Keeping New Senior Members

[Pace]

I am starting to see a trend with new senior members, and I am unsure what to do about it. I am hoping to get some sage advice from the seasoned commanders here.

Background:
1. My squadron is critically staffed on the SM side, and no one (including me) has much more time than we already devote to CAP.
2. To do more activities, we need more SMs due to time constraints.
3. To get more senior members, it seems we need to do more activities and more training (which takes additional time).
4. My newer SMs that have come and gone complain about insufficient local PD courses. (We're nowhere near a major population center.)
5. New members these days have a tremendous front-load of online courses that makes it unappealing to most.

What are you guys doing (with limited staff and time constraints) to keep new SMs?

Or is it just me that my new members have little interest in the amount of courses needed to participate?

[arajca]

A couple answers:

1. Unfortunately, not an uncommon situation.
2. See 1. Can your cadets plan an activity with limited senior oversight during the planning process? This is a good project for past cadet commanders.
3. See 1.
4. Have you asked group or wing HQ for help? Can you offer a place to hold the courses? I know in my wing, on occasion, wing has paid for hotel rooms for a few (3-4) instructors to go to the opposite side of the state to hold PD courses (SLS and CLC weekend, IIRC). The host unit had to arrange for space and students.
5. My R&R Officer, who is also my CDS, explains the rationale behind all the training. While our newer members are not happy with the amount, they understand the why behind it and actually work together to get it all knocked out quickly. I have two who have completed all of it and have stepped up to take staff assignments in the squadron, plus another who has just completed the last item and we're going to chat tonight. Then I have two more who are still chewing through the course work. I make it a point to be available to answer questions for them. Most are parents who really want the unit to excel, not merely succeed.

[dwb]

I agree that CAP has made it more difficult to onboard in recent years.

If you have Internet at your meeting location, you can do all of the introductory training at the meeting. You're not spending more time besides the meeting you're already at, and it's quicker to get people through things in person than it is online.

Once they complete Level I, those seniors can immediately jump in and start helping as assistants to your currently overworked senior staff. After they've started to get up to speed and have a little more invested in the program, you can try to steer them to an online SLS or TLC opportunity. If you don't live near a population center and in-person PD is not readily available, the online stuff is the best alternative.

If you (like many units) don't have Internet at the meeting location, then perhaps your new seniors would be willing to commit to one 4-5 hour PD blitz where you complete Level I and get everyone started in their respective specialty tracks.

[Garibaldi]

I am starting to see a trend with new senior members, and I am unsure what to do about it. I am hoping to get some sage advice from the seasoned commanders here.

Background:
1. My squadron is critically staffed on the SM side, and no one (including me) has much more time than we already devote to CAP.
2. To do more activities, we need more SMs due to time constraints.
3. To get more senior members, it seems we need to do more activities and more training (which takes additional time).
4. My newer SMs that have come and gone complain about insufficient local PD courses. (We're nowhere near a major population center.)
5. New members these days have a tremendous front-load of online courses that makes it unappealing to most.

What are you guys doing (with limited staff and time constraints) to keep new SMs?

Or is it just me that my new members have little interest in the amount of courses needed to participate?

Oddly enough, Spam, our GTL and I had a similar conversation on Saturday. We are all getting up there in years somewhat, and we're looking to recruit younger Officers to lead the teams. Since our unit is fairly small, it's not so easy to recruit new SMs outside the few parents that are interested in limited participation.

The larger units I've been in have had a real major cadet presence, and adults who come in to the program see that there is a real need for adults. Our span of control in smaller units is pretty manageable.

The biggest problem I've seen is what you said: time constraints and a heavy amount of on-line and in-person courses up front. SLS, CLC, TLC, and so on all require a full weekend, and who really wants to do that after a full week at work and honey-do lists and spouses who aren't that into what CAP does?

Another issue is that between 18 and 21, young adults who join can't really do much. They can't drive a COV, which limits some of the things they can do. FO grades are kind of useless, and after a year or so, I've seen new FOs that were former cadets just fade away. Haven't seen many new off-the-street FOs.

But, to answer your question, we have not been able to do much. Initial interest is tempered by the amount of busywork that needs to be done to progress after the first 6 months. Some of us soldier on through the BS, and some give up. We had a member go through the whole O-flight certification process and he gave up at the sheer amount of hoops that need to be jumped through.

It's getting harder and harder to retain, much less recruit.

[dwb]

"SLS, CLC, TLC, and so on" don't actually need to be done up front. Maybe we're making this more daunting than it needs to be.

