Interview with Harold Goldstein by I-O newsletter team

Julie Dinh, Alessa Natale, Yuliya Cheban, Shivani Shah, Liz Weglarz, and Dina Fleyshmakher

Although some of us may be familiar with your research, tell us more about your research!

My primary focus is on studying intelligence.  Intelligence is such an important construct that captures the capability of humans to think, integrate, process, solve problems, and gain insights.  It impacts outcomes that we associate as ‘cognitive’ in nature such as problem solving and learning but it also effects outcomes we think of as ‘non-cognitive’ such as leading others, building teams, preparing properly, and understanding the perspectives of others during interpersonal interactions.  For a long time, I/O psychology seemed to move away from studying intelligence likely because of the racial and ethnic group differences that emerge on typical intelligence measures but my colleagues and I felt we needed to refocus on understanding intelligence because of its central importance to human functioning in work organizations.  So for the past 15 years, the primary focus of my research has been on developing an increased understanding of the role of human intelligence in work organizations, studying how it manifests in the work place, and developing measures of the intelligence construct that have reduced contamination and deficiency which we believe is the cause of the group differences observed on these measures.  Another main focus of my research that builds off of what I just described is diversity and how to build organizational systems that are fair to all groups.  In particular we focus on how to create selection and promotion systems that are fair and allow organizations to hire and promote a talented diverse workforce.  I feel that currently an unfortunate legacy of our I/O field will be the discrimination against particular groups that has come from selection and promotion systems that we as a field have helped build and implement in organizations.  I am hoping this research helps contribute to changing this legacy.  Lastly, my research has been shifting focus to understanding how to predict performance using multiple domains of human capability and conceptualizing how they intersect to explain performance outcomes.  This has primarily been spurred by our work in sports where we focus on the interaction of multiple domains of human capability that include intelligence, personality, temperament, and physical.  In this work, we have had the opportunity to interact with other fields such as medical, neuropsychology, and sports psychology to see if an intersection of various approaches can yield a better understanding of predicting human performance.  It has caused us to expand the type of work we do such as incorporating novel stimuli into our assessments as well as leveraging new methods such as eye tracking, neuro measures, and text analysis into our assessments.  Working with these other fields really creates a synergy in trying to understand something as complicated as human capability.  In some ways we like the interdisciplinary name ‘performance psychology’ better than I/O psychology when it comes to truly trying to understand the individual differences that predict human performance.  Working with people from these different fields has been eye opening and I think this intersection of scientific disciplines can lead to real progress in understanding the prediction of human performance.

How has this past year been going for you? What have been some challenges and lessons learned?

It certainly has been a unique year.  I have generally managed to keep our research and applied projects moving forward while operating remotely.  Our team of researchers use to gather almost weekly in New York, Washington DC, or at client locations around the country but that came to a halt as it has for many people.  The last time I saw the team in person was last March when we gathered in New York to work on the NFL combine data and then we were supposed to fly out together to Columbus for a presentation.  We cancelled that morning as things shut down and headed to our homes not knowing that the next time we would see each other would be on Zoom.  But we have managed to transition like many others to video calls and emails as a way to move forward.  In reflecting, I guess I am still trying to understand how this change has impacted how we work with each other.  The changes are subtle and so intangible in some ways that I am still trying to get a handle on them.  One thing that seems to have changed in general is the whole notion of time and how work gets conducted across the days and weeks.  The boundaries have changed – and I get that this was always the case – that is, work was always impeding on our lives but this has accelerated in a different manner that I don’t think I yet quite grasp.  It has certainly been a difficult year in some ways but personally I know it was much harder for others than myself and so I am thankful for that and it helps you keep things in perspective.  You find yourself realizing all that you need to be thankful for and I try to appreciate things that I previously maybe took for granted.

How do you think the program has changed during your time with us?

