PL as the highest ranking vs. most important

[Stosh]

"jblake,

I see the PL as the most important job in the Troop, but not the highest ranking. The difference in the two might not be readily apparent, but I will save that for another thread."

 

If it's the most important, why would it be of a lesser ranking?

 

This is like saying the most important position is not the one with the most authority to do the most important job.

 

If the PL's are responsible for the functioning of the patrol surely they should be the one deciding what's best for their boys. If they are the PL of the NSP, then their responsibility is to insure the boys are oriented to the functioning of the troop, welcome them into the fold, protect them from the interference of the other patrols, and assist them in achieving success in the T-F-C rank advancement. They shepherd them their first year to make sure they are aware of all that is necessary to succeed in the BSA program.

 

The PL of the venturing patrol has a whole different set of responsibilities with a totally different focus. These boys are looking to spread their wings and take advantage of some of the more challenging offerings of the BSA program, helping them with rank advancement of the upper ranks and assisting their patrol members to succeed with a totally different set of expectations.

 

Now, add to that an SPL that dictates all patrols are to be treated the same. Someone's going to be disappointed and the responsibility of the PL's will at different times be undermined. Our PL can't provide for us what we need to succeed. The older boys will quit and the younger boys will be taught that leadership in their direct leaders (PL) is always questionable.

 

If the PL's are expected to know and acquire what is best for his patrol members, anything that will jeopardize his authority to be successful at that will hamper the functioning of that patrol.

 

If authority does not reside with the PL, then it will have to be dictated through them by others who will make decisions based on what's best for others and will put the PL in a position of ineffectiveness. If the PL doesn't lead why follow him? If the SPL is calling the shots, we'll need to follow him and ignore the PL.

 

Most of what I see as older boys quitting because of "fumes" (car fumes and per fumes) is not necessarily valid. It's an excuse the adults use to justify the frustrations these boys feel and quit because they have no control of their goals and successes in the troop, it is always being dictated to them and they have no say so or influence on the decisions being dictated to them.

 

If the PL has no authority, what difference does it make who holds the position? Give it to the new guy, he needs the POR patch to wear and it will have no affect on whether or not the patrol members are successful or not.

 

When boys constantly are seeking decision making or information provided to them by the SM, it's because they know that this is where the authority for such decisions resides. If the SM tells them to go ask their PL, when they do the PL says, "We have to do it this way because the SM says so." The boys aren't stupid, they know how the system works, why not just cut to the chase and ask the person who's doing the real leadership and has the ultimate authority to call the shots?

 

If the PL is this person calling the shots, they will naturally go to him first for the program decisions, and won't waste their time asking the SM.

 

When boys come to me and ask me for a decision/information, I always tell them I don't have the authority to make that decision, that responsibility AND authority has been given to the PL. You need to be talking to him.

 

Now, here's where everyone starts to toss in all kinds of what-if's. What if the boys want to do paint ball. Well, the PL knows the program, knows the parameters of the BSA program and nips that in the bud right from the git-go. What if they want to go sky-diving. Same answer. What if the PL isn't trained to know such things? Then he shouldn't have been given the responsibility OR authority to be PL in the first place.

 

If patrol members elect PL's this will happen more often as not. The "new guy" can't lead because he isn't trained in the duties, responsibilities and authority of that position. That is why the PL's, like SPL's in other troops is assigned, and not elected. TLT and NYLT are supposed to train the boys to be able to handle the responsibility AND authority of leadership.

 

Does that mean the SM has ultimate authority to make those decisions? Yep, but once the boy is placed in the POR the responsibility and authority to do the job is given to him, it's part of his leadership development. "You have all the responsibility to lead these boys, but no authority to do it." Yep, that's the position all the boys aspire to....

 

The troop officer corps are generally the better trained boys who have the experience to support the PL's in their duties, but not to undermine their authority or leadership in front of their boys. All of their responsibilities start with, "I'm the Quartermaster, how can I help you and your patrol be successful?", "I am the Scribe, how can I help you and your patrol be successful?", etc. If the PL wants their insights and expertise to help him in his tasks, he always knows who to turn to and it won't be the SM.

 

The SM coordinates the troop officer corps and is constantly asking them such things as, "What can I do to help you do your job as Quartermaster/Scribe/SPL?" He is their sounding board for the problems of leadership they may be faced with or assistance with dealing with a problem that has arises and is beyond their level of expertise. These boys of the troop officer corps are given the responsibility and authority to help the PL's be successful.

 

No leader can stand and lead without the SUPPORT of others. If there is no SUPPORT and only dictatorial expectations, he will need to FOLLOW not LEAD. Leadership is the name of the game.

 

Stosh