New IAM standards

[trashbat]

The IAM is not a social group, and nor should it try and be one. It's a service provider.

It needs to incentivise AD, but before it can do that, it needs to be actually capable of addressing people outside its quite tightly targeted (if unintentionally so) demographic, and indeed outside of its internal clique. IME it is not.

Trying to form a piecemeal second guess of what under-25s might think about the IAM or indeed AD is doomed to fail.

[WhoseGeneration]

IAM should organise flat out track days for young drivers.
Then, on those days, include sessions with two way traffic, an imaginery centre line existing.
Thing is, as a society, we're hypocritical about how we want young ones to behave. Sign up to the military, male or female and we want them to fly fast jets, enter conflict zones to fight or be "peacekeepers". This being seen as good.
Similar behaviour in terms of danger, outside of societal sanctioned, bad.
Bring back National Service?
I can remember how I behaved when I was much younger.
Some here appear to have been born old.

[hir]

Ah, but the percentage of all licence holders that are actually interested in driving is, I would argue, pretty small. And they're the only ones that really count. I would further argue that a fair size percentage of that group would also likely be TG viewers. That, I suggest, makes is significantly more than 10% of the available target market for the IAM that have had their views on AD tainted.

I've not been commenting on the 10% of the IAM's target group. My comments are with regard to the 90% of the general public who, in my experience, do not know what the IAM is or does.

My comments were originally in response to StressedDaves' observation that... "Sadly the general public seem to link 'advanced driving' with the image of the IAM being all old farts in string back driving gloves and pedantic viewpoints on how a car's controls should be operated. A few trendier members would help."

I was commenting on the general public's perception of AD. You then introduced the argument that Top Gear reached a huge percentage of the general public. Which it doesn't.
Now you're suggesting that, in your words... a fair size percentage of that group [the pretty small percentage of all licence holders that are actually interested in driving] would also likely be Top Gear viewers.

I think we now agree, following a close examination of your argument, that the percentage of all driving licence holders [ie. the general public of StressedDave's posting], have neither heard of the IAM or had their views of the organisation coloured by comments that have been made on Top Gear.

[zadocbrown]

We aren't going to get the max power boys lying down with the shy doctor's daughters.

Just you try and stop them.

Come up and see my new blow-off valve....

[Silk]

So are you suggesting some sort of under 25's IAM scheme that would help young drivers to not only be safer drivers but to also reduce their insurance premiums?

That's been done and doesn't work. Even when you attract under 25s, they tend to be the offspring of teachers, doctors, lawyers, etc. They're usually the sort of kids who handed in their homework on time and passed all their exams. To have any chance of success, you need to be able to target all under 25s, regardless of background.

errrmmmmmm...... errrrr.... when you say..... oh never mind....

I don't get the GDE matrix either.

[zadocbrown]

Actually I think the wheel shuffling image is relevant but relates to driver training generally rather than just IAM. People remember their experience as novices and assume IAM is more of the same give or take a little speed ....

[trashbat]

"The vast majority of the driving public have no interest in driving outside of it being a means to get around"

How could you possibly know?

I don't actually think the statement is true, but I don't know how you're supposed to tell whether a group has any interest in your subject when not only do they not have any knowledge of it, or exposure to it, but you haven't managed to engage with them.

[Gareth]

The only people that IAM will *ever* be able to appeal to are those that have at least some interest in driving

I think you may not be including those who are nervous drivers and want to feel more confident, those who want to make sure they are safe drivers, those who have had a brush with the (motoring) law, and maybe some who have scared themselves or been scared by an unexpected situation. None of them are likely to be interested in driving for its own sake.

[Kimosabe]

IAM should organise flat out track days for young drivers.
Then, on those days, include sessions with two way traffic, an imaginery centre line existing.

Great idea! Go for the skills circuit type events and follow it up with an Under 25s SfL plan or vice versa and I think there'd be interest. Even the Caravan Club of GB have organised events for anyone who wants to pit their skills against others who want to reverse between cones etc etc.

