In spite of the research activity reviewed above, nobody would question that the majority of the theoretical models, paradigmatic examples, measuring instruments and intervention techniques in W/O Psychology, that are used and applied in our country, were produced beyond our borders, predominantly in U.S.A. In light of this fact, we must reflect on and attempt to clarify the processes of dissemination and eventually adoption, of these theoretical and practical contributions.
In a discipline directly linked to professional practice such as ours, not only are theoretical models, that help interpret the work and organizational "reality", disseminated, but also paradigmatic examples, measurement instruments, intervention techniques, strategies and indeed professional roles. However, the methods of diffusion are not exclusive to the university milieux or to the scientific community. They are open, for instance, to Schools of Business Administration, to internal and external consultants, to executives and managers etc. They highlight scientific findings in literature but also identify expert-knowledge exchanged in seminars, conventions and meetings where scholars and scientists are conspicuously absent.
Dissemination has positive effects because it results in the incorporation of know-how. For instance, often magazines and technical journals for business men and women summarise scientific findings in our field and thus avoid redundant efforts to generate and develop knowledge and techniques already available. However, there are also some dangers, particularly those resulting from the acritical application of these contributions, without a detailed consideration of the peculiarities of specific cultural, social and labor realities.
The demand for quick answers, combined with certain mimetic attitudes, the lack of a strong research tradition and the deficient system of scientific communication at a national level, frequently causes us to fuse programmes and models created in other latitudes and contexts. This acritical incorporation represents risks including cultural shock, inadequacy of the models for the real situation, erroneous interpretations and disappointment because of an unfavourable use of our discipline. For example, are the contributions of research on psychosocial aspects of new technology, developed in the context of progressive technological development, transferable to situations of a "technological leap", such as is happening in our country? Can knowledge about business management be applied to small and medium-sized businesses of our country?. Can manager-training programmes in leadership styles be used in our cultural context even though it differs from the context in which they were developed (e.g. Prieto, 1989)? .
We think it is necessary to encourage a critical and well-founded fusion of theoretical and professional contributions produced in cultural milieux different from our own. Thus, we suggest that this incorporation requires research effort for its adequate adaption and indeed to establish its usefulness and validity in our organizational context. In addition, it is necessary to promote research about relevant and important aspects of our environment, especially if "ready made" solutions have failed or have not produced the expected outcomes. Evidently, it is important to consider the factor of "cultural proximity" when importing these types of "products". This is why we should take into account European contributions more than we have done so up to the present.
JOSÉ RAMÓN CORREAS GONZALEZ
Please sent comments and suggestions to:
psdife4@sis.ucm.es
LAST UPDATED Tuesday 5 de September de 1995