|
Article Excerpt
What have we forgotten?
It is remarkable how often concepts described, tested and successfully applied decades ago are presented as novel in contemporary psychological, management or human resource literature. This seems to be particularly true of early psychological work carried out in Britain. We shall examine aspects of the National Institute of Industrial Psychology (NIIP), especially those dating pre-1940, many of which seem to have been forgotten, and relate them to work that seems currently important (or, perhaps, fashionable). The NIIP will therefore be used almost as a case study because of its importance and longevity. We shall then go on to consider why psychology seems to have forgotten some of its past. Shimmin and Wallis (1994) present an excellent account of British occupational psychology since World War Two, and we shall not duplicate that material. Instead, we would like to start with a brief account of the NIIR, the organization that much of the paper will focus on, in order to orient the reader and develop the context for the rest of the paper.
The NIIP was set up as a 'not for profit' organization in 1921 by Charles Myers, probably the most significant figure in British psychology in the early part of the 20th century (Bartlett, 1965; Bunn, 2001b; Lovie, 2001), and Henry Welch, a prominent industrialist. In its constitution, the primary object of the institution was 'To promote and encourage the practical application of the sciences of psychology and physiology to commerce and industry by any means that might be found practicable'. From the beginning, it viewed itself as an organization that brought practical psychology to industry. But more than that, it was a scientific institute dedicated to improving both conditions for people at work and the efficiency of enterprises. And this it did. Perhaps its most exciting and influential period was between the two world wars. When we consider the content of its explorations, we may glimpse some of the excitement of that time and also become aware of work that currently seems unknown or neglected.
There was much interest in being involved with the institute. The NIIP attracted significant figures from both the worlds of commerce and politics. Baldwin, Churchill, the Prince of Wales, the Duke of York and Lord D'Abernon are just some of the prominent people who spoke at, and on behalf of, the NIIP between the First and Second World Wars. Viscount Haldane, the former Chancellor of Great Britain, was president at one time. The political engagement that Anderson, Herriot, and Hodgkinson (2001) advocate as essential for contemporary psychology (but not evident) then definitely existed. As well as these significant individuals, many organizations were keen to be associated with psychology and the National Institute of Industrial Psychology. The first annual report states that donations were received from Rowntree, Cadbury, Debenhams and the Carnegie Trust, amongst others. By 1925 Alfred Nobel Industries, Selfridges and Professor Elton Mayo (who donated 5 [pounds sterling] and three shillings) are listed. By 1930, the Bank of England, Bryant and May, Lyons and Co, Lazard Brothers, the Rockefeller Fund, the Corporation of the City of London, the National Union of Railwaymen, Lloyds Bank, ICI, Standard telephones and Cables, Rolls-Royce, the county borough of West Ham and the Tottenham teachers discussion group (who gave one guinea) had joined the list, together with many others. The list of council members reads like a social and psychological 'who's who' of the time. Our point here is that, whilst inevitably embedded in its historical period, the NIIP was actually astonishingly well known and influential, practically as well as politically.
From its foundation the NIIP had inadequate funding but Myers and Welch decided to go ahead without the funding they needed because they felt the need for its services was so great (Editorial; the early history of the NIIP, 1922). The NIIP was funded by subscription, in the form of either individual contributions (initially 1 [pounds sterling]) or donations from benefactors and, finally, from its consultancy fee income. However, when one examines the accounts it is clear that a major problem was the implicit financial model. For example in 1934, a financial deficit of 1,800 [pounds sterling] was forecast (on a turnover of just under 25,000 [pounds sterling]) and 2,500 [pounds sterling] was projected as having to be taken from the capital of the Balfour Memorial Fund (a reserve of some 10,000 [pounds sterling] at that point, raised some years earlier). This was in large part due to vocational guidance work that lost money. In today's figures, this would roughly be equivalent to an annual loss of around 90,000 [pounds sterling] on a turnover of 1.25 million [pounds sterling]. This was a typical deficit and plainly unsustainable. The tone of the Mansion House speeches that Myers and others gave at fund-raising dinners, while never desperate, became more urgent over the years.
