New Army recruitment campaign

If their syntax is a shyte as yours then it is just another huge waste of public money.
He taught @2ndpreimage everything he knows - except, unfortunately, how to use the 'quote' function.
You're hopelessly out of date I'm afraid and as I said earlier (which you entirely ignored), it's wholly overstated. If you look at the make up of at senior management of the firms that I've spent most of my life working.

It might have looked like that back when you experienced it, it doesn't today to anything resembling the same degree. I know because this is the world in inhabit, today.



The idea that the old boy network isn't 'nearly as important as people outside it seem to think it is' and that 'the senior decision makers have woken up to the idea that the right person and the right mix of team is far more important' is, in my view and experience, confirmed on a monthly basis, living in some sort of utopian la-la land. The tailwind may not get you the job but it gives far more chance of getting it than the 'right person' fighting a headwind.

Hence my disagreement with @2pi's view and post.
Oh. ... oh well ... ho hummm ... bizarre.

Your comments really are bizarre, they can be largely categorized as

1) I made a comment, unrelated to yours but I've already made all the points you could have made, only better.
2) I ignored your point and now I claim you made a different one
3) I assume my background is unique, you couldn't possibly understand
4) I question peoples experience rather than evaluate their statements (at no point have I asked you about yours, but you've asked me about mine, in behavioral analysis that practice has a name and its pejorative, I wonder if you know of it)

To re-iterate my point, for when you ignore it again, you are hopelessly out of date. The 'following wind' concept you cite is different to actively maintained and developed networks that professionals engage in today to their benefit. Funnily enough my father's contemporaries didn't get it either.

Ho hummmm bizarre indeed....

To add: You presume I haven't experienced the old boys network in the form you describe. It's not clear on what basis you make that assertion.
Maybe a little less of the high THC non-pollinated hybrid hydroponics before posting would help. I'll give it a brief try, but some of your post seems to have been missed by the inter-galactic translator.
... as I said earlier (which you entirely ignored), it's wholly overstated
Far from ignoring it I disagreed with it; repeating it and pretending I ignored it doesn't make it any more correct.
If you look at the make up of at senior management of the firms that I've spent most of my life working.
I'll have to pass on that. The i-gt must have missed part of that on its way from Zog.
It might have looked like that back when you experienced it, it doesn't today to anything resembling the same degree. I know because this is the world in inhabit, today.
Aaah ... on Zog. Things are different on Planet Earth, where merit alone doesn't give everyone the same opportunity to get to the top in many professions, from the city to the law, the Army to academia. It'd be nice if it did, but instead there's back-scratching and the old boy network.
Your comments really are bizarre, they can be largely categorized as
1) I made a comment, unrelated to yours but I've already made all the points you could have made, only better.
2) I ignored your point and now I claim you made a different one
3) I assume my background is unique, you couldn't possibly understand
4) I question peoples experience rather than evaluate their statements (at no point have I asked you about yours, but you've asked me about mine, in behavioral analysis that practice has a name and its pejorative, I wonder if you know of it)
Sorry, your i-gt seems to have a technical problem. It's a bit garbled, but if in point 4 you're suggesting I've asked you about your experience, you're delusional.
To re-iterate my point, for when you ignore it again, you are hopelessly out of date.
To re-iterate, re-iterating doesn't make it correct.
The 'following wind' concept you cite is different to actively maintained and developed networks that professionals engage in today to their benefit.
The two are inter-dependent, rather like recruiting and retention. Treating them as separate issues / concepts doesn't work. If you don't realise something as basic as that after 20 years you've been taking money under false pretences.

On the one hand you say that networks are "wholly overstated" and the concept's "hopelessly out of date" ...
Yet on the other hand you say that "it's one that professionals engage in today to their benefit", that that's how you got your present job, that it's "about developing connections and helping that network and those participants out when you can" and that a "chunk of my success can be attributed to giving back in many guises" and that the "upside as it so happens has been significant".

Contradictory doesn't even begin to describe that.

To add: You presume I haven't experienced the old boys network in the form you describe. It's not clear on what basis you make that assertion.
A presumption and an assertion? Oh well ...

Because if you had, to any worthwhile extent, you'd know that it was extensive and on-going. That you don't think it's extensive and ongoing means you haven't or you'd know, etc, etc, etc. It's s bit of a Catch 22.
 

