When is too much leadership too much?

[Stosh]

I have but one boy that would fit that bill and unfortunately, he

1) turned 18 this past year,

2) became a ASM,

3) took all the SM training

4) took WB

5) has scuba cert.,

6) was hired on as staff at an out-of-council camp,

7) will be moving to Oklahoma this fall, taking up engineering, ROTC and 8) signing on in the Air Force Reserves.

 

Going to to a USAF fighter pilot. Best Eagle Scout I've ever seen.

 

I'm sure the whiney parents didn't bring up such things in their discussions...

 

If I was 16 again, I'd take you up on it myself, sounds like you have figured out the key to running a successful boy-led program, my hat's off to you. Well done.

 

Our council has another struggling boy-led, patrol-method troop, 25 miles away. I'm thinking they may need some no-help from another adult.

 

Stosh

 

 

[Eagle92]

Everything happens for a reason. Good luck with that troop.

[SSScout]

Is it too late to file a grievance with your shop steward? ;-)

 

There are Scouts and there are scouts. If the Scouts in our home Troop asked to plan the summer camp, boy, wouldn't I be surprised and pleased. It is a balance between allowing and hearing the SPL say "you mean I can DO THAT?" when we ask him for his decision about something.

 

As the UC, I often find myself reminding our SM that his lectures are very authoritive, but you can see the boys dozing off, waiting for the meeting's Patrol game.

 

Our present SPL asked for ideas from the Troop for Troop meeting activities. His surprise was evident when several Scouts and adults suggested (in writing) Scout skill practise, and instruction in Scout skill things. We will see....

[Stosh]

I found that when the boys took ownership (including planning) of a trip that they wanted to go on, they figured it out rather quickly. If the boys didn't have ownership and they didn't plan, there was no investment of themselves and when it came time to go, they could easily back out as having no dog in the game.

 

It also means that if they don't have ownership, getting them to plan was an uphill battle. If they didn't have ownership and didn't want to go in the first place, then all it's going to do is frustrate the SM who puts a ton of effort into an activity that no one but he and his 2-deep show up for.

 

Your mileage may vary,

 

Stosh

[Eagledad]

There is point where too much can be demanded from a scout. I learned, thru much humility, to look for signs in each scout of when scouting was nolonger fun. So it would be interesting for me to learn from stoshe's scouts where they reached that point, or where the parents reached the point. Not suggesting anything about stosh, its just my nature to learn where the disconnect occured.

 

Barry

[NJCubScouter]

Jblake,

 

Do you know how many boys complained? (Out of how many involved in the planning, leadership, etc. (presumably the PLC)) I am just wondering whether this was just a small minority or a consensus of the PLC.

 

The most disturbing part of this to me (and please correct me if I am misinterpreting the facts you have presented) is that boys who complained did it behind your back. From what you have written, it sounded like they were acting like they were happy to be running things, planning things, etc., and even took on more work voluntarily, and then (at least for some percentage) complaining about it to their parents. Maybe the appropriate thing for the parents to do at that point would have been to ask their sons, "Have you told the Scoutmaster you feel this way?" So, if my interpretation is correct, it may be as much the parents' fault as the boys, but the conduct of these boys is still troubling.

 

 

[Oak Tree]

This is troubling all the way around, no matter what.

 

The boys complained to their parents, but wouldn't mention anything in the troop. The parents execute a power play to remove the Scoutmaster. The CC/COR/IH/UC/DE go along with this.

 

It's all just very sad, and a bit odd.

 

Stosh acknowledges that the root of the problem was communication. I've always envied his ability to focus on working with the boys, but I always felt I had to spend half my time talking with adults about the program (or sending out emails that accomplish some of that same "good news preaching").

 

I don't really blame the Scouts - I can imagine them wanting not to act like they are not doing their assignments when they're with the troop - and it's really hard to know how the interpersonal relationships are shaping up. But no one came back to discuss this with the Scoutmaster? No one? I'm really amazed by this. I guess I can see how it might happen with a Scoutmaster who devotes 100% of his time to working with the boys. Especially if he happened to do something that rubbed someone the wrong way. Things like that can fester - and without communication to wear away any perceived rough edges, I guess eventually it can explode.

 

It's really a shame, all the way around.

