This Article Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Griffith, J. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

After 9/11, What Kind of Reserve Soldier? Considerations Given to Emerging Demands, Organizational Orientation, and Individual Commitment

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: griffithJH{at}verizon.net.

	Abstract

Two concepts, Moskos’s institutional–occupational orientations and Meyer and Allen’s organizational commitment, were used to develop several hypotheses concerning relationships of soldiers’ stated reasons for joining and staying in reserve military service to their stated career intentions and to perceived unit readiness. Survey data were obtained from first-term, junior-ranking enlisted Army National Guard soldiers nationwide at three time periods. Time periods corresponded to different phases of the Iraq conflict— before, during, and after the initial invasion. The number of soldiers at each time period equaled about 7,000 to 8,500. Results suggest material incentives may increase recruitment and retention, yet at the same time, such incentives may not enhance readiness. Rather, incentives fostering normative and affective commitments, such as joining and staying for camaraderie and service to country, were related both to self-reported career intentions and perceived unit readiness.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?