Organizaion Behavior
Organization Behavior
Organization Behavior / Army Morale
Organization Behavior / Army Morale
Performance among military personnel is always based on their commitment and morale towards the achievemnt of organizational goals. The outcomes are not necessarily based on the quality of skills of the employees. Scores of top military managers with an understanding of human resource motivation models identify the workplace motivators as accustomed to specific employees. The consequence is that there are elements of sound motivation systems that encourage supportive supervision.
According to Fennell (2011), the diffusion and displacement of responsibility mechanisms continue to obscure morale agencies in terms of the potential actors. Responsibility of displacement refers to responsibility attribution for an individual's actions and authority figures with tacit condoning or explicit directed behaviors. Diffusion of responsibility is applicable in similar ways while referring to ways of dispersing responsibility among people's actions for group members. Distortion of dehumanization, consequences, and the blame attribution mechanisms serves towards reducing or eliminating the distress perceived to be inflicting harm.
According to Rowland & Weaver (2008), Army morale identifies various categories of constructs where logical network propensities determine the morale disengagement. First, there is an element of morale relevance where individual personality traits and morale reasoning orientations and abilities from the dispositional morale emotions. The categories and constructs are explained based on the inclusion rationale and expected relationships between network factors are based on propensities of morale disengagement and focal construct for developing for criterion variables for unethical behavior. The intention aims at exhaustively tapping into the possible categories and constructs of potential relevance and propensity of morale disengagement while theoretically choosing salient representative constructs for the conceptual categories.
Morale disengagement happens on the basis of cognitive mechanisms that are inter-related while facilitating unethical behavior. Advantageous comparison, morale justification, and euphemistic labeling are some of the morale disengagement mechanisms that cognitively restructure the army's unethical acts and appear less harmful. Cognitive morale justification reframes the unethical acts based on the service provided to the greater good. Illustrations involve the justification of military atrocities that serve as worthy goals and re-cast inappropriate behavior.
According to Lang (2012), some of the critical considerations include unfair treatment for the appropriation of protecting friends and the organization. Euphemistic labeling involves the application of sanitized language for purposes of renaming harmful actions and making them appear benign. For instance, corrupt sections of the army allow for collusion with positive labels of 'teamwork'. Advantageous comparison is a prospect of exploiting contrast between the behavior within its consideration and the reprehensible behaviors of making the former appear innocuous. For intake, there are actions that conceive misrepresentation of lies regarding expense reports viewed as acceptable as compared to report violations with more egregious expense.
According to Bender (2012), morale leadership among top leaders is based on trickle-down effects into middle management and is affected both negative and positive outcomes from the followers in the operational levels. For instance, there is a negative relationship between followers' group deviance level and morale of top leaders as defined through voluntary membership's behaviors and workgroup outcomes. There is a relationship between morale orientation of top leaders and the commitment to the organization by the followers such as organizational citizenship behavior. According to Fennell (2011), this means that a morale leadership by top leadership determines the morale orientation of sub-leaders, which later influences the efforts and morale among followers down the main hierarchy. Such a trickle down the implication works based on combinations of social exchange and social learning mechanisms. The social learning theory appropriates that people through witnessing and emulating the behavior and values of morale models deemed attractive and credible. Individuals continue learning through direct experience while observing other entrants as well as how treatment is awarded to them.
According to Robbins and Judge (2013), leaders factor in the element of influencing their followers through virtue of their position while dissociating legitimate models for behavior among followers. The behavior of leaders is observed by the subordinates and serves as extensive cues in appropriating morale and motivation. Conversely, unmotivated leaders have a high likelihood of having followers that are engaged in plenty of unethical behaviors. According to Lang (2012), the alternative other influence and learning source relates to how leaders reward morale behavior and punish unethical practices. While followers learn the approach over time, morale and motivation is rewarded and valued through promotion of morale behavior through punishing wrong and the likelihood for refraining from inappropriate behavior. From this, the acquisition of leadership presupposes and morale leadership...
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now