Get people through Level I. Get them working in the squadron. Get them promoted to 2d Lt. Then, 6-12 months down the line, suggest SLS, or OBC. People need to be invested in the program before they'll do things on their own time.

The sentiment you express is valid, though. In recent years we've shifted a bunch of "things done at the weekly meeting" to "things done at home", which requires a higher threshold of commitment to the program that is clearly leaving people twisting in the wind. Pushing everything online has exacerbated this problem, as NHQ continues to overestimate the number of units that can regularly access the internet during their weekly meetings (IMO).

Getting from new member -> Form 5 checkride is even more daunting. That path is fraught with peril and as an organization we're pretty terrible at getting pilots and aircrew up to speed.

[NIN]

You have to engage people. Its difficult.   "I could let 2nd Lt Bagodonuts do the safety report, but it will take him a week and 12 emails to me. If I do it, it will take 15 minutes.."


Thats the easy way out. I've done it.

Give a man a fish vs. teach a man to fish.

The first time its a week and 12 emails. If you have the right guy in the right seat, the 2nd time is a day and 2 emails and the third time is an hour and no emails.

[Pace]

You have to engage people. Its difficult.   "I could let 2nd Lt Bagodonuts do the safety report, but it will take him a week and 12 emails to me. If I do it, it will take 15 minutes.."

Thats the easy way out. I've done it.

Give a man a fish vs. teach a man to fish.

The first time its a week and 12 emails. If you have the right guy in the right seat, the 2nd time is a day and 2 emails and the third time is an hour and no emails.

I've done that, and it seems just as they're doing their tasks independently, they quit.

[Eclipse]

I've done that, and it seems just as they're doing their tasks independently, they quit.

It's a brute-force effort until you get enough in-house and ramped-up to self-sustain.  That's why so many CCs throw up their hands and
give up.

I've taken to being straight with new seniors (of course now they will be called "actives"?, sounds like a term they'd use on 24) -
"...we're in a growth phase and I can't give you the undivided attention you need and deserve, so the first 6 months or so will be a little slow,
but we'll get you there and then you'll be able to help carry a corner."

So far that has been well-received.  Most people would prefer to hear the truth vs. a snow job.

[NIN]

Eclipse nailed it.

As a leader, when you delegate something, you also have to make sure that the tasks are understood, supervised and accomplished.

Its never "Here ya go, let me know if you have question."

Its more about having organized conversations with your officers as you give them more and more responsibilities.

So you get a new guy, you make him assistant safety officer, say.

So you work with your safety officer, who also has 2 other jobs in the unit, to effectively train the new guy (or gal.. not being sexist, just term of reference).

This helps train your Safety Officer as an officer in how to successfully delegate things (just cuz he's the safety officer doesn't make him an expert at offloading thing, training a new guy, etc). It shows your new guy you care about his progression to sit down and take the time.

Is it time consuming? Yes, it can be.

So say you have a half-dozen officers in your unit who each hold down 2-3 jobs apiece, you included.  You have 2-3 new officers who are either in a holding pattern or have engaged in 1-2 "assistant" duties.


So you sit down first with your two deputies (or one deputy) and say "OK, lets look at how we can spread the wealth? Where are our pain points?  Where do we need the most help right now?"


then you direct your resources there first, where you'll get the biggest bang for your buck.

But don't treat this as a one-off occurrance. This is an ongoing thing.  Part of your onboarding process.  "ID what someone is interested in doing during the initial interviews and such."

This prevents you from making an IT guy the unit IT officer when the last thing he wants to do on Tuesday nights is IT.

It shows you're paying attention.

Do it in an organized way. Make 30 minutes of each meeting a time where the commander sits down with the new staff officers and their supervisors and plots out next steps, looks for roadblocks, measures the progress so far, etc.  Doesn't have to be extensive, but it should be on a regular basis and involve not just the commander and the affected staff officer, but that staff officer's supervisor.

"Hey, new safety assistant, lets sit down with the sq SE.."

"How goes? How are you progressing in the safety training track?"
"Hey, current SE, how are you doing with offloading 30-50% of your workload over here?"
"Current SE will eventually be the deputy for seniors in the next 6-12 months, so we have an event horizon to get you up to speed so he can move up and you can move up."

There are a myriad of conversations to be hand, but they can't be all hit-and-run discussions, occurring in the hallway, etc. Formal sitdowns, even if not labled as such.

The new guy sees that the commander is engaged.
The SE sees that the commander & the deputy or XO knows he's up to his eyeballs.
The SE sees that the commander or the deputy or XO know that there will be progression
Both officers see that the command team is interested in making things work and helping them out, not just throwing them to the wolves.

