Is BSA failing by "Corporate" standards?

[jkhny]

An article in the news discussing corporate performance brought up an interesting point. Publicly held corporations are accountable to their shareholders. Even those managed in a way that benefit their own executives instead of shareholders have to defend their actions. Dissidents can challenge management and force their ouster when performance falters.

 

B.S.A. has been failing on a very pragmatic basis.

 

That's a simple fact.

 

Dispute the cause but numbers in Scouting programs continue to decline with no end in sight.

 

Despite an unending focus on adding members, the number of boys enrolled in Scouting has declined steadily for the last half dozen years (for decades with only minor pauses). Even the "official" count lists only 3.1 million boys in B.S.A. (participating at any point in 2004). Active enrollments at this very moment are likely 2.6 - 2.7 million. Boy Scouts has less than 1 million - by official numbers.

 

Whatever strategies are being used by current management to stop this trend, they are failing. Even if you blame a "changing world" - management is failing to cope. Even professionals note the "fossilized" thinking at the National level. A new perspective is clearly needed.

 

Adult membership is declining even faster - a fact which B.S.A. itself admits. Many Councils have Scouters over 70 or even 80 filling positions because nobody else is available. Council level adult membership has dropped by 27% in the past 5 years (I suspect due as much to deaths as volunteers walking away).

 

Meanwhile you have enrollment scandals - Executives are faking performance to meet "goals" - The very accounting the organization uses to report performance is "deceptive" (being kind). The "year end youth served" statistic is focused on maximizing "Counts."

 

One can argue that this is akin to counting gym membership "sales" by counting ALL memberships - however short. But what is the point of counting single visit trials or month long "introductory memberships" - when the goal is membership that lasts a dozen years. What are you trying to accomplish and what are you counting? If you are exposing boys to Scouting but NOT keeping them as members you are FAILING - no matter what other "numbers" you tout. Boy Scouts is NOT some gym that WANTS people NOT to come back after taking their money, is it? or IS it?

 

Camps for boys are being sold off while new offices for staff are being built. Another way of puttin it is: Valuable capital assets used to support the organization's core function are used to fund management "perks".

 

Increasingly limited facilities contribute to decreases in program participation. i.ei. If you sell off your "factories" where do you get work done?

 

Salaries are NOT in line with comparable industries - low level staff seem underpaid while high level staff are grossly OVERpaid.

 

The ONLY "success" is occurring in a program secondary to your stated purpose. This program was set up to receive funding that you cannot legally receive for your primary function. This program exists ONLY through charitable donations and politically directed funding. Without them it would not exist.Many would describe this program as "contrived" at best. It has been the source of overstated claims in the past.

 

Your own employees are raising serious issues about the veracity of various management claims and even going to outside law enforcement agencies - who are finding those claims justified.

 

Management REFUSES independent audits of performance claims. Any audits that are conducted are carefully and legally limited in scope - but even those have shown "overstatement." The organization deflects serious inquiries about performance by dismissing them with rhetoric about "Attacks on our values."

 

Even with complicit oversight from Hand-picked boards, how long do you think this situation would exist in ANY other corporation?

 

Would you excuse such management failures in your own company?

 

Why does it continue to exist in Boy Scouts?

SHOULD such a situation exist ANYWHERE in Boy Scouts?

 

Again, if not seeing these things in your Council, great, but be sure that is so. But it is clear that there are serious issues with the performance of NATIONAL leadership, irrespective of your local Council performance.

 

It should be possible to discuss these issues rationally and without rhetoric but clearly, B.S.A. National does NOT wish to do so. They hide in offices, issue statements saying all is fine or "we're working on it" while they still protect lying and incompetenet staff while throwing out dedicated volunteers who point out the obvious.

 

If you truly care about Scouting, should you excuse the long term failures of paid management?

 

If a volcano's rumbling nearby, Chicken Little may have a point.

 

 

[Prairie_Scouter]

jkhny,

 

You can expect that some of the posters here are already warming up their flamethrowers, so you can expect some interesting responses

Thanks, tho. A very interesting post.

