Alexandra Ilie
University of South Florida
Dan Ispas
University of South Florida
Broadly speaking, researchers can be classified into two groups: those that focus on one specific area of research and others that publish across many topics. For this issue’s interview, we talked to Dr. Timothy Judge, professor and researcher in I/O psychology/business/organizational behavior that publishes across various areas from selection to work-family conflict. We interviewed Dr. Judge about research in general and about some of his interests.
Timothy A. Judge is the Matherly-McKethan Eminent Scholar, Department of Management, Warrington College of Business – University of Florida. Dr. Judge holds a Bachelor of Business Administration degree from the University of Iowa, and master’s and doctoral degrees from the Institute of Labor and Industrial Relations, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Dr. Judge published more than 100 articles in refereed journals; six of which received “best paper” awards from professional societies or academies. Dr. Judge serves on the editorial review boards of eight journals, including Academy of Management Journal, British Journal of Management, International Journal of Selection and Assessment, Journal of Applied Psychology, Personnel Psychology, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Journal of Management, and European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology. He is a fellow of the Academy of Management, the American Psychological Association, the American Psychological Society, and the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. In 1995, he received the Ernest J. McCormick Award for Distinguished Early Career Contributions, Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, and in 2001, Judge received the Cummings Scholar Award from the Organizational Behavior Division of the Academy of Management. In 1999, he was named to list of Outstanding Faculty in Business Week’s Guide to the Best Business Schools, and in 2004 received the teacher of the year award from the University of Florida professional MBA program.
EJOP: Your research covers many different areas in I/O psychology, OB and business. What would be the advantages and disadvantages of covering a large number of research topics? What about the advantages and disadvantages of focusing on one main area?
Timothy A. Judge: I think that depends a lot on the person. I think one should have a core area but I tend to believe in the benefits of being relatively broad. I was just reading an example about the American company Proctor & Gamble, which does business in 180 countries. They are sort of like a sponge – they get more than half of their ideas from outside the company, and they’re always trying new things. Often, you don’t know how well a research area will progress until you try it, see what you think, and whether it fits you. I believe a lot in experimentation and openness.
Now, for some people this clearly will not work. Some people much prefer to focus on a narrow area and I think if that works for them, that’s fine. There are many people in I-O psychology who have successfully implemented that model. I’m a big believer in naturalism (much of what happens in life is due to forces of nature, and expression of our genes) and I think the best thing someone can do is to discover what is natural for them, what works for them.
EJOP: You are a very prolific researcher and you have published a large number of articles in peer-review journals. What are your pieces of advice for those who want to become successful researchers?
Timothy A. Judge: First, I think international researchers need to make sure their papers are prepared, in writing and format, exactly according to American (or British) standards, since those two countries tend to set the standard in I-O journals. To some degree, this isn’t really fair (that journal publications should be so U.S.-centric), but life often isn’t fair. One way to do that is to have English experts edit your work, or to share your work with American colleagues, or ask them to co-author.
Second, I would use culture to your advantage. I-O psychology is really globalizing. I’ve been more change in the past five years than in the previous 15. American researchers are becoming much more receptive to cultural differences, and I think European and Asian I-O psychologists are becoming much more interested in American research. So, gradually, cultural boundaries are going to diminish, which I find exciting. At the same time, local cultures are different, and I think you can use our own lens to introduce new thinking into the field.
EJOP: Researchers from the academic world are under a lot of pressure to publish their work (“publish or perish”). Are there any possible negative consequences on research and science in general?
Timothy A. Judge: Surely. I think there are benefits to having clear, rigorous standards, but like anything, there are side-effects (what economists call externalities). One is the expectation to people establish “their” area of research too early in their career (before they learn what they are like, and what they’re good at). Robert Merton, the Univ. of Chicago sociologist, wrote about this when he described “The Matthew Effect.” Another externality is the behavioral implications of counting – often great writers are known for their best work, not their worst. I worry that taking a county mentality too far discourages researchers from developing a singular, high risk project.
EJOP: There is a lot of research showing the divide between academics and practitioners in HR and management. What can academics do to bridge this gap?
Timothy A. Judge: This is a real problem. I think some things are being done. For example, Denise Rousseau is leading an Academy of Management initiative on evidence-based management. Whether such efforts will “pay off” I’m not sure, but it is a problem. I was a manager once, and the truth is, you can get by and even excel without knowing anything about the science of I-O or OB. Is that situation changing? I’m not sure.
EJOP: Your research shows that tall people enjoy higher prestige and income. What are the mechanisms involved?
Timothy A. Judge: There are two possible mechanisms, each with their own sub-mechanisms. The two main mechanisms are (a) tall people are more self-confident, and therefore do better in their careers because they believe in themselves more; (b) others see tall people as more authoritative and leader-like, and therefore they are more effective because people defer to them. Our study, and some other studies, suggest that the latter mechanism (the demand side, if you will) is more important than the former.
EJOP: In regard to the same topic, what are the societal consequences? What can we do to prevent this bias?
Timothy A. Judge: It’s possible that there could be government regulation to protect the employment status of short people. However, I think it’s more realistic to think that managers can be made aware of their implicit biases and try to change them in that way. There are very few jobs for which height is a legitimate job requirement (within the range into which the vast majority of people fall), and the enlightened manager will realize this and try to overcome implicit biases.
EJOP: How generalizable are these findings to other cultures?
Timothy A. Judge: We found that they did generalize to the UK. Other studies have found similar results in Germany. As for other countries, I’m not sure, but I suspect they do generalize, at least to other European cultures.
EJOP: You proposed a new construct called core self-evaluations. Why are core self-evaluations important in organizations?
Timothy A. Judge: Because self-confidence is so fundamental – people who believe in themselves strive for more, try harder, persist longer, and overcome obstacles. It’s not magic – having self-confidence does not assure success, but it certainly helps. Life is full of many difficulties and uncertainties, and those who have a self-positive inner dialogue tend to fare better.
EJOP: Research shows that self-fulfilling prophecies can have powerful effects. What are some of possible benefits of the Pygmalion and Galatea effects for organizations?
Timothy A. Judge: I think such effects can matter, though they tend to be short-lasting. In general, I think the dispositional aspect of self-confidence is more important than the situational part, because the dispositional part transfers from situation-to-situation. Albert Bandura, of course, disagrees strongly with this view.