"He're the 12lb blue binder. Catch."

[MacGruff]

We've run into the same situation in our squadron which was compounded by having a "generational" change of Senior Members.

(Generational Change because a whole batch of cadets grew out of the program and their parents - who were officers - stopped attending and doing their jobs...)

We've essentially adopted the suggestions given here. I am the Professional Development Officer and I sit down with the interested newcomer during every one of their three visits before signing up and go over the program with them and explain how CAP does things. I am upfront about the need for them to finish Level 1 before being assigned to a duty, and the requirement that as soon as they finish Level 1, they will be given a staff position which will then have the contributing to the squadron. I make no bones about the fact that it will take them between a year and two years to get the hang of it and use my example of 18 months as the backstory.

Once they signed up and got their CAPID, I sit down with them and go over e-services sign ups and show them where the Level 1 materials are. We also go over the Pamphlets and I suggest to them to read each of the ones that sound interesting as I am gearing them up for the "summary conversation". I identify myself to them as their mentor in the program.

Over the next few weeks I approach them to ask how they're doing and resolve any questions/concerns. Once they are done with Level 1, I schedule a discussion with the Squadron Commander which leads to a staff assignment. At that point, I re-emphasize the contents of the pamphlets. I am also the Group PDO and have developed a list of Master-rated folks in our group. When a new Senior Member chooses a Specialty Track, I refer to that list and arrange for mentorship between the new SM and the Master-rated SM. This is to help explain even better what are the duties of that staff position. Only after all of this, do I start discussing Level 2 requirements.

It's been taking between 10 weeks to 4 months to get senior members through this course of action and it does keep me busy, but I see that as part of my job and it's been getting the senior members prepared and engaged so they have something meaningful to look forward to at the weekly meetings, rather than just sitting in the corner.

[Spaceman3750]

(of course now they will be called "actives"?, sounds like a term they'd use on 24)

The main characters on Joss Whedon's "Dollhouse" were called "Actives". Here I thought that the brain wiping and reprogramming was reserved for wing-level and above personnel, but apparently they're rolling out the program for everyone .

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1135300/

[Eclipse]

"Fixing a squadron" for lack of a better term, is going to be a 6-month to 1-year plus situation, which should be communicated
to the membership when annual goals are discussed, etc.

Everyone needs to be engaged in the end goals to stay on that timeline, but if they accept that, things won't be as rocky and
the command staff will get some leeway.

For example, we realized last week, one of the reasons our senior NCOs are struggling, is because they had no one to model themselves
after, and no leaders to guide them.  The current cadre of officers came up before the stagnation, and even then mostly on their
own volition, and then there was at least 18 months of pretty much "nothing but the usual", so the examples aren't there.

Fixing that is on the adults, with sensitivity for the cadets if they aren't sure where to stand even though they are wearing 8 stripes.

Same goes for the seniors who want to be useful, but need to know the bigger plan - you can't have people standing up in the middle
of the meeting "deciding" "tonight is AE night".

[Spaceman3750]

The way that I look at it is this:

When you join as a senior, realistically there's about a one-year run-up to what the government would call "full performance". This run up includes things like Level I, OBC, a technician rating in your specialty, and if you're working in cadet programs, TLC. Hopefully Level 2 soon thereafter. Until then, in a perfect world you should have a pretty high level of supervision and mentorship, which can wane as you come closer to that one year mark.

This approach ties in with our core value of Excellence. By setting an expectation that "I don't need you to do all of this up front; however, this training is important to develop you as an officer and help you do your job better, and we expect you to complete it at some point in the first year", we show the prospective member that we are committed to their success, and helping them be an outstanding member of the unit, rather than someone who shows up and kind of does "stuff", and then not quite right.

It would probably help if you facilitated an SLS or TLC (or both) so that your members don't have to wait for the one-a-year opportunity to drive halfway across the state.

Not that I'm currently the boss; however, if I were this is the tack I would take.

[Eclipse]

It would probably help if you facilitated an SLS or TLC (or both)

This is sadly the only way to insure that your people hear a consistent message.

I heard a story this weekend regarding an all too "typical" TLC with an instructor who clearly hadn't looked at the material until
it was on the screen before him.

The participants essentially said "enough of this guy wasting our time by not being prepared, we're leaving".
Thankfully someone with a clue stepped in and saved the situation.

Someone who is experienced and informed about the current state of the program can usually jump into these
without too much issue, but if the last time you looked at a slide, it was actually a "slide", you shouldn't get yourself involved.