The program has definitely changed since I first arrived.  Joel Lefkowitz did a wonderful job as the architect of creating this program and laying the groundwork and foundation for what the program could become.  The program always had good balance when it came to the I and O side of the field and that has remained.  In addition, I think the program was very collegial and had a positive atmosphere.  The students always seemed incredibly close and they were collaborative which I really value and I think it creates culture that fosters development and growth.  The biggest change over the past two plus decades has been the shift to increase research productivity.  All of the faculty and students are heavily involved in research, which is a key change from when I first arrived.  This started with Kristin Sommer who arrived the year after I did instituting brown bag research discussions that encouraged students to present their research and has progressed to dozens of conference presentations and publications each year.  I also think the rigor has increased in foundational courses focused on research methods and statistics, which helps the students gain key knowledge that they need.  I think the program has also expanded into critical newer areas of emphasis in the field including diversity and inclusion research, people analytics, and occupational health.  The program still uses a strong science/practice lens that reflects the I/O field but does so with greater rigor and scientific foundation, which is what is required in both academics and practice.  I believe that Charles Scherbaum has been an outstanding leader in terms of guiding the program forward and helping it evolve into something really special.  We are extremely lucky to have him.     

What is your proudest career accomplishment to date?

I would probably say making contributions when it comes to diversity and inclusion. I am proud of our multiple approaches to this which includes: (1) Our team’s work on measuring intelligence with reduced race and gender differences, (2) our work in consent decree situations trying to build systems that reduce discrimination based on race and gender in organizations, (3) our expert witness work that tries to drive change when it comes to fairness and discrimination, (4) our work with the NFL putting in place a fair and predictive assessment for athletes, and (5) our work with the United Nations exploring the development of global tests of intelligence.  Most of all when I look at this work, I am proud of the fact that we have done this as a team.  Over the years you realize that people who you think of as work colleagues have become friends, and what you also realize is that it is more fun to do this work with friends than to do this alone – which is something my business and research partner Ken Yusko has always said dating back to when we started working to together back in graduate school.  What I always noticed about I/O psychology is that it is a field with truly wonderful people and getting to know them and work with them over the years has been a real gift.  I’m not sure if other fields are that way, but I definitely value that this one is.

What is the most important lesson that you’ve learned in your career to date?

Be open to new ideas and other approaches to doing things.  I think that an interdisciplinary approach is what leads to most break throughs in science.  I think you can at times get too tunnel vision within your own field, or even just a subset of your field, and not see the bigger picture or alternative perspectives.  I think you can break mental set by being open to other things and exposing yourself to other perspectives (reading Rolling Stone on occasion instead of Personnel Psychology).  I remember in graduate school at the University of Maryland that Dr. Robert Zajonc (who was head of my honors thesis class as an undergraduate at the University of Michigan) came to speak about his current research and he started off saying he was reading a book by a 17th century French physician which led to his new ideas for psychological research.  First I thought - why was he reading some obscure book by a physician – but that is how new ideas emerge and that is how real progress in thinking occurs.

What advice do you have for current and incoming graduate students?

Make the mental shift from this is ‘school’ to the realization you are joining a profession and beginning your career.  The people in your cohort, the other students, the faculty, and everyone you meet in our field are your colleagues and your network for your career.  Take control of managing your career in terms of figuring out what you need to learn and then guiding your own development.  This is the same thing we speak to high potentials in organizations about and that really fits our graduate students too.  Also, find people you enjoy working with and build a relationship with them.  I still work with many people that I met in graduate school.  I loved working with them then and I still do now.

What do you believe is the most rewarding part of your work?

The people I work with which includes my research team, the students I get to meet at multiple levels, other persons from our field that I have met over the years and had the opportunity to collaborate and partner with, and my clients - many of whom we have had for decades and are really just wonderful people that we truly love spending time with.  I also love the impact we have had in terms of social change – the focus on diversity.  I have always found that particularly rewarding.

What are you involved in beyond your research and teaching?

Professionally I play an administrative role of running the MS in I/O program at Baruch so that takes up time as well.  I also spend time consulting in the field which is where much of my research data comes from.  I definitely find a synergy in terms of my consulting practice and my research – I believe they foster and enhance each other.  Personally, at least prior to COVID, I spend time with family and friends, enjoy traveling, and have always had an interest in music and sports.

Any other advice, thoughts, wisdom?

I/O psychology is a wonderful field.  I am actually more excited and energized about it now and all the possibilities that it reflects than I was when I first entered the field.