Leadership roles

[ianmartin]

Just is a general way, I have noticed that many of the roles advertised are for those with leadership experience, however, I have noticed that these roles seem to die out quickly and are re-advertised periodically. 

The stipulations for most of these are prior leadership roles, YET it is showing (to my eyes anyway) that this does not necc. lead to the best candidate. 

Just my $0.02 but I say let some more non-experienced people through the gates.

[Zoltan]

If you had a good app and there wasn't someone else more "qualified" for the role, I'm sure staff would consider it.

[ianmartin]

Yes, but it specifically calls for prior leadership experience, this WILL automatically stop a person with no leadership experience from applying.  It is my notice from real world experience that prior leadership experience makes for poor future leadership.

[Fomalhaut]

If you had a good app and there wasn't someone else more "qualified" for the role, I'm sure staff would consider it.

Players who have already proven themselves and received good notes as a PC leader are given the first look because of the level of responsibility required and the high turnover rate of these roles.  Given the proper attributes and good account notes, a player with no leadership experience can still get sponsored roles, but it is harder because of the 'unknown' factor.

[Cutthroat]

Just is a general way, I have noticed that many of the roles advertised are for those with leadership experience, however, I have noticed that these roles seem to die out quickly and are re-advertised periodically. 

The stipulations for most of these are prior leadership roles, YET it is showing (to my eyes anyway) that this does not necc. lead to the best candidate. 

Just my $0.02 but I say let some more non-experienced people through the gates.

I find that generally the only sponsored roles that are advertised as requiring prior leadership experience are templars. Sometimes not even then.

Just going through the last ten or so most recent sponsored role posts in Staff Announcements, that seems to still be the case. Other roles are where leadership experience is preferred but not required, or where good knowledge of how things work (e.g., Allanaki politics for an Oash noble) seems to be more important.

The most important qualifier of all generally seems to be consistent playtimes and a history of working with staff/sending reports. In other words, prove you're dependable. That's something you can build on anytime.

[Cowboy]

I promised myself I would not ask ianmartin which "real world" he lives in but feck it.  Which one is it?  There are no absolute predictors of the future but is often stated, past performance is the best available predictor for future preformance.  Arma leadership roles are more tilted towards management than leadership.  Balancing the constant demands of your own people, outside requests and demands, pay and equipments, training reguirements in some positions.  Add in recruitment, providing some "action",  keep up tradions....shit.  The thing that I've noticed, like ianmartin, in the last two years or so is that someone gets a sponsored leadership role, shows up once or twice and then you never see them again.  For what ever reason, this seems to be happening more than I can recall it happening in the past.  Anyone else noticed this?  I often wonder if they knew what they were getting into or what.  If your RL was so hectic, to preclude playing, why did you apply for the position in the first place?  Perhaps it is only a coincidence.  Arma leadership roles take time, in game, more time than most players have.  You're not a leader if you show up IC once a RL week for three or four hours, asking what's been going on.  Past performance in management and play time works for me as predicitors of success in the future with Arma leadership roles.       

[Zoltan]

Yeah, my RL busy-ness has pretty much stopped me from appin' at those leader roles. I love leading, whether sponsored or not, but I just don't have the time. And it takes a ton of time to do it right.

*sigh* Maybe when my new work schedule gets finalized I can get a routine going...

[Kalai]

I was going to say 'I'm never going to be a good leader with those qualifications' but then I realized how much I DM for my D&D group, or lead the party when I'm playing. And how when I'm working with a good group on a project sometimes I'll take the reins and make things work. I'm just not willing to make Arm my big project right now. Only a small one.

It's not too hard to build up prior experience. Go do some interesting things. Recruit and organize people, deal with them going crazy, doing stupid things, getting killed, vanishing from boredom, abandoning you for shadier pastures. Do something interesting enough to get killed. Get to understand the traditions of your tribe / city / race / clan. Talk with staff about what you're doing, regularly (generally weekly). There are plenty of non-sponsored ways to lead. Show what you can do.

It really won't hurt your ability to do it, I promise.

[Talia]

Just is a general way, I have noticed that many of the roles advertised are for those with leadership experience, however, I have noticed that these roles seem to die out quickly and are re-advertised periodically. 

The stipulations for most of these are prior leadership roles, YET it is showing (to my eyes anyway) that this does not necc. lead to the best candidate. 

