Search results

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the interactive effect of collective personality fit and its diversity on relationship conflict in a team context.

Data were collected from 1,265 employees and their leaders in 110 work teams in a Korean manufacturing company.

The results show that the two-way interaction between collective personality fit and its dispersion affects relationship conflict in teams. The effect of collective fit on relationship conflict was found to be weaker when the dispersion of collective fit is low than when it is high. This study reports that a high level of collective fit dispersion may help resolve relationship conflict in certain conditions, such as when the level of collective fit is high.

This paper implies that the diverse perception of fit does not always hamper intragroup consonance, and relationship conflict can be reduced as long as the overall level of collective fit is high. The diverse or heterogeneous personalities of team members contribute unique attributes of each member to the success of the team because some members of a heterogeneous team may play the role of filling the gap left by others.

This study argues that collective fit is a new construct, not a simple aggregation of individual fit traits, and the pattern of relationships at the individual level is not replicated at the group level, either conceptually or empirically.

This paper investigates the interaction effects of gender diversity and diversity beliefs on group-level personality fit (“collective personality fit”) and group organizational citizenship behavior (GOCB). It seeks to provide a sufficient understanding of the under-researched area, such as how group composition impacts group behavioral outcomes.

Data were collected from 453 employees and their leaders in 63 teams of Korean private sector firms using a moderated-mediation model.

This study found that high diversity beliefs can weaken the negative effects of gender diversity on collective personality fit and further enhance GOCB. The results confirm the moderated-mediation effect of diversity beliefs in the relationship between gender diversity and GOCB.

Management should realize that the negative effect of workforce diversity on GOCB can be reduced by boosting collective personality fit in the team. In this process, enhancing diversity beliefs may relieve the adverse effects on GOCB caused by workgroup gender differences.

This study develops a group-level model proposing that the interaction effects of gender diversity and high diversity beliefs enable a high level of collective personality fit, enhancing GOCB. It attempts to investigate the effects of gender diversity at the group level under boundary conditions.

This paper examines Korean reserve forces with respect to their missions, roles and utilisation. Korea has a huge standing army of 686,000 and reserve forces of 3,040,000. The Korean peninsular is the last spot of the cold war. In spite of mutual efforts by South and North Korea to keep peace in this region these days, there has been no sign yet to downsize military manpower and equipments by either side. It is generally believed that in the future, as the international security environment and inter-Korea relations change, the size of the standing army will be downsized and the role of reserve forces will increase instead. The Korea Institute of Defence Analyses (KIDA) estimated that the appropriate military strength of Korea be around 500,000 in the year of 2015, 200,000 less than the present size. In particular, the number of draftees will be reduced, while the number of officers and non-commissioned officers (NCOs) will be kept at the present level (Lim, 2001). The reduction of the standing army, as has been observed in other nations, may require proper utilisation of reserves.

This chapter attempts to explore the convergence and divergence on perceptions of security issues by military professionals and civilians and then to portray its implications for civil–military relations in South Korea.

Since the 1990s, South Korea has experienced the development of political democracy and the improvement of the relationship between South Korea and North Korea. Although South Korea suffered from serious economic crisis in the late 1990s, it soon restored its economic basis to the earlier level. However, the country has become to encounter ideological cleavage and cultural diversity among people. Traditional views on national security and international relations, which were based on national consensus in the past, have been replaced by a new conception of diversification, heterogeneity, and even sharp opposition. Thus, we examine the consensus or dissension between military and civilian sectors on various issues related to national security, the role of the armed forces, and South–North relations.

This chapter reports that there are similarities on some issues (e.g., security situation assessment, attitudes toward neighbor countries, and trust in the military), while substantial differences are found on others (e.g., threats to national security, Korea–US relations, and threats from North Korea) between the military and the civilian society. These findings suggest that overall the views of military professionals are not so different from civilians on security issues in Korea even though divergences emerge on some other issues. This chapter concludes by stating that civilian society and the military are “different, but not separate.” This statement renders implications for civil–military relations in South Korea.

This paper explores the relations between the military and civil society in Korea over the past few decades. In this paper, two models for civil–military relations, i.e., the integration model and the segregation model are proposed and contrasted. In the integration model, the military maximizes components common to civilian society whereas in the segregation model the military community maintains a certain distance from civilian society highlighting specific features of the military institution. Over the years, the Korean military has moved from segregation to integration with civil society by incorporating civilian values and norms, and by adopting the logic of civilian organization to the military. This paper argues that old solutions seem no longer acceptable to the public in Korea. It stresses that cooperation with the local community is very important for the stable deployment of military units. This paper suggests that general and military-specific features should be compromised on the occasion of selecting policy alternatives.

I first met Charles C. Moskos back in 1983, at the first international conference in which I had the fortune to participate, and, since my history of relations with him parallels those of many colleagues and friends who study the military and who, like me, remember him, it seems worthwhile to introduce these studies in his honour with a personal recollection.

I first met Charles C. Moskos back in 1983, at the first international conference in which I had the fortune to participate, and, since my history of relations with him parallels those of many colleagues and friends who study the military and who, like me, remember him, it seems worthwhile to introduce these studies in his honour with a personal recollection.

The armed forces and the societies they come from, and/or work in are related to one another in a multitude of ways (for the following see Kümmel, 2002). An adequate theoretical framework to capture the relationship between what may be termed the military world and what may be termed the world out there is offered by the systems theory as, for example, put forward in Martin Edmonds’ Armed Services and Society (Edmonds, 1990: especially 113f.). In this vein, the armed services can be conceived as a system that is distinct from its environment and is in its interacting and interdependent component parts operating on specific systems logic. Thus the system (or rather the sub-system) of the armed forces can be analyzed in terms of its relationship with its environment and with other (sub-)systems that are working and operating in this environment. One may distinguish six – to be sure: interdependent and interpenetrated – dimensions to cover the richness of civil–military relations.¹ These are: economy, finances, technology, culture, society, and politics. But the complexity of the theoretical framework has to be advanced even further. Two additional points have to be dealt with. One is that the environment of the military the world out there falls into two different spheres; a national and an international one implying that these very six dimensions have to be seen in a national/domestic as well as in an international context. The second and last point is that these various dimensions of relations between the military and society look quite different depending on the point in time they are looked upon. In other words, the time factor has to be included into the analysis. According to the scheme resulting from this tableau, research issues can be grouped. The following table gives some examples for research topics that fall into the various categories and illustrate that the study of relations between the military and the society is an interdisciplinary undertaking (Table 1).