Troop Committee question

[Bob White]

Did I ever say that things should not be discussed? Did I say voting wasn't permitted? Did I say that the committee members operated in secret without reporting to the committee or keeping the chairman informed?

 

Does the phrase "fear monger" ring a bell?

 

Every Easter I get together with my parents and 4 brothers and their wives. The twelve of us make our plans for the family Christmas party for us and the kids. The party lasts for a few days and so there are lots of plans to make, and yet, we never take a vote. We talk we volunteer we cooperate, we do our assigned tasks. No vote! Of course we keep mom, the committee chair informed of our progress.

 

Operating a unit committee is no different.

 

If the adults on your committee are not competent enough to make decisions on the task assigned them, then are they competent enough to to be voting on decisions for other committee functions as well?

 

What about a committee where you have some people who understand scouting and some who don't. Why give the the ones who don't an opportunity to hinder the ones who do.

 

A good example. If less than half the committee understands that the PLC makes the program plans, does it benefit the boys or the program to allow them to be outvoted by a majority who incorrectly think the committee should make the plan?

 

Bob White(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[sctmom]

Bob writes:

"Did I say voting wasn't permitted? "

 

Uh, Yes. Lots of times. You have said there is nothing to vote on and that the only mention of voting is that the scoutmaster can't vote.

 

Committee members may be competent but some decisions should be made as a group. Example of my popcorn kernel. He comes back to the pack leadership and says "do you want to do show & sell? I recommend we do and here is why." If we all felt disagreed, then we override him and the group makes the decision.

 

Yes, the documentation says den leaders do not attend committee meetings, but where I live every pack does it this way. Otherwise you have a committee meeting for the cubmaster, and then the cubmaster goes to another monthly meeting with the den leaders to tell them what was said in the committee meeting. Let's just add to that volunteer's job, sure he likes meetings. Also, since most packs around here do not have much of a committee and the den leaders are impacted as parents & leaders by decisions made in committee meetings, it helps for the den leaders to be involved.

 

[Bob White]

Sctmom here is an example. A previous poster said what if the committee advancement chair says "we are only going to do one Court of Honor this year". first of all that committee is already off base because that is not a decision of the Advancement Chair. Secondly the Quality Unit Award calls for quarterly COHs (and why someone would volunteer to help but not want to follow the program is a mystery to me) so the committee chair would need to say "we will follow the national guideleines and do one each quarter".

 

The planning is done by the PLC. The advancement chairmans job is to see that the COH take place and that the boys are advancing and being recognized. So in putting together the calendar the SM reminds the SPL that they need to schedule quarterly COHs. The PLC puts them on a calendar. The committee reviews the calendar and makes recommendations of possible changes. The PLC reviews the changes and enact whatever changes they choose. Lets say the PLC wants the COHs to be pot Luck dinners. The Committee chair arranges for a dinner coordinator and assigns them the task. The dinner coordinator works with; the scribe to get the dinners publicized, the SPL and SM for an agenda, The advancement chair for the awards, the COR for the space, the committee chair and the finance chair on budget and bill paying. And what is there to vote on? Nothing. Progress gets reported back at the committee meeting or sooner if needed.

 

Hope this clarifies things,

Bob White

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Bob White]

Sctmom,

I don't mean to split hairs but I am sensitive about being misquoted or mirepresented even if by accident.

I have said that voting wasn't required, wasn't needed, wasn't taught in the scouting materials.

 

I never said it wasn't permitted. Ther is a big difference between "not permitted" and "not required".

 

In your example of popcorn sales it is the troop that should decide whether to do Show and Sell or not. After all it is their time their effort their money for their program. If you expect the sale to be effective you need the boys behind it. So this should not be the committees call.

 

In a cub Pack the decision is made through discussion with the Cubmaster, the committee chair, and the finance chair.

The cubmaster says here is what the dens need, the Committee Chair says here is what we want to accomplish. The Advancement chair says this is what we expect to spend on awards. The finance chair says this is what we have, this is what we need, and the Popcorn chair says this is how we can raide it.

Try another situation. I would bet that it is a boy decision or one that does not require a vote (a conversation perhaps, but not a vote).

