IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hic/wpaper/107.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Organizational Weapons: Explaining Cohesion in the Military

Author

Listed:
  • Paul D. Kenny

    () (Yale University)

Abstract

Cohesion is defined as the creation and maintenance of cooperative effort towards the attainment of the organization’s goals. This paper argues that existing theories of cohesion in the military are deficient. For most soldiers, patriotism and ideology play only a diffuse an indirect motivational role. Explanations based on selective incentives and primary group solidarity also suffer from theoretical and empirical inconsistencies. This paper maintains that the more individual soldiers self-identify as members of an armed organization over other putative identities, the greater will be organizational cohesion. While the military provides individuals with a sense of belonging to an entity greater than the face-to-face primary group, it also provides a means of status distinction within, as opposed to across communities. Three mechanisms by which organizational socialization is strengthened are identified: training, ritual, and collective burden sharing. Evidence from the U.S. Army in Vietnam and the Wehrmacht in the Second World War suggests that the latter may be especially significant. Soldiers kill and die, not for society as a whole, but for an imagined community of fellow warriors, an imaginary brotherhood.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul D. Kenny, 2011. "Organizational Weapons: Explaining Cohesion in the Military," HiCN Working Papers 107, Households in Conflict Network.
  • Handle: RePEc:hic:wpaper:107
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.hicn.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/wp1071.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Collier & Anke Hoeffler, 2004. "Greed and grievance in civil war," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 56(4), pages 563-595, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hic:wpaper:107. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Alia Aghajanian) or () or () or (). General contact details of provider: http://www.hicn.org .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.