Military Identity and the Transition Into Civilian Life: “Lifers", Medically Discharged and Reservist Soldiers
Author: Wilson-Smith, Kevin M; Corr, Philip J
Date: 2019-03-12T07:00:00+00:00
Keywords: Psychology; personality; Social Psychology; Psychotherapy; General; Political Science; Security (National & International); Technology & Engineering; Military Science; Psychedelic Library
Description: This book outlines the relationship between social identity theory and military to civilian transition, examining the mass movement of soldiers back into the civilian occupational world by considering literature specifically on role exit and in relation to the process of full-time military exit. The authors document a range of biographical and experientially-focussed case studies to highlight the range of transitions experienced by individuals leaving the armed forces. This book highlights the challenges faced by those transitioning between military and civilian roles through retirement, redun
Publisher: Springer

Kevin M Wilson-Smith and Philip J Corr

Military Identity and the Transition into Civilian Life

“Lifers”, Medically Discharged and Reservist Soldiers

Kevin M Wilson-Smith

School of Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK

Philip J Corr

Department of Psychology, City, University of London, London, UK

ISBN 978-3-030-12337-6e-ISBN 978-3-030-12338-3
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12338-3

Library of Congress Control Number: 2019930714

Corrected publication 2019

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.

The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.

The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Cover illustration: © Harvey Loake

This Palgrave Pivot imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG

The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

Preface

The aim of this book is to share three short narratives of military exit and role transition, each outlining their own unique and individual experience. But first, in Chapter 1 we introduce definitions of identity and then provide a short overview of Identity Theory and Social Identity Theory. Chapter 2 then explores identity role exit. The chapters thereafter provide 3 personal accounts of the lived experience of military identity and the transition to civilian life (Chapter 3 —Lifers, Chapter 4 —Medically Discharged, Chapter 5 —Reservists), with a short reference to the psychological literature at the end of each narrative to allow the reader to make sense of each experience as it is read. It is worth noting that this text is not making claims that each individual will experience transition in the same way, rather the opposite in fact, as the book intends to highlight the point that each person’s military identity is so multifaceted and socially complex that transition support models that imply a one size fits all strategy are unfit for purpose. The literature cited offers only a snapshot of the potential breadth and depth of research that has been undertaken in the field and is, therefore, far from exhaustive and on occasion relies on theoretical perspectives and research that is not specifically conducted in military contexts.

The showcasing of the accounts in this book attempts to give voice, ideographically, to the three individuals who have kindly shared their unique stories and to recognise that the key to successful transition is accounting for individuality and nuanced self-identities within the overarching idea of a singular archetypal public image of a military self—we hope to encourage reflection on the possibility of the problems that this might cause. The book then (Chapter 6 ) describes some of the consequences and challenges of transition from the military with specific interest given to finding a civilian job and how the psychologist might help. Chapter 7 explores the use of careers counselling models as one example of how organisations can develop individual support for potential employees who are veterans; and, finally, Chapter 8 provides a final reflective summary. All names throughout the text are pseudonyms.

Kevin M Wilson-Smith Philip J Corr Glasgow, UKLondon, UK

The original version of the book was revised: The corrections provided by the co-author have been incorporated. The correction to the book is available at https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12338-3_9

Acknowledgements

This book is dedicated to John, Ollie and Jack for whom, without the gracious contribution of their personal stories, this text would not have been possible.

Preamble

Old soldiers never die, they just fade away —General D. MacArthur, Farewell Address, 1951

Contents

1 Theoretical Perspectives on Identity and Transition
1

2 Role Exit
19

3 “Lifers”: Exit from the Armed Forces After 36 Years’ Service
27

4 “Medically Discharged”: Forced Exit Due to Injury, Health and Wellbeing
43

5 “Reservists”: Changing Identities Between Civilian and Military Roles
57

6 Impact of Role Exit: Problems Associated with Leaving the Armed Forces
67

7 Help with Finding a Civilian Job
79

8 Conclusion
99

Correction to: Military Identity and the Transition into Civilian Life
C1

References
103

Index
117

© The Author(s) 2019

K. M. Wilson-Smith, P. J. CorrMilitary Identity and the Transition into Civilian Lifehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12338-3_1

1. Theoretical Perspectives on Identity and Transition

Kevin M. Wilson-Smith[1] and Philip J. Corr[2]

(1) School of Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK

(2) Department of Psychology, City University London, London, UK

Kevin M. Wilson-Smith (Corresponding author) Email: kevin.wilson-smith@glasgow.ac.uk

Philip J. Corr Email: philip.corr.1@city.ac.uk

Abstract

In this introductory chapter, we explore some of the classic theoretical perspectives that help us understand identity. Specifically, the chapter explores two key theories: Identity Theory and Social Identity Theory. Identity Theory sees the self as a multifaceted social construct that develops from an individual’s various roles in society and stipulates that variations in self-concept are due to the individual occupying these different roles. We also explore Stryker’s concept of identity salience and identity commitment. In the second half of the chapter, we outline the role of self-enhancement strategies and self-categorisation, as described in Social Identity Theory.

Keywords

IdentitySalienceCommitmentSocial identitySelf-enhancementSelf-categorisation

The literature that is used to consider critically the formation of a military self is more often than not deliberated in relation to classic theoretical perspectives on identity formation (both individual and social). Therefore, this introductory chapter provides a brief overview of the classic perspectives. The chapter is not a catch-all, but rather an attempt to introduce some foundational literature and classic models of thought that influence the critical interpretation of military identity and transition.

Defining Identity

Howard (2000) suggests the term “identity” became a central focus of psychological research and theory development in the modern world due to the shift over time from a stable society in which identity was “assigned rather than selected or adopted” (p. 367). Howard argues that “modern times” had developed within us a greater sense of a need to know who we are due to the “overwhelming pace of change in surrounding social contexts and changes in the groups and networks in which people and their identities are embedded and in the societal structures and practices in which those networks are themselves embedded” (p. 368).

However, the term “identity” is not easy to define (Beart, Hardy, & Buchan, 2005) and despite making the observation over 30 years ago, Gleason’s (1983) opinion that dictionary definitions of the term do not encompass its complexity, remains true to this day. Gleason argued that despite the proper use of the word in everyday discourse, “identity” as a recent social construction is complicated and difficult to surmise in a short, adequate summary statement. Nevertheless, a general attempt at a definition is provided by Sarup (1994) who implies identity is “the story we tell of ourselves and which is also the story others tell of us” (p. 91). More specifically, Stryker and Burke (2000) suggest that when one restricts the field to that of sociology and social psychology , three clear uses of the term become apparent. In the first instance, they describe identity as relating “essentially to the culture of a people” (p. 284), where one does not distinguish between, for example, ethnicity and identity. In the second example of the usage of the term, they outline Tajfel’s (1982, cited in Stryker & Burke, 2000) notion of identity which posits that it is based on “common identification with a collectivity or social category” (p. 284). The final usage of the word, which underpins personal identity perspectives discussed in the next section, takes a symbolic interactionist approach to identity, claiming that identities are parts of the self which are “composed of the meanings that persons attach to the multiple roles they typically play in highly differentiated contemporary societies” (p. 284). The theoretical exploration that follows initially outlines two main approaches to understanding identity. In the first section, we explore Identity Theory (e.g. Burke, 1991; McCall & Simmons, 1978; Stryker, 1980) and, in the second, we explore Social Identity Theory (Tajfel, 1978; Tajfel & Turner, 1979; Turner, 1985, 1987).

Identity Theory

Influenced by a symbolic interactionist view (e.g. Mead, 1934), Identity Theory (Burke, 1991; McCall & Simmons, 1978; Stryker, 1980) aims to explain social behaviour in terms of the mutual, or reciprocal, relationship between society and self. More explicitly, identity theorists propose that the self is a reflection of the wider social structure composed of the role positions engaged by the individual, which represents self as a collection of identities (Hogg, Terry, & White, 1995). Although Identity Theory is rooted in symbolic interactionism , Hogg et al. (1995) claim that it is not wholly homogenous due to a fundamental difference in how society is organised, with traditional symbolic interactionism viewing society as “a relatively undifferentiated, cooperative whole” (Stryker & Serpe, 1982, p. 206) and identity theorists arguing that society is “complexly differentiated but nevertheless organised” (Stryker & Serpe, 1982, p. 206). The focus of the literature covered here relates to the original suppositions of Identity Theory (Stryker, 1968, 1987; Stryker & Serpe, 1982), although as Hogg et al. (1995) recognise, the term is also applied to a body of theoretical work (e.g. McCall & Simmons, 1978) that also links the idea of a “multifaceted notion of self to a wider social structure” (p. 256). Stryker and Serpe’s (1982) model of society as being “differentiated yet organised” forms the central basis of the Identity Theory perspective; that is to suggest, as Hogg et al. (1995) does, “as a reflection of society, the self should be regarded as a multifaceted and organized construct” (p. 256). On this basis, identity theorists argue that these multifaceted elements of the self can be seen as identities, often referred to specifically as role identities

, which have a direct impact on social behaviour. The variations in the extent to which any particular role identity affects social behaviour in different social contexts is further explained using the notion of identity salience and commitment

, each of which will be briefly explored in turn.

Role Identities

As previously suggested, Identity Theory sees the self as a multifaceted social construct that develops from an individual’s various roles in society and stipulates that variations in self-concept are due to the individual occupying these different roles (Hogg et al., 1995). These unique components of the self are often referred to as role identities (Stryker, 1968) and represent the role positions we inhabit in society. In short, a role identity is the meaning we attribute to ourselves in a role; and on that basis, Burke and Reitzes (1981) suggest three main characteristics of a role identity .

Firstly, they suggest that role identities are “ social products

” (p. 84) which are maintained through the process of naming or locating the self in socially recognisable categories (e.g. father role, worker role, friend role, etc.), interaction with others and through the process of validating and confirming our self-concepts through “ self-presentation and altercasting” (p. 84). Secondly, in line with Stryker’s (1968) description, role identities are self-meanings, developed in particular situations and organised hierarchically, which constructs the self; whilst the meanings of these roles are in some part assigned based on the opportunities and demand characteristics of the situation and via the comparisons of the “similarities and differences of the role to complementary or counter-roles

” (Burke & Reitzes, 1981, p. 84). Finally, Burke and Reitzes (1981) refer to role identities as being characterised as symbolic and reflexive in nature; it is by way of interactions with others in society that we come to know these meanings, because in role-specific situations the people around us react to the individual as a performer of the role.

As such, the meanings we attach to the self and our various role identities are learnt from our interpretation of how others respond to our actions and, eventually, the reactions of others are enacted by the individual as a representation of the specific role identity . Role Identities equate directly to the way an individual chooses to behave, as the meanings we attach to the self leads to a guiding set of standards of behaviour for each role identity in context, providing a set of expectations prescribing behaviour that is deemed acceptable and appropriate by others (Simon, 1992). Callero (1985) solidifies this idea by suggesting that the very definition of a role identity “implies action” (p. 205) and it is the action itself through which role identities can be “realized and validated” (p. 205).

The process of realisation and validation of identity has been claimed to have direct effect on wellbeing (e.g. Stryker & Serpe, 1982); and Callero (1985) states that “self-definitions associated with salient role identities are important because they help determine one’s overall evaluation of self, or self-esteem” (p. 204). Despite an overall lack of empirical evidence in support of this notion (Callero cites Rosenberg, 1965 as an exception), Callero argues that it is reasonable to assume that acting out more “ salient

” role identities will ultimately result in a more positive sense of self for an individual and vice versa; that inhibiting, or failing to enact role identities, may result in a poor sense of self.

Identity Salience

According to Stryker (1968), the term identity salience is defined in two ways; firstly as “the probability, for a given person, of a given identity being invoked in a variety of situations” (p. 560) and, secondly, as “the differential probability amongst persons of a given identity being invoked in a given situation” (p. 560). In each circumstance, Stryker argues that the hierarchy of salience is defined by a rank order of possibilities and, assuming all else is equal, behavioural products of a role identity can be expected to the degree that the specific role identity ranks in the hierarchy, with all of an individual’s separate identities taking positions from the highest to the lowest, ultimately constituting the overall self. This concept of Identity salience is also described as consisting of multiple selves with varying degrees of value allocated to each one respectively. Hoelter (1983) articulates this well by implying:

I, who for the time have staked my all on being a psychologist, am mortified if others know much more psychology than I. But I am contented to wallow in the grossest ignorance of Greek. My deficiencies there give me no sense of personal humiliation at all. Had I “pretensions” to be a linguist, it would have been just the reverse. (1983, p. 309)

In simple terms, the salience of an identity relates to its readiness to be acted out (Stryker, 2002; Stryker & Serpe, 1994), with identities situated at the top of the hierarchy being more self-defining and readily acted out in given situations than those towards the lower end of the hierarchy (Stryker, 1987). When investigating identity salience in blood donor identities, for example Callero (1985) pointed out that role-specific behaviours may be acted out by some members of a group who share the same role identity and not by others in a given context, due to the differences in the individual’s salience of the role identity in question. However, Stryker (1968) adds the stipulation that the supplication of an identity, that is to say the “perception of an identity as relevant to a particular interaction” (p. 560), may be purely situational. Stryker suggests that even in context that appear to be distinctly separate from the salient identity there maybe circumstances where the identity is so strong that it becomes salient nonetheless (e.g. an individual with a strong political identity may find that aspects of this identity become salient during their time as a parent). On this basis, Stryker argues that Identity Salience is not necessarily a predictor of behaviour per se, but instead implies that “saliency interacts with situations to affect the threshold of invocation of an identity” (p. 560). Nuttbrock, Larry, and Freudiger (1991) describe an example of salience in action, whereby an individual with a highly salient “parent” identity may act in a role congruent (parenting) manner, even in situations that are inappropriate or irrelevant to the role, for example in the workplace. Yet, despite a central premise of Identity Theory being the idea that identity salience engenders role congruent behaviour, Stryker (1968) accepts that the context of certain situations may be so strong that the pattern of behaviour enacted by the individual is a product of the situation alone, rather than due to salience (e.g. a fighter identity in situations of self-defence). The effect of salience is not limited purely to behaviour but may also impact on affective and relationship outcomes. For example, Callero (1995) suggests that one might experience increased levels of self-worth when enacting identities higher in the salience hierarchy, which may positively influence the perception and evaluation of our relationship with others in our social world (McCall & Simmons, 1978). When considering the central importance of role identity salience in the formation and enacting of the self, the next aspect of Identity Theory to be explored focuses on what determines the strength of salience, the answer to which can be described by the notion of commitment .

Commitment

Another key concept of Identity Theory , that of an identity’s “ commitment

”, refers to the way in which the level of salience of a particular role identity is influenced by the importance and the number of social relationships premised on that role (Hogg et al., 1995). Stryker and Stratham (1985) define commitment as “the degree to which the individual’s relationships to particular others are dependent on being a given kind of person” (p. 345). The main premise of commitment is that an identity’s salience will be increased when commitment to the role forms as the identity strengthens (Stryker, 1980) and, in turn, commitment to a role is higher for individuals who perceive that many of their important social relationships are affirmed on occupancy of that role (Hogg et al., 1995). On this basis, Kornhauser (1962) suggests that commitment, in its original definition, is measured by the cost of giving up relationships that are important to us. Stryker and Serpe (1982) imply that counts of the number of relationships based on a particular position are a good indicator of the strength of the commitment . Hoelter (1983) highlighted that commitment is born of the individual’s concern over losing social networks if they vacate the role which psychologically impacts on the evaluation of self-esteem and self-worth. He also added a second proposition, suggesting salience is affected positively by an increase in one’s self-evaluation of performance in the role, in some degree as a self-perception of one’s commitment to the role in question. Stryker (1980) described two types of commitment : interactional and affective. Interactional commitment is outlined as the extensivity of commitment, which is a reflection of the amount of roles attached to specific identities, whereas affective commitment outlines the intensity of commitment, based on the importance of the relationships that are attached to each identity in terms of the measure of the potential effect of associated loss of social relationships if the identity was not enacted.

In summary the main characteristics of Identity Theory aims to produce a model which is a social psychological explanation, that social factors are important in the development of self and that the self is made up of the multifaceted role identities one occupies which vary in salience and by proxy commitment (Hogg et al., 1995). As a useful summation, Turner (2013) cites a revised formulation of Stryker’s (1980) hypotheses on salience and commitment as follows:

1. 1.

Higher commitment to a particular role identity equates to a higher position of the identity in one’s hierarchy of identity salience .

2. 2.

Commitment is affected by the extent to which the identity is positively evaluated by others, congruence of the expectations of others to whom the individual relies on for the identity and the extensiveness and size of one’s networks on whom the individual depends.

3. 3.

The consequence of high salience on an identity includes an increase in the likelihood that the individual will act out or perform behaviours expected of that role, perceive a situation as appropriate to enact the role and to seek out situations in which the role can be enacted.

4. 4.

The higher the commitment to a role, the higher the effect on self-esteem of performing the role and the higher the chance that performance of the role will be based on role related norms and values.

Identity Theory focuses on the individualistic outcomes of identity related processes and, therefore, has less interest in the impact of role identities on the relationship with others (Hogg et al., 1995). Despite claims of significant overlap in concepts (e.g. Stets & Burke, 2000), a greater degree of focus on the social self is more adequately outlined in Social Identity Theory (Tajfel, 1972, 1978, 1981; Tajfel & Turner, 1979; Turner, 1982).

Social Identity Theory

There are two variations of Social Identity Theory . The first initially developed by Tajfel and Turner (1979) and Tajfel (1981); and secondly, the later development (considered as a further expansion of one of the central concepts of Social Identity Theory ) of Self-Categorisation theory (Turner, 1987), both of which shall be discussed in brief. Tajfel (1972) posited that, at that time, most of the research focusing on the individual and social processes of intergroup behaviour , tended to be concerned more so with the individual in “the sense that they employ constructs and sets of empirical relationships which can be conceived as being external and preliminary to any social context” (p. 65). Tajfel (1972) described how the focus of the early development of a theory of social identity aimed to move away from the study of men “tout court” towards the study of “men in groups”. The foundations of Social Identity Theory (and later Self-Categorisation theory ) was subsequently developed by Tajfel and Turner over the course of the following 20 years (Tajfel, 1972, 1978, 1981; Tajfel & Turner, 1979; Turner, 1982). The early version of Social Identity Theory focused on the psychological motivations that led a member of a group to support or renounce an existing group membership (Huddy, 2001). According to Turner (1982), an individual’s behaviour and attitudes (including how they see themselves and others in the world), that form the reaction of the varying parts of the self, are dictated by the social situation in which the individual currently resides. In turn, the various social identities are formed from the person’s self-concept , which is a product of the perceived membership of the range of social groups in which they feel they belong (Hogg & Vaughan, 2002), with two main socio-cognitive processes underpinning the theory: categorisation and self-enhancement . Social Identity Theory implies that (social) categorisation (e.g. religion, sports team, profession, Soldier, Civilian, etc.) offers the individual a definition of who they are, based on the defining characteristics of the specific category, which forms a self-definition that constitutes part of the overarching self-concept . Furthermore, the individual has a catalogue of distinct category memberships which range in importance to the self-concept (Hogg et al., 1995). In terms of categorisation , each membership takes up position in the self-concept as a social identity which describes and prescribes perceptions of the way in which the individual should think, feel and behave in order to maintain membership to that group.

In specific contexts, one selects an appropriate social identity which will become salient , leading to self-perceptions and behavioural enactments which conform to the normative and stereotyped expectations of the in-group that the individual currently exists in. Meanwhile, outgroup perceptions form outgroup stereotyped expectations , which lead to intergroup discriminatory and competitive feelings, thoughts and behaviours (Hogg et al., 1995). When one is able to dissociate from other “collectives” (Reid & Hogg, 2005) there may be a reduction in the uncertainty of how to act, thus lowering anxiety (Hogg & Mullin, 1999). The process of categorisation is guided by the socio-cognitive process of Self-enhancement , which refers to the way in which one will not only socially categorise oneself but will aim to boost the attitudes of individuals towards themselves, which serves to attach desirable qualities, such as morality and status to the in-group , whilst allocating negative or undesirable traits to the outgroup (Long & Spears, 1997). Hogg et al. (1995) outlined that the self-enhancement process is based on the need for a positive evaluation of the self-concept and that each individual has a basic need to see themselves positively in relation to (relevant) others. Haslam (2001) describes two possible strategies for self-enhancement : social conflict or social creativity. Social conflict refers to the process whereby members of the in-group may aim to undermine the status, resources and attributes of the outgroup , whereas social creativity focuses on an in-group’s emphasis on the strengths of the group which is then compared to a weaker outgroup .

Both categorisation and self-enhancement help explain group member behaviours but an important aspect of Social Identity Theory is that both socio-cognitive operations are expressed in line with subjective belief structures (Hogg et al., 1995), described as the viewpoint about the nature of the relationship between in in-group and relevant outgroups (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). These beliefs about the relationship between one’s own group and another will often focus on two primary belief structures. Firstly, how stable and legitimate an in-group’s status relationship may be (whether or not the individual believes their group deserves status and whether it is likely to last). Secondly, belief about the possibilities of social change and social mobility (passing from one group to another) (Hogg & Terry, 2000). Hogg et al. (1995) also highlight that these subjective beliefs are often based on ideological constructs and, therefore, not wholly or, on occasion, not at all based on objective reality.

Self-Categorisation Theory

Despite a consideration of the role of Self-categorisation in Social Identity Theory (Turner, 1985; Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reiker, & Wetherell, 1987), Turner, unhappy with some of the criticisms of the (Social Identity) theory (see Turner & Oakes, 1989 for a summary of the issues), expanded and developed the framework to focus explicitly on the role of categorisation in social identity phenomena (Hogg & Hains, 1996)—thus Self-categorisation theory was born. Turner’s (1985, 1987) notion of Self-Categorisation theory emphasised the role of the cognitive process of categorisation as the basis for behaviour in groups and specifically focused on the way in which the process of categorisation intensifies the perception of similarities between objects and/or people within ones social category, whilst equally emphasising the perceptual differences between objects and/or people in outgroups . The process of accentuating similarities and differences in our social categories is based on factors which are perceived to correlate with the category in question which, according to Hogg et al. (1995), “renders experience of the world subjectively meaningful and identifies those aspects which are relevant to action in a particular context” (p. 261). Self-categorisation theorists generally refer to two levels of self-categorisation : the individual and the collective, with individual categorisation relating to the process of emphasising differences between group members and collective categorisation focusing on similarities of group members (Prentice, 2006). Turner defines individual level self-categorisation as “the subordinate level of personal self-categorizations based on differentiations between oneself as a unique individual and other in-group members that define one as a specific individual person (e.g., in terms of one’s personality or other kinds of individual differences)” (Turner et al., 1987, p. 45). Individual level self-categorisation involves the individual thinking of themselves in terms of differences between them and other in-group members, in other words their unique identity becomes salient (Prentice, 2006). On the other hand, Turner clarifies the collective self-category by describing it as a process, “based on social similarities and differences between human beings that define one as a member of certain social groups and not others (e.g., “American,” “female,” “black,” “student,” “working class”)” (Turner et al., 1987, p. 45). Collective self-categorisation occurs when the individual makes their membership of the group their salient identity, based on proclivity, morals, belief and, equally, by the context in which the group exists (Prentice, 2006). As a consequence of collective categorisation, an accentuation in the perceived similarity in the cognitive representation of the defining features of the group occurs (Hogg et al., 1995), which in turn leads to “ depersonalisation

” of the self, due to, in theoretical terminology, the individual “functioning as prototypical group members” (Prentice, 2006, p. 39). Depersonalisation refers “to the process of ‘ self-stereotyping

’ whereby people come to perceive themselves more as the interchangeable exemplars of a social category than as unique personalities defined by their individual differences from others” (Turner et al., 1987, p. 50) and should not be confused with processes such as dehumanisation (see Haslam & Loughnan, 2014, for an overview of psychological dehumanisation) and deindividuation (e.g. Festinger, Pepitone, & Newcomb, 1952), but rather in terms of a change from personal to social identity as found in social psychological phenomena, such as empathy or altruism (Hogg et al., 1995). Depersonalisation is not losing an identity and this is made clear by Turner (1987) who states it

is not a loss of individual identity, nor a loss or submergence of the self in the group (as in the concept of deindividuation), nor any kind of regression to a more primitive or unconscious form of identity. It is the change from the personal to the social level of identity, a change in the nature and content of the self-concept corresponding to the functioning of self-perception at a more inclusive level of abstraction. (p. 51)

Prototypes, formed from cognitive representations of social categories, provide the individual with subjective representations of the defining attributes of a group, not as a checklist of traits per se but rather as “fuzzy sets” to attach to the context dependant (rather than fixed) features of membership (Hogg et al., 1995). Hogg and Reid (2006) suggest that prototypes adhere to the meta-contrast principle (Turner, 1985) which implies that an enhancement of perceived entitativity (the properties of a group that lead to a perception of it being a homogenous and distinct entity) is achieved by a maximisation of the ratio of intergroup differences to intragroup differences. This implies that our prototypical perceptions of what it means to gain group membership are synchronically linked with the process of making within and between group comparisons and that the salience of the outgroup also impacts the prototype. A by-product of our prototypes is the forming of group norms as we tend to share the same views as people in the in-group within a specific context, thus there is synergy with other in-group members based on a shared view of social reality (Turner, 1991). It is worth noting here that despite most self-categorisation theorists referring to the notion of having two levels of categorisation , Turner et al.’s (1987, as cited in Prentice, 2006) original inception of the process included a description of a third super-ordinate level of categorisation, described as the “the super-ordinate level of the self as human being

, self-categorizations based on one’s identity as a human being” (Turner et al., 1987, p. 45), relating to our sense of belonging to one huge in-group of humanity, a shared humanity, in comparison to alternative species of life.