 

Legally, I suppose that BSA is a "private club" and as such, they can do what they want, including things that would get corporate executives in a good deal of trouble in many states. That includes appointing board members that make sure the status quo is protected, if they so wish. But, as a group that markets itself as being "all American", I'd think that they would want to be above reproach. That begins by being transparent in their dealings, and I have to think that they, at least at the National level, are anything but that. And I think that that is unfortunate. Using the corporate analogy, they have created effective means of stifling dissent; if you don't think what they are doing is right, you are shown the door.

 

BSA at the local level does a lot of good work. I continue to believe that that's where Scouting really is. The National office seems to be, well, somewhere else.

 

 

[Eamonn]

Some years back a little Lad arrived at the Scout Hall. I was busy, Scouts were paying into their Scout Bank accounts, flags were being made ready, the SPL was searching for something. A ASM was running a game.

I was too busy to make this little Lad feel welcome.

As luck would have it he had come with his best friend and the next week they both arrived back.

If he hadn't the fault would have been mine.

When I served as District Cub Scout Training Chairman. I accepted the offer from the local VFW to use their upstairs hall for what was then the Cub Scout Basic training. I had been in the downstairs hall. But I never checked out the room until the night of the training. That night I found that there was only one electrical outlet, which didn't work and there was no light in the bathroom, as if this wasn't bad enough the stairs were very steep and badly lit. The training was a disaster. I'm sure that the impression that I made on these new Den Leaders was not good.

Two years ago I was one of the people in our Council who was not only for bringing in a food service company to take care of feeding our summer campers, I was a driving force. Last summer the food was good, this year all the reports I have had lead me to believe that the food was worse than bad. Selling summer camp will be a chore next year.

While I am in no way perfect. I really do try to live by the Scout Oath and Law. I don't cheat. I think that cheating is wrong. When the District I serve has made Quality District, it has done so fair and square. There is no way anyone can "Pull a fast one" I'm on top of all the membership reports and have tracked them for over ten years. I admit that I have at times applied pressure on people to start new units. Of the six Crews that started over the past few years five didn't recharter. The one that remains informs me that they will have approx 90 members this Fall.

Camps are being sold because the funds are just not there to maintain them. In our Council we have a lot of good people who willingly will give up time to pound nails, and build buildings, however they just don't see that the nails and bricks need to be paid for and some of them are a little shy when it comes to putting their hand in their pocket.

I see things very differently than it seems you do.

I don't see this as any sort of "Us and Them".

We (Me) are here to serve the youth in our programs. I am the BSA. I like to think that I'm doing my best to do what I can to help and support Scouting in the area in which I live.

I try really hard not to forget that we do what we do for our youth members. If that means that I attend meetings of the local Lions Club and allow the local newspaper to take photos of me accepting their check. I smile for the photo. If it means eating over-cooked turkey at the Rotary meeting and telling tales from the Jamboree, I can be very entertaining.

The little Lad that will join Tiger Cubs, has joined to have fun. The Den Leader wants him to "Search, Discover and Share".

His Parents like the idea that Cub Scouting has:Citizenship

Compassion

Cooperation

Courage

Faith

Health and fitness

Honesty

Perseverance

Positive attitude

Resourcefulness

Respect

Responsibility as its core values. His parents don't give a monkeys uncle about corporate standards to them and the little fellow the BSA is his Den, his Pack and the adults who deliver the program.

My son is now a fairly intelligent 17 year old. He hears a lot about the "Non-program" end of Scouting in our Council. Last night we had dinner with our Scout Exec. and Council Commissioner. He was there when we discussed the hurt the United Way has cast upon our Council, but even at 17 and even with all this chatter, he wanted to talk about the fun the Camp Staff had when they finished tear down and went to a local amusement park.

The quality of the program that attracts youth members and retains them doesn't come from Irving, Texas or from your Council Service Center or even the home of the District Chairman, it all happens at the unit level. In the eyes of the most important people in the BSA,the corporate guys are the people are the adults who work with them and for them week in and week out.

Eamonn

[dsteele]

Amen, Eamonn.

 

Unc.

[Eamonn]

It would seem that a lot of the organizations that charter BSA units are thinking.

