The "Auxiliary of One" philosphy has been mentioned in the past. There are those who would deny that is official policy and have been trying to sell you a specious philosophy of the Aux becoming ever closer to the Coast Guard.

Read on my misguided friends.

quote:

In support of these efforts, the Department of Personnel has debuted a new type of campaign known as the “... Campaign.” The focus of the campaign is different from what has been done in the past in that it focuses less on volunteer service and the Auxiliary ties to the Coast Guard and more on personal fulfillment of the prospective member. It was designed with the Boomer demographic in mind.

Source: United States Coast Guard Auxiliary
National Department of Personnel
OPCOM Report, August, 2007
Executive Summary (second paragraph)

No - you cannot get the above document on-line (or anywhere else). But it was my getting those documents and letting you know the contents of them was one of the major factors in my recent travails.

A little further down page 1:

quote:

As per the proposal submitted to the National Executive Committee (NEXCOM) by the Deputy Department Chief of Personnel, a booth has been secured at the National AARP Conference in Boston, MA in September, 2007. ... Department personnel supported by select volunteers from District 1 Northern Region ... will be available to assist AARP attendees in awareness and membership in Auxiliary membership. As AARP is composed primarily of Boomer Generation age persons, this is a very rich stream of potential members to tap into. Leads will be forwarded to all Districts’ DSO-PS for follow up action as a result of the interaction at the conference.

As a pre-Boomer I am offended. What? We are barely worn out and they are trying to replace us! I won't reach TBO for at least another couple of years.

Now don't be too upset - the Auxiliary of One philosophy is really being driven by the Mad Dash For Cash caused by the big fall off in membership the last few years. It is just there are more Boomers then there are Silents. The Aux has to go to the Boomers for the same reason Willy Sutton robbed banks - that is where the money is.

However, such a recruiting philosophy is at odds with Past NACO Gene's philosophy, shared by his protoge Steve that the Aux needs a 'culture of committment'. You will not get a 'culture of committment' out of a group recruited into the Aux for "personal fulfillment of the prospective member" rather then the older "volunteer service and the Auxiliary ties to the Coast Guard".

quote:

a booth has been secured at the National AARP Conference in Boston, MA in September, 2007.

I wonder if the AARP will get a little "bent" that the Aux is focusing on what is their "younger members," thus discriminating against largest dues-paying base.

...gjd

I joined the AARP when I became of the proper age (?) and got back out in hurry (one month.)
The first issue of their magazine got this good ol" boy to send them a nastygram and leave. At that time the leadership was to left of Fidel. Maybe they have changed in 17 years. Have they?

No, but now your government is to the right of Ghengis Khan. Moderation in all things is my motto, I am joining AARP.

quote:

However, such a recruiting philosophy is at odds with Past NACO Gene's philosophy, shared by his protégé Steve that the Aux needs a 'culture of commitment'. You will not get a 'culture of commitment' out of a group recruited into the Aux for "personal fulfillment of the prospective member" rather then the older "volunteer service and the Auxiliary ties to the Coast Guard".

Now here, we disagree.

I think both approaches are valid and important.

There will always be room for the folks who are driven by their desire to "give back" to their country through meaningful volunteer participation. These are usually our more militaristic leaning, operations oriented, USCG direct support, stand up and salute members. And God bless them for their desire and willingness to serve. I too, am primarily motivated by a desire to give something back to this wonderful country I adopted. I think we find almost all of these types of folks on this forum.

But, these so-motivated folks are dwindling rapidly. If you read NADCO Fred Gates' extensive study on the "generations" and how they reflect upon Auxiliary recruiting you will understand the challenge.

According to all of the studies I have seen, including Fred’s paper, the "give back to the country" motivation is fading with the "Greatest Generation" and the more senior baby-boomers. But we are doing a dismal job recruiting from younger generations. We sound the trumpet, run up the flag, call to action and we get a big yawn.

So what are we to do? Continue to beat that dead horse until we dwindle to nothing or change our organization's marketing and positioning to reflect the way the world really is these days?

There is nothing inherently diminishing about offering potential recruits a personal-fulfilling opportunity. While they are being personally fulfilled, we are also accomplishing our missions. And in truth, in a volunteer organization such as the Auxiliary, that fulfillment of self is always the bottom line anyway. We do what we do because it's what we want to do. If we want to sacrifice our time and efforts for our country, that is why we do what we do. If you want to learn about protecting the marine environment, that is why you do what you do.

The Auxiliary as a whole cannot afford to take an elitist position. The truth is, we're not that elite anyway. Within the Auxiliary we have elite cadres and programs. That's cool, if that's where you want to participate and you're willing to earn your spurs. But that should not be the majority of us.

It is our Auxiliary schizophrenic approach to this dichotomy that is reflected in our marketing message and our poor recruitment results.

We have a great message! We have a plethora of meaningful and personally-fulfilling missions (most dying on the vine). This is a great organization. Folks should be flocking to sign up. But overall, we can't recruit worth a crap. Because we are pulling against each other all of the time.

