Strong personalities - PLC

[oldisnewagain1]

Just looking for some thoughts on PLC meetings.

 

Background: We are a boy lead troop and have been that way for years. The Scoutmaster has always sat back,

let the SPL run the meetings and the PLC has come up with "the plan". (The Scoutmaster also kept us ASM biting our tongues instead of speaking up. lol)

 

Last night was my first PLC as the new Scoutmaster and my intent was to sit back and listen but the committee was also meeting and needed my input.

 

When I returned to the PLC meeting, I asked what "the Plan" was for the year and was met with blank stares. They at least had the next few meetings planned out so there will need to be another PLC meeting soon. On the ride home I asked my son , who is a PL, what had happened during the PLC meeting. It seems like there were three different people (with strong personalities) who had three very different positions on the way things should run and argued the entire meeting. Each of these guys is bucking to be the next SPL in the coming elections (the current SPL will be turning 18 in a couple of weeks).

 

There is a part of me that thinks, this might not have happened if I was there and perhaps I could have kept them on track. But there is another part of me that thinks "boy lead" and they should work this out themselves.

 

Thoughts?

 

 

[Eagledad]

I think being out of the room was fine, but it is important to know what was going on. In fact, being out of the room lets the scouts act in the way they think is appropriate and allows you to see what needs fixing. Your goal is teach them the skills so that the meeting would run no different if you didn't show up that day. You are teaching independence.

 

In my world, the boys do nothing wrong, they just dont know how to do it right yet. So we train them. Also, never give a boy more than they can handle in the next meeting. In other words, dont give a one hour lecture on how to run meetings. He needs only just enough to have the confidence to get started. Then you go from there and build on his experiences. I typically never give more than two suggestions for him to try at the next meeting.

 

I like to meet with the SPL after a meeting and ask him how it went and where we could improve. I usually sat outside the room near enough the meeting just long enough to get an idea of the tone of the meeting. You dont need to hear the whole meeting to see the problems. The number one biggest hugest problem for most newer SPLs is group control. We all go through it, it just takes time to learn how to control groups. I give the SPL a couple ideas to try at the next meeting. Anything from just ask the problem scout to leave to leave the room to remind all the scouts that only one can speak at a time. I had one basic rule for all scouts and adults all the time, "never ever yell". Yelling is a sign of losing control. That rule forces us to learn the skills to control groups. Or in my case, it motivates the scout to ask for help when yelling seems the only way for him to gain control.

 

The other problem for most new SPLs to control meetings is organization. I dont know why, but 90% of SMs dont teach or use agendas. Instead they let the scout run amok the whole meeting by memory and rarely if ever does that work smoothly. Meetings always take rabbit trails and long discussions that distract the SPL. Then they stand there in a long pause trying to remember where to go from there. It is a no brainer for a boy to simply look down and go to the next item on the list. Take two equal scouts running two meetings, give one and agenda and that meeting will always run half as long and under more control. Our scouts at JLTC wrote at least 18 meeting agendas in for days of training. I figured one day that my SPLs probably wrote at least 50 agendas during their six months of leadership. That didnt include other agenda he asked for from other scouts like the campfire and activities agendas. Agendas dont have to be long, just a few lines.

 

I think you are doing OK and your scouts are running into normal problems. You just need to gain the experience of helping scouts work through these problems. But remember these are good problems that you want. Youre here to teach them skills of leadership. If you dont know what is broke, how can you fix it? And just because your troop is boy run and you dont always sit in meetings doesnt mean you arent proactive in learning the problems and fixing it. Giving scouts the skills to be successful is how you build a more solid performing boy run program. And remember, the other scouts learn by watching the older scouts. I used to tell my SPL that even if he didnt need an agenda or need to take notes, do it anyways so the others scouts watching learn from him.

 

Your one problem that I see is that you dont need to work with your outgoing SPL, so you will need to work with the other three scouts at the same time. Maybe you and your SPL can work as a team.

 

I think you can look forward to a lot of great Scoutmastering days a head. I really enjoyed working with the SPL and the PLC in these kinds of situations. They will grow like crazy and you will loose sleep smiling with pride.

 

Ah, I love this scouting stuff.

 

Barry

 

[eagle77]

Maybe the problem is the outgoing SPL is running the PLC for the upcoming year in which he will not be running the troop. The other boys who are hoping for the position are trying to get what type of program they would like should they win the election. Two problems that I see are the SPL for the upcoming year should be the one running this planning meeting.The other is getting all the boys to understand servant leadership. Which basically states doing what the boys in the troop would like or what is good for the troop and not just what they want or desire.

[Crew21_Adv]

oldisnewagain1,

 

 

Greetings!

 

Here are my comments.

 

SM entering and departing the PLC is okay and acceptable. Every troop will have to find a balance.

 

Strong personalities are good.

 

Arguing is not good. Brainstorming, debating, persuasion, discussing, and identifying the best avenue and program is what is desired. As long as strong personalities do not create a hostile environment in the PLC.