I live by the mantra - "I won't waste your time, don't waste mine."  PD is supposed to help make better, more effective members.
If you're only there to check the box for a ribbon or promotion, then you've cheapened that ribbon or promotion anyway.

[Майор Хаткевич]

I live by the mantra - "I won't waste your time, don't waste mine."  PD is supposed to help make better, more effective members.

Professional Development isn't.


Any industry with "professionals" has this "continuing education" bit.


Unfortunately for us, we've got a lot of Master rated folks in all trades of CAP, with 19XX as the completion date.


Just to look at my little corner of CAP - Cadet Programs - things changed drastically JUST in the time I was in college. Drill tests, new books, no procedures, online testing, new requirements, changes in concepts, etc, etc. I was a young senior, former Earhart cadet, and the learning curve for me was at least 6-12 months to get back "in" and know what's going on. But we have people who were cadets in the 70s and 80s coming in, either after a decades long break, or with little "current" knowledge, and being expected to perform based on past achievements under old rules. Not fair to our cadets, and certainly not fair to those seniors.


We need continuing education, refreshers, and heck, maybe even a CPAC - Cadet Programs Advisory Council - where local folks get together to talk, share, and bounce ideas off each other.

[Spaceman3750]

Any industry with "professionals" has this "continuing education" bit.

So you raise a really great point. In a world where you do stuff once and are done, how do CC's help their people stay sharp and continue to grow? This is just as important to retaining them as getting them trained in the first place. Engaging work is one prong, but since the national PD program isn't set up for it, how do we develop & administer continuing education locally?

I'd also like to add that to retain senior members - avoid making them a "moose" (as my CC calls it - they need antlers for all the hats). Don't bring your new SM's in and say "great! We have these 12 things for you to do." Let them do one or two things, become really good at them, mentor a new person in how to do them, then try something else. This is really hard to do when there's a lot to be done and 3 people to do it, but I truly believe it's a key to retain and dig yourself out of a hole. Let CP people be CP people, let admin people be admin people, let AE people let AE people, etc.

[Eclipse]

Professional Development isn't.

True enough - how many other organizations would allow a new member to be assigned at the state or region level
as a Director in a job they've never performed at before? 

CAP does it all the time.

CAP has no process for Technical training, it's all OJT, even if there's no qualified trainer.

The tech rating should be required before you get the job, not 2-years in because you want a silver bar.

[Eclipse]

I'd also like to add that to retain senior members - avoid making them a "moose" (as my CC calls it). Don't bring your new SM's in and say "great! We have these 12 things for you to do." Let them do one or two things, become really good at them, mentor a new person in how to do them, then try something else. This is really hard to do when there's a lot to be done and 3 people to do it, but I truly believe it's a key to retain and dig yourself out of a hole. Let CP people be CP people, let admin people be admin people, let AE people let AE people, etc.

When squadrons are operating at the level they are supposed to (see NIN's numbers for reference), new members have the time and breathing room
to become "members" and do a few fun things before having to take a staff job. At our current manning and staffing, that is simply not possible.

No staff job worth assigning should only have one person doing it - that takes time and people, something in increasingly short supply at the unit level.

I agree though, CC's have to stop seeing every person in the door as their "savior".

[Майор Хаткевич]

Any industry with "professionals" has this "continuing education" bit.

So you raise a really great point. In a world where you do stuff once and are done, how do CC's help their people stay sharp and continue to grow? This is just as important to retaining them as getting them trained in the first place. Engaging work is one prong, but since the national PD program isn't set up for it, how do we develop & administer continuing education locally?

I'd also like to add that to retain senior members - avoid making them a "moose" (as my CC calls it). Don't bring your new SM's in and say "great! We have these 12 things for you to do." Let them do one or two things, become really good at them, mentor a new person in how to do them, then try something else. This is really hard to do when there's a lot to be done and 3 people to do it, but I truly believe it's a key to retain and dig yourself out of a hole. Let CP people be CP people, let admin people be admin people, let AE people let AE people, etc.

One way is conferences. But they need to be held more often than every two years or so, and need to be more specialized, and need to come with the understanding that participation then needs to be almost mandatory to make it "worth it", as getting 5% of the membership to a conference doesn't get the job done.


Other ways? Here's a job for Groups. I don't know, at least in any easily available way who my counterpart CDCs are in my Group. I know some, based on interaction, but not all. I don't have their emails. I don't have their numbers, and we certainly don't talk on a regular basis. While we've made great strides in the last 10 years or so on making, at least locally the program to be more than just MY unit vs YOUR unit, there are still no easy channels of communication or "get together" events. Who better to help a new PD officer than 2-3 experienced PD officers? How about that new admin officer who has a tough time with all the minutiae of the job, and no one in the unit to help because the last four admin officers up and left when they hit the same wall? Sometimes group SMEs can help, but if we're talking about consistent support and "knowing the problem" nothing beats it like a peer group.

