Signs that your unit might be Adult Led

[blw2]

 

The boys tried the NSP last year and decided that it didn't work.  The new scouts cross over at different times, so it was difficult for the older scouts to teach any skills because in two weeks three more scouts would arrive.  Also, the new scouts kept asking why they weren't allowed to be with the rest of the troop.  The new scouts want to hang out with the older boys -- that is the fun part of joining boy scouts.

 

The PLs and APLs have to adjust a bit to accomidate the new scouts.  It becomes a little bit more difficult to keep the patrol focused and on task.  It seems like the guys who have been around for a year and have matured just revert back to being Webelos.  We now have the older boys who are in the JASM and ASM (18 year old Eagles) roles provide coaching and support to the PLs and APLs so that they have strategies for handling the addition of scouts to their patrols.

 

 

....

 

 

Of all the problems that were created from the induction of NSPs, this was my number one struggle. See, I came from the sixties and seventies where scouts joined a troop as soon as they qualified by age or Cub scout advancement, so troops received new scouts 1 or 2 at a time all year long. It wasn't a hardship on the patrol because they started teaching the new scout skills as soon as he joined. As new leaders starting a new troop in the 90s, we were trying to build our troop from the memories of our youth experiences and the Webelos crossing over by Dens threw a huge wrinkle at us. After a few years and loosing a lot of first scouts, we eventually figured out how to make it work for a boy run troop. I know it can work, but the NSP is a challenge for the boy run program. The NSP system changed a lot of traditions that are here to stay even if troops don't use the NSP in their program.

 

Barry

 

... and then Stosh wrote:

It sounds as if the boys are coming at different times and from different packs.  The dynamics of a cohesive existing den then doesn't apply.  At that point whatever works would be the better option.  Hanging out with the older boys means less work for them as well.  The older boys are seen as a more "adult" like figure at that point.

 

This is an interesting line of discussion to me, as I am currently watching the exact thing live, in living color!

To stosh's point... I don't even think that's the case.... since den's aren't always cohesive anyway.  The bigger point is they are boys of a similar age, with similar interests and abilities.  If some want to split out later into other existing or new patrols, great!  why not?

 

My son and one den mate crossed into our troop.  The other den scouts went with their dads and older brothers to a neighboring troop... and it was interesting that with the exception of only one boy, this split happened right down the dividing line of the two cliques of boys.  All but one of these boys, by the way, were with us at day one at the Tiger round-Up meeting.

 

So anyway, my son joined the troop 2 weeks ago.  We are expecting 4+ new scouts from another pack in a few weeks.

 

My observations so far are these:

• This transition dead time could have been better thought through by the troop perhaps since the reality is that it's only a few weeks, and it really is no big deal at all.
• The first official troop meeting, after joining, happened to be a COH
• before the meeting, the two new boys hung back in the corner a few minutes, and were promptly requited by the FOS presenter to pass out the pledge forms on his queue.
• It wasn't too long after, that the two most senior scouts invited them to join their patrol's table (as a guest).  they pulled the shy card and hesitated, so the two older scouts joined them... and in the down time when the actual ceremony wasn't happening they looked through the handbook together... and otherwise talked to the new scouts generally about the troop, practices, and so on...
• The following normal troop meeting, they joined one of the patrols (as a guest) and since my son already had his new handbook he got a couple of signoffs.  Since the next meeting will be elections, the new scouts even submitted the applications with their 1st, 2nd, and 3rd choices of which POR they would like to run for! (troop practice)... for what its worth they both selected PL as #1 and APL #2.... 
• So in summary... these new boys are currently called the no-name patrol, and it was decided that their patrol's election will be delayed for the other new scouts in a few weeks (I think an adult decision).  Otherwise, they are feeling welcomed, and are coming up to speed just fine.  Maybe a bit slow, but it's only for a short time!

My thoughts:  

IF I were deciding or suggesting, instead of all of that I would suggest that the two new scouts now would be coached as if being a patrol right now.... because in reality they are. Since the elections are happening now, I would include their patrol in it. Let the two elect which one is PL... and just get the thing up and running.  They would camp as a patrol of two for the upcoming monthly camp, etc...

Then, by the time the additional scouts join they have a functioning (loose term i know) patrol already.

