Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-55597f9d44-fnprw Total loading time: 0.711 Render date: 2022-08-11T15:52:10.074Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

What If Industrial–Organizational Psychology Decided to Take Workplace Decisions Seriously?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2015

Reeshad S. Dalal*
Affiliation:
George Mason University
Silvia Bonaccio
Affiliation:
University of Ottawa
Scott Highhouse
Affiliation:
Bowling Green State University
Daniel R. Ilgen
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
Susan Mohammed
Affiliation:
The Pennsylvania State University
Jerel E. Slaughter
Affiliation:
University of Arizona
*
E-mail: rdalal@gmu.edu, Address: Department of Psychology, George Mason University, David King Hall, MSN 3F5, 4400 University Drive, Fairfax, VA 22030-4444

Abstract

The major premise of this article is that increased exposure to—and increased application of—theories, methods, and findings from the judgment and decision-making (JDM) field will aid industrial–organizational psychology and organizational behavior (IOOB) researchers and practitioners in studying workplace decisions. To this end, we first provide evidence of the lack of cross-fertilization between JDM and IOOB and then provide an overview of the JDM research literature. Next, with the aid of a panel of prominent IOOB scholars who share JDM interests, we discuss the philosophical and methodological traditions in IOOB and JDM, the areas in which IOOB has already been enriched by JDM as well as the areas in which it might be further enriched in the future, ways of increasing cross-fertilization from JDM to IOOB, and ways in which IOOB can in turn contribute to JDM. Through this focal article, we hope to spark conversation and ultimately engender more cross-fertilization between JDM and IOOB.