Just my $0.02 but I say let some more non-experienced people through the gates.

Players have plenty of options for gaining leadership experience in game that don't require staff to hand over the keys to the templars' quarter. Any player who wants to can make a mundane PC and get recruited into the AoD, the Tuluki Legions, the Byn, Kurac, Kadius, or Salarr, and then work their way from unpaid, unappreciated grunt all the way up to Sergeant, First Hunter, etc. In fact, doing so goes a long way with staff, because it shows that you are willing to do the hard and often thankless work of leadership in the real trenches of Armageddon. And, it gives staff time to see that you will not abuse coded power, and that overall you know what you're doing.

If a player isn't willing to work from the ground up, then why should I be willing to take him/her on in a leadership role? Players are often given the advice to work from the ground up, and almost always ignore it and just keep applying for those templar roles. Everyone wants to play those templar roles, but not everyone is willing to work for it.

[Nyr]

New players aren't very likely to get chosen over the longer-term players who apply for role calls.  Why do I say this?  Because for every role call thats been done since I started playing, I've seen it happen.  The newer players just can't compete, sadly, and just aren't given the chance.  The ladder is being pulled up behind the veterans and that can and does drive newer players away.  So instead of risking these crucial roles, another system needs to be in place.

Over the past year, more than half of the roles I approved (or had a hand in getting approved) in clan-sponsored roles were first-timers.

To clarify:  they had never played such a role before. 
I don't mean "haven't played a Salarri yet but played a Kadian."  I mean "haven't played a GMH family member at all," or "never touched a noble role," or "I've always wanted to be a templar and I app a few times but I haven't ever gotten approved for one."  Sometimes, it's a combination of all of them:  "I have played long-term, dependable roles, but I have never been in a sponsored role before."

I staff different clans now, but all of the ones I staff now have an interesting factor that ties them together:

You can become a leader in any of them without being chosen as a sponsored role.  You just have to work hard.

The only roles that you can't (generally) obtain without a sponsored application are templar and nobility roles.  With time, you can become a GMH Agent or Merchant.  You can even get adopted into the family.  With time, you can become a Byn Sergeant, a tribal leader role of some sort, a Sergeant in the Legions or in the Arm of the Dragon.

Things that will most likely weigh against you when you are being considered for a sponsored role (whether that be an in-game promotion that you are seeking, or a role call):
--few character reports to no character reports
--low playtimes to no playtimes

Things that will absolutely keep you from getting a sponsored role:
--not applying for the role

The worst that can happen is that you get rejected.  If you ask for more details on why you were rejected, you can get pointers on improving a future app.  It's a win-win.

[Kalai]

Also, you know something interesting about leadership, whether sponsored or not?

Most people don't want to lead most of the time. They want to follow. Seriously, we had a poll on it and everything.

If you're willing to lead go make their day. Prove yourself, have the right attitude and they will follow! 

[Old Kank]

I have noticed that these roles seem to die out quickly and are re-advertised periodically. 

Leadership roles are hard.  Most of the time they are completely thankless and they're frequently isolated and removed from the traditional Arm experience that people play for.  If you enjoy Arm because you like pretending to chop people up with bone swords, there are only a couple of leadership roles open to you.  Other roles are often even more difficult because they require a thriving PC/story environment to really work in, and I don't think Arm has had that in some time.

I think most people go into roles knowing how hard it is, but it can still be a rude awakening.  New leader PCs rarely start in a vacuum; they enter a game where most resources (PCs wanting to join a clan) are already spoken for and the story, as it were, is dominated by one or two long-lived characters that have much more money and a stronger network than the new character.  If they tough it out for long enough they can usually stake their claim, but the going is slow and boring and weeds out a lot of people.

I've often wondered if it would help to recruit 1-2 underlings with leadership roles.  Bring a noble in with a moderately skilled captain of the guard, first hunter, or tressy-tressed aide or concubine so the environment isn't so completely sink-or-swim.  I think the new karma skill-bumps will likely help out in this regard, but recruiting for these roles could also be sort of a leadership launch-pad or sorts.  Just a thought.

[Talia]

I've often wondered if it would help to recruit 1-2 underlings with leadership roles.  Bring a noble in with a moderately skilled captain of the guard, first hunter, or tressy-tressed aide or concubine so the environment isn't so completely sink-or-swim.  I think the new karma skill-bumps will likely help out in this regard, but recruiting for these roles could also be sort of a leadership launch-pad or sorts.  Just a thought.

