returning to the pack?

[Lisabob]

What's your take on former cub leaders returning to pack leadership after their boys have moved on to boy scouts? Good idea? Or not? What pitfalls and/or advantages are there to consider before agreeing or declining to return as a pack leader? Are there conditions that should be attached to such an invitation, or to its acceptance?

 

Yes, I have a specific situation in mind but I'd appreciate your hypothetical comments for now. Thanks.

 

Lisa'bob

 

 

[msnowman]

Our Pack is in this position right now. I was the Cubmaster but after 3 years I was ready to do something else. Besides, Nephew had moved on to Boy Scouts, so I didn't have a boy in Cubs. Well, in September we registered Wolves and Bears (had neither group the year before), so I said I would take the den, but still was not going to recharter as CM. In December our former Web 2 leader (no boy in the Pack) volunteered to fill the recently vacated (long story) Tiger Leader slot. That still left us w/o a CM. Well, the current CC (also no boy in the Pack) said she would take CM if there was something to fill her post. None of the parents wanted anything to do with it so we ended up going outside of the Pack. The current CC is a former CC/DL whose boys have aged out of the Troop, both having made Eagle. She admits she is a bit behind in the updates in Cub Scouting but will be taking training.

 

I think if the adult is willing to help out put 'em to work. Many hands make light work.

 

YiS

Michelle

[OneHour]

To me it would be a better situation ... when my oldest was a wolf, I got volunteered to be the CM. My attention was devoted to the pack and not to his den or him. He had a great den leader, but it's not the same (as he later pointed out to me). If you have someone who doesn't have a child in the Pack and who is experienced and willing to join the leadership, that is someone who will have the dedication and devotion your Pack can definitely use.

 

1Hour

[Oak Tree]

Lisa'bob,

 

I'd say that it would depend entirely on the person involved. But if they were a good leader before, I'd be happy to have them stay with it.

 

Oak Tree

[gwd-scouter]

Lisabob. Must agree with the posts already given. If someone wants to volunteer, unless there is some underlying reason to deny them, I would say welcome aboard. It is so hard to find volunteers!

 

Of course, it really depends on why the former leader wants to return. You say you have a specific situation in mind. Without knowing the particulars, it is difficult (at least for me) to give anything but a positive answer to accepting the returning cub leader.

 

Now, if that cub leader showed poor judgement in his/her past duties, didn't get along with others, etc. etc., then maybe there would be reason to say no.

 

I have had an experience where a volunteer returned after a few years and was a bit difficult because changes (improvements) had been made in the operations of the Pack and he kept saying "that's not how we used to do it." That's an instance where a returning leader could be a drawback.

 

One of the things I really liked about my years in cubs was the regular change in leadership that brought new enthusiasm and new ideas to the Pack.

 

I miss that sometimes, now that I'm in Boy Scouts.

[Lisabob]

Here are the potential down sides that I see; tell me what you think:

 

1. I think leadership ought to come from families with boys who are currently in the pack. If these families care enough to have their boys involved, then they should figure out how to get involved. If an answer to their leadership needs just seems to fall into their laps they'll never really get involved themselves.

 

2. I'm concerned that one person might end up doing the bulk of the work and others will feel they can free ride on that person's efforts. The potential returning leader in question has been known to spend a good bit more than that "hour a week" in order to ensure that pack events went smoothly.

 

3. As gwd-scouter said, fresh leadership is one of the big advantages of packs vs. troops, where people tend to get entrenched. Is asking "old" leaders to return setting up a situation where entrenchment and stale thinking are more likely?

 

4. The position in question here is the Committee Chair - a pretty important role in the pack. While I don't think there's reason to believe this person's return would cause a problem in and of itself, the fact is that the pack hasn't had a CC since about May. So other leaders - notably the CM - have sort of taken on these responsibilities on an unofficial basis, and giving them up may ruffle some feathers. This is a pragmatic concern, not a rulebook type of concern. (Don't ask me who has been signing off on things as the CC for them since May, I don't know. But, they've been told that without a CC the pack won't be allowed to recharter in Feb. and will have to fold.)

 

5. The person in question is involved with a troop and has been asked to consider serving as a UC as well. They might be over loaded if they agreed to return to the pack, or there might be a conflict of interests if they were asked to be a UC for the pack instead.

