New Army recruitment campaign

There is a significant difference between a business marketing skincare products and the Army. Actually, there are a few:-

1. You have multiple competitors selling similar stuff. Your website needs to be easy for first time visitors to navigate or they will tend to go elsewhere.
The Army has far fewer competitors, and for some career options has virtually none. Their website only needs to fulfill basic functionality.

2. You are selling a product which lasts a short time, so are dependent on repeat orders, which means repeat visits from customers. If their online experience of your business isn't great, they will tend to go elsewhere.
The Army is selling a career choice. Once a person has been through the process, they normally don't need to repeat it.

3. You are selling a product which will be delivered to them by someone else. Your only contact with customers is the online contact, which makes that online contact the be all and end all.
The Army is using its online presence only to act as an invitation for further direct contact.
Well, I couldn't agree more with all your points which are pretty well undeniable unless you badly mis-read them.

The reason I referred to Capita as 'a bunch of Bobs' wasn't just gratuitous abuse (that was just a bonus) but because there were real parallels. Capita had no experience and minimal knowledge of what the Army needed them to do (and Capita said they could do) but they somehow convinced the Army that what little knowledge they had qualified them.

Similarly, Bob has no experience of digital marketing beyond selling his 'natural' line of beauty products on line, competing with others made from sheep fat, goat's milk or camel dung, which has diddley to do with what the Army needs from it's website, but he's somehow convinced some here that what little knowledge he has qualifies him.
 
There is SO much going on now in working units. I knew where my troops were and stacked should have done too. But the orderly room or RAO just can't keep up with the myriad of functions a modern troop can be carrying out.

we have it to keep track of it. Excel and a printer

a cpl's club meeting, let's say Thursday 13-1400. I'd day on an average thursday, I'd have one cpl on a de t manifest, inspection and packing. One on a matt/trg, one in the garages (so spare) and the other delivering trg or carrying out online maint of a det.

None of that will be known by the orderly room. At least one of those cpls will unreleasable.
@T_T, I agree with you entirely on this one, except that's always been the case - it's nothing new.

What the SSM was asking for, though, going back to post #1,968, was an updated nominal roll from sqns on his own spreadsheet which, I think we're agreed, would have been pointless as sqns could no more have given availability for some future Cpls Mess meeting than the orderly room or RAO nor should they have been asked to.

I may be old-fashioned about this, but to me this was simply one of the most dis-courteous and dis-respectful things I've ever seen, not only to the JNCOs but to the RSM and his fellow SSMS and in any units I've been in would have been followed not by an "awesome SJAR" but by a succession of "who the feck do you think you are" moments.
 
RPAS pilot, WSO and pilot are neither the only jobs in the RAF nor the only jobs they advertise. If you can't recall somehow, click on either of the two links to the main RAF sites.

Un-B-lievable.
If you only wanted to join the RAF as a pilot, WPS or RPAS pilot, fine.

... but please don't talk nonsense, first that "the RAF requires A Levels for entry" and then that the only jobs they advertise are "pilots and drone flying."

Alamo seems as misinformed about his own service as he does the Army, but the links could hardly be clearer.
The only jobs you can’t get in the other forces that they advertise. Sure you can be a chef without an ALevel but the RAF has more roles that require them and pretty much all the ones unique to them need one.
 
Many in the forces like to think that there are no competitors but there are. Many.
If you want a career as an infantry soldier, your options are, British Army, Royal Marines, RAF Regt, FFL, or for those with dual nationality, that other nation's army. That doesn't appear to be many. If you want to be one of those blokes who dresses up in a red coat and a big furry hat and marches around London, you have now restricted your options to only the first of those few.

How many times does a lot-recruit go on to the website for info? There's a dazzling array of jobs. Do they view the other services? Other uniformed services? Fe/he?
The majority only have to go through the application process just the once.


