In the spirit of the New Year's resolutions and building off my wish list from last year (http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=3948.0), here's a list of things I would love to see Civil Air Patrol as an organization accomplish in the coming year. If we checked off these items by the end of 2009, I'd consider it a stellar year of advancement. Some of these are still on the list from 2008, many have changed due to a shift in focus or priorities. Please post your own hopes for 2009!
Public Affairs & Communications/Marketing
- Stop creating all external marketing materials for the first quarter of 2009. Take this hiatus to make an inventory of CAP's marketing vehicles, efforts, assets and weaknesses (perform a full-on SWOT analysis).
- Based on the analysis, create an identity and brand for CAP that leverages our assets and strongpoints.
- Eliminate all logos and emblems from use except for two: keep the seal for official use and one logo for public branding. (My recommendation is the command shield for this purpose; phase out the round emblem, AF symbols and that new triangle thing)
- Create a style guide with the new branding, including specification of color, typography, logo usage and actually apply it to all future CAP publications (textbooks, recruiting brochures, PowerPoint presentations, PSAs, posters, whatever)
- Establish local level materials templates for business cards, letterhead, recruiting fliers, etc (which match new branding, of course). Make them standard and mandatory. Units can only modify them to the extent of inserting their local unit info.
Information Technology
- Issue a white paper on how CAP can implement a standard unit web presence much like the Air Force Public Web (AFPW) (http://www.ngb.army.mil/news/archives/2008/07/071008-One_size.aspx) project. Acquire server space and materials for implementing in 2010-2011.
- Return member/internal webcontent to a separate site from external/recruiting.
- Create my.cap.gov internal landing page for all members: Reference this post (http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=1450.0)
- Implement e-Learning (reference PAWG's site)
- Create bridge between SIMS and E-Services Cadet Promotions module
Recruiting/Retention
- Take same 1-quarter hiatus in efforts as marketing/comm/advertising to evaluate situation and campaign efforts (see above). Match future efforts to the new branding.
- Produce CAP-branded, low-cost giveaways (such as lanyards, pens, caribiners, and other tchotchkies.) which units can purchase at 25% cost, with NHQ footing bill for 75% of cost (with a limited annual supply to cap NHQ's annual portion).
CAP Foundation/development/institutional advancement- We still don't know you exist. You should read this post and work on it: http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=6086.msg115566#msg115566
- Just re-read the above post
Cadet Programs- Continue the great work done already!
- Finish work on the new leadership textbooks
- Continue exploring online testing alternatives
- Begin work on standardized curriculums for Airman Leadership School and NCO Academy, much like Cadet Great Start. Include plans for lesson plans, handouts, quizzes, PPT slides, etc. IOW, Course in a Box.
Professional Development- Move Specialty Track documentation to a format much like SQTRs with an online entry module in E-Services. Members complete required tasks for ratings, OJT CAPID is reference for supervising task completion, commander gets notified to approve/disapprove a completed rating, specialty rating shows up on member record.
- Add more online quizzes for specialty track advancement, much like CP and IT. Plan to tie completion of these to automatically record in the above mentioned "SQTRs" for ratings.
- Beef up specialty track documentation to be more like guidebooks/references. The pamphlets should contain several chapters of best practices and tips on performing the job, including what bare minimum functions that position needs to perform (to meet SUI and regulatory standards, for example). John Q. Public or Parent O'Cadet should be able to pick up the pamphlet and figure out how to do the major portions of their duty assignment - many units don't have experienced OJTs and people are left to their own devices.
- Beef up some of the specialty rating service requirements. Some specialties have well fleshed out knowledge and service requirements to earn ratings. Others, you practically sign-up for the track and breath long enough and you'll warrant a senior or master rating.
- Officer Basic Course. Make it happen, make it meaningful and worthwhile, make it easily implementable at the squadron level (i/e: Course in a Box) and make it achievable and reasonable for no-prior-experience recruits.
Member Services
- Nice work and improvements in 2008 with moving more things online!