Similarities and Differences in Identity Theory and Social Identity Theory

As highlighted in the previous sections, Identity Theory and Social Identity Theory differ in their emphasis on the nature of Identity and have often been treated as being “scientifically isolated” from one another (Hogg et al., 1995). Hogg et al. provides a succinct summary of both the similarities and differences between the two theories which is worth exploration here, primarily because the literature in relation to work identities that follows utilises the spectrum of terminology, concept and models from both approaches. It is worth highlighting the point that both theories are constantly evolving and growing; therefore interpretation naturally may change over time (Burke, 1991). In recap, Hogg et al. (1995) remind us that both theories ultimately describe the self as socially constructed, dynamic in nature and which, by proxy, has a mediating effect on our relationship between society and social structure and our behaviour at an individual level. The behaviour itself may be described differently by Identity Theory (as roles) or by Social Identity Theory (as prototypes ) but, nonetheless, both acknowledge a reciprocal relationship between the self and society. Both theories also facilitate an individual’s definition of the self through the internalisation of identities, albeit in the form of labelling and commitment in Identity Theory , or the concepts of social identification and self-categorisation in Social Identity Theory . Hogg et al. (1995) state that the similarity between the theories is due to the distinctiveness of Social Identity Theory’s fundamental assumption that society has primacy over “individual”, thus placing Social Identity Theory in opposition of modern day social psychological identity perspectives which focus more on intrapsychic and interpersonal processes (p. 262). Nevertheless, there are differences between the theories which make them uniquely separate. Identity Theory is not a psychological theory, and sits firmly within sociological models, whilst Social Identity Theory adopts a social psychological perspective in terms of its attempt to describe cognitive processes underpinning identity. This, Hogg et al. (1995) argue, is the first overarching difference between the theories: the level of analysis of the socio-cognitive processes involved in each. Although the analysis of socio-cognitive processes are overtly explored in Social Identity Theory (e.g. categorisation processes and the later work of Turner, 1985), to claim that Identity Theory does not discuss it at all is misleading (Stets & Burke, 2000), as one can see discussion on a range of socio-cognitive processes including the processes of reflected appraisals (McCall & Simmons, 1978), the definition of the situation (McCall & Simmons, 1978; Stryker, 1980), role taking (Stryker, 1980), and self-verification and dissonance reduction (Burke, 1991), as cited in Stets and Burke (2000). The theories also differ in their description of intergroup behaviour , with Social Identity Theory focusing on intergroup relationships and group behaviour, in contrast to the focus on role behaviour in Identity Theory (Hogg et al., 1995). This is further emphasised by the fact that Social Identity Theory discusses the role taken by the outgroup whereas, with the exception of counter-roles , Identity Theory does not. The theories also differ in relation to the way in which they describe roles and groups, with Hogg and colleagues claiming a clearer distinction between role and group in Social Identity Theory . Stets and Burke (2000) imply that this is not empirically accurate, providing exceptions in the form of research examples of Identity Theory being used to explore attitudes of members of age groups (see Mutran & Burke, 1979). Based on the logic that Identity Theory neglects the group over individual roles, Stets and Burke suggest that Social Identity Theory may do the same in reverse, neglecting role over that of the group. Social Identity Theory may view roles as offering a sense of positioning within a group but it does not talk about role identities as crucial to the development of a self-definition with the same conviction as Identity Theory ; but again there are exceptions (Deaux, Reid, Mizrahi, & Ethier, 1995). Whilst Social Identity Theory offers more detail on intergroup dynamics and Identity Theory provides more detail on role behaviour within groups, Stets and Burke (2000) suggest that this a matter of over-emphasis in one over another, rather than an all-out rejection of concept respectively and that the application of either theory is suited to explore the role of personal role and group identities. The final difference between the theories, according to Hogg et al. (1995), is the way in which identity is deemed as salient and/or socially contextual in relation to how the immediate situation impacts on behaviour. In Identity Theory (more specifically in Stryker’s formulation), the self is seen as being made up of a number of discrete structures in the form of role identities, which change in relation to role position, whereas Social Identity Theory posits that social identity is an “enduring construct that changes with the changing intergroup relations” (Hogg et al., 1995, p. 265) and emphasises that different contexts will surface different behavioural responses which are relevant to maintaining membership to the in-group in such a way that our social identity can be described as being “responsive to immediate contextual factors” (p. 265). Again Stets and Burke (2000) refute this difference and imply that due to the fact that the birth of Identity Theory was grounded in symbolic interactionist frameworks, the role of the impact of the immediate situation is inferred by proxy (McCall & Simmons, 1978).

Hogg et al.’s (1995) paper offers a critical comparison of both Identity Theory , rooted in sociology and Social Identity Theory rooted in psychology , both of which aim to provide a formulation between the relationship between self and society. Each theory has been selected for discussion here as the concepts outlined help us to make sense of the lived experience of individuals, specifically members of the Armed Forces who navigate a change in identity when they once more become a civilian.

References

Beart, S., Hardy, G., & Buchan, L. (2005). How People with Intellectual Disabilities View Their Social Identity: A Review of the Literature. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 18, 47–56.Crossref

Burke, P. J. (1991). Identity Processes and Social Stress. American Sociological Review, 56, 836–849.Crossref

Burke, P. J., & Reitzes, D. C. (1981). The Link Between Identity and Role Performance. Social Psychology Quarterly, 44, 83–92.Crossref

Callero, P. L. (1985). Role Identity Salience. Social Psychology Quarterly, 48, 203–215.Crossref

Callero, P. L. (1995). Role as Resource in a Prison Uprising. In B. Markovsky, K. Heimer, & J. O’Brien (Eds.), Advances in Group Processes (pp. 221–247). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Deaux, K., Reid, A., Mizrahi, K., & Ethier, K. (1995). Parameters of Social Identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 280–291.Crossref

Festinger, L., Pepitone, A., & Newcomb, T. (1952). Some Consequences of Deindividuation in a Group. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47, 382–389.Crossref

Gleason, P. (1983). Identifying Identity: A Semantic History. Journal of American History, 6, 910–931.Crossref

Haslam, S. A. (2001). Psychology in Organizations: The Social Identity Approach. London: Sage.

Haslam, N., & Loughnan, S. (2014). Dehumanization and Infrahumanization. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 399–423.Crossref

Hoelter, J. W. (1983). The Effects of Role Evaluation and Commitment on Identity Salience. Social Psychology Journal, 46, 140–147.

Hogg, M. A., & Hains, S. C. (1996). Intergroup Relations and Group Solidarity: Effects of Group Identification and Social Beliefs on Depersonalized Attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 295–309.Crossref

Hogg, M. A., & Mullin, B. A. (1999). Joining Groups to Reduce Uncertainty: Subjective Uncertainty Reduction and Group Identification. In D. Abrams & M. A. Hogg (Eds.), Social Identity and Social Cognition (pp. 249–279). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Hogg, M. A., & Reid, A. (2006). Social Identity, Self-Categorization, and Group Norms. Communication Theory, 16, 7–30.

Hogg, M. A., & Terry, D. J. (2000). Social Identity and Self-Categorization Processes in Organizational Contexts. Academy of Management Review, 25, 121–140.Crossref

Hogg, M. A., Terry, D. J., & White, M. J. (1995). A Tale of Two Theories: Critical Comparisons of Identity Theory and Social Identity Theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 58, 255–269.Crossref

Hogg, M. A., & Vaughan, G. M. (2002). Social Psychology (3rd ed.). London: Prentice Hall.

Howard, J. A. (2000). Social Psychology of Identity. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 367–393.Crossref

Huddy, L. (2001). From Social to Political Identity: A Critical Examination of Social Identity Theory. Political Psychology, 22, 127–156.Crossref

Kornhauser, W. (1962). Social Bases of Political Commitment. In A. M. Rose (Ed.), Human Behaviour and Social Processes (pp. 321–329). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Long, K. M., & Spears, R. (1997). The Self-Esteem Hypothesis Revisited: Differentiation and the Disaffected. In R. Spears, P. J. Oakes, N. Ellemers, & S. A. Haslam (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Stereotyping and Group Life (pp. 296–317). Oxford: Blackwell.

McCall, G. J., & Simmons, J. L. (1978). Identities and Interactions. New York: The Free Press.

Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, Self, and Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Mutran, E., & Burke, P. J. (1979). Feeling ‘Useless’: A Common Component of Young and Old Adult Identities. Research on Aging, 1, 188–212.

Nuttbrock, L., & Freudiger, P. (1991). Identity Salience and Motherhood: A Test of Stryker’s Theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 54, 146–157.Crossref

Prentice, D. (2006). On the Distinction Between Acting Like an Individual Versus Feeling Like an individual. In T. Postmes & J. Jetten (Eds.), Individuality and the Group: Advances in Social Identity (pp. 37–55). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Reid, S. A., & Hogg, M. A. (2005). A Self-Categorization Explanation of the Third-Person Effect. Human Communication Research, 31, 129–161.

Sarup, M. (1994). Home and Identity. In G. Robertson, M. Mash, L. Tickner, J. Bird, B. Curtis, & T. Putnam (Eds.), Traveller’s Tales: Narratives of Home and Displacement (pp. 89–101). London: Routledge.

Simon, R. W. (1992). Parental Role Strains, Salience of Parental Identity, and Gender Differences in Psychological Distress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 33, 25–35.Crossref

Stets, J. E., & Burke, P. J. (2000). Identity Theory and Social Identity Theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63, 224–237.

Stryker, S. (1968). Identity Salience and Role Performance. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 30, 558–564.Crossref

Stryker, S. (1980). Symbolic Interactionism: A Social Structural Version. Menlo Park: Benjamin Cummings.

Stryker, S. (1987). Identity Theory: Developments and Extensions. In K. Yardley & T. Honess (Eds.), Self and Identity: Psychosocial Perspectives (pp. 89–103). New York: Wiley.

Stryker, S., & Burke, P. J. (2000). The Past, Present, and Future of an Identity Theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63, 284–297.Crossref

Stryker, S., & Serpe, R. T. (1982). Commitment, Identity Salience, and Role Behavior: A Theory and Research Example. In W. Ickes & E. S. Knowles (Eds.), Personality, Roles, and Social Behavior (pp. 199–218). New York: Springer.Crossref

Stryker, S., & Serpe, R. T. (1994). Identity Salience and Psychological Centrality: Equivalent, Overlapping, or Complementary Concepts? Social Psychology Quarterly, 57, 16–35.

Stryker, S., & Statham, A. (1985). Symbolic Interaction and Role Theory. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology (pp. 311–378). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Tajfel, H. (1972). Social Categorisation. In S. Moscivici (Ed.), Introduction à la psychologie sociale (Vol. 1). Paris: Larousse.

Tajfel, H. (Ed.). (1978). Differentiation Between Social Groups: Studies in the Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations. London: Academic Press.

Tajfel, H. (1981). Human Groups and Social Categories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 33–48). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Turner, J. C. (1982). Towards a Cognitive Redefinition of the Social Group. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Social Identity and Intergroup Relations (pp. 15–40). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Turner, J. C. (1985). Social Categorization and the Self-Concept: A Social Cognitive Theory of Group Behavior. In E. J. Lawler (Ed.), Advances in Group Processes (pp. 77–121). Greenwich, CT: JAI.

Turner, J. C. (1987). Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-Categorization Theory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Turner, J. C. (1991). Social Influence. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-Categorization Theory. Oxford: Blackwell.

Turner, J. C., & Oakes, P. J. (1989). Self-Categorization Theory and Social Influence. In P. B. Paulus (Ed.), The Psychology of Group Influence (2nd ed., pp. 233–275). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Turner, J. H. (2013). Contemporary Sociological Theory. London: Sage.

© The Author(s) 2019

K. M. Wilson-Smith, P. J. CorrMilitary Identity and the Transition into Civilian Lifehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12338-3_2

2. Role Exit

Kevin M. Wilson-Smith[1] and Philip J. Corr[2]

(1) School of Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK

(2) Department of Psychology, City University London, London, UK

Kevin M. Wilson-Smith (Corresponding author) Email: kevin.wilson-smith@glasgow.ac.uk

Philip J. Corr Email: philip.corr.1@city.ac.uk

Abstract

Interconnections between social roles and identities can be intricate and ambiguous and, therefore, exiting a role to which we feel strongly committed can lead to the sense of identity being threatened. The idea of there being a consequence to leaving a social role rests on the premise that identities are formed within socio-cultural spaces and, therefore, when one leaves a role an empty space remains. In this chapter, we explore this process, often referred to as “role exit” and the seminal work of Blau (1972), who outlines four key reasons that may lead to such a transition. The chapter also provides a short snapshot of some of the large scale international programmes that have researched the reasons for and consequences of military exit in the United States and Canada.

Keywords

Role exitPrototypical behaviourCareer changeEx-roleType atomismVeterans metrics initiative

On the basis of the potential for conflict in identity when making the transition from full-time military personnel to civilian worker, we examine the process of role exit as a way of understanding the start of the social process in leaving such a core aspect of one’s identity.

As shown in the previous chapter of this book, Identity Theory (Stryker, 1987) and Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) provide an overview of the nature of the self as a multifaceted construct composed of a number of role identities. Stier (2006) states that everyone adheres to a wide range of unique, dynamic and contextual roles which are negotiated through social interplay and this means that a fundamental part of our ability to operate as social beings lies in the ability to alternate between roles. Interconnections between social roles and identities can be ambiguous and intricate (Stier, 2006) with any one identity having its own set of roles referred to as a “role kit” (Stier, 1998). Therefore, it is not surprising that a major change to, or undesirable exit from, a role to which we feel strongly committed, is likely to make our identity feel threatened (Blau, 1972). Accordingly, a voluntary choice to leave full-time military may become a social and cognitive minefield.

The idea of there being a consequence to leaving a social role rests on the premise that identities are formed within socio-cultural spaces and therefore when one leaves a role the empty space remains (Stier, 2006). This process can be described as “ role exit

”, a term first coined by Blau (1972), which refers to an occasion when “any stable pattern of interaction and shared activities between two or more persons ceases” (p. 2). Blau’s (1972) seminal work on role exit was originally grounded in her attempts to study ageing, yet she also discussed the concept more generically in an effort to develop a theoretical framework that might be applied to other settings. Part of this theoretical framework included a description of what Blau believed to be the four key reasons that may cause role exit which included: an act of nature

, for example, death of a partner , injury/illness ; expulsion by a group/collective

, such as excommunication or banishment; involuntary action, for example, being fired or made redundant; and voluntary action, for example, initiating a career change. Despite the fact that Blau did not further the theoretical framework of reasons for role exit with empirical comparative evidence (Ebaugh, 1988), it can be clearly mapped against data provided by the Ministry of Defense on personnel outflow which describes military exit as either due to voluntary exit , redundancy , or discharge (either medical or due to disciplinary) (Ministry of Defence, 2014). There is, however, an obvious gap in the literature which neglects to explore how varying types of exit may comparatively effect military role exit , albeit a range of studies do identify the reason for exit (for a comprehensive exploration of reasons for leaving US Army see Hoover, Randolph, Elig, & Klein, 2001) or try to offer an exploration into specific antecedents (as either cause or effect) of military exit, including mental health and PTSD (e.g. Anderson, 1992; Bellwood & Bussuttil, 2009; Hoge, Auchterlonie, & Milliken, 2006) or physical injury (e.g. Sayer et al., 2010), to name a few.

Developing the work of Blau, Ebaugh (1998), having experienced a significant personal role exit from being a catholic nun (to become a mother, wife and professor of sociology), became specifically interested in voluntary role exit which she described in the following way:

The process of disengagement from a role that is central to one’s self-identity and the reestablishment of an identity in a new role that takes into account one’s ex-role constitutes the process I call role exit . (p. 1)

Ebaugh suggests that, despite the various differences between the type of role exit situations, a commonality can be seen between the variables of each that make it a unique and definable social process. On this basis, Ebaugh (1988) retrospectively explored the role exit experiences of people who chose voluntary exit from a range of roles. Based on her analysis she outlined a four-stage process that claimed to offer cohesion between each of the varying role exits which included: experiencing doubt

; searching for alternatives

; experiencing a turning point and; the creation of a new identity as former role occupant

. In the first stage, the individual experiences doubt over the commitment to their role and often involves a “reinterpretation of reality, a realisation that things are not what they had seemed” (p. 62). Ebaugh outlines a number of reasons as to why doubt creeps into the individual’s mind and one such reason that may be applicable to the current exit from the British Armed Forces is doubt brought on by organisational change . In Ebaugh’s sample, some participants began to doubt commitment to the role when the organisation to which they belonged began to experience significant changes, often rapidly occurring in which she claims that members may be unwilling to accommodate.

In a military context, Ebaugh refers to one participant, an ex-navy man who justified his departure from his secure and well defined military identity due to an organisational change towards liberality and away from traditional values of discipline akin to the origins of the military as a “ total institution

” (Goffman, 1961). In Ebaugh’s second stage, individuals who began doubting their existing role begin to explore alternative roles available to them. At this stage for members of the Armed Forces, it may even be that the alternative role is simply “civilian”, without due consideration of the possible specifics of occupational life after exit. However, Ebaugh found that of 185 people interviewed only twelve claimed to have made a role exit without due consideration of alternative roles. Following on from a consideration of the alternatives, where the individual may begin to identify with new in-groups and begin to rehearse new roles, a turning point occurs at which a definite decision to exit takes place. In occupational terms, many of those exiting job roles in Ebaugh’s sample suggested that the final decision to leave the role was a gradual one, with one ex-school teacher emphasising a buildup of the decision by stating “those little things go to me, a little nick her and a little nick there, and a griping here” (p. 145). Ebaugh goes on to identify five main turning point types that cause people to definitely leave the role including: specific events, “the straw that broke the camel’s back”, time-related factors, excuses, and finally other alternatives. The final stage of role exit involved creating the “ ex-role

”. This was deemed to be a unique and interesting social psychological phenomena on the basis that it emphasised that an individual’s identity with it did not so much consist of what role they were currently undertaking but instead placed focus on how current identity was, in fact, placed on expectations, norms and prototypical behaviour of the previous role; and as Ebaugh articulates, the process of becoming an ‘ex’, in this case a veteran, may involve “tension between ones past, present and future” (p. 170). On this basis, Ebaugh makes the distinction between those who have never been members, who do not hold a “ hangover identity

” (p. 170), that is a side effect of having a previous role and, thus, do not experiences the difficulties in merging their familiar yet old identity with their new self-concept .

Wacquant (1990) provides a critique of Ebaugh’s framework of role exit based on her seminal work “Becoming an Ex”, summarising a number of key critical evaluations of the work. Although Ebaugh herself argued that she was not intending to develop a theory of role exit , Wacquant points out that the analytical strategy may lead to “an enumeration of factors that threaten to degenerate into ‘ type atomism’

…with residual catch all categories that provide little analytical assistance in the work of comparison” (p. 399); and, thus, infers that the data are based more on common sense than on deep iteration of them. Equally, and of specific importance to military contexts in which the individual is felt to have been forcibly removed from his/her role (such as reaching retirement age), the work of Ebaugh says very little of the structural constraints effecting role exit . Wacquant points out that in cases of more drastic and rapid exit, such as that experienced by those injured in war and medically discharged , the stages proposed within the one size fits all proposition of role exit becomes curtailed.

Despite these critiques, which form a few of many critical comments provided by Wacquant’s review, it is clear that the time of writing there had been little attention placed on processes of dis-identifying during exit from a role (Wacquant, 1990); and as previously mentioned, Ebaugh herself comments that this, in part, was due to the fact that, apart from in times of war, individuals were much less mobile and tended to have one marriage and one occupation irrelevant of how satisfied or unsatisfied they were (Ebaugh, 1988, p. 24). Whilst it is not an overarching theoretical framework, it becomes a starting point for understanding role exit in applied circumstances and organisations.

A Brief Look at Some International Literature

Whilst this book aims to provide a snapshot of avenues of the literature it is worth noting one or two large scale studies from across various ponds.

A number of large scale international projects have found a range of noteworthy findings. A Canadian study (Life After Service Survey, 2016), exploring the transition from the military to civilian, was conducted to understand and improve the health of veterans. The data were collected via telephone by Statistics Canada, including people who had finished service between 1998 and 2015. The findings suggest that 52% of veterans had an easy adjustment to civilian life and 32% reported it as challenging. There are nuances in the sample (in terms of adjustment in lifestyle): officers had a lower rate of difficulty in adjustment (17%) in comparison with 29% of senior non-commissioned members, and 39% of Junior Non-commissioned Members (JrNCM). There are a multitude of other factors including (but are not limited to), time since release, time spent in Afghanistan, employment and self-reported mental health. The research is being used to inform and improve schemes/services to Veterans in Canada.

A study in the United States (US) (Vogt et al., 2018) has reviewed and critiqued current limitations in the literature and programmes that are offered at the end of military service. The study proposes a new method, called The Veterans Metrics Initiative (TVMI), which assesses veterans within three months of release from the military and to complete five assessments at six-month intervals. Furthermore, it evaluates the use of post-service programmes and their wellbeing in the three years after release. The study consisted of 9566 participants at the first assessment—this changed as people withdrew throughout the study or only partial responses were returned. The study is the first in the literature to begin to examine (on a large scale) how veterans’ experiences progress as they separate from military service, and how different programmes effect this transition. The research is multifaceted and longitudinal, therefore certain aspects are still underway. The study has identified a gap in the literature and is aiming to provide accurate information about support after military service and the effects of this on Veterans in the United States.

Castro, Kintzle, and Hassan (2014) conducted a study in the state of California, as it is home to 1.8 million former service members (which is larger than any other state in North America). The study suggests the findings are applicable to communities, national organisations and states in developing future methods of supporting veterans transitioning to civilian life. Although there were ex-service personnel adjusting to civilian life well, the report focuses on those who were facing challenges, these include obtaining employment , housing, resolving physical or mental health issues and adjusting to civilian culture . The study surveyed 1300 veterans (living in Los Angeles County), and followed up with group focused interviews. The study summarises with four main concerns to consider in the future development of programmes: service personnel are not prepared for the transition to civilian life; support is not easily available from one organisation due to the complexities in requirements; organisations are not set up for holistic (physical and mental wellbeing ) support; and most veteran organisations are structured as reactive rather than protective, for example, an organisation that supports homeless veterans does not have any methods in place to prevent this before it occurs. This can be applied in a range of areas where support is needed.

References

Anderson, K. (1992). Effects of Military Experience on Mental Health Problems and Work Behaviour. Medical Care, 30, 554–563.Crossref

Bellwood, M., & Busuttil, W. (2009). Exit Satisfaction Surveys & Warwick Edinburgh Mental Well Being Scale (WEMWBS) Outcome Study (Parts 1 & 2). Internal Publication. Leatherhead, Surrey: Combat Stress.

Blau, Z. (1972). Role Exit and Identity. Paper Presented at the American Sociological Association Meetings, New Orleans. Cited in Ebaugh, H. R. (1988). Becoming an Ex: The Process of Role Exit. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Castro, C., Kintzle, S., & Hassan, A. (2014). The State of the American Veteran. Retrieved from http://cir.usc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/USC010_CIRLAVetReport_FPpgs.pdf.

Ebaugh, H. R. (1988). Becoming an Ex: The Process of Role Exit. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Crossref

Goffman, E. (1961). Asylums: Essays on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other Inmates. New York: Doubleday Anchor.

Hoge, C. W., Auchterlonie, J. L., & Milliken, C. S. (2006). Mental Health Problems, Use of Mental Health Services, and Attrition from Military Service After Returning from Deployment to Iraq or Afghanistan. Journal of the American Medical Association, 295, 1023–1032.Crossref

Hoover, E. C., Randolph, J. S., Elig, T. W., & Klein, P. M. (2001). Overview of the 2000 Military Exit Survey. Arlington, TX, USA: Defence Manpower Data Centre. Retrieved January 2, 2015 from. http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA40068.

Life After Service Survey Veterans Affairs Canada. (2016). Retrieved from http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/about-us/research-directorate/publications/reports/lass-2016.

Ministry of Defence. (2014). Defence Statistics: UK Armed Forces Quarterly Personnel Report. Retrieved February 11, 2015 from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/284506/UK-af-personnel-quarterly-1-january-2014.pdf.

Sayer, N. A., Nooraloochi, S., Frazier, P., Carlson, K., Gravely, A., & Murdoch, M. (2010). Reintegration Problems and Treatment Interests Among Iraq and Afghanistan Combat Veterans Receiving VA Medical Care. Psychiatric Services, 61, 589–597.Crossref

Stier, J. (1998). Dimensions and Experiences of Human Identity: An Analytical Toolkit and Empirical Illustration (Doctoral Dissertation, No. 69). Department of Sociology, Göteborg University.

Stier, J. (2006, May). Career Retirement, Role Exit and Identity Concerns. Interaction on the Edge. In Proceedings from the 5th GRASP Conference, Linköping University.

Stryker, S. (1987). Identity Theory: Developments and Extensions. In K. Yardley & T. Honess (Eds.), Self and Identity: Psychosocial Perspectives (pp. 89–103). New York: Wiley.

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 33–48). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Vogt, D., Perkins, D. F., Copeland, L. A., Finley, E. P., Jamieson, C. S., Booth, B., … & Gilman, C. L. (2018). The Veterans Metrics Initiative Study of US Veterans’ Experiences During Their Transition from Military Service. BMJ Open, 8, e020734.

Wacquant, L. J. D. (1990). Org Review: Exiting Roles or Exiting Role Theory? Critical Notes on Ebaugh’s “Becoming an Ex”. Acta Sociologica, 33, 397–404.Crossref

© The Author(s) 2019

K. M. Wilson-Smith, P. J. CorrMilitary Identity and the Transition into Civilian Lifehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12338-3_3

3. “Lifers”: Exit from the Armed Forces After 36 Years’ Service

Kevin M. Wilson-Smith[1] and Philip J. Corr[2]

(1) School of Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK

(2) Department of Psychology, City University London, London, UK

Kevin M. Wilson-Smith (Corresponding author) Email: kevin.wilson-smith@glasgow.ac.uk

Philip J. Corr Email: philip.corr.1@city.ac.uk

Abstract

John provides the first of three stories explored in this book. John served a total of 36 years with the military holding a variety of roles both in full-time and Reserve service. He outlines the transition from regular service to civilian life and allows us to explore his lived experience and ‘sense-making’ as he recalls it. John provides us with insight into the impact of military exit on both his own identity and his relationship with others around him. In the second half of this chapter, we provide psychological perspectives alongside John’s story in order that the reader can consider the application of theories, such as Social Identity Theory and other research on military identity, in order to better understand John’s experiences.

Keywords

LiferRe-socialisationNegative capitalRelease anxietyPre-exit identityCentral identity

John’s story (as with Jack’s and Ollie’s that follow) is provided to give a tangible narrative in which to consider the psychological literature. The research studies cited after the story are not all relevant to John’s experiences, but rather shed light on a range of potential sub-facets of military exit. (You may wish to read the literature and then go back to John’s story to reflect on how specific aspects of the research are relevant to the lived experience of his role exit .)

Johns’ Story

My name is John; I am the son of a serviceman who completed 22 years’ service, retiring as a Junior Non-Commissioned officer (JNCO). I served for just short of 36 years’ with the army retiring as a Major. From an early age, I had been totally immersed in a military environment. My Dad was in the Marines and my Mum had been in the RAF for a short period. Both my grandparents had been in the forces—Marines and RAF. So I come from a military background.

My dad retired from the Marines the year I joined up, everything I did prior to enlistment was somewhat military orientated, not unusual as I had always been in that environment. So it was quite natural for me to just join the forces. I selected the army-catering corps because I didn’t like woodwork or metalwork at school and had an interest in cooking taking home economics instead. I have always been ambitious even in the Cubs. I was a sixer and in the Cadets I was a Colour Sergeant. I joined the junior army and achieved apprentice CSM. I was never satisfied with the rank I was in and so always strove to attain the next rank. I believe that I have been relatively successful in the Regular Army as I went on and achieved W01 and at the age 37 I took a late entry commission and became a Captain in the Royal Logistic Corps. I left the army in 2016 at the age of 52. I acknowledge that my success was reliant on not only my own capabilities but also of those around me contributing to their own and my success. Perhaps I was a little bit more fortunate than others being promoted when they were not. Out of an intake of 233, I passed out at no. 2 having missed out on apprentice RSM and this success was replicated in adult service.

My father had never discouraged me from the military and to be honest when I was 13/14ish years old I was left to my own devices. I was not pushed one way or the other and my parents left me to get on with it. The military for me was the obvious choice of work as I was living in Plymouth and that was a military environment with the RN, RM and army being garrisoned there. So the military for me was the easy, straightforward option. I had those connotations from family. All of my hobbies were military orientated. Military history, cap badge collection, German history, WW2 and that’s who I was and what I still do today. I lived in a military environment and everything I did was centred on being boisterous and having a military orientated attitude. So joining the military was almost ordained I suppose. It’s just the way it was.

In terms of developing military identity I had that from an early age. I also recall, at least from the age of 27 and as a senior NCO, the difference in the way soldiers across the board looked and treated you, as a sergeant: you were treated with a bit more respect. I recognise now and throughout my career, that from that point as an SNCO, the organisation I was part of did nothing but change, evolve, amalgamate, and combine. To some degree that has assisted me in later transitions because, it’s that understanding that things change. Not all soldiers understand or understood that and to some degree, that understanding assisted me.

The organisation I joined does not reflect the organisation now. It’s evolved so many times; we had an elitism when I joined. If you got into certain jobs and roles, you were in the top percentage of whatever educational spheres that you came from. That was what the army demanded, the army selection centres classed you one, two, three or 4. Class three and four generally ended up in the infantry and there’s nothing wrong with that career choice, “ horses for courses
”. That’s just how it was intellectually. That’s the way I understood how the military was. You had people coming in who joined because it was a job; it wasn’t the reason I had joined. Don’t get me wrong, I didn’t join an organisation and wanted to go to war and shoot people, but at the back of my mind, I knew it was always a possibility.