So essentially the army website is selling a product delivered by someone else...
No, It's inviting people to join something. And in that vein, would you decline an invitation to a party purely because the invite was not on the best weight of card, not gilt-edged, and had your name handwritten in Biro?
 
The only jobs you can’t get in the other forces that they advertise. Sure you can be a chef without an ALevel but the RAF has more roles that require them and pretty much all the ones unique to them need one.
The RN have jets and drones, so you're wrong. The RAF have firefighters, the RN don't, so again you're wrong.
 
This was fimed the same year I joined the mob, and is exactly as I remember it:
I recognise a few on it.
Basic, and pretty much straight to the point. Maybe that's what is required- instead of this marketting "over-engineering"?


Edit: this was 44 entry of '92. I was 49 entry. Nov '92.
 
The only jobs you can’t get in the other forces that they advertise.
Absolute, utter, complete bollox.

Look at the link I gave for examples of the jobs that the RAF advertise, which very clearly show engineering (your intended job in the Army) with as much prominence as pilots just on the first page.

You can fly fast jets, rotary and drones in the RN and rotary and drones in the Army, all very clearly advertised although not in the recent three sets of Army ads which don't concentrate on any trades. You can fly drones in the Army with no formal educational qualifications at all and while you can't join as an AAC pilot other than as an officer you can become a pilot once in the Army, if you have the aptitude, without commissioning and with no formal qualifications at all and many are and always have been.

Nearly two thirds of AAC aircrew are NCOs: a recent chief instructor on Apaches started out as an ex-junior infantry junior soldier in my coy over 35 years ago and one pilot was a Gurkha JNCO from my then regt over 25 years ago.

You've either been i) incredibly badly informed, ii) you couldn't understand what you were told, or, far more likely, iii) your selection tests made you ineligible.

If you lacked the ability to find this out for yourself (eg you couldn't google british army drone'/ british army pilot / RN pilot etc), as you evidently lack the ability to find out about your CertHE, then it's almost certainly the latter.
Sure you can be a chef without an ALevel but the RAF has more roles that require them and pretty much all the ones unique to them need one.
Simply nonsense. See above.

I don't want to put you off the military and the Army before you even join, but if you couldn't find this out for yourself this isn't a failure in advertising or the websites but the chances are that you lack the ability for those roles.
Does the RN advertise those roles? From what I’ve seen they’ve been running the same engineer advert for the last 200 years.
Sorry to say this, but you evidently haven't seen very much. Look on your lack of vision as part of the selection process.
 
Last edited:
There is a significant difference between a business marketing skincare products and the Army. Actually, there are a few:-

1. You have multiple competitors selling similar stuff. Your website needs to be easy for first time visitors to navigate or they will tend to go elsewhere.
The Army has far fewer competitors, and for some career options has virtually none. Their website only needs to fulfill basic functionality.
I don’t believe it is true that it needs to fulfill
only basic functionality. Sure, it’s functionality is different; it’s not a shop. But it is “front of house” of the recruiting system. It has only one primary function; to convert leads into applications. Those leads can come from anywhere; referrals from friends and families, job centres, response to adverts etc etc; they’re all leads.

So why would you waste hard to get leads with a shit website that doesn’t make it easy to sign up?

And why would you create a website that actually turns people off? If it’s dull, boring and hard to use (especially on a phone) people will scroll by and move on.

This website is far better. Buttons that work taking you straight to sign up, engaging content, smartphone optimised, constantly changeing etc etc. And **** me, it does the same thing.....

Find Jobs in the ADF
 
I don’t believe it is true that it needs to fulfill
only basic functionality. Sure, it’s functionality is different; it’s not a shop. But it is “front of house” of the recruiting system. It has only one primary function; to convert leads into applications. Those leads can come from anywhere; referrals from friends and families, job centres, response to adverts etc etc; they’re all leads.

So why would you waste hard to get leads with a shit website that doesn’t make it easy to sign up?

