The Official Chain of Command?

[Bob White]

oops yes, the Jasm

[Gold Winger]

"On the other hand if one wants to build a teamwork type of group, the commander/dictator dynamic doesn't apply anymore."

 

That's a lot of horse pukey. On a good team everyone knows their jobs but there still needs to be someone calling the shots. What if a football team didn't have the QB calling the plays? It would be pandemonium.

 

On a ship, every crewman knows his job but there is still the captain to coordinate things. The Cap'n says "All ahead 2/3s." The lee helmsman doesn't wait for the cap'n to say, "Petty Officer brown, set the engine order telegraph appropriately." The lee helmsmans sends the order to engineering and snipes spring into action because everyone knows their job. Why do they know what their job is? Because someone told them.

 

Whether you like to admit it or not, in any group larger than three there will be a director of some sort. Someone has to make decisions. What if both the Rattlesnakes and the Flaming Squirrels want to set up the flag pole but neither wants to clean the fire ring. Someone has to step in and say, "Work together on the flag pole and then clean the fire ring" or "Rattlesnakes did the fire ring last time so Flaming Squirrels you get to do it this time" or something.

 

Maybe chain of responsibility would be a better term but I'd say that to a large extent there are two parallel ones in Scouting CC, SM, ASM and SM, SPL, PL.

[Bob White]

Certainly different situations require a different style of leadership, but telling or directing is certainly not the only one available to you, nor is it the right one for every situation.

 

If the rattle snake patrol wants to put up a flag pole in their patrol site why should that keep the sqirrels from putting one up in their own site as well?

 

OHHH I SEEE. You aren't using the Patrol Method and so your choice of not using the scouting methods has creatd a problem which you now want to resolve by "telling" the scouts what to do. Your problem is not the chain of command, its the lack of understanding of the Boy Scout Methods and their application.

 

As far as cleaning the fire ring whose fire ring is it, the rattle snake's of the squirrel's? Oh thats right no patrol method. So it was the "troops" fire ring. You mean that the troop leader who decided to do a troop fire did not have a duty roster and a plan already arranged with individuals or a patrol who agreed ahead of time to clean the ring? Where is the leadership in this troop?

 

The problems you suggest are not caused by the BSA leadership model, they are caused by lack of knowledge and lack of use of the BSA leadership model.

 

 

Michael

1. There is no chain of command in Boy Scouts troop operation.

 

2. There is only one troop elected position SPL, and one elected patrol position PL. All other positions are selected by the SPL or PL. You do not "run " for JASM.

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[MichaelOA]

"2. There is only one troop elected position SPL, and one elected patrol position PL. All other positions are selected by the SPL or PL. You do not "run " for JASM."

 

As much as I would like that idea, my scoutmaster doesn't. The only thing I as an SPL ever got to appoint, was the ASPL. And my scoutmaster isn't going to let this SPL do that. Sadly, how the troop runs is how the SM, wants to run it :|

[Gold Winger]

Doesn't matter bob. Let's take your example. So the rattlesnakes want to put up a flagpole in their campsite. Everyone wants to put it up but it only takes three guys. Another three guys are needed to clean the fire ring but no on wants to do that.

 

Now the PL can sit down with them and say, "Okay guys, we need to work together. Someone has to do the task that isn't fun. Who wants to do that?" No one will raise their hands. Teams need a leader, pretty simple concept.

 

 

[Stosh]

Just because someone makes a decision doesn't mean he's going to dictate the next steps. Suppose one person of three makes a decision, the other two agree and they form a consensus that #1 is best at doing part of the task, #2 is good at another and #3 picks up the slack. No one has to direct the other two, the team just knows how to work as one and get the job done. If #1 dictates and #2 and #3 just follow along, they haven't got much of a functional team, they have a leader and a work crew, but no team where everyone participates as a combined unit.

 

It never ceases to amaze me how such chains of command infiltrate every organization and seems to dictate how things have to be done. Surely a one man show can never accomplish as much, nor do it efficiently as a well oiled team of cooperative members.

 

Sorry, I prefer the team approach over the one-man dictation approach.

 

Horse hockey or not, it still works better and everyone has a better time if they feel they are a valid part of a team rather than a member on a work crew. Eventually the people will tire of domination and simply leave. At worse case scenerio, if the leader makes a poor decision and inflicts it on everyone else, he's destined for failure and no one's going to back him. If the decider is a member of a team and makes a poor decision, there's still a strong possibility that the team will correct things before they get out of hand and will rally around the other team member as one of their own rather than cut him loose from the team.

 

Making decisions and then directing others might be leadership to some, but it's also seem as a mild form of bullying to others. Try having a younger SPL try this out on a patrol of older scouts. I've NEVER seen that scenerio succeed unless an adult is nearby to insure it's enforcement. That means nothing more than the SM is the real leader in that situation, i.e. a dictator can only rule from a position of inflicting fear.

 

If no one is going to clean out the fire pit, it doesn't need a leader, all it needs is a taskmaster that will force them to do it. It's not as simple as one would like others to believe.

Stosh(This message has been edited by jblake47)

[Gold Winger]

All together now, sing "We are the world . . ."

