Transcript Industrial-Organizational Psychology and Organizational

PSY 6450 Psychology of Work
1
PSY 6450 Unit 1 Schedule
• Today and Monday: Lecture
• Wednesday, 9/11: Exam
2
PSY 6450 Unit 1
• Some facts and a little history of I/O
– Aamodt
• Differences between I/O psychology
and OBM
– Bucklin et al. (2000)
– Written essential material into SOs
• History of OBM
– Dickinson (2000)
– 20th anniversary issue of JOBM
3
SO 1: I/O vs. Business Fields, #1
• The application of psychological
principles distinguishes I/O from related
business fields
– HRM texts advocate using unstructured
interviews for selection; I/O has shown these
are much less effective than other methods
– Business advocates the use of Myers-Briggs
to select and coach employees; I/O does not
– Business advocates the use of “stretch”
goals; I/O does not
– Business advocates EOM programs; I/O does
not
(2 differences and explain each, giving examples; little hard to abstract out)
4
SO 1: Daniels’ Oops: 13 management
practices that waste time and money
1. Employee of the
month programs (and
most other forms of
reward and recognition
programs; winners/losers)
2. Stretch goals
3. Performance
appraisal
4. Ranking employees
5. Rewarding things a
dead man can do
6. Salary & hourly pay
(no accidents, no errors, be at your workstation)
5
7. You did a good job,
but…
8. The sandwich method
of providing feedback
(good, bad, good)
9. Overvaluing smart,
talented people
10. The budget process
11. Promoting people no
one likes
12. Downsizing
13. Mergers, acquisitions
(Enron, JPMorgan, 5.8 billion trading/investment)
SO 1: I/O vs. Business Fields, #2
• I/O focuses on factors that affect the
people; business focuses on factors that
affect running a business*
– Business courses: accounting, finance,
marketing, business law, corporate policy,
– Psychology courses: training and development,
selection and placement, systems analysis,
experimental methodology (permitting
evaluation of interventions)
*However, there is clearly overlap: Psychology of work vs.
organizational behavior and management; systems
analysis vs. business process management and supply
chain management, for example.
6
(recommend that all of our students
take accounting)
Four basic areas of I/O psychology*
(NFE)
• Personnel Selection and Placement
– Main area of emphasis for I/O
– Not emphasized in OBM
• Training and Instructional Design
– Largest area of employment for MAs
• Performance Management
– Focus of this course
• Systems Analysis - Organizational
Development
*these differ from Aamdot’s list: his are more general
(Note: not counseling or clinical. EAP programs - counseling/clinical/social work degrees;
recent health and wellness programs - yes)
7
SO 3: The I and O in I/O Psychology
• Industrial
– Focuses on the individual worker/position
• Determining the requirements of each job/position
• Selecting individuals who have those requirements
• Training individuals to improve their competency
• Organizational
– Any aspect of the organization and structure
that affects performance and/or satisfaction
• Reward/pay systems
• Feedback systems
• Organizational structure (systems analysis)
(distinction that has little relevance today, overlap between the two, but remains in the name)
8
Some I/O history: First area of application
• SO4A: The oldest area of application and
the one that still dominates today is
Personnel Selection & Placement.
– Main difference between I/O programs and OBM
programs.
• SO4B: Personnel Selection got started by
selection and placement of military
personnel in WWI & WWII
– Clinical tests, typically intelligence and
personality tests, and used them to test recruits
(emphasis influences other aspects of training - statistical methods used to determine reliability
and validity of tests - job relatedness; SO8 – Aamodt, at least 5 stats courses in PH.D. IO)
9
SO5: Putting the “O” in I/O psychology
• One of the greatest episodes in the
formation of I/O according to many:
Hawthorne Studies in the 1930s
– Heretofore restricted to personnel issues such
as selection and training (the I in I/O)
– Expanded to:
• Human relations
• Quality of work environment
• Attitudes
– Satisfaction and group morale
10
SO6: Personnel Selection (NFE)
• I/O expanded greatly
when Congress
passed Title VII Civil
Rights Act, 1964
– Banned unfair
discrimination
against minorities
and females
• I/O has a “lock” on
personnel selection
as a profession
Other EEO Laws:
•Age Discrimination
•Vietnam/Disabled
Veterans
•Americans with
Disabilities Act
(overlap between I/O and OBM and other areas: mgt – 0% MBA programs, human resources,
Industrial engineer - selection remains I/O. don’t deal with laws and issues here, personnel selection)
11
SO9: Where do I/O psychologists work?