2ndpreimage

Old-Salt
He taught @2ndpreimage everything he knows - except, unfortunately, how to use the 'quote' function.
Maybe a little less of the high THC non-pollinated hybrid hydroponics before posting would help. I'll give it a brief try, but some of your post seems to have been missed by the inter-galactic translator.

Far from ignoring it I disagreed with it; repeating it and pretending I ignored it doesn't make it any more correct.
You asked me what my point was, I told you it was in the first sentence, you did entirely ignore it. It's in evidence earlier in the thread.
I'll have to pass on that. The i-gt must have missed part of that on its way from Zog.
Aaah ... on Zog. Things are different on Planet Earth, where merit alone doesn't give everyone the same opportunity to get to the top in many professions, from the city to the law, the Army to academia. It'd be nice if it did, but instead there's back-scratching and the old boy network.
Sorry, your i-gt seems to have a technical problem. It's a bit garbled, but if in point 4 you're suggesting I've asked you about your experience, you're delusional.
You asked me what my experience of being in the military was. I said for the purposes of this thread assume it's zero. You've done it with plenty of others too!

To re-iterate, re-iterating doesn't make it correct. The two are inter-dependent, rather like recruiting and retention. Treating them as separate issues / concepts doesn't work. If you don't realise something as basic as that after 20 years you've been taking money under false pretences.

On the one hand you say that networks are "wholly overstated" and the concept's "hopelessly out of date" ...
Yet on the other hand you say that "it's one that professionals engage in today to their benefit", that that's how you got your present job, that it's "about developing connections and helping that network and those participants out when you can" and that a "chunk of my success can be attributed to giving back in many guises" and that the "upside as it so happens has been significant".

Contradictory doesn't even begin to describe that.
No, you've selectively quoted me deliberately out of context. Are you a journalist?


Quoting doesn't work very well on all devices, if the conclusion is I'm therefore on drugs you've entirely lost this.
 
You asked me what my point was, I told you it was in the first sentence, you did entirely ignore it. It's in evidence earlier in the thread.

You asked me what my experience of being in the military was. I said for the purposes of this thread assume it's zero. You've done it with plenty of others too!


No, you've selectively quoted me deliberately out of context. Are you a journalist?


Quoting doesn't work very well on all devices, if the conclusion is I'm therefore on drugs you've entirely lost this.
Oh dear, you'll be getting an essay of a lifetime now.
 
... anything less than a full career seems to have this label of "quitter" attached to it.
This time I will ask about your experience.

Have you ever actually been in the Regular Army or the military?

I ask because nothing could be further from the truth.

A large number of officers leave after commanding their bns - many if not most of the very best, not only in my opinion but in that of many others. They joined for the privilege of direct command of soldiers and once that goes there's no point in staying further. It's got absolutely nothing to do with being a "quitter".

On the other hand many hang on for as long as possible not because they're not "quitters" but because they're terrified of leaving the safety of the 'coccoon' and having to fend for themselves.

(and FWIW I'm not asking because that would mean you're not fit to make worthwhile contributions, as the reverse applies and I don't believe there's any chance the Army can sort its problems out for itself, but I'm curious where you would have got ideas like this from)
 

2ndpreimage

Old-Salt
Oh dear, you'll be getting an essay of a lifetime now.
I bet I am, as an aside:
https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/threads/new-army-recruitment-campaign.289560/page-53#post-9017866
https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/threads/new-army-recruitment-campaign.289560/page-52#post-9017619
https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/threads/new-army-recruitment-campaign.289560/page-56#post-9018808

Last one's good. But I'm sure my point will be ignored, changed and then there will be some clear explanation as to why:

It's a bit garbled, but if in point 4 you're suggesting I've asked you about your experience, you're delusional.
Isn't:

Sorry, but may I ask what your military experience is?
from https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/threads/new-army-recruitment-campaign.289560/page-56#post-9018808
 
You asked me what my point was, I told you it was in the first sentence, you did entirely ignore it. It's in evidence earlier in the thread.
Understood now. You mean I entirely ignored it when I'd already answered it, at considerable length here:
That isn't how 'networks' work or ever have. They're interconnected - like a 'net', hence the name. It's not just whether one person's been in the Army or gone to the same school or is a member of the same club, but that they know someone who has.