From what I'm hearing they seem to think that the BSA is the right program for the youth that they serve.

These Chartering Organizations, the groups that in fact "Own" the units are very well represented and do have a voice which is heard loud and clear by the National Council, in fact many of these groups make up the National Executive Board.

These Chartering Organizations think that the BSA and the values of the BSA go hand in hand.

As for "standard bearer for "ethics and morals" Surely you have to agree that the BSA is a reflection of organizations that it serves, because that is not only what they want, but they are the people who sit on the board and decide such things?

So while some volunteers might be less than happy with some things that they might not like locally, the organizations that have been chartering units long before these "Unhappy Campers" were around and will, in all likelihood continue to charter units long after we are all pushing up the daisies. Do seem to be very satisfied and happy to continue partnering with the BSA.

Cardinal McCarrick and the other Bishops who said the Roman Catholic Mass at Fort AP Hill during the Jamboree seemed to be very happy with what they saw.

Eamonn.

[concerned_scout66]

> "If you truly care about Scouting, should you excuse the

> long term failures of paid management?"

 

No, but I think the problem is bigger than just poor corporate management.

 

For decades, BSA has avoided direct confrontrations and encouraged America's youth to "respect and defend the rights of all people". Recently, however, BSA stopped respecting and defending and now allows outside interests to use it as a battering ram in their fight against Americans who have different opinions regarding certain controversial "moral" positions.

 

IMHO, BSA should get back to the business of supporting America's youth and let the churches wage their own war to take away the rights of people they don't agree with. If BSA gets out of the morality definition business, those people who used to donate "liberally" will return. It's a guarantee and United Way will be at the front of that list.

 

Concerned.

[Hunt]

The tensions here can be found in any large organization which has a "national" decision-making hierarchy and local volunteer units. If you have ever been a member of a church that is part of a national denomination, you know what I mean. There are always people like jkhny who decry what the national organization is doing--and they are often right. There are always people like Eamonn who point out the good work done on the local level--and they are usually right.

But there does come a point at which problems with the national organization can really impair what the local groups are doing. This has led some churches to split, for example. As an example, the United Methodist Church has come perilously close to schism over the question of ordination of gay clergy, and the split was largely between national leaders and local leaders. Similarly, a scandal about misappropriation of funds by the executives of a charity can wreck the efforts of the volunteers to collect money--that has happened with some United Way organizations.

 

As I see it, there are two general themes in criticisms of BSA National: First, the familiar theme that it is shooting itself in the foot by maintaining its membership restrictions. While this may be true, I don't think that issue should turn on its effect on membership. My church would get greater attendance if it served free beer. The membership restriction issues will have to be resolved through the hard job of evaluating the principled arguments on both sides.

Second, though, is a more general management question, and this seems to be what jkhny is talking about--things like overpayment of executives, misallocation of resources, etc.--the sorts of things that have caused problems for other non-profit organizations. It seems to me that if these kinds of problems do exist, they should be fixed, and no big discussion of the values of Scouting and the quality of the local program is necessary. To me, the revelations about inflated numbers is a warning sign that there is an organizational problem. I'm not sure what rank-and-file members can do about it, though. I wouldn't quit over it, unless it made it impossible to deliver the program locally.

[fgoodwin]

jkhny: what exactly do you suggest we, as unit level Scouters, do about the issues you raise?

[jkhny]

What do you do?

 

First: Make sure YOUR Council is doing the "right" thing.

That means making sure that you as volunteers DO have a voice in Council management through the Executive Board. Make sure these people represent you and are not hand-picked by paid staff. Now most could care less about that level if things are working. But you need to pay attention.

 

Second: Make sure your Council is ACCURATELY reporting "numbers" - enrollments, "Quality" status and all else. Odds are you don't really have a clue what's being claimed outside your own unit. If there's a kid still on your roster after renewal that should be gone, get them off. Insist. No "errors" - isn't that Council's job - ACCURATE record-keeping?

 

Third: Stay informed. If people are asking for and reading reports of the Exzecutive Board Meetings and Annual Reports, if "leadership" knows people are paying attention and calling them on "inaccuracies" - you're far less likely to have problems.