• 10A: Ph.D.s (learn top three for exam)
– Higher education
– Consulting firms
– Private Industry
– Public Government
40%
25%
24%
8%
• 10B: MAs (learn top two for exam)
– Private Industry
– Consulting firms
– Public Government
– Higher education
44%
37%
11%
<1%
(note difference PhD universities vs. industry; difference MA, private, more likely to work in private
business with MA; consulting firms, interesting data
12
SO10: $$ Salaries - SIOP Survey 2012 (NFE)
Median
Starting
Median
Overall
Male
Median
Female
Median
$120,000
$103,000
PhD
$78,000
$118,000
MA
$64,000
$82,500
$ PhD median starting same for applied & profs
$ Profs significantly lower than applied
$ Female median is 15% lower than males
but first significant decrease-and least since-1982!
(High starting salary for MAs - $40-$50 K; last pertains to PhD&MA combined; mean salaries 20% lower; about 50% of students
are now female; 14% when I got my IO degree in 1977; WMU figures in Sos; expt inst. ranks lower; fulls paid 12% less than males;
Differences are less than in the past; university has gender equity committees looking into this/reduce it. Dr. Baker & Fuqua)
13
Facts about I/O psychology
• SO11: Primary professional
organization for I/O psychology
Society for Industrial/Organizational Psychology
Web site: www.siop.org
Also, SIOP is Division 14 of APA
(Behavior Analysis is Division 25)
14
Facts about I/O psychology
• SO12: Primary journal for I/O
psychology (NFE)
Journal of Applied Psychology
Note list of 22 journals in Table 1.5
JOBM is not included
(little cross-fertilization between IO psychology and OBM:
At this point in time most OBM practitioners/students don’t know much about IO and vice versa
2011 special issue of JOBM devoted to integration; well worth reading)
15
Facts about I/O psychology
• SO13: Percentage of PhD psychologists
who are I/O psychologists
4%
50% of APA’s 96,000 psychologists are
clinical, counseling and school psychologists
Thus, it’s not surprising that people don’t
know about us
16
SO14: Growth of IO (nfe)
Year
# of IO psychologists
1939
100
1960
760
1991
3,000
2008
7,500
Year
MA programs
PhD programs
1986
23
44
2008
75
65
(I graduated in 1977 with my MA degree in IO)
17
SO15: Licensing of IO Psychologists
(this slide NFE)
• Very different than clinical psychology
• Varies from state to state
– Some require it, most don’t
• Some states preclude it - i.e., MI
– Educational and experiential requirements
focus on clinical/counseling courses and
internships
• Academics (who do not practice) do not
have to be licensed
(next few sos, licensing in IO psychology, and certification/licensing in BA)
18
SO15: SIOP opposes licensing - why?
• SIOP maintains that I/O psychologists
– Should be able to be licensed
– But should not be required to be licensed
• Main reason why licensing is not needed
– Licensing is designed to protect the public in
health care areas (mental and behavioral health).
I/O psychologists are not health care providers
and do not deal with vulnerable populations.
