The field of study that emphasizes the application of psychological principles and theories to work settings is known as industrial/organizational (I/O) psychology, in which researchers study how individuals and organizations work and how psychological principles can be applied to improve effectiveness.
The focus of I/O psychology is twofold. Professionals working in the subfield of industrial psychology are concerned with effectively managing the human resources in organizations. Organizations rely on workers, and the quality and quantity of work that can be done depends heavily on the training, knowledge, and productivity of the workforce. Industrial psychologists identify with the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other traits that are required to perform various jobs.
The subfield of organizational psychology, by contrast, focuses more broadly on factors pertaining to the organization as a whole. For example, organizational psychologists study the ways in which different organizational systems and structures affect worker productivity and morale.
MATCHING PEOPLE TO JOBS
Organizational productivity increases when jobs fit workers' abilities and interests. To determine which people should be assigned to specific jobs, one must first understand the requirements of each job. This is usually accomplished by performing a job analysis.
Job Analysis
Job analysis usually involves collecting data about the behaviors performed by workers while doing the job; the physical, mechanical, social, and informational characteristics of the work environment; and the necessary human attributes for job performance (R. J. Harvey, 1991).
There are several methods for conducting a job analysis. Functional job analysis identifies the ways in which workers manipulate things, the ways in which they need to respond to and analyze data, and the ways in which they must relate to other people (Gatewood & Field, 1998). Functional job analysis, thus, emphasizes the tasks that are required by the job.
An alternative method for analyzing jobs, the KSAO system of job analysis, focuses on the human characteristics required to successfully perform the job (R. J. Harvey, 1991). These are most often classified into four categories: knowledge (K), skills (S), abilities (A), and other characteristics (O) such as emotional stability or conscientiousness.
Job analysis lays the foundation for many other business functions: recruiting, hiring, training, and evaluating job performance. Accurate job analysis is so important to the success of organizations that many large companies spend millions of dollars each year simply analyzing jobs (E. L. Levine, Sistrunk, McNutt, & Gael, 1988). Since the purpose of job analysis is to provide both the company and the worker with an understanding of expected duties or responsibilities and required employee qualifications, it serves as the starting point for understanding how to match employees to the job - the organizational function referred to as personnel selection.
Predictors of Job Performance
Personnel selection specialists use a number of methods to identify people who are likely to be successful at a particular job.
Employment Interviews
One of the most frequently used and widely varying selection techniques is the employment interview. Selection interviews vary widely in the content of the specific questions that are asked and in the framework in which the interview is conducted. Interview techniques may have either a structured or unstructured (open-ended) format.
In a structured job interview, all job applicants are asked the same questions, usually in a fixed order by the same individual or team of interviewers. The chosen questions, which are usually derived from the job analysis, pertain directly to the applicant's ability to perform the tasks of the job. The applicant's responses usually are scored, often numerically, using a consistent scoring scheme. In contrast, an unstructured job interview typically has no fixed format and the questions asked may vary widely from person to person. Furthermore, there usually is no specified method of scoring applicants' responses. Most often an overall rating or ranking is assigned to each applicant based on the interviewer's subjective impression and judgment.
Compared to scores from unstructured interviews, scores from structured interviews are more highly correlated with measures of subsequent job performance. In other words, structured interviews have higher criterion-related validity, sometimes called predictive validity.
Whether structured or unstructured, employment interviews also provide an opportunity to talk about the nature of the job. By giving applicants a realistic picture of the demands of a job, employers can help them determine whether the job will be a good match to their expectations.
Employment Tests
Interviews are time consuming and relatively expensive. When there are many more applicants than can be hired, organizations often rely on objective, paper-and-pencil tests to screen applicants. This reduces the possibility of bias in favor of applicants whom managers personally like or who are similar to them (T. L. Stanley, 2004).