You might say it's not fair taht the other boys weren't included in the election or patrol name selection.  I say so what....How is any of that any different for some theoretical scouts that join say in April?

keep no-name for now if you'd rather... but for both points it's only till the next election anyway, and if there's a general consensus later on among the patrol that they want to change the patrol name, ok that would be just fine.  

 

But if for some reason it must go like it has, then I would have suggested that it could be just a bit smoother if the elections, and the following ILST planned soon after, had been pushed back a bit... even though previously planned I'm sure.  They could have easily been shifted a few weeks, a couple months back when the packs' crossover dates were known.... and one of the patrols could formally act as a "foster parent"... but this line of thinking ONLY because it's known more scouts are coming in short order.

[qwazse]

Well, we're working toward being boy-led.  There was a crop of Scouts who Eagled out and then due to lack of recruitment, there were just 6-8 Scouts left in troop and of those, the Venture Crew keeps poaching them.  Due to some significant recruitment efforts, we just bridged over about 8 Scouts this past summer from my son's Webelo Den (helped that I was Den Leader, haha!) and now we have three or four older Scouts (including SPL and sometimes the ASPL) there to guide the new Scouts at any given troop meeting but they are outnumbered.  So, while we're trying to be boy-led, frankly, it's been a bit tricky b/c even the older Scouts, barring the SPL and ASPL, are not that much older.  But, we're working toward being as boy-led as possible.  It's a work in progress...

That sense of "poaching" is unfortunate. I lean pretty hard on my venturers to put serious effort into their troop or youth group. On the flip side, a troop's better to lose older scouts who would rather not be there, than never get any cross-overs because the older boys are aloof. Sometimes, you just don't get a group of older boys who are the nurturing type. Sometimes, however, there are personality conflicts between a scout and his SM. If the SM really relates as a mentor, a boy will stick around even into adulthood unless war or college takes him elsewhere.

 

Meanwhile, it's easier to for a young scout to find jobs to do. (E.g., "Johnny, could you ask around 3 or 4 parents to see if they can give us rides to camp? Let me know who tells you they can." If the SM does that once, pretty soon the PL will catch on that he's to ask that question when it comes time to organize the next event.)

 

One suggestion: talk to those SPL/ASPL and see if they would like to be Den Chiefs. You've got a one-patrol troop. It's fine if one of those first-years is PL and actually has most of the management responsibility for meetings, etc ... Let the SPL/ASPL position be a laid back "call me if you need anything" deal. The idea is to slowly get these older boys acquainted with the next couple of years' potential cross-overs, so that by the time they're 14, they'll have some personal investment in their well-being as they move into the troop.

[Stosh]

In my Venturing Crew we "poached" boys from troops but expected them to stay registered in their troops and Eagle.  Most did, a couple didn't.

 

I see no difference between Venturing skimming off the top boys of a troop, it's what happens in a age based unit all the time.  This is a result of the older boys not getting autonomy to do high adventure and must always answer to the troop as a whole.  This way they can cut ties with the troop and establish a program they would like.

 

If one has a SM who understands how this works, he/she can retain the boys in many cases.  Having been a CA and SM both, I can see how this works.

[Krampus]

I see no difference between Venturing skimming off the top boys of a troop, it's what happens in a age based unit all the time.  This is a result of the older boys not getting autonomy to do high adventure and must always answer to the troop as a whole.  This way they can cut ties with the troop and establish a program they would like.

For us the key was making sure there was a carrot and stick approach, so to speak. You HAD to demonstrate your leadership as a guide, instructor or JASM for our "leadership corps". That was the only way in. You were expected to STILL hang with the troop, guide new leaders and give demonstrable leadership during events.

 

I'd sum it up this way, all of our events were designed with a sloping level of difficulty. This took some time to work in to the boy led model, but it eventually worked. That means that for any one activity there is a basic, intermediate and advanced level of difficulty. Each Scout can learn and enjoy based on his position along the red sloped line. Also, this allowed older Scouts to demonstrate leadership, earn their way into the leadership corps and go off and do their own adventure WITHOUT decapitating our unit of older scout leadership.

 

Does it always work? Nope. Life, school and other events end up decapitating you sometimes. But that is where the younger scouts can step up. Same model works then too.

 

[Eagledad]

In my Venturing Crew we "poached" boys from troops but expected them to stay registered in their troops and Eagle.  Most did, a couple didn't.

