Membership Soars Past 61,000!!!

[RADIOMAN015]

See the article here:
http://www.capvolunteernow.com/todays_features.cfm/cap_membership_soars_past_61000?show=news&newsID=9131

61383 members as of 10/31/2010.   Cadets:  26335 & Seniors: 35048.   No further breakdown was far as aerospace members, retired members, patron members etc.

Of course we all know the reality of "active" and "contributing" members is quite different than the numbers
RM 

[RiverAux]

Hard to have overall numbers going up without also having the number of active members going up at the same time. 

That being said, with all our different membership categories I'd like to see the trends broken down better.  Are the senior members being claimed ACTUAL senior members or do they include adults in the other categories such as Aerospace Education Members?

[jimmydeanno]

Why are you taking such a dismal view of such good news?  Membership growing, year after year, doesn't necessarily mean that our active membership is somehow lower.  If anything, it means that we have more people coming in that want to be active.

Membership growth is a fantastic thing, even if it's 10,000 extra patron members.  There really is no "downside" to this news.

WOO HOO! GO CAP!

[a2capt]

Because in the past when they have shown just how many they have added in one year, pure numbers, and then they tell you the total each year .. it's astounding how many people get added and how many drop.

If we all could figure out a way to retain, those additions would mean a whole LOT more.

[CAP Producer]

Because in the past when they have shown just how many they have added in one year, pure numbers, and then they tell you the total each year .. it's astounding how many people get added and how many drop.

If we all could figure out a way to retain, those additions would mean a whole LOT more.

It's simple. Leaders at all levels need to take care of our people better.

[meganite]

I'm new, and I'm an active member Well I guess numbers can get anyone down, since they don't always say the true situation, but there's hope. Yay CAP!!! I'll do my best and see if I can get some friends to join too

And CAP Producer: I agree with you.

[C/Martin]

I agree with CAP producer also. My squadrons has 23 cadets on the rooster and only 15 of them ecver show up. We actuaklly have 3 cadets who have been on the roosters for 2 years, but do not show up.

[RiverAux]

Nothing new to any of this.  In every organization you have inactive and active members.  In every organization a significant percentage of new members drop out after the first year.  I've never seen anything showing that CAP has any worse problem with this than any other group. 

[Eclipse]

I agree with CAP producer also. My squadrons has 23 cadets on the rooster and only 15 of them ecver show up. We actuaklly have 3 cadets who have been on the roosters for 2 years, but do not show up.

Why are they still on the roster?

[FW]

As of today, we have almost 63,000 members.  This is about where we were after  Sept, 2001; the highest membership so far in the past decade.  No matter how you look at the numbers, this is good news.

[RiverAux]

Wow, almost 2,000 new members in less than 2 weeks!

My interest in getting the internal numbers is so that we can actually do year-to-year comparisons.  Our membership today has several categories that weren't present in the old days that are quite large. 

[RADIOMAN015]

As of today, we have almost 63,000 members.  This is about where we were after  Sept, 2001; the highest membership so far in the past decade.  No matter how you look at the numbers, this is good news.

These type of press releases are great for PR outside of CAP, internally we should be provided the breakdown of the membership into the various categories that are currently authorized.  On a monthly basis that should be posted to the members only website.  I would think with that new expensive association management software package they are getting, they will have the capability to do a lot more analysis without much programming effort.

I can only speak from what I observe in my unit, with between 40 to 50 senior members listed, I would consider about 43% as active & contributing members to the unit.  On the cadet side, our cadet management personnel have told me that of the almost 50 cadets, about 30-35% are regular attendees (meaning 4 out of 5 meetings a month, 3 out of 4 meetings per month). 

RM

 

[bosshawk]

I would hope that those who are cheering about adding so many new members will concentrate on making them productive, active members.  As has been mentioned, a significant number will likely be 1 year members.  I have found over the years(almost 18), that about 30-40% can be counted on to participate in any sort of active way: I am only talking about seniors.  I have no experience with the cadet side of the house, so don't have first hand experience in that arena.

In the Sq that I belong to, we have lost three members in the past month to non-renewals and one has transferred to another Wing.  By the end of the year, we will lose one more to non-renewal and there have been NO new members in over a year.  I have mentioned a recruiting effort and get stared at.  That is out of about 15 active members, so the work force is getting pretty thin.  Who is getting all the new members?  It certainly isn't CAWG: our numbers have dropped in the past month.

[jimmydeanno]

We had 10 potential members at our meeting on Monday, just sayin'.

[coudano]

Because in the past when they have shown just how many they have added in one year, pure numbers, and then they tell you the total each year .. it's astounding how many people get added and how many drop.

If we all could figure out a way to retain, those additions would mean a whole LOT more.

