Search

Whether to develop and/or conduct training can represent a significant decision for organizations due to associated financial, personnel, and time demands. Various stakeholders in that decision will want to know what to expect from such training, including its likely effectiveness. Informing such stakeholders of the magnitude of relevant previous results – from a single study or, better, from studies aggregated via a meta-analysis – can help their decisions to be as informed as possible. But explanations of the size of training effects as found in the literature are not always phrased in a way easy for an applied audience to understand. This brief article clarifies the ‘percent improvement due to training’ interpretation of d, and extends it to differing rates of pre-training success. This in turn suggests that customer involvement in estimating appropriate base-line success rates could make interpretations of the degree of training effectiveness more organizationally specific and hence more useful. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Anti-work philosophy holds that work, in and of itself, tends to be harmful for most people. Some anti-work theorists even advocate for the abolition of paid employment altogether. We argue that, while endorsement of the radical ideology of anti-work is in no way necessary for I/O psychologists, considering the thinking behind these ideas can be beneficial. In fact, reviewing the tenets of anti-work may prompt some to a broad reconsideration of the nature and purpose of the I/O field and its role, nested as it is in potentially problematic power dynamics both within organizations and in broader society. In this article, after describing anti-work's core tenets, we outline a number of research directions and practical applications inspired by this perspective. While in some cases these may involve the creation of new theory, constructs, and interventions, they often simply entail the repurposing or refocusing of existing ones that are more attuned to the problematic nature of work. Possibilities for research include, but are not limited to, the examination of the prevalence and nature of "managerialism," how we might better understand the psychological character of organized labor and its outcomes, and how to encourage healthier manifestations of employee engagement. In terms of practice, we bring to the reader's attention how anti-work might inspire extensions or adjustments in how we recruit and onboard, train managers, improve job characteristics, measure performance and work with unions and other political advocates. Ultimately, consideration of anti-work's assertion of the inevitable authoritarian character of employment, combined with I/O psychology's emphases on objectivity and the translation of science into practice, can spark inquiry and innovation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]