– Same argument OBM practitioners are making
about license laws for behavior analysts
• SIOP successfully blocked many states
from passing license laws ~10 years ago
(click no, licensing originally to protect public - vulnerable populations, health care areas
Next slide, certification/licensing of behavior analysts)
19
SO16: Certification vs. Licensing,
Behavior Analysts
• Certification is voluntary, licensing is
legally required
• The Behavior Analysis Certification Board
(BACB) certifies behavior analysts at the
national level
– Because of this, certification requirements are
the same for every state in the country
• Individual states pass license laws
– Because of this, the laws vary from state to
state
(independent from ABAI; compliance overseen by licensing boards established by the state;
Legal penalties for violating license laws )20
Certification vs. Licensing of BA
• National certification began in 1998
• Licensing began only recently
– 10 states now have licensing laws for
behavior analysts
– Laws are pending in 9 states
– A MI law is currently being drafted
– In most states, if you are certified, you
qualify for licensing
(it’s hard at this point to separate certification and licensing, but they are still separate)
21
Certification of Behavior Analysts
• Primarily relevant for those who work in
human services (autistic and developmentallydisabled clients)
– Protection of at-risk individuals
– Many states require providers of behavioral
services to be certified (or licensed) to receive
insurance reimbursement
• Thus, almost all human service
organizations that provide behavioral
services require employees to be certified
to be hired
– Particularly MA and Ph.D. level
22
Certification of Behavior Analysts
• At this point, direct care staff and
technicians do not have to be certified, but
the BACB is initiating a new credential:
Registered Behavioral Technician
23
SO17: OBM and Certification
• Most individuals in OBM are not certified
– Do not deal with at-risk individuals
– Our clients in business and industry do not
require it – no money or insurance
reimbursement is at stake
– The current certification process, particularly
the exam, is not very relevant for those in OBM
• Exam, for the most part, focuses on applied behavior
analysis with at-risk individuals
• Different skills are required by those who work in OBM
(not functional assessments, preference assessments; feedback, goal setting, management
reward systems, systems analysis; BACB did reach out to OBM a long time ago, and again recently–
not sufficient interest/market from folks in OBM to make it cost-effective)
24
OBM and Certification
• Individuals in OBM can become certified
– Coursework in WMU’s graduate program
meets the educational requirement
– Can count work in OBM toward the experience
requirements
• However, none of the WMU OBM faculty are certified,
thus we cannot supervise those hours according to
the new certification requirements
25
SO18: Two reasons for BA license laws
• To protect at-risk individuals
– Push for licensing came from behavior analysts
who work with at-risk individuals
– Association of Professional Behavior Analysts
• Promote and advocate for BACBs
• Different than ABAI, but many individuals belong to
both if they work with at-risk individuals
• States began to pass autism insurance laws
to cover ABA services
– Needed a way to determine who was competent
to provide those services and thus who could
receive insurance reimbursement
(only cover applied behavior analysts – not nonhuman operant or human operant – same
reasons as for certification)
26
SO19: Two main types of laws
• Broad title and practice laws
You cannot call yourself a behavior analyst or
practice behavior analysis unless you are
licensed
– Five states have passed this type of law
• Arizona, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Missouri, and
Virginia
(the wording of the laws do differ and others might object to my categories, but I am
attempting to give you a broad overview – things are complicated right now)
27
SO19: Two main types of laws
• Restrictive laws
Only behavior analysts who provide services to
autistic children or to individuals with
pervasive behavioral disabilities need to be
licensed
– Four states have passed this type of law
• Nevada, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island
– Michigan’s draft law restricts licensing to
behavior analysts who provide clinical services
• I expect further revisions before it is finalized
28
Other types of laws & state regulations
• Title license law: Wisconsin
– You can practice behavior analysis without a
license but you cannot call yourself a behavior
analyst
• Regulations tied to insurance autism laws
(often written into insurance laws)
– Autism service providers must be certified to
receive insurance reimbursement
– 16 states have these type of regulations
• I don’t know how many are considering license laws
• West Virginia recently determined that certification was
adequate; that is, that licensing was not necessary
29
How will these laws affect you & OBM?
• The first laws that were passed were based
on the model license law developed by the
BACB – broad title and practice laws
• In most cases the licensing process is the
same as the certification process, so if you
are certified you automatically qualify for
licensing
– Some laws require certification to be licensed
– Some permit licensing of individuals with
equivalent training and experience
(makes sense – states don’t have to reinvent the wheel and there will be some/quite a bit of
consistency across states – which is a very good thing for behavior analysts who want/need to
be licensed.)
30
How will these laws affect you & OBM?
• Based on concerns expressed by members
of the OBM community, the BACB revised
its model license law last October
– Now includes exclusionary language for OBM
(and other behavior analysts who serve
“nonpatient” consumers) should states wish to
do that
Exemption #3 language: A behavior analyst who
practices with nonhuman or nonpatient clients
or consumers, including, but not limited to,
applied animal behaviorists, and practitioners of
organizational behavior management.