Type
Focal Article
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2010 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ariely, D. (2008). Predictably irrational: The hidden forces that shape our decisions. New York: HarperCollins. Google Scholar
Arkes, H. R., Kung, Y-H., & Hutzel, L. (2002). Regret, valuation, and inaction intertia. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 87, 371385. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bazerman, M. H., & Moore, D. (2008). Judgment in managerial decision making (7th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Google Scholar
Beach, L. R. (2010). The psychology of narrative thought: How the stories we tell ourselves shape our lives . Bloomington, IN: Xlibris.Google Scholar
Bonaccio, S., & Dalal, R. S. (2006). Advice taking and decision-making: An integrative literature review, and implications for the organizational sciences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 101, 127151. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonaccio, S., & Dalal, R. S. (2010). Evaluating advisors: A policy-capturing study under conditions of complete and missing information. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 23, 227249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonner, S. E. (1999). Judgment and decision-making research in accounting. Accounting Horizons, 13, 385398. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boudreau, J. W. (1984). Decision theory contributions to HRM research and practice. Industrial Relations, 23, 198217. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bromiley, P., & Curley, S. (1992). Individual differences in risk taking. In Yates, J. F. (Ed.), Risk taking behavior (pp. 87–132). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Brooks, M. E., & Highhouse, S. (2006). Can good judgment be measured? In Weekley, J. A. & Ployhart, R. E. (Eds.), Situational judgment tests (pp. 39–55). SIOP Frontier Series. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Brooks, M. E., Highhouse, S., Russell, S., & Mohr, D. (2003). Familiarity, ambivalence, and firm reputation: Is corporate fame a double-edged sword? Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 904914. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, R. V. (1989). Toward a prescriptive science and technology of decision aiding. Annals of Operations Research, 19, 467483. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunswik, E. (1955). Representative design and probabilistic theory in functional psychology. Psychological Review, 62, 193217. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116131. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cannon-Bowers, J. A., & Salas, E. (Eds.). (1998). Making decisions under stress: Implications for individual and team training. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cascio, W. F., & Aguinis, H. (2008). Research in I/O psychology from 1963–2007: Changes, choices, and trends. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 10621081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, M., March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1972). A garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 125. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connolly, T., & Koput, K. (1997). Naturalistic decision making and the new organizational context. In Shapira, Z. (Ed.), Organizational decision making (pp. 285303). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
Connolly, T., & Zeelenberg, M. (2002). Regret in decision-making. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 212216. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalal, R. S., & Bonaccio, S. (2010). What types of advice do decision-makers prefer? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 112, 1123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, J. H. (1996). Group decision making and quantitative judgments: A consensus model. In Witte, E. & Davis, J. H. (Eds.), Understanding group behavior: Consensual action by small groups (pp. 3559). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar
Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W. (1987). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 497509. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doherty, M. E. (2003). Optimists, pessimists, and realists. In Schneider, S. L. & Shanteau, J. (Eds.), Emerging perspectives on judgment and decision research (pp. 643679). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunning, D., Johnson, K., Ehrlinger, J., & Kruger, J. (2003). Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12, 8387. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Facteau, J. D. (Chair). (2009, April). Beyond rxy: Communicating the impact and value of selection programs . Symposium presented at the 24th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, New Orleans, LA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischhoff, B. (1982). Debiasing. In Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 422444). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gigerenzer, G. (1996). On narrow norms and vague heuristics: A reply to Kahneman and Tversky (1996). Psychological Review, 103, 592596. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gigerenzer, G., Gaissmaier, W., Kurz-Milcke, E., Schwartz, L., & Woloshin, S. (2008). Helping doctors and patients make sense of health statistics. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 8, 5396. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gigone, D., & Hastie, R. (1993). The common knowledge effect: Information sharing and group judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 959974. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gladwell, M. (2005). Blink: The power of thinking without thinking. New York: Little, Brown & Co. Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R. (1970). Man versus model of man: A rationale, plus some evidence, for a method of improving on clinical inferences. Psychological Bulletin, 73, 422432. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayward, M. L., & Hambrick, D. C. (1997). Explaining the premiums paid for large acquisitions: Evidence of CEO hubris. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 103127. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Highhouse, S. (1996). Context-dependent selection: The effects of decoy and phantom job candidates. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 65, 6876. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Highhouse, S. (2001). Judgment and decision-making research: Relevance to industrial and organizational psychology. In Anderson, N., Ones, D. S., Sinangil, H. P., & Viswesvaran, C. (Eds.), Handbook of industrial, work and organizational psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 314331). London: Sage. Google Scholar
Highhouse, S. (2009). Defining experiments that generalize. Organizational Research Methods, 12, 554566. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Highhouse, S., Brooks-Laber, M. E., Lin, L., & Spitzmueller, C. (2003). What makes a salary seem reasonable? Frequency context effects on starting salary expectations. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology (Special Issue: The Industrial and Organizational–Cognitive Interface), 75, 6981. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Highhouse, S., & Gillespie, J. Z. (2009). Do samples really matter that much? In Lance, C. E. & Vandenberg, R. J. (Eds.), Statistical and methodological myths and urban legends: Doctrine, verity and fable in the organizational and social sciences (pp. 249268). New York: Routledge. Google Scholar