City firms, and many others, don't just hire "the person who is more likely to make (them) money" directly. They also hire the person who's more likely to make them money and open doors because their friends / family / network have the connections to make them money and open doors. People get hired not just because of their financial ability but because of their ability to open doors and to lead to others who can open more doors.

I'm not saying it's 'right', far from it, but that's how it works. If you don't think it happens and that everything's merit based then you're in for a very nasty shock (and a ready excuse for when you're knocked back).
That sort of 'ignore'. I see.

You asked me what my experience of being in the military was. I said for the purposes of this thread assume it's zero. You've done it with plenty of others too!
My apologies. I presumed you were talking about your experience in the city, in context, not something asked in a totally different context. Having re-read where I asked you your experience there was nothing remotely pejorative at all, it was simply to try to put things in perspective as you didn't appear to know the simplest things about the military. Personally I can't understand the man of mystery, nudge, nudge, wink, wink bit, but if you enjoy it then crack on.
No, you've selectively quoted me deliberately out of context. Are you a journalist?
No, I've selectively quoted you deliberately to show that you're contradicting yourself rather absurdly - probably more so than anyone I've ever seen here. ... and 'no', I'm not a journo.
Quoting doesn't work very well on all devices, if the conclusion is I'm therefore on drugs you've entirely lost this.
No, the drugs was a joke. The conclusion's you're a dumb-arrse.
 
Odd. I clicked on the links to see what I'd written only to find your previous posts about RMAS based on your experience over the last twenty years advising on HR and leadership:around the world:
My experience in the last twenty years that globally, in the 15 cities over 10 countries and 3 continents where I've led teams, we are getting better at educating and training, we have dramatically improved leadership skills at all levels and organisations have got much better at understanding what makes them effective and what make their staff tick.
It must have been a hell of a job to fit that in with your present job, which you've also been doing for the best part of twenty years in the City, networking, interviewing and giving back:
I've spent the best part of twenty years in the City ...
HAVE A GOOD FLIGHT BACK TO ZOG. BOTH OF YOU.
 
Last edited:
Yes, 2.5 was the ratio I was using. Put your sly hat on instead of your 'WYSIWYG' one (that's a compliment, BTW) and the con may fall into place - not a lie, but far from an honest picture.
More inclined to think it’s the kind of bullshit that becomes the truth. Someone relatively junior briefs a fact that senior person latches on to a subsequently misuses. Saw it happen lids of times while serving; thrusting staff officer briefs what he thinks the General wants to hear and it runs as fact.

How often are VSOs “all over the numbers”. They aren’t; detail is for specialists.
 
A war is always good for recruitment.

We seem to be 'out of date' for one with the french.
 
More inclined to think it’s the kind of bullshit that becomes the truth. Someone relatively junior briefs a fact that senior person latches on to a subsequently misuses. Saw it happen lids of times while serving; thrusting staff officer briefs what he thinks the General wants to hear and it runs as fact.

How often are VSOs “all over the numbers”. They aren’t; detail is for specialists.
The 815k 'unique hits' in a month in 2019 vs 427k 'views' in 2018, suggesting an increase but actually the reverse, was from an MoD release. Urch's (with stabbing finger and on screen) was 170,000 'unique hits' in five days.

Both carefully specific and designed to impress, with an equally carefully casual switch from "hits" to "views", as was the "over a year". If you accept that the only mistake is calling 'hits' 'unique hits', then the figures all add up perfectly and are perfectly reasonable.

Unfortunately for Urch, Karmarama and the Army they also add up to the ad campaign being a dismal failure, with less 'hits' (or 'views') than either 'belonging' or 'Don't Join the Army'.

The only thing that's genuinely up is the number of 'applications' which was only to be expected, as Karmatama must have known. Binge gamers, phone zombies, etc, are exactly the sort of people who register their interest on websites to get more information with no intention of ever taking it further or 'buying the product'.

It's exactly like kids who, in pre-internet days, used to clip out the free-post coupons in magazines to get vast amounts of brochures (and even visits at home and school from over eager salesmen!) on something that had caught their interest but they never had any intention of buying and weren't able to even if they wanted to. I know - I was one of them! I was planning on becoming an architect, so I'd clip out, tick, and send off all manner of ads for anything from house plans to double-glazing. Wierd, but human nature hasn't changed even though times have.

