Propensity to Serve

Studies about the recruitment and employment of individuals into the US military are plentiful (Brown & Rana, 2005; Faris, 1995; Ford, Gibson, DeCesare, Marsh, & Griepentrog, 2013; Ford, Gibson, Griepentrog, & Marsh, 2014; Maley & Hawkins, 2017; Mankowski et al., 2015). Primarily, they focus upon the propensity for military service and measure the extent to which that propensity evolves into actual service (Brown & Rana, 2005; Ford et al., 2014; Maley & Hawkins, 2017). This literature was examined to see if it lends some explanation about the identity connection of personnel in the services with their service organisation when in post-service employment. In particular, whether a propensity to serve remained throughout the long-term career of the individual, and therefore explained job satisfaction issues in post-service employment that was not of a service nature. Research in this area helped add context to the interview questions about the participants’ aspirations before their service career, and how those aspirations changed in their post-service environment.  

Further, the studies address the connection between propensity for military service and length of service (Ford et al., 2014). There is little to no similar research on propensity for service in police or emergency services. There is some literature relating to the attitude of young Australians to military service, which holds the capacity to draw some conclusions about propensity to serve, but nothing as specific nor definitive as the international studies (Wadham, Skrzypiec & Slee, 2014). Obviously, service is not restricted to these professions, with hundreds of other roles in society being service oriented, so it was literature that specifically addressed this type of service role that was sought. Maley and Hawkins (2017) examined the propensity for military service inside a cultural legacy framework, specifically as it exists in the Southern states of the US. Interestingly they suggest that there are normative pressures that influence individuals in their choice for military service that are both descriptive and injunctive norms (Maley & Hawkins, 2017). They explain that descriptive norms relate to individual factors such as age, gender and race; and injunctive norms relate to environmental factors such as family influences, education and religion (Maley & Hawkins, 2017). The latter is a significant influence as it draws upon the approval or disapproval of others in the choice to serve in the military (Maley & Hawkins, 2017). It is suspected that normative pressures would have the same influence on individuals in their choice to serve in the police and emergency services, although no direct research has been located in relation to this. Brown and Rana (2005) confirm that existing research found that the former or current military service of family members influences the future service of their children, which Faris (1995) suggests is related to patriotism. Faris (1995) suggests that patriotic motivation stems directly from family influences, whilst Brown and Rana (2005) argued that individuals with family members who are currently or have historically served in the military will have a higher propensity for military service. Similarly, Legree et al. (2000) suggest that family members will substantially influence the individual decision to enlist, thereby further activating that individual’s propensity for military service. This then lends itself to inquiry as to whether family influences are an important component of an individual’s choice to join or enlist in the police, military or emergency services, and whether an identity connection is created before recruitment. 

Expounding upon this, Brown and Rana (2005) found that the existence of family members with military service backgrounds is a moderating factor between that individual’s propensity for military service and their actual enlistment. They studied this in a social exchange theory framework that suggests the exchange between the military and the individual is of reciprocal value, with the individual’s human capital via service offered in exchange for military benefits including education with pay (Brown & Rana, 2005). The presence of family influence can be the factor that pushes the individual to follow their propensity for service and undertake the exchange (Brown & Rana, 2005). However, Legree et al. (2000) found that often the influence of family on individual propensity to serve was misinterpreted. Their study revealed that although young Americans were influenced by their family, often their actual understanding of their family’s position in relation to military service was incorrect (Legree at al., 2000). But this did not prevent the fact that family influenced the transition from military propensity to military enlistment (Legree et al., 2000). The influence, albeit potentially misinterpreted, was present.  