 

Bob White

 

PS you have the order reversed on your meetings, The cubmaster meets with the den leaders and then goes to the committee and says this is what we are doing here is where we need your help. Not the other way around. Program drives the activity of the committee, the committee does not drive the program.(This message has been edited by Bob White)(This message has been edited by Bob White)(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[sctmom]

Bob, Since many people in this thread read your posts as "no voting is ever needed", I'm not the only one that felt that you implied you should NEVER vote.

 

I think communication is hindered if the committee and the den leaders do not talk face to face. Also, you asking the cubmaster to attend a monthly meeting with the committee AND a monthly meeting wiht the den leaders AND roundtable AND pack meeting. Also, our cubmaster attends the weekly den meetings (we all meet on the same night, same place). So this means he will be meeting basically twice a week, almost every week. Maybe if our committee was large and we had more than 5 den leaders, I would see this different. But with cubmaster, cc, adv. chair, and 5 den leaders, it works fine.

 

[sctmom]

If the Popcorn chair says "we are doing a show & sell on Saturday" and the den leaders say "no way, I'm not standing out there with the kids to earn $100". Then the popcorn chair is going to be out there by himself. If we don't ALL agree to do the show and sell, then it doesn't work. Popcorn chair may not know of last year's show & sell fiasco (where? not many sales, etc.) Perhaps the den leaders could suggest a new location, a different approach. I know I would not want to make such a decision in a vacuum. I may not always be right, someone else just might have a better idea.

 

 

[Bob White]

One problem at a time scoutmom.

You are agreeing and disagreeing with me all at once.

The desion to sell popcorn or raise funds needs to be program driven. The committee suppports the program the program is not driven by the committee.

 

You wrote "I think communication is hindered if the committee and the den leaders do not talk face to face."

Not at all, they have the cubmaster there to represent them. You wouldn't want all the committee members at your den meeting, that's not their purpose. You don't belong at the committee meeting, that's not your purpose.

 

You wrote "asking the cubmaster to attend a monthly meeting with the committee AND a monthly meeting wiht the den leaders AND roundtable AND pack meeting."

So if I count correctly that is three meetings a month for the Scoutmaster, that's fewer meetings than den leaders go to, fewer than Boy scout Leaders, fewer than most district volunteers. Only the Pack Committee Chair has fewer meetings required. nThis has no bearing on committees voting.

 

You wrote "Also, our cubmaster attends the weekly den meetings"

Sorry but thats a personal problem. The den meetings are run by den leaders. This is a problem that is separate from committees voting.

 

You still haven't presented a situation where voting is any more effective than open conversation.

 

Bob White

 

[jbroganjr]

My two cents

bob white may be correct in quoting BSA literature and is definately correct that training is essential, where i digress from this is as follows:

One, training has been dumbed down out of national in the last couple of years. The number one issue on this board, my council and district is disharmony and lack of communication or wrong communication between scouters. Bob, you come off as a big know it all on a big horse and as soon as someone disagrees with you, IMHO you throw away that part of the scout law about being courteous, kind and respectful. I believe the training currently offered, at least in my council follows that mode of ignoring courteous kind and respectful.

Two. In my state, NJ and in lots of places in the N.E. region there is an epidemic of lethargy on COR. IF our council gets responses to the many attempts at communication with CORs, we would be lucky to find 10% active. Unfortunately, those that are active, most are not trianed, do not understand the program, and I have witnessed there attempts of imposing their ideas of boy scouting which flies in the face of BSA aims and mission. Most units "relocate" when this happens. I do not mean to paint a broad brush here, just point out reality, and unfortunately reality flies in the face of a lot of bob's well meaning advice, though he does come off awfly testy.

The reality is that with a duty to country and each man a vote, adults bring their life experiences to any organization and voting is the accepted practice of our country.

three, I am glad your family all gets along and respects each other, but your model implodes when put in place with the transitional nature of boy scout program, either on the boy level or the adult way. It is and should be in constant flux. The materials from BSA are very useful, but many times are designed for a utopia not realized, except for Bob's units, in the rest of the country.

