Significant Cultural Changes are Coming Soon

[Cburkhardt]

DE Job Description

 

After a close read, it seems to me that one task in the DE job description volunteers might not want to embrace is the fund raising component.  If this function were centralized in a different position, the remaining program elements might be done by volunteers.  In that case we would need a significantly invigorated volunteer staff at the district level.  This would require a bigger time investment than folks are used to.

 

 

[Cburkhardt]

Volunteer YPT Enforcement?

 

We already have great volunteer YPT committees and chairs in our councils. In the past several years they have primarily focused on getting everyone trained and aware of the operating rules to implement the policies.  Is now the time to add a number of carefully chosen volunteers to spot check and assure compliance?  They presumably would need some authority.  So far this authority rests in the hands of the Scout Executive and whoever he delegates.  Do we want to continue this as a professional-only function?  If we are serious about this, we might need to take some volunteer ownership.  This would be a significant culture shift, because currently, only a Troop Committee, COR, Scout Executive or CO executive officer can issue direction to a volunteer adult leader.

[TAHAWK]

... and our districts were eliminated two years ago in favor of "professionally" run "service teams."  Volunteers were not "team players' (insufficiently servile).  The awful monthly gatherings that resulted before COVID ended them -  90% announcements and fund-raising - greatly diminished volunteer efforts outside units, and no ne really knows what's going on in the council area.  The only communications that I receive from Council are about $$$$$$$$$$$$ and YPT.

[ParkMan]

51 minutes ago, Cburkhardt said:

DE Job Description

 

After a close read, it seems to me that one task in the DE job description volunteers might not want to embrace is the fund raising component.  If this function were centralized in a different position, the remaining program elements might be done by volunteers.  In that case we would need a significantly invigorated volunteer staff at the district level.  This would require a bigger time investment than folks are used to.

 

 

As I looked through the job description, just about everything there is already done by volunteers. 

I do see that in some of these are some items around membership.  If there was a reduced need to fund DEs, I could also see a reduced demand to grow membership.   If Scouting membership is largely a function of interest - then he pressure to grow membership at all costs could be reduced.

3 hours ago, Cburkhardt said:

• Work with a volunteer board of directors and other community and business leaders to identify, recruit, train, guide, and inspire them to become involved in youth programs.
• Achieve progress towards specific goals and objectives which include: program development through collaborative relationships, volunteer recruitment and training, fundraising, membership recruitment and retention.
• Be responsible for extending programs to religious, civic, fraternal, educational, and other community-based organizations through volunteers.
• Ensure that all program sites are served through volunteers, regular leader meetings, training events and activities.
• Collaborate with adult volunteers and oversee achievement of training for their respective role.
• Be a good role model and recognize the importance of working relationships with other professionals and volunteers. The executive must have communication skills and be able to explain the program’s goals and objectives to the public.
• Provide quality service through timely communication, regular meetings, training events and activities.
• Have a willingness and ability to devote long and irregular hours to achieve council and district objectives.

I agree - these are more appealing to someone paid to do them

3 hours ago, Cburkhardt said:

• Secure adequate financial support for programs in assigned area. Achieve net income and participation objectives for assigned camps and activities.
• Recruit leadership for finance campaign efforts to meet the financial needs of the organization.

Yet, if we are not paying DEs, I sense this could be a more focused effort to pay for camps and other central resources.  A few paid fundraising professionals would likely be more financially successful for a council to employ here.

 

Edited December 10, 2020 by ParkMan
clarified a thought

[Cburkhardt]

Responses on DE Issue    

 

Post:  “Yet, if we are not paying DEs, I sense this could be a more focused effort to pay for camps and other central resources.  A few paid fundraising professionals would likely be more financially successful for a council to employ here.”

 

Response:  Perhaps centralizing fundraising and going all-volunteer at the District level is indeed the way to go.  A challenge will be to get new volunteers to do this District-type work in areas where the volunteer BSA culture has fully dissipated.  I think it is possible to do that, based on my several years of recruiting people to volunteer as commissioners.  Some of the most effective people I recruited for those roles did not even have a background in Scouting.  I know it sounds counter-intuitive, but a group of motivated young businesspeople who know each other and the community work well as commissioners.  We are not limited to former unit leaders with five rows of square knots.  One of those people I recruited back then (mid 80s) is now a council president of a small Midwest council is and on the front lines of all of this.

 

Post:  “... and our districts were eliminated two years ago in favor of "professionally" run "service teams."  Volunteers were not "team players' (insufficiently servile).  The awful monthly gatherings that resulted before COVID ended them -  90% announcements and fund-raising - greatly diminished volunteer efforts outside units, and no one really knows what's going on in the council area.  The only communications that I receive from Council are about $$$$$$$$$$$$ and YPT.”