A limitation on the work of both Faris (1995) and Legree et al. (2000) is that they studied only males on the basis that the military is a male dominated workplace environment. However, their work is confirmed in later studies by Ford et al. (2014) and Wadham et al. (2014) where both male and female participants were included; and by Mankowski et al. (2015) who studied female enlistment decisions. Ford et al. (2014) conclude that propensity for military service is one of the ‘most valid predictors of enlistment available’ (p. 12), however they also identify that propensity has no influence over eligibility and further, individuals without propensity may still enlist as a result of other factors such as regions with high military presence. Statistically, their results indicate that individuals who had identified that they were going to join the military were 13 times as likely to join as those who had said they would definitely not join and twice as likely as those who said they would probably join (Ford et al., 2014, p. 10). Further, they confirm that many enlistments arise from those who had indicated no propensity to serve (Ford et al., 2014). Their earlier work (Ford et al., 2013) indicates that propensity is related to tenure and that those individuals who said they were going to join and did so, stayed in service longer than those who initially said they were not going to join, yet enlisted anyway (Ford et al., 2014). 

However, the recruitment processes in Australia are different and cultural differences in patriotism are apparent. 

From an Australian perspective, Wadham et al. (2014) studied the attitudes of young Australians to military service and although they indicate that attitudes to service may influence actual enlistment, they did not address the question directly. As such, they concluded that favourable attitudes to the military do not automatically correspond to propensity to serve, however they note that the reasons young people are attracted to military service are not significantly different from the testing conducted in North America (Wadham et al., 2014). Further, Ford et al. (2014) do suggest that other factors apart from propensity can result in enlistment, and a favourable attitude may be a factor. 

From a gender perspective, Mankowski et al. (2015) (who studied female enlistment decisions) state that almost half their participants (44 percent) indicated that familial ties to the military were an important reason for enlistment in the military. 

Propensity to serve is rooted in the factors that contribute to an individual’s choice to undertake a certain form of employment. The significance of this is great for military but also police and emergency services personnel as it lends itself to a need to examine their individual propensity to serve prior to enlistment in any of these service organisations, and thereafter the continued need to serve when transitioning from these occupations. Bachman, Segal, Freedman-Doan, and O’Malley (2000) reduce these factors to three key categories. Firstly, family background and demographics. Secondly, educational attainments and plans. Thirdly, attitudes, values and behaviours (Bachman et al., 2000). Whilst these categories can be applied to the military, it remains to be seen how they can be applied to police and emergency services. However, the specific factors that then make up each category are where differences occur. Bachman et al. (2000) in their study addressed factors such as parents’ average education and residential region in the first category; included college plans in the second category; and attitudes toward the military were included in the third category. Further, Bachman et al. (2000) added the specific military requirements between propensity to serve and actual enlistment. Faris (1995) suggests that a move toward viewing the military as an occupation instead of an institution and attempts to apply econometric techniques to its function in the marketplace ignored the values of patriotism and citizen responsibility. As such, he suggests that the propensity to serve is in the measure of the individual’s desire to serve their country, regardless of economic considerations (Faris, 1995).  

What was also apparent in the literature on propensity to serve was the factors that do draw individuals to these types of occupations (Mankowski et al., 2015; Wadham et al., 2014). The US National Research Council’s (2004) study into the employment aspirations of youth in the US is reinforced by the results of Wadham et al.’s (2014) Australian study, summarising the following themes as the basis of propensity to serve: learning opportunities, working conditions, external incentives, patriotic adventure, and equal opportunity. These factors are significant entering into this study as they help explain the reasons why individuals may enter the service organisations of police, military and emergency services in Australia. These findings demand a greater exploration of the motivation to enlist or join service organisations such as the police, military or emergency services to measure the impact of these motivations during the post-service transition period. 

It remains to be seen whether these themes are replicated in Australian military participants, as well as the police and emergency services. Wadham et al. (2014) explain that they qualitatively explored these themes which were statistically measured in the US study. Unlike the work of Ford et al. (2014) and Faris (1995), Wadham et al. (2014) found that familial connection and patriotism were in the minority. However, it is important to recall that the study by Wadham et al. (2014) was measuring attitude to the military rather than propensity to serve, therefore a greater focus was on the physical activities and resources of the individual Australian Defence Force services, such as the tactical ground warfare of the Army and the planes and helicopters in the Air Force. In the absence of any specific studies, Wadham et al. (2014) explore the Australian context of service in the military with factors that attract recruits, such as learning new skills, interesting job, work as a team, good pay, job security, parental approval, doing something for your country, and equal employment opportunity for women, to name just a few.