I joined up in 80 just before the Falkland’s happened in 82, and I joined up when everything was about Northern Ireland. My fathers’ last draft was Northern Ireland and he had told me about his experiences. He also served in Borneo and Malaya; he’d been in the troubles in Cyprus. So I knew that warfare was a facet of military service. I accepted it and believe attitudes started to change after “
Options for Change
”, the different type of soldier we had coming in, it seemed that they thought it was the case if it was a job, it was 9 to 5 and when they got promoted it was because they felt they were owed it on time served. Then as newly promoted SNCOs some felt that they could be friends with the people they were supposed to lead and manage. That wasn’t my army identity or the army I joined or what I understood my responsibilities were and perhaps that’s why I was successful in that evolution. I was always led to believe that you had to be a moral individual, stand up and be prepared to be counted. There were too many people after the 90s certainly after 2000; all they wanted to be was a senior NCO because it was a better place to be in the Sergeants Mess, abdicating some of the associated responsibilities as an SNCO or Warrant Officer. That wasn’t why I joined. You could still be mates with the people that were in your section, department etc. But in my view, one had two personalities, one at work and one off duty. The organisation I joined wasn’t the organisation I left.

Looking back, I am certain that the best part of my professional life was the pride I felt when I commissioned. Becoming an officer was probably one the proudest moments of my life. I achieved my ambition at the age of 45 by promoting to Major as that was what I set out to do. I tried going for commission at 22 as a Corporal but had been unsuccessful; my wider knowledge of the world was too narrow. I was very military orientated and had not been exposed to the softer aspects of life, opera or theatre for example which seemed to be important to get commissioned at the time, more rounded personalities. I was really fortunate to be dined out of the sergeants mess, ejected and then welcomed into the officers mess, I turned up to the officers mess and the colonel stood on the doorstep and a said “ welcome Captain X, this is your new home, enjoy it
”.

As a new captain, I realised that I needed to change. So, I did with the aid of those around me. I used to see the world in black and white and my wife has helped me in this education, it was either right or wrong, you do it or you don’t. My dad had taught me when I joined up, you question things, which is what a good person does, “ ask, order, and charge
”. You have that business of there’s the carrot, there’s the stick and there’s also the nasty end of the stick. That is what I grew up with.

I believe that if I had left the army as a WO1, I wouldn’t have evolved into the type of collaborative manager that I am now in civilian contexts having not had the experience as an officer aiding my personal evolution. Being a Senior NCO has a different identity than being an officer. Don’t get me wrong I was a good manager in and at what I was doing and I led well but now that I’ve left the army, my experience as an officer has made me better leader and manager. A stronger leader than I ever was as a WO, having actually been permitted to lead. It’s easier as a junior and senior NCO or WO, because of the hierarchical rank structure and as WO1 you are top of the game but the officer, certainly from senior captain up leads, having access to more information and being more aware of the strategic aspects of what is occurring.

At the point I realised my time with the army was coming to an end—it felt like resettlement crept up on me. After I had returned from an operational tour I realised I only had a year to sort myself out and try to work out how I was going to leave. However, because they were closing down and withdrawing from some of the sites I worked at and my involvement in the process, my resettlement was put on hold for the exigencies’ of service. I had another two years to sort myself out, so you would have thought that I would have faced resettlement better or differently given the fact I had more time. However, due to the intensity of the job at hand, it was very much a case of I just got on with the job and the two years went by. Suddenly it was hard to believe that it was going to end. Looking back, I should have faced it in a different manner, actually, although I don’t regret how I faced it.

It was very much a case of thinking it was going to happen and saying it wasn’t going to be difficult. I had confidence in my own skills and drill and capabilities. We were living in Germany at the time and we thought we might stay there but around the same time my son told us his girlfriend was pregnant so that changed our focus because prior to that and this is no word of a lie, if I were to say to you in the last 10 years of service I saw my son a week a year I would be lying. If we were lucky we would see him a week a year, invariably it was probably a weekend every now and again at best. It probably would have been easier for me to get a job down South, which is where I am from and up to that point, we never really considered living in the North, but our son had moved up North and because we were expecting our first grandchild, it was a “no brainer” to move there, to be closer to him, his girlfriend and our granddaughter.

That was, without doubt, the biggest decision we made with regards to the initial transition and made no more than 18 months out.

I don’t think we, or I even realised the impact that that decision would have with regards to employability. I am not from a manufacturing background; I had been a caterer for twenty years. NB. I only started liking Christmas about four years ago because to me Christmas started the first week of November and ended in last week of January. When you are doing 80–100 functions in that period you never had a proper Christmas. That’s the way it was. Then 13 years as a general logistics officer. So we moved up here.

For a period of time, my son, much to my annoyance became a chef. I had told him what it was like for me as a military caterer and of course a civilian caterer is similar in some respects. He did it for about 4 or 5 years and when his partner got pregnant he realised that he was going to have no life with his daughter as if he stayed a chef. He was working 16, 18 hours a day and getting paid peanuts. Certainly now that I am out, or was looking at getting out, there was no way I wanted to go back into catering so anything catering, retail or leisure where everyone else is having fun on the fun days and you’re working is not for me. I have done that, worked the 23-hour days and I am not going to do it again. That’s not to say I am not prepared to work hard, I am just not prepared to go back into that industry.

After leaving Germany, we had six months in Catterick. My son was going to America to see his wife’s family so we decided to go with him as part of the process of “ leaving/retiring
”, but at this point my job prospects hadn’t materialised. By end of May of 2016, I’ve got no job, I am out the army and still living in quarters, but they had given me three months extra, so technically I was in quarters as an illegal occupant. I left on the 16th May and on the 17th of May I started paying three times the amount for the same house I was living in the day before. I suppose in some respects I should be grateful they let me live there. By the beginning of the third month, we made the decision that we have to leave because at the end of the three month period they start proceedings against me as an illegal occupant (in spite of being given permission) and it wouldn’t look good for house purchase applications in the future, so we had to leave. We were unable to find suitable accommodation so we had to take holiday accommodation for a period of a month that cost us £2000. We then managed to find a flat, which was ok, but riddled with damp. I am not one of those people who feels down on their luck but, even now, our whole house and all of our belongings are in three ISO containers because we do not have our own house.

It feels like the only part of the army covenant that worked for me is I was able to get on the council list and the council gave me point recognition all the way back to the beginning of my military service. Fortunately, after 6 months a two bedroom house came up. This was far better than the two bedroom flat that we had but it was still a council house. I never in my wildest dreams anticipated I would end up in one. The reason I mentioned the covenant is that when I left I had a lump sum of money and savings with full intention of being employed within three months of leaving, buying our own house and everything else that is associated with that plan. Nearly two years on, my lump sum and savings have gone. If I had been able to access my lump sum in the last six months of service, I would have used that to put a deposit on house and would have had my full-time pay at the time to secure a mortgage. Having left the army, my only income is my pension and my pension isn’t enough to continue to live as we did or wish to. In that regard, the covenant has failed because I see no tangible proof other than the housing of any real assistance that has aided me gain meaningful employment and transition out of the military into civilian life.

At the point of leaving, I understood and certainly, when you look at Sandhurst motto, it’s all about serve to lead. You have to serve to lead but actually some senior officers (not all, and I have been led by some real stars) are only worried about where their next job is going to be and their service has become too politicised, some it seems have forgotten how to, or choose not to lead because of the desire to maintain their job. I probably left at the right time because I realised I was beginning to become a bit of a “ crusty
” myself. I believe things have become so political that it’s undermined the trust of many of those beneath them, certainly those that have served a long period of time. There are now soldiers and officers coming up in this atmosphere of distrust; you inherently used to trust your senior officers sadly in my view that is no longer the case. There is also the fact that the operational deployments that we have taken part in, we have gone out and done the job but the recognition of what we have done and suffered, is not recognised and if it is all too fleetingly. As a captain in Cyprus, I was doing an adventure sailing expedition and I introduced myself as John to one of the Lance Corporals. He was taken aback stating that none of his LE officers would have introduced themselves as I had. I said, you are not in my chain of command and this is adventure training and a learning experience for us both. We got chatting about his prospects. He said he had been selected for full corporal but that he was going to leave, so I asked why? He said “
I’ve shot people, I’ve seen people shot, seen my mates shot, my mates blown up and maimed, at the moment I’ve got all my bits, and it’s only going to be more of the same so it’s time for me to leave
”. I had been in the army for 20 odd years at the time and there was nothing I could say to the soldier that would have meant anything or could have done anything to change his mind. I completely understood what he was saying and respected his decision. There are too many people at all levels and in the civilian world that just don’t understand that’s what it’s all about. These soldiers have come back and suffer with PTSD or and have problems with medical care and it is appalling that the political agenda takes over. I’d ask why the covenant doesn’t provide something similar to the GI bill in the US after all that’s where the idea came from.

In the last period of resettlement and transition, I gained lots of professional accreditation appropriate to rank and experience (these are handed out), I have gained qualifications and completed an MBA etc. and yet despite all this after 18 months of leaving the army I have applied for 102 jobs, had only four interviews and I am still unemployed. Even though I went through the transition workshops, it felt weird because there was me with 32 years plus service having a resettlement discussion with some sergeants with 12–14 years’ experience. A whole week of the transition workshop that I didn’t get a lot out of, it so the way they currently support the transition is not great, it’s all lumped into one. I’ve had some people try to support and signpost me since I have left and I’ve attended a number of courses. Recently on a life works course, all of the other delegates on the course had medical problems, one had had a heart bypass, another a collapsed lung and there was me as ex-major with all of these soldiers with medical issues, I felt a fraud. It was only then that I realised that I didn’t only lose my job but I also lost my status, respectability and my entire purpose to some degree. My main focus is still on getting a job but it is frustrating.

I am not sure I still see myself as military, because the way I feel I was treated towards the end of my service and I don’t think I can get away from that. Yes, I am the person I am today because of how I’ve evolved in the military organisation. I don’t see myself as a senior NCO or ex-Warrant Officer and I haven’t done since I commissioned. I see myself as an ex-officer who tried to uphold the tradition and values of the organisation he was in. I suppose in reality I currently can’t see myself as anything other than a veteran, the civilian environment hasn’t welcomed me into its world as I have not received any additional information to influence me, lots of platitudes but no real assistance to aid in the transition.

I received some advice suggesting I looked for employment in roles similar to that which I was doing when I was 24 years old. I am sorry, things have changed, knowing that work forms a major part of my life I am not going to do a job that I will detest doing or that is so retrograde that I am the office junior again. In the army when a 20-year-old officer told me as a 27-year-old sergeant to do something I didn’t necessarily like it but I did it, because that was the way the organisation worked. I don’t have to do that now. I’ve been trained to a management and leadership level, in which I know I can add value, to do anything substantially less negates my service and demeans everything I stand for. I accept that I need to stand down a couple of levels but not to start again.

You can often spot ex-service personnel because of their general demeanour and how they carry themselves, and many people instinctively ask “ you’re ex-military aren’t you
”? That appears to be a positive having learned shoulders back, head up, chin forward in training and at an early age, once learned something not easily shrugged off or relinquished, it becomes part of who you are.

Part of my problem I think is, whilst I am applying for roles, recruiters aren’t really looking for people—relying on computer programmes to spot the ideal. Too few jobs being advertised with too many applicants (those on ‘social’ have to demonstrate looking even if not really), No feedback because of the number of applicants therefore lack of opportunity to amend applications and CVs appropriately; LinkedIn, other people link in with me because of the connections they think I might have, rather than linking into try to help so it hasn’t worked for me at all, not helped by a lack of a network due to a new area, 10 years out of the country and what network I had is gone because it was predominately military; It has also been suggested that my CV is scaring a potential boss or employer off, but I can’t dumb it down and take away 36 years of army experience. Is ageism being practiced? If so at the age of 52 it appears that am I on the scrapheap and my military service is for naught.

I can’t do anything for myself either, there is lots of stuff in my iso containers from my hobbies perspective, reading or doing stuff to further my hobby. I don’t know how I can move on from where I am, and if I don’t I’ll be stuck between making a transition and living the rest of my life.

Psychological Perspectives

Social Identity Theory can serve as a useful tool in understanding the challenges faced by individuals leaving full-time military service. In recap from previous chapters, Tajfel (1978, p. 63) defined social identity as “that part of an individual’s self-concept which derives from his knowledge of his membership of a social group (or groups) together with the value and emotional significance attached to that membership”. Social Identity Theory has been used to explain the emotional, behavioural and social psychological reactions of military members (Griffith, 2009). Griffith (2009). It stipulates that, within military context, the individual begins to define their identity exclusively based on membership of the military in-group and in some circumstances the powerful military culture leads to the military culture role taking a dominant position within the self than one’s personal role (Wolpert, 2000). McNeil and Giffen (1967) also suggested that when the individual leaves their military role, there is a fragmentation of their social identity which can lead to a sense of grief over the loss of a central aspect of the self and this is further supported by a model of job loss that relates job loss reactions to bereavement reactions (Amundson & Borgen, 1982; Hurst & Shepard, 1986). Wolpert (2000) summarises the core concerns with military exit in relation to role transition. He suggests that there is a loss of status: leavers cannot/do not find the same level of status or responsibility one finds in the military role; financial reasons mean they have to work; leavers must compete with younger people; civilian employers may not understand military service; they may not have strong civilian roots or role identifications; and, finally, there is a change in the family dynamics.

This significant transition period may need a period of re-socialisation , yet some military skills should translate to civilian roles (Wolpert, 2000, p. 67). Although this may be the case for some returning soldiers, Higate (2000, p. 99) argues that the cultural habit of the military may in fact lead to “ negative capital

” in context to skills and attributes transfer. Katz and Kahn (1966) also suggest that where there are significant differences between two organisations, there is likely to be a development of role conflict.

Wolpert (2000) argues that the military role has greater importance than individual roles for military personnel and, therefore, standard (voluntary or age-related) military exit for full-time soldiers brings with it the process of role transition and, therefore, “ role problems

”, caused by “a change in position, a change in behaviour, or the interaction of the two” (Wolpert, 2000, p. 108). Naphan and Elliot (2015) suggest that when serving military members choose to leave, the process of role exit will lead to disengagement with a central identity that must be replaced with a new one, with most individuals not realising that they will be judged by both their current role performance and by the expectations based on people’s perception of their previous role identity (Ebaugh, 1988).

For an individual exiting the military, this can be even more problematic, specifically because some of the role typical behaviours that may have been previously allowed may now, in a civilian sense, be deemed unsuitable or possibly even criminal (Naphan & Elliot, 2015). This is supported by research which highlights the uniqueness of skills required for combat, such as hyper alertness, aggression and paranoia not found in everyday aspects of civilian life (Borus, 1975); therefore, it is no surprise that their previous role identity and its associated norms and behaviours may lead to a feeling of dysfunction on exit.

In a qualitative study focusing on participants experience of role exit from the military and enrolment on learning programmes in a US college, Naphan and Elliot (2015) found that role exit from the military was compounded by five main themes: (1) military emphasis on task cohesion ; (2) military structure ; (3) military responsibilities and release anxieties ; (4) combat experience ; and (5) social cohesion in combat units . Participants described how military task cohesion had led to an increase in skill in working with others whilst also feeling “disgusted” by the selfish behaviours exhibited by some of their fellow classmates. Equally, participants shared their perceptions of military structure providing them with clear, unambiguous directions and instructions, not commonly found in civilian work life. One participant emphasised the disconcertion that a lack of directness caused when she left the military:

In the Army you do something wrong, someone yells at you. You don’t take it personally; you get used to people just….correcting you by screaming at you, and it’s not personal…for a long time I wished I could be in an environment again where people were just direct. (p. 45)

The military role also provides responsibility and participants within the sample expressed how they felt proud of the time that they had served despite the fact that some were concerned over a lack of recognition (in terms of academic transfer of credit) of their military training. The study also made reference to the concept of “ release anxiety

”, a term used by Goffman (1961) which infers that military members feel that they know the ropes within their military role and, thus, feel like a “big fish in a small pond”, whereas role exit leads to a reversal in this security that makes individuals feel like “little fish in a big pond”. Participants in the study also expressed how exposure to combat may have affected the ease of role exit .

One participant, Adam, explains how his combat experience altered his self-identity in civilian life:

It’s like being a sanctioned criminal. You know, pretty much. I know that sounds crazy but…if you did what we were trained to do, you’d be a criminal” whereas in civilian life, “things get real grey” when stimuli associated with combat trigger inappropriate reactions. (p. 45)

Whilst on the other hand, research indicated that participants who had been in support roles found the transition out of their role much easier as the behaviour within military contexts did not differ significantly from new college role identity . Finally, the last theme to emerge was that of the significance of social cohesion , which Naphan et al. claimed to be of most importance to the participants who expressed greater social cohesion with their military colleagues and felt misunderstood by those who had not been part of the military. This research provides a rich insight into role exit for members of the military entering into education, but is initially criticised on the basis for not being able to recruit the required number of participants required for theoretical saturation—the point at which additional data fails to add/generate new information (Morse, 1995).

Yet there is empirical support for a number of the themes found including the fact that those who experienced more combat may find role exit more challenging (Borus, 1975), as well as the fact that ex-military personnel often feel more socially disconnected from their new civilian peers (DiRamio, Ackerman, & Mitchell, 2008; Elliott, 2014; Elliott, Gonzalez, & Larsen, 2011). Interestingly, as a continuing critique of Ebaugh’s lack of consideration for anything other than volunteer exit , Walker (2013) explores the way in which soldiers differed in their pre-exit identity orientation, finding five typologies evident in the sample. One constructed typology was that of the “transformed” orientation , which described their identity as being superior to civilian identity with the belief that they will “make their mark” in civilian life (p. 293). Another pre-exit identity orientation was that of the “
Soldier-scam

”, which saw some participants describe how they were never really soldiers, being able to maintain distance from the characteristics that connect them with the military. The third type of pre-exit identity was found in soldiers who claimed that their service had “ no-difference

” on their concept of self. The fourth typology was referred to as the “disavowed” soldier , who saw their solider identity altered by routine events in their life, such as marriage or parenthood. Finally the last category of pre-exit identity referred to the “blighted” pre exiter , who defined themselves as having a forced identity change, possibly due to trauma, physical problems or mental health concerns.

Despite a significant amount of negative media coverage on the impacts of leaving the military, a large cohort study conducted by Iversen, Dyson, and Smith (2005) reported that UK veterans, on the whole, did well after exit, with 87.5% achieving full-time employment . Of course, this figure is unlikely to account for a true reflection of the range of issues being faced which are not reported even when one simply acknowledges that military personnel will not typically seek help based on a sense of prototypical stoic “pride” and “independence” (Johnson, Jones, & Rugg, 2008). The process of role exit is clearly intricate and complicated when we consider the totality of military culture in defining social identity and the processes involved in the exit from it.

The next chapter explores Jack’s story, whose military exit was unexpected as a result of injury.

References

Amundson, N. E., & Borgen, W. A. (1982). The Dynamics of Unemployment: Job Loss and Job Search. The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 60, 562–564.

Borus, J. F. (1975). The Reentry Transition of the Vietnam Veteran. Armed Forces and Society, 2, 97–114.Crossref

DiRamio, D., Ackerman, R., & Mitchell, R. L. (2008). From Combat to Campus: Voices of Student-Veterans. NASPA Journal, 45, 73–102.

Ebaugh, H. R. (1988). Becoming an Ex: The Process of Role Exit. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Crossref

Elliott, M. (2014). Predicting Problems on Campus: An Analysis of College Student Veterans. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 15, 105–126.Crossref

Elliott, M., Gonzalez, C., & Larsen, B. (2011). U.S. Military Veterans Transition to College: Combat, PTSD, and Alienation on Campus. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 48, 279–296.Crossref

Goffman, E. (1961). Asylums: Essays on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other Inmates. New York: Doubleday Anchor.

Griffith, J. (2009). Being a Reserve Soldier: A Matter of Social Identity. Armed Forces and Society, 36, 38–64.Crossref

Higate, P. (2000). Tough Bodies and Rough Sleeping: Embodying Homelessness Amongst Ex-servicemen. Housing Theory and Society, 17, 97–108.Crossref

Hurst, J. B., & Sheppard, J. W. (1986). The Dynamics of Plant Closings: An Extended Emotional Roller Coaster Ride. Journal of Counseling and Development, 64, 401–405.Crossref

Iversen, A., Dyson, C., & Smith, N. (2005). ‘Goodbye and Good Luck’: The Mental Health Needs and Treatment Experiences of British Ex-service Personnel. British Journal of Psychiatry, 186, 480–486.Crossref

Johnson, S., Jones, A., & Rugg, J. (2008). The Experience of Ex-service Homeless Personnel in London. York: Centre for Housing Policy, University of York.

Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1966). The Social Psychology of Organizations. New York: Wiley.

McNeil, J. S., & Giffen, M. B. (1967). Military Retirement: The Retirement Syndrome. American Journal of Psychiatry, 123, 848–854.Crossref

Morse, J. M. (1995). The Significance of Saturation. Qualitative Health Research, 5, 147–149.Crossref

Naphan, D., & Elliot, M. (2015). Role Exit from the Military: Student Veterans’ Perceptions of Transitioning from the U.S. Military to Higher Education. The Qualitative Report 2015, 20, 36–48.

Tajfel, H. (Ed.). (1978). Differentiation Between Social Groups: Studies in the Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations. London: Academic Press.

Walker, D. I. (2013). Anticipating Army Exit: Identity Constructions of Final Year UK Career Soldiers. Armed Forces and Society, 39, 284–304.Crossref

Wolpert, D. S. (2000). Military Retirement and the Transition to Civilian Life. In J. A. Martin, L. N. Rosen, & L. R. Sparacino (Eds.), The Military Family (pp. 103–119). London: Praeger.

© The Author(s) 2019

K. M. Wilson-Smith, P. J. CorrMilitary Identity and the Transition into Civilian Lifehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12338-3_4

4. “Medically Discharged”: Forced Exit Due to Injury, Health and Wellbeing

Kevin M. Wilson-Smith[1] and Philip J. Corr[2]

(1) School of Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK

(2) Department of Psychology, City University London, London, UK

Kevin M. Wilson-Smith (Corresponding author) Email: kevin.wilson-smith@glasgow.ac.uk

Philip J. Corr Email: philip.corr.1@city.ac.uk

Abstract

The second story of the book is provided by Jack, who experienced an injury in the first 5 years of his military service. Jack’s journey starts with his experience of joining the army, followed by a brief description of how he was injured and then culminates in his exit via medical discharge, due to a non-combat related injury. Jack helps us to understand the feeling of rejection from the armed forces and how in some ways this makes the transition back to civilian life, at least for Jack, slightly easier. In the literature that follows, we explore a snippet of theory and research which focuses on sudden and unexpected transition and its impact on our identity. We also discuss the literature in the context of forced/involuntary military exit, both for non-combat and combat related injuries.

Keywords

Medical dischargeForced exitInvoluntary exitBlighted orientationHabitusHysteresis effect

Jack’s Story

The second story of the book is provided by Jack, who experienced an injury whilst in the first 5 years of his military service. Jack’s journey starts with his experience of joining the army, followed by a brief description of how he was injured and then culminates in his exit via medical discharge. In the literature that follows, we explore a snippet of theory and research which focuses on sudden and unexpected transition and its impact on our identity.

So, my story…I am 27 now and I joined the army when I was 20 years old. I joined the 2nd Royal Tank Regiment. It was always something I wanted to do growing up. I was always quite keen on my rugby so at that point I wasn’t sure I was ready to leave my civilian life as I was worried about not being able to play. I had real potential with my rugby and thought I might end up in the higher leagues, but when that didn’t come off then the focus started to shift to how else I could earn money and that’s when I decided perhaps the army was an option. I was originally a shop fitter before I joined the army although my grandfather had been involved in the military, but at the back of my mind it was always something that I wanted to do from when I was a young child. I’m not sure there was any specific reason why as a child I wanted to join…my mother would probably tell you I had a little army uniform as a kid but I wouldn’t put it down to that. I just like being outdoors and I was always very active growing up and loved playing sports. I was always into team sports and being around a rugby club mentality it seemed like a good fit and I sort of looked at the army as being in a rugby club 24/7, and I thought that would be an ideal environment, same sort of banter. When I joined I went into the recruitment office, they told me I would get a degree for free which I was keen on because I always planned to go to university. So the recruitment sergeant said you’ll get a degree for free and get to play rugby all the time and gave me that full spiel and I thought well that’s even better. He said “Why study at university with no money all the time when you can come and study and play and get paid for it, travel the world”—however it didn’t pan out like that.

After joining, the first few weeks of basic training there was a long adjustment period and you don’t have time to ring home and so that time is the hardest. Over time you get to know people you start to gel and then after that I fell in love with it. Probably the hardest time was the first two weeks at regiment as at the time everyone had their own room with en suite and so when you finish work you don’t talk to anyone whereas in basic training you’re in a ten-men room or four-men room and so you’re always with someone. Then all of a sudden you are a bit more isolated as most of the lads just close their doors and play on their video games and so there wasn’t that sort of bonding as you would expect, to build that rapport with people, that you know banter, that makes the work so much better. Over time being the new boy wears off, I was the only person from my intake to go to my regiment and so I was by myself basically so. It took a bit of time to get to know everyone. I wouldn’t say it was because of me or them, it was just a new experience and you have to find out what it’s all about. The issue was everything they teach you in basic training, like bracing up to corporals and all that stuff just gets the piss taken out of you at the regiment and so you have to test the water with it all.

We actually went away on the ranges quite quickly after that so we were all sharing the same room and you get a bit more socialising time. When I was about 16 I wanted to join there, but my father held me back saying I wasn’t quite mature enough and that I wouldn’t be able to deal with it yet and looking back he was right. I was never really naughty or getting into real trouble but I just loved my sport and you know what 16 year old lads are like they just like to do their own thing. When I actually enlisted, I was like “right this is it” and I didn’t really think about anything else. I felt I had found my niche and I couldn’t have been happier with what I was doing. My plan at that point was to get to sergeant rank in about ten years and definitely wanted to be in for the long term.

My family definitely noticed a difference in me when I got back from basic training from the way I ate my food to the way I woke up in the morning. In fact my dad used to find it hilarious to shout standing outside my room so that I would jump out of bed and start running around the room. There were obviously a lot of changes, even the way I was walking around totally proud saying “ look at me, look at me
”. The way I saw it was certain things are required of you at all times. For example, my mum is a practice manager and she has to be professional at all times and in the army it’s the same—as a soldier certain things are expected of you at all times. She would be expected to talk really posh and all that but as a soldier I would be expected to swear a lot and be very direct. They noticed it but I can’t say I got massive joy out of the acknowledgement, it’s just the way it was. I never really bragged about being in the army. I had friends at the time who were already in so the banter started before I even got out of training so I just sort of kept my head down really.

So at this point everything was going great and I was at regiment, I had done a few ranges, went bobsleighing, played a lot of corp rugby and done my tank training as well. I had been away to Canada. We got back and began doing pre-deployment training, and my 2I/C of my squadron wanted me to play rugby on Wednesday. I didn’t want to because I wanted to play army vs navy under 23s rugby at Twickenham on Saturday and well there’s no other way of saying it…I got hurt.

