Exploring the Normative Structure of Finnish Soldiers’ Home Association: Understanding an Auxiliary Organization Through Volunteer Values

Method

The impetus for this inquiry was sparked by a sincere curiosity and interest in the role of volunteering and resilience within the security sector. Our primary objective was to gain insight into the specific circumstances surrounding the participation of individuals in SODE activities, particularly in regard to their motivations to start volunteering at SODE. Our aim was to understand the specific conditions for joining SODE; the reasons why individuals join a female-dominated organization close to the Finnish Defence Forces. Our initial discussions with SODE leadership brought into focus a foundational element of SODE: values.

As our knowledge of the organization deepened, it became clear that comprehending the organization to which new members were willing to join was essential to explaining the value-based behavior of the volunteers. Our research was significantly influenced by the consideration of the reciprocal relationship between individuals and the organizations they are part of.

We began from a claim by Bevir and Rhodes (2004, p. 130) that “to understand actions, practices and institutions, we need to grasp the meanings, the beliefs and preferences, of the people involved.” This is why we were focused on understanding and meaning.

Our stance is interpretivist (see, for example, Sandberg, 2005). Interpretive theorizing creates understanding of a subject matter through redefining a topic, recontextualizing it along with previous ways of theorizing about it, ultimately uncovering deeper historical and social meanings. This process of re-signification involves moving from one set of social meanings, such as our current theoretical writings on a topic, to another set of social meanings that capture the broader implications of these writings. A key aspect of interpretive theorizing is its flexibility and willingness to explore new conceptualizations and introduce new topics that more accurately reflect our current experiences of organizations (Cornelissen et al., 2021).

Our approach is rooted in hermeneutics. Alvesson and Sköldberg (2018) outline fundamental aspects of hermeneutic interpretation: (1) The pattern of interpretation, akin to theory in non-hermeneutic discourse, develops through a dynamic dialogue with the text. It originates from the interpreter’s initial preconceptions, which evolve during the interpretive process. The act of changing interpretations and the researcher’s continuous engagement with the text results in a deeper understanding and the generation of new knowledge. (2) In practical terms, the starting point of research is the interaction between text and context, often represented by sources rather than mere data. The term “text” extends beyond written or spoken words to encompass figurative social actions. Through interpretation, facts emerge from these sources, and these perceived facts, in turn, influence the interpretive framework. (3) The dialogue between sources and interpretation is to achieve the most comprehensive interpretation, beginning with the interpreter’s preconceptions and incorporating theoretical, methodological, and factual aspects. As Madison (1988) summarized, this process follows more a logic of argumentation rather than a logic of validation.

In answering our research questions, we were engaged in a discussion and theorizing that is conceptually, in all respects, uncertain and inconclusive. In response, we adopted a unique approach that involves examining the personal values of individual actors within the organization. We consider these values as a proxy for understanding “the organization,” as direct measures for this concept are lacking. We refer to Albert and Whetten (1985), that the “criterion of claimed central character” (p. 80) of an organization refers to its fundamental identity, purpose, and values that form the foundation of its existence. However, the utilization of such a concept is largely metaphorical, as there is inherently no external explication of any core or essence of an organization that is universally comprehensible. It represents the intrinsic qualities and characteristics that define the organization’s unique identity and distinguish it from other entities. That is, we examine and understand our subject as an organization that is constructed as a socially goal-oriented collective of people and at the same time as a community within a specific functional context.

In the first phase of this research, the explanatory and inferential framework, which emerged from previous research, was created by using abductive reasoning. Abduction as inference means “studying facts and devising a theory to explain them” (Niiniluoto, 1999, p. 439). Often depicted as “inference to the best explanation,” it is a method of reasoning that is used to evaluate the best of the available explanatory hypotheses or theories. The researcher compares one theory with another in terms of the evidence, rather than simply examining the relationship and explanatory power of one selected theory in relation to the data (Haig, 2008).

