Leader Selection - Not A Myth.

[Eamonn]

Having been in business for many years I go along with the old adage "If you pay peanuts you will get monkeys."

In Scouting if we fail to select the right person for the job, why are we so surprised when they mess up?

We have a really good tools at our disposal if only we would use them.

It seems that when things don't go as they should that idea of selection never happened, that the chartering organization is some kind of Utopian idea that no one ever heard of and the dog ate my home work. These new leaders that have been selected have to be approved by the chartering organization when they are first selected and have to be approved annually at rechartering time. All appointments in Scouting at the volunteer level are yearly.

Before we even start the selection process we need to have as a goal that we want the best possible person to fill the position. We are not looking for any old Tom, Dick or Harry. We are selecting a quality leader or committee person.

So how do we go about selecting quality leadership?

First we need to gather a selection committee. The head of the organization or the COR appoints a selection committee. In the case of an existing unit this might be the Unit Committee, but other people might be asked to serve on this Selection Committee - Parents and members of the chartering organization.

Next we need to list the qualifications that the candidate needs to possess for the position that we are filling. Everyone on the selection committee needs to know what traits we are looking for.

Then we need to list all the Candidates.

This is done by the Selection Committee brain storming a list of all possible candidates.All candidates names are listed and no committee member can disqualify a candidate at this time. Once the list of candidates is complete the committee should numerically prioritize the list.

Then as leadership is the responsibility of the Chartering Organization, the head of the Chartered Organization needs to approve the Committees selection.

Once you have the approval of the Chartered Organization. The selection committee selects three people to be the visitation team. This team should consist of: someone who knows about Scouting, Someone from the Chartered Organization and someone who knows the prospect.

Then the visitation committee makes an appointment to visit/ interview the candidate at home. A truthful presentation should be made of what the position entails and what the expectations are, the presentation should end with the person who knows the candidate asking him or her to serve.

If they say yes three things need to happen:

An adult application needs to be filled out.

Fast start training needs to happen (Within 48 hours.)

And an announcement needs to be made to the organization and others of the candidates acceptance of the position .

If the candidate says no. He should be offered another position .

The selection committee then goes back to the head of the Chartering Organization for his approval of the second name on the list.

You can find all these steps on

Selecting Cub Scout Leaders, No.13-500 and Selecting Quality Leaders, No. 18 -981.

We owe it to the youth in our programs to select the best possible leadership.

Eamonn

[Bob58]

Well said, Eamonn. Well Said!

 

I reminded of the saying,

 

"Hope is not a plan."

 

And I would like everyone to understand if we dredge up those publication numbers every once in a while...

 

Selecting Cub Scout Leaders,

No.13-500

Selecting Quality Leaders,

No. 18 -981.

 

I understand the need to look elsewhere when one fails, I'm sure that I have. Failed and looked elsewhere but part of delivering the promise is making sure that there is good communication with Charter(ing) Organizations and if at all possible a second string of trained leaders.

 

I believe that we also need to convince parents that if they think their child benefits from the program they need to ask how they can help the unit, & therefore their child. (All are not born to lead, but everyone has a role.)

 

Thanks for the entre Eamonn

[Fat Old Guy]

Gee, our selection process consists of asking, "Who wants to be Scoutmaster?" and then grabbing the slowest person heading out the door.

 

 

[frank10]

No, not a myth, more a joke.

 

Ok, we start by making our list of what we are looking for... Good with kids, good leadership track record, schedule that allow them to be there, etc.

 

Then we try to match it up... Well, there's Tom, but he's with another troop, there's Dick but he's a coach for soft ball and there's Harry but he's got no background for the job.

 

OK, lets meet again next week and try again while the troop fades away.

 

[Eamonn]

I am sad that you see that way.

We use this method all the time and it works.

I am interested to know how your unit goes about selecting quality leadership?

Eamonn

[Laurie]

wingnut -- doesn't that hurt the program in any way? It sounds like your unit is strugging.

