Click on the video player below to watch Peter’s message.

Trouble viewing this video? Click here to open it in your browser.

On Friday August 30th, the Annual General Meeting took place, bringing with it some new faces who have been elected to the National Committee. The committee is now as follows:

• Peter Zarris, National Chair
• David Heap, Deputy Chair
• Karen Whittingham, Treasurer
• Tim Bednall, Secretary
• Nicholas Reynolds, National CPD Secretary
• Damian Cotchett, Membership Secretary
• Craig Camamile, State Chair QLD
• Rosie McMahon, State Chair VIC
• Ern Green, Deputy State Chair VIC
• Jan Sipsma, State Chair WA
• Mark Cipants, State Chair NSW
• Sophie Holdstock, State Chair SA
• Peter Murphy, State Chair ACT

In particular we welcome the two newest members of the committee, David Heap as Deputy Chair, Tim Bednall as Secretary and Damian Cotchett as Membership Secretary.

We also will be wishing farewell to Joanne Fitzgerald, our former Membership Liason, Prasuna Reddy, the former Membership Secretary and Shelley Rogers, the former Chair of South Australia. In addition to this, Nic Eddy will be taking leave of the Deputy Chair position he has held and moving on to the branding team.

I would like to extend a huge thank you to all those who are leaving their positions for the wonderful work they have done and to those who are continuing to guide and nurture our profession as committee members.

On 18 September 2013 three VIC COP members fronted up at the Victorian Parliament to present at the Inquiry into the performance of AHPRA and the “cost effectiveness, the regulatory efficacy of, and the ability of, the National Scheme to protect the Victorian public.” VIC COP State Chair Ern Green, past VIC COP State Chair Rachael Palmer, and VIC COP Lead Strategic Relations Gina McCredie had just 30 minutes to discuss with the politicians in the Legal and Social Issues Legislation Committee the impact of national registration on current and future organisational psychologists in Victoria. Our main points had already been submitted some months before (see submission #36).

Well briefed by Arthur Crook, the Chair of COP’s National Regulatory Developments Working Party, the three spoke on the following:

• the poor fit of Organisational Psychology as a ‘health profession’
• the lack of protection for publics outside the health sector, including schools, organisations, Governments, Courts, sports teams and communities
• the unclear complaints mechanism for these publics – they don’t know to contact a Health Services Commissioner or AHPRA
• the large numbers of people trained in Organisational Psychology who are choosing not to register or seek endorsement because the Scheme is too ill fitting, the administration too bureaucratic, the requirements too clinically oriented and the supervision process too onerous and expensive for all involved
• the demise of Org Psych post-graduate programs and the faltering pipeline we now have as students face high fees for provisional registration which the Act never intended
• the high registration fees we pay for little obvious return, the Psychology Board’s rapid depletion of two-thirds of the legacy funds, and both AHPRA and the Psychology Board’s focus on best practice (at additional cost to registrants) rather than simply safe practice

The committee noted our concerns about the future viability of Organisational Psychology as a specialty psychology profession. You will be able to read a transcript of our session (available from mid-October). We’ve since received feedback that our contribution at the hearing was seen as positive and valuable to the Inquiry.

This is an example of the advocacy work that the College of Organisational Psychologists does on behalf of Australian Organisational Psychologists and students of Organisational Psychology. COP works to ensure that wherever possible the needs of Organisational Psychologists are represented and not inappropriately regulated.

REACH article prepared by Gina McCredie, Lead Strategic Relations, VIC COP.

By Arthur Crook, Chair.

The 2013 Industrial and Organisational Psychology Conference in Perth was most encouraging, stimulating and enjoyable, with a diverse range of topics across the spectrum of IO Psych. – dynamic systems, multi-level leadership theory, human factors applications (often multi-disciplinary) in maritime and aviation fields, and much more. It was clear that our part of the profession is still “alive and kicking” conceptually and in practice terms (although some are still suffering the negatives of the post-GFC recovery period). At the same time the problems arising from the NRAS were quite prominent, one keynote speaker giving a short but precise assessment of some of those problems including loss of courses in IOP. Other Conference participants complained about interference with course syllabus content, supervision requirements and their impacts on placement and intern opportunities (and many other matters), although we sought the positives as well, and did find a few. It was evident that there is still passion in our field to protect (but not reserve to ourselves), extend and enhance what we think and do, a necessary ingredient in our NRAS advocacy if we are to persuade decision-makers that we are not engaging in a mere intellectual exercise but really do care deeply about what is happening.

Our NRAS Forum was reasonably well attended, bearing in mind that there were three other competing and attractive streams. The first session, in which participants wrote about (by filling in a brief survey form) and told us (via small groups) their experiences of the NRAS, went very well – much information relevant for our NRAS Review Papers, and a great deal of animated discussion. The second session (where I outlined the thrust of those Papers), truncated due to the success of the first session, nonetheless gave participants a reasonable update.

A couple of important issues that I did not have time to address fully were: (a) the adversarial nature of the NRAS as created by the National Competition Council and the group of economists within the Productivity Commission who wrote influential reports starting back in the mid-1990s about reforming the health sector; and (b) that the WP is not an action or advocacy group.

Regarding (a), the NCC and PC reports stimulated and subsequently underpinned the character and focus of COAG’s reforms to the health sector (of which the NRAS is a part). In those reports they cast the health professions as “vested interest groups” who were resistant to change and would stand in the way of reform of the sector. Co-regulation and self-regulation were poo-pooed: regulation by the state would have to be imposed if reforms were to be achieved. This adversarial “top down” view of health reform was apparently aimed mainly at the medical professions and the medical and nursing workforces. IO Psych did not come onto their radar. Psychology (undifferentiated) was included by the NCC and PC only as an appendixed “allied health profession” – no recognition at all of organisational, educational, community, forensic, sports or other areas of the profession.

