measuring tool for the command climate of military units:...

7th International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences

“ASEAN 2015: Challenges and Opportunities” (Proceedings)

Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University, June 5-6, 2015 280

Measuring Tool for the Command Climate of Military

Units: The Intangible Human Dimension

1. Kwong Fook Wen , Col. Universiti Pertahanan Nasional Malaysia, Kem Sungai Besi,

57000 Kuala Lumpur, [email protected].

2. Jegak Uli, Prof. Dr. Universiti Pertahanan Nasional Malaysia, Kem Sungai Besi, 57000

Kuala Lumpur, [email protected].

3. Inderjit Singh, Lt. Col . Universiti Pertahanan Nasional Malaysia, Kem Sungai Besi, 57000

Kuala Lumpur, [email protected].

4. Norazman, Prof. Ir. Dr, Blast Engineering, Universiti Pertahanan Nasional Malaysia, Kem

Sungai Besi, 57000 Kuala Lumpur, [email protected]

Abstract

The climate of a unit has a direct impact on its effectiveness. Reviewing the unit

climate is important for a commander as that would allow him to manage his human

resource effectively. Thus, a tool for the review is necessary for assessment of military

units. This paper highlights the research done in developing a command climate survey

tool for commanders. The paper addresses the unit command climate survey factors

such as morale, leadership, cohesion, quality of life and human relations environment.

The research adopted the quantitative approach using the post-positivism philosophy

as its philosophical paradigm. Proportionate stratified random sampling was used for

sampling and Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was used for the statistical validation

of the model with the data (n = 1,132). The results indicate that the unit command

climate could be explained by the domains of morale and environment (R2 = 0.319).

Morale comprises the dimensions of leadership, motivation, espirit de corps and

spirituality while environment involves the dimensions of work, neighbourhood, family

and friends, and community. The Importance-Performance Matrix Analysis (IPMA)

shows that both the morale and the environment domains have similar total effect on

the command climate of a unit. However, environment demonstrates a more important

role in determining the outcome of the unit command climate when compared to

morale. The paper offers a stand-alone survey tool for a commander who can

administer it to obtain score and tally the results for an analysis of the unit climate. This

would provide indications of the surveyed unit’s strengths and weaknesses.

Keywords: Command Climate, tool, survey. PACS: 89.20.Dd

mailto:[email protected]




Introduction

Command connotes authority and some degree of formality and impersonality

involving official exercise of authority. Also, command implies expectation of obedience

and the implication of imposing specific points of procedure or method (Malaysian

Army, 2011). On the other hand, Issac (1993) pointed out that climate is a complex

construct composed of perceptions about organizational structure, communications,

allocation of responsibilities, rewards, risk-taking, warm and support, performance

standards, acknowledgment of conflicts and identification. Combining the words

command and climate as a single term, command climate can be taken as a perception

among the personnel of a unit on how they will be treated by their leaders and the

opportunities they envision within the unit. Command climate is often seen as an

organizational requirement underpinning the attainment of goals. Consequently, the

command climate of a military unit has a direct impact on its effectiveness and that of

the Army. Currently, there are shortcomings in existing processes of command climate

such as in the aspects of hierarchical barriers, ineffective measurement and perceptual

biases. Thus, an instrument is necessary for the review of command climate as an

assessment of the effectiveness of the military unit.

The purpose of this paper is to highlight the research done in developing a

validated and reliable instrument capable of surveying the status of command climate of

a military unit. First, the paper conceptualizes and operationalizes the components of

command climate by addressing the factors contributing towards command climate

which is identified using meta-analysis. Then, it highlights the methods to illustrate the

development of the instrument used for the measuring of command climate that

involves the identified intangible human dimensions. Consequently, the paper offers the

results and discussion based on the application of the instrument in the survey of

command climate in the military units. The paper ends with a conclusion that includes

a recommendation for future research.

Conceptualizing and Operationalizing the Measure of Command Climate

The literature of command climate has established that command climate and

effectiveness in an organization/military unit are intertwined. A healthy command

climate augments the development of performance, satisfaction, productivity and

growth in the unit (Griffin, 2001). Issac (1993) defined command climate as leader-




subordinate interactions, performance and interaction. Where else Collin and Jacobs

(2002) defined climate as “a reflection of how organizational members feel about

organizational factors such as job performance expectations, fairness of rewards and

punishment, flow of communication, and example set by the organization’s leaders”.