Industrial psychologists use a wide variety of employment tests. Some measure cognitive abilities, while others measure personality characteristics. Research has shown that both types of tests are excellent predictors of job performance (Barrick & Mount, 1991; Ree, Earles, & Teachout, 1994; F. L. Schmidt & Hunter, 1998). However, tests of cognitive abilities have the highest overall predictive validity and the lowest cost (F. L. Schmidt & Hunter, 2004). Tests of cognitive ability, for the most part, measure general intelligence or general mental ability. As one I/O psychologist put it, "If we could know only one attribute of a job candidate upon which to base a prediction, we would want an assessment of intelligence" (Muchinsky, 2006, p. 103).
Unlike tests of general mental ability, which have correct and incorrect answers, objective tests of personality generally include self-descriptive statements about personal preferences ("I would rather go to a baseball game than read a book") and typical behaviors ("I am able to set clear goals and work effectively to achieve them"). In recent years, most I/O researchers have used the Five Factor Model of personality to explore the relationship between personality and job performance. Of the five major personality traits, conscientiousness is tied most closely to job performance. Conscientiousness refers to a person's ability to finish projects that are started, to attend to detail without becoming absorbed by it, and to care enough about the quality of work that it is not compromised by inattention or lack of effort. Although the other four major personality traits (emotional stability, agreeableness, openness to experience, and extraversion) may be related to job performance in some settings (J. Hogan & Holland, 2003), conscientiousness is a valid predictor of job performance in all jobs (Barrick & Mount, 1991; Barrick, Mount, & Judge, 2001; W. S. Dunn, Mount, & Barrick, 1995). Furthermore, conscientiousness is not significantly correlated with general mental ability. Therefore, using both a test of general mental ability and a test of conscientiousness typically results in a better, more accurate prediction of future job performance than is possible from either test alone (F. L. Schmidt & Hunter, 2004).
Other employment tests, known as integrity tests, predict negative or counterproductive behavior. These tests include questions that measure three of the five factors linked to counterproductive behavior: conscientiousness, agreeableness, and emotional stability (F. L. Schmidt & Hunter, 2004). By identifying applicants who score low on these three dimensions, integrity tests can help employers screen out potentially difficult employees before they are hired.
Measures of Previous Performance
One of the long-standing dictums in psychology is this: The best predictor of future performance is past performance. In other words, high performers in previous positions will most likely perform at a high level in future positions as well. Thus, personnel selection specialists often pay particular attention to job applicants' previous work histories. One method of accomplishing this is by requiring each applicant to provide a prior job history as well as general personal information (such as name, phone number, and so forth). Applications are the most frequently used method of selection (Schultz & Schultz, 1998).
Personnel selection specialists also check references to assess an applicant's previous job performance. Job applicants can be required to provide contact data for their former work supervisors. However, many employers are reluctant to comment on the quality of a previous employee's work, since any negative information preventing the employee from securing a new job could result in a costly lawsuit (Fishman, 2005).
Finally, job applicants can be asked to demonstrate content knowledge of the soughtafter job or to actually perform relevant skills. The predictive validity of job knowledge and work sample tests is very high, although they are only useful if applicants have had similar roles in the past.
Assessment Centers
High-level management positions call for skills that are difficult to evaluate using traditional selection methods (Jansen & Stoop, 2001). In these cases, several applicants may be put into a simulated and highly structured group setting, or assessment center. The typical assessment center evaluation lasts two days, involves several group exercises and the administration of a variety of ability and personality tests, and includes a lengthy, detailed, structured interview (Gaugler, Rosenthal, Thornton, & Bentson, 1987). Assessment centers are reasonably good at predicting the long-term performance of individuals in upper management.
Is it possible to use just a few selection methods with good results? Industrial psychologists conclude that the most effective combination generally includes a test of general mental ability along with either a structured interview or a test of conscientiousness (F. L. Schmidt & Hunter, 2004).
MEASURING PERFORMANCE ON THE JOB
Evaluating employee job performance is important for organizations, which depend on high levels of performance to maximize productivity and profitability. But effective performance evaluation also improves the quality of organizational decisions, including pay raises, promotions, and terminations. It helps employees understand how well they are doing their jobs; and can encourage worker loyalty toward the organization (K. R. Murphy & Cleveland, 1995). Finally, formal performance appraisals also can provide a legally defensible rationale for terminating an employee.
