Stosh

Being an effective manager is always easier than being an effective leader. One has full control over management, but when it comes to leadership, other people have full control over the process. Either they follow, or they don't.

@gumbymaster There is a very fine line between leadership and management. The rationale I use is the overall intent of the two dynamics. Management is the process by which tasks, projects, goals, objectives are accomplished. The "leadership" involved in that can range from servant leadership to downright bossy tyranny. Whatever it takes to get the job done! Yes, people are involved in the accomplishment of tasks, projects, goals and objectives. Are they an integral part of the team which the group is as a whole trying to fulfill, or are they merely just another "resource" needed to get the job done? One does not need leadership to delegate people around to the various aspects of the project. As long as the job gets done, one can move people in and out of that responsibility until it is accomplished successfully. A Position of Responsibility (POR) is designed to center itself around a management task, and the scout's advancement is dependent upon how well he does the job. Being responsible for the troop's equipment may nor may not involve other people. Sure, the scout needs the management skill of working with other people, but he doesn't need to lead them in the process. Little Johnny turns in a request for a Dutch oven from the troop trailer and Sammy makes sure he gets one. Sammy doesn't lead Little Johnny anywhere, but simply reacts to the task needing to be done. How about the Bugler. Need someone to play Taps at 10:00 pm? There's a job to be done. Bugler leads no one, but simply does the task at hand at 10:00 pm. While there may or may not be times when fulfilling the POR that a person may be "leading" a group of people, it still may not actually be leadership. Take the Patrol Leader POR for example. It sounds like leadership, but is it really? He manages the duty rosters, assigns tenting arrangements, makes sure his boys are progressing through their advancement, attending meetings to make sure the schedule of events is available to them, coordinates a lot of activities, but how many of them does he really lead as a leader and how many of them are mere delegations of a good manager? So this is the rub I run into with the Eagle project. The requirement explicitly states the candidate is to show leadership. What muddies the water is the fact that unless leadership is taught all along with the various management tasks, the only recourse the candidate has is to do a large project (task), with plenty of coordination, delegation, and other management of tasks activity to cover up the fact that he might not be able to generate sufficient interest from the other people helping with the management project. Eagle candidate A needs workers to build a fishing dock for the local nursing home. How many of his friends and other scouters, and people from school, and family members are all clamoring to help out!!! And how many times have we heard about a boy getting all his ducks in order only to have no one show up on the work day scheduled? At that point, true leadership becomes obvious! In the second scenario, no one is following and will only show up if they are forced. That candidate may have done an outstanding job of managing the project, but absolutely nothing to show leadership.

Where in G2SS does it forbid two unmarried homosexual males can't tent together????? Once one starts down the slippery slope, just hang on, it's going to be a long and unknown ride until one gets to the bottom.

It depends on the parents in many cases. I have been told flat out by my daughter, when her daughter gets old enough it is my responsibility for teaching her safe firearm training and making sure she goes through Hunter's Safety and then taking her hunting. Fishing she can do now. We were just up in the woods last week cleaning up the trails for the summer. She's three.

Show me the money!

@siouxzenscouter, welcome to the forum... and by the way, if you have an opinion on anything, just toss it out there!

Yep, that's #1 and #2. Having explained and trained, then comes the question of whether or not they are able to do what is expected. A good leader lays the ground work for success.

On the other hand, my boys voted to have neckers and they wear them all the time. It's good to have the option for each troop/patrol to decide on their own.

@Col. Flagg, I guess we'll need to disagree here. With all the boys I have had over the years that come from single-parent household, dealing with domestic abuse, multiple-marriage family structures, etc. and all the "stuff" many of the kids today have to deal with. I'm not talking about "heavy petting" or "making out" with one's spouse here, obviously. But the example of a solid marriage and how to make it work has come up as campfire conversation many times over the years. While it might not be explicitly spelled out in BSA protocol for running the program, it does fit in with the Buddy System that involves more than hanging out at the waterfront with another boy, tenting in pairs, or finding someone to go to the latrine with. The lesson I teach with the Buddy System is taking care of just one other person besides yourself. That's a big step for many of my boys. When I'm on an outing with the Mrs. coming along as chaperone or safety-afloat backup expert, she's always my "buddy". The Buddy System of the BSA today is the same principle of a good marriage tomorrow. Oh, by the way, the Mrs. does appreciate it when she needs to use the latrine. With me as her buddy, I check out the latrine to make sure all the boys are out and then guard the door for her. It's what a good Buddy does.

