Career Boundary Crossing: The Importance of Networks for the Transition from the Military to Civilian Employment

Abstract

Research on the transition from the military to civilian life tends to focus on challenges such as unemployment, alcoholism, violence, and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) even though these problems affect only a minority of veterans. In contrast, this study analyses what forms of economic, cultural, and social capital (Bourdieu) are obtained during military training and service and how they are transferred to civilian employment. I argue that during the transition from the military to civilian employment, all three forms of capital are important. In particular, social capital in the form of formal and informal networks plays a crucial role with respect to transferring cultural capital or skills from one field to the other, but also for the investment (or borrowing) of economic capital. Boundary crossing between different fields – in this case organisational and work cultures–requires the transformation of habitus. The notion of a ‘veterans’ habitus’ is introduced. This study contributes to the understanding of career transitions and is based on biographical interviews with veterans who served in the British military.

Keywords

boundary crossing capital career transition civilian field habitus transformation military skills transfer United Kingdom veterans

Introduction

Existing literature on military veterans’ transition to civilian life and work tends to focus on difficulties such as mental and other health issues, unemployment, alcohol and drug abuse, violent and criminal behaviour (Williams et al., 2018). Furthermore, the British public perceives veterans as suffering from social and mental health problems (Phillips et al., 2022). Veterans experience the return to the civilian sphere as cultural shock or ‘cultural transition’ (Cooper et al., 2017), which is associated with the loss of military structure, status, and camaraderie. Thus, much of the existing literature on veterans has focused on the difficulties associated with leaving the military whereas career transitions from the military to the civilian labour force have found less attention. Rather than focusing on loss, my study examines what resources (or capital) are obtained in the military, how they are transferred to civilian employment, and how this transfer of capital is related to a transformation of the ‘military habitus’ (Cooper et al., 2018). For sociologists of work and careers, military veterans represent an intriguing part of the workforce. Whether a military career lasts several decades or only a few years, military service is usually just one career which is followed by other forms of employment.¹ Given the perceived differences between the military and the civilian sphere, veterans’ transitions to civilian employment provide a good opportunity to examine career boundary crossing between different organisational contexts and cultures.

Career transitions include the change of organisations, occupations, sectors, or geographic location and involve boundary crossing (Rodrigues et al., 2016). Whereas different types of career boundaries have been identified (Gander, 2021; Gunz et al., 2007; Rodrigues et al., 2016) less is known about the actual process of boundary crossing. I employ Bourdieu’s (1984) concepts capital, field, and habitus to examine the migration between different organisational cultures which requires the adjustment to new contexts. This involves the transfer of different forms of capital from one field to the other and habitus transformation (Bourdieu, 1977). Given the prevalence of career transitions in contemporary societies (Potter, 2020), it is important to know how boundary crossing is accomplished. I argue that social capital and networks of people who are familiar with the logics, cultures, and practices of different fields, are critical for career boundary crossing and matter for the transfer of economic and cultural capital. The examination of transition processes between different fields and organisational cultures in veterans’ networks thus contributes to the understanding of ‘boundary management strategies’ (Rodrigues et al., 2016: 683). Furthermore, this study of veterans’ boundary crossing broadens the scope of existing career research which has primarily focused on elites and has examined only a limited range of occupations and careers (Gunz and Mayrhofer, 2017; Rodrigues et al., 2016; Sullivan and Ariss, 2021).

This study asks: What forms of capital are obtained in the military and how are they transferred to the civilian sphere? What role does habitus transformation play in the transition process? What does the examination of veterans’ career transitions contribute to the understanding of career boundary crossing? First, I briefly review research on career transitions, career boundary crossing, and how the careers literature has utilised Bourdieu’s concepts of capital, field, and habitus. Then I give a short overview over civil-military relations and veterans’ transitions to civilian work and life. The methods section describes data collection, sample, and data analysis. The results section describes what forms of capital are obtained during military service and how they are transferred. It also examines habitus transformation during the transition process and introduces the notion of a ‘veterans’ habitus’. The discussion section returns to the research questions, whereas the conclusion highlights the theoretical contributions and practical implications of this study.

Career studies and career boundary crossing

The notion of boundaryless careers which has dominated career studies since the 1990s (Roper et al., 2010) has been critically evaluated as focussing too much on individual agency and neglecting structural constraints (Inkson et al., 2012; Rodrigues et al., 2016), given that careers are ‘inevitably careers in context’ (Mayrhofer et al., 2020: 330). Thus, contemporary careers are characterised by boundaries and boundary crossing requires more attention (Gander, 2021). Career change can involve five different types of career boundaries: occupation, non-work, organisation, sector, and geography (Rodrigues et al., 2016: 676). These analytically distinguishable career boundaries are not necessarily mutually exclusive, and therefore need to be studied holistically. Career boundaries have subjective and objective dimensions, and might be permeable or impermeable (Gander, 2021). More knowledge is needed to understand how the transfer of context-specific skills and resources between different cultural or organisational contexts is accomplished. This study extends existing research on career transitions through examining the role of networks for learning to understand a different organisational culture (Carnabuci and Wezel, 2011). In contrast to existing research on networks which has emphasised information and influence (Castilla et al., 2013; Granovetter, 1973; Trimble and Kmec, 2011), this study examines the role of networks for the transfer of capital and the transformation of habitus. A Bourdieusian approach is employed which highlights how contexts shape (and are shaped by) people’s actions as well as their transition between social settings. Drawing on Bourdieu, this study examines how different forms of capital are obtained and transferred between fields and what role habitus transformation plays in the context of career boundary crossing.