Formal methods of evaluating performance, called performance appraisal systems, aim to provide an unbiased assessment of the quantity and quality of work contributed by individuals. There are several methods of performance appraisal, each appropriate for different kinds of work.
When productivity can be measured directly, an objective performance appraisal is usually used. Objective methods are based on quantitative measurement, such as counting the number of goods produced, the number of pieces assembled, or the dollars of product sold. For example, teachers, managers, nurses and many other employees do important work that cannot be "counted." For these types of jobs, subjective measures of performance must be used. Subjective performance appraisal methods rely on judgments about the quality of an employee's work. Subjective methods are used extensively throughout all types of organizations.
One of the greatest challenges in creating a fair, unbiased performance appraisal system is to identify exactly what is expected of workers. Carefully written job analysis-based descriptions help personnel psychologists identify important tasks. They serve as a good starting point for the development of a performance evaluation system that is clear and relatively free from error.
Generally speaking, evaluations based on behaviors, rather than on attitudes or intentions, are less prone to error. Behaviors are observable; therefore, evaluators need to rely less on subjective judgments. One commonly used performance appraisal method is the behaviorally anchored ratings scale (BARS). A BARS system first identifies specific behaviors that are associated with high performance, average performance, and substandard performance for the job being evaluated. When evaluators use a BARS scale to rate a particular employee, that employee's typical behavior is compared to the positive and negative incidents identified on the scale. The result is a performance rating that reflects the job-related behaviors that the employee characteristically displays in his or her work.
ISSUES OF FAIRNESS IN EMPLOYMENT
In the past, both in the United States and abroad, some companies have refused to hire employees based on their gender, age, race, or religious beliefs (Brinkley, 1999). Today, most industrialized nations have developed legislation to guard against discriminatory employment practices. In 1964, the United States Congress enacted the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a sweeping set of laws and regulations aimed at protecting the rights of individuals and groups who had historically experienced discrimination. The overarching purpose of these laws, and others that have followed, has been to create a society that is fair to all individuals, regardless of their background and beliefs. The Civil Rights Act includes an array of provisions that define and prohibit discriminatory practices in all walks of life. Title VII of this act expressly prohibits discrimination against employees because of their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
In the years since the Civil Rights Act was passed, the scope and number of groups protected by the Civil Rights Act have expanded. Citizens over the age of 40, pregnant women, and people with physical or mental disabilities are now protected against discrimination under federal law. And in some cities and states, civil rights have been extended to members of groups beyond those protected under federal law. For example, in certain areas there are now laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, thereby protecting the rights of gay men and lesbian women. Although federal laws currently do not include sexual orientation as a category protected under federal statute, considerable debate on this issue is sure to come.
BEHAVIOR WITHIN ORGANIZATIONS
Industrial/organizational psychologists are concerned not only with employee selection, performance evaluation, and fair treatment. They also are involved in preparing workers to perform to the best of their ability and in creating a motivating organizational environment.
Training Employees
The first step in developing an employee training program is to determine the need for training by means of a three-step process (Landy & Conte, 2004; Ostroff & Ford, 1989). First, an organizational analysis is done in which the company's goals are examined and problems are identified. Next, for problems that lend themselves to training-based solutions, a task analysis is performed. Task analysis identifies which job tasks can be addressed through training. It also determines the knowledge (K), skills (S), abilities (A), and other characteristics (O) required to perform those tasks successfully. Finally, a person analysis is conducted to examine the knowledge, skills, and current performance of workers to determine which ones need additional training.
Where discrepancies exist between tasks required on the job and skill levels of workers, training programs can be designed to teach workers the necessary skills, behaviors, or attitudes that will allow them to perform job tasks effectively. Once training is complete, an assessment of training outcomes can help managers evaluate which training needs have been successfully addressed, and which remain (Alliger & Janak, 1989; I. L. Goldstein & Ford, 2002).
