New Army recruitment campaign

I have to differ the vast majority of Universities 'select' on predicted grades and then this year will simply wait until A Level Results Day to see if the student has met, or exceeded the prediction and confirm an offer. Only one issue with this is somewhere in excess of 30% of all predicted grades are wrong. In other cases potential students decide the course or university isn't for them.

The real clock starts ticking on 15th July this year as non of this years applicants can be offered a firm place before then and clearing is open until 20th September.

So the longest a potential student can wait is the period between results and the commencement of a clearing sourced course about three months, but the vast majority will know in days.



If the Army could convince the powers that be there is a notification scheme within Clearance (I am not sure exactly how it works) which turns clearing into a two way street, ie Universities can see potential students and approach them to suggest courses. If the Army could access that and offer alternatives to a degree in the form of Apprenticeships or in service degrees that may be a way of sourcing some recruits of reasonable quality (or not as the case may be)



Agreed, perhaps the Army can learn from the Police?



Agreed, in the context of training investment there is very little risk
You’re probably right; I simply looked for available statistcs on paths that teens might take. On the clearance one, I suspect that Google and / or Facebook would have a solution. Target those who are searching universities during the clearance period?

If you follow @John G s line of thought that 73% of recruits had a positive view of the process, you’d conclude that the time issue isn’t a show stopper. That rather depends on how many drop out because of time; he can’t have it both ways.

Personally, I think the 7.4% conversion rate from application to recruit that @CAARPS quote is pretty impressive. Of course it could be better, but I seriously doubt that 10% is realistic. I doubt the conversion rate of AFCOs was that good..

90000 applications with 7.4% conversions is 6600 recruits. Attract another 30000 applications and you’re there. Convert 10% and your there.
 
Funnily enough that's exactly what the recruits who actually joined thought, as last year 73% of them were happy with the recruiting process - up from 67% the year before.

That's a pretty good satisfaction rate, despite what Uncle Bob says - it's all in that data he says doesn't exist, taken from the feedback he says we don't need to do.

Maybe if the Army listened to its people, whether it's recruits, K44, Stacker1 or even CAARPS, instead of just hearing them it could learn something.


(not so sure about stacker, though)
Out of interest, we’re those recruits who joined the wrong people. After all, they joined through a process that you claim attracts the wrong people?
 
Not quite the 'Cancun platoon'. But a cracking effort.

Ahh. 9 regt. I was with them with 237 sig sqn. Including when Robson and Jerome filmed some we2 thing.

Just out of prurient curiosity rather than anything else, who's the girl who's barely wearing what appears to be '95 Pattern trousers and shirt?
 
There does seem to be an awful lot of time, money and emphasis on recruiting people who don't want to be recruited. Beyond replicating what has always been done, why is this resource being put forward?
Sinpke. Because of the Bobs.

The Army's had recruiting and retention issues for the last fifty years or so, with them spiralling down on an ever steepening curve. Fifty, forty, thirty and even twenty years ago it hardly mattered. The Army was big enough for it to not be an issue as it was rarely tested and when it was all it had to do was put up a few thousand out of an Army double the size it is now, and at the same time the Army was steadily being reduced in size anyway. Since the turn of the century, though, things changed as the Army was tested (and arguably found as wanting as it always had been) and the decline reached critical.

It had little to do with gen x vs baby boomers vs gen z vs millenialls or the information age, but it was just more of the same downward spiral on the same ever steepening curve. What had changed was that it had finally reached critical.

Instead of looking at where the problem lay, though, which was where it had always been (themselves) a bunch of over-promoted Bobs looked round for any other reason and seized on "We're in the 21st centureee ...let's get wiv it" and looked round for a bunch of civilian experts they could pass the buck to, who could either at best save the day and give them the credit or at worst take the blame.

What did they get? Another bunch of Bobs, in the form of Capita, Carillion et al, who'd read the Big Dummy's Guide but had no experience and less ability.

... you did ask .....
 
If you follow @John G s line of thought that 73% of recruits had a positive view of the process, you’d conclude that the time issue isn’t a show stopper. That rather depends on how many drop out because of time; he can’t have it both ways.
It's not my "line of thought", Bob. That's what they said. It may make your whole argument look like like the proverbial crock of cr@p, but I think I prefer to believe a few thousand who've gone through the process rather than someone who just thinks he knows what they think who's as out of touch with them as I am.