Therefore, command climate establishes the importance of the organization and its

climate that ultimately shapes the effectiveness of the unit i.e. the organization for

establishing interdependency of its personnel in the unit and the climate as the critical

link between the personnel and the organization (James, 1982). The intangible elements

ascertained from the definitions of command climate are variables that could be

conceptualized and operationalized for the formulation of an instrument for measuring

command climate.

The conceptualization of the measure of command climate is based on the two domains

of command climate identified from the literature review namely, morale and

environment. Each domain comprises of other dimensions from which the

measurement of command climate can be established. These dimensions are considered

as prime components in determining command climate. For this research, the

dependent variable is the ‘command climate’. Where else the independent variables are

parameters involving the domains of morale and environment that contribute to the

command climate. The model for command climate is conceptualized as an integrated

model of a linear relationship between the dependent variable (command climate) and

the independent variables (morale and environment). The theoretical framework for

this research is as shown in Figure 1 below.




Figure 1: The Theoretical Model of Command Climate

Morale

Morale in a military unit is reflected when the soldiers put the mission before his

own personal concerns although this may entail his own death. There are numerous

definitions used in defining morale. Baynes (1987) defines morale as "the enthusiasm

and persistence with which a member of a group engages in the prescribed activities of

that group”. On the other hand, Manning (1987) describes morale as "a function of

cohesion and esprit de corps." Likewise Britt, Castrol and Adler (2006) term morale as

“a soldier’s level of motivation, commitment, and enthusiasm for accomplishing unit

mission objective under stressful conditions.” Based on the various definitions, for the

purpose of this research, morale is defined as a soldier’s level of motivation,

commitment, and enthusiasm for accomplishing unit mission objective under stressful

conditions. Based on the outcomes of literature review, the various components of

morale that must be measured include the dimensions of leadership, motivation, espirit

de corps and spirituality.

Confidence in leadership amongst officers and soldiers at all levels is needed to

build the morale needed in an organization. The fighting power and combat readiness

will deteriorate in the absence of leadership and morale. Leadership plays a pertinent

role in ensuring the sustenance of the morale of the soldiers especially those who are

exposed to extreme conditions and heavy fire in the battlefield environment (Malaysian

Army, 2007; United States Marine Corps, 1997; United States Department of Defence,

Leadership

Motivation

Espirit de corps

Work

Neighbourhood

Community

Morale

Environment

Command Climate Spirituality

Family & Friends

DependentVariable

Independent Variable




2010, Australian Army, 2009; Murphy & Farley, 2002; Gal & Manning, 1987; Goyne,

2004; Shamir et al., 2000; Hooker, 1995; Griffith, 2002; Nkewu, 2014).

Motivation is related to the morale of the soldier as he must be motivated to face

the enemy despite the risk of being harmed or killed. Unless the soldiers are motivated,

they will not be combat ready to carry out their mission (Murphy & Fogarty, 2009; Britt,

Castrol & Adler, 2006; Siebold & Manning, 1999; Goyne, 2004).

Espirit de corps aims to create synergy towards the performance and is the

bonding between soldiers and their secondary groups beyond their primary group

bonding that relates the soldiers to the institution of the unit. Therefore, the degree of

bonding between members of an organisation will also reflect their willingness to fight

as a team and the fighting power generated (Malaysian Army, 2011; Cushman, 1947;

Gal, 1986; Baynes, 1987; Siebold & Manning, 1999; Krulak, 1996).

The spirituality aspect forms a strong intangible element that acts as a force

multiplier in a combat force and can be related to the subjective outcomes in the aspects

of perceived quality of life, well-being or life satisfaction. Hence, the level of spirituality

possessed by the soldiers could be used as a measure of the command climate in a

military unit (Malaysian Army, 2007; Campbell, 1976; Andrews & Withey, 1976).

Environment

The Oxford English Dictionary defines environment as the surroundings or

conditions in which a person, animal or plant lives or operates (Stevenson, 2013). As

such, the domain of environment in which the soldiers operate has a critical role in

establishing the command climate of a military unit. Based on the literature review, the

aspects of environment that affect the command climate are the dimensions of work,

neighbourhood and housing, community and family and friends. These dimensions

could help in achieving commitment among soldiers that would result directly in high

effectiveness of the unit.

Many past research and studies have concluded that work/job is one of the main

contributors towards quality of life that affect the combat readiness of an armed force

(Campbell, 1976; Andrews & Withey, 1976; Flanagen, 1978; Bestuzhey-Lada, 1980;

Murrell et al., 1983; Glatzer, 1987; Rath & Harter, 2010). The military unit focuses on

the environment through a safe and conducive working environment that would result

in high work satisfaction, therefore enhancing its command climate.




Neighbourhood and housing provides the social environment that enhances the

quality of life (Sirgy & Cornwell, 2002). Healthy neighborhoods have housing, schools,

commercial and retail facilities, employment, parks and recreation, health care and day

care, personal security and neighborhood safety. Thus, neighbourhood and housing

serve as motivation factors for the soldiers that are important for command climate and

effectiveness in the unit. (Campbell, 1976; Andrews & Withey, 1976; Bestuzhey-Lada,

1980; Murrell et al., 1983; Verwayen, 1980; Glatzer, 1987; Moller, 1992; Rath & Harter,

2010).

Community living in nilitary bases that are of quality and standard could

enhance the espirit de corps and morale of the soldiers (Malaysian Army, 2011). It

involves community integration and participation as well as the availability of social

support (National Research Council, 2002). These indicators contribute towards their

quality of life and the environment of command climate in the unit. (Flanagen, 1978;

Bestuzhey-Lada, 1980; Murrell et al., 1983; Glatzer, 1987; Moller, 1992; Rath & Harter,

2010).

Research has shown that work-family conflict increased work turnover, caused

more sickness absences (Hacker & Doolen, 2003) and less job done, as well as poor

family, community and life satisfaction (Hassan, Dollard & Winefield, 2009). Thus, the

enhancement of the aspects of family and friends for a better environment is done

through improvement of the service and social environment. Therefore, a measure of

commitment towards family and friends among the officers and soldiers would provide

an indication of the command climate that allow them to carry out their missions.




Operationalizing the Domains of Command Climate

The identified dimensions of morale and environment were operationalized by

using the descriptions as shown in Table 1 below. This operationalization enabled the

construction of items for the survey questionnaire of the eight identified dimensions

used in the instrument for command climate.

Table 1 - Descriptions of the domains of command climate Domain Dimension Description Morale Leadership The degree to which subordinates have confidence

and trusts in their leaders. Motivation Motivation for combat can be understood as “the

impulse that compels the soldier to face the enemy on the battlefield” or “the determination that induces soldiers to fight, in spite of the adversities and the inherent dangers of war”.

Espirit de

corps The feeling of pride that goes along with the sense of belonging, fellowship and loyalty between comrades, units, formations and Corps in times of peace and war. The bonding between soldiers and their secondary groups beyond their primary group bonding that relates the soldiers to the institutions of the unit.

Spirituality “Spiritual fitness” is the core values, beliefs, and the

source of one’s meaning in life and the provision of psychological and counselling services.

Environment Work A safe and conducive working environment that

result in high work satisfaction. Neighbour-

hood High quality and standard housing facilities and infrastructure, encompassing the necessary maintenance services.

Community The interaction of personnel between military

installations and their surrounding or nearby civilian communities. The provision of community facilities in bases that are of quality and standard.

Family and

friends Family unity and supports from friends.




Methods Used For the Measure of Command Climate

The research adopted the quantitative method approach and embraced the post-

positivism philosophy as its philosophical paradigm. The survey research involved

cross-sectional studies using a questionnaire for data collection. The questionnaire

consisted of a 42 items ten-point Likert-scale paper and pencil self-report assessment. It

comprises of four sub-scales each measuring the two domains of morale and

environment. The leadership’s dimension contains six items, the motivation’s sub-scale

has four items, the espirit de corps’ sub-scale comprises of five items, the spirituality’s

sub-scale contains four items, the work’s sub-scale comprises of ten items, the

neighbourhood’s sub-scale contains five items, the community’s subscale has four items

and finally the family and friends’ sub-scale contains four items. Command climate is

measured by three items represented by cohesion, willingness to be deployed and the

state of discipline in the military unit. Proportionate stratified random sampling of n =

1,132 was used for sampling in this research. The statistics show that the demography

of the respondents represents a subset of the total population. The quantitative design

used is the non-experimental correlation design that comprises of the multiple

regression and Partial Least Square (PLS) - SEM techniques. The variables of morale,

environment and command climate were used to obtain correlational statistics to

describe and measure the degree of association and their relationships. As in other

multivariate data analysis, considerations that are needed when applying PLS-SEM

include the elements of the variate, measurement, measurement scales, coding and data

distributions (Hair et al., 2014). The multivariate measurement involves using several

variables to indirectly measure the concept of command climate to improve

measurement accuracy. The anticipated improved accuracy is based on the assumption

that the variables of morale and environment to measure a single concept of command

climate is more likely to represent all the different aspects of concept and thereby result

in a more valid measurement of the concept (Hair et al., 2014).