 

I see no difference between Venturing skimming off the top boys of a troop, it's what happens in a age based unit all the time.  This is a result of the older boys not getting autonomy to do high adventure and must always answer to the troop as a whole.  This way they can cut ties with the troop and establish a program they would like.

 

If one has a SM who understands how this works, he/she can retain the boys in many cases.  Having been a CA and SM both, I can see how this works.

This is interesting, we saw this too in our area, but it was in the same age patrol troops. For some reason these troops top out at age 14. My opinion is that it's less to do with patrol style and more to do with program maturity. Troops that struggle to plan activities more advanced than just using first class skills struggle to hold older scouts. After doing three years of the same thing, scouts burnout. 

 

By the way stosh, older scouts wanting just high adventure is a myth. I and others on this forum have found that the majority of scouts 14 and older can take it or leave. What they want is a program that challenges them mentally and physically. That is why Venture Patrols and many Troop created Venturing Crews fail so miserably.

 

And it is never mentioned here, but the troop adults also burnout in these programs. If the troop adults are burning out, why would we assume the older scout wouldn't. 

 

Scouts 14 and older have the mental and physical maturity of adults. The nature of adults is measuring their place in society by comparing themselves to others. So instinctively older scouts like challenges where they can measure their performance. That is why giving them the reins of a complicated program like a troop feeds that challenge.  If it wouldn't be interesting for the adults, it will be interesting for the older scouts.

 

Barry

Edited February 9, 2016 by Eagledad

[Stosh]

I don't know if that has been the case in my part of the country.  The older boys wanted autonomy, a chance to participate in a program that isn't so much youth oriented as adult oriented.  Boys by the time they are 14/15 have spent half their scouting career doing the knot tying, the compass orienting, the hurry cases of first aid.  If they stay that means the second half is going to be just like the first, I'm thinking that ANYTHING is better than a continual repeat of the first 4 years.  I survived 4 years in scouting and had had enough,  It was going to be just more of the same until I turned 18.  Where's the adventure in all of that?

 

Instead I see a "midlife crisis" for the boys at this point.  They are faced with having to "lead" the show for a bunch of 6th, 7th and 8th graders.  Wow, does that ever sound like a root canal!  They have developed skills in camping, cooking, they like hiking, canoeing, and doing all the kinds of things most adults only dream about but these kids have the energy and drive to accomplish it.  I went to Philmont at the age of 50.  I would have enjoyed it more if I had been 16 or 17. 

 

So what do we see happening?  Boy mentally checking out of the program.  They lay back, maybe let attendence drop off, maybe put some time into their Eagle requirements, but at this point they are no longer focused on anything but getting through to the end with or without the Eagle.  Parents play a major role at this point with the guilt tripping, withholding driver's licenses, and other forms of coercion to get the boys through what they started.  But the boy's hearts aren't in it.

 

We are in a program that helps young boys become men.  We do good at getting them started but we are terrible in following through to the end.  Seriously!  How many boys really want to go to council summer camp 7 times in a row?  After about 3, they want something more and if BSA doesn't provide it, something else will and so with the lack of programming for these boys, they leave and I don't blame them one bit.

 

The adult led troops produce about 2-3% Eagles from the hundreds that start.  But boy led troops are no better.  Out of the 97%-98% of the boys that have left the program, now many exit interview have been held so as to learn to improve the program?  30+ years of BSA and I haven't heard of any in my area.

 

As far as the Eagle thing goes, either one gets it at a young age and then quits, or they simply take a calculated hiatus and come back for the last minute project.  Either way the older half of the program is basically sidestepped.

 

Yes the older boys may not want all HA in the second half of their scouting career, but what are the alternatives?    Just what is it that BSA offers for these kids?  Does anyone ever ask them what they want?

Edited February 9, 2016 by Stosh

[Hedgehog]

First Committee meeting I attended, adults decided on one of the campouts "because that is an easy on to do."  My wife had to talk me out of quitting after that meeting.

 

With the new SM, things changed.  We DID ask the boys what they wanted to do.  The answer was COPE courses, rock climbing, backpacking treks, canoeing, climbing mountains, bicycling to camp, backpacking into summer camp, sea kayaking, camping in Maryland and touring Washington D.C. and more.  We did those.  We kept asking -- the adventures on the boy's lists now are building snow shelters and sleeping in them, cross country skiing and snowshoing, horseback riding, fishing, mountain biking, sailing (on a lake and also overnight on a larger boat) and a wilderness survival campout.  The latest trend at camps are Mountain Boards -- pretty much an all terrain skateboard.  Yep, that's on the list.  An upcoming campout is an Iron Chef competition and maybe an hour at the rifle range.