Changing our message to appeal to the majority of potential recruits is going to be a very tough sell.

I am not about to join a socialist organization just to get a discount ticket to the zoo.

quote:

Originally posted by Ancora:
I am not about to join a socialist organization just to get a discount ticket to the zoo.

Interesting... I almost quit AARP because they were backing some of the Administration's proposals regarding Social Security, Medicare and that Prescription Drug program.

The AARP is hardly a "socialist organization." The biggest criticism of AARP might be that it is becoming nothing more than another capitalistic insurance company.

What was originally an advocate for "seniors" and "retired" folks has now changed it's name to simply AARP (dropping the long form reference to "Retired People"). It's just a "business" now -- no longer a true mutual benefit organization.

Their insurance programs are pretty good, and the pricing is competitive.

...gjd

I've gotten requests to join.... and I'm only 31.

I think when they opened up their membership to everyone who is 50+ they kinda had to drop the whole "retired persons" deal.

quote:

they opened up their membership to everyone who is 50+

Like any organization, AARP's first priority was "to perpetuate the organization" -- in other words, "to grow." When membership began to level off in their "retired persons" niche, the only thing they could think to do was to lower the age requirement.

They reacted the same way the Golden Gage Bridge Authority did back when the bridge was essentially "paid off," and jurisdiction was supposed to revert to the State of California. Instead of letting that happen and dissolving the organization, the Authority reacted by expanding it's jurisdiction -- going into the Bus and Ferry Boat business.

...gjd

There is nothing inherently diminishing about offering potential recruits a personal-fulfilling opportunity. While they are being personally fulfilled, we are also accomplishing our missions

I think diminishing is the wrong word or concept - diluting I think is closer to it.

I think you might even agree the Aux has too many missions and needs to focus. However, that cannot happen when you switch your recruiting focus from 'this is what we (the Aux) do, can you help us' to 'the Aux - be all YOU can be'. Members and leaders forget that almost all training occurs at the flotilla level and no flotilla can come near training in all Aux mission areas.

If you read the "Duck" ads - the Aux is making a committment to find a place for a prospective member no matter what skill or desire they bring to the table. The burden for finding that 'place' will fall on already burned out and jaded flotillas. The Aux may be able to boost first year recruitment numbers but it will be hit with even greater problems then it has now in year 2 and 3 when the reality of the Aux not being able to be all things to all prospective members sets in.

Further, if the member is recruited on the basis of personal fulfillment then his/her committment begins and ends at that point. They aren't going to appreciate being told after being trained and qualified that now they are expected to meet some heretofore unspecificed performance committment. Performance committments are exactly what is behind the Culture of Committment that NACO Gene used to talk about. And that Culture is a vastly different mindset from the new recruiting campaign.

And this campaign isn't supposed to be a pick and choose proposition for the flotillas. The "Be All You Can Be" "Auxiliary of One" is supposed to be a single national campaign. The project list starting on page 2 of the referenced report states:

quote:

Develop a Central Recruiting Message and Properly Roll out this message to all Auxiliarists

While we discussing the NACO Steve article in Proceedings someone remarked that they were glad to see the Aux moving away from the supposed 'yacht club' mentality and more toward being closer to the CG. The Proceedings report was for public consumption. The "P" report is what the Aux is really doing. Included within that report are the following items - which some might see as reinforcing a yacht club or boating club mentality.

quote:

Develop Fellowship Guidance that raises awareness of the need and benefits of having fun within the membership

quote:

Develop a family involvement plan for membership

Can you say "Boating Club"? I thought you could.

FWIW - the two items above have a Yin and Yang, Come and Go cycle in The Aux Chronicles. Usually when you see them it is a sign the Aux has lost its way and mission focus and Fellowship "The Infamous Glue" is trotted out as a stop-gap to try and hold the membership together until the Aux and the CG can figure out what the Aux is supposed to be doing.

There are some good things in the "P" report - I'll probably put them in a separate thread in a few day.

quote:

I think you might even agree the Aux has too many missions and needs to focus. However, that cannot happen when you switch your recruiting focus from 'this is what we (the Aux) do, can you help us' to 'the Aux - be all YOU can be'. Members and leaders forget that almost all training occurs at the flotilla level and no flotilla can come near training in all Aux mission areas.

I do agree that the Aux has too many missions prmarily because we have so few active members to fulfill them but also because some of these mission need to be completely rethought and where obsolete or untenable, dropped from our list. I do not agree that we cannot adjust our mission focus if we recruit for "be all YOU can be". That seems to imply we will tailor missions to each individual's desire which is silly. We can however tailor our missions focus to reflect our true Auxiliary overall capability. Our capability is determined by our organization's vision of our purpose and again, that is a schizophrenic vision.

quote:

If you read the "Duck" ads - the Aux is making a committment to find a place for a prospective member no matter what skill or desire they bring to the table. The burden for finding that 'place' will fall on already burned out and jaded flotillas. The Aux may be able to boost first year recruitment numbers but it will be hit with even greater problems then it has now in year 2 and 3 when the reality of the Aux not being able to be all things to all prospective members sets in.

