In this issue, we continue on our exciting new development for the International Practice Forum! With Walter Reichman (OrgVitality) and a number of I-O psychology practitioners and academics, we explore the ways in which “Industrial-Organizational Psychology Helps Heal the World.” Through a series of articles, we present real and actionable ways in which I-O academics and practitioners have an impact in innovative and creative ways and how they have been helping to heal the world!

I’m pleased this issue to welcome a guest coauthor, one of the founding members of the Global Task Force for Humanitarian Work Psychology and the first Chair of the Global Organisation for Humanitarian Work Psychology (GOHWP), Dr. Ishbel McWha-Hermann.  This is not Ishbel’s first time in TIP’s pages—far from it!  Readers who have followed this column have seen her name in the byline in the past, and mentions of her important work both in the “Spotlight” column and in reports from SIOP’s UN team.  She has lived and worked all over the world, and through her work has developed a perspective on issues related to work in the humanitarian sphere that has helped to significantly expand the borders of I-O psychology.

In the summer of 2016, we issued a Call for Proposals to submit unique and innovative methodologies to rank I-O graduate programs. In response to this, many projects were proposed to us. After much hard work (and the broader SIOP community’s help), the five selected projects have been completed. Each of these five papers are included in the current issue of TIP. We believe each of these papers will be an important contribution to our field and will guide individuals in the future – as well as generate much thought and discussion about the state of our field and the programs that educate the future of IO Psychology. In particular, we hope that these rankings will result in graduate programs examining themselves and thinking about ways they excel, as well as areas they could improve. Additionally, we hope that future undergraduate students applying to I-O programs will use these rankings, not to determine what the “best” programs are, but which programs are the best fit for them.

Past I-O psychology program ranking surveys have differed in a number of respects such as sample type and size (e.g., faculty, students), type of data collected (e.g., objective, subjective), and number of programs ranked, the majority focused on ranking doctoral programs based on research productivity (Beiler, Zimmerman, Doerr,  & Clark, 2014; Gibby, Reeve, Grauer, Mohr, & Zickar, 2002; Oliver, Blair, Gorman, & Woehr, 2005; Payne, Succa, Maxey, & Bolton, 2001; Winter, Healy, & Svyantek, 1995).  An exception is the research of Kraiger and Abalos (2004) who surveyed masters and doctoral students with a focus on nonresearch factors (e.g., instruction quality, faculty support, funding, class size).

Author Note: First three authors are listed based on contribution. Remaining authors are listed based on alphabetical order. Correspondence concerning this paper should be addressed to Yalcin Acikgoz, Department of Psychology, Appalachian State University, Box 32109, 222 Joyce Lawrence Ln., Boone, NC (28608). Email: acikgozy@appstate.edu. Phone: +1-828-262-8926