DuctTape

Recently I was driving somewhere and it became apparent that I was in the vicinity of a few cars that were in a convoy. Their driving to maintain proximity and eye contact with each other created a dangerous situation, These other drivers were oblivious to everyone else due to their primary objective of staying in a group. Since I was able to discern which vehicles were involved, I was able to maintain being safe. While I am sure some very capable drivers would be able to drive in a convoy and maintain safety, it does add just one more item by which one could be distracted.

That questionnaire is definitely a great idea. So are the suggestions you gave to the District Executives. Agreed, the hardest part is getting the actual leaders to buy into it. Other practical steps. (I apologize in advbance for my stream of consciousness) Committee Chair and SM need to be on the same page as the troop requires adult leadership in both areas. Immediately register every adult in the troop and have them complete YPT. this serves a number of functions, first and foremost it sets the tone that participation and training is the basic expectation of all people in the troop; scouts and adults alike. At all scouting events, including (and especially) meetings have an adult training piece. It can be any number of the module trainings like the YPT, or other adult leader type training. Or live trainings like Introduction to the Patrol Method, Troop Committee Training, etc... These can be conducted by the SM, Committee Chair, or any number of current adult leaders (just like we have the scouts train their patrol mates not just the PL or SPL) Ask them to do something small. (also a reason for the YPT). "Hey Mr. X, next weekend the Eagle Patrol is doing a hike. I could really use your help as one of the shuttle drivers." Host District/Council Training events so that your adults can more easily attend. Adults, like youth, have natural preferences. They will either lean towards Troop Committee type roles, or SM/ASM type roles. recognize these tendencies and nurture them. Invite adults for coffee chats (think SM conference for adults). Lastly, recognize everything. It is not just Scouts who react positively to praise and recognition. Notice and thank them publicly for everything. Create incentive "awards" such as "The Troop Driver Pin"- awarded to an adult who has driven scouts 5x. Invite adults to the Troop Committee Meeting where they will be recognized for completing trainings, making contributions, etc... I suggest to do this at Committee Meetings so as to not take focus away from the Scouts at their meetings. Certainly special recognitions for adults may occur at COH, but these should be minimized at much as possible. As I mentioned from the onset, I do not have this all figured out. I only know that it requires a system wide approach. Hopefully these pratical ideas as an addition to the ones you already mentioned will be helpful to you and others.

I apologize, it isn't an easy distinction to make and most dismiss my distinction as a difference in rhetoric but it is much more than that in practice. The distinction is between focus on people vs system. Notice your response was focused solely on people; how many, etc... Because people come and go, and this is especially true when the number is limited, this focus rarley is successful. And as you point out, people are complicated. I advocate a focus on the organization itself, the processes which are utilized, and the decisions which are made. All of the decisions, processes, procedures are based on the development of future leaders of the organization. From the moment of introduction to onboarding and so forth. The entire purpose is to develop future leaders. This removes the search for the person and instead makes all people the potential future leaders. I know it does not seem like a difference, but it really is. One measure of the difference is whether people willingly step down from a position in order to create the vacuum for the next person to serve. This will permeate within the organization at all levels. I suppose I can phrase the distinction in the form of a question, Are individuals looking for their successor, or does the organization create them by design?

Yep. The finding one's successor is the problem I identified years ago in so many organizations. This doesn't work. It focuses on finding a person. Instead I believe it is better and more effective to focus on one's replacement's replacement. This requires focusing on the system instead of an individual. People come and go, which is why the "find one's successor" most often fails in the long term. It does not sustain itself, it has a single point of failure. When the focus is on creating a system by which leaders are nurtured, recruited and supported then the system itself generates successors. By focusing on my replacemen't replacement... a person i will never meet, it requires I create and nurture a sytem of leadership development to ... find my replacement's replacement.

Yeah, leader burnout is a real thing. this is true in most organizations who fail to have a systematic approach to future leader recruitment and training. This also permeates to the youth; for good and for bad. I have found that the best philosophy for myself is to build the capacity to cultivate your replacement's replacement. This future forward approach requires longer term planning than the typical "find one's replacement". It is difficult for sure. I still have not figured it out completely. I have figured out that just having that principle as the premise helps tremendously as it focuses one's efforts and decisions. I try to keep a first principle in mind for all my decision making. With the scouts it is "do not do for a scout that which they can do for themselves". With the adults it is "cultivate your replacement's replacement".