 

Fourth: When you hire "paid professionals" - know who you're hiring. Do NOT take another respected staffer's "word" - look hard and deep. Our SE's problems were clear and visible - and SHOULD have surfaced in a superficial Google search. THIS forum had detailed posts relating problems with him - his name is Jack Sears.

 

Fifth: Have a problem, let others know. Don't let weasels hide. This forum could be a valuable tool to keep professionals honest. Colleges have "Student Guides to professors" - the web has "Rate your Teacher" sites. All in all, with enough posts, the truth is pretty clear. There are some really horrid professionals out there who should NOT be in Scouting. And BSA NEVER seems to fire these guys. WHY? Who knows? Have a problem - let others know.

 

WHY NOT Have a "Rate your Scouting Professional" category? BSA sure doesn't ive much official weight to how volunteers feel about paid staff - though it's supposed to be part of their evaluation - "Volunteer Relations". If so, our DE should've been gone years ago.

 

Finally: EVERY time something happens that's an embarassment to Scouting - LET NATIONAL KNOW YOU'RE UNHAPPY

 

How many people complained about all the enrollment scandals, asking National What's going on?

 

When Willis got fired by Holmes, how many people called up and said - What kind of BS is this? Why is HOLMES still employed and the volunteer whistleblower out?

 

When Smith got arrested for child porn - yeah it "could" happen anywhere - how many people called up National and said "This is an embarassment to ALL of us?" And why did't he get FIRED!?!? "allowed to retire?" Want to bet he wouldn't get his pension if FIRED?!?! He committed ILLEGAL acts?!

 

DEMAND that BSA be HONEST.

Smith DID have regular contact with kids.

Holmes did lie about numbers and still is.

Hansen didn't report child abuse.

Atlanta is still lying about "disadvantaged youth"

 

 

I don't hae all the answers but some steps are clear.

 

FIRST STEP

 

DEMAND DIRECT ACCOUNTABILITY FROM BSA. If they won't give Scouters a direct voice in running Scouting (instead of the readily manipulated "representative democracy"), provide a REAL way to register complaints and problems - one that WORKS.

 

WHY doesn't BSA have an "Inspector general's office" that is INDEPENDENT of the PAID staff. Why isn't there ANY easy, DIRECT way to register complaints with BSA about anything?

 

If something is wrong in your Council - where do you go? What do you do if the problem IS your Scout Executive and he's hand-picked the Council's Board. They're a bunch of local businessmen, unfamiliar with Scouting. They "trust" the "professional." Hope you never have to find out how impossible it is to deal with that situation.

 

About "INDEPENDENT" volunteer panels in BSA - right now, they're NOT. BSA's Appeals Process for volunteers who've had their registrations revoked is a joke. The "independent" volunteer boards are clearly manipulated or guided by paid staff - Park (the legal Counsel) pops up regularly in these things though he has no defined role. A volunteer who speaks out and angers his SE can get thrown out of Scouting - even when right - as Willis' case shows. They'll probably get slandered by BSA in the process and portrayed as a "troublemaker" Any excuse that can be used, will. Have any skeletons in YOUR closet? But odds are they won't tell you why. You have to prove you're innocent of ..."something". This forum has detailed the process. I've confirmed that truth with Scouters ousted from BSA. There arer too many this has happened to. An "open and transparent" organization does NOT stifle valid dissent and fact-based criticism.

 

 

 

Transparency. Let independent outsiders audit membership so management can be held accountable - not this BS have a volunteer sign off on counts internal we can still hide this and lay it off on a volunteer "solution." Procedures, Bylaws, EVERYTHING should be openly available to ANYONE. RECORDS should be openly available to ANYONE. Transparency keeps you honest and does alot to insure "ethical and moral" behavior.

 

Accountability. ANYONE - ANY volunteer or professional - that lies, steals or breaks the law (fails to report child abuse to authorities, distributes child porn, whatever) is out of Scouting - fired if a professional. Accountability tkaes care of when you aren't "ethical and moral" Make paid staff directly accountable to those they serve. Make volunteer evaluations the MOST important part of a professional's evaluation. Do the Scoutmaster's Cubmasters and others think he's doing a good job. Is he helping them run Scouting?

