By Anh-Thu Nguyen

At the 2014 annual Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) conference, the newly inaugurated SIOP president took the stage and opened with good news: "We're number one! We're number one!" I felt a mixture of pride and amusement in that moment, because most people I know, including my friends and family, cannot tell you what industrial-organizational (I-O) psychology is.

That year, the Bureau of Labor Statistics had ranked I-O psychology as the fastest-growing occupation in the United States. Several factors drove that growth: organizations were investing in big data and people analytics; were responding to growing demands around workplace diversity, globalization, and legal compliance; and were increasingly recognizing that employee experience was not only the right thing to do for people, but a smart business decision.

We have all heard similar sets of core values at every firm touting how people are their most important asset. However, it is hard to find someone who would say that they truly believe their organization values their people the most. In practice, that gap can look like ignoring a team that is burning out and asking for help, or prioritizing short-term profits over investing in people for the long term. That is where the increased demand for I-O psychology comes in.

This year will be my first time attending the Association of Change Management Professionals (ACMP) conference, alongside colleagues from Simatree. For years, SIOP was my professional touchstone: concurrent sessions spanning the full range of I-O research and practice, the opportunity to reconnect with former colleagues and professors, and an environment grounded in academic rigor. Choosing ACMP this year was about exposure to something new and making new connections. From what I observed in reviewing the program, ACMP sessions tend to be more practitioner-oriented, focused on applied tools, real-world case studies, and the experience of leading and supporting organizational change.

Applied Science, Different Name

Change management, at its core, grew from the same scientific roots as I-O psychology, applying its underlying theory to organizational transformation. It applies the study of human behavior in organizations to the specific challenge of change.

When you enter an organization and need to understand where it currently stands, an I-O practitioner calls that a needs assessment. In change management, it shows up as a current state assessment. Stakeholder assessments measure motivation, resistance, trust, and cultural alignment, all constructs well-grounded in I-O research.

Many of the frameworks in change management, including Prosci and Kotter, are built upon existing I-O theory. For example, Prosci's ADKAR model maps its five conditions for individual change, awareness, desire, knowledge, ability, and reinforcement (Hiatt, 2006) directly onto established I-O concepts: awareness to sensemaking theory (Weick, 1995), desire to self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000), ability to self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997). Knowing the science behind the frameworks is what allows you to adapt to each client's unique organization and circumstances.

The Translation

What first drew me to I-O psychology was that it sat at the intersection of two things I was looking for: the social psychology side of human behavior that I loved, and a more data-driven, applied way of working with it. I-O psychology was that combination, and management consulting was a natural fit. The transition from academic to applied work came with a new vocabulary, but it did not take long to recognize that the work itself was the same.

What consulting added was the experience of being both practitioner and researcher in the real world, seeing results in real time but outside of a fully controlled environment. You have to be comfortable with ambiguity and finding solutions, and that keeps things interesting. It also means you do not always have the conditions for a comprehensive assessment instrument, and being transparent with clients about that is part of doing the work with integrity.

Sometimes the situation requires assessing with emotional intelligence instead of a calibrated survey. Rooted in social psychology and deployed in I-O psychology in the workplace, emotional intelligence encompasses empathy as one of its core components. In practice, it means reading a room, putting yourself in someone's shoes, and actively listening so that people feel heard and comfortable sharing openly. Tuning in to how people feel in these informal conversations provides qualitative data when a formal survey is not an option.

The Reality of Change

Without trust in an organization, people will be more resistant to change because they do not know what to expect. When people feel like they are always on edge, they cannot relax and let change happen to them. This is what psychological safety means in practice, not a culture initiative or a values statement, but the day-to-day experience of feeling safe enough to engage honestly with uncertainty. When that foundation is missing, no communication plan or training program will compensate for it.

Because change is inevitable, it does not always wait for trust to be established. External forces, whether regulatory, technological, or organizational, frequently drive change on their own timelines regardless of readiness. A new system goes live, a new structure takes effect, a deadline gets met, but none of that is the same as changing a culture. The culture underneath is often unchanged, sometimes more strained than before.

This is why change management installs parameters. Change itself is ever-moving and does not resolve neatly, but the practice of managing it is about bringing order and adaptability to something that will keep happening regardless. We set boundaries, define discrete goals, and establish measurable outcomes not to contain change but to work through it and with it as it unfolds.

Looking Ahead

Sessions like "Remaining Human in the World of Artificial Intelligence: Leading Change with Ethics, Empathy, and Trust," "Decoding Resistance Archetypes: The Psychology of Pushback and How to Lead Through It," and "Human at the Center: Neuroscience-Informed Strategies for Sustainable Digital Change" are the ones I am most curious to explore with my change management colleagues. In a world that is becoming increasingly automated, the human element becomes more essential, not less.

I am looking forward to attending ACMP to gain new perspectives, make new connections, and stay current on how the work is evolving. Understanding what drives people, what affects them, and what helps them adapt is the most effective way to help them navigate inevitable change. That shared social understanding is what connects us, not just as professionals in the field, but as people who are also learning, growing, and curious about what comes next.

References

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. W.H. Freeman.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2014). Occupational Outlook Handbook. U.S. Department of Labor.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268.

Hiatt, J. M. (2006). ADKAR: A Model for Change in Business, Government and our Community. Prosci Learning Center.

Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in Organizations. Sage Publications.