Abstract
This chapter offers responses to the demand for humanitarian work psychology at multiple levels. At the political level, we learn about the knowledge, skills, and abilities required for new diplomacies, for example negotiating between different stakeholder groups in development projects and programs (see also, Saner & Yiu, this volume). At the level of individual dynamics, we hear about innovative applied research on mapping the psychology of corporate social responsibility. At the organizational level, we are introduced to the concept of using psychometric selection to ensure greater access to startup loans, for and by entrepreneurs who wish to develop enterprises in low income settings. At the occupational level, we meet a range of editors from a recent Global Special Issue on Psychology and Poverty Reduction, who are part of Psychology’s own efforts to make more of a contribution in the humanitarian domain. At the community level, we hear about one major corporation’s contribution to health Millennium Development Goals, through the establishment of community-based healthcare facilities, using digital records to enhance and enable higher quality health care services, in rural and remote areas in lower-income settings. Finally at the level of institutions, we are given a concise and informative overview of the United Nations Global Compact, which is a worldwide initiative designed to encourage and motivate multinational organizations and others to pledge their commitment to pro social goals, and to corporate social, global and local responsibility.
Keywords
Corporate Social Responsibility Poverty Reduction International Labour Organization Global Compact Organizational PsychologyPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- Annan, K. A. (2000). We the peoples: The role of the United Nations in the 21st century. New York: UN Department of Public Information.Google Scholar
- Berry, M. O., Reichman, W. & Schein, V. (2008). ‘The United Nations Global Compact needs I/O psychology participation’. The Industrial Psychologist, April, 33–7.Google Scholar
- Ciavarella, M., Buchholtz, A., Riordan, C., Gatewood, R. & Stokes, G. (2003). ‘The Big 5 and venture survival: Is there a linkage?’ Journal of Business Venturing, 19, 465–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Crilly, D., Schneider, S. C. & Zollo, M. (2008). ‘Psychological antecedents to socially responsible behaviour’. European Management Review, 5(3), 175–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Cruse, S. & Carr. S. (2010). ‘Pro-social I-O — Quo Vadis? Corporate social responsibility has gone global: The UN Global Compact’. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 48, 99–104.Google Scholar
- Dalal, A. K., Stone, D. L., Louis, W., Burt, C. & Carr, S. C. (2009). ‘Pro-social I-O — Quo Vadis? I-O joins worldwide initiative: A ‘global special issue’’. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 47, 92–5.Google Scholar
- Economic & Social Research Council (2010). ‘Impact case study: Discrepancies in aid and development workers’ salaries’. Impact Case Studies. Retrieved from http://www.esrc.ac.uk/ESRCInfoCentre/Images/Impact%20case%20study%20discrepancies% 20in%20aid%20and%20development%20workers%20salaries_tcm6-37066.pdf on 27 July 2011.Google Scholar
- Frese, M. (Ed.) (2000). Success and failure of micro-business owners in Africa: A psychological approach. Westport, CN: Quorum Books, Greenwood Publishing.Google Scholar
- IBM Service Corps (2010). ‘Helping people by doing business with them’. Retrieved from http://www.ibm.com/smarterplanet/us/en/healthcare_solutions/article/corpora te_service_corps.html? sa_campaign=message/leaf2/corp/ideas/csc on 27 July 2011.Google Scholar
- Klinger, B. & Carr, S. C. (2011). ‘Pro-social I-O — Quo Vadis? Organizational supply: Enabling capacity in the ‘missing middle’ by expanding roles for psychometric tests’. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 48(3), 97–101.Google Scholar
- Landy, F. J. & Conte, J. M. (2010). Work in the 21st century: An introduction to industrial and organizational psychology. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Maynard, D. C. & Ferdman, B. M. (2008, April; Co-Chair). ‘The marginalized workforce: How I-O Psychology can make a difference’. Roundtable discussion presented at the 23rd Annual Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) Conference, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
- Osicki, M. & Carr, S. C. (2010). ‘Pro-social I-O — Quo Vadis? New diplomacies in corporate social responsibility’. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 48, 111–14.Google Scholar
- Prahalad, C. K. (2010). The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid: Eradicating poverty through profits. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.Google Scholar
- Rauch, A. & Frese, M. (2007). ‘Let’s put the person back into entrepreneurship research: A meta-analysis on the relationship between business owners’ personality traits, business creation, and success’. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 16, 353–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Saner, R. & Carr, S. C. (2010). ‘Pro-social I-O — Quo Vadis? The new diplomacies’. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 47, 121–5.Google Scholar
- Saner, R. & Michalun, M. V. (Eds). (2009). Negotiations between state actors and non-state actors: Case analyses from different parts of the world. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Republic of letters.Google Scholar
- United Nations General Assembly (2010). Keeping the promise: A forward-looking review to promote an agreed action agenda to achieve the Millennium Development Goals by 2015. New York: Report of the Secretary-General.Google Scholar
- Yiu, L. & Saner, R. (2005). Decent work and Poverty Reduction Strategies (PRS): An ILO Advocacy Guidebook. Geneva: ILO.Google Scholar
- Zollo, M. & Carr, S. C. (2010). ‘Pro-social I-O — Quo Vadis? The micro-foundations of responsible management’. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 47, 93–6.Google Scholar