Culture Clash: The Influence of Behavioural Norms on Military Performance in Asymmetric Conflicts
| dc.contributor.author | Fitzsimmons, Scott | |
| dc.contributor.editor | Fitzsimmons, Scott | |
| dc.contributor.editor | McDougall, Alex | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2020-12-18T19:54:34Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2020-12-18T19:54:34Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2008 | |
| dc.description.abstract | This paper establishes the ways in which the military cultures of mercenary groups and their opponents influence their military performance in asymmetric conflicts. It develops and tests a constructivist military culture theory of military performance against the empirical record of two modern mercenary groups, one of which achieved victory over its opponent and one of which was defeated. The core logic of the theory is that a grossly outnumbered force must be highly flexible and adaptable if it is to perform the range of military tasks required to defeat materially superior opponents. Norms encouraging the pursuit of a wider range of tactical behaviour should increase military effectiveness, which, in turn, should increase a group’s prospects for military success. If the theory is correct, a military force’s performance should be conditioned by the degree to which the members of the force have been indoctrinated into norms that encourage them to be militarily effective. Specifically, the theory reasons that military forces that strongly emphasize norms encouraging creative thinking, decentralized authority, personal initiative, technical proficiency, and group loyalty, should exhibit greater militarily effectiveness than forces that deemphasize these norms. Moreover, it reasons that military forces exhibiting greater military effectiveness should experience greater battlefield military performance than less effective groups, all else equal. Taking this into account, the theory predicts that the materially weaker party in an asymmetric conflict, which the mercenaries were in both cases, should only be able to defeat its materially stronger opponent if the weaker party emphasizes behavioural norms that encourage it to perform a wide range of tactical behaviour – that is, be very militarily effective – and the stronger party does not emphasize these norms because this should allow the weaker party to exploit the weaknesses and counter the strengths of the stronger party and, through this, defeat it. On the other hand, the theory predicts that, in asymmetric conflicts where neither party emphasizes behavioural norms encouraging them to perform a wide range of tactical behaviour, neither party should be capable of exploiting the weaknesses and countering the strengths of the other and, as a result, the balance of material capabilities should allow the materially stronger party to prevail. | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1480-6339 | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1480-6390 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1880/112888 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://dx.doi.org/10.11575/PRISM/38483 | |
| dc.publisher.department | Political Science | |
| dc.publisher.faculty | Arts | |
| dc.publisher.institution | University of Calgary | |
| dc.rights | © Innovations: A Journal of Politics 1998-2052 | |
| dc.title | Culture Clash: The Influence of Behavioural Norms on Military Performance in Asymmetric Conflicts | |
| dc.type | journal article |