Bourdieu and career boundary crossing

Bourdieu’s theory of practice with its emphasis on the interplay between structure and agency is particularly well-suited for the study of dynamics of careers (Chudzikowksi and Mayrhofer, 2011) and thus career boundary crossing. Bourdieu’s (1990) interrelated concepts field, habitus and capital provide a useful conceptual framework to explain people’s actions in various social and cultural settings as well as their transition between fields. A field is defined ‘as a network, or configuration, of objective relations between positions’ (Bourdieu and Wacquant, 1992: 97) which ‘follows rules, or better, regularities, that are not explicit and codified’ (Bourdieu and Wacquant, 1992: 98). Actors within the field need to understand the ‘rules of the game’ (Bourdieu, 1984). The reproduction – or transformation – of the field is an outcome of the interaction between actors who deploy various forms of the capital available to them. This means that actors might be able to shape fields, while fields also shape actors’ habitus – their perceptions, thinking and expressions. Over the life-course, the habitus is transformed by schooling and subsequent experiences, including employment, ‘from restructuring to restructuring’ (Bourdieu, 1977: 87). Thus, like the field, the habitus is both reinforced and modified overtime.

In each field, actors strategically employ different forms of capital. Bourdieu identifies a wide range of types and subtypes of capital, most prominently economic, cultural, and social capital which to a certain extent can be converted (Bourdieu, 1986). Economic capital is the most material type of capital and manifests in money, assets, and property. It can be used to obtain cultural capital in the form of educational qualifications, cultural goods, or practices. Practices associated with cultural capital, such as attending schools, membership in societies, or participating in events can contribute to the accumulation of social capital– the development of networks and relationships that provide access to opportunities, including job opportunities which in turn may contribute to the accumulation of economic capital. This means that although the forms of capital are distinct, they are related and can be converted to other forms of capital. Any form of capital can be authorised as symbolic capital if it is perceived and given value by social agents (Bourdieu, 1998: 47). This matters for the transfer and valuation of skills (cultural capital) from one field to the other.

The strength of Bourdieu’s theory of practice for the study of careers and career boundary crossing lies in providing a relational and dynamic approach and framework for interdisciplinary and multilevel analyses. At the same time, open questions such as ‘how is social capital structured; which roles do social networks play and how do they transfer into symbolic capital?’ (Chudzikowski and Mayrhofer, 2011: 29) remain, which require empirical investigation. My study of career boundary crossing examines the transfer of various forms of capital (social, economic, cultural) from one field to another. Furthermore, it considers the adaption or transformation of habitus in the context of boundary crossing which can be especially necessary and challenging if fields are perceived as quite distinct. In the next section, differences between the military and civilian field are discussed.

Civil-military relations and veterans’ transition to the civilian sphere

The military and the civilian sphere are considered as two distinct fields (Cooper et al., 2017: 57; Cooper et al., 2018: 161). Obviously, neither the military nor civilian work cultures are monolithic, thus these two ‘meta-fields’ (Cooper et al., 2017: 57), include interlinked sub-fields (Fligstein and McAdam, 2012). The military comprises different services, ranks, combat, and combat-supporting roles, whereas the segmented and stratified civilian labour market provides a wide range of employment opportunities. In contrast to most civilian organisations the military is a ‘total institution’ (Barnao, 2019; Goffman, 1961) which regulates and regiments its workforce to a greater or lesser extent.

Literature on civil-military relations focuses primarily on the relationship between civilian and military leadership and less on the gap between the military and society (Pion-Berlin and Dudley, 2020). The British Armed Forces – like other European militaries – have adopted New Public Management (NPM) and – to some extent – have become ‘normal organisations’ even though they are seen ‘fundamental different from the rest of society’ (Norheim-Martinsen, 2016: 314). Veterans² represent a group ‘along the continuum of military institutionalization’ (Griffith et al, 2020) and ‘fall in between complete and partial immersion in the military’ (Griffith et al., 2020: 2) – as well as the civilian sphere and thus between two fields with different logics.

The transition from the military to the civilian sphere requires adaptation and involves the ‘unmaking’ of military identities (Bulmer and Eichler, 2017; Cooper et al., 2017, 2018). Leaving the military can therefore be experienced as a loss of identity (Binks and Cambridge, 2018; Williams et al., 2018) and requires negotiating the cultural gap (Rahbek-Clemmensen et al., 2012) between civilian and military spheres such as differences in values and attitudes. Service leavers who undergo this ‘cultural transition’ (Cooper et al., 2017) must develop adequate cultural competences and an understanding of values and communication styles when re-entering the civilian sphere which might be hampered by a ‘military habitus’ (Cooper et al., 2018) or ‘military residue’ (Higate, 2001). The Military habitus is a result of institutional socialisation and shapes bodies and demeanour (Cooper et al., 2018). Difficulties that veterans experience in the transition to the civilian sphere are related to the perceived differences between (ex-)military and civilians regarding task and work orientation, the social division of labour, role differentiation and communication, in particular humour (Edelman, 2018; Walker, 2013). Note, that the ‘military habitus’ encompasses a wide range of different military experiences (Cooper et al., 2017, 2018).

