- +44 (0) 20 7324 2764
- [email protected]
- Register your interest
The Programme Committee, aided by the International Advisory Group, has put together an invited programme which both reflects our theme Interventions at work – Integrating Science and Practice, and showcases some of the best work in our profession.
Keynote speakers will present some of their game-changing ideas for work & organizational psychology while Current Issue speakers focus on challenges and opportunities for the profession. Invited Symposia highlight research by eminent academics and practitioners, plus there will be events offering the opportunity to consider how research contributes to effective practice. Panel discussions provide a space for lively debate.
Only Connect: 20 years of the Social Identity Approach to Psychology in Organizations
University of Queensland
Title - Only Connect: 20 years of the Social Identity Approach to Psychology in Organizations
Abstract - It is 20 years since the breadth of organization research informing the Social Identity Approach was first reviewed in my book Psychology in Organizations. Since that time, interest in the approach has boomed — to the point where its scope and depth is now almost impossible to chart. Nevertheless, this talk attempts to do this. Alongside a survey of key developments, it does so by focusing on three key topics that are the focus for symposia and workshops elsewhere in the conference: leadership, organizational change, andfollowership. Research shows that social identity is central to all these phenomena and hence can provide a platform for a range of positive organizational outcomes. However, at the same time, it also highlights the ways in which toxic identities (and the identity leadership and engaged followership that support them) can also have problematic consequences for organizations and their members. These considerations lead to a call for greater attention to the links between social identity and health, and to the forms of identity leadership that sustain healthy organizations. The practical implications of the analysis are also brought home by a discussion of 5R — an evidence-based leadership development programme that leverages social identity insights to help leaders build inclusive, effective and flourishing teams.
Bio - Alex Haslam is Professor of Psychology and Australian Laureate Fellow (2012-18) at the University of Queensland. His research focuses on the study of leadership, group, and identity processes in organizational and health contexts. Together with over 300 co-authors around the world, Alex has published over 250 peer-reviewed articles on these topics and written and edited 15 books — including most recently, The New Psychology of Health: Unlocking the Social Cure (Routledge, 2018, with Catherine Haslam, Jolanda Jetten, Tegan Cruwys and Genevieve Dingle; winner of the British Psychology Society’s Book of the Year in 2020) and The New Psychology of Leadership (2nd ed, Routledge, 2020, with Steve Reicher and Michael Platow; winner of the International Leadership Association’s Book of the Year in 2014) and Together Apart: The Psychology of COVID-19 (Sage, 2020, with Jolanda Jetten, Steve Reicher and Tegan Cruwys). Alex has been awarded the European Association of Social Psychology’s Kurt Lewin Medal for outstanding scientific contribution, the British Psychology Society Presidents’ Award for distinguished contributions to psychological knowledge, the International Society for Political Psychology’s Sanford Prize for distinguished contributions to political psychology, the Australian Psychological Society’s Workplace Excellence Award for Leadership Development (with Nik Steffens & Kim Peters), the Society of Personality and Social Psychology’s Wegner Award for Theoretical Innovation, and the Australian Psychological Society’s Award for Distinguished Contribution to Psychological Science. In both 2019 and 2020 he was identified by Clarivate as a highly-cited cross-field researcher (Google Scholar, h=114).
Leadership and Employee Health and Well-Being
University of Amsterdam
Title - Leadership and Employee Health and Well-Being
Abstract - Leaders play an important role in the health and well-being of employees. In this talk I discuss work to date and share the results of our new research showing that this role is especially crucial for more vulnerable workers who are more dependent on their leaders. Our meta-analysis and a field study show that leadership is a double-edged sword with constructive forms of leadership being beneficial and destructive forms of leadership harmful to well-being. Both the beneficial and harmful effects of leadership are stronger for vulnerable and more precarious workers. Leaders also strongly affect employee psychological health during crises. In research during the Covid-19 pandemic we found that common responses of leaders to the crisis were showing consideration for employees or pressure for performance and a focus on the bottom-line. The former enhances a sense of control and protects employee psychological well-being and the latter harms it, and the role of leaders was again more pronounced for vulnerable workers who experience higher personal and national economic threat. I discuss these findings and their important practical implications.
Bio - Deanne heads the Leadership and Management Section and is Director of the Research Institute of the Amsterdam Business School. Her research is in the fields of Leadership, Organizational Behavior, and HRM, topics include (un)ethical and charismatic leadership, dark triad and big 5 personality traits, well-being, trust, culture, careers, proactive and innovative work behavior, and strategic HRM. She has published in high quality academic journals including the Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Management, Journal of International Business Studies, Journal of Organizational Behavior, and The Leadership Quarterly. Deanne is a member of several editorial boards and serves on Board of Governors for the Academy of Management.
Evolution of Emotions and Empathy in the Primates
Emory University, Atlanta, USA and Utrecht University, the Netherlands
Title – Evolution of Emotions and Empathy in the Primates
Abstract - Emotions suffuse much of the language employed by students of animal behavior -- from "social bonding" to "alarm calls" -- yet are still regularly avoided as explicit topic in scientific discourse. Given the increasing interest of human psychology in the emotions, and the neuroscience on animal emotions such as fear and attachment, the taboo that has hampered animal research in this area is outdated. It is crucial to separate emotions from feelings, which are subjective experiences that accompany the emotions. Whereas science has no access to animal feelings, animal emotions are as observable and measurable (face, voice, physiology, neural activity) as human emotions. They are mental and bodily states that potentiate behavior appropriate to mostly social situations. I will discuss early ideas about animal emotions and draw upon research on empathy and the perception of emotions in primates to make the point that the study of animal emotions is a necessary complement to the study of behavior. Emotions are best viewed as the organizers of adaptive responses to environmental stimuli.
Bio - Dr. Frans B. M. de Waal is a Dutch/American biologist and primatologist known for his work on the behavior and social intelligence of primates. His first book, Chimpanzee Politics (1982), compared the schmoozing and scheming of chimpanzees involved in power struggles with that of human politicians. His scientific work has been published in hundreds of technical articles in journals such as Science, Nature, Scientific American, and outlets specialized in animal behavior. His popular books - translated into 20+ languages - have made him one of the world's most visible primatologists. His latest books are Are We Smart Enough To Know How Smart Animals Are? (Norton, 2016) and Mama’s Last Hug (Norton, 2019). De Waal is C. H. Candler Professor Emeritus at Emory University and Distinguished Professor Emeritus at Utrecht University. He has been elected to the (US) National Academy of Sciences as well as the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences. In 2007, Time declared him one of The Worlds’ 100 Most Influential People Today.
Do Individuals Make the Place? Employee Influences on Collective Work Performance
Enhancing the sustainability of careers in disruptive times
Dodo or Phoenix? Let's Change Together.
Massey University, Aotearoa/New Zealand
Title - Dodo or Phoenix? Let's Change Together
Abstract - The flightless dodo could not adapt to radical changes in its environment - it died; a Phoenix by contrast reconstitutes itself - and flies. The world of work has been radically changed by confluencing health, working poverty and insecurity, wage inequality, gender inequality, racial justice and environmental crises. Practice and Research are different wings in WOP. By working together, we can meet these challenges - and opportunities to contribute to more sustainable livelihoods, shared prosperity and social protection.
Even before the pandemic, the ILO and World Bank were warning us that poor work conditions were the 'number one challenge for the world of work', and to 'protect people not (poor quality) jobs.' That is OUR job, but we can only do it together. This opening keynote focuses on successful co-ordinations between practitioners and researchers. It illustrates how by working together we improve policies at work, within and across organisations, sectors, and economies.
Bio - Stuart C. Carr is Professor of Psychology, Industrial and Organizational (I/O) Psychology Program, Massey University, New Zealand. Stuart co-facilitates the End Poverty and Inequality Cluster (EPIC), which includes a focus on transitions from precarious labor to decent work and living wages. Intersecting with EPIC is Project G.L.O.W. (for Global Living Organizational Wage), a multi-country, multi-generational, interdisciplinary study of the links between decent wages (in purchasing power parity), and sustainable livelihoods for the eradication of poverty – the primary UN Sustainable Development Goal (SDG1). Stuart’s professional focus is Humanitarian Work Psychology, which has included a Global Task Force for Humanitarian Work Psychology, promoting Decent Work aligned with local stakeholder needs, in partnership with global development agencies. He was a lead investigator on Project ADDUP, a multi-country DFID/ESRC-funded study of pay and remuneration diversity between national and international labor in developing economies. Stuart is a Fellow of the Royal Society of New Zealand (RSNZ), the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP), and the New Zealand Psychological Society (NZPS). He is the coordinating Principal Investigator for a RSNZ Marsden Grant awarded to the New Zealand hubs in GLOW (2018). He is a previous Editor of the Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology, and presently edits International Perspectives in Psychology: Research, Practice, Consultation, which supports the SDGs.
Post-Pandemic Workplace: The New Unequal?
Warwick Business School, University of Warwick
Title: Post-Pandemic Workplace: The New Unequal?
Abstract: The Covid-19 pandemic normalised changes that those interested in good work long advocated: working from home as equally productive, less commuting given detrimental health effects, flattened lines of communication across hierarchies, extended use of technologies toward greater inclusion. However, it also brought new problems or exacerbated old ones: work-life boundaries blurred then disappeared, technological access and home circumstances curtailed engagement, women and minorities bore the brunt of care obligations and job losses, organisational politics reconfigured themselves, rather than going away. In the midst of this, trust and voice emerged as central issues, expressed in the rise of their opposites of surveillance and exclusion. Are employees trusted to control their work? Can they participate in the changes taking place? In whose interest is the new workplace being designed and with what consequences? The talk will outline emerging insights we have regarding how the pandemic has reconfigured inequalities in the workplace, and reflect on possibilities for better.
Bio: Dr Korica is an Associate Professor of Management and Organisation at Warwick Business School, University of Warwick. She specialises in studying the work of senior leaders and boards of directors in practice, and the consequences of their actions on workplaces, neighbourhoods and societies. In 2017, she was shortlisted for the Thinkers50 Radar Award, as one of the “management thinkers most likely to share the future of how organisations are led and managed”.
Everything is cool when you’re part of a team: The role of large-scale collaboration in improving replicability and generalisability
Institute of Neuroscience & Psychology, University of Glasgow
Title - Everything is cool when you’re part of a team: The role of large-scale collaboration in improving replicability and generalisability
Abstract - The "replication crisis" has led to a call for initiatives to increase the replicability of psychological science, such as data and code sharing, pre-registration, registered reports, and reproducible workflows. Similarly, researchers have questioned the extent to which studies of WEIRD populations (Western, Educated, Industrialised, Rich, and Democratic) generalise to the majority of people in the rest of the world. Here, I will discuss how large-scale collaborations can improve both replicability and generalisability, with a focus on the Psychological Science Accelerator, a globally distributed network of more than 500 laboratories from 70 countries across all six populated continents.
Bio - Lisa DeBruine is a professor of psychology whose meta-science interests include team science (especially the Psychological Science Accelerator), open documentation, data simulation, web-based tools for data collection and stimulus generation, and teaching computational reproducibility. Her substantive research is on the social perception of faces and kinship. Her projects and tutorials are available at https://debruine.github.io/
The good, the bad, and the ugly: Trends in leadership and management in a disruptive world
VU University Amsterdam
Title - The good, the bad, and the ugly: Trends in leadership and management in a disruptive world.
Abstract - Major disruptions such as 9/11, the banking crisis, COVID-19 and the AI-revolution pose significant challenges for workplaces worldwide. How different institutions and organizations cope with these mega-changes is determined partly by the quality of their leadership (as seen in the recent pandemic). But what kind of leadership do we prefer during such transitions and what leaders are most effective? An evolutionary risk management provides some answers, and offers inputs for leadership and organizational development programs.
Bio - Mark van Vugt is professor of psychology at the VU University of Amsterdam and director of the Amsterdam Leadership Lab. Mark specialises in studying leadership, work and organizational behaviour from an evolutionary perspective. He works in various cross-disciplinary teams to understand the biological, anthropological and ecological roots of leadership. His latest work investigates how Big-event disruptions (e.g., wars, pandemics, laws) shape workplace dynamics. His projects can be found at:https://www.professormarkvanvugt.com/
Birkbeck University of London, Genius Within CIC
Title: Neuroinclusive by Design
Abstract: The Neurodiversity movement has come of age and aligns with the social model of disability, wherein disablement occurs as a result of barriers in the environment rather than an impairment of the individual. Neurodiverse conditions such as ADHD, autism, dyslexia and Tourettes are increasingly recognized for their strengths and talents, this narrative has become widely adopted by forward thinking companies as a way to increase their competitive advantage and develop creative thinking. However, the unemployment picture is still one of exclusion, with fewer than 20% of Autists employed, around a third of long term unemployed people dyslexic and over half the prison population with ADHD. To date, inclusion efforts have been directed at individual “reasonable adjustments” and targeted affirmative action programs such as Autism at Work or EY’s dyslexia network. While laudable, it is time to move on to systemic inclusion by “Universal Design”. Nancy’s talk will explain the latest work and findings from the alliance between the Centre for Neurodiversity Research at Work and Genius Within, where we are exploring more upstream interventions, adjusting HR processes throughout the entire employee life cycle to reduce barriers systematically, for all, rather than one at a time.
In the following one hour practical session, Nancy and her research and practice colleagues will hold a workshop and panel discussion with some of their industry partners and clients, who will be able to talk about the everyday experiences of being Neuroinclusive by Design. You will meet some corporate HR practitioners and neurodiverse employees who have lived experiences of neuroinclusion consulting who will discuss their experiences, good and bad (!) and some of the difficulties faced when trying to effect change at the cultural level. We will run some small group exercises to demonstrate the processes of change and generate discussion about the cognitive biases at work when we are deciding what is “normal” at work versus what is required for optimum performance (clue: these are not the same!)
Bio: Dr Nancy Doyle is the founder of Genius Within, a social enterprise dedicated to the full inclusion of neurodiverse people at work. Nancy also co-founded the Centre for Neurodiversity Research at Work. Nancy’s work and research involves assessment coaching and training support for employees and those who are long term unemployed or incarcerated, as well as organizational consulting for organisations wanting to take a proactive approach to neuroinclusion. In recent years, Nancy’s work was featured in the worldwide, award winning series Employable Me, and has been recognized by the BPS for her role influencing the development of neuroinclusive policy in the UK Department for Work and Pensions, Ministry of Justice and the International Labor Organization. Nancy has ADHD and both the Research Centre and Genius Within a majority disability/neurodivergent staffed and led.
The WHY, WHAT and HOW of effective management teams: Why do we need them, what are their characteristics, and how can we develop them?
Title - The WHY, WHAT and HOW of effective management teams: Why do we need them, what are their characteristics, and how can we develop them?
Abstract - I will present a research-based model for effectiveness in management teams, which can be used as roadmap for practitioners who want to develop more effective and well-functioning management teams, and for researchers who want to study factors influencing management team effectiveness. I will propose a “Big Five” of the most typical challenges management teams meet, and suggest ways these challenges can be handled. The presentation will combine my 30 years of practice with developing effective management teams, with my own and others’ research on management teams.
Bio - Henning Bang is an Associate Professor at the University of Oslo where his academic interests include group dynamics, team efficiency and management; organizational culture; leadership, leadership development; conflicts in groups and organizations; organizational theory as well as coaching, guidance and development of professionals. His recent publications focus on character strength and mental toughness in the military as well as the factors that are characteristic of effective management teams.
Change and Adaptation: Personal Reflections on 3 Decades of Change in the International Security Environment
Strategic and International Affairs Adviser to the NATO military
Title - Change and Adaptation: Personal Reflections on 3 Decades of Change in the International Security Environment.
Abstract - In the international security environment over the last 30 years, the only constant has been change. Navigating the change, absorbing the change, and building stability on change has required clarity of purpose, a common understanding of core objectives, servant leadership, organizational agility, and the ability to visualize and communicate a path to a common strategic end-state. This session will address personal reflections on 3 decades of adaptation to a constantly changing security environment.
Bio - Stephen R. Covington serves as Strategic and International Affairs Adviser to the NATO military. His three decades of service in NATO extend from the end of the Cold War to the current period. His expertise in the sphere of strategy, negotiations, and problem solving have been relied on by the 11 Supreme Allied Commanders, Europe (SACEUR), the highest ranking military commander in NATO. Mr. Covington is widely published in international security periodicals and books, most recently writing a series of articles on Russia for the Belfer Center at Harvard University.
Is evidence-based work and organizational psychology simply too difficult to do? And does it have to be?
Professor of Organizational Psychology at Queen Mary, University of London
Title - Is evidence-based work and organizational psychology simply too difficult to do? And does it have to be?
Abstract - The past 20 years has seen a slowly growing interest in evidence-based practice (EBP) in work and organizational psychology. The term “evidence-based” is now even used to describe one of EAWOP’s key characteristics. However, it seems fairly clear the uptake of EBP has been slow and inconsistent – particularly compared to other areas of psychology (e.g., clinical and health) and related areas of practice such as HR. There are numerous explanations for this but one of the most common seems to be that EBP is simply perceived to be too difficult – by academics, practitioners and their clients. But is this perception accurate? Is EBP almost impossibly difficult to do? Can EBP principles be simplified or explained in a way that it becomes perceived as do-able and attainable? How can evidence-based organizational psychology become the norm rather than the exception?
Bio - Rob Briner is Professor of Organizational Psychology at Queen Mary, University of London and also co-founder and Scientific Director of the Center for Evidence-Based Management. His research has focused on several topics including well-being, emotions, stress, ethnicity, the psychological contract, absence from work, motivation, work-nonwork and everyday work behaviour.
Beyond academic research Rob helps practitioners and organizations make better use of evidence, including research evidence, in decision-making as well as encouraging academics to make research more accessible. He has written for and presented to practitioners on many aspects of HR and organizational psychology and is now involved in many initiatives aimed at developing and promoting evidence-based practice.
He has received several awards for his work in this area including the British Psychological Society Division of Occupational Psychology Academic Contribution to Practice Award in 2014 and topped HR Magazine’s Most Influential Thinker list in 2016.
When It is Darkest: Understanding Suicide Risk
Professor of Health Psychology at the University of Glasgow
Title - When It is Darkest: Understanding Suicide Risk
Abstract - In this presentation, I will draw from my new book When It Is Darkest: Why People Die by Suicide and What We Can Do To Prevent It (Vermilion, 2021). My aim in the book is to get to the heart of this most tragic of human outcomes, challenging myths and misunderstandings as well as bringing together the personal and the professional. Suicide and self-harm are major public health concerns with complex aetiologies which encompass a multifaceted array of risk and protective factors. In this presentation, I will dispel some of the myths associated with suicide as well as describing the Integrated Motivational–Volitional (IMV) Model of Suicidal Behaviour (O’Connor & Kirtley, 2018). The IMV model outlines the pathways to the emergence of suicidal ideation and the transition from suicidal thoughts to acts of suicide. This tripartite model maps the relationship between background factors and trigger events, and the development of suicidal ideation/intent through to suicidal behaviour. Crucially, the IMV model identifies clinical targets for treatment. As I have done in When It Is Darkest, I will present an overview of some of our clinical, experimental and intervention studies to illustrate how psychological, physiological and social factors increase suicide risk and what we all can do to tackle suicide. I will also highlight the psychological evidence of what works to prevent suicidal behaviour. Since the onset of the COVID pandemic there has been concern about the short, medium and long-term impacts on population mental health. I will also present findings from the UK COVID-19 Mental Health and Wellbeing Study, as well as the wider research literature, to describe the changes in mental health and wellbeing over the course of the pandemic. In addition, I will outline some other ongoing work on suicide prevention research as well as illustrating the opportunities to mitigate the risk of the longer-term impacts of COVID-19 on suicide risk. The wider clinical implications for the prevention of suicide will also be discussed.
Bio - Rory O’Connor PhD FAcSS is Professor of Health Psychology at the University of Glasgow in Scotland, President of the International Association for Suicide Prevention and a Past President of the International Academy of Suicide Research. Rory leads the Suicidal Behaviour Research Laboratory ( www.suicideresearch.info ; Twitter: @suicideresearch ) at Glasgow, one of the leading suicide/self-harm research groups internationally. He has published extensively in the field of suicide and self-harm, specifically concerning the psychological processes which precipitate suicidal behaviour and self-harm. He is also co- author/editor of several books and is author of When It is Darkest. Why People Die by Suicide and What We Can Do To Prevent It (2021). He is Co-Editor-in-Chief of Archives of Suicide Research and Associate Editor of Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior. Rory acts as an advisor to a range of national and international organisations including national governments on the areas of suicide and self-harm. He is also Co-Chair of the Academic Advisory Group to the Scottish Government’s National Suicide Prevention Leadership Group.
What the virus has taught us about being human
Bishop Wardlaw Professor of Psychology at the University of St Andrews, School of Psychology and Neuroscience
Title - What the virus has taught us about being human
Abstract - Stephen Reicher is a leading authority on crowd psychology. He is a member of the Sage subcommittee advising on behavioural science aspects of the COVID-19 pandemic and will use his invited speaker address to share his unique insights into what the virus has taught us about humans and human organization.
Bio - Stephen Reicher is a fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh. He has held positions at the University of Dundee and University of Exeter before moving to St Andrews in 1998 where he has been head of the School of Psychology. He is a former Associate Editor of the Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology and Chief Editor (with Margaret Wetherell) of the British Journal of Social Psychology. Reicher is an editor for several journals including Scientific American Mind. His research is in social psychology, focusing on social identity, collective behaviour, intergroup conflict, leadership, and mobilisation. He is broadly interested in the issues of group behaviour and the individual-social relationship.
His research interests broadly cover the issues of group behaviour and the individual-social relationship. More specifically, his recent research can be grouped into three areas. The first is an attempt to develop a model of crowd action that accounts for both social determination and social change. The second concerns the construction of social categories through language and action. The third concerns political rhetoric and mass mobilisation - especially around the issue of national identity. Currently, he is starting work on a Leverhulme funded project (jointly with Nick Hopkins of Lancaster University) looking at the impact of devolution on Scottish identity and social action in Scotland.
Identity Leadership as a key to well-being and innovation at work and in society
Goethe University Frankfurt
Title - Identity Leadership as a key to well-being and innovation at work and in society
Abstract - In this symposium, four presenters and a discussant will discuss the role of identity leadership for innovation and well-being at work and in society. Identity leadership aims at creating a sense of “us” and “we” in teams, organizations and other groups such as communities or nations. It comprises the four dimensions of identity prototypicality, identity advancement, identity entrepreneurship, and identity impresarioship.
(1) In the first presentation, van Dick et al. will introduce the Global Leadership Identity Development (GLID) project which spans a team of researchers in 30 countries and aims at validating the Identity Leadership Inventory across languages and cultures. Results of the first two project phases with more than 15,000 participants will be presented showing that the ILI is a valid tool in many languages and cultures and that it relates to work-related employee attitudes – results from this large data set are complemented by longitudinal evidence from Germany.
(2) Next, Bracht et al. zoom in by presenting results from 23 countries across 9 different culture clusters. They show how follower innovative behavior is predicted by identity leadership and three established leadership constructs (LMX, transformational and authentic leadership), mediated by personal identification with the leader and social identification (with the team and organization).
(3) Kerschreiter et al. also use the German subsample with cross-sectional and longitudinal data of the GLID project. They explore the idea that identity leadership can countervail the negative consequences of official contact restrictions during the Covid-pandemic which disrupted people’s working lives (e.g., by imposing working from home and the use of information and communication technology).
(4) Frenzel et al. widen the perspective by presenting results from a longitudinal study in Australia, China, Israel, the US, and Germany looking at the relations between identity leadership of the country’s leaders and citizens’ adherence to Covid-19 health-protective interventions (e.g., wearing facemasks, reducing social contacts).
(5) Finally, Alex Haslam will integrate the findings, discusses its implications and poses open questions.
The data of all four presentations show that leaders who engage in creating shared identities contribute to more innovation and less burnout and this is true especially for employees working remote due to the Pandemic and even holds for identity leadership in the very large context of nations where identity leadership contributes to better adherence of regulations.
The overall conclusions are that identity leadership is a central concept of achieving team, organizational and societal goals via shared identities and thus power through instead of power over others.
Biographies
Rolf van Dick is Professor of Social Psychology and (from 2018-2021) served as Vice President for International Affairs and Early Career Researchers at Goethe University Frankfurt (Germany). Prior to his current position he was Professor at Aston Business School, Birmingham (UK). Rolf van Dick is scientific director of the interdisciplinary Center for Leadership and Behavior in Organizations (CLBO). He has written, edited or co-edited over 20 books and special issues, and published almost 300 book chapters and papers in academic journals such as the Academy of Management Journal, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Marketing, Journal of Business Ethics, or the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Rolf was visiting professor in Tuscaloosa (USA), on Rhodes (Greece), in Shanghai and Bejing (China), Rovereto (Italy), in Oslo (Norway), and in Kathmandu (Nepal) and he was editor/associate editor of the British Journal of Management, the European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, the Journal of Personnel Psychology, and The Leadership Quarterly. His research is in the area of social identity processes, and he applies social identity theory to topics such as leadership, mergers & acquisitions, health and stress, or diversity. Rolf is a Fellow of the International Association of Applied Psychology.
Rudolf Kerschreiter is Full Professor and Head of the Social, Organizational, and Economic Psychology Division at Freie Universität Berlin (Germany). Prior to his current position he held a position as Interim Professor at the Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich and has been Postdoctoral Visiting Researcher at the Aston Business School (Aston University, UK) and the University of Pittsburgh (USA). Rudolf Kerschreiter is scientific director of the Berlin Leadership Academy of the Berlin University Alliance (BUA) and Visiting Lecturer at the European School of Management and Technology (ESMT) Berlin. His research focuses on group processes including leadership, virtual team effectiveness, group decision making, social identity, and social exclusion. He has published his research in leading international scientific journals, including the Academy of Management Review, Academy of Management Learning & Education, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, and Psychological Science. In 2005, Rudolf received the Burgen Scholar Award of the Academia Europaea in recognition of excellent academic achievement.
Svenja Frenzel is a PhD candidate in the Department of Social Psychology at Goethe University Frankfurt (Germany) since 2019. Prior to her current position, she was working as a research associate in the Department of Health Psychology at Johannes Gutenberg-University in Mainz (Germany). In her research, she investigates the underlying mechanisms of the social cure phenomenon and applies the Social Identity Approach to health, (chronic) stress and the management of chronic diseases such as Diabetes mellitus type 1 and type 2.
Eva Bracht is a researcher in the areas of social/organizational Psychology. She received her Master of Science degree from LMU Munich, and her PhD from Goethe University in Frankfurt. Her research interest covers leadership and self-leadership in organizations, and how both can enhance creativity and innovation. Being also a consultant for leadership and organizational development, she seeks to connect research with hands-on experience from practice.
Alex Haslam is Professor of Psychology and Australian Laureate Fellow (2012-18) at the University of Queensland. His research focuses on the study of leadership, group, and identity processes in organizational and health contexts. Together with over 300 co-authors around the world, Alex has published over 250 peer-reviewed articles on these topics and written and edited 15 books — including most recently, The New Psychology of Health: Unlocking the Social Cure (Routledge, 2018, with Catherine Haslam, Jolanda Jetten, Tegan Cruwys and Genevieve Dingle; winner of the British Psychology Society’s Book of the Year in 2020) and The New Psychology of Leadership (2nd ed, Routledge, 2020, with Steve Reicher and Michael Platow; winner of the International Leadership Association’s Book of the Year in 2014) and Together Apart: The Psychology of COVID-19 (Sage, 2020, with Jolanda Jetten, Steve Reicher and Tegan Cruwys). Alex has been awarded the European Association of Social Psychology’s Kurt Lewin Medal for outstanding scientific contribution, the British Psychology Society Presidents’ Award for distinguished contributions to psychological knowledge, the International Society for Political Psychology’s Sanford Prize for distinguished contributions to political psychology, the Australian Psychological Society’s Workplace Excellence Award for Leadership Development (with Nik Steffens & Kim Peters), the Society of Personality and Social Psychology’s Wegner Award for Theoretical Innovation, and the Australian Psychological Society’s Award for Distinguished Contribution to Psychological Science. In both 2019 and 2020 he was identified by Clarivate as a highly-cited cross-field researcher (Google Scholar, h=114).
Only connect: Organizational change as a social identity process
University of Queensland
Title - Only connect: Organizational change as a social identity process.
Abstract - In recent years, there has been increasing recognition that organizational change is, at heart, process of identity change. Moreover, in this regard social identity theorising provides a framework for understanding not only how change ‘works’ (and doesn’t), but also how it can be better managed. This symposium showcases the work of three researchers whose work (together with that of their colleagues) is at the forefront of these developments. Their papers provide insights into the ways that the loss, maintenance, and acquisition of social identities defined at different levels of abstraction are critical to people’s experience of, and responses to, change. Importantly too, their research also points to the importance of identity leadership for this process, and in this way speaks to the political considerations that structure both the initiation of change and its broader impact.
Paper 1 - Introducing the Social Identity Model of Organizational Change (SIMOC)
Neela S. Mühlemann, University of Greenwich
Organizations have to constantly change in order to survive in today’s competitive markets. While some employees adjust well to the organizational changes, a number of employees have great difficulties to adjust and experience organizational change s as highly stressful events. One reason for this is that major organizational changes, such as mergers and acquisitions, imply changes to the organizational identity and put at risk employees’ ability to maintain a sense of ‘who we are as an organization’. The present study aims to introduce and provide empirical evidence for an integrative model for understanding employees’ responses to organizational changes. More specifically, the model explains how and when organizational changes impact employees’ adjustment, health and well-being.
Based on the social identity approach, we developed the Social Identity Model of Organizational Change (SIMOC), which proposes two pathways to adjustment to organizational change: the identity maintenance pathway and the identity gain pathway. A key proposition of SIMOC is that the two pathways are interdependent and that negative consequences for post-change identification and adjustment are likely to arise from employees’ pre-change identification if neither of the two pathways is accessible (i.e., if employees can neither maintain old identities nor gain new ones).
Paper 2 - The buffering effect of organisational identification in a failing organisation
Kim Peters, University of Exeter
This research aims to test whether organisational identification helps employees to cope with organisational change in the context of organisational decline. This paper aims to see whether the documented ability of social identities to increase people’s resilience in the face of negative life events generalises to the change events that occur in a failing organisation.
There is a growing body of evidence that organizational change events associated with organizational decline and failure (e.g., organizational downsizing and restructuring) can have serious negative consequences for worker mental health, wellbeing and job engagement. However, existing theorizing in the social identity tradition suggests that workers’ social identification with their organisation may act as an important buffer of these effects. According to this theorising, belonging to meaningful social groups can confer a range of benefits to people’s physical and psychological wellbeing. In line with this expectation, there is evidence that people who identify highly with the important groups in their life also tend to have greater physical and psychological wellbeing and to be more resilient in the face of setbacks. Similar findings have been observed in organizational contexts. For instance, a meta-analysis by Steffens et al. (2016) found that employees who identify more highly with their organisations are in better general health, have lower burnout and report greater engagement with their jobs. This paper explores whether organizational identification also helps buffer workers from the negative effects of organizational change in the context of organizational failure. On the basis of this theorizing, we expect that workers who identify more highly with their organisation will maintain higher levels of (1) wellbeing and (2) job engagement over the course of organisational change than workers who have lower levels of identification.
Paper 3 - Change leadership: A social identity perspective
Steffen R. Giessner and Kate Horton, Rotterdam School of Management
Taking a social identity perspective, this paper reviews literature on leading change. Although leading change is considered to be an essential part of leadership in general, the empirical literature on this topic is relatively sparse. The social identity perspective offers, however, valuable insights into this topic, because the original Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) has been developed to explain why individuals resist or support change. While this theory and its accompanying Self-Categorization Theory (Turner et al., 1987) were primarily developed to address minority protests in societies, early writings as well as recent applications have placed this theoretical perspective as a core framework to understand leadership. Consequently, recent literature in this area has developed important insights into how to lead change processes in organizations. We will reflect on how leading change via identity mechanisms can be accomplished at top- and mid-level management levels. Further, we reflect on what types of leaders are best positioned to lead change and what types of behaviors they need to enact to motivate followers to endorse the change process and identify with the post-change organization. We also raise some new questions and ideas with regards to how different levels of identity (i.e., organizational, team and professional) may facilitate change reactions. Finally, we discuss whether shared or distributed models of leadership can be feasible leadership mechanisms in fostering strong post-change organizational identification and support among employees.
Biographies
Neela Mühlemann is a lecturer in Human Resource Management and Organizational Behavior at the University of Greenwich. Prior, she was a Fellow and Research Officer at the London School of Economics and Political Science and a Research Associate at the Nottingham Trent University. She has a background in social and organisational psychology. In her research, she applies a social identity approach to study identity and group processes in organisations, leadership, health and well-being. In particular, her work addresses the questions how change (on the social, organisational, and individual level) and the associated identity dynamics can affect health and well-being and how identity transitions can be managed to facilitate adjustment.
Kim Peters is an organisational psychologist who currently holds the position of Professor in Management at the University of Exeter Business School. She explores how people’s perceptions of self and other fuel their motivation to lead and follow. Her work has been published in leading journals in social and organisational psychology, including Journal of Management, The Leadership Quarterly, Psychological Science, Psychological Bulletin, and Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Her work has applied implications (for leadership, diversity, wellbeing at work) and she has written a number of articles and reports for non-academic audiences (e.g., European Parliament, Harvard Business Review and British Medical Journal Careers).
Steffen R. Giessner is Professor of Organisational Behaviour and Change at the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University (RSM). He holds an MSc in Psychology from the University of Kent at Canterbury, UK, and a PhD in Psychology from the Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Germany. His research is located at the intersection of organizational psychology and management. His primary research topics are employee support during organizational merger, follower’s perceptions of leadership, antecedents of leader behavior, and non-verbal communication of power. He has authored and co-authored papers in the areas of organizational behavior, management, and psychology. His research received media coverage in outlets like the New York Times, Financial Times, The Guardian, Harvard Business Review, Harvard Business Manager and Wall Street Journal. His most recent book on Leading with Presence addresses how one can develop the non-verbal aspect of leadership impact.
Alex Haslam is Professor of Psychology and Australian Laureate Fellow (2012-18) at the University of Queensland. His research focuses on the study of leadership, group, and identity processes in organizational and health contexts. Together with over 300 co-authors around the world, Alex has published over 250 peer-reviewed articles on these topics and written and edited 15 books — including most recently, The New Psychology of Health: Unlocking the Social Cure (Routledge, 2018, with Catherine Haslam, Jolanda Jetten, Tegan Cruwys and Genevieve Dingle; winner of the British Psychology Society’s Book of the Year in 2020) and The New Psychology of Leadership (2nd ed, Routledge, 2020, with Steve Reicher and Michael Platow; winner of the International Leadership Association’s Book of the Year in 2014) and Together Apart: The Psychology of COVID-19 (Sage, 2020, with Jolanda Jetten, Steve Reicher and Tegan Cruwys). Alex has been awarded the European Association of Social Psychology’s Kurt Lewin Medal for outstanding scientific contribution, the British Psychology Society Presidents’ Award for distinguished contributions to psychological knowledge, the International Society for Political Psychology’s Sanford Prize for distinguished contributions to political psychology, the Australian Psychological Society’s Workplace Excellence Award for Leadership Development (with Nik Steffens & Kim Peters), the Society of Personality and Social Psychology’s Wegner Award for Theoretical Innovation, and the Australian Psychological Society’s Award for Distinguished Contribution to Psychological Science. In both 2019 and 2020 he was identified by Clarivate as a highly-cited cross-field researcher (Google Scholar, h=114).
Toxic behaviour and toxic leadership
University of St Andrews
Title - Toxic behaviour and toxic leadership
Abstract
Paper 1 - Rethinking the roots of toxic behaviour
Stephen Reicher, School of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of St Andrews and Alex Haslam, School of Psychology, University of Queensland.
In this talk we shall revisit the classic work in psychology on the basis of toxic behaviour. In particular I shall argue that Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment and Milgram’s Yale Obedience studies do not, as conventionally understood, show how people act toxically out of an unawareness of the consequences but rather that they understand and indeed celebrate what they are doing. I shall suggest that this involves a process of identity leadership and engaged followership and will illustrate the power of such an analysis in relation to real-world examples of toxic behaviour.
Paper 2 - Doing good as a warrant for doing bad: why people ‘obey’ in a Milgram-type paradigm
Megan Birney, School of Psychology, Staffordshire University, and Nik Steffens, School of Psychology, University of Queensland.
This talk will draw on a series of experimental studies in which we investigate an ‘engaged followership’ reinterpretation of Milgram’s classic ‘obedience’ studies. We argue that people ‘obey’ because the experimenter convinces them that they are participating in a valuable scientific enterprise that will contribute to human progress. Across four experiments we show that the more a study is presented as a piece of ‘prototypical’ science, the more worthwhile it is seen to be, and the further participants will go in implementing toxic instructions from the experimenter.
Paper 3 - Toxic behaviour in business
Fergus Neville, School of Management, University of St Andrews, and Maaike Homan, College of Psychology, University of Amsterdam.
This talk applies the ‘engaged follower’ analysis to toxic behaviour by business organisations. The more that people identify with an organisation and endorse its values and goals, the more they will be willing to implement toxic instructions. First, we use this lens to examine real world examples of misbehaviour. Second, we present the results of two studies which examine the relationship between identification with the organisation and misconduct. Third, I draw out the implications for how to minimise misconduct in the future.
Discussant: Alex Haslam, School of Psychology, University of Queensland.
Biographies
Stephen Reicher is a fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh. He has held positions at the University of Dundee and University of Exeter before moving to St Andrews in 1998 where he has been head of the School of Psychology. He is a former Associate Editor of the Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology and Chief Editor (with Margaret Wetherell) of the British Journal of Social Psychology. Reicher is an editor for several journals including Scientific American Mind. His research is in social psychology, focusing on social identity, collective behaviour, intergroup conflict, leadership, and mobilisation. He is broadly interested in the issues of group behaviour and the individual-social relationship.
His research interests broadly cover the issues of group behaviour and the individual-social relationship. More specifically, his recent research can be grouped into three areas. The first is an attempt to develop a model of crowd action that accounts for both social determination and social change. The second concerns the construction of social categories through language and action. The third concerns political rhetoric and mass mobilisation - especially around the issue of national identity. Currently, he is starting work on a Leverhulme funded project (jointly with Nick Hopkins of Lancaster University) looking at the impact of devolution on Scottish identity and social action in Scotland.
Megan Birney (School of Psychology, Staffordshire University). I am a social psychologist at heart! My research centres around identity processes, intergroup contact, communication, social stigma, obedience, and social exclusion; I love teaching about how these theories can be applied to real-world problems in society and passing some of my passion for these topics on to my students.
I completed my undergraduate degree in Psychology and Interdisciplinary Studies (specialising in International Studies and Business Leadership) from Virginia Tech (USA). I went on to receive an MSc (with distinction) in Social and Organisational Psychology in 2010 and a PhD in Psychology in 2015, both from the University of Exeter. My research during this time focused on understanding how perceptions of non-native accents influence the relationship between immigrants and host country natives. After my PhD, I worked as a Research Fellow at the University of St. Andrews investigating the role that identity processes play within variants of the Milgram paradigm. I am still involved in these projects today. Prior to coming to Staffordshire, I spent 6 years at the University of Chester helping develop the psychology provision at undergraduate and postgraduate level at their campus in Shrewsbury. I both taught and led modules there in areas related to Social Psychology, Organisational Psychology, and Quantitative Research Methods, and in 2016, I became a Fellow of the Higher Education Academy. Throughout this time, I remained an active researcher. Some highlights include co-editing a special issue in the Journal of Language and Social Psychology and starting as an Associate Editor at the open-access journal, Psychology of Language and Communication. If you’re interested do get in touch via email ([email protected]) or my Twitter account: @meganebirney
Nik Steffens (School of Psychology, University of Queensland) I lived, worked, and studied psychology in Germany and Spain and completed my PhD in the UK (awarded from the University of Exeter in 2012) before taking up a position at The University of Queensland. I am an ARC DECRA Fellow and Senior Lecturer in UQ's School of Psychology. I am interested in psychological drivers that make groups and organisations fairer, more motivating, more effective, and healthier. My work focuses on social identity and team work processes in social and organisational contexts including leadership and followership, motivation and creativity, and health and well-being. In my research, I use diverse methods — I have expertise in experimental and intervention studies, field and survey research, archival methods, psychometric and scale development research, and meta-analysis. In 2017, I won the APS Workplace Excellence Award for Leadership Development (together with Alex Haslam and Kim Peters) for our work with industry partners on the 5R program that seeks to help leaders to develop their leadership ability and enhance team functioning and well-being. In 2018, I was awarded a Discovery Early Career Researcher Award (DECRA; a research fellowship) from the Australian Research Council. Twitter - @NikSteffens
Fergus Neville (School of Management, University of St Andrews) Dr Fergus Neville is a Lecturer in Organisational Studies in the School of Management at the University of St Andrews. His research is broadly focussed on group processes and their pro-social and anti-social consequences. He is particularly interested in social identities, including within organisational contexts. His research covers a range of phenomena which are central to understandings of organisations and their management, including leadership and influence, normative processes, responsible enterprise, social support and toxic behaviour in groups. Fergus Neville (@FergusNeville) | Twitter
Maaike Homan (College of Psychology, University of Amsterdam). I am a Ph.D. student in Political Science at the University of Amsterdam. I recently graduated from the research master Social Psychology at Vrije Universiteit . My master thesis focused on social identity and leadership processes with help from professor Alex Haslam. I am interested in interdisciplinary research, resulting in a broad range of interests such as communication science, neuroscience, and politics. I am especially interested in combining psychological processes (such as identification and emotional reactions) with physiological responses (e.g. brain activation, face muscle activity) in political contexts. For my master thesis (grade: 9.5) I worked together with Prof. Dr. Alex Haslam at the University of Queensland on the influence of social identity and obedience on corruption. I am continuing the project ‘Identifying Stereotypical Implicit Bias in Natural Language’ started with the Network Institute, now at the faculty of humanities. I am currently working on two co-author publications. Maaike Homan (@MaaikeHoman) | Twitter
Alex Haslam is Professor of Psychology and Australian Laureate Fellow (2012-18) at the University of Queensland. His research focuses on the study of leadership, group, and identity processes in organizational and health contexts. Together with over 300 co-authors around the world, Alex has published over 250 peer-reviewed articles on these topics and written and edited 15 books — including most recently, The New Psychology of Health: Unlocking the Social Cure (Routledge, 2018, with Catherine Haslam, Jolanda Jetten, Tegan Cruwys and Genevieve Dingle; winner of the British Psychology Society’s Book of the Year in 2020) and The New Psychology of Leadership (2nd ed, Routledge, 2020, with Steve Reicher and Michael Platow; winner of the International Leadership Association’s Book of the Year in 2014) and Together Apart: The Psychology of COVID-19 (Sage, 2020, with Jolanda Jetten, Steve Reicher and Tegan Cruwys). Alex has been awarded the European Association of Social Psychology’s Kurt Lewin Medal for outstanding scientific contribution, the British Psychology Society Presidents’ Award for distinguished contributions to psychological knowledge, the International Society for Political Psychology’s Sanford Prize for distinguished contributions to political psychology, the Australian Psychological Society’s Workplace Excellence Award for Leadership Development (with Nik Steffens & Kim Peters), the Society of Personality and Social Psychology’s Wegner Award for Theoretical Innovation, and the Australian Psychological Society’s Award for Distinguished Contribution to Psychological Science. In both 2019 and 2020 he was identified by Clarivate as a highly-cited cross-field researcher (Google Scholar, h=114).
Me, myself and I: How leader narcissism and other dark traits affect their behaviour and followers
University of Amsterdam
Title - Me, myself and I: How leader narcissism and other dark traits affect their behavior and followers
Abstract - In this symposium we look at how dark traits and especially narcissism affect the abusive and egoistical behavior of leaders. We also address whether this differs for different (groups of) followers and how they are affected. First, Pircher Verdorfer and Belschak address the role of the dark triad traits in exploitative leadership and abusive supervision and show narcissism matters in particular. The second paper by Braun and colleagues goes more deeply into different aspects of narcissism and addresses how two elements of leader narcissism in particular (grandiosity and vulnerability) relate to abusive supervision. Next we turn van Gerven and colleagues who address how the behavior of narcissists is perceived by followers, whether their impulsive and egoistic nature leads to subordinates viewing them as inconsistent in their leadership and whether gender differences play a role in these assessments. Next, while narcissistic leaders as grown-ups clearly show negative forms of leader behavior, at a younger age, narcissism may not yet be equally toxic and Nevicka and colleagues focus on whether in children there are also groups that might thrive under narcissists and they discuss how this may be helpful in developing better leadership skills at a younger age before the negative effects of narcissism start showing. Finally, Den Hartog will provide a short discussion of how this set of papers contributes to the knowledge of narcissism in leadership and lead the Q and A session with the audience.
Paper 1 - Who displays Exploitative Leadership and who Bears the Brunt?
Armin Pircher Verdorfer & Frank Belschak, University of Amsterdam Business School, the Netherlands
While the bulk of research in the field of destructive leadership has focused on leader behaviors that are inherently hostile and aggressive, typically reflected in the notion of abusive supervision (Tepper et al., 2017), recent research has stressed the relevance of destructive leadership behaviors that are more subtle yet can still have strongly detrimental effects on subordinates and organizations. Most notably, Schmid et al. (2019) showed that an important facet of leader destructiveness refers to exceedingly self-interested behaviors and the use of influence to exploit followers for one’s selfish gain. However, research on exploitative leadership is still at a very early stage and there are many open questions. Most importantly, our understanding of the conditions that predict the occurrence of exploitative leadership is limited. Furthermore, no existing research has taken characteristics of the follower into account when studying the exploitative leadership process. This is unfortunate, as prior research indicates that destructive leader behaviors are, to quite some extent, contingent on follower characteristics (Lian et al., 2014). Therefore, in light of the importance to better understand how organizations can minimize the occurrence of exploitative leadership, investigating the antecedents and boundary conditions of exploitative leadership is both necessary and urgent.
With these gaps in mind, in the present research we investigate whether one source of motivation for leaders to exhibit exploitative behavior emerges from their dark triad personality traits, i.e., narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy (LeBreton et al., 2018). These features, with their inherent focus on egotism, manipulation, and a lack of empathy, appear to be particularly suited to predicting exploitative leadership. In addition, building on an interactionist view of destructive leadership (Thoroughgood et al., 2018), we argue that the dispositional inclination of dark triad leaders to exploit followers is influenced by specific characteristics of the victim (i.e., the subordinate). Specifically, we hypothesize that dark triad leaders are more likely to exploit those followers, whom they see as particularly good performers.
Paper 2 - The two faces of narcissism – How grandiose and vulnerable narcissism relate to abusive supervision
Susanne Braun, Durham University, UK, Birgit Schyns, NEOMA Business school, France; Yuyan Zheng, University of Sheffield, UK ; Robert G. Lord, Durham University, UK
The purpose of this research is to better understand the role that the two faces of narcissism – grandiosity and vulnerability – may play in explaining why abusive supervision occurs in organizational contexts. These two facets of narcissism are united in a lack of agreeableness, potentially putting the ways in which narcissistic individuals relate to others at risk. The antagonistic nature of narcissism is of particular concern for organizations as it may hinder positive relationships between supervisors and subordinates. We therefore seek to clarify whether and why narcissistic individuals express abusive supervisory attitudes toward others.
Self-regulatory theory has described the paradoxical nature of narcissism. Narcissistic grandiosity implies overly positive and inflated self-views, valuing the self over others, whilst requiring continuous affirmation (Morf & Rhodewalt, 2001). In interpersonal relationships, grandiose narcissism is displayed in characteristics that can be seen as dominant (e.g., being extraverted, charming or bold), but are potentially more acceptable than the antagonistic characteristics of vulnerability (e.g., being introverted, avoidant or defensive; Jauk et al., 2017). This is why grandiosity and vulnerability have been referred to as the “two faces” of narcissism (Wink, 1991, p. 590). We argue that feelings of inadequacy or fear of failure (Miller et al., 2011) are one reason why narcissistic vulnerability puts positive relationships between supervisors and subordinates at risk. On this basis, we theorize and test a process model that links narcissistic vulnerability to abusive supervision through attributions of failure and subsequent emotional experiences of shame.
