SPL - Necessity, luxury or something else?

[Kudu]

 

So Platypus96, these "tools to do it" that you teach, do they enable the two Patrols to camp 300 feet from each other? Do the Patrol Leaders then set off on separate Patrol Hikes without you, the JASM, and the adult leaders tagging along?

 

If so, congrats!

 

The Patrols in most Troops are forced to camp close together in a single campsite to learn "leadership skills" in a protected "Webelos III" setting where the risk of a few burned pancakes is the very worst that can happen.

 

Yours at 300 feet,

 

Kudu

 

[Eagle92]

Kudu,

 

Thanks for the clarification.

 

I'll be honest, I do like the fact that the members of the troop elect the SPL. It reminds me more of our democratic republic format, i.e. the PLC= Congress and the SPL=President. It's just that the SPL also presides over the PLC. IMHO, it reinforces the concept that you must elect good leaders.

 

The orignal SPL selection of GBB's, i.e. PLs elect the SPL, reminds me more of a parlimentary system.

 

But again that's just me.

[Eagledad]

>> I'll be honest, I do like the fact that the members of the troop elect the SPL. It reminds me more of our democratic republic format, i.e. the PLC= Congress and the SPL=President. It's just that the SPL also presides over the PLC. IMHO, it reinforces the concept that you must elect good leaders.

[boomerscout]

bad SPL: elected as a popularity contest, receives little training, has no management models to fall back on except big brother to little brother (punch, smack...)

 

good SPL: has experience as APL or PL, has received the unit's leadership training while a PL, later goes on to council's leadership training, is mentored/trained by current ASPL/SPL. Does own fundraising to go to Philmont for leadership training. If still interested, takes on more & more PLC troop-wide projects (as project manager) before throwing his hat into the ring for SPL

 

Who does the SPL camp with? Is there no patrol of older Scouts who are really his peers in Scoutcraft?

[Tampa Turtle]

In our Troop I have noticed that the last 3 SPL's have been pretty good former PL's. Also that they treated the younger guys kindly; the "soft spoken" types win over the "bullying" type. As we have a big Troop being a bit of a politician (in the best way) also helps.

 

Where they sometimes breakdown is in their appointments. I think a SPL in a large troop lives or dies over his ability to recruit a good team.

[Stosh]

I have always had a problem of the SPL being elected by popular vote. What happens if the troop members elect an inexperienced popular boy and all the PL's are better qualified. This immediately pulls all functional support for the PL's. They are on their own until the next election.

 

What happens if the elected SPL doesn't get along with any of the PL's. Again, there will be a breakdown in functional support for the PL's.

 

Who will the PL's follow? That is person that should be selected for how well he interacts with all the PL's and if that means the PL's select him, that's even better because they know best who will work well in that combination of PL's for that term.

 

For all those who are top down management guru's, what this means is that anywhere along the trickle down the chain-of-command/communication is broken, there's going to be problems. This is human nature, it happens everywhere around you all the time.

 

While it is an American ideal to elect one's leadership, we all know that election of unqualified people will always lead to problems. Why would troops be any different.

 

If elections were set up select people the voter is willing to follow, that is one thing, but if others select a leader that they don't have to follow, there could be all kinds of problems. If the SPL is responsible for supporting the PL's and everyone else does the voting, it is no guarantee the PL's will follow. It would be no different than adding the people of Canada and Mexico to the voter base for election of the US president.

 

In the troop method the troop can select the SPL because he is "troop leader", but in the patrol method where the SPL is responsible for developing leadership among the PL's that's a whole different story.

 

One cannot be the servant of two masters, either the SPL is developing leadership among the PL's or he's running the troop. Sure, some boys can try to do both, but most adults can't handle that load.

(This message has been edited by jblake47)

[Eagledad]

What is an "an experienced popular boy"?

 

Barry

[Eagle92]

I've been fortunate in that groqwing up, we selected some good SPLs, Great SPLs, and 1 lousy SPL that I mentioned in a previous thread.

 

The way it worked out in that case was the ASPL, me, picked up the slack and ran the troop in his absence.

 

Thinking about it, I think I know why he got elected.

 

1) We had an influx of crossovers who ahd joined the troop about a month or two before that he had been a den chief for, and his little brother was in the den as well.

 

2) The older guys who knew better split their voting amongst the best candidates, and those two didn't get enough votes to beat the crossover block.

 

Good thing was that everyone realized the importance of selecting a good, dedicated SPL,and the troop didn't have that problem again while I was involved.

[acco40]

SPLs candidates are approved by the Scoutmaster and elected by the Scouts. I think that is a good balance but yes, each could sabotage the election.

[Tampa Turtle]

We do what Acco40 commented on. I think the screening is to deal with any boys not in good standing due to "incidents" that the SM kept in confidence.

[jrush]

jblake,

I'm not sure that is as much of a problem, because the group that elects the SPL will turn right around and elect their own PLs.

 

If the scouts have "buyer's remorse" after a month or 2, well, tell them "elections have consequences" and they need to remember that in 4-5 months when the next elections are held. Boy Scouts is about preparing young men to be responsible members of society.

 

Further, it's not the SPL's job to "run" the PLs. The PLs don't work for him...the PLs work for their patrols. IMO, the SPL is there to be the link between the adult leadership/troop committee/etc and the PLC. Now, whether the troop is operating by the PLC giving their plans to the TC or the other way around is besides the point. Point is, it doesn't matter if a troop has one patrol or six...the SPL can be that adult-to-patrol link.

 

So, SPL being a luxury v/s necessity is predicated upon the adult leader to patrol relationship. If you don't mind the patrols coordinating directly with the adults, then it is a luxury, no matter how few or many patrols you have.