Foster Excellence

Employment, Careers, and Talent in the 21st Century

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 19:34:00 +0000

The world of work is changing in a way that easily rivals that of the Industrial Revolution. Business—and how people organize in general—is increasingly global, aided by information transfer via the Internet and ever-increasing computing power. The search for sustainable competitive advantage remains paramount, of course, but that quest is taking new forms, with implications for business, society, and people’s careers.

Here, I’ll try to summarize some of my thoughts on how changes in the business environment are influencing a more independent workforce and businesses seeking new sources of talent. My thinking has been influenced by my own research and study of work within the organizational sciences during the past several years. While what I discuss here is likely over-simplified, the implications are hard to dispute.

As depicted in the figure below, changes in the business environment—for example, globalization, advances in information technology, and increasing competition—are driving a number of changes. First of all, these changes are driving businesses to make their workforces more flexible.

Flexible employment contracts refers to the reality that organizations are increasingly turning to part-time, temporary, and contract arrangements with employees. This is a drastic departure from long-held beliefs and expectations surrounding employment, such as lifelong work with a single employer and relatively stable job security. As such, college graduates today will have much more varied, self-managed careers than those of their parents and grandparents.

The independently managed career is becoming and will be a norm, particularly among professional “knowledge” workers. People will continually need to be on the lookout for new opportunities while demonstrating their worth to their current employers.

One the employee side, this means that people will need to manage their own personal brand and sell their services. Career success will depend upon people being able to showcase their talents and accomplishments, via the Web, and use their online social networks to find new opportunities.

On the business side, independently managed careers will likely influence businesses to seek new ways to access talent. They, like individual employees, will depend upon the Web and social networks to find talent. Furthermore, firms will likely be look outside of their own organizational boundaries for solutions as a way to maintain a fresh approach toward innovation.

Finally, as depicted in the figure, the arrows between “changes in the business environment” and both “personal branding and selling” and “businesses seeking new talent sources” are double-headed. That’s because those latter changes are likely to influence new changes in the business environment, creating a cycle of sorts.

Directly related to these changes, we see the Whinot platform as filling a niche, as depicted in the figure below.

By providing independent workers with a way to brand and sell their services, Whinot will be an individual source of competitive advantage for workers as they manage their careers. And by connecting businesses seeking new talent sources with those workers, Whinot will foster and even more productive collaborative community—one that we see as a win-win for both businesses and employees.

This post also appears at The Whinot Blog.

The Case for Collaboration: Productive Practices within Organizations

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 02:50:00 +0000

As discussed in the introduction to this series on the business case for collaboration, we can think about collaboration in two ways: within organizations and among organizations. In a sense, the two go hand-in-hand. Why? It’s because both have to do with people working together. For organizations to successfully work together, the people representing each organization must work together effectively on a personal level.

So that’s how looking at what makes collaboration successful within organizations can potentially shed light on what makes collaboration successful among organizations. After a rather extensive review of the research on collaboration within organizations, I’ve identified a number of factors that explain why people may or may not be likely to collaborate. These factors include:

Characteristics of the collaborative group. It turns out that a variety of individual factors—such as demographics, group size, and personality and ability differences—matter when it comes to how well people work together. Research on these differences and their influence on group effectiveness is rather messy, but a few general implications include that it’s important that group members have high levels of ability while having sufficient diversity in terms of expertise and background to promote creativity.

Resources. People are likely to work together when they perceive that other parties have valuable resources that may benefit them.

Goals. Goals that reward cooperation within groups may facilitate higher levels of collective performance than other more individualistic or competitive goal structures. Individual goals, therefore, should be integrated into group goals and vice versa.

Technology. The tools that workers use often have a dramatic impact upon how they collaborate. Specifically, workers are increasingly turning to various information technologies as ways to collaborate across distances. Although advanced technology certainly has its advantages, managers must ensure widespread familiarity with such technology while minimizing potential information loss among collaborators.

Organizational culture. Organizations develop deep norms that reflect and drive “how things get done around here.” If that culture rewards and supports solely independent work, then collaboration is unlikely. Building a culture that promotes collaboration, however, will encourage employees to bridge departmental boundaries and work together.

Interpersonal trust and fairness. Collaboration is about sharing, and sharing requires trust. People need to believe that the people they’re collaborating with will hold up their end of the bargain. When people perceive that they’re being treated unfairly in a collaborative relationship, things are likely to break down quickly.

Leadership. Good leaders foster collaborative relationships by clearly defining roles, setting cooperative goals, and rewarding productive collaborative behavior.

While the factors influencing collaboration within organizations are numerous and multifaceted, those listed above cover many of the reasons why people choose to collaborate. And although these factors are specifically related to collaboration within organizations, they’re also important points to keep in mind when maintaining productive relationships among representatives from different organizations.

This post also appears at The Whinot Blog.

The Case for Collaboration: Introduction

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 16:30:00 +0000

In a global economy that’s riddled with uncertainty, a few constants remain. In addition to death and taxes, business leaders can be sure to expect continued expansion into global markets, rapid advancement of how people work and do business using technology, and increasingly tough competition. So what are some potential responses to these forces by strategically minded executives?

Some businesses try to deal with uncertainty by copying what works for others. This can happen explicitly—for example, a CEO deliberately decides to offer a similar service as a competitor—or implicitly. An example of the latter might be the shared knowledge that spreads across organizations in the same industry by consultants, who may offer similar advice to different firms.

One problem with these tactics has to do with imitability, or how easy something is to copy. If a firm copies a resource and turns it into a capability, then it’s clear that another firm could potentially copy the resource and use it to its advantage. And there goes the firm’s competitive edge.

Another way in which business leaders are trying to make their firms more competitive has to do with collaboration. Academics have defined collaboration as something beyond coordination (negotiating interrelated tasks) and cooperation (parties coming together and forming relationships). Specifically, some scholars defined collaboration as a “relationship that is negotiated in an ongoing communicative process and that relies on neither market nor hierarchical mechanisms of control” (Lawrence et al., 2002, p. 282).

What on earth does that mean? It means that collaboration has to do with developing mutually beneficial relationships. These relationships can be formal or informal, and they can occur within organizations (intraorganizational) or among organizations (interorganizational). Strategically, collaborative relationships are quite handy for business leaders and achieving business success. That’s because they depend upon complex relationships among people, and that’s something that’s really tough to copy.

In a series of future posts, I’ll discuss a little bit more about the business case for collaboration. I’ll start by exploring intraorganizational collaboration, and then I’ll unpack interorganizational collaboration. My goal is simply to introduce some of the research surrounding these topics, in a way that—I hope—is relevant and clear, maybe even sparking some thoughts about using collaboration as a way to achieve business success.

Reference: Lawrence, T., Hardy, C., & Phillips, N. 2002. Institutional effects of interorganizational collaboration: The emergence of proto-institutions. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 281-290.

This post also appears at The Whinot Blog.

Time to Ditch SPSS? A Free, Robust Alternative

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 12:40:00 +0000

Software programs are like blue jeans. You look for something that fits, maybe try on a few different options, and finally settle on a choice. Over time, they get more and more comfortable to use. But one day you find yourself suspecting that it might be time to move on to an option that is updated, fits better, or will serve a broader range of purposes.

That’s the sneaking suspicion I’m starting to have about SPSS. My primary complaint is that it can’t do some of the statistical analyses that I currently use or may want to use in the near future. Specifically, I’m thinking about structural equation modeling and hierarchical linear modeling. Currently, I need two additional software programs to run those analyses.

Of course, one logical alternative is SAS. But given my limited experience using SAS, I want to explore my options prior before I learn another programming language. In a recent conversation I had with a quantitative methods expert, he mentioned another data analysis and statistical computing program, known simply as “R.”

Among other circles—for example, computer science and statistics—R is probably well known. But being in the social sciences and business, I’m just hearing about R for the first time. After some preliminary research, it seems like R might be a very attractive option. Here’s why:

It’s free. You simply download it and get started.
It’s flexible, with the capability to do all sorts of statistical analyses, including those I mentioned above.
It’s open source, meaning that code-writing geniuses around the world are continually making it better and providing updates.
It appears to have a community of avid supporters, who produce user manuals, publish a journal, and host conferences. Its Web site refers to the software as "The R Project for Statistical Computing," which has a neat grassroots, cutting-edge kind of feel to it.

