Article Text

Download PDFPDF
UK Armed Forces Continuous Attitude Survey: a short history and description of a key strategic information tool
  1. Nicola Elliott-Mabey1 and
  2. H Davison2
  1. 1 Headquarters Air Occupational Psychology Team, Headquarters Air Command, High Wycombe, UK
  2. 2 Army Personnel Research Capability, Army Headquarters, Andover, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Nicola Elliott-Mabey, Headquarters Air Occupational Psychology Team, Headquarters Air Command, High Wycombe, UK; Nicola.Elliott-Mabey419{at}mod.gov.uk

Abstract

The tri-Service Armed Forces Continuous Attitude Survey, commonly known as AFCAS, was introduced in 2007 to coherently assess and monitor the attitudes of Regular Service personnel in key policy and management areas and is used by groups internal and external to the Ministry of Defence. It is a statistically valid and robust survey which is annually distributed to almost 28 000 regular serving personnel. AFCAS data have been used to inform the development and evaluation of a wide range of personnel policies, including remuneration, accommodation, flexible working, career management and training. AFCAS allows for the tracking of attitudes over time, as well as the analysis of differences between respondent cohorts. AFCAS is well regarded as it is a one-stop shop survey for strategic personnel issues. This article describes the purpose, content, conduct and use of the survey to inform Armed Forces personnel policy.

  • psychology
  • military
  • surveys
  • attitudes

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Contributors NE-M and HD contributed to the writing of the manuscript.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent Not required.

  • Ethics approval Ministry of Defence Research Ethics Committee.

  • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; externally peer reviewed.