Stosh

I have only three rules for my troop. #1 - Safety first #2 - Look and act like a Scout #3 - Have fun My boys wear the full field uniform for all scout activities. During summer camp we relax the rule #2 as long as they aren't abusing the privilege. Most of the guys like to buy a new camp shirt and wear that for the week. We blend rule #2 and #3 for summer camp attire. However, at all flag ceremonies, inspection level uniform is the norm. That includes their staffs, patrol and troop flag and total silence. How as SM do I enforce this? Don't have to, the accolades of others do it for me.

So what is BSA doing to promote the leadership part of it as they do the advancement part? Should it not be more balanced? There is a ton of outdoor skills training, and even some organizational training in the patrol-method, etc. but how much time/effort is dedicated to leadership development among the boys? Too often adult-led leads to the lack of youth leadership development. One can't learn to lead if all they ever do is follow. In school the students follow the directions dictated by the teacher. In home the kids follow the directions dictated by the parents. In church the kids follow the directions dictated by the clergy. In sports the kids follow the directions dictated by the coach. and in the BSA the scouts follow the directions dictated by the SM. Where do they learn to lead? If scouting is just another follow along program, how will scouting ever get the boys interested in just another program one follows. Do this, do that, check the box and voila, you're an Eagle. I really don't think this is the program envisioned by BP. A military "scout" was trained to think on his feet, travel and survive in unknown areas, and be self sufficient because they were not directly connected to the army when they were on a mission. The squad leader was also responsible for the safety and welfare of the other soldiers on that mission. While our scouts are not scoping out the enemy, the dynamics of their activities remain the same. Are we in fact really training scouts?

Basically, I see troops emphasizing the advancement aspects of personal advancement in the BSA program, i.e. Eagle mills. But, what efforts in that process are they working on to advance leadership and character building? On the other hand, is it proper to spend a ton of time in leadership building/character building i.e. service to others at the expense of advancement? I see these as two entirely different goals, one focus inwardly on individual concerns and the other outwardly on community concerns. How do troops address the balance between two differing objectives. For me, I see to much on individual success and it's not always all that beneficial. There have been a ton of threads on Eagle mills and the problems that are created there and still even more threads on Eagles that have little or no character anymore. So, where do we go from there, is there a bigger picture that needs to be addressed?

I agree that the T-FC skill requirements do go a long way to build self-confidence in their skill abilities. Yes, setting goals and achieving them is also important, but again focuses around the individual. I always start my SL training with Tenderfoot requirement #9, the buddy system. Whereas it has devolved down to the waterfront, I carry it even further. It's just not hang out with your buddy, but take care of your buddy. If he can't find his necker, help him out. If he is having trouble with his knots, help him out. If he forgets his mess kit, help him out. ... etc. That caring goes a long way to bond people together. If I am having a problem, I have a buddy to help me out and if my buddy is having a problem, it's my responsibility to pitch in and help him. Once I get that routine down, then I move on to helping out more than just my buddy. Maybe I help out the grubmaster even though I'm not on the roster for that meal, I'm the first to volunteer for the group service project, etc. etc. Once people see that initiative, they elect me PL and now I am responsible for 5-7 other boys. I have been working since day one on this process and now I'm up for the challenge. After that I might take on a troop responsibility and do QM and make sure all MY patrols (vs. THE patrols) have the proper equipment. Then I get elected SPL and I have a responsibility of taking care of all my PL's. Yes, I'm learning leadership along the way, but I am also refocusing my attention away from myself towards others. Along the way (I have 7 years to do it), I can get my Eagle, simply by keeping on with what I'm doing. Is there altruistic dynamics going on here as well? Sure, when my boys (the one's I'm looking after) look good, duh!, I look good. When SPL elections roll around, who do my boys think of first? Yep, the guy that's going to help them the most. It always reminds me of another troop in my council that had 1-2 NSP's each year. This one older boy (Eagle) was TG for them. Everywhere they went, they hovered around him like chicks following the mother hen. If he walked into the lake, they would have all followed without questioning it. I asked the SM about it once and he told me that this boy had been that way since he started in the troop. (I wonder if this is what BP meant by natural leader?) He told me he suspected that the lad was making up for the fact that he was an only child. Might have had some truth to that. I had one boy in my troop that when we went off to summer camp they all buddied up. As it ended up one older boy was "stuck" with the odd little scout left over. His parents had basically abandoned him, he was being raised by elderly grandparents. He wet the bed at night, he was on meds and needed them 3 times a day and he was a general handful to say the least. Without batting an eye, the older boy went over and asked him to be his buddy (he really didn't have a choice, but the little guy didn't know it). The older boy got him up ever morning, got his mess cleaned up, got him to the nurse 3 times a day and got him to his MB classes, all while doing his own thing. If that older boy came up and asked me for a recommendation for his Eagle, there would have been no question in my mind. By the way, the older boy thanked me at the end of the week for the opportunity to work with the little guy. When I told the older boy's parents about how great a kid they have, they simply smiled and said, "Yeah, we know." How does one put that on their college application form or resume?