I've seen this done, and IMO it's not much of a help, if any. Staffside it's at least 2x the work of recruitment and setup. Playerside, the player being set up as the minion-leader (leader of minions, minion who is also a leader) now has the burden of doing all the recruitment of other PCs and clan ramp-up, and they may not be ready for it either. These minion-leaders seem to peter out as quickly as the regular sponsored leaders do. End result: More work, little to no benefit.

It's true that leader roles are extremely hard work and often thankless, however, just for myself...they are the most fun I've ever had Arming. And that wasn't because of special bling or fancy clothes or a fat stipend purse (most of the time I had none of those things), but just because I love making things happen in the game and I love working with other players toward the result of "fun."

But that's why I love staffing, too, which is also hard work and often thankless

[jstorrie]

These minion-leaders seem to peter out as quickly as the regular sponsored leaders do.

This is a huge bummer when it happens, to, because the beleaguered leader thought he was finally getting some help... but then the applicant just disappears after a week, and you're back to carrying the whole show.

Don't apply for leadership roles if you have no time to play them! Leave them open for those who do.

[Armaddict]

These minion-leaders seem to peter out as quickly as the regular sponsored leaders do.

This is a huge bummer when it happens, to, because the beleaguered leader thought he was finally getting some help... but then the applicant just disappears after a week, and you're back to carrying the whole show.

Don't apply for leadership roles if you have no time to play them! Leave them open for those who do.

Considering the same thing often happens to the leader itself, I don't think the leader-minion should be all but shut down because of.  The right-hand-man is actually my -favorite- special application, not the leader itself.  It may not solve all problems, but when it works out...it's such a boon to clan presence it's ridiculous.

More Silver Scorpion special Apps.  More grizzled Byn apps.  More Oashi Elite Apps.  More AoD Sergeant Transfers.  More more more special apps for those existing positions that take literally at least an IC decade to reach...telling people to start at the base and work towards those positions?  They'll get experience, -if- they make it that far, which you usually...very usually...don't.

[Old Kank]

I've seen this done, and IMO it's not much of a help, if any.

Judging from the special app calls I've seen in the last few months, leadership attrition seems like a big problem these days.

What about letting the players do some of the recruiting?  It used to happen all the time.  Some of it was entirely illicit, some of it was mostly above-board GDB/OOC presence, and it gives some players a unique advantage, but it was usually pretty successful.  You get two or three players that work well together and have similar goals, and they get stuff done.

I know OOC recruitment is its own beast and causes its fair share of problems, but couldn't it be moderated like family recruitment is now?

[Talia]

More Silver Scorpion special Apps.  More grizzled Byn apps.  More Oashi Elite Apps.  More AoD Sergeant Transfers.  More more more special apps for those existing positions that take literally at least an IC decade to reach...telling people to start at the base and work towards those positions?  They'll get experience, -if- they make it that far, which you usually...very usually...don't.

We need more opportunities for people to apply into Byn leader roles Considering that a few years ago the thought of Byn sponsored leaders was anathema, and now that is done at least a few times per year, I don't think we do. Experience shows that, for the most part, players who make their way up from Runner to Trooper to Sergeant do better in that role than those who apply in, for reasons that have zero to do with coded skills.

Same thing with any other minion-leader role. If a player can't hack working their way up through the ranks to obtain the officership, they're not likely to do to do as good a job nor to stick with it.

From my viewpoint, having both done it myself and seen it done often, all it takes to work your way up from the bottom is patience, perseverance, hard work, and not dying. None of these are that difficult.

The essential problem is that most players aren't willing to work that hard. They want to have the role handed to them and get to be boss out of the box.

What about letting the players do some of the recruiting?  It used to happen all the time.  Some of it was entirely illicit, some of it was mostly above-board GDB/OOC presence, and it gives some players a unique advantage, but it was usually pretty successful.  You get two or three players that work well together and have similar goals, and they get stuff done.

I know OOC recruitment is its own beast and causes its fair share of problems, but couldn't it be moderated like family recruitment is now?

I have a ten-foot pole and I'm not touching that.

[Nyr]

Leadership attrition:  When a PC in a sponsored position becomes inactive, stores, or dies, we need to replace them.  What exactly do you mean by OOC player recruitment for leader positions?