And why would you create a website that actually turns people off? If it’s dull, boring and hard to use (especially on a phone) people will scroll by and move on.

This website is far better. Buttons that work taking you straight to sign up, engaging content, smartphone optimised, constantly changeing etc etc. And **** me, it does the same thing.....

Find Jobs in the ADF
Still fixated on the same old story that's peripheral to the main recruiting issues ... perfectly highlighting the reason why the Army's failing so dismally to recruit: too many Bobs, so convinced that they're experts and know all the answers that they don't need to heed let alone listen to those who've been through the system recently or those who come from and know the Army's main recruiting base intimately, and that it's all about being a twenty-first centuree boy and selling snake oil, so they're earnestly looking the wrong way and see no ships.
So why would you waste hard to get leads with a shit website that doesn’t make it easy to sign up?

And why would you create a website that actually turns people off? If it’s dull, boring and hard to use (especially on a phone) people will scroll by and move on.
You mean the same website that someone who's actually had to use it and who was central to an article about why in his view applications weren't converted to recruits said ""The website looked clean and modern, so I felt reassured when it first began," ?

It's not selling camel shit to MILFs, Bob. As long as it's FFP, if it sorts the wheat from a vast amount of chaff and stops the chaff blocking up the system during the recruiting process and on into units, so much the better.

Even the Army and your friend Ty Urch have finally been forced to reluctantly admit that the whole idea of concentrating on a website and centralised call system was "naive" and one of many "bad mistakes", even if you still haven't.

(The funniest part of their whole grilling by the Defence Committee, like a pair of naughty schoolboys, was when Urch was asked if the shambles "was led by military incompetence or civilian incompetence" just after he'd stated that the RPP was Army led. He looked as if he'd swallowed a frog.)
 
France to send all 16-year-olds on a month’s national service.

All French 16-year-olds will wear a uniform and salute the flag under a national service scheme that will start trials in June, the government said yesterday.

Three thousand girls and boys from 13 regions will take part in the first test of Universal National Service, a much softer version of the compulsory military service that President Macron promised in his 2017 election campaign.

President Chirac ended conscription in 1997. As a candidate, Mr Macron said: “Each young French person will experience military life, even briefly . . . to allow our democracy to be more united and increase the resilience of our society.”

(Unfortunately the rest is behind a pay-wall).

(I will post a LINK in related threads . . . ).

France to send all 16-year-olds on a month’s national service
France to send all 16-year-olds on a month’s national service.

All French 16-year-olds will wear a uniform and salute the flag under a national service scheme that will start trials in June, the government said yesterday.

Follow the LINK below, or press the little blue arrow, in the “Quote” box above.

1548337936506.png


https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/t...ar-olds-on-a-month’s-national-service.290140/
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
France to send all 16-year-olds on a month’s national service.

All French 16-year-olds will wear a uniform and salute the flag under a national service scheme that will start trials in June, the government said yesterday.

Follow the LINK below, or press the little blue arrow, in the “Quote” box above.

View attachment 373645

https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/t...ar-olds-on-a-month’s-national-service.290140/
Well that'll be cheap.
Good job they can get financing from the EU.
 

Guns

ADC
Moderator
Book Reviewer
Some may notice this thread has been tidied up. Ad Homs to stop. @John G and @bobthebuilder and others - take note any more ******* around and thread ban.
 
Still fixated on the same old story that's peripheral to the main recruiting issues ... perfectly highlighting the reason why the Army's failing so dismally to recruit: too many Bobs, so convinced that they're experts and know all the answers that they don't need to heed let alone listen to those who've been through the system recently or those who come from and know the Army's main recruiting base intimately, and that it's all about being a twenty-first centuree boy and selling snake oil, so they're earnestly looking the wrong way and see no ships.
You mean the same website that someone who's actually had to use it and who was central to an article about why in his view applications weren't converted to recruits said ""The website looked clean and modern, so I felt reassured when it first began," ?
Let’s stay polite John. There is valid debate here, looking at a problem from multiples angles.

