Wing Level Recruiting and Retention

[Snake Doctor]

I'm looking for a Wing level Recruiting and Retention Officer job description. I've already been to 20-1 and that is useless.
I'm also looking for a Wing Level Recruiting and Retention Plan.

Thanks in advance!

[capmaj]

This help at all?    http://images.magnetmail.net/images/clients/CivilAir/attach/RECRUITANDRETENOFFICERJD2012.pdf

[Private Investigator]

...
I'm also looking for a Wing Level Recruiting and Retention Plan.

I am guessing your Wing never had one. So did you think about running your question by Region? They might have an ideal what they would like from the Wings in their Region instead of a 'cut and paste' from a Wing outside of their Region.   

[Snake Doctor]

capmaj, That will help. Thanks!  Private Investigator, Don't have a Region RRO and out Wing never really had one.  The job description from CAPR20-1 is more tactical than strategic. It would be fine for a Wing RRO to get in the weeds to help but not all the time.   
And usual I don't want to reinvent the wheel if I don't have to. Modify maybe.... :-)

[capmaj]

Take a look at this. It's a 2014 layout of Goals and Objectives from Minn Wing. Might help get you started.


https://www.mncap.org/rs/

Also, this..............   http://www.capmembers.com/cap_national_hq/recruiting_and_retention/

[Snake Doctor]

I've been to both and I am going to incorporate some of MN Wings stuff. When I get this done I will share.

[NIN]

Oh I'm theiving that.

/new wing recruiting & retention guy too

[stillamarine]

When I was the wing RRO I mainly tried to help the squadrons with staffing larger events and with getting material to them. I stockpiled as much material I could order from eservices. Sometimes it was faster for me to run stuff to them than them ordering it last minute. I also acted as a point of contact with several school districts with my day job as an SRO. Sometimes I got calls returned to me easier that way.

[Snake Doctor]

NIN, I'm hoping to get something put together to keep mu RRO on track as well help others with this. CAPR20-1 is OK to a point.
stillamarine, I'm swiping what you wrote.

[THRAWN]

I've said it before: recruiting ain't rocket surgery, but you do have to recruit, vice hire, or crab trap. Identify what types of resources you need: need pilots? Recruit pilots. Need AE types? Recruit them. Focus on what you need, versus building numbers. Get existing members in the fields you're targeting to talk to potential members about their experiences. The attached article does a good job of explaining the concept. Granted, it's ES/EM specific, but the idea is the same.

Good luck!

[Eclipse]

Identify what types of resources you need: need pilots? Recruit pilots. Need AE types? Recruit them. Focus on what you need,

Critical to the process and outside the RROs job, this needs to be completed in advance of the fiscal year.

I would also say that retention issues, these days, are more important then recruiting.
When you look at the 25-40% annual churn, it becomes clear that CAP doesn't have as much issue bringing people
in, and they do keep them.

[THRAWN]

Identify what types of resources you need: need pilots? Recruit pilots. Need AE types? Recruit them. Focus on what you need,

Critical to the process and outside the RROs job, this needs to be completed in advance of the fiscal year.

I would also say that retention issues, these days, are more important then recruiting.
When you look at the 25-40% annual churn, it becomes clear that CAP doesn't have as much issue bringing people
in, and they do keep them.

Agreed. Mostly because the "wrong people" are being brought in. We tend to swear in pretty much anyone who walks in the door, as opposed to identifying who is needed, targeting that group, and putting them to work.

[Private Investigator]

Identify what types of resources you need: need pilots? Recruit pilots. Need AE types? Recruit them. Focus on what you need,

Critical to the process and outside the RROs job, this needs to be completed in advance of the fiscal year.

I would also say that retention issues, these days, are more important then recruiting.
When you look at the 25-40% annual churn, it becomes clear that CAP doesn't have as much issue bringing people
in, and they do keep them.

Agreed. Mostly because the "wrong people" are being brought in. We tend to swear in pretty much anyone who walks in the door, as opposed to identifying who is needed, targeting that group, and putting them to work.

We do bring the "wrong people" in on many levels. And do not get me started on Membership Committees. 

[NIN]

NIN, I'm hoping to get something put together to keep mu RRO on track as well help others with this. CAPR20-1 is OK to a point.
stillamarine, I'm swiping what you wrote.

I'm working on my plan/goals, too, and I will share when I have them

[NIN]

And do not get me started on Membership Committees. 

Just curious what your experience has been. My unit has used a Unit Membership Board since about circa 2000-2001, with nary a problem.

