• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Ombudsman Report on the Recruiting Process - July 19, 2006

Towards_the_gap

Sr. Member
Reaction score
3
Points
230
Surprised it's not been posted yet, but the Ombudsman for the Canadian Forces has released his report on the recruiting process.

Some interesting reading, and very valid recommendations!

http://www.ombudsman.forces.gc.ca/reports/special/recruitment/recruit_toc_e.asp




[Edit Title to add date.]
 
The 18 recommendations made:


Recommendation One
I recommend that:
The Canadian Forces Recruiting Group develop and implement comprehensive service standards explaining exactly what clients can expect from their Recruiting Centres. The standards should include, but not be limited to:
A standard timeframe (48 hours, for instance) in which applicants can expect to receive replies to their inquiries, be they by telephone, written communication or e-mail;
The type and quality of service applicants can expect;
How to contact someone within the recruiting system should applicants have a question; and
Information, in writing, on how applicants can file complaints with someone outside of their local Recruiting Centre. These complaints must then be dealt with in a specified period of time.
Once developed, these standards must be promulgated and communicated to both applicants and recruiters. They should not only appear on the Canadian Forces website, they should be prominently displayed in all Recruiting Centres.

Recommendation Two
I recommend that:
The Chief of Military Personnel provide the Canadian Forces Recruiting Group with the resources required to put in place a Standards Cell, whose responsibility would be to monitor and report on performance measures, and to develop best practices and lessons learned for the benefit of the entire organization.

Recommendation Three
I recommend that:
The Canadian Forces Recruiting Group develop, implement, monitor and report on client service standards for their recruiting ‘call centre’

Recommendation Four
I recommend that:
The lines of responsibility and authority for the military recruiting process be identified and/or clarified and communicated to all implicated organizations in the most effective manner.

Recommendation Five
I recommend that:
Client Service Agreements be developed (where they do not exist) and formalized between the Canadian Forces Recruiting Group and all ‘service providers’. These agreements should establish clear expectations and service standards, including performance measures and indicators, and they should be adhered to in a rigorous way.

Recommendation Six
I recommend that:
The Chief of Military Personnel develop performance measures to monitor the effectiveness of the service agreements, including the communications between groups, and to identify when changes are required.

Recommendation Seven
I recommend that:
The Chief of Military Personnel, the Chief of Reserves and the Canadian Forces Recruiting Group monitor the implementation of these directives rigorously and make adjustments if, and where, necessary to refine them.

Recommendation Eight
I recommend that:
The Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces assess the feasibility of extending or expanding the measures taken as part of Operation Connection to reduce and/or eliminate delays in the security screening process.

Recommendation Nine
I recommend that:
All Recruiting Centre staff be provided with an appropriate level of training and information on the Government of Canada Security Policy, the National Defence Personnel Security Screening Program, and all aspects (and components) of the security screening process.

Recommendation Ten
I recommend that:
The Canadian Forces Recruiting Group develop standard procedures for informing applicants of the security screening process, including providing a reasonable assessment as to how long the process will take for each individual applicant

Recommendation Eleven
I recommend that:
The Chief of Military Personnel develop, implement and analyze performance measures to determine the effectiveness of communications and cooperation between the Canadian Forces Recruiting Group and Canadian Forces Health Services and, ultimately, the impact that this arrangement has on the military recruiting system.

Recommendation Twelve
I recommend that:
The Canadian Forces Recruiting Group develop a current information distribution process that ensures that all Recruiting Centre staff have easy access to the latest information regarding the Recruit Allowance Program.

Recommendation Thirteen
I recommend that:
The present policy of awarding a recruit allowance based on the date when an applicant is enrolled be amended to reflect the date when the application is received by a Canadian Forces Recruiting Centre with all supporting documentation.

Recommendation Fourteen
I recommend that:
The present policy include a provision that, should a recruit allowance increase (or be instituted) after a qualified individual has applied to join the Canadian Forces but before that individual is actually enrolled, then the individual should receive the new (higher) allowance.

Recommendation Fifteen
I recommend that:
All offers of a recruit allowance (including relevant terms and conditions) be provided to applicants in writing, and in very clear and easily understood terms.

Recommendation Sixteen
I recommend that:
The Chief of Military Personnel, in consultation with the Chief of Reserves and the other various stakeholders, develop and implement a National Reserve Recruiting Policy. While establishing national goals and procedures, this policy must also recognize the unique requirements of the various Reserve elements.

