New Incident Reporting Kits and GTSS updates

[qwazse]

Discussed this with SM while hiking this weekend. For these near misses, can we just send in a photo and general description of each boy in the troop? Proactive reporting would save so much time!

 

Seriously though, I think structured interviews of a stratified random simple of unit's across the nation will be more effective and accurate. Most leaders have a good idea of the troubles they had last year, and your more likely to get them to rattle off that info than to report every incident pig or small.

[Twocubdad]

We went skiing this weekend with 38 people. As best I can figure, I need 147 copies of the Near Miss Incident Information Report (No. 680-017).

[Tampa Turtle]

I'd rather push this down to the SPL and PL's--they should be becoming more aware. But that wouldn't be acceptable.

 

 

[John-in-KC]

And folks wondered why I opened the bureaucracy thread...

 

http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=377558&p=1

 

I'll go hurl now. Oh, wait, that means I'd have to file an incident report...

[Tampa Turtle]

Make it a "Best" one!

[frankpalazzi]

More make-work projects for someone to justify their job.

 

I'm giving this one my "OH, PUH-LEEZ."

[HICO_Eagle]

Gre-e-e-e-eaa-a-a-at. More paperwork. Love it. Is National really looking for more ways to drive out dedicated volunteers?

[JMHawkins]

For these near misses, can we just send in a photo and general description of each boy in the troop? Proactive reporting would save so much time!

 

Just mention you drove to the trailhead on a public road. The near miss there probably dwarfs anything that (almost) happened on the trail.

 

Seriously though, I think structured interviews of a stratified random simple of unit's across the nation will be more effective and accurate.

 

If the objective is getting information out to other unit leaders about things that can go wrong, this would be great. My insurance company sends me a quarterly newsletter/magazine with lots of stories about claims. The highlight is always on what could've been done to prevent the damage or injury. I've learned more about safety from those articles than I ever have from restrictions coming from on-high.

 

 

Most leaders have a good idea of the troubles they had last year, and your more likely to get them to rattle off that info than to report every incident pig or small.

 

We have a strict policy of hushing up pig incidents around here. It's only common sense - the last pig incident in the Pacific Northwest nearly led to war between the US and Great Britain.

[Oak Tree]

Help me understand why when offered tools to capture this data and you have a chance to provide it you chose not to do it?

 

It may indeed be interesting to have this data. In particular, it would be useful information to know about serious injuries and what their causes were.

 

That said, there are a lot of reasons why people will choose not to do it.

It's more paperwork with no benefit to the people who have to fill it out.

It's doubtful that the data is going to be made available in a useful way.

There is no guarantee that the data won't be used against you. I doubt people want to create a paper trail of every single thing they've ever done wrong in their troop that resulted in someone getting hurt.

It's clear that not everyone is going to fill it out, so any statistics will be meaningless. Since the statistics will be meaningless, why bother to contribute?

It creates an atmosphere of bureaucracy in the troop, which isn't what you want when you are trying to create a sense of adventure.

 

I'm sure there are more, but I think that hits the high points.

 

[qwazse]

- the last pig incident in the Pacific Northwest nearly led to war between the US and Great Britain.

 

JMH, are you picking on my autocorrect? Do we need to file a "near miss" for damage to self-esteem?

[RememberSchiff]

Adding a search point for the discussion in progress before the forum update occurred. Hope this helps - RS