"We", "Them" and "Us"
Michael F. Bowman (mfbowman@CAPACCESS.ORG)
Sun, 4 Jun 1995 08:38:57 -0400
Jim Miller, Sr.,
With regard to your critique of Hank Heine's posting, I think you may be
overreacting a bit and assuming too much. Many times you are going to
hear "we" and "them" from volunteers on the front line who are frustrated
by changes that are perceived as harmful to how the program is being
delivered to the Scouts. "Them" can be National, just as easily it can be
professionals, and likewise it can be Nationa, Regional, Council or
District volunteer leaders who have suggested changes. Most of us who
serve have learned to let it roll off our backs and understand that its
just simply frustration or irritation and then we get to the source to try
and make things work better. If you want to look at it in a positive
light, its a signal that tells you when something isn't selling in Peoria
so that you know what's going to fly and what's not. Of course folks can
just clam up and then you won't know why an excellent volunteer simply
quit one day and then another.
Probably the worst case of the "we-them" business started at Schiff in
professional development courses where new District Executives were taught
that they were responsible when volunteers failed through the use of
training material that emphasized a "we-them" theme. I am happy to say,
however, that in recent years that I have seen much better attitudes all
around.
In my Scouting career spanning several Councils, I have seen this ugly
business perpetuated from time to time in the professional ranks when a
group of professionals is unhappy with the independent attitudes of
volunteers especially in determining priorities - funding v. program.
And just as often I've seen volunteers use the same approach when they
were frustrated by changes they didn't feel they were a part of making.
And as to the latter, I've been on the receiving end as a volunteer when
unit leaders were unhappy with the direction of the District Committee or
the Commissioner's staff.
Anytime you see this crop up its mostly a matter of failed communication
and serves only to be divisive. My point here is to remind you that the
"we-them" business crops up frequently and is no respecter of position or
status. And people who are dedicated are going to have strong opinions,
some are going to be vocal. If these people didn't have strong beliefs,
they probably wouldn't be staying around giving dedicated service. The
trick is how WE use the feedback so that WE all can get together on serving
the Scouts. WE can learn to resist the temptation to rail at the symptom
(criticism of how the message is delivered) and then WE can use the
information to strengthen how WE deliver the program, whether its at the
National level or the Unit level.
My hat is off to Michael Holmes for seeking that feedback on an issue that
cropped up while he was at a National meeting allowing all of US to throw
in some thoughts so that WE have a chance to have input into a proposed
change.
And lest you think I am trying to perpetuate the "we-them" business, let
me say that I am extremely happy with the relations I've had with
National. The folks there have gone out of their way more than once to be
helpful on a project that I'm working on. Similarly, we've been blessed
with some great DEs on the local level, whose deep committment and long
hours for the Scouts speaks volumes about the team effort they are part
of.
Speaking only for myself in the Scouting Spirit, Michael F. Bowman
Prof. Beaver, Nat. Capital Area Council, BSA mfbowman@CAPACCESS.ORG
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City |