The transition from the military to civilian employment is shaped by various factors (Mangum and Ball, 1987) including the social background of military personnel prior to enrolment (Elder et al., 2010; Wang et al., 2012) and generational differences (Humensky et al., 2013; Kleykamp, 2013; MacLean and Elder, 2007). In the United States, veterans are over-represented in occupations and industries that draw on technical subsets (air traffic control, maintenance, health) and military functions (security, transportation) as well as in management occupations, education/training/library occupations and life/physical/social science occupations (Schulker, 2017: 704). While military service can contribute to social mobility by offering training and work experience to disadvantaged groups (Elder et al., 2010), it also perpetuates, or even exacerbates, social inequality. In contrast to lower ranks, officers have more opportunities gaining leadership skills that can be successfully transferred to the civilian sphere.

In the UK, service leavers are entitled to support for the transition from the military to the civilian sphere by the UK Armed Forces (Godier et al., 2018) and Career Transition Partnership (CTP) (Ministry of Defence, 2016). Depending on rank, length of service, and circumstances of leaving entitlements vary (Godier et al., 2018). At one end of the spectrum are generous voluntary severance packages and pensions for long-serving and high-ranking military personnel. On the other end of the spectrum are training credits for acquiring additional skills for civilian employment. In addition to financial resources and acquired skills, employers’ attitudes matter for the veteran’s employment in the civilian labour market (Kleykamp, 2009; Stone and Stone, 2015). Civilian employers unfamiliar with military careers have a limited understanding of the skillset and employment trajectories of military personnel (Deloitte, 2016: 41; Cooper et al., 2018).

As long as the military and the civilian sphere are perceived as fundamentally different, the transition from the military to a civilian career thus represents an important example of career boundary-crossing.

Data and methods

Like other investigations of careers and career transitions (MacKenzie and Marks, 2019), an understanding of veterans re-entering the civilian sphere requires a temporal dimension (MacLean and Elder, 2007; Zinn, 2010). This means that all stages of the transitions between civilian and military spheres need to be taken into consideration. A life-history approach allows us to understand what attracted people to the military, what they learned, why they decided to leave, what resources were available to them, and how service leavers experienced the transition. This includes the class background of former service personnel, their motivations to join and to leave the Armed Forces, which I have discussed elsewhere (Roth, 2021). Narrative interviews can be employed to study the role of habitus in careers as it emerges in open-ended accounts (Cuzzocrea and Lyon, 2011:1037).

My study is based on 16 semi-structured, retrospective life history interviews with white British men, which were carried out between May 2017 and July 2018. The sample includes veterans from different services (British Army, the Naval Services, and the Royal Air Force), ranks, regions, and class backgrounds (see Table 1), but I was not successful to recruit female and Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) veterans for this study. However, white British men still make up most of the military personnel in the UK Armed Forces and the sample thus overall reflects the composition of British veterans with respect to gender and ethnicity.³ The sample of this qualitative study is, of course, not representative, but theoretical and purposive with the aim of capturing a range of different experiences.

Table 1.

Overview over sample, selected characteristics.

Service

-British Army (8)
-Royal Navy (5) & Royal Marines (2)
-Royal Air Force (1)

Age when joining

-Under 18 (3)
-18-19 (6)
-Over 20 (6)
-Age not known (National Service = conscription) (1)

Length of Service

-Less than 5 years (2)*
-Between 5 and 9 years (5)
-Between 10 and 19 years (5)
-20 years or more (4)
*including one who was enrolled in National Service

Rank when leaving

-Officer (9)*
-Non-Officer (7)
*Seven joined by enrolling in officers training, two moved up through the ranks

Family background and Education

-Military family (family members served in the military) (10)*
-Cadets programme at school (military training and recruitment) (6)*
-Grammar school, public school, boarding school (6)*
-Low income, financial difficulties (6)*
-University (5)*
*these categories are not mutually exclusive

Research participants were recruited in various ways including personal contacts, snowball sampling, advertisements, posters, and through various organisations. On average, the length of the interviews was one and a half hours (95.5 minutes), the shortest interview lasted 49 minutes, the longest 163 minutes. The study had ethics approval of the researcher’s university, participants were guaranteed strict confidentiality and provided written informed consent. Any identifying characteristics have been removed when quoting interview data.

Respondents were first asked to describe the circumstances that led them to military service, how they experienced serving in the military and the circumstances that led to the decision of leaving the armed forces before describing their transition to the civilian sphere. The narrative interviews were summarised, transcribed, and coded thematically using NVivo. I read the transcripts repeatedly to develop the coding scheme which was informed by the theoretical framework and my interest to understand the transitions between the military and civilian sphere in a biographical perspective. Codes related to concepts capital (various resources that could be accessed through the military), field (characteristics and practices of the military and civilian workplaces), and habitus (feelings and demeanour concerning context, culture, and communication). Accounts and reflections of embodiment and communication were the basis for the understanding of the transformation of a military to a veterans’ habitus. Next, I turn to different forms of capital and the opportunities and obstacles of transferring them from the military to the civilian sphere.

Capital transfer and habitus transformation during the transition from the military to the civilian workplace

During military training and service different forms of capital – economic, cultural and social–were acquired. Economic capital was most easily transferred from the military to the civilian sphere. As noted above, depending on rank and length of service, the entitlements varied. Only a small number of respondents stayed long enough receive a pension when leaving the armed forces (see Table 2).

Table 2.

Brief description of participants, selected characteristics.

