Surveys of organizational personnel practices often indicate that techniques advocated by industrial and organizational (YO) psychologists are used with less frequency than might be expected given their technical merit. This article attempts to explain this phenomenon by viewing the adoption of I/O-type personnel practices as organizational innovations that are subject to the mechanisms and processes described in the innovation-diffusion literature. It is argued that the adoption of I/O-type personnel practices constitutes administrative innovation and that such innovation is not strongly influenced by technical merit. Rather, imitation processes, environmental threat, government regulation, and political influence often dominate highly uncertain adoption processes. Recommendations are made for enhancing the adoption rate for psychology-based personnel innovations.Most industriaVorganizationa1 (I/O) psychologists have probably had the experience of encountering personnel practices in place in large, successful organizations that were, on the surface, the very antithesis of what the discipline prescribes. How, one asks, can a successful organization fail to have implemented state-of-the-art I/O practices? This article provides a selective view of some of the factors that constrain the application of I/O psychology in organizations.One does not have to resort to anecdote to confirm that the application of I/O psychology is often thwarted. Surveys of organizational personnel practices provide fairly convincing evidence.Recruiting. Rynes and Boudreau (1986) surveyed the college recruiting practices of 145 Fortune 1000 corporations. They concluded that college recruiting was managed casually by most of these firms and was not