It has, as I recall, shooed off 2-3 (during my time as commander) prospective members who were a little sketchy. It also gave me a leg to stand on (ie. it wasn't just the capricious and arbitrary decision of one person) the one time I actually had to say to a prospective member "Hey, uh, you know, maybe you're not a good fit for CAP at this time..." (In one instance where somehow we did not use the membership board, it resulted in a person joining who there for ALL the wrong reasons. Grrrrr..)

I also know of an instance where a long-time member went to rejoin after a break in service and a local unit commander rejected his application out of hand for some relatively minor information (ie. "I was arrested for shoplifting when I was a teenager, over 35 years ago..") that hasn't precluded membership in the active duty military or the National Guard.   Running that thru a membership board/committee might result in a less arbitrary decision.

[Eclipse]

Identify what types of resources you need: need pilots? Recruit pilots. Need AE types? Recruit them. Focus on what you need,

Critical to the process and outside the RROs job, this needs to be completed in advance of the fiscal year.

I would also say that retention issues, these days, are more important then recruiting.
When you look at the 25-40% annual churn, it becomes clear that CAP doesn't have as much issue bringing people
in, and they do keep them.

Agreed. Mostly because the "wrong people" are being brought in. We tend to swear in pretty much anyone who walks in the door, as opposed to identifying who is needed, targeting that group, and putting them to work.

It's not just the wrong people, but that's a big part of the whole problem.

In many units, every warm body is viewed as a "savior".  "Podunk Composite is super-excited because Goober from
the fillin' station is thinking about joining and he's seen some kids playin' in the field behind his shed, so he's sure
to turn them around..."

There is zero strategic plan to justify anything, steer anything, inform anything, or support anything.

"We need more pilots." is the general mantra.  OK, fair enough.  Why?

"Because we're not flying enough hours..."

Um, says who?  How many missions were not accomplished due to lack of pilots? Not training, missions.

"None."

Ok, well then you have enough pilots.

"Well NHQ says we have to put 200 hours on each airframe every year."

Or?

"We risk losing the plane."

So?  If no missions went unattended, and you aren't flying the needed hours, then simple math says
you already have too many airplanes.

"Well, what if we get more missions?"

Then you request more resources...then...

Maintaining 550 airplanes because "if you don't you'll only have 400" is typical military reasoning.
They might as well be incubators.

So we bring in more pilots, but there's no missions to perform, the bureaucracy stagnates their ability to
even get into a CAP plane, and these FNGs find themselves standing on a ramp or watching
an icing video on a severe clear Sunday instead of flying their own plane.

Then we wonder why they don't stick around.

Another retention issue is that we don't recruit "pilots", we recruit "everything" - some
well-meaning guy who wants to use his ticket for more then hamburger runs is hounded to
become the Snacko, Logistics, Finance, and any other open position at every echelon.

If we need "pilots" we should recruit "pilots" and let them be "pilots" while developing
members internally over a multi-year period for possible staff and other service.

Once they have a clue.

[THRAWN]

"Another retention issue is that we don't recruit "pilots", we recruit "everything" - some
well-meaning guy who wants to use his ticket for more then hamburger runs is hounded to
become the Snacko, Logistics, Finance, and any other open position at every echelon."

That's actually pretty much my point: we do not "recruit everything". What we do is bring in anyone who wanders by, give them a cool sounding title, and....no training, or support or a second thought. That is why we have the turn over that we do. If we moved to a targeted recruiting strategy, seeking out pilots, ES types, AE types, finance, logistics, admin, chaplain, etc., we will have people that fit the job that we need done.

[Eclipse]

Agree 100%.

[Snake Doctor]

"Another retention issue is that we don't recruit "pilots", we recruit "everything" - some
well-meaning guy who wants to use his ticket for more then hamburger runs is hounded to
become the Snacko, Logistics, Finance, and any other open position at every echelon."

That's actually pretty much my point: we do not "recruit everything". What we do is bring in anyone who wanders by, give them a cool sounding title, and....no training, or support or a second thought. That is why we have the turn over that we do. If we moved to a targeted recruiting strategy, seeking out pilots, ES types, AE types, finance, logistics, admin, chaplain, etc., we will have people that fit the job that we need done.

Agree! Membership review boards are great if used. That is an opportunity to get the prospective members expectations and more importantly layout the squadrons expectations. "Yes we need your pilot skills but in turn we need an Administration Officer. That job entails........"

[Eclipse]

"Yes we need your pilot skills but intern we need an Administration Officer. That job entails........"

Why are these things the same conversation or viewed as the same people?