31
How will these laws affect you & OBM?
• Because of this exemption in the revised
BACB model license law, and the fact that
most states use this as a starting point, my
best guess is that if you work in OBM (and
other nonpatient/nonclinical areas) you
won’t have to be licensed
– But I could be wrong! Remember it is up to the
individual states and the position of the
behavior analysts advocating for the laws in
those states.
(However, there are those who are advocating that license laws cover all BA – interestingly the only ones I have
come across are those that provide clinical servers, appear to know what is best for the rest of us –
protection of the field and professionalization of the field: and there are those who believe that if OBM
individuals work in HS, they should be licensed/certified – I am more sympathetic to that, but still don’t believe it
is necessary. let’s move on….next slide Bucklin & Dickinson)
32
Some Major Differences Between
I/O and OBM
Bucklin et al., 2000
(only highlight some important differences - embedded those in sos)
33
Purpose
To identify similarities and differences
with respect to topics and research
methods used in OBM and traditional
I/O psychology
34
Method
• JAP
– Authors reviewed every article in JAP between
1987 & 1997 (N = 997)
– Classifications were primarily derived from
Nolan et al. (1999) who previously analyzed
articles in JOBM for the same years (N=119)
• JOBM
– JAP classification results were compared to
JOBM data collected by Nolan et al. (1999)
35
Qualification on the data
• VanStelle et al. (2012) published an updated
review of the publications in JOBM
• Reviewed articles published between 19982009
• I couldn’t use these updated data because
there aren’t any comparison withs JAP
• I compared the JOBM data from the two
articles, however, and was struck by
similarity of data
(DVs, IVS, social validity; some of the differences simply reflect the interests of the academics)
36
SO20: No unifying theory in I/O (NFE)
• I/O Psychology
– No unifying theory historically
– No unifying theory today
• At least 10 motivational theories: Aamodt
• At least 8 leadership theories: Aamodt
– Motivational theories and leadership
theories (already 18 different theories)
– Leads to research and articles about who
is right
37
SO20: Unifying theory of OBM (NFE)
• OBM (emerged in the early 1960s)
– Unifying theory of behavior analysis
– Emerged from other areas in behavior analysis
- programmed instruction (Brethower)
- clinical psychology (Daniels, Gilbert)
- experimental (Anderson, Brown)
- general applied (Hopkins)
- education (Sulzer-Azaroff)
• Behavior analysis is unique - apply the
same principles across all specializations
(not only for topics within OBM)
38
SO21: Topics in JAP & JOBM
20A: Rank order top 3 in JAP
JAP
JOBM
1. Selection &
1. Productivity &
Placement
Quality
2. Statistical Analysis 2. Customer
Procedures
Satisfaction
3. Performance
3. Training and
Appraisal
Development
39
SO21B: Of top 12 topics, commonalities
Only three!!
1. Productivity & Quality
2. Training & Development
3. Health & Safety
40
Differences (NFE)
• Ranking :
JAP
JOBM
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Selection/Placement
Statistical Analysis
Performance Appraisal
Attitudes, Cognition
Legal Issues
Turnover, Absenteeism,
Attendance
7.
T&D
8.
Productivity & Quality
9.
Gender & Minority
10. Group Performance
11. Leadership/Decision
Making
12. Safety, Health
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Productivity & Quality
Customer Satisfaction
T&D
Safety, Health
Accuracy
Rate of Performance
Sales
Labor Cost
Timeliness
Novelty
Management/Systems
Analysis
(most OBM articles dealth with productivity & quality issues, 5-10 measures; more breadth I/O)
41
SO22: Primary research strategy
• Percentage of research articles that were
experimental vs correlational (NFE)
JOBM
JAP
Experimental
95%
40%
Correlational
5%
60%
• Primary research strategy (for exam)
– JOBM: Experimental
– JAP: Correlational
• What is the problem with correlational
research?