We have unfortunately been caught up as “collateral damage” in this continuing covert “war”. We (including the College’s National Committee and indeed the APS National Office staff) have long been trying (largely unsuccessfully perhaps) to turn this adversarial framework into a more cooperative and collaborative one where joint change objectives can be identified, agreed and pursued, and where the diversity of the profession and the science is recognised and respected. A fuller understanding by APS members of this fundamental systemic “adversarial dynamic” in the NRAS would (I think) help APS advocacy efforts. “Sweet reason” may not take us very far where there is an obstinate “command and control” agenda of the NCC/PC kind, energetically adopted by some of those driving the NRAS developments, and psychologists are seen (for various reasons) as having low socio-political power. Alternatives or additions are needed to carefully-argued submissions, which seem mainly to have fallen on deaf ears.

This brings me to point (b) – the role of the NRD WP. Our job is to identify and evaluate NRAS developments, advise the College National Committee accordingly, and draft submissions for the National Committee. We do not set priorities, determine action steps or undertake advocacy. That is the job of the National Committee and the larger APS, which our WP has always respected. In advocacy the KISS principle is usually important. In stark contrast the work of the WP involves comprehensive and careful analysis and evaluation, so that our advice to the National Committee is as sound as possible. So please don’t expect the WP to settle on three or four key advocacy objectives and associated tactics: that’s for the COP NC and APS groups. We’ll help if and as asked but won’t drive that advocacy. The precise forms of advocacy regarding the forthcoming independent review of the NRAS cannot yet be determined. We don’t know who will be carrying out the review, or its terms of reference. When they are known, we will consult with the National Committee about the implications.

I was thanked at the Conference Dinner for my contribution to the work of the Working Party, which I much appreciated. But I would like to record here the valuable work done by the other members, which I was able to recognise at the Conference Forum, and which I repeat here. We are a DIY group without external resources of any kind. My colleagues have found the time and effort to carry out a demanding voluntary role for many years, and once again I thank them for it.

At the recent Industrial and Organisational Psychology Conference, Arthur Crook was presented with a Lifetime Contribution to Organisational Psychology Award. Arthur has had a longstanding relationship with the College, and he has had a significant impact on the profession.

In his speech about Arthur, Peter Zarris listed some of the highlights of Arthur’s career. Arthur has taken on numerous roles. He has worked as a psychologist in both the Royal Australian Air Force working with air traffic controllers, and the Navy where he used selection validation tools.

From here he moved to PricewaterhouseCoopers as a principal consultant. In this role, he managed personnel and introduced regular psychological assessment, something quite ground-breaking in 1971.

He then moved into academia, taking on a senior academic role at what is now the Caulfield campus of Monash University. He spent 25 years in this role, designing, implementing and coordinating world class accredited training programs, some of which Peter Zarris himself went through.

He was a foundation member of the APS and has been an office bearer in the Society for 40 years. The roles he has taken on are as numerous as the rest of his career. He has been the Principal Political Analyst, a Member of the Professional Practise Advisory Group, the Acting Executive Director for the APS, Director of Professional Affairs, Chair of the Industrial Relations Committee, APS treasurer, a foundation editor of the APS Professional Practice Handbook among many others.

Furthermore, he has been an integral part of COP in numerous high-profile roles. Probably his most important role is as the Secretary (and now) Chair of National Regulatory Development Working Parties, keeping track of the bureaucracy that we must adhere to every day.

Beyond all this, he has provided counsel and been a mentor to many. In Peter Zarris’ words, ‘he makes us look good’.

Watch Peter Zarris’s speech.

Watch Arthur’s response.

It is with great sadness that we must inform our members of the passing of one of our most distinguished members, Barry Fallon. He passed away on the 26th of June after battling illness. He leaves behind his much-loved wife, Felicity, children Tanya and James and their families.

His outstanding achievements and lifetime of contributions to the profession were spoken of in a eulogy given by Peter Zarris where he was remembered not only as an outstanding academic and prolific contributor to organisational psychology, but as a Fellow of the APS and a winner of the Elton Mayo Award for teaching and research excellence.

He graduated from the University of Queensland and completed his PhD at State University of New York and his academic appointments include the Foundational Professor of Psychology at Australian Catholic university, convenor of the postgraduate Organisational Psychology Program at Melbourne University along with appointments at Deakin University and Monash University. In 2006 he was awarded the ACU Excellence in Postgraduate Supervision Award and will be fondly remembered by those he supervised in 21 higher degree research theses in I/O psychology.

His extensive contribution to the Australian Psychological Society and the College of Organisational Psychology included 18 years as a member of the APS Council / Board, two of which were as APS President, and 12 years involvement in accreditation including as a foundation Director of the Australian Psychology Accreditation Council. He was inducted as a Fellow of the APS in 1991 and was the editor of the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychology between 1994 and 1996

He will be remembered fondly by all those who had the pleasure of meeting him and we send our deepest condolences to his family during this difficult time.

Barry’s eulogy, delivered by Peter Zarris.

Members are reminded that the current continuing professional development (CPD) cycle will end on November 30th of this year. To comply with the APS and Psychology Board of Australia (PsyBA) requirements, all psychologists must complete three CPD components by this date.

1. An individual Learning Plan.

2. 30 Hours of CPD Activities, including at least 10 hours of peer consultation, and (a recommended) 10 hours of active CPD.

3. A journal entry for each hour of CPD.

More information about the CPD cycle can be found on the APS and PsyBA (Guidelines on continuing professional development) websites. The APS also has a facility for online logging of CPD.