R seems like a promising alternative to the limited, get-a-new-version-every-year scenario offered by SPSS. I’m curious to know, however, about others’ experiences in learning R and using it for applications in business and social-science research. Metaphorically speaking, I suppose, I’m still in the window-shopping phase. But I’m starting to think that my current “blue jeans” aren’t really cutting it anymore, and R might be a nice alternative that I’d like to try on in the near future.

Generational Differences at Work: Enough Already!

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 21:51:00 +0000

In the popular business press, it seems that talk about differences across the various generations of workers—be they “Baby Boomers,” “Generation Xers,” or “Millennials”—is everywhere. And don’t even get me started on the blogs. At the extremes, many of these sources make it sound like managing young workers is akin to managing a different species, some sort of spoiled-yet-independent, narcissistic-yet-altruistic global citizen. The bottom-line assumption of most of these arguments is that the “millennial generation” approaches work in a fundamentally different way than previous generations.

I don’t buy it. And I think that organizations that are even sitting down to answer the question, “How do we manage this newest generation of workers?” are heading down the completely wrong path. Here’s why.

The vast majority of research on generational differences among people at work is cross-sectional, meaning that it analyzed data collected at one point in time. That makes it exceedingly difficult—virtually impossible—to disentangle “generational” effects from variations due to age, experience, skills, tenure, you name it. So we don’t actually have strong evidence of these “differences” yet, necessitating further research.
Even if differences actually do exist across generations of workers, they are likely to not matter at all to managers. That’s because when it comes to psychological variables, which matter greatly at work, there is always more variation within a group than between groups. Take the highly controversial topic of intelligence testing, for example. Studies show that, on average, Asians score about one standard deviation above whites, and that white people, on average, score about one standard deviation above black people. Even given these well-researched findings, it is plain bad logic and practice to reduce these findings to the individual level and claim that one Asian person is likely to score higher a white person. That’s because Asians vary greatly in their scores from other Asians, as do whites from other whites, as do blacks from other blacks. So even if group differences actually exist between generations, treating someone different just because he or she is a member of a specific generation is silly, wrong, and possibly illegal. Regardless, it’s always incumbent upon the manger to get to know his or her people and support them accordingly.
Related to the previous point, labeling specific generations with specific attributes is stereotyping, plain and simple. This current fad is a gross generalization about an enormously important group of workers, within which we’re likely to find wide differences regarding attitudes toward work.

Here’s the discussion organizations should be having: “How do we train our managers to lead many different types of people?” It all comes down to bringing an attitude of inclusion to the everyday practice of management and learning to lead people of all types—be they male or female, white or black, gay or straight, Christian or Muslim, young or old. So, regarding all of the talk about generational differences—enough already.

And the Gloves Come Off: Redbox has Competition Groveling for Business

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 01:07:00 +0000

There’s a refrigerator-sized vending machine that has both traditional movie-rental chains and movie studios seeing red—both literally and figuratively. I’m referring, of course, to Redbox. And it’s Redbox, with its 15,000-plus machines (yes, they’re red) and $1 movie rentals, that’s posing the biggest threat to the traditional movie-rental chains like Hollywood Video and Blockbuster since the online rental giant Netflix hit the scene.

Here’s how it works. You simply pick out a movie using the machine’s touch-screen monitor, swipe your credit card, and take your movie from the contraption’s dispensing slot. All you pay is $1 plus tax, and if you keep it for an extra day, you simply pay an extra dollar per day. An even quicker option is to pick out your movie online and then pick it up at a pre-selected location. You can return your DVD at any Redbox location.

So it’s an easy, cheap substitute to other movie-rental options. But that’s not what’s really interesting. What’s particularly intriguing will be to see how chains like Hollywood Video will compete with Redbox’s extreme low-cost leadership strategy.

Should chains like Blockbuster and Hollywood Video fight to regain competitive advantage or just roll over and die? Have they outlived their purpose?

Regarding Hollywood Video’s strategy, at least, it’s clear that the corporation has directed its store managers to emphasize customer service and give personalized incentives. For example, the chain’s card-holding members get birthday phone calls inviting them to enjoy a free rental. This isn’t a new offer.

What’s new is that Hollywood Video’s employees, at least those I’ve encountered, have turned into small-talk-making, movie-recommending chatterboxes. And just today, one of those friendly local film buffs called just to invite me to stop by for a free movie rental.

Talk about desperate.

The fact of the matter is that Redbox exploited a unique opportunity in the market. Apparently, millions of people are just like me—people who don’t already subscribe to Netflix or a similar online rental service and are loath to shell out $4 for the latest new release from Tinseltown. For us, Redbox hits the spot. It comes down to a product that matches its customers, and a strategy that considers their priorities and desire for relatively commitment-free service.

Speaking of Tinseltown, the big studios are also upset with the Redbox’s low prices. Apparently, 20th Century Fox, Universal, and Warner Brothers are withholding their new releases from Redbox until the new movies have been in stores for one month (see this New York Times story). Redbox is suing the three studios on antitrust grounds.

Regarding business strategy, my bet is that executives at chains like Blockbuster are taking Redbox very seriously and kicking themselves for not thinking of the Redbox concept first. According to this Chicago Tribune story, Blockbuster is reacting in a completely predictable manner—by copying Redbox and rolling out its own legions of cheap-movie renting kiosks.

But what will influence customers to shop at Blockbuster kiosks over Redbox? Will Blockbuster adopt a personalized, people-centered approach like Hollywood Video? How will top management communicate the new strategy and ensure it's implemented? Who knows.

If Blockbuster wants to stay viable, though, it’ll need to differentiate itself, find some way to achieve a competitive edge. Otherwise, we’ll all be seeing red—Redbox kiosks, that is—whenever it’s a stay-at-home movie night.

Coping with Animal Euthanasia: Strategies for Shelter Workers

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 00:54:00 +0000

It’s the “American dream:” a nice house, white picket fence, two-car garage—and, of course—the family dog. Pets are an almost ubiquitous aspect of American culture. But pet overpopulation in the United States makes the euthanasia of more than 3 million dogs and cats every year a tragic necessity. And conducting animal euthanasia takes its toll on those charged with this gruesome responsibility.

In a special report published July 1 in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, my coauthors and I tackled one part of the animal euthanasia issue. Specifically, we analyzed ways in which experienced animal-shelter workers advocate coping with the stress related to the euthanasia task. We focused on 242 workers’ responses to the following question, which we included in a survey of 62 animal shelters across the country: “What recommendations would you give to someone who is just starting out in this career field? That is, what would you tell them to do, or not to do, to deal with the euthanasia-related aspects of this job?”

Through systematic, rigorous qualitative data analysis procedures, we found that these experienced workers suggested eight general types of coping strategies, as listed below.

Competence or skills strategies. These types of strategies included gaining appropriate education and training and practicing proper techniques when conducting euthanasia.

Euthanasia behavioral strategies. This category of advice centered on specific practices to follow when conducting euthanasia, such as allowing enough time for the procedure, having someone else euthanize special pets, and keeping the euthanasia room neat.

Cognitive or self-talk strategies. These pieces of advice were primarily ways in which workers could manage stress through their own patterns of thinking. For examples, workers should realize that euthanasia is sometimes the best option for certain animals, avoid blaming themselves, learn about the reality of sheltered animals and overpopulation, and focus on successful aspects of animal welfare.

Emotional regulation strategies. These types of strategies involved ways in which workers should deal with the emotional aspects of their work. For example, acknowledging their feelings and venting when appropriate. Another strategy within this category involved workers altering their levels of emotional attachment to animals, striving to maintain a healthy balance between becoming completely detached from the animals and becoming too dependent upon them for their emotional well-being.

Separation strategies. Respondents suggested that sometimes it’s helpful to find ways to distance themselves from their work. For example, they advocated keeping work separate from non-work activities and seeking diversions through hobbies and reflection.

Get-help strategies. This category of advice focused on ways to cope with euthanasia-related strain that involve assistance from others, including communicating with management about concerns and seeking counseling from professionals.

