Institution Vs Organisation

Once the individuals have chosen to enlist or join the service organisation, the next logical step in examining their pathway from service to transition is to examine the organisations in which they serve. The need arose to investigate the way in which the practices of the organisation influence the identity work of the individual, and the influential moments that defined the individual in their service role. There is substantial literature around the institutionalisation of military personnel (Cooper, Caddick, Godier, Cooper, & Fossey, 2018; Godfrey, Lilley & Brewis, 2012), as well as some research into what is often termed cultural impacts on police (Prenzler, 1997). There is a small amount of research that touches upon this area for emergency services (Rich, Lepine & Crawford, 2010). Before organisational practices could be said to influence the identity work of the individual employee, the question of whether these service organisations institutionalised their workers needed to be answered.

Faris (1995) suggested that a move of the military from an institution to an organisation contributed to a decline in recruitment numbers during the post-Cold War years. However, literature since that time indicates that institutionalisation in the military is still strong and remains a focus of studies in identity work for the transition of military personnel (Beech et al., 2017; Brunger et al., 2013; Higate, 2001). It is a multi-layered framework which begins upon entry to the military organisation and induction into the institution and/or culture (Prenzler, 2009; Sever, 2008), followed by membership of the largely hegemonic masculine organisation, which redefines the individual’s identity in the transition from civilian to military (Brunger et al., 2013; Higate, 2001). An examination of the institution and the rituals that separate it from the civilian world (Godfrey et al., 2012) is key to understanding the processes and to ascertaining whether the reasoning can be applied to other para-military organisations such as police and emergency services.

As part of an examination of the socialisation of individuals within the military, Godfrey et al. (2012) explore the organisation of the body within a military framework. In context, the study examines how a previously civilian body is ‘made fit for military purpose’ (Godfrey et al., 2012, p. 542). It prompts discussion around the fact that individuals are transitioned from civilians to the military and conditioned to be soldiers, which is of great significance to any examination of the challenges facing military personnel who are transitioning back to civilian life. Whilst the work of Godfrey et al. (2012) is focused on the military there are elements that are transferable to police and emergency services. Essentially, Godfrey et al. (2012) address the fact that part of the institutionalisation of individuals in organisations such as the military is the way in which the physical body is transformed to a military body. Butler (1993) states that the body is the receiver of social meaning, which Godfrey et al. (2012) explain ‘is governed through a range of institutional practices and discourses’ (p. 544). In the military, and in a similar manner in the police and emergency services, these institutional practices include high-level physical training, intense discipline, humiliation, and separation from their previous life (Godfrey et al., 2012). Further, using Foucault’s (1977) strategy of discipline and his theory of the docile body, Godfrey et al. (2012) explain that isolating individuals (or their bodies) from society as a whole and tasking specific activities is key to creating an alternative non-civilian body. Cooper et al. (2018) suggest that these activities which take place in specific time and space are a process of training that become a transformative act; and that the ‘transformation of the civilian into the soldier’ takes place as soon as the individual commences basic training (Godfrey et al., 2012, p. 549).

The transformation takes place almost immediately when the individuals undertake basic training, and although the literature is focused on the military, similar practices are seen in the police and emergency services (QPS, 2014). Following the training, the workplace itself begins to reinforce the transformation on a regular basis. It starts with a uniform, which is a symbol of the change that is apparent not only to the wearer but also to the wider community. Godfrey et al. (2012) suggest that the use of uniforms contributes greatly to the socialisation of individuals when transformation activities are being used to create a new identity and group collective. In the military, but also in police and emergency services, the use of a uniform is twofold. In the first instance, the uniform helps the individual to identify with the group collective and shed their own individual characteristics. Secondly, the uniform identifies the individual to others as part of a group collective, with certain roles and expectations, and sets them apart from general members of society. Uniforms are not unique to these three groups but are part of the process of group thinking that is encouraged and utilised to redefine each individual. Godfrey et al. (2012) also suggest that rank is a further contributor to defining the group mentality because it uses both discipline and partitioning as a technique to foster competitiveness and rivalry. This in turn encourages the group mentality as the individuals strive to perform for recognition and work hard to hone the necessary skills and behaviours. Most importantly, for military, police and emergency services, in this context, the preparation for the undertaking of a unique form of labour is the most significant factor in the socialisation process (Godfrey et al., 2012); particularly when the labour can prove to be life threatening – for the individual, their peers, or members of the community. Foucault’s (1977) work suggests that the instrumental coding of the body by the repeated activities and exposure in training detaches the individual from the actual nature of their labour, distinguishes them from non-members of the group, and allows them to accept the most lethal of practices as a technical skill (Godfrey et al., 2012). This is essential for the operation of any military, police or emergency services organisation as it removes the need to think and replaces it with action under any external circumstances, such as the pressure of armed conflict. However, it is this coding of the individual that lends itself to the new identity within the military, police or emergency services group.

