ABSTRACT
Historically, the value system characterizing I-O psychology has been comprised of several problematic components: (i) a managerialist bias, with an accompanying disinterest in or even antagonism toward organized labor; (ii) a disavowal of humanist concerns and moral values because of a mistaken belief that normative judgments are incompatible with scientific research and professional practice; while nevertheless (iii) adopting an economic corporatist value system; (iv) a near-exclusive focus on and concern for the organization, with correspondingly little concern for individual employees and other stakeholders; and (v) a failure to look beyond criteria of technical competence and economic utility for the firm, to acknowledge the importance of the societal consequences of what we do (or should be doing). Examples are drawn from I-O psychology and labor, Elton Mayo and the Hawthorne Studies, the scientist-practitioner model, the nature of careers and job security, unacknowledged values positions, employee selection, employment at-will, and perceived identity crises in I-O psychology. The chapter concludes more optimistically by noting several countervailing trends and indications of a more humanistic, prosocial I-O.