Also, it is disengenious to come off the like the expert all the time, not acknowledge the diversity of opinions, but rather hide behind rules and regulations. bob you once said in a post that it is o.k. to stir the pot, just stick with the ingredients. I believe you should taste your own medicine on this. If not, maybe you should find a relaxing fun hobby, instead of being the Boy Scout Police...I checked, there is no such animal in the BSA.

Being helpful is one thing, Being rude and ornery is another.

[sctmom]

Bob, The cubmaster is at the den meetings for a few different reason -- reason #1 his son is there, reason #2 it give him a chance to communicate (with handouts) to the den leaders weekly. As a den leader, I have every right to attend a committee meeting if I wish. Have you ever played the game "gossip"? I tell the cubmaster, he tells the committee, what if there is a misunderstanding? Oh, wait, I know, that's my problem or his problem,etc.

 

If we had 10 den leaders and 6 to 8 committee members, to meet all at once would not be productive. But having 5 den leaders and 3 committee members and 1 cubmaster (no assts.), one meeting covers it all. We all have to do what works sometimes. I think the books say den leaders SHOULD meet separately, I don't think it is a LAW.

 

Even at the troop level, there are some decisions that must be made as a group or at least most adults want it made as a group. Should we have the yard sale here or there? Any suggestions? Any comments on why here or there? Okay we will have it there, yard sale person, go get that place reserved. It is for input and so you don't end up with dictators like so many people on the board talk about. The committee chair who makes all the decisions, the popcorn person who decides on a show and sell location or date that doesn't work with the majority of the adults.

 

If you don't have buy in from your group, you are putting yourself up for failure as a leader. Isn't this what we teach the boys?

[Bob White]

I never said don't discuss things, I said there is nothing to vote on. Do you really feel that a decision cannot be made by the Chairman of the committee or sub committee unless there is a vote? If you asked someone to be the popcorn Chair it is hopefull that they were chosen because they were the best person for the job. If they are the best you could get then let them do the job. If you are the chairperson of the rummage sale and can't decide whether to start at 8 a.m. or 9 a.m. then ask for input . Listen to suggestions and make a decsion, but don't waste peoples time voting on which time to start.

[Eagle74]

Ok, I think I've got a handle on this now (after reading three pages worth of posts).

 

Nowhere is it required that the committee votes. Nowhere is it prohibited for the committee to vote.

 

Committee members are assigned tasks / responsibilities and report back to the committee. Some tasks / responsibilities are broad - investigate, come back with a recommendation; while others are specific - call and make reservations report back on the time we will be going and the cost per person.

 

Some things need to be discussed among the committee (options presented; decision to be made that best serves all involved), while others do not (the naturalist will present the program the PLC desires at 1:00 on Saturday the 13th).

 

The committee may need to come to a "consensus" on some decisions. This requires "discussion". (Discussions without decisions are conversations or chit-chat)

 

Some "votes" are formal (can we see a show of hands - not required, but not forbidden) some are informal (OK we all think that sounds good - we see heads nodding in the affirmative).

 

So where's the problem? Am I missing something?

 

Operating any organization requires rules, policies, and procedures, but I have yet to see any organization where the rules, policies, and procedures are all-encompassing or cover every detail of operations. Two organizations with the exact same rules, policies and procedures will not operate in exactly the same manner. It is within those gray areas that organizations adapt to their circumstances, developing an operation that best fits the needs of its members, albeit under the umbrella of the established rules, policies and procedures. And that operation is in a state of flux, adjusting constantly to best practices for the organization while maintaining the boundaries set by the rules, policies and procedures.

[LauraT7]

Eagle;

 

THANK YOU! Somebody cut thru the fog and made it clear!

 

 

I think some of the forum comes down hard on Bob because he DOES know the book, but "the book" is often vague and seemingly conflicting with itself.

 

then when people "interpret" the "book" each reads slightly different things into it.

 

I think we have to remember the BSA is a volunteer organization, and that the "rules" are neccesarily lax in some areas because some leeway is needed to make things work. And if your troop / pack does things a little differently - and it works for you, and espcially, THE BOYS. Then those little deviations are fine.