[Bob White]

GW this is such simple situation you bring up, and that's great because it helps show how simple the Patrol Method and Leadershiop Development Method are.

 

So the whole patrol wants to work together as a team and put up the flag pole...and you see this as a problem? Patrols are supposed to want to work together GW, thats what teams do. So what is the worst that can happen? They get the job done faster because of the team work and then they all go do the fire ring.

 

Good patrol leadership would have a duty roster of things that needed to be done and the patrol members would have deecided in advance who would do what.

 

Performing patrols pitch in to get whatever work needs to be done without the need for a duty roster so that they have time to do other things together.

 

Leaders understand that the majority of the work is done BEFORE and AFTER the activity so that during the activity they can observe evaluate and adjust.

 

Take for instance a situation directly our oif the content pf the Scoutmaster Specific BASIC Training Before the Troop meeting the Scoutmaster meets with the SPL to review the agenda and see if the SPL needs anything prior to the meeting beginning. The meeting is then run by the SPL and the PLs and the Scoutmaster is in the background observing and evaluating. The Scoutmaster only speaks during the meeting at the end for the Scoutmasters's Minute. Then AFTER the meeting the SPL and the PLS gather for a quick reflection on what went well and what they can improve on nect week.

 

The scoutmaster as couch/Mentor does his or her most active work before and after the meeting. Duroing it he observes and evaluates. so that outside of the meeting situation he can coach and mentor the junior leaders.

 

We train the patrols leaders to do the same thing with the patrol. Most of their work for a campout should already be done before they arrive. Then they observe, evaluate, and adjust. They coach and mentor the members of the patrol to helps them work together for their own benefit.

 

Notice, no telling or directing and No Chain of Command.

 

[Gold Winger]

" They get the job done faster because of the team work and then they all go do the fire ring."

 

No, they get in each other's way because it is nine trying to do a job for three. In the meantime, night is falling, the fire ring is a mess and no one build a fire because the nine are still squabbling over who need to hold the halyard.

 

I'm beginning to think that you haven't been around boys much.

[Bob White]

"No, they get in each other's way because it is nine trying to do a job for three."

 

NINE! before it was just 6, now you've decided to add three more scouts to the scenario. No matter, because you don't know that is what will happen. You have chosen to think the worst of the scouts before they have even attempted the task. Not the attitude a good leader would ever take. You need to realize that as long as they are working together for a common positive goal it's a good thing. Teamwork requires practice and this is how patrols practice.

 

If they are squabbiling and do not get the fire built then they learn that by not working together they do not get as much accomplished. Thats not a bad lesson to learn.

 

I however have confidence that if the scouts all wanted to do a job together that they will do just fine, and either the SPL or I will be willing to stand in the shadows and watch so that we can be ready to congratulate them for the job they did, or later the SPL can coach the PL on how he can get the job done better in the future.

 

You really do not get the whole youth leadership and Patrol Method thing.

 

While I an willing to bet I probably have more unit leadership experience than you it is irrelevant to the issue. A leader with only two years experience that understands and follows the program is a better leader and will do a better job of achieving the mission of scouting than someone who does not understand the program or has not followed it for decades.

 

Tenure is not as important as ability.(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Stosh]

Of course the only way a group can function effectively is if one of the group takes command, grabs the reins and begins dictating order to other to make sure things happen correctly. Only one who has been trained, tested and shows great command presence can do this. Surely all the other dolts in the group must obediently toe the line and one has a great running patrol. This is a youth moving up the ladder and will become an effective SPL if the other dolts know what's best for them.

 

Surely this is what BSA literature means when it makes reference to an effective boy-led patrol.

 

Of course if your unit is so inept that there are no boys who can step up to the plate and make the call, there are plenty of adults can can coach, coerce, belittle and/or mentor the boys into doing what they want, when they want it and in the way they want it.

 

... :^) This scenerio is not fantasy, I have seen it happen over and over again in the many years of scouting I have been involved in.

 

Boy-led, patrol-method is in practical terms the real fantasy because when it is put into practice, it is most often a topic of derision. I can't help but chuckle everytime a SM describes HIS patrol-method troop when in fact most often than not he should be describing THE BOY'S patrol-method troop.

 

Stosh

 

 

[Gold Winger]

"NINE! before it was just 6, now you've decided to add three more scouts to the scenario."

 

Not at all. There were always nine Scouts involved, the other three were trying to convince each other that they needed a buddy to go to the can.

[Stosh]

This is why it is recommended to have only 8 boys in a patrol. That extra one screws up the buddy system and is basically just a fly in the ointment.

 

Stosh

[Gold Winger]

Life isn't perfect.

[Bob White]

Actually Stosh if the scoutmaster is delivering the program correctly it is the BSA's Patrol Method, it is the boys' Patrol, and it is the charter organizations troop.

 

What you describe in your your last post may exist in soe troops, in fact I am sure it does. What you do not acknowledge is that it is not what the BSA teaches or supports that causes or promotes that attitude or environment,

 

What you describe has nothing to do with the BSA program but is in fact caused tby the absence of the use of the BSA program Methods by the adult leaders.

 

A team does not require someone to bark out commands to get the job done and nothing in the BBSa suggests tat it does. Nor does the BSA program teach adults or youth to lead that way.