Introduction
Organizational behavior is influenced by certain organizational culture and results in the effectiveness of a structure. The understanding of organizational culture helps to understand the origin of a certain type of organizational behavior. It is a general opinion that military organizations would not be successful without applying specific approaches to creating requirements for organizational behavior which is obligatory for its members. Therefore, it is crucial to provide a detailed review of the organizational behavior within the U.S. Army and indicate its main characteristics that are beneficial for the development of strong leaders and effective warriors.
Organizational Identification in the U.S. Army
Organizational identity is determined by three dominant theories based on social identity, social constructionist, and social actor. It helps to understand how researchers make frames and conceptualize the main phenomena in the selected field. It is noted that the focus on organizational identity theory helps to determine organizational identity in various institutions (Haslam, Cornelissen, & Werner, 2017). Thus, organizational identity means that the individuals share a common vision of who they are in the frames of the given organization. It includes cognitive schemes and shared narratives gathered by the members of an organization to refer to the experience they shared. Organizational identity assists in determining specific social identity, which results in individual categorizing and engaging in certain kinds of group behavior which is appropriate for an organization. It is also associated with several behavioral commitments and external legitimizing claims, which are usually dependent on the characteristics of the organization. Therefore, it is possible to say that the organizational behavior in the U.S. Army is a result of strict social identity and a shared experience of its members.
Identity is a subject of close study in management, especially in various researches related to organizational behavior. It is regarded as a major factor that impacts behaviors related to work because people spend a significant portion of their life engaging in the activities related to work. Identity and work environment are believed to be connected and influence each other. Some researchers state that people usually chose an occupation that corresponds to their traits and a specific environment might influence the identity of an individual (Miscenko & Day, 2016). A strong professional identity is regarded to be a cause of job satisfaction and a feeling of pride. Therefore, work identity can be defined as a set of meanings associated with the work domain. The role of a professional is usually associated with specific social expectations and thereby determine the behavior of an individual. It is a general opinion that people value their identities as positive, which increases their self-esteem. Still, it is crucial to distinguish work identity and identification which is externally oriented. It is possible to differentiate different levels of work identity such as individual, interpersonal, and collective. These levels are believed to interact and provide different layers of inclusiveness. Thus, work identity is a key factor to determine organizational behavior. The individuals involved in jobs within the U.S. Army share the same work identity which is crucial in indicating the main determinants of their organizational behavior as well.
It is a general opinion that organizational citizenship behavior refers to voluntary employee behaviors which might significantly contribute to some aspects of performance practiced in certain organizations. Such behaviors include helping colleagues with work-related problems and preventing their occurrence, maintaining a positive attitude in difficult situations, promoting the organization to other people and defending its values, and readily accepting rules and procedures of the organization. Voluntary acts that involve creativity to accomplish the tasks related to the job and important for the organization, as well as willingness to participate in management and readiness to improve the professional skills and knowledge are regarded as organizational citizenship behavior as well. The main aspect of such behaviors is that they are offered voluntarily and freely by the employees. It is emphasized that such kind of behavior is a part of the U.S. Army expectations and requirements to the employees, which is prescribed in job descriptions of in-roles and is measured in job performance evaluations (Rose, Herd, & Palacio, 2017). The comparison of work culture in the U.S. Army and civilian work behaviors makes it possible to state that the individuals that are transferred from a military career to a civilian one might need to reframe their behavior according to the new work environment. Thus, a military career has a great impact on the social and work identity of an individual.
The Aspects of the Organizational Behavior in the U.S. Army
Job satisfaction is regarded to be one of the most important factors that influence organizational behavior. The study of the correlation between job satisfaction and organizational commitment among military leaders proved that top lever U.S. Army leaders of various ranks develop and maintain a sense of uniqueness between the organization and themselves (Alvinius, Johansson, Larsson, 2017). This identification is a part of their work identity in the military organization. The organizational commitment is established among this category of military employees through reacting to organizational greediness and maintaining an organizational image. The theoretical model built on these findings makes it possible to utilize the better model for evaluation of organizational commitment and job satisfaction in military organizations, as well as to improve the practice of selection and development of qualified military officers. Thus, job satisfaction is closely related to organizational commitment which is one of the main factors that determine organizational behavior in military organizations.
