Patrol Leadership: Management Style Vs Scoutcraft Style

[Mafaking]

The Context

 

The current PL training literature endorses a concept that a patrol leader does not have to have the necessary scoutcraft skills just the high level view of the group needs and then delegate accordingly. His is a manger of his group having identified those in the patrol with the skills to perform certain task and then implementing them in the most resourceful manner.

 

Another approach is that it is through the mastering of the scoutcraft skills that elevates the scouts leadership position within his patrol. That by having some of the best scoutcraft skills the other will naturally gravitate to that individual. The PL then naturally ascends in the grouops order as a leader. Further the confidence in having the scout craft skills and being able to demonstrate these skills facilitates his personal development as a leader.

 

My Experience

Three patrols go camping one has and experienced PL and a few younger scouts with big hearts but little experience. His patrol does great. The second patrol has scouts similar in age and a highly skilled PL. His patrol does well. The third patrol has older-ish scouts one very experienced scout but a PL and the rest of the scouts have limited experience. This patrol does poorly. Yes, all the PL have had training, mentoring and we routinely review leadership and responsibility at the PLC. All have had about the same amount of leadership training.

 

The main difference that I can see is that the poorly performing PL lacked the initiative and the higher level thought to delegate to the more experienced scout or that the Scout craft skills of the others better prepared them to be leaders.

 

Given the constraints of time we can either focus our attention of developing management theory (EDGE) or scout crafts skills but not both. Which should we choose?

 

 

[Stosh]

Neither, there are other options that are more effective.

 

Management style: PL - I have the knowledge and you do as I tell you and things will work just fine.

 

ScoutCraft style: PL - I have the skills and I can teach you, but I don't necessarily know how to put it together for everyone's benefit.

 

 

Stosh

[Beavah]

Yah, if anything da current financial crisis should teach us it's that "management style" doesn't even work in da big boys world. A bunch of management bankers who don't understand what their derivatives operation is doin' aren't an asset any more than a management-style FEMA director is worth a plug nickel when it comes to leadin' an emergency management team in a New Orleans hurricane.

 

We teach skills, and then we recognize and coach leaders. Yeh can't write a novel by memorizin' a standard form for successful novels. Yeh have to learn how to read first.

 

Beavah

 

[Twocubdad]

Two somewhat random thoughts:

 

First, keep in mind that scoutcraft skills are a means to an end. We're not a camping club. In 20 years I could care less if my Scouts can remember how to tie a bowline or how far from camp their bear bag needs to be hung. I am more concerned that they understand the role of a leader and how to work as a team. Camping and Scoutcraft is the context -- or if you prefer, labratory -- in which we teach all sorts of things - team work, compromise, negotiationing, decision making, trustworthyness, loyalty, helpfullness ... you know the list. Not just management-style leadership.

 

Secondly, I think your proposition that we can't teach both management-style leadership and Scoutcraft is a false one. If we're "playing the game" properly and putting our Scout in situations such that a patrol must work together to be successful, the Scouts must have both sets of skills. A patrol on a campout with no scoutcraft skills will fail in very obvious and predictable ways. A patrol with no leadership or teamwork skills will also fail, but differently.

 

I know it has become fashionable here to criticize "management-style" leadership, how WB21C is run and even the overall direction of how BSA looks at leadership training. But I believe it has an important place in the program. Relatively few people are traditional, charasmatic leaders and -- in my opinion -- that type of leadership can be taught only on a very limited basis. You can learn to mimic the style of a charasmatic leader, but you either have it or you don't. We can, however teach management-style leadership skill -- organization, communications, delegation, etc.

 

I have several boys in the the troop who in no way, shape or form could be considered leaders. A couple are so painfully shy and withdrawn, I personally would describe them as having behavioral problems. One kid in particular is so shy he won't even order his own food when we go out. Smart as a whip, but won't say boo to his shadow. In the past, I've had to trick him to sit down and complete requirements and talk with me long enough to consider the conversation a Scoutmaster conference. But guess who got elected PL last term? Interestingly enough, he didn't do a half-bad job. He showed up for patrol time and campouts ultra-prepared with detailed menus, recipies and cooking instructions. He basically delegated to his APL the job of yelling. Totally management-style leadership, but the patrol was generally successful.

 

I see as one of the advantages of the management-style leadership that BSA uses is that it is accessable to all the boys, not just the Rockwellesque, charasmatic leaders. If you rely on the natural leaders rising to the top, there are going to be a whole bunch of boys left at the bottom.

