Cohesion during Military Operations

Abstract

Military leaders and social scientists often regard unit cohesion as the key element in combat motivation and fighting resilience. However, a close look at today's battlefield calls for rethinking this assumption. This study is based on observations of combat units during the current Arab-Israeli conflict (the "Al-Aqsa Intifada"). In contrast to the usual depiction found in the scholarly literature, these units were characterized by some rather unique features. Instead of socially cohesive structures (based upon mutual, continuous, and common experiences), the action of these combat units during operations is based upon temporary frameworks based on short-term, ad hoc, and diverse components. In general, the components comprising these ad hoc frameworks do not have a common background and do not belong to the same organizational arms of the Israeli military. Nevertheless, the fighting power of the emergent amalgamations has not been diminished or damaged. Our study depicts several possible explanations for the social dynamics of such "instant units" and focuses on the importance of "swift trust" to their functioning.

Organizational processes and gender integration in operational military units: An Israel Defense Forces case study

“…Many debates have accompanied this process, most of which have centred on arguments in favour of or against the integration for biological, psychological and cultural reasons (DeLance, 2016). This argument can be countered by raising a number of questions, especially in view of accumulated experience in cohesiveness patterns in operational military units, where it has been found that these units operate well, even without much prior familiarity between their members (Ben-Shalom, Lehrer, & Ben-Ari, 2005). A central sociological area of study in this field is the social stratification of women in the army and the reproduction of their marginal status in military organizations.…”

“…This often leads to the establishment of a 'Hyper Masculine' culture, which may undermine the integration of women into such units (Archer, 2013). This argument can be countered by raising a number of questions, especially in view of accumulated experience in cohesiveness patterns in operational military units, where it has been found that these units operate well, even without much prior familiarity between their members (Ben-Shalom, Lehrer, & Ben-Ari, 2005). Moreover, it has been proven in western armies that women have functioned equally well on the frontline and that the ability of women to integrate into combat units depends more on the equivalent military training.…”

Cohesion: Exploring the Myths and Opening the Veil

“…12 "Cohesion is commonly considered by military leaders and social scientists as a crucial factor in contributing to the effectiveness of individuals and groups in battle…." 13 Military researchers study personnel assignment policies, training, and combat operations to discover useful methodologies contributing to unit cohesion. 14 Military research on cohesion is extensive and establishes a strong link between cohesion and unit performance.…”

Developing and Maintaining Trust in Hastily Formed Relief Networks

“…The very act of forming a network may of itself trigger an initial level of trust, where a positive assumption about the trusting behavior of others becomes the baseline position (Meyerson et al, 1996). However, Coppola et al (2004) and Ben-Shalom et al (2005) suggest that this baseline is also affected by the expectations of trust that members import from other settings with which they are familiar. In the HFRN, similar familiar settings include previous interactions with other humanitarian organizations and their logisticians in other disasters.…”

“…In considering the swift trust model (Figure 1), it is not only important to note the five elements of peripheral trust, but also to distinguish between trust and trusting behavior. Hung et al (2004) depict the latter as being mediated by the perceived risk of potential gains (or losses) of acting on the basis of inter-personal trust (see also Meyerson et al, 1996;Kramer, 1999;Hung et al, 2004;Ben-Shalom et al, 2005). In the disaster relief context, perceived risks can encompass physical danger as well as the loss of reputation as a result of depending on the behavior of other members of the HFRN.…”