- When renewing, offer member the option to include buying a new Photo ID at the same time (adding a simple checkbox to the form will accomplish this). This way, NHQ won't have to send the standard membership card (saves NHQ money), saves a separate credit card transaction, and saves the member an extra step.
- Make a "Membership News Feed" that serves as a clearinghouse for all internal updates: ICLs, regs posted for comment, new forms, deadlines for nominations for awards or NCSAs, reminders about phase-out/phase-in dates, messages from the CAP/CC, other news that would be of interest to just members.
Operations- Have marketing materials made for wing and lower echelons to market CAP's operational capabilities to other agencies. The Capabilities handbook is great once the relationship is to the point of making that pitch, but a flyer or rack card that could be left behind strategically, to sell CAP's services much like recruiting literature, would be great.
- Simplify renewing specialty ratings for currency. Current method of resubmitting SQTRs is not-intuitive.
- I'm sure others will have more insight in this arena.
So I guess we'll see how 2009 goes. Is this too ambitious? Way off the mark? What are your ideas?
Here are couple of simple items reference providing a consistant image:
1. Develop AND DISTRIBUTE a Word wizard/template to create a standard CAP business card. Make a version for Open Office. You know, fill in the blanks (name, unit, grade, address, etc), select the print material (# cards per page), and the program creates your cards.
2. Ditto for letterhead, except change member information to unit information.
3. Enter a national contract with Fedex/Kinko's or other major nation-wide copy shop to provide printing services for PD courses. The director sends in the form, designates the local shop, and national sends and pays for the print order. The director (or designee) picks up the materials a couple days before the class. Expand this to cover UCC and TLC in addition to SLS and CLC.
4. Get a CAP instructor course going!!! We need one, not just to check the box on the PDO Master rating, but we do not have many trained instructors. Most of our current trained instructors are getting on in years and will be leaving/slowing down within a few years. We need trained replacements.
I disagree with dropping the CAP emblem. It has significant historical value.
I vote PYLON as our next commander!
HAIL PYLON!!!!
:o :o
::) ::)
>:D >:D
I didn't see anything major I would quibble about in Pylon's agenda. It is a little focused on smaller details of running CAP rather than the "big picture", but those details often need attention and I don't think anything he suggested couldn't be done within this year.
Quote from: arajca on December 29, 2008, 05:12:09 PM
Here are couple of simple items reference providing a consistent image:
1. Develop AND DISTRIBUTE a Word wizard/template to create a standard CAP business card. Make a version for Open Office. You know, fill in the blanks (name, unit, grade, address, etc), select the print material (# cards per page), and the program creates your cards.
No thank you, we're fine with what we (don't) have - as a matter of fact, there is little consistency in the military for business cards, either.
Quote from: arajca on December 29, 2008, 05:12:09 PM
2. Ditto for letterhead, except change member information to unit information.
Ditto for this - the Tongue and quill gives us all we need to know, and both the above would be another unfunded, unenforcible mandates.
Quote from: arajca on December 29, 2008, 05:12:09 PM
3. Enter a national contract with Fedex/Kinko's or other major nation-wide copy shop to provide printing services for PD courses. The director sends in the form, designates the local shop, and national sends and pays for the print order. The director (or designee) picks up the materials a couple days before the class. Expand this to cover UCC and TLC in addition to SLS and CLC.
No thank you. In this day and age, why anyone would be spending the exorbitant amounts these places charge for printing is beyond me. I could literally buy a new printer and a ream of paper, and dispose of it afterward for less than they would charge.
First, the materials aren't really needed for the classes anyway, second, they are all available online. Send participants the links, and print one or two to have on hand. If they want them, they can print them, or bring them on their notebooks, PDA, or Kindle.
As of this minute, besides donuts or lunch, SLS/CLC/TLC, etc., should be held at ZERO MEMBER COST.
My wish list would be for them to troll this board and CS, find every "nails on the chalkboard", "rubs you the wrong way", minutia complaint, and solidify the regulatory verbiage so that we can all stop arguing about it and move on to other nags and complaints.