An abductive approach, as described by Haig (2005), does not involve the prior selection of a theory that is then tested through the creation and examination of hypotheses. It also differs from the process of constructing and substantiating theories based on analyzing empirical data obtained from precise observations of specific events. Instead, abduction is employed to deduce facts, allowing for the potential validation of a new theory. This theory can be accepted if no alternative explanation exhibits superior validity, or it can contribute to the refinement and expansion of an existing theory. The methodological process can be viewed as a mechanism for reinterpreting how the same observation evolves when considered from various theoretical perspectives and at different moments in time (Timmermans & Tavory, 2012). We proceeded as Yanow (2015) proposed:

Further layers of understanding are added as each new insight revises prior interpretations in an ever-circular process of making meaning. Interpretations are, therefore, always provisional, as one cannot know for certain that a new way of seeing does not lie around the corner. (p. 16)

After developing an analytical model to establish the boundaries and framework for interpreting our research object, we conducted quantitative analysis of survey data to provide a foundation for further exploration. Hence, it became clear that in the spirit of abductive reasoning, we combined both deductive (theory inspired) and inductive (data inspired) approaches in our knowledge development. This led to the development of our research questions, with Question 1 led by the inductive approach, focusing on the nature of SODE, followed by our deductive approach, with Questions 2 and 3, focusing on SODE volunteer motivations and values.

Building on the insights gained from the quantitative phase, we situated our findings within a larger academic discussion to enhance understanding of the focal organization. Our text represents both an analytical process and its resulting outcome. Through a dialogue between the text and the conceptual understanding that surrounds it, a description is produced and anchored in the theoretical field. Our research seeks to understand a particular phenomenon that depends on the context and the activities taking place in the context, rather than seeking general laws (e.g., Welch et al., 2011). Quoting Laurel Richardson, “the writing process and the writing product as deeply inter-twined; both are privileged. The product cannot be separated from the producer or the mode.” We conclude, drawing form a quote of Elisabeth St. Pierre, “that researchers’ texts do not capture truth but produce it” (St. Pierre, 2007).

How and Why We Relate Values to the Organization?

Asking research questions such as “what is an organization like?” or “what is the core of the organization?” poses significant challenges and complexities. While the concept of an organization may appear straightforward on the surface, it is a multifaceted and intricate phenomenon that defies simple categorization or definition. Several researchers have led the discussion on the essence of the organization, the core, which has its own character and qualitative content. Such conceptualizations include inter alia, conceptual definitions of organizational culture (Schein, 1990) and organizational identity (Albert & Whetten, 1985), with several variants and research approaches.

SODE is a voluntary organization with a total of 4,800 members in 37 local associations throughout Finland. SODE represents a specific form of volunteering, where participation and voluntarism are directed toward the goals of national security. SODE as an association promotes the will to defend ² and readiness of the national defense in Finland, and as a partner of the Finnish Defence Forces, they support the well-being of conscripts and reservists during their service. The main task of SODE’s local associations is to provide food and refreshment and mess services to conscripts and reservists by operating cafeterias and facilities for socializing and leisure (Sotilaskotiliitto, 2019). The organization is female-dominated, and although male members do exist, they are rare. Besides normal daily operations, SODE prepares and trains for special duties during emergency situations to operate mobile canteen services. Those members who are trained, experienced, and ready to commit to these special tasks can be reserved for auxiliary service in emergency conditions by the Finnish Defence Forces. Engagement in such services is based on volunteering and a positive attitude toward national defense work (Sotilaskotiliitto, 2020).

SODE as an organization is at the same time both voluntary and nonprofit, community-serving organization, and an organization that during the times of emergency transforms into an auxiliary organization for the Finnish Defence Forces with a command structure of its own. This duality makes SODE a multipurpose hybrid organization, where its organizational identity reflects multiple roles and purposes of the organization—intraorganizational intertwining of separated institutional logics and organizational fields (e.g., Evers, 2005, 2020). As a voluntary organization and independent of the Finnish Defence Forces or the Finnish government, SODE can be depicted within the military organization typology as an auxiliary organization (see Table 1).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Military Organization Typology.

