Over the years, employee opinion surveys have evolved in their use and how they are conducted. A major advancement has been the use of linkage analyses, whereby employee attitudes at a unit level are statistically related to other important organizational outcomes. A more recent development has been linkage analyses at the individual level and over time. In order to carry out these types of analyses, “identified surveys” must be used—surveys that retain identifying information on each survey respondent in order to link with other individual-level variables over time. The purpose of this article is to open up a discussion on identified surveys, describe under what circumstances they may be uniquely beneficial, and highlight potential concerns with them. We close with proposed guidelines for professional practice and recommend that our profession have a point of view on identified surveys for ourselves and to advise others.

The goal of our focal article was to open up a discussion within our profession on a new trend called identified surveys. We feel that we have achieved this goal with the varied and interesting commentaries. At the same time, we do not feel discussion is enough. We as a profession need to better understand the implications and use of identified surveys. We have an obligation to inform others and to have a point of view on how they should be used, taking into account not just an organizational perspective but the point of view of employees as well.

The primary federal regulation concerning employment testing has not been revised in over 3 decades. The regulation is substantially inconsistent with scientific knowledge and professional guidelines and practice. We summarize these inconsistencies and outline the problems faced by U.S. employers in complying with the regulations. We describe challenges associated with changing federal regulations and invite commentary as to how such changes can be implemented. We conclude that professional organizations, such as the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP), should be much more active in promoting science-based federal regulation of employment practices.