Originally published: . Volume 12, No. 7. Source pages: 2.
In 1969, more than half a century ago, APA President George Miller challenged psychologists and future generations to “give psychology away." Miller’s vision echoed through the halls of a new, fresh discipline that was in its salad days. Clinical psychologists had flown the coop of medicine and it was a greenfield for innovation and divergent thinking. In that time, applied psychology was steeped in diverse viewpoints. Everyone was aware, at least to some extent, of not only the foundational applied science that we needed, but of all the other specialty areas and their contributions. Ed Timmons was said to have put it this way, “We train them so you can pick them up by the ear and drop them in anywhere and they will make a difference."
Last month I presented a motion at LPA having to do with the IO psychologists helping the state board solve its financial and organizational problems. (I was standing in for Gig Costelloe, Chair of that committee, who was out sick.) Before any real discussion could get off the ground, a council member jumped in with an amendment that neutered the whole idea. He added, “with the approval of the LSBEP.“ While this sounds polite, it completely changes the power dynamics intended in the intervention. By giving the LSBEP a veto, we removed the citizens from their legitimate authority over their own government. Later another council member deleted the IO committee, removing those who have the skill set and perhaps also the motivation to do the job. Both amendments violated key principles in the proper design of organizations, which have been in place for 40 years. Interventions should push the power (along with control, accountability, and ownership) down as far as possible in the hierarchy. When we ignore this principle we can’t engage the resources and talents of those we have available to us, and we enable the problem–solving blind spots and biases that come with hierarchical power. Isn’t it odd that we have a board, and now a professional organization, that feels comfortable prancing its financial problems out in front of the whole state legislature, but can’t effectively engage its own experts? Miller’s vision requires that we use applied psychology, and the meta-cognitive skills set that comes with it, to solve human problems. A sad example is that there is a mental health crisis in the US and it’s getting worse. Something is basically wrong when one person in every five has some sort of mental health difficulty. The same sad condition exists for suicide rates and behavior based chronic disease. And yet, to a large extent, psychology seems to stand helpless. If organized psychology can’t solve a simple problem like helping its own board use the knowledge from its own applied organizational scientists, then how will we ever give psychology away to others?
This article is part of a historical newspaper archive. Read the original issue for its original layout, photographs and graphics.