The data screening and descriptive analysis show the suitability of the data

collected. The 5 % Trimmed Mean statistics shows that the two mean values obtained

for all the items in the command climate measurement model are not very different

indicating that there is no requirement to investigate the data points. The histograms of

all the dimensions show scores which are reasonably normally distributed. The Q-Q

Plots also show reasonably straight lines that suggested a normal distribution of the




data. Similarly, the detrended normal Q-Q Plots that were obtained by plotting the

actual deviation of the scores formed straight lines with no real clustering of points

indicating normal distribution of data. The analysis output obtained using the IBM-SPSS

indicates that all the items of the dimensions of the morale variable have correlation

coefficients > 0.3, indicating that the data are suitable for further analysis (Pallant,

2015).

Results and Discussion

The hypothesized relationships among the constructs of morale and

environment with command climate were obtained by running the PLS-SEM algorithm

in obtaining the estimates for the structural relationships (i.e. path coefficients). The

results of the PLS-SEM algorithm are as presented in Figure 2 below:

Figure 2 : Structural Relationship of the domains of Command Climate

The R2 value of 0.319 of command climate indicate that 31.9% of command

climate is predicted by the constructs of morale and environment. The estimated path

coefficients, β, obtained indicate standardized values between -1 and +1 representing

positive and negative relationships. The results of the path coefficients indicate that

morale (β = 0.317) and environment (β = 0.274) have positive relationships with

command climate. The β values indicate that environment is a weaker indicator than

morale in the structural model of command climate. The structural model shows that

there are relationships between morale with environment (β = 0.828). As pointed out




by Hair et al. (2014), the values of the variables of command climate that are close to +1

or -1 are statistically significant. The ultimate test to determine the significance of the

coefficients was conducted by means of bootstrapping. The results of the bootstrapping

are indicated in Figure 3 below.

Figure 3: Bootstrapping results of the command climate structural model

The bootstrapping results provides the standard errors and compute the

empirical t values that determine whether the coefficients are significant. The results in

Table 2 below indicate that the relationships between morale and environment with

command climate as well as morale with environment are significant at a level of 5%

probability of error as all the t values are >1.96 threshold value. Amongst the two

predictive constructs, morale (β = 0.317) has better total effect in predicting command

climate as compared to environment (β = 0.274).




Table 2: Significant t value of the command climate model

Construct Path Coefficient

t Value (>1.96)

Remark

Morale <-> Command Climate 0.317 6.609 Significant Environment <-> Command Climate

0.274 6.049 Significant

Morale <-> Environment 0.828 48.032 Significant

The relative importance of the dimensions/sub-domains in measuring the

constructs/variables of morale and environment is as summarized in Table 3 below.

Spirituality (f2 = 0.45) and motivation (f2 = 0.348) stood out among the other

dimensions in its importance in measuring morale. As for the measure for the

environment construct, community (f2 = 0.361) contributed most among the four

dimensions used in measuring the construct.

Table 3 : Relative importance f2 of the dimensions of command climate

Variable/ Construct

Dimension/ Sub-domain

Command Climate Path Coefficient f2 effect

size Remark

Morale Leadership 0.489 0.314 Medium effect

Motivation 0.508 0.348 Large effect Espirit de corps 0.487 0.311 Medium

effect Spirituality 0.557 0.45 Large effect Environment Work 0.502 0.337 Medium

effect Neighbourhoo

d 0.450 0.253 Medium

effect Community 0.515 0.361 Large effect Family 0.483 0.305 Medium

effect The importance-performance matrix analysis (IPMA) was used to extend the

results of PLS-SEM by taking the performance of each construct to draw conclusions on

its performance and the relative importance of constructs in explaining other constructs

in the structural model of command climate. The extension builds on the PLS-SEM

estimates of the path model relationships and adds an additional dimension to the

analysis that considers the latent variables’ average values (Hair et al., 2014). IPMA




contrasts the command climate structural model total effect (importance) and the

average values of the latent variable scores (performance) to highlight significant areas

for improvement for the morale and environment aspects so as to improve the

command climate of the military unit. The results of the command climate structural

model based on the rescaled data is reflected in Figure 4 below. The target latent

variable/construct, command climate, has a value of 67.50. Contributing towards the

score of command climate are the scores of morale with a value of 68.87 and

environment with a value of 67.07. Thus, the relative performance of the three

exogenous constructs is headed by morale and followed by environment.