Recommendation Seventeen
I recommend that:
The Chief of Military Personnel, the Canadian Forces Recruiting Group and the other various stakeholders involved in the Reserve recruiting process develop and implement standard operating procedures, including service level standards, in this area.

Recommendation Eighteen
I recommend that:
That the Canadian Forces Recruiting Group develop a Standard Operating procedure that would allow access to Recruiting Centres outside the normal business working hours. This would allow access to applicants who work full time. Consideration should be given to have recruiting centres open during evenings to coincide with Reserve Units hours, in order to facilitate contacts in processing their candidates.
 
GAP said:
The 18 recommendations made:




Recommendation Eight
I recommend that:
The Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces assess the feasibility of extending or expanding the measures taken as part of Operation Connection to reduce and/or eliminate delays in the security screening process.

Recommendation Nine
I recommend that:
All Recruiting Centre staff be provided with an appropriate level of training and information on the Government of Canada Security Policy, the National Defence Personnel Security Screening Program, and all aspects (and components) of the security screening process.

Recommendation Ten
I recommend that:
The Canadian Forces Recruiting Group develop standard procedures for informing applicants of the security screening process, including providing a reasonable assessment as to how long the process will take for each individual applicant


These were the recommendations most relevant to me. If you read further into the actual .pdf document it also recommends scrapping the requirement for pre-secs for pers who have lived in NATO/AUS/NZ countries.

But one point of my own to add, it said nothing about foreign born applicants from NATO/AUS/NZ countries, which I think is a shame, as I personally know quite a few people who would seriously consider joining the canadian army at the end of their British Army service.

Edited to add: cheers GAP for posting the extract
 
The press didn't lose a minute

Forces losing recruits: Study
By KATHLEEN HARRIS   Wed, July 19, 2006
http://www.ottawasun.com/News/National/2006/07/19/1691707-sun.html

The Canadian Forces is losing out on some fine personnel catches because of a recruitment process wrapped in red tape, the military watchdog concludes in a special report to be released today.

National Defence Department ombudsman Yves Cote studied 301 complaints lodged from 2003-05 and found a number of flaws in the recruitment and selection process, including excessive delays in medical and security screening and discrepancies in how bonuses and other incentives are offered to potential recruits.

While the Forces has managed to meet its recruitment targets, many candidates have dropped out of the process as a result of a glitch or an excessive delay.

Among his recommendations, Cote is calling for a comprehensive national reserve recruitment policy.



 
Another related article, probably already posted on other threads, reproduced under the...oh never mind- just click on the link!

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/07/19/military-recruiting.html



 
Military's recruitment methods slammed
Forces' lack of responsiveness scaring off many talented people, Ombudsman says
GLORIA GALLOWAY

From Thursday's Globe and Mail

OTTAWA — Television ads attempt to lure young Canadian men and women to join the Forces with promises of action and exciting careers, but Canada's defence ombudsman says the welcome is not always so warm for those who actually try to enlist.

Yves Côté says he is concerned about the number of people who have told his office that they quit the recruitment process, or were about to quit, because of an unsatisfactory experience during recruiting.

"The Canadian Forces must improve the quality and timeliness of the service provided to applicants to ensure that it does not routinely lose the services of talented Canadians interested in a military career," Mr. Côté told a news conference yesterday as he released a report on recruitment problems.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060720.wxmilitary20/BNStory/National/home
 
Review finds 'incredible' delays for would-be military recruits
 
Mike De Souza
CanWest News Service


Thursday, July 20, 2006


OTTAWA -- Documented cases highlighting nightmarish delays and unfriendly staff in a new report about the military have prompted Canadian Forces officials to admit they must clean up their recruitment process.

The report, prepared by National Defence and Canadian Forces ombudsman Yves Cote, concluded that the military has significant room for improvement to ensure that its tactics are not driving away talented candidates in the recruitment phase.

"Some of the stories that our investigators have heard are just incredible in this day and age," Cote said at a news conference.

After reviewing nearly 600 complaints made between 2002 and 2005, Cote said one of the most alarming stories he heard was when he chatted with some new recruits in training at St-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Que. He said one of them was a frustrated medical doctor who had approached a recruiting centre in Southern Ontario and called several times without getting any positive feedback or advice.

