The Bureaucracy of Scouting

[qwazse]

The removal of the patrol overnight exemption was just after your SM HB. We discussed it here:

http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=307375&p=1

 

OGE, sure, I'm using a little hyperbole. But, I sincerely believe our citizens are better served by properly trained patrols of scouts out in the field. Having to coordinate a rendezvous with adults for their overnight unnecessarily limits the range of a patrol.

[OldGreyEagle]

I am no stranger to hyperbole, but equating the end of patrol overnights without adults to the murder of a human is not scoutlike

[John-in-KC]

First, I agree with OGE. No surprise there.

 

Second, acco, as Beavah often makes the point (though not in his words) ... Able to parse BSA program materials for inconsistencies? You betcha!

 

RichardB, that bubblewrapping National Professional protector of Scouts from all risks remotely imaginable, was the one who basically declared it here.

 

 

[Kudu]

 

He wanted his name to be forever associated with what he destroyed.

 

Too soon?

 

The point all you Wood Badge enthusiasts are intentionally obscuring is that you "parse" the droppings of your office cubical "leadership skills" role-models, for rules that (in what Baden-Powell called Scouting) should be provided in a copy of Policy, Organization, & Rules (PO&R) given to each and every Scouter.

 

No surprise there.

 

B-P's last PO&R:

 

http://inquiry.net/traditional/por/proficiency_badges.htm

 

[OldGreyEagle]

If Baden-Powell initiated the Boy Scout program to teach youth such a flippant attitude to human life, then perhaps its a good thing it's being erradicated(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

[JMHawkins]

Appropriate adult leadership must be present for all overnight Scouting activities...

 

So if there is no appropriate adult leadership present, then it isn't a Scouting activity, ergo it's not subject to BSA rules.

 

Which is just a fancy way of saying a group of friends can get together and do whatever their parents allow them to do. The only two things the G2SS does are a) give BSA a fig leaf to avoid liability if something goes wrong, and b) make it harder for the SM to guide the Scouts in planning and conducting a safe overnight activity, thereby increasing the odds of something going wrong.

 

It is a perfect exercise in bureaucracy - increasing the chance of trouble while decreasing the accountability for it.

 

 

[qwazse]

Pardon me if while growing up reading the "Scouts in Action" section of Boys Life about medal of honor recipients who while on an overnight with their patrol, happened to complete a rescue of some hapless stranger that I took it to mean that "patrols, well prepared, save lives."

 

Heck, I remember one time while hiking with my buddies (back in the day when you just got together and did those sorts of things) that we crossed a pipeline and smelled gas. We hustled home and reported it. There's no telling if it amounted to a big problem or not. But that's what I think patrols should be doing: covering their community and taking a little responsibility for it.

 

That's why I will still support any group of youth who come to me with a plan to go hiking and camping on their own, and help them have a solid plan.

 

Put too many layers of bureaucracy in their way, and you have groups of guys who stay home and play video games.

[Get Outdoors]

Unfortunatly I've seen first hand good adults leaving the program due to the bureaucracy at council and national. At a certain point a person starts to ask themselves is it worth it?

 

 

[RichardB]

Really folks? Chapman? I liked the Star Wars analogies much better.

 

And don't go getting the basement guy started on 5 shot J-frame revolvers.......

 

As to the topic at hand.

 

Perhaps one could look at the role of the national council as developing program. The program is delivered locally via local councils and community organizations. Could it be that the program is not being delivered as desired, designed or in the best interest of youth?

 

Think about it......

 

Richard

 

[Kudu]

 

RichardB writes:

 

I liked the Star Wars analogies much better.

 

The one where you take Luke's laser away, and replace it with leadership skills and ethical choices?

 

 

[qwazse]

Rich,

 

The thing is, councils take national's attempt to simplify things (like the tour plan instead of a goofy array of tour permits) and bludgeon volunteers with them (like attempting to require them for every gathering outside your regular place of business).

 

The medical form is now a small novel. On the bright side, if one of our languages is ever lost to history, archaeologists will now be able to use it as a Rosetta stone.

 

And everyone waves that insurance bogey man!

 

Simple program changes can be stifling. An SM gets wind of boys planning to camp at Farmer Ben's, they already have someone who will take them in their land speeder and pick hem up after breakfast the next day. Rather than supporting them, he -- having never read an original handbook or looked on Kudu's site --requires them to have an adult present. No adult is available to go. Trip gets cancelled. The empire's hold on the galaxy strengthens.

 

Okay, it's a stinky Star Wars analogy, but you get the picture.

[OldGreyEagle]

"The one where you take Luke's laser away, and replace it with leadership skills and ethical choices? "

 

I am pretty sure the Jedi believed in Servant Leadership and the Jedi respected Life, in any form

 

 

[RichardB]

Okay, so now its the council beating folks or some insurance company? It's a vicious circle that keeps repeating. "We" are the solution to move the movement forward. "they" are just the scapegoats and execuses. What can you do to move the movement forward? Do it. Repeat.

 

 

[Eagledad]

Believe it or not, the bureaucracy problem is 10 times worse at the Cub Scout level. Bureaucracy is probably not really the best word, but it fits in the way this discussion is going.

 

Less than 50% of Webelos crossover to the troops. That means the BSA has looses around 50% of all its 10 year old scouts. That is just the 10 year olds, what if we add the average losses of the younger scouts ages. The BSA could be loosing maybe as much as 75% of the Cub families before the scouts reach the Boy Scout age.

 

I know there are several contributers to the losses, but it basically comes down to bureaucracy. We have to understand that most boys at the cub age do what their parents tell them to do. If the BSA looses the parents at the cub age, they lost the kids forever.

 

And while I agree that liability is a big driver of bureaucracy at the troop level, membership is driving it at the cub level. Tigers alone requires three times more volunteer time to manage than any other age group because of scout's maturity. That is not including the required participation of parents.

 

Experts say that volunteer organizations can expect an average of 20 months from their volunteers. That is less than two years and the Cub program is five years long.

 

Scouting is hard and bureaucracy is a major contributer. As much as I hate the requirement for adults at Patrol campouts, it's moot if the scouts are driven out of scouting before they even reach the troop program.

 

Barry

[RichardB]

Okay, so now its the council beating folks or some insurance company? It's a vicious circle that keeps repeating. "We" are the solution to move the movement forward. "they" are just the scapegoats and execuses. What can you do to move the movement forward? Do it. Repeat.