Highhouse, S., & Johnson, M. A. (1996). Gain/loss asymmetry and riskless choice: Loss aversion in choices among job finalists. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 68, 225233. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Highhouse, S., Luong, A., & Sarkar, S. (1999). Research design, measurement, and effects of attribute range on job choice: More than meets the eye. Organizational Research Methods, 2, 3749. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hollenbeck, J. R., Ilgen, D. R., Sego, D. J., Hedlund, J., Major, D. A., & Phillips, J. (1995). The multi-level theory of team decision making: Decision performance in teams incorporating distributed expertise. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 292316. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber, V. L., Neale, M. A., & Northcraft, G. B. (1987). Decision bias and personnel selection strategies. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 40, 136147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humphrey, S. E., Hollenbeck, J. R., Meyer, C. J., & Ilgen, D. R. (2002). Hierarchical team decision making. In Ferris, G. R. & Martocchio, J. J. (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 21, pp. 175213). Stamford, CT: JAI Press. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ilgen, D. R. (1986). Laboratory research: A question of when, not if. In Locke, E. A. (Ed.), Generalizing from laboratory to field settings (pp. 257267). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Google Scholar
Ilgen, D. R., Hollenbeck, J. R., Johnson, M., & Jundt, D. (2005). Teams in organizations: From input-process-output models to IMOI models. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 517543. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ilgen, D. R., Major, D. A., Hollenbeck, J. R., & Sego, D. J. (1995). Raising an individual decision making model to the team level: A new research model and paradigm. In Guzzo, R. & Salas, E. (Eds.), Team effectiveness and decision making in organizations (pp. 113148). SIOP Frontier Series. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Google Scholar
Judge, T. A., & Bretz, R. D. (1992). Effects of work values on job choice decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 261271. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263291. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1996). On the reality of cognitive illusions. Psychological Review, 103, 582591. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Karren, R. J., & Barringer, M. W. (2002). A review and analysis of the policy-capturing methodology in organizational research: Guidelines for research and practice. Organizational Research Methods, 5, 337361. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kellermanns, F. W., Floyd, S. W., Pearson, A. W., & Spencer, B. (2008). The contingent effect of constructive confrontation on the relationship between shared mental models and decision quality. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29, 119137. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, G. A. (1998). Sources of power: How people make decisions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Google Scholar
Klimoski, R., & Mohammed, S. (1994). Team mental model: Construct or metaphor? Journal of Management, 20, 403437. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ku, G. (2008). Learning to de-escalate: The effects of regret in escalation of commitment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 105, 221232. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhl, J., & Beckmann, J. (1994). Volition and personality: Action versus state orientation. Seattle, WA: Hogrefe & Huber. Google Scholar
Kuncel, N. R. (2008). Some new (and old) suggestions for improving personnel selection. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1, 343346. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larrick, R. P. (2004). Debiasing. In Koehler, D. J. & Harvey, N. (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision making (pp. 316338). Oxford: Blackwell. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larrick, R. P., Heath, C., & Wu, G. (2009). Goal-induced risk taking in negotiation and decision-making. Social Cognition, 27, 342364. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, L., Frederick, S., & Ariely, D. (2006). Try it, you’ll like it: The influence of expectation, consumption, and revelation on preferences for beer. Psychological Science, 17, 10541058. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lerner, J. S., & Tetlock, P. E. (1999). Accounting for the effects of accountability. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 255275.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levine, J. M., & Moreland, R. L. (1990). Progress in small group research. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 585634. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipshitz, R., Klein, G., Orasanu, J., & Salas, E. (2001). Taking stock of naturalistic decision making. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 14, 331352. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mathieu, J., Maynard, M. T., Rapp, T., & Gilson, L. (2008). Team effectiveness 1997–2007: A review of recent advancements and a glimpse into the future. Journal of Management, 34, 410476. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maule, A. J., & Svenson, O. (1993). Theoretical and empirical approaches to behavioral decision making and their relation to time constraints. In Svenson, O. & Maule, A. J. (Eds.), Time pressure and stress in human judgment and decision making (pp. 325). New York: Plenum Press. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGrath, J. E. (1984). Group interaction and performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Google Scholar
Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., & Dechurch, L. A. (2009). Information sharing and team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 535546. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meyer, R. D., Dalal, R. S., & Bonaccio, S. (2009). A meta-analytic investigation into situational strength as a moderator of the conscientiousness-performance relationship. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 10771102. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mohammed, S., & Ringseis, E. (2001). Cognitive diversity and consensus in group decision making: The role of inputs, processes, and outcomes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 85, 310335. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mohammed, S., & Schwall, A. (2009). Individual differences and decision making: What we know and where we go from here. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 24, 249312. Google Scholar
Mook, D. G. (1983). In defense of external invalidity. American Psychologist, 38, 379387. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, D. A., & Flynn, F. J. (2008). The case for behavioral decision research in organizational behavior. The Academy of Management Annals, 2, 399431. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, D. A., & Small, D. A. (2007). Error and bias in comparative judgment: On being both better and worse than we think we are. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 972989. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Naylor, J. C. (1984). A time of transition. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 34, 14. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naylor, J. C., Pritchard, R. D., & Ilgen, D. R. (1980). A theory of behavior in organizations. New York: Academic Press. Google Scholar
Nutt, P. C. (2002). Why decisions fail: Avoiding the blunders and traps that lead to debacles. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. Google Scholar