 

That is how the pack I serve used to do things, basically to just have whoever was available lead. Sadly, those leaders either (1) left--I mean just dropped away--didn't even say anything & wow, what a loss in youth in followed that! or (2) were discouraged, worn out, tired & ready to quit. The problem is that noone was selecting leaders; leaders were basically put into place by fellow leaders because they wanted their sons to have Cubs and it was serve or your son won't have a den. Now, here's the thing: we have all positions filled, have a CR in more than name, and we are working hard on building a relatioship with the CO. We did it all backwards, we know that, and here's what we feel hurts us: we know we need for someone from the CO to assign leadership and to make sure leaders are suited for the roles they are in. Therefore, we have talked to our CR. This year, he did look over the names and did ask a little about the leaders, but he was new too so he was learning as we were. This coming year, as we need to add leaders, he has agreed to get involved more. He is coming to an event in the near future just to meet the adults and the youth. Therefore, though not ideal, it is the beginning of selection rather than leaders getting stuck. The more things are done in the right way, the more satisfied the leaders are. Their commitment has grown, and not one finds it easy to be a leader, but all find it worthwhile and make it a priority. I hope that what Eamonn describes will soon be our method, for so far, all BSA guidelines have strengthened the unit and the leadership.(This message has been edited by Laurie)

[frank10]

Note: my experince with this method goes back about 12 years ago and does not involve my current troop.

 

Our Scoutmaster droped out due to health and family issues. So we formed a selection committee. That's was the start of it all. They had no real idea how to run a troop and would meet each week and follow the program as outlined above. As I said, they got no where while the ASM's tried to hold things togeather.

The end of our problems came when we asked all the folks on the selection committee to step up and take a real role in the troop or get out of the way of the folks who were doing the real work. One of the Asm's steped up to SM, troop went from 20 to 40 scouts in a single year with 100% retention.

 

Eamonn,

Sorry if my original post came off as an atack, I should have reread and then toned down my reply.

[Eamonn]

In another thread I posted about 30 day goals.

I'm not sure if it is nation wide, but in my neck of the woods if you don't want to get something done you form a subcommittee.

One thing that I learned while serving as a District Commissioner, was that if you don't set goals and make people accountable for meeting them - Nothing gets done. You would never believe how long it took me to work that out. Month after month I would get reports that such and such a unit was a Red Unit, having such and such a problem and there was no action. Nothing was being done to fix the problem. Just the Commissioner informing me that they still had the problem.

I agree that a Search Committee that drags its feet is not going to be very effective.

Depending on the position or positions that need to be filled I would set dead lines. If we were looking for a couple of people to strengthen the troop committee maybe the 30 day goal would be OK. If it was a unit leader and the pack troop or crew was going to be without a leader I would think that 7 days would maybe be too long.

Eamonn

[NeilLup]

Last September, the Key 3s of our council met and determined that volunteer leader recruiting was the most serious problem that we had. They asked the council to do something about it.

 

So the Scout Executive and I prepared a 90 minute training on how to recruit. We start off with 45 minutes of instruction then do 45 minutes of practice and case histories. Surprise, we use the methods Eamonn listed. They work extremely well if you use them.

 

We have now presented this 4 times to 4 districts. We have been asked back to two of those districts and last Monday, I was asked to present the session to the entire professional staff of our council. That hasn't happened to me before

 

One thing I would add to Eamonn's excellent post. Recruiting is hard work and if you start out when your leader has quit, it has been 3 months without a leader and everybody knows it, it it tough. Really successful recruiting is a continuing process and a good Pack or Troop (or District or Council) should be continually thinking about who will be the next leaders. Ideally, if the SM or CM were to be abducted by aliens tomorrow, there would be a back-up leader ready to take their place. That isn't always the case, but it is a goal to work toward. The selection committee is really doing a good job when its main job is to select the back up to the leader, not the leader himself or herself.

[Twocubdad]

I've mulled on this thread for a couple of days. I'm not writing this to discourage anyone from using this method or to complain about it. But I think many folks, myself included, read things like this, roll our eyes and think, "Oh, please, could they possibly make this more convoluted!" At one time or another we have probably all (well, almost all) read some BSA guideline or suggested method and thought the same thing. Does that make us poor Scout leaders? Does it mean the guideline should be ignored?