Question: Is anyone doing anything about these (i.e. pitching them to the appropriate people), or is this purely for discussion?
This question brings me up to something I'd like to see (in regards to suggestions). To my knowledge, CAP doesn't have anything like this at the moment, but correct me if we do. I'd like to see a way in which John Doe CAP member (Cadets and seniors alike) can submit suggestions and ideas themselves . Maybe in the form of an eServices module of some sort, where you select the appropriately involved area of CAP (i.e. CP, ES, AE, IT, PD, etc.) and your comments / ideas are forwarded directly to someone within that area at NHQ. I'll bet some of the best ideas lie within the general membership - but there's no organized way to get suggestions to the right people.
YMMV.
Quote from: PhoenixCadet on December 30, 2008, 01:14:12 AM
.......I'd like to see a way in which John Doe CAP member (Cadets and seniors alike) can submit suggestions and ideas themselves . Maybe in the form of an eServices module of some sort, where you select the appropriately involved area of CAP (i.e. CP, ES, AE, IT, PD, etc.) and your comments / ideas are forwarded directly to someone within that area at NHQ.
At an employer many years ago, we had a suggestion box. All that ever went inside were half eaten ham sandwiches and cigarette butts. I would argue that Cap's suggestion "box" would be the same.
We are supposed to propose our suggestions through the Chain of Command, now if your Commanders at various levels do anything with them that is a totally different matter.
Quote from: PhoenixCadet on December 30, 2008, 01:14:12 AM
....but there's no organized way to get suggestions to the right people.
A memorandum addressed to the appropriate NHQ component submitted through your chain of command would be the established, organized way to theoretically get suggestions to the right people.
Quote from: Eclipse on December 29, 2008, 11:45:51 PM
No thank you, we're fine with what we (don't) have - as a matter of fact, there is little consistency in the military for business cards, either.
Yep and it slowly degrades their branding, too. Doesn't make it right. The Air Force ran into the same "leave-me-to-my-own-devices"-itis when they rolled out the Air Force Public Web project. Lots of units thought they had better websites. Many probably did. The Air Force template is nice, but certainly not the best website ever. But mandating it for
everyone brings every AF unit website to a very good middle-ground and builds a consistent message and identity; they're not 1,000 independently-acting units and bases, they're one Air Force. Many units had to give up a little bit of their local pride and stubbornness to achieve this important goal. But now when you see an AF website, you know you're on an Air Force website. The same should ring true of
our websites, business cards, fliers and letterhead. Otherwise, you're not building brand equity with your existing efforts. This would be covered on day 1 in any communications management graduate course.
Quote from: Eclipse on December 29, 2008, 11:45:51 PM
Quote from: arajca on December 29, 2008, 05:12:09 PM
2. Ditto for letterhead, except change member information to unit information.
Ditto for this - the Tongue and quill gives us all we need to know, and both the above would be another unfunded, unenforcible mandates.
Unfunded, unenforcible? What are you talking about?
You simply make a word template that reflects the format set by CAPR 10-1. In other words, it's a template that says "This is exactly how your letterhead should be set-up. You can't screw it up, the seal won't be in the wrong place, you won't be using the wrong logo graphic or the wrong header wording. Just type in the unit name where it says <<UNIT NAME>> and address where it says <<ADDRESS>>, etc."
Too many units insert incorrect logos, make up wording that is inconsistent with CAPR 10-1, or just plain invent their own letterhead. Making an electronic word template, distributing it to all echelons by email with an ICL saying "Use this for all official correspondence from here forward." doesn't sound like it needs to be funded too much, nor does it sound impossible to mandate. Again, "leave-me-to-my-own-devices!"-itis doesn't get the overall whole organization very far.
Quote from: RiverAux on December 29, 2008, 11:09:44 PM
I didn't see anything major I would quibble about in Pylon's agenda. It is a little focused on smaller details of running CAP rather than the "big picture", but those details often need attention and I don't think anything he suggested couldn't be done within this year.