You got me curious. Eschew means to shun or avoid. I was using it to mean move "away from the middle of the road" balance kind of thing. Meaning moving off dead center (eschewing the center) towards achievement. Sorry for the confusion. I think you are spot on with the adult emphasis. I'm a little bit in the Kudu camp on going with the boy-led thing and his emphasis on leadership vs. modern business theory. I use the terms leadership and management. Leadership means to lead people, which of course will eventually complete a task (people skills) , and management (organizational skills) which is simply accomplishing a task. I can force people to accomplish a task, but in my book that's really not leadership, it's dictatorship. I think you are right in that many adults don't or can't trust the boys to make good choices on their own and thus they make them for them. Helicopter parents are extremely proficient in this process. You will get your Eagle if you are member of this troop, etc. On the other hand, there are those who try to develop what I think the BSA program, at least historically, is all about, developing leaders. The Good Turn Daily people, the help the old lady across the street person, the caring trendsetter (leader). How do we get the boys to be that way rather than just act that way to get a reward of some sort? Advancement to me is more of a management issue. Here's what you do, when it's done, check the box. When all the boxes are completed, you get a pin/pat on the back/badge, etc. The focus is getting it done by the individual. Sure you learn along the way, but where is the character/leadership development in the process? To a certain extent advancement is important. The boys need to learn the skills to be self sufficient. They have to be able to take care of themselves before they can turn their attention on taking care of someone else. That shift from one side (self) to the other (others), or maybe a balancing act between the two is where I started going with this thread. Is what we are doing developing tomorrow's leaders? or simply training them with a bit of management skills so they can check the box on the college entrance application or a footnote on a job resume?

When you're as old as I am Foxfire actually means something..... Need to update to the 21st Century...

I guess I wouldn't have a problem with the CM coming in and running the den on a temporary basis.

Correct me if I'm wrong. What you are saying is the balance between SL and achievement is eschewed towards achievement rather than SL (service towards others)? If that be the case, how do the heavily achievement troops (Eagle mills) move towards either the middle or even better towards SL?

The login on the android cell phone under Foxfire doesn't work.

"My hope for the future of scouting is that a lot of these Eagles (or Life Scouts) decide to come back to help as adults. I'm thinking many of them will, but as teenagers they really don't know everything they need to be doing." For me this IS the quandary. If boys aren't taught the skills of servant leadership and are only interested in self-achievement, why would they ever consider coming back to "help out"? Sure, once that Eagle has a son of his own, he will come back FOR HIS KID, but again, it won't be for the betterment of any troop he decides to register his son in.