And that brings me up to another issue. I'm sure I'll need to drop a quarter into the Nin-fund, but we really need to change up how we do membership. We've already started at the national level with renaming categories - great! But we need to stop taking people in via trickle in. It doesn't work, it's unsustainable, and it's a drain on resources. Set 4 "open houses" on weekends during the year. Work out a CENTRAL training program, on weekends, staffed by the Group SMEs, and unit doers to train ALL the local new members as ONE group. Let them network, let them get to know each other, and let them go through the program together as a support group. It would completely change our culture within a 2 year period, and I believe it would also change our retention.

[NIN]

I agree though, CC's have to stop seeing every person in the door as their "savior".

How does it make the organization look?

Desperate

[SMWOG]

Be honest and dont sell people a bridge. A lot of folks think they are going to put on a zoom bag and hang out at the O club and sing "Youve lost that luving feeling"

Show them your unit in action,not a fantasy!

[Chappie]

Be honest and dont sell people a bridge. A lot of folks think they are going to put on a zoom bag and hang out at the O club and sing "Youve lost that luving feeling"

Show them your unit in action,not a fantasy!

You mean we don't fly inverted either?

[Fubar]

It would be nice if we could figure out a way to reduce the amount of work it takes to keep a squadron afloat. If we can't seem to add enough people for the current workload, perhaps the workload should be adjusted.

That will likely mean removing certain aspects or programs from AE/ES/CP, which could be painful.

[Майор Хаткевич]

It would be nice if we could figure out a way to reduce the amount of work it takes to keep a squadron afloat. If we can't seem to add enough people for the current workload, perhaps the workload should be adjusted.

That will likely mean removing certain aspects or programs from AE/ES/CP, which could be painful.

We can probably save on admin by making eservices track any and all meaningful data.

[Fubar]

We can probably save on admin by making eservices track any and all meaningful data.

Definitely.

[Eclipse]

We can probably save on admin by making eservices track any and all meaningful data.

Meaningful being the keyword, discarding the stuff that punches a box and does not serve any purpose.

For example, there is an entire bureaucracy around tracking Safety currency, yet CAP does not track attendance.

One has incredible value at every level, one has nearly zero value at any level. The energy and effort around both
is a nice paradigm for the current state of CAP.

[etodd]

Goals of the new member.

Some new members aren't interested in ranks/grades and uniforms, so the carrot of a new ribbon/badge isn't what they are looking for. Ask them what their goals are and show them the path in a clearly defined step by step process. The websites are a mess in this regard.

Most new Senior members who were never Cadets don't have clue what jobs/duties are available, and again, what the paths/steps are if they see one they like. Trying to look themselves on the websites is very frustrating.

Some things could really be downsized. I spent about 8 - 10 hours or more going through FEMA 100,200 & 700(?) to get those knocked off. I marathoned it one Saturday. SO much duplication. I don't have any desire to be a Director or leader, etc.. So after all of that 'training' and testing, what I got out of it was: show up, check in, find your supervisor, do as your told.  Those four steps are all I really needed to know as a little volunteer helper. Those who want to the boss can take the longer course. Someone with less time on their hands may take weeks or months to finish up those courses. That can discourage folks. And yes, I realize CAP doesn't have control over these courses, but its a good example and the principle applies to many other situations.

Everyone is expected to fit a certain mold.  Cookie cutter solutions. In this day and time ....

[Eclipse]

Everyone is expected to fit a certain mold.

Yes, they are - that is the nature of a paramilitary organization.  If the structure and expectations are more then you are interested in,
there are any number of other less-structured organizations that would be happy to make use of your time and contributions, however the
number of those who will allow you to sign out a $350k aircraft without some standardized training is somewhat..."limited".

The ICS classes are one of the things which set CAP apart from other organizations, and CAP's internal adherence to ICS principles
is one of the things it markets to partner agencies and customers.  The three you mentioned are baseline "follower" training
designed to introduce you to the functions you would encounter as a field asset (i.e. aircrew or ground resource) during a mission,
they have little to do with being a leader in those situations other then some definitions of the terminology.

Everyone absorbs things at a different rate, but those classes should be an hour or so each tops. Directors and Section Chiefs are
required to take in-residence classes which last from 2-days to a week or sometimes more.