 

Response:  Great observations that support the comments on how volunteers need to take back ownership through activity.  It goes to changing the culture we have of expecting the professionals will do all of the detail work.  Part of this goes to an attitude that if a volunteer cannot or will not get something done, you put that task on the plate of a professional.  When the tasks become too numerous, there is a perceived need for another paid person. 

 

When there is no volunteer support for something, perhaps that particular task is not merited.  An example would be a longtime executive  in knew who insisted that there be two District camporees every year in a small District.  This quickly wore out the volunteers, so the organization of camporees became a professional task.  There should never have been an overload of camporees and the volunteers should have continued to be in charge.

 

It is interesting that the two things you do get communications on (finance and YPT) are two things that have been problematic during recent decades.  If there had been volunteers who know local communities tasked to intervene with units presenting significant youth abuse risk, we might not be where we are now.  Instead, it looks like you are receiving ineffective missives about a topic of crises importance (YPT). 

 

Overall

 

The postings so far, even by commenters who rarely embrace my points, do reflect the need for Scouters to go beyond rearranging things.  We must fundamentally alter the basic aspects of how we operate and support Scouting.

[Eagle94-A1]

1 hour ago, Cburkhardt said:

Volunteer YPT Enforcement?

We already have great volunteer YPT committees and chairs in our councils. 

I do not think you can assume this for every council. I have no idea who my YPT Chair nor who any of the other YPT trainers are except for the one I teach with since 2 are required to do the live course IF you can pry it from the SE's hands.

 

1 hour ago, TAHAWK said:

... and our districts were eliminated two years ago in favor of "professionally" run "service teams."  Volunteers were not "team players' (insufficiently servile).  The awful monthly gatherings that resulted before COVID ended them -  90% announcements and fund-raising - greatly diminished volunteer efforts outside units, and no ne really knows what's going on in the council area.  The only communications that I receive from Council are about $$$$$$$$$$$$ and YPT.

This is very similar to our situation.  Except we lost volunteers when they were yelled and cursed at by the pros.

[Eagle94-A1]

25 minutes ago, Cburkhardt said:

Responses on DE Issue    

Post:  “Yet, if we are not paying DEs, I sense this could be a more focused effort to pay for camps and other central resources.  A few paid fundraising professionals would likely be more financially successful for a council to employ here.”

Response:  Perhaps centralizing fundraising and going all-volunteer at the District level is indeed the way to go.  A challenge will be to get new volunteers to do this District-type work in areas where the volunteer BSA culture has fully dissipated.  I think it is possible to do that, based on my several years of recruiting people to volunteer as commissioners.  Some of the most effective people I recruited for those roles did not even have a background in Scouting.  I know it sounds counter-intuitive, but a group of motivated young businesspeople who know each other and the community work well as commissioners.  We are not limited to former unit leaders with five rows of square knots.  One of those people I recruited back then (mid 80s) is now a council president of a small Midwest council is and on the front lines of all of this.

 

My question is will the pros listen to and respect the volunteers? I know I am very pessimistic of late. But I was not always this way. I served on district and council committees. I helped organize and run district and council events. I did FOS presentations. I was a  council Flavor Aid drinker for a long time. Then things changed in the council regarding the pros and their attitudes to the volunteers. A lot of folks quit their district and council posts altogether, and a few left Scouting altogether.

 

25 minutes ago, Cburkhardt said:

 

Post:  “... and our districts were eliminated two years ago in favor of "professionally" run "service teams."  Volunteers were not "team players' (insufficiently servile).  The awful monthly gatherings that resulted before COVID ended them -  90% announcements and fund-raising - greatly diminished volunteer efforts outside units, and no one really knows what's going on in the council area.  The only communications that I receive from Council are about $$$$$$$$$$$$ and YPT.”

Response:  Great observations that support the comments on how volunteers need to take back ownership through activity.  It goes to changing the culture we have of expecting the professionals will do all of the detail work.  Part of this goes to an attitude that if a volunteer cannot or will not get something done, you put that task on the plate of a professional.  When the tasks become too numerous, there is a perceived need for another paid person. 

 Again the challenge is how will the volunteers treated? Will they be trusted to do things as they should be done, or be told exactly what and how to do things, and then removed if they do not do what the pros want?