 

Feedback - Establish an INDEPENDENT "Inspector General's office"

Give volunteers an easy way to register feedback - and LISTEN to them.

 

CHANGE - No matter how you look at it, fundamental changes are needed. The focus on "numbers and money" isn't working and has perverted the outlook of professionals. It's time to focus on kids and Scouting. The paid professionals SHOULD exist to SERVE and SUPPORT the volunteers running Socuting. They should guide us and keep us "honest" and true to the basic program, make sure we're trained, etc. BUT they serve US and are OUR employees. That attitude is sorely lacking in the professional ranks. Many seem to feel we exist only to help them meet their "goals"

 

Texas needs a clean sweep and a rethink. The current group has been in long enough. They've failed. The mindset is ossified and autocratic. Most Councils are working - some are outstanding.

 

Take what's best from them but give Scouters a REAL voice in Scouting. Perhaps it's time to rethink the whole paid staff structure. In too many Councils, staff and overhead are the biggest expense and they're NOT doing much besides "raising money to pay their own salaries.

 

Transparency, Acountabliity, Feedback and CHANGE. That should do it.

 

 

AND FINALLY - as far as what you can do.....

 

Let BSA know you're unhappy with the continued failures. Say you want change. HOLD the PAID LEADERSHIP of BSA to HIGHER standards that we as volunteers are held to.

 

 

 

 

[stlscouter]

jkhny-while I don't disagree with everything you have written I would submit that what you have said could be said about almost any community non-profit organization-for example your local school districtthe non-transparency-some over paid people at the top- inflated test scores-people being promoted when they should be dismissed etc. I don't think these shortfalls are unique to the BSA.

I find myself agreeing more with Eamonn.

[fgoodwin]

Personally, I don't have an axe to grind either with my local Council or with National.

 

There's not much I can do about what's going on in other Councils, but apparently, not everyone feels that way.

 

More power to them . . .

[GernBlansten]

So FGoodwin, are you saying you are OK with declining enrollment of scouts?

 

If anything, I think that's where National is falling down. They can justify their salaries and other bennies if they are attracting new membership and growing the BSA. Where's the growth?

[Eamonn]

Hi GernBlansten

I can see what I can do in my local community to recruit youth members into Scouting. I'm a little confused what you think the guys from the National Office can do?

Do you think Roy L. Williams would do a better job of recruiting youth in your area? Or would someone who knows the area and the people in the area do a better job?

This year, maybe more than in any other year National has really gone all out to provide some really great tools that will help recruit more youth members. Having G.M. come on board shows that it's not the same old, same old.

Of course there are those who will see having corporate America coming in and helping as a bad thing.

I haven't looked at the reasons why our Cub Scout numbers are down. I do know that every now and then in the District in which I serve we see a "Bubble". A time when there is a lot more boys of Cub Scout age who are available to join Cub Scouting. When this happens recruitment seems easier. Sad to say once the bubble bursts and the extra Lads are not available, things go back to normal and we are left wondering why our numbers are not what they were.

While recruitment does help with the membership total, there is also retention. Keeping the youth that have joined in the program. When it comes to retention, we are only as good as the last meeting. Youth members quit when the meetings are not good. The guys in the National Office don't deliver the program, so how can we blame them when Scouts quit because they are bored?

Eamonn.

[fgoodwin]

GB: where do you get the idea that I'm OK with falling memberships?

 

And assuming that you have a problem with that, what can you do about it? All I can do is recruit for my local units -- there's nothing I can about the situation in Atlanta or any other Council, outside of my own. Even within my own Council, the only direct impact I can make is upon the numbers within the units I'm part of.

 

Sticking my nose in somebody's else's business doesn't exactly comport with a Scout being friendly, courteous or kind.

[Bob White]

You want more boys in scouting???

 

Then you should focus on having better unit meetings.

 

Follow the program better.

 

Keep the promise of scouting.

 

Learn your job and do it the best it can be done, then worry about forming an opinion about what you think others should be doing.