Nearly 100 years ago, economist John Maynard Keynes predicted that, by today, technological advancements would allow the workweek to dwindle to just 15 hours, or 3 hours per day, and that the real problem of humanity would be filling their time with leisure. Although much has changed in the world of work since this prediction, such a drastic change has not taken place. In this article, several industrial-organizational psychology scholars discuss why this is the case. Why do we continue to work as much as we do, and how might that change? More fundamentally, what do these trends, contra Keynes’ prediction, tell us about the nature of work itself? We use this discussion to propose several research directions regarding the nature of work and how it might change in the future. We depict the phenomenon of working hours as multilevel in nature, and we consider both the positive and negative possible implications of working less than we do now.

Global disruption, technological advances, and population demographics are rapidly affecting the types of jobs that are available and the workers who will fill those jobs in the future of work. Successful workers in the dynamic and uncertain landscape of the workplace of the future will need to adapt rapidly to changing job demands, highlighting the necessity for lifelong learning and development. With few exceptions, industrial-organizational (I-O) psychologists have tended to take an organization-centered perspective on training and development; a perspective that promotes worker development as a means to organizational success. Hence, we call for a broadening of this view to include a person-centered perspective on workplace learning focused on individual skill development. A person-centered perspective addresses lifelong learning and skill development for those already in the labor force, whether they are working within or outside of organizations (e.g., gig workers), or those looking for work. It includes the most vulnerable people currently working or seeking work. We describe the factors affecting the future of work, the need to incorporate a person-centered perspective on work-related skill learning into I-O research and practice, and highlight several areas for future research and practice.

Ethical decision making has long been recognized as critical for industrial-organizational (I-O) psychologists in the variety of roles they fill in education, research, and practice. Decisions with ethical implications are not always readily apparent and often require consideration of competing concerns. The American Psychological Association (APA) Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct are the principles and standards to which all Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) members are held accountable, and these principles serve to aid in decision making. To this end, the primary focus of this article is the presentation and application of an integrative ethical decision-making framework rooted in and inspired by empirical, philosophical, and practical considerations of professional ethics. The purpose of this framework is to provide a generalizable model that can be used to identify, evaluate, resolve, and engage in discourse about topics involving ethical issues. To demonstrate the efficacy of this general framework to contexts germane to I-O psychologists, we subsequently present and apply this framework to five scenarios, each involving an ethical situation relevant to academia, practice, or graduate education in I-O psychology. With this article, we hope to stimulate the refinement of this ethical decision-making model, illustrate its application in our profession, and, most importantly, advance conversations about ethical decision making in I-O psychology.

Organizations and managers often implement workplace training programs aimed at fostering collaboration, belonging, and respect among employees. However, the effectiveness of these programs can be undermined when they are framed in ways that only resonate with some participants while alienating others. We propose that moral reframing can enhance the success of such initiatives by aligning messaging with a broader range of moral perspectives. Drawing on moral foundations theory, we identify five key dimensions, care, fairness, loyalty, authority, and purity, that shape how individuals interpret and respond to workplace training efforts. Although many programs emphasize care and fairness, individuals who prioritize loyalty, authority, and purity may perceive them differently, leading to disengagement, skepticism, or resistance. We argue that strategically framing training initiatives across multiple moral frameworks can foster greater engagement, buy-in, and overall effectiveness. Additionally, we offer practical recommendations for organizations to implement moral reframing strategies, ensuring that training efforts resonate with a wider audience and contribute to a more cohesive and productive workplace.

This paper explores the impact of return-to-office (RTO) mandates on workplace inequality, particularly within the context of recent shifts in federal policies. The rapid adoption of remote and hybrid work, accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic, offered significant benefits in terms of flexibility and work-life balance. However, recent regulatory changes, including RTO mandates, threaten to reverse these gains, disproportionately affecting women, caregivers, employees with disabilities, and low-wage workers. This paper critically examines the equity implications of RTO mandates and offers recommendations for industrial-organizational psychologists, organizational leaders, and policymakers to develop equitable, evidence-based approaches to remote and hybrid work that promote employee well-being and organizational effectiveness.

While nonspeech communication and “metaphorical” silence (in opposition to voice) have benefited from a considerable academic attention, less is known about quiet environments and the intentional practice of silence. We theorize these silences as potential catalysts of internal and collective reflection. Such silences can strongly impact individual and organizational processes and outcomes, notably in the workplace. The meaning, valence, and effects of these silences are highly context- and perspective-dependent. By characterizing and studying these silences and their effects, we show how they are functional or dysfunctional to individuals or organizations. These silences can notably serve as emotion regulators and generate an environment favorable to individual and collective decision making. Examining what is lost by individuals and organizations due to a lack of these silence and what can be gained with a better harnessing of their power is promising.

In recent years, there has been an alarming increase in both proposed and enacted legislation that targets diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives within higher education and organizations. These laws aim to dismantle protections and support for vulnerable individuals and groups. In this focal article, we provide an overview of the motives driving these anti-DEI legislative initiatives and categorize the laws based on the type of restrictions they impose: (a) reduction in knowledge, (b) reduction in access, and (c) reduction in support. Next, we discuss the consequences these anti-DEI laws yield for individuals, organizations, and society at large and provide an overview of how individuals and organizations may counteract these regressive policies. Last, we conclude with a call to action for I-O psychologists to investigate and call attention to the consequences of anti-DEI laws for recruitment and selection, well-being and safety of minoritized individuals, organizational reputation, and organizational performance and profits.

In this article, we argue that changes in workplace characteristics over the last few decades may affect work relationships and call for adjustments in the traditional theoretical framework used to understand them. Since the last quarter of the 20th century, there have been theories regarding changes in labor relationships following technological, political, globalization, and economical changes. However, we examine the changes in light of psychological theories rather than labor or industrial approaches. We review four main areas where social exchange theory (SET) has been implemented, address recent changes that challenge the traditional SET perspective, and propose alternative models. We refer to these models as “hybrid” as they integrate traditional SET premises with new-era workplace characteristics. First, we describe several changes in workplace characteristics. Next, we review some of the most conventional applications of SET to work relationships. Finally, we critically examine whether this theory meets the requirements of work relationships in the new world of work and conclude by arguing that SET needs to be adjusted to reflect the assumption that frequent changes in employee and organizational characteristics in the new workplaces require similar frequent adjustments in exchange relationships.