Yep. I'm not sure where organizationally we can best head to keep ourselves relavent, effective and useful. I think we can have dozens of those discussions (and I think we have had many of them here) and never come to a consensus. I'm also not privy to the talk that goes on at the highest levels. This post is more like a low-level member's wish list of tweaks that would make life easier and better for the general membership and the organization at those lower-levels, in my opinion. But please, feel free to add your wish list and thoughts! :)
Quote from: arajca on December 29, 2008, 05:12:09 PM
I disagree with dropping the CAP emblem. It has significant historical value.
Red epaulet straps and khakis have significant historical value, yellow plane paint jobs have significant historical value, and we can appreciate all of our historically significant past without still having to actively use it. But we could use the round logo for our external logo, then, and do away with the command shield for everything but the flight suit patch. That works, too. The point is that we get what the Air Force and other services have: an official seal for internal use, and an external/general-use logo for the public affairs and recruiting efforts. Not 7 different seals/logos/shields/roundels that we use at random, at will and without rhyme or reason.
QuoteIt is a little focused on smaller details of running CAP rather than the "big picture",
I will ask this question.. How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time....
There is so much wrong with CAP today... So many BIG elephants so to speak. If we start with small bites and keep on eating away I think this organization can be turned back into what it was intended to be.
Here's an additional question. Why can't those who are like minded institute some of these ideas? For example, have the WORD/ OPEN OFFICE template for BC's and LH. Distribute them around with a letter of explanation. Perhaps as Martin Luther was able to ignite the reformation, squadrons can do the same thing?
^ Eventually someone will carry the grassroots idea on up to NHQ as they move their way up and mandate it because it is what they have been using for years. Sounds like a good plan.
Quote from: Pumbaa on December 30, 2008, 02:14:23 AM
QuoteIt is a little focused on smaller details of running CAP rather than the "big picture",
I will ask this question.. How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time....
There is so much wrong with CAP today... So many BIG elephants so to speak. If we start with small bites and keep on eating away I think this organization can be turned back into what it was intended to be.
I wasn't complaining.....we've got plenty of pie-in-the-sky wishlist threads on CAPTalk, many of which we come nowhere near consensus on. The items he mentioned wouldn't revolutionize CAP, but would nibble around the edges at some minor issues. Nothing wrong with that at all.
Quote from: Pylon on December 30, 2008, 01:37:40 AM
Quote from: arajca on December 29, 2008, 05:12:09 PM
2. Ditto for letterhead, except change member information to unit information.
Ditto for this - the Tongue and quill gives us all we need to know, and both the above would be another unfunded, unenforcible mandates.
Unfunded, unenforcible? What are you talking about?
A "new" standard where one didn't exist will require anyone who has already paid for business cards, etc., to have to buy new ones - on the member's dime, and invariably those units that have spent time on trying to look professional will suffer because they will have to conform to an LCD identity.
Its unenforcible, because all this stuff is, especially when technology and ability allow for members to do whatever they want, regardless. We live in a world today where actual meaningful regulations are ignored to no effect, do you think forcing a business card template and letterhead, where general guidelines already exist is going to make a bit of difference?
Units like mine will adhere, regardless, because those are the rules, and then we'll have to sit and watch as all those with no taste for the rules do their own thing, perhaps in a way which is more appropriate anyway.
Unless you're talking about a full-on, hammer-down enforcement of a brand-identity, with painful ramifications, don't add lip-service where its not needed.
You're missing the point that everything has gone in so many different directions because of a lack of specific guidance rather than people violating the generic recommendations we have now.
Quote from: Eclipse on December 30, 2008, 03:48:16 AM
A "new" standard where one didn't exist will require anyone who has already paid for business cards, etc., to have to buy new ones - on the member's dime, and invariably those units that have spent time on trying to look professional will suffer because they will have to conform to an LCD identity.