Seek long-term solution strategies. These types of advice involved those aimed toward focusing on ways to reduce the frequency of euthanasia overall. For example, respondents advocated that workers should learn about and promote responsible pet ownership. One way in which this could take place is through participating in various types of community outreach programs.

Withdrawal strategies. According to respondents, euthanasia is such a tough part of their jobs that sometimes workers should know that the job is not for everyone and, as a last resort, seek a different type of job.

The full report includes more information, including examples of survey respondents’ actual comments in each category of coping strategies. Overall, this study provides valuable insight that could help animal shelter workers, especially newcomers to the job, to deal with the strain caused by having to conduct euthanasia.

With increased public outreach and education—in areas such as spay and neuter programs, animal adoption, and responsible pet ownership—euthanasia should become less necessary as an over-population control measure in the United States. But in the meantime, shelter workers and their managers may find the strategies advocated by respondents in our study to be helpful ways to maintain their psychological well-being despite the threats posed by animal euthanasia.

Reference: Baran, B. E., Allen, J. A., Rogelberg, S. G., Spitzmüller, C., DiGiacomo, N. A., Webb, J. B., et al. (2009). Euthanasia-related strain and coping strategies in animal shelter employees. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 235, 83-88.

Surviving “The Next Catastrophe” by Reducing Vulnerabilities

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 21:12:00 +0000

If the renowned organizational sociologist Charles Perrow had a classic-rock theme song, it just might be “You Ain’t Seen Nothin’ Yet,” the 1974 hit song by Bachman Turner Overdrive. Let me explain.

In his classic book, Normal Accidents: Living with High-Risk Technologies, Perrow discussed the numerous high-risk technologies that pervade modern life and the dangers they pose for society. First published in 1984 with an updated version released in 1999, Normal Accidents presents an argument for the inevitability of large-scale disasters such as nuclear meltdowns, petrochemical-plant explosions, maritime accidents, and so forth. These accidents are inevitable, or “normal,” because they stem from systems that have specific structural characteristics. Namely, these systems are interactively complex, meaning that different parts of the system are likely to work together in ways that produce unanticipated consequences. Secondly, these systems exhibit tight coupling, meaning that a single change in one part of the system will directly lead to changes in other parts of the system.

This means that over time disasters will become increasingly likely. In other words, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

In his 2007 book The Next Catastrophe: Reducing our Vulnerabilities to Natural, Industrial, and Terrorist Disasters, Perrow builds upon the themes presented in Normal Accidents while suggesting a few approaches toward limiting the havoc that such normal accidents will inevitably wreak upon society. In so doing, he also points out three more sources of vulnerability beyond interactive complexity and tight coupling. These three sources are all in the form of high concentrations of the following:

Energy. In numerous locations around the United States, industrial storage facilities house vast quantities of explosive, toxic, and flammable substances. Because these storage facilities are concentrated in specific locations, an accident in any one of them would be much more disastrous than if storage occurred in smaller quantities at a greater number of separate sites.

People. High population densities in risky areas make disasters in those locales catastrophic. For example, New Orleans is a vulnerable city—due to its geography and its proximity to high-risk industry. The fact that it is also high in population density makes it particularly vulnerable.

Economic and political power. Perrow has a knack for drawing our attention to the role of power in organizations, and he argues here that mega-corporations and the political entities with which they interact wield so much power over very real aspects of our daily lives that any failure within them could pose serious risk. One example he cites is the pervasive nature of the Microsoft Windows operating system. If Windows failed—due to a massive computer virus, for example—catastrophic damage to business, government, and personal livelihood would likely result. Another example, although not addressed directly in the book, is the danger posed by financial institutions deemed “too big to fail” that we have witnessed in recent years.

To address these issues, Perrow argues that (a) government should implement wise regulations that limit these concentrations and (b) that leaders should focus on these concentrations as real threats instead of being distracted by other less-likely sources of disaster. In essence, he suggests that the focus should be on “shrinking the targets.” For example, Perrow argues that political interests have overestimated the terrorism threat in the United States while underestimating the threats posed by industrial forces, such as the nuclear power industry.

Overall, Perrow presents a number of examples that suggest the three areas of concentration listed above are indeed sources of vulnerability. His approach toward shrinking those targets, however, appears to focus mostly on policy decisions rather than aspects of human behavior within organizations.

As such, The Next Catastrophe provides an interesting view of disaster and vulnerability at a macro level. Much like “watchdog” groups that illuminate concerns within government agencies and programs, Perrow has been shining a light on the dark side of organizations, business, and government for decades. And his suggestions, when coupled with other viewpoints at the micro level, may provide a way for us to avoid the ominous theme of “you ain’t seen nothin’ yet” that underscores his theories.

Discovering the “Big Picture” and Gaining Self-Awareness: Reflections on the Graduate-School Experience

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 01:20:00 +0000

Because of its heavy demands on one’s time and intellect, graduate school is often an intense experience for students. But it’s also a time when students can gain invaluable insights both about the larger context of their field and about their own worldviews, strengths, and weaknesses. Those are just a few of the reflections offered by Eric Peterson in a recent conversation with Foster Excellence.

Peterson, who earned his master’s degree in organization development from American University/NTL, currently serves as the manager of diversity of inclusion at the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM).

“SHRM's diversity vision is to be a leader provider of tools, resources, and thought leadership for diversity and inclusion practitioners in four years’ time,” said Peterson. “We also seek to advance the diversity and inclusion profession by bringing the best new thinking into practice in members’ organizations, and to bring a new level of professionalism, rigor, and standards to the profession.”

More information about SHRM’s diversity initiatives is online, and for frequent updates about a wide range of workplace issues, follow Peterson on Twitter.

The following is a summary of Peterson’s responses to a series of specific questions about graduate school and career-related issues.

What did you learn in graduate school that has been MOST helpful in your career?

Organization development (OD) is essentially the science and art of creating sustainable change in organizations. Diversity management, at its core, is all about shifting the culture of organizations. When I entered the American University/NTL program, I had already been a diversity practitioner for a number of years, but graduate school allowed me to see the work in a larger context, to approach it more strategically, and to really understand the theoretical underpinnings of the work. It's difficult to choose a single theory that has been most useful, but the ability to see the “big picture” (and to see how “big” the work really is) has been invaluable.

Also, approaching the work as “culture change” enabled me to step away from the good guy/bad guy mindset that plagues many diversity and inclusion practitioners. I now have an appreciation for how deeply ingrained culture can be, and it's much easier to approach those who resist the change in a non-judgmental way.

Looking back, what, if anything, would you have changed about your graduate-school experience?

I would have done it sooner. Before entering the program, I had no idea how I could possibly make it work, both in terms of finances and my own sanity. Looking back, I still don't know how I managed to do it. But when I was in it, I didn't have the luxury of letting it get to me; I just had to make it happen—and I did. In many ways, I entered the program at a perfect time, when I was really ready to do it. And yet, it’s sometimes difficult not to look at the years hesitating as wasted, somehow.

Once you graduated, what was it like to adjust to working fulltime outside of the academic setting?

Well, I was working full-time while I was going to school full-time. So, after I took my comprehensive exam, the idea of just working a full-time job with no other major obligations felt like a huge relief. I don't remember much about the six months immediately following graduation, except that I watched a whole lot of bad television and ate really terrible foods. But I have no regrets.

While working full-time during school, I had the ability to put much of what I was learning into immediate practice at work, and to apply the lessons I was learning on the job into my academic experience. Rather than either suffering, both were enriched; it was a very symbiotic dynamic!

Knowing what you know now, what advice do you have for current graduate students in your discipline?

Don't hesitate to throw your whole self into the experience. The best OD practitioners have a very clear sense of self, and the best OD programs provide experiences that will provide more self-awareness than you ever thought possible. Some of the revelations are painful, or at the very least extremely uncomfortable. But the growth and wisdom that results from doing that kind of work is incredibly valuable, both professionally and personally.

Do you have any other lessons learned or pieces of advice that you think would be helpful to current graduate students?

I would tell people to lean on their strengths. Studying OD requires equal parts from your brain, your heart, and your gut—and I've yet to meet someone who is equally comfortable in all three areas. But if you're pursuing your degree for the right reasons, there will be much in your program that you'll be really excited about, so focus on that while you encounter portions of the curriculum that are overwhelming, scary, or confusing. You'll benefit from both the positive and less-than-positive experiences, but keeping your focus on what you're naturally good at will keep you sane during the process.