[scoutldr]

OUR SENIOR EMPLOYEES HAVE BEEN SCHOOLED IN THIS NEW PHILOSOPHY WHICH HOLDS THAT AS LONG AS A PERSON IS WELL VERSED IN A FEW SIMPLE RULES OF HOW TO HANDLE PEOPLE AND SITUATIONS, HE NEED NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE DETAILS OF THE PROGRAMS HE IS MANAGING OR THE INCREASINGLY SOPHISTICATED TECHNOLOGIES ON WHICH MANY OF THESE PROGRAMS ARE BASED. THIS HAS ALLOWED THE NON-PROFESSIONAL TO ACHIEVE HIGH STATUS AND HIGH PAY WITHIN THE GOVERNMENT. THESE MANAGERS CAN MOVE EASILY FROM ONE POSITION TO ANOTHER WITHOUT THE SLIGHTEST PAUSE. AS LONG AS THEIR AREA DOES NOT BECOME A PUBLIC DISASTER, THEY ARE SAFE. IF TROUBLE ERUPTS, THEY ARE LOST; THEY CAN THEN BLAME THOSE BENEATH THEM OR THOSE WHO PRECEDED THEM.

 

ADM Hyman G. Rickover, 1979

 

(please forgive the all-caps)

[asm 411]

A Boy Scout Troop is a diverse group. Some patrols and some boys will excel at some things and not others. The first question you should ask is if the Scouts are having fun on the outing? If they are then other training can be added to improve their abilities in leadership and scout craft. However don't ever forget "The fable of the Animal School". http://www.janebluestein.com/handouts/animal.html

 

Here are some of my thoughts about leadership and management

 

Leader Develops a vision or identifies the direction for the group based on values

Manager Develops the mission based on a leaders vision

Worker Does what is identified in the mission efficiently by taking the initiative

Trainer Instructs/guides/supports any of the above in how to be more effective or efficient

 

Scouts and Scouters We wear the hat of the leader, manager, worker or trainer depending on the situation

 

In Scouting some projects may require us to participate in only one of the four roles. Most projects require us to take on more than one of the roles and often times all four. In scouting the SPL is the Leader, the ASPL and the PLs are typically managers and the patrol members are typically the workers. Often times in Scouting these roles change depending on the situation and environment. Training happens at all levels by Scouts and Scouters.

 

Keep mindful when to lead, when to manage, when to work, when to train and when to stand aside and so others can learn by leading, managing, training or becoming proficient at a task.

 

 

[Mafaking]

 

Twocub dad wrote:

"First, keep in mind that scoutcraft skills are a means to an end. We're not a camping club. In 20 years I could care less if my Scouts can remember how to tie a bowline or how far from camp their bear bag"

 

Couldn't you say the same about school work? Students learn all sorts and facts and computation that they never use. Yet we emphasize competency in school work. Why? Because learning to master a craft is the objective. Maybe we should teach students to pool and coordinate their efforts. Just learn math management theory. Sports is the same way. You don't have to be a good hitter, fielder or pitcher just be able to keep everyone's spirits up. That' how you will add value.

 

Ok then if competetency need not be mastered to be a PL then exactly whose skills is he manageing?

 

Its an illusion that a scouts can be a good PL and not be proficient in scoutcraft skills. A de-emphasis on skills only to be replaced with management theory is a disservice to the youths we serve.

 

 

Its easier to deliver a program full of theory than skills. That Eagle scout can't camp worth a darn, tie a knot, set-up a tent, organize a campout or cook a meal. But he is chock full of the magic stuff called "leadership theory".

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Eagledad]

Wow Twocubdad, that is a great post and you are right on target. I learned back in college that about 4 percent of the population is natural leaders, or in your words the charismatic leader. But scouting is a program that develops the other 96 percent into leaders as well.

 

I also want to support what you said about the scout craft skills. Done correctly, the first class skills program is one of the best tools for teaching leadership skills. .

 

I have always said that what scouting does so well is develop confidence. It really doesnt matter how skilled you are if you have the confidence to move forward.

 

My SM Minute for this subject is about the fire that started to spread in San Francisco. Several stations were called in so it wouldnt spread to the other parts of the block. But there was so much heat from the fire; the firemen had to back away. About that time one fire truck came fast down the hill passing the other trucks with its sirens blaring and didnt stop until the firemen were close enough to jump out and blast the fire far enough back so the other trucks could pull in. A few weeks later the Mayor presented City Awards of Merit to all the firemen of that truck. When he got to the captain of the truck, the mayor asked if there was anything the city could do to thank the men. The captain replied that a new set of brakes for the truck would be wonderful.

 

Leadership is easy when you can pick and choose the best leaders at the right time, but it takes special leadership when it is thrust on you without planning. Scouting prepares our youth for the day the brakes go out.

 

Thanks Twocubdad

 

Barry

 

 

 

[OldGreyEagle]

TwoCub,

 

Persistence may be considered a virture by some and annoying by others, but I am not sure "fahionable" would be the adjective I would use.

