Several years ago the Air Force's marketing arm, GSD&M, told the military that only 0.2% of teens have an interest in even so much as contemplating a military tour (similar to what students suggested to GMnavy.go volunteers in "Comment 6").
Even if the 0.2% were closer to 5%, that would still leave 95% of "teens" reflexively dismissive. Whatever the actual figure, and however skewed by lowering the military recruiting bar (see "Where the bar is placed," a subtopic in exhibit "I"), marketers and lobbyists relentlessly knock on the doors of Congress and the DOD to keep the ad dollars coming!
● For decades, most military branches have barely been able to get the mandated number of recruits. Thus, at first blush, the branch that realized a 25% excess in qualified applicants seemed like a wonderful victory, right? The thing is, without an excess of 100%, 200% or more, selectivity nosedives (likewise detailed in exhibit "I"). And don't be fooled, suppressing recruiting standards to get enough qualified applicants may be more than just deceptive, it may ultimately prove to have been reckless.
● Trust your instincts: Just barely getting enough applicants to meet "mission" (the manpower number set by Congress) wipes out selectivity. And to the extent that the U.S. might tomorrow face off against a major technologic military power, our elected leaders and military heads should and must find a better way to fill ranks today.
Congress, too, can sometimes get locked into linear thinking, perhaps believing that a nicer ad or a different cable channel might bring military recruiting selectivity. For the rest of us, this Storyboard is a preview of Storyboard 54, Storyboard 56, Storyboard 57, Storyboard 58, Storyboard 59, exhibit "I" (referenced above) and exhibit "J". NOTE, HOWEVER, THAT THE PURPOSE OF USING THE MILITARY EXAMPLE IS NOT TO SEEK THE MILITARY AS A SPONSOR. RATHER, THE PURPOSE IS MERELY TO ILLUSTRATE THE POWER OF THE GMNAVY.GO MODEL, EVEN IN ONE OF THE TOUGHEST CHALLENGES IN THE U.S., MILITARY RECRUITING.