It's simple. Leaders at all levels need to take care of our people better.

There's a little more to it than that...
CAP needs a legitimate "full time" operational mission as well.  That would help the commanders focus the attention of their people.

[RiverAux]

CAP needs a legitimate "full time" operational mission as well. 

We have several. 

[FW]

 ^yes. we do have several and, if you think having a viable cadet program and aerospace education program; combined with a somewhat successfull school program is less than "full time"....

Anyway, after looking (somewhat quickly) over the membership lists, the member numbers include all catagories except retired.  As far as "active members" are concerned, anything over 20% is a good thing in most organizations.   

[RiverAux]

FW- any idea about the 2K membership jump in 2 weeks?  Seems just a little out of whack. 

[FW]

I think the difference can be due to the way CAP "counts" members.  After the 31st, all members not getting their renewals in by the 31st of the month are dropped from the member list.  They are "picked up" again after the 1st of the next month when the "check" is processed.  That usually is the reason for such large increases in the first two weeks of any month.  Membership keeps creeping up until the end of the month.  Then, the cycle repeats.  To show a trend in membership, we need to look at the previous 6 to 12 months for comparisons. 

[JC004]

FW- any idea about the 2K membership jump in 2 weeks?  Seems just a little out of whack.

Maybe they decided to input applications that have been sitting for a while.     No...I was thinking maybe being near the beginning of the school year with enough time for things to be going for a while - classes to start, students to make friends, units doing recruiting in schools.  It seems like a majority of units do like a 3-week visit thing for prospective members.  So going back a month, that puts you after the end of the summer when things have calmed down and school has got going.  I had a policy of a year-round recruiting attitude because I hated the previous excuses of "It's the summer - everyone's busy" and "It's the school year - everyone's busy."  (It's always the school year or not the school year)  That didn't seem to change the fact that a lot of the recruiting seemed to get done at the beginning of the school year - at least for us.

[coudano]

My reply was specifically about retention.

Two questions:

1.  Are you seeing a lot of specifically senior members joining specifically to run cadet programs?  Because i'm not.

2.  Who are your quitters?
Mine are folks who joined to do ops, and after a year or two of not doing any, gave up.

[meganite]

Yeah, I can see myself getting bored after I finish all the training stuff... because after a certain point, it just becomes the same monotonous nothing to do. We should keep training! For... something.

Of course, the theory is that you never stop training. But the problem is if no further challenges are being provided, people will get bored and leave. Challenges should increase at the same rate an individual's abilities increase.

I think if I get bored training on SAR stuff, I will probably switch over to Aerospace Education if I can. I'm pretty interested in that, and it's always fun to teach new and enthusiastic faces.

[FW]

My reply was specifically about retention.

2.  Who are your quitters?
Mine are folks who joined to do ops, and after a year or two of not doing any, gave up.

When it comes to the "quitters";  most who leave say they have nothing productive to do.  The second reason many leave is because of a feeling of exclusion. 

Most who join wish to serve in some capacity.  Membership "outreach" is important.  Mentorship is important.  Making the new member feel as a part of the team is integral in retaining the member.  Ops?  I don't really know what that means anymore.  Do you mean flying?  Pilots can fly any number of missions; supporting cadet programs, aerospace education and emergency services.  Scanners and Observers should be in couraged to fill other needs in a squadron which though "not as exciting" are important in the ongoing success of the unit.  Same for ground team members.

CAP is not a full time job.  It is a benevolent service organization dedicated to its chartered missions and serving the public.  We've pretty much stayed the course since 1948 and, unless congress decides to change our charter, we will keep on performing this way for years to come. 

IMHO, the hard work is not in finding a "full time operational mission".  The hard work is in recruiting members who understand CAP and are willing to serve.  The other hard part is for the "veteran" members to be willing to bring in new members and, spend the time with "recurits" to make them feel as full and productive members of CAP.

[RickFranz]

Yeah, I can see myself getting bored after I finish all the training stuff... because after a certain point, it just becomes the same monotonous nothing to do. We should keep training! For... something.

Of course, the theory is that you never stop training. But the problem is if no further challenges are being provided, people will get bored and leave. Challenges should increase at the same rate an individual's abilities increase.

I think if I get bored training on SAR stuff, I will probably switch over to Aerospace Education if I can. I'm pretty interested in that, and it's always fun to teach new and enthusiastic faces.

Ma'am
I've been around a long time and there has always been something new to learn or get interested in. 

P.S. Nice artwork!

[coudano]

Ops?  I don't really know what that means anymore.  Do you mean flying?  Pilots can fly any number of missions; supporting cadet programs, aerospace education and emergency services.  Scanners and Observers should be in couraged to fill other needs in a squadron which though "not as exciting" are important in the ongoing success of the unit.  Same for ground team members.