 

We've gotten so activity based that one younger scout asked about the last campout, "so what is the activity we're doing?"  The boys got to decide when they got there and settled on a hike, throwing knives and tomahawks and playing chess.

 

It took some adult leadership to get the outdoor program kickstarted and into the hands of the boys.  Now it is their program.  The next goal is to get them to come up with the complete plan for the trip -- including figuring out where we camp, how to get there, what activitiy and how we get the gear or supplies to do it.  Then, we've really taught them to be prepared for life.

[Eagledad]

 

 

Yes the older boys may not want all HA in the second half of their scouting career, but what are the alternatives?    Just what is it that BSA offers for these kids?  Does anyone ever ask them what they want?

Yes, all the time. They liked to be challenged as I mentioned above. The alternative you asking for is handing them the responsibilities of running a program where all the scouts continually grow from their experiences. You keep suggesting that older scouts don't want to lead younger scouts, If that was the case, then why do adults do it? These scouts are just adults looking for the same satisfaction of successfully running, not leading, but running a program where their actions determine how others will participate in their program. They have ownership of a program where they have responsibility for the lives of other scouts. Can you not see the romance of that vision?

 

We have a motto, let's develop the troop so that adults (18 and older) are out of business. 

 

Maybe I'm the problem because that is how our troop runs. Over 40% of our troop is scout 14 and older. There has to be a reason why they like the program. Sure, we have plenty of high adventure, but I find that only 25 percent of the older scouts join a crew at least once a year. A Troop should be a place where a scout likes to go because the program makes him feel good about himself. Ask an older scout how he can make a difference and he will have some ideas. 

 

I remember one 16 year old scout who wanted to talk to me because his dad, an ASM, was giving him a hard time because he took a job that would require him to miss the last half of the troop meeting. He said, and I will never forget this: "My dad misses meetings all the time for work and nobody says anything. But if I miss a couple of meetings, the adults get upset". He liked the troop and he wanted to keep coming, but he could only give the troop 30 minutes of his life at each Monday meeting and he didn't want to be hassled. I keep saying that if adults are truly humble, they will learn and grow from listening the scouts. I grew a lot at that moment. After we discussed this for a while, I asked him if he would mind coming in 30 minutes early to coach new grub masters. He loved the idea and boy did he take off with that responsibility. He told me later that he just wanted to be part of helping the troop. It wasn't a babysitting job to him, it was helping young scouts do better. 

 

The biggest hindrance to scout growth is adult preconceived ideas. None of us are the smartest guys in the room. But we can listen and change what doesn't work. Our program was pretty successful, but I tell anyone who listens that we did a lot more things wrong than we did right. What made us successful was the willingness to fix problems. 

 

I wish I could say fixing a troop to where older scouts like to stay and work the troop program is as easy as flipping a switch, but it takes time because both the older scouts and adults have to grow and mature enough to effect changes. The adults have to quit projecting their idea troop on the scouts and the scouts have to learn to project ideas to improve the program. That takes time to develop, at least for us. But wow what a satisfying feeling of accomplishment when I think back on it. 

 

Barry

Edited February 9, 2016 by Eagledad

[NJCubScouter]

We've gotten so activity based that one younger scout asked about the last campout, "so what is the activity we're doing?"  The boys got to decide when they got there and settled on a hike, throwing knives and tomahawks and playing chess.

It's good to have a variety of interests. But you've got to watch out with the throwing knives and tomahawks, the next thing you know the kids will be using water guns.

[Eagle94-A1]

As you know, my troop is HEAVILY adult run, and I hate every minute of it. Our NSP is having so much trouble, that I was appointed the NSP ASM. Did I mention I HATE NSPs because they tend to be Webelos IIIs? This weekend was interesting. NSP had the same repeated problems and PL would not take responsibility. No one would. I went off. until the SPL took over, let me calm down, and then I went back to them because the SPL was beginning to go off on them. For whatever reason, they won't listen to the PL, whom they elected, nor the TG, who voluntarily left this patrol to help them out because they needed help.

