**5. Conclusions**

This study addresses personal and collective factors emerging in energy behavior in a military unit. These are the main conclusions from the study:

First, collective and individual behavior has to be segregated while testing energy behavior in a military unit. The research findings justify this conceptual segregation and show that the dependence between the behavior change factors and the collective energy-saving behavior is pronounced more than the dependence between the factors of the individual's behavior. The segregation of collective and individual behavior is a fundamentally new approach when testing the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation-Behavior (COM-B) model.

Second, an extended COM-B model can be used while measuring pro-environmental energy behavior in the military. The model validation process led to a construct with three statistically reliable indicators representing the three independent *COM* variables. In this construct, the three indicators were formed of a different number of measures, respectively: Capability was defined by three levels of knowledge (I receive information, I know, I understand). Opportunity was defined by seven measures and composed the largest indicator in the construct. Motivation, composed of three measures, was the strongest component of the model.

Third, positive energy behavior is linked with an overall satisfaction with the military service. This finding indicates that the three COM-B model variables—Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation—need to be understood more broadly than only in conjunction with pro-environmental energy behavior. Motivation is the dominant variable of the COM-B model in this study and it is, therefore, linked with the satisfaction too. Military service satisfaction through motivation is said to influence energy behavior in the military unit.

Fourth, there is only a small difference in energy behavior between the professional soldiers and conscripts. This finding demonstrates that while collective behavior prevails over the individual one in the military unit, the time and nature of the military service does not make a significant impact on energy behavior. This confirms the theoretical statements that energy behavior is a learned entity and therefore, further research on energy behavior in military organizations should incorporate this insight.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization—R.S., A.J., G.L.; Data curation, A.J., G.L.; Formal analysis, R.S., A.J.; Investigation, R.S.; Methodology, G.L.; Writing—Original draft, R.S., A.J.; Writing—Review& editing, A.J., G.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This research received no external funding.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.