	Length of service	Age when leaving service	Employment in civilian sphere after leaving AF
VT-1	Over 20 years	40s	Self-employed
VT-2	nearly 20 years	40s	Private Sector
VT-3	2 years (conscripted)	20s	Self-employed
VT-4	About 20 years	Late 30s	Public Sector
VT-5	Over 10 years	Early 30s	Private Sector
VT-6	8 years	Late 20s	Private Sector
VT-7	30 years	Late 40s	Private Sector
VT-8	10 years	Late 20s	Public Sector
VT-9	6 years	Late 20s	Public Sector
VT-10	3 years	20	Private Sector
VT-11	10 years	Early 30s	Public Sector
VT-12	About 5 years	Early 20s	Private Sector
VT-13	Over 10 years	Late 20s	Self-employed
VT-14	nearly 10 years	Late 20s	Student (Higher Education)
VT-15	Over 10 years	Late 20s	Private Sector
VT-16	6 years	Late 20s	Private Sector

Financial security through a pension allowed veterans to take their time to figure out the next chapter in their employment history, or as the following respondent put it ‘the next adventure’.

I’m going to have an immediate pension, so we’ll have food to put on the table, yeah, so I was very excited. And I think I thought it was right, you know, a new. . . here we are, the next adventure [VT-01].

Another officer, who had moved up through the ranks and was entitled to a pension, explained that he had done ‘all the fun stuff’ in the military and that he felt it was time ‘to do something new’. In his late thirties, it was the right time for him to start a second career:

Now, if I could have planned the final five years of my career to make sure I was in that place at that time at that rank with that seniority with that much service, I couldn’t have planned it any better, because it meant that I would have served enough time to leave the [military service] with an immediate pension, I would get the redundancy package, I’d hit a glass ceiling on where I was going to go in my career rank-wise, the jobs I’d done I had pretty much done all of the – all the fun stuff; everything else was going to be the same jobs but in different places. [ . . .] at the time I was only – I was about 38 – yes, 37 and I thought, ‘I could start another career somewhere else; I’ve got – this isn’t the end, this is just the time to do something new’. [VT-04]

The redundancy package and immediate pension provided him with financial security during the transition period. Another former officer, who had served a shorter period, and thus was not entitled to a pension, explained that his savings and a lump sum that he had received when leaving military service gave him time to be ‘a little bit more entrepreneurial in trying to create my own thing’ rather than having to look for a job to earn money right away. Moreover, he drew on contacts from the Armed Forces to raise additional funds for the company he was starting. He recalled,

We just came up with some good strategies of borrowing money and lending money to each other; this was a whole bunch of other Army guys who were doing the same thing and we became a little group [. . .] of people that work and help each other and the good thing about that was there was this instant trust, an officer’s mess trust; if you’ve been in the Army, you’ve been an officer, there is a high degree of trust there that just you don’t get with any other – with a civilian let’s say, which is great and it allowed me to push on. [VT-13]

Thus, not only the military itself was a source of economic capital, also the informal networks of veterans. Furthermore, service leavers were entitled to financial support for training and education which varied with respect to the length of service. One former soldier recalled that after six years in the Armed Forces he had realised that he increasingly disliked the military lifestyle. However, he was aware that after serving eight years, he would be entitled to financial support for higher education. Therefore, rather than ‘throwing the towel’, he carefully planned his way out and applied to university. He explained,

If you reach your eight year point you get a higher tier provision which most soldiers are not aware of, a lot of chain in command are not aware of and that’s intentional. They don’t want all these soldiers knowing that when they hit the eight year point, they can get an eight year higher tier payment scheme that pays for a full degree cost so £9,000 a year. [VT-14]

After he had secured his place at university, he handed in his notice, knowing that the Armed Forces had to release him to pursue his studies. Economic capital acquired in the military could thus be used to obtain cultural capital. In addition, respondents obtained a range of (to a greater or lesser extent) transferable skills in the armed forces through leadership positions, adventure training, travel, and apprenticeships.⁴ While some respondents emphasised that they had made good use of the available resources, others noted that they could have gotten more out of the training opportunities that the military offered. Many respondents, in particular those who had held officers’ positions, stressed that military service provided opportunities to gain skills in leadership and training as well as soft skills:

Transferrable skills that probably a significant proportion of military personnel have got. Organising and planning, and understanding the dependencies, and many of those disciplines that go with good project management, I think are things that we take for granted in the Service world [VT-02]

Thus, depending on rank and service, respondents obtained a range of transferable skills and cultural capital in the Armed Forces. What they had to learn – and felt that they were not taught by the CTP – was how to transfer this cultural capital to the civilian sphere. Depending on the length of their military career, they had spent years within an organisation without having to write CVs or participate in interviews. One former officer recalled a job interview during which he was told:

‘We looked at your CV with a lot of interest and you’re obviously very varied in what you’ve done but we couldn’t understand why you kept on changing your job every two or three years’ and I said, ‘What do you mean? I was in the Army for 30 years’. He said, ‘Your CV doesn’t come across that way because you put that from 1972 to 1975, ‘I did blah blah blah’ [. . .], ‘1975 to 1978 I did –’ and so they assumed, having had no experience of the Armed Forces or the military, that I was changing my profession every two to three years (laughs) and so professional CV writing is so important. [VT-07]

Given the gap between the military and the civilian sector, experiences and skills were not necessarily recognised in the civilian sphere. Thus, boundary crossers experienced obstacles transferring cultural capital, such as knowledge and skills acquired in the military to the civilian sphere. Referring to the cultural capital he had acquired during service and training, a former officer [VT-2] recommended getting ‘some help to translate that into language that the private sector would understand’. Several respondents described that they were mentored informally or formally which helped them to recognise their knowledge and capacities and how to communicate and transfer these skills.