Another aspect of organizational behavior in the U.S. Army is a necessity to make life-or-death decisions in the conditions of combat which greatly influences the ethical principles of military employees. It is argued that in the nearest future this problem will become even more challenging as the technological progress results in the deployment of automatic machines and drones that can be utilized remotely (Bloomfield & Vurdubakis, 2015). Thus, it is crucial to examine the ethical issues that military employees have to resolve on an everyday basis and in extreme conditions. It is possible to say that the replacement of humans with remotely controlled machines greatly influences the organizational behavior of the employees in the military organizations as it leads to the destruction of other people without seeing them which makes them less human in the eyes of military men. Thus, the War on Terror has proved that the attempts to practice targeted killing of high-value terrorists led to the escalation of victims among civilians.
The studies of the impact of humor on the organizational behavior state that it is utilized either as a method of managerial control or a method of employee resistance. It is a general opinion that humor can be used as a tool for changing, modifying, and improving workplace motivation and group cohesion to increase employee retention. Some researchers note that humor can also be used as a disciplinary approach in military organizations (Godfrey, 2016). It is emphasized that the structure of military organizations creates such conditions that make it possible to apply a controlled type of resistance for employees through humor. This practice is believed to serve the demands of the military organization. Thus, humor serves to establish a form of social cohesion by utilizing disciplinary technologies of exclusion and inclusion at the local and broader level. It influences the relationship at the workplace governed by rank and arose through self-regulation. The dynamic and dialectic nature of humor makes it an interesting subject of study as it also impacts the social identity and organizational behavior of an employee. The ability of humor to manage an organizational activity makes it a powerful instrument for disciplinary activities widely used in military organizations in many countries.
The military profession is traditionally defined as masculine, and the organizations seem to struggle in attempts to provide equal opportunities both for men and women. It is a general opinion that women are informally excluded from performing most of the military jobs in the army. Muhr and Sløk-Andersen (2017) emphasize that the main reason for such exclusion is the historically based image of an ideal soldier and the assumptions that women are not physically and psychologically fitted to the military profession and usually are not capable of taking other person’s life. Still, at present, many women volunteer to be a part of the military profession, and the number of females in the U.S. Army and other armies of the world has significantly increased. Despite this, the number of women in the higher executive levels has not changed. Therefore, historical prejudices of the female capabilities still influence management decisions. This fact might significantly impact the organizational behavior of females in the U.S. Army as informal exclusion from some military professions is regarded as the violence of equal rights of genders.
Psychological Contract and Productive and Unproductive Behavior
The military sector in the United States is mainly characterized by a complicated network of private companies and government bureaus which are dependent on the funding by the government. Such a structure is believed to encourage bureaucracy and unproductive behaviors in the army both in wartime and peacetime. Some researchers state that the outcomes of military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan were caused by systematic corruption, waste, and fraud in the military sector of the United States, which resulted in unproductive entrepreneurship (Coyne, Michaluk, & Reese, 2016). It is emphasized that in wartimes, the reasons for unproductive behavior are multiplied because of the involvement of additional funds which have to be utilized quickly in the conflict environment that is constantly changing. The analysis of the factors that lead to unproductive behavior in the U.S. Army shows that the undesirable results are not caused by the greed of military employees but by the set rules applied in the organizations. Thus, unproductive behavior is a result of certain rules and explains some economic factors of corruption and waste that was experienced during the interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq.
The socialization process of a new employee is largely influenced by a psychological contract shaped at the beginning of the career. It can be defined as a personal perception of the mutual obligations that impact the relationship between the employer and the employee. Delobbe, Cooper‐Thomas, and De Hoe (2016) note that in the military organizations, the newcomers who obtain a high sense of personal obligations might benefit more from training and build a better relationship with their colleagues and supervisors, which will help them to adjust to the working environment better. It is believed that intensive training programs in military organizations utilize highly institutionalized socialization tactics. Thus, the high quality of exchange between the leader and an employee is regarded as evidence that the employer is fulfilling the given obligations. It might influence the level of employee obligations in the future. Moreover, the understanding of the obligations by newcomers at the beginning of the military career greatly assists in such socialization results as role clarity, the perception of organization values, and group integration. Thus, training usually predicts the obligations and organizational behavior of the newcomers in the context of the shaped psychological contract.