Element	Regular armed forces	Reserve forces	Civil guard	Auxiliary organizations	Militia groups/paramilitary	Private military contractors
Purpose	A permanently and professionally organized body established by the state for the primary purpose of national defense.	Maintains trained units and qualified persons to be available for active duty when needed; Reservists can be mobilized in time of war; Called up for refresher trainings.	State-governed military force independent of the regular forces; becomes part of regular armed forces during times of crisis; Organized in accordance with military principles, possesses weapons and holds exercises of a military nature.	Assisting organizations that support or supplement the regular armed forces, can be called upon to assist the State’s armed forces under certain conditions; providing additional support or specialized skills during times of war or other emergencies.	Privately organized armed groups outside of the country’s legitimate armed forces: (1) Those that profess allegiance to a government or authority/or are tolerated by the State (2) Motivated by a political or religious ideology.	An entity that contracts with a State with a commercial interest to provide specialized services in support of the State’s armed forces related to war, security, and conflict.
Examples		UK: Regular reserve, Voluntary reserve (Territorial Army from 1979 to 2014)	USA: National GuardEstonia: Estonian defense leagueSweden: Hemvärnet, Svenska LottakårenNorway: HeimevernetDenmark: Hjemmeværnet	Finland: Sotilaskotiliitto (SODE), The National Defence Training Association of Finland (MPK)USA: Civil Air PatrolSweden: Swedish Voluntary Radio Organization (FRO)	USA: Michigan MilitiaIreland: New Irish Republican Army	Russia: WagnerUSA: Constellis (up till 2009 Blackwater)
Personnel recruitment	By law, by conscription	By law, by conscription	Voluntary and open to all citizens	Voluntary and open to all citizens	Voluntary and open to selected persons	By contract
Autonomy from the State	None	None	None/low	High	High	High

An auxiliary organization in this study, borrowing from Rauta (2020), is defined as an organization that is not part of the regular forces but is directly embedded into the structures of operating forces in collaboration with or alongside regulars. Their relationship to the defense forces takes a supplementary form, with these groups providing additive value through combination. Combination underlines a pattern of strategic collaboration and association: nonsequential arrangement and rearrangement of activities in support of and with regular forces (Rauta, 2020). Because an auxiliary organization derives both from reserve forces and contracted partners in its basic construction, the analytical tools and approaches needed to make sense of such sociological systems need to correspond the research purposes. In this respect, we consider SODE as an auxiliary organization and build our approach and analysis by advancing on theoretical background from past research, including literature on transmigrants and reserve forces.

In this study, we adopt the perspective that an organization can be understood as its social structure, specifically referred to as a “normative structure” following Scott’s (1992) framework. Within any social organization, the arrangement of values, norms, and roles is not arbitrary but rather forms a relatively cohesive and consistent system of beliefs and assumptions that shape the behavior of its participants. The normative structure within an organization plays a crucial role in guiding and shaping individual and collective behavior. It dictates the goals of action, the appropriate means to achieve those goals, and the roles that individuals are expected to fulfill within specific social positions (Scott, 1992). The organization as a normative structure is the set of characteristics of its members, which can be observed in a higher-order unit as a whole, and is therefore distinct from atomistic building blocks. There is—and has long been—a controversy in organizational science as to how to deal with this dualistic nature of the individual and the organization. Our solution has been to inspect the individual members’ values, to understand the behavioral patterns and attitudes of the members, as well as to comprehend the nature of the organization the individuals are involved with.

According to Bourne and Jenkins (2013, p. 500), “shared values” form “the characteristics of societies, organizations and groups are manifested in their members’ personal values.” When members of an organization consider their personal and organizational values matching, they will be more open to internalizing organizational beliefs and missions. A social identification process facilitates this internalization and serves as a motivator to the individuals to work on behalf of the organization (Ashforth & Mael, 1996).

The organization, as a social category, may be perceived as embodying attributes that are prototypical of the members or of the organization as an abstraction. In identifying with the organization, people often internalize these attributes as their own. In a real sense, people who identify may see themselves as personifying the organization (Mael & Ashforth, 1995, p. 310).

It is important to note that values impact behavior (Homer & Kahle, 1988). Values are internalized principles that guide individuals and thus lessen the need for constant social control. They serve for a basis of judgment of which behavior is socially appropriate, to justify their demands on others, and to achieve a desired behavior (Schwartz, 2012).