When I say "ops" I mean actual "emergency services" missions. (not mere flying around, there's plenty of that to do, particularly if you have the money)
Sure, there are people around who get the chance to get involved in these (i've been one of them).
But the vast majority of those 63,000 members never do.
You hook at least some of those in the door with the (possibly misunderstood) promise that they will be doing actual emergency services operations (making a real difference).  After a year or two, many of them figure out that isn't the case, and vamoose.  Of course it's possible that they may find another angle of the program during that time, but now CAP is baiting and switching, which is awfully used car salesmanish, don't you think?

At least in my area, not many senior members join just to "be affiliated" or to do "benevolent service" in general...  and just letting the specifics of how when where and why work themselves out.  They usually have a specific motivation for coming on board.  If/when that specific motivation turns out to be a non-starter, so does their membership renewal.

Fix THAT, and you'll see retention numbers go through the roof...  so much that you might actually have to start limiting how many people you are willing to recruit, so as to not overpopulate the organization.

Especially at $70.00+ per year...  I have prospective senior members who want to get involved specifically to work cadet programs, but are turned off by or simply can't afford the time commitment and/or the dues+uniforms+etc.

IMHO, the hard work is not in finding a "full time operational mission".  The hard work is in recruiting members who understand CAP and are willing to serve.

Yah, that's exactly my point.  Many of your "soaring membership numbers" don't understand CAP.
When they gain that understanding, see ya later.

If you want to only recruit people in the door who understand CAP up front, and still want to be here anyway, your 63k is going to take a pretty severe nosedive.

[JC004]

In terms of setting members' expectations and its impact on retention, a huge part of the problem is that the marketing strategy (or lack thereof) is wrong.  CAP sets expectations high with the first explanation often being the percentage of AFRCC-tasked inland SAR.  It gets pounded in with subsequent things like introductory materials.  Hearing stuff like "95%" leads people to think that they'll be out doing SAR like all the time.  Then reality hits.  As mentioned, if there is another hook that got them in the meantime, they'll probably stay but if they were counting on the impression that they were given, they go poof.

[RiverAux]

If you're honest up front about the local operational tempo and make people come to a couple of meetings before giving them an application and run a good local program, then senior member retention isn't an issue. 

[FW]

^I think that is absolutely true.  We must be totally honest with who and what we are.  Prospective members must fully understand the basic premise of CAP before they join. It is a waste of their precious time and resources to come into it and, it is wrong for us to recruit those who will not be willing to add anything to CAP.

That being said, it would be nice to know why our numbers have jumped almost 8.000 members since 2006.

[RADIOMAN015]

That being said, it would be nice to know why our numbers have jumped almost 8.000 members since 2006.

Lots of good historical membership and other stats in the "Reports to Congresss" posted at
http://www.capmembers.com/cap_national_hq/cap_reports/
What is very unfortunate is CAP's decision over the last 2 to 3 years to not publish these stats, instead relying only on the Audited Financial Statements which don't have as much statistical information.
Perhaps we would be better off having all memberships expire on the lst of the Month rather than the last day of the month?  This would give the member 30 days to send in their check and might reduce the wide swings in monthly totals.

Also it would be interesting at least from the regular senior member stats to get a breakdown of number of years of service, e.g. under <1, greater than 1 to 2, 2-5, 6-10, 10-19, 20+, or something like that. 

Additionally I think it's reasonable to expect that all the member categories would be addressed with statistics for each.   

RM   

[Major Carrales]

Remember, there are lots of things to consider about membership.

There was one period of my service where I maintained membership for about 2 years due to having to concentrate on some schooling mandated by my school district.  During that time, I was not what you would call active.  Also, there are many people I know, who were cadets, that go off to college and cannot participate but also maintain their membership.

Some people, join with full intentions of being active, but life gets in the way.

There is much merit to those that call for an active program to retain members.  I call this "squadron maintenance," the idea that a unit require direction, building and an active program.  This comes from having three things 1) Structure, 2) Activities and 3) a sense of purpose.

Structure need not be a strict military one, but one where leadership (defined as a Commander and the Staff) provide direction and maintain procedures that promote productive meetings.  "Hanging out" with no agenda, goal nor checklist can be boring.  Boring is the death knell of CAP.

Activities include the usual training, active meetings (to roll reason one into the second) and what some might call "fellowship" activities.  Squadron dinners, airshows (to mingle more than to "work"), provide a fostered "General Aviation Community" and just to get to know one another and, to some degree, the families of one another.

