Everest Expedition - The Way Ahead?

Discussion in 'Army Reserve' started by Blyth_spirit, May 2, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Unless you've been hiding under a stone these past few weeks, I daresay you've seen the coverage of the Army Everest expedition 2006. If you haven't, take a moment to peruse the ( as ever) well presented website:

    http://www.armyoneverest.mod.uk/

    Prominent on all of the promotional material and adverts are the two symbols of the Army and TA. At every stage it is made patently clear that the expedition is made up of both regular and TA soldiers and this is clearly the first (and IMHO very successful) stab at One Army Recruiting (OAR).

    It does, however, raise an interesting issue.

    The two brands: Army Be the Best, and our own 70's green and yellow go faster TA are shown next to one another, implying that they are different organisations. I have always identified the Army symbol as covering both regular and TA but the implication here is that it is only the regular element. Furthermore, from the Army home page (http://www.army.mod.uk/index.htm):

    Now just one cotton picking minute! If we're not part of the British Army then what the buggery bollards are we part of?

    As I understood it, project OAR would give the British Army (regular and TA) a one army recruiting umbrella with the full time and part time elements developing sub brands within that. The issue appears to be either that the regular army recruiters fear that by letting the TA within 'their' brand they will somehow devalue it or that they are unwilling to develop a new regular brand to sit alongside the TA but beneath the general Army brand.

    I don't think we should get into another round of TA re-branding discussion (although the subject remains unresolved) but we should get some clarification on this point. Under OAR we should not be seeing the TA element further distanced from the Army brand as this will exacerbate the problems OAR was developed to solve.
     
  2. msr

    msr LE

    I'm just amazed they got all their ITFAs and ATFAs squared and didn't have the land clearance pulled at the last minute....

    But seriously, we are two separate organisations, doesn't the co-location of the logos (which I don't think I have seen before) show how close the two organisations are?

    msr
     
  3. I have to say BS, I'm with msr here.

    Softly softly, catchee monkey.

    The very fact that the two brands are side by side is a step forward, and maybe not a bad thing that they remain separate as we negotiate the next few years of rebalancing and all the challenges that this will bring.

    I'm more concenred about whether the TA guy(s) have got enough MTDs, have got permission from their employers, have passed MATTs, and will get comparable treatment by the MOD if they fall off the mountain and are paralysed for life.....
     
  4. Interesting thought, Blyth, which I hadnt noticed. I think we all know why there isnt a sub brand for regs as well as one for TA - it's because of the mindset of those whose trainset it is. :roll:

    Having said that, I was just trying to find the link from all the infantry ads that have been on recently (not a lot of search engine optimisation done by the army) and came across this page:

    infantry jobs

    I'm impressed - I'm not infantry (as can be seen by the fact I was able to turn this PC on :wink: ) but if I was that would make me feel loved! They need to work on the other pages on the site but the juxtaposition of the regulr - part time is exactly what OAR is about.

    I think OAR recruiting is a major benefit for the TA - and it would be even more so if it was taken entirely away from RFCAs and given to the C of C. Already, I can see opportunities for us opening up with no detriment so far.

    Anything that stops those godawful 'you need the TA' ads running again. Was never quite sure of their message "are you a hyperactive idiot, with no friends? - then You need the TA!" FFS! :roll:
     
  5. From the TA part of the everest site

    I like it!
     
  6. BS, stop being so touchy, this isn't Arabism. I put it to you that had the TA logo not been on no one would have thought for a minute that some of 'the Pride of England- her volunteers' were on the exped. I also agree that use of phrase 'part time officer and soldier' on infantry site a massive step forward.
     
  7. I think the danger is that if you don't include the TA logo, people will assume the TA isn't involved. We should continue to include both logos and move towards a shared image. Once we are closer, we can start fidling with combined logos.

    I have to agree with the bad terminology though. We should be integrating the thought of the TA being "the reserve element of the British Army" rather than a seperate organisation.
     
  8. I would point out that I think the joint marketing of the Everest exped is an excellent first step and should be applauded. Getting the TA badge on the marketing is a big advance.

    PE's example from the infantry web page is an excellent example of how it should be done. regular and part time career opportunities shown side by side within the wider infantry brand. The webmaster at DInf is to be congratulated. Unfortunately this is not replicated across the board. In fact none of the other corps web pages provide anything like this.

    I'm not trying to be chippy about this, I'm not saying that the TA should be marketed the same as the regulars. We're different organisations with different issues and needs. But we are both part of the same larger organisation: The British Army. That's why I find it counterproductive to read comments like "soldiers and officers from the British Army and the Territorial Army" on the front page of the Army website.

    We are undeniably in a state of flux - the Everest marketing is evidence of this - and so it is right to look at how changes should be made. Now is the opportunity, while the new organisations are bedding in, to try and get this marketing right. A cynic might say that OAR is just a ploy to minimise spend on TA marketing by sticking the logo on all regular marketing and that's it. If we want to make the marketing work for us it needs to be more than that.