Identification with the organization can channel the way personal values manifest themselves through behavior (Lipponen et al., 2008). Furthermore, commitment to organization is connected to socialization experiences and congruence of organizational mission and values with personal values (McCormick & Donohue, 2019). Elsewhere, as Johnson and Jackson (2009) highlighted the importance of person–organization compatibility on the basis of identity and values. If this link between socialization, personal values, and organizational identity exists, we posit that the link is bidirectional (e.g., Bourne & Jenkins, 2013; Vaughn, 1997), and hence, an aggregate of member’s individual values can reveal something about the organization under study. Members’ values influence the organization and the organization influences the values of its members. This is in line with the arguments that identity is the very essence of an organization (Albert & Whetten, 1985; Margolis & Hansen, 2002). Afshari et al. (2019) investigated the link of identity and commitment, but their premise—as many others’—was left unanswered: a commitment to what? The answer cannot simply be “to the organization” (e.g., Reichers, 1985).

In this context, we consider an organization metaphorically more as a “community,” something which is based on interaction of individuals, that brings organizations into existence through an intersubjective and shared experience (King et al., 2010). Thus, subjectively meaningful action is the central force of organizational behavior and organizations may be studied as “shifting coalitions” or “loosely coupled systems” (Astley & Van de Ven, 1983). This is in line with phenomenological base of the interpretivist school, as we treat “organization” as something the members as individuals, and as well as a collective, bring forth (Sandberg, 2005). “The organisation” is established and exists on activity, social interaction, and interpretations made through communication between people (Prasad & Prasad, 2002).

Soldierly identity is a dynamic phenomenon, which is constructed by interrelation of the individual and their environment, their co-determination and dialectics (Haitiner & Kümmel, 2009). In this respect, we emphasize a holistic view in understanding individual agency, underlining what Haitiner and Kümmel (2009) argued as “an analysis of the soldierly subject that does not pay due attention to his/her organizational, societal and global embeddedness runs short” (p. 76). According to Johansen (2013), military identity can be described by the extent to which individuals are willing to internalize the armed force’s roles, prevailing goals, values, and tasks. The military aims at creating and maintaining uniformity by emphasizing core values, an integral part of military culture and experience (Redmond et al., 2015).

As Vest (2013) noted, “Individual identification with and ability to reconcile dual civilian and military identities has direct impact on recruitment and retention” (p. 622). Social identity, according to Wilson-Smith and Corr (2019, p. 9), implies that social categorization (e.g., profession, soldier, civilian) “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.” Social identification leads to activity, which is congruent with the collective identity, support for institutions that embody the identity and reinforces the antecedents of identification (Ashforth & Mael, 1989).

We study the military as a social institution, as Siebold (2001) wrote, as a system of roles based on beliefs and norms, structures, and patterned behavior. We are aware of the detailed discussion of the caveats and pitfalls of using individual measures to represent higher level (see, for example, Ostroff, 1993; Van Mierlo et al., 2009). However, organizations do not really possess values apart from the values of their members (Meglino & Ravlin, 1998), that is to say that “organizational values embody those general values that guide organizational members in their selection or evaluation of behavior” (Bourne & Jenkins, 2013, p. 497). And to continue this line of thought, shared values are a major component of an organization’s culture (O’Reilly & Chatman, 1996).

Survey Findings

We will present results in order of the latter two research questions, starting with SODE volunteer motivations.

Research Question 2: What Motivated SODE Members to Start Their Volunteering Roles?

Table 2 presents the percentage of motivations in order of frequency to begin volunteering at SODE. The findings show that defense-related values and attitudes was the most frequently noted reason for joining SODE (28.4%), closely followed by simply being asked to join by someone (24%).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 2.

Frequency and Percentage of Motivations for Beginning to Volunteer at SODE.

	Frequency	%
Defense-related values and attitudes	115	28.4
Was asked to join	97	24.0
Desired a new hobby	56	13.8
Family members already in SODE	33	8.1
Patriotism	30	7.4
Social reasons (friends, community)	21	5.2
Desire to help	15	3.7
Other reasons	15	3.7
To learn and develop	10	2.5
SODE location	9	2.2
Recruitment campaign	3	.7
To grow and develop emotionally	1	.2

However, given the small frequencies in various categories, we combined those categories with fewer than 5% of responses (see Table 3 and Figure 1). The findings suggest that following the reasons of defense-related values and being asked to join SODE, the third most common motivation to begin volunteering at SODE was the desire to acquire a new hobby (13.8%). Notably, 8% of participants already had a family member as part of SODE, which was also cited as a reason to join the organization. Patriotism was also reported as a motivation for joining (7.4%), a reason closely related to the most frequent motivation of defense-related attitudes and values.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 3.