 

Last night the same thing happened again. Bickering and arguing over what to do on Scout Sunday. It got to the point where I had to interevene and tell them point blank, do I need to treat them like a bunch of Cub Scouts? That got their attention for about a minute. I left the room and when I and another leader pass by, its back to the arguing and bickering. Since nothing was accomplished while they were suppose to, TG said they need to stay a few minutes after the meeting to finish what they were suppose to do. Out of the 9 who were at the meeting, 4 stayed. So TG will be telling his PL what will be going on on Sunday.

 

Part of the problem is that the NSP comprises Scouts that A) came from 4 different packs at 4 different times. We had 2 packs  do their main Cross Over in December 2014. Then the 3rd pack crossed over in Marc or April 2015. The we had 2 folks who met the 10 and Earn AOL requirement in 6 months, and crossed over in June instead of December with the rest of the den. Then we got another new Scout who transferred troops.  It's a mess and EVERYONE, youth and adult is starting to hate NSP concept.

 

I can see why the original TG, who was elected PL, acted like a "dictator" or "boss" as several Scouts put it: that was the only way for him to get them to do things.But having a dictator, or an adult for that matter, telling them what do to every single minute doesn't help them grow.

 

Nor does the 'Mommas" or in one case "Grandma." Instead of letting their sons take responsibility, learn to over come adversity, and do things for themselves, they allow their sons to sneak in a cell phone when the adult leaders specifically asked that no cell phones be brought to camp. And when that sons calls in the middle of the night complaining about the heat, bugs, and sleeping in tents, instead of telling him to deal with it, drives over first thing in the morning to pick him up. Instead of letting the kid take responsibility for the position they were elected to do, they tell the other scouts to do it. Instead of letting the kid do the shopping, they do it for them, buy more than what they are suppose to buy or buy the wrong stuff altogether, and go over budget, then complain when they have to pay out of pocket for the food that ends up being thrown away becasue the kids didn't pack it right in the cooler. Try to talk to them about it, and they make excuses.

[Stosh]

Eagle94-A1

 

One of the things that one must remember with NSP is that they need time to work out the trust issues with their leadership.  Being the "Boss" and yelling only delays that development.  Keep it in mind that coercive leadership of an established PL will curtail a lot of that initial chaos and will divide and conquer the younger boys in the various patrols where they don't have the majority of numbers.  

 

I had the Webelos II boys in our scout meeting tonight so as to assist them with the AOL requirements  and acclimate them to the troop hopefully to recruit them.  It was a "den" meeting of boys from 3 different packs.  I as an adult had trouble handling them, an inexperienced PL and a semi-experienced TG would still have been eaten alive.  It was frustrating but I never did a "signs up", called on boys that raised their hands, and basically talked softly enough that if their buddies were jaw-jacking I wouldn't be heard.  About half way through they began to police the disruptions themselves and settled down.  No, we didn't get as much accomplished as I would have liked, but told the boys upfront the more they waste time the harder it's going to be to remember all this stuff.

 

When it was over, I lied through my teeth about how well they paid attention and thanked them for paying attention so well.

 

We are putting up with this Cub Scout "stuff" so the boys get their AOL and we might gain a few new scouts to cross over.  Well, when all was said and done, two boys came up and said they wanted to join our troop.  So in spite of all the chaos, not paying attention, goofing off, and disruptions, we doubled the troops size and we're only just starting .  There were about a dozen boys in attendance and another dozen boys that couldn't make it because of other commitments.  So as frustrating as it was, I count it as a tremendous success!  It was just last weekend a lot of the boys (including the two that expressed interest in our troop) had been on a visit outing with another troop in the area. 

 

Do I expect next week to be just as chaotic?  Probably, but Rome wasn't built in a day.  NSP's require finesse and patience, not brute force.  Not many boys (and even adults) can pull it off gracefully.

[Eagle94-A1]

Yes, one reason why I'm glad the SPL took over and let me calm down. And then when I saw that he was getting agitated I stepped in again since I was calm. You would think that dealing with the exact problem at least 4 months in a row, no/missing duty roster on the trip, they would heed the advice of their SPL, and the adults who had have to get involved when they got out of control.

 

SPL asked me to work the situation last night while he dealt with the older scout patrol. So we role played and demonstrated how it  ad uty roster can be created within 7 minutes, and that included going off on tangent just like they do.