 

First, you need to think about how and to whom these recommendations are written. They must be written for someone with absolutely no experience and no idea how to go about recruiting volunteers. They need to be very linear, covering every step along the way. They are written for a national audience and must be all encompassing. Sure, your unit may have some special circumstance that doesn't need to be addressed in a national procedure. I'm sure there is also some thought given to liability and other legal issues. The goal is to produce a one-size-fits-most, sure-to-work-in-most-cases procedure.

 

I don't want to rekindle the wing-it/real world vs. by-the-book/Utopian debate we just went through in another thread. Rather, I look at these things as the "ideal" way of doing something, or perhaps the "default" method. If I've never done something before and am looking for a resource, here it is. On the other hand, if I've been doing this for awhile but suddenly find I'm not having success with my own methods, here's a touchstone to go back to and reassess what I'm doing right or wrong, much as what Neillup did for his council.

 

I liken these things to the instructions that come with tools and equipment. I know not to touch the sawblade until it comes to a stop without having to read the instructions. On the other hand, last fall I helped a buddy put together a metal garden shed that must have had 9,000 pieces. Had we not precisely followed the assembly instructions, we would have been absolutely lost. Experience tells me what I can and can't do, when I need help and when I need to read the instructions.

 

As to the the specifics of volunteer recruitment, I have to admit that I've never read the document Eamonn references. I am familiar with the section in the leaders' handbook on voluteer recruitment and what I remember from my training is the idea that we should seek out the best person for a job, not just the first one who agrees to take it. I suppose we are fortunate in our pack that for the key leadership positions (Cubmaster, Committee Chair and Den Leaders) we seem to have always had well-qualified individuals step up and offer to fill these slots without our having to recruit them. In the three years I've been in unit leadership positions, I've not been disappointed in the quality of our volunteers. We have had people to drop out, sometimes in mid-year, but that usually relates to job changes or sometimes family issues. Honestly, I have more trouble filling some of the support positions, like newsletter editor or the leader of a particular activity. For those, we usually simply ask for a show of hands. We get by with that approach because for most of these jobs the greatest qualification is simply a willingness to do the job. We may have a Pulitzer prize winner in the pack, but if he or she is interested in editing our newsletter, they're not going to make a good volunteer.

 

The published procedures are fine and will work if you apply them. But if your method works for you, that's fine too. The bottom line is whether or not the volunteers you recruit are delivering a good Scout program to the boys in your unit.

 

(Disclaimer -- it has been difficult to write this without using the word "policy." I think I went back and deleted it. Note that in BSA lingo a "policy" is black-letter law that may not be altered, as compared to a guideline, recommendation or suggestion that you can follow or not.)

 

 

 

[Bob White]

I could agree with Twocubs assessment if it were not for the fact that lack of adult participation is so often a continual problem in so many units.

 

As a commissioner, lack of adult volunteers at the unit level was the most common problem in three districts that I served in. As a trainer the most frequently mentioned challenge during Pack Committee and Cubmaster training is adult recruitment. At Troop Committee Challenge training the most frequently asked question is "how do we get more parents involved".

 

Scouting draws from all walks of life for its volunteer force. Most people are not in a management or supervisory positions in their professional life, and so naturally the majority of volunteers are not either. Though selecting and recruiting might seem a common skill to some, most people have never been in a personal or professional situation where they needed to do it.

 

Scouting needs an abundance of volunteers to deliver the program in a quality manner. Because it is such a common challenge and since few volunteers are experienced in it, the need for a clear effective method seems obvious. The BSA has developed a process to fill that need.

 

Knowing how to select a recruit quality leadership is often the difference between delivering a "good" scout program, or the "best" scout program available. And to a scout that can be a huge difference.

 

Can you do it your own way? Sure you can. But if your way isn't working isn't it nice to know that there is a remedy available for you to use?

