A Thorough Overview of Organizational

Psychology

A review of

The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Psychology (Vols. 1 and 2)

by Steve W. J. Kozlowski (Ed.)

New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2012. 1,512 pp. ISBN

978-0-19-534282-6, set. $250.00, set

Reviewed by
Bernardo M. Ferdman

Industrial and organizational (I/O) psychology is not often at the forefront of most people’s
image of the discipline of psychology; indeed, many if not most introductory courses in
psychology either do not cover the field or do so in a very cursory fashion. In many cases,
even well-read psychologists from other subdisciplines have a relatively vague and
sometimes even misinformed view of what I/O psychology is or does. Even though some
(e.g., Sternberg, 2005) have made powerful calls for greater unity across psychology’s many
subdisciplines, in my experience I/O psychology’s contributions and perspectives do not
often figure prominently in such appeals.
In part, this may be because the general perspectives and organization of the I/O field
are not always clearly framed in ways that are relatively accessible to other psychologists.
As in other subdisciplines, I/O psychologists often write and speak in ways that are
somewhat insular; their books and articles may make sense primarily to those already
immersed in the field. Certainly, I/O psychologists can and must do more, not only to ground
their work in key theories and research in basic areas of the field, such as social psychology,
but also to communicate how their perspectives and findings contribute back to those areas.
And when they produce major works designed to provide insight into the field of I/O
psychology as a whole, as well as its various components, these should be useful not only to
specialists in the subject area but also to psychologists across a broad spectrum.
Although there are certainly various sources that students and established
psychologists can use to get oriented both to the basics and to the nuances of the field, The
Oxford Handbook of Organizational Psychology, edited by Steve W. J. Kozlowski, now
takes a prominent place among these. The Handbook’s two volumes are part of a larger and
extensive series of handbooks constituting the Oxford Library of Psychology series, which
currently includes 82 titles and is an impressive series in terms of both breadth and depth, as
well as in providing a thorough and systematic review of psychology. Kozlowski’s
contribution involves 69 authors who have contributed 42 chapters. They are all well-known
scholars who provide a good representation of the field; however, it is notable that only 13
of them—from nine different countries—are based outside the United States.
Kozlowski’s approach to the field of I/O psychology and the organization of his
Handbook will be particularly appealing to generalists because both his approach and the
volumes are framed from the perspective of dynamic psychological processes and of the
relationship of people to their work-related context. I encourage those who are not I/O
psychologists to use this resource—delving deeply into some chapters and skimming others,
perhaps—to get a good sense of the scope and depth of this important but often overlooked
subdiscipline of psychology.
Although not every chapter will be equally accessible to a nonspecialist, the general
approach and tone of the Handbook and the way it is organized make it a particularly useful
resource for those wanting both breadth and depth. Most authors do a good job of framing
the issues they cover in the broader context of theory and research, providing integrative
coverage of the subject under discussion, and discussing useful future directions. And most
chapters are written in a style and with content that should be interesting and relevant for
those who are not I/O psychologists (or who are I/O psychologists but with a different focus
or expertise).

A Thorough, Unique, and Inviting Approach

In the book’s introductory chapter, Kozlowski—distinguished in the field as editor of its