Note: This article is part of Foster Excellence’s “Early-Career Practitioner Conversations” series, which provides advice from successful practitioners who earned a graduate degree in industrial/organizational psychology, human resource management, or a related field within the past five years. For more information and to participate, click here.

I/O Psychology Graduate Students: Get an Internship, Take Charge, and Keep Learning

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 16:45:00 +0000

An Early-Career Practitioner Conversation with Eva Rykr

Note: To provide graduate students with insights from practitioners, Foster Excellence has launched an “Early-Career Practitioner Conversations” series, which provides advice from successful practitioners who earned a graduate degree in industrial/organizational psychology, human resource management, or a related field within the past five years.

To kick off the inaugural article in its Early-Career Practitioner Spotlight series, Foster Excellence caught up with Eva Rykr. After earning her undergraduate degree in psychology and neuroscience from Penn State, Rykr earned a master’s degree in industrial/organizational (I/O) psychology from the University of North Carolina at Charlotte in 2008.

“I initially intended to go to medical school,” said Rykr, “but then I realized I wanted to work at the intersection of business and psychology. That made earning my master’s in industrial/organizational psychology a logical choice.”

Following the completion of her graduate training, Rykr accepted a full-time position as the learning director at EQmentor Inc, a role in which she continues to serve.

“EQmentor is a professional development company that uses a unique approach to enhance the emotional intelligence of current and future leaders,” she said. “Our online mentoring journey features an extended learning model that allows mentees to learn what they need, when they need it. In addition to asynchronous access to an experienced mentor who has been there and done that, our program emphasizes multi-modal learning (which our CEO discusses more in his blog) through anonymous cross-industry/cross-vocation peer collaboration as well as 24/7 access to a research database of peer-reviewed business knowledge.

“To truly weave learning and business results, each mentee generates three to five immediately implementable action items during their journey which address a current company challenge,” Rykr added. “As the learning director, I work with assessments, surveys, and mentee learning and development.”

Although this role keeps Rykr busy, in her free time she consults and writes about industrial/organizational psychology and business on her blog. She’s also an active social-media participant, using sites like Twitter to collaborate and network.

The following is a summary of Rykr’s responses to a series of specific questions about graduate school and career-related issues.

What did you learn in graduate school that has been MOST helpful in your career?

“I think expanding my knowledge around the topic of I/O psychology and thoroug hly learning about the discipline was very valuable. I realize that's stating the obvious but that's where the value of grad school truly lies. It’s in acquiring more knowledge—much more knowledge—about a specific topic.

“Then again, I also learned about myself, and that was important. For example, I learned about my preferences for working with others. I know my strengths and weaknesses better than I did prior to grad school.”

Looking back, what, if anything, would you have changed about your graduate-school experience?

“The most prominent aspect of my training that I would’ve changed is having more of a practical focus, rather than only concentrating on the concepts. It’s crucial to be able to answer the ‘So what’ question regarding our work. Specifically, I would have preferred classes to be project-based.

“For example, one of my favorite assignments was to design a selection system as the final exam. While that was very practical, it’s really only 50 percent of the real project because developing a report doesn’t equate to delivering results. The other half is implementation and follow-through. What happens, for instance, if after a year the system isn’t working?

“Another helpful skill I would have liked to learn is using Excel and other data-analysis tools in addition to SPSS. Most places you work will not have SPSS, but yet you'll still need to run a correlation analysis. Knowing more than one way to do so is great.

“Finally, I/O psychology wouldn’t exist without business, so it would be very helpful to learn general business skills during graduate school. In the business world you have to weave a bit of marketing in all that you do, so it’s crucial to be able to know how to explain how solutions grounded in I/O psychology provide practical benefits over other options.”

Once you graduated, what was it like to adjust to working fulltime outside of the academic setting?

“It was quite an easy transition, but I noticed a few key differences between graduate school and workplace settings. I like that the pace is much faster but yet less competitive at the same time. Rather than getting a vague assignment that’s due in four months, you’ll work on projects with clear deliverables. Rather than worrying why you missed four points on an exam, at work there is more of a focus on the things that matter for the business. As a bonus, I love that at the end of the day, there is no more feeling guilty about not doing work.”

Knowing what you know now, what advice do you have for current graduate students in your discipline?

“First, it’s crucial to get a wide range of practical experience through internships. Find internship opportunities early on, both in grad school and as an undergraduate. I thought I didn't need to do internships as an undergraduate because I was planning on going to med school. Not only was I wrong, but I changed my career path and that extra general work experience would have helped no matter what I chose to do. So I highly recommend internships. I am so thankful for my internship experience in grad school because it provided a great deal of practical knowledge and experience.

“Second, take charge. My biggest advice would be to create your own work. That's how I’m in my current position. In the workplace, too many people will complain of being bored, or they'll complain that something is broken. You might be the only one that sees it or sees how easily it can be fixed. So step up and do it—that’s leadership.

“Third, save your knowledge. Save all your work somehow because you won't remember it all. Create an electronic filing system and back it up. It also helps for preparing for comprehensive exams.

“Fourth, actually read your assignments. Don't underestimate the importance of those ‘classic’ foundational articles. I've actually used them at work more than I thought I would.

“Finally, don’t stress about your grades. You'll graduate whether you stress about it or not. It seems like while you're in school, there's this culture of ‘who can get the highest grade’ and even ‘who can get the highest grade while studying the least’ and that's unfortunate. Apart from your own ego, who cares? I guarantee the people with the highest grades will not be the most successful after the degree.”

Do you have any other lessons learned or pieces of advice that you think would be helpful to current graduate students?

“Keep learning even after you graduate. Keep an open mind about your first full-time position and even your internship, especially in this economy. You can do something I/O-psychology related almost anywhere you work.”

Confirmation of Obama’s Supreme-Court Pick to Highlight Employment-Law Case

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Wed, 27 May 2009 10:55:00 +0000

“Reverse discrimination.” “Racism.”
“Judicial activism.” The mud-slinging has only just begun, and it’ll likely be particularly furious during this time prior to confirmation hearings for Judge Sonia Sotomayor, whom U.S. President Barack Obama announced yesterday as his nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court.

The political process, sometimes, thrusts rather specific business practices into the national spotlight. And when that happens, pundits on all sides often shift their typical jockeying for attention into overdrive. But it’s also common to hear many of those pundits reaching far beyond their areas of expertise, making uninformed claims that are simply ignorant of facts.

In the instance of Sotomayor, the specific business practice that may vault into the headlines is the use of tests for employment-related decisions. That’s because while serving as a federal appeals court judge, she ruled in favor of the city of New Haven, Conn., which had allegedly discounted test results that would’ve promoted an all-white cadre of firefighters. That case, Ricci v. DeStefano, has made it all the way to the Supreme Court.

Thirty-eight years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in the landmark case Griggs v. Duke Power that employment tests that disparately impact minority groups must be reasonably related to the job. In so doing, the case interpreted legal provisions within the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII.

In Ricci v. DeStefano, the primary questions before the court are as follows:

Can a municipality reject results from an otherwise valid civil service exam when the results unintentionally prevent the promotion of minority candidates?
Does 42 U.S.C. Section 2000e permit federal courts to relieve municipalities from having to comply with local laws that require strict compliance with race-blind merit selection procedures?

This case will clearly impact the work of hiring managers, employment-law attorneys, human-resource professionals, and personnel-selection specialists. In fact, Ricci v. DeStefano may soon take its place among other landmark cases of employment law. But as the case begins running the gauntlet of public opinion and media attention, here are a few points to ponder:

Just because a specific demographic group scores higher on a test than another demographic group does not necessarily suggest that the test itself is biased. That’s actually a different question, one that involves what industrial/organizational psychologists call “differential prediction.”
When the specific demographic group that scores higher on a test than another demographic group happens to be a majority group (e.g., white males), employers should concern themselves with the possibility of their procedures having an “adverse impact” on minority groups.

Discussing exactly what experts mean by differential prediction and adverse impact is beyond the scope of this article. But as the furor surrounding Sotomayor’s confirmation to the Supreme Court builds, it’s interesting to consider how politics, business, law, psychology, and public policy intersect in Ricci v. DeStefano.