In addition, these practices and processes, repeated activities, and acquisition of technical skills are what give the individual capital within their organisation. Rank structures support this capital and provide the necessary power that is normal with increased capital. Bourdieu (1986) suggests that this sort of cultural capital is embodied in knowledge which Cooper et al. (2018) explain occurs in ‘long lasting dispositions of the mind and body’, however with these specific organisations it is often institutionalised and trapped inside rank, positions and roles (p. 162). Cooper et al. (2018) further explain that the absence of any ‘offstage’ area to which individuals can escape ensures that any former or pre-existing identity is removed (p. 159). It creates the concept of the ‘total institution’ where integration is the key and the military body is the result (Cooper et al., 2018, p. 159).

As this transformation continues to expand, the individuals in these service organisations become more focused on their role inside the organisation and less upon their role in the wider community. They begin to define themselves within the activities they undertake in the work environment each day. The question that arises is why this process remains so powerful when it is simply work tasks in a work environment. Woodward and Jenkings (2011) expand upon this concept and suggest that the primary component to the activities conducted in the institutional setting is because the individual is no longer ‘being’ but is now ‘doing’. This becomes one of the largest contributors to the coding of these individuals, with little to no input as to how that coding can be undone when these individuals transition back to civilian life. Woodward and Jenkings (2011) suggest that the transformational ritual is based in the fact that these institutional identities have a materiality to them and the technical skills that construct the new identity are learned (Woodward & Jenkings, 2011). Therefore, at the centre of the military identity is the act (Woodward & Jenkings, 2011). Thereafter comes immersion in the behaviours that will reinforce the identity associated with these acts; and continued participation in military events confirms a military identity (Woodward & Jenkings, 2011).

Once the individuals begin to identify as their role then their worth begins to change in the workplace. The more valuable they become to the service organisation the more human capital they build in that environment. It begs the question why this is an issue for former members of the police, military and emergency services and how can it be managed in relation to the development of their identity in a post-service environment. The literature provides a link between the activities and training seen in the military and mirrored to an extent in the police and emergency services, and the building of human capital (Davey, 2009; Godfrey et al., 2012). Davey (2009) describes the use of Bourdieu’s habitus as an anchor to cultural capital, suggesting it is a tool to understand the positioning of individuals in their new environments. Bourdieu’s (1986) theory of habitus is often contested as being ill-defined but the use of it together with cultural capital stabilises it as a tool to understand the narratives of individuals as they navigate change. Bourdieu (1986) uses cultural capital to help understand the types of capital that are non-material but arise from economic capital. He refers to capital in three specific guises: economic capital, cultural capital and social capital (Davey 2009; Bourdieu, 1986). He explains that economic capital is immediately transferable into money and cultural and social capital may be convertible into economic capital under the correct conditions (Bourdieu, 1986). For example, the use of social and cultural capital as a currency in police, military or emergency services can result in an increase in rank which can result in an increase in economic capital, namely higher pay and benefits. Cultural capital is most commonly understood in its institutionalisation into educational qualifications, with reference to the return on investment into oneself (Bourdieu, 1986). Social capital is the aggregate of the resources available from networking with others (Bourdieu, 1986), or in this case, membership of a group. Further, Bourdieu’s notion of symbolic capital, described with reference to prestige and social honour captures the way in which capital can be non-economic yet still create social inequality (Hatch, 1989). This is based on the notion that standing and achievement are part of a central motivation behind systems of inequality (Hatch, 1989). For the police, military and emergency services personnel, this concept helps explain the divide between them as service members and the non-serving civilians. Davey (2009) examines the use of cultural capital and social capital during the transition of three state-educated students to a private/independent school environment in the US. She follows their progression through the transition period and concludes that continuity occurs when there is a direct fit between an individual’s habitus and their new field; whereas transformation occurs, with layers being built onto habitus, when there is a discord between the individual’s habitus and their new field (Davey, 2009). Applying this thinking to the training process for police, military and emergency services, there is a possible discord between the individual habitus pre-training and the new field presented in the training environment. In fact, the work of Godfrey et al. (2012) suggests that the new field of the military is specifically adjusted at all times to be ‘new’ to all individuals to ensure a discord between their previous identities and their to-be established identities as military soldiers. Most importantly, it is the institutional recognition of cultural capital (Bourdieu, 1986) that has the biggest impact on individuals within police, military and emergency services. This creates conversion rates that become both material and symbolic and contribute greatly to the identity of the individual within the service organisation as part of the group collective (Bourdieu, 1986). Once the individual leaves the service organisation they are then in possession of overall human capital that needs to be translated to the measures of worth used in the non-police, military or emergency services employment sector.

