How v Frustrating!
"Good for Nothing Youth? Think again..."
This is the slogan for the latest national ad campaign from youth volunteering charity v. Hmmm. I see the point about challenging negative stereotypes, and on one level it's almost clever, but I do think it's dangerous to play with these themes unless you're absolutely certain about what you want to achieve. And in this case surely the whole point is to inspire more young people to get involved? I'm not at all convinced that this campaign will do that as it seems to be more focused on persuading the old folk and the establishment that young people ‘aint really all that bad.' Is this v's job?
I'm increasingly frustrated by the v programme. Not by the people that out there on the front line engaging and supporting young volunteers - I've met a few and they're great people who believe in what they are doing - but by head office, the place where they devise national communications strategy.
Given how much funding v has had since they launched in 2006 - over £140m - surely every young person in the UK should know about it by now? But I don't think they do. As a parent, I have friends with teenage kids that fall into the v age range and few have heard of the scheme let alone got involved in it, which seems crazy to me.
So why this apparent lack of awareness? I suspect that employing a marketing director for the first two years whose primary experience was selling photocopiers probably didn’t help. But even now after they have been replaced with a seemingly clued up marketing head from a consumer media background, the messages still seem out of kilter, lacking in any real direction. What are they trying to do? Challenge media stereotypes, raise awareness, recruit more young people? It's not clear and the result is one confusing campaign after another.
How is the latest campaign supporting the 1m target?And how is v getting on with its 1m new young volunteers target? I see no reference to it in any of their communications, indeed the 'inspiring a million new volunteers' tag line has mysteriously disappeared - have they dropped the target? And if so why? I suspect it's because they are nowhere near to meeting it.
My 19 year old daughter and some of her friends got involved with RockCorps a few months ago. They were motivated by the opportunity to go to an exclusive concert - all huge Lady GaGa fans who was the headline act - and ended up really enjoying the experience and have since joined a local environmental project. Frustrating for me, my nagging her to do something has been met with zero interest for years, but hugely successful for this new initiative which has the backing of Orange and E4 to name but a few big brands.
I think that one of the problems for v is that it's probably driven by people like me, ie parents and teacher types who they think they know what's best for young people. We all know that telling your teenage kids to do something is pretty much the kiss of death to get them to actually do it and in this celebrity and reality obsessed world, charity schemes like this need to be clever and position themselves as something that teenagers will want to do, not because their parents have told them to.
Rumours abound that v may well be axed if the Tories get in next year. Is this such a bad thing? Perhaps, but mainly because to date v has failed to have the awareness impact that was expected of it and this seems like a huge missed opportunity. I very much doubt that the Tories will want to fund such a large scale volunteering programme in future and I envisage many critics of national advertising campaigns that will claim they are a waste of money. But let's look at what RockCorps have achieved in a short amount of time, levering in big commercial brands to promote a very simple message – volunteering is fun, it's cool and gives you access to great stuff you could not get elsewhere. 'Simple' as the meercats would say.
If I had the ear of the Tory policy makers I’d say rather than ditch the scheme completely, keep the great work the local teams and projects are doing, get someone nationally to co-ordinate and lead them, like the Princes Trust or National Youth Agency, and commission RockCorps to manage the marketing. That way we could build on this otherwise great scheme and make sure that all young people in the UK have both heard of it and can't wait to get involved with it.
Right, that's that sorted, what's next...
x
x
1 RSS Feed »
Comments
What next you say? Well while you seem to have completly sorted out the policy, those in the know always seem to take a bit longer to get there, even when they have been told.
Saying that though, I was interested to see that the latest press releases for v had Tory MPs support - in fact one even had the Tory MP's comments placed several pages above the current Ministers! l Sightly rude, but perhaps indicative of some level of support and a lot of hard work, certainly given F Maudes Comments a wee while ago. I must say I have been out of the volunteering loop for a wee while but I can imagine the gossip and wonder what reaction the supportive Cameron / Prince W comments got. Have v finally made the mark???
As to raising awareness I for one can't listen to X FM anymore as it seems to have become the public service information point. Well done civil servants and charity bods, you have found a radio station that young people listen to, but did you have to take it over? Yes Frank I'll chat to you, once I've done my favour and got an STD test and become an apprentice.
Gottcha that RockCorps has made a massive impact but if v can get some visible Tory support whose to say they won't get their heads together and join up with the new model Corps, and by golly what a show that would be. Currently I'm more Gaga than gabba, but I'm not stuck on that things can move.
The only other question is whether v have enough time to show everyone what they have got. May ain't so long way
Interesting response to Obamas plans the increase AmeriCorps from Michele Bachmann, a Republican congresswoman from Minnesota who is being hailed as a new and increasingly powerful voice in American politics.
'She has dubbed Obama's plans to increase AmeriCorps – a government volunteer service group – as a plan to forcibly indoctrinate young people. "I believe there is a very strong chance that we will see young people put into mandatory service... there are provisions for what I would call re-education camps for young people,"
Ouch. Perhaps V should count their blessings that they have yet to have that kind of comment thrown at them, or maybe goverment backed schemes can never win?