The bold certainly seems the case in most troops. My 17 year old son is the later version. He's served in positions or the fun of it, and for the personal motivation to see others learn more and do more. He just stepped up with just over 6 months left before he turns 18 to serve as troop instructor because he has seen scout skill proficiency take a nosedive, and watched the troop instructors who know just enough to be dangerous about some subjects (like a couple of weeks ago demonstrating ax useage he about had a coronary that someone was going to remove a limb from a body rather than a tree branch). He's been very active in OA ceremonies, den chief, summer camp volunteer staff and paid staff, trying to ensure everyone in the troop learns what they need to know AND advance as well. He's actually been kind of bummed about earning Eagle. To him, true Eagles are the 2nd type, they are in scouting for the scouting and Eagle is not their goal but they usually earn it anyway with a bit of extra effort (like the Eagle project and maybe a couple of merit badges they have to push themselves to complete). Yet our troop is full of boys who are earning Eagle like it's a check box on a college application, they are in it for the potential scholarships and prestige and it makes him sad. He wasn't sure if he wanted to get his Eagle if he was going to be thought of as being "just like them." As for servant leadership in the workplace, my husband works for a huge worldwide computer company and that is their new buzzword. The thought is that if you as a manager help those "below" you to grow in their postions, they will become a better asset to the company. Along the way, they realize that you can form a tight knit team that works well together, and on the move upward for the manager, he will often pull the rest of his team upwards with him, where they follow him upward to bigger and better things in the company. Who knows how well it really works on the corporate level, but it certainly can't help to have managers who are looking out for their team and helping them to grow--it should make for a better company to work for, eh? "As for servant leadership in the workplace, my husband works for a huge worldwide computer company and that is their new buzzword. The thought is that if you as a manager help those "below" you to grow in their postions, they will become a better asset to the company. Along the way, they realize that you can form a tight knit team that works well together, and on the move upward for the manager, he will often pull the rest of his team upwards with him, where they follow him upward to bigger and better things in the company. Who knows how well it really works on the corporate level, but it certainly can't help to have managers who are looking out for their team and helping them to grow--it should make for a better company to work for, eh?" Isn't this a definition for the patrol method?? Take any reference to the manager's (PL) department/team (patrol) and company (troop) and apply it to the same conversation. I work for a multi-billion dollar international company that is also following these principles and low and behold, once the managers/supervisors quit trying to dictate to the workers and began to enable them, some really fantastic things are changing around here for the company.

Some good points to ponder, but I'm a bit confused on the dynamics described. The helping managers have people that will actually "follow" their managers because it improves their employment situation. On the other hand who really follows the manager that is upward bound career climber? In my experience, employees that have managers like that are hoping and praying the person gets a promotion so they don't have to work with them anymore. I would think that to a certain extent this might be happening in the troop. We got "stuck" with this SPL or PL or whatever, for a certain period of time. We have to tolerate him, but once his has his POR requirement time in, he'll move on and we won't have to put up with him anymore. I'm really not seeing any leading and following in the corporate career model you describe. Am I missing something? I totally agree that paving and blocking is 100% wrong and should not be tolerated by any troop or committee.

While reviewing the current threads, the issue of Servant Leadership has once again made an appearance. Having thought about it a bit, it dawned on me that the "goals" of Servant Leadership seem to run contrary to the "goals" of rank advancement to a certain extent. How does one reconcile this or balance this in the troop setting? Servant Leadership seems to focus on service to someone other than themselves, teaching, leading, guiding, mentoring others vs. the self-achievement focus of advancement. I see a lot of - getting one's Eagle so they can put it on their resumes and getting ahead on college applications, etc. While on the other hand, we seem to lose a lot of boys once they reach the rank of Eagle because they have little or no interest in "helping other people at all times". I got what I wanted and now I'm gone. We hear a lot of accolades of how Eagles "give back" to their community, but we also hear of a lot of scouts going after the Eagle rank simply for personal gain. Your thoughts?

No warrior shows up for battle without knowing what weapons they have brought. No worker shows up for work without knowing what tools they they have brought. No teacher shows up for class without knowing what skills they have brought. There's a pattern here. Self-awareness of what one brings to the game is "armed" to accomplish the task/challenge that lays ahead. No one ever built a road on smooth ground. There's always obstacles along the way. How one addresses them before beginning the challenge often times determines the outcome. If one knows they are overly "straight forward" and they know it produces less than stellar results, then by simple awareness, are now capable of trying something different. Those that stubbornly refuse to learn will simply continue to beat their heads against the wall. And the last suggestion I leave is: "Never let them see you sweat." There are a few out there in the world that love to push peoples' buttons. It's a game for them. If one reacts to these kinds of people, they will continue their little game with you. However, if one doesn't react the way they are supposed to, then the game is no fun and they move on. I have a pin-button that resides on my nightstand so I see it every morning when I get up. I love it's message: "Don't tell people your troubles. 80% don't care and the other 20% are glad." It really helps me get through the day. Stosh

I agree that those that join knowing the expectations, honor the commitment. Stosh