 

25 minutes ago, Cburkhardt said:

When there is no volunteer support for something, perhaps that particular task is not merited.  An example would be a longtime executive  in knew who insisted that there be two District camporees every year in a small District.  This quickly wore out the volunteers, so the organization of camporees became a professional task.  There should never have been an overload of camporees and the volunteers should have continued to be in charge.

 Or could the volunteers be tired of  the pro's interference and mistreatment, and thus no one wants to support the task? 

 

25 minutes ago, Cburkhardt said:

It is interesting that the two things you do get communications on (finance and YPT) are two things that have been problematic during recent decades.  If there had been volunteers who know local communities tasked to intervene with units presenting significant youth abuse risk, we might not be where we are now.  Instead, it looks like you are receiving ineffective missives about a topic of crises importance (YPT). 

Overall

The postings so far, even by commenters who rarely embrace my points, do reflect the need for Scouters to go beyond rearranging things.  We must fundamentally alter the basic aspects of how we operate and support Scouting.

 

 

Communication is vital.

[Cburkhardt]

9 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

I do not think you can assume this for every council. I have no idea who my YPT Chair nor who any of the other YPT trainers are except for the one I teach with since 2 are required to do the live course IF you can pry it from the SE's hands.

What a regretful set of circumstances.  Scouting is being burnt to the ground over YPT and a key volunteer like you who can address this crises is not even informed of who your YPT chair is.

[Cburkhardt]

Eagle 94-A1:

I hope the treatment of volunteers by professionals will rapidly fade as an issue and that we can begin to envision how volunteers will more-fully run things at the District and Council levels.  The tragic "perfect storm" is providing us an opportunity to make some very significant adjustments.  Many higher-salaried people with hardened viewpoints are already choosing to move on.  We have all been part of a system that has not functioned well for an extended time.  Let's put our operating expectations and behavioral standards firmly in place fairly soon.  I want my fellow volunteers and me to be treated appropriately.  We remind the girls in our Troop that they ascribe to a higher standard of kind behavior when they swear the Scout Law.  Let's hold ourselves as well as to pros to this higher standard and assure that your concerns are not a dominant aspect of our experiences.   

[Eagledad]

10 minutes ago, Cburkhardt said:

 

The postings so far, even by commenters who rarely embrace my points, do reflect the need for Scouters to go beyond rearranging things.  We must fundamentally alter the basic aspects of how we operate and support Scouting.

 

I have a record of going beyond rearranging things at the council, district and unit levels. I find these stargazing prophecies out of touch with reality.

RARELY, do volunteers have the skills of fund raising or even recruiting. In fact, most lack the skills to perform the task they given. In most cases, tradition keeps the machine working, just not efficiently. Efficiency seems to depend on the luck of skilled volunteers found.

DEs are worth their weight in gold if the have vision of quality skills and ability to recruit. Fund raising always gets in their way, and ironically I find fund raising is easier when programs are functioning successfully..

Since quality volunteers rarely step up to take a district level task, the DE is left to finding those volunteers. There is the rub, if council doesn’t find and train a qualified DE, then low quality leadership follows all the way down to the patrol level. Yep, low quality SMs led to low quality patrol method.

I agree with recruiting quality Unit commissioners is a step in the right direction, but I have rarely work with a Key 3, much less a District Commissioner skilled with both the task to recruit quality UCs, and train them . I have only met one such person. He ran a very successful commissioner program in Minneapolis 25 years ago. It’s one thing for someone from out of nowhere to recruit quality UCs, but they still have to be trained and directed.

The best districts had strong SKILLED leadership. Most often business professionals with the needed skills. I even watched one district fire and recruit their DE. The District Chairman was a successful business man who was a great recruiter with no ego. He knew his limits and stayed out of other Responsibilities. If the volunteers couldn’t function sufficiently to support the program, he recruited help for them. The help generally had the skills and eventually took over the committee tasks. But such a person is rare because a DE with vision to recruit him is rare.

At a National level, New ideas of the future have to realistically consider the average volunteers pool that will run these programs. My suggestion is better trained council leaders who understand the vision of the scout program. But I think that requires National level leadership who understand the vision of the scout program. 
 

Barry

 

[Cburkhardt]

7 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

Since quality volunteers rarely step up to take a district level task, the DE is left to finding those volunteers. There is the rub, if council doesn’t find and train a qualified DE, then low quality leadership follows all the way down to the patrol level. Yep, low quality SMs led to low quality patrol method.