The initial set of traits and characteristics that shape the organizational behavior in the U.S. Army is believed to decrease the military recruitment turnover by increasing the number of cadets who decide to contract. The contract represents a written obligation to participate in an Armed Services Organization of the United States after graduation. Some researchers state that long-term commitments in military career might be influenced by such factors as grit, self-efficiency, and perceived organizational support (Jordan, Gabriel, Teasley, Walker, & Schraeder, 2015). While the first two factors seem to have little influence on the cadet’s decisions to contract, the perceived organizational support is reported to have positive relations to the contracting decisions. Thus, certain organizational behavior in the U.S. Army, as well as a positive experience of organizational support and relationship with leaders and peers might impact the decisions of the newcomers to contract and make long-term commitments.
Leadership in the Military Organizations
Extreme and life-threatening situations greatly influence the methods of making decisions by military leaders. Leadership in combat conditions is believed to be the topic that is not fully studied yet. Some researchers note that in dangerous situations, sense giving and sensemaking are utilized simultaneously, which makes crucial the type of training that military leaders receive, as well as the understanding of duty proclaimed by the leaders (Dixon, Weeks, Boland, & Perelli, 2017). Crisis leadership can be regarded as a possessed quality used to evaluate leadership competency. In combat conditions, a leader needs to make sense regarding the current situation and give this sense to the followers to help them to survive and navigate them through the extreme situation. The awareness of the situation is regarded to be an integral part of the decision-making process in deathly danger. The military campaign in Iraq and Afghanistan made it possible to research the organizational behavior of leaders in the U.S. Army to understand better the aspects that influence their decisions in combat conditions. Thus, the model was developed to evaluate such factors as presentation capacity, distributive cognitive capacity, as well as situational awareness. These factors are stated to influence the organizational behavior of military leaders in extreme conditions.
The other aspect that influences organizational behavior in military organizations is transformational leadership. It is utilized to reach the higher-order goals through the communication process and development of followers who would transcend their interests in favor of the goals of the organization. Some researchers argue that transformational leadership applied by the leaders in the U.S. Army indirectly assists in the reduction of turnover intentions of their followers through increasing their job embeddedness (Eberly, Bluhm, Guarana, Avolio, & Hannah, 2017). The positive impact of such type of leadership is also reported for organizational and individual outcomes. The aspects of transformational leadership are associated with managing crises and extreme situations, as well as uncertainty. The capability of a leader to manage the situation in an extreme context is crucial because of negative aspects of working in such situations such as fear of death, insecurity, and conditions hazardous to health. Thus, transformational leadership is one of the skills that determine the competence of the military leader and influences the organizational behavior of the followers.
Temporary Groups and Intergroup Communication
The military forces of the United States are traditionally trained to engage in activities that require the participation of national forces and collaboration with them. Therefore, police and military officers are equally trained to work with civilians effectively. Some researchers note that the Good Stranger frame greatly assists in communicating with civilians in the extreme situations as it allows them to build trust (Klein, Klein, Lande, Borders, & Whitacre, 2015). Therefore, this frame needs such skills as perspective talking, trustworthy behavior, and gaining voluntary compliance and rapport. It is believed that this type of behavior is easy to acquire for military employees as some aspects of it are a part of the organizational behavior which is obligatory for military organizations.
The network of Army coalition control and command organization utilizes the communication time series which effect the important variants of scenarios that might occur over time. Usually, the military network is divided into Brigade and Division levels. Some researchers state that the prediction of communication volume is dependent on the events in the given time point rather than on the events that occur according to the scenario (Marusich & Buchler, 2016). Thus, the Brigade communications can be predicted by the events that occurred in the battlefield and Division communications are determined by past values. It gives a better understanding of the levels of subordination in the U.S. Army that often influence the organizational behavior of military employees and their values.