Frequency and Percentage of Motivations for Beginning to Volunteer as SODE—Reduced Categories.

	Frequency	%
Defense-related values and attitudes	115	28.4
Was asked to join	97	24.0
Desired a new hobby	56	13.8
Other	53	13.1
Family member(s) already in SODE	33	8.1
Patriotism	30	7.4
Social reasons (friends, community)	21	5.2

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

Frequency of Motivations Reported as Reasons for Joining SODE.

Clearly then, defense-related attitudes and values and simply being asked were the most common motivation to join (>50% of participants).

Research Question 3: What Are SODE Volunteers’ Values?

We present the rank order of SODE volunteer values, which we will then compare with Schwartz’s (2012) commentary on common rank orders.

The rank order of SODE volunteer values in this sample can be found in Table 4. On the third column of the table, a comparison ranking from Schwartz’s (2012) commentary is provided.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 4.

SODE Volunteer Values in Rank Order and Comparison With Schwartz’s (2012) Rankings.

SODE volunteer rankings of values	Schwartz’s rankings
1. Security	4
2. Benevolence	1
3. Conformity	5
4. Tradition	8
5. Universalism	2
6. Self-direction	3
7. Hedonism	6
8. Stimulation	9
9. Achievement	7
10. Power	10

Most important values for SODE volunteers related to security, benevolence, conformity, and tradition. While benevolence has been found to be universally a dominant value (Schwartz, 2012), it is noteworthy that security, conformity, and tradition usually place after universalism and self-direction in various studies (Schwartz, 2012). These results suggest a somewhat unique value profile of SODE volunteers, who appear to be guided by other-, socially focused values—those relating to patriotism and conservatism. These findings further support for the uniqueness of this organization and whom it attracts.

The uniqueness of the military embodies notions of republican citizenship—contributing to the state through voluntarism and sacrifice. There is always a value dimension in becoming involved with the military, even at the extreme of risking of one’s life (Gazit et al., 2021). The main factor influencing a citizen’s willingness to serve in the reserve army is related to their commitment to the collective. This commitment relates to the identification with the collective and the individual’s desire to protect it (Ben-Dor et al., 2002). Similarly, there is a value component in choosing to participate in voluntary defense work. The idea of nation in arms as well as the citizen soldier concept—that relates to strong collectivism, patriotism—both premise that military service is a national obligation, motivated by a greater good surpassing personal interest. The assumptions correspond with institutional values, referring to Moskos’s (1977, 1986) institutional-occupational theory (Johansen et al., 2013). Institutional motivations incorporate intangible values and norms, such as duty to country, loyalty, commitment, and sacrifice (Edmunds et al., 2016).

However, despite being an important actor in the Finnish soldierly milieu, SODE is not a military, armed organization. That is, SODE is not organizationally part of the armed forces, but only contractually as a provider of services in times of peace and an auxiliary by contract during crisis. In this regard, the rich research tradition on military organizations, and theorization about reserve forces (Ben-Ari & Lomsky-Feder, 2011; Griffith, 2009, 2011), in terms of recruitment, values, and motivation, does not give an accurate picture and cannot directly be applied to the SODE context. Similarly, referring or narrowing down the focus only to research findings about voluntarism in civilian organizations does not fairly describe the motivational factors of SODE members. However, to understand SODE’s composition of a hybrid structure of both military and civilian constituents, we posit that the SODE members’ values are more understandable against the idea of what Lomsky-Feder et al. (2008) have conceptualized by using the metaphor of “transmigrants.” Unlike regular service personnel, reservists exist in both military and civilian environments and are continuously moving between the two worlds. Edmunds et al. (2016) claim that the transmigrant status constructs a special sociological category, and that in relation to recruitment and retention, ethos, role, or deployment has to be treated differently from the established assumptions about regular military personnel or other actors in the field.