Its unenforcible, because all this stuff is, especially when technology and ability allow for members to do whatever they want, regardless. We live in a world today where actual meaningful regulations are ignored to no effect, do you think forcing a business card template and letterhead, where general guidelines already exist is going to make a bit of difference?
Units like mine will adhere, regardless, because those are the rules, and then we'll have to sit and watch as all those with no taste for the rules do their own thing, perhaps in a way which is more appropriate anyway.
Unless you're talking about a full-on, hammer-down enforcement of a brand-identity, with painful ramifications, don't add lip-service where its not needed.
The exact same could be said about all of our uniform regulations.
Just like uniforms, new requirements to move our professional image forward sometimes comes at a cost to the member - usually our most active members. CAP is usually very generous in allowing long phase-out periods for members to get the most out of existing materials, but the organization can't be expected to never make progress if it means creating small incidental costs along the way.
And the same with uniforms, yes -- it is sometimes a pain to be the ones complying with the sometimes frustrating new regulations buy buying that new command patch or ensuring you add a "U.S. Civil Air Patrol" tape to your next uniform only to take it off again. And also with uniforms, it's frustrating to see those who flaunt the regs or totally pretend they don't exist. Members who ignore the rules will always happen, whether we're talking about uniforms, or correspondence formats, or pencil-whipped SQTRs and Specialty Ratings, or a communications style guide. That doesn't mean we don't stop doing our best to improve our uniforms, or specialty track requirements or external communications.
We still try our best, though. Even with 75% of the members in compliance with one standard, we're already better off than having 1,000 different standards and levels of quality.
Quote from: Pylon on December 30, 2008, 03:56:25 AM
We still try our best, though. Even with 75% of the members in compliance with one standard, we're already better off than having 1,000 different standards and levels of quality.
!@#$%... I wish I could argue with that... :'(
I vote that UK gets some new pictures and becomes the poster child for the new "CAP Values" lines of posters. Each poster kit should come with a new UK action figure complete with every uniform combination in 39-1. That should increase our recruiting and retention. :angel:
I like all of Pylon's ideas. I'd like to see some changes in ES specifically targeted in the ground teams but that would probably end up with a hijacking and a different thread. I really like the idea of PD SQTR's but I think that they need to go through and upgrade quite a few of the specialty tracks. I've never understood why we need an admin officer and a personnel officer. I think that one person could probably handle both of those jobs. JMHO.
In speaking of the Open Office stuff, why can't CAP do what my college did. The school worked out some deal with MS to provide free software to each student. If you quit the school, you have to delete the software. If you graduate, you get to keep it all. It just seems like that would make more sense. Isn't there some sort of "organizational license" available for MS Office? I'm just wondering...
Quote from: Sqn72DO on December 30, 2008, 05:36:21 AMI've never understood why we need an admin officer and a personnel officer. I think that one person could probably handle both of those jobs. JMHO.
In most units they are the same person, but in a large, fully-operational squadron, they are two important, seperate jobs.
Quote from: Sqn72DO on December 30, 2008, 05:36:21 AM
In speaking of the Open Office stuff, why can't CAP do what my college did. The school worked out some deal with MS to provide free software to each student. If you quit the school, you have to delete the software. If you graduate, you get to keep it all. It just seems like that would make more sense. Isn't there some sort of "organizational license" available for MS Office? I'm just wondering...
Those licenses are still HHUUGGEEE BUCKOs, and NHQ is already providing a notebook with MS Office to every unit. Even if you assume only 1/2 the members would tick a license, thats still ~25k, more than most schools and even a lot of companies ever look at. Just not economically feasible, not to mention the management of the licenses, etc., which would be a full-time job for several people.
In addition to Open Office, which is the answer for everything but SIMs, there are freeware viewers, etc., for everything, so its really a non-issue.