I agree the opportunities and expectations of membership need to be discussed with prospects well before an application is mentioned,
but the fact of the matter is that if you want to serve in an organization with a larger scope, there are significantly higher training
expectations then your characterization, even if the actual duty looks a lot like your portrayal.    A new member doesn't know what
he needs until he needs it, thus standardized training for everyone.

The "I only need this" attitude is regularly cited as one of CAP's limiting factors when it tries to expand its mission scope, or work with new partners.

[etodd]

.... those who will allow you to sign out a $350k aircraft without some standardized training is somewhat..."limited".

Of course. I was speaking too broadly, and obviously there are many exceptions. All of your points are well taken.

This thread is entitled 'Keeping New Senior Members' ... and we have other threads related to Recruitment.  In my view (over 40 years in marketing) if you put 80% of your efforts on the Retention side .. the recruitment side will take care of itself with just minor efforts needed. Easier to keep someone than to find a new person and start from scratch.  Exit polling over a casual lunch where people will open up and talk helps.

[SarDragon]

Every time I go to the wing conference, we are told recruitment and retention figures, and the point is made that retaining just 25 or 30 percent of the people who drop out, in addition to the normal recruiting input, will give us a 3 to 5 percent gain in members every year. EVERY YEAR!

[Eclipse]

Every time I go to the wing conference, we are told recruitment and retention figures, and the point is made that retaining just 25 or 30 percent of the people who drop out, in addition to the normal recruiting input, will give us a 3 to 5 percent gain in members every year. EVERY YEAR!

True enough, and from the year-over-year figures currently, CAP is clearly not executing on even that level.

The problem with that assertion, is that it doesn't factor in who you're retaining.  Keeping people on the roster purely for the sake of numbers,
does not serve the emission, and in many ways actually impedes it.

[SarDragon]

OK, who do you want to retain? Fifty percent of our cadets leave after their first year. Retaining any portion of them is a start.

[Eclipse]

OK, who do you want to retain? Fifty percent of our cadets leave after their first year. Retaining any portion of them is a start.

Those who participate.  Anything else shields the churn and virtually insures nothing will change and it will likely get worse.
Allowing a cadet's parents to continue to write checks for a cadet off to college who's never coming back, or a cadet who
came to two meetings, didn't like it, and is never coming back, doesn't serve anything.

Raw numbers are the quickest / easiest to access gauge of the organization's health.  A high churn rate indicates
something is broken - whether it's expectations or execution, something isn't right, but if you hide the churn in
empty shirts, that doesn't bubble up unless the leadership is willing to look deeper at progression and participation.

Within the above is supposed to be a lot of energy and effort around the "why you left", which CAP tends to ignore culturally.

[etodd]

Within the above is supposed to be a lot of energy and effort around the "why you left", which CAP tends to ignore culturally.

Hence my comment above regarding a casual lunch or cup of coffee a few days or maybe even a month after a Senior Member has left (cooling off period) to get some ideas of "how they would make the Squadron better". And obviously should be done by some low ranking member the former member would feel comfortable discussing it with.

But then again ... would anything really 'new' come from those exit interviews? Are not most reasons already known? Everything from "our squadron didn't do anything" to "the military wannabes turned me off" .... and more.

[dwb]

But then again ... would anything really 'new' come from those exit interviews? Are not most reasons already known? Everything from "our squadron didn't do anything" to "the military wannabes turned me off" .... and more.

Maybe. I would posit that some well-meaning local leaders don't realize how they might be failing to bring new members into the fold. That, and hearing the same reason(s) more than once means you can't pretend that it's the other person's fault (i.e., the only constant in all your failed relationships is you).

Last summer I joined a local running club. I had been thinking about joining for a couple years, and I finally bit the bullet. On my very first run with the group I spent the whole run with one of the guys who talked all about the routes they go on and which days they run and who the key people in the club were, etc. When I saw him at the next run he introduced me to all the people I hadn't met and we ran together again talking about all manner of things. He wasn't a club officer or anything, just a friendly guy.

It's a small gesture, right? But that early kindness made me feel so welcome and made me want to join them on more group runs. I re-arranged my running schedule over time to where most of my miles are now with the club. There's a tangible emphasis on camaraderie and encouraging each other.

The running club is a social activity. It bears no resemblance to CAP. But what if we could have even a fraction of that welcoming atmosphere when a new senior walks in the door? Maybe stop signing people up then leaving them in a corner to figure everything out for themselves. Encouraging people no matter where they are in their education and training.

On the CAPF 12 there's a sentence above the commander's signature that asks the commander to verify that a mentor has been assigned to the new member to bring them up to speed. I wonder how many squadrons actually do that.

