More Selective Recruiting

[Chippewa29]

One of the other adults in my troop (a very dedicated, educated Scouter) brought up an idea that I hadn't really thought about. I thought it would be a good discussion topic for this forum.

 

Each year, we get X number of Webelos to cross over. For some troops, that is five, for some it is 35. Most troops plan on losing a certain percentage of those new Scouts within the first couple of months. In our troop, if we can get the Scout to get active for that first summer, they will usually stick around for at least the next three years. The other point where we lose Scouts is when they go from middle school to high school. If a Scout sticks with it through the fall of their freshman year, then they stick around for good.

 

As we all know, the Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts are different programs in many ways. Some kids that love Cubs may not like what the Scouts do (how many kids have you run across that think roughing it is an RV with a microwave and DVD player?) Each year, my troop has some kids join whose parents say they are afraid to go camping or are really homebodies or whatever. The parents don't have any inclination to push the kid to get out and experience some new things. We get these kids registered, put them in a patrol, they come to a couple of meetings, then disappear on us. Suddenly, what we thought was going to be an eight Scout patrol ends up as a 3 or 4 Scout patrol for campouts.

 

We end up spending a lot of time and energy wondering where these kids are and what is happening to them. We call and they may come to the occasional troop meeting, but they never seem to go on a campout and are not advancing. By the end of the summer, they are gone for good. I think that often with these Scouts, neither they nor their parents really had any intention of making any kind of commitment. Their attitude was "I guess we can kind of try this" and of course, the kids don't get much out of a couple of troop meetings. When it comes time to recharter, we realize we haven't seen the Scout since August and he only came to maybe a half dozen meetings at best, so we drop him off the roster.

 

The question is this. Should we be more selective in recruiting and registering Scouts? Should we be telling the Scouts and their parents that if they are going to cross over and join, they need to make some kind of commitment (say, six months) like they would for a sports season? Would it be better for us to cross over less Webelos into Scouts, but have a much higher retention rate? Would we be able to provide a better program? Would the patrols be better able to "gel" and become a more effective unit?

 

Your feedback on this would be greatly appreciated.

[jr56]

Interesting points. I guess we really have to have the program available to all boys. You are right in pointing out that there is a certain percentage of boys who will just not get into scouting for whatever reason.

You can lead the horse to water, but you can't make them drink. All we can do is provide the best possible program, and realize that it won't be for everybody.

[yellow_hammer]

What you've described is true of every organization that I've been involved with. People come and go but there is hopefully a core group that sticks around and makes things happen. I think that the answer is to recruit many, count on the few that like scouting to stick around, and don't sweat the ones that don't.

 

The really sad situations for me are the boys that are interested but have parents that are not supportive or even work against the boys desires. You know the ones... dads that want their boy to be the ball player they never were and see scouts as a competing interest. Almost as sad are the dads that love scouting but their sons are not interested.

 

[GernBlansten]

Cast a wide net, be grateful for the few that remain.

[Venividi]

Chippewa29,

 

I think your idea has merit, and is a topic that could/should be discussed by the PLC, the SM/ASM core, and the troop committee. Your question is one that has to be answered by your particular group based on what you (the collective you) want to accomplish, the resources available, etc. (sort of back to the "mission" thing).

 

One eye opening conversation I had was with a long time scouter in our district. The troop he was involved with had a policy that all families must provide an adult to serve the troop in order for their son to be a member of the troop. He told the story of a woman that brought her son to sign up for this troop. After explaining the policy, she said that she was a single mother and did not have time to assist. He gave the application back and referred her to another troop in town. She said she had already looked at other troops in town, and that the program at this troop was far better, and she wanted that for her son. The troop was firm on this policy, because that is what enabled the troop to provide the program that they did. The woman did agree to assist, they gave her a task she could do from home (transportation coordinator), and she did an excellent job.

 

This example is slightly different than your selective recruiting, but I think follows the same line. If your troop committee and parents want to build a better program than average, you need to do something different than the average troop does. That may be more selective recruiting, or something else. But it is certainly worth a discussion within your troop. The discussion may bring out lots of ideas on what you want to accomplish, and morph into how you position your troop's specialty, and then how to recruit those that are interested in the particular program that your troop committee is offering.

 

For example, if your troop's mission is to provide a high quality experience for scouts committed to the scouting program with an emphasis on field leadership experience, then some type of selective recruiting is consistent with that mission. Similarly, if part of your mission is to develop very high level back country skills, your recruiting will gravitate towards those that want to backpack. In many places, there are enough troops in the area that those that are looking for somethng different than you offering have choices, and you will be doing potential recruits a favor if you refer them to other troops that may be a better fit for them.

 

For what it is worth, I think it is a good thing that there are troops that have different areas of emphasis. If all troops try to be all things to all scouts, then oppotunities for scouts are decreased rather than increased.

[John-in-KC]

RANT MODE

 

How does being "selective" fit with the Aims of the Boy Scouts of America?