I'm not trying to have it "both ways", Bob. Just listening to those who've gone through the process successfully rather than someone from the planet Zog.
90000 applications with 7.4% conversions is 6600 recruits. Attract another 30000 applications and you’re there. Convert 10% and your there.
Un-B-lievable. UN-B-FECKIN-LIEVABLE.

Over half the recruits last year (and it's a similar picture in previous years) learnt about the Army from friends and family who are serving / have served - what @Yokel would call the 'a' group. They've gone. They're in or rejected. All that's left are some of the 'b' group and the 'c' group.

You don't need to know the detail to realise that was unavoidable and you don't need to be in digital marketing to realise that you're going to get far less conversions from your last 30,000 applications than from your first 90,000. All you need is a working brain cell and a level of common sense.
 
Out of interest, we’re those recruits who joined the wrong people. After all, they joined through a process that you claim attracts the wrong people?
What part of this is beyond you, Bob:
  • MORE OF THE WRONG PEOPLE who are going to struggle in training, holding back and putting off those who aren't.
  • MORE OF THE WRONG PEOPLE who are going to get through after costing more due to injuries and longer training time, more money and more manpower.
  • MORE OF THE WRONG PEOPLE who are going to have to be carried in units and who are going to have to be covered for when they're not fit to deploy.
  • MORE OF THE WRONG PEOPLE who are going to p1ss off the right people, so the right people leave and the wrong people stay.
 
Surely there are three groups:

a. Those who really want to join, and will jump over hurdles to do so. Eat their own spleen or a cactus - why not?

b. Those who might think about joining, but would need persuading that it is a worthwhile option.

c. Those who will never join, regardless of the efforts to attract them.

Surely efforts should focus on group b?

As an aside, yesterday I was passing by the AFCO that I last went to in 2001/2002. In the old days there was a manned reception with someone you could see who then let you in. Nowadays you simply buzz the office for the Army, RAF, or RN/RM. Does that put casual enquirers off?
That doesn’t help when it comes to targeting the people you want.
 
Meanwhile on FYB (Again)

Cpl Mess.PNG


When I first posted on ARRSE over ten years ago, I used to say bullshit like this happened, there were a few serving officers (Really?_Fascinating being one of them) who denied it and said thing like this didnt happen.
Its 2019 and adults who may be sent to warzones have their career resting on whether they show up at a third rate club
 
Meanwhile on FYB (Again)

View attachment 373269

When I first posted on ARRSE over ten years ago, I used to say bullshit like this happened, there were a few serving officers (Really?_Fascinating being one of them) who denied it and said thing like this didnt happen.
Its 2019 and adults who may be sent to warzones have their career resting on whether they show up at a third rate club
Just maybe cohesion is important at some units, and a Cpls club is the way forward. I wouldn’t try it in a Signals unit though. Ballsy email too.
 
Just maybe cohesion is important at some units, and a Cpls club is the way forward. I wouldn’t try it in a Signals unit though. Ballsy email too.
Most cpls messes are utter shite. if you need to force people to attend it's an indication that the soldiers don't give a **** about it.
 
Most cpls messes are utter shite. if you need to force people to attend it's an indication that the soldiers don't give a **** about it.
As are most NAAFI bars.
When my old lot moved from Cyprus to Canterbury the RSM told us" if you want a drink,use the NAAFI. There is nothing at all for you,in Canterbury."
To reinforce this,he then issued dress regulations regarding civvy clothes,no jeans or trainers etc.Luckily he got posted just as we moved.
 
Most cpls messes are utter shite. if you need to force people to attend it's an indication that the soldiers don't give a **** about it.
You have to force people to attend sport and AT nowadays, should we bin that too or just recognise that you need to force people to attend “stuff”? Don’t take my comment as @K44 thinks Cpls messes are a good idea!
 