[NC Hokie]

"Yes we need your pilot skills but intern we need an Administration Officer. That job entails........"

Why are these things the same conversation or viewed as the same people?

Because many (most?) units are undermanned based on the org charts, and need people to fill vacant positions or give relief to other members who wear multiple hats.  In my case, I don't present this as quid pro quo, but I do show them the org chart and ask if there's anything they'd be willing to help out with.

[Eclipse]

That's what perpetuates the "circle of life" that CAP needs to get out of.

Recruit a pilot?  Don't discuss anything but flying.

Need an admin officer, that's the discussion.

If they see a need they want to fill later, so be it, but CAP would be better off and better manned if treated recruiting that way.
The local FBO wouldn't (usually) expect their Instructors to also answer the phones and deposit checks, why should CAP?

[Snake Doctor]

I agree with that to a point. if the unit is undermanned that's one thing. CAP needs members that want to do one thing. It also needs those willing to wear multiple hats. 

[THRAWN]

I agree with that to a point. if the unit is undermanned that's one thing. CAP needs members that want to do one thing. It also needs those willing to wear multiple hats.

But those hats need to be handed to them after they become members. You're reinforcing the idea that since 3 new members joined the unit, there are 9 staff slots filled between them. People do not join CAP for another full time job and giving them one before the ink is dry on their check leads to loss of retention.

[Eclipse]

I agree with that to a point. if the unit is undermanned that's one thing. CAP needs members that want to do one thing. It also needs those willing to wear multiple hats.

But those hats need to be handed to them after they become members. You're reinforcing the idea that since 3 new members joined the unit, there are 9 staff slots filled between them. People do not join CAP for another full time job and giving them one before the ink is dry on their check leads to loss of retention.

Exactly.  If there are 10 jobs, we need 12+ new people, not 4.

That's the way it's supposed to work.  Everybody puts in a few hours here and there, and then goes home,
instead of CAP becoming another career. There's plenty of people, so plenty of hands and plenty of opportunities.

No one is living at their unit CC or the local FBO putting in 60 hour weeks just to keep the doors open, so
there's none of the improper sense of "ownership" that comes when you're a 1-man show.

It also insures the program doesn't collapse when one guy leaves, gets fired, or just wants to do something different.

Many CAP unit view recruiting as a one-time or once a year thing.  They have 27 staff openings, bring in
two guys, one who is a savior, and don't think about it again for a year.

[NIN]

I had a discussion with a squadron commander recently about retention techniques. He asked me what kind of things I would recommend that the unit do to improve their retention.

I said " think of all the things you could do that would make somebody unhappy about their participation and leave. Things like not communicating scheduled events, not following up with someone about expectations , not providing somebody with some guidance on how to do a job they have been assigned. Just outright not communicating with someone. This is some real basic stuff here"

And it reminded me that some years ago, when I was a squadron commander the first time, I had a person join my squadron who was later found to be not someone we really wanted to keep around. I'll spare the details, but suffice to say that this person was not really helpful to the unit, had actually sort of gained membership under a cloud, cause all kinds of he said/she said problems in the unit, and never really contributed anything. I really did not have anything to hang a solid slam-dunk termination action on with this number, only a combination of disruptive behaviour and a vague sense that a termination would actually lead to all kinds of repercussions, legitimate or not.

A number of members of my staff came to me and asked what we were going to do about this member. It was very clear there was a problem, and it was very clear this person had an agenda that was not in keeping with the mission and purpose of the organization. Frankly I kind of thought there was maybe some kind of mental disorder.

I finally said to my deputy commanders and my XO " you know all of those things we do to retain members? Communicate? Give clear guidance? That sort of thing? Yeah, let's not do any of that with this member."

Took less than 60 days. After we neglected to communicate a couple of training evolutions, held the member responsible for duties &  things that were not communicated, and really stop giving the member an opportunity to be disruptive. ( short version, we had to treat a senior member much like we treat cadets, to prevent unwarranted accusations of improper behavior toward my officers)

But that gave me a very good eye in to what would cause someone to basically join and then leave. It is very easy to lose members when you stop doing the real basic stuff like communicate well with them.

[FW]

But that gave me a very good eye in to what would cause someone to basically join and then leave. It is very easy to lose members when you stop doing the real basic stuff like communicate well with them.

Darin, although I would take issue with the way you "lost" that member, I would agree with your last sentence 100%.

