Why does CAP refuse to use its members to meet strategic goals?

[Holding Pattern]

BLUF: Why are my tax/membership dollars being used to hire people to do things when we already HAVE PEOPLE?!

More often than not I see oblique references on facebook or captalk to how CAP will "hire someone for this IT project" or "Hire people for writing this new task guide" or other items.

What's wrong with using the people we have? We've gone half a year without a single new publication in the rewrite process and by this point I could have rewritten several of those on my own.

We have IT measures being taken and not one single call out to the membership of members with IT ratings for assistance or feedback.

We have ES task books that haven't been rewritten in 10 years, making a joke out of our training material on the GTM side with its complete lack of GPS training and we have plenty of people that can help write those new tasks.

But if you reach out to NHQ you get a non-answer/polite brushoff if you volunteer to help.

What's wrong with this picture?

[etodd]

Anyone interested in a job?

DIGITAL MEDIA COORDINATOR

Apply online:

https://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/about/employment/digital-media-coordinator

[arajca]

Not the same thing.

I've gotten the brush off more than once, to the point I don't think I'd try again. Last time was just a couple years ago.

[etodd]

OK ... I'll play this game of conjecture:

Assign a volunteer a project, and he/she gets busy and slacks off, can you threaten him/her if it doesn't get it done by the deadline?

Assign a volunteer a project, do you have to tippy-toe around hurting his feelings if you ask for a re-write?

Assign a volunteer a project, and he leaves CAP, do you have to start over at ground zero with another member?

Assign a volunteer a IT project, will he use standard code that the next person can easily work with, or will he customize it to the point the next IT person will say they have to start from scratch? (Been there, done that, elsewhere)

Et., etc. ....

[arajca]

OK. You have some valid points, but you can flip it around.

Ask for volunteer. Get volunteers for a project, delay project for 4, 5, 6 months with no updates. Provide no contact information for volunteers. Start dribbling out information. Volunteers decide the project isn't important to CAP based on how it's handled by NHQ and find other things to do.

Real experience

[Eclipse]

OK. You have some valid points, but you can flip it around.

Ask for volunteer. Get volunteers for a project, delay project for 4, 5, 6 months with no updates. Provide no contact information for volunteers. Start dribbling out information. Volunteers decide the project isn't important to CAP based on how it's handled by NHQ and find other things to do.

Real experience

+1

[Eclipse]

A: Contractors will do what you tell them to do, and generally not have an opinion about it.

B: Volunteer members are likely to have experience and an opinion.

#A gets you eservices and WMIRS.

[Holding Pattern]

OK ... I'll play this game of conjecture:

Assign a volunteer a project, and he/she gets busy and slacks off, can you threaten him/her if it doesn't get it done by the deadline?

Assign a volunteer a project, do you have to tippy-toe around hurting his feelings if you ask for a re-write?

Assign a volunteer a project, and he leaves CAP, do you have to start over at ground zero with another member?

Assign a volunteer a IT project, will he use standard code that the next person can easily work with, or will he customize it to the point the next IT person will say they have to start from scratch? (Been there, done that, elsewhere)

Et., etc. ....

Assign CAPNHQ to a publications rewrite, watch as over half a year goes by with no progress...

etc. etc.

I can't see how volunteer work puts us in a worse position than the status quo.

[Eclipse]

Also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_invented_here

[etodd]

Assign CAPNHQ to a publications rewrite, watch as over half a year goes by with no progress...

etc. etc.

I can't see how volunteer work puts us in a worse position than the status quo.

And people want to swear that the "CAP WAY" is the best way. As well as the old "We've done it this way for decades, no reason to change it now" attitude.

Can't have it both ways.  Is CAP ready for a wholesale RESET, and become a new CAP, or are all the old ways still working just fine and will keep up the pace with this fast pace world?

Sure looking like the very foundations need to be dug up, and start this organization over from the ground up, to hear y'all complain.

[Eclipse]

Surely you are not that naive.

You are not the first, nor the last, to suggest CAP needs a re-boot, few would argue the point.

However random people making things up and ignoring the regulations for expediency puts themselves,
and the entire organizaiton at risk.

It also impacts good order and discipline, retention, and mission effectiveness.

[etodd]

Surely you are not that naive.

You are not the first, nor the last, to suggest CAP needs a re-boot, few would argue the point.

However random people making things up and ignoring the regulations for expediency puts themselves,
and the entire organizaiton at risk.