 

It is hard for me to get an objective read on the situation because I know too many of the people involved here, and I spent a lot of time and effort helping this pack rebuild after some rough times. So I want to see it succeed and I want to offer good advice.

 

Lisa'bob

[gwd-scouter]

Lisa'bob.

 

I think it's universally true that there are those dedicated Scouters out there that hold more than one position and actually do them all well.

 

Then again, there are those Scouters that hold multiple positions that do poorly at all of them.

 

I've seen both. Those that hold muliple jobs and do them well are usually doing it for the Scouts. Those that hold multiple jobs and do them poorly, are usually in it for themselves (just another knot on their uniform).

 

Perhaps your returning leader simply wants to see the pack succeed and is offering his help - you say the pack hasn't had a Committee Chair since May.

 

Yes, the Committee Chair is an important position. Has there been any kind of politics going on that might put him in a position to get rid of someone in a leadership position? Not trying to start an argument here, just a question.

 

[FScouter]

I think you may be overly concerned. I see leaders with no kids in the unit as a real benefit. They're in it because they love Scouting. So many leaders are involved soley because their kid is a member. They don't do anything unless their little darling gets a direct benefit.

[ScoutNut]

According to BSA's brochure, "Selecting Cub Scout Leadership", the CO creates a list of prospective leaders from membership lists of the charter org, parent rosters & others suggested by the selection team. BSA also makes a point of saying not to make assumptions about whether or not the prospect will have the time to do the job. That decision belongs entirely to the prospect.

 

This means that the BSA encourages the involvement of the community & members of the Charter Organization in their units, weather or not they are parents of unit members. The number of other positions held & units served also has no bearing on whether or not they are asked to become leaders.

 

My husband & I both stayed with the Pack when our son moved to a Troop. We have also encouraged other parents to stay on. Heck, even our son is in the Pack leadership as a Den Chief. The Pack also has current parents in registered leadership roles & a lot of parents who help out any way, where & how they can.

 

New blood & fresh ideas are wonderful. We have those with the new den leaders. However, the thing that was rather hard on the Pack was that, unlike the Troop, there was no continuity of leaders. New leaders were kind of tossed to the Wolves (or Bears or Webelos). Older leaders were focused on their own den & then gone. Cubmasters came & went. With some of us "Oldtimers" staying around to provide support & stability, things are running much better.

 

I do wish we would broaden our Committee Member base with more parents. However, the CM (who IS a Cub dad) & our CC/COR (who is a member of CO but not a Cub dad) seem to be happy with the way it is now.

 

A Cub Scout leader can be as young as 21 & an Assistant as young as 18. We had one ADL who was the big brother of one of the Cubs. My son is talking about coming back to work with the Pack when he turns 18. I seem to find myself being reeled into District Training, so maybe I will let my son take on my Tigers when the time comes!

 

Bottom line, don't worry if he is a dad or not, or is to busy. Worry about him having the right qualities & characteristics for the job & being the best possible choice to fill the position.

 

 

 

 

[GopherJudy]

I think it all depends on the person. I was my son's ADL from Bears to Webelos II & when he crossed over to Boy Scouts in March 2005 I was very "lost" & "denless". I really enjoyed the time I spent with the boys in the den & helping them learn new skills, things, etc. & watching them grow. I was still involved in the pack at pack meetings committee meetings. When September rolled around I helped out with registration & told the CC & CM that if none of the parents want to be the Tiger DL that I would take on that responsibility. I went to Tiger Leader training (already had Webelos Leader Training) & I was just waiting to find out if there were any Tigers. At registration some of the parents didn't sign their sons up because they didn't want to be at the den meetings with them, they thought they could just drop their son off at the meeting. I have 3 Tigers & I'm having a great time & so are they! We've done a lot of different things, they're very eager & enthusiastic & I'm really enjoying it! Their parents are great too, very cooperative!

 

I said I'd be the Tiger Leader because I had a great time with my son & his den. Also, I wanted to still be involved & help out as much as I could & this was a great way to do both. I told my Tigers & their parents that I'd be with them until they crossed over to Boy Scouts! It's a great learning experience!

 

Judy

[Oak Tree]

Lisa'bob,

 

Your posts on the forum thus far have shown a great deal of insight, so I'll trust that if you perceive there to be a problem here, there might be one. But I'm not really sure it would stem from the question of whether or not the leader has a boy in the pack.

 

To your points:

 

> 1. ...If these families care enough to have their boys involved, then they should figure out how to get involved...