 

some troops are short on volunteers, and some volunteers don't feel comfortable with the responsibility of decisions. you work with what you got - if you got lemons, hopefully you have some sugar to turn them into lemonaide!

 

On the other hand - if your troop is like mine - some sour lemons are hurting the boys - well, then maybe we need some rules to work things out.

 

I think sometimes we need to "hear" a little less judgementally. Bob shares alot of knowledge and experience that i respect - and if he sounds a little curt saying it - just consider that BSA takes reams of paper to say what he's trying to shorten into a little post here.

 

I try to soak in as much as i can from as many sources as I can, sort through it ans use what makes sense ans what i can back up. And in any case, as I always tell my boys - anything you find on the web has to be checked against real BSA documentation. The web is handy, but much of it is subject to error.

[Bob White]

Thank you for your patience Laura.

 

In reviewing some of my recent posts I see I have been quick to snap at folks. I have allowed my frustration with a few posters to control my etiquette and for that I apologize. I will try to be a kinder, gentler Bob White in further posts.

 

I honestly don't see vagueness in rules of scouting, only in the procedures where variety is allowable. My whole point on the voting issue I think has been widely misunderstood. Neither the BSA nor I say you can't operate a committee by voting, just that voting is not necessary or required. In most cases it slows down decision making and bogs the meeting down in micro-management.

 

Bob White

 

Actual submission pending Zorn's approval.

 

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Eagle74]

Thanks BW. As Laura mentions, you bring a wealth of knowledge and information to the forum and it is appreciated.

 

You remind me somewhat of a building code official that I deal with regularly, who seems to be able spit out the chapter, section, paragraph, and exact wording of everything in the building code. This kind of knowledge is very valuable to those of us who don't know the "letter of the law" for many things. It provides us with a checks and balances system that keeps us within the proscribed boundaries.

 

It's those gray areas, those "spirit/intent of the law" items, that require a balanced approach on everyone's part. And this is often where the best we can sometimes do is agree to disagree and move forward. It is in these situations that we either lead or look to leaders. It is for these situations that we need to develop leaders (Scouts - our future). It doesn't take a leader to follow rules, leaders take us down the right path in those areas between the rules. BW, this is where we need you to help us. You know the rules, share with us what works when the situation isn't black or white.

 

A snippet from my JLT presentation that helps me balance the rules and the gray areas:

 

Managers do things right; Leaders do the right thing.

Managers are referees; Leaders are coaches and cheerleaders.

Managers focus on what to do; Leaders focus on how to do it.

Managers focus on what to say; Leaders focus on how to say it.

Managers are responsible; Leaders are responsive.

Managers are quantitative; Leaders are qualitative.

Managers manage from the manor; Leaders lead from the trenches.

Managers look for things done wrong; Leaders look for things done right.

Managers initiate programs; Leaders initiate ongoing processes.

Managers develop programs; Leaders develop people.

Managers are driven by rules and limitations; Leaders are driven by goals and vision.

Managers are concerned with maintaining life; Leaders have a passion for life.

Managers are concerned with efficiency; Leaders are concerned with effectiveness.

 

Are these a part of the proscribed JLT program? No, but it's a value-added reflection/discussion that supports and I hope makes the program more fulfilling within the boundaries set by BSA.

 

Managers care for the body of an organization; Leaders care for the spirit; Good Leaders Do Both!

[Bob White]

Good point Eagle74,

I have felt so bogged down with some of the outrageous violations that appear on this board that I find myself using all my time shouting the policies rather than sharing the successes that can be had.

 

Try this at your next committee meeting, rather than vote tell the committee members you trust them and appreciate what they bring as individuals to the group. So rather than vote lets discuss the pertinent information and then allow the committees to create a plan and share it with the committee. when the plan is presented, rather than vote on it, discuss it. let the planner make the alterations they feel are best and then praise them for the work they have done. Let them know you look forward to the outcome and remind them to keep you appraised of progress.

 

It's friendlier, faster, and develops better managers within the committee.

 

Bob White

 

Actual post pending Zorn's approval.