Skip to main content Accessibility help

The Licensure of Industrial and Organizational Psychologists: It's Déjà Vu All Over Again 1

  • Steve W. J. Kozlowski (a1) and Georgia T. Chao (a1)


If one has been involved in the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) since its inception, as we have, one will have had several opportunities to reflect on the issue of licensing to regulate the practice of industrial and organizational psychology (IOP). Some find value in licensure, but the vast majority of industrial and organizational (I-O) psychologists do not. As the target article written by the Licensure of Consulting and Industrial-Organizational (I-O) Psychologists (LCIOP) Joint Task Force (2017) documents, there have been several policy statements made by SIOP leadership over the years. The essence of SIOP's policy is quite clear and consistent. Although SIOP does not support and will not promote the licensure of I-O psychologists, it does support a pathway to licensure for those who desire it, and is supportive of efforts to reduce the many barriers to licensure for those who desire it. It is our understanding that SIOP's participation in the LCIOP Joint Task Force was predicated on this long-standing policy.


Corresponding author

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Steve W. J. Kozlowski, Department of Psychology, Michigan State University, 316 Physics Road, Room 309, East Lansing, MI 48824-1116. E-mail:


Hide All

Although we both serve as members of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) Executive Board in the capacities of Past-President and Representative to the American Psychological Association Council, the views expressed in this commentary are ours alone. They are not intended to reflect the views of any other group or institution.


With appreciation and apologies to Yogi Berra:



Hide All
AACSB. (2003). Report of the doctoral faculty commission to AACSB International's Board of Directors. Retrieved from
American Psychological Association (APA). (2011). Model act for state licensure of psychologists. American Psychologist, 66, 214226.
Byrne, Z. S., Hayes, T. L., McPhail, S. M., Hakel, M. D., Cortina, J. M., & McHenry, J. J. (2014). Educating industrial–organizational psychologists for science and practice: Where do we go from here? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 7 (1), 214.
Ford, J. K., Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Ryan, A. M. (2014). Solutions in search of the problem: Innovation, flexibility, and graduate education. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 99, 390403.
Licensure of Consulting and I-O Psychologists (LCIOP) Joint Task Force. (2017). The licensure issue in consulting and I-O psychology: A discussion paper. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 10 (2), 144181.
Murray, M. (2011). MBA share in the U.S. graduate management education market. Business Education & Accreditation, 3 (1), 2940.
Nelson, J. (2016, September 1). Whatever they say . . . it's about money. The Psychology Times, pp. 11–14. Retrieved from
SIOP. (2006). 2006 Member Survey: Employment Setting. Retrieved from
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Industrial and Organizational Psychology
  • ISSN: 1754-9426
  • EISSN: 1754-9434
  • URL: /core/journals/industrial-and-organizational-psychology
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *


Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed