Industrial-organizational psychology focuses on the use of psychosomatic approaches and ideologies to tackle administrative challenges in the workplace (Koppes & Thayer, 2007). The field seeks to address those hitches attributed to human performance and those that influence workers’ performance. Industrial-organizational psychologists utilize psychological assessments and investigation outcomes associated with human aptitudes, inspiration, awareness, and learning to enhance the fit amid the requirements of the workplace and the staff members. Industrial-organizational psychologists are concerned with staff training and recruiting new employees for several reasons (Koppes & Thayer, 2007). As such, recruits frequently require training concerning their roles, workplace rules, events, or services. The article below analyses the legal and ethical concerns, which arise in implementing training and structured versus unstructured interviews in industrial-organizational psychology.
One of the foremost legal concerns of Industrial-organizational psychologists relates to compliance standards. In many countries, psychologists rarely act as instructors (Koppes & Thayer, 2007). Different countries have distinctive standards and rules on who should act as professional trainers. Usually, Industrial-organizational psychologists come up with training requirements, identify employees that should be trained, and assess how an organizational issue is to be addressed through training. However, when an industrial-organizational psychologist acts as a trainer, legal issues may arise based on the country’s laws.
Similarly, when implementing training, ethical concerns may arise. For instance, companies devote much of their resources in training their employees. However, it is argued that a few of the allocated resources are used in determining the effectiveness of the training (Koppes & Thayer, 2007). Given that industrial-organizational psychologists are mandated to oversee such training, they should be blamed for failing to assess with precision what the organizations are benefitting from such investments. Therefore, it is unethical for industrial-organizational psychologists to fail in overseeing the above roles (Ferrell & Fraedrich, 2014).
Also, legal and ethical concerns may arise in the workplace due to the type of interview adopted during the recruitment process. Compared with a structured interview, the unstructured interview may lead to several legal issues. For instance, the unstructured interview may contradict the aims of reverse discrimination leading to heated legal battles. As such, an unstructured interview is prone to prejudice. In the 1960s, workers from minority groups were more expected to say they accepted the civil rights demos if the interviewer was from the minority group rather than the majority group (Koppes & Thayer, 2007).
Ethical concerns may also arise due to the use of unstructured interviews. Unlike the structured interview, in the unstructured interview, candidates are asked different and unique questions. Based on the above illustration, the unstructured interview subjects the candidates to unequal assessment. Therefore, the approach increases the chances of selecting unsuitable candidates. In this regard, it is unethical to use the unstructured interview (Ferrell & Fraedrich, 2014).
For companies that use interviews as a means of recruiting new staff members, a structured interview should be prioritized. In the structured interview, all contenders are given equal chances. As such, the approach utilizes the same queries in the same order. Recent advancements in structured interviews seek to inquire about the contestants’ reactions to specific workplace situations. Therefore, to end the above legal and ethical challenges during staff recruitment structured interviews rather than unstructured interviews should be adopted (Ferrell & Fraedrich, 2014).
References
Ferrell, O., & Fraedrich, J. (2014). Business ethics: ethical decision making and cases. San Francisco: Cengage learning.
Koppes, L. L., & Thayer, P. W. (2007). Historical perspectives in industrial and organizational psychology. Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum.