I wonder if a better formulation is that morale is roughly, “the belief that you are winning for a reason” with a boost from (1) contributing and (2) effort.
I prefer this for a few reasons:
‘Winning’ incorporates both the societal and the individual and folds in cases where you might achieve some goals but not see material change in your conditions. Plus, it incorporates in-group biases and the shared sense of victory when you support a team. For example, when you support a sports team and you win, you feel high morale even though your condition has likely not actually improved as a result.
‘Winning’ also incorporates the importance of mission alignment. Your condition might get better from effort, but you might still not feel a morale boost unless your effort and condition are correlated with what you believe in. You might work 80 hour weeks in a bank and make a bigger bonus, or fly an extra mission and get closer to being discharged, but feel absolutely demoralised because you don’t believe that the effort you are doing gets you to ‘winning’. ‘Winning’ is more than improved conditions. Literature around morale suggests that this kind of mission alignment is pretty important.
‘Contributing’ and ‘effort’ both seem meaningful but distinct additions to morale. The boost from ‘I was the taxi driver for the lead player of the team I support and they won because I got him there on time’ is more contribution oriented. The boost from ‘I have been supporting this team and going to their games for twenty years, and this is the first time they won’ is effort oriented. Both may see huge morale boosts, but don’t involve similar levels of contribution / effort.
I wonder if a better formulation is that morale is roughly, “the belief that you are winning for a reason” with a boost from (1) contributing and (2) effort.
I prefer this for a few reasons:
‘Winning’ incorporates both the societal and the individual and folds in cases where you might achieve some goals but not see material change in your conditions. Plus, it incorporates in-group biases and the shared sense of victory when you support a team. For example, when you support a sports team and you win, you feel high morale even though your condition has likely not actually improved as a result.
‘Winning’ also incorporates the importance of mission alignment. Your condition might get better from effort, but you might still not feel a morale boost unless your effort and condition are correlated with what you believe in. You might work 80 hour weeks in a bank and make a bigger bonus, or fly an extra mission and get closer to being discharged, but feel absolutely demoralised because you don’t believe that the effort you are doing gets you to ‘winning’. ‘Winning’ is more than improved conditions. Literature around morale suggests that this kind of mission alignment is pretty important.
‘Contributing’ and ‘effort’ both seem meaningful but distinct additions to morale. The boost from ‘I was the taxi driver for the lead player of the team I support and they won because I got him there on time’ is more contribution oriented. The boost from ‘I have been supporting this team and going to their games for twenty years, and this is the first time they won’ is effort oriented. Both may see huge morale boosts, but don’t involve similar levels of contribution / effort.