 

The PLC is not the time for creating an annual plan, the PLC meeting is usually to plan the next month meetings and events (possibly two months). "The Plan" is usually one time in the year and called an Annual Plan Conference.

 

The best time may be immediately after the school year begins, bringing the district and council calendar, the city and state calendars, the school calendar, the community sports calendar (Little League, Soccer, Football, etc). To write a basic plan (not meeting plans) of the year.

 

To let you know more about my troop and PLC.

I still serve as an ASM with the troop and an Advisor with the Crew. As for our PLC which is a little younger than the Crew Officers meeting. They need the adult leaders as buffers, to keep their planning in a channel or canal, and keep them focused on a program that is fun, educational, and will assist them in advancement.

If the adults only met at the PLC we'd have a plan in 30 minutes. With the SPL, PLs and adult leaders we run about an hour maybe an hour and fifteen minutes. I think if it were just our SPL and PLs without any adults, they would exhaust the SPL (whomever it may be), their meeting would probably last a couple of hours till cell phones start ringing telling the Scouts to get out to the parking lot now or walk home, and only half the month would get planned. Events may be planned, they may be educational, but we would have a difficult time tying them in with any merit badge, camping experience or rank advancement.

 

The PLC still needs some adult association. They should have fun and discuss the events and plan. But they will need some help to state, an event may be unsafe or may be financially out of reach of the troop at this time. Most of our comments consist of;

Great Idea!

Not so great idea, but can we make it satisfy a requirement?

That's a little too dangerous guys.

What do you think about this... (followed by) you discuss it.

 

 

I think our PLC formula works well. The SPL, PLs, SM and ASM come out feeling that they contributed, while the SPL maintained the agenda.

 

Scouting Forever and Venture On!

Crew21 Adv

[Mafaking]

 

 

I think you should have been there.

 

Running a meeting is one part skill one part art.

 

Your SPL may have had the skill to have an agenda and know what needs to be discussed but not the art to recognize when others are sabotaging the meeting and preventing progress.

 

An issue gets too controversial, suggest the scouts table that issue until more information can be collected. One scout monopolizes the conversation, suggest the SPL hear from others as well. Diffused debates, suggest the SPL summarize the topic being discussed and ask the scouts to focus on that topic.

 

Traditionally the PLC is where the leadership training happens. This is where they learn how to run their own Patrol meetings and carry out their POR's. If the PLC is complete chaos with several scouts talking at one time, then so will the patrol meetings.

 

My opinion, the SM needs to be at the PLC to coach them through their own agenda.

 

 

[Stosh]

Because of these kinds of testosterone combats, we do not have a PLC that "runs" the show. Competition is great between patrols, not between leadership. Our PLC views itself as the support mechanism for the patrols, not the other way around. The PLC's discussions revolve around what can WE do to assist our patrols be better. The collaborative approach builds teamwork better and no one gets bragging rights for wearing a SPL patch. Support rather than domination doesn't allow much room for prima donnas. Many scouts want to run the show, but very few want to actually roll up their sleeves and actually do some helping others. When you get a scout willing to do that, you will begin to see some great results. The tone of the PLC revolves around, "Okay, patrol leaders, how's it going and what can we do to help you make it better." rather than, "I'm running the show and this is what I've decided we're going to do this year." Without consensus and ownership, this approach is doomed.

 

Stosh

[Beavah]

Yah, lots of good thoughts here.

 

Another thing that yeh might try is teachin' the lads some version of Rules of Order for a meetin'. Motions, discussion where each person is limited in da number of times he can speak, votes. Plus da ability to call for the orders of the day (demand a return to the agenda) .

 

Takes 'em a bit of time to learn the system, and yeh have to select a lad as chair who behaves like a good impartial chair, but it provides a mechanism for resolving differences in vision or other disputes in a rational, fair way.

 

Consensus is great, eh? It just doesn't always happen in democracies . For da rest, we have procedures for resolution.

 

Beavah

 

[CalicoPenn]

"It seems like there were three different people (with strong personalities) who had three very different positions on the way things should run and argued the entire meeting. Each of these guys is bucking to be the next SPL in the coming elections"

 

I think the above is the whole key - what you have is three people who just auditioned in a way in front of their peers for the SPL role. It doesn't really matter at this point if a final plan was developed (after all, as someone else mentioned, your current SPL will be aging out fairly quickly and the new SPL should have a major role in future plans). What does matter is what the rest of the folks on the PLC thought of the direction each of these individuals might take. Now I realize that this isn't a campaign, but you can be sure that the others may be thinking about the meeting and deciding who they think would be the best SPL - and you can be sure they'll make that opinion known to their Patrols.

 

The one meeting you should definitely stay for is the first meeting of the new SPL - this is the time to start the mentoring process, and it's a time to make sure there are no sour grapes hanging on the vine.