- act play .It is rather a process that involves
several acts or steps.
2. Systematic Assessment: Performance appraisal is a systematic assessment of an
employee‘s strengths and weakness in the context of the given job.
3. Main Objective: The main objective of it is to know how well an employee is going for the
organisation and what needs to be improved in him.
4. Scientific Evaluation: It is an objective, unbiased and scientific evaluation through similar
measure and procedures for all employees in a formal manner.
5. Periodic Evaluation: Systematic (i.e., formal) appraisal of an individual employee is likely
to occur at certain intervals throughout that person‘s history of employment (say quarterly,
six monthly, annually, etc.)

PURPOSE OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

The following are the main purposes of performance appraisal.

1. Appraisal Procedure: It provides a common and unified measure of performance

appraisal, so that all employee are evaluated in the same manner. It gives an in
discriminatory rating of all the employees.
2. Decision Making: Performance appraisal of the employees is extremely use fooling the
decision making process of the organization. In selection, training, promotion, pay
increment and in transfer, performance appraisal is very useful tool.
3. Work Performance Records: Performance appraisal gives us a complete information in
the form of records regarding very employee. In the case of find us trial disputes even
arbitrator accepts these records in the course of grievance handling procedure.
4. Employees Development: Performance appraisal guides the employees in removing their
effects and improving their working .The weaknesses of the employee recorded in the
performance appraisal provide the basis for an individual development programme. If
properly recorded and used, the performance appraisal gives the fair opportunities to
employees to correct and rectify their mistakes.
5. Enables Supervisors to be More Alert and Competent: Performance appraisal enables
supervisor to be more alert and competent and to improve the quality of supervision by
giving him a complete record of employee's performance. He can guide an employee,
where he is prone to commit mistakes

USES OF PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL

1. Help in Deciding Promotion:

It is in the best interest of the management to promote the employees to the positions where
they can most effectively use their abilities.
2. Help in Personnel Actions:
Personnel actions such as lay-offs, demotions, transfers and discharges etc. May be justified
only if they are based on performance appraisal. While in some cases, actions are taken
because of unsatisfactory performance of the employee, in some other cases it may be called
for due to some economic conditions beyond control such as changes in production process.
In former case, the action can only be justified on the basis of the result of performance
appraisal.

3. Help in Wage and Salary Administration:

The wage increase given to some employees on the basis of their performance may be
justified by the performance e appraisal results. In some cases appraisal, i.e., merit and
seniority are combined for higher salaries on better positions.
4. Help in Training and Development:
An appropriate system of performance appraisal helps the management in devising training
and development programmes and in identifying the areas of skill or knowledge in which
several employees are not at par with the job requirements. Thus the appraisal system points
out the general training deficiencies which may be corrected by additional training,
interviews, discussions or counselling. It helps in spotting the potential to train and develop
them to create an inventory of executives.
5. Aid to Personnel Research:
Performance appraisal helps in conducting research in the field of personnel management.
Theories in personnel field are the outcome of efforts to find out the cause and effect
relationship between personnel and their performance. By studying the various problems
which are faced by the performance appraiser, new areas of research may be developed in
personnel field.

TRAINING

Training is the systematic process by which employees learn the knowledge, skills, and/or
attitudes (KSAs) necessary to do their jobs. Because training is systematic, it is distinct from
other ways in which employees acquire new KSAs, such as through experience or
serendipitous learning.
Training is different than employee development. Training addresses KSAs in one’s
current job, whereas developmental efforts enable employees to target KSAs that may be
useful in some future job. This distinction, though, is sometimes fuzzy. A training course on
basic supervisory skills may be both a training experience for new supervisors and a
developmental experience for entry-level employees seeking promotion.
Training is ubiquitous. Whenever a new employee is hired, that individual is likely to
go through some form of orientation, formal training on core job responsibilities, and
informal training to learn the ropes from a supervisor or more proficient co-workers. All of
these activities are considered training. Several professional organizations, including the
American Society for Training and Development (ASTD), publish periodic reports on
training-related activities by U.S. employers. According to their reports, the average number
of hours of formal learning by employees ranges from 25 to 30 for smaller organizations to
35 to 40 for larger organizations. These organizations typically spend about $800 to $1,300
per employee (depending on the size of the organization).