Should Sotomayor’s stance on this case become a major issue during her confirmation? Should we use tests for high-stakes personnel decisions? What should “fairness” look like in American society? Will that image of what is fair change as majority groups become minority groups during the next 50 years?

These are big questions, of course. But they’re questions that we should be asking and discussing right now, because the answers to those questions will greatly influence how we interact, organize, and do business as a society. Here’s to hoping that people care enough to weigh in on these issues—before it’s too late.

Maintaining Competitive Advantage Requires High-Reliability Organizing

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Sun, 17 May 2009 21:20:00 +0000

A healthy dose of paranoia and an obsession with failure: That’s not typical leadership advice. But that’s part of what management guru Jim Collins discusses as a crucial ingredient for leaders hoping to maintain competitive advantage through crisis and adversity.

What he didn’t say, at least in the teaser to his new book featured in the May 25 issue of BusinessWeek, is how much we can learn about business resilience and leadership from “high-reliability organizations.”

High-reliability organizations (HROs) are those that face so much danger, complexity, and ambiguity on a daily basis that we’d expect them to fail very frequently—but they don’t. Typical examples of HROs include nuclear power plants, naval aircraft carriers, and emergency response agencies. For a variety of reasons, these organizations are able to continually cope with small errors and negotiate the ambiguity around them such that they avoid disaster.

Two of the most prominent thought leaders regarding what makes HROs special, Karl Weick and Kathleen Sutcliffe, described five specific principles that HROs embrace:

Preoccupation with failure
Reluctance to simplify
Sensitivity to operations
Commitment to resilience
Deference to expertise

As I’ve previously written, leadership along these principles is about creating a culture that seeks errors, questions assumptions, and makes sense of circumstances through respectful interpersonal communication. It’s not about always being positive, and it’s certainly not about always saying what other people want to hear.

This notion of leadership differs from much of leadership thought—both in academic and managerial circles—that focuses on leaders as heroic men and women who gallop around organizations on white horses, dream about possibilities, and inspire followers to march along toward greatness. I’m exaggerating for illustrative purposes, of course, but my point is that we can learn from the tough, questioning, interactive model of leadership suggested by HROs.

A common critique of using HROs as a model for leading business organizations through crisis and adversity is that HROs are simply too different from the private, for-profit sector to offer any worthwhile lessons. The research that Collins described, however, suggests otherwise. For example, he suggested that organizations encounter five stages of decline: (a) hubris born of success, (b) undisciplined pursuit of more, (c) denial of risk and peril, (d) grasping for salvation and (e) capitulation to irrelevance or death.

Discussing the dangerous nature of success, Collins wrote, “The best leaders we’ve studied never presume they’ve reached ultimate understanding of all the factors that brought them success. For one thing, they retain a somewhat irrational fear that perhaps their success stems in large part from fortuitous circumstance.” Therefore, it seems that leaders who preoccupy themselves with failure are also those best poised to maintain success.

Additionally, Collins suggests that teams “on the way up” have specific patterns of interaction that allow them to maintain their organizations’ resilience and competitive advantage. These dynamics include:

Rewarding those who highlight “grim facts"
Leading by asking questions
Crediting others for success
Arguing and debating to help the organization overall
Learning from past mistakes

Therefore, it seems as though Collins is suggesting a way for organizations and their leaders to succeed that has much in common from what we’ve learned from HROs. Or, as I’ve suggested, what we can infer is that maintaining competitive advantage requires high-reliability organizing.

Collins’ new book, How the Mighty Fall and Why Some Companies Never Give in, probably offers numerous other ways in which business organizations can become more resilient and ways in which leaders can effectively lead during crises. All I’m saying is that those principles have much in common with what we’ve already learned from HROs. Namely, Collins’ research strongly suggests that we can apply lessons learned in HROs—be they combat teams, nuclear power plants, or flight-deck operators—to the realm of business, providing distinct ways for leaders in organizations to avoid the disastrous consequences of failure.

The article also appears at Stepping into the Void.

Yeah Man, That’s The Good Stuff: Defining the Slippery Nature of Employee Engagement

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Fri, 15 May 2009 11:16:00 +0000

In one specific way, employee engagement is a lot like love: It’s tough—very tough—to define. And maybe nailing down a definition of employee engagement is a losing battle. Maybe it’s just “the good stuff” that managers everywhere want from their employees, that which keeps them satisfied, productive, and likely to stick around.

But slippery definitions can be quite problematic for people obsessed with precise measurement—and for good reason. Without a clear definition of what we’re trying to measure, it’s very difficult to create a valid way in which we can assess current attitudes among employees and connect those attitudes to other business outcomes. Fuzzy definitions also make it tough to provide clear recommendations to managers.

What is clear, however, is that employee engagement is a hot topic. For example, a Google search of the phrase “employee engagement” yielded about 638,000 results. Academic research also suggests that employee engagement has significant positive relationships with a host of desirable outcomes, including satisfaction, safety, and retention (Harter, Schmidt, & Hayes, 2002). So what are we talking about when we talk about employee engagement?

Without devolving into the metaphorical nature of popular country-music lyrics like Kenny Chesney’s song “The Good Stuff,” here are a few definitions of employee engagement from a variety of sources:

“Work engagement is defined as a positive, fulfilling work-related state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption” (Schaufeli, Salanova, Gonzalez-Roma & Bakker, 2002)
“Engagement is seen as the antipode of burnout” (Langelaan, Bakker, van Doornen, & Schaufeli, 2006)
“Rather than a momentary and specific state, engagement refers to a more persistent and pervasive affective-cognitive state that is not focused on any particular object, event, individual, or behavior” (Schaufeli, Bakker, & Salanova, 2006)
“Employees feel engaged when they find personal meaning and motivation in their work, receive positive interpersonal support, and operate in an efficient work environment” (Development Dimensions International Inc. white paper)

So how do you define employee engagement? Is it even worth defining? Is it just “the good stuff?” If so, how do we increase employee engagement, especially in a tough economy when employees face increasing job insecurity, tight budgets, and, presumably, a big dose of occupational stress? At the very least, thinking about these issues may provide clarity to our efforts regarding human resource management as it relates to employee engagement.

Perhaps together we can get a better idea of what constitutes employee engagement and what it looks like. Let’s think. Let’s discuss.

SPSS Syntax 102: Recoding and Computing Variables, Calculating Descriptive Statistics

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Wed, 13 May 2009 00:38:00 +0000

Once you’ve set up your SPSS data file, created variable and value labels to aid in interpretation of future analyses, and cleaned the data as necessary, it might be time to recode and compute new variables. You may also want to calculate some basic descriptive statistics regarding key variables in your data set. All of these tasks are remarkably simple using SPSS syntax.

As a reminder, this forum focuses on common analyses performed by researchers and practitioners within organizational behavior, industrial/organizational psychology, and human resource management. An in-depth explanation of everything SPSS syntax can possibly do is far beyond this forum’s scope. The focus here is on practical issues and no-nonsense knowhow to bolster your productivity.

Recoding Variables

Although you may need to recode variables for a variety of reasons, the most common reason by far that I have to conduct this procedure is to deal with “reversed” items. That’s because I deal primarily with survey data about employee’s attitudes, such as job satisfaction, supervisory support, organizational commitment, and other related variables. Reversed items are those items for which the response options mean the exact opposite of the other items in a measure.

Here’s an example. The Survey of Perceived Organizational Support (Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison, & Sowa, 1986) originally had 36 items designed to assess employees’ global perceptions about how the degree to which the organization values their contributions and cares about their well-being. More recently, researchers (e.g., Roch & Shanock, 2006) used the six-item version of the original measure listed below with satisfactory results. Responses range from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

1. My work organization is willing to help me when I need a special favor.
2. My work organization shows little concern for me.
3. My work organization takes pride in my accomplishments at work.
4. My work organization values my contributions to its well-being.
5. My work organization strongly considers my goals and values.
6. My work organization really cares about my well-being.

