Troop Leadership -- appoint or elect?

[TheFourGuardians]

Well, in my troop(and I recently was elected SPL)we do the following.

 

First the SPL is elected:

 

1. Nomination

2. Seconded

3. Accepted

 

Each nominee goes through this. Then a vote is held in one of any fashions(secret ballot, raise of hands, etc. It was rasing hands this time.)

 

Then the SPL carries out the election in a similar fashion for all other youth position save instructors, guides, JASM, and Den Chiefs.

 

These are then selected(save JASM who is selected by scout master.)

 

 

 

 

[Kudu]

I don't know why this is here, but I come to the Patrol Method forum to get away from such ranting. There is a place for it of this forum, which allows the rest of us to talk real scouting. Patrol Method discussions is actually a place where problems do get solved. Not a place to vent on the personal perceptions of life.

 

The term "rant" is an emotional term used to dismiss points of view to which we object and/or don't understand. Assertions such as the "rest of us to talk real scouting," and "actually a place where problems do get solved," are merely a reflection of your own "personal perceptions of life."

 

In most of the world, appointing the SPL is "real Scouting," and "solves actual problems."

 

Troop elections or Scoutmaster appointments are just two different ways of playing the game of Scouting. Each way has advantages and drawbacks.

 

Well good news Kudu, there is such a program and I know it is growing. Do a search for Baden Powell scouts; I think that is what it is call, and you will find just what you are looking for.

 

It looks like an excellent program :-)

 

http://www.1sttarrantbpscouts.org/Activities.html

 

Kudu

 

 

[FScouter]

"In most of the world, appointing the SPL is 'real Scouting,' and 'solves actual problems.' "

 

That's interesting about how Scouting is done in other parts of the world. In Boy Scouts of America, Scoutmasters help boys learn to make their own choices. We facilitate that by setting up troop elections and teaching boys how the process works in the real world.

[pargolf44067]

I am currently involved in my second troop, as we moved and my son transferred to a new troop. I am also the new SM in this troop. In this troop they have appointed SPL and ASPL for the last couple of years due to "poor choices" by the boys in the past.

 

In the other troop that I was involved with, the boys elected the same SPL and ASPL as the previous year, even though they missed a third of the scouting year due to other committments and hadn't really been the best leaders, just more popular.

 

In my new role, I don't want to step on any toes (YET) and will go along within the next month of having the SM and committee select the SPL and ASPL. However, when we hold elections in six months, I will start the transition to the boys electing the SPL and ASPL. My thoughts were to have the SM and committee select three to four boys, that we feel are qualified and have the boys elect from those candidates.

 

Any thoughts?

[drakmund]

If you are moving to a hybrid (election/appointed) process like you are suggesting pargolf44067 then I would ask the scouts to apply for the positions they want then screen them through the committee. You might find that the scouts you want would rather have a different position.

 

 

 

[acco40]

Why not follow the program laid out by the BSA that we promised to deliver by signing our adult applications?

 

Oops. Seems like I'm essentially repeating my post from 4/22/2004.

 

 

[FScouter]

"... screen them through the committee".

 

Does the committee really know the boys well enough to make this kind of selection?? Regardless, their job is to support the PLC and the Scoutmaster, not screen the boys to weed out the "bad" leaders.

[pargolf44067]

I am going through SM training this week in the evenings and I know what the BSA program states. As I have seen in other posts in the various forum I am trying to change things somewhat gradually. I do, however, think there should be some vetting process at the committee level to ensure that candidates that are interested are qualified and to ensure that the same people don't keep getting elected to those positions on an ongoing basis.

 

As far as the idea of having the Scouts nominate themselves, I think that would be a good idea and I probably will do that next time.

 

Thanks,

 

Bill

[Hunt]

Ater reading back over this thread (which began in April of 2004!)it seems to me that there is an underlying question: how do you deal with the problem of the "bad" SPL?

Clearly, in some troops the boys have elected SPLs who didn't perform well, in some cases with serious effects on the troop. As a result, some of these troops have looked for ways to prevent this from happening again: having adults appoint the SPL, having adults screen the candidates, setting eligibility requirements and so forth.

Some posters seem to suggest that if the adult leaders do their job properly in training, that the bad SPL will never get elected in the first place. I'm skeptical of this idea. A related idea is that the boys should be allowed to elect the SPL and cope with the results themselves if they choose a bad one. I can see this, but I think it can be pretty tough on the newer scouts who don't realize what they're getting into. It also could really harm the troop, especially where the SPL serves for a year.

So I think the boys should definitely elect the SPL, but I wouldn't fault adult leadership that took steps to avert a clear disaster. I kind of like the idea of scouts telling the SM they want to run, and letting him serve as a gatekeeper.

[OldGreyEagle]

I am in the camp of running the Troop the way the BSA says in its publications/ The boys elect the SPL.

 

That being said, I dont think boy led has to mean boy led into the ground.

 

Scouts running for SPL should be aware of the responsibilities of the position. After election, and before the next Troop meeting the Scoutmaster should go over the job responsibilities with the scout. The expectation of the job layed out and the scout told who his resources are when he needs help. If the scout falters, the SM or adult asigned to mentor the SPL/ASPL or PLC steps in to provide support. If the SPL doesnt fulfill the responsibilities of the job, as layed out by the scoutmaster and does not change behavior after counseling, he gets fired and does not get credit for a POR. Troop holds a special election to complete the term. Actions, or perhaps inactions have consequences. Now, I would hope the "firing" of an SPL would be rare, but to say that the kids elected a good time Charley and he ruined the troop, is a big fat cop out The adults abdicated responsibility rather then hold the SPL to his duties, which were explained to him the week of his election.

 

Its not the job of the adults to select, screen or otherwise coronate troop leadership. It is the job of the adults to train the youth leadership and to hold those youth responsible for their obligations.

[FScouter]

"I do, however, think there should be some vetting process at the committee level to ensure that candidates that are interested are qualified..."

 

No boy is qualified for the job. We're here to train them to be leaders, not screen them out. If a "bad" leader is elected, then that simply is more of a challenge for the Scoutmaster to train him. That is our job.

[drakmund]

OldGreyEagle & FScouter,

 

If you read pargolf44067's post, he has an adult appointed unit and he wants to transition to a boy elected troop. We all know from the multiple posts here that the best way is for the boys to elect but pargolf44067 was asking for help to transition. He didn't want to make the dramatic switch but rather cross over gently. If that means they screen scouts (Committee or Scoutmasters) a couple times, and later move to a full election then I would be all for it. The point of the last couple posts was to help give him a process to transition to the "offical BSA" process.

 

I have been transitioning things in my own troop to improve things and move toward a better program and unit. The thing that I have found is that changes don't occur instantly and when people try they cause a lot more problems.

 

As for bad SPLs, it would depend on the unit and the situation. It is the adults responsibility to teach leadership by example and through Junior Leader Training but if the troop is in danger of losing members or folding the adults of the troop probably should step in.

[OldGreyEagle]

A request was made for thoughts, and I posted mine

[FScouter]

I'd transition it now. Acquiescing to committee control now won't make it easier to transition later. The rut just gets deeper.

[Hunt]

I guess the advantage of allowing the boys to elect a SPL about whom you have doubts, and then "firing" him later if he can't or won't perform, is that you might have been wrong about your evaluation of him. I think firing the SPL would be pretty traumatic, though, and a lot of units would probably struggle through a bad situation rather than do it. Obviously, you will try to help and train the underperforming SPL, but that may not always work.