premier journal, Journal of Applied Psychology, and as an expert on learning, teams, and
multilevel theories—provides an interesting and quite readable overview of both I/O
psychology and the book, focusing on the role of work in human experience and history as
well as various dialectical tensions and evolutionary trends within organizational
psychology. This is followed by Laura Koppes Bryan and Andrew Vinchur’s
thorough—although U.S.-centric—overview of the history of I/O psychology.
The rest of the Handbook is organized into 10 multichapter sections and a concluding
chapter. These address the field’s research and conceptual foundations; the alignment of
people and jobs through processes such as recruitment, selection, work design, performance
management, training and learning, and person–environment fit; individual processes such
as motivation, attitudes, and performance; social processes, including socialization,
mentoring, organizational culture, networks, and leadership; group processes, focusing
particularly on work teams; organizational processes, including organizational learning,
organization development, and human resource management; diversity issues, including
diversity management, employment discrimination, and cross-cultural issues; the
relationship of work and other aspects of life (family, learning, safety and health, and aging);
and the relationship of performance with technology and system design, including human
factors, cognitive engineering, computer-supported cooperation, and decision making.
As I read through the two volumes, I frequently found myself wanting to share
various chapters with others, and I noted many chapters that I will go back to repeatedly
both for reference and for insights into particular subjects. For example, I thought about
referring my students to various chapters that provide incisive overviews of critical areas.
The Handbook, in addition to serving as an overview of the field as a whole, will be very
useful for anyone needing a thorough, thoughtful, and up-to-date review of most subareas
within I/O psychology.
Kozlowski’s approach contrasts somewhat with other overviews that are structured in
terms of historical divisions of I/O psychology into personnel and organizational
perspectives or that are framed primarily from the perspective of the organization and its
needs and goals. The 26 chapters of Schmitt, Highhouse, and Weiner’s (2013) recent volume
on I/O psychology, for example, are structured in terms of personnel psychology,
organizational psychology, and the work environment (after introductory chapters on the
field overall and research within it). The three-volume APA Handbook of Industrial and
Organizational Psychology (Zedeck, 2010) is organized in terms of organizational
imperatives: Volume 1, Building and Developing the Organization; Volume 2, Selecting and
Developing Members for the Organization; and Volume 3, Maintaining, Expanding, and
Contracting the Organization (these volumes were reviewed in PsycCRITIQUES [Topolski,
2011]).
In this sense, Kozlowski’s approach seems distinct and original. Although there is
certainly overlap with Schmitt et al.’s (2013) and Zedeck’s (2010) coverage—as well as in
various chapter authors—the Oxford Handbook’s structure challenges readers to think a bit
differently about the field as a whole as well as its components. Kozlowski’s introduction
highlights a number of tensions within I/O psychology that could be experienced and treated
as polarizing and problematic, or, as he prefers, as more dynamic and essential to the field.
These include the tension between (a) industrial and organizational, (b) employee well-being
and organizational effectiveness, (c) basic and applied science, (d) science and practice, and
(e) a focus on the individual versus on the organization.
Kozlowski, both through the introduction and in the organization and coverage of the
Handbook, prefers to keep the tensions alive rather than to resolve them, and this is how he
frames the challenge:

I think that the tensions are endemic in the origin, nature, and evolution of the field, and
that the dialectic flux is healthy so long as we actively endeavor to maintain a dynamic
balance between the poles and among the collective tensions. (p. 8)

I found this approach to be appropriate, encouraging, and forward-looking. Rather

than focusing on authority, tradition, and expertise, the style here is one that is based on
clear reasoning and evidence. Some of the chapter authors approach their task by
systematically compiling and reviewing a large set of journal articles (e.g., Kirkman,
Gibson, and Kim in Chapter 25, on virtual teams). Others take a grand view and generate a
broad picture of a phenomenon (e.g., Campbell in Chapter 6, on the structure of
performance).
In a few chapters, rather than providing a simple review of a subject, authors offer
new lenses and insights that seek to challenge conventional wisdom or give an integrated
view of concepts that are often kept separate. In Chapter 5, for example, Ryan and Sackett
take a look at work on individual differences and provide a new and more dynamic
perspective on the subject than have past authors. Smither, in Chapter 10, focuses on various
aspects of managing performance in an organizational context, rather than simply addressing
performance appraisal. This type of approach not only makes the Handbook and its chapters
more accessible and interesting, but it also opens them to engagement and critique, as a work
of this sort should, in my estimation.

