Assessing Military Professionals' Endorsement of Decision-Making Assumptions: An Exploratory Factor Analysis

Area of Science:

• Military Psychology
• Decision Science
• Organizational Behavior

Background:

• Military decision-making in volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) environments is critical.
• Existing frameworks, such as Klein's, are often assumed to represent a unified construct of decision-making beliefs.
• Understanding the nuanced interpretation of these frameworks by military professionals is essential for effective strategy.

Purpose of the Study:

• To examine how military professionals interpret decision-making claims within VUCA contexts.
• To determine if endorsement of Klein's decision-making claims reflects a unified construct or distinct beliefs.
• To investigate the underlying structure of decision-making beliefs among active-duty military personnel.

Main Methods:

• A survey was administered to 225 active-duty personnel in the Norwegian Armed Forces.
• Exploratory factor analysis (principal axis factoring with Oblimin rotation) was performed on nine decision-making items.
• Comparative model testing was used to evaluate unidimensional versus two-factor structures.

Main Results:

• A two-factor structure provided a better fit than a unidimensional model, explaining 29.24% of the variance.
• The two identified dimensions were Planning/Structure and Analytic/Evidence-based practices.
• Both dimensions demonstrated acceptable internal reliability.

Conclusions:

• Military professionals' endorsement of decision-making frameworks is not unidimensional.
• Two complementary attitudes—Planning/Structure and Analytic/Evidence-based practices—characterize effective decision-making beliefs.
• This bifactorial structure provides a foundation for future research on adaptive decision making in military and high-stakes operational settings.