Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x5gtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-07T18:49:36.338Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Taking Workplace Decisions Seriously: This Conversation Has Been Fruitful!

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2015

Silvia Bonaccio ,
Reeshad S. Dalal ,
Scott Highhouse ,
Daniel R. Ilgen ,
Susan Mohammed  and
Jerel E. Slaughter
Silvia Bonaccio*
Affiliation:
University of Ottawa
Reeshad S. Dalal
Affiliation:
George Mason University
Scott Highhouse
Affiliation:
Bowling Green State University
Daniel R. Ilgen
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
Susan Mohammed
Affiliation:
The Pennsylvania State University
Jerel E. Slaughter
Affiliation:
University of Arizona
*
E-mail: bonaccio@telfer.uottawa.ca, Address: Telfer School of Management, University of Ottawa, 55 Laurier Avenue East, Ottawa, ON, Canada K1N 6N5
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We are gratified by the large number of commentaries to our focal article (Dalal, Bonaccio, et al., 2010) that advocated greater integration of industrial–organizational psychology and organizational behavior (IOOB) with the field of judgment and decision making (JDM). The commentaries were uniformly constructive and civil. Our disagreements with the commentaries are mild and are limited primarily to the roles of external validity, internal validity, and laboratory experiments in IOOB. For the majority of our response, we attempt to build on the views expressed in the commentaries and to articulate some thoughts regarding the future. We structure our response according to the following themes: barriers to cross-fertilization between IOOB and JDM, areas of existing and potential JDM-to-IOOB cross-fertilization, areas of potential IOOB-to-JDM cross-fertilization, and ways to increase (and ideally institutionalize) cross-fertilization. We hope our focal article and our response to the commentaries will help to ignite exciting basic research and important practical applications associated with decision making in the workplace.

Type
Response
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 3 , Issue 4 , December 2010 , pp. 455 - 464
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2010 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Telfer School of Management, University of Ottawa

**

Department of Psychology, George Mason University

References

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211. Google Scholar
Brogden, H. E. (1949). When testing pays off. Personnel Psychology, 2, 171–183 Google Scholar
Bottom, W. P., & Kong, D. J. (2010). Normative models for strategic decision making in industrial–organizational psychology and organizational behavior. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 3, 417–420.Google Scholar
Byham, W. C. (2010). Assessment centers are an excellent way of studying decision making. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 3, 443–444.Google Scholar
Connolly, T. (2010). What if we took researchers' workplace decisions seriously? Mundane incentives versus intellectual merit in the selection of research topics. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 3, 452–454.Google Scholar
Dalal, D. K., Diab, D. L., Balzer, W. K., & Doherty, M. E. (2010). The lens model: An application of JDM methodologies to IOOB practice. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 3, 424–428.Google Scholar
Dalal, R. S., Bonaccio, S., Highhouse, S., Ilgen, D. R., Mohammed, S., & Slaughter, J. E. (2010). What if industrial–organizational psychology decided to take workplace decisions seriously? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 3, 386–405.Google Scholar
Dalal, R. S., & Hulin, C. L. (2008). Motivation for what? The criterion question. In Kanfer, R., Chen, G., & Pritchard, R. (Eds.), Work motivation: Past, present and future (pp. 63–100). New York: Routledge. Google Scholar
Goodwin, P. (2010). Business forecasters can gain from the cross-fertilization of IOOB and JDM. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 3, 429–430.Google Scholar
Hayes, T. L., & Wooldridge, J. D. (2010). IOOB already takes JDM seriously, but is it reciprocated? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 3, 406–410.Google Scholar
Highhouse, S. (2009). Designing experiments that generalize. Organizational Research Methods, 12, 554–566. Google Scholar
Highhouse, S., & Gillespie, J. Z. (2009). Do samples really matter that much? In Lance, C. E. & Vandenberg, R. J. (Eds.), Statistical and methodological myths and urban legends: Doctrine, verity and fable in the organizational and social sciences (pp. 247–265). New York: Routledge. Google Scholar
Hodgkinson, G. P., & Healey, M. P. (2008). Cognition in organizations. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 387–417. Google Scholar
Ilgen, D. R. (1985). Laboratory research: A question of when, not if. In Locke, E. A. (Ed.), The generalizability of laboratory experiments: An inductive survey. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath and Company. Google Scholar
Judge, T. A., Thoresen, C. J., Bono, J. E., & Patton, G. K. (2001). The job satisfaction-job performance relationship: A qualitative and quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 376–407. Google Scholar
Kuhn, K. M. (2010). Can managers be trained to make better decisions? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 3, 434–437.Google Scholar
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2009). Has goal setting gone wild, or have its attackers abandoned good scholarship? The Academy of Management Perspectives, 23, 17–23. Google Scholar
Meyer, R. D., Dalal, R. S., & Hermida, R. (2010). A review and synthesis of situational strength in the organizational sciences. Journal of Management, 36, 121–140. Google Scholar
Mohammed, S., & Schwall, A. (2009). Individual differences and decision making: What we know and where we go from here. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 24, 249–312. Google Scholar
Naylor, J. C., Pritchard, R. D., & Ilgen, D. R. (1980). A theory of behavior in organizations. New York: Academic Press. Google Scholar
Pfeffer, J. (1993). Barriers to the advance of organization science: Paradigm development as a dependent variable. Academy of Management Review, 18, 599–620. Google Scholar
Reb, J. (2010). Integrating IOOB and JDM through process-oriented research. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 3, 445–447.Google Scholar
Reiter-Palmon, R., & Hullsiek, B. (2010). The role of creativity in JDM. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 3, 431–433.Google Scholar
Rosen, M. A., Shuffler, M., & Salas, E. (2010). How experts make decisions: Beyond the JDM paradigm. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 3, 438–442.Google Scholar
Staw, B. M. (2010). The trouble with JDM: Some limitations to the influence of JDM on organizational research. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 3, 411–416.Google Scholar
Sumner, K. E., Bragger, J., Om, E., & Malandruccolo, D. (2010). Studying personnel and organizational judgments as judgments requires training. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 3, 448–451.Google Scholar
Terborg, J. R., Castore, C., & DeNinno, J. A. (1976). A longitudinal field investigation of the impact of group composition on group performance and cohesion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 782–790. Google Scholar
Terborg, J. R., & Davis, G. A. (1982). Evaluation of a new method for assessing change to planned job redesign as applied to Hackman and Oldham's job characteristic model. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 29, 112–128. Google Scholar
Terborg, J. R., & Miller, H. E. (1978). Motivation, behavior, and performance: A closer examination of goal setting and monetary incentives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, 29–39. Google Scholar
Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Google Scholar
Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley. Google Scholar
Weiss, H. M., & Adler, S. (1984). Personality and organizational behavior. Research in Organizational Behavior, 6, 1–50. Google Scholar
Whyte, G. (2010). Why has there been so much JDM–IOOB cross-fertilization? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 3, 421–423.Google Scholar