Recruiting members, and retaining them is not rocket science (well, maybe for cadets...).  We just need to offer them a useful way to spend their time, a place to feel welcome, and a way to grow as a member of a team.  CAP offers that, and much more.  The difficult part is remembering why we joined and stayed in the first place; then impart that on others.  Squadrons live or die on the "family" that is created and sustained. Creating an environment for growth is key.  I think we all have the abiltiy to succeed at it, we just need a gentle "push".

[NIN]

Darin, although I would take issue with the way you "lost" that member, I would agree with your last sentence 100%.

Indeed. I'm often asked for advice about building a good effective squadron. I've done it enough darn times.   A couple things I use as "easy to digest answers" are:

"Operate to standard, either the ones provided by HHQ, or if you need additional, local guidance. Have a unit schedule, preferably at least a quarter in advance, and a 12 month rolling calendar would be even better.  Communicate both the standards and the schedule to your membership."

or

"In the military, its 'accomplish the mission, welfare of the troops'. In CAP, flip that: 'welfare of the troops, accomplish the mission'. Because without the troops, you have no mission."

WRT the loss of the member: My point to illustrate that to the unit commander was "I will tell you what we did, and you can see the immediate proximate results. We sort of intentionally did that.  Imagine what happens in units where they unintentionally do that?"

Did I like marginalizing  member to cause them to quit? No.  Absolutely not. 

(Full disclosure: this was a young lady who came to us before we did membership boards for everybody. She seemed interested in the program, so I took her CAPF 12 and print card, sent it off to NHQ.

Turns out:

• My leadership officer was a cop in her town.  They had a standing order in the PD to only send two officers to her house due to weird interactions with her. Like calling the PD for a prowler and then showing up to the door scantily clad and claiming she 'heard a noise'...
• She didn't write "NONE" on the Arrests line on the CAPF 12.  I assumed she missed it, hadn't said anything to me about arrests after filling out the CAPF12, so in an effort to be complete, I wrote NONE there for her.  Yeah, big mistake.  Turns out she'd been arrested and charged with embezzlement some years before, etc. We got it sorted out with NHQ, but she became the reason why we started doing membership boards for everybody.
• She outright accused my 70+ year old German immigrant AEO of being "inappropriate" with her. Turned out he spoke to her in a way that she felt was inappropriate.  I think it was the fact that English was a 2nd language for him, not anything he actually did. He later quit in a huff because he didn't think we were moving fast enough to eliminate her from the program.
• She made vague statements about how she didn't like the way my XO, a retired ARNG Major, talked to her.  (Huh?)
• Other weird 'not right' things that were inconsistent in her stories.

Pretty quickly, nobody wanted to be in a one-on-one situation with her. You know, cadet protection-style.

Both my deputy commanders and my XO were like "Nobody in the unit wants to be around this woman."  Proving "false statements" for a 2B would have induced a lot of 'he said/she said' issues and likely not resulted in an effective 2B. Plus she had a history of legal action (we found out later) against people and organizations she felt had wronged her.

I think we were lucky to get her to not renew without a fuss. )

[Eclipse]

This applies to everyone in CAP, and might as well apply to running to Walmart and every other part
of life, but it applies x10 if you are a Commander.

If you wouldn't do "x" in the context of your professional life, don't do it in CAP.  Period.

If the level of "complete, informed, communicated, or quality" isn't the same or better as your professional life, don't do it,
or accept the responsibility.

Ask for help well before you need it, or as soon as you realize you're in trouble.

Assume the best of people and prepare for the worst.

If you're not capable of being a commander, staff officer, or unit Snacko, simply don't take the job.
Nothing important will go undone, and nothing unimportant needs to be done - people fail to
understand that nuance and difference.  An ill-prepared staffer who feels put-upon and is non-performing
but "took the job because no one else will" is of NO VALUE to CAP and is actually more of a detriment then
a blank line.

Don't accept any less from the list above from your membership, and pay everyone, including the
organization, the respect they deserve by "dis-inviting" those who don't belong in CAP, or your unit or activity.

Also this, in spades.

"Operate to standard, either the ones provided by HHQ, or if you need additional, local guidance. Have a unit schedule, preferably at least a quarter in advance, and a 12 month rolling calendar would be even better.  Communicate both the standards and the schedule to your membership."

or

"In the military, its 'accomplish the mission, welfare of the troops'. In CAP, flip that: 'welfare of the troops, accomplish the mission'. Because without the troops, you have no mission."

If your unit is involved in CAP-appropriate activities, your members are invested and prepared (because you insured they were)
and everyone understands their role (or lack thereof), you will never have a retention problem, recruiting handles itself,
and people will smile even when they are busy.