Troop Committee Functions - and rubber bands (long)
Beaver (xl23795@SWBELL.NET)
Wed, 21 Jul 1999 09:09:22 -0500
There have been a number of recent posts dealing directly or indirectly with
the role of the Troop Committee v. that of the Scoutmaster. Bob Rosebrough's
post did a great job of relating this to management practices in the business
world. I agree fully with his post with respect to junior leader
performance. I might strongly disagree with his post if it related to some
other aspect of a youth's participation in Scouting. How can this be?
When it comes to drawing an organizational chart, Scouting is unique. All of
the little lines and boxes are blurred. They are not "black and white."
There's a whole bunch of gray. Sometimes a Scoutmaster will have to pick up
the pieces for a PLC (to prevent drowning the Troop under the guise of "boy
run" as alluded to by James Wellborn in his recent post). Sometimes a Troop
Committee will have to pick up the pieces from a Scoutmaster (he's new, he's
too gung ho, he hates boy sports, he loves boy sports, he has a fetish about
dutch ovens, he has a personality conflict with a Scout or his parents, etc.,
etc.). Sometimes a Scoutmaster will have to pick up the pieces from the
Troop Committee (failing to provide support, e.g. transportation). Sometimes
our District Professionals and District Commissioners have to pick up the
pieces from all of us. Sometimes volunteers will have to pick up the pieces
left by the Professionals. I could go on and on and so could you. Scouting
realizes that all of us are different and that each boy (I prefer young man)
is different. It's this way intentionally. That is why you can pick up any
book on any Scouting position and honestly disagree with another leader over
the role of that position. Committee members will naturally tend to give
more authority to the Committee. Scoutmasters will naturally tend to give
more authority to the Scoutmaster. We all know in our hearts that the
Scoutmasters are right but others can honestly disagree. (Sorry, I just had
to sneak this comment in to the blender.)
To complicate things further, Scouting reaches across many geographical,
cultural, economic and religious boundaries. The program has to be flexible.
Each Scout unit is a rubber band. When the rubber band just lays there in
its normal, flaccid state, we refer to that state as the "comfort zone." I
don't know about you but I hate the comfort zone. However, all of our units
are in this "comfort zone" at some time or another. Except in one instance,
we have to consciously stretch things to get out of this warm, cozy,
comfortable state. If we don't, we are failing to "deliver the promise of
Scouting" to the maximum number of youth with the maximum number of personal
interests.
When should the rubber band always be in the "comfort zone?" All of our
units should provide, at a minimum, a welcoming, safe, friendly environment
to all Scouting youth. We call this the "safe haven." This is the one place
the rubber band should never stretch. My recent post on Boards of Review
emphasized that the number one purpose of a Board is to find out if a "safe
haven" is securely in place for the youth being reviewed. All other things
come in second place if they place at all.. For this reason, I believe that
Troop Committees have "super and unquestioned authority" over youth
protection or "safe haven" matters. They should not be distracted from this
mission by embarking on a fishing expedition during a Board of Review because
its members know how to "tie a square knot" and by golly they're going to
make sure every Scout knows the correct way.
Now, some units decide to blur the lines further than B.S.A. Some units
decide to allow Committee Members to masquerade as Assistant Scoutmasters.
Some units decide to allow Assistant Scoutmasters to masquerade as Committee
Members. I think both types of units are wrong but that is my opinion.
Scouting allows units to have the flexibility to pretty much do as they
please when it comes to "delivering the promise" with one important
exception, once again, "safe haven" and youth protection. Therefore, if you
regularly camp with the Troop, have regular authority over the Scouts and
actively participate in Troop activities, don't sit on a Board of Review.
You're not a Committee Member, you're an Assistant Scoutmaster for this
purpose and you have no place sitting on a Board. You're spouse should not
sit on the Board either. Now, if you're the retired Scoutmaster, you have
the title of Assistant Scoutmaster, and you rarely, if ever, camp with the
Troop, by all means sit on a Board of Review. Your presence is needed.