As are most NAAFI bars.
When my old lot moved from Cyprus to Canterbury the RSM told us" if you want a drink,use the NAAFI. There is nothing at all for you,in Canterbury."
To reinforce this,he then issued dress regulations regarding civvy clothes,no jeans or trainers etc.Luckily he got posted just as we moved.
And how long ago was this?
 
Meanwhile on FYB (Again)

View attachment 373269

When I first posted on ARRSE over ten years ago, I used to say bullshit like this happened, there were a few serving officers (Really?_Fascinating being one of them) who denied it and said thing like this didnt happen.
Its 2019 and adults who may be sent to warzones have their career resting on whether they show up at a third rate club
I'm confused and obviously out of touch as I can't follow this at all. Unless I've misread it:

  1. Why does a SSM have to write to (presumably) his fellow Sqn / Coy / Bty SMs for a list of JNCOs in the unit? Can't he just ask the Chief Clerk or Orderly Room (or equivalent) for one?
  2. WTF is a SSM doing dictating what goes in to a JNCO's SJAR? I'd ask for and value his input, but as a Pl Comd I'd resent his thinking he had a right to dictate what went into it, and as Adjt or OC I'd tell him to wind his neck in.
I'd also be distinctly unimpressed with a SSM who thought the right way to get JNCOs supporting the Cpls Mess was to force them to attend rather than make the Mess worth attending. The 'potential' and 'leadership' paras in his own SJAR would be less than glowing.
 
I'm confused and obviously out of touch as I can't follow this at all. Unless I've misread it:

  1. Why does a SSM have to write to (presumably) his fellow Sqn / Coy / Bty SMs for a list of JNCOs in the unit? Can't he just ask the Chief Clerk or Orderly Room (or equivalent) for one?
  2. WTF is a SSM doing dictating what goes in to a JNCO's SJAR? I'd ask for and value his input, but as a Pl Comd I'd resent his thinking he had a right to dictate what went into it, and as Adjt or OC I'd tell him to wind his neck in.
I'd also be distinctly unimpressed with a SSM who thought the right way to get JNCOs supporting the Cpls Mess was to force them to attend rather than make the Mess worth attending. The 'potential' and 'leadership' paras in his own SJAR would be less than glowing.
It would be really simple to get this from a Ch Clk, but that too might be a Cpl. The man/woman is blatantly a fool for sending this email though. I would be interested in seeing their MPAR this year.
 
You have to force people to attend sport and AT nowadays, should we bin that too or just recognise that you need to force people to attend “stuff”? Don’t take my comment as @K44 thinks Cpls messes are a good idea!
You force them for their first time (in the case of sports or AT) and if they dont like it why continue to make them go? They clearly aren't interested.

Enforced fun is a major factor in poor retention.
 
10:30 for the boys, 12:30 for the girls BFT. just the second half of a BFT? No march/run first 15 min out?

If they make them double time everywhere, that will fix the problem. Not being vindictive, just helping the lasses that didn't knock off their BFTs.
 
Last edited:
I'm confused and obviously out of touch as I can't follow this at all. Unless I've misread it:

  1. Why does a SSM have to write to (presumably) his fellow Sqn / Coy / Bty SMs for a list of JNCOs in the unit? Can't he just ask the Chief Clerk or Orderly Room (or equivalent) for one?
  2. WTF is a SSM doing dictating what goes in to a JNCO's SJAR? I'd ask for and value his input, but as a Pl Comd I'd resent his thinking he had a right to dictate what went into it, and as Adjt or OC I'd tell him to wind his neck in.
I'd also be distinctly unimpressed with a SSM who thought the right way to get JNCOs supporting the Cpls Mess was to force them to attend rather than make the Mess worth attending. The 'potential' and 'leadership' paras in his own SJAR would be less than glowing.

The SSMs will enforce their subordinates comply, they will also know where their JNCOs are, the clerks will just produce a list of JNCO pidded to the sqn.

Some young officers might stand up to their SSMs, most wont.

I can guarantee if the SSM was RLC his SJAR would be awesome for forcing his soldiers to have enforced fun.
 
It would be really simple to get this from a Ch Clk, but that too might be a Cpl. The man/woman is blatantly a fool for sending this email though. I would be interested in seeing their MPAR this year.
Why? That's exactly the sort of shit that gives senior officers a stiffy.
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top