How to recruit associates to the IAM/ROSPA

[daz6215]

This is why I think the whole driving test system is wrong. Everyones lessons should incorporate all of the above, otherwise they should not be put in for their test. In feb of this year we had snow, I phoned my instructor and asked for lesson in it, which I had. If I had not had that lesson there is no way I would of been able to handle the situation to the best of my ability. The lesson gave me the confidence to be able to drive in that situation. But again it was personal choice for me to pay for a lesson after i had passed my test.

So lets say they have covered all of the above but driver A has driven in fog to about 500m visibility and driver B has driven in fog to about 50m visibility , they have both driven in fog but to two totally different extremes, when I as an instructor sign them off to say they have driven in these conditions whats the benchmark we use to make it fair? there are so many different variables with things like the weather and nothing can be forecast or guaranteed!

[x-Sonia-x]

Very true!! there is no way it is humanly possible to cover all scenarios and even if you did it would not stop you reacting in different ways, given different situations! I personally think the driving test should cover at least 3-4 hour sessions with assessments on each. And at each time having the same examiner. The cost would be higher but for me it cost me £1000 for tests alone over 6 months.

[crr003]

Why cant you learn how to use motorways on a dual carriageway as a learner, they have the same top speeds as motorways and are much more dangerous (intersectons, T junctions and pedestrians for example) , surley if you can handle a dual carriageway with all the extra hazards thrown in that a motorway does'nt have, the transistion onto motorway driving should be no real problem when you pass your test?

That makes sense on paper, but I'm sure there is a real psychological issue with some drivers and motorways.
I've had a couple of Associates (women, one young, one not so) who had never been on a motorway (and it's easy to access on the Wirral) because they were "scared".
It's faster (forget the speed limit). It will also appear faster as you have lorries driving at a speed the new driver would not even be comfortable with (56). I've driven with ADIs who teach 50 in a 60 on SC NSL and DC work is not much. Probably because the test routes don't call for it?
There're many more big lorries (who "just pull out")
There are normally three or more lanes - people "move all over the road" (which is why I think poor drivers sit in lane 2, because they've been told by some relative it's "safer" - no lane changes to make)

The more I think about it the more new drivers should have mandatory motorway training, or not be allowed to use them.

[x-Sonia-x]

but I'm sure there is a real psychological issue with some drivers and motorways.

The more I think about it the more new drivers should have mandatory motorway training, or not be allowed to use them.

I agree 100%!! The only way to overcome psychological issues is to be faced with the problem. If new drivers are not given any guidance on a motorway then the fears will remain. Maybe motorways would be too much to incorporate in the normal driving test, then maybe after say 6-12 months refresher lessons should be given and your licence should then show you have done the additional training required to use motorways.

[jont]

The problem with additional complexity on the licensing is the enforcement aspect. Police already can't cope with the numbers of uninsured/unlicensed drivers. Adding more complexity is unlikely to help, especially with the increasing reliance on automated enforcement (eg ANPR checks can only flag car details, not specific driver).

[Custom24]

I just bought the Haynes manual for my Civic this evening, and there, right on the first page, is a short article about advanced driving and a plug for the IAM.

Well done, IAM (no sarcasm).

Yes, yes, maybe Honda Civic, IAM and pipe and slippers all go together.

[zadocbrown]

The basic problem is that driving is now so full of 'must do', and 'must not do', and 'if you do x then y will be done to you'. The more worried we get about people's driving the more we try to control them; the more we control them the more disinterested they become; and the less interested they are the worse their driving gets! So it's a self defeating viscious spiral.

There is quite a bit of research on intrinsic/extrinsic motivation which I think sheds some light on this. Essentially the more you try to control what people do and how, the worse they perform.

It's a pity the IAM HQ seems to be in bed with this. A few days ago someone was on the radio doing the old 'if you hit someone at 35 mph' spiel. It's inane and any fool can see that. Even if you assume that preventing speeding should be a priority this kind of preaching is self-defeating. The fact is that most speeding (and indeed most other 'misbehaviour') is unintentional and the result of disengagment with the task in hand, and we make this worse when we adopt a coercive approach. This doesn't only apply to speeding, of course.

It's my belief that the 'enjoyment factor' is the key to both recruiting associates and getting the best out of them. By that I don't mean just 'having a laugh', I mean the feeling of being positively engaged with the task, as opposed to being forced to engage with it, which is detrimental in the long term.

When dealing with associates or the public we should deliberately put safety (and legality) second. Yes I really did say that. Why? Because we have more long term impact on safety by not ramming it down peoples' throats. Our aim should be long term encouragement not short term compliance.

[martine]

The fact is that most speeding (and indeed most other 'misbehaviour') is unintentional and the result of disengagment with the task in hand...