 

- Character Development

- Citizenship Training

- Personal Fitness

 

Every Troop is a little different, just by the youth who are the program members. That said, if one Troop is not a fit, another may very well be.

 

IT IS OUR JOB AS SCOUTERS TO HELP THE YOUNG MEN AND THEIR PARENTS FIND A TROOP WHICH WILL BE A FIT TO THE FAMILY.

 

Why do we have fellowship opportunities at Roundtable? Why do we have fellowship opportunities at training events, such as Woodbadge, or at OA events, such as inductions? SO WE SCOUTS AND SCOUTERS CAN KNOW OTHER FOLKS AND OTHER TRAILS TO THE DESTINATION.

 

Our job as Scouters is to set the Scouts up for success. Once we've done that, they have the freedom to succeed, and to have good failures, on their own.

 

/RANT MODE(This message has been edited by John-in-KC)

[Chippewa29]

Some very good points so far. I would like to respond to John's comments.

 

I believe you misunderstood the meaning of the term "selective" (it's possible I didn't communicate it well). My only criteria for recruiting a Scout is two things: 1) that he is willing to submit to the troop leadership and follow the program established by the PLC; 2) that he is willing to make an honest commitment for a reasonable length of time.

 

The only time I have ever stopped recruiting Webelos to join our troop was when a den visited us on a campout. The kids were very rude and disrepectful to both the Scouts and the adults. Also, their parents laughed at them and thought they were cute when the kids shot their mouths off. I never called them again to visit or about joining the troop. If they had called me and wanted to join, I would not have turned them away. However, I would have made it very clear that the disrepectfulness they showed wouldn't have been tolerated.

 

I would rather have some shy, dorky, klutz of a kid that really wants to be there than the "superstar" that only shows up occasionally and quits after a few months.

 

I feel that when joining the Scouts, the Scout and his parents should make a commitment to be active for six months. During that time, he should make it a priority to get to as many meetings and events as possible. After that time, if he doesn't like it, then he can quit. If they don't feel they want to make a commitment like that, then they probably shouldn't join, because they will quit anyway.

 

What bothers me is that a new Scout comes to one or two meetings, then decides that Scouts aren't what he thought they would be, and quits.

 

When I was ten, a friend and I decided we wanted to join a winter bowling league (16 weeks long). After two weeks, I was by far the worst on my team and one of the worst in the league. I decided I didn't really like bowling and wanted to quit. When I told my parents that, they said no. I had made a commitment and they made me stick to it. They said that if I didn't want to bowl again after the season, that was fine. However, I had to fulfill this commitment. I did end up having some fun with it and getting my average way up by the end of the season. Did I ever bowl again after that? No. But I am really glad my parents didn't let me quit.

 

As I type this, I think the point I'm trying to make is that before we go through the steps of registering the Scout and setting him up in a patrol and making him a part of the troop (and possibly loaning him a uniform from the uniform bank), shouldn't we try to get some kind of commitment on their part? If you were coaching a sports team, wouldn't you expect the kid signing up for the team to at least make a commitment for that one season? Shouldn't we in Scouting expect new Scouts and their parents to commit for a season (in our case, six months)?

 

Just as I am about to pass War and Peace for length, let me stop now.

[evmori]

I've sorta looked at it like a mass mailing plan. The more mail you send out the better your chance.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[DanKroh]

Chippewa: "What bothers me is that a new Scout comes to one or two meetings, then decides that Scouts aren't what he thought they would be, and quits."

 

So, would it be better to have this scout feel obligated to keep coming for six months, and be miserable the entire time?

 

I don't think any boy joins scouts intending to quit after a couple of meetings. I'm sure if you asked all of them when they joined if they thought they would be around for at least six months, they'd all say yes.

 

However, you know what they say about the best laid plans...

 

Perhaps a better strategy would be be very specific in your recruiting about what your troop does, so that the scout (and their parents) can better decide if it is something little Johnny will be interested in. But even then, you never know until they try.

 

For instance, even though I love camping, my DW was not the camping type, and thus, we never ended up doing any family camping. My older son and I went on the Webelos Woods overnights, but he still wasn't sure when he joined Boy Scouts if camping was something he would enjoy. But he gave it a shot, and he loves it. However, if he had decided he hated camping, I wouldn't expect him to go on troop campouts as part of a "commitment" to the troop if it was going to make him miserable to go.

[evmori]

Chippewa: "What bothers me is that a new Scout comes to one or two meetings, then decides that Scouts aren't what he thought they would be, and quits."

 

So, would it be better to have this scout feel obligated to keep coming for six months, and be miserable the entire time?

 

I don't think any boy joins scouts intending to quit after a couple of meetings. I'm sure if you asked all of them when they joined if they thought they would be around for at least six months, they'd all say yes.

 

I have a problem with this logic. If you sign up for something then you should see it through for the time you signed up for. If it's a year then stick it out for a year. If it's until it's time to recharter, then stick it out until then. One or two meetings isn't giving anything a fair chance! There's another thread going on discussing commitment. This is the same thing!