"He must continue to get hands on in each area, making sure that the end result is what he designed/planned. If issues come up he needs to be there to address them. Reviewing after-the-fact is not doing 100% of his job in either leadership or management." Being in two or three places at the same time is something I've never been able to manage myself. I surely wouldn't expect it of any of my Eagle candidates. Simply standing around watching an adult cut up trees with a chain-saw might not be a very productive leadership and/or management option either. Sometimes good leadership involves 1) careful explanation of expectations for the task, 2) make sure they are capable of doing the task, 3) occasional observation to make sure things are going smoothly, and 4) follow-up to make sure the task is completed and the person assigned/delegated the task feels they have contributed successfully with the work. Leave any of those things out, and I would question their leadership, not management. The goal is to have people feel they have contributed something worthwhile to the project and feel good about it. It's the taking care of others part of leadership over management that I focus on. @Col. Flagg, you are correct, one can't leave out any parts of the process to make it a good Eagle project.

I did that with my Webelos boys. I planned out my activities to coincide with fun activities. My only problem was when the boys went to the pack meeting to get their award pins, they didn't know what the pin was for. The CubMaster asked the boys what they did to earn the pin in front of the whole meeting. The boys stood there with their "deer-in-the-headlight" impression. I bailed them out when I "translated" for them. Readyman pin? Remember all the neat first aid stuff we did? or the "Aquanaut" pin? Remember going to the hotel and swimming in the pool? One couldn't get them to shut up after that!

We always assume the worst, it's human nature to always find fault. People do things correctly 99% of the time, but the one time they slip up, we remember.... and often times we don't let them forget it either. If it involves child molestation or abuse, it would surely be serious enough to remember, but how often does that really happen in the vast majority of cases?

So the question remains....is the boy leading by delegating out the various tasks to boys and adults alike and then doing a "staff" review afterwards to make sure the task is completed? Sure, that smacks of good management but is it not always good leadership of taking care of his staff and their success with what they were assigned to do? The buck stops with the leader. Is he doing proper task assignments and following through regardless of whether that task is assigned to an adult, or does it only "count" if it's another boy? As an example, a number of trees need to be cleared off the trail reconstruction process. No boy is allowed to use a chain saw, so the task is delegated to an adult to run the saw. The adult knows which trees need cutting up and at his direction, the boys remove the logs from the trail. Does that make the whole project "run" by the adult? What if the candidate is off with another team of boys raking off the leaves and sticks while the adult is cutting trees? He's not present, nor is he doing the work.... but is he leading nonetheless?

How boring would this forum be if all we heard were glowing reports of everyone doing everything correct for every boy. I would love to do nothing more than rant on about my boys and never have to discuss all the "failures", negative votes with feet, program snafu's, etc. I would like to not have to try and help other scouters who do find the bumps in the road. After 40+ years of scouting, I would love to say it has all been a walk in the park, but it hasn't. What I have always taught my boys, making mistakes, having things go wrong, etc. are nothing more than learning experiences. One can either learn from their own mistakes, which tends to be a bit more painful. Or one can learn from the mistakes of others. My preference! But on the other hand, if all my life experiences have been positive, maybe there's a gem or two in the weeds that might help someone else out there with getting through a tough spot or two. How am I to know how I might help if I don't know what it is that they are struggling with? Although it doesn't always come through very well with just the printed text, I think the mainstays on the forum try for the most part to keep things up-beat and helpful. Like many here, we have 10+ years on the forum of offering advice (whether it is welcomed or not), but the underlying idea behind the whole process is the reference back to the Scout Oath ".....help other people at all times!..." This needs to apply to other scouters as well. And I come back to this forum over and over again, not because of some misplaced, "been-there, done-that" attitude, but because I have learned more from others than what I feel I have given to the forum. We have a ton of lurkers out there that know what I am referring to.