Notice how item number 2 differs from the other items. In responding to this item, an employee who perceived a very high level of organizational support would likely respond “disagree” to item number 2 but “agree” to the other five items. That’s because item number 2 is a reversed item. To properly analyze any measure that uses a reversed item, the analyst must recode that variable. Here’s the syntax to do just that (replacing “VARNAME” with the actual variable name):

recode VARNAME (1=5) (2=4) (3=3) (4=2) (5=1) INTO VARNAME_R.
exe.

Running that syntax will create a new variable named “VARNAME_R,” which has been properly recoded. Now, we need to compute a new variable that takes the mean of each respondent’s responses to the items in each measure.

Computing New Variables

To continue the example above, we need to create one variable that represents respondents’ overall perceptions of organizational support, not just their responses to individual items. The process for doing this correctly may vary depending on what you’re measuring; for example, some psychometric scales require summing the responses while others take the items’ mean.

To calculate a composite variable for the measure described above, we take the mean. The syntax to do this is as follows (replacing “VARNAME” with the actual variable name):

compute VARNAMEOVERALL = mean (VARNAME1, VARNAME_R, VARNAME3, VARNAME4, VARNAME5, VARNAME6).
exe.

Note that I used VARNAME_R instead of VARNAME2, because that’s the variable created during the recoding process. Running the compute command above will result in a new variable titled “VARNAMEOVERALL,” which is the mean average of the responses given to each of the measure’s six items. Also, the compute command works for all sorts of other transformations (not just taking the mean of other variables). So you can use it in many other instances as well.

Calculating Descriptive Statistics

Finally, you may want to know some basic information about your variables such as the frequency of responses to each of the response options and the items’ maximums, minimums, means, and standard deviations.

To do this, simply run the following syntax (replacing “VARNAME” with the actual variable name):

desc VARNAME1 VARNAME2 VARNAME3.
freq VARNAME1 VARNAME2 VARNAME3.

Summary: The Running List of Syntax Discussed Thus Far

So here’s a running list of basic SPSS syntax that I’ve discussed on this forum thus far. Simply replace “VARNAME” with the variable name and make other adjustments as necessary for your specific situation.

Variable and Value Labels

variable labels VARNAME 'description of item or variable' .
value labels VARNAME 1 'strongly disagree' 2 'disagree' 3 'neither agree nor disagree' 4 'agree' 5 'strongly agree'.

Compute New Variable

compute VARNAMEOVERALL = mean (VARNAME1, VARNAME_2, VARNAME3, VARNAME, VARNAME5, VARNAME6).
exe.

Recode New Variable

recode VARNAME (1=5) (2=4) (3=3) (4=2) (5=1) INTO VARNAME_R.
exe.

Descriptive Statistics and Frequencies

desc VARNAME1 VARNAME2 VARNAME3.
freq VARNAME1 VARNAME2 VARNAME3.

To tell SPSS to run syntax commands, first copy and paste it into your syntax file. Then, simply highlight it and type CTRL+R on your keyboard. You can also select “run” from the menu at the top of the syntax file or click on the right-facing triangle in the menu bar.

References

Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 500-507.

Roch, S., & Shanock, L. (2006). Organizational justice in an exchange framework: Clarifying organizational justice distinctions. Journal of Management, 32, 299-322.

Using Excel 2007 to Organize Research References

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Sun, 10 May 2009 11:10:00 +0000

After two years of work toward my Ph.D. in organizational science, I’ve conducted numerous literature searches and downloaded quite a few full-text PDFs of research articles—1,374 of them, to be precise. So it’s fortunate that very early in my graduate school experience, I figured out a way to organize all of those files in a manner that I can easily (a) locate, (b) search, (c) sort, and (d) modify. In this short article, I explain what I did and how it helps me stay organized. Then, I provide a downloadable Excel 2007 workbook that you can use in the same manner.

To be fair, a number of software programs designed to catalog and store research references and citations exist. I tried to familiarize myself with EndNote, which seems to be a good program for this purpose. My problem with EndNote, however, is that I needed more flexibility in how I kept track of all my references. I also wanted to use a program that is portable; that is, I wanted to be able to open and use my reference catalog on whatever computer I chose to work. Most computers can open Excel 2007 files, but that’s not exactly the case with EndNote. So I went with Excel.

What did I do? It’s quite simple. I created a spreadsheet with separate columns for important information pertaining to research articles: topic, author(s), year, citation, abstract, journal, and so forth. But the truly helpful column that I included in the workbook was the “full text” column, in which I inserted hyperlinks to the full-text versions of the article PDFs. That means I can access the full text of any of my references with a simple mouse click.

So now what I have is a large spreadsheet with 1,374 rows. Each row contains information about a research article that I’ve used at some point on a project or for a class, spanning a number of topics from industrial and organizational psychology, organizational sociology, organizational communication, organizational behavior, and the management sciences. In a few short moments, I can easily sort or filter the spreadsheet by any number of meaningful criteria, including the project or class I for which I used the reference, the article’s topic, author, year, and journal name.

Many of my classmates have asked about this spreadsheet and have found using it to be quite helpful. You may find it useful as well. Therefore, I created an example spreadsheet to get you started. Pay special attention to the comments regarding columns G, H, and I. Download the example spreadsheet here and start getting organized today.

Hiring the Right People in a Labor Market Flush with Talent: The Importance of Valid Selection Practices

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Sat, 09 May 2009 23:04:00 +0000

It’s about supply and demand, human-resource style. Remember when the unemployment rate in the United States was less than 5%? According to the U.S. Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics, that describes about five of the past 10 years. That also describes times when employers spent much of their energy on recruiting talent, or wooing top performers to apply for jobs.

But times have changed. The unemployment rate now sits at 8.9%, which means employers everywhere are coping with huge numbers of job applicants for a small number of job openings. Recruiting is still important, and valid selection is always important. In a labor market flush with talent, however, figuring out whom to hire from the crowd is all the more crucial—and tricky.

So what really has changed? It’s something called the “selection ratio.” Simply put, the selection ratio is the number of people you can hire divided by the number of job applicants (read more). In a tough economy, lots of people are vying for a small number of jobs. Companies that used to have 40 applicants for 20 jobs (a selection ratio of 0.5) now may have 400 applicants for 10 jobs (a selection ratio of 0.025).

In other words, the labor supply is increasing, but the labor demand is shrinking. Therefore, many employers have the opportunity, theoretically, to make huge gains in terms of human capital. This assumption depends upon a crucial, often-overlooked and taken-for-granted part of the hiring process: that the procedures organizations are using to make hiring decisions must actually work. Namely, the methods used to choose new employees must adequately distinguish people who have what it takes to succeed from those who don’t.

Industrial psychologists have investigated personnel selection for decades. Although describing the nuances of designing a valid selection system is beyond the scope of this article, a number of general guidelines hold true across most industries and job types.

Conduct a proper job analysis. This involves figuring out what exactly constitutes performance regarding the job position in question, helping the hiring manager to know what types of knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (KSAOs) a successful job applicant should embody.
Understand the legal aspects of hiring. For example, employers should pay attention only to those aspects of applicants that are relevant to the job, or “bona fide occupational qualifications.” Consult an attorney well-versed in employment law to clarify any other concerns, including compliance with the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (read more).
Conduct structured interviews. Many hiring managers assume that they can gauge the quality of job applicants through an informal conversation and a handshake. Quite simply, this is a big myth. And thousands of pages of rigorous research provide evidence to this effect. Structured interviews should function like any test: They should have specific questions designed to assess specific KSAOs, and hiring managers should conduct them in the same way for all job applicants who pass initial résumé screening. Here’s a decent guide for conducting structured interviews from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
Consider the use of psychological tests and other selection hurdles. The decision to use these types of selection procedures depend on a variety of factors, and most organizations should consult an expert for further guidance.

Overall, a labor market with large numbers of qualified job seekers can be a very good situation for employers. It gives organizations the opportunity to build their human capital with less of a need for recruiting. But to truly capitalize on the current nature of human-resource supply and demand, employers must understand and implement valid selection procedures. Otherwise, it’s just a shot in the dark—resulting in random selection that is unfair, potentially illegal, and bad for both organizations and employees.

SPSS Syntax 101: Basic Guidelines, Variable and Value Labels

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Wed, 06 May 2009 22:51:00 +0000

Perhaps you’re now convinced that using SPSS syntax might save you some time in the long run. Maybe you even now know how to create a new syntax file.

