The rank dynamics of integrating new members: The process of hierarchical crafting.

Abstract

Given that hierarchy is a ubiquitous form of organization that influences social behavior, we explored the relational dynamics of how newcomers and incumbent members negotiated and managed rank in a transient yet interdependent work setting. Our investigation focused on a specialized military base that monitors over 200,000 flights per year and is responsible for activating military aircraft in response to potential threats. We identified four themes: the omnipresence of hierarchy; how rank differences can facilitate and complicate newcomer entry; crafting hierarchical relations to advance social and task goals; and the tension of navigating changing hierarchical demands. Against the backdrop of highly formalized rank differences, squadron members described an elastic hierarchy at the base—due in large part to the process of hierarchical crafting. Vertical relationships were actively managed and shaped by higher ranking members to advance task and social goals. Despite higher ranking members’ efforts to maximize the benefits and minimize the costs of hierarchy, these shifting expectations for social behavior could result in uneasiness and ambiguity for lower ranking members. In fact, efforts to implement an elastic hierarchy may unintentionally reinforce power and status differences by highlighting the asymmetric influence wielded by higher ranking members. These findings illustrate specific ways in which rank is an integral and dynamic component of the intake process.

Advancing open science and methodological rigor in Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology.

“…It is recognized that there will be instances, for example, in the use of qualitative studies (see Tamminen et al, 2021), where it would not be possible to provide data for open access use without violating assurances of anonymity and/or confidentiality. Since adopting the TOP Guidelines, the journal has received and published several high-quality qualitative studies that make this very point (e.g., Benson et al, 2022; Hong & Allen, 2022; Lassman et al, 2022; Salim & Winter, 2022). In making data available, authors are also directed to ensure that they follow their respective institutional review board requirements related to the treatment of shared data (i.e., de-identification).…”

The nature of status: Navigating the varied approaches to conceptualizing and measuring status

“…The perceived mutability of status hierarchies especially encourages members to advance their own relative position (Hays & Bendersky, 2015). At the same time, high-status individuals may employ strategies to defend their status or strategically downplay their status (Benson et al, 2022). For example, dominance-oriented individuals may exclude talented group Organizational Psychology Review 14(2) members from participation, withhold information from the group, closely monitor potential rivals, and prevent talented members from finding other allies (Case & Maner, 2014;Maner & Mead, 2010;Mead & Maner, 2012).…”