[ianmartin]

I just want to say for the record, the majority of reasons why I post stuff is so that other players, sometimes newer ones have questions but are either afraid or don't realize that they need that info until later.  Lots of reasons.

I am not doing it to lash out for not being accepted in a role.  Hell (drov) I've been turned down a lot of times but it doesn't bother me and I don't stop applying. 

[Old Kank]

Leadership attrition:  When a PC in a sponsored position becomes inactive, stores, or dies, we need to replace them.  What exactly do you mean by OOC player recruitment for leader positions?

I mean allowing the player playing, or soon-to-be playing whatever leadership role to recruit OOC for a right-hand man type role (in the hopes of making leadership roles more viable), similar to what's done with IC families now.

I know it could cause problems, but it seems like the family-PC stipulations have worked for that scenario, so why wouldn't it work for leadership roles as well?

[Talia]

I don't know what Nyr's take on it is, but mine is that the family role application requirement was put in place to prevent abuses of power. The family role policy wasn't created to make it easier or better for players to play those roles, it was created to limit collection/concentration of power through OOC means.

Creating a policy that would allow players to OOCly recruit for an additional sponsored role (right hand dude/ette) is essentially creating a policy that OKs an overconcentration of power and probable abuse of said power by OOC means. Which is the total opposite of the reason why the family role policy was created.

[Armaddict]

Sorry, I didn't mean more Byn roles in particular.  That was a bad example.  I essentially meant more of the minion-leader type genre.

I'm not going to argue for it or against the staff policy or stance on it, or anything.  I just wanted to say...I don't think it's a problem causer any more than leadership roles themselves.  And -I- like them.   

[Talia]

I'm not going to argue for it or against the staff policy or stance on it, or anything.  I just wanted to say...I don't think it's a problem causer any more than leadership roles themselves.  And -I- like them.   

I don't think it's a problem-causer. I just think, from a staff perspective, it's extra work with little to no benefit. When I consider how I need to spend my staffing time, it just doesn't equate to spend it on things that are more work and little benefit.

That being said, if YOU (player) have a role that YOU want to play in a clan, and you have time for it and whatever else to offer...then...there's no harm in writing to the clan staff (via the request tool) to say, "Hey I have this concept, would you guys be willing to sponsor me in?" Worst that can happen is the clan staff says no, right?

[Nyr]

Leadership attrition:  When a PC in a sponsored position becomes inactive, stores, or dies, we need to replace them.  What exactly do you mean by OOC player recruitment for leader positions?

I mean allowing the player playing, or soon-to-be playing whatever leadership role to recruit OOC for a right-hand man type role (in the hopes of making leadership roles more viable), similar to what's done with IC families now.

I know it could cause problems, but it seems like the family-PC stipulations have worked for that scenario, so why wouldn't it work for leadership roles as well?

Everywhere else in the game, we try to discourage IC relationships (employer, lover, friend, etc) based on OOC relationships (employer, lover, spouse, friend, etc).  This seems like it would fly in the face of that and also provide more work for staff (now 2X the startup work for what was once one role).  I don't see how it would stop, slow down, or affect leadership attrition in any meaningful way.

--If a leader PC dies, having a sponsored right-hand man means nothing.  It means they may get a promotion (if applicable).  If not applicable, it means we put in another role call.  The right-hand man may stop playing or store without their OOC buddy.   We could have had all of this happen without the extra work.
--If a leader PC stops playing or stores, having a sponsored right-hand man means nothing.  It means they may get a promotion (if applicable).  If not applicable, it means we put in another role call.  See above about the right-hand man ceasing to play or storing.

It seems like work with few possible payoffs for the staff side of things and for the playerbase, whereas family roles are just family roles.

[X-D]

I am happy to see on here that staff actually does prefer, when possible, for many leader positions be worked into rather then sponsered.

I also think whenever possible they should be as well.

I do believe in the somewhat distant past in the game that might have not been the case. I've seen many sponsered role calls in clans with many Promotable PCs already in them. Of course this often results in a frag.

And I had assumed, due to the high number of calls for such roles in the last two years it was still the case.

I am glad it is not and must be other reasons for the role calls.

And as Nyr and Talia have already stated, To all of you who do want to try that templar or noble...Your best bet is to get one of the other leader roles under your belt first...and there are many. Hell, Even starting your own hunting/salting/mercenary/trading etc group and running it well and keeping staff informed counts...Hell, it might even count more.