But wasn't v supposed to have supported the sector, researched and reached out to those who would never think of volunteering as well as raise numbers and awareness? Maybe they have manged to change a lot but the focus, as with other big projects, always comes back to the telephone number targets. If that is the case, it seems that they may well have been set up to flounder and what does that mean for future projects?.
Thought provoking piece Janice, great first article - echoes what I was saying back in April on the Red blog http://thoughtsred.blogspot.com/2009_04_01_archive.html
Interesting that the Tories are making good noises publicly Jax, tho I met with with policy bod there recently and in private it was very different, but time will tell. At the end of the day, it matters not what policy peeps think or say but whether the average young adult on the street has heard of v and gets involved - that's where RockCorps has done so well, albeit limietd t London and Manchester. I have 3 sisters of v's catchment age and none have ehard of it, which is crap really given their brother works in the sector!! Hey ho...
The compulsion issue is alreday here in the UK, GB announced a compulsory community service scheme back in April and David Blunkett has been tasked with making it happen - v may well have to get involved although the Tories have come out against any form of compulsion so far.
I think it's good to get people talking about these things - I think Janice's point about the million target is interesting, I've not seen any mention of it for a while, tho quality over quantity is not a bad thing... howevever I was pretty convinced that 1m with that sort of budget was totally doable, so be interesting to know if they have dumped it and why.
Glad to see my first post is getting so much interest! Thanks to you both for the feedback. Jax I do hear what you're saying, but have to agree with JamieT that the key to success for v is whether the kids on the street know about it and are getting involved. I'm sure that v could show us statistics that would confirm they are indeed reaching out there, but in my world and those of my friends and colleagues, they simply have little relevance, as harsh as that might sound. RockCorps on the other hand have been sen everywhere, including E4 at the weekend which my daughter and her friends watch regularly - v on Xfm is useful but as you say every other cause is on there and they have a limited audience.
The compulsion issue is interesting and I will have to look into the community service plans that blunkeet is leading on - JamieT do you have a link or more info? Interestingly I once asked a group of my daughter's friends what would most encourage them to volunteer and they all said 'make us do it'! This was before RockCorps mind you, but perhaps compulsion does have a role to play?
Sure when i-volunteer opens to the public we'll have loads more views! Exciting stuff...
What a great post - it is so good to see someone from outside the system taking a look at volunteering initiatives - and making such sensible suggestions. Hopefully when i-volunteer goes live later today some policy peeps will see this and take note.
We don't want to see the baby thrown out with the bathwater - there has been a lot of money spent and a lot of good local work done; but, like others here, I'm not convinced the national element of the programme has been successful.
Hmmm...... I've not been keeping an eye on the national picture for a while, but my initial reaction is one of deja vu: Experience Corps anyone?
Dead right, Chris. In its early days v was nicknamed The Inexeperience Corps because the model (and chances of success) looked very similar.
Last 2 comments made me :)))
It's true that v had some issues in the early days and didn't really succeed in getting their message out across the country for much of the first year of the project but these have largely been sorted out now and their recent link up with organisations such as the News International group is seeing a much higher profile. We're still such a regionally diverse country that I'm not convinced that any national programme could have achieved better results. If (and it's a big if) there is a change in the way youth volunteering is managed after the next election maybe it should be away from a national body and placed in the hands of regional co-ordinators. As for RockCorp there's no wonder that this was so well marketed as the whole scheme appeared to be little more than one huge promotion for Orange and didn't really attempt to engender any long term commitment to volunteering. It was also far from being a national initiative with only a handful of major cities being covered. So a national advertising campaign for a localised initiative results in maximum publicity for Orange and limited engagement for the majority of young people.
Thanks for the comments all! Great to see people interested in this issue and having such a variety of views...
I think the message of the add campaign may have been missed by some. I manage a vinvolved team who are incredibly succesful and have exceede all of their targets. Their work also involves creating more opportunities for young people to volunteer which involves 'selling' young people to organisations who often have negative stereotypes. So this message would be useful to those organisations. I also think the campaign may appeal to young people who are disengaged, who can respond positively to the images of young people who look like themselves and their peers.
As for Orange Rockcorps I strongly dislike the scheme for two reasons:- it further strengthens the negative stereotype of young people by suggesting they will only volunteer if there is something they will get in return, which from our expeience is total rubbish.
- It goes against all the good practice advice to offer insentives like this. Four hours of volunteering for a concert ticket, is that not a contract?
Thanks for the feedback @Becca. I wasn't being critical of local vteams at all, more the head office' communications strategy, which as you point out is missing some of the key demographic with message sthat are not hitting the right note. You mention 'selling' young people to organisations, which I totally understand the need for, and likewise you need to 'sell' voluntereing to some young people that would just not get it. Offering an incentive is not about entering a contract, it's just an incentive, and surely no different to offering training/qualifications - which frankly are far more beneficial in financial terms. Throwing a concert for people that volunteered some time and effort - and do we start saying that only doing four hours does not count? - is just another way of saying thank you. I know of numerous charities that have parties and award ceremonies for volunteers, which amount to nice evening or day out, and I see a concert as no different really.
At the end of the day the real issue is who volunteers, and if this scheme gets more young people into volunteering beyond the initial four hours - and there seems to be plenty of evidence to support this - then it has to be a good thing, surely?
Have you got something to say?
Sign up or Log in to contribute.