During the game, I was in a scrum and the two props on my team lost their bind and let go and basically, the second row is behind me, they bind and they are pushing on my buttocks. The opposing scrum was pushing hard on my shoulders and I turned into a bit of a pinch point, folded, and ended up rupturing 4 of my spinal discs which crushed my spinal cord. I went down on the ground, nobody came and ran to me, and they left me out there lying on the ground. I tried to get up onto my feet after 2–3 minutes. I managed to turn around to my squadron leader, who is, to me, very senior, and said something is not right. I’ve really hurt my back and he said mate you need to get back out there we haven’t got a replacement for you and if you don’t stay on you’ll be doing guard duty this weekend. So I attempted to carry on and was in agony. After that we were due to deploy and I was still having massive pain and still doing my pre-deployment training despite the fact I was physically, virtually unable to walk, let alone run, and I was carrying all the weight, it wasn’t great. I finally ended up in hospital with it almost ten months after the initial deployment. I got rushed in. I didn’t actually have an MRI until almost ten months after my injury.

After the initial injury I had a little physiotherapy, reported sick the next day, tried going out on a little run and couldn’t get my legs to go any faster than a slow walk so started doing more physiotherapy and after an exercise they took me off the ORBAT to try and recuperate and then I would meet them out there and obviously that didn’t happen so I ended up moving onto maintenance of the tanks, which was heavy machinery so that was also a write off. After that I got moved into a unit welfare role and again, I had wives crying to me and it sounds blunt but I’m not trained to deal with that and did I really care, probably not, which makes me sound awful but it’s not who I was or why I joined. Part of my concern is that you have people like me, a trooper, who are put in the position of welfare officer, in a welfare suite, listening to all your problems and I don’t blame them but they basically had the attitude of “ just man up
” and get on with it, but that’s when it all started, the process of leaving, mentally.

Shortly after being given the unit welfare role I was given an MRI and immediately after they got the result they said “you need surgery” and that was basically it. I was kept on light duties for a bit and one day I woke up and I couldn’t believe it but I started urinating and soiling myself so I got rushed into hospital and was there for around 8 weeks. At this point I didn’t feel as though this was the end of me as a soldier because the surgeon was saying there is no reason why I wouldn’t make a full recovery, despite the fact that I went through a bit of tough time contracting a superbug after the op. I got a huge infection, a horrible fever and at one point my mum was telling me that they considered putting me into a coma to help me recover. The issue was with the drugs I was taken I started to also feel quite violent which is the total opposite of me. But even then, in my head I had high hopes and I was thinking that I would be running a marathon by this time next year. I started my recovery and was able to start walking a little having had to learn how to walk again.

Eventually after a few weeks at home they told me I had to go to Headley Court and to be honest that’s when it starts getting really psychologically tough because you are there with guys who are double and triple amputees and people who are missing bits of their body. Whilst it was nice being back in an army environment, your heads also half back at home with your other half, your family and your friends and then you are thrust back into it. They said I would be there for 3 weeks and ended up being there for 6. It was tough being away from the family and I started getting homesick and thinking I don’t want to be here, at the same time I was getting smashed with physical training. That has its affect obviously. I was tired, I was hurting, and all I could think was I want to go home. Although I did see the benefit if I really just wanted to go home. At this point I still didn’t have the thought of leaving the army or that it would be over for me.

Everyone was staying quite optimistic but I started to struggle psychologically. One day I was on the floor doing core exercises, throwing medicine balls, and I was with these lads who had legs amputated and the ball got thrown and I went to get it but I couldn’t get up off the floor, but one of the lads who had no legs was able to go and get it and at the time I hated him for it. When I went down to the doctor later I said to him “ right you need to cut my leg off, this foot is hardly working just chop it off
” because he could run and I can’t and it hurt and I thought I’m not having that. At this point I was thinking “
By any means necessary
” I have to get back to being me.

Following that I went home for another few weeks and then they sent me to a regional rehabilitation unit (RRU). Whilst at Headley Court they tried to get me to run on the anti-gravity machines and they were trying to do the same in the RRU until one day they had a physio come in and he took me to one side and sat me down and said “ mate you have to understand that you are not going to be the same, you’ve had 5 major surgeries on your back, you’ve had all these problems and you’re still suffering from your incontinence
” and in truth it was crushing at the time, it crushed me. But I thought I’d be fine because he was the only person who had said it. I think I was a bit delusional or in denial and just tried to get on with it. Some people were trying to give you the rainbows and the butterflies but he gave me the hard edge and just said there’s absolutely no chance of going back to how you were. At that stage, I was crushed about the army but about who I was. Everything about me was about being physical, running, sports, motorbikes, motorsports, anything; and it all involved some physical aspect of it and then he turned around and said “ you’ve got to be a bit more precious from now on and look after yourself
” and that was the tough aspect, starting to accept it. I wasn’t recovering the way I should have been. I was setting myself these little targets. In hospital I could do 10 yards and so I would try 20 yards tomorrow and then I got to a point when I plateaued. I wasn’t getting any better and it started to sink it. I was noticing that I couldn’t do basic household things like bending over to wash the toilet or the sink or all the basic household things. I just couldn’t do it anymore. I could run a little but I was limping and people would say I sounded like a T-Rex running because I was so heavy on my feet.

At this point they said I was probably going to be medically discharged. At the time I was 22 and I was told to stay at home and just claim benefits and I just thought, no. I was in the RRU for 9 weeks and he said that at the 2-week point and after that they diagnosed me with adjustment depression and at the time I thought “no way I don’t have that” but looking back now, my other half said “oh yeah you did”. I was always very chilled out and I became quite aggressive, if someone said the wrong thing or looked at me the wrong way, road rage became intolerable, it…I…became an absolute nightmare. It was tough.

So the chat is now focused on medical discharge and I got sent to a Personnel Recovery Unit (PRU) and my PRU office there was fantastic. I didn’t feel the welfare officer or the regiment were all that supportive at this point. I was becoming highly irritable and it was frustrating me. The Sergeant Major, every time I spoke to him, he asked “ what’s the matter with you
” and I explained I had surgeries and the only reply I got was “ well you probably won’t have a job next year
”. That was exactly the kind of thing I didn’t need at the time. The PRU was much better and they checked in on you regularly and see how you are doing and what you need. It started to go a little bit more smoothly. They started putting me on the core recovery events (CRE) courses and it started to feel more like and effort and I was fairly certain at this point, I knew I was coming out of the army. I just didn’t want to be there anymore. It felt like I had done all this to be here and they were just prepared to get rid of me that quickly. I became very impatient with it to the point where I felt that my regiment were so appalled with me that I didn’t want to have anything to do with them. They would occasionally invite me for their regimental days and I just didn’t want anything to do with it. It became a constant drain to stay motivated. I would think right today I am going to crack on and do this or that and then someone would remind me that I would be losing my job soon and so I would just think “ oh cheers for that
”. It’s stressful more than anything. People react differently to stress but I was thinking how I am going to survive financially. I thought the army compensation would look after me. Some people get 500 k and they are set up for life. I damage my back, have to have my wife pull me out of bed in the morning and I got 15 grand and I just became bitter towards everyone and everything. It was a very lonely place. People say that there are people who understand what you are going through but I didn’t want to talk to people. As lads you feel quite macho and you don’t want to talk about it. Even my welfare officer said the only person who cares about you is you and your family. He told me I had to stop worrying about the opinion of the army.

The thing is when you go to these places and speak to the lads and every injured persons experience is different and for some the army’s reaction afterwards was brilliant and for others it isn’t. I would have got more respect if I had died. It was basically I was out of sight out of mind. To some degree, as time went by, I perhaps needed someone to blame and now I just get on with it. I woke up one day and thought it’s time to crack on.

My mate and I were invited to take part in a road rally to raise money for Help for Heroes. At the time my mate and I thought it was fantastic, a once in a life time trip around Europe and the organisers ended up making us their poster boys and every day of the rally you had all these guys asking us all these questions, some of them assumed we had PTSD or something. We had all that attention on us, the med team kept checking in on us and we felt we were getting all this one to one attention from all these professionals and I remember thinking “ that’s what I needed at the time
”. But then we went straight back to the regiment straight afterwards and I thought “ bugger
”.

If it was a combat related injury we may have been treated differently. When I was in the welfare role, one of my mates got shot in his head, it hit his helmet and skimmed him, gave him a scar across his head. Another guy was blown up in a bulldog (tank) and punctured his lungs, broke his ribs, broke his arm. They both came back and the three of us were going through it together but we all got a little bit disconnected together so there was definitely some shared experience of it, but I felt people might see them differently. I remember speaking to my welfare team and they had done a two week course and so how qualified are they to see the differences between us all and our individual needs.

After I left I got a place to do civil engineering at University but my wife was studying to become a teacher, we had also just bought a new house, so I just tried to find full time employment as we had to pay the bills. So I had no phone call from the regiment at this point and so I felt quite disconnected quite quickly. Now I work as a HGV driver and I am also a photographer—I found a little niche and take photos of weddings and specialist cars and stuff.

I tried to set up a Help for Heroes event that could have been a big thing but it got pulled at the last minute and so even though I had left the army I was still trying to grasp on to it in some small way and in some way it was at that moment that the final disconnect started to happen. Out of my entire regiment I talk really to just one of them. I am god father to his son. There are a couple of others who I speak to from time to time but as for the rest of them I am completely not bothered. I was in a group of 180 so it’s pretty sad really. But like I said it’s out of sight out of mind. If someone turned round and said they were joining the army I wouldn’t say don’t join. It’s good, get a trade out of it. I came out qualified to drive tanks and funnily enough not many people need that skill set on Civvie Street. That’s the only advice I would give. I loved the army and what it stands for. It was just my personal experience. I had a pretty tough time. I am disconnected.

Part of the military identity survives though, definitely. I get told off for it sometimes, the language is definitely still there, swearing, etc. When I go into work my wife will tell me off and say I am too direct with people. She says I don’t ask people I tell them, I bark at them. You pick that up so quickly and it stuck. When I work now I work alone when I am driving but for example when we had bad snow the manager wanted me to come in, in the army I would never answer back and I would do as I am told, whereas now I am more argumentative and I said no. I am not driving in the snow. The transition between army and Civvie Street wound me up because I found people lazy, everyone seemed like they were being half-arsed. I often felt there was no respect and people spoke to you like trash and so I would get grumpy and argue.

The hardest part of being medically discharged is…well they tell you on the CRE course this is what you are going to go through but by that time you’ve gone through it. The hardest part for me was the psychological aspect as no one actually tells you how much you are going to struggle to just sit around your own house, when everyone else has to go out to work. It’s the psychological impact. If I could say anything to someone else going through what I went through I would almost say “ don’t worry about your physical injury

, watch out for that, the quiet time, the part where you are sitting alone in your house when everyone else is at work
”. First and foremost it’s left me with a great sense of feeling that the only person who looks out for you is yourself which I sadly now believe is completed true, and you watch the advertisements and you are part of a team and all that and I feel let down. I didn’t and don’t now feel part of that team.

However, it’s not all doom and gloom, I love my life now. I get to see my wife every day, I have my own house and you know, would I like to still be in the army, obviously had the experience not happened I would probably still be there now. But all in all you just have to get on with it.

Psychological Perspectives

We saw in the last chapter, identity in the pre-role exit stage can be affected by the way the individual categorises the reason behind the need to exit. In Jack’s story, he experiences a life-changing injury that leads to a role exit that was not anticipated and, therefore, was forced to leave his military career (and his identity) behind. The way in which one can struggle with a forced occupational transition is, of course, not unique to military contexts and there is substantial literature that explores the changing nature of identity after both physical and mental trauma .

During periods of physical and mental ill health individuals can experience a disruption of identity, particularly when the illness requires a role transition as a result (Charmaz, 1983). A number of studies explore how physical and mental trauma lead to a shift in one’s identity, including its impact on careers and occupational roles. Studies include exploration of the impact of brain injury (Gelech & Desjardins, 2011), cancer (Hubbard, Kidd, & Kearney, 2010; Hughes, Closs, & Clark, 2009), multiple sclerosis (Irvine et al., 2009), and mental ill health (e.g. Carless & Douglas, 2008), to name a few. These events can lead to a distorted sense of identity and helplessness, including changes to the routine pattern of occupational engagement and occupational identity generally, especially when role exit is forced/involuntary .

The issue of combat related traumatic events needs to be mentioned here, albeit only briefly given that for Jack the injury was not of this type. A particularly thorough exploration of career transition caused by traumatic combat experiences can be seen in the work of Haynie and Shepherd (2011), who introduce the story of a young Marine, Aaron, who was critically injured by a roadside bomb during a tour of operation and had to come to terms with the fact that, as well as adjusting to life after a near death experience, the extent of his injuries meant that his career as a Marine would have to come to an end. Haynie and Shepherd describe how, for Aaron, the loss of his military career identity was highly salient and ubiquitous given the military socialisation practices he experienced. The salience and commitment to the military role is developed “as a consequence of military socialisation practices replete with symbols, artefacts, and ceremony designed to cultivate a conception of self-identity that is intertwined with the military organisation the relationship between self-identity and the military organisation” (p. 501). An unexpected trauma is severe enough but, given the engrained military identity, it is further exacerbated by the disorientation of losing the expected future self, akin to losing a map half way through an unknown journey. Haynie and Shepherd articulate this well in the following extract:

To understand the power of this linkage, consider that in the years preceding his injury, Aaron told us, he would introduce himself to new people by saying, “I’m Aaron; I’m a Marine”. After his injury, Aaron reported that he would not introduce himself to new people, because he “didn’t know what to say”. The career that informed his most closely held beliefs about who he was had been terminated the instant that bomb exploded in Iraq. (p. 501)

As previously mentioned, Walker (2013) indicated 5 typologies of pre-exit identity and of specific interest to the issue of medical discharge is the notion of a “blighted” orientation . Walker describes the blighted soldierly orientation as one which is forced by a challenging change in circumstances or an event, such as injury, which becomes the reason that they have to leave. Walker also notes that preparedness for role exit is key, with a number of supporting studies showing better long-term outcomes for those who had more anticipated exits from the military. Stanford (1971) shows that those with higher levels of anticipation are more likely to have higher morale post-exit. Cooper, Caddick, Godier, Cooper, and Fossey (2016) highlight that the transition to civilian life for those who are medically discharged can be “abrupt, complicated and potentially traumatic” (p. 166) because the veteran becomes “culturally disorientated” due to the army habitus (Higate, 2000) not providing the opportunity to readjust to civilian life. Cooper et al. rightly highlight the speed of transition leaves little time for psychological preparation and this amplifies fear, uncertainty and anxiety. Bourdieu and Passeron (1977) describe this as the hysteresis effect (the feeling of anxiety and fear caused by the significant difference between one habitus and another). Sweet, Stoler, Kelter, and Thurrell (1989) note that involuntary retirement from the military may lead to poorer overall adjustment and lower levels of life satisfaction than those who choose to leave. They list a number of negative effects of involuntary military retirement due to illness, including depression, social isolation, boredom and a lack of social relationships .

Ebaugh (1988) helps us understand some of the properties of role exit that may explain the differences between voluntary and involuntary exit . She outlines 11 variables (Reversibility, Duration, Single vs Multiple exits, Individual vs Group exits, Degree of Control , Social Desirability, Degree of Institutionalisation, Degree of Awareness, Sequentiality , Centrality of the role, and Voluntariness ) which affect the nature and consequence of the role exit process. For those who have forced, unanticipated or speedy exits from the military, the variables of Reversibility, Degree of Control , Sequentiality and Voluntariness are worth consideration. Reversibility refers to “whether or not the occupant of a role can return to the role he or she has exited” (p. 145). In the case of medical discharge , the Reversibility of the exit is more often than not irreversible, given the fact that the injury would have been deemed severe enough as to not allow the individual to return to normal soldier duties. This may not be the same for those who leave and go back to Reserve service, as outlined in the next chapter. Equally the Degree of Control one has during the medical discharge process is also likely to be low, given that the decision is typically made by another person, usually someone in authority. It is, of course, worth noting here that those that serve until forced retirement equally have no (or little) control. Sequentiality refers to “the specified progression of some exits” (p. 156). In Jack’s case, he had a set sequence mentally laid out for his career, to reach the rank of Sergeant. At one point in his story, he was offered the role of storeman but this did not match his expected sequence of exit—it was either continue as planned, or not continue at all. Finally, the variation in the extent to which one volunteers or is forced to leave the role naturally fits well with Jack’s story. Even if other military roles were offered to him, it may have felt that exit was still, de facto, involuntary given the mediating effect of the other variables, previously discussed.

References

1. Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J.-C. (1977). Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture. London, UK: Sage.

2. Carless, D., & Douglas, K. (2008). Narrative, Identity and Mental Health: How Men with Serious Mental Illness Re-story Their Lives Through Sport and Exercise. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 9, 576–594.

3. Charmaz, K. (1983). Loss of Self: A Fundamental Form of Suffering in the Chronically Ill. Sociology of Health & Illness, 5, 168–195.Crossref

4. Cooper, L., Caddick, N., Godier, L., Cooper, A., & Fossey, M. (2016). Transition from the Military into Civilian Life: An Exploration of Cultural Competence. Armed Forces & Society, 44, 1–22.

5. Ebaugh, H. R. (1988). Becoming an Ex: The Process of Role Exit. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Crossref

6. Gelech, J. M., & Desjardins, M. (2011). I Am Many: The Reconstruction of Self Following Acquired Brain Injury. Qualitative Health Research, 21, 62–74.CrossrefPubMed

7. Haynie, J. M., & Shepherd, D. (2011). Toward a Theory of Discontinuous Career Transition: Investigating Career Transitions Necessitated by Traumatic Life Events. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 501–524.

8. Higate, P. (2000). Tough Bodies and Rough Sleeping: Embodying Homelessness Amongst Ex-servicemen. Housing Theory and Society, 17, 97–108.Crossref

9. Hubbard, G., Kidd, L., & Kearney, N. (2010). Disrupted Lives and Threats to Identity: The Experiences of People with Colorectal Cancer within the First Year Following Diagnosis. Health, 14, 131–146.

10. Hughes, N., Closs, S. J., & Clark, D. (2009). Experiencing Cancer in Old Age: A Qualitative Systematic Review. Qualitative Health Research, 19, 1139–1153.

11. Irvine, H., Davidson, C., Hoy, K., & Lowe-Strong, A. (2009). Psychosocial Adjustment to Multiple Sclerosis: Exploration of Identity Redefinition. Disability and Rehabilitation, 31, 599–606.

12. Stanford, E. P. (1971). Retirement Anticipation in the Military. The Gerontologist, 11, 37–42.Crossref

13. Sweet, M., Stoler, N., Kelter, R., & Thurrell, R. J. (1989). A Community of Buddies: Support Groups for Veterans Forced into Early Retirement. Hospital and Community Psychiatry, 40, 172–176.

14. Walker, D. I. (2013). Anticipating Army Exit: Identity Constructions of Final Year UK Career Soldiers. Armed Forces and Society, 39, 284–304.Crossref

© The Author(s) 2019

K. M. Wilson-Smith, P. J. CorrMilitary Identity and the Transition into Civilian Lifehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12338-3_5

5. “Reservists”: Changing Identities Between Civilian and Military Roles

Kevin M. Wilson-Smith[1] and Philip J. Corr[2]

(1) School of Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK

(2) Department of Psychology, City University London, London, UK

Kevin M. Wilson-Smith (Corresponding author) Email: kevin.wilson-smith@glasgow.ac.uk

Philip J. Corr Email: philip.corr.1@city.ac.uk

Abstract

The experience of social identity for Reservists is of particular interest to theorists—Reservist engage in fast-paced intermittent service between military and civilian job roles. This chapter explores how Reservists make sense of their identity and subsequent enactment of prototypical behaviours, which appear to rely on various psychosocial processes, such as the attitudes and beliefs that the individual has about the nature of military service. We are introduced to Ollie, who became a Reservist after several years of regular military service. Ollie’s story provides insight into the constant shift between military and civilian selves that is a common experience for army Reservists who to, some extent, have to engage in the management of multiple and/or dual cultural and social identities that may at times conflict.

Keywords

ReservistTransmigrantWeekend warriorSoldier warriorConservative ideologueInstrumental volunteer

In this chapter, we explore the recurrent transition between military and civilian identity for those serving with the Army Reserve. We begin with Ollie’s story, who, after leaving full time military service, continued to engage with a military identity through Reserve service.

Ollie’s Story

My name is Ollie. I am in my mid-forties and currently a Reservist having spent 18 years previously in the Regular
Army

. Prior to that, I worked on oilrigs for a bit after university. From childhood, I was interested in the army and the forces in general. Whilst I was at university, I was in the officer-training core (OTC). I wouldn’t say it put me off the army but I wasn’t sure if I wanted to do it full time. I think what initially put me off, funnily enough, was the people. Some people in the OTC took themselves very, very seriously and that wasn’t me. I just was not sure but I had some good friends there and so stuck it out. Generally, as an organisation, it took itself very seriously and it did rather put me off for a bit. As I said, my first job was working on oilrigs. At the time, I did still consider Reserve service to be an option but it just wasn’t compatible with that job at all. It’s two weeks on and two weeks off and the company I worked for wanted to own you, you couldn’t plan your life really, if they need you to go somewhere, they needed you to go somewhere. Therefore, it was put on hold. I did for two years. It was quite dull actually and I had two good friends who joined the army who said, “Look it’s not as it was at OTC you’ll love it, just stop messing around, have a go”, and everything happened pretty quickly after that. I applied in March 97, and then went to Sandhurst in May 97 and didn’t look back. Originally I thought, I would just do a short service commission and see how it goes. However, I’m too lazy to make any kind of change and I was enjoying it. I went through troop command, junior captain’s role in squadron operations. Then without really knowing it became a bit more ambitious and wanted a military career and actually that stayed with me probably right up until I hit forty, when I thought ok you’ve probably gone as far as you are going to get and you’ve had a great time after a couple of brilliant tours. It just seemed like a good time to go but I still really enjoyed the army. Therefore, I did, about 3 years ago now. By the time, I decided I was going to leave that didn’t last very long, it was important to get out and start my next career early while I still had a good 20 years of a career in me. At the time it wouldn’t have occurred to me to leave the army but when they started making people redundant. I think anyone who didn’t take a look around and think to themselves what would I do if I were made redundant? I would have been a fool, so like many other people I thought it’s not going to be a nightmare to leave the army, there are plenty of opportunities out there. My last few years were spent kind of setting myself up for resettlement, and I applied to the defence academy in Cranfield for the defence sponsored MSc programme in project management. It was quite hard work but it did allow me to take a lot of my military experience and translate it into something that was marketable outside the army. After a gap of about 12 months, I decided that I needed to reengage and planned to join the Reserves.

Going back in as a Reservist, in truth it was absolutely no different and despite having been out of uniform for some time. I think I had spent that long in uniform that it didn’t feel different, it was second nature. I just slipped back into it at first. To a certain extent I think the major difference I’ve noticed in my work outside of the army, is that you have “ colleagues
” but they’re not really mates like you used to get in the army. This is certainly true when you are on operational tour. You don’t have the same level of humorous conversation. I don’t want to say the word that begins with “B” [banter] because I don’t like it.

I am far more cautious about what I say and that’s probably a terrible thing to admit to. I think you just know in military service that maybe people’s thresholds are far higher, to do with what you can say in terms of what people would find appropriate or inappropriate. I am certainly more comfortable being less cautious in a military environment.

The company I work for involves a lot of work within an MOD environment. I work there with a lot of ex-forces people, however it is different, it’s a different environment and regardless of my past and the past of those around me, we still have a reputation to protect. Therefore, there is no room for error or being inappropriate. I am far more careful in my approach. That doesn’t necessarily change when I go back to putting on a uniform.

I suppose the difficulty is, my military past means little in my civilian role. It means more in the Reservist role. It’s difficult to put a finger on actually, because even in the Reservist role, I deliberately chose something that was new to me (not the same job as my Regular Army role); I mean there’s an angle to the logistics of what I doing, but it is new to me. I consider myself still very much a student of my new Reservist specialism. Therefore, it doesn’t come as naturally, as if I were doing a leadership role in a logistics unit, where I know absolutely what it is we are supposed to achieve and how to go about it. This is new to me and I am still learning. Actually as a Reservist, even though I’ve been there 2 years now, it only amounts to about three months of actual work. Despite the rank and my military experience, I don’t think it actually means that much in my military role now.

This particular company, and the financial services company that I worked for before, liked the association with the military, be that ex training or service. They draw upon the experiences in things such as aligning activity to strategic priorities, because there are models and tools we use in the army, which are taught from a very junior level, which means you automatically consider everything you’re doing. I found when I went to the first paid job outside the army, that there are a lot of people who are doing new stuff and they did not rationalise why they were doing it, and they should have because, actually it had no bearing on what the company was trying to do strategically. In addition, the middle management layer were not translating that higher-level group strategy into “this is what it means to you on a daily basis”. “This is why you should be doing this”. That was really interesting to me, because I think in the army from private soldier upwards you are taught to question what it is you are doing and why you are doing it. What is their intent? That is entirely engrained and 100% transferable, to any facet of life.

Currently I only attend set weekends with the Reserves but I have done a long six-week block in between my two civilian jobs

.

It was relatively straightforward and easy to flip back into the full time military role. I did find that I could bring something slightly different to bare, as effectively everything in the army was a project or a programme, but it’s not the same as a commercial one. I brought that experience back to bare on what we were doing. There was more to it than just extraction of orders; this is what we are going to do. When you begin to take into account what resources cost the best use of them, the army has something to learn. That’s what I think I brought back into it and will continue to do so. I didn’t find any trouble at all sort of flicking back into it, which I suppose I should be worried about.

Even in the military environment, I would still be my civilian self, in terms of not making assumptions about use of acronyms and thing like that. It took a while for me to stop using military language freely in my daily life. I soon realised people didn’t have a clue what I was talking about most of the time and that can be difficult in going between roles.

The term “ say again
”, I still use that quite a lot. People understand what you’re getting at but they kind of look at you funny. Terms like, “
Get to the start line
”… again, it doesn’t take a lot to stretch the imagination to understand what is being said. For a while, I made assumptions that people knew what I was talking about, but they didn’t. I don’t mind but in a way, I probably need to adapt this a bit more.

I feel slightly amused shall we say, but then again it’s not down to other people to understand what I am talking about because I am ex-army and now a Reservist, it’s down to me to adapt to their environment.

I can certainly see how some people would leave after a full career and expect the world to understand them, but it is a completely different world. The army is a bit behind society. There are things that I have to adjust to. Firstly the fact that because people don’t wear their status you can’t see what rank they are. Nor can you rely on the fact that age is an indicator of status, you can in the forces because the army does not recruit in higher management level from outside. Therefore, you can pretty much guess, by the way someone is dressed, even if someone is dressed in civilian clothing what band of management they are. There’s senior management and when they are in uniform, it’s easier because they are wearing it. You obviously pay different attention to those of a higher rank. I found myself really being quite flippant about people who looked far younger than their actual status. Because I was making assumptions based on my experiences before and I had to get over that really, really quickly. Likewise, I was paying more attention to those who were more advanced in years which shouldn’t necessarily be the case. That’s not to say I didn’t treat everybody with respect you know, because anyone deserves that, but it’s a case of just how flippant I could be, with people who were actually quite important to my business. I have to amend that quite quickly. The other thing is about meeting terms and turning up for meeting five minutes early, which is a complete waste of time because meeting rooms are generally booked out for a full hour. You can’t get into them before the start and actually, when you are billing your time on a five-minute increment basis for various different projects and programmes, five minutes sitting there waiting for a meeting to start is wasting money. I still have a bit of trouble with that.

The five minutes thing, I can see where it comes from, it comes from every layer of responsibility, they need to check let’s put it down to inspection. Section commander used to check everyone before going to the platoon and the platoon sergeant checked everyone before the platoon commander comes along. Put that in a company or battalion context, that’s why everyone has to be there five minutes before the allotted time, so that adds up. It is a bit of an anachronism but there you go. You try finding someone in the army who doesn’t expect everyone to be there five minutes early. Also, insubordination is not something punishable in a civilian world in the same way as in the military world. However if people wore their management level like rank in the civilian world, I think it would change the way people act unless you absolutely do not care what people think of you, or how you could be perceived and how your career could go. I really believe that being able to identify where people were in various stages of their career affects your behaviour.

I don’t really have a problem flitting between the two and having to change my outlook on life. I don’t go into uniform, suddenly look down, and go right. I’m wearing my major’s robe today. I know better than everyone who is below me status wise. I have never done that. I think there are some people out there who do sadly. It is slightly rarer amongst the Reservist community those that balance a civilian job with the military lives. People who have spent some time in the Regular Army are probably more prone to it, albeit this is complete conjecture on my part.

I have worked with regular and American
Reservists on deployment and I think most of their motivations for joining as Reserves are slightly different to those in the UK. Although over the past fifteen years, they maybe became more aligned. Joining the Reserves was an opportunity to do stuff in life that you just don’t get the opportunity to do. You know all the adventurous training, the shooting, running around doing assault courses, its all-good fun, very hard to do, twenty years ago. Nowadays you have tough mudder (is a strong man competition) etc., maybe more opportunities to do shooting as a civilian yeah, still quite rare and you were paid for it. A great opportunity. The American side is more about duty of service. They hold their service personnel up on a pedestal. They give them an awful lot of respect because of their service. I suspect that over there people will join for that, or to serve more so than over here. Maybe those motivations have become more aligned in the last ten, fifteen years or so but I still think that is part of it.

My wife was a regular for many years; our son has got used to us both being in and out in uniform. This is interesting. My son who is twelve now doesn’t have the same kind of gender bias towards soldiers that maybe many other children his age would have. As far as he’s concerned, being a soldier is a job for a man and a woman. She left about a year and a bit before I did. If anything, the challenge was reengaging in the Reserve element because she doesn’t really understand my motivations for doing so. She was Regular Army, had a full career and left. As far as she was concerned that part of life is over, and she doesn’t really understand why I keep going back to it.

Having been through various experiences, the MSc and though Sandhurst, we were forced to take a long hard look at ourselves and understand what made ourselves tick. I know that I am somebody who will adapt to an environment, rather than change that environment to suit me. There are pluses and minuses to both sides of that. If you want someone to drive transformational changes, to lead and say this is good enough to change this; that needs to be someone who isn’t someone who will necessarily accept the status quo. I would go somewhere and usually just adapt my way of working into one of the environments. It’s a plus and a minus depending on the situation. Moreover, that’s the lens through which I look at it all of this. I had to adapt my behaviour to suit the situation, that’s just the way I am always going to be and it’s what allows me to move between civilian and military identities.

Psychological Perspectives

The experience of social identity for Reservists is of particular interest to Identity theorists when we consider the fact that Reservists engage in fast paced, intermittent service between military and civilian job roles (Griffith, 2010). With this in mind, research has explored how Reservists make sense of their identity and subsequent enactment of prototypical behaviours , which appear to rely on various psychosocial processes, such as the attitudes and beliefs that the individual has about the nature of military service (Griffith, 2011). Based on the existence in both uniformed and non-uniformed work roles , Reservists have been described as “ transmigrants

” because, according to Lomski-Feder, Gazit, and Ben-Ari (2008):

like the transmigrant, reservists move between different cultural and social spaces and as a result create the potential for communities and social networks that cross political, social and organizational boundaries and form conduits for the flow of ideas, interests and identities. (p. 599)

Consideration of the types of overarching identities that may be formed from the amalgamation of both a commitment to one’s military service and to one’s civilian role was conducted by Griffith (2008), a significant contributor to the Reserve identity literature, who, utilising Social Identity Theory , described a number of roles including the “ weekend warrior

”, “
Soldier Warrior

”, “
Conservative Ideologue

” and “ the instrumental volunteer

”. The weekend warrior identity was described as those who have a civilian role but engage in uniformed service due to a perceived threat to national defence and was supported by the mass influx of recruits following the 9/11 attack in New York. The soldier warrior is described as having a more meaningful uniformed identity, one who sees themselves as a soldier first and a civilian second. The Instrumental volunteer identity is characterised by those who serve for the benefit of such things as pay or status, and finally the conservative ideologue depicts a Reservist identity formed by the need to carry out a conservative or political agenda.

Vest (2012) argues that, to some extent, all individuals have to engage in the management of multiple and/or dual cultural and social identities and suggests that on review of the literature across anthropology, sociology and social psychology , individuals may employ three main processes in order to establish a sense of unity amongst each competing identities: (1) behavioural practice ; (2) spatial displacement ; and (3) narrativity . In short, behavioural practice refers to the concept of having “ habitus

”, based on the work of Bourdieu (1977), but reconceptualised by Vest as referring to the result of “processes of enculturation and socialisation” (p. 605), which explains reflexive and conscious monitoring of social rules and, thus shapes behaviour. More importantly for the Reservist’s ability to adapt to multiple or dual identities , Vest accepts Bourdieu’s notion that individuals can develop a “second”, “split” or cleft habitus , which explains how one can invoke different behavioural norms in order to satisfy different identities in different contexts. The main application of the process of behavioural practice is embodied in rituals of transition; for example, as a Reservist, one might mark the physical transition from civilian to soldier by putting on the uniform and changing non-verbal behaviour (such as walking in pace, or forcing shoulders back) (Ben-Ari, 1989). The second process of negotiating dual identity is that of spatial displacement , referring to both place (geometrically defined) and space (where practices and meaning are created) (Vest, 2012, p. 606). Vest explains that National Guard soldiers describe being a soldier “in here”, such as when in the armoury, or on training exercise, yet describe themselves as being civilian “out there”, when at home (the place) whilst at the same time enacting different practices in each location to differentiate identities (space). The final process, Narrativity , refers to the idea that “social life is itself storied…people construct identities (however multiple and changing) by locating themselves in the repertoire of emplotted stories

” (Somers, 1994, p. 614).

Vest (2012) explains that the disorganised self is, in essence, ordered by narrated life stories and, within this storytelling, develops discursive processes which allow the individual to use different language in different social settings, such as soldiers swearing, using acronyms or slang. This is supported by research claiming that there are fundamental differences between military and civilian speech, which emphasise divisions in role identity (Kirtley, 2010). Utilising ethnographic evidence from in-depth interviews, Vest (2012) demonstrates varying patterns of relationships between the soldier–civilian dichotomies. For National Guard soldiers who had not experienced deployment to war, the study revealed that the soldier part of their identity came second to their civilian role, simply seen as one of many parts of their identity, whereas those who had been deployed had internalised the soldier identity and maintained a primary soldier habitus (p. 609). In the non-deployed soldiers, participants experienced the sense of living a double life, where they were civilian by nature, but wearing the uniform helped them to assume a soldier identity, whereas the soldiers that had been deployed indicated that the soldier identity had been internalised as they had done “real soldier work” (p. 609). It was also found that behavioural practices and spatial displacement were the main processes engaged to unify dual identities for non-deployed soldiers, whereas narrativity was utilised by those who had been deployed.

We now move to Chapter 6 which explores some of the problems associated with military role exit.

References

1. Ben-Ari, E. (1989). Masks and Soldiering: The Israeli Army and the Palestinian Uprising. Cultural Anthropology, 4, 372–389.Crossref

2. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Crossref

3. Griffith, J. (2008). Institutional Motives for Serving in the U.S. Army National Guard: Implications for Recruitment, Retention, and Readiness. Armed Forces and Society, 34, 230–258.Crossref

4. Griffith, J. (2010). Decades of Transition for the US Reserves: Changing Demands on Reserve Identity and Mental Well-Being. International Review of Psychiatry, 72, 1–11.

5. Griffith, J. (2011). Contradictory and Complementary Identities of U.S. Army Reservists: A Historical Perspective. Armed Forces and Society, 37, 261–283.Crossref

6. Kirtley, J. (2010). Making a Soldier Out of a Civilian: Linguistic Identity in the U.S. Military. In Selected Papers from the Fourteenth College-Wide Conference for Students in Languages, Linguistics, and Literature, pp. 74–80.

7. Lomski-Feder, E., Gazit, N., & Ben-Ari, E. (2008). Reserve Soldiers as Transmigrants: Moving Between the Civilian and Military Worlds. Armed Forces and Society, 34, 593–614.Crossref

8. Somers, M. R. (1994). The Narrative Constitution of Identity: A Relational and Network Approach. Theory and Society, 23, 605–649.Crossref

9. Vest, B. M. (2012). Citizen, Soldier, or Citizen-Soldier? Negotiating Identity in the US National Guard. Armed Forces & Society, 39, 602–627.Crossref

© The Author(s) 2019

K. M. Wilson-Smith, P. J. CorrMilitary Identity and the Transition into Civilian Lifehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12338-3_6

6. Impact of Role Exit: Problems Associated with Leaving the Armed Forces

Kevin M. Wilson-Smith[1] and Philip J. Corr[2]

(1) School of Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK

(2) Department of Psychology, City University London, London, UK

Kevin M. Wilson-Smith (Corresponding author) Email: kevin.wilson-smith@glasgow.ac.uk

Philip J. Corr Email: philip.corr.1@city.ac.uk

Abstract

The literature engages with the process of military exit from a number of perspectives, viewing it as a status passage and/or an influence on life course, but often more as a problem. This chapter explores two main categories associated with role exit: problems with wellbeing (including mental health) and problems associated with reintegration into the civilian workforce. In the first half of the chapter, we review the literature on the relationship between military exit and homeliness. Homelessness in veterans appears to be mediated by a number of interrelated factors which includes relationship breakdown—it is often the case that prolonged absence from the family during service leads to partner resentment and eventual separation. Financial difficulties and being forced to leave temporary accommodation with friends/family also account for homelessness. In the second half of the chapter, we explore the issues relating to finding a civilian job and the potential for the civilian world to misunderstand the military skill (and mind) set. We conclude with a short overview of how psychologists might help with these issues.

Keywords

HomelessnessPTSDVeteransCivilian jobJob coachingOccupational psychology

The literature engages with the process of military exit from a number of perspectives (Walker, 2013), viewing it as a status passage (e.g. Bellino, 1970), an influence on life course (Teachman & Tedrow, 2007) but often more as a problem. For the purpose of this review, we focus on two main categories: problems with wellbeing (including mental health) and problems associated with reintegration into the civilian workforce .

Problems with Wellbeing After Exit

In relation to role exit wellbeing, research has traditionally focused on post-conflict readjustment in relation to demobilisation of US war veterans. Historically, very little is known about UK soldiers due in part to the lack of significant longitudinal follow-up studies (Iversen & Greenberg, 2009). Much of the research has focused on the clinical mental health of soldiers (e.g. Browne, Hull, & Horn, 2007; Kulka, 1990), specifically in relation to the development and effects of Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD; e.g. Hoge, Auchterlonie, & Milliken, 2006; Hoge et al., 2004), although equally common mental health concerns highlighted in the literature indicates a high prevalence of depression, anxiety disorders and alcoholism (Ismail, Kent, & Brugha, 2002; Toomey et al., 2007).

Iverson and Greenberg (2009) report that post-deployment mental health rates vary between operations, with 19.1% of returnees from Iraq suffering from a mental health problem compared with 11.3% from Afghanistan, and 8.5% from alternative geographical deployments. Hoge et al. (2006) suggest that these rates were compounded by the effects of combat experiences , mental healthcare referral and role exit from military service (Iversen & Greenberg, 2009). In a sample of approximately 78,000 military personnel, certain subgroups were more likely to have mental health problems, including those that were younger, female, serving with the army, less educated, white, single or those on short service enlistments (Riddle et al., 2007)—similar UK-based studies reporting those that were single and lowered ranked were more at risk (Iversen, Dyson, & Smith, 2005), albeit with a significantly smaller sample (N = 496). Despite an academic and media surge in PTSD discussion, it appears that substance dependence and depression more so than PTSD are more frequently reported by a significant number of veterans (Riddle et al., 2007)—PTSD accounts for only 1% of admissions (Hoge et al., 2002).

Homelessness Amongst Ex-military Personnel

Alongside psychiatric disorders and alcoholism , risk of homelessness was also identified by Loh (1994). The homeless population in Britain is said to include a large number of ex-military personnel (Crane, 1997; Dandeker, Wessely, Iversen, & Ross, 2003), but most of the literature reflects the significant problem of veteran homelessness in the United States (Gamache, Rosenheck, & Tessler, 2001; Mares & Rosenheck, 2004; Rosenheck & Koegel, 1993) with recent statistics indicating that veterans make up 12.3% of the homeless population (Tsai & Rosenheck, 2014). However, a significant study conducted by Johnson, Jones, and Rugg (2008), on behalf of the Ex-Service Action Group on Homelessness (ESAG), provides a sharp reminder of the issue faced by veterans closer to home. The report indicates that whilst the statistic continues to fall, there are currently 1100 non-statutory homeless and approximately 2500 statutory homeless in London alone. The demographic makeup of the homeless ex-service personnel in London is reflective of this research: they appear to be typically men from junior ranks prior to exit.

Homelessness in veterans appears to be mediated by a number of interrelated factors (Milroy, 2001), which includes relationship breakdown (e.g. Randall & Brown, 1994)—prolonged absence from the family during service can lead to partner resentment and eventual separation (Johnson et al., 2008). Financial difficulties and being forced to leave temporary accommodation with friends/family also accounts for homelessness (Fitzpatrick, Kemp, & Klinker, 2000), alongside the more common factors of mental health and alcohol dependence akin to the more general homeless population (Milroy, 2001). The figures associated with measuring rates and consequence of homelessness in ex-servicemen and woman suffer the same methodological inaccuracies as generic homelessness research (Pawson & Davidson, 2006) and primarily rely on data collected from homeless ex-servicemen who present themselves to homeless support initiatives (Johnson et al., 2008).

Criminality

There is a growing body of literature recognising the number of leavers ending up in prison (Fear et al., 2007). Interestingly, Teachman (2007) highlights the fact, that during World War II, service in the military was believed to have reduced the likelihood veterans would get in trouble with the law (Sampson & Laub, 1996). However, Bouffard (2005) indicates that veterans who were part of the All volunteer force (AVF) were significantly more likely to have direct contact with the judicial system than a comparison group of non-veterans. But, few studies have directly investigated exit from military service as a direct cause of criminality (e.g. Bouffard, 2003)—this indicates that most criminal behaviour was either engaged in prior to service or, in fact, was reduced as a consequence of serving (e.g. Sampson & Laub, 1996). Drug use appears to be the main cause of criminal charge with ex-servicemen (Bouffard, 2005). Research demonstrates that, in most cases, drug use started whilst on active tour, specifically in Vietnam, and post-exit arrests were primarily down to continued use upon return to their home countries (Robins, Davis, & Goodwin, 1974; Robins, Helzer, & Davis, 1975).

More recent studies have explored the possibility that although most imprisoned veterans are first time offenders, they are statistically more likely to be serving time for violent offences than their non-veteran inmates (Mumola, 2000). Whilst these studies should raise concern over the potential need for support of those exiting the military, it should be pointed out that ascertaining direct causation between military service and subsequent criminality is, of course, a contentious task in the light of the age-old argument of the academic chicken and egg scenario. As Cronin (1995) points out, it is difficult to know whether, in the case of violence for example, the military environment attracts violent people or combat leads them to be so. Equally, Bouffard (2003) highlights the point that many studies treat the military experience as constant, not comparing how those who have served over long period of times have experienced varying changes to their military selves—a greater focus on the individual, over the institution, may be needed to gain a more realistic view of criminality.

Finding a Civilian Job

Most members of the military who meet the standards for retirement exit are still of working age and are often motivated to find a second career, whether by the pressure of economic, psychological and social factors, or some combination of them. On surveying a large cohort of UK military veterans, it was shown that 87.5% were successful in finding work (Iversen et al., 2005).

However, the perception that transition is straightforward is inaccurate and exit data differ significantly, especially when one compares the data with Vietnam veterans who appeared to do significantly worse in terms of getting a job and overall earnings when compared to those who stayed at home (Angrist & Krueger, 1990). Regan, Mason, Bryant, and Harrison (1995) found that army leavers were disadvantaged in terms of employment prospect and social relations due to a lack of contact with civilian labour markets. Equally, Lutz (2007, p. 67) found that when questioned about employing soldiers, 61% of employers stated that they had “little understanding of skills and qualifications ex-servicemen offer” and three quarters of ex-veterans going back to civilian employment felt they had “an inability to effectively translate their military skills to civilian terms”. This is further compounded when one considers the military social network is switched for relationships with civilian employers, who may offer less of an understanding of the veterans concerns and expectations of work culture (Iversen & Greenberg, 2009); and moreover may have differing attitudes towards the veteran based on public attitude of whether or not any active service they were involved in was considered a “just war” (Brownlee & Mullen, 1980). Druss (1965) also makes the point that, for many military personnel, there is a certain level of status and power that comes with the role and that this loss of status can cause psychological problems when returning to a civilian job . The literature also shows a significant degree of individual differences affecting post-exit work choice. In a sample of ex-military personnel who had successfully made the transition to civilian work, Jolly (1996) found that 40% of the sample looked for roles that allowed them to maintain continuity with their uniformed identity, with junior ranks taking up roles in uniformed positions within civilian services, such as the police force and security services. Whilst it is acknowledged by Jolly that her sample may be unrepresentative due to its size (Higate, 2001), it is also evident in other empirical work that there is a relative constriction on career pathway choice when leaving the military (Regan et al., 1995), with one survey (Hooper & Stephens, 1996) demonstrating that 75% of leavers from across the Army, Navy and Air force had taken on jobs that could be deemed as “masculinised” institutions (Higate, 2001, p. 452).

A number of studies have investigated the effects of pre-retirement/pre-exit planning on preparing to make the transition to civilian work life (Baruch & Quick, 2007, 2009; Spiegel & Shultz, 2003). Spiegel and Shultz identify several factors that influence adjustment and satisfaction of military exit/retirement. In the first instance, planning is key to helping the leaver to reduce anxiety about exit. McNeil, Lecca, and Wright (1983) suggested that planning one year ahead allows the leaver to channel anxiety and, thus, reduce the risk of later psychological distress. Whilst Wolpert (1989) pointed out that some of the pre-exit planning programmes lacked efficiency, he too found that the process helped overall transition and satisfaction on exit. Another factor highlighted was the ability effectively to transfer knowledge and skill to the civilian workplace. Spiegel & Shultz (2003) give an example to highlight this point: a heavy artillery gunner may naturally struggle to relate their skill and knowledge to a civilian role, yet this is also equally true of military transport pilots who despite having lots of transferable skills may face limited job prospects (Dunning & Biderman, 1973). The ability to utilise the skills and knowledge obtained appeared to be related to rank, with high-ranking officers seemingly more able to get equivalent or elevated roles on exit (Whelan, 1981).

How Can Psychology Help?

There are a number of ways, both clinically and occupationally, psychologists can play a role in supporting veterans and those exiting the military role. The American Psychological Associations guide entitled “The Mental Health Needs of Veterans, Service Members and Their Families” (APA, 2014) cites four main ways in which psychology may be involved in meeting the mental and behavioural needs of veterans. Firstly, psychologists can play a role in clinically supporting veterans with PTSD and traumatic brain injury, with research showing early intervention makes a significant difference in preventing the long term negative consequences of these conditions (APA, 2014). They also suggest that psychologists can provide critical support in two other clinical areas: giving support to those with suicidal ideation and anger issues, and working with individuals who are learning to adjust to a life after amputation. The National Center for Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (2004) indicate that psychologists help facilitate support in developing confidence by offering a safe space in which veterans can discuss the impact of disability and trauma on their future civilian life. Finally, the APA suggests that psychology can aid in the process of supporting returning soldiers to develop coping skills by preparing them for the potential family and occupational challenges that lie ahead. Occupational psychology also directly contributes to the support of service leavers with a number of posts both within the Ministry of Defence and alongside charities that support ex-servicemen and woman. One such support programme that is available in the UK is the Vocational Assessment Service set up by the Royal British Legion. This provides assessment, counselling and guidance on career management and development to Service leavers and ex-services personnel of the UK Armed Forces, Reserve Forces and their dependants. Equally, Remploy (2014), an occupational psychology service available to veterans, lists a number of potential services that may aid the transition into civilian work, including: ergonomic consultation; job coaching; psychometric vocational support; and transferable skills analysis—these demonstrate the potential scope for occupationally based support.

In conclusion, despite a range of services being available, the potential numbers leaving the service, both through natural attrition and the possible cuts with Reserve 2020 , psychology has a significant role to play. One potential area that appears lacking in the literature is utilising psychologists in development of training and support within the civilian organisation itself. Future programmes of intervention may need to focus more on training within the organisation alongside the need to support the individual leaver directly. In order to highlight how this might work, the final chapter explores the way in which career counselling models could be used to help military leavers recognise how their military skill set and interests are portable and to develop dialogue and reflection on what might come next.

References

Angrist, J., & Krueger, A. (1990). Lifetime Earnings and the Vietnam Era Draft Lottery: Evidence from Social Security Administrative Records. American Economic Review, 80, 313–316.

APA. (2014). The Mental Health Needs of Veterans, Service Members and Their Families. American Psychological Association.

Baruch, Y., & Quick, J. C. (2007). Understanding Second Careers: Lessons from a Study of U.S. Navy Admirals. Human Resource Management, 46, 471–491.Crossref

Baruch, Y., & Quick, J. C. (2009). Setting Sail in a New Direction: Career Transitions of US Navy Admirals to the Civilian Sector. Personnel Review, 38, 270–285.Crossref

Bellino, R. (1970). Perspectives of Military and Civilian Retirement. Mental Hygiene, 54, 580–583.

Bouffard, L. (2003). Examining the Relationship Between Military Service and Criminal Behaviour During the Vietnam Era. Criminology, 41, 491–510.Crossref

Bouffard, L. (2005). The Military as a Bridging Environment in Criminal Careers: Differential Outcomes of the Military Experience. Armed Forces and Society, 41, 491–510.

Browne, T., Hull, L., & Horn, O. (2007). Explanations for the Increase in Mental Health Problems in UK Reserve Forces Who Have Served in Iraq. British Journal of Psychiatry, 190, 484–489.Crossref

Brownlee, R. L., & Mullen, W. J. (1980). Changing an Army. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

Crane, M. (1997). Older People’s Experiences in the Armed Forces and the Merchant Navy. [Report] for the Sir Oswald Stoll Foundation.

Cronin, C. (1995). Adolescent Reports of Parental Spousal Violence in Military and Civilian Families. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 10, 117–122.Crossref

Dandeker, C., Wessely, S., Iversen, A., & Ross, J. (2003). Improving the Delivery of Cross Departmental Support and Services for Veterans (Joint Report). London: Department of War Studies and Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College.

Druss, R. G. (1965). Problems Associated with Retirement from Military Service. Military Medicine, 130, 382–385.Crossref

Dunning, B. B., & Biderman, A. D. (1973). The Case of Military Retirement. Journal of Industrial Gerontology, 7, 18–37.

Fear, N. T., Van Staden, L., Iversen, A. C., French, C. E., Dandeker, C., & Wessely, S. (2007). Transition Back into Civilian Life: A Study of Personnel Leaving the U.K. Armed Forces Via ‘Military Prison’. Military Medicine, 172, 925–930.

Fitzpatrick, S., Kemp, P., & Klinker, S. (2000). Single Homelessness: An Overview of Research in Britain. Bristol: The Policy Press.

Gamache, G., Rosenheck, R., & Tessler, R. (2001). The Proportion of Veterans Among Homeless Men: A Decade Later. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 36, 481–485.Crossref

Higate, P. (2001). Theorizing Continuity: From Military to Civilian Life. Armed Forces & Society, 27, 443–460.Crossref

Hoge, C. W., Auchterlonie, J. L., & Milliken, C. S. (2006). Mental Health Problems, Use of Mental Health Services, and Attrition from Military Service After Returning from Deployment to Iraq or Afghanistan. Journal of the American Medical Association, 295, 1023–1032.Crossref

Hoge, C. W., Castro, C. A., Messer, S. C., McGurk, D., Cotting, D. I., & Koffman, R. L. (2004). Combat Duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, Mental Health Problems, and Barriers to Care. New England Journal of Medicine, 351, 13–22.Crossref

Hoge, C. W., Lesikar, S. E., Guevara, R., Lange, J., Brundage, J. F., Engel, C. C., …, Orman, D. T. (2002). Mental Disorders Among U.S. Military Personnel in the 1990s: Association with High Levels of Health Care Utilization and Early Military Attrition. American Journal of Psychiatry, 159, 1576–1583.Crossref

Hooper, N., & Stephens, B. (1996). The Transition from Service to Civilian Employment. York: Centre for Defence Employment.

Ismail, K., Kent, K., & Brugha, T. (2002). The Mental Health of UK Gulf War Veterans: Phase 2 of a Two Phase Cohort Study. British Medical Journal, 325, 576.Crossref

Iversen, A., Dyson, C., & Smith, N. (2005). ‘Goodbye and Good Luck’: The Mental Health Needs and Treatment Experiences of British Ex-service Personnel. British Journal of Psychiatry, 186, 480–486.Crossref

Iversen, A., & Greenberg, N. (2009). Mental Health of Regular and Reserve Military Veterans. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, 15, 100–106.Crossref

Johnson, S., Jones, A., & Rugg, J. (2008). The Experience of Ex-service Homeless Personnel in London. York: University of York, Centre for Housing Policy.

Jolly, R. (1996). Changing Step: From Military to Civilian Life: People in Transition. London: Brassey’s.

Kulka, R. A., Schlenger, W. E., Fairbank, J. A., Hough, R. L., Jordan, B. K., Marmar, C. R., and Weiss, D. S. (1990). Trauma and the Vietnam Generation: Report of Findings from the National Vietnam Veterans Readjustment Study. New York: Brunner/Mazel.

Loh, S. H. (1994). Resettlement and Training Factors Affecting Employment of Ex-servicemen in the Malaysian Army—A Case Study (MEd thesis). University of Canberra, Australia.

Lutz, R. (2007). Disconnect Between Employers and Transitioning Military Personnel. Military.com. Retrieved December 14, 2014 from http://www.military.com/aboutus/twocolumn/0,15929,PRarticle110507,00.html.

Mares, A. S., & Rosenheck, R. A. (2004). Perceived Relationship Between Military Service and Homelessness Among Homeless Veterans with Mental Illness. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 192, 715–719.Crossref

McNeil, J. S., Lecca, P. J., & Wright, R. (1983). Military Retirement: Social, Economic, and Mental Health Dilemmas. Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Allanheld.

Milroy, W. H. (2001). Pathways to the Streets for Ex-service Personnel: An Examination of Various Routes to Homelessness for Ex-service Personnel (Unpublished PhD thesis). University of East Anglia, Norwich.

Mumola, C. J. (2000). Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report: Veterans in Prison or Jail (Publication # NCJ 178888). U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.

National Center for Post-traumatic Stress Disorder. (2004). Treating the Traumatized Amputee. In P. Schnurr & COL S. Cozza (Eds.), Iraq War Clinician Guide (pp. 50–54). Washington: US Department of Veterans Affairs.

Pawson, H., & Davidson, E. (2006). Fit for Purpose? Official Measures on Homelessness in the Era of the Activist State. Radical Statistics, 93, 7–29.

Randall, G., & Brown, S. (1994). Falling Out: A Research Study of Homeless Ex-service People. London: Crisis.

Regan, S., Mason, L., Bryant, L., & Harrison, E. (1995). Career Change, Job Search and Family: Naval Leavers in Plymouth (Unpublished Report to the Royal Navy). Department of Sociology, University of Plymouth.