The recruit told Cote that he only managed to get his application process moving forward after speaking to a family friend who was a major in the military.

"Imagine that in 2005 the recruiting system would behave in that way to such a precious commodity," said Cote. "It's just unbelievable."

He also was shocked about a case involving a reservist who waited for months to transfer into the regular forces, only to call and find out that his application was never processed because the military was waiting to receive a home address for his father, who had passed away.

Cote said that many talented individuals will move on to careers in other fields if the military doesn't provide regular contact with applicants.

He said one potential recruit told investigators that he called seven days in a row before getting an update on his file.

"Eventually I just gave up," the applicant said. "I now have a very good job and no longer have any interest in joining the Canadian Forces."

The military's recruiting group is welcoming the ombudsman's report, which also confirmed that the military is meeting its recruitment targets to boost its regular and reserve forces.

"His findings are fair and balanced," said Capt. Holly Brown. "We find that a lot of the recommendations that were made were things that we were already looking at."

For example, she said the military has already identified improving the support services in its recruitment process as a priority.

"We recognize that customer service can always improve," she said. "We were not surprised to hear that."

But she stressed that it is always a challenge to process nearly 25,000 applications per year through the existing 39 recruitment offices. In the past three months alone, the forces have received more than 9,000 new applications, she added.

In many cases, she said the military must also wait for the RCMP and CSIS to complete screening and background checks before proceeding with an application.

Meanwhile, she said potential recruits can send their inquiries to a new e-mail service (jobs@recruiting.forces.gc.ca) or a toll-free line (1-800-856-8488) for answers to their questions.

mdesouza@cns.canwest.com
 
Hmn, 600 complaints over three years for some 75000 applicants.  That's not so bad in my mind.  Always room for improvement though...

A national reserve recruiting policy is an excellent suggestion.  especially in regards to the militia.
 
Hmn, 600 complaints over three years for some 75000 applicants.  That's not so bad in my mind.  Always room for improvement though...
Those are just the people that were ticked off enough to contact the ombudsmen office and complain. I am sure there are plenty more who just walked away. Looking at the number of people who waited 1-3 years to get in you have to wonder how many other good candidates were not willing to wait that long.

I hope they take these recommendations and make the changes needed.

 
Some of those complaints were probably not legit either.  So it balances itself out.  Even if you double those numbers it isn't that bad.

But as I said.  Always room to improve.
 
Even if you double those numbers it isn't that bad.
The number of complaints is low (in your view) therefore the system is more or less fine. That does not fly with me. Only a certain of percentage of people will resort to complaining when things don't work out. Most people that I spoke to that were having problems don't bother to file a complaint because they feel it will do no good, or filing a complaint will hinder their chance of getting in.

As a person who spent 2+ years getting in, I feel the system needs a pretty big overhaul.  I have also spoken to and interacted online with people who have spent equal, if not more time getting in. On my course the average time to get in was 1 1/2 years (for people in my section) and one fellow spent 4 years trying to get in.

I also know at least three people who came to Army.ca for help who seemed to be excellent candidates (having great education and work experience) who gave up in absolute disgust, or could not wait and started down a different career path. None of them complained because they did not see how it would help, despite my encouragements to do so.

I am actually one of the 600 who did bother to file a complaint with the Ombudsman. I had a lengthy telephone conversation with the Ombudsman and I outlined various aspects of the system that I thought were hindering. I hope that my input helped, but I also know that complaining did nothing to help my file get processed.

Plenty of room for improvement.
 
For anyone acquainted with the recruiting system, this is not news.  In fact, there was a SCONDVA report 3 years ago or so that all but called CFRG to the mat for its inadequacies.

Looking at the list, there's some good stuff in there from a procedural/ policy/ management perspective.  However, the key thing needed to improve recruiting is cultural.
1.  Like the USMC, recruiters need to be high performing, charismatic members.  Too often, we adopt the "if he's got the course he can do the job" approach.  Recruiting is effectively sales, and even with training, not everyone can be a good salesman.

2.  There's a risk averse culture that tends to creep in.  One of the biggest reason for delays in the recruiting process is a zero error approach.  This is the mentality that resulted in 100% of applications needing to be med reviewed by one Med O in Borden for a couple of years.  Better to meet the numbers and deal with a few irregular enrollments than fall short (or start careers off with a negative experience)

3.  Success measures are inward facing, instead of customer facing.  The potential problem with many of the recommendations from the ombudsman is that they are very metric driven, and there's a risk that there will simply be a transferrance of focus onto different internal metrics rather than an improvement in the client experience.  I should note that this applies to both sets of clients- the applicants themselves, and the units/ career managers who require the new members.