It also impacts good order and discipline, retention, and mission effectiveness.

I knew you would be the one to respond. So predictable.

[Holding Pattern]

Assign CAPNHQ to a publications rewrite, watch as over half a year goes by with no progress...

etc. etc.

I can't see how volunteer work puts us in a worse position than the status quo.

And people want to swear that the "CAP WAY" is the best way. As well as the old "We've done it this way for decades, no reason to change it now" attitude.

Can't have it both ways.  Is CAP ready for a wholesale RESET, and become a new CAP, or are all the old ways still working just fine and will keep up the pace with this fast pace world?

Sure looking like the very foundations need to be dug up, and start this organization over from the ground up, to hear y'all complain.

You can follow the CAP regulations and bylaws and still allow members to participate in the execution of the strategic planning and documentation writing...

[etodd]

Assign CAPNHQ to a publications rewrite, watch as over half a year goes by with no progress...

etc. etc.

I can't see how volunteer work puts us in a worse position than the status quo.

And people want to swear that the "CAP WAY" is the best way. As well as the old "We've done it this way for decades, no reason to change it now" attitude.

Can't have it both ways.  Is CAP ready for a wholesale RESET, and become a new CAP, or are all the old ways still working just fine and will keep up the pace with this fast pace world?

Sure looking like the very foundations need to be dug up, and start this organization over from the ground up, to hear y'all complain.

You can follow the CAP regulations and bylaws and still allow members to participate in the execution of the strategic planning and documentation writing...

Of course.  LOL

[etodd]

Who is in charge of printing membership cards? Inside or outside job?

Does the back of yours say CAP "Nation"?

I'm a member of the Nation of CAP now. LOL

[Holding Pattern]

Who is in charge of printing membership cards? Inside or outside job?

Does the back of yours say CAP "Nation"?

I'm a member of the Nation of CAP now. LOL

Funny you should mention that. We should ostensibly be moving towards a HSPD-12 complaint card, and .gov agencies are doing that through fedidcard.gov. That seems like a logical solution to use.

[Mitchell 1969]

Who is in charge of printing membership cards? Inside or outside job?

Does the back of yours say CAP "Nation"?

I'm a member of the Nation of CAP now. LOL

Thanks for that. I looked. And there it was.

(Sheesh).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fubar]

While it sounds simple to sic the thousands of interested volunteers on national level projects, in my experience it ends up being a bit more complicated than that. For one thing, we already have a large number of volunteers assigned to NHQ, many in director level positions. The issue tends to be that adding more people to a problem can in fact make the problem worse. See both the Theory of Constraints and Brooks' Law.

Don't get me wrong, I'm as frustrated as anyone that everything NHQ touches takes forever, some of that is likely due to the small number of paid staffers, volunteers who have limited time, and the bureaucracy that comes with having to run a lot of stuff by CAP-USAF (or higher up the AF chain of command). Some of this stuff certainly seems excessive, such as the regulation re-write, but I doubt adding more people is the solution.

There are a large number of working groups currently plugging away at a number of very important topics, most of them are top to bottom redesigns of programs. It's a huge effort, even large companies would see this take a lot of time, let alone volunteers working on the side.

[LATORRECA]

BLUF: Why are my tax/membership dollars being used to hire people to do things when we already HAVE PEOPLE?!

More often than not I see oblique references on facebook or captalk to how CAP will "hire someone for this IT project" or "Hire people for writing this new task guide" or other items.

What's wrong with using the people we have? We've gone half a year without a single new publication in the rewrite process and by this point I could have rewritten several of those on my own.

We have IT measures being taken and not one single call out to the membership of members with IT ratings for assistance or feedback.

We have ES task books that haven't been rewritten in 10 years, making a joke out of our training material on the GTM side with its complete lack of GPS training and we have plenty of people that can help write those new tasks.

But if you reach out to NHQ you get a non-answer/polite brushoff if you volunteer to help.

What's wrong with this picture?

HQ have use volunteer to get the new web interface for the Squadrons. I have a member from my OS flight working directly with them and have roll out a suit of google business solution for the OS squadrons.
  The emails and web infrastructure has been created, however they are in a holding pattern due to HQ.

So yes the still use volunteers to meet our Strategic plans.

R/
Carlos


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[RiverAux]

Should there be more opportunities for volunteers to participate in national level projects and priorities more than they do now?  Probably, sure. 

But, have you seen how many people are really interested in performing CAP administrative-type work at your squadron, group, wing or region?