Date of this Version
Published in Industrial and Organizational Psychology 10:4 (December 2017), pp. 577-584.
I will be making some highly personalized comments on the Aguinis et al. article* concerning rigor vs. relevance, renaming/rebranding I-O psychology, and I-O psychology vs. business school OB. Before commenting, however, I feel compelled to briefly frame my remarks from the perspective of my 50-year academic career. For example, I think it is important to note that I go back to the early 1960s at the University of Iowa, College of Business. I was studying for my Ph.D. in the just emerging field of management and organizations (nothing was offered called organizational behavior or strategic management). However, and very unusual for the times for management majors, I also took a minor in the psychology department concentrating on social and I-O psychology. Also, after receiving my Ph.D. in 1965, for my two-year military obligation, after infantry officer training I was assigned to West Point and taught cadets the required psychology course and military leadership. This background had a formative and lasting impact on my thinking about OB and I-O psychology.