Understanding the group collective and associated training mentality and techniques is important to fully grasp the concept of institutionalisation in a workplace organisation and the way in which it impacts on the identity of the individual (Bergman, Burdett & Greenberg, 2014). King (2006) suggests that military institutions rely upon social cohesion amongst their groups because the nature of their labour demands commitment to a collective goal. The commitment to collective action is what creates a uniform response under combat conditions because it is the stress of such conditions that is most likely to result in the deviant actions of individuals (King, 2006). As such, to avoid individuals responding to instincts of self-preservation, they are repetitively trained in activities that will ensure social cohesion in the group and therefore a group response to the situation. Most importantly, for the individuals, this repetitive activity and shared goals become deeply ingrained in not only the collective consciousness, but also the individual consciousness (King, 2006). Similar training is seen in police and emergency services, where the activities are the focus of the practice and are repeatedly and constantly performed until the group moves as one. Further, specialist groups in the police are even more similar to the military as they form the small primary groups that are responsible for elite tasks in addition to their standard role as police. This helps answer the question whether the same institutional issues apply to police and emergency services as well as military and supports the examination of identity issues for members from all three service groups.

It is also significant to an understanding of camaraderie in these organisations, that it is based in workplace requirements and collective goals rather than social relations. This has a potential impact on the social capital of the individual once they are no longer a member of that team, or no longer require those technical skills. It is suggested that these issues are possibly not unique to the military and will be investigated as part of this study for police and emergency services. King (2006) suggests that the work of Durkheim (2008) on the processes of group formation are applicable to the military. Durkheim and Swain’s (2008) study of Aboriginal clans revealed that their participation in rituals committed them as individuals to the group and to each other (King, 2006). Further, acknowledgment of the totem was an acknowledgement of a hierarchy like that seen in military and para-military organisations (King, 2006). Durkheim (2008) considered these group formation processes to be universal (King, 2006). King (2006) explains that the military have developed procedures and techniques that sustain social cohesion in any environment. He suggests that this ‘ritualistic priming’ unifies the group around the collective goal and commits each individual to that group (King, 2006, p. 504). However, what is interesting in King’s (2006) work is that he suggests that camaraderie in the military is a consequence of the group formation processes and not a pre-requisite.

King (2006) states that military sociologists often suggest that the relationship between individuals, in particular the bond between males, is the precursor to the social relations that secure the group mentality and commit individuals to the group collective. But King (2006) states that the comradeship seen between military individuals is a function of their continued and repetitive collective training drills, not from their personal exchanges. This contributes to a better understanding of the camaraderie seen amongst members of the police, military and emergency services, which is present even when personal relationships are not. This is addressed by Godfrey et al. (2012) who consider the group of individuals to be one military body as they undertake their training. They provide the example of passing out parades (Godfrey et al., 2012), which are seen in military, police and emergency services (fire services in particular), where the whole group is uniformed and moves as one as opposed to a number of individuals. King (2006) provides examples of highly successful British military operations that demonstrated incredible teamwork towards a collective goal amongst individuals who had been in conflict only hours before. He suggests that personal relationships are irrelevant to camaraderie in the military environment (King, 2006). Further, he provides examples of British military missions that have gone awry and yet were being conducted by groups who were known to be friends (King, 2006). The reports on the mission were that they could not get the team operating as one and/or their technical skills were lacking (King, 2006).

Considering this, addressing the issue of continuity of identity post-service becomes relevant. If individuals are redefined using physical and psychological training techniques that encourage them to embrace a group mentality and willingly participate as a member of a group collective, then continuity of this habitus will mediate the level of discord in their post-service transition. Whilst Davey (2009) suggests that continuity can be viewed as both a positive and negative experience, with one encouraging transformation and the other reducing discord; in the context of the military experience, and possibly transferable to police and emergency service experiences, Higate (2001) suggests that continuity post-service fails to allow the individual to effectively redefine their non-military identity. This addresses the need to strengthen transition processes and consider new skill development as part of post-service employment preparation. Otherwise, the transition process is essentially delayed by allowing continuity of employment. This is a new understanding, that in light of the findings, should contribute greatly to improved transition processes for former police, military and emergency services workers post-service.