A sense of Purpose is KEY! People don't want to "serve" in an organization where these is no "service."  Never forget that we are all "paying dues for this."  Negative meetings (where yelling and the like are done out loud before all, fighting, power mongering  et al.) destroy the purpose for being there.

[meganite]

When I say "ops" I mean actual "emergency services" missions. (not mere flying around, there's plenty of that to do, particularly if you have the money)
Sure, there are people around who get the chance to get involved in these (i've been one of them).
But the vast majority of those 63,000 members never do.
You hook at least some of those in the door with the (possibly misunderstood) promise that they will be doing actual emergency services operations (making a real difference).  After a year or two, many of them figure out that isn't the case, and vamoose.  Of course it's possible that they may find another angle of the program during that time, but now CAP is baiting and switching, which is awfully used car salesmanish, don't you think?

At least in my area, not many senior members join just to "be affiliated" or to do "benevolent service" in general...  and just letting the specifics of how when where and why work themselves out.  They usually have a specific motivation for coming on board.  If/when that specific motivation turns out to be a non-starter, so does their membership renewal.

Fix THAT, and you'll see retention numbers go through the roof...  so much that you might actually have to start limiting how many people you are willing to recruit, so as to not overpopulate the organization.

Yeah, this is kind of what I meant when I said "get bored"... I had some false impressions at the beginning about the frequency of the emergency service missions, but then I asked and found out how often people actually get to participate in those... and of course it varies from region to region based on need. (Typically less SAR near cities because people tend to SEE airplanes going down, or so they say.) But I found all this out before I joined and still joined. To me, training and being prepared for unexpected events has some value in and of itself. Then there's value of joining to learn a bit more personal discipline....etc. There are many reasons. If we're up front about what actually goes on in CAP (not cynical, but realistic) then I think actually more people might stay vs. finding out later that it wasn't what they thought it was, getting a bad attitude, and leaving.

But yeah, more often than not people seem to just drop off the map when other things happen in life. But that happens with every organization. Retention = give people a purpose.

[Sgt.Pain]

Wow that's amazing. If only every one of those where active... that'll be the day!

[SunDog]

We need to not waste member's time, and we do a lot of that - we have a growing list of semi-silly saftey blocks to fill; the bureacratic burdens have expanded, and senior members become annoyed with such things.

My squadron had five mission pilots 18 months ago, and about the same number of Form 5 pilots. The squadron has one MP now. Such things ebb and flow, but he ebbing is increasing.

All the pilots ARE still on the rolls. They all know it's easier to come back later if you maintain membership; but they aren't participating.

The common denomiators seem to be the hassles associated with CAP flying, the dis-jointed training events/efforts, and the lack of mission clarity.

I'm an MP, and I renewed, but I'm not form 5 current, and will go non-current for MP in early spring. The one big advantage CAP has is low cost C17  flying - without that, the pilot population would probably tank.

[BillB]

I would like to see MGen Courter set up several committees of members, former members and/or inactive members to take a look at various programs in CAP. You hear that in cadet programs we are molly-coddling the cadets, or that mush of the cadet program is of no interest to cadets. A committee of former DCPs or cadets from the 70's or 80's might take a look at the program
Pilots both current and inactive might look at the flight operations of the organization. Consider that at one time when CAP flew USAF L-4s and L-5s all that was needed was a private license and a check out by an Air Force check pilot. The only paperwork was filling out the Form 1 at the end of each flight.
The safety program could be argued pro or con, but needs to be looked at from the members standpoint, not the "save the corporation" attitude that exists in much of CAP.
In this age of Skype, emails, and electronic information transfer these committees could come up with answers from the members or even local Squadron concerns. Granted many of the ideas to modify the current programs, might not be posible, but some might improve the members perception or operations to better the organization. 

[FW]

Under Gen Courter's leadership, we developed some great Long Term Objectives for the next 5 years.  We are now in "year 3".  Where we are in reaching these "LTO's" is anyones guess.  And, with only about 9 months to go in her term, I don't see any new committees being formed to evaluate our current programs and training modalities.
However, your proposal is a good one.  Maybe the next commander and leadership team will consider it.

[Ned]

It is worth considering that the safety items, and most of the other things mentioned were products of CAP committees.

Without exageration, I spend most of my CAP time in committee meetings or doing work in preparation for such things.  Conference calls, conferences, etc.

I think we could make a pretty good argument that we might already have too many committees that make it difficult for senior leaders to create a vision, develop the appropriate strategy, and implement it.

Perhaps we should send the idea about forming more committees to a committee for study.   

[bosshawk]

Ned: as I am sure that you are painfully aware, this mimics the way that our Congress does things.  If you don't want to make a hard decision, refer it to a committee.

Unfortunately, I see folks in leadership positions in CAP constantly demur from making decisions and the membership suffers.