Karmarama didn't target those most suitable for the Army, with 'stamina', 'resilience' and 'spirit' - it targeted those most likely to hit the website and register their interest even if they knew, or should have known, that they were the least likely to follow it through and even less likely to last more than a couple of weeks of Ph1, leading to a drop in the currently very high conversion rate and a waste of training resources.

..... but, of course, none of that will be Karmarama's, Urch's or the Army's fault as they'll have all done their job and got a tick in the box.
 
'Stamina' and 'drive' isn't sitting on your arrse and binge gaming all night, at least not the sort of stamina or drive the Army needs. That's living in a fantasy land that'll get a registration on the internet because that's the world they're living in - a fantasy world. As soon as reality hits and they realise they have to get off their arrse and go to the careers office, or if they get past that hurdle and make it to recruit selection, or somehow get past that hurdle and make it to recruit Ph1 where they won't be able to do the only thing they've got the stamina and drive for - binge gaming - they'll realise that fantasy and reality are two very different things and leave. The binge gamer's mate in the ad summed it up - "you can't get him off that thing".
How could anyone in their right mind think that the fantasy world of binge gaming your way through the jungle, sitting on your arrse, was the same as the real world of fighting through it?

'Resilience' isn't pushing trolleys badly at Tesco's. That's doing the minimum to get by, thumb up bum, putting in the minimum effort, unable and not interested enough to even line up the trolleys. But it'll get a hit and registration as they've got nothing better to do while they should be doing their job. How can anyone relate mind in neutral to resilience?

'Spirit' isn't being the unreliable class clown, the joker in the office who can't do his job that no-one wants to work with - that's being an arrse-hole. But it'll get a hit and registration as it passes the time while they can't do the job they're being paid for and they're happy to be carried by those around them.

'Focus' isn't being a phone zombie, who can't see and ignores what's going on around him - that's being divorced from reality .... and if someone's a phone zombie and can't live without it they're never going to make it past the first week of Ph1 when the one thing they can't be is a phone zombie. But it'll get a hit and registration as ... well ... they're phone zombies, and phone zombies play with their phones.

Brilliant, absolutely brilliant, if Karmarama's aim was to get hits and registrations / applications. Karmarama couldn't have picked a better target audience.

Beyond mind-numbingly stupid if the Army's aim was to get interest and applications that would convert to recruits and capable soldiers. The Army couldn't have picked a worse target audience unless they'd targeted Netley, Broadmoor and Saga.

Can the Army's assorted VSOs and Commissioned Officers pretending to be Warrant Officers really be that mind-numbingly stupid?
  • Not a chance. They wouldn't have got to where they are if they were.
Can they really lack the honesty and moral courage to admit that the system's broken, that they don't know the answer, and to trust their soldiers and listen to them?
  • Beyond any doubt. They wouldn't have got to where they are if didn't.
 
Gotta love the Army. A WO, who's actually a Maj, with the job title Cpl Major!
"Cpl Major" ?

No stranger than a Staff Sergeant Major who's a WO1 or a Cpl of Horse who doesn't ride a horse and is a Sergeant or a LCpl of Horse who's equivalent to a Lance Sergeant but is called Corporal ... which he is .....

..... or Sqn Ldr's who don't lead squadrons and Wing Cdr's who don't command Wings.

... but Warrant Officers who are actually Commissioned Officers but who pretend to still be Warrant Officers, and who the Army pretends still are?

Yes, it doesn't get much more absurd than that.
 

Alamo

LE
..... or Sqn Ldr's who don't lead squadrons and Wing Cdr's who don't command Wings.
I commanded a sqn as a sqn ldr, and a wg as a wg cdr; depends on the type of organisation. But at least we only have one name for each rank.
 
Last chance to change your mind ... only one name for each rank in the RAF?


This is a pretty basic question, after all, for someone with your rank and experience, and I'd hate to suggest without good grounds that someone with that rank and experience didn't know their arrse from their elbow about their own service.
 

Alamo

LE
Last chance to change your mind ... only one name for each rank in the RAF?


This is a pretty basic question, after all, for someone with your rank and experience, and I'd hate to suggest without good grounds that someone with that rank and experience didn't know their arrse from their elbow about their own service.
Go on, you're dying to tell ....
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top