Who is the customer?

[packsaddle]

In the parent thread, Beavah made a statement about poor treatment of the customers and (correct me if I'm wrong, Beavah) I think he meant that the boys and the families are the customers.

Now I tend to agree with this, assuming I'm correct about his statement. However, I not so certain that if Beavah is correct about the way BSA operates in his post, that BSA has the same 'customer' in mind. I am reminded of a recent large organization with which I was involved, in which the administrative types stated explicitly that THEY were the customer.

Alternatively, it could also be that there are customers and then there are CUSTOMERS, meaning that like it is in economic transactions, certain groups are treated with greater care than others.

So what do you think?

Who is the customer supposed to be?

Who do you think IS the customer as perceived by BSA?

Alternatively, why is the customer treated poorly, as Beavah noted?

[Beavah]

Nah, packsaddle, yeh read me wrong, eh?

 

For the BSA, the customer is the Chartered Organization. The BSA sells charters and program materials to Chartered Organizations. That's its business. Aside from Scoutreach and perhaps uniform sales, it doesn't provide services for kids or families, just for Chartered Partners and units.

 

For an individual unit, the kids/families are the customer, eh? So most unit scouters think of the kids as the customers. Rightly so, for them. They work for da CO and provide services for youth, using resources the BSA provides to the CO.

 

For da BSA, the kids and families are just consumers. They don't get the same treatment, or the same voice, as da real CO customers.

 

Beavah

 

[AlFansome]

I'd also add that IMHO the "customer" for local Councils many times tends to be the donors/patrons/financial-supporters of the Council and not the Chartered Orgs nor the Scouts.

[NJCubScouter]

Who the "customer" is in theory and who gets customer-like treatment are not necessarily the same thing, which I think is part of what Packsaddle is getting at. I think national and councils are likely to see large donors and organizations that charter many units as being the "customers", but maybe not the individual CO's that don't make waves and don't even send their reps to district and council meetings. It would be nice if they saw the boys as the ultimate and most important beneficiaries of their efforts, and I am sure some people at national/councils do, but maybe not all.

 

And with apologies to the current and former Scouting professionals reading this, some of the professionals I have spoken to -- not all, but some -- behave as if they believe THEY are the customer. Whether the various levels of their superiors encourage or discourage this attitude, I do not know.

 

As I wrote in another thread within the past few months, this sort of thing is certainly not unique to the Boy Scouts. Many people think that no matter what their job or role in an organization is, they are the center of the universe and that the organization and its actual "customers" exist for their benefit. Try dealing with court systems on a regular basis.

[perdidochas]

As a volunteer Scouter, I'm often amazed (and irritated) at the way I'm treated by the prof Scouters. I find most of them to be very rude and very short with volunteers. I hope that they aren't that way with "civilian" (meaning non-volunteer) parents or donors.

[packsaddle]

NJ has it about right but I admit, I hadn't articulated it the way Beavah did and I see his point. In simple terms, the customer, in my mind, is the person who pays the money and that would fit a view of donors as the customers. I guess on that basis most CO's would be consumers though, unless they pay more than they do around here (which is practically nothing other than collecting registration fees - and those come from the families). But as NJ points out, the intended beneficiaries are (I hope) the boys and perhaps broader society as a result.

I, like NJ, have encountered administrative types who seem to have a personal sense of entitlement as if they are the customers. This is not confined to BSA. It is my belief that if enough of an administrative unit adopts this attitude, the real customers will turn away and the unit will fail.

 

When United Way first cut back and then terminated support for BSA here and there, around these parts I heard outrage and indignance which was almost the perfect caricature (according to talk shows) of the ungrateful welfare recipient who has just been taken off assistance. I've also sensed this at more than one shameless solicitation for FOS at B&G celebrations. It is at times like those that I've wondered about answers to those questions I asked at first.

 

But Beavah's clarification raised another interesting thought in my mind: if BSA does view donors and those CO's which pay the most as the customers, perhaps even with some arrangement of priority, then have we described a program that, essentially, can be bought by the highest donor? Interesting.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[SR540Beaver]

"Customer" isn't the way to look at Scouting. Who is the "end user" at the bottom...or top depending on how you view it? The kids. All of those "customer" relations up or down the chain exist for one reason.....the end user. Councils, donors and charters are all partners providing a product to the end user.

[moosetracker]

Some large donors might see themselves as the customers, if they have anything making them want to have input into the regulating of the program.

 

Some CO's/COR's may see themselves as the customers, if they take an active interest.. But those COR's that don't take an interest, probably don't see themselves as the customer.. They were probably asked by someone wanting to start a unit, and saw it as more as a public service to their community, or Public Relations for their buisness.

 

They probably think being the customer for BSA is similar to telling them that if their company does and "Adopt a Road" project, they are the customers for the Highway Department.

 

I am pretty sure the COR training is something the mandiatory training with encompass in a few years after the direct leadership, and direct-contact leadership mandate years pass. It will be interesting to see what changes will happen with the COR's & CO's once the COR's are required to take the training. Will they become more actively involved ? Time will tell..

 

We have a CO that knows their power, but I went all through cub scouts & about 2 1/2 years of troop with my son with our CO's not knowing.. Although the pack's CO was open to donating other things we may have needed, like camperships.

[skeptic]

Moose;

 

I suspect that in most councils, the idea that COR's will actually take their job seriously is the SE's biggest nightmare. Sorry to say that, but in rare instances, COR's acting in majority, have been know to force major changes, and even firing of SE"s and other lower professional staff. Of course, most COR's either do not understand they have a vote, or just do not really care. They can be difficult to even locate at times.