Paper 3 - Gender Differences in the Perceived Behavior of Narcissistic Leaders
Emma J. G. van Gerven, Annebel, H. B. de Hoogh, Deanne N. den Hartog, & Frank D. Belschak
University of Amsterdam Business School, The Netherlands
Although narcissists often emerge as leaders, the relationship between leader narcissism and follower task performance is ambiguous and often even found to be negative. Since narcissists have the tendency to be impulsive and change their minds on a whim, they may come across to others as inconsistent. We propose and test ‘inconsistent leader behavior’ as a new mechanism in the relationship between leader narcissism and follower task performance.
Narcissism is a cluster B personality disorder, which implies being dramatic, emotional, and erratic (DSM-V, American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Narcissistic characteristics overlap with typical agentic traits, such as arrogance (Campbell, Rudich, & Sedikides, 2002), exploitativeness, egocentrism (Sedikides & Campbell, 2017), opportunism (Konrath, Ho, & Zarins, 2016), and impulsivity (Malesza & Ostaszewski, 2016; Vazire & Funder, 2006). A common denominator of these characteristics that are linked to narcissism is an element of irrationality and unpredictability, suggesting that narcissistic leaders are more likely to be perceived as displaying inconsistent behavior. Inconsistent leader behavior is behavior that is varying over situations in erratic and seemingly random ways. These behaviors are difficult to predict as they often appear to not fit the situation or differ from previous behavior in a similar situation. We expect narcissism to be positively linked to inconsistent leader behavior. However, we suggest that leader gender is a critical factor in determining whether narcissistic leaders are perceived by their followers as inconsistent or not.
Research has shown that gender impacts the evaluation of characteristics and behaviors, such that men are perceived differently than women depending on the socially expected and accepted sex role behavior (Rudman & Phelan, 2008). Women are expected to act according to rules and norms and to not demonstrate divergent behavior (Eagly, Wood, & Fishbaugh, 1981), which is why we propose that the negative aspects of narcissism in terms of being divergent and unpredictable are more salient and less acceptable when shown by female narcissistic leaders, as these female leaders violate the gender stereotype. For male leaders being unpredictable and impulsive is congruent with the expected (agentic) sex role behavior and thus these aspects will stand out less. We thus expect that the effects of narcissism on the perception of leader behavior are contingent on leader gender where female narcissistic leaders are perceived as displaying more inconsistent behavior than male narcissistic leaders. Inconsistent leader behavior in turn negatively affects follower task performance as it acts as a stressor that is likely to deplete followers’ energetic resources and distract their attention away from their core tasks. Previous research suggests that followers’ response to leader behavior is influenced by the quality of the leader-follower relationship, such that followers in a high-quality relationship respond more favorably to their leaders’ behavior than followers in a low-quality relationship (Michel & Tews, 2016; Piccolo & Colquitt, 2006). In line with this we argue that the effects of perceived inconsistent leader behavior are dependent on the quality of the relationship between leader and follower.
Paper 4 - Children With Low Self-Esteem Thrive Under Narcissistic Leaders
B. Nevicka, S.M. van den Hee, & E. Brummelman University of Amsterdam, Dept of Psychology, The Netherlands
Who thrives under a narcissistic leader? The aim of this research is to investigate the compatibility of leaders’ narcissism and followers’ self-esteem. Individuals with low self-esteem are drawn to leaders who can help fulfil their needs for clarity, direction and self-esteem, which fits well with the narcissistic leader’s charismatic appeal. Unfortunately, leaders’ narcissism is also associated with abusive behavior towards followers. Recent research suggests however, that at a young age, leader narcissism may not yet have such toxic consequences for followers. Therefore, we examined the potential functionality of narcissistic leaders for followers with low self-esteem among children. Here we sought to examine the potential beneficial impact of narcissistic leaders on followers with low self-esteem during childhood. According to dominance complementarity theory (Grijalva & Harms, 2014), the dominance and confidence of narcissistic leaders may provide a good match with the submissiveness and insecurity of followers with lower self-esteem. While lower self-esteem can make followers more vulnerable to narcissistic leaders’ abusive behavior, as found in adults (Nevicka et al., 2018), we integrate the recent findings on decreased toxicity of narcissism in children with research showing that individuals with low self-esteem are also more attracted to and seek charismatic and high-power individuals to help boost their self-esteem and provide direction and clarity (Padilla et al., 2007; Thoroughgood et al., 2012). Narcissistic leaders’ charisma, confidence, dominance and visionary communication may help fulfill such followers’ needs. We theorize that these effects of narcissistic leadership can already emerge in childhood. Narcissism develops around the age of 7, when children acquire the ability to see themselves as superior to others (Thomaes & Brummelman, 2016). From this age, leadership skills become increasingly important. In late childhood and early adolescence, children spend most of their free time at school in groups of three or more peers (Coplan, Ooi, & Rose-Krasnor, 2015). Unsurprisingly, from this age, narcissistic children tend to emerge as leaders (Brummelman et al., 2021).
Genius Within
Title - Neuroinclusive by Design
Abstract - The Neurodiversity movement has come of age and aligns with the social model of disability, wherein disablement occurs as a result of barriers in the environment rather than an impairment of the individual. Neurodiverse conditions such as ADHD, autism, dyslexia and Tourettes are increasingly recognized for their strengths and talents, this narrative has become widely adopted by forward thinking companies as a way to increase their competitive advantage and develop creative thinking. However, the unemployment picture is still one of exclusion, with fewer than 20% of Autists employed, around a third of long-term unemployed people dyslexic and over half the prison population with ADHD. To date, inclusion efforts have been directed at individual “reasonable adjustments” and targeted affirmative action programs such as Autism at Work or EY’s dyslexia network. While laudable, it is time to move on to systemic inclusion by “Universal Design”. Nancy’s talk will explain the latest work and findings from the alliance between the Centre for Neurodiversity Research at Work and Genius Within, where we are exploring more upstream interventions, adjusting HR processes throughout the entire employee life cycle to reduce barriers systematically, for all, rather than one at a time.
In the following one hour practical session, Nancy and her research and practice colleagues will hold a workshop and panel discussion with some of their industry partners and clients, who will be able to talk about the everyday experiences of being Neuroinclusive by Design. You will meet some corporate HR practitioners and neurodiverse employees who have lived experiences of neuroinclusion consulting who will discuss their experiences, good and bad (!) and some of the difficulties faced when trying to effect change at the cultural level. We will run some small group exercises to demonstrate the processes of change and generate discussion about the cognitive biases at work when we are deciding what is “normal” at work versus what is required for optimum performance (clue: these are not the same!)
Panel Biographies
Dr Nancy Doyle is the founder of Genius Within, a social enterprise dedicated to the full inclusion of neurodiverse people at work. Nancy also co-founded the Centre for Neurodiversity Research at Work. Nancy’s work and research involves assessment coaching and training support for employees and those who are long term unemployed or incarcerated, as well as organizational consulting for organisations wanting to take a proactive approach to neuroinclusion. In recent years, Nancy’s work was featured in the worldwide, award-winning series Employable Me, and has been recognized by the BPS for her role influencing the development of neuroinclusive policy in the UK Department for Work and Pensions, Ministry of Justice and the International Labor Organization. Nancy has ADHD and both the Research Centre and Genius Within a majority disability/neurodivergent staffed and led.
Georgina Wong MSc CPsychol (GW associate) is an occupational psychologist with 18 years’ experience in assessment and selection, training, disability, vocational and cognitive assessment and rehabilitation, and health and wellbeing at work policy making. She has diverse experience in the workplace across various industries in the private, public and third sectors.
She is committed to enabling employers develop healthy, safe, inclusive, ethical and sustainable workplaces that in turn benefits society and the wider world. Over the last 10 years, Georgina has supported hundreds of neurodiverse and disabled adults to identify suitable employment and establish appropriate support in the workplace. More recently, she has been involved in helping employers achieve awareness and inclusion of hidden disabilities at the organisation level.
Georgina is a chartered psychologist (occupational) with an MSc from Goldsmith’s College, University of London. She is a registered practitioner psychologist with the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) and is listed on the BPS Register of Qualifications in Test Use. In 2020, Georgina completed her Expert Witness Training Certification through Bond Solon & Cardiff University.
Uzma Waseem MSc (Prof Doc student and GW employee) is a Business Psychologist experienced in delivering evidence-based diagnostics and solutions in people development domains. She is skilled in leadership and team development, psychometric assessment, and executive coaching. Uzma has a particular interest in creating systemically inclusive work environments suited to all neurodiverse profiles. Her recent focus has been on research and development in inclusive psychometric design principles, employee onboarding and job design, and organisational awareness at the individual and group level.
Interventions to enhance the sustainability of careers in times of transition – what we can learn from research
Antwerp Management School
Title - Interventions to enhance the sustainability of careers in times of transition – what we can learn from research
Abstract - Careers are no longer regarded as a linear sequence of predictable experiences over time, taking place within a stable context. Individual agency is seen as a key element of contemporary careers, which brings along opportunities - but also many challenges - for workers to create their own career path in line with their interests, needs and talents. Yet, the latter cannot be realized without considering the context in which careers unfold, i.e., the labor market and the broader socio-economic environment, but also individuals’ private life context. It is this interplay between individual and contextual factors that will affect the sustainability of a career over time. These dynamics becomes especially clear when considering workers making major (voluntary or involuntary) career transitions.
In this panel, we will organize a lively debate on what a sustainable career means for workers making major career transitions during which career sustainability might become at risk, i.e. labor market entrants, older workers, immigrants, and unemployed. We have four panelists sharing key insights from their research on this topic in terms of what’s needed for enhancing the sustainability of a career of workers undergoing major career transitions, what are pertinent research questions, and what this means for practical interventions by counsellors, organizations, policy makers, and other important stakeholders.
Jos Akkermans will elaborate on the latest insights into transitions from education to work, and how young people can be supported in terms of career sustainability during this significant career transition. Among other things, he will discuss the interventions he developed and tested in the Netherlands (Career SKILLS) and Ireland (Career Leap). Moreover, he will talk about the role of career shocks during the transition from school-to-work, and how they can impact young people’s employability and career success.
Ute Klehe will discuss what we can learn from research on career adaptation and proactivity to understand how even in times of job insecurity, un- and underemployment, and thus in the face of possibly adverse career transition, people can strengthen the sustainability of their careers via different self-regulatory behaviors. This is important as sustainability of careers implies not only the sustainability of any given job (i.e., is it a job that one is willing and able to fulfill for a longer period), but also across jobs in terms of seeking and experiencing growth and learning in preparation for an as-of-yet uncertain future.
Jelena Zikic will elaborate on the careers of skilled migrants and refugees. In seeking to understand the complex life and career transitions of migrants and refugees, she will question and explore new meanings related to sustainable career dimensions and its outcomes. Specifically, as these global careerists actively navigate major career interruptions and batter related career challenges, what role does continuity across time and social spaces play for them? What quality do health, happiness, and productivity as the three core indicators of a sustainable career have in dynamic migrant careers?
Beatrice Van der Heijden will discuss how life-span theories offer relevant theoretical perspectives to further our understanding of sustainable careers when workers get older. In particular, these theories may help to explain how, due to age-related changes in the perception of time (i.e., a changing future time perspective), an individual’s goals change over the life-span. Relating these to the role of important stakeholders, more light will be shed on fruitful avenues for future research in this domain as well as on recommendations for organizational interventions to protect, and preferably further enhance the career sustainability until workers’ retirement age.
The panel will be moderated by Ans De Vos. Panelists will briefly pitch their major insights, which will be followed by an interactive discussion with the public.
Panel Biographies
Ans De Vos is Full Professor at Antwerp Management School, where she holds the SD Worx Chair on Sustainable Careers. She is also Professor at the University of Antwerp. Her research focuses on careers from an individual and organizational perspective, with special interest in the topics of sustainable careers and employability. She has published in academic journals including Academy of Management Review, Academy of Management Annals, Human Resource Management, and Journal of Vocational Behavior. She is currently associate editor for the European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology and serves on the board of several other academic journals. She actively stives to translate her research into practice, through her teaching, her work with organizations, and her role as expert advising the Flemish government on lifelong learning and the recovery of the labor market after the pandemic.
Jos Akkermans is an Associate Professor of Careers and Organizational Behavior at Vrije Universiteit (VU) Amsterdam, the Netherlands. His research focuses on three inter-related themes: sustainable careers, employability, and career shocks. Jos is an Associate Editor for the Journal of Vocational Behavior and the 2021-2022 Division Chair of the Academy of Management Careers Division. His work has been published in a range of journals including Journal of Vocational Behavior, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, and Human Resource Management. Jos has been guest editor for several recent special issues on sustainable careers (JVB), career shocks (CDI), school-to-work transitions (JCD), and an upcoming special issue on employability (EJWOP). He also actively strives to connect his research to practice, for example through the CareerSKILLS and Career LEAP interventions that he developed to support young adults during the transition from education to work.
