Military Review English Edition September-October 2013 | Page 21
S O C I A L C A P I TA L
Soldiers of the 4th Battalion, 118th Infantry Regiment, South Carolina Army National Guard, watch television in the battalion’s dayroom at Camp Buehring, Kuwait, following the facility’s opening on 25 August 2012. (U.S. Army)
Maintaining longevity and the associated norms developed within units matters.57 Adjusting career timelines, establishing home stations, and providing predictability to permanent change of station moves builds a culture within the Army Profession that develops social capital. Slowing changes of duty station and leadership preserves bonds and builds more esprit de corps. With longevity in units, families are stable and can develop trust in individual leaders along with the Army as an organization, which strengthens the bonds between the Army Profession and its families. Moreover, units filled with already established esprit de corps counter toxic leaders. Pride and trust between various junior leaders and
soldiers are strong, and long established relationships minimize a toxic leader’s impact more than if the unit’s bonds were weak and easily broken. By keeping organizations together longer, soldiers, families, and units can continue to build the ties required to cultivate social trust, unit pride, and social capital. In other words, to strengthen the Army Profession, keep people together. Break down barriers. Bridging social capital requires the Army Profession to break down barriers between it and the nation it serves. Since 9/11, increased force protection measures built up the walls around Army installations. Americans could not get on military installations to interact with soldiers and Army leaders. There was no bridging. There was only isolation. The Army Profession separated itself from whom it served. The citizens who trusted their defense to the Army Profession no longer understood the force. Social networks and norms of reciprocity disappeared. Through open posts like Fort Bliss and the U.S. Military Academy, along with community wide events hosted by garrison commands and local leaders, bridging occurs. As the social capital increases between society and the Army, the outcome is an enhanced view of the Army Profession by more Americans, along with improved opportunities for support networks for Army professionals. Social capital will form naturally if the Army Profession sustains its strength over the next decade. However, the challenge is to stem the breaches of trust before social capital, and with it, the Army Profession, erodes. Understanding the factors that hinder social capital and adjusting policies and leadership to cultivate bonds and norms of reciprocity associated with social networks will develop social capital and the Army Profession. MR
NOTES
1. Donna Miles, “Army Post Sets Example, in Curbing Suicides, Preventable Deaths,” Armed Forces Press Service, 15 February 2013, (16 February 2013). 2. Robert D. Putnam and Lewis M. Feldstein, Better Together: Restoring the American Community (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2003), 2. 3. Michael Woolcock, “The Rise and Routinization of Social Capital, 1988-2008,” Annual Review of Political Science 13 (2010): 471-72. 4. Robert D. Putnam, Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993), 167. 5. Putnam, Making Democracy Work, 170-71. 6. Robert D. Putnam, Bowling Alone (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2000), 136. 7. Ivan Light, “Social Capital’s Unique Accessibility,” Journal of the American Planning Association 70 (Spring 2004): 146. 8. Putnam, Bowling Alone, 20-21. 9. Putnam, Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy, 172-73 10. Peter Block, Community: The Structure of Belonging (San Francisco: BerrettKoehler Publishers, 2009), 3. 11. Putnam, Bowling Alone, 22-23. 12. Xavier de Souza Briggs, “Social Capital: Easy Beauty or Meaningful Resource,” Journal of the American Planning Association 70 (Spring 2004): 152. 13. Putnam, Bowling Alone, 20. 14. Cynthia Estlund, “Working Together” (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), 7. 15. Estlund, 4, 13-14.
MILITARY REVIEW ? September-October 2013
19