Stosh

So 18 year old crew members have to have YPT to stay on the crew roster?

Welcome to the forum! The IH or COR are the only ones that can remove a leader from their position. Talk with them and them only. Express your concerns and leave it at that. If your CO doesn't care about the quality of the program, you and your son might want to check out a Pack that does. Other than that, there's nothing more one can do except participate in a back-biting campaign against this guy. I personally would avoid that. If someone came to me and wanted me to be involved and they weren't heading toward the COR's house, I'd check my calendar to make sure I'm busy at that time. Otherwise let them know you have already expressed your comments to the COR and let it go.

Ask if he has ever taught the skill to others and how did that work out. Ask if he ever uses that skill places other than scouting. Ask when the last time he had to use that skill. Ask if that skill was interesting enough to learn more about it in the future. Ask how he helps other people at all times. Ask how he was helpful to someone today. Ask what it means to be brave when someone's being bullied. Ask questions that relate to the skill and how it's used and whether he is using the skill he was taught. If the boy says the skill is stupid, useless, and he'd never use it in his entire life, ask him if he knows what the Scout Motto is.

01:04

Hopefully you had older scouts to help. I'm looking at 2 maybe 3 NSP's and 2 boys less than 13 as "older" boys.

The number one reason people quit their jobs is because of their managers.

When it comes to patrol operations: 1) They can pick and change their names at any time. 2) They can pick and change their leadership at any time. 3) They can pick and change their patrol membership at any time. 4) If they have 6 boys they can start a patrol of their own. 5) New scouts can have their own patrol or join an existing one, THEIR choice 6) No adult can interfere in any of the structure and operation of the patrol.