Beatrice van der Heijden is Full Professor of Strategic HRM at the Radboud University, Institute for Management Research, Nijmegen, the Netherlands, and Head of the Department Strategic HRM. Moreover, she is affiliated with the Open University of the Netherlands; Ghent University, Belgium; Hubei University, Wuhan, China; and Kingston University, London, UK. Her main research areas are: sustainable careers, employability, and aging at work. Van der Heijden is Associate Editor for the European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology and Co-Editor for the German Journal of Human Resource Management. She has published, among others, in Academy of Management Annals, Personnel Psychology, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, Journal of Vocational Behavior, HRM, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, and Career Development International. Next to her scholarly work, Van der Heijden is actively engaged in valorisation of knowledge for the broader society.
Ute-Christine Klehe chairs the team of Work and Organizational Psychology at Justus-Liebig-University Giessen (Germany). A graduate from the Universities of Toronto (Canada) and Marburg (Germany), she has worked in Switzerland (University of Zurich) and the Netherlands (University of Amsterdam). Her research addresses antecedents, processes, and consequences of career-related self-management during difficult career transitions (unemployment, migration, …), as well as candidate self-presentation during personnel selection, and has appeared in outlets such as the Journal of Applied Psychology, Personnel Psychology, the Journal of Organizational Behavior, and the Journal of Vocational Behavior. She currently serves as action editor for the Journal of Organizational Behavior.
Jelena Zikic, PhD (University of Toronto, Rotman School of Management) is an Associate Professor and Graduate Program Director at York University, School of Human Resource Management. Her program or research and international expertise centers on career transitions of diverse populations (e.g., unemployed, entrepreneurs, baby boomers, migrants) stress and coping. Currently she is studying labour market integration of foreign professionals and cross-cultural mentoring relationships as a resource for coping with unemployment. Dr. Zikic has significant international background and experience. Her work appeared in journals such as Journal of Organizational Behavior, Human Relations, International Journal of HRM, Human Resource Management Journal, Journal of Managerial Psychology, and Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology among others. Recently her work was featured in the media, such as Globe and Mail newspaper, Harvard Business Review, and CTV news.
Benefits and challenges of collaboration between psychology and economics
ETH Zurich and University of Lausanne
Title - Benefits and challenges of collaboration between psychology and economics
Abstract - Influencing policy through research evidence is a general challenge, which other social disciplines, especially economics, seem to be more successful at than work and organizational psychology. Collaborating with economists can help in this respect, but can also bring many other advantages, for instance by bridging micro and macro perspectives on the quality of working life. The chairs will convene a panel of psychologists and economists to discuss their experience of working with the respective other field and to derive recommendations for enhancing such collaborations. First, the panellists will discuss among themselves about their motivation for collaboration (policy impact, research methods, multi-level research, etc.), success factors, and personal lessons learnt. In the second part, all participants will engage in a discussion of the benefits and challenges of such collaborations at roundtable conversations moderated by the panellists. The symposium will close with a plenary discussion on recommendations for intensifying the collaboration between psychology and economics.
Panelists (*still to be confirmed): Maria Cubel (University of Bath), Kevin Daniels (University of East Anglia), Ekkehard Ernst (ILO), *Anke Plagnol (City, University of London), Janka Stoker (University of Groningen)
Biographies
Gudela Grote (ETH Zürich) has been full Professor of Work and Organizational Psychology at the Department of Management, Technology, and Economics since 2000. Before she was Assistant Professor (since 1992) and Associate Professor (since 1997) at the ETH Zurich. Gudela Grote studied psychology at the University of Marburg and at the Technical University in Berlin. She received her doctorate at the Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, USA, in 1987. Since 1988 she has continued her research at the ETH Zurich. She has held visiting positions at the University of Sheffield, Birkbeck University of London, Boston University, NASA Ames, University of Western Australia, and MIT. The main objective of her research is to provide psychologically based concepts and methods for integrative job and organizational design, taking into consideration the changing technological, economic and societal demands and opportunities. A special interest in her research are the increasing flexibility and virtuality of work and their consequences for the individual and organizational management of uncertainty. Application fields for Prof. Grote's research are e.g teamwork and standardization in high-risk systems, effects of new technologies on work processes, and the management of the employment relationship.
Prof. Grote is associate editor of the journal Safety Science and member of the editorial board of several other journals. She has published widely on topics in organizational behavior, human factors, human resource management, and safety management. She has worked with companies such as the Swiss Railways and Swiss Re and with public organizations, especially regulatory agencies. Gudela Grote has been Head of the Department of Management, Technology, and Economics at ETH Zürich and President of the European Association of Work and Organizational Psychology. She is a Fellow of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology and member of the Swiss National Research Council. Together with Prof. Bruno Staffelbach from the University of Lucerne she publishes biennially the "Schweizer HR-Barometer", a representative survey of the working situation and employment relationship of employees in Switzerland. Since 2020, she is member of the Scientific Advisory Board of the German Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
Rafael Lalive (University of Lausanne) is a professor of Economics at the Faculty of Business and Economics of University of Lausanne. His research is both academic and applied. He works on questions related to labor market policy and the effects of public policies on individual behavior (unemployment insurance, etc.); family policy where his research investigates the effects of family policies on labor market participation, fertility, and behavioral outcomes of children; and in the area of Energy consumption and transportation: where he has conducted a range of evaluation studies (both micro and macro level studies) and set-up field experiments addressing issues in energy consumption and transportation. He teaches empirical methods for economics and management and is managing co-editor of the Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics.
Interventions at work: how much difference can work psychologists ever make and how can we most effectively make a difference?
Queen Mary, University of London
Title - Interventions at work: how much difference can work psychologists ever make and how can we most effectively make a difference?
Abstract - The purpose of this Town Hall session is to stimulate in-depth and lively discussion amongst both academic and practitioner participants of several key issues about the scope and purpose of work psychology interventions particularly in light of people issues – such as discrimination and mental health – currently facing organizations.
The session, which will be facilitated by Rob Briner, will start with a very short (less than 5 minutes) presentation of the key propositions described in the abstract. Next, participants will be asked to consider their answers to number of specific questions aimed at challenging and exploring the scope of work psychology interventions and the implications of this analysis for the future design of interventions and intervention research.
Many of the most pressing people issues currently faced by organizations are simply reflections of fundamental problems in wider society: Discrimination, systemic racism, poor mental health, skills gaps, life-long career development, meaningful work, and so on. Organizations, and the work psychologists employed to help them, will therefore often find it difficult to make much practically significant difference to important outcomes. For example, the strongest influences on mental health are factors such as socioeconomic status and personality, hence even the most effective workplace interventions can only ever have quite small impacts on mental health. Similarly, the development of prejudice and racism occurs historically, developmentally and structurally and workplace interventions such as training or awareness conducted are likely to have mostly negligible effects.
This does not mean we should not even try to intervene but, rather, having a good understanding of the most important influences on the outcomes we are trying to shift will help us improve our interventions in several ways.
First, we need to have a good understanding of the scientific evidence from outside work psychology and psychology in general about the outcomes we are trying to influence. Having such an understanding will help us develop realistic expectations of what, in principle, our interventions can achieve and therefore also evaluate them more effectively. Integrating science and practice means taking account of all the science from all disciplines that can help explain and predict the outcomes we are aiming to change. In the case of mental health, this would mean examining evidence from fields such as epidemiology, psychiatry, and sociology.
Second, understanding wider and stronger influences on outcomes should help us better design and target our interventions. Some behaviours may for some individuals be strongly shaped by socioeconomic status, for example, and although we may try to change such behaviours through attempting to develop the person or change their work environment this will be difficult to do without understanding the real origins and causes of such behaviours.
Most work psychology interventions (with some notable but little relatively little-used exceptions such as job redesign) tend to focus on the individual level. For example, under-represented groups may be offered leadership development to help them progress vertically through the organization. However, if the main causes of this under-representation are the systems and structures within the organization which themselves are replications of external systems and structures in wider society then individual-level interventions such as leadership development are likely, by themselves, to make very little difference. A third way in which a better understanding of these wider influences will improve out interventions is that such an understanding will enable us to better identify other system level interventions that also need to be put in place at the same time. A current example of this multi-level approach is that although it seems to be widely acknowledged that unconscious bias training for individuals does little in itself to change individual attitudes or organizational outcomes it may have some value as part of part of a broader range of actions and interventions.
Acknowledging the limitations of our interventions and developing a broader understanding of the often strong influences on workplace behaviour from outside the workplace will enhance rather than diminish the role of work psychology practice.
Biography
Rob Briner is Professor of Organizational Psychology at Queen Mary, University of London and also co-founder and Scientific Director of the Center for Evidence-Based Management. His research has focused on several topics including well-being, emotions, stress, ethnicity, the psychological contract, absence from work, motivation, work-nonwork and everyday work behaviour. Beyond academic research Rob helps practitioners and organizations make better use of evidence, including research evidence, in decision-making as well as encouraging academics to make research more accessible. He has written for and presented to practitioners on many aspects of HR and organizational psychology and is now involved in many initiatives aimed at developing and promoting evidence-based practice.
He has received several awards for his work in this area including the British Psychological Society Division of Occupational Psychology Academic Contribution to Practice Award in 2014 and topped HR Magazine’s Most Influential Thinker list in 2016.
What does integrating science and practice really mean and how can it most effectively be accomplished?
Queen Mary, University of London
Title - What does integrating science and practice really mean and how can it most effectively be accomplished
Abstract - The purpose of this Town Hall session is to stimulate critical thinking and discussion for both practitioners and academics of the practical meaning of integrating science and practice and how we can do it better. Although there is broad agreement that it is a good idea to integrate science and practice there is little agreement about what it means and how it can be done.
The session, which will be facilitated by Rob Briner, will ask participants to consider a series of questions. Building upon the responses, the facilitator will then share some additional possible ways of answering the question. The questions which will be addressed include:
- What does it mean to “integrate science and practice”?
- What existing frameworks exist for doing this?
- To what extent can the discipline of work psychology be described as one which successfully does this?
- Why else do we need to integrate apart from science and practice?
- How can we start to assess the extent to which we are integrating science and practice both on specific projects but also within the discipline as a whole?
The theme of this conference – integrating science and practice - is one that has been repeated throughout the history of work psychology and indeed the history of most professions. The underlying logic is that neither practice nor science on its own is enough to provide a sound basis for intervention and, rather, we need to somehow integrate the two.
However, it is now clear that repeated exhortations to “integrate science and practice” has not been particularly effective. There are many reasons for this but perhaps the most important is that it is not clear what it means and therefore it does not provide a sound basis for taking action and monitoring progress. What does integrating science and practice mean? How do you actually do it? How would we know whether or not and the extent to which we were doing it?
In this presentation I will consider different ways of thinking about what integrating science and practice means and discuss how this is viewed from an evidence-based practice perspective. I will also describe some of the practical steps that work psychologists can take to integrate science and practice can be integrated, why we need to integrate other sources of information, and how we can and why we must measure or assess the extent to which we are integrating science and practice.
Biography
Rob Briner is Professor of Organizational Psychology at Queen Mary, University of London and also co-founder and Scientific Director of the Center for Evidence-Based Management. His research has focused on several topics including well-being, emotions, stress, ethnicity, the psychological contract, absence from work, motivation, work-nonwork and everyday work behaviour.
Beyond academic research Rob helps practitioners and organizations make better use of evidence, including research evidence, in decision-making as well as encouraging academics to make research more accessible. He has written for and presented to practitioners on many aspects of HR and organizational psychology and is now involved in many initiatives aimed at developing and promoting evidence-based practice.
He has received several awards for his work in this area including the British Psychological Society Division of Occupational Psychology Academic Contribution to Practice Award in 2014 and topped HR Magazine’s Most Influential Thinker list in 2016.