COR's can dictate membership requirements and make that clear up front before any scout joins. With that, mandating religion is a slippery slope that your COR is playing loose and free with. Instead of working to INCLUDE people and helping them feel welcomed, just the opposite might be happening. The Ecumenical Movement of the '60's brought to light by Pope John, might not haven gotten much footing in your COR's parish. It's unfortunate, because I don't see what's happening in your troop as happening in other Catholic COR's. If your troop is the only show in town, it's one thing to issue mandates, but if not, one may lose a few of the good scouts out there that either quit because their non-Catholics buddies go somewhere else. If I were an ASM of that troop, I hope one would not hold it against me if I either opted out of the service, and/or slept through the one I was forced to go to. I guess I just don't see many Catholic COR's expecting all their scouts to attend a mass instead of a service of their choice. I wouldn't expect Catholic scouters to go with them unless they wished to, either. Evangelism is an invite, not a mandate. Feel free to ignore my advise, I'm probably going to hell anyway. Welcome to the Forum! I hope your thread gets some good discussion. Stosh

EagleScout441: MattR makes a good point. If you are thinking I am in anyway slamming you, you have totally misread my intention. I have worked with youth groups for over 40 years and have seen a ton of guys and gals step up to the plate and do some fantastic things. I have seen a lot of them as well, blowing me off and taking their chances. The choice is yours as to how you want to handle it. Leadership? Getting people to do something they may not want to? Nope! The new guy gets stuck with doing the dishes. This is normal and he's not happy about it. However, if an older scout comes over and says, "let me help you." Okay, what's that new guy going to think? Does he have to like you? Nope. Are you going to be his best friend? Nope. But if he has a problem, who's he going to turn to? You hit the campsite, you're the first out the car door and you yell out, "I'm going to put up the dining fly, who's going to help?" Pete steps up and volunteers to help, you turn to Tom and Bill and ask them to set up two tents while you and Pete put up the fly? Sure, as long as they don't have to help with the fly! John has to start cooking dinner. You stop by John and ask, "Do you have everything out of the trailer?" "Need help?" Who's John's new best friend? New guy is trying to learn his knots. He's got the book in his lap and struggling. You walk by and offer to help. Your buddy lost his necker, you offer to help look for it..... Joe needs to head to the latrine, but his buddy refuses to go with him. You announce you need to go (whether you do or not) and help him out. Okay, next election rolls around. Are you any of these guys' best friend? Probably not, but who are they going to vote for? I saw one fella at Centennial Jambo pull this off while wandering around the 4 patrols of the contingent. I don't think any one of the boys from SPL down to the lowliest scout, not get some assistance from him at one time or another. On the second to the last day, he turned his ankle, and I never saw so many people stopping by asking him if he needed anything. They packed up his gear and tent and got everything including him onto the bus, short of carrying him. Surprising, that out of all the scouts on that trip, he's the only one I remember by name. Seriously, servant leadership is really not all that hard! (That's how you lead from the back seat!) Stosh

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2011/02/04/death-gps-rise/ So much for high-tech And though I know the area well, there are roads in my neighborhood that don't exist and would cause a novice to the neighborhood at least mild confusion.

As one who has lived in both urban and rural environments, I can attest to the fact that city people use directions in right, left, straight ahead, and turn around and go the other way. The rural people use the terms, north, south, east, and west. With that being said, there's nothing wrong with using rural terms in an urban setting. Give a city map to the boys and a compass. Give all directions for the 5 mile hike in map terminology, north, south, east, west. Give distances in feet/miles, not blocks and go for it. First of all, the boys will need to ignore the city street signs and if the coordinates indicate a movement diagonally through a city park, all bets are off on the block measurements anyway. Be creative, but with the map, ignore the city landmarks and treat them as geological features of a rural map instead. If relying on a map/compass format, it won't make any difference whether the boys are urban or rural. A country boy should be able to follow the directions to get to anywhere in the city and never have to be told a street name or building landmark along the way. Now, on the other hand, if the boys are making the map, they need to use only map terminology when making their map. They can't use street signs, nor block measurements, but have to walk off the distance and take compass readings instead. I've done it and it works quite nicely. Stosh

My first question would be, why must you step up and abandon your boys? This is a problem that needs to be worked out by the pack committee. Either they are going to recruit a CM or a DL. In the interest of the boys (which is always my #1 consideration), you should stay with your boys and the committee starts working on the CM position. Now, if you truly wish to do CM instead of DL, I would recruit a good person to take over your boys with a good DL. Add a ADL and maybe a trained DC to insure a good experience for the boys. After that is done, go for CM. If the committee wants you as CM, you can always insist assistance in finding good DL/ADL/DC to take over your den before accepting CM. So who wins? I don't care as long as it is the boys.