As I said before, the problem with using positive comment from those who have gone through is that it is highly likely to be positive; they’re the ones it worked for. So you don’t get feedback on what is wrong. Google Analytics will be picking up how the website is physically performing and how many abandon the process but you can’t beat comment.

If you follow a strategy of advertising to attract recruits to join through a website, why wouldn’t you make the site the best it can be? If you are targeting a generation that uses social media for social proof before doing anything, why wouldn’t you make sure your social media is the best it can be? If you invest millions in advertising, why wouldn’t you make sure that every lead it attracts gets captured? Beats me; you’re evidently the expert!

Which brings me to attracting “the right” leads, which is our main bone of contention. What you don’t know is that the RRP is using some seriously capable segmentation tools are being used to sort out the wheat from the chaff. Whatever you say it really is about more leads, quickly dumping the tyre kickers and focussing resources on the good ones.

The lack of a chat bot on the website is frankly dreadful. Better still a bot backed by a human. There are live chat functions on the US Army, ADF and Bundeswehr recruiting sites. And the crabs.
 
Regardless of whether the hits are from those trying to join or those thinking of joining, what's undeniable is that the interest is there.

That seems to indicate pretty conclusively that there's a more than sufficiently decent digital marketing campaign, however much it could be improved (and undeniably it could), and all improving it is likely to achieve is get more of the same interest.

The problem couldn't be more glaringly obvious.
  • The WRONG PEOPLE are interested in the Army.
  • The WRONG PEOPLE are then thinking about joining the Army.
  • The WRONG PEOPLE are then trying to join the Army.
  • The WRONG PEOPLE are then getting into the Army.
  • The WRONG PEOPLE are then getting through training and into units.
How much simpler does it have to be?

Why do you want more of the WRONG PEOPLE ???
But 'wrong' from what perspective? The recent campaigns haven't been designed to fill the ranks with the most suitable, they've been designed to make those with a certain political outlook feel warm and fuzzy and about the armed forces and 'the society it reflects'. Unfortunately, peddling fantasies to make those with a certain political outlook feel warm and fuzzy has been the tried and tested path to professional success since the end of the Cold War, regardless of what that means for capability and efficiency.
 
But 'wrong' from what perspective? The recent campaigns haven't been designed to fill the ranks with the most suitable, they've been designed to make those with a certain political outlook feel warm and fuzzy and about the armed forces and 'the society it reflects'. Unfortunately, peddling fantasies to make those with a certain political outlook feel warm and fuzzy has been the tried and tested path to professional success since the end of the Cold War, regardless of what that means for capability and efficiency.
Agreed 100%, @F_F.

The aim should be to fill the ranks of a small but highly professional Army with the best available. Nothing else and nothing less.

A look at Ty Urch (CLF) 's much publicised twitter feed, linked to earlier, sums it up. What I'd like to see, whether as a potential recruit, serving soldier, or old fart, would be soldiers enjoying a challenging and rewarding overseas exercise and some R&R afterwards, having their accommodation replaced and refurbished with decent SLAM and proper cooking facilities, doing something constructive and necessary, even a reservist somewhere hot and sandy.

Instead, in the first scroll (and I only wish I was exaggerating or joking) all I get is a thank you note from an autistic child for CLF sending him photos of the Army 'in action'; a link to the Army BAME association; a thank you from the Army dressage team coach for CLF's support; and the welcome news that the Army LGBT union has moved up 33 places in the Stonewall rankings.

All very laudable, but is that really going to motivate me to join as a potential recruit, to think that the Army was interested in me as a serving soldier, or to impress me as an old fart / gatekeeper?

Is it going to make me think I'd trust those running the Army with my life or that I wouldn't trust them to feed my dogs in case I came back to find they were on a vegan diet?
 

Similar threads


Top