Further, if the member is recruited on the basis of personal fulfillment then his/her committment begins and ends at that point. They aren't going to appreciate being told after being trained and qualified that now they are expected to meet some heretofore unspecificed performance committment. Performance committments are exactly what is behind the Culture of Committment that NACO Gene used to talk about. And that Culture is a vastly different mindset from the new recruiting campaign.

quote:

quote:
Develop a Central Recruiting Message and Properly Roll out this message to all Auxiliarists


While we discussing the NACO Steve article in Proceedings someone remarked that they were glad to see the Aux moving away from the supposed 'yacht club' mentality and more toward being closer to the CG. The Proceedings report was for public consumption. The "P" report is what the Aux is really doing. Included within that report are the following items - which some might see as reinforcing a yacht club or boating club mentality.


quote:
Develop Fellowship Guidance that raises awareness of the need and benefits of having fun within the membership



quote:
Develop a family involvement plan for membership

So here's a classic example of the completely schizophrenic message.

"While we discussing the NACO Steve article in Proceedings someone remarked that they were glad to see the Aux moving away from the supposed 'yacht club' mentality and more toward being closer to the CG."

And then in the same report, "Develop Fellowship Guidance that raises awareness of the need and benefits of having fun within the membership" and "Develop a family involvement plan for membership"

I simply do not see what this huge fear of becoming a freindly, happy organization that focuses primarily on Boating Safety and contains within it a huge dollop of fun and fellowship. I think we need to move way over into the Yacht Club mentality (whatever that is).

We'll still have the specialty USCG direct support disciplines that require advanced and specialized training within the organization. All who want to participate there are welcome. But all who do not are equally welcome. It's not a them or us deal at all.

Doesn't this seem like a healthy organization to you?

quote:

We'll still have the specialty USCG direct support disciplines that require advanced and specialized training within the organization. All who want to participate there are welcome. But all who do not are equally welcome. It's not a them or us deal at all.

Joe - How I wish that what you say was true. However, all evidence I see - and by his posts, I'd say that Crumudgeon probably sees - is that its the OPS side that is the only side that really counts today. For example, take a look at the requirements to run for division elected office. Do you see any RBS related requirements - No. But look at the OPS requirements - you need ICS 100, 200, 700 and 800 - all OPS related and all required for the Cox'n qualification. And what past Specialty Course has been eliminated? - Administration, the only specialty course totally unrelated to running a boat.

As an eighteen year member of the Auxiliary, I look back with fond memories to the old "yacht club" ambiance we used to have. We enjoyed far more comradery than we do now. When did the word "fun" become pejorative? Whatever happened to the "Fourth Cornerstone? The paramilitary aspect of the Auxiliary with the accompanying
ODUs and boots have made the wanabees happy but what about the rest of us?

I seem to recall that Auxies had to patrol in uniform before the ODU, so I don't think wearing a pair of boots makes all that much difference. And, as always, the CG makes the rules and the Aux follows them.

My flotilla wears the proper uniforms and still manages to have fun. They aren't mutually exclusive, you know.

quote:

Originally posted by RiverAux:
I seem to recall that Auxies had to patrol in uniform before the ODU, so I don't think wearing a pair of boots makes all that much difference. And, as always, the CG makes the rules and the Aux follows them.

My flotilla wears the proper uniforms and still manages to have fun. They aren't mutually exclusive, you know.

indeed. My former flotilla was very big on the fourth cornerstone, but being it was the Hampton Roads, Va area, (tidewater) they were all ex-military and gung-ho at the same time. No law says it's an either/or kind of theing...

I find that the feathermerchants are more prone
to be gung ho than the vets, i.e., been there, done that.

I find that the feathermerchants are more prone

Part of the problem is that everyone views the membership on one dimension, ie civilian volunteer vs para- or 'more military'. It then tries to correlate service or fellowship to that one dimenison..

Use civilian/paramilitay as the horizontal axis. Bisect it vertically with another axix. Label the top of the vertical axis "service" and the bottom fellowship.

You now get a much broader spectrum of membership attitude. Take the outer 4 points as the extremes you have:

1. Upper left. The civilian volunteers dedicated to service. Probably don't cotton much to the paras of any stripe and really don't like the party animals. Some include this group in the yachties, others don't.

2. Upper right. The paras dedicated to service. Might respect group 1 for their service but cannot stand their 'civilian-ness'. Some include this group in the wannabees, others don't.

3. Lower left. The civilian party animals. Think booze cruises and picnics as 'operations'. No doubt about it these are the real yacht or boat club members.

4. Lower right. The ceremonial paras. Love to put on a uniform but only if it is a non-working one. Think Choker Whites as the uni of choice. No doubt about it this is the home of the wannabees. We used to have a primo example of one of these here but by his absence in AuxInfo, I believe he left the Aux last year.

And it would be a mistake to assume that vets, retired military or prior-served are not represented in all 4 quadrants. As are non-prior service.