Of course this only works if the SPL/ASPL actually function as figureheads. If they get into the faces of the PL's and try to dictate what the patrols can/can't do, then it's a recipe for disaster. If one wants strong leadership, it begins at the PL level, not the SPL level. With 4+ patrols in a troop and a supportive rather than dictatorial, one can develop strong leadership 4+ times faster in a troop than relying on an SPL to try and run a whole troop, which in reality impossible to do anyway. In my troop, the SPL was the #1 leadership mentor for the PL's and did not run the troop or the patrols.

Oh, by the way, as far as elections go? If one thinks themselves to be a great leader, then why is no one following? Might want to take a personal inventory of what skills you are lacking that keeps the other boys from following? The first step in good leadership is taking care of those that follow. If one does that, they will follow you anywhere. If they think for a moment that the leader is thinking only of themselves, they will desert in droves.

Wearing a patch and getting credit for advancement don't make you a good leader. Leaving when the troop needs you the most doesn't make you a good leader either. Getting "credit" for one's work doesn't make you a good leader and looking at the disappointments instead of the opportunities doesn't make you a good leader either. Okay, with that being said, what have you left? I had one Eagle candidate that made a major mistake as he was rolling down the final stretch for his Eagle. As SM I told him I wouldn't sign a letter of recommendation (council required) until I saw some real leadership from him. Then I took away all his POR positions he was filling in the troop. I said, "Now show me your leadership" and walked away. For years he had heard me preach about leading from the back of the pack. Sport coaches do not play the game, orchestra conductors make no noise, and driver's education instructors don't sit behind the wheel. You said, "I'm tired of doing the job without getting the recognition and the person who holds the position gets the recognition even though they didn't do the work." WELCOME to the real world. This is how 99% of the world works. Get used to it now because it's only going to get worse as you get older. ""I had the same problem with patrol leader before I was officially elected. The way things are going now, I doubt I'll ever get the chance to serve a term as SPL." Okay, now re-read my second paragraph above. Then read it again. "My contributions not being recognized is 1 of 3 reasons for my leaving to Venturing," - Read paragraph 2 again. "the 2nd is because I prefer high adventure over regular car camping" - and what have you done to take the LEAD on changing that in the troop? "and the 3rd is I'd rather camp with people my own age(out of the 18 people in my troop only 2 are my age, the rest are younger)." - and who needs your leadership more, the younger boys or your buddies? You will get far less leadership opportunities hanging out with your buddies than you will with mentoring a troop of younger boys. "If the election was a popularity thing, then the troop needs you more than ever. You need to show true unselfish servant leadership and be the SPLs most trusted assistant. Those scouts stick out." - couldn't say it better. "Honestly, I'd rather watch him fail and be the one to pick up the pieces." - One never obtains true leadership greatness at the failures of others. They do a better job on their own efforts. So, when all is said and done, if I was your SM, I'd hand you an application for Venturing and tell you to be careful not to let the door hit you on the butt on the way out. If you can't lead regardless of the situation you find yourself in, you're really not the level of leader you think you are. And by the way, the Eagle candidate I talked about? Yeah, he got his Eagle but he worked his butt off for 6 months before I signed. At his Eagle Court of Honor, he called me up and presented me with his mentor pin. He was crying as he pinned it on me. You have a tremendous opportunity staring you in the face and you can't even see it. Don't run away, roll up your sleeves and start learning how to really lead. And I'll assure you it isn't in any patch or assignment of POR that's going to determine that. Stosh

Unless the Boy Scout is your son, then yes, it's a violation.

The camp gets around the handgun issue by dual registering the 14 year olds into a Venturing Crew. It costs nothing more for the scout and he can sign his own application. When shooting he is under the auspices of Venturing, not Scouting. Our local council has been doing this for a couple of years as well.