So what do you do with that file and how do you make it manage or analyze your data?

As a reminder, this forum focuses on common analyses performed by researchers and practitioners within organizational behavior, industrial/organizational psychology, and human resource management. An in-depth explanation of everything SPSS syntax can possibly do is far beyond this forum’s scope. The focus here is on practical issues and no-nonsense knowhow to bolster your productivity.

To begin, let’s cover a few guidelines regarding the use of SPSS syntax.

Notes: You can make notes to yourself within the syntax file about what you are analyzing, why you are analyzing it, what results you found, and anything else that may help put your analysis in context for future reference. To make a note to yourself, simply precede your note with an asterisk (*) and end your sentence with a period. That will ensure that SPSS will skip over that sentence when running the analysis you specify. It is sometimes useful to use many asterisks in a row to demarcate different sections of your syntax.
Sensitivity: Although syntax is not case-sensitive (to the best of my knowledge), syntax code is very sensitive to every other character you type (including periods and other punctuation).

Now, let’s practice. Open a data set and create a new syntax file. Click anywhere in the syntax file’s blank box. Insert a row of asterisks, a description of the file, another row of asterisks, and a period. Save your file somewhere appropriate with an appropriately distinctive file name. Your syntax should now look something like this (click on the image for a larger view).

The next step is to insert code into your syntax file that will specify the types of analyses that the program will conduct on your data. Three general ways that I typically generate code are through (a) directly typing it in from memory, (b) copying, pasting, and editing syntax from another source, and (c) using the program’s “paste” function. I recommend starting your foray into SPSS syntax using methods (b) and (c), which may or may not naturally progress into method (a).

One common task when setting up your data for analysis is properly inputting your variable and value labels. This is helpful because when you run analyses, the SPSS output will include the labels assigned to the variables that were analyzed, assisting in your interpretation of the results. Let’s imagine that one of your variables is “overall satisfaction with life,” being measured by one item on a five-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Forget, of course, that using a single item to measure a construct is a bad idea from a measurement perspective.

Let’s go ahead and designate a variable in your data set as having the name “lifesat.” Select the “variable view” on the bottom left corner of your data file and type “lifesat” into the upper left cell under “Name.” You can quickly assign labels to both the variable itself and to its values using the syntax below:

variable labels lifesat 'overall satisfaction with life' .

value labels lifesat 1 'strongly disagree' 2 'disagree' 3 'neither agree nor disagree' 4 'agree' 5 'strongly agree'.

To run this syntax, first copy and paste it into your syntax file. Then, simply highlight it and type CTRL+R on your keyboard. You can also select “run” from the menu at the top of the syntax file or click on the right-facing triangle in the menu bar.

An output file should appear which will simply repeat the syntax listed above. Note that you will receive an error message if there is no actual variable named “lifesat.” If you look at the “label” and “values” columns in the data set, the labels and values specified above should now appear.

This procedure is especially useful when setting up an SPSS data file from raw data, which often is in the form of an Excel spreadsheet or comma-separated values (.csv) file. For example, this is specifically how the popular online survey tool SurveyMonkey compiles data for users to download. It is especially helpful when conducting initial SPSS data file setup to list all of the variable names in one column, followed by all of the corresponding variable labels in the adjacent column, and then use the concatenate function in Excel to help create all of the syntax for you. Download this Excel 2007 spreadsheet for a quick template; pay attention to the comments in each cell regarding instructions. Note that the workbook has two spreadsheets, one for variable labels and one for value labels.

I have frequently found these basic SPSS syntax procedures to be useful in the initial-setup phase of data analysis. Future posts will discuss and explore using syntax to actually analyze your data, but these initial procedures are useful because they will aid in the interpretation of those analyses.

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

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Tue, 05 May 2009 01:07:00 +0000

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.

SPSS Basics: Getting Started with Syntax

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Sat, 02 May 2009 14:40:00 +0000

Getting started is half the battle, especially when trying to learn a new software program or trying to accomplish a new task in a familiar one. In a previous p ost, I discussed some of the advantages of using syntax in SPSS instead of the software program's drop-down menus. As an astute reader commented, syntax can be very frustrating because it requires the user to follow its specifications very closely. That means that any misplaced characters or punctuation can prevent your program from running correctly, or from running at all.

So is SPSS syntax worth learning for garden-variety social scientists studying organizational behavior, industrial and organizational psychology, and other related fields? Absolutely. But that's because I'm going to try to demonstrate how you can use SPSS syntax in a smart, efficient way to do the basic tasks that you may encounter on a relatively frequent basis in graduate school classes, research projects, and in providing consulting recommendations.

I'll do that through posting actual syntax code that you can copy, paste, edit, and run on your own data. That should help with tasks including computing and recoding variables, calculating descriptive statistics, and conducting analyses such as reliability analysis, factor analysis, correlations, and hierarchical regression--including mediation and moderation analyses. I'll also post some of the tips that I've learned the hard way regarding keeping your syntax and data files user-friendly.

To get started, however, I'm going to assume that you've never used syntax before. You may even be a little scared of it. You're studying or previously studied psychology, organizational behavior, or human resource management because you want to help people and organizations work and play well with one another.

No one told you'd have to be a statistician or computer scientist. But neither am I. All I'm saying is that good consulting and good science builds from an understanding of research methods; therefore, it makes good sense to figure out how to use the tools we have available in the smartest, most efficient way possible. Statisticians, computer scientists, and actuaries: You may want to search elsewhere for solutions to your specific challenges.

SPSS File Types

SPSS has three common file types associated with it. First, there's your data file. This file ends with the file extension .sav. Second, there's your output file. This file ends with the file extension .spo, and SPSS automatically creates it when your run an analysis. Third, there's your syntax file. This file ends with the file extension .sps.

Creating a New Syntax File

To create a syntax file, start by opening the SPSS program or a data set (.sav file). Then, go to the drop-down menu at the top of the screen, go to "file," then "new," and select "syntax file." A new screen should open that looks like the image below. Note that an empty data set is in the background, and the new syntax file is in the foreground.

The syntax file in the foreground serves as your "command center," so to speak, for your data analysis. I recommend maintaining a single syntax file for each project. For example, I used the same single syntax file for all of the analysis relevant to my master's thesis and have separate ones for other projects. Basically, the syntax file is a text document that you can save, "save as," copy and paste items into and from, and so on.

Helpful hint: If you're ever on a computer that doesn't have SPSS yet need to open your syntax file for some reason, you can open it as a text file in Notepad or Wordpad. You won't be able to run the program, but you'll be able to see it, read the notes you made in it, and copy its contents.

So now you know (a) what a syntax file looks like and (b) how to create a new one. Future posts will address next steps and general tips for using the file to analyze your data. Congratulations--you got started, and that's half the battle.

Helpful Tool or Rumor Mill 2.0: The Role of Social Media in Crisis Communication

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:26:00 +0000

It’s commonly assumed that when it comes to communication that more is better. But if we look closely at what that assumption means regarding how people behave within organizations and how leaders function during crises, it’s relatively easy to find evidence suggesting that more isn’t better. In fact, too much information can greatly exacerbate ambiguity within organizations and, during a crisis, incite panic among external stakeholders.

Consider the current buzz surrounding the H1N1 influenza virus, the so-called “swine flu.” It’s getting a great deal of attention—as it should—from major news outlets around the world. For example, a Google News search of the keyword H1N1 at 1:10 p.m. EST on April 30 yielded 77,337 results within the last hour alone. Combine that coverage with millions of people sharing it and discussing it on social-media sites like Twitter and Facebook, and you have an incredible amount of information bouncing around cyberspace. Yet the question remains: During crises, are social media and Internet-based technologies helpful tools? Or do they make the problem worse by functioning like a high-tech rumor mill?

Certainly, arguments exist for both sides. The Internet and social media make information dissemination extraordinarily fast. Tech-savvy leaders during crises could potentially use sites like Twitter to provide stakeholders with useful updates that ensure wide dissemination of information.

It’s also plausible that people may become overloaded with contradictory or erroneous information, and that specific pieces of information may unduly influence people’s perceptions. Additionally, the Internet and social media may encourage users to gauge a crisis’ severity incorrectly and take inappropriate action. For example, it’s a distinct possibility that people may hoard personal stashes of the influenza medication Tamiflu, greatly hindering public-health efforts.