 

That's true whether or not the existing leaders have boys in the pack. I agree it's important for the leaders to delegate out the work and get others involved, but that's true regardless.

 

> 2. I'm concerned that one person might end up doing the bulk of the work and others will feel they can free ride on that person's efforts....

 

Also potentially true whether or not the leader has a boy in the pack. I've certainly known plenty of instances where the Cubmaster had a son in the pack and still did all the work.

 

> 3. ...Is asking "old" leaders to return setting up a situation where entrenchment and stale thinking are more likely?

 

This one could be true. But this really gets back to the question of who is the best available person for the job. If you have another, better, candidate, go with them. And 'better' might mean 'fresher ideas'.

 

> 4. ...may ruffle some feathers. This is a pragmatic concern...

 

This seems like an honest concern. This still has nothing to do with whether or not the leader has a boy in the pack, but it certainly might deal with the question of whether he's the best person for the job.

 

> 5. They might be over loaded...or there might be a conflict of interests...

 

They shouldn't be a UC for the pack and the CC at the same time, that's definitely true. As to whether they're overloaded, that's going to depend a lot on the person. Certainly many people are involved with both a pack and a troop and do fine. And again, I'm not sure it really has much to do with whether they have a boy in the pack.

 

So I guess in summary, I'd say you might indeed have valid concerns about this person serving as CC. There might be a better candidate. But I probably wouldn't phrase it with the issue of whether or not they have a boy in the pack.

 

Oak Tree

[mbscoutmom]

I think it's great to have former leaders stay with the pack. One leader has been with us for two years since her youngest son crossed over. She has been a great help to me this year in my first year as CC. With her and two others who have stayed on an extra year, there's a little bit of "we've always done it that way", but also a lot of "this is what has always worked best". And when I get crazy ideas, they can tell me, "we tried that and it didn't work".

 

Keeping leaders maintains continuity from year to year, and helps us run events more smoothly. This year we had to run the Pinewood Derby without the mom who had done it for several years. No one knew how to run the software, and the results of the races didn't get saved! We had to quickly race every car again once to award the trophys. Fortunately, most of the families are new to scouting, and didn't know this isn't the way it's usually done.

 

I've been hinting to our Web II leaders that I'd love it if they would stay on with us. One said he probably will. He's the one who always buys supplies for the campouts, and knows exactly where to shop and how much to buy.

[John-in-KC]

As I read mbscoutmom's post, one thought came to mind:

 

We've all heard "Every Scout deserves a trained leader."

 

I submit: "Every Scout deserves an assistant leader trained and ready to step up to full leadership."

 

We live in a mobile society. People can and are relocated from their jobs on short notice. Sadly, bad things can and do happen to good people. Those bad things can be as transient as having to provide elder care for their own parents, or as permanent as ... death.

 

Being "one man deep on the depth chart" in any given area risks confusion should the primary leave the picture for any reason.

 

The backup doesn't have to be "another new person," although with some jobs it should be, so there is ongoing renewal of leaders. It simply should be "another person," who is willing to learn and be ready "just in case."

 

Returning to Lisa's initial post, if the Scouter in question is suitable and a contributor/supporter, then by all means let him or her step up to the plate. Too much fun is never enough

 

 

[EagleInKY]

I've been out of the pack for 3 years, but still am the Committee Chairman. After 4 1/2 years as Cubmaster, they felt I had some value to add. It is true that I am able to explain to them why certain things have been done over the years, and also try to keep some unit traditions going. When the Cubmaster that followed me decided to start doing things "his way" and ruffled lots of feathers, I was there to help settle things down after the dust settled. When he eventually stepped down, I helped the new Cubmaster transition. Of course, he is more interested in how I did things than his predecessor. So, for the purposes of continuity and history, I think it's a great thing to.

[ScoutNut]

I think we all know how to combat the dusty, musty, entrenched, "we've always done it this way" thinking.

 

It doen't matter if the leaders have been with the unit for 1 year or 15. The only cure for that type of attitude is, yep here it comes, TRAINING!

 

And not just Fast Start or the basics 15 years ago. We are talking ongoing, regular updating of ideas. Roundtables, Outdoor, Pow Wow's, YPT, Leader Development, University of Scouting, Committee, & Woodbadge.

 

Roundtables (if done right) are probably the best place to keep up on new ideas & also to offer some of your own.