Given the emphasis on the idea of the “citizen-soldier” in reserve forces research, it is noteworthy that only a small number of SODE members have received formal military training within the defense forces, despite actively participating in military life as co-operators. This can be attributed to the Finnish militia system, which implements universal male conscription, although voluntary military service is open to females in all services and branches. We suggest using the term “civic consciousness,” borrowing the term from Janowitz (1983), to avoid the flaming emotions associated with the connotation of patriotism, while recognizing that SODE involvement goes deep into military and national defense issues. As an organization it is, and has been, the traditional way of organizing Finnish women’s activities in the field of voluntary national defense, and after 1945 also substituting the all-female Lotta Svärd ³ activities.

Discussion

In countries with limited economic and human resources, total defense of the society can be built on a model that exploits the contribution of volunteer actors in creating resilience and scalability for war and crisis. This means opening up the core structures of national defense system to new actors and compels new ways of structuring a useful whole. Crucial to the effectiveness of the system is the commitment of the actors to the mission they are tasked with, and the belief that the defense forces can rely on the stability and effectiveness of affiliated organizations.

SODE is not a purely civilian organization, but its position within defense-related civilian volunteer organizations that assist the Finnish Defence Forces has been defined by historical developments and cultural context, reflecting the Nordic model of national defense structures that make extensive use of volunteer contributions. As an auxiliary organization, this is how SODE differs from privatized operators. The foundation of the private military contractors is based on the pursuit of profit, so their organization’s publicized commitment to national defense is not ideological or value-driven. The value-laden and ideological mission of SODE is a cultural foundation based on the concept of the will to defend one’s country. The will to defend is at the heart of the operational and political resolutions of Finnish defense policy.

The basic mission of the military organization is to safeguard the integrity and security of the state. The armed forces are part of the state apparatus, an independent and traditional institution with clear organizational boundaries with the rest of society. However, the military establishment is an organizational entity whose structure and nature change with the demands of the times and the environment in which it operates. Among others, Wilén and Strömbohm (2022) have noted that the boundaries of military organizations are becoming increasingly blurred. Instead of merely a “total” institution, with a character of its identity being built upon the differentiation between the insiders and the outsiders, or distinct, collective identities from the rest of the society, military organizations can be examined by the interdependence of and constant exchanges with its environment (Wilén & Strömbohm, 2022).

The Nordic concept of security or “Total Defense” (e.g., Wither, 2020) emphasizes a broad policy that brings together the resources of society as a whole. The regular state military is supplemented by various associated organizations, some of which are voluntary. The benefits of such a structure of independent actors optimize both cost-effectiveness and motivation. Since the Nordic model focuses on the defense capability of the nation, the key decisions in policy-making are always linked to ideal of a citizen’s army, that is not external to society, but whose performance is built on society’s assets, resources, and human capital. The question worth considering then is: What is the core of the armed forces that it cannot, organizationally speaking, give over to the control of other actors? Similarly, a further question from the Armed forces’ perspective is: What are the strategic modular elements of the whole that add value to the core tasks of the military? And further, who are the organizations that can be parts of the total defense structure, and what kind of “institutional arrangements” are required for these actors to construct a partnership?

By “institutional arrangements” we mean here the cultural-cognitive, normative, and regulative structures that are taken for granted as natural, normatively valued beyond their technical usefulness and also reinforced by coercive mechanisms (Scott, 2001). It is about the boundary conditions under which a defense institution at the heart of society can achieve and maintain legitimacy, including in arrangements within which it delegates parts of its organizational functions to a partnership.

In the case of SODE, absolute organizational strengths for cooperation with the armed forces are cultural understanding, cultural fit, legitimacy, core values, and the seamless integration of the auxiliary role with synergistic interests, and in SODE’s case, the maintenance of national defense will.