Social capital such as informal and formal networks that were developed during military service were essential for making the best use of economic and cultural capital acquired in the Armed Forces. Particularly contact with veterans who had already made the transition to civilian careers was critical. Peer-support from veterans most importantly included sharing how to communicate leadership and other skills to civilian employers who were not familiar with skills and habitus acquired in the military. Talking with other veterans about job aspirations helped respondents to identify the kind of employment they were interested in and how to apply for it. Veterans recognised each other and their habitus shaping their behaviour and demeanour, for example how they dressed and communicated. One respondent explained how he went to a job interview where he was the only candidate who had turned up in a suit, while other applicants were dressed more casually:

Went into the interview and the chap who was interviewing, he’s looked at my CV and he said, ‘Ah! [military service]?’ I said, ‘Yes’. ‘How long have you been out?’ So, I said, ‘Oh, about three and a half weeks or so’. ‘Fine. Hmm. Start Monday?’ Yeah. I started Monday. [. . .] Now, what I didn’t know at the time, I turned up at 9.00 am on Monday morning, and the chap who was interviewing me stood there wearing a [military service] tie. Ah! Right. That’s it. ‘[military service] myself’, he said. ‘Ah, right, okay’, ‘So, I know what I’m getting here’, he said. [VT-08]

Having served in the military, especially in the same service or regiment, indicated to the employer or hiring agent skills and character. The shared military background provided familiarity and served as a basis of trust among former service personnel, even among those who did not know each other personally during military service. Friendship offered another form of social capital that was important. A former officer recalled how he found his first job after military service:

I was actually recruited out of the Army by a very good friend of mine who was running his own very successful [. .] company based in [. . .] and I was – I went as his Operation’s Director, responsible for the – I was really the interface [. . .] I had a team [. .] from the Army [VT-07]

Veterans’ networks comprised organisations, personal contacts, strong long-lasting friendships as well as strangers with a shared military background. Some respondents benefitted from mentoring through a formal veterans’ network in their private sector workplace. One respondent, who benefitted from being mentored by in such a network is now mentoring other veterans. He explained how he helped someone who stated,

‘I’m Corporal in the Royal Engineers, what do I know?’ So, I helped him recognise his qualities and mentor him on to this platform. He got into [private sector employer] on the internship with my help and he had a process where he was exposed to all these different areas within the [private sector] and found an area that he was comfortable with and he now has a job in [private sector employer] in an area that [. . .] he never really thought about and never really considered and he is flourishing, he does it exceptionally well, he’s very well paid, especially considering his job in the Army and what he was looking at and now his whole life is transformed in to – he’s on a different level of trajectory [VT-15]

Formal and informal contacts with former Armed Forces personnel thus played an important role in the transition to civilian employment. Once veterans had found work in the civilian sphere, they had to adapt to different forms of communication and practices. During the transition their military habitus was transformed. All respondents, regardless of class background, rank, and length of service, shared in the interviews that leaving the armed forces was a liberating experience, but that they also had to adjust to communication and decision-making in the civilian sphere. A former officer recalled,

And started my NHS [National Health Service] job, really enjoyed it for about three months and then the culture clash started getting a bit much, because coming from a military environment where you are quite male dominated, fixing things very quickly, telling people how to do their job and fix it, you suddenly go into a very female dominated environment of medical professionals where they like healing things. So as long as it is going in the right direction, it doesn’t really matter how long it takes, and that was a struggle, but I found it really interesting and very beneficial for me. [VT-11]

In this quotation, the differences (‘culture clash’) between the male dominated military field and the female dominated field of the NHS which shaped his habitus are highlighted.⁵ This respondent described the military habitus as ‘fixing things and telling people’. When he encountered the work culture of the NHS, he felt that his military habitus did not fit the civilian field to which he had to adapt. This involved habitus transformation while getting accustomed a ‘new way of being’, different ways of perceiving and solving problems and communicating. He was not the only one who had to get used to a more deliberative practice of decision making. Another former officer recalled,

I think initially it was quite difficult because in the Army, in particular in the infantry, you do things and do them very quickly and you do them very, you know, you don’t stop until they’re done and, you know, there’s a sense of urgency that you kind of get instilled with throughout training and your kind of daily life, and it was quite difficult to start off with understanding that people who hadn’t received that kind of training. [. . .] They want to be a little bit more slow and a bit more analytical with it. [VT-16]

Whereas the military decision-making processes were clearly structured in a ‘chain of command’, the civilian sphere often involved lengthy deliberations which respondents initially experienced as frustrating. However, respondents became accustomed to a deliberative style of decision making and found that this could lead to better solutions. Working in the civilian sector after a longer or shorter period in the military required adjusting to different ways of communicating. Communication practices played an important role in the context of career boundary crossing and habitus transformation. Several respondents missed the banter and innuendo that they were used to from the masculine culture of the armed forces. Referring to his civilian workplace, a former officer explained,

I am quite hyper aware of what I’m saying all the time, because in the military, you have a lot of banter, there is a lot of swearing, there’s a lot of kind of, you know, hyper masculinity, and I think I don’t want to offend anyone [. . .] So I am very conscious about trying to be overtly inclusive and overtly polite at all times, which can be a little bit difficult and might make me sound a little bit disingenuous potentially [VT-16]

