Two wars and two long occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan have intensified the pace and danger of Army operations. Combined with an improving U.S. job market, this resulted in the Army missing its active duty and Reserve and National Guard recruiting targets for February 2005. The Guard and Reserve now risk missing their recruiting missions for the year. H Maj. Gen. Michael D. Rochelle has led the Army’s recruiting effort for both active and reserve forces as commanding general, U.S. Army Recruiting Command, Fort Knox, Ky., since the fall of 2001, soon after the war on terrorism began.
 
He is responsible for Army active duty and Reserve recruiting. Indeed, the job of attracting recruits in sufficient numbers and quality is getting tougher, acknowledges Rochelle. Yet, he remains confident the Army can continue to attract a superior, all-volunteer force.

Rochelle, 55, is a graduate of the Army Command and General Staff College, the Army War College, and holds a master’s degree in public administration from Shippensburg University, Pa. Senior officer assignments have included command of the U.S. Army Garrison and installation at Fort Monroe, Va.; military assistant to Deputy Secretary of Defense John J. Hamre during President Clinton’s administration; and commanding general, U.S. Army Soldier Support Institute, Fort Jackson, S.C.

Rochelle entered the Army in 1972, accepting a regular Army officer commission after graduation from Norfolk State University in Virginia. As a junior officer he served with the 321st Field Artillery; the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) at Fort Campbell, Ky.; and commanded the 226th Adjutant General Company (Postal) in Munich, Germany. As a major, he ran the Military Entrance Processing Station, Portland, Maine, his first experience with recruiting, and later commanded the Brunswick, Maine-based recruiting battalion. In the following interview with contributing editor Tom Philpott, Rochelle talks about the changing face of today’s Army, the unique challenges of recruitment in a time of war, and why current recruits are a “generation of new heroes.” This interview has been edited for space and clarity.

America is engaged in its first protracted war with an all-volunteer Army. How confident are you that if the war lasts years longer, at this level of effort, the Army still can fill its ranks with volunteers only?

I’m very confident. Is it going to be easy? No. Recruiting never is, even in the best of times. But if we [properly] scale the incentives, the terms of service, and the opportunities we offer people, we can do this.

Frankly, it’s in the best interests of the Army and America that we succeed. You can’t compare the quality you get from a volunteer versus a draftee. Now, I don’t want to insult anyone from a previous generation. I came into the Army during the draft, so I would insult myself if I were to do so. But if you look at the quality, at the talent, we are able to attract with an all-volunteer force, it’s superior. We can continue to do it.

How is Army recruiting today?

We are having a particularly challenging period right now, which could last through May. But I remain confident that it’s going to get better as we go into the summer months. I expect we will make a very strong recovery in the regular Army [recruiting] mission and finish the year successful.

What’s behind the trouble?

First, the strength of the economy. We have an unemployment rate right now of 5.2 percent, and it’s projected to go lower. At 5 percent, most economists will tell you, you’re at full employment. That works in the minds of our youth and creates a wait-and-see attitude [toward enlistment].

The second troubling sign is the overall propensity of youth to join the military as measured by the Department of Defense Youth Poll. Since October 2001, propensity to join the military among youth ages 17 to 21 is down 20 percent. Our computer models indicate that over a 10-month period that drop represents from 10,000 to 11,000 fewer enlistments.

What’s behind it?

Obviously, the war is, to some extent, and an improving economy.

One measure of recruit quality is military entrance exam scores. How is the Army doing there?

Our goal is that no less than 67 percent of recruits score in mental aptitude categories I through IIIA [average and above]. We are at 71 percent. That’s down a little over my tenure as commanding general, but still very respectable. Last year, we were able to get it almost to 80 percent. But we were below 70 percentin February.

Another measure of quality is number of recruits scoring in mental Category IV, the lowest we can accept. By law, we can’t accept more than 2 percent Category IVs. We are at 1.9 percent. I can assure you, even if it means missing a few months’ numbers, we won’t sacrifice quality.

We’re fielding a quality Army! Just look at what these young people are doing all over the globe. I’m very encouraged [by] the quality we’re getting right now under some very trying circumstances.

What do the numbers for the delayed enlistment pool look like?

We entered [FY] 2005 with 20 percent of the recruits needed for the coming year in our delayed enlistment pool. The objective is 35 percent. I predict we will enter [FY] 2006 [next October] a little below
20 percent. So it’s not just the 2005 mission we’re concerned with. It’s also how we enter 2006 as we attempt to grow the Army by 30,000 soldiers over the next three years.

What are you doing to prepare for the trouble ahead?

We have the ability to be very proactive. We can see these things coming and respond so we don’t put the nation, in effect, at risk. We’re increasing the number of regular Army recruiters by 1,000 [for a total of] 7,000. The number of Army Reserve recruiters also is increasing by 700.

Also important is the quality of our advertising to reach both prospective recruits and influencers such as parents, aunts, uncles, school teachers, clergy, and others who influence young people with respect
to military service. They are the ones we are most challenged right now
to communicate with.

How do you know that?

[DoD] surveys influencers as well  as prospective applicants. Recent results tell us that influencers are 30 [percent] to 35 percent less inclined to recommend service today [than before the war].

With the Army growing, must you sign up even more recruits today than usual just to keep the ranks full?

Our mission in [FY] 2002, when I took the command, was 79,500. In 2003 it dropped to 66,000 because we were not growing the Army. In [FY] 2004, it was 77,500. Now it’s 80,000, back up to 2002 levels. The Army will grow both through higher retention and more non-prior service enlistments. But, in [FY] 2006, I expect our mission to be a little higher than 80,000.

Are you having to relax standards? For example, are you allowing more waivers for behavioral concerns, such as past marijuana use?