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Laurie]

Twocubdad, you seem to be the type of person who would find leadership selection to be fairly simple without it being so complicated. You also are not the norm I say that in the nicest possible way--it is a compliment in case you wonder. For me it would be easy to do this too; I've worked as a volunteer coordinator in a non-profit and have experience in this area. I also worked in another youth group that basically made us "jump through hoops" (for lack of a better term) in ensuring the right candidate was in place for the right position. The benefit in this is that it made it easier to avoid having leaders who simply weren't cut out for the role they filled. In one of the units I serve, we have a CC who took the position "just because it was open"--nothing at all was known of him. In this unit, there is now a problem brewing because this one person is pretty much on a power trip. He has little experience or knowledge but claims to know all the right answers and to have the power to make things work the way he believes they should. Had this person been chosen, rather than just taking an open position, this problem may have been avoided. This, to me, is the single greatest benefit in leadership selection. It is also a good tool for those who are not experienced in organizing leadership and/or who are uncomfortable with it.

[Twocubdad]

Can you do it your own way? Sure you can. But if your way isn't working isn't it nice to know that there is a remedy available for you to use? I totally agree, and would add that that is a fair summary of part of my post.

 

Two other thoughts: one regards the idea that there is a theoretical "best" person for any given job. "The Best" is obviously a subjective quality. Is the editor of the local newspaper "the best" person to edit our pack's newsletter? Or is a mom with an interest in Scout, a desire to help and a basic knowledge of word processing the better candidate?

 

Secondly -- and I think this is what you are getting at, Laurie -- at what point do we look at the cost-benefit of the recruitment process. Yes, we could have recruited the newspaper editor had we put together a proper search committee, had a couple dads who are big advertisers make the pitch, and really worked the process. But after devoting 20 man hours to recruiting the editor, are we that much better off than we would have been with the mom who raised her hand when asked? Would that time have been better spent elsewhere?

 

I'm a contractor. A big part of my job is knowing what and who is good enough. There may be 100 people who want a job, 75 of whom are fully capable. Is it necessary that I consider all 100 applicants if I believe the first one to be capable of doing the job? Certainly my judgement will vary depending on the job. I would put more time and effort into selecting a fininsh carpenter or a Cubmaster than I would to a day laborer or a pack newsletter editor. The first two are crtical to my/our success and the latter less so. And as you point out, not every Scout leader has that skill so the written procedures are there for those who need them.

[Eamonn]

TwoCubDad

Hits on a lot of good points.Still I like this system and use it to fill positions that need filled on the District Committee. Believe me most of the people who serve on the nominating committee are well versed in the "How Too" of Scouts and Scouting.

Like a good number of us I found myself not by choice having a unit leader position "Dumped in my lap." One minute I'm a happy Cub Scout parent chewing on a chicken leg the next minute I find out that the new Cubmaster is me. I can smile about it now. But I do feel that I was tricked into it. Then I went about building a pack committee. I had never heard of any plan and took it all on myself. We went through three Pack Committee Chairs in row years. I wasn't selecting anything all I was looking for was a behind that would fill the seat.

There I was in a pack chartered by the only Roman Catholic Church in the area, a church with nearly 700 families that regularly attended mass. A church with its own school and parents association and while I knew a few families and had been active on the parent association, I never even looked at these groups. I was too busy trying to do it alone.

As I grew wiser I asked the chairman of the Parent Association to sit on the selection committee. His knowledge of the capabilities of people in the parish who might want to help was far greater then mine.His sitting on the committee opened a door that had never really been opened the pack was now mentioned at their meetings.

I like the idea that we take time to look at the Job Description of the position that we are trying to fill. How many adults quit when they find out that it does take more then an hour a week?

The list that the selection committee generates is a useful tool for future use. Of course there are names on it that are of people that are busy doing other stuff and might not be suitable for the job that we are trying to fill but even these busy people can be approached to do a "One Time Only" job for the unit.

When we don't use the system and don't involve the chartered organization in the selection process and we don't get the approval of the CO isn't this the start of alienating the Scout Unit from the CO? How are they supposed to interact with the unit leaders when they don't know anything about them?

I also like the idea that three people arrive to inform the selected person about his selection. He or She knows that this isn't something that is off the cuff. It has been given a lot of thought.

Eamonn