(in this and the next few Sos, I have rounded the %s to make it easier for you to learn)
42
SO23: Field vs. Laboratory Exp. (NFE)
Experimental
Setting
JOBM
N = 60
JAP
N = 308
Field
80%
20%
Laboratory
20%
80%
(NFE, but using this to make a point later, % reversed)
43
SO24: Research studies:
Applied vs. theoretical
What percentage of research studies were
designed to solve an organizational problem
vs to answer a theoretical question?
• Applied
Conducted to solve an organizational
problem
• Theoretical
Conducted to examine a theoretical,
conceptual or “bridge” question
(included some field studies)
44
Results: Applied vs. Theoretical
Research
Question
JOBM
N = 60
JAP
N = 308
Theoretical
55%
95%
Applied
45%
5%
(more applied studies in the VanStelle 2012 review– 73%)
45
OBM vs. I/O
(NFE)
• The percentage of experimental studies
conducted in the field was much higher
in JOBM
JOBM = 80% JAP = 20%
• The percentage of applied vs. theoretical
experimental studies was much higher in
JOBM
JOBM = 45% JAP = 5%
• OBM is more applied and the gap between
research and practice appears to be
larger in I/O than in OBM
46
SO25: Why is I/O less applied? (for exam)
1. Multiple theories
•
Testing hypotheses in the theory
•
Comparing one theory against another - who
is right?
2. Experimental design issues
•
Rigorous experimental methodologists
who adhere only to between group
designs, rejecting single-subject
designs as legitimate designs
(not 1 of 8 texts SS;Hard for our students to get I/O faculty positions; feedback from CMU;
small N research would not permit publication in I/O journals, which would not help
them increase their status among I/O programs)
47
SO26: Why do BG designs restrict
applied research?
• Between group designs are not usually
feasible in applied settings because they
require random assignment of participants
to groups
– In organizations, in-tact groups
– Do lab studies where Ps can be randomly
assigned
• Within subject designs
– Do not require random assignment
I/O psychologists have yet to view small N
within subject designs as “legitimate”
experimental designs
48
SO 27: Independent variables in studies
• 27A
Bucklin et al. identified the top 9 IVs
that were examined. Of those how
many were the same for JOBM & JAP?
(Table next)
49
Independent Variables
JAP (N=308)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Antecedents/
Information
Training
Goals
Feedback
Monetary
consequences
Non-monetary
consequences
Praise
JOBM (N=60)
71%
1.
2.
3.
15%
10%
8%
4.
5%
5.
1%
6.
7.
8.
9.
.3%
Feedback
Training
Monetary
consequences
Antecedents/
Information
Non-monetary
consequences
Goals
Praise
Punishment
System design
75%
63%
33%
32%
28%
25%
18%
5%
2%
(top 7 were the same, but proportion very different. JAP antecedents/JOBM consq, pack;
Combined goals, feedback, consq.; not surprising I am covering the topics I am in this class
Not changed much in 2012 review; package interventions more effective, in sos articles)
50
SO 27: Independent variables in studies
• 27B Describe the major differences
between the IVs that were examined
1. In I/O, main IV is antecedent/instructional control;
rarely manipulate consequences
–
2.
70% manipulated antecedents; only 15% examined
feedback or consequences
A. In OBM, antecedents are only rarely used
alone; consequences are manipulated more
–
Feedback, 75% and consequences, 65%
B. In OBM package interventions are used a lot;
not so in I/O
(B no doubt reflects differences in types of studies – applied in OBM vs. lab in IO)
51
SO 27: Independent variables in studies
• 27C Why package interventions are often
used in OBM applied studies but not in
either OBM or I/O lab studies; refer to the
objectives of each type of study
1. Applied studies: Designed to improve
performance as quickly as possible
–
–
Delays adversely affect profits and other critical
business results
Package interventions are more effective than single
component interventions – see SOs for four review
studies, three OBM, one HSS
2. Lab studies: Designed to isolate the effects of IVs
(now switch to DVs)
52
Dependent Variables (NFE)
• JAP
– Self-report measures were used in 50% of
experimental studies and 76% of
correlational studies;
– Behaviors in only 5% of studies
• JOBM
– Products of behaviors
(accomplishments) were used in 78% of
experimental studies
– Behaviors in 43%
53
SO28: JOBM weakness, social validity
• Social validity (NFE)
– JAP researchers assessed social validity to a
much greater degree than JOBM researchers
JAP = 51%
JOBM = 27%
– Interesting given that a much larger proportion
of JOBM experimental studies were conducted
in applied settings (45% vs. 5%)
• JOBM researchers appear not to be doing a great
job re social validity
– I was surprised these data decreased in the
VanStelle review (20%), particularly given that
the percentage of applied studies increased to
73%
54
SO28, cont: Social validity ( this part NFE)
• Three aspects of social validity
– Goals: are the goals of the intervention
important and socially significant?