Total cost is on a continuum. I have seen high quality active outdoor troops which were relatively inexpensive. I have seen low quality less active troops be more expensive. And everthing in between. A quality program is not synonymous with expensive. Quality, Easy, Cheap. pick two. A thrifty troop fills the $ gap with more work/effort.

Sadly, it is more common than one might think at summer camps. And some camps are significantly worse than others. Part of the problem is the "counselors" are other scouts, albeit a few years older. This should not be allowed. Even if if was an adult who officially signed the card. The adult is supposed to have tested each scout on the requirements, not rely on a 15 year old CIT who "led a class". The merita badge mill summer camps are a stain on the entire process. Sadly BSA doesn't just turn a blind eye, it appears they actively encourage it.

I am not that worried about a DBA, or Trademark name. I am also not concerned about co-ed troops. I understand the concerns that some have expressed. However, if the Patrol Method and Scout-Led is done correctly, I see those as the mitigating factor for all the concerns. For example, one concern was that some boys want to be separate from the girls; to do their own thing without having to worry about primping etc... Then the Patrol Method and Scout Led is the solution. In a Scout Led, Patrol Method troop, the scouts choose their own patrols so these boys can choose to be all together as an all -boy patrol and they can decide on their own adventures. There is no requirement that this patrrol do the same campout, event, adventures as the other patrols which may be all-girl, or co-ed. They do not even have to travel to the same forest for their campout. This has been true even before the discussion about girls. There were issues with scouts not wanting to be with other scouts in their patrol or did not want to go on the same camporee for the 5th time. The solution is and has always been, use the Patrol Method and have a Scout -Led troop. Issues arise due to adult interference. The adult objection I have heard over the decades is, they have to go to the same event as the other patrols because we do not have enough adults to drive to separate events. This is hogwash IMO, and here is why. In order to transport each patrol of say 6 scouts, this will require two vehicles, thus two adults. Each patrol has their own independent transportation and 2-deep leadership by default. So, back to my original comment. I am not concerned if the adults will get out of the way of the patrol method and eliminate practices and decisions which erode the Scout Led and Patrol Method of their troop.

The Scoutmaster's "Minute" is not just for a Troop Meeting Closing, it is a guiding principle. 😉

Perhaps she needs a refresher course.

Rephrase it as 3x the opportunities for scout growth. Scouting isn't "work". By her doing one big patrol she is denying scouts opportunities.

All good responses so far. I apologize for not including this phrase in my prior reply as I feel it is very important; others have hinted at it in their responses. I believe that Scouting done well is evidence of the truth of this statement. Not eveything that counts is measureable, and not everything that is measureable counts. (paraphrase of a quote often attributed to Einstein)

Growth in individual scouts. Seeing a new scout who can barely tie their own shoes develop into a patrol leader who plans, and leads their patrol on an overnight camping trip with adults only as drivers and required YPT. And all the other iterations of similar growth.

The article stated the restriction on fundraising was lifted for a short period of time late 23-early 24, but it doesn't say when these kids were doing their fundraiser and whether it fell within that window. I would think this detail would be relevant.

What is not ok? It aapears the GTA is not being violated. The scout is not being re-tested on requirements. The PLC is just initialing in the handbook that they provided the instruction and the scout is ready to be tested by the ASM/SM in accordance with the GTA.

@InquisitiveScouterfor National Commissioner!

This is a neat idea. The left hand column initials by the PL as an indicator that the scout is ready to be be tested by the ASM (the person authorized to do sign-offs). I can see the scout having an increased motivation to ask to be tested and have confidence in their success. This also keeps the older scouts sharp, and provides leadership and peer mentorship. Even if the PLC decides (with authorization by the SM) to have SPL or PL do official testing and sign-offs, I really like the idea of another older scout put their initials on the left side as an indicator of "readiness to be tested". For example, the PL might become authorized to sign-off on requirements and the APL helps the scouts be ready and uses their initials on the left to communicate said readiness.