I've also found that making a decision to be the most difficult part of leadership for the boys. That is because decision making is not part of leadership, it is part of management. If there is a task that needs to be done, the manager decides what has to be done to accomplish it. A leader doesn't decide, but takes his cue as to what needs to be done from those that follow him. If THEY are hungry he feeds them. If they need warm clothing, he gets it for them. He decides nothing but only reacts what the people need. Now problem solving is a close relative to decision making but is not the same thing. The people need something from the leader and it might take some problem solving to figure it out and provide what's needed. Once people figure out what goes into the leadership bucket and what goes into the management bucket, life gets a lot easier to figure out and teach. For example, when the boys are deciding on outings, Right there is an example of management. We have the TASK of coming up with an outing activity. If the boys were in NEED of such an activity the decision would be a lot easier and they would come by it a lot quicker. there is a tendency to come up with ideas, talk about them and then move on to something else without actually making a decision. But they have decided that none of those ideas met any of their real needs! That's a decision that most won't recognize NOT TO DECIDE IS TO DECIDE! There is a balance between listening to people and trusting your own instincts (or you own wants) but ultimately a decision has to be made. Even putting something to a vote is making a decision. If the process boils down to a vote, then ALL the people will not be taken care of and only those who vote for the issue will follow the person leading. If people's needs are not being met they will seek leadership elsewhere. Voting is a management decision whereby the most people are taken care of and the rest either accept it or go somewhere else. I also think that the exercise you did gives the boys a sense of how difficult it is to actually lead. I find that people who are used to servant leadership make the best followers. This may sound a bit convoluted, but the servant leader finds no difficulty in making decisions because the management task needed to meet the needs of his followers is given to him by the followers. All he need to is manage their directives. As long as he is providing what they say they need, they will follow! I would disagree. A group without a leader is less likely to engage in teamwork. And that assessment is bogus. ALL groups have a leader, and in many cases the designated leader is counter productive to teamwork, especially the designated leader who feels he/she has the authority to mandate the management of the group and it's tasks. A football team where the quarterback (or coach) doesn't call a play is not going to succeed. Unless the other team fumbles the ball and the defensive lineman picks it up and runs it into the end zone and wins the game. Again this is a bogus assumption. Every player on the team at one point or the other has the skills and opportunities to pick up a fumble and make the group successful. To rely on a single leader is saying that the football team is there to make sure the quarterback wins the game. That is not, nor ever will be, my definition of football teamwork. The Grubmaster and Quartermaster are positions of responsibility, not leadership. Again that is a blanket statement of a partial truth. The Grubmaster that takes care of his boys in the group IS the leader! The Quartermaster who provides the right equipment at the right time for the group IS the leader! Yes they have management tasks to perform but where do they get their marching orders from? Yep, the group. The Grubmaster makes meals he knows his boys want or they won't eat them. The Quartermaster provides equipment the boys need or they won't use them. Either way, if the Grubmaster or Quartermaster aren't serving the group they are not a leader and they have no benefit to the rest of the group. One does not need to be the leader all the time, good leaders know when to step back and let another in the group lead as necessary. This give and take of leadership in the group is what I call TEAMWORK. If little Johnny picks up the fumble and heads for the end zone, the others don't wait for the quarterback to come on the field to take the ball into the end zone. Nope. Everyone on the defense does whatever they can to make it possible for little Johnny to make it to the end zone. This arbitrary designation of leaders is a waste of time. Everyone on the team needs to be taught to lead because the time will come when someone will be expected to pick up the ball and run at some time or another. If little Johnny doesn't know what to do with the ball fumbled on the ground, the team will lose. There is a difference. A Quartermaster can do everything themselves (exercising their responsibility but no leadership) or can work with other scouts to accomplish what needs to be done (exercising both responsibility and leadership). Yep, Quartermaster can be a job or it can be leadership of taking care of others If my job is defined by a series of check boxes, take inventory, clean trailer, make sure things are clean, etc. he will be effective in his management of prescribed duties. But if he leads he will have to know what his people need and get it to them when they need it. A PL can facilitate his patrol in deciding on the menu, Or the Grubmaster can take the lead and work with the boys directly and more efficiently. remind the Grubmaster to talk to the QM to make sure he has the right gear (e.g. Dutch Ovens for the pasta), Which would be a clear indication that the PL is letting the Grubmaster know he isn't capable of doing his job and has to be reminded over and over again what he needs to do to MANAGE his job. That will surely support and encourage any boy to endeavor to ever take on that job. work with the Grubmaster to assign cooking duties Is there such a thing as helicopter PL? and work with the TG to make sure that boys who need to demonstrate cooking skills get the opportunity. super helicopter PL doing the job of everyone on the team. Sounds like a severe trust issue going on with the PL running around reminding everyone how little he trusts their ability to do the job they were supposed to be doing. That is leadership on the PL's part by making sure the GM, QM and TG all suceed in their positions of responsibility. And this exactly how to insure they won't! Why should I do the work if the PL is going to cover all the bases himself. Ultimately, the answer to my question seems to be that I's starting with a blank page of paper and developing this myself. You have the right idea, but a look deeper into the dynamics of what's happening here would be helpful. I would disagree. A group without a leader is less more likely to engage in teamwork. A football team where the quarterback (or coach) doesn't call a play is not going to succeed. The Grubmaster and Quartermaster are positions of responsibility, not leadership. There is a difference. A Quartermaster can do everything themselves (exercising their responsibility but no leadership) or can work with other scouts to accomplish what needs to be done (exercising both responsibility and leadership). A PL can facilitate trust his patrol in letting the Grubmaster lead when deciding on the menu, he can trust his Grubmaster so he won't need to remind the Grubmaster to talk to the QM to make sure he has the right gear (e.g. Dutch Ovens for the pasta), He can trust work with the Grubmaster to assign cooking duties and work with the TG to make sure that boys who need to demonstrate cooking skills get the opportunity. That is leadership helicopeter management on the PL's part by making sure the GM, QM and TG all suceed know they can't be trusted in their positions of responsibility. Here's my PL... He goes up to Grubmaster and says, "What's on the menu next weekend?" Grubmaster says the boys want hot dogs and Pop-Tarts all weekend long! PL says, "What can I do to help fix it so we have more nutritious meals for the boys?" Grubmaster, "What are your ideas as to what to suggest?" etc. PL then goes to QM, "How it going for the weekend?" QM says, pretty good, but he's missing a Dutch Oven and it should be in the storage shed. PL says, let me help you find it. It'll save you some time for more important things. PL then goes to the TG and says, "Any of the new boys gonna be helping the Grubmaster this weekend?" TG says, yep, I already got it lined up with him to have Johnny and Jimmy helping out with the Pop-Tarts and hot dogs. Instead of saying good bye at the end of each of these conversations the PL says, "Great job, keep it up and if you need any help let me know right away." THAT is servant leadership on the part of the PL... and servant leadership of everyone else at different times doing different jobs Can a patrol operate without a PL? Nope, each team member needs a champion to cheer them on, and help them out on occasion when needed. When the team members look good, the PL looks good. This approach has been found to get my boys up and running very quickly in terms of leadership and teamwork. Management seems to fall into place quite naturally AFTER leadership and teamwork has been established, not before. I have found that without everyone's leadership and teamwork, management usually ends up a slow-motion train wreck every time.