Summarizing all of this another way, if you have regular authority over the
Scouts and you regularly exercise this authority, do not sit and do not allow
your spouse to sit on a Board of Review no matter how good either of you can
tie the square knot. Boards are not about square knots, they're about
"heart."
"Heart" and the "trust" that goes with it are the essential ingredients in
that hard to define substance called "Scout Spirit." We know what it is, but
we all have a hard time defining it. It is not the same in every unit or
with every individual. Committees or boards that get caught up in square
knots are a lot like the G.I. on sentry duty that gets caught up looking at a
pretty girl. They allow the wrong person to sneak by or the wrong situation
to unfold because they've let their guard down. When this happens, we've
broken the "heart" of a young man that trusts us and the rubber band of
"trust" has snapped. To him, we've destroyed the "promise of Scouting."
Now, if you're one of these "pseudo Assistant Scoutmasters," you still have a
place on the Troop Committee in some units. You have a good, working
knowledge about Troop equipment, or lack thereof, or Troop transportation, or
lack thereof. You might be in a good position to do a great job of
supporting the Troop at the Committee level. Just remember, when you're on
an outing or at a Troop meeting, the Scoutmaster or his designee is your
boss. Your boss may very well end up being a thirteen year old youth who may
or may not know his stuff. If you can't handle taking directions from a
thirteen year old, stay home. Intervene only when common sense about safety
tells you to do so.
Without delving too deep and starting a bunch of new threads, Troop
Committees and Scoutmasters should be very wary about other kinds of "form
over substance." I've talked about one example, the "pseudo Assistant
Scoutmaster/Committee Member" serving on a Board of Review. There are
others. When you see a rule you don't like or that doesn't fit the "culture"
of your unit, think about why that rule exists. Very generally and
dangerously speaking, if you can get by without violating the "spirit" or
"heart" of that rule, go ahead and do it. I cite the example of the retired
Scoutmaster serving on a Board of Review. You'll stretch the "rubber band" a
bit but you won't break it. However, there are other examples of "form over
substance" that, on the surface of things, seem to be all right but really
aren't. There have been a number of threads on this list that dealt with
these issues. For example, canoe trips. B.S.A. says that a non-swimmer may
only canoe as a passenger in a canoe if they are in the canoe as a passenger
with a certified lifeguard. Troops routinely avoid this issue by saying that
the youth is going to canoe with the parent, not the unit. Or, the family
decided to shadow the Troop. Or, we can't prevent families from camping and
canoeing in public areas. Well, this seems okay but it's not. The purpose
of the B.S.A. rule is prevent a dual victim situation, i.e. two unskilled
swimmers being rescued by a competent (or maybe even incompetent) rescuer.
One rescue is bad enough. Two rescues are extremely difficult. You could
end up with three victims. Therefore, don't give in to "form over
substance." If a family shadows you, terminate the outing, go home and ask
the family to leave the Troop. Be wary and be wise.
Now, when do we stretch the "rubber band?" Almost always except when it
comes to youth protection or common sense safety. We grow our units to their
maximum potential. We do high adventures despite lack of funds. We camp our
brains out. We support our Council camps till we can't swing a paint brush
anymore. We give youth real authority to run their own program and
discipline their own members. We do the "Scout stuff" to infinity. If the
Scoutmaster wants to stay in the "comfort zone," we need pushy Committee
Members asserting authority. I say good for them. If the Troop Committee
members want to stay in the "comfort zone," we need renegade Scoutmasters
who'll push and shove the band in spite of them. And hopefully, just
hopefully, we'll all have a bunch of "AJ, squared away" Scouts that'll take
the "rubber band" away from us and they'll push and shove on their own. This
is the auto pilot or cruise control that we all want. We want them running
things and we'll just be along for the ride. In the meantime, I'm always
pushing the accelerator and turning the wheel to see what's around the bend.
How about you?
YIS,
Dave Beaver
Scoutmaster
Mud Dogs 54
DeSoto, Kansas
P.S. I get the cookies if we run over any Girl Scouts.