Depending on the type of skills or attitudes that the organization wishes to address, several methods of training are available. When specific, job-related skills need to be learned, on-the-job, vestibule, or simulation trainign methods are often used.
On-The-Job Training
One of the most common methods of teaching new workers the skills they need to perform their job is on-the-job training, in which the trainee learns new job tasks while actually performing the job. For example, an assistant chef may have worked in several restaurants before coming to work at a new job, but may be unfamiliar with how the current employer wants food to be plated and sauced. Through on-the-job training, the new assistant chef can be shown by an experienced employee exactly how these tasks are to be performed.
There are many advantages associated with on-the-job training. Employees learn the new skills required for the job on the very important equipment they are to use when performing their work. On-the-job training also conserves the organization's resources, since it usually minimizes costs for training equipment and supplies. However, it also has some disadvantages. For example, productivity usually declines during the training period because learning each new task slows performance. Moreover, coworkers functioning as trainers usually cannot instruct trainees and perform their own jobs at the same time, leading to further declines in productivity. Finally, experienced employees do not always make skilled trainers: A highly competent worker may not necessarily have the skills to effectively train a new employee (Riggio, 2003).
One of the oldest on-the-job training programs is apprenticeship, which is still used extensively in the crafts and trades. Many jobs associated with apprentice training programs are in heavily unionized occupations; plumbers, carpenters, electricians, and equipment operators in manufacturing industries often learn their skills through apprenticeship training. Today, more than 30,000 apprentice programs exist in the United States involving nearly a half-million trainees, called apprentices (U.S. Department of Labor, 2006). Apprentices go through a formal on-the-job training program, which includes both instruction and supervision by a skilled worker.
Another type of on-the-job training is job rotation, in which workers are trained to perform all jobs in a particular supervisory unit. For example, in an assembly unit in which five different workers each perform a specific part of the assembly of a machine, each worker would learn each of the five jobs involved. Job rotation programs provide organizations an effective way of staffing jobs that have high turnover, since workers are already trained to take over the job of a person who quits (Riggio, 2003). Job rotation is often part of the training that supervisors receive to help them develop a better understanding of procedures throughout their work division. Research suggests that supervisors who are rotated through several jobs are more likely to remain with a company than those who receive no such training (Grensing-Pophal, 2005; Pooley, 2005).
Vestibule and Simulation Training
When new job skills cannot be learned while performing the actual job, an alternative approach is vestibule training. Vestibule training allows employees to learn job tasks at work stations similar to those used in production in a training facility, rather than on the actual production floor.
In other cases, training simulators are used. For example, flight simulators are used to teach pilots how to fly. Flight simulators operate like real airplanes, with fully equipped cockpits and pitch-and-roll machines that move the simulator to replicate the actual movements of an aircraft. From the pilot's perspective, the only major difference between flying a simulator versus a real airplane is that the simulator doesn't actually leave the ground.
Computer-based simulations also cater to some types of training needs. Today, computer-based simulations are being used to train firefighters, medical personnel, and heavy equipment operators, as well as workers in many other jobs (Construction Equipment, 2006; Foundry Management and Technology, 2006; Scerbo, Bliss, Schmidt, & Thompson, 2006; Jack Smith, 2006). Because computer-based training often provides a cost-effective and safe way to provide training, its use is increasing in a wide variety of training applications.
Changing Attitudes in the Workplace
Sometimes organizations wish to develop their workforce in terms of attitudes and interpersonal behaviors. Cultural diversity training and sexual harassment training are two examples of such training.