Temporary high-performance teams that are built-in extreme situations are reported to have members with various skills, competence, and attitudes. It helps to make tough decisions and reach team goals, as well as communicate in stressful situations and manage conflicts in extreme conditions. Moldjord and Iversen (2015) emphasize that the encouraging of vulnerability trust development in such teams greatly assists in increasing their performance. Creating a caring attitude, familiarity, and recognition of the authority of other team members are the main factors in developing vulnerability trust. Thus, it is possible to distinguish role trust and vulnerability trust as a part of the organizational behavior of the military employees. Role trust is based on rational assessment and stereotypes while vulnerability trust is related to personalized, rational, and initial trust.
Conclusion
The given review dealt with the aspects of organizational behavior in the U.S. Army. It is possible to say that the organizational behavior of military workers is closely related to their social and work identity. Some of the aspects of voluntary organizational behavior such as the promotion of values of the military organization and support of coworkers are obligatory in the U.S. Army. The psychological contract greatly influences the behavior of newcomers and the level of their commitment. Transformational leadership is an integral part of leader behavior and influences the attitude to work and turnover intentions of their followers, especially in combat conditions. Thus, the organizational behavior of military employees greatly differs and has a significant impact on their personality and actions.
References
Alvinius, A., Johansson, E., Larsson, G., Institutionen för säkerhet, strategi och ledarskap (ISSL), Ledarskapscentrum, & Försvarshögskolan. (2017). Job satisfaction as a form of organizational commitment at the military strategic level: A grounded theory study. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 25(2), 312.
Bloomfield, B. P., & Vurdubakis, T. (2015). Mors ex Machina: Technology, embodiment and the organization of destruction. Organization Studies, 36(5), 621-641.
Coyne, C. J., Michaluk, C., & Reese, R. (2016). Unproductive entrepreneurship in US military contracting. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Public Policy, 5(2), 221.
Delobbe, N., Cooper‐Thomas, H. D., & De Hoe, R. (2016). A new look at the psychological contract during organizational socialization: The role of newcomers’ obligations at entry. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37(6), 845-867.
Dixon, D. P., Weeks, M., Boland, R., & Perelli, S. (2017). Making sense when it matters most: An exploratory study of leadership in extremis. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 24(3), 294-317.
Eberly, M. B., Bluhm, D. J., Guarana, C., Avolio, B. J., & Hannah, S. T. (2017). Staying after the storm: How transformational leadership relates to follower turnover intentions in extreme contexts. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 102, 72-85.
Godfrey, R. (2016). Soldiering on: Exploring the role of humour as a disciplinary technology in the military. Organization, 23(2), 164-183.
Haslam, S. A., Cornelissen, J. P., & Werner, M. D. (2017). Metatheories and metaphors of organizational identity: Integrating social constructionist, social identity, and social actor perspectives within a social interactionist model. International Journal of Management Reviews, 19(3), 318-336.
Jordan, M. H., Gabriel, T. J., Teasley, R., Walker, W. J., & Schraeder, M. (2015). An integrative approach to identifying factors related to long-term career commitments: A military example. Career Development International, 20(2), 163-178.
Klein, G., Klein, H. A., Lande, B., Borders, J., & Whitacre, J. C. (2015). Police and military as good strangers. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 88(2), 231-250.
Marusich, L. R., & Buchler, N. (2016). Time series modelling of army mission command communication networks: An event-driven analysis. Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, 22(4), 467-486.
Miscenko, D., & Day, D. V. (2016). Identity and identification at work. Organizational Psychology Review, 6(3), 215-247.
Moldjord, C., & Iversen, A. (2015). Developing vulnerability trust in temporary high performance teams. Team Performance Management, 21(5/6), 231-246.
Muhr, S. L., & Sløk-Andersen, B. (2017). Exclusion and inclusion in the Danish military: A historical analysis of the construction and consequences of a gendered organizational narrative. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 30(3), 367.
Rose, K., Herd, A., & Palacio, S. (2017). Organizational citizenship behavior: An exploration of one aspect of cultural adjustment faced by U.S. army soldiers transitioning from military to civilian careers. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 19(1), 14-24.