When this respondent started working in the civilian sphere, he realised that the ‘banter’ he was used to from the military was perceived as inappropriate and he adjusted his communication in the company of colleagues without a military background. Like other respondents, he had consciously left the Armed Forces and had started a new chapter of his life. During the transition period, pride about the military experience was mixed with fear of being stereotyped in the civilian workplace, as the following former officer explains,

I think I walked an almost schizophrenic path between being proud of my military heritage, and wanting to hide it for fear of that being a mechanism by which I would be stereotyped and lose my credibility. So, it was an interesting period, and it definitely took a long time, probably years, to stop feeling uncomfortable at the lack of camaraderie. And that, I suspect, when you talk to lots and lots of ex-Service people, you will hear that I think come through time and time again that the sense of unified behind a common purpose, and unified by a sense of belonging in there. And it was that, I think, that was probably the most difficult part of the transition, of just not having that network in such a strength. [VT-2]

Regardless of rank and length of service, respondents felt that only those who had served in the armed forces could really understand them. As one former soldier put it,

On the same wavelength in the way you chat, you know, you straight away relate to each other and we like, ‘oh yeah, I did four years in the navy’ and ‘I did nine years in the army’ and, you know, we were chatting loads and you socialise easier. [VT-14]

The previously mentioned private sector veterans’ network did not only offer mentoring opportunities, but also opportunities for socialising with others who share a military background. One respondent shared,

I miss the camaraderie; civilians are quite different to that and I know I’m saying that now that I’m a civilian but we have it here where we have a [private company] Military Network and guys we know here are ex-Army and it’s great when we all meet up and we have a few drinks, we go and get some food because no matter who you are, what you’ve been, what you’ve done, you have those common, shared experiences of being Army, or being in the military, whether it’s Navy, Air Force, Army. [VT-15]

Through the contact with other veterans in the private sphere and at the workplace former military personnel developed a veterans’ habitus and were able to transfer economic and cultural capital from the military to the civilian sphere.

Discussion

In contrast to existing scholarship which focuses primarily on the difficulties which veterans experience during the transition process (Williams et al., 2018), this study examined how capital that was acquired in the military is transferred to civilian employment. I now return to the research questions posed in the introduction. First, what forms of capital are obtained in the military and how are they transferred to the civilian sphere? My study shows that different forms of capital were acquired and that social capital mattered for the transfer of economic and cultural capital. Boundary crossing requires the transfer of cultural capital through obtaining ‘cultural and field-specific coded forms of language’ (Demirel et al., 2021: 926). For the transfer of cultural capital acquired during military service, it was necessary to explain and translate the significance of military experience and skills to the civilian sphere. In this regard, cultural meaningful networks (Edelmann, 2018) or social capital played a crucial and positive role. Former military staff understood the ‘military habitus’ (Cooper et al., 2018) and were able to assist service leavers in recognising their skills and communicating them in their CVs, applications and interviews. Veterans’ networks which include strong and weak ties (Granovetter, 1973), facilitate the transfer and translation of skills and knowledge between different fields, the military and civilian employment. This involves getting accustomed to a ‘new way of being’, different ways of perceiving and solving problems and communicating (Cooper et al., 2018; Davey, 2009). Veterans serve as bridge-builders between different spheres. It is important to keep in mind that veterans are civilians – they are familiar both with military service and the civilian sphere. Familiarity with both spheres and the ‘veterans’ habitus’ enables former service personnel to give and receive peer support. Whereas Edelmann (2018) found that service leavers with a higher military proportion within their cultural meaningful networks faced more difficulties in the transition to civilian work and life, this study suggest that military contacts were helpful in the transition.

Second, what role does habitus transformation play in the transition process? Previous studies (Cooper et al., 2018; Edelmann 2018) have indicated that the ‘military habitus’ can hamper the transition to a civilian career. This study introduces the concept of a ‘veterans’ habitus’ which encompasses familiarity with the practices and ‘rules of the game’ of both, the military and civilian fields. My data analysis shows how during the career boundary crossing from the military to the civilian labour market the ‘military habitus’ is transformed into a ‘veterans’ habitus’. This involves becoming aware of taken for granted knowledge and behaviour in the military field and adapting to communication and demeanour in the civilian sphere. Veterans recognise and share an understanding of both the military and a civilian habitus. The veterans’ habitus is developed when veterans navigate the civilian sphere, translate skills, and transfer various forms of capital. It is important to remember that a habitus is not fixed but ‘a never-ending process of construction, with individuals’ biographies and stocks of capital in constant tension or alignment with the field’ (Davey, 2009: 278). Veterans are in a dual position in that they are civilians and part of the civilian sphere, but they are also familiar with the military, its culture, structure, and processes. Access to veterans’ networks in the private sphere and at the workplace supports veterans’ habitus transformation. According to my study, these networks are perceived as more important than the support offered through the Career Transition Partnership and services of the Armed Forces.

Third, what does this study of veterans contribute to the understanding of career boundary crossing in general? It indicates that boundary crossers benefit from networks of those who are familiar with the logics, cultures, and practices of different fields and thus can translate between different work cultures. This is not only relevant for career boundary crossing between the military and civilian workplaces, but for transitions (or migration) between other different (work) cultures. The transition between different fields requires ‘speaking the language’ and finding the right ‘tone’ (Demirel et al., 2021). In addition, this study addresses the need to ‘look at careers beyond the mainstream’ (Gunz and Mayrhofer, 2017) and extends existing career studies which have primarily focused on elites.