Cultural diversity training is used to help workers adapt their actions and attitudes so they can work effectively in a multicultural work environment. The U.S. workplace broadly reflects the population overall, and that population is becoming much more diverse. For example, of all new additions to the workplace in the 1990s, nearly half (45%) were non-White and nearly two-thirds were women. In response to increasing workplace diversity, a growing trend exists among organizations to offer programs in cultural diversity training. One goal of such training is to create an atmosphere that is fair and nondiscriminatory for all employees; failing to do so puts companies at risk for lawsuits filed under antidiscrimination laws such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 1991. Cultural diversity training also alerts workers to how their actions may be offensive to others and helps them learn to work cooperatively with coworkers who represent different cultures or gender. Another goal of diversity training is to better capture "the benefits in creativity and problem-solving capabilities that a diverse workforce provides" (Chrobot-Mason & Quinones, 2002). When workers are able to appreciate and embrace the various points of view expressed in a diverse work environment, productivity is enhanced. Finally, the ever-increasing globalization of the workplace means that increasing numbers of employees take assignments abroad, which in turn leads to a need for cultural-diversity training (Speitzer, McCall, & Mahoney, 1997). For these reasons, most industrial/organizational psychologists predict that this type of training will become even more important in the future (Bhawuk & Brislin, 2000).
Most organizations also offer employee training that is aimed at reducing sexual harassment in the workplace. Sexual harassment can take several forms. Quid pro quo (Latin for "this for that") harassment is defined as behavior in which sexual favors are solicited in return for favorable treatment. An example of quid pro quo harassment might involve a manager offering a salary increase or a promotion to a subordinate in exchange for sexual attention. Sexual harassment also exists when managers or coworkers create a hostile work environment, perhaps by telling sexist jokes, posting nude "pin-up" photos in lockers, or teasing of a sexual nature. The goals of sexual-harassment prevention training parallel those of cultural-diversity training: to protect the organization form lawsuits and to create an environment where every worker is able to perform to his or her maximum level of creativity, effort, and productivity.
Motivating Employees
Another means of improving workforce productivity involves motivating workers to give their best effort. Over the years, a variety of theories about worker motivation have been put forward. One way of understanding how these theories approach the topic of motivation is to categorize them into groups.
Cognitive Theories of Motivation
Rather than emphasizing inherent individual differences among workers (skills), cognitive-based theories of motivation emphasize how workers think about their jobs and how that in turn affects their attitudes and behaviors on the job. Three cognitive views that have received considerable attention from I/O psychologists are equity theory, expectancy theory, and goal-setting theory.
Equity theory holds that relative to coworkers, employees monitor the amount of effort they expend on the job and the rewards they receive for this effort. In the simplest case, equity theory predicts that when workers believe they are expending equal amounts of effort, they should benefit from equal levels of reward. Motivation, then, depends on the worker's sense of fairness, or equity. When employees are either over- or under-rewarded relative to their coworkers, their motivation suffers and they will adjust the quality or quantity of work they produce correspondingly.
Expectancy theory also emphasizes the cognitive processes workers use in evaluating their level of effort and the rewards they receive. However, in expectancy theory the comparison made is not how our own effort and rewards compare to those of others, but rather how we view the connection between our own behavior and the likelihood of attaining desired rewards. According to expectancy theory, employees are aware of the goals or rewards they wish to attain through their work, and they are aware of how their behavior on the job is connected with attaining those rewards. Based on their assessment of the value of the rewards they seek and of the degree to which they expect they can attain those rewards by working harder, they will expend the corresponding amount of effort on the job (Van Eerde & Thierry, 1996; Vroom, 1964). For example, if workers attach high value to a promotion and if they believe that through hard work they will be promoted, this expectancy will motivate them to perform. Conversely, if the rewards offered on the job are not perceived by workers to be valuable, or if workers do not believe that their efforts will result in the attainment of valued rewards, motivation and effort will diminish.
A similar set of assumptions is advanced by goal-setting theory, which emphasizes the impact on motivation of clearly articulated goals. According to this theory, when workers believe that their efforts will lead to the attainment of previously set, clearly stated goals, they will be highly motivated toward meeting those goals (Locke & Latham, 2002). Many people apply goal-setting theory in their own lives. For example, a student may work extra hours at a second part-time job to buy a car or pay the rent. The keys in goal-setting theory are to identify appropriate, attainable goals and to clearly communicate to workers what they need to do to reach those goals.
