Lack Of Clarity In Bsa Communication

[TAHAWK]

 

 

Scouting helps you learn good ways to communicate clearly.

   BSA  2015

 

It has been pointed out in another thread that what "animal" means in Second Class Requirement 6 is not fully revealed until one reads the BSA training materials for Introduction to Outdoor Leader Skills.  As another member pointed out, those materials are seen by only a small minority of Scouters.

 

To me, this is simply another example of a larger problem:  BSA is quite often not very good at expressing itself.

 

By that I do not refer to what may be deliberate lack of clarity, as with the explanations of " Reverent" or "Duty to God."  When there is no benefit to being clear, one may be vague by design.

 

Instead, I refer to the numerous cases where nothing would seem to be gained by lack of clear prose, and, yet, there it is.  

 

The "troop leader" may do this, and the "troop leader" can do that.  The BSA Glossary of Scouting Terms does not include "troop leader," and I can find no definition in any other BSA literature.  One may suspect that BSA usually means "Scoutmaster" by the term "troop leader," but what if the Scoutmaster is not present, as with our Scoutmaster who skips summer camp?  Can "the troop leader" be present in the absence of the Scoutmaster?  If no adult is present, say at a summer camp formation, and the SPL is present, is the SPL "the troop leader"?  One can speculate, but why be forced to puzzle out what BSA means when it would be quite easy to write what is actually meant instead of forcing the reader to deal with verbal slop?

 

It not a good solution to say that lately BSA has been actually willing to communicate with volunteers with questions, unlike in the bad old days of Battlin' Bob's regime. Communication with BSA, even in this more enlightened age, is a sometime thing.  Further, the volunteer may need clarity NOW, rather than clarification some days later or no response whatsoever.

 

What makes this all a great shame is that there are volunteers capable of clear writing who would help BSA communicate at no charge.  

[LeCastor]

We need a National Director of Scoutcraft to write our books for us.  

[TAHAWK]

LeCastor, I have been told by Bill's contemporaries that one of his unofficial jobs was to point out inconsistencies in BSA literature and insist that they be corrected.  That, alone, would help the problem of lack of clarity.  What would Bill have said about the G2SS discouraging "large sheath knives" and two BSA books on survival each suggesting use of bolos and/or khukuris (short swords, for those who don't know)?  I suggested, tongue in cheek, in a letter to BSA that perhaps these massive chopping tools got a "pass" under G2SS since they are carried in scabbards and not in a sheath.

[Gone]

 

What makes this all a great shame is that there are volunteers capable of clear writing who would help BSA communicate at no charge.  

 

 

 

 

We need a National Director of Scoutcraft to write our books for us.  

 

 

LeCastor, I have been told by Bill's contemporaries that one of his unofficial jobs was to point out inconsistencies in BSA literature and insist that they be corrected. 

 

 

After I left the military my first job was working in non-profits; specifically working on the organizations documentation and continuing ed literature to harmonize it...make everything consistent. The organization hired a library sciences person to organize a team of 10 people to pull this off. It took two years of detailed work. We met with volunteers, opened on online forum (back in the days of BBS systems ), accepted emails and even had a few focus groups. Point is, we turned over every stone we could talking to the volunteers in the US to get all the feedback on what was wrong with our documentation and continuing ed materials. After ALL this was done we worked with our continuing ed department to develop a new curriculum and new materials.

 

My point in all of this is my organization had a $3m budget for EVERYTHING, not just this project but for every aspect of our organization. BSA has FAR more than that. Fixing the communication problems BSA has does not take a rocket scientist. I was essentially a 20-something working on a team of 20-somethings lead by a 40-something.

 

BSA could fix this, but they need the right people making the decisions. This goes back to my point in other threads about BSA continuing to hire bean counters and internal types. They don't have the first clue how to run an organization and fix these problems. They know scouting, but scouting is not the problem.

[TAHAWK]

BW, I fear when you say they "know scouting," you are giving a good many of them too much credit.  Scouting bureaucracy, yes.  Scouting, no.

[Gone]

BW, I fear when you say they "know scouting," you are giving a good many of them too much credit.  Scouting bureaucracy, yes.  Scouting, no.

 

Very true.

[MattR]

BW, I fear when you say they "know scouting," you are giving a good many of them too much credit.  Scouting bureaucracy, yes.  Scouting, no.

Case in point: squirt guns.

 

There's a clear lack of leadership at National and by that I mean there are all sorts of players pulling in different directions (traditional scouting, bean counters, religious, lawyers, ...). It's difficult to write coherently and concisely when everyone agrees. When people don't agree we get committee reports for boys to read.

[JoeBob]

BSA could fix this, but they need the right people making the decisions. This goes back to my point in other threads about BSA continuing to hire bean counters and internal types. They don't have the first clue how to run an organization and fix these problems. 

Once the bean counters are in place, the organization is doomed.