From an organizational perspective, SODE’s auxiliary role can be interpreted using van Fenema and Beeres’s (2010) idea that it is an absorption of supportive and operational resources on the part of the armed forces. SODE’s core services are related to the well-being of soldiers, “humanizing” the landscape in which conscription or military service is performed. It is about safeguarding mental well-being, which ultimately translates into increased resilience of soldiers. Thus, SODE’s output for the whole is second-order, but of fundamental quality. The defense forces could buy these services from a private service provider, using the traditional sourcing approach, but then the possibility to contribute to the maintenance of national defense will through volunteer work would be lost. SODE members have made a value choice, they are committed to serving the defense forces and the homeland. The core of their work lies in volunteering, which is ideologically focused on serving the needs of national defense. Volunteerism is therefore an essential part of SODE’s characteristics, as it is an asset for SODE itself, as well as for the wider field of national security.

Volunteer motivation and engagement are paramount to the success of the organization. However, declines in volunteering and struggles with recruitment and retention (Baxter-Tomkins & Wallace, 2009; Hyde et al., 2016), combined with increase in short-term volunteering (Chacón et al., 2007; Davila de Leon & Fuertes, 2007), raise grave concerns for organizations like SODE, where long-term commitment has been the norm for volunteering roles. As a case in point, the average tenure of our participants was over 18 years, a figure which is at risk at declining with the increase of episodic volunteering (Cnaan et al., 2022). Indeed, our communication with SODE leadership indicated this as one of the perceived risks to the organization.

Our findings illuminate the importance of values in successful recruitment and a positive volunteering experience. Surprisingly, volunteer values are rarely the focus of research attention, despite their fundamental role in human cognition, including motivational states and the decision to engage in volunteering. Indeed, it could be argued that values play even a more critical role in volunteer motivations, given the lack of opportunities to reward behavior through financial and other tangible rewards (Kiili, 2016). Values form a key part of person–organization fit (Westerman & Cyr, 2004), and value realization has significant, positive benefits for employees and volunteers alike (Bahat, 2020). In the context of defense forces, Kiili (2016) found alignment with personal values (using Schwartz’s value inventory, similar to us) and organization’s mission with the Estonian defense force personnel, and while outcomes of this alignment were not investigated, past work would indeed suggest that those who closely identify with their organization show stronger volunteering commitment (e.g., Bahat, 2020; Stukas et al., 2016).

The basic nature of SODE and its values play a critical role in shaping the identity of the volunteer and their identification with the organization. It is, therefore, essential for SODE to align the basic nature of the organization with the personal values of volunteers to ensure successful recruitment and retention. This in turn ensures successful organizational renewal and is an essential component of the viability of the supporter network, as volunteers who feel a strong alignment between their personal values and the organization’s values are more likely to stay engaged and committed over the long term.

Some practical implications are evident from our research. For organizations like SODE to continue to engage volunteers successfully, reinforcement and communication about key organizational values likely promote higher likelihood of fit between potential members and the volunteering role. Making values salient enables potential volunteers to assess the degree of fit with the organization, increasing the likelihood of stronger identification with the organization, and subsequently, positive volunteer experience, and thereby retention. Furthermore, providing opportunities for existing volunteers to express their key values through activities that are meaningful to them is likely to enhance commitment to SODE. Our survey results suggest that simply being asked to volunteer with the organization appears a fruitful recruitment avenue for SODE. Past research further supports informal recruitment channels (Malinen et al., 2019) and may also prove beneficial for retention. This is due to existing volunteers having a “realistic job preview” of the volunteering role and an understanding of the potential member’s fit with the tasks and organization. However, the trend toward shorter-term volunteering ought to be acknowledged (see, for example, Cnaan et al., 2022), and opportunities for short-term activities could result in further and younger volunteer engagement.

Conclusion

Auxiliary organizations consisting of volunteer members offer a valuable opportunity to strengthen national defense forces. Beyond reserve forces, the Finnish Soldiers’ Home Association, a civilian organization supporting the military forces, is an apt example of such an organization. However, the commitment of volunteers is essential for national defense system to rely on such affiliated organizations; commitment, which we argue is based on volunteer values and identification with the organization. We show that SODE volunteers have high pro-defense attitudes, patriotism, and security values and suggest that these should be made salient for successful recruitment and to reinforce volunteer–organization fit, identification and to ensure continued volunteer engagement, and subsequently strengthening the availability of military resources in times of need.