The 2025 Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) Annual Conference in Denver, Colorado, held in April of this year marked a significant moment of reflection and transformation for the IO Psychology community.
As a convergence point for scholars, practitioners, and thought leaders, this year’s conference highlighted not only enduring theoretical debates but also emerging frontiers in applied psychology. As might be expected, the dominant theme in the conference was the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in practice. Nonetheless, other important trends were also prevalent, such as the evolving perspective on talent assessment and candidate experience, and the growing imperative to rethink personality in a culturally diverse workplace.
As always, our TTS consultants and execs were present to contribute to and learn from international best practices in IO Psychology. In this article, we summarize some of the more important developments highlighted at the conference.
Embracing AI: From hesitation to integration
The most conspicuous shift noted during the conference was the profession’s maturing stance toward AI and Large Language Models (LLMs). In contrast to earlier years marked by caution and speculation, this year’s sessions demonstrated a pragmatic and enthusiastic embrace of AI as both a tool and a topic of inquiry.
Delegates and presenters explored the use of LLMs in streamlining talent processes, the use of AI to assist in job analysis and survey design, and the deployment of chatbots for real-time candidate engagement.
However, these innovations were not presented without caution. Key discussions surfaced around the ethical challenges of AI: Particularly candidate faking, unauthorized AI use in assessments, and algorithmic bias.
Conference delegates acknowledged that while AI expands the IO Psychology toolkit, it also demands a critical recalibration of ethical frameworks. Many presenters emphasized the need to develop not just technical competencies but also a robust understanding of how to manage risk, ensure transparency, and align AI systems with evidence-based principles of assessment.
Rethinking personality in a global context
Another thought-provoking discussion came from the panel entitled, Navigating Personality and Cultural Differences in a Shifting Work Climate.
This session tackled the growing tension between standardized personality models (most notably the Five Factor Model) and the realities of a globalized, multicultural workforce.
Key points of discussion included:
- Relevance of personality: Despite trends toward skills-based hiring, panelists agreed that personality remains a valid predictor of job performance. However, its role must be understood within a broader talent ecosystem that includes competencies like adaptability and emotional intelligence.
- Cross-Cultural validity: The panel scrutinized the applicability of global models in regional contexts. For instance, traits such as conscientiousness may manifest differently across collectivist versus individualist cultures. This raises the question of whether universal models are sufficient or whether localized adaptations are required.
- Bias and fairness: The session also tackled the critical issue of bias in personality assessments. Cultural norms can affect the expression and interpretation of traits, leading to misaligned assessments. Strategies such as localized norming and culturally responsive assessments were proposed.
- Leadership and culture: Drawing on research such as the GLOBE study, the panel noted that some leadership traits, like integrity, are universally valued, while others are context specific. This has implications for multinational leadership development programs, which must balance global consistency with local relevance.
The panel underscored that cultural awareness and adaptation in personality assessment is not a nice to have but rather an essential building block of contemporary talent assessment strategy.
Candidate experience and the Net Promoter Score (NPS)
TTS’s own Dr Sebastian Clifton participated in the symposium Exploring the Drivers of Candidate Satisfaction in Selection and Development (chaired by Marie Wendel).
His paper, Candidate Assessment Experience across Smartphone and Non-smartphone Devices contributed to a data-rich look at how candidate reactions can be systematically understood and improved. Sebastian’s research was not alone in using the Net Promoter Score (NPS) framework: A tool borrowed from customer experience research.
In the session, he highlighted how both process-related factors (e.g., assessment length, delivery method) and person-related variables (e.g., personality, demographics) influence satisfaction.
Key findings from the research included:
- Device and delivery format: Sebastian’s research into smartphone-based assessments in South Africa emphasized the importance of test equivalence and accessibility. With mobile-first assessments becoming increasingly common, understanding user experience across devices is vital.
- Assessment design: Goyal discussed how assessment type and length affect candidate satisfaction. Gamification and adaptive testing emerged as promising trends, though their impact varies by context.
- Applicant reactions and fairness: Schäke explored how specific reactions, particularly perceptions of fairness, serve as strong predictors of NPS ratings. Gender and ethnicity-based differences were also examined, adding nuance to discussions on equity and inclusion.
- Personality and demographics: Bailey and Goyal’s joint study showed that traits such as agreeableness and emotional stability, as well as demographic variables like age and gender, can influence NPS outcomes. These findings have direct implications for how organizations tailor candidate experiences.
- Development programs: Scott expanded the conversation beyond selection, illustrating how participant reactions and training design influence satisfaction with leadership development initiatives.
The overarching insight was clear: organizations that fail to consider candidate reactions risk reputational damage and talent loss. Using an elegant metric like NPS, when combined with deeper diagnostic analytics, provides a practicable way to enhance both candidate experience and organizational branding.
ROI, utility, and skills-based talent
A recurring message throughout the conference was the need for IO Psychologists to speak more meaningfully and directly to the businesses they serve. Return on Investment (ROI), utility analysis, and the quality of hires were emphasized across multiple sessions.
Presenters advocated for clearer, more actionable metrics that can bridge the divide between evidence-based practice and hiring manager decision-making.
In this context, the shift toward skills-based hiring and development was particularly pointed. Several speakers highlighted the movement away from traditional credential-based selection toward more agile, competency-focused frameworks, again highlighting why competencies remain an evergreen feature of the talent assessment landscape.
Final thoughts
The 2025 SIOP Conference reflected the dynamic and ever-changing discipline of IO Psychology. It highlighted both the challenges and opportunities inherent in such developments. For instance, AI is no longer a fringe concept or technology but a central element of practice. This development holds both promise (e.g. greater efficiency, new insights) and peril (e.g. the risks to assessment integrity).
But for our profession the message is clear: Technical expertise must be matched with cultural agility, digital fluency, and ethical clarity. As our tools grow smarter, so too must our frameworks for using them responsibly and inclusively.
If you’d like to know more about how TTS contributes to the IO Psychology profession and best practices, why not connect with us at info@tts-talent.com?