Yes 'most' but there is a significant minority of drivers intentionally drive at speed in the most inappropriate places. Killing a child would make them think again I'm sure but it's trying to get that message across of unintended consequences.

It's my belief that the 'enjoyment factor' is the key to both recruiting associates and getting the best out of them.

100% agree for the 'younger driver' - as has been said by many here, it's showing that driving to a higher level can be challenging and fun and satisfying. For many middle-aged and older drivers a different approach emphasising safety, control, refreshing training is probably more effective (IMO).

When dealing with associates or the public we should deliberately put safety (and legality) second. Yes I really did say that. Why? Because we have more long term impact on safety by not ramming it down peoples' throats. Our aim should be long term encouragement not short term compliance.

Yes, yes, yes! (sounds like 'the scene' from 'When Harry met Sally') .

Zadoc - can I enlist you onto my commitee...in fact do you fancy a job at IAM HQ?

[zadocbrown]

The fact is that most speeding (and indeed most other 'misbehaviour') is unintentional and the result of disengagment with the task in hand...

Yes 'most' but there is a significant minority of drivers intentionally drive at speed in the most inappropriate places. Killing a child would make them think again I'm sure but it's trying to get that message across of unintended consequences.

But the really bad drivers are even less likely to respond to the tactics which we agree are not very effective even on responsible drivers. If you want to influence these people it's even more essential to engage actively with them. We also have to accept that a small minority simply should not be allowed to drive, ever.

Zadoc - can I enlist you onto my commitee...in fact do you fancy a job at IAM HQ?

Yes - if I ever move to Bristol. And No, absolutely not!

[fungus]

zadocbrown wrote,

"When dealing with associates or the public we should deliberately put safety (and legality) second. Yes I really did say that. Why? Because we have more long term impact on safety by not ramming it down peoples' throats. Our aim should be long term encouragement not short term compliance".

Oh dear zadoc, you realy must not make statements like that. You know it will upset the experts from BRAKE
Seriously though, I think you are correct. The more you tell people, you must do this & you must not do that, the more people will dissengage from the task, and in some cases it make them downright rebelious.

Nigel ADI
IAM trainee observer

[TripleS]

zadocbrown wrote,

"When dealing with associates or the public we should deliberately put safety (and legality) second. Yes I really did say that. Why? Because we have more long term impact on safety by not ramming it down peoples' throats. Our aim should be long term encouragement not short term compliance".

Oh dear zadoc, you realy must not make statements like that. You know it will upset the experts from BRAKE
Seriously though, I think you are correct. The more you tell people, you must do this & you must not do that, the more people will dissengage from the task, and in some cases it make them downright rebelious.

Nigel ADI
IAM trainee observer

Yep, see what happened to me!

....although fortunately I have not become totally disengaged from the task.

I agree very much with what zadoc said.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[Octy_Ross]

I guess if it's young'uns you're after, and are doing a show somewhere, get the people with the most interesting cars to come along and let people look at them....then get them to say something along the lines of -

it's amazing how much more fun I have in my super fast and super sexy car now that I'm an "IAM" / "Rospa" driver

Then throw in the super insurance deal and the decreased accident chances, along with the higher average speed and lower fuel efficiency - you may interest a few.

But having 'Derek' in his 1.? Ford Mundano from last decade isn't going to get anyone excited (unless they happen to like Mundano's )



Ross.

[waremark]

I guess if it's young'uns you're after, and are doing a show somewhere, get the people with the most interesting cars to come along and let people look at them

Did you happen to see photos of Stefaneinz at the Under 17 Car Club Fun day? i am sure he will have inspired a few, but sadly the ones there will have been ones who did not need inspiring in the first place.

[nuster100]

I guess if it's young'uns you're after, and are doing a show somewhere, get the people with the most interesting cars to come along and let people look at them....then get them to say something along the lines of -

it's amazing how much more fun I have in my super fast and super sexy car now that I'm an "IAM" / "Rospa" driver

Then throw in the super insurance deal and the decreased accident chances, along with the higher average speed and lower fuel efficiency - you may interest a few.

But having 'Derek' in his 1.? Ford Mundano from last decade isn't going to get anyone excited (unless they happen to like Mundano's )



Ross.

When I do a demo drive for youngsters, it tends to be on B roads at a quick pace, normally with full commentry.

I find it tends to install a kind of "I still have a lot to learn" in them.

As ross says, it helps if its not in a boring car.

Jay

[MrToad]

I agree that 'interesting' cars would attract more attention at events, but I think they could be counter-productive on a demo.

Could an inexperienced person tell how much is the driver's skill, and how much is down to the car? It'd be all too easy for them to say 'ah yes, but if my car was that good I could drive like that too'.

Producing a sparkling drive from unexceptional machinery might make the point more clearly.