Figure 4: Rescaled command climate structural model

The creation of an IPMA representation of the command climate model in the

form of a graph as shown in Figure 5 below. The IPMA of command climate reveals that

both morale and environment are of similar importance for establishing command

climate. The IPMA of the command climate model provides additional information that

though morale and environment provide similar contribution towards the performance

of command climate, the environment aspect is of higher relative importance in the

overall measure of the command climate. This analysis can be seen from the values of

the total effect of environment that is almost double that of morale. Thus, there is a need

for the military unit to maintain the performance of both morale and environment.

Concomitantly, emphasis must also be placed in enhancing the importance of morale

domain in order to augment the overall effectiveness of command climate in the unit.




Figure 5: IPMA of command climate

Conclusion

The command climate of a military unit has a direct bearing on its performance

and effectiveness. Currently, there are some shortfalls in reviewing the command

climate of units that are often subjected to perceptual biases, hierarchical barriers and

ineffective measurement. Thus, this paper highlights the research done in the

development of an instrument the review of command climate as an assessment of the

effectiveness of the military unit. The unit command climate survey factors under the

domain of morale and environment have been addressed during the research. The

research adopted the quantitative method approach using the post-positivism

philosophy as its philosophical paradigm. The sampling was done using proportionate

stratified random sampling. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was then used for the

statistical validation of the model with the data (n = 1,132). The results indicate that

31.9% of the command climate variable are explained by the domains of morale and

environment (R2 = 0.319). The output of the research is a survey instrument that could

measure command climate based on morale and environment. The items of morale

focus on the dimensions of leadership, motivation, espirit de corps and spirituality

while the items for environment involve the dimensions of work, neighbourhood, family

and friends, and community. The Importance-Performance Matrix Analysis (IPMA)

shows that both the morale and the environment domains have similar total effect on

the command climate of a unit. However, environment demonstrates a more important

role in determining the outcome of the unit command climate when compared to

morale. The final outcome of the research offers a stand-alone survey tool for a

commander who can administer it to obtain score and tally the results for an analysis of




the unit climate. This would provide indications of the surveyed unit’s strengths and

weaknesses. The research did not look into the mediation and moderation effect of the

morale or environment variables that could alter the results of the command climate.

Thus, for future research, this aspect of moderation and mediation should be considered

in reviewing the instrument for measuring the command climate in the military units.

Acknowledgments

The author extends his utmost gratitude to the Malaysian Armed Forces and the

Malaysian Army for sponsoring his studies. Appreciation is also extended to the

National Defence University of Malaysia’s Niche Research Group Grant Scheme (NRGS)

and Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS) project teams on Morale headed by

Professor Dr. Jegak Uli and Lieutenant Colonel Inderjit Singh Tara Singh respectively for

including him as a member of the team of which much research skills and experience

have been gained.

References

Andrews, F.M., & Withey, S.B. (1976). Social indicators of well-being: The development

and measurement of perceptual indicators. New York: Plenum.

Baynes, J. (1987). Morale: A study of men and courage (new ed.). Washington DC: Avery

Pub Group. In the U.S. Army study of the human dimension in the future 2015-2024,

TRADOC Pamphlet 525-3-7-01, 2008.

Bestuzhey-Lada, I.V. (1980). Way of life related concepts as parts of a system of social

indicators. In A. Szalai and F.M. Andrews (ed.). The quality of life: Comparative

studies. London: Sage Publications

Britt, T., Castrol, A., & Adler, A. (2006). Military Life: The Psychology of Serving in Peace

and Combat, Military Performance, 1: 162.

Campbell, A. (1976). Subjective measures of well-being. American Psychologist, 31, 117-

124.

Collin, J. & Jacobs, B. (2002). Trust in the profession of arms. In The future of the army

profession, D. Snider, G. Watkins & L. Matthews, (ed.). Boston: McGraw Hill,

p.468.

Cushman, R.E. (1947). Battle Replacements. Marine Corps Gazette, November 1947, 46-

50.




Flanagen, J.C. (1978). A research approach to improving our quality of life. American

Psychologist, 33, 138-147.

Gal, R. (1986).Unit morale: From a theoretical puzzle to an empirical illustration - An

Israeli example. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16(6), 549-564.

Gal, R., & Manning, F. (1987). Morale and its components: A cross national comparison.

Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 369-391.