Quote from: Sqn72DO on December 30, 2008, 05:36:21 AM
I vote that UK gets some new pictures and becomes the poster child for the new "CAP Values" lines of posters. Each poster kit should come with a new UK action figure complete with every uniform combination in 39-1. That should increase our recruiting and retention. :angel:
I vote that UK gets a new comrade, UB (Ultimate Barbie) with optional UT (Ultimate Toddler) or UP (Ultimate Pet) and becomes the poster couple for CAP Family Values......
Quote from: Eclipse on December 29, 2008, 11:45:51 PM
Quote from: arajca on December 29, 2008, 05:12:09 PM
3. Enter a national contract with Fedex/Kinko's or other major nation-wide copy shop to provide printing services for PD courses. The director sends in the form, designates the local shop, and national sends and pays for the print order. The director (or designee) picks up the materials a couple days before the class. Expand this to cover UCC and TLC in addition to SLS and CLC.
No thank you. In this day and age, why anyone would be spending the exorbitant amounts these places charge for printing is beyond me. I could literally buy a new printer and a ream of paper, and dispose of it afterward for less than they would charge.
Which is why National needs to set up a contract. Corporations do not pay standard pricing.
QuoteFirst, the materials aren't really needed for the classes anyway, second, they are all available online. Send participants the links, and print one or two to have on hand. If they want them, they can print them, or bring them on their notebooks, PDA, or Kindle.
As of this minute, besides donuts or lunch, SLS/CLC/TLC, etc., should be held at ZERO MEMBER COST.
Are you advocating the Check Box mentality toward PD courses? For a simple, 30 - 60 min class, you could probably get away without having student materials, as long as you do not expect them to actually learn anything. Your statement about not needing the materials shows the low regard you have for CAP training. When directed TLC, I did send the students the links to the materials. I still had about half who wanted a printed copy because they didn't have the time to spend printing averything out and babysitting their printers while doing so. Neither did I. I gave them the option and let them know what my providing the hardcopy materials would cost. Having students work on their notebooks during a class is very distracting to the instructor and other students. BTDT.
As for the zero member cost, that's why National pays for the printing, not the director or the member. See emphasized section.
Quote from: arajca on December 30, 2008, 02:56:41 PM
As of this minute, besides donuts or lunch, SLS/CLC/TLC, etc., should be held at ZERO MEMBER COST.
Are you advocating the Check Box mentality toward PD courses? For a simple, 30 - 60 min class, you could probably get away without having student materials, as long as you do not expect them to actually learn anything.
Your statement about not needing the materials shows the low regard you have for CAP training. When directed TLC, I did send the students the links to the materials. I still had about half who wanted a printed copy because they didn't have the time to spend printing averything out and babysitting their printers while doing so. Neither did I. I gave them the option and let them know what my providing the hardcopy materials would cost. Having students work on their notebooks during a class is very distracting to the instructor and other students. BTDT.[/quote]
No, it shows that I have a calendar, and my members have devices that allow them to view the materials without paper - last I checked this was 2008.
Members who can't be bothered to "babysit a printer", especially when it saves them money? You're reaching.
I stand by my statement that the materials are unnecessary for successful, rich sessions of the new SLS/CLC/TLC.
These are discussion based curriculum, not the old days of people standing in front of the room reading the slides they have never before seen in their lives until that moment.
I have to agree with Eclipse. All you need is a prepared instructor, & interested and active students. Those students should take the notes they need for future reference.
The materials I've received thus far at CAP courses only served as note paper and even then it was a waste. The notes I took could have easily fit on a few sheets of paper and I would reference them more. The courses where I received 50 pages and took a 1 or 2 line note here and there never get looked at. In fact they are on the list of things to go threw and recycle.
If materials are handed out they should be of specific need. Charts/graphs etc... I don't need a print out of every slide or a fully expanded outline.
Not everybody is the same when it comes to retaining material. In many of the classes I've taught (primarily Level I, BCUT/ACUT/MRO, and SLS), the students have frequently thanked me for the printed materials. I've found it better to err on the side of providing more than less when it comes to providing printed matter. As as student, if you don't see a need to retain the stuff they give you, don't write in/on it, and return it to the instructor.