 

Certainly what NYLT teaches is applicable to all facets in a youth life as is the current Wood Badge Curriculum for adults. I don't see it as detracting from Scouting Skills but others may not hold the same view.

[OldGreyEagle]

"Its easier to deliver a program full of theory than skills. That Eagle scout can't camp worth a darn, tie a knot, set-up a tent, organize a campout or cook a meal. But he is chock full of the magic stuff called "leadership theory"."

 

Sorry man, but if you have such an Eagle Scout or if you know of such an Eagle Scout, it is not the BSA who is responsible, the blame falls directly on the shoulder of the adults who allowed such an abomination. Yes, there is much talk about Management theory but if the program does not teach knots and then reinforce the knot knowledge with games and the opportunity of using the skills, it is not the BSA's fault. If the Unit does not teach the scout how to organize a campout or a meal (which sounds a lot like it should be based on "leadership theory" by the way,) it is not BSA's fault, but the unit.

 

I have neer seen an Eagle Application signed by the BSA, all the ones I have seen are signed by Unit volunteers, it is these people who are to assure the skills required to advance have been taught and are retained by the units program.

 

if Eagles cannot tie knots, its not on the BSA

[Mafaking]

Naw!

 

Three posters come in and cheer the remark that scout skills aren't that important. "They don't matter in the big picture." Then the same subcribe to the position that if they don't know these skills your program has failed. Wait! if they don't know them and it doesn't matter than how has the program failed?

 

Ah! because you have replaced the skills with the Magic NYLT theory.

 

I am more agreeable to the position that a scout lacking in scoutcraft skills is program shortfall. And support that by stating that these skills are essential for being a successful youth leader within boy scouts. That the BSA PL literature to the contrary are incorrect. Further that its harder for a PL to default or transfer authority as taught in the hand books than it is just to teach him the skills. Delegating is a tough concept when you don't know what iit is that needs to be done.

 

Let's try this; is the concept of delegating authority and directing others a higher order skill than the typically scoutcraft skills? If so can you teach magic management theory to a scout whose scoutcraft skills are weak and obtain sucess?

 

Given a limited amount of time, the unit leadership program is better served by

A) teaching scoutcrafts skills?

B) teaching management theory?

 

 

 

 

(This message has been edited by Mafaking)

[Twocubdad]

Mafaking -- I think you missed my point. For a patrol to be successful at the Scouting game, it takes both sets of skills. A patrol devoid of any Scout skill isn't going to have a successful campout regardless of the ability of its leaders. If the outdoor program is the laboratory in which leadership, teamwork and the other character development skills are learned, then Scoutcraft skills are the test tubes, beakers and buntsen burners with which we conduct the experiment.

 

You are absolutely right -- this IS exactly like school work. And that's usually the example I use to explain it. I couldn't solve a quadratic equation with a gun to my head. But the years I spent taking math taught me a method of logical problem solving I use everday.

 

Same story, different class: My older son is struggling with honors chemistry. He understands the material and "gets it" but is having a hard time keeping his grade up because he keeps missing little details in the assignments. He'll leave off a parenthesis at the end of an equation or forget the valence of a particular element and consequently gets the problems wrong. I keep trying to explain to him that the real, underlying, long-term lesson he needs to learn is precision. He'll probably never take another chemistry course again, but if this class teaches him to be more precise and accurate in his work, he has learned an invaluable lesson.

 

Scouting works the same way.

 

And, Barry, thank you for your remarks. That is a real compliment coming from one of the folks here whose opinion I respect a great deal.

 

 

[OldGreyEagle]

Well, I reject the premise you can't do both.

 

But, that never stopped me from posting

 

How many technical types out there know people who became a Supervisor based on being the bet engineer, best technician, best whatever the plant had ever seen and then failed miserably in the position because they didn't know how to manage? You need both technical skill and managerial know how.

 

In scouting, the scouting skills are what is taught and without them what do we have? But we also need to provide a context, a way to show the youth how to manage those who need to learn and implement those skills. When is the Boy Scout program the best? When boys learn and implement the outdoor skills because they are fun and learn how to teach and learn repsonsibility and how to lead as a by product without even knowing they are learning.

[Stosh]

Why does the Peter Principle keep popping into my head?

 

Leadership and management are not the same animal.

 

If I'm lost, the only "leader" I want to see is the guy/gal who knows how to get out of the woods. I don't care what skills they may have, what knowledge they have, whether or not they can teach them, whether I'm happy, whether my self esteem is comforted, as long as they know how to get out of the woods, I'll follow them.

 

Stosh

[gcnphkr]

I agree with OGE. Both can and are taught. I'll even throw in "making ethical decisions".

 

Of the three, scout-craft is much simpler to learn and to teach. Perhaps Mafaking is so hung up on this because anything more is beyond his skill set.