Ian M. Katz

Purpose: Understanding how characteristics of the work context may influence employee green behavior (EGB) is essential for organizations to achieve their environmental sustainability goals. So far, however, the role of workplace information and communication technology (ICT) use in influencing EGB is not well understood. Drawing from the concept of “twin transformation” and work design theory, we hypothesize that workplace ICT use is positively associated with four specific dimensions of EGB (i.e. changing work processes, embracing sustainable innovation, monitoring environmental impact, and reducing resource use). Additionally, we explore how perceived environmental impact of work moderates these relations. Design/methodology/approach: We collected longitudinal data from N = 2,418 employees in Germany across four monthly measurement waves and analyzed the data using mixed effects models. Findings: Workplace ICT use was positively related to embracing sustainable innovation at the between-person level. Additionally, the positive between-person relation between workplace ICT use and reducing resource use was stronger when the perceived environmental impact of work was lower (vs. higher). Furthermore, perceived environmental impact of work moderated the positive within-person relation between workplace ICT use and monitoring environmental impact, such that this relation was stronger when the perceived environmental impact of work was higher (vs. lower). Originality/value: This study advances the understanding of how workplace ICT use is related to EGB, providing novel insights into how the “twin transformation” unfolds at the individual level.

As of May 12, 2025, President Donald J. Trump had signed 152 executive orders (EOs)-a record for any U.S. president during their first 112 days in office (Peters & Woolley, 2025). These federallevel policy shifts have prompted various cascading effects and responses at state and local levels (e.g., John, 2025; Mahtesian, 2025). Many EOs and proposed policy changes across levels have direct implications for labor and employment in the United States, and the frenetic release and implementation of these policies has prompted new uncertainties and questions for the science and practice of industrial and organizational (I-O) psychology. Whether reshaping workplace diversity initiatives and employment protections to regulating artificial intelligence (AI) and modifying labor standards, these policy changes have the potential to redefine how organizations function and how I-O psychologists conduct research, advise organizational stakeholders, and implement interventions. This special issue aimed to document a range of these potential policy implications for the field of I-O. Moreover, I-O psychologists are not only parties affected by these policy changes but also leading experts on work and workers. This issue is aimed, accordingly, to present various I-O analyses of and proposed responses to the current landscape of relevant U.S. policy changes. Through these accounts and their recommendations, we hope I-O psychologists, trainees, and organizations can orient to, understand, and adapt to policy change in an empirically and ethically sound manner. In the following sections of this editorial, we first discuss the topics covered in this issue's policy brief commentaries in greater detail, synthesizing key themes and perspectives on various interrelated policy changes. We organize the policy briefs into four areas, including those discussing policy related to (a) workplace settings and environments, (b) human resource management (HRM) processes, (c) worker perceptions and identities, and (d) higher education and training. Then, we explore additional considerations for I-O psychologists reading this special issue, highlighting the ongoing and dynamic nature of this turbulent political climate as well as its wide-reaching effects. Finally, we conclude with recommendations for I-O psychologists in supporting themselves, their colleagues, and the organizations and systems in which they workin the coming months and years of this administration and beyond.

This meta-analysis aimed to confirm and clarify the relationships between attachment style and various workplace correlates, including job performance, burnout, personality, and job satisfaction (K = 109 independent samples, N = 32,278 participants). Results provided the strongest support for the relationships between attachment style and the Big Five personality traits, burnout, and job performance. Anxious attachment was also related to a host of other correlates, including job stress, turnover intentions, job satisfaction, and work engagement. Additionally, dominance analysis was used and found that attachment style had incremental validity beyond the Big Five in the prediction of job performance, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and leader-member exchange. Finally, we examined meta-analytic path models in which attachment style impacted job performance, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover intentions, and leader-member exchange through trust in supervisor. This indirect effect was supported for all correlates and for both anxious and avoidant attachment. Overall, the results supported the use of attachment styles as an important correlate with organizational variables. Limitations, implications, and areas for future research are discussed.

Environmental sustainability is a strategic and ethical imperative for organizations, and numerous studies have investigated associations between leadership and employee pro-environmental or “green” behavior. However, these studies have typically focused on leadership styles that conflate leader behavior with its assumed antecedents or consequences. Moreover, the literature on relations between leadership and environmental sustainability constructs is fragmented and in need of systematic integration to effectively guide future research and practice. Accordingly, we pursue three goals in this conceptual paper. First, after a brief review of key insights from extant theoretical and empirical research, we define leadership in the context of environmental sustainability and leader green behavior based on established theoretical frameworks. Second, based on a systematic integration and extension of the literature, we present an integrative conceptual model of multilevel antecedents and consequences of leader green behavior. We further develop eight propositions on multiple known and novel pathways toward leader and follower green behaviors, as well as multiple known and novel pathways toward consequences related to environmental sustainability at the leader, follower, and organizational levels. Finally, based on our integrative conceptual model and propositions, we outline several recommendations for future research on leadership and environmental sustainability, including theoretical and methodological considerations.

The global COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the lives of workers and taken its toll on health and well-being. In line with recent calls for more inductive and abductive occupational health science research, we exploratorily meta-analyzed workers’ COVID-19 distress, defined as psychological and psychosomatic strain contextualized to experiencing the virus and pandemic broadly. We identified many existing COVID-19 distress measures (e.g., Fear of COVID-19 Scale by Ahorsu et al., International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 2020; Coronavirus Anxiety Scale by Lee, Death Studies, 44(7), 393–401, 2020a) and correlates, including demographic variables (viz., gender, marital status, whether worker has children), positive well-being (e.g., quality of life, perceived social support, resilience), negative well-being (e.g., anxiety, depression, sleep problems), and work-related variables (e.g., job satisfaction, burnout, task performance). Additionally, we found preliminary evidence of subgroup differences by COVID-19 distress measure and country-level moderation moderators (viz., cultural values, pandemic-related government response) as well as COVID-19 distress’s incremental validity over and above anxiety and depression. The findings—based on k = 135 independent samples totaling N = 61,470 workers—were abductively contextualized with existing theories and previous research. We also call for future research to address the grand challenge of working during the COVID-19 pandemic and ultimately develop a cumulative occupational health psychology of pandemics.