It's been a long time since I took EMT training, but after the initial cost of the class, the national certification was maintained by attending a certain amount of free continuing education classes put on by the local hospitals, schools and ambulance services. I kept that up for 15 years at no cost, just an hour or so a month with updates and practice sessions to keep one's skills up-to-date. I can't imagine why councils couldn't adopt a similar program instead of the expensive hoops they have their volunteers jumping through. If I had to pay for a bi-annual re-attendance of SM training, I would have quit many years ago.

If a group has only one leader there cannot by definition be any team work. A PL can determine the menu, but if the Grubmaster doesn't know how to prepare the food selection, the PL will have to cook. A PL can determine the equipment but if the Quartermster doesn't have the equipment the PL will have to bring it. A PL can pick out the movie for movie night but everyone's seen it the rest won't show up. To think that rotating around the PL leadership among all the boys is like saying everyone has the same skills, the same talents, the same interests, the save drive, Sure a boy might be able to solve a problem given in a training session, but did they do the best job? Chances are one boy might be miles ahead of everyone else solving that problem.... but what about the next problem down the road, will that same dynamic hold true? I wouldn't put any money on it, To train as it is a possibility is a waste of time. Leadership is not a one-size fits all. Rotating leadership on a problem only teaches one boy to solve one problem and teaches the rest that they aren't going to do as well. They never make recordings of pigs singing for a reason. most people would prefer song birds or even whales over a pig. Every person on a team has something to offer the group, not just the guy we designate as a "leader". Once a group figures it out one has teamwork and in reality, one doesn't need a designated leader to make it work.

Sorry, MattR, but to have one person make all the decisions and everyone else is forced to obey is not the definition of leadership, it's the definition of authoritative management out of control. True teamwork is when everyone, regardless of of any identified "leader" works together to solve the problem. A good team won't know which member is the leader until well into the process. The leadership of any good team depends on the problem and which member of the team has the skills and talents to solve it. If the patrol doesn't have enough Dutch ovens for the evening meal, it's not the PL/APL or Grubmaster who has the best opportunity to solve the problem as well as the QM can.....A PL who has to tell the QM to go get a DO for the Grubmaster is basically admitting there is absolutely no teamwork going on in the patrol.

My generation tucked the collar into the shirt.

Scientific studies have gone a long way in recent years to show the effectiveness of training primates when trinkets and beads are introduced as rewards......

Most primates respond well to lab experiments when rewarded with trinkets and beads....

Let me take that one step further @@fred johnson If everyone in the patrol (group, troop, whatever) is doing their job (management of task) or helping someone else do their job (Best leaders are the best followers, i.e. "What can I do to help?") and taking care of others, that not team work without the ropes and rubber bands? I teach my boys that when all are leaders and followers in the group at various times, that is what teamwork means. It's looking out for others around you.... full circle back around to TF #9.. It's not linear from newbie to leader, it is a constant circle of always coming back to helping other people at all times until everyone in the group figures out what that means.

My adult training program is what is required by BSA to insure their position, i.e. YPT, etc. Then my "real" training begins. It consists of 2 chairs, one for them, one for me. We sit get a coffee, tea, soda, whatever and sit and watch the boys. I have that person do a running commentary on what they see and I give them feedback on what they don't see. I ask what they would do differently than what the boys are deciding and if the boys asked what they would say, how they would say it and when they would say it. After the adults are "trained" in observing and being prepared to support the boys, I do the same thing with the PL's one at a time. APL takes over and the PL and I go through the same process. I then suggest to the PL's they try the process with their APL's and others in the patrol as they see fit. It's really surprising how much more people "see" when they are not neck deep in the process.