I have to agree with this.  The District my Father helped lead in the south suburbs of Chicago in the 1970s was like a small, high-quality council.  The top business people, best past unit leaders and wealthy socialites all converged to promote a local cause that was considered to be central to their community.  When I much later served as that Council's president, I went back to see my small town mayor.  He remembered the names of the DEs we had in those days -- they stayed for years and were well-known. Today Districts often lack the prestige and opportunity they once provided to professionals and volunteers alike -- leading to the circumstances you colorfully (and accurately) describe.  I'm not asking for us to go back in time, but what are some of the fundamental things you think need changing at this moment?  This is a 50-year occurrence that will change Scouting just as much as WWII did -- or maybe put it out of business.  We need optimism and a path forward.

[ParkMan]

I very often wonder how many of our issues at the district & council level are due to the loss of skills in our district volunteers.  

Unit service to me is a great example.  Ideally, we have a person who can help units solve problems and be successful.  Perhaps that person is in the unit.  Perhaps it's someone in a district or council.  Perhaps it's a volunteer or maybe a professional.  Scouting for a long time has tried to have this person be a district volunteer.  Then, when it got hard to recruit, we started looking to the DEs to do this work. 

Today, we are lucky is we have one DE for every 75 units.  One person cannot get to know 75 units - it's impossible.  Yet, we've pretended that this is exactly what we are doing.  In the process, we've got district commissioners who do not know how to recruit unit commissioners.  We've got council commissioners who have no idea how to help district commissioners do that. 

Our unit service infrastructure has been so neglected that we've got units that don't get basic coaching and mentoring.  I suspect that if we stopped having DEs do this, we would eventually start to figure it out.  Why - because we have to.  Volunteers would be sitting around asking themselves "who can go talk to Pack 1234?".  Today it's too easy to just send over the DE to apply a band aid.  Today it's too easy to give lip service to finding a UC to do it.  However, if we really had to make it work, we would start to find a way.  Would lots of units fail - of course they would.   But, I think we would start to find a way.  

[Cburkhardt]

52 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

I very often wonder how many of our issues at the district & council level are due to the loss of skills in our district volunteers.  

I am blessed to be in a strong council and district (our District is within the precise boundaries of the District of Columbia)  where we still have those skills and practices.  My Troop never hears from our 42-unit DE because our excellent commissioner is the one who reminds me to get rechartered on time, etc.  Our situation is an example of the earlier poster's view that strong councils beget strong districts, which beget strong troops, which beget strong patrols.  It really is true. 

Parkman's posting was pretty distressing to read and caused me to call our DE and have an informal chat about how things are going.  To make a long story really short, things are going very well and it is simply because we are executing on all of the basics here.  Being District Chair or Commissioner of the DC District is a prestige role and we lead the Council in every measurable statistic.  This, despite the fact that we have a lot of hard-core inner city units and many impoverished kids that our Troop committees effectively scrounge to keep in the program.  This does not include any Scoutreach.  My late Dad would have felt very much at home in this District.  We are dropping five units due to COVID-caused difficulties, but added five better ones.  Money and membership will be ahead of last year.  This all made me feel better about the future because our local situation is not remarkable in any way.  It just shows that  if you have the right people and act rationally, Scouting still works -- even in a tough environment like our District.

Maybe it is possible that the concerns of Eagledad and Parkman might be partly addressed by the downsizing of Scouting that is going to take place next year in most places.  Fewer units (especially the weak ones) and more capability to execute.  Fewer disagreeable personalities as marginal performer drop away.  More focus on the essentials as the fluff is no longer in the council budget.  That said, the impact of COVID and the horror of these bankruptcy claims will change things above the unit level in every council.  The volunteer assumption of DE-like roles will be necessary in many places.  All of you who pine for a volunteer run and controlled situation will have your chance to perform if you wish.  Nobody will come knocking at your door.  You will have to reach for it.  Many, if not most, camps will be shuttered and probably sold.  We can depart in anger at this unavoidable event or adjust our camp property practice to one of intensive cooperation.  Despite all that has happened and been said, we will emerge different, but intact.    

[JoeBob]

7 hours ago, Cburkhardt said:

Minimum Qualifications

•  
• Bachelor's degree from an accredited college or university (transcript with the date degree conferred stated is required for employment).

May I ask why?  This would eliminate 1/3 of the ASMs that I've enjoyed working with.  Most trades (carpenters, plumbers, welders, electricians, etc.) farmers and enlisted military don't have or need a BA/BS.   Many of these individuals are self-employed, which allows them to schedule their time for volunteering.

My 6 years of college were a lot of fun, but influenced about 1% of anything I did as a scouter.

[RememberSchiff]

 

4 minutes ago, JoeBob said:

May I ask why?  This would eliminate 1/3 of the ASMs that I've enjoyed working with. 

A Bachelor's degree requirement would have also eliminated BP.