Conclusion

This examination of veterans’ transition to civilian employment progresses the sociological understanding of careers by examining how career boundary crossing is accomplished. It thus goes beyond studies that map career boundaries (Rodrigues et al., 2016). I employed the conceptual framework of Bourdieu to show how habitus transformation and capital transfer are accomplished during transition and career change. Existing research identified the ‘military habitus’ (Cooper et al., 2017, 2018) as an obstacle for the successful transition to the civilian sphere. In contrast, my study found that the ‘veterans’ habitus’ reflects the adjustment to the civilian sphere. It confirms that veterans’ networks are culturally meaningful (Edelmann, 2018), but concludes that they have a positive rather than a negative impact on the successful transition to the civilian sphere. Veterans’ networks play a crucial role for the development of the ‘veterans’ habitus’ and the transfer of capital. This matters not only for the transition between the military and the civilian sphere, but also for the career boundary crossing between other (work) cultures. Existing research on networks emphasises information and influence (Castilla et al., 2013; Granovetter, 1973; Trimble and Kmec, 2011), in contrast, my study demonstrates that networks play an important role for the transfer of capital and the transformation of habitus (learning ‘the rules of the game’). Future research should investigate the role of different types of networks, how they are utilised by different groups, and consider different contexts of career boundary crossing.

The study also has practical implications and draws attention to some of the processes that shape the transition from the military to civilian employment and improve the transition experience overall. First, it is important to consider what forms of economic, cultural, and social capital can be acquired during military service. Second, peer-support plays an important role. Third, it is important to keep in mind that veterans are civilians. Thus, it is important to distinguish between civilians who have a military background and those who do not. Veterans are employers or co-workers who can offer support to those who are leaving the Armed Forces. Future research should examine the career boundary crossing of female, Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) veterans. Furthermore, the transformation of the ‘veterans’ habitus’ and the role of social capital should be studied in a longitudinal perspective. In addition, the role of different networks such as online social networking sites, veterans’ networks and mentorship programmes in the private sector, and the role of third sector organisations for career boundary crossing of veterans should be investigated.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

I am very grateful to the research participants who shared their experiences with me. Many thanks to Pauline Leonard and Heidi Armbruster for their encouragement and feedback on earlier versions of this article. Thank you to the anonymous reviewers and editor, I very much appreciate the perceptive and constructive feedback that helped me to improve the paper.

Ethical Approval

This study had ethics approval from the University of Southampton.

Funding

The author disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study was funded by the Strategic Interdisciplinary Research Development Fund of the Faculty of Social and Human Sciences of the University of Southampton.

ORCID iD

Silke Roth

Notes

Author biography

Silke Roth is Professor of Sociology in the Department of Sociology, Social Policy and Criminology at the University of Southampton. She works at the intersections of political sociology and the sociology of work. Her recent publications include the book Organising for Change. Social Change Makers and Social Change Organisations (with Clare Saunders) and the Handbook on Humanitarianism and Inequality (co-edited with Bandana Purkayastha and Tobias Denskus).

References

Barnao

(2019) Military training. Group, culture, total institution, and torture. Italian Sociological Review 9(2): 304–304.

Binks

Cambridge

(2018) The transition experiences of British military Veterans. Political Psychology 39(1): 125–142.

Bourdieu

(1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Bourdieu

(1984) Distinction. A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. London: Routledge.

Bourdieu

(1986) The forms of capital. In: Richardson

(ed.) Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. New York: Greenwood, pp. 241–258.

Bourdieu

(1990) The Logic of Practice. Cambridge: Polity.

Bourdieu

(1998) Practical Reason: On the Theory of Action. Cambridge: Polity.

Bourdieu

Wacquant

LJD

(1992) An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Cambridge: Polity.

Britton

Logan

(2008) Gendered organizations: Progress and prospects. Sociology Compass 2(1): 107–121.

10.

Bulmer

Eichler

(2017) Unmaking militarized masculinity: Veterans and the project of military-to-civilian transition. Critical Military Studies 3(2): 161–181.

11.

Carnabuci

Wezel

(2011) Back to the future: Career transitions at the dawn of capitalism: The immigration of merchants from the Southern Netherlands to Amsterdam, 1578–1602. Organization Studies 32(12): 1621–1637.

12.

Castilla

Lanm

Rissing

, et al. (2013) Social networks and employment: Mechanisms (Part 1). Sociology Compass 7(12): 999–1012.

13.

Chudzikowski

Mayrhofer

(2011) In search of the blue flower? Grand social theories and career research: The case of Bourdieu’s theory of practice. Human Relations 64(1): 19–36.

14.

Cooper

Caddick

Godier

, et al. (2017) A model of military to civilian transition: Bourdieu in action. Journal of Military, Veteran and Family Health 3(2):53–60.

15.

Cooper

Caddick

Godier

, et al. (2018) Transition from the military into civilian life. Armed Forces & Society 44(1): 156–177.

16.

Cuzzocrea

Lyon

(2011) Sociological conceptualisations of ‘career’: A review and reorientation. Sociology Compass 5(12): 1029–1043.

17.

Davey

(2009) Using Bourdieu’s concept of habitus to explore narratives of transition. European Educational Research Journal 8(2): 276–284.

18.

Deloitte (2016) Veterans Work. Recognising the Potential of Ex-Service Personnel. London: Deloitte/Forces in Mind Trust.

19.

Demirel

Nemkova

Taylor

(2021) Reproducing global inequalities in the online labour market: Valuing capital in the design field. Work, Employment and Society 35(5): 914–930.