When the weather is nice, we hold our regular meetings outside. Now that's a stretch for "outdoor activity", but it does acclimate the boys to fresh air that when they do go on a hike, picnic, campout, etc. it's not such a shock to find out where bugs live.

I wear loafers (at my age, tying knots takes too much time)..... but when I wear boots, I tie a double knot.

Are we in the process of teaching the boys from Cub Scouts on that it's a once and done? So the boys missed the opportunity on one campout. Why not have another? There's nothing in the Cub Scout materials that indicate that teach of the requirements can't be done more than once. However, I concur, that any time one is outside the building it's an outdoor activity. After a year of Cub Scouts, one should have had 3-5 opportunities to fulfill that requirement.

Lead by example. With the number of divorces, live-in relationships, and other "norms" that were unacceptable in past years, it is kinda refreshing to see a married couple example that works. As SM no one has ever questioned the PDA/sleeping arrangement that the Mrs. and I are involved with and yet has stirred many discussions on the subject of marriage and family around the campfire in the evening. I always insist that the Mrs. and I sit next to each other at the fire. The majority of the boys I have been involved with over the years all seem to come from "broken homes" to use a phrase from years gone by. The Mrs. and I are both on our second marriages. We have weathered the storm and have found a working solution to the problems we faced. Again, we can both speak to the boys in a way that they can understand and we take seriously our responsibility to lead by example. My oldest daughter and my wife's youngest son have come in an helped the boys with the children's point of view in a divorce situation. Now, one can deny these dynamics, change the subject, sweep it under the rug, or they can take on these things head on and use one's life experiences and an opportunity to teach those things that may come to be in the scout's lives of the future. Ignoring the issues doesn't do the boys any good. In spite of any difficulties they may face in the future, they will have had the opportunity to learn from Mr. & Mrs. Stosh that there's always hope for a better life after disaster strikes.

My only experience with Philmont was with an adult led troop which meant everyone was on the trail by 7:00 am and we reached our destination by noon each day regardless of elevation or distance. Bleeding blisters were the norm for everyone except me. I did not race for an hour and then break for 10 minutes. I kept a steady pace and did not take breaks except for breakfast on the trail about 9:00 am. The group constantly broke into two due to the hurry attitude of the SM. He didn't hassle me much for "lagging" behind, but then I didn't blister and I wasn't dead tired when we reached our destination each day. We covered 110 miles and got in all 5 of the major peaks in the reservation. So, one can do the fast and furious and miss out on everything along the trail or one can take their time, pace oneself and enjoy the trek. Both worked even if the two "attitudes" differed and some of the boys had difficulty. It was interesting that only one other adult was allowed to stay back with the "old laggard", but when it came time to designate a different adult to stay with me, there always ensued a heated discussion. None of the boys were allowed the steady pace option, only one adult, that always was an argument as to who would lag with me. Eventually it boiled down to the one adult that insisted he stay back with me and that discussion stopped after the first couple of days. No one other than the SM and the trek lead (high school football player) wanted the fast and furious option. Slow and steady, wise use of time and resources, and in spite of the two options, I was the first one on top of each peak when the time came. The SM never asked how I was able to do that.

At least I am of the age where the training records really don't matter. Council: Mr. Stosh, it would appear that on the records you have never taken __________ training and you need it. Me: That's nice. I'll check my calendar and find a day or two that I can totally waste so we can clear this up. I'll get back to you.

Oh good I thought this was Bob's horse.....

What make anyone think I know anything about fixing Bob's horse?

The context of the quote was throwing me off. the quoted comments in "The Servant as Leader" is referenced under the Power and Authority section and referenced the practical application of the servant-leadership in the problem solving context. I was referencing from Greenleaf's earlier theoretically premised book "Servant Leadership, A Journey into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness" published in 1977, which was the basis for the servant leadership movement in our society.

I looked for the quote in the 1974 edition. couldn't find it. Got a page #?

G2SS does not allow the youth to fire large bore artillery. But it's a ton of fun!