If trying to convert a car camping troop into a backpacking troop (or just trying to get them to plan ahead better), try this: -Always pack a backpack for the trip. Patrol gear & food split up among patrol and packed in backpack. -Trailer is used to transport packed gear only. (We never brought the trailer as it was only a storage shed). -Park cars some distance from campsite, cars get locked and not visited during trip. (If at public campground, this is still possible using main lot). -Patrols hike (even if only a quarter mile) to their campsite as a patrol. Starting with the above as a baseline for ALL camping trips, one can see how the transition to longer backpacking trips is a gentler step.

One major drawback to text based communication is the lack of tone and body language which provides A LOT of information. There have been studies that showed most people will read positive text as neutral, and neutral text as negative. This bias towards the less positive is likely from a place of safety/defense inherent to the evolution of our species. I often listen to people discuss emails from others and it is amazing how much "tone" and malice is projected onto the writer. Understanding this, I know I must consciously ADD +++ in my reading of other's text in absence of other specific evidence to the contrary.

There are no restrictions on the number of positions one person may hold as long as the individual serves in only one position per unit with the exception of the chartered organization representative (CR), who is the only individual that can be registered in more than one position within the same unit. The CR may also serve in a multiple capacity as the committee chair (CC) or as a member of the committee (MC, NM, or PT) within that unit. From: Registration Guidebook rev 2019 (page 14) https://www.scouting.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Registration-Guidebook.pdf

I agree with Fred and the others. My only additions would be: 1. Start slow, give the PLC authority for signing off on one of those non-skill based requirements, and perhaps only for tenderfoot rank. Then build from there. 2. the SM should meet with the PLC before implementation to generate protocols, establish norms and expectations. 3. (initially) after every sign-off the SM discuss the process, etc... with the PLC to ensure protocols etc are being met and adhered to. This can diminish in regularity after the SM is confident in the PLC with their new authority. As an aside--- 4. SM conferences should occur regularly with scouts not just "as the final requirement". I would say the SM should conference with each scout at least every 4 months (that might not even be enough). The SM conference is a major aspect of the Adult Association Method within the troop. These conferences can be invaluable for the youth development and for the SM to understand the perspectives of each scout re: troop, patrol, and their individual life. Imagine if one looks at SM conferences also as a way for the SM to improve. Powerful!

You are correct that the Requirement as written is unambiguous. The activities in 9b must be done on the trips in 9a. As far as being held to the mercy of the troop, I would say the Scouts should plan the outings as a patrol not the troop. The scout can and should motivate the patrol to do preferred activities with their patrol. If the patrol members want different things, then perhaps the makeup of the patrols is an issue. This is separate from the mB requirement question. And welcome to the virtual campfire!

For how long have we here at Scouter.com advocated for required mBs to be in groups/categories of which the scout could choose?

When an organization's focus is on Quantity; Quality suffers. When the focus is on Quality; Quantity will also improve. Just summarizing our esteemed colleagues' aforementioned experiences.

I do not see how it takes so long to re-Charter. IMO there should not be an annual Re-Charter. Chartering is a completely separate issue from individual memberships.. The Chartering Agreement between the Council and the CO does not need to be redone annually. The Agreeement can and should remain in force until one (or both) parties agree to sever the relationship. Any changes to personnel do not require a change in the Chartering Agreement. Name/title changes can be a separate document and can be modified whenever changes are necessary. As individuals join a Unit either as Scouts or Adult Scouters, their paperwork is submitted to Council for processing. This process should be expedititious for Scouts and the only time issue for Scouters is a background check. If one is on file, then no time needed. The entire system is antiquated, and it is ridiculous how long it seems to process . I bet 3 or 4 of us here could revamp the entire system in a single day. The way i see it, there are 3 separate parts (and before it is suggested that the Annual Re-Charter does all of these, IMO that is the problem.) 1. Chartering Agreement. The contract between Council and CO. This Agreement is done once and signed by the Council and IH on the date of Charter. The Charter continues to exist until one or both parties sever. Re-Charters are reserved for the rare occurence of a former Charter is being re instated. 2. Leadership Documents. Document which details names of IH, COR, SM, etc... this is updated continuously as changes are made not saved for an annual event. 3. Individual Membership Documents. These would include Application for joining. Change in Status/Unit form, etc... These must be processed immediately. For Scouts, membership should be considered conferred when the Unit signs the paperwork. For Adults, the only delay is for background check validation. I have rambled enough.