20.

Edelmann

(2018) Culturally meaningful networks: On the transition from military to civilian life in the United Kingdom. Theory and Society 47(3): 327–380.

21.

Elder

Jr Wang

Spence

, et al. (2010) Pathways to the all-volunteer military. Social Science Quarterly 91(2): 455–475.

22.

Fligstein

McAdam

(2012) A Theory of Fields. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

23.

Gander

(2021) The hybrid career concept: Creating hybrid career pathways. Career Development International 26(7): 853–868.

24.

Godier

Caddick

Kiernan

, et al. (2018) Transition support for vulnerable service leavers in the U.K.: Providing care for early service leavers. Military Behavioral Health 6(1): 13–21.

25.

Goffman

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

26.

Granovetter

(1973) The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology 78(6): 1360–1380.

27.

Griffith

Connelly

Catigani

, et al. (2020) Reservists and veterans: Viewed from within and without. In: Sookermany

(ed.) Handbook of Military Sciences. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 1–26. DOI:10.1007/978-3-030-02866-4_34-3.

28.

Gunz

Mayrhofer

(2017) Rethinking Career Studies: Facilitating Conversation across Boundaries with the Social Chronology Framework. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

29.

Gunz

Peiperl

Tzabbar

(2007) Boundaries in the study of career. In: Gunz

Peiperl

(eds) Handbook of Career Studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 471–494.

30.

Higate

(2001) Theorizing continuity: From military to civilian life. Armed Forces & Society 27(3): 443–460.

31.

Humensky

Jordan

Stroupe

, et al. (2013) How are Iraq/Afghanistan-era veterans faring in the labor market? Armed Forces & Society 39(1): 158–183.

32.

Inkson

Gunz

Ganesh

, et al. (2012) Boundaryless careers: Bringing back boundaries. Organization Studies 33(3): 323–340.

33.

Kleykamp

(2009) A great place to start? The effect of prior military service on hiring. Armed Forces & Society 35(2): 266–285.

34.

Kleykamp

(2013) Unemployment, earnings and enrollment among post 9/11 veterans. Social Science Research 42(3): 836–851.

35.

MacKenzie

Marks

(2019) Older workers and occupational identity in the telecommunications industry: Navigating employment transitions through the life course. Work, Employment and Society 33(1): 39–55.

36.

MacLean

Elder

(2007) Military service in the life course. Annual Review of Sociology 33(1): 175–196.

37.

Mangum

Ball

(1987) Military skill training: Some evidence of transferability. Armed Forces & Society 13(3): 425–441.

38.

Mayrhofer

Smale

Briscoe

, et al. (2020) Laying the foundations of international careers research. Human Resource Management Journal 30(3): 327–342.

39.

Ministry of Defence (2016) Career Transition Partnership Annual Statistics. UK Regular Service Personnel Employment Outcomes 2010/11 to 2014/15. Bristol: Ministry of Defence.

40.

Norheim-Martinsen

(2016) New sources of military change – Armed forces as normal organizations. Defence Studies 16(3): 312–326.

41.

Phillips

Connelly

Burgess

(2022) Exploring the victimization of British veterans: Comparing British beliefs about Veterans with beliefs about soldiers. Armed Forces & Society 48(2): 385–409.

42.

Pion-Berlin

Dudley

(2020) Civil-military relations: What is the state of the field. In: Sookermany

(ed.) Handbook of Military Sciences. Cham: Springer, pp. 1–22.

43.

Potter

(2020) The ghost of the stable path: Stories of work-life change at the ‘end of career’. Work, Employment and Society 34(4): 571–586.

44.

Rahbek-Clemmensen

Archer

Barr

, et al. (2012) Conceptualizing the civil–military gap: A research note. Armed Forces & Society 38(4): 669–678.

45.

Rodrigues

Guest

Budjanovcanin

(2016) Bounded or boundaryless? An empirical investigation of career boundaries and boundary crossing. Work, Employment and Society 30(4): 669–686.

46.

Roper

Ganesh

Inkson

(2010) Neoliberalism and knowledge interests in boundaryless careers discourse. Work, Employment and Society 24(4): 661–679.

47.

Roth

(2021) Finding purpose, challenge and adventure: Military service as meaningful work. In: Kupfer

(ed.) Work Appropriation and Social Inequality. Wilmington, DE: Vernon Press, pp. 49–68.

48.

Schulker

(2017) The recent occupation and industry employment patterns of American veterans. Armed Forces & Society 43(4): 695–710.

49.

Stone

(2015) Factors affecting hiring decisions about veterans. Human Resource Management Review 25(1): 68–79.

50.

Sullivan

Ariss

(2021) Making sense of different perspectives on career transitions: A review and agenda for future research. Human Resource Management Review 31(1): 100727.

51.

Trimble

Kmec

(2011) The role of social networks in getting a job. Sociology Compass 5(2): 165–178.

52.

Walker

(2013) Anticipating army exit. Armed Forces & Society 39(2): 284–304.

53.

Wang

Elder

Jr Spence

(2012) Status configurations, military service and higher education. Social Forces 91(2): 397–422.

54.

Williams

Allen-Collinson

Hockey

, et al. (2018) ‘You’re just chopped off at the end’: Retired servicemen’s identity work struggles in the military to civilian transition. Sociological Research Online 23(4): 812–829.

55.

Zinn

(2010) The biographical management of risk and uncertainty – British veterans. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research 11(1). DOI: 10.17169/fqs-11.1.1457.