– Procedures/interventions: do managers and
employees consider the interventions
acceptable (i.e., are they satisfied with the
interventions)
– Effects/results of study: are managers and
employees satisfied with the results of the study
55
SO28, cont. Why is social validity important?
(for exam)
1. If our clients are satisfied, they are more
likely to continue PM
2. It could increase the acceptance of PM in
business and industry
3. It could mitigate complaints that our
technology is manipulative and coercive
56
History of OBM in the Private Sector
1950s - 1980s
Dickinson, 2000
57
SO29: When did OBM become visible?
OBM started in the mid to late 1960s
58
Table 1: Lifetime Achievement or Outstanding
Contributions Awards (NFE)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Aubrey Daniels
Thomas Gilbert
Edward Feeney
Beth Sulzer-Azaroff
Thomas Mawhinney
Dale Brethower
William Redmon
Alyce Dickinson
Paul Brown
Geary Rummler
Chevron Chemical
Corp (CLG)
(red: wmu connection, 10 of 23)
59
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Terry McSween
Jon Bailey
Maria Malott
D. Chris Anderson
William Abernathy
Scott Geller
John Austin
Dwight Harshbarger
Timothy Ludwig
Terry McSween
Judy Agnew
Alyce Dickinson
OBM Precursors: 1950s
• SO30: Who is responsible for programmed
instruction?
– Skinner
• The science of learning and the art of
teaching, 1954
• Teaching machines, 1958
• Holland & Skinner, Analysis of Behavior, 1961
• SO31: First organized application of
behavioral principles in business &
industry
– Programmed instruction (more on this later)
60
SO32: OBM precursors, cont. (NFE)
• Applications in other areas in behavior
analysis began before OBM
• Authors who published the first applied
article in the field of behavior analysis
– Ayllon & Michael: The psychiatric nurse as a
behavioral engineer, JEAB, 1959
• Who is the father and thus grandfather of
OBM? (according to Hopkins)
– Jack Michael
– Family tree: Bailey (Wolf) -- Austin, Carr, Wilder
• and Iwata, for those of you who work in human
services
• Bailey retired; graduating 100 Ph.D. students but still
teaches at FSU Panama City campus – MA program
61
The 1960s: OBM gets started
• Articles & books - fewer than 10 during the
whole decade (NFE)
• SO33: First professional organization
– National Society for Programmed Instruction:
1962, 12 years before ABAI
– Now, International Society for Performance
Improvement (applied vs academic)
• Dale Brethower, Geary Rummler, Don Tosti, Susan
Meyer Markle, Tom Gilbert
• www.ispi.org (great resource for jobs)
62
University of Michigan workshops (NFE)
• U of M workshops, 1961-1969
– Center of Programmed Instruction
– Brethower, Rummler, Gilbert, (& Malott) hooked
up (B&R actually published first applied OBM
article in Personnel in 1966)
• There, programmed instruction led to
performance-based instruction, which led
to behavioral systems analysis
– Brethower, Center for PI
– Rummler, College of Business
• Just for fun, go to the following web page and see
an article from 1975 with Dr. Malott leading one of
these workshops:
www.aliciapatterson.org/APF001975/McCrea/McCre
a06/McCrea06.html
63
SO34: Brethower’s accomplishments
• Three main accomplishments
– Programmed instruction
– Performance-based instruction
– Behavioral systems analysis
• Other interesting things to know
– Published first behavioral systems book in 1972.
The book was published by a publishing firm
called “Behaviordelia” - run by Dr. Dick Malott.