No. In fact, before our recruiting mission began to grow, we raised the bar for granting all types of waivers and have not lowered it.

How would you describe the reserve recruiting environment?

It’s more challenging, without a doubt. The nation is demanding a lot more of its reserve soldiers. Recruiting is difficult but hasn’t become impossible. Again, it’s a matter of scaling incentives, options and lengths of service, and duration of deployments. Reserve recruiting became more challenging midway through last year. The mission for [FY] 2005 is 22,175, up slightly from 21,000. Incentives have been increased. We’ve doubled, to $4,000, the bonus offer for going into training in our toughest months of February through May so we can optimize efficiency and readiness.

Has the war changed the type of soldier the Army attracts?

It’s a different mix, though many of those enlisting today would have come our way at some point. Prior to Sept. 11, the motivation to join was very much “What’s in it for me? What are you going to do for me?” That was money for college, travel, and an opportunity to pick up a skill. Today, those are secondary motivations for prospective recruits. The primary motivation is to make a difference.

I don’t think we can underestimate this generation of new heroes. I see them before they become soldiers, as they prepare to become soldiers, and later during initial military training. They really are a unique breed. Some demographers call them the millennials and say they are the strongest generation since World War II.
 
I read the book Millennials Rising before I came back to the recruiting command and I see [what the authors were talking about] every day. These recruits are service-oriented. They are joiners. They are volunteers. They have a sense of duty that is a throwback to the generation that fought in the 1940s.

Now, earlier motivations still apply for recruit influencers. That’s the conundrum we face: The young enlistee is motivated by something quite different than those who influence him or her.

Given the impact of influencers and the fact that young service women are dying in Iraq, are fewer women joining the Army today?

We’re down from 20 percent females among regular and reserve recruits to about 18 percent. The average age for a woman enlistee, however, is higher than it has been. It’s approaching 24 years old. That’s associated with the opportunities women see if they gain some military experience. Post-military is attractive to them. Plus, they are millennials too.

Have you seen other demographic changes with the war?

African American recruiting has dropped precipitously. Frankly, the drop goes back to 2000, but after Sept. 11, it dropped again. African Americans are 14 percent of the population and, if you go back before 2000, they accounted for between 20 [percent] and 22 percent of all enlistments. It’s down
to about 13.5 percent, a sharp drop.

What explains that?

To a large degree it is the influencers, mothers in particular. For a couple of ethnicities—Hispanics and African Americans—the mother is an especially significant and prominent influence in the household.

Have you found that Hispanicrecruiting also dropped?

The decline is almost negligible.

What other tools would you like to have to improve recruiting?

We are constantly revising and adapting our incentive packages. General [Pete] Schoomaker, [Army chief of staff], has encouraged us to be very creative and think outside the box. We are doing that. The commanding general of the U.S. Army Accessions Command is leading the effort to identify a competitive advantage for Army recruiting, regular and reserve. You might recall the tremendous market expansion that the Army College Fund gave us in the 1980s. We are looking for something of that quality to expand our market competitiveness.

Are your recruiters working harder, longer hours?

Recruiting is always challenging. The young people today have been marketed to since they were 2 years old. Everyone wants to sell them something. Getting our message to them [requires] breaking through that clutter. The ability to tell the Army story is a powerful thing, but that generally means access.

Has the Army kept its “Power of One” advertising theme?

Yes. It’s designed specifically with the millennial generation in mind. They are joiners and think outside of themselves. But they also want their individuality respected. They don’t want to be lost in the masses.

I suppose you’ve heard from critics among those influencers that the message can sound self-absorbed, and sort of, “What’s in it for me.”

There was a backlash early on. That’s pretty well dissipated. The problem was we didn’t prepare our alumni for what was coming. It was a radical departure and caught them off guard. The real message of the theme is that no chain is stronger than its weakest link. It’s as simple as that and as complex as our warrior ethos—to always place the mission first, never accept defeat, and never leave a fallen comrade behind.

Has your advertising budget grown?

It’s actually down about $15 million, to $225 million a year. My suspicion is we will have to look at the size of that budget.

Will you go after more recruits with some college experience?

One out of every four enlistees today comes to us with some college [education]. I would like to see that number go upwards of 30 percent. It’s a good business proposition for the Army when you think about what our young people are challenged with today. For the global war on terrorism they need that level of education, training ability, and cognitive ability.

Even before the war, a big concern for the Army was first-term attrition, with one of every three soldiers failing to complete his or her initial service obligation. Has that changed since the war?

I think it’s a little less. About a third of the 33 percent attrition figure was seen in the Delayed Enlistment Program, so they never entered active duty. Training base attrition is running about 16 percent right now. And that 33 percent figure also includes first-assignment attrition.

What job specialties are particularly difficult to fill?

Military police ... simply because of requirements for a clean background. Field artillery also is challenging.

Special Forces?

Two years ago we began recruiting Special Forces out of the general population. That had not been done since the 1980s when I was a young recruiting battalion commander. It’s been extraordinarily successful.

Traditionally, persons joining Special Forces have been with us for three to five years. We recruit from junior enlisted and junior officer populations. But we have found that the Special Forces opportunity is most attractive to professional men including school teachers, high school football coaches, and lawyers. In the 1980s, recruiting civilians directly into Special Forces had not been successful in training outcome. It is very demanding physiologically and intellectually.

Well, having been around when we did it wrong, I said “I know how to do this. We’re going to communicate this opportunity to the professional ranks.’’ This year we will enlist into our special operation forces over 1,600 people out of the general population. And their success rate in training will equal or exceed that of our in-service population. We’re doing this right.

Bottom line, however, you’re in a tough recruiting environment.

We really are. That’s the primary message.