Oh, and the bigger problem is with training systems and availability of instructors- how big is the PAT Company (Battalion? Brigade?) in Borden these days?
 
Pieman said:
The number of complaints is low (in your view) therefore the system is more or less fine. That does not fly with me. Only a certain of percentage of people will resort to complaining when things don't work out. Most people that I spoke to that were having problems don't bother to file a complaint because they feel it will do no good, or filing a complaint will hinder their chance of getting in.

As a person who spent 2+ years getting in, I feel the system needs a pretty big overhaul.  I have also spoken to and interacted online with people who have spent equal, if not more time getting in. On my course the average time to get in was 1 1/2 years (for people in my section) and one fellow spent 4 years trying to get in.

I also know at least three people who came to Army.ca for help who seemed to be excellent candidates (having great education and work experience) who gave up in absolute disgust, or could not wait and started down a different career path. None of them complained because they did not see how it would help, despite my encouragements to do so.

I am actually one of the 600 who did bother to file a complaint with the Ombudsman. I had a lengthy telephone conversation with the Ombudsman and I outlined various aspects of the system that I thought were hindering. I hope that my input helped, but I also know that complaining did nothing to help my file get processed.

Plenty of room for improvement.

0.8% Complaint rate?  That's not low in your view?  In my view as you put it, it is.  But, it would be better if it was at 0.

I'm not saying that there isn't room for improvement but don't make it sound like 2 years is the standard timeframe to recruit someone.  It may have been that way in your case and your beef with the system is probably legit.  But some of the problems the recruiting system has is outside elements beyond it's immediate control.  security screenings, medical reviews etc.  Some of these issues have been addressed and some will be in the near future.  And a lot of the issues arise from applicants themselves.

I personnally agree with the recommendations that were made.  And oddly some of the recommendations have been floating around for a number years but never acted on for whatever reasons.
 
Crantor said:
I'm not saying that there isn't room for improvement but don't make it sound like 2 years is the standard timeframe to recruit someone.  It may have been that way in your case and your beef with the system is probably legit.  But some of the problems the recruiting system has is outside elements beyond it's immediate control.  security screenings, medical reviews etc.  Some of these issues have been addressed and some will be in the near future.  And a lot of the issues arise from applicants themselves.

Are you a serving or past member of the CF? I checked your profile and you don't have anything filled in.
Because of that, I do not know if you have actually been through the recruiting system or not.

Most people looking to join do not know that they can issue a complaint with the ombudsman when things are taking an excessive amount of time, things are being forgotten, phone calls not returned, etc.

By the sounds of the ombudsman's report, the types of complaints that have been received by their office have also been posted and discussed on these forums before by others who are frustrated with the way the system is currently running.

I think the recommendations are great, and I hope that they are acted upon so that we will have a smoother running recruiting system in the future.

+1 for Pieman  :salute:
 
I know of one person who has been reading the ARMY.CA and the now, on again/off again, LFRR Discussion Group sites.

The CF Ombudsman.

Most of what he presented in his report was already discussed between the two forums.

Who said, Big Brother is not listening.
 
Three cheers for the ombudsman, mirroring what army.ca posters have been saying since the 90's!

Glad this report came out, not surprised.

Question is will anything be done.
 
Another thing to consider is 600 complaints put in is only the people who put the effort in to make a formal complaint.  There's more than likely quite a few people waiting and venting on boards like this, but who don't really wish to put a formal complaint through.  I know I've been toying with the idea for a bit but the chances of me actually putting one though are slim to none.  As frustrated as I am I know the recruiting centre itself is waiting just as much, it's the other end thats making up the "official offer" that's screwing the pooch...
 
Not surprising to see so many complaints. Recruiters working at the same center are often not on the same page. I recall calling the Montreal recruiting center a few months ago, three times on the same day to ask the same question...I got three different answers !

I remember also when I applied to become an infantry officer. I was told the process took three months from application to basic; I applied August 19th 2005...start IAP on August 26th, 2006....more than a year later...no wonder why so many applicants give up in the middle of the process.

I guess that's what happens in a big organization.
 
Back
Top