Remploy. (2014). Armed Forces and Veterans Services: Supporting Serving and Ex-service Personnel to Achieve Sustainable Civilian Careers. Remploy. Retrieved on March 13, 2017 https://www.remploy.co.uk/files/veterans-brochure.pdf.

Riddle, J. R., Smith, T. C., Smith, B., Corbeil, T. E., Engel, C. C., Wells, T. S., …, Blazer, D. (2007). Millennium Cohort: The 2001–2003 Baseline Prevalence of Mental Disorders in the U.S. Military. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60, 192–201.Crossref

Robins, L. N., Davis, D. H., & Goodwin, D. W. (1974). Drug Use by U.S. Army Enlisted Men in Vietnam: A Follow-Up on Their Return Home. American Journal of Epidemiology, 99, 235–249.

Robins, L. N., Helzer, J. E., & Davis, D. H. (1975). Narcotic Use in Southeast Asia and Afterward: An Interview Study of 898 Vietnam Veterans. Archives of General Psychiatry, 32, 955–961.Crossref

Rosenheck, R. A., & Koegel, P. (1993). Characteristics of Veterans and Nonveterans in Three Samples of Homeless Men. Hospital & Community Psychiatry, 44, 858–863.

Sampson, R., & Laub, J. (1996). Socioeconomic Achievement in the Life Course of Disadvantaged Men: Military Service as a Turning Point, Circa 1940–1965. American Sociological Review, 61, 347–367.Crossref

Spiegel, P. E., & Shultz, K. S. (2003). The Influence of Preretirement Planning and Transferability of Skills on Naval Officers’ Retirement Satisfaction and Adjustment. Military Psychology, 15, 285–307.Crossref

Teachman, J., & Tedrow, L. (2007). Joining Up: Did Military Service in the Early All Volunteer Era Affect Subsequent Civilian Income? Social Science Research, 36, 1447–1474.Crossref

Toomey, R., Kang, H., Karlinsky, J., Baker, D. G., Vasterling, J. J., Alpern, R, …, Eisen, S. A. (2007). Mental Health of US Gulf War Veterans 10 Years After the War. British Journal of Psychiatry, 190, 385–393.Crossref

Tsai, J., & Rosenheck, R. A. (2014). Risk Factors for Homelessness Amongst US Veterans. Epidemiologic Reviews, 37, 177–195.Crossref

Walker, D. I. (2013). Anticipating Army Exit: Identity Constructions of Final Year UK Career Soldiers. Armed Forces and Society, 39, 284–304.Crossref

Whelan, W. J. (1981). Senior Military Leadership and Post Military Careers. Dissertation Abstracts International, 42, 839.

Wolpert, D. S. (1989). Planning for Military Retirement: A Study of the Career Transition Programme, General Preretirement Planning Activities, and Their Effect on Job and/or Life Satisfaction (Doctoral dissertation). University of Pittsburgh. Dissertation Abstract International, 50, 3742.

© The Author(s) 2019

K. M. Wilson-Smith, P. J. CorrMilitary Identity and the Transition into Civilian Lifehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12338-3_7

7. Help with Finding a Civilian Job

Kevin M. Wilson-Smith[1] and Philip J. Corr[2]

(1) School of Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK

(2) Department of Psychology, City University London, London, UK

Kevin M. Wilson-Smith (Corresponding author) Email: kevin.wilson-smith@glasgow.ac.uk

Philip J. Corr Email: philip.corr.1@city.ac.uk

Abstract

This chapter focuses on the value of using career counselling to support the transition of veterans back into the civilian workforce. We provide a brief theoretical overview of career counselling orientations as well as a summary description of its application with a client (“Chris”). Our case study demonstrates the utility of psychological testing as an assessment tool, as part of Kidd’s (2003, 2006) second stage of career counselling: enabling client’s understanding. Our case study also describes the use of the Occupational Interests Profile+ as a basis for discussion with the client, along with career recommendations based on a combination of a career history interview and interpretation of the results from the psychometric test.

Keywords

Careers counsellingPsychometrics15fq+Occupational interest profileCareer history interviewPsychological testing

In this chapter, we offer a case study to demonstrate the application of careers counselling and psychological testing as part of a career development interview for an ex-soldier who had recently left the Armed Forces and wished to consider what options were available to him for his future career, as well as to understand his identity was not wholly defined by the military environment. The chapter offers a brief theoretical overview of the career counselling orientations and a detailed description of its application with a client (“Chris”). The case study also demonstrates the use of psychological testing as an assessment tool as part of Kidd’s (2003, 2006) second stage of career counselling, enabling client’s understanding . The case study describes the use of the Occupational Interests Profile + as a basis for discussion in the session, along with the recommendations made to the client based on a combination of his career history interview and the interpretation of the results from the test.

The Client

Chris (pseudonym used), a 39-year-old man, wanted a discussion to consider possible career options open to him, which suited his experience, knowledge and skills. Having recently left the Armed Forces after serving 21 years as an infantry soldier, Chris had begun discussions with the Adult learning team of a local college about his desire to get a “new” career but felt overwhelmed by his options and expressed confusion over his career prospects. The member of staff who was interviewing Chris recommended that a career counselling interview might be a good starting place to help guide his choices and so a referral was made. At this point, the only information received was that Chris was 39 and had recently made the transition to civilian life.

Major Theoretical Orientations in Career Counselling Interviews

To begin, it is necessary to make some initial distinctions when referring to the process of counselling. In this context, the term counselling takes on a work/career/vocational guidance related definition similar to that used in the United States school system (Schmidt, 2003), as opposed to clinical/therapeutic applications. Traditional generic definitions of counselling describe it as “an interactional process involving a series of decisions in pursuit of a particular goal” (Nelson-Jones, 2003); however, the British Association for Counsellors specifically highlights the role of counselling for the purpose of development and guidance in their definition which outlines counselling as:

Work with individuals and with relationships which may be developmental, crisis support, psychotherapeutic, guiding or problem solving…The task of the counsellor is to give the client an opportunity to explore, discover and clarify ways of living more satisfyingly and resourcefully. (BAC, 1984)

Furthermore, the application of counselling in non-clinical settings is further supported by Dryden and Feltham (1993), who describe the counselling relationship as:

Very brief or long duration, take place in organisational or private practice setting and may or may not overlap practical, medical and other matters of personal welfare. (Dryden & Feltham, 1993, p. 6)

In the context of counselling within organisations, a distinction can be made between counselling as an activity involving a ‘professional’ and counselling as a style/set of skills which are used as a model of interpersonal process for managers, supervisors and advisors etc. (Millward, 2005). Within work contexts, there appears to be two clear ways in which counselling can be used: career/development counselling or counselling for stress and other problems that affect/inhibit work; and professional development (Millward, 2005).

Counselling models and practices are more often than not intrinsically linked to one (or a combination) of the five therapeutic orientations of the counsellor, which are outlined by Millward (2005): psychodynamic approach (e.g. Adler, 1927); humanistic/experiential (e.g. Rogers, 1951); cognitive/cognitive-behavioural approaches (e.g. Beck, 1976; Ellis, 1957); behavioural approaches (Wolpe, 1958); and the constructivist approach (e.g. Peavy, 1997). However, counselling techniques developed with career development and guidance in mind are also influenced by career theories (Millward, 2005) for which Kidd (1996) claims there are four overarching theoretical (as opposed to therapeutic) orientations with each offering varied approaches/models to adopt when conducting career counselling sessions.

The key aspects of the four orientations include: person-centred career counselling (Bozarth & Fisher, 1990); developmental orientations (e.g. Super, 1957); goal-directed orientations (e.g. Egan, 1990); and person–environmental fit (e.g. Holland, 1973; Rodger, 1952). Within the context of our case study, the theoretically eclectic model of career counselling, put forward by Kidd (2003, 2006), is outlined alongside description of its use with Chris, with specific reference to how career counselling technique was guided by approaches within this orientation.

Person-Centred Career Counselling

The person-centred approach is attributed to a talk by Rogers on new ways of working in psychotherapy (McLeod, 2003). He suggested that the therapist was of most help to a client when they facilitated the client to solve their own problems rather than providing them with specific direction; in other words, the counsellor becomes non-directive. The use of person-centred techniques was achieved in part by the fostering of three core counselling conditions: congruence/genuineness (allowing the client to see you as you really are); unconditional positive regard (accepting the client as they are); and empathy (non-sympathetically ‘walking in the clients shoes’) (Rogers, 1951). According to Kidd (1996), when Carl Rogers initially introduced the world to person-centred counselling in 1942 he showed little interest in its application to career counselling, yet Patterson (1964) offered organisational psychology its first attempt at explaining the applicability of the person-centred interview techniques, such as genuineness , unconditional positive regard and empathic understanding, into the career counselling toolkit. This was further developed by Bozarth and Fisher (1990) who described four ‘axioms’ of person-centred applications to career counselling which include:

1. 1.

The person-centred career counsellor has attitudes and behaviours that focus on promoting the inherent process of the client self-actualisation.

2. 2.

There is an initial emphasis on a certain area of client concern, that of work.

3. 3.

There are opportunities for the client to test his or her emerging concept of personal identity and vocational choice with real or simulated work activities.

4. 4.

The person-centred career counsellor has certain information and skills available to the client through which a career gal can be implemented. (Bozarth & Fisher, 1990, p. 53)

Based on the axioms listed above, person-centred career counselling approaches tend to adopt an interview technique which focuses on attitudes and beliefs rather than goals (Kidd, 1996) which can be viewed as sitting in opposition to goal-directed orientations of career counselling, which are outlined next.

Person–Environment Fit

Sometimes referred to as the trait-factor approach (Gothard, Mignot, Offer, & Ruff, 2001), the person–environmental fit is described as an orientation based on diagnosis and assessment with the outcomes of the assessments forming the basis for recommendations to the client on which course of action to follow and assumes that both the individual and occupations can be adequately measured (Kidd, 1996). Interview strategies have classically been based on the work of Rodgers’ (1952) seven point plan and Holland’s (1973) theory of occupational choice . Within Rodgers’ seven point plan, seven headings are provided which act as a basis for interviewing, which includes questions based on the physical make up, the attainments, general intelligence, special aptitudes, interests, disposition and, finally, the current circumstances of the client. The seven point interview plan has lost popularity due to the perception that it is out of date, rigid and too focused on content rather than the process of the interview in supporting the client (Kidd, 1996).

A popular person–environment fit model used in the United States is that of Holland’s (1973) theory of occupational choice , which categorises personality and occupational environments into six types: realistic, investigative, artistic, social, enterprising, and conventional. Using a range of available psychometrics, such as the vocational preference inventory (Holland, 1985a), the career counsellor can determine the category and should one be able to find congruence between the personality type and the occupation type then the individual would find vocational satisfaction (Arnold, 1997).

Developmentally Focused Career Counselling

Developmental orientations to career counselling focus on the need for a client to develop through a number of stages or tasks in order for them to become vocationally mature and, therefore, it is the job of the career counsellor to pitch their support at the appropriate level (Gothard et al., 2001). The developmental orientation sees the choice of occupation as a continuous process and tends to use the language of developmental psychology to explain career related outcomes (Kidd, 1996).

The most commonly associated theorist with the developmental orientation is Super (1957), who argued that occupational preference and also occupational competencies changed over time alongside individuals life experiences (and thus changing the individuals self-concept ) and coined the phrase ‘vocational maturity ’—defined as “the way in which an individual successfully completes certain career development tasks that are required according to his current developmental phase” (Super, 1977, p. 294). Super suggested that five career life stages existed which linked to age and included growth (lasting from birth to fourteen), exploration (lasting from fifteen to twenty-four), establishment (lasting from twenty-five to forty-four), maintenance (from forty-five to sixty-four) and, finally, the decline stage (from sixty-five onwards).

Super’s theory tends to indicate a linear career progression and has been criticised on the basis of being too general (Osipow & Fitzgerald, 1996), for ignoring the issues faced by woman and minority groups (Brown, 1990; Sharf, 1997), redundancy and for career changes in later life (Gothard et al., 2001) (e.g. in Chris’s case). Yet, despite these drawbacks, it continues to occupy ‘centre stage’ (Brown, 1990, p. 356) in the career counselling arena.

Goal-Directed Career Counselling

Goal-directed career counselling orientations cover a wide range of models, yet all share the singular purpose that, at least part of, the aim of career counselling session is to set goals and develop action plans to achieve those goals (Kidd, 1996). The emphasis here is on changing behaviour by supporting the client to see the ‘blind spots’ in their thinking, which in turn allows them to formulate an action plan (Gothard et al., 2001). Egan’s (1990) approach, although rooted in therapeutic counselling, provides a clear model of goal-directed career counselling because it offers such a rigid and prescriptive structure to conducting a career interview (Kidd, 1996). Egan’s ‘skilled Helper’ model suggests three stages to the interview process. In the first stage, the client is encouraged to explore what is currently going on for them (the present scenario) by allowing them to tell their story. At the first part of this stage, the Rogerian core conditions are employed and then the interviewer may draw on a number of skills to allow full exploration of the client’s problem including challenging discrepancies, negative self-talk or offering a different perspective with the intention of helping the client to identify blind spots in their thinking (Egan, 1990). The second stage of the model requires the client to begin to develop a preferred scenario and to identify what possibilities might lead to a better future. The final stage requires the client to formulate strategies and plans that best fit their environment, ideally developing a specific and measurable step-by-step procedure for ensuring each goal is achieved in order to achieve their preferred scenario (Egan, 1990). Many models for career counselling are rooted in Egan’s skilled helper model (e.g. Ali & Graham, 1996; Fielding & Vautier, 1994): its significant strength is in providing a straightforward, practical, approach that is applicable to a wide range of settings (McLeod, 2003).

Kidd’s (2003, 2006) Model of Career Counselling and Tasks

When comparing the broad categories of theoretical orientations available to the career counsellor, it can be argued that the main principles are not in fundamental disagreement with one another (Krumboltz & Nichols, 1990). Kidd (1996) recommends that a practitioner may wish to draw on a number of models to best suit their clients’ needs by either:

1. 1.

Stay with one or possibly two models

2. 2.

Identify common features from a number of models which seem to produce the largest client gain (referred to as the common factors approach)

3. 3.

Tease out specific methods and techniques (technical eclecticism )

4. 4.

Try to develop your own model based on theoretical integration.

Bases on technical eclecticism , Kidd (2003, 2006) developed a set of 4 stages and associated tasks that the career counsellor may engage in as part of the career counselling process. In the first stage, the focus is on building a working relationship and alliance with the client. In the second stage, the task is to develop the client’s understanding and to assess their attributes and their current situation. The third stage involves an exploration of new perspectives by providing the client with information. Finally, the last stage involves forming strategies and plans .

The next section outlines each stage in more detail and describes how this model was applied to career counselling with Chris. (One of the present authors, K. M. Wilson-Smith, “I”, was the counsellor who worked with Chris—accordingly, the next section is written in the first person.)

Core Conditions

I aimed to establish the core conditions of genuineness , unconditional positive regard and empathy (Rogers, 1957) throughout the session, from start to finish. There is, of course, a sense of artificiality when one does not engage in counselling practice regularly and so adopting the core conditions was a very cognitive effort, focusing on what I could say or do to ensure that they were perceived by Chris. Empathy is an important part of counselling, partly based on the principle that a client who feels ‘heard’ is believed to lead to a higher ability to explore and take on board previously denied aspects of self (McLeod, 2003). I perceived empathy in this circumstance to mean taking the position of ‘walking in Chris’s shoes’ whilst at the same time avoiding sympathy. Finding the lack of consistent counselling experience slightly nerve-invoking, I looked to structured models which saw empathy as a purposeful activity on behalf of the counsellor, in this case utilising strategies from parts of the empathy cycle (Barrett-Lennard, 1981). For example, stage 3 of the model implies the need to demonstrate expressed empathy by demonstrating my felt awareness of the client’s experience. This was achieved mainly through communication skill, specifically with responses to Chris’s description at feeling lost at the moment, to which I responded “It seems like it’s a really confusing time for you”. Genuineness (or congruence) refers to the “state of being of the counsellor when his/her outward responses to the client consistently match the inner feelings and sensations which she has in relation to the client” (Mearns & Thorne, 1988, p. 75). The appearance of genuineness entails attending to one’s own feelings and being honest with the client about them as they arise, for example within Chris’s story of deciding to come to seek face-to-face advice. He told me during the session that he had spoken to a university over the phone who had told him that he could not do anything without his GCSE in maths. When he told me this, I instinctively scrunched my face up and slowly shook my head. Chris laughed slightly and asked what that reaction was about and I told him honestly that hearing that had made me feel angry and that I felt it was important that people ensure that they have accurate information before providing others with advice. Sharing genuine reactions in such a way is valuable in building relationships within the counselling setting and acts to develop trust whilst also acknowledging to the client that if I, as the counsellor, can show vulnerability to my emotions then so can they, whereas incongruence can leave the client feeling confused (McLeod, 2003).

The final core condition that I tried to promote in Chris’s session was that of unconditional positive regard , which Rogers (1957) described as accepting others as they are and without judgement or evaluation. This is not to say one accepts or condones inappropriate behaviour of the client, but rather tries to attend to how that might have felt for the client rather than focus on the act itself. There were a number of occasions that Chris discussed his use of drugs, for example, and how using drugs had given him the desire to work in a helping profession. Although I obviously did not advocate the use of drugs, I replied by stating “I can see why your experiences with drugs would give you that interest”. Of course, the examples here are one-off descriptions to highlight the point; the entire session from start to finish was conducted with the core conditions in mind.

Establishing a Contract

Kidd (2006) suggests that establishing a contract as early as possible is vital to the relationship and ensures that the client is clear about the expectations in the session, especially in regard to what advice you can provide.

Shortly after Chris had sat down I began the session by referring him to the contract, stating that before we get started we need to establish what the aims of the session were and as part of that process both he and I would sign a paper copy of a session contract. The contract indicated to Chris that the session was confidential and that it was free of charge. The session contract also stated that the purpose of the sessions was to provide an environment in which both he and I could establish his career desires and discuss what education and training options might be available to him. The contract also stated that in order to provide Chris with the best possible advice it may be necessary to review a number of sources of information (discussed in the next section) and this may include: a discussion about career history, a review of his C.V. and the use of psychometrics testing to ascertain vocational interests and/or ability. Chris was asked if he had any questions and he said he did not so we then proceeded to the main body of the session, as described in the following section.

Enabling Clients Understanding (Including Assessment Techniques)

Kidd’s second stage of career counselling focuses on trying to gain a deeper understanding of the client’s current circumstances and tends to orientate around the use of assessment in one form or another. A person-centred perspective is more likely to opt for the use of standard psychometric assessment tools, such as the Myers Briggs type Indicator (Myers & Briggs, 1993), or a vocational guidance tool, such as the Career belief inventory (Krumboltz, 1991)—this tends to enforce a counsellor-led approach rather than seeing the relationship between the counsellor and the client as being equal (Kidd, 2007). In the case of Chris, utilising a theoretically eclectic mix of techniques allowed me to tailor the session to meet pragmatic needs of time and resource. On this basis, although I aimed to provide the core conditions of counselling from a person-centred perspective, I also opted for a more person–environment fit orientation by the decision to use a standardised career psychometric to help Chris explore his career interests, albeit interpreted in the light of Chris’s career history discussion.

Informal Assessment 1: Career History Discussion

Following on from a short period of small talk and signing of the contract, I began the process of trying to understand better Chris’s circumstances and tried to get a picture of what had brought him into the college. This literally began with the question “so what’s brought you here today?” This simple question was used early on as a way of identifying the presenting problem question (McLeod, 2003) and is most effective when asked straight away. Chris implied that he was there because he needed help with sorting out what to do next with his life and I responded by asking which specific bit he was referring too. Chris explained that he had served for a number of years in the Armed Forces and that had been his one and only job. When discussing Chris’s military career it became evident that he had experienced a number of different roles within the broader context of being a soldier but most of them focused on the soldiering itself (e.g. weapons handling which may not be easily transferable to a civilian context at first glance). Chris seemed to indicate that he felt frustrated by the fact that he had lots of soldiering-based skills but this was perceived irrelevant to civilian jobs . This concept has been empirically supported by Lutz (2007, p. 67) who found that, when questioned about employing soldiers, 61% of employers stated that they had “little understanding of skills and qualifications ex-servicemen offer” and three quarters of ex-veterans going back to civilian employment felt they had “an inability to effectively translate their military skills to civilian terms”. Chris explained that part of the problem was that he was unsure about what other professions might interest him as he had become so used to being a soldier.

Due to the time constraints over our session, I believed that at this point a more formal assessment of Chris’s occupational interests might provide a basis for exploring new perspectives for Chris’s future career and so I asked him whether he would be interested in taking an occupational interest psychometric test. This seemed to please Chris who explained that he had taken psychometrics before and had found that he preferred a more directive approach to problem-solving. At this point, I decided that a more environment–person fit or goal-focused approach might be more suited to Chris’s preference.

Assessment: Introducing the Occupational Interests Profile+

The Occupational Interest Profile+ (OIP+) is a test developed by PsychTech International (PsychTech, 2014), specifically for use in guidance situations. Before outlining some of the technical details of the psychometric test, it is worth noting that the choice to use this test was for practical reasons, primarily because it was available for use and I had been trained in its administration. The test is based on the original theoretical structure of Holland’s (1985a) six career themes (artistic, realistic, investigative, social, enterprising, and conventional) although it is acknowledged that some of the original themes have been expanded and adapted in this test to meet changes in technology; for example, the theme “investigative” has been split into logical and scientific. The test consists of 16 scales, divided into two main sections measuring work needs and then occupational interests. A brief description of each scale can be seen in Table 7.1.

Table 7.1

A summary of the 16 scales of the OIP+ (adapted from the OIP technical manual, Psytech International, 2014)

Personal work needs

Occupational interests

Excitement: measuring how much change and variety an individual needs in their life

Persuasive: high scorers enjoy roles involving persuasion such as sales, politics etc.

Stability: high scores equate to emotional stability, low scores equate to emotionally volatile individuals

Practical: high scorers enjoy practical and mechanical roles, working with their hands

Agreeableness: high scores equate to trusting, kind-heartedness etc., low scores equate to cynicism etc.

Artistic: a preference for careers that require the individual to develop artistic products or ideas

Optimism: high scorers have a more optimistic view on life, low scorers tend to be more pessimistic

Scientific: scientific pursuits such as a preference for discovering new facts and problem-solving

Conscientiousness: high scores equate to paying attention to detail, low scorers tend to be less organized

Administrative: show an interest in organising and sorting information, separated into clerical and administration based preferences

Extraversion: a scale of sociability. High scorers will dislike lone working, low scorers will dislike being in large groups

Logical: such individuals enjoy solving puzzles of all types and would be extremely interested in any activities dealing with logic, computation and mathematics

Openness: a measure of being open to new ideas. High Scorers are likely to enjoy theoretical discussion and intellectual pursuits, low scorers tend to be more pragmatic and hands-on

Nurturing: enjoy helping and caring for others, jobs using skills of empathy and talking to others

Financial: measures how much money motivates the individual. High scorers equates to money as a big motivator to work, low indicates money as a low motivator to work

Managerial: enjoys roles where they manage and direct others and feel comfortable giving people instructions

A Brief Overview of Normative Data, Validity and Reliability of the Occupational Interest Profile+

The OIP+ was designed for a broad spectrum of career guidance circumstances and standardisation sample is based on 2500+ adults in the UK, including constituent samples from: management applicants, postal survey sample, general applicants, 5th year student, and child care applicants. The generality of the norm referenced group makes it a good choice of test for every day guidance use.

Reliability for the OIP+ is reported in a number of ways, including a measure of internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) reporting coefficients above 0.79 for all dimensions in the test (Psytech International, 2014). Construct validity was also measured to assess the internal structure of the OIP+  with fairly small correlations between the person work needs subscales indicates that they are each measuring constructs independent of one another. The relationships between OIP+ and other career personality and vocational interest tests, demonstrate concurrent validity across a number of similar tests including the Rothwell-Miller interest blank (RMIB; Miller, Tyler, & Rothwell, 1994), and 16PF (Cattell, Cattell, & Cattell, 1993). Of note is the strong relationship between OIP+ vocational interests and Holland’s (1985b) vocational preference inventory (VPI) with reasonably high correlations between the VPI’s investigative scale and OIP+’s scientific scale (r = 0.7), the artistic scales in each (r = 0.76) and nurturing and social scales (r = 0.66). The above statistics provide a basis for satisfactory reliability and validity and a suitable norm reference group for Chris.

Administering the Test to Chris

Chris was asked to complete the assessment using a computerised version of the test. Despite some concerns over the use of computer-based testing, such as the risk of technical difficulty or negative candidate reactions (Bauer, Maertz, Dolen, & Campion, 1998) and the risk of cheating/collusion (Lewis & Zibarras, 2013), the fact that this was an interest test meant that computerised administration was more cost-effective and allowed the test to be administered instantly in a room where Chris could have some privacy without the feeling of being watched or thrown into an exam style assessment. In order to administer the test, I took Chris into a private study room (one computer and frosted glass) and logged into the Psytech online system. I then created a user profile using the demographic data Chris had provided on the contract and I selected the administer test option, specifically choosing the OPI+. Chris was told that the test should take no more than approximate 20–30 minutes and that he should complete the test and then return to see me. (two hours from the current time) in order to give me time to score and write the report. Chris indicated that he had done a number of ability tests in the Armed Forces and felt comfortable with the process. I then left Chris to complete the test.

Exploring New Perspectives

Results of the Occupational Interests Profile+

On completion of the test, I received an email notification to say that the data was now available for analysis. I logged into the system and analysed/interpreted the results in order to produce the final report. Chris arrived at 4 p.m. and I explained to him that the results of his tests had been analysed and we were now in a position to feedback and discuss them in context to possible career preferences. At this stage, I made Chris aware that there were no right or wrong answers on the test and that all results must be taking into consideration with other information about Chris’s life. For example, even if the psychometric test indicated that an individual had a strong preference for working as a prison officer, a criminal record would mean that this was not possible. Also, one has to consider the individual’s age, physical and mental health to ascertain whether a certain career is possible.

The starting point of feedback was to explore Chris’s personal work needs as expressed by statements of his personal qualities, split into three categories: Interpersonal style , thinking style and coping style .

Chris’s Interpersonal Style

Chris’s results indicated that he is likely to be slightly less sociable than others and although he would not actively avoid people, he is likely to prefer jobs where he can work on his own. The results also indicated that although he is slightly more reserved, he is likely to come across as warm and approachable once the ice has been broken. Chris’s interpersonal profile also indicated that he is not likely to take people at face value and tends to question things, only trusting people when they have earned it. Therefore, roles in which he is expected to trust people quickly are, less suited to him, although roles, where he is required to inspect peoples work and question their output would be more in line with his style. Chris would appear in work to be very direct, not afraid to assert himself, even if that meant upsetting someone. This trait also means that he might be prone to pushing his own agenda without due consideration of others.

Chris’s Thinking Skills

Chris’s profile indicated that he is a diligent individual who has a high level of self-control. He prefers order, following rules and procedures and is unlikely to do things impulsively. With a strong sense of duty to his role, he is likely to commit fully to finishing a task. Chris’s profile suggests that he is down to earth and has a tendency to only have concern over operational real-world issues and so would find intellectual pursuits cumbersome and is likely to show little interest in overly academic debates.

Chris’s Coping Style

Interestingly, Chris’s profile indicates that he is slightly tenser than the average person in his norm group and so he may be likely to lack poise under pressure. He may have a tendency to be less patient and will not take criticism well, even when it is intended as constructive. As a fairly average optimist, Chris is also likely to start a task in an optimistic way but knows when to cut his losses and, therefore, handle setbacks reasonably positively.