Reinforcement Theory
Some motivational theories focus less on how workers think about their jobs and more on the outcomes associated with an employee's work. Reinforcement theory, which is based on the principles of operant conditioning, has been used to explain how workers can be motivated toward high levels of performance.
According to this theory, when work behavior is followed by positive outcomes (reinforcements), that behavior will be maintained and strengthened; when work behavior is punished, that behavior will decrease. An example of reinforcement theory in a productive setting is the piece-rate system. In a piece-rate system, workers are paid according to the number of "pieces" they assemble. Thus, a worker who builds 25 pieces in a day will be paid more than one who builds only 20 pieces. Sales commission systems, where sales agents are paid a percentage of the price of the products they sell, are another compensation system based on reinforcement theory.
Research indicates that reinforcement can indeed increase workplace productivity. One study that examined the effect of reinforcement-based performance systems over a span of 20 years showed a 17% improvement in productivity (Stajkovic & Luthans, 1997). In a more recent study, more than 90% of organizations experienced sustainable improvements in work productivity through reinforcement (Komaki, 2003). Moreover, when workers are paid according to their performance, their sense of autonomy and control over their work is also enhanced (Eisenberger, Rhoades, & Cameron, 1999).
However, there are some potential pitfalls associated with the use of reinforcement. For example, when workers are paid according to their own individual successes, they may be reluctant to participate in activities that require cooperation with others. In fact, "pay-for-performance" systems can encourage competitive behavior which, at the extreme, may involve sabotage of coworkers' efforts and an overall decline in workplace productivity. Placing workers in highly stressful, competitive work environments poses yet another issue to consider when evaluating the desirability of reinforcement-based motivational approaches.
Organizational Culture
All of the topics discussed thus far - job analysis, personnel selection and performance evaluation, fair employment practices, and employee training and motivation - occur in the context of a particular organization. Organizations have their own corporate (organizational) culture, which refers to the formal and informal rules, procedures, and expectations that define an organization's values, attitudes, beliefs, and customs. In that organizations sometimes differ dramatically from each other, they are characterized by their own unique organizational culture.
As jobs have become more complex, technology has continued to explode, and worker expectations have changed, many organizations have adopted a "team-based" approach to work.
Teams and Teamwork
The basic idea behind work teams is that productivity is enhanced when several people collaborate to solve organizational problems. Teams are particularly effective when problems must be solved by the workers themselves. A good team generally outperforms individual work efforts in tasks that require experience, judgment, and multiple skills (Salas, Stagl, & Burke, 2004). Moreover, research suggests that people who work in teams are more satisfied with their work and are more productive (Glassop, 2002).
Depending on the goals of an organization, there are many different ways that work teams can be organized and several different functions they can perform (Sunstrom, DeMeuse, & Futrell, 1990). Workers on a team may be trained to perform all jobs in their unit (job rotation) and then regularly exchange jobs. Job rotation helps to keep skills sharp and also helps to relieve the boredom of performing the same job day after day.
Team-based approaches have been gaining popularity (Borman, Ilgen, & Klimoski, 2003). Three factors appear to underlie this trend. First, businesses exist within a complex, information-rich culture in which no employee can know or master everything needed to run a successful enterprise. Second, the modern workforce is better educated and thus better prepared to perform complex decision-making functions. Furthermore, workers at every organizational level expect to find challenge in their work; and most are unwilling to work at repetitive, intellectually empty tasks. Finally, the work performed in modern organizations has itself changed. Most jobs no longer consist of performing the same set of simple repetitive tasks; rather, they involve flexible approaches to rapidly changing technologies and business climates (Muchinsky, 2006).
A discussion of team approaches to organizational structure and operation raises the question of leadership. Although workers within a team are interdependent and share responsibilities, team success also depends on effective leadership.
Leadership
Several theories of leadership have emerged to explain why some individuals become leaders and others do not. Contingency theories are based on the assumption that leadership is the product of both the characteristics of the leader and those of the worker and the workplace.