TRAINING ACTIVITIES

Classic models of training development generally include four steps in the training process:
• Needs assessment. During this step, the organizational need and support for training is
identified and the training content is defined.

• Training development. During this step, the training content is determined and decisions are
made about the appropriate training method (e.g., how should material be conveyed? How
long should the training last?).

• Training delivery. During this step, trainees complete the training program. Training may be
on-the-job, in a classroom, online, or through workbooks, or offered in some other format.

• Training evaluation. During this step, the organization evaluates the effectiveness of the
training program during training and/or back on the job.

TRAINING EFFECTIVENESS

Given preliminary evidence that training works, it is important that training be designed to
maximize employee learning of job-related KSAs. Psychological research over the years has
resulted in a number of principles related to effective training. These include the following:

• Ensure trainees are motivated. Trainees who are motivated to learn become more active
learners, actively processing new information to ensure that it is efficiently stored and more
easily recalled. Trainees are likely to be motivated when they perceive the training content as
relevant to their jobs or career development. The trainer’s expertise, charisma, or
instructional style can enhance trainee motivation. An uncomfortable setting or poorly
designed Web site can undermine trainee motivation.

• Provide constructive feedback. The impact of feedback on performance improvement is

well documented in many areas of psychology and applies to training contexts, as well.
Feedback should be timely and relevant, and it should address both positive and negative
aspects of training performance.

• Provide opportunities to practice. It is important that trainees have the opportunity to

practice new skills in training, before enacting them on the job. Practice works best when the
training context resembles the work environment, at either a surface or structural level.
Surface-level fidelity occurs when the equipment or work space in training closely resembles
that in real life. For example, a successful chain of gas station/ convenience stores requires
that employees spend a week of training in a completely operational replica of an actual store
before starting work. Structural fidelity occurs when the problems, issues, or performance–
outcome contingencies in training resemble real life. The navy once conducted aircrew
coordination training on a transport ship by having team members sit in folding chairs
surrounding a plunger that served as the “ship’s” throttle. Although the surface fidelity of this
training was low, the crew practiced responding to simulated emergencies drawn from real-
life events.

• Prepare trainees to transfer. Transfer of training occurs when trainees apply what they’ve
learned successfully to their jobs. Transfer can be enhanced by preparing trainees for post
training obstacles to transfer. For example, a computer technician may attend training to learn
new strategies for diagnosing customers’ computer malfunctions. However, when she returns
to her job at a technical support centre, a month passes before she receives a call that allows
her to use this new strategy, or she begins to use pertaining strategies when her supervisor
complains that she is not handling calls as quickly as she had in the past. Trainees can be
prepared by telling them what challenges await and providing contingency plans for when
obstacles are encountered. Transfer, and hence, training in general, is more likely to be
successful when the training is embedded in a supportive environment. This means that
training is perceived as beneficial, sufficient resources are allocated to plan and administer
effective training programs, and trainees return to supportive environments that allow them to
implement and refine newly acquired skills. Given evidence of the potential impact of
training, it makes good sense for organizations to offer strong support for training initiatives.

REFERENCES

Britt, S. M. (2008). Organizational psychology: a scientist-practitioner approach (2nd ed.).

New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.

Levy, P. E. (2010). Industrial/Organizational Psychology-Understanding the Workplace (3rd

ed.). New York: Worth Publisher.
Muchinsky, P. M. (2006). Psychology Applied to Work (8th ed.). United States of America:
Thomson Wadsworth.

Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2014). Essentials of Organizational Behavior (12th ed.).
United States of America: Pearson Education.

Schultz, D. &. (2013). psychology and work today. India: pearson education.

Wikis, A. (2014). Industrial and organizational psychology. Retrieved from Industrial and
organizational psychology: https://oiko.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/2014-anoikos-
wikis-industrial-and-organizational-psychology.pdf