[SeattlePioneer]

Unfortunately, nothin is more common than parents who don't want to talk about problems or issues they have with a Scout unit, in my experience. Often people will just leave without a word or a word of complaint.

 

As I sit here, I'm imagining that I might be happier that a family was motivated enough to go to the council with a complaint than simply quitting. My guess is there is a reasonable probability of keeping the boy and the family in Scouting if the complaint is answered in a reasonable way.

 

 

 

 

[Stosh]

I wasn't involved with the meeting so I don't know what the issue was, who was making it, or how many it involved.

 

I had two ASM's. One that took over the troop and the other ASM was not invited either to the meeting and so he knows less than I do. He hasn't called me to say anything so I'm thinking the "cone of silence" has him on the outside too.

 

I haven't wasted my time pursuing a done deal. If I happen to find out more about the situation it'll probably by hit-or-miss chance sometime in the future.

 

I called the Council office and left messages but none have been returned.

 

Stosh

 

[GKlose]

My reaction is much like Oak Tree's. Puzzling all the way around.

 

A few things strike me...one is that it seems like there is a mix of families in this situation. Those who have been in the troop for awhile, and those who are relatively new. Those who have been there for awhile know how the troop works and have seen the success. They, if in fact they were involved in the "coup", didn't contact Stosh directly to discuss things first.

 

Those who are new, didn't contact Stosh directly to 1) find out the concept of the program and how the troop manifests that vision, 2) offer any kind of feedback, whether it be complaint, requests for clarification, or anything else.

 

To me, and perhaps I might be reading the situation wrong, but this doesn't seem like a breakdown of Stosh's communication. This seems like a case of a group of parents, perhaps even a small minority, that did a power play to take over the troop. Couldn't have done it, I think, without the cooperation of the ASM taking over the troop, or without the actions of the CC.

 

Which brings up another point -- the CC let this all happen without extending the courtesy to Stosh (the "Chief Program Officer" of the troop) of letting him know what was going on.

 

I'll relate a brief story -- when my older son joined a troop, three years ago, the troop was somewhat reeling from the loss of a den (ooops, patrol), about 25% of the troop. This "Webelos III den" (patrol) had crossed over the year before. By November of that year, they had decided (the dads, I've sinced learned, were the impetus for the change) to split off and form their own troop. Webelos III style, the troop is the patrol, father-son camping, one rank per year, etc. Active, though. Very active. When my son and I were on a troop visit, I just loved the pictures of the dads cooking at the ski condo they were staying at that February.

 

I don't really fault them for taking off and forming their own troop -- they had a certain vision that wasn't being fulfilled by the troop they joined. They had issues, such as their monolithic den (which had stayed together all the way through Cub Scouts) was in danger of being split apart, with members going to separate patrols. They also didn't like having zero input into the troop calendar (that year had already been planned, when they joined). But at least they didn't stage a coup and enforce their vision.

 

This might seem like a non-sequitur, but I've always enjoyed this quote from the movie Hoosiers: "Look, mister, there's... two kinds of dumb, uh... guy that gets naked and runs out in the snow and barks at the moon, and, uh, guy who does the same thing in my living room. First one don't matter, the second one you're kinda forced to deal with."

 

Guy

[eisely]

Stosh,

 

You were treated extremely shabbily and are handling it far better than I would under the circumstances you describe. Clearly the chartered organization (if it was involved at all) is entitled to select or deselect the unit leadership with or without cause, if the CO doesn't think it likes the way the program is being delivered. Most people do not like confrontation and no one had the guts to speak to you directly. You are better off out of there.

 

The people who lose the most are the boys. Too often adults do not think of the larger interest when they pursue their own agendas. Too often the people up the chain, both volunteers and paid people, act shamefully in responding to parent complaints by failing to even ask the targeted volunteer what is going on before they take a precipitate action.

 

Good luck to you in your future scouting.

[qwazse]

jb

 

We're Venturing, so you're boy's "in" with us. Although the other stuff in his life sounds like he'll have a shortage of funds and time(Although he'll have one sweet ride in a couple of years! 0 to 250 in .05 sec, probably.)

 

I got some young women who don't want to be treated like girl scouts and boys who are tired of faking boy-led in key positions.