Science & Practice Work Together
Title - Science & Practice Work Together
Abstract - Co-operation between research, teaching, application of knowledge to practice, evaluation and review are the lifeblood of Work and Organizational Psychology. However, those representing these fundamental aspects of our profession (i.e., research, teaching and application to practice) are often found to be working in separate contexts, thereby, missing the opportunity of synergistically co-creating further knowledge. Opportunities are therefore missed to learn from practice, more broadly disseminate knowledge and to promote application to policymakers and the broader public. This stream highlights the value of co-operation between scientists and practitioners by providing a series of focused symposia describing the co-creation of knowledge and an interactive debate exploring innovative ways to continue such co-operative activities.
Three sessions will bring together contemporary practitioner and scientific voices in active debate between presenters and the audience generating ideas and activities to improve co-operation. A contemporary and innovative process known as a “Bar Camp” will be used to encourage presentation from expert speakers (working as a scientist / practitioner pairing), co-creation, interaction, and discussion between researchers and practitioners. Each interactive debate will end with a plenary session reviewing and summarising outcomes. A final discussion session will end the stream exploring learning outcomes.
Symposium 1 – A revolution in participant feedback led by Dr Colin Roth (BlackBox-Open, Germany, Editor InPractice) and Dr Roman Soucek (School of Business, University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany).
In this session we will explore new ways of performance management and feedback in organizations. The term performance management refers to organizational interventions or activities aiming at improving individual, group, or organizational performance, for example by using goal setting, feedback, and reward systems. Extensive research in the field over many decades, shifts in workplace designs and the digital transformation in organizations have led to innovative techniques such as multi-source feedback, team-based feedback, and instant feedback on a day-to-day level. We will also take a closer look into the question on how individual or team outcomes of feedback interventions can be linked to firm level performance.
Symposium 2 – The digital, agile, and flexible workplace – led by Joachim Hasebrook (Germany) and Dr Carolyn Axtell (Institute of Work Psychology, the University of Sheffield, UK).
In this session, we would like to explore the transformation of organizations with a rigid structure into agile networked organizations, and the associated positive and negative changes. Specifically, we will present learnings from several interventions across several sectors that highlight the need for considering different levels within the organization (the organizational, team and individual level) and the importance of active co-creation in the transformation process. We will also highlight some of the major pitfalls of these interventions and, together, we would like to figure out how research can support practitioners in their work with organizations and how to manage the digital transformation.
Symposium 3 – The agile transformation and the dark side of leadership: Implications for research and practice led by Dr Diana Rus (Creative Peas, The Netherlands, Editor InPractice) and Prof. Barbara Wisse (The Netherlands).
In this session, we would like to explore the potential impact of the move towards more “agile networked” organizations on leader ethical versus unethical behaviour. Specifically, we argue that a major shift from more stable, top-down, hierarchical organizational forms to more flexible and agile workplaces will result in leader (fear of) power loss. We will present recent research showing that leader fear of power loss leads to more unethical behaviour (i.e., self-serving behaviour, abusive supervision, resource hoarding), and that this effect is stronger in organizations with more competitive climates. We would like to discuss with the audience how these effects could potentially be mitigated as well as create a shared understanding of how research can support practitioners implementing large-scale organizational transformations.
Final discussion session - our learning about Science and Practice working together – expert presenters and facilitators (including Helen Baron, Dr Angela Carter, Ingrid Covington) will lead a discussion exploring learning and co-creation of work and organizational psychology knowledge and practice.
An introduction to the activities of the EAWOP Impact Incubator
Session 1: Chair Prof Rosalind Searle
EAWOP Director and University of Glasgow Adam Smith Business School
Title - What is the impact incubator?
Abstract - Who we are and what we are doing
Session 2: Chair Prof Jo Silvester
Loughborough University, School of Business and Economics
Title - Join up to recovery post pandemic
Abstract - A series of flash talks drawing on some of the work that has been done by work psychology in the pandemic followed by Q&A.
Professor Kevin Daniels (University of East Anglia Norwich Business School ) – how did organisations’ approaches to employee health and wellbeing change and what were the lesson learnt
Dr. Helen Fitzhugh (University of East Anglia Norwich Business School ) – focuses on new ways of working and their impact on wellbeing and performance
William Phillips & Michael Whitmore (Rand Europe) – workplace psychosocial stressors – the before and during impact
Dr Roberta Fida (University of East Anglia Norwich Business School ) & Dr. Marinella Paciello (Uninettuno Telematic International University) – Not so confident after all? Understanding impact of stress on self-efficacy
Prof. Abigail Marks (Newcastle University Business School) – the impact of home working.
Session 3: Chair Prof Rosalind Searle
EAWOP Director and University of Glasgow Adam Smith Business School
Title - Making an Impact
Abstract - The panel will share their experience of making an impact on organisations and policy.
Prof. Karina Nielsen (Sheffield University Management School) – World Health Organisation.
Prof. José Peiró (University of Valencia) – Youth and other incubators.
Dr. Ioannis Nikolaou (Athens University of Economics and Business) – New ways to approach unemployment crisis.
Prof Jo Silvester (Loughborough University, School of Business and Economics) – Politics
Prof Stuart Carr (Massey University New Zealand) – United Nations.
Session 4: Chair Prof Jo Silvester
Loughborough University, School of Business and Economics
Title - Working with Organisational Psychology
Abstract - Policy maker perspectives
Douglas Bilton (Assistant Director, Standards and Policy) – Professional Standards Authority
Chris Adams (Strategy Manager) - Edinburgh City Council
Session 5: Chair Prof Rosalind Searle
EAWOP Director and University of Glasgow Adam Smith Business School
Title - Next steps and getting involved
Abstract - In this World Café session the next steps for the incubator will be considered and using the world café method we will add further insights from those attending.
Meet the Editors: Get your Burning Questions about Publishing and Reviewing Answered
Dublin City University and Ghent University
Title - Meet the Editors: Get your Burning Questions about Publishing and Reviewing Answered
Abstract - Have you ever wondered what makes a good research article? Or how to get your work published in top outlets in the field? What factors should you consider when choosing a journal? The aim of this roundtable is for participants to get the unique opportunity to meet and hear from editors of some of the well-established journals in the field of Work and Organizational Psychology about (a) expectations of editors for potentially publishable papers; (b) the journal submission process; and (c) the journal review process.
Discussion points will include:
- Goals and objectives. What type of papers is the journal looking for?
- Types of papers. Does the journal focus on empirical papers or theory pieces? Development of measures? Intervention studies? How about contributions from practitioners?
- Characteristics of an “ideal” paper. Methods, including laboratory versus field methodology, theoretical and practical contributions. Is the journal open to different epistemologies and methods? How is qualitative research treated and are there experts to handle these submissions?
- Submission “flow” issues. How many papers are submitted and accepted annually?
- Review process. How many reviewers? How long is the typical review process? When a paper is accepted, how long does it take until it is published?
- What can reviewers do? What characterizes a helpful review to editor and author?
- Diversity and inclusion. What efforts are taken to make the journal more diverse and inclusive in terms of authors, reviewers, editorial boards
Each editor will provide a 3 to 5-minute summary of their journal, followed by Q&A in order to engage the audience. After Q&A, we will have breakout groups to ask more specific questions, time permitting. This is a session where everyone will feel comfortable and “safe” to ask what they have always wanted to know about the journal submission process.
The session will be chaired and facilitated by Janine Bosak, Consulting Editor of the Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology (JOOP) and editorial board member for the Journal of Personnel Psychology and the Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance, and Bart Wille, editorial board member of the Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Journal of Counseling Psychology, the International Journal of Selection and Assessment and the International Journal of Testing.
Editor Panel Participants
John Antonakis - University of Lausanne, Switzerland
Editor: The Leadership Quarterly
Sharon Clarke – University of Manchester, UK
Incoming Editor: Journal of Occupational Health Psychology
Matt Cronin - George Mason University, USA
Co-Editor: Organizational Psychology Review
Lillian T. Eby - University of Georgia, USA
Editor: Journal of Applied Psychology
Ute Klehe - University of Mannheim, Germany
Associate Editor: Journal of Organizational Behavior
Lisa Schurer Lambert – Oklahoma State University, USA
Co-Editor: Organizational Research Methods
Ioannis Nikolaou – Athens University of Economics and Business, Greece
Editor: International Journal of Selection and Assessment
Sandra Ohly - University of Kassel, Germany
Editor: European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology
Floor Rink – University of Groningen, The Netherlands
Associate Editor: Academy of Management Journal
Steven Rogelberg - University of North Carolina-Charlotte, USA
Editor: Journal of Business and Psychology
Donald M. Truxillo – University of Limerick, Ireland
Editorial Board Member: Journal of Management
Build Back Better: Enhancing Work Opportunities and the Workplace in a Post-Pandemic World
Claremont Graduate University
Title - Build Back Better: Enhancing Work Opportunities and the Workplace in a Post-Pandemic World
The current pandemic crisis is bringing big changes in how people work and live, to name a few: companies are selling their real estate, people are moving out of urban areas and into ‘zoom’ towns, and remote work is providing opportunities for a global workforce. What will the world look like post-pandemic? How will the pandemic impact work opportunities, the workplace, and employee experience and expectations? How can we take advantage of the sweeping social and societal changes triggered by the pandemic to Build Back Better? How can we ensure great work opportunities and fair wages for groups that have been most severely affected by the pandemic
In this session, five researchers will discuss how the pandemic has affected worker experience and engagement, demands on managers, employment and career opportunities for two groups (women and youth) who have been specially impacted by the pandemic, and the ability of employees to earn a living wage. The tone of this session will be optimistic and positive. The five presenters will share data and research findings that point to both challenges and opportunities, and also provide recommendations for how researchers and practitioners around the world can help ensure that we Build Back Better.
The five experts who will be presenting bring diverse perspectives and experiences to this topic. They live and work in different countries. Each has been examining the impact and lasting consequences of the pandemic from a different angle. Some have been exploring broad topics and global trends. Others are focused on special populations in their local countries, although their findings are likely to generalize to other countries and other groups of workers. Collectively, the researchers will illustrate the wide range of ways that work and organizational psychologists are shedding light on important work and workplace trends and are helping ensure that organizations and society Build Back Better.
Biographies
Sarah Johnson is VP of Enterprise Surveys at Perceptyx. She has more than 30 years of experience in organization surveys and people analytics, both as an external and internal consultant. Sarah specializes in employee experience and engagement, organizational effectiveness and human resources analytics. She advises senior leaders at Fortune 500 firms around the world. She has a BA from Purdue University, and MA and PhD in Industrial/Organizational Psychology from The Ohio State University. Sarah’s research focuses on how the global COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the experience of work for all employees, whether working on-site or working remotely. Survey research conducted by Sarah and her colleagues continuously during the pandemic revealed data patterns previously unseen in organizations, which hint at potential repercussions. While employee engagement improved in the early months of the pandemic, many organizations have returned to pre-pandemic levels, and reliable demographic patterns in results, such as highest engagement for the newest employees, have dissipated. Sarah will discuss how organizations can Build Back Better in light of what we are learning about employee experience and concerns.
Christine Ipsen, PhD, is Associate Professor and head of the Implementation and Performance Management group at DTU Management at the Technical University of Denmark (DTU). She has led a number of research projects in collaboration with industry focusing on sustainable work and management, such as how to safeguard both employee wellbeing and performance and how companies can implement preventive changes. Since 2015, her research has focused on distance work. In March, she initiated an international survey of experiences of work from home (WFH). Her current research projects focus on managers who are now leading teams working remotely or in hybrid setting. There has been a great deal of research and strong focus on employees and how to safeguard their wellbeing, however, there has been much less focus on how the pandemic has impacted managers. Managers have borne considerable responsibility for both employee wellbeing and (re)design of their organizations and processes to ensure both organizational performance and health in tandem. In her presentation, Christine will share some of the results from the Covid-19 surveys she has conducted.
Tammy D. Allen is Distinguished University Professor at the University of South Florida in Tampa, Florida. Her research interests include work-family issues, career development, remote work, and occupational health. During the pandemic, she has been investigating the impact of the pandemic on women, remote work practices, and employee wellbeing. This work has been featured in the popular press and shared with policymakers in organizations and the government. During the session she will share findings from this research and implications for the future of work.