Comparison of Career Interests

Based on Chris’s profile, a list of primary occupational interest can be deduced as a basis for exploring new perspectives on the possible careers that might suit him.

Primarily, Chris’s profile indicates a strong interest in working within a managerial role or one which requires him to direct/coordinate people, projects or resources. Scoring in the 98th percentile, only 2% of the comparison norm group would have expressed a greater interest than Chris in management based careers. Of least interest to Chris was any career directly working in the creative arts/artistic sector, having rated his interest below the 1st percentile of the comparison norm group.

The second highest occupational interest for Chris was that of jobs involving nurturing for which he scored in the 62nd percentile indicating that he shows a little more interest in that area work than the norm group. Rating his preference above average in this category means that Chris would appear to enjoy work within roles where the core task involves caring for/looking after others or alternatively working in the care industry in support roles that are indirectly involved in patient/service user care.

Providing Career Information

Once the full report was explored with Chris, I asked him how he felt about the report overall, what he felt he agreed with, what he disagreed with and anything that specifically surprised him. Chris indicated that he was not surprised by the results and made reference to the fact that part of his uncertainty about his career choice was based on not being sure what type of organisation to work for. On reflection, this was an interesting statement for Chris to make which I did not pick up on at the time. Chris had spent a significant amount of time within the military organisation and expressed concern that some types of organisation may not recognise his skill. Problematically, Higate (2000, p. 99) argues that the cultural habit of the military may, in fact, lead to “ negative capital

” in context to skills and attributes that long-serving members may take from their organisation to another. Equally, Kidd (1996) points out that traditionally career counselling has focused on early career choice rather than the choice of organisation or employer and although methods for assessing organisational career systems do exist they often require the counselling to have an “insider knowledge” (p. 107).

Nevertheless, based on the information gained from the psychometric test and a brief overview of Chris’s Army career, we jointly acknowledged that management careers may be of interest to him.

Forming Strategies and Plans

The Way Forward

Taking the discussion with Chris into account along with his work personal qualities and occupational interests ascertained from the OIP+, the following points were summarised as the main points of guidance:

- Based on Chris’s personal qualities:

1. 1.

Roles that require a high level of social contact may not suit his current preference

2. 2.

Roles that require him to develop trusting relationships with people may not be suited to him

3. 3.

He may need to work on skills of tactfulness and diplomacy

4. 4.

With a lack of specialism in a technical area, or without any trade training outside of the Armed Forces, he may still be able to pursue management type roles but he may have to consider more junior roles (e.g. supervisory roles) to gain more experience

5. 5.

Jobs that are methodical appeal to him and so reviewing job specifications will help ensure roles can meet his needs

6. 6.

He may need to develop skills and strategies to deal with stress at work.

Based on his career preference:

In order to ensure Chris had realistic expectations about his career preferences, I emphasised the point that leadership and management positions need to be based on more than just interest but dependent on his other interests (such as nurturing roles) there were potentially lots of opportunities available to him to follow a career in management in a variety of sectors and that he should maybe consider looking to get qualifications in management studies and then consider careers in public or volunteer service management.

A Brief Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Career Counselling

Kidd (1996) outlines the point that, although there is significant theoretical backing for the various career counselling orientations, it is difficult empirically to assess whether the actual advice, assessment and guidance directly impacts on entry to an occupation and more importantly job satisfaction. Early attempts to judge career counselling’s utility were merely assessing predictive validity of the career counsellor’s judgement rather than directly assessing the impact of the advice given (Watts & Kidd, 1978). Yet research has demonstrated effective outcome for the clients of career counselling, which Killeen (1996) suggests can be summarised into the following categories each with a number of supporting empirical research studies.

1. 1.

Immediate outcomes, such as a change in attitude, motivation to work and the learning outcomes of self and opportunity awareness (e.g. Law & Watts, 1977)

2. 2.

Intermediate outcomes, such as better job search skills and wider explorations of opportunities (e.g. Tyers & Sinclair, 2004)

3. 3.

Ultimate outcomes at the individual level, for example, suitable career choices (e.g. Hunt & Smith, 1944; Tyers & Sinclair, 2004)

4. 4.

Ultimate outcomes at system level, for example, increased labour productivity (e.g. Watts & Sultana, 2004).

The next, and final, chapter, provides a synopsis, key themes and take-home messages from the previous chapters. It ties together the conceptual and theoretical themes in the context of very practical issues of understanding—and thereby contributing to helping—the psychological, social and occupational challenges faced by military personnel existing the Armed Forces and transitioning into civilian life.

References

Adler, A. (1927). Understanding Human Nature. New York: Greenburg.

Ali, L., & Graham, B. (1996). The Counselling Approach to Careers Guidance. London: Routledge.

Arnold, J. (1997). The Psychology of Careers in Organizations. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (pp. 1–37). Chichester: Wiley.

Barrett-Lennard, G. T. (1981). The Empathy Cycle: Refinement of a Nuclear Concept. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28, 91–100.Crossref

Bauer, T. N., Maertz, C. P., Dolen, M. R., & Campion, M. A. (1998). A Longitudinal Assessment of Applicant Reactions to an Employment Test. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 892–903.

Beck, A. T. (1976). Cognitive Therapy and the Emotional Disorders. New York: International Universities Press.

Bozarth, J. D., & Fisher, R. (1990). Person-Centered Career Counseling. In B. Walsh & S. H. Osipow (Eds.), Career Counseling: Contemporary Topics in Vocational Psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

British Association for Counselling (BAC). (1984). Code of Ethics and Practice for Counsellors. Rugby: BAC.

Brown, D. (1990). Summary, Comparison & Critique of the Major Theories. In D. Brown, L. Brooks, & Associates (Eds.), Career Choice & Development (pp. 338–363). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Cattell, R. B., Cattell, A. K., & Cattell, H. E. P. (1993). 16PF Fifth Edition Questionnaire. Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.

Dryden, W., & Feltham, C. (1993). Brief Counselling: A Practical Guide for Beginning Practitioners. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

Egan, G. (1990). The Skilled Helper (4th ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Ellis, A. (1957). Rational Psychotherapy and Individual Psychology. Journal of Individual Psychology, 13, 38–44.

Fielding, A., & Vautier, E. (1994). Guidance Explored: An Integrated Approach to Guidance Interventions. Swanley, Kent: The College of Guidance Studies.

Gothard, B., Mignot, P., Offer, M., & Ruff, M. (2001). Careers Guidance in Context. London: Sage.

Higate, P. (2000). Tough Bodies and Rough Sleeping: Embodying Homelessness Amongst Ex-servicemen. Housing Theory and Society, 17, 97–108.Crossref

Holland, J. L. (1973). Making Vocational Choices: A Theory of Careers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Holland, J. L. (1985a). Making Vocational Choices: A Theory of Vocational Personalities and Work Environments. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Holland, J. L. (1985b). Vocational Preference Inventory (VPI) Manual 1985 Edition. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources Inc.

Hunt, E. P., & Smith, P. (1944). Scientific Vocational Guidance and its Value to the Choice of Employment Work of a Local Education Authority. Birmingham: City of Birmingham Education Committee.

Kidd, J. M. (1996). The Career Counselling Interview. In A. G. Watts, B. Law, J. Killeen, J. M. Kidd, & R. Hawthorn (Eds.), Rethinking Careers Education and Guidance: Theory, Policy and Practice (pp. 189–209). London: Routledge.

Kidd, J. M. (2003). Career Development Work with Individuals. In R. Woolfe & W. Dryden (Eds.), Handbook of Counselling Psychology (pp. 461–480). London: Sage.

Kidd, J. M. (2006). Understanding Career Counselling: Theory, Research and Practice. London: Sage.

Kidd, J. M. (2007). Career Counselling. In H. Gunz & M. Peiperl (Eds.), Handbook of Career Studies (pp. 97–113). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Killeen, J. (1996). Career Theory. In A. G. Watts, B. Law, J. Kileen, J. M. Kidd, & R. Hawthorn (Eds.), Rethinking Careers Education and Guidance: Theory, Policy and Practice. London: Routledge.

Krumboltz, J. D. (1991). Career Beliefs Inventory. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Krumboltz, J. D., & Nichols, C. W. (1990). Integrating the Social Learning Theory of Career Decision Making. In W. B. Walsh & S. H. Osipow (Eds.), Career Counseling: Contemporary Topics in Vocational Psychology (pp. 159–192). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Law, B., & Watts, A. G. (1977). Schools, Careers and Community. London: Church Information Office.

Lewis, R., & Zibarras, L. (Eds.). (2013). Work and Occupational Psychology: Integrating Theory and Practice. London, UK: Sage.

Lutz, R. (2007). Disconnect Between Employers and Transitioning Military Personnel. Military.com. Retrieved December 14, 2014 from http://www.military.com/aboutus/twocolumn/0,15929,PRarticle110507,00.html.

McLeod, J. (2003). An Introduction to Counselling (3rd ed.). Buckingham: Open University Press.

Mearns, D., & Thorne, B. (1988). Person-Centred Counselling in Action. London: Sage.

Miller, K. M., Tyler, B., & Rothwell, J. W. (1994). Rothwell-Miller Interest Blank Manual (Revised Australian Edition). London: Miller & Tyler.

Millward, L. (2005). Understanding Occupational and Organisational Psychology. London: Sage.

Myers, I., & Briggs, K. (1993). The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Nelson-Jones, B. (2003). Lifeskills Helping: Helping Others Through a Systematic People-centred Approach. London: Brooks-Cole.

Osipow, S. H., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1996). Theories of Career Development (4th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Patterson, C. H. (1964). Counseling: Self Clarification and the Helping Relationship. In H. Borow (Ed.), Man in a World at Work. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Peavy, R. V. (1997). A Constructive Framework for Career Counselling. In T. Sexton & B. Griffin (Eds.), Constructivist Thinking in Counselling Practice, Research and Training (pp. 122–141). New York: Teachers College.

Psytech International. (2014). Technical Manual for the Occupational Preference Inventory. London: Psychtech International. Retrieved from http://www.psytech.com/Content/TechnicalManuals/EN/OIPplusMan.pdf. Accessed December 8, 2014.

Rodger, A. (1952). The Seven Point Plan. London: NIIP.

Rogers, C. (1951). Client-centered Therapy: Its Current Practice, Implications and Theory. London: Constable.

Rogers, C. (1957). The Necessary and Sufficient of Therapeutic Personality Change. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 21, 95–103.Crossref

Schmidt, J. (2003). Counseling in Schools: Essential Services and Comprehensive Programs (4th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Sharf, R. S. (1997). Applying Career Development Theory to Counseling. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Super, D. E. (1977). Vocational Maturity in Mid-careers. The Vocational Guidance Quarterly, 6, 294–302.Crossref

Tyers, C., & Sinclair, A. (2004). Intermediate Impacts of Advice and Guidance. Department for Education and Skills, Research Report RR638. Retrieved from http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130401151715/ and http://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/RR638.pdf. Accessed February 16, 2015.

Watts, A. G., & Kidd, J. M. (1978). Evaluating the Effectiveness of Careers Guidance: A Review of the British Research. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 51, 235–248.

Watts, A. G., & Sultana, R. G. (2004). Career Guidance Policies in 37 Countries: Contrasts and Common Themes. International Journal for Educational and Vocational Guidance, 4, 105–122.

Wolpe, J. (1958). Psychotherapy by Reciprocal Inhibition. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

© The Author(s) 2019

K. M. Wilson-Smith, P. J. CorrMilitary Identity and the Transition into Civilian Lifehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12338-3_8

8. Conclusion

Kevin M. Wilson-Smith[1] and Philip J. Corr[2]

(1) School of Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glascow, UK

(2) Department of Psychology, City University London, London, UK

Kevin M. Wilson-Smith Email: kevin.wilson-smith@glasgow.ac.uk

Abstract

The final chapter provides a concluding synopsis of each of the preceding chapters and summarises key messages that emerge from an interpretation of the stories provided by John, Jack and Ollie, and the career counselling of Chris. It outlines some of the current changes occurring to the armed forces under the remit of “RESERVE 2020” and concludes that future reductions in full-time military personnel are going to lead to a torrent of identity transitions, with all the resultant problems we have uncovered in this book. The final section summaries the authors’ belief that overarching transition models are not suitable for understanding the complexity of an individual soldier’s military exit—given the individualised nature of each lived experience of exit, the starting point of any effective support should be an in-depth idiographic interview to find out what the soldier needs, rather than telling them what we, the civilian world, think they need. Only then, supported positive change will be realised.

Keywords

Reserve 2020TransitionLived experienceOrganisational supportMODReadjustment

Consideration of the literature and case studies outlined in this book reveals the lived reality and the perception of identity, in the context of experiencing the shift between military and civilian roles, is both complex and multifaceted, for the individual who tries to make sense of it directly and for their family, friends and co-workers who do not have first-hand experience of this transition. The research shows that there are individuals who occupy spaces between theoretical models; and, more specifically, the case studies highlight that we should not see overarching categories of military exit (e.g. medical discharge, retirement etc.) as a single homogenous group—Jack testifies to the fact that, even within the medically discharged group, identity is altered depending on whether that identity is associated with combat vs non-combat injury.

The number of military-to-civilian transitions is likely to increase over the coming years especially given the changes to the Armed Forces, outlined in the Ministry of Defences “Reserve 2020” strategy. The document summarised four main concerns exist: (1) Reserve forces are in decline; (2) there has been a lack of modernisation of the Reserve forces; (3) not exploiting the potential of Reserve forces; and (4) Reserves are not being used effectively.

On the basis of these concerns, Reserve 2020 recommends the following actions be taken between 2011 and 2020:

1. 1.

Stabilisation and betterment of provision for Reservists

2. 2.

Revising the roles that Reserves do

3. 3.

Enablement (e.g. a Reserve service which is responsive and ready to act)

4. 4.

Adjusting the Regular: Reserve Balance

5. 5.

Force generation (increasing ratio between Reserve and Regular service deployment)

6. 6.

Governance.

Of all the changes outlined, there has been significant media coverage over the decision to adjust the Regular: Reserve balance, with a significant drop in Regular forces from 102,000 to 82,000 and an increase in Reserves from 20,000 to 30,000 (Wyatt, 2013). This is congruent with other uniformed public services, such as the Scottish police service, which has reduced full-time staff numbers by centralising resources and systems (Carrel, 2014).

The nature of these changes will see a significant number of individuals in the UK experiencing a period of readjustment and transition in work identity, either through redundancy, redeployment or by enlistment into the world of part-time uniformed public service. Occupational and organisational psychologists are able to support this period of industrial change in the United Kingdom via research, training and interventional support. The need for the role of psychologists in supporting the occupational health of employees in Reserve service is evident from a variety of studies which demonstrate that readjustment between roles is a challenge, with accounts describing concerns over the barriers involved in the transition from uniformed service back to civilian job roles (Block, 2003; Davenport, 2004). Research equally demonstrates a positive correlation between organisational support and work readjustment for individuals in these circumstances (Aryee & Stone, 1996); thus, occupational and organisational psychologists have a role to play in the empowerment of organisations to support its staff through the use of research, training and interventional support.

A final word, this book captures merely a snapshot of the experiences that John, Jack and Ollie had in their military careers, and the resulting impact on their identity. These case studies do not aim to generalise to the wider population; in fact, quite the opposite: they allow us to peer into the world of their experiences and perceptions and, then, affording us the opportunity to reflect on the social psychological impact each transition has on the individual’s identity and the infinite complexities and needs that can be unique to the individual based on even the slightest difference in military service.

A concluding point, we believe that overarching transition models are not suitable for understanding the complexity of an individual soldier’s military exit, and given the individualised nature of each lived experience of exit, the starting point for any effective support should be an in-depth idiographic interview to find out what the soldier needs—from their own unique perspective point—rather than telling them what we, the civilian world, think they need. They deserve, at the very least, this modicum of respect.

References

1. Aryee, S., & Stone, R. J. (1996). Work Experiences, Work Adjustment and Psychological Well-Being of Expatriate Employees in Hong Kong. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 7, 150–164.Crossref

2. Block, S. (2003). Reservists Pay Steep Price for Service, Many Citizen Soldiers in Iraq Face a Struggle to Rebuild Their Professional and Personal Lives When the Return to USA. USA Today. Retrieved from https://eu.usatoday.com/. Accessed September 2017.

3. Carrel, S. (2014). Scotland’s New Unified Police Force Replaces Eight Regional Constabularies. The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/apr/01/police-scotland-stephen-house-chief-constable. Accessed February 14, 2015.

4. Davenport, C. (2004). Troops Return, Elated But Changed. Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.highbeam.com/publications/the-washington-post-p5554/jan-4-2004. Accessed September 2017.

5. Wyatt, C. (2013). Army Reservists to Receive More Benefits. BBC News. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23155942. Accessed February 14, 2015.

© The Author(s) 2019

K. M. Wilson-Smith, P. J. CorrMilitary Identity and the Transition into Civilian Lifehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12338-3_9

Correction

Correction to: Military Identity and the Transition into Civilian Life

Kevin M Wilson-Smith[1] and Philip J Corr[2]

(1) School of Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK

(2) Department of Psychology, City University London, London, UK

Kevin M Wilson-Smith (Corresponding author) Email: kevin.wilson-smith@glasgow.ac.uk

Philip J Corr Email: philip.corr.1@city.ac.uk

The updated version of the book can be found at https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12338-3

Correction to: K. M. Wilson-Smith and P. J. Corr, Military Identity and the Transition into Civilian Life, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12338-3

The original version of the book was inadvertently published without incorporating some of the corrections provided by the co-author, which have been now incorporated.

This correction to book has been updated with the changes.

References

Adler, A. (1927). Understanding Human Nature . New York: Greenburg.

Ali, L., & Graham, B. (1996). The Counselling Approach to Careers Guidance . London: Routledge.

Amundson, N. E., & Borgen, W. A. (1982). The Dynamics of Unemployment: Job Loss and Job Search. The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 60 , 562–564.

Anderson, K. (1992). Effects of Military Experience on Mental Health Problems and Work Behaviour. Medical Care, 30, 554–563. PubMedPubMedCentral

Angrist, J., & Krueger, A. (1990). Lifetime Earnings and the Vietnam Era Draft Lottery: Evidence from Social Security Administrative Records. American Economic Review, 80, 313–316.

APA. (2014). The Mental Health Needs of Veterans, Service Members and Their Families. American Psychological Association .

Arnold, J. (1997). The Psychology of Careers in Organizations. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (pp. 1–37). Chichester: Wiley.

Aryee, S., & Stone, R. J. (1996). Work Experiences, Work Adjustment and Psychological WellBeing of Expatriate Employees in Hong Kong. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 7 , 150–164.

Barrett-Lennard, G. T. (1981). The Empathy Cycle: Refinement of a Nuclear Concept. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28, 91–100.

Baruch, Y., & Quick, J. C. (2007). Understanding Second Careers: Lessons from a Study of U.S. Navy Admirals. Human Resource Management, 46, 471–491. Crossref

Baruch, Y., & Quick, J. C. (2009). Setting Sail in a New Direction: Career Transitions of US Navy Admirals to the Civilian Sector. Personnel Review, 38, 270–285. Crossref

Bauer, T. N., Maertz, C. P., Dolen, M. R., & Campion, M. A. (1998). A Longitudinal Assessment of Applicant Reactions to an Employment Test. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83 , 892–903.

Beart, S., Hardy, G., & Buchan, L. (2005). How People with Intellectual Disabilities View Their Social Identity: A Review of the Literature. Journal of
Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 18, 47–56.

Bellino, R. (1970). Perspectives of Military and Civilian Retirement. Mental Hygiene, 54 , 580–583.

Bellwood, M., & Busuttil, W. (2009). Exit Satisfaction Surveys & Warwick Edinburgh Mental Well Being Scale (WEMWBS) Outcome Study (Parts 1 & 2) . Internal Publication. Leatherhead, Surrey: Combat Stress.

Ben-Ari, E. (1989). Masks and Soldiering: The Israeli Army and the Palestinian Uprising. Cultural Anthropology, 4, 372–389.

Blau, Z. (1972). Role Exit and Identity . Paper Presented at the American Sociological Association Meetings, New Orleans. Cited in Ebaugh, H. R. (1988). Becoming an Ex: The Process of Role Exit. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Block, S. (2003). Reservists Pay Steep Price for Service, Many Citizen Soldiers in Iraq Face a Struggle to Rebuild Their Professional and Personal Lives When the Return to USA. USA Today . Retrieved from https://eu.usatoday.com/ . Accessed September 2017.

Borus, J. F. (1975). The Reentry Transition of the Vietnam Veteran. Armed Forces and Society, 2, 97–114.

Bouffard, L. (2003). Examining the Relationship Between Military Service and Criminal Behaviour During the Vietnam Era. Criminology, 41 , 491–510.

Bouffard, L. (2005). The Military as a Bridging Environment in Criminal Careers: Differential Outcomes of the Military Experience. Armed Forces and Society, 41, 491–510.

Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J.-C. (1977). Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture . London, UK: Sage.

Bozarth, J. D., & Fisher, R. (1990). Person-Centered Career Counseling. In B. Walsh & S. H. Osipow (Eds.), Career Counseling: Contemporary Topics in Vocational Psychology . Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

British Association for Counselling (BAC). (1984). Code of Ethics and Practice for Counsellors . Rugby: BAC.

Brown, D. (1990). Summary, Comparison & Critique of the Major Theories. In D. Brown, L. Brooks, & Associates (Eds.), Career Choice & Development (pp. 338–363). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Browne, T., Hull, L., & Horn, O. (2007). Explanations for the Increase in Mental Health Problems in UK Reserve Forces Who Have Served in Iraq. British Journal of Psychiatry, 190, 484–489.

Brownlee, R. L., & Mullen, W. J. (1980). Changing an Army . Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

Burke, P. J. (1991). Identity Processes and Social Stress. American Sociological Review, 56 , 836–849.

Burke, P. J., & Reitzes, D. C. (1981). The Link Between Identity and Role Performance. Social Psychology Quarterly, 44, 83–92.

Callero, P. L. (1985). Role Identity Salience. Social Psychology Quarterly, 48 , 203–215.

Callero, P. L. (1995). Role as Resource in a Prison Uprising. In B. Markovsky, K. Heimer, & J. O’Brien (Eds.), Advances in Group Processes (pp. 221–247). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Carless, D., & Douglas, K. (2008). Narrative, Identity and Mental Health: How Men with
Serious Mental Illness Re-story Their Lives Through Sport and Exercise. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 9 , 576–594.

Carrel, S. (2014). Scotland’s New Unified Police Force Replaces Eight Regional Constabularies. The Guardian . Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/apr/01/police-scotland-stephen-house-chief-constable . Accessed February 14, 2015.

Castro, C., Kintzle, S., & Hassan, A. (2014). The State of the American Veteran . Retrieved from http://cir.usc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/USC010_CIRLAVetReport_FPpgs.pdf .

Cattell, R. B., Cattell, A. K., & Cattell, H. E. P. (1993). 16PF Fifth Edition Questionnaire . Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.

Charmaz, K. (1983). Loss of Self: A Fundamental Form of Suffering in the Chronically Ill. Sociology of Health and Illness, 5 , 168–195. PubMed

Cooper, L., Caddick, N., Godier, L., Cooper, A., & Fossey, M. (2016). Transition from the Military into Civilian Life: An Exploration of Cultural Competence. Armed Forces & Society, 44, 1–22.

Crane, M. (1997). Older People’s Experiences in the Armed Forces and the Merchant Navy . [Report] For the Sir Oswald Stoll Foundation.

Cronin, C. (1995). Adolescent Reports of Parental Spousal Violence in Military and Civilian Families. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 10 , 117–122.

Dandeker, C., Wessely, S., Iversen, A., & Ross, J. (2003). Improving the Delivery of Cross Departmental Support and Services for Veterans (Joint Report). London: Department of War Studies and Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College.

Davenport, C. (2004). Troops Return, Elated But Changed. Washington Post . Retrieved from http://www.highbeam.com/publications/the-washington-post-p5554/jan-4-2004 . Accessed September 2017.

Deaux, K., Reid, A., Mizrahi, K., & Ethier, K. (1995). Parameters of Social Identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 280–291.

DiRamio, D., Ackerman, R., & Mitchell, R. L. (2008). From Combat to Campus: Voices of Student-Veterans. NASPA Journal , 45 , 73–102.

Druss, R. G. (1965). Problems Associated with Retirement from Military Service. Military Medicine , 130 , 382–385.

Dryden, W., & Feltham, C. (1993). Brief Counselling: A Practical Guide for Beginning Practitioners . Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

Dunning, B. B., & Biderman, A. D. (1973). The Case of Military Retirement. Journal of Industrial Gerontology, 7, 18–37.

Ebaugh, H. R. (1988). Becoming an Ex: The Process of Role Exit . Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Egan, G. (1990). The Skilled Helper (4th ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Elliott, M. (2014). Predicting Problems on Campus: An Analysis of College Student Veterans. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 15 , 105–126.

Elliott, M., Gonzalez, C., & Larsen, B. (2011). U.S. Military Veterans Transition to College: Combat, PTSD, and Alienation on Campus. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 48, 279–296.

Ellis, A. (1957). Rational Psychotherapy and Individual Psychology. Journal of Individual Psychology, 13 , 38–44.

Fear, N. T., Van Staden, L., Iversen, A. C., French, C. E., Dandeker, C., & Wessely, S. (2007). Transition Back into Civilian Life: A Study of Personnel Leaving the U.K. Armed Forces Via ‘Military Prison’. Military Medicine, 172 , 925–930.

Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance . Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Festinger, L., Pepitone, A., & Newcomb, T. (1952). Some Consequences of Deindividuation in a Group. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47, 382–389.

Fielding, A., & Vautier, E. (1994). Guidance Explored: An Integrated Approach to Guidance Interventions . Swanley, Kent: The College of Guidance Studies.

Fitzpatrick, S., Kemp, P., & Klinker, S. (2000). Single Homelessness: An Overview of Research in Britain . Bristol: The Policy Press.

Gamache, G., Rosenheck, R., & Tessler, R. (2001). The Proportion of Veterans Among Homeless Men: A Decade Later. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 36, 481–485.

Gelech, J. M., & Desjardins, M. (2011). I Am Many: The Reconstruction of Self Following Acquired Brain Injury. Qualitative Health Research, 21 , 62–74.

Gleason, P. (1983). Identifying Identity: A Semantic History. Journal of American History, 6, 910–931.

Goffman, E. (1961). Asylums: Essays on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other Inmates . New York: Doubleday Anchor.

Gothard, B., Mignot, P., Offer, M., & Ruff, M. (2001). Careers Guidance in Context . London: Sage.

Grieve, P. G., & Hogg, M. A. (1999). Subjective Uncertainty and Intergroup Discrimination in the Minimal Group Situation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25 , 926–940.

Griffith, J. (2008). Institutional Motives for Serving in the U.S. Army National Guard: Implications for Recruitment, Retention, and Readiness. Armed Forces and Society, 34 , 230–258.

Griffith, J. (2009). Being a Reserve Soldier: A Matter of Social Identity. Armed Forces and Society, 36 , 38–64.

Griffith, J. (2010). Decades of Transition for the US Reserves: Changing Demands on Reserve Identity and Mental WellBeing. International Review of Psychiatry, 72 , 1–11.

Griffith, J. (2011). Contradictory and Complementary Identities of U.S. Army Reservists: A Historical Perspective. Armed Forces and Society, 37 , 261–283.

Haslam, N., & Loughnan, S. (2014). Dehumanization and
Infrahumanization. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 399–423. PubMedPubMedCentral

Haslam, S. A. (2001). Psychology in Organizations: The Social Identity Approach . London: Sage.

Haynie, J. M., & Shepherd, D. (2011). Toward a Theory of Discontinuous Career Transition: Investigating Career Transitions Necessitated by Traumatic Life Events. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96 , 501–524.