Buy a package of Oreo or Oreo cookies or the Oreo cookies with the mint filling...... Buy a package of Chocolate chips, any semi sweet, any brand or just the blocks of semi sweet will work too.. Melt chocolate chips, put a splash of mint extract in the chocolate. Stir well, Open all the oreo cookies and scrape out the middle (optional) Dip in chocolate and put on wax paper. Try not to eat them all before they have a chance to cool. If one doesn't take them apart and dunks them in chocolate they are known as fat mints instead. For those who are REALLY CHEAP-SKATES, use Ritz crackers instead of Oreos, they go very well with milk as well. ===== Semi sweet chocolates chips, coconut and evaporated milk does up Mounds bars really well. Milk chocolate chips, coconut, evaporated milk and a bag of almonds does up the Almond Joys.... All my recipes are from the Walmart knockoff suppliers in China, but you can make them right here in the good old US of A....cue the Sousa March music, please!

Hmmm, I don't do JLT, TLT, or ISLT. I use a loosely defined patrol training program based on the GBB training program. Everything is done on the patrol level only and issues are addressed only when the PL runs into difficulty. PL has a job to do - take care of the boys (leadership) and run the patrol (management). APL has a job to do - be the PL's right hand man, the go-to guy to make things happen, Make sure the PL is successful, if the PL looks good, the APL does too. It's a team relationship. QM has a job to do - make sure any and all equipment needs are handled so "all the boys are taken care of". Scribe has a job to do - make sure all finances, reporting, advancements, are dealt with with the appropriate people outside the patrol. This is critical because it is important that "all the boys are taken care of." Grubmaster has a job to do - he does all the planning, prep, cooking and serving of meals for the patrol. He works closely with the QM to make sure the equipment he needs is available and "all the boys are taken care of for meals." The Chaplain's Aid has a job to do - provides the necessary spiritual aspect of the patrol, so that "all the boys are taken care of" Name a job and as long as it starts with something to do and ends with "so that all the boys are taken care of" there is no need for training. The boys figure it out or the patrol replaces them with someone who will do the job and take care of them. With such an approach the boys tend to take care of each other and get the work done. Other than that we don't do any other leadership training. Only once did the boys ask for a leadership training program and the SPL and I were in the process of teaching the boys the GBB training material when I as SM was asked to leave because I was expecting too much leadership from the boys..... It was rather unfortunate because the boys were having a blast.

Yes, I have the real nightmare of taking 3 NSP's to summer camp with only two older boys. Reminds me of the time I drove a 66 passenger bus full of kids to a church youth gathering. My other youth director kept order and I drove the bus. I survived that, I can survive 20+ newbies in scouting.

One of the reasons the GS/USA has been able to keep their prices low is the fact that the quality and quantity of the product has gone downhill. I remember the thin mints actually having a white filling like mint layer between the chocolate and the cookie. And what people don't realize is that the caramel coconut cookies (they go by many names) actually cost more than 25-cents per cookie! Of course none of that has stopped me from buying the cookies. The "Pigtail Mafia" has learned the secrets of marketing very well.

Maybe that's what we need for adults to be trained.... earn First Class legitimately. Being shown how to do it in training is not the same thing as being able to do it. If one can demonstrate their knowledge they shouldn't need to be trained on it. Having lived through the 1960's as a scout, I can assure you that no one went to the effort to "decorate" their uniforms the way they do today. If they did, I don't remember it as having stood out. Community strip, state and numerals on left sleeve and, rank on pocket was what I had on my uniform when I quit after 4 years. I don't think the Banana Republic Generals era came about until later on.

Don't worry so much about quantity, go for quality. I've been struggling for a couple of years now, just making the grade on 5 boys, currently have 2 active. Must to my "dismay" I have 34 potential Webelos II cross overs this spring. It might just be one of those, "Be careful what you wish for." kinds of things. Welcome to the forum!

I still think it was strange that world wide scouting got to 2 million scouts within 15 years of origin. They must have had some "special" way of counting in foreign countries.