[NIN]

But then again ... would anything really 'new' come from those exit interviews? Are not most reasons already known? Everything from "our squadron didn't do anything" to "the military wannabes turned me off" .... and more.

I think you're pretty spot on here.  I won't say there is nothing new under the sun, but for the most part, its not hard to look at a unit and go "not active," or "zero communication" or something without having survey the departed.  Maybe the commander needs to hear that from "the departed" to make him/her go "Hmm, really?"

(as a commander, I always took feedback like that. I may not have fixed exactly what the person who left was expecting, but I tried to apply it..)

There are only so many times we can hear "admin requirements are too high" or "didn't do anything" or "my time wasn't valued."

*Some* of these things we can help with at a national scale.  Some things (ie. "crap leadership") varies from unit to unit and time to time, and its hard to pin down and correct. "OK, so yeah, these two people think this unit has poor leadership. Are *they* willing to step up and help correct that? No?"

[Holding Pattern]

There are only so many times we can hear "admin requirements are too high"

No, this one can be repeated a lot more. The technology exists to streamline a not-insignificant amount of the admin work, and we don't have it.

...

I'm sending my notice to volunteer for higher level IT committee discussions now. 

[NIN]

There are only so many times we can hear "admin requirements are too high"

No, this one can be repeated a lot more. The technology exists to streamline a not-insignificant amount of the admin work, and we don't have it.

...

I'm sending my notice to volunteer for higher level IT committee discussions now. 

and in the very next paragraph I said "*Some* of these things we can help with at a national scale."

Like that.

Yes, I agree, it needs to happen. And people are trying to make it happen.
And it does need to be said over and over again.

But you hear the same 5-6 "Time wasn't valued" "Didn't do anything" "Admin burden too high" etc, yes you realize that those things need to be fixed.

But I can't fly to 1000 squadrons and fix their lack of mentorship or an inability to delegate.

that comes thru selecting and training good squadron commander and leaders. People who "get" that you engage your members and value them.   Don't drop 12lbs of blue binder in their lap and walk away.

Some of this is accomplishable nationally in a short time, some of it is not. It is a sea change that will take *years* to come to fruition.

[Eclipse]

If the prospective members don't see >you< i.e. CC, and staff, enjoying your time and being excited for the future, why, on earth,
would they want to join?

I literally had this exact conversation last night with a couple or prospective members.  We had a lot going on, there was a fair amount of
energy in the air, and conversations about current and future ops. 

I told them that they seemed like a potential fit, we had interesting things they might enjoy, and being on the upswing of the bell,
lots of opportunity, but I did not view them as "saviors" and it would be 6 months before they could really be a resource to the unit as they get their sea legs.

Expectations properly set, no surprises.  Of course it's also incumbent on the existing staff to continue to execute and keep the promises we're making.

It's about planting the seeds, and then tending to them dutifully, knowing some won't grow, but overall the effort will pay off. 


Knowing what you're doing, what you intend to do, and not being overly concerned about the naysayers helps too.

[NIN]

BTW, when we talk about retention:


Those stats (59.68% and 89.47%) are from my unit.

[Holding Pattern]

But I can't fly to 1000 squadrons and fix their lack of mentorship or an inability to delegate.

Can we find 1000 of these through DRMO?



(This is a joke.)

[indiaXray]

Be honest and don't sell people a bridge. A lot of folks think they are going to put on a zoom bag and hang out at the O club and sing "You've lost that luv-ing feeling"

Show them your unit in action, not a fantasy!

Exactly.  When I first visited my now squadron as a potential senior member, the squadron commander and his deputy were welcoming and friendly, genuinely interested in what I could offer the unit.  They explained things simply and frankly, and the steps and procedures necessary to becoming fully involved.  They also allowed me to observe typical squadron activities and see if I was comfortable.  Successful Senior retention starts from day one.

[NIN]

This thought popped in my head along these lines..

In a lot of units, you're understaffed. Desperately understaffed. So understaffed that a warm body walks in the door feigning the least bit of interest, you're on him or her like a monkey on a cupcake.

So you give them the 90-second (more like 90-minute) recruiting spiel, glossing over things because you know if that if you say "CAP costs money" or "You actually have to do things" they *might* turn around and walk out the door.  Please, please, please, don't go!



My unit has 31 seniors right now. Some are pilots and don't show up to the cadet meetings, some are active, some aren't.

But when a potential senior walks in the door, we're like Mike Damone.



Like Mike Damone, you never let on how much you want a senior member to join....

"Oh, Debbie. Hi."

Smooth. 