 

End user, the kids, is what would be a great "ideal". An executive board made up of "involved" individuals for the most part, rather than "political" members would go a long way to alleviate many issues I think. Our annual meetings seldom have more than maybe 30% of the total board, past or being seated, at the event. It is obvious who really are the leaders and go to members. Fortunately at the moment, we appear to have people at the top who are actually "involved". But there are a lot of fuzzy concerns that get fuzzy answers in the council. I worry about what may be hiding just beneath the surface; but I only have longevity, not financial or political clout.

 

We persevere, trying to focus on the kids.

[moosetracker]

True - skeptic. I was once told that by a DE. So sometimes they don't want them. Yet, at other times I know I have heard DE's say that they do want them active.. Maybe it is different DE's, Maybe it depends on what they want them active or not active in.

 

I don't know how the COR video training is, but I know for the COR's who take the training in person, our council did open their eyes to the power they have (or some of the power they have).

 

Our old COR (who knew her power) passed away.. After about 1 1/2 years of drifting, someone who was a parent & committee member in our troop took the position. At the time she took it, we were all freightened as she is known to take a bone, and dig in and smash through everything leaving destruction in her path. Good heart, but if on the wrong path that she thinks as right, she had tunnel vision..

 

Well she went to the "in person" council COR training, My husband and I were taking other training at the same time.. We met up afterwards and she was just bug eyed and stated.. "Wow, I didn't know I had so much power!!!"..

 

At the time we thought "Oh, no! Here it comes!".. (Not sure how come she did not know the power of the COR, our last COR, used her power and we learned from watching her in action the true power of an active COR..)

 

To her credit though I think with her kids out of the program, and maybe a little bit of us slapping her down over the years (sometimes not kindly, because you just couldn't hear the soft mellow friendly like "No" when you are being a freight train in action).. She has honestly mellowed out.. She will take the power when she needs to, but not often. So, far from what I hear, she is being fair minded, and just recently listened and took notes of everyones views of the program, and weighed everyone insights and is now ready to make some much needed leadership changes, (I know last year she was reluctant to make, these very same changes when others asked her to.). So, rather then just barrelling in and doing things her way, she is doing a good job.

 

Just wondering, if the mandated training will open the eyes of other COR's..

[Eamonn]

Maybe customer is not the word that I'd use?

When I look at who caters to whom.

I see that the volunteer leaders normally cater to the youth members and their families at the unit level.

Districts try to cater to the volunteer leaders, offering trainings and R/T's. As a rule these are ran by other volunteer leaders.

Things get a little bit cloudy when it comes to Councils.

Councils while they are corporations, tend to be more in the business of passing down and implementing the stuff that comes from the National Office. While also trying to ensure that things at the local level don't get too out of hand.

Most Council Executive Boards do what they do without much thought about the wants and needs of the CO's in the area.

While of course in theory COR's can vote officers of the Council into office, in most cases the methods used to elect these officers make this very difficult.

While I have never served on the National Council or worked in the National office. I get the feeling that we as an organization are fearful of upsetting the organizations that have the most members and or the most charters.

We (They) are not going to do anything that might upset a group like the VFW, or other groups because they might pull the plug and decide to go with another organization or maybe start one of their own.

Ea.

[Oak Tree]

I'd say they are all different sizes and styles of customers.

 

I agree with Eamonn that units view the kids/parents/families as the primary customer. And districts are there to support the unit leaders.

 

I agree with Beavah only in the theoretical sense that what councils do is sell charters. They really make their money by selling memberships, and the membership number appears to be the coin of the realm. And not just member numbers, but the number of units. It seems to me like council views one of their primary jobs to be starting new units.

 

I think individual COs barely register. They don't complain, they don't show up, they aren't that hard to find. If you have some people who want to start a unit, you can find a place to host it.

 

I do think big donors are customers. But they are the customers in the sense that you don't want to do anything to tick them off. I think this is one reason the BSA is so quick to expel volunteers who have any kind of question mark over their head.

 

National chartering partners definitely are an important customer. This probably is the primary reason for some of the conservatism that shows through - a number of these groups might have particular items they are focused on, and the BSA is loathe to change any of these.

 

This diverse focus is one reason why professionals might not come across the best they could. In my council I've had no issues whatsoever - I've genuinely had good dealings with the SE, the DE, the Field Director, the office personnel. We did connect up with one guy who seemed to be really lazy, but other than that, I can't complain anything like what I hear from some of the rest of you.

 

Our state parks, on the other hand, appear to have no customer focus whatsoever. I guess that's what happens when all (or most) of your money comes from the government and you don't get rewarded based on how much money you bring in.

[BadenP]

To those of you who think the big money people are the BSA customers you are way off. Corporations and individuals who donate large sums, for the greater majority, are in it mainly for the write off and getting/buying some recognition as a great philanthropist, bottom line. They could give a rip about how the scouting program is delivered, or helping out a scout camp, unless they can get the camp or a building named after them. So don't delude yourself into thinking otherwise.

 

As far as scouting professionals acting like they are special I think that is mostly true of SE's and higher who view the council as their domain to control and mandate policies as they wish. DE's are at the bottom of the food chain of pro scouting and are treated as such by their higher ups, and forced to follow the mandates of those same individuals, even in violation of BSA policies. I have seen two really obnoxious DE's when I was a pro scouter, one got fired in their first year, and the other became a FD in another council so go figure.

 

Bottom line, the BSA's primary customer is the CO, the local councils primary customer are the unit volunteers and youth.

[packsaddle]

I noticed the relevance of this thread to the one on 'STEM-NOVA award'. This is because for this new program, "EOM (Exxon Mobile) has generously agreed to fund the development of such a program within Scouting through a special multi-year grant."

Does this make Exxon Mobile a customer?

[Oak Tree]

It at least means that Rex Tillerson is a customer.