 

As for the TG, I know he's getting frustrated. We talked a little about them not listening to him, and his decision to let them learn the hard way and make their mistakes. Also talked about how the PL isn't really doing his job, and how the PL ignore him, then tries to blame him for his mistakes. And he's a little peeved that 1/2 the patrol left when he told them they need to stay a few minutes to finalize Scout Sunday, including the PL.

 

I so wish I wasn't the NSP ASM.  I feel like CS leader again at times. I see my son growing up and taking responsibility ( YEAH!), but then getting frustrated when they don't listen. And for me, It's very uncomfortable because at the back of my mind I'm thinking am I an interfering daddy, or a long time scouter who is getting involved as needed.

 

As Ramirez sang to Macleod, " B-A-L-A-N-C-E balance."

[Stosh]

@@Eagle94-A1

 

A couple of insights might help, otherwise just ignore me. 

 

You don't want the job so that's a point in their favor.

You don't want to be a CS leader, that's another point in their favor.

They are pushing the envelop which is normal for any new group.  Yet another point.

No one's listening to anyone.  The score is rapidly going against the adults/leaders here.

Tag teaming with the SPL isn't working, TG isn't leading (no one listens to him)

 

Out of all the people involved, the new scouts of multiple factions (totally out of control) , the PL (has given up) , the TG (totally inept) the SPL (respite provider but not really his direct job) and the ASM advisor (who doesn't want the job in the first place) , who's leading?  If this is a servant leadership situation, who's taking care of whom?  I don't see anyone taking care of anyone else. 

 

So what's the next step?  This situation has progressed to a Level 4 conflict which means it has turned into a game of brinkmanship on everyone's part.  Who's going to quit first, who's gonna outlast whom?

 

Level 1 conflict - Duty roster didn't get done. Simple enough to solve, just make one up.

Level 2 conflict - NOBODY listens to ANYBODY ELSE.  So who's NOBODY? and who's ANYBODY? confusion is introduced.

Level 3 conflict - PL isn't doing his job, the boys won't listen to the AG. Someone has to take the blame for this.  Which doesn't make any difference who started what.

Level 4 conflict - There's someone in the process who's keeping this fiasco going because it's kinda fun and that someone's in the game to win.

Level 5 conflict - Divorce.... Game over, it isn't fun anymore someone's gotta go! You have designs set on leaving as ASM Advisor...right?

Level 6 conflict - Jihad - I'll destroy you even if it means I'm destroyed in the process  You will go on record to tearing apart this NSP even if it jeopardizes your position as ASM..

 

While I can see your situation progressing up to Level 4 teetering on Level 5, one has to keep it in mind the only conflict that can be resolved is Level 1 conflict.  Most authorities on conflict management will emphasize that once the situation gets to Level 4 it's pretty hard to resolve it.

 

The first step in conflict management is self-control.  One can't do much about "the other guy" but one has full control of self.  That's where one needs to start.   So are you a leader?  What people is one expected to take care of and is it being done?  So are you a manager?  What tasks have to be done, how does one measure a success in this situation.

 

Me?  I'm kind of a leadership kind of guy and would focus on who the people are that one is being asked to take care of, and start from there.  Once one gets their head wrapped around that, things will look a lot differently.

[Eagledad]

 

Part of the problem is that the NSP comprises Scouts that A) came from 4 different packs at 4 different times. We had 2 packs  do their main Cross Over in December 2014. Then the 3rd pack crossed over in Marc or April 2015. The we had 2 folks who met the 10 and Earn AOL requirement in 6 months, and crossed over in June instead of December with the rest of the den. Then we got another new Scout who transferred troops.  It's a mess and EVERYONE, youth and adult is starting to hate NSP concept.

 

Are you saying this group of scouts have been together in the troop roughly a year? NSP?

 

Barry

[Eagle94-A1]

@@Eagle94-A1

 

A couple of insights might help, otherwise just ignore me. 

 

You don't want the job so that's a point in their favor.

You don't want to be a CS leader, that's another point in their favor.

They are pushing the envelop which is normal for any new group.  Yet another point.

No one's listening to anyone.  The score is rapidly going against the adults/leaders here.

Tag teaming with the SPL isn't working, TG isn't leading (no one listens to him)

 

Out of all the people involved, the new scouts of multiple factions (totally out of control) , the PL (has given up) , the TG (totally inept) the SPL (respite provider but not really his direct job) and the ASM advisor (who doesn't want the job in the first place) , who's leading?  If this is a servant leadership situation, who's taking care of whom?  I don't see anyone taking care of anyone else. 