So how should leaders use the Internet and social media during crises? Or should they even use these tools at all? The answers to those questions are complex, but perhaps leaders could start by recognizing the Internet and social media outlets for what they are—tools. And like any tool, they are only as good as the way in which they are used. Maybe leaders should start with understanding the important messages they need to communicate, the audiences that they need to reach, and then wisely employ the most appropriate technologies accordingly.

At the very least, it behooves leaders to understand what tools are available and strategize how best they might use them before crisis strikes—remembering, of course, that (a) more information isn’t always better and (b) anything disseminated via the Web has the propensity to spread like wildfire.

SPSS Basics: Why Syntax Beats Point and Click

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 10:27:00 +0000

Consider yourself very, very lucky: It wasn't that long ago that researchers were calculating all of their statistics by hand, without the use of powerful statistical programs like SPSS, SAS, and Excel. But just because software running on powerful computers allows anyone to spit out statistics doesn't mean that you don't have to know what you're doing and to conduct your analysis in a meaningful way. Because, after all, the numbers that your software program of choice quickly hurls back at you after a few short commands is only as good as (a) the data itself and (b) what you told it to do in terms of analysis.

It seems that different academic disciplines gravitate toward different software programs, and many researchers in industrial/organizational psychology, organizational behavior, and human resource management tend to use SPSS. And that's just fine for the majority of the types of analyses we like to conduct (with structural equation modeling being a notable exception). One of the big differences between SPSS and other statistical programs is that it has a variety of "point and click" options, meaning that one can tell the program to run a variety of types of analyses without having any knowledge of the program's programming language simply by using drop-down menus. While that may sound nice to beginners, it has its pitfalls. Most notably, it encourages a haphazard approach toward data analysis that in the end leaves users wondering, "What did I just do?" So I strongly encourage anyone getting started with SPSS to quickly learn to start doing all of their analyses with syntax.

What's syntax? Syntax is what we call the programming language used to conduct data analyses in SPSS without using the “point and click” method. It's useful for a multitude of reasons, including:

It helps us conduct our analyses in a meaningful, systematic manner
It is a lasting record of what analyses we conducted
If something does not work, we can easily find out why
It can perform operations that are laborious or impossible using the drop-down menus
It is easily transferred among collaborators

Future posts on this forum will further expand upon the basics of using syntax for analyzing data in SPSS. But for now, consider abandoning the "point and click" method. You'll be glad you did.

Ricci v. DeStefano: An Employment-Law Case to Watch

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 23:13:00 +0000

Thirty-eight years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in the landmark case Griggs v. Duke Power that employment tests that disparately impact minority groups must be reasonably related to the job. In so doing, the case interpreted legal provisions within the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII. But there's a new case in town that has hiring specialists and managers listening.

It's Ricci v. DeStefano, in which white firefighters from New Haven, Conn., are crying foul after their fire department allegedly discounted test results that would've promoted them. The department, it seems, didn't want to use the tests because if they did almost all of those promoted would be white.

The primary questions before the court are as follows:

Can a municipality reject results from an otherwise valid civil service exam when the results unintentionally prevent the promotion of minority candidates?

Does 42 U.S.C. Section 2000e permit federal courts to relieve municipalities from having to comply with local laws that require strict compliance with race-blind merit selection procedures?

Clearly, the results of this decision will be of interest to a wide range of selection specialists and hiring managers. And there's a chance that Ricci v. DeStefano may soon take its place among other landmark cases of employment law. Regardless of the outcome, the case serves as a reminder to keep in mind the legal implications of organizational consulting--especially as they pertain to issues of fairness within personnel testing, selection, and promotion.

Engagement and Retention Resources

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 15:59:00 +0000

Summary: Two of the most basic goals of evidence-based management of human capital are to maximize the performance of individual employees and retain top talent. Employee engagement is one of the constructs currently popular among practitioners and researchers that attempts to describe efforts designed to bolster employees' satisfaction, motivation, and work-related effort. Research suggests that employee engagement has significant relationships with several meaningful outcomes that have a direct impact on an organization's bottom line. One of these outcomes is retention, or keeping employees from voluntarily leaving the organization.

The following are resources related to employee engagement and retention developed by advanced graduate students in industrial/organizational psychology and organizational science at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.

Disclaimer: These resources are provided only as starting points and references for other students and professionals; as always, you are responsible for the originality and veracity of your own work. With that being said, I hope that you find these resources useful.

Download presentation: click here

References:

Corporate Leadership Council. (1999) Salient Findings on the Career Decisions of High Value Employees. Corporate Executive Board, 1-22.

Corporate Leadership Council. (2008). Engagement and the organization’s bottom line. Corporate Executive Board: Council Analysis & Case Studies, 1-17.

Cartwright, S. & Holmes, N. (2006). The meaning of work: The challenge of regaining employee engagement and reducing cynicism. Human Resource Management Review, 16, 199-208.

Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hayes, T. L. (2002). Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 268-279.

Leadership Development Resources

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 15:59:00 +0000

Summary: A cornerstone in many organizations' talent-management systems, leadership development comprises a wide range of training, evaluation, and other programs intended to hone leadership skills and abilities at many organizational levels. Leadership development often involves systems for obtaining developmental feedback for leaders regarding their performance, often through the use of 360-degree feedback instruments. Another key part of leadership development is the identification and further development of high-potential employees through mentoring, coaching, career development, and other means.

The following are resources regarding leadership development developed by advanced graduate students in industrial/organizational psychology and organizational science at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.

Disclaimer: These resources are provided only as starting points and references for other students and professionals; as always, you are responsible for the originality and veracity of your own work. With that being said, I hope that you find these resources useful.

Download presentation: click here

References:

Conner, J. (2000). Developing the global leaders of tomorrow. Human Resource Management, 39, 147-157.

Mumford, M. D., Marks, M. A., Connelly, M. S., Zaccaro, S. J., & Reiter-Palmon, R. (2000). Development of leadership skills: Experience and timing. Leadership Quarterly, 11, 87 – 114.

Riggio, R. E. (2008). Leadership development: The current state and future expectations. Consulting Psychology Journal, 60, 383-392.

Hopkins, M. M., O’Neil, D. A., Passarelli, A., & Bilimoria, D. (2008). Women’s leadership development strategic practices for women and organizations, Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 60( 4), 348–365

Barret, A. & Beeson, J. (2002). Developing business leaders for 2010. Conference Board Research Report, 1-62.

Zenger, J. H., & Folkman, J. (2002). The Extraordinary Leader: Turning Good Managers into Great Leaders. New York: McGraw Hill. Chapter 10: What Individuals do to Become Great Leaders (p. 229 – 250); Chapter 11: The Organization’s Role in Developing Leaders (p. 251 – 276).

Mentoring and Coaching Resources

noreply@blogger.com (Ben Baran) — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 15:59:00 +0000

Summary: Research has demonstrated that a well-designed mentoring program can improve performance in a variety of ways. Similarly, the coaching movement continues to gain momentum among consulting psychologists and executive training professionals. Many organizations are starting to include coaching and mentoring programs within their talent-management systems in an attempt to reap its purported benefits to individual employees.

The following are resources related to coaching and mentoring developed by advanced graduate students in industrial/organizational psychology and organizational science at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.

Disclaimer: These resources are provided only as starting points and references for other students and professionals; as always, you are responsible for the originality and veracity of your own work. With that being said, I hope that you find these resources useful.

Download presentation: click here

References:

DeLong, T. J., Gabarro, J. J., Lees, R. J.. Why mentoring matters in a hypercompetitive world. Harvard Business Review, 86 (1), 115-121.

Ducharme, M. J. (2004). The cognitive-behavioral approach to executive coaching. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 56, 214-224.

Feldman, D. C., & Lankau, M. J. (2005). Executive coaching: A review and agenda for future research. Journal of Management, 31, 829-848.

Peterson, D. B. (2007). Executive coaching in a cross-cultural context. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 59, 261-271.

Sherin, J., & Caiger, L. (2004). Rational-emotive behavior therapy: A behavioral change model for executive coaching. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 56, 225 – 233.