As well as the hand-to-mouth existence of the NIIP for much of its life, there were also other antecedents that presaged its demise. A successful foray into the world of marketing led to significant internal political fallout: Rowntree, the sponsor of the work (and producers of the famous 'Black Magic' chocolate assortment), did not want the NIIP's techniques to be applied to competitors' products. The consequences of this disagreement led to Myer's demotion and the departure of others (Bunn, 2001b; Raphael, 1970). Perhaps as a consequence, the constitution of the NIIP was (unfortunately in our view) altered in 1951 during the directorship of Frisby 'To encourage and develop the science of industrial and occupational psychology'. The 'practical application' had been dropped and 'science' was now king. It was probably about this time that the NIIP began to become, as we see it, anxious and inward looking. It developed an unhelpful introspective and mildly neurotic culture. For example, all internal documents were carefully coded (David Duncan, one of the authors of this paper, was 'D9'. Frisby, the longest serving director, was 'F4'). This was said to be so that those responsible could be internally tracked but not externally credited. The culture moved from engagement to detachment.
We do not need to describe in detail the eventual end of the NIIP in 1977 in cramped offices in a semi-derelict former cigarette factory, Livingstone House, which was then part of the North East London Polytechnic. This is covered in Shimmin and Wallis (1994). It briefly tried to compete with the immensely better resourced and increasingly prestigious universities, on the one hand, and the much more nimble and commercially aware consultancies on the other. It had become too reliant on a single client and was too focused on being 'scientific'. It had lost energy, staff and impetus. The correspondence of this time reveals a tetchy relationship both with the polytechnic where it was now based and, worse, with potential clients. Yet, this was a boom time for organizational consultants and test publishers. Finally, the test collection went to the National Foundation for Educational Research, Spearman's papers to the British Psychological Society and back numbers of Occupational Psychology (which the journal had become) to Krauss reprints of Liechtenstein. Archives went to the London School of Economics (where early NIIP lectures had been given). The bulk of its library has recently arrived at Cranfield University from the Wellcome Institute via a sojourn in a damp underground car park in East London, with some psychology books finding their way to the British Psychological Society.
But yet, as we hope to show, much that has been forgotten of the NIIP's early work is relevant, important and, further, unjustly neglected, with consequences for both psychology and the world of work.
What the NIIP did: The subject matter and content of its work
It is impossible to cover everything that the NIIP did in a short paper. We shall therefore be selective. As many readers would expect, vocational guidance and assessment was of great interest; to quote from the frontispiece of volume 1 of the Journal of the National Institute of Industrial Psychology (1922): 'The application of Science to secure the more efficient guidance of children in taking up their life's work, to determine the best methods of training apprentices and operators, to reduce human wear and tear and to improve the mental and physical health of the industrial and commercial population is work of the highest national importance.' Numerous papers were published in this area; many were developing theory and practice along what one might term 'traditional' lines, examining sets of characteristics and their relation to jobs (Burt, 1922a, 1922b; Keeling, 1926). But the NIIP went beyond that, considering, for example, the importance of temperament in work (Rodger, 1934), the difficulty of assessing personality (Vernon, 1934), compensation for lack of ability (Rodger, 1937) and in all this, the importance of considering vocational tests as servant not master, in other words, balancing evidence and using tests as only one source of data (Myers, 1923b). Thus, the NIIP had a major interest in vocational guidance and much of Burt's early work was in this domain (e.g.1924). As well as applying these techniques, evaluation was carried out; empirical evidence was gathered as to the efficacy of vocational guidance at the NIIP (Myers, 1937a, p. 21). Indeed, the London County Council, which had set up a vocational guidance unit as early as 1913, enthusiastically used these principles (Burt, 1921).
So one of the key areas of work was concerned with vocational guidance but a great deal of other work was also carried out. We shall try to provide a taste of its breadth and indicate a few examples where it presaged contemporary thinking or has, in our view, been unjustly neglected and could contribute to current issues.
For example, what is currently referred to as emotional intelligence (e.g. Goleman 1996, 1998) was actually well known and contained within notions of temperament, mood, emotion and sentiment over 80 years ago (Bevington, 1928; Myers, 1920a, 1931; Smith,...
|