 

Bean counters are comfortable with other bean counters who think the same way that they do.  They hire more bean counters. 

Bean counters are NOT comfortable with people who know their stuff, because bean counters fear being found out.  So they attack, diminish and try to marginalize subject matter competent folks.  Bean counting becomes more important than growing beans.

 

How do you ever get rid of the BSA bean counters?

I fear they are entrenched beyond the ability of C4.

[NJCubScouter]

I think the problem is twofold.  Some of the writing is vague, but additionally, when there is "supplemental information" that might be necessary to fully understand and implement something in one of the "main books", I don't think the BSA does enough to get that information into the hands of those who need it.  For example, in the training syllabus Tahawk mentioned, I don't even know what training course you are talking about.  Is it a training course on advancement?  If so, I doubt our Scoutmaster knows about it, and I am fairly certain that the older Scouts who are signing off the younger Scouts on their requirements don't know about it.  So a Life Scout is signing off a Tenderfoot Scout on his 10 wild animal identifications, but if all of US are unsure of whether frogs or salamanders or starfish fulfill the requirement until we are presented with clarifying language from a publication completely separate from the Handbook, just imagine the position the Life Scout is being put in.

 

And much to my chagrin, I also don't know about that training syllabus - and I was a troop advancement coordinator for three years.  There's got to be a better way to do this.

 

As for "troop leader", maybe this from the Guide to Advancement will help, or not:

 

 

 

What Does “Unit Leader†Mean? Throughout this publication the term “unit leader†refers only to a Cubmaster, Scoutmaster, Varsity team Coach, Venturing crew Advisor, or Sea Scout Skipper. “Unit leadership†is used as a generic reference to any adult leader in a unit and as such would include the unit leader.

 

I would say that if "unit leader" in the context of a troop means "only" the Scoutmaster, and not ASM's (or SPL's or anybody else), "troop leader" probably means only the Scoutmaster.  But why should we have to guess?  And if my reasoning is correct, then why even use "troop leader", they should just say "Scoutmaster".

[Gone]

 

How do you ever get rid of the BSA bean counters?

I fear they are entrenched beyond the ability of C4.

 

First you need a CEO that recognizes the problem and is willing to take the steps to make the correct changes.

 

However, given the comments made by Gates (see other thread) he clearly had gulped the Kool-aid and is not focusing on what needs to be done.

[packsaddle]

Sputtering......FLAVOR AID! It was Flavor Aid that the people drank at Jonestown. NOT Kool Aid. How many times do I have to correct you guys?

[Gone]

Sputtering......FLAVOR AID! It was Flavor Aid that the people drank at Jonestown. NOT Kool Aid. How many times do I have to correct you guys?

 

It's like saying, "Give me a Kleenex!" when you really mean tissue. It is an allowed substitution.

 

Besides, we volunteer for BSA...directionaly correct works. 

[TAHAWK]

One cause of the inconsistency problem is what a friend at BSA (Yes, there are friends of ours there.  They are just outnumbered.) calls the "Bubble Problem."  The Safety Bubble issues safety rules. The team on Journey to Excellence does the same from their bubble.  The Advancement Team bubble ditto.   And so on. (Anyone old enough to recall the song "Tiny Bubbles"?

 

Take the latter two bubbles.  The first wants lost of "success" so they decree that a weekend in a building playing electronic games is a "weekend campout" for JTE purposes.  Meanwhile, the advancement team defines "camping" as under canvas or the stars doing, you know, like camping things.  This phenomenon is repeated endlessly.

 

Gates is the President.  That position looks more like Chairman of the Board for BSA.  The Chief Scout Executive is effectively the CEO and COO, as with councils.  The Chief controls the information flow to the President and the Board, and all the department and "team" leaders report to him, directly or through direct reportees.  

 

And, judged by objective results, the Chiefs have not been very good for years  They were there because they good at getting up the bureaucratic ladder, not becasue they were good at directing the organization to meet the organization's goals.  Such a situation is hardly unique but common to most all bureaucracies. Heck, books have been written about how this works.  "Incompetency" in terms of objective results is less important than competency in acquiring and holding on to power.  See Ameritech.

 

The new Chief looks like he might be a different sort of bird.  We shall see.

[NJCubScouter]

Sputtering......FLAVOR AID! It was Flavor Aid that the people drank at Jonestown. NOT Kool Aid. How many times do I have to correct you guys?

 

It appears that the answer would be "an infinite number of times."  And I know there's an "infinite number of monkeys" joke lurking in there somewhere.

[qwazse]

My favorite JTE peeve is an example: Silver has been the highest value in BSA. Why would they put gold at the top JTE level? Do they think committee members are girl scouts?

 

But, why does JTE need levels anyway? Just get your score. See if you can beat it next year. If you're a commish, call your units whose scores dropped the most. 'Nuff said.

 

Sometimes, I feel that the problem is not not necessarily writing inconsistently, it's writing too much.