Opportunities Lost

Praiseworthy as the Handbook is, there are some important perspectives and issues that it
does not address, and perhaps should or could have. Most notable is the contrast between the
Handbook’s title—in which organizational psychology appears as the name of the
field—and most of the chapters, which usually refer to industrial and organizational
psychology or to I/O psychology. The appropriate name for the field has been a matter of
debate for some time: Although it was originally called industrial psychology (in the United
States), and later became industrial and organizational psychology, at various times attempts
were made to switch to organizational psychology (Highhouse, 2007). In Europe, the usual
name for the field is work and organizational psychology.
In spite of the implications of these choices for how the field is structured, what topics
are emphasized, and how it is perceived, Kozlowski glosses over the distinctions and simply
mentions them in a footnote, in which he writes that he is “among many who think
‘organizational psychology’ is shorter, sweeter, and superior” and indicates that he “will use
the labels interchangeably, but with a decided preference for ‘organizational psychology’ as
the name for our field” (p. 20). Particularly given his cogent arguments for maintaining the
tensions among the field’s various perspectives and the importance of including both the “I”
and the “O” sides in the field, it surprised me that the issue of nomenclature—and, more
important, the field’s identity—is not given more substantive attention. Indeed, in spite of
the compelling contents and organization of the Handbook, it is never particularly clear why
the particular topics covered were chosen and why others, such as job analysis,
compensation, careers, interpersonal relationships, conflict, and intergroup relations, are not
given much, if any, attention.
Another notable opportunity lost is that issues of culture and diversity are not well
represented and are mostly relegated to three chapters: Roberson on managing diversity;
Colella, McKay, Daniels, and Signal on employment discrimination; and Aycan and Gelfand
on cross-cultural organizational psychology. The other chapter authors do not generally
address multicultural or international issues, and, when they do, it is mostly not in a
prominent or well-integrated fashion.
Addressing these issues can be a useful vehicle not only for considering application
across a range of circumstances and populations but also for assessing specificity versus
universality of the various processes and concepts discussed. This is certainly an area where
the field of I/O psychology as a whole needs to develop further (Dawson, Johnson, &
Ferdman, in press). Notably, Dunnette and Hough’s Handbook of Industrial and
Organizational Psychology (2nd ed.), published in the 1990s, included a complete volume
(Triandis, Dunnette, & Hough, 1994) devoted to cross-cultural issues and to I/O psychology
outside the United States.
Related to this, I found that, in spite of the novel way of organizing topics, many of
the book’s chapters—and the coverage overall—are nonetheless somewhat conventional,
and challenging, yet still important, issues in and for the field are not addressed. For
example, there is little to no exploration of the role of I/O psychology in society, particularly
from a critical perspective (e.g., Haney & Hurtado, 1994; Lefkowitz, 2008; Prilleltensky,
1989), nor of the role or application of the field in nontraditional workplaces or in other
types of organizations or contexts (e.g., Olson-Buchanan, Koppes Bryan, & Thompson,
2013). Topics such as marginalized workers, poverty, migration, flows of capital, and other
aspects of work and organizations around the world are not very present in the book. Thus,
the book does not take on important questions such as whose interests are served by I/O
psychology and whose perspectives are represented in the field’s theories and research.
 Conclusion

Ultimately, The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Psychology provides a wide-ranging,

accessible, and broad account of the field, and the book will be useful to those in the field as
well as to psychologists and others from other subdisciplines. The Handbook will certainly
occupy a prominent place in my library, and I will recommend many of its chapters to
colleagues and students in I/O psychology, and to other psychologists wishing to learn more
about particular areas of the field.

References

Dawson, B., Johnson, C. D., & Ferdman, B. M. (in press). Organizational psychology. In F.
T. L. Leong (Ed.), APA handbook of multicultural psychology: Vol. 1. Theory and
research. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
Haney, C., & Hurtado, A. (1994). The jurisprudence of race and meritocracy: Standardized
testing and “race-neutral” racism in the workplace. Law and Human Behavior, 18,

223–248. doi:10.1007/BF01499586
Highhouse, S. (2007). Where did this name come from, anyway? A brief history of the I-O
label. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 45, 53–56. doi:10.1037/
e579082011-005
Lefkowitz, J. (2008). To prosper, organizational psychology should . . . expand the values of
organizational psychology to match the quality of its ethics. Journal of Organizational

Behavior, 29, 439–453. doi:10.1002/job.527

Olson-Buchanan, J., Koppes Bryan, L., & Thompson, L. F. (2013). Using
industrial–organizational psychology for the greater good: Helping those who help
others. New York, NY: Routledge/ABC-CLIO.
Prilleltensky, I. (1989). Psychology and the status quo. American Psychologist, 44, 795–802.

doi:10.1037/0003-066X.44.5.795
Schmitt, N. W., Highhouse, S., & Weiner, I. B. (Eds.). (2013). Handbook of psychology:
Vol. 12. Industrial and organizational psychology (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
 Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.). (2005). Unity in psychology: Possibility or pipedream? Washington,

DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/10847-000

Topolski, J. M. (2011). Return on an investment in the psychology of work [Review of the

books APA handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vols. 1–3), by S.

Zedeck (Ed.)]. PsycCRITIQUES, 56(23). doi:10.1037/a0023774

Triandis, H. C., Dunnette, M. D., & Hough, L. M. (Eds.). (1994). Handbook of industrial
and organizational psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 4). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting
Psychologists Press.
Zedeck, S. (2010). APA handbook of industrial and organizational psychology. Washington,
DC: American Psychological Association.

PsycCRITIQUES July 3, 2013, Vol. 58, Release 27, Article 4

1554-0138 © 2013, American Psychological Association