I'm sure that there's a benevolent will behind what's going on in the IAM and that inspires hope, at least for me it does.

Imagine being 20, your money is all but spent come the second Monday in the month and your car is due an MoT. You wanted to upgrade to those really nice bulbs, your engine hasn't been serviced in a while and your wipers need changing....and you're (still) fairly broke.

It's Summer so the wipers can wait, even though you suffer when it rains and the bulbs might not see much use, even though you'd feel great driving about with them at night, so you decide to buy engine oil, a filter or two, washer fluid and brake pads. That's going to cost at least a hundred pounds, so what do you do? You buy an IAM 'pre-MoT fluids, tyres, bulbs and paperwork etc check', call it 'an accessories check'. It's a 'way in' for the IAM to link with young drivers. That also buys you a discount on some of the stuff you'll need to get the car through the MoT from eg.Halfords,Kwik Fit etc.

It also gets you a discount on an IAM SfL course, which culminates in a track day skills event and reduced insurance. It's dangling a carrot in front of drivers who, for the most part, might only see people with sticks, looking for reasons.

It's good to dream as something might come from it.

[Kimosabe]

The only people that IAM will *ever* be able to appeal to are those that have at least some interest in driving

I think you may not be including those who are nervous drivers and want to feel more confident, those who want to make sure they are safe drivers, those who have had a brush with the (motoring) law, and maybe some who have scared themselves or been scared by an unexpected situation. None of them are likely to be interested in driving for its own sake.

I know there are people who aren't particularly stimulated by driving but who would like to knock off a few unhealthy knobs and excrescences (been looking for a way to fit that word into a sentence for a while. Now my life is complete ) and I think the IAM are well placed to address those people....now that they won't be banging the PP drum (as much).

I don't think those folk would buy more driving lessons, because they feel that they can already drive, save for a few minor recurrent blips. The IAM already have 'experienced driver assessments' but who's ever heard of them? So there's a good start. Get that out on large roadside billboards and without the usual 'fears and threats' lingo that normally accompanies justifications for foisting something onto drivers and that could be a go-er.

[Carbon Based]

I can see (at least) two potential sides to the IAM:

A skill providing, membership offering, type organisation for those who are interested in driving or who have some motivation, even if temporary to seek training. The market for this is as suggested above, a pretty small proportion of those holding a driving licence.

Then you have the lobbying, active and influencing organisation that is capable of gaining awareness of road safety without being BRAKE.

[WhoseGeneration]

Then you have the lobbying, active and influencing organisation that is capable of gaining awareness of road safety without being BRAKE.

Therein lies the problem. Ain't no way the IAM can counteract BRAKE whilst lowest common denominator is the norm. Despite all the stuff about the DVSA test is harder than it's ever been.
Truth is, there should be mandatory retesting, with a fail meaning loss of licence.

[jont]

Then you have the lobbying, active and influencing organisation that is capable of gaining awareness of road safety without being BRAKE.

Therein lies the problem. Ain't no way the IAM can counteract BRAKE whilst lowest common denominator is the norm. Despite all the stuff about the DVSA test is harder than it's ever been.
Truth is, there should be mandatory retesting, with a fail meaning loss of licence.

Which in turn would mean having a useful number of trafpol to enforce. Given that law breaking in vehicles is already endemic (phone use, speeding, unroadworthy vehicles for starters), we've created a situation where it wouldn't actually be possible to stop unlicensed drivers using the roads.

[trashbat]

Then you're asking the wrong question and are not very good at marketing.

Take a cross section of the driving public. How many would be interested in taking up a free track day experience? How many would be interested in a demonstration drive from the police? In reducing their insurance? In some element besides pure utility when buying a car? In being less stressed and tired when commuting?

So all of those people might be interested in driving, just not in your particular proposition.

[Gareth]

less stressed and tired when commuting?

That might be enough to hook some people.