– Was my advisor here at WMU!
64
SO35: How did PI lead to PBI then BSA?
• Programmed Instruction
– Very skilled at getting people to learn what they
taught, but often the training did not transfer to
the job
• Performance-based instruction
– Did training actually transfer to job?
– Led to performance management - it wasn’t the
training that was the problem, but the
management system
• Behavioral Systems Analysis (the BIG
picture)
– PBI and PM got transfer to the job, but…
– Was the performance contributing to the
mission/goals of the organization?
65
PM vs BSA conflict (NFE)
• Sales vs manufacturing: classic problem
Implement a sales incentive program so
your sales representatives sell a lot of cars,
but manufacturing can’t keep up. That
creates a long delay for the consumer who
then buys a car from someone else. Your
PM program for sales has worked, but to
the detriment of the entire organization.
66
SO36: Brethower, Rummler, & Gilbert
• Brethower and Rummler developed
behavior systems analysis together when
they were graduate students at UM in the
60s
• Gilbert was invited to teach some of the
workshops at UM
• Rummler and Gilbert started a consulting
firm together (Praxis in NYC) that was one
of the first behavioral consulting firms in
the country
– 1967-G, 1969-R, dissolved 1979 and sold to
Kepner-Tregoe
67
(Work of these individuals is very similar
– not a coincidence)
SO37: Gilbert’s book and date
• Human Competence, 1978
– Introduced the concept of “worthy performance”
and focusing on accomplishments vs. behavior very controversial in the field.
– Behavior Engineering Model was one of the first
comprehensive performance diagnostic tools
for the field.
• Austin’s PDC and Binder’s six boxes based on this
model: Austin’s PDC, next unit
– PIP: potential for improving performance
• Exemplar performance minus average performance =
PIP.
• Many consultants use some variant of this today.
(define accomplishments;1995 unfinished
autobiography, Human Incompetence )
68
Tom Gilbert
Og Lindsley
Rich O’Brien
69
Tom Gilbert
SO38: Aubrey Daniels
• Formed Behavior Systems, Inc., 1971
– With Larry Miller & Fran Tarkenton
• First editor of JOBM, 1977
– Practitioner journal, BSI
• Published one of the first books in OBM
(written for supervisors)
– Performance Management, now in its 4th
edition
– New edition is due out soon, coauthored by
Jon Bailey
(Minnesota Vikings, “got divorced,” ADI founded in 1978)
70
Aubrey Daniels
71
SO39: Where did the name of our field
come from?
• JOBM, 1977
– Aubrey Daniels
– Problem with name
• Not distinctive within business - OB vs. OBM
• Business people don’t understand it
– Their kids behave (misbehave); their workers
perform
• Performance Management - still a problem
72
SO40A: First graduate program to offer OBM
and systems analysis?
• Western Michigan University!!!
– Early 1970s, Applied Behavior Analysis
program
73
SO40B: First faculty member at WMU?
• Dr. Richard Malott was responsible for the
systems analysis training here at WMU
– Dr. Malott graduated the first students trained
specifically in systems
– 1978, Brethower joined faculty to behavioralize
MA program in I/O, due to Dr. Malott
– 1984 Dickinson joined WMU faculty
• My generation, first students trained in OBM
74
SO 41
• How do early events in traditional I/O,
business and management fields
relate to the development of OBM?
– They were chronological precursors but
not causal precursors, unlike many have
maintained when writing about the
history of OBM
– Field of OBM emanated from the field of
behavior analysis
75
SO 41, cont.
• Why does Dickinson maintain OBM came from
behavior analysis and was not much influenced by
I/O, business, or management fields?
– The individuals who most influenced and pioneered the
field came from other areas within behavior analysis, not
from these traditional fields
• Aubrey Daniels - clinical
• Dale Brethower - school psychology
• Beth Sulzer-Azaroff - education
• Bill Hopkins - general behavior analysis
• Tom Gilbert - clinical
• Paul Brown – experimental
• Chris Anderson – experimental
• Chuck Crowell - experimental
76
THAT’S ALL FOLKS!
• Questions?
• E1: Wed., 9/11
77