Goyne, A. (2004). Measuring unit effectiveness: What do commanders want to know and

why? Psychology Research and Technology Group, Australian Army.

Glatzer, W. (1987). Components of well-being. In A.C. Michalos (ed.), German social

report: Living conditions and subjective well-being, 1978-1984, pp. 25-33).

Griffin, M. (2001). Job satisfaction among detention officers: Assessing the relative

contribution of organizational climate variables. In Journal of Criminal Justice.

21:220.

Griffith, J. (2002). Multilevel analysis of cohesion's relation to stress, well-being,

identification, disintegration, and perceived combat readiness. Military

Psychology, 14(3): 217-239.

Hacker, S. K., & Doolen, T.L., (2003). Strategies for living: Moving from the balance

paradigm. Career Development International. 8: 283-290.

Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M. & Sarstedt, M. (2014), A primer on partial least

squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Los Angeles: Sage Publications

Inc.

Hooker, R.D. (1995). Building unbreakable units. Retrieved from

http://www.usafa.af.mil/jscope/ JSCOPE98/HOOK98.HTM

Issac, R. (2000). Organizational culture: Some new perspective. In handbook of

organizational behavior, R.T. Golembieskui, ed. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc,

1993, p.99.

James, L. (1982). Aggregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement. In Journal of

Applied Psychology. 67:219.

Krulak, C.C. (1996). ALMAR 454/96 Unit Cohesion - Commander’s Intent. Washington, DC:

Headquarters United States Marine Corps, 23 December 1996.

Malaysian Army. (2007). Command, leadership and management. Kuala Lumpur: Central

Ordnance Depot, p. 2-1.




Malaysian Army. (2011). Malaysian Army Transformational Plan. Kuala Lumpur: Central

Ordnance Depot, p. xii.

Manning, F.J., & Ingraham, L.H. (1987). An investigation into the value of unit cohesion

in peacetime. In G.L. Belenky (Ed.), Contemporary studies in combat psychiatry,

47-68. Westport, CT: Greenwood.

Moller, V. (1992). Applications of subjective well‐being: Measures in quality of life surveys

(Centre for Social and Development Studies CSDS Working Paper No. 5). Durban:

University of Natal Durban.

Murphy, P.J., & Farley, K.M.J. (2002). Morale, cohesion and confidence in leadership: Unit

climate dimensions for Canadian Soldiers on operations. In C. McCann & R.

Pigean (Eds.). The human in command: Exploring the modern military experience.

New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. Retrieved from

http://www.springer.com/psychology/book/978-0-306-46366-2

Murphy, P.J., & Fogarty, G. (2009). The human dimensions of mission readiness. In Focus

on human dimensions in land operations. Canberra: Department of Defence, p. 50.

Murrell, S.A., Schulte, P.J., Hutchins, G.L. & Brockway, J.M. (1983). Quality of life and

patterns of unmet need for resource decisions. American Journal of Community

Psychology, 11, 25-39.

Nkewu, Z. (2014). Impact of psychological wellbeing and perceived combat readiness on

willingness to deploy in the SANDF: An exploratory study (unpublished Master

dissertation). Stellenbosch University, South Africa.

Pallant, J. (2015). SPSS survival manual – A step by step guide to data analysis using

SPSS. (5th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.

Rath, T., & Harter, J. (2010). Well Being: The five essential elements. New York: Gallup

Press.

Siebold, G. L., & Manning, F.J. (1999). The evolution of the measurement of cohesion.

Military Psychology, 11(1), 21-22.

Shamir, B., Brainin, E., Zakay, E., & Popper, M. (2000). Perceived combat readiness as

collective efficacy: Individual- and group-level analysis. Military Psychology,

12(2), 105-119.

Stevenson, A. (2013). The Oxford Dictionary of English, 3rd ed., London: Oxford

University Press, 2013. Retrieved from

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition /english/combat.




United States Department of Defence. (2010). CJSC Guide to the Chairman’s Readiness

System. United States of America: Joint Chief of Staff, p A-2. Retrieved from

http://www.dtic.mil/cjcs_directives /cdata/unlimit/g3401.pdf

United States Marine Corps. (1997). Warfigthing. Washington DC: United States Navy,

p.47.

Verwayen, H. (1980). The specification and measurement of the quality of life in OECD

countries. In A. Szalai and F. M. Andrews (0.Eds.), 7he Quality of Life: Comparative

Studies (pp. 235-247). London: Sage.

measuring tool for the command climate of military units:...

Documents