Second,  you always call the shots. "You should turn in your paperwork next week. You won't regret it."


Third, act like wherever you are, that's the place to be. "Isn't this drafty National Guard armory great?"

Fourth, when ordering food, you find out what they want, then order for the both of you. It's a classy move.  "Now, the gentleman will have the everything bagel with cream cheese, and a large regular with extra cream."

And five, now this is the most important. When it comes down to scoring the recruiting deal, whenever possible, put on side one of Led Zeppelin IV.

Er, wait...

[Garibaldi]

I really want some of whatever NIN is smoking right now.

[Pace]

Thanks everyone for replying. My main problem (and that of most of my SMs) is time commitment. I was able to talk one of my newer members from leaving (he's a freakin rock star with PR). I did get some clarity in what you all have said. I think I am going to call on group to help me train newer officers when my efforts are commited elsewhere in the squadron. Thanks again, everyone!

[etodd]

My unit has 31 seniors right now. Some are pilots and don't show up to the cadet meetings, some are active, some aren't.

^^ Emphasis mine. Made me wonder about your Senior meetings being different than Cadet ones, time wise? Our Senior meetings are running in one room while the Cadets are meeting in another. Some times if there is a special program, we combine. But most of the time we are split. Which is the norm with most Composite Squadrons?

[Holding Pattern]

And five, now this is the most important. When it comes down to scoring the recruiting deal, whenever possible, put on side one of Led Zeppelin IV.

Er, wait...

That's not how I remember it...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYE3nm9voUk

[NIN]

^^ Emphasis mine. Made me wonder about your Senior meetings being different than Cadet ones, time wise? Our Senior meetings are running in one room while the Cadets are meeting in another. Some times if there is a special program, we combine. But most of the time we are split. Which is the norm with most Composite Squadrons?

Some are composite in name only, wearing the mantle while being "big" cadet squadrons. Others are more like two separately operating flights with full ops sides of the house, etc. My sq leans toward the former, but we're still kind of ops-heavy.

Tonight we had 20 of 31 at the meeting. Two had to leave early due to schedule. The ops folks were doing training, new SMs were doing PD, etc. busy

[stillamarine]

Thanks everyone for replying. My main problem (and that of most of my SMs) is time commitment. I was able to talk one of my newer members from leaving (he's a freakin rock star with PR). I did get some clarity in what you all have said. I think I am going to call on group to help me train newer officers when my efforts are commited elsewhere in the squadron. Thanks again, everyone!

I say this, take what you can if it helps. Personally for me because of my on-call schedule and other things I'm currently only able to attend actual meetings every other week. I am able to perform a lot of my duties by email. So I'm still contributing to the squadron just not making every meeting. I hate that because of this my step-son is only making every other meeting but hopefully we will be able to fix it soon.

[NIN]

^^ Emphasis mine. Made me wonder about your Senior meetings being different than Cadet ones, time wise? Our Senior meetings are running in one room while the Cadets are meeting in another. Some times if there is a special program, we combine. But most of the time we are split. Which is the norm with most Composite Squadrons?

Let me expand on this a little now that I'm at a keyboard.

So not everybody in the squadron has a "duty" that needs to be done every week at the unit.

So some of our seniors (our safety officer, for example) are only there 1-3 meetings a month, not all 4.

But, while there are shenanigans occurring in the drill hall  (last night was a *zoo*.. We only have the drill hall really, so imagine 60+ cadets in 4 flights plus the cadet staff doing D&C plus classroom training in one big room.. it makes me crazy from essentially mid-October to mid-April when we can finally do D&C outdoors and not on top of one another) the seniors are in the DFAC doing pilot stuff in one corner, PD training in another corner, admin work in the middle, etc.

We could benefit from the use of the full armory like we had circa 1999-2000.  Then we had an office we shared with the Sea Cadets, supply was in one of the little huts out back, we had at least 2 classrooms to use plus the drill hall. But things have changed with the config of the armory, the classrooms are cubicle farms now, they've shoehorned more units in there, the range was converted to the DFAC, now we've got a more restrictive MOU with the Guard, etc.  I expect in the next MOU round we'll get told that we can't use the bathrooms anymore or something. *sigh*

Our aircrews have a once a month meeting where they go over aircrew-ish things, safety, etc.  We have a senior planning meeting quarterly where we get the seniors and the cadet commander in the room and hash out the next quarter and then following 9 months, etc. 

Last night was weird for seniors, we had a bunch more there than kind of normal, and we were still missing 2-3 people who often come.



(yes, for some crazy reason the seniors all fell in as a column formation. Then some more seniors showed up and made it a line formation. )