We describe the construction of a Job in General (JIG) scale, a global scale to accompany the facet scales of the Job Descriptive Index. We applied both traditional and item response theory procedures for item analysis to data from three large heterogeneous samples (N = 1,149, 3,566, and 4,490). Alpha was .91 and above for the resulting 18-item scale in successive samples. Convergent and discriminant validity and differential response to treatments were demonstrated. Global scales are contrasted with composite and with facet scales in psychological measurement. We show that global scales are not equivalent to summated facet scales. Both facet and global scales were useful in another organization (N = 648). Some principles are suggested for choosing specific (facet), composite, or global measures for practical and theoretical problems. The correlations between global and facet scales suggest that work may be the most important facet in relation to general job satisfaction.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Organizations are undergoing unprecedented transformation in the area of talent management (TM). Companies are rapidly adopting new tools and approaches in a variety of what has traditionally been core areas of industrial and organizational (I-O) psychology such as performance management, employee attitudes, recruiting, testing and assessment, and career development. Increasingly, however, these new approaches have little to no research backing behind them, and they do not tend to be the focus of I-O psychology theory and research. We call this trend anti-industrial and organizational psychology (AIO), as we believe these forces to do not advance the field for long-term strategic impact. We present a framework that describes how AIO practices are adopted by organizations, and how I-O psychologists often gravitate away from these practices rather than actively help to separate the wheat from the chaff. We found support for our hypothesis through a brief analysis of Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, the peer-reviewed journal of the Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP). In this analysis, we found that only 10% of the focal articles from 2008 to 2016 represented topics that we call frontier—emerging areas in organizations but where there is no research support for them. We propose a set of recommendations for the field of I-O psychology and call for a more strategic approach to identifying and vetting new TM trends in order to increase the relevancy and impact of I-O psychology for our key stakeholders.