 

So what's the next step?  This situation has progressed to a Level 4 conflict which means it has turned into a game of brinkmanship on everyone's part.  Who's going to quit first, who's gonna outlast whom?

 

Level 1 conflict - Duty roster didn't get done. Simple enough to solve, just make one up.

Level 2 conflict - NOBODY listens to ANYBODY ELSE.  So who's NOBODY? and who's ANYBODY? confusion is introduced.

Level 3 conflict - PL isn't doing his job, the boys won't listen to the AG. Someone has to take the blame for this.  Which doesn't make any difference who started what.

Level 4 conflict - There's someone in the process who's keeping this fiasco going because it's kinda fun and that someone's in the game to win.

Level 5 conflict - Divorce.... Game over, it isn't fun anymore someone's gotta go! You have designs set on leaving as ASM Advisor...right?

Level 6 conflict - Jihad - I'll destroy you even if it means I'm destroyed in the process  You will go on record to tearing apart this NSP even if it jeopardizes your position as ASM..

 

While I can see your situation progressing up to Level 4 teetering on Level 5, one has to keep it in mind the only conflict that can be resolved is Level 1 conflict.  Most authorities on conflict management will emphasize that once the situation gets to Level 4 it's pretty hard to resolve it.

 

The first step in conflict management is self-control.  One can't do much about "the other guy" but one has full control of self.  That's where one needs to start.   So are you a leader?  What people is one expected to take care of and is it being done?  So are you a manager?  What tasks have to be done, how does one measure a success in this situation.

 

Me?  I'm kind of a leadership kind of guy and would focus on who the people are that one is being asked to take care of, and start from there.  Once one gets their head wrapped around that, things will look a lot differently.

 

 

Stosh,

 

I try to keep an open mind.  So no, I won't ignore. I do think I need to adapt. I'm use to adults staying out of the way of the Scouts, interjecting only for safety purposes. And obviously this isn't working. Heck my son even said it last nite when we talked to the situation. He said they won't listen to anyone "except the adults and possibly the older Scouts." Wish I still had my 3d edition SMHB, because I remember  a training regime in it that may work.

 

I guess I'm the one keeping the situation together at the moment. Not so much for fun, it's not, but more to keep the other two patrols that are working from being split apart at this moment. Several of the adult leaders want to split up the patrols NOW. I keep saying let the situation continue until the next  unit elections, which will be May 2nd. Why until then? Because that is traditionally when new SPL and PLs get elected. Also I want to give the older Scouts a chance to come up with ideas to change the situation that the adults may not have thought of. At the moment, it's looking like the a complete revamp of the patrols into mixed aged.  I am pushing and promoting and commenting that the Scouts need to decide which patrols they join instead of assigning them to patrols. 

 

But maybe we do need to speed up the transition process?

 

 

Are you saying this group of scouts have been together in the troop roughly a year? NSP?

 

Barry

 

Yes, that is correct.

 

2 have been in for 13 months. One of those went to summer camp with the troop and attended 10/12 of the monthly activities since joining. The 2nd Scout went provisional to summer camp, and has been to approximately <50% of the activities.

 

2 have been in since April. One went the entire week of summer camp, the other had mom pick him up Wednesday at 6:30AM. They have gone on 10/10 monthly activities.

 

2 have been in since June. Both went to summer camp and have done 6 or 7 /8 activities since joining.

 

1 came aboard in October. hasn't done any of the monthly activities due to conflicts with parental custody.

 

1 came aboard in January. He's truly brand new. But he missed the camp out due to the parental custody situation.

 

And we got a brand new guy on this last campout and meeting. He's in the process of filling out paperwork.

 

And that is another reason for the frustration. 6 of the 8 Scouts have been together since June, and they are still acting like a bunch of Cubs.

 

Again, I think part of the reason was their original TG, who became the PL later. In stead of guiding them and teaching them to do things on their own, he told them exactly what to do and how to do it. Although there were some complaints about him as TG, they did elect him PL. Complaints did increase during his tenure as PL, and when his term ended, he went back to his original patrol.  Thinking back, the duty roster situation started when he didn't attend a trip, and no one had  a copy of it. Then it has continued since he moved back to his patrol.