Hefferon, K., & Gil-Rodrigues, E. (2011). Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. The Psychologist, 24 , 756–759.

Higate, P. (2000). Tough Bodies and Rough Sleeping: Embodying Homelessness Amongst Ex-servicemen. Housing Theory and Society, 17, 97–108.

Higate, P. (2001). Theorizing Continuity: From Military to Civilian Life. Armed Forces & Society, 27 , 443–460.

Hoelter, J. W. (1983). The Effects of Role Evaluation and Commitment on Identity Salience. Social Psychology Journal, 46, 140–147.

Hoge, C. W., Auchterlonie, J. L., & Milliken, C. S. (2006). Mental Health Problems, Use of Mental Health Services, and Attrition from Military Service After Returning from Deployment to Iraq or Afghanistan. Journal of the American Medical Association, 295, 1023–1032. PubMedPubMedCentral

Hoge, C. W., Castro, C. A., Messer, S. C., McGurk, D., Cotting, D. I., & Koffman, R. L. (2004). Combat Duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, Mental Health Problems, and Barriers to Care. New England Journal of Medicine, 351, 13–22.

Hoge, C. W., Lesikar, S. E., Guevara, R., Lange, J., Brundage, J. F., Engel, C. C., …, Orman, D. T. (2002). Mental Disorders Among U.S. Military Personnel in the 1990s: Association with High Levels of Health Care Utilization and Early Military Attrition. American Journal of Psychiatry, 159 , 1576–1583.

Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (1993). Towards a Single-Process Uncertainty-Reduction Model of Social Motivation in Groups. In M. A. Hogg & D. Abrams (Eds.), Group Motivation: Social Psychological Perspectives (pp. 173–190). London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

Hogg, M. A., & Hains, S. C. (1996). Intergroup Relations and Group Solidarity: Effects of Group Identification and Social Beliefs on Depersonalized Attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 295–309.

Hogg, M. A., & Mullin, B. A. (1999). Joining Groups to Reduce Uncertainty: Subjective Uncertainty Reduction and Group Identification. In D. Abrams & M. A. Hogg (Eds.), Social Identity and Social Cognition (pp. 249–279). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Hogg, M. A., & Reid, A. (2006). Social Identity, Self-Categorization, and Group Norms. Communication Theory, 16 , 7–30.

Hogg, M. A., & Terry, D. J. (2000). Social Identity and Self-Categorization Processes in Organizational Contexts. Academy of Management Review,
25 , 121–140.

Hogg, M. A., Terry, D. J., & White, M. J. (1995). A Tale of Two Theories: Critical Comparisons of Identity Theory and Social Identity Theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 58, 255–269.

Hogg, M. A., & Turner, J. C. (1985). Interpersonal Attraction, Social Identification and Psychological Group Formation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 15, 51–66.

Hogg, M. A., & Vaughan, G. M. (2002). Social Psychology (3rd ed.). London: Prentice Hall.

Holland, J. L. (1973). Making Vocational Choices: A Theory of Careers . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Holland, J. L. (1985a). Making Vocational Choices: A Theory of Vocational Personalities and Work Environments . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Holland, J. L. (1985b). Vocational Preference Inventory (VPI) Manual 1985 Edition . Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources Inc.

Hooper, N., & Stephens, B. (1996). The Transition from Service to Civilian Employment . York: Centre for Defence Employment.

Hoover, E. C., Randolph, J. S., Elig, T. W., & Klein, P. M. (2001). Overview of the 2000 Military Exit Survey . Arlington, TX, USA: Defence Manpower Data Centre. Retrieved January 2, 2015 from. http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA40068 .

Houghton, N. (2011). Future Reserves 2020 . Ministry of Defence. Retrieved January 1, 2015 from http://www.army.mod.uk/documents/general/88_FutureReserves_2020_(1).pdf .

Howard, J. A. (2000). Social Psychology of Identity. Annual Review of Sociology, 26 , 367–393.

Hubbard, G., Kidd, L., & Kearney, N. (2010). Disrupted Lives and Threats to Identity: The Experiences of People with Colorectal Cancer within the First Year Following Diagnosis. Health, 14 , 131–146.

Huddy, L. (2001). From Social to Political Identity: A Critical Examination of Social Identity Theory. Political Psychology, 22, 127–156.

Hughes, N., Closs, S. J., & Clark, D. (2009). Experiencing Cancer in Old Age: A Qualitative Systematic Review. Qualitative Health Research, 19 , 1139–1153.

Hunt, E. P., & Smith, P. (1944). Scientific Vocational Guidance and its Value to the Choice of Employment Work of a Local Education Authority . Birmingham: City of Birmingham Education Committee.

Hurst, J. B., & Sheppard, J. W. (1986). The Dynamics of Plant Closings: An Extended Emotional Roller Coaster Ride. Journal of Counseling and Development, 64, 401–405.

Irvine, H., Davidson, C., Hoy, K., & Lowe-Strong, A. (2009). Psychosocial Adjustment to Multiple Sclerosis: Exploration of Identity Redefinition. Disability and Rehabilitation, 31, 599–606.

Ismail, K., Kent, K., & Brugha, T. (2002). The Mental Health of UK Gulf War Veterans: Phase 2 of a Two Phase Cohort Study. British Medical Journal, 325, 576. PubMed

Iversen, A., & Greenberg, N. (2009). Mental Health of Regular and Reserve Military
Veterans. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, 15, 100–106.

Iversen, A., Dyson, C., & Smith, N. (2005). ‘Goodbye and Good Luck’: The Mental Health Needs and Treatment Experiences of British Ex-service Personnel. British Journal of Psychiatry, 186, 480–486.

Johnson, S., Jones, A., & Rugg, J. (2008). The Experience of Ex-service Homeless Personnel in London . York: Centre for Housing Policy, University of York.

Jolly, R. (1996). Changing Step: From Military to Civilian Life: People in Transition . London: Brassey’s.

Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1966). The Social Psychology of Organizations . New York: Wiley.

Kidd, J. M. (1996). The Career Counselling Interview. In A. G. Watts, B. Law, J. Killeen, J. M. Kidd, & R. Hawthorn (Eds.), Rethinking Careers Education and Guidance: Theory, Policy and Practice. (pp. 189–209). London: Routledge.

Kidd, J. M. (2003). Career Development Work with Individuals. In R. Woolfe & W. Dryden (Eds.), Handbook of Counselling Psychology (pp. 461–480). London: Sage.

Kidd, J. M. (2006). Understanding Career Counselling: Theory, Research and Practice . London: Sage.

Kidd, J. M. (2007). Career Counselling. In H. Gunz & M. Peiperl (Eds.), Handbook of Career Studies (pp. 97–113). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Killeen, J. (1996). Career Theory. In A. G. Watts, B. Law, J. Kileen, J. M. Kidd, & R. Hawthorn (Eds.), Rethinking Careers Education and Guidance: Theory, Policy and Practice . London: Routledge.

Kirtley, J. (2010). Making a Soldier Out of a Civilian: Linguistic Identity in the U.S. Military. In Selected Papers from the Fourteenth College-Wide Conference for Students in Languages, Linguistics, and Literature , pp. 74–80.

Kornhauser, W. (1962). Social Bases of Political Commitment. In A. M. Rose (Ed.), Human Behaviour and Social Processes (pp. 321–329). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Krumboltz, J. D. (1991). Career Beliefs Inventory . Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Krumboltz, J. D., & Nichols, C. W. (1990). Integrating the Social Learning Theory of Career Decision Making. In W. B. Walsh & S. H. Osipow (Eds.), Career Counseling: Contemporary Topics in Vocational Psychology (pp. 159–192). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Kulka, R., & Schlenger, W. (1990). Trauma and the Vietnam War Generation: Report of Findings from the National Vietnam Veterans Readjustment Study . London: Routledge.

Kulka, R. A., Schlenger, W. E., Fairbank, J. A., Hough, R. L., Jordan, B. K., Marmar, C. R., and Weiss, D. S. (1990). Trauma and the Vietnam Generation: Report of Findings from the National Vietnam Veterans Readjustment Study . New York: Brunner/Mazel.

Law, B., & Watts, A. G. (1977). Schools, Careers and Community . London: Church Information Office.

Lewis, R., & Zibarras, L. (Eds.). (2013). Work and Occupational Psychology: Integrating Theory and Practice . London, UK: Sage.

Life After Service Survey Veterans Affairs Canada. (2016). Retrieved from http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/aboutus/research-directorate/publications/reports/lass-2016 .

Loh, S. H. (1994). Resettlement and Training Factors Affecting Employment of Ex-servicemen in the Malaysian Army—A Case Study (M.Ed thesis). University of Canberra, Australia.

Lomski-Feder, E., Gazit, N., & Ben-Ari, E. (2008). Reserve Soldiers as Transmigrants: Moving Between the Civilian and Military Worlds. Armed Forces and Society, 34, 593–614.

Long, K. M., & Spears, R. (1997). The Self-Esteem Hypothesis Revisited: Differentiation and the Disaffected. In R. Spears, P. J. Oakes, N. Ellemers, & S. A. Haslam (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Stereotyping and Group Life (pp. 296–317). Oxford: Blackwell.

Lutz, R. (2007). Disconnect Between Employers and Transitioning Military Personnel. Military.com . Retrieved December 14, 2014 from http://www.military.com/aboutus/twocolumn/0,15929,PRarticle110507,00.html .

Mares, A. S., & Rosenheck, R. A. (2004). Perceived Relationship Between Military Service and Homelessness Among Homeless Veterans with Mental Illness. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 192, 715–719.

McCall, G. J., & Simmons, J. L. (1978). Identities and Interactions . New York: The Free Press.

McLeod, J. (2003). An Introduction to Counselling (3rd ed.). Buckingham: Open University Press.

McNeil, J. S., & Giffen, M. B. (1967). Military Retirement: The Retirement Syndrome. American Journal of Psychiatry, 123 , 848–854.

McNeil, J. S., Lecca, P. J., & Wright, R. (1983). Military Retirement: Social, Economic, and Mental Health Dilemmas . Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Allanheld.

McNutt, J. (2005). Work Adjustment of Returning Military Reservists: The Effect of Deployment and Organizational Support . Ann Arbor, MI: UMI.

Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, Self, and Society . Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Mearns, D., & Thorne, B. (1988). Person-Centred Counselling in Action . London: Sage.

Miller, K. M., Tyler, B., & Rothwell, J. W. (1994). Rothwell-Miller Interest Blank Manual (Revised Australian Edition). London: Miller & Tyler.

Millward, L. (2005). Understanding Occupational and Organisational Psychology . London: Sage.

Milroy, W. H. (2001). Pathways to the Streets for Ex-Service Personnel: An Examination of Various Routes to Homelessness for Ex-Service Personnel (Unpublished PhD thesis) Norwich: University of East Anglia.

Ministry of Defence. (2014). Defence Statistics: UK Armed Forces Quarterly Personnel Report . Retrieved February 11, 2015 from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/284506/UK-af-personnel-quarterly-1-january-2014.pdf .

Morse, J. M. (1995). The Significance of Saturation. Qualitative Health Research, 5 , 147–149.

Mumola, C. J. (2000). Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report: Veterans in Prison or Jail (Publication # NCJ 178888). U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.

Mutran, E., & Burke, P. J. (1979). Feeling ‘Useless’: A Common Component of Young and Old Adult Identities. Research on Aging, 1, 188–212.

Myers, I., & Briggs, K. (1993). The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator . Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Naphan, D., & Elliot, M. (2015). Role Exit from the Military: Student Veterans’ Perceptions of Transitioning from the U.S. Military to Higher Education. The Qualitative Report 2015, 20 , 36–48.

National Center for Post-traumatic Stress Disorder. (2004). Treating the Traumatized Amputee. In P. Schnurr & COL S. Cozza (Eds.), Iraq War Clinician Guide (pp. 50–54). Washington: US Department of Veterans Affairs.

Nelson-Jones, B. (2003). Lifeskills Helping: Helping Others Through a Systematic People-centred Approach . London: Brooks-Cole.

Nuttbrock, L., & Freudiger, P. (1991). Identity Salience and Motherhood: A Test of Stryker’s Theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 54, 146–157.

Osipow, S. H., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1996). Theories of Career Development (4th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Patterson, C. H. (1964). Counseling: Self Clarification and the Helping Relationship. In H. Borow (Ed.), Man in a World at Work . Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Pawson, H., & Davidson, E. (2006). Fit for purpose? Official Measures on Homelessness in the Era of the Activist State. Radical Statistics, 93, 7–29.

Peavy, R. V. (1997). A Constructive Framework for Career Counselling. In T. Sexton & B. Griffin (Eds.), Constructivist Thinking in Counselling Practice, Research and Training (pp. 122–141). New York: Teachers College.

Prentice, D. (2006). On the Distinction Between Acting Like an Individual Versus Feeling Like an Individual. In T. Postmes & J. Jetten (Eds.), Individuality and the Group: Advances in Social Identity (pp. 37–55). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Psytech International. (2014). Technical Manual for the Occupational Preference Inventory . London: Psychtech International. Retrieved from http://www.psytech.com/Content/TechnicalManuals/EN/OIPplusMan.pdf . Accessed December 8, 2014.

Randall, G., & Brown, S. (1994). Falling Out: A Research Study of Homeless Ex-service People . London: Crisis.

Reid, S. A., & Hogg, M. A. (2005). A Self-Categorization Explanation of the Third-Person Effect. Human Communication Research , 31 , 129–161.

Ricoeur, P. (1970). Freud and Philosophy: An Essay in Interpretation . New Haven: Yale University Press.

Regan, S., Mason, L., Bryant, L., & Harrison, E. (1995). Career Change, Job Search and Family: Naval Leavers in Plymouth (Unpublished Report to the Royal Navy). Department of Sociology, University of Plymouth.

Remploy. (2014). Armed Forces and Veterans Services: Supporting Serving and Ex-service Personnel to Achieve Sustainable Civilian Careers. Remploy . Retrieved on March 13, 2017 from https://www.remploy.co.uk/files/veterans-brochure.pdf .

Riddle, J. R., Smith, T. C., Smith, B., Corbeil, T. E., Engel, C. C., Wells, T. S., …, Blazer, D. (2007). Millennium Cohort: The 2001–2003 Baseline Prevalence of Mental Disorders in the U.S. Military. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60, 192–201.

Robins, L. N., Davis, D. H., & Goodwin, D. W. (1974). Drug Use by U.S. Army Enlisted Men in Vietnam: A Follow-Up on Their Return Home. American Journal of Epidemiology., 99, 235–249. PubMed

Robins, L. N., Helzer, J. E., & Davis, D. H. (1975). Narcotic Use in Southeast Asia and
Afterward: An Interview Study of 898 Vietnam Veterans. Archives of General Psychiatry, 32, 955–961.

Rodger, A. (1952). The Seven Point Plan . London: NIIP.

Rogers, C. (1951). Client-centered Therapy: Its Current Practice, Implications and Theory . London: Constable.

Rogers, C. (1957). The Necessary and Sufficient of Therapeutic Personality Change. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 21, 95–103.

Rosenheck, R. A., & Koegel, P. (1993). Characteristics of Veterans and Nonveterans in Three Samples of Homeless Men. Hospital and Community Psychiatry, 44, 858–863. PubMed

Sampson, R., & Laub, J. (1996). Socioeconomic Achievement in the Life Course of Disadvantaged Men: Military Service as a Turning Point, Circa 1940–1965. American Sociological Review, 61, 347–367.

Sarup, M. (1994). Home and Identity. In G. Robertson, M. Mash, L. Tickner, J. Bird, B. Curtis, & T. Putnam (Eds.), Traveller’s Tales: Narratives of Home and Displacement (pp. 89–101). London: Routledge.

Sayer, N. A., Nooraloochi, S., Frazier, P., Carlson, K., Gravely, A., & Murdoch, M. (2010). Reintegration Problems and Treatment Interests Among Iraq and Afghanistan Combat Veterans Receiving VA Medical Care. Psychiatric Services, 61 , 589–597. PubMed

Schmidt, J. (2003). Counseling in Schools: Essential Services and Comprehensive Programs (4th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Sharf, R. S. (1997). Applying Career Development Theory to Counseling . Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Simon, R. W. (1992). Parental Role Strains, Salience of Parental Identity, and Gender Differences in Psychological Distress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 33, 25–35. PubMedPubMedCentral

Somers, M. R. (1994). The Narrative Constitution of Identity: A Relational and Network Approach. Theory and Society, 23 , 605–649.

Spiegel, P. E., & Shultz, K. S. (2003). The Influence of Preretirement Planning and Transferability of Skills on Naval Officers’ Retirement Satisfaction and Adjustment. Military Psychology, 15, 285–307.

Stanford, E. P. (1971). Retirement Anticipation in the Military. The Gerontologist, 11 (Spring Part 1), 37–42.

Stets, J. E., & Burke, P., J. (2000). Identity Theory and Social Identity Theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63, 224–237.

Stier, J. (1998). Dimensions and Experiences of Human Identity: An Analytical Toolkit and Empirical Illustration (Doctoral Dissertation, No. 69). Department of Sociology, Göteborg University.

Stier, J. (2006, May). Career Retirement, Role Exit and Identity Concerns. Interaction on the Edge. In Proceedings from the 5th GRASP Conference , Linköping University.

Stryker, S. (1968). Identity Salience and Role Performance. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 30, 558–564.

Stryker, S. (1980). Symbolic Interactionism: A Social Structural Version . Menlo Park: Benjamin Cummings.

Stryker, S. (1987). Identity Theory: Developments and Extensions. In K. Yardley & T. Honess (Eds.), Self and Identity: Psychosocial Perspectives (pp. 89–103). New York: Wiley.

Stryker, S. (2002). Symbolic Interactionism: A Social Structural Version . Caldwell, NJ: The Blackburn Press.

Stryker, S., & Burke, P. J. (2000). The Past, Present, and Future of an Identity Theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63 , 284–297.

Stryker, S., & Serpe, R. T. (1982). Commitment, Identity Salience, and Role Behavior: A Theory and Research Example. In W. Ickes & E. S. Knowles (Eds.), Personality, Roles, and Social Behavior (pp. 199–218). New York: Springer.

Stryker, S., & Serpe, R. T. (1994). Identity Salience and Psychological Centrality: Equivalent, Overlapping, or Complementary Concepts? Social Psychology Quarterly, 57, 16–35.

Stryker, S., & Statham, A. (1985). Symbolic Interaction and Role Theory. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology (pp. 311–378). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Super, D. E. (1977). Vocational Maturity in Mid-careers. The Vocational Guidance Quarterly, 6 , 294–302.

Sweet, M., Stoler, N., Kelter, R., & Thurrell, R. J. (1989). A Community of Buddies: Support Groups for Veterans Forced into Early Retirement. Hospital and Community Psychiatry, 40 , 172–176. PubMed

Tajfel, H. (1969). Cognitive Aspects of Prejudice. Journal of Social Issues, 25, 79–97.

Tajfel, H. (1972). Social Categorisation. In S. Moscivici (Ed.), Introduction à la psychologie sociale (Vol. 1, pp. 30–37). Paris: Larousse.

Tajfel, H. (Ed.). (1978). Differentiation Between Social Groups: Studies in the Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations . London: Academic Press.

Tajfel, H. (1981). Human Groups and Social Categories . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 33–48). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Teachman, J., & Tedrow, L. (2007). Joining Up: Did Military Service in the Early All Volunteer Era Affect Subsequent Civilian Income? Social Science Research, 36, 1447–1474.

Toomey, R., Kang, H., Karlinsky, J., Baker, D. G., Vasterling, J. J., Alpern, R, …, Eisen, S. A. (2007). Mental Health of US Gulf War Veterans 10 Years After the War. British Journal of Psychiatry, 190, 385–393.

Tsai, J., & Rosenheck, R. A. (2014). Risk Factors for Homelessness Amongst US Veterans. Epidemiologic Reviews, 37, 177–195.

Turner, J. C. (1982). Towards a Cognitive Redefinition of the Social Group. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Social Identity and Intergroup Relations (pp. 15–40). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Turner, J. C. (1985). Social Categorization and the Self-Concept: A Social Cognitive Theory of Group Behavior. In E. J. Lawler (Ed.), Advances in Group Processes (pp. 77–121). Greenwich, CT: JAI.

Turner, J. C. (1987). Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-Categorization Theory . Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Turner, J. C. (1991). Social Influence . Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

Turner, J. C., & Giles, H. (1981). Intergroup Behaviour . Oxford: Blackwell.

Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-Categorization Theory . Oxford: Blackwell.

Turner, J. C., & Oakes, P. J. (1989). Self-Categorization Theory and Social Influence. In P. B. Paulus (Ed.), The Psychology of Group Influence (2nd ed., pp. 233–275). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Turner, J. H. (2013). Contemporary Sociological Theory . London: Sage.

Tyers, C., & Sinclair, A. (2004). Intermediate Impacts of Advice and Guidance. Department for Education and Skills, Research Report RR638 . Retrieved from http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130401151715/ and http://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/RR638.pdf . Accessed February 16, 2015.

Vest, B. M. (2012). Citizen, Soldier, or Citizen-Soldier? Negotiating Identity in the US National Guard. Armed Forces & Society, 39 , 602–627.

Vogt, D., Perkins, D. F., Copeland, L. A., Finley, E. P., Jamieson, C. S., Booth, B., … & Gilman, C. L. (2018). The Veterans Metrics Initiative Study of US Veterans’ Experiences During Their Transition from Military Service. BMJ Open, 8 , e020734.

Wacquant, L. J. D. (1990). Org Review: Exiting Roles or Exiting Role Theory? Critical Notes on Ebaugh’s “Becoming an Ex”. Acta Sociologica, 33 , 397–404.

Walker, D. I. (2013). Anticipating Army Exit: Identity Constructions of Final Year UK Career Soldiers. Armed Forces and Society, 39 , 284–304.

Watts, A. G., & Kidd, J. M. (1978). Evaluating the Effectiveness of Careers Guidance: A Review of the British Research. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 51, 235–248.

Watts, A. G., & Sultana, R. G. (2004). Career Guidance Policies in 37 Countries: Contrasts and Common Themes. International Journal for Educational and Vocational Guidance, 4 , 105–122.

Whelan, W. J. (1981). Senior Military Leadership and Post Military Careers. Dissertation Abstracts International, 42 , 839.

Wolpe, J. (1958). Psychotherapy by Reciprocal Inhibition . Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Wolpert, D. S. (1989). Planning for Military Retirement: A Study of the Career Transition Programme, General Preretirement Planning Activities, and Their Effect on Job and/or Life Satisfaction (Doctoral dissertation). University of Pittsburgh. Dissertation Abstract International, 50 , 3742.

Wolpert, D. S. (2000). Military Retirement and the Transition to Civilian Life. In J. A. Martin, L. N. Rosen, & L. R. Sparacino (Eds.), The Military Family (pp. 103–119). London: Praeger.

Woodward, R., & Jenkings, K. N. (2011). Military Identities in the Situated Accounts of British Military Personnel. Sociology, 45 , 252–268.

Woodward, R., & Jenkings, K. N. (2012). Soldiers’ Photographic Representations of Participation in Armed Conflict. In S. Gibson (Ed.), Representations of Peace and Conflict (pp. 105–119). London: Palgrave.

Wyatt, C. (2013). Army Reservists to Receive More Benefits. BBC News . Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23155942 . Accessed February 14, 2015.

Index

A

Affective commitment

Alcoholism

Anticipated exits

‘Axioms’ of person-centred applications

B

Behavioural practice

Behavioural products

Bereavement reactions

“Blighted” orientation

‘Blighted’ pre exiter

Brain injury

C

Career history discussion

Career life stages

Careers counselling

Categorisation

Category membership

Civilian job

Cognitive processes

Cognitive process of categorisation

Collective self-categorisation

Collectivity

Combat experience

Combat related traumatic events

Commitment

Comparison of career interests

Consequence to leaving a social role

Conservative ideologue

Coping style

Core conditions

Counselling in non-clinical settings

Counselling models and practices

Counter-roles

Criminality

Cultural habit

Culture

D

Death of a partner

Defining identity

Degree of Control

Dehumanisation

Deindividuation

Demobilisation

Depersonalisation

Developmental orientations

Differences between voluntary and involuntary exit

‘Disavowed’ soldier

Discharge

Disengagement

Disorganised self

Dissonance reduction

Distorted sense of identity

Dual identities

E

Effectiveness of career counselling

Empathy

Emplotted stories

Employment

Employment prospect

Enabling clients understanding

Enculturation

Establishing contract

Existence in non-uniformed work role

Existence in uniformed work role

Ex-role

Ex-Service Action Group (ESAG) on Homelessness

F

Forced/involuntary

Forced occupational transition

Forming strategies and plans

Four stage process
creation of a new identity as former role occupant
experiencing a turning point
experiencing doubt
searching for alternatives

Fragmentation of their social identity

G

Genuineness

Goal directed career counselling

Goal directed orientations

Group membership

H

Habitus

Hangover identity

Hierarchy of salience

Homelessness

Hysteresis effect

I

Identity salience

Identity theory
similarities and differences between social identity theory and

Ideological constructs

Impact of role exit

Individualistic outcomes of identity

Individual level self-categorisation

In-group

Injury/illness

The instrumental volunteer

Interactional commitment

Interconnection

Intergroup behaviour

Intergroup dynamics

Intergroup relationship

Intermittent service

International literature

Interpersonal style

Intrapsychic and interpersonal processes

J

John’s story

K

Kidds

L

Level of status

Life After Service Survey

Lifers

M

“Masculinised” institutions

Medical discharge

Membership to the military in-group

Mental trauma

Meta-contrast principle

Military career identity

Military emphasis on task cohesion

Military responsibilities and release anxieties

Military socialisation practices

Military social network

Military structure

Model of career counselling and tasks

Morality

Multifaceted role identities

Multiple selves

N

Narrativity

Negative capital

Negative effects of involuntary military retirement

No-difference

O

Occupancy

Occupational Interests Profile (OIP)

Occupational Interests Profile + (OIP+)
results
reliability

Occupationally based support

Organisational change

Out-group

Out-group stereotyped expectations

P

Partner resentment

Perceived membership

Person centred career counselling

Person-environmental fit

Physical injury

Planning

Planning programmes

Positive evaluation

Post deployment mental health

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)

Preparedness for role exit

Problems with wellbeing after Exit

Prototypes

Prototypical behaviour

Providing career information

Psychological preparation

Psychological testing

Psychology

R

Readiness

Reasons of role exit
act of nature
expulsion by a group/collective

Redundancy

Reintegration civilian workforce

Relationship breakdown

Release anxiety

‘Reserve 2020’ strategy

Reservists
changing identities between civilian and military roles

Re-socialisation

Rituals of transition

Role exit

Role identity

Role problems

Role specific behaviours

Role taking

Role typical behaviours

S

Salient

Self-categorisation

Self categorisation theory

Self-concept

Self enhancement

Self-presentation

Self-stereotyping

Self-verification

Sequentiality

Seven point interview plan

Skilled helper model

Social cohesion

Social cohesion in combat units

Social conflict

Social construction

Social Identity Theory
similarities and differences between identity theory and

Social interplay

Social mobility

Social products

Social relationships

Socio-cultural spaces

Soldier habitus

Soldier-scam

Soldier warrior

Spatial displacement

Subjective belief structure

Super-ordinate level of the self as human being

Symbolic interactionism

T

Technical eclecticism

Theory of occupational choice

Thinking skills

Total institution

‘Transformed’ orientation

Transmigrants

Type atomism

U

Unconditional positive regard

Undesirable exit

V

The Veterans Metrics Initiative (TVMI)

Vocational maturity

Vocational Preference Inventory (VPI)

Voluntariness

Voluntary exit

Volunteer exit

W

Weekend warrior

Wellbeing