Industrial-organizational (I-O) psychology has begun to shed its reputation as a handmaiden to corporate and managerial interests, in part, through its engagement with humanitarian concerns. However, as highlighted by recent commentary, I-O psychology still has a decidedly POSH perspective on the world; that is, it has focused on Professionals who hold Official jobs in a formal economy and who enjoy relative Safety from discrimination while also living in High-income countries. This POSH perspective reflects an underlying bias away from people living in multidimensional poverty. We empirically illustrate some of the connections between a POSH perspective and poverty by reviewing 100 years of research in I-O psychology, and then we make a case for why a neglect of people living in poverty undermines the discipline's science, its practice, and its humanist charge. As moral justification for greater engagement with humanitarian concerns and as a guide to navigate the difficult ethical quandaries involved in doing so, we suggest that I-O psychologists should consider the capability approach. We discuss the concept of human capabilities, relate it to I-O psychology, and demonstrate its utility in the form of three hypothetical scenarios. Perhaps our most controversial claim is that there is a moral imperative for I-O psychology to overrepresent people living in the deepest forms of poverty in both its science and practice.

a b s t r a c tAchieving the MDG goal of reducing world poverty by 50% by 2015 requires the cooperative effort of many disciplines. To date the discipline of organizational psychology has not played as significant a role as it might in this endeavor. With the recent establishment of the Global Task Force for Humanitarian Work Psychology, this discipline signaled its commitment to the global effort. Organizational psychology offers to bring its expertise to poverty reduction: its ability to assess needs and capacity, develop partnerships with stakeholders, bring about and manage change, and systematically review, evaluate, monitor and revise high level mandates, policy development, program implementation and consultation on personnel issues. Its successes as practitioners-scientists in private enterprise will enhance its credibility for success in the public sphere. The article reviews the research and practice of some of the organizational psychologists presently engaged in poverty reduction and how humanitarian work psychology might enhance the efforts of anti-poverty organizations.

No abstract

SummaryDeveloping a globally responsive Science-Practitioner-Humanist model (Lefkowitz, 2008) means articulating professional values (supply) and meeting global demand. The United Nations' Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) seek to halve human poverty by 2015 and how organizations respond to this constitutes a formidable demand on Organizational Psychology. A key process for delivering more effective aid is the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, which seeks collaborative contributions from a plethora of Organizations, including business organizations and professions like ours. We argue that a thoughtful articulation of what Organizational Psychology uniquely stands for, and can offer, is therefore needed. It is proposed that a key mechanism for addressing this challenge is a Task Force, whose functions will include the coordination of institutions within psychology, and linking them to those in development. We describe such a task force and outline its core mission (Reichman, Frese, Schein, Carr, MacLachlan, & Landy, 2008). Organizational Psychology's response to poverty reduction should meet Lefkowitz's criteria for developing a more humanist model of science and practice as the MDGs are inherently humanist and valuesbased.

The implementation of the employee assistance program in the New Jersey State Police was studied over a three-year period. Quesionnaires were sent to a stratified random sample of sworn members once each year for three years. The questionnaire contained items to measure the degree of diffusion, receptivity, and the use of the program. The initial hypothesis was that the implementation of the program would follow the three-phase process of diffusion receptivity and use. The result of the first survey indicated the program was in the diffusion stage with more than 69% of the troopers having heard of the employee assistance program. Response to the receptivity items revealed there was an awareness and sensitivity to the need for the program and its potential benefits. The results of the second survey showed that the diffusion stage was strengthened with 78% of the response having heard of the program. Receptivity to the program had not increased significantly and use was minimal. On the basis of these results, recommendations were made to enlarge and enhance certain program elements. The results of the third survey were quite similar to those of the second. The program was largely in the diffusion stage and was little into receptivity and utilization. Innovative procedures were recommended to move the program into an integral part of the Division.