Belgin Okay-Somerville is a Lecturer in Human Resource Management at the Adam Smith Business School, University of Glasgow (Scotland). Belgin’s research focuses on young people’s labour market entry (i.e., school-to-work transitions, employability and job search) and experience of work (e.g., underemployment, skill utilisation, work-related wellbeing and career development). She was one of the organisers of the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) and EAWOP Small Group Meeting on Young People’s Work, Employment and Careers and the ESRC Festival of Social Science Digital Exhibition displaying Images of Youth Employment. She was recently a guest editor on EAWOP In Practice Special Issue on Youth Employment. Belgin is leading the youth employment strand of the EAWOP Impact Incubator. Belgin will provide an overview of how the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted young people’s employment and career opportunities. She will then discuss findings from a City of Glasgow empirical study on university-to-work transitions at the height of the pandemic and consider policy and practice implications for improving young people’s career development.
Dr. Ishbel McWha-Hermann is a lecturer at the University of Edinburgh Business School. She studies social justice at work, particularly for marginalized and vulnerable workers. Working internationally, she has advocated for the role of work and organizational psychology in addressing global grand challenges, such as poverty reduction, through contributing to the United Nations’ Agenda for Sustainable Development. Ishbel leads the decent work strand of the EAWOP Impact Incubator, is a SIOP representative to the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), and sits on the British Psychological Society’s Expert Reference Group on “poverty to flourishing.” Ishbel will talk about the importance of decent working conditions for building back better, in particular focusing on the living wage and the work currently being done by a team of work and organizational psychologists around the globe. COVID-19 has reinforced and widened existing inequalities in society and at work. Ishbel will highlight how a psychological understanding of the living wage is crucial for addressing these inequalities.
M. Gloria González-Morales, PhD is an associate professor of psychology at Claremont Graduate University. She is the chair of the Conferences Sub-Committee at the Alliance for Organizational Psychology (https://alliancefororganizationalpsychology.com/). Her research has been funded with scholarships and grants, including a prestigious Fulbright scholarship and funding from the Canadian Foundation for Innovation. Her studies involve the disciplines of occupational health psychology and positive organizational psychology that focus on stress, work-life issues, victimization, incivility and civility, and positive organizational interventions to enhance well-being and performance. She is associate editor of Work & Stress Journal, and her research has been published in some of the world’s top-ranked psychology outlets such as Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Work & Stress, and Journal of Organizational Behavior.
Essential Competencies for Work and Organizational Psychologists’ International/Global Engagements
Title - Essential Competencies for Work and Organizational Psychologists’ International/Global Engagements
Abstract - WOP professionals are initiating, leading, and supporting global work activities, both in person and virtually. WOP professionals must be prepared for these unique work contexts (i.e., foreign, global, and virtual). An expert panel of practitioners and academics will discuss essential competencies for successfully navigating administrative, political, interpersonal, and contextual factors.
In today’s global environment, Work and Organizational psychologists (WOP) are not only finding themselves electronically or virtually managing people scattered around the globe and supporting a multicultural workforce from their headquarters, but they too are sojourning or being assigned to locations away from their home country. Scholarship and practice, however, are no longer at an arms-length, but instead they are intimately intertwined with colleagues in those other countries, whether in face-to-face (physical) connection or virtual connection. Often, employee professional development programs are being developed in one country and implemented in other countries. Cross-cultural negotiations are occurring between parties from two different companies, as well as between parties from within the same company, but located in different parts of the world. International engagements and collaborations are becoming more commonplace. For example, academics from different countries might coordinate student and faculty exchanges, short-term faculty-led study abroad hosted by another university or collaborate on scholarly research in different countries to understand cross-cultural measurement invariance and/or differences. An WOP practitioner (from one country) might be responsible for assessing team climate in various locations around the world or amongst employees working on the same team for a specific product line, but they are situated in different countries. A practitioner might also be sent abroad to spearhead the establishment of an office(s) in new countries.
Despite the increasing need for cross-culturally competent WOP professionals skilled in and capable of navigating various contextual factors that are often quite nuanced, few WOP programs prepare students for international engagements and cross-national collaborations. Becoming globally-minded (Holt & Seki, 2012) and competent in navigating administrative, political, interpersonal, and contextual factors, however, rarely develops quickly for people who have seldom if ever travelled outside their country or interacted with people from different countries. It takes education and experience to develop an understanding of one’s own biases (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006) in order to effectively work around or through them to avoid pitfalls and to be successful across a variety of different cultural contexts. It is about challenging oneself and stretching oneself to think differently about a situation and avoiding falling into one’s default ways of behaving. Indeed, the advantages of developing cross-cultural competencies in the globalized world of business are smoother intercultural interactions, better directed processes for recruitment, selection, training, and performance management, as well as a better understanding of cultural nuances to interpret results of employee attitudinal surveys and brokering collaborations.
The Alliance for Organizational Psychology (AOP) is partnering with SIOP’s International Affairs Committee (IAC) through this panel to document best practices and pitfalls when working on international projects or programs. The desired end-state of this session is not only to raise awareness of the complex nature of international engagements and collaborations, but to provide cogent and evidence-based guidance on essential competencies recommended to IO/WOP professionals for successfully navigating the complex web of cross-cultural collaborations in light of the rapidly changing nature of work.
The two main aims of this session, therefore, are:
- to have WOP professionals, academics and practitioners share their experiences and perspectives on competencies necessary for working with people on international engagements and collaborations
- to develop a list of key competencies based on the expert panelists’ recommendations, which will be shared with the AOP, EAWOP and SIOP community through the IAC’s white paper series or other publishing outlets.
We invite the EAWOP community to engage and learn from an expert panel of academics and practitioners how they navigated the “boots on the ground” intercultural challenges that have honed their cross-cultural competencies to achieve their work pursuits. We anticipate hearing how these competencies have helped them engage with colleagues worldwide and move their collaboration agendas forward despite the global pandemic-related travel restrictions that prevented in-person meetings. Thus, unlike other sessions that may focus on graduate programs of studies, portability of theory measurement equivalence, or funding for research collaborations, this session will provide practical guidance on how to actualize a collaboration or engagement by navigating barriers presented by administrative, political, interpersonal, and environmental (e.g., in-person or virtual) or other contextual factors.
Each of the four panelists comes from a different country, thus presenting a unique cultural viewpoint of international collaborations. Amongst the academics, Barbara Kożusznik, and Jose Maria Peiró will speak about international research and teaching collaborations, both in-person and virtually, and negotiating through a “tuning” process of disparate curricula across universities and countries. The practitioners, Drs. Babette Raabe and Anna Erickson, will speak about the challenges of ensuring equivalence, legal and ethical issues in people management, and driving organizational initiatives across borders. All the panelists will present on administrative, political, interpersonal, and contextual factors that supported or constrained their interactions with their international partners. This panel will reveal essential competencies that will serve as a basic toolkit for professionals wishing to embark on international engagements and collaborations or for professionals wanting to hone their skills and understand of some challenges they might face.
Panel Biographies
Anna Erickson, Ph.D., President and founder of Iron Post Leadership, headquartered in USA, helps organizations improve their hiring and talent management processes, work environments, employee engagement, and leadership effectiveness by applying psychological principles and evidence-based practices. She has worked as a consultant for several global consulting firms delivering services to numerous organizations including ABC News, AT&T, CARE, Coloplast, Fiat Chrysler Automotive, Glanbia, Mazda, Nissan, Time Warner, and United Technologies Corporation. She was part of a “startup” team that launched a Swiss telecommunications firm, adapting US processes to fit global culture. She has provided leadership feedback to more than 100 executives across dozens of industries. She has partnered with colleagues around the world to implement processes that are consistent yet adapted to cultural and legal differences across countries. Dr. Erickson is an active member in SIOP, Minnesota Professionals for Psychology Applied to Work, and the American Psychological Association. She is currently chair of SIOP’s Local IO Groups Relations Committee, as well as a committee member of the Alliance for Organizational Psychology, supporting local groups worldwide.
Barbara Kożusznik, Ph.D., is Professor of Work and Organizational Psychology and Director of the School of Management of University of Silesia in Poland. She was nominated for the Professor title by the President of the Polish Republic and was the Vice-Rector for International Cooperation at the University of Silesia at 2005-2011. Prof. Kożusnik serves as a President of the Division 1 of the International Association of Applied Psychology (IAAP) and as a President of the Polish Association of Organizational Psychology (PSPO). She is a member of Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) and the European Association of Work and Organizational Psychologists (EAWOP), a member of the Board of Representatives in Alliance for Organizational Psychology and the representative of Poland in European Network of Organizational Psychology (ENOP). Prof.. Kożusznik is the author of more than 120 publications including 24 books and over 80 articles and invited chapters. She is the Editor of Management and Information Technologies and serves on the editorial board of the Polish Journal of Applied Psychology. She is a member of the Institute Research Board of IDOCAL (Institute for Research in Psychology of Human Resources, Organizational Development and Work Quality of Life), University of Valencia.
José M. Peiró, PhD., is Professor of Work and Organizational Psychology at the University of Valencia, Spain, a senior researcher at the IVIE (Valencian Institute of Economic Research), and a member of the Spanish Academy of Psychology. He has published more than 200 articles in scientific journals and about 30 books and monographs. He was former Associate Editor of the European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology (1995-2001) and serves as member of the Editorial Team of the Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology. Prof. Peiro serves or has served as member of the Editorial Board of several journals, such as (Journal of Management, Work and Stress, Human Relations, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, and more). He has been President of the International Association of Applied Psychology and of the European Association of Work and Organizational Psychology. He is a Fellow of SIOP and co-founder of the Alliance for Organizational Psychology. Prof. Peiró was also a member of the team that developed the EuroPsy certificate of Psychologists (Lunt, Peiró, Poortinga, & Roe, 2014). He has coauthored, with a multidisciplinary team, a monograph on The Socioeconomic Impact of the Digital Economy commissioned by the Spanish Socio-Economic Council (Pérez et al., 2019). He also participated and/or lead a number of projects granted by the European Commission, The European Institute of technology, etc. He has received the Honorary Doctorate from (U. Maastricht, The Netherlands, University Miguel Hernandez, Spain; Methodist Univ. Sao Paulo, Brazil).
Dr. Babette Raabe is an Industrial-Organizational Psychologist and a Global HR Director of Talent Strategy and Strategic Workforce Planning at Air Products and Chemicals Inc., an Industrial Gas company headquartered in the USA. She started her career with Siemens AG, developing and delivering training solutions for virtual leadership and intercultural sensitivity in Munich, Germany. In 2005 she moved to Pittsburgh to integrate an acquisition into Siemens in Learning and Organizational Development, and subsequently held global HR Director positions with PPG Industries, and then Air Products. She now resides in Germany. Dr Raabe has been intimately involved in decisions to deploy executives and high potentials into international assignments in various organizational settings for over 10 years. Her practitioner work has her focused on developing teams and organizations in China, India and the Middle East, and expanding her personal experiences into organizational development and business growth in Saudi Arabia.
Ethical, relevant and rigorous research 5 years after - Implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding (EJWOP, 2017) in the WOP community
ETH Zurich and Claremont Graduate University
Title - Ethical, relevant and rigorous research 5 years after - Implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding (EJWOP, 2017) in the WOP community
In February 2016, 24 scholars in the field of WOP met in Zürich under the auspices of the Alliance for Organizational Psychology to discuss measures to lead WOP out of the global reputation and impact crisis in academia. There was much ambition and commitment in the room, which led to a memorandum of understanding published in the European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology in 2017, listing a wide variety of actions that the WOP community can take at individual and institutional levels. The memorandum was introduced and discussed at a number of Alliance sessions at SIOP, EAWOP, and IAAP.
Now, five years later, it is time to take stock. In a preparatory meeting for this proposal, with most of the original signatories of the memorandum present, an impressive set of activities and successes were reported.
Examples are:
- Journal policies – registered reports, special method checks, reduced pressure on novelty, transparency/open science, more diversity in editorial boards.
- Training – Conference sessions on methods, reviewing, and advocacy.
- Resources – journal papers on methods/impact, methods repositories, collaboration with CARMA, reviewer competencies model.
- Tenure/promotion/funding policies – more emphasis on quality of research, less emphasis on quantity of research/impact factors, staff competencies model.
- Policy impact – changed laws, EAWOP Impact Incubator, improved media relations, workshops with policy makers, collaboration with academic associations.
- Research practice – more (research on) multidisciplinary research, collaboration with economists/engineers/practitioners, intervention research.
- Academic career paths – EAWOP Small Group meeting on mid-career planning, reflection of pressure resulting from increased demands on rigor & relevance.
At the proposed session, we want to move further by reaffirming and updating the memorandum and encouraging a wider community within WOP to participate and carry the work forward.
