Sensemaking in Military Critical Incidents: The Impact of Moral Intensity

Abstract

This study explores the relationship between moral intensity and the use of different sensemaking strategies in military critical incidents. First, narratives of military personnel were used in order to select prototypical high/low moral intensity critical incidents. In a follow-up, a scenario study was conducted with active duty military personnel (N = 325) in order to examine the relationship between moral intensity (high versus low) and the use of sensemaking tactics. This study offers three main conclusions. Firstly, the use of sensemaking tactics is strongly tied to the level of moral intensity in the situation. In high intense situations the servicemen draw on previous experiences, prediction of consequences, and help of others in order to recognize and interpret the situation. Less attention goes out to higher level "critical thinking" (i.e., moral awareness, integrating available information, and analyzing personal biases in the decision-making process). Thus, it seems that in these critical incidents the servicemen react without giving room for thorough consideration and deliberation. Secondly, the number of deployments a serviceman experienced influences the perceived seriousness and harmfulness of the situation negatively in low intense situations. Finally, and in line with earlier studies, the results indicate that the concept of moral intensity is formed out of three rather than the six dimensions originally proposed by Jones (1991). The implications of these findings are discussed. Keywords business ethics; ethical decision making (EDM); military; moral intensity; sensemaking When facing ambiguous circumstances or a novel, challenging situation, individuals usually try to figure out what is going on and what the proper response in this situation might be (cf. Weick, Sutcliffe, & Obstfeld, 2005). This cognitive process is labeled "sensemaking" (cf.

Mission Accomplished? Reflecting on 60 Years ofBusiness & Society

“…Methodologically, techniques and approaches deployed included discussing ethnographic research in CSR (Bass & Milosevic, 2018), reflexive historical case study (Stutz & Sachs, 2018), experimental methods (Barnett & Leih, 2018; Døskeland & Pedersen, 2021), qualitative comparative analysis (Delmas & Pekovic, 2018), and sentiment analysis of social media data (Etter et al, 2018). The contexts being researched were also notably more varied than in prior phases of the journal, with some research being explicitly comparative (Grosvold et al, 2016; Jain, 2017), and other studies examining much more diverse forms of organizational context than previously seen in the journal with studies examining cooperatives (Davila & Molina, 2017), labor unions (Dawkins, 2016), the military (de Graaff et al, 2019), NGOs operating in extreme operating environments (Barin Cruz et al, 2016), social enterprises (Engelke et al, 2016) alongside a continuation of emphasis on small and entrepreneurial business (Casson & Pavelin, 2016). Notwithstanding the proliferation of novel research found in the journal in this period, the journal continued to publish contributions that took stock of the state of some significant areas of business and society research.…”

Cash Flow Volatility and Debt Maturity Structure: Role of Macroeconomic Factors

“…The problem which sensemaking solves is thus confusion, not ignorance; so aim of sensemaking is to reduce equivocality by generating a plausible account of the confusing events (Weick, 1995) and then enacting according to the newly acquired knowledge. This process concludes when an individual perceives that his/her understanding of the situation is sufficient to take a purposeful action (de Graaff, Giebels, Meijer, & Verweij, 2019). Therefore, sensemaking involves both cognitive processing of cues and behavioural actions which are employed to understand a novel situation (Klein & Eckhaus, 2017).…”

“…Usually the process of sensemaking begins when either reality is perceived to be different from expectation (Klein & Eckhaus, 2017) or the new situation departs from routine (de Graaff et al, 2019). Literature suggests that under uncertain situations sensemaking is triggered by violated expectations (Maitlis & Christianson, 2014), surprises (Louis, 1980), discrepant events (Weick, 1995), ambiguous events (Sandberg & Tsoukas, 2015), organizational crises (Weick, 1993), environment jolts, threat to identity and planned change initiatives (Maitlis & Christianson, 2014), or interruption in routine activities (Sandberg & Tsoukas, 2020).…”

Confronting Co-workers: Role Models, Attitudes, Expectations, and Perceived Behavioral Control as Predictors of Employee Voice in the Military

“…For example, a United States assessment of well-being of soldiers deployed to Iraq showed that fewer than 50% of the troops were willing to report a member of their unit for ethical violations (Warner et al, 2011). Due to the high stakes of military operations, for both the soldiers themselves, as well as for the operation and the local population, it is especially important for unethical behavior in the military to be actively prevented and dealt with (De Graaff et al, 2016, 2017). We argue that creating a culture of voice starts in the barracks at the home base in order for this culture to be solidly present in the more extreme and complex situations of deployment.…”