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[John-in-KC]

Chippewa: OK, feedback is a gift, and listening is another gift.

 

Part of the service a Troop should give to any Webelos Den looking ahead to bridging is accurately describing who and what you Troop is. If expectations on the Troop side reasonably match expectations on the boy/parent side, then there is a fit. If those expectations are not mutual, boy/parent need to keep searching.

 

Ed: I agree with you, but the conversation you describe is first and foremost between a boy and his parents!! It's also between the boy and the PL, SPL, TG and SM, but it belongs first to the family.

 

I've noticed, over the years, that the Scout who has a Scouter parent has a better long-term chance of success than the drop-off.(This message has been edited by John-in-KC)

[Chippewa29]

So, would it be better to have this scout feel obligated to keep coming for six months, and be miserable the entire time? I think a Scout who decides to commit to joining the troop should commit for six months.  He may not have a great experience his first couple of meetings and first campout (when kids cross over in February and camp in March, there is a chance for really bad weather), but it is nothing that should make him really miserable.  However, I do agree with you and a couple of other posters that things should be communicated very clearly before the crossover occurs.

I don't think any boy joins scouts intending to quit after a couple of meetings. I'm sure if you asked all of them when they joined if they thought they would be around for at least six months, they'd all say yes. I'm not sure about you, but every year we have kids that cross over and at the ceremony, some parent will ask me again when and where we meet, then tell me they have their son try it for a couple of weeks to see how they like it.  We always get a couple of "wishy-washy" kids coming in.  We had three this year.  One came to one meeting and quit.  One has come to about a half dozen meetings (no campouts) and we aren't sure what his intentions are.  The third one was really nervous about going camping.  His parents told him that if he wanted to do this he had to stick with it through the summer.  After he went on a couple of campouts, he is now hooked and absolutely loves it.  None of those three kids would have said yes if you asked them if they were going to be there in six months.

The feeling I'm getting after reading these posts is that we need to be much more clear to those potential new Scouts that they need to make a commitment like they would for a sports team.  Go with it for a season.  If you don't like it after that, then know that you've really given it a go.  Any Scout that wants to join the troop I would welcome with open arms.  I just think they need to know what they are really getting into.

[Lynda J]

I hate the idea of being selective. Like some kids aren't good enough.

I have one young man in my troop that I guess a troop that wanted to be selective wouldn't want.

 

In third grade he was in Kevin's class. Their teacher came to me and ask if there was any way I could get him in Scouts because he needed something positive in his life. Took me over a month to run him mother down to sign the forms. She is a drug addict. Grandparents are too. Father is in prison for 25 yrs. One night in 5th grade he rang my door bell at midnight. Seems their electricity had been turned off and he didn't know where anyone was. He had been sitting there ever since he got home from school with no lights and alone. They have never had a phone. Our community is small and I know most of the officers with the PD. I called them and told them where he was. CPS has been called several times. But they don't consider him "at risk" So I will do what ever it takes to keep him is Scouting. Because of any boy in our troop he is the one that needs it the most. So if one of the membership requirements to join our troop was a parent be active he wouldn't qualify and to be honest I don't want his mother anywhere around. And I agree. I doubt that BSA has a policy of selective membership.

I have found with some troops that when a boy comes a couple of times and doesn't return the troop program simply isn't for him. Sometimes they are to structured and sometimes not structured enough. I have also discovered over the years that many times it isn't the boy but the parents. Troops give boys so much more freedom especially in the planning and there are parents that aren't ready to let their boys grow up.(This message has been edited by Lynda J)

[Eamonn]

As a little Lad I suffered from allergies and some sort of asthma.

In fact I'm told I was a very sickly child.

My Mother was worried about me going too far from home and wasn't going to allow me to attend summer camp that first year.

The Troop I was in at the time wasn't that active, in fact it was near death. So not being very active was no big deal.

When the Troop did die I transfered to what was without a doubt the most active Troop in the District.

I was about 14 by this time.

I know that if it hadn't been for the 17th, I would have ended up like a good many of my school pals - into drugs and sadly a couple of them ended up dead.

We have no way of ever knowing what path the little Lad who joins the Troop will take.

I have seen kids from good families start off really enthusiastic only to at some later date land in all sorts of hot water and become couch potatoes while little Mommies boys (Like me!!) turn out to be Scouts who are super outdoors men.

Forget selective recruiting and put the effort into super programming.

Eamonn

[EagleInKY]

I understand your POV. It can be frustrating to lose several scouts right out of the gate. It casts a negative feeling over the rest of the group. I don't do much "selective recruiting", but I do make sure they understand the program and the commitment that we expect. If there's someone who doesn't appear to be a fit, I make sure they know there is no hard feelings if they decide to pick a troop down the road. We also are in the practice of giving new scouts a "trial run" to let them see if they like it. No obligations. They come to a few meetings, go on a campout. If they want to go for it, we turn the app in and cash their check. If it doesn't look like it is going to work out, we let them walk away, without charging them anything (except the cost of the activity).