An important aspect of contingency theories is that there is no specific set of traits, skills, abilities, or attitudes that will guarantee leadership success. On the contrary, to be effective, the leader's characteristics must match the demands of the situation. Consequently, a person who is very effective as a leader in one setting may not be effective in another. This situation is often observed in sales-based organizations that promote managers from within. There is no certainty that someone who is an outstanding leader in one division of a company will be effective if transferred to a different division. Similarly, a person who forms a small start-up company and leads it effectively during its formative years may not be the best person to lead the company when it has hundreds or thousands of employees and multiple offices worldwide.
Certain leadership characteristics do seem to generalize across different types of organizational settings. For example, leaders who are charismatic, who exude confidence and have a vision that followers can relate to, are often effective in a wide array of settings (Yukl, 2002). They are also especially effective in motivating the productivity of work teams (R. T. Keller, 2006). Charismatic leaders, sometimes called "transformational leaders," seem to inspire higher levels of job satisfaction in employees as well (Judge & Bono, 2000). Leaders who establish clear expectations are also generally effective in a wide range of situations (R. T. Keller, 2006).
ORGANIZATIONAL ATTITUDES
Effective leadership contributes to organizational productivity in many ways. For example, a leader can have a significant effect on the attitudes that workers develop about their jobs and the organizations for which they work. Among the attitudes that organizational psychologists are most interested in are the degree to which workers derive satisfaction from their jobs and the extent to which they develop a sense of trust in the organization and an appreciation that its processes and procedures are fair.
Job Satisfaction
Organizational psychologists are interested in job satisfaction because it is linked to many important organizational variables. Perhaps the most clearly studied relationship is that between job satisfaction and job performance. Intuitively it seems that workers who are satisfied with their jobs will perform at higher levels than those who are unhappy in their work. However, hundreds of research studies have shown that job satisfaction is, at best, only moderately linked to job performance (Judge, Thoreson, Bono, & Patton, 2001). Nevertheless, most employees want satisfying jobs and so most employers seek to create a workplace that contributes to job satisfaction.
The amount of pleasure employees derive from their jobs is determined in large part by the extent to which they feel that their expectations about their jobs are met (Hulin & Judge, 2003). When expectations are met or exceeded, levels of job satisfaction are generally high. However, there is a limit to what employers can do to increase job satisfaction since it is also affected by employee age, length of employment, overall health, personal motivation, marital status, and leisure activities (Schultz & Schultz, 1998).
Organizational Justice
In recent years, I/O psychologists have become interested in the extent to which employees perceive fairness and justice in the workplace - issues of organizational justice. One aspect of organizational justice is employees' perceptions that what they receive in recognition is appropriate for what they contribute to the organization. Most employees expect that when they work hard and contribute positively to the productivity of the organization, they will be rewarded.
Another aspect of organizational justice involves the extent to which the policies and procedures used within the organization are responsive to the feelings of employees. For example, if an organization needs to eliminate a position within a unit, advance notification about the reasons why the position must be terminated, the criteria for deciding which position will be affected, the timeline for making the change, and an appeal process for workers to voice their concerns all contribute to perceived fairness in the workplace.
Finally, organizational justice is high when organizations show concern for workers as individuals. Examples might include a manager sending a get-well card to a subordinate following a surgery or attending the wedding of a worker in the unit he supervises.
Research clearly demonstrates that all three forms of organizational justice contribute to employees' perceptions of fairness in the workplace (Colquitt, Conlon, Wesson, Porter, & Ng, 2001). When workers perceive that rewards are distributed fairly, that rules and procedures are just and are enforced without favoritism, and that they are valued and respected by the organization and its leaders, organizational justice is enhanced. When workers are treated fairly, job satisfaction, commitment, and productivity increase, and negative workplace behaviors, such as absenteeism and sabotage, decline (Simons & Roberson, 2003). Research on the topic of organizational justice is likely to continue as I/O psychologists work to better understand how to enhance workplace productivity while maintaining a positive environment.