What is it about?

The article(s) focus on consultations where there consultant's "client" is an organization and distinguishes those from those where the "client" is an individual subject who is the sole requester of the consultation. Points of ethicality are debated regarding these two consultant roles.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

This article addresses an extremely important distinction between - application of psychological principles in healthcare, research and academic settings where there is often a notable, and potentially abusable, imbalance of power between psychologists and those with whom they have strong influence - and - applications in business, sport, law enforcement and other settings where there is no influential , or potentially abusive, power imbalance between the psychologist and client.


This article was an excellent opportunity for the authors to exchange views in a respectful and direct way - and, in my opinion, illustrates the value of collegial debate.

Dr Carroll H Greene
Private Consultant

Operational psychology is poorly-understood by many in the broader field. Sadly, those that would malign or besmirch such practitioners rarely have any direct contact with operational psychologists or their work products. Fear, innuendo, and false reports have added to this misperception. In an attempt to remove the influence of this practice community, some vocal elements, largely working out of an extreme political agenda, have recommended the removal of operational practitioners (re-naming them as "adversarial"). In establishing criterion to do so, these radical elements have painted with a broad-brush in a manner that would indict most applied psychologists.

Mark Staal

Read the Original

This page is a summary of: An examination of “adversarial” operational psychology., Peace and Conflict Journal of Peace Psychology, January 2015, American Psychological Association (APA),
DOI: 10.1037/pac0000095.
You can read the full text:




The following have contributed to this page