Perpetuating the military myth: why the psychology of the 2014 Australian defence pay deal is irrelevant

Peter Balint, Nenad Dobos

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    1 Citation (Scopus)

    Abstract

    There is a widespread belief that members of the armed forces have a unique psychological relationship with their institution and their nation, and that it is this relationship that leads to loyalty and self-sacrifice. Yet this 'military myth' does not hold. Many soldiers serve for 'occupational' rather than 'institutional' reasons, and as the experience of private military contractors demonstrates, this need not reduce operational effectiveness. In this article, we argue that the concern expressed in the recent commentary in this journal by Williamson et. al. (2015) that the dispute over the 2014 Australian Defence Pay Deal may damage the 'psychological contract', turn it from 'relational' to 'transactional', and undermine operational effectiveness is unfounded and seems to buy into this military myth.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)359-363
    Number of pages5
    JournalAustralian Journal of Public Administration
    Volume74
    Issue number3
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2015

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Perpetuating the military myth: why the psychology of the 2014 Australian defence pay deal is irrelevant'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this