How do service members interpret and respond to relational hierarchies that emerge informally within their unit? This is an important question for military psychology researchers because it can have significant effects on morale, productivity, cohesion, and retention. Relational hierarchies are informal social structures that arise when individuals organize themselves into groups based on their perceived power, status, influence, or authority. These hierarchies may be based on factors such as rank, experience, position, skill, age, gender, race, ethnicity, personality, physical appearance, or personal relationships.
Some units may form "informal command chains" where subordinates defer to a particular individual who acts as a leader even though they lack formal authority. Other units may have a more egalitarian structure with no clear leaders. There are many possible configurations of these hierarchies. In this article, I will discuss how service members interpret and respond to relational hierarchies based on various types of evidence from the literature.
Let's consider what service members say about these hierarchies. Qualitative studies interviewing veterans found that they often view hierarchy in terms of power, with senior-ranked individuals having greater control over junior-ranked ones (Boswell & Cohen, 2016).
There was also evidence that some participants saw hierarchy as an opportunity to gain prestige or social capital by associating with powerful individuals. Another study found that junior-ranked women often felt marginalized due to implicit biases towards male dominance (McNaughton et al., 2018).
Most participants reported positive attitudes towards hierarchy but noted it could sometimes lead to tension and conflict within the unit if not managed properly.
We can look at how relational hierarchies affect performance. One review found that hierarchical structures tend to increase cohesion, motivation, and task commitment among members (Humphreys et al., 2009).
Other research suggests that too much hierarchy can actually decrease performance by limiting creativity and innovation (Ashforth & Mael, 1989).
When hierarchies become rigid or inflexible, it can cause friction between individuals who feel unfairly treated.
Military leaders may use relational hierarchies to promote their own interests instead of those of the group, leading to poor decision-making and morale problems.
We need to consider how service members respond to relational hierarchies. In one study, participants were randomly assigned to a high-hierarchy or low-hierarchy condition before completing a cognitive test. Those in the high-hierarchy condition performed worse on the task because they became anxious about maintaining their status rather than focusing on the task itself (Wigfield & Eccles, 20000). This is known as "status anxiety" and can be detrimental to performance and wellbeing. Another study found that some individuals attempt to manipulate relational hierarchies for personal gain, such as seeking favor from powerful individuals or avoiding criticism from subordinates (Boswell & Cohen, 2016).
Most studies suggest that service members adapt to hierarchy by conforming to expectations and norms within their unit.
We should examine how hierarchies affect retention. One study found that individuals in high-hierarchy units were more likely to leave due to perceived unfair treatment or lack of opportunities for advancement (Gorman et al., 2005). Another review found that junior-ranked women were especially prone to leaving if they felt marginalized or discriminated against (McNaughton et al., 2018).
Some individuals may stay in their unit due to social support networks or sense of belonging, even when feeling disempowered (Fitzgerald et al., 2017).
Research suggests that service members interpret and respond to relational hierarchies based on various factors, including age, gender, race, ethnicity, personality, physical appearance, and personal relationships. They may view hierarchy positively as a source of power or negatively as a threat to equality. These hierarchies also have important effects on performance, decision-making, morale, and retention. Future research could explore how leaders can promote fairness and flexibility while still maintaining necessary order and cohesion within the unit.
How do service members interpret and respond to relational hierarchies that emerge informally within their unit?
Researchers have found that service members are generally aware of the formal chain of command but may also recognize an informal hierarchy that emerges from their personal relationships with other members. This informal hierarchy can be based on factors such as rank, position, personality, experience, and skill level. The responses of individual service members to this informal hierarchy vary depending on their values, beliefs, and perceptions of fairness.