O’Leary, B., Bartol, K. M., Cannella, A. A., Greenberg, J., & Locke, E. A. (2009, April). Are CEOs overpaid? Panel session presented at the 24th Annual conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, New Orleans, LA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ordóñez, L. D., Schweitzer, M. E., Galinsky, A. D., & Bazerman, M. H. (2009). Goals gone wild: The systematic side effects of overprescribing goal setting. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23, 616. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ones, D. S., & Viswesvaran, C. (2000). Most published authors in Journal of Applied Psychology and Personnel Psychology during the 1990s. The Industrial–Organizational Psychologist, 37, 2632. Google Scholar
Pfeffer, J. (1993). Barriers to the advance of organization science: Paradigm development as a dependent variable. Academy of Management Review, 18, 599620. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pliske, R., & Klein, G. (2003). The naturalistic decision making perspective. In Schneider, S. L. & Shanteau, J. (Eds.), Emerging perspectives on judgment and decision research (pp. 559585). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, J., & Staw, B. M. (1993). Organizational escalation and exit: Lessons from the Shoreham nuclear power plant. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 701732. Google Scholar
Rotundo, M., & Sackett, P. R. (2002). The relative importance of task, citizenship, and counterproductive performance to global ratings of job performance: A policy-capturing approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 6680. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rowe, G., & Wright, G. (1999). The Delphi technique as a forecasting tool: Issues and analysis. International Journal of Forecasting, 15, 353375. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salas, E., Rosen, M. A., & DiazGranados, D. (2010). Expertise-based intuition and decision making in organizations. Journal of Management, 36, 941973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savage, L. J. (1954). The foundations of statistics. New York: Wiley. Google Scholar
Schkade, D. A., & Kahneman, D. (1998). Does living in California make people happy? A focusing illusion in judgments of life satisfaction. Psychological Science, 9, 340346. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwall, A., & Mohammed, S. (2007). Group decision-making quality and performance. In Rogelberg, S. G. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of industrial/organizational psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar
Schwenck, C. R. (1995). Strategic decision making. Journal of Management, 21, 471493. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapira, Z. (1997). Organizational decision making. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
Simonson, I., & Staw, B. M. (1992). Deescalation strategies: A comparison of techniques for reducing escalation to losing courses of action. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 419426. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slaughter, J. E., Bagger, J., & Li, A. (2006). Context effects on group-based employee selection decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 100, 4759. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slaughter, J. E., & Greguras, G. J. (2008). Bias in performance ratings: Disentangling the role of positive versus negative escalation. Human Performance, 21, 414426. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slaughter, J. E., & Reb, J. (2007). Judgment and decision-making processes. In Rogelberg, S. G. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of industrial/organizational psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar
Slaughter, J. E., Sinar, E. F., & Highhouse, S. (1999). Decoy effects and attribute-level inferences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 823828. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slovic, P., & Lichtenstein, S. (1971). Comparison of Bayesian and regression approaches to the study of information processing in judgment. Organizational Behavioral and Human Performance, 6, 649744. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solomon, I., & Shields, M. D. (1995). Judgment and decision-making research in auditing. In Ashton, R. H. & Ashton, A. H. (Eds.), Judgment and decision-making research in accounting and auditing (pp. 137175). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stasser, G. (1999). A primer of social decision scheme theory: Models of group influence, competitive model-testing, and prospective modeling. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 80, 320. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1987). Effects of information load and percentage of shared information on the dissemination of unshared information during group discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 8193. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevenson, M. K., Busemeyer, J. R., & Naylor, J. C. (1990). Judgment and decision-making theory. In Dunnette, M. D. & Hough, L. M. (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 283374). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Google Scholar
Sunstein, C. R. (2003, September 17). The power of dissent. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://articles.latimes.com/2003/sep/17/opinion/oe-sunstein17 Google Scholar
Sunstein, C. R., Hastie, R., Payne, J. W., Schkade, D. A., & Viscusi, W. K. (2002). Punitive damages: How juries decide. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tetlock, P. E. (1985). Accountability: The neglected social context of judgment and choice. Research in Organizational Behavior, 7, 297332. Google Scholar
Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Google Scholar
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 11241131. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453458. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Eerde, W., & Thierry, H. (1996). Vroom's expectancy models and work-related criteria: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 575586. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vedantum, S. (2007, April 2). The decoy effect, or how to win an election. Washington Post. Retrieved from www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/01/AR2007040100973.html Google Scholar
Von Winterfeldt, D. (1989). A re-examination of the normative-descriptive distinction in decision analysis. Annals of Operations Research, 19, 499502. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiss, H. M., & Adler, S. (1984). Personality and organizational behavior. Research in Organizational Behavior, 6, 150. Google Scholar
Weiss, H. M., & Ilgen, D. R. (1985). Routinized behavior in organizations. Journal of Behavioral Economics, 14, 5767. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wittenbaum, G. M., Hollingshead, A. B., & Botero, I. C. (2004). From cooperative to motivated information sharing in groups: Moving beyond the hidden profile paradigm. Communication Monographs, 71, 286310. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wong, K. F., & Kwong, J. Y. (2007). The role of anticipated regret in escalation of commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 545554. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
32
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

What If Industrial–Organizational Psychology Decided to Take Workplace Decisions Seriously?
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

What If Industrial–Organizational Psychology Decided to Take Workplace Decisions Seriously?
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

What If Industrial–Organizational Psychology Decided to Take Workplace Decisions Seriously?
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *