Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 01/20/20 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    I've not been in the military but I have many friends who have been or currently are. One thing that is consistent whether they went in as recruits or officers is they tell me that new officers, fresh out of training, may technically be superior in rank to their sergeant (or equivalent) but in reality especially for that first 6 months (but also after) when they are in it for real they look to that sergeant who is their deputy and who probably has 15 years in both age and experience on them for guidance on how things are really done. And if they don't they are a fool!
  2. 2 points
    Even in the military there is a distinction drawn between lawful and unlawful orders, and my understanding from close relatives who are officers is that there is a lot more questioning and give and take than you would expect if your image is the drill sergeant from boot camp or OCS.
  3. 1 point
    There are a lot of variables in the openess issue IMHO. Sometimes the pro's know the issue will be contentious and they don't want to deal with it until they absolutely have too. I put the Philmont mortgage in that category. Selling a council camp would be another. While a volunteer council committee is suppose to approve these decisions, in reality most committees are "yes men" Another reason for lack of openess is to prevent people from finding out how screwed up things really are. And sometimes that lack of openess applies to the DEs. When I interviewed and looked at information at my job interview and first planning conference, a lot of things that another council did when I interviewed with them didn't happen. It was several months into the job that I found out the full extent of how screwed up the council was. Sometimes the lack of openess is because the professional does not have the capability to change things directly. They work behind the scenes to correct matters to the extent possible so that those parts of the movement that are working, that are making a difference, do not get damaged by the revelation of issues. Sometimes the lack of openess is the result of prior experience. I know one SE who as a DFS with 2 FDs and 12 DEsunder him that encountered a problem, revealed it, and fixed it. His reward: "promotion" to SE of a council of 1 FD and 4 DEs.
  4. 1 point
    We're kind of in a weird place in this organization when it comes to obedience. In some ways we're sort of military-adjacent when it comes to rules and procedures. If a leader tells you to do something, you do it. In the military, the logic is that orders are followed without question so that the unit runs smoothly and without hesitation in potentially life and death situations. And in the BSA we include "obedient" right in the law. But we're not the military, and we pride ourselves on being a youth organization that develops leadership abilities, making kids into solid leaders and critical decision-makers. Using the broken leg example, if a soldier is ordered by his superior to move another soldier with a broken leg, they do so without question, regardless of whether they are in a dangerous situation or not, because they are taught to obey orders and assume that their superior is giving them orders based on their knowledge of the situation, their understanding of what is happening and the information that a superior would have. In scouts, we teach them to proceed as they feel is correct and safe, and to potentially question an "order" from an adult if they believe it is not the best course of action. A scout can and should defy an adult if they feel the injured party should not be moved. I've often wondered if the "A Scout is Obedient" part of the law still fits with modern norms, even in the context of scouting itself and teaching kids to be leaders (and potentially people who can and should question if what they are told is right). I wouldn't suggest removing it, but I wonder if maybe there's just a better word that says "smartly obedient" or something to that effect.
  5. 1 point
    The communications dysfunction is a symptom of the overall organizational dysfunction. Most organizations today take communications seriously and can very proactively and quickly disseminate information throughout the ranks. I'm sure part of the problem with us is due to the volunteer nature of so many roles but in reality this is something that leadership in a functional organization would account for and figure out a way to manage. I don't know that Mosby is going to have the most innovative solutions to problems like these but at least he seems to have some background in change management. My fear is that he is going to be focused pretty exclusively on high level issues that really won't result in much improvement for people working at the unit level, or at least not for some time, and that things could get even bumpier for awhile. It is concerning that despite his being weeks on the job, we have yet to have any kind of universal direct message from him other than his announcement. It feels like units aren't even on the radar.
  6. 1 point
    Anyone else think that was going to go: Fear.... ....is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering. - Yoda
  7. 1 point
    It is crazy how opaque both councils are and national. They know how many LDS units and Scouts they had. They could easily release for a few years adjusted and unadjusted numbers so that we could know the LDS impact and the girl impact. They are so afraid, they try to keep everyone in the dark. I work for a large fortune 50 multinational. It is night and day about transparency. For example, our council is on a conditional charter. What were the issues? What is the plan? They are not saying anything beyond they need more funds and more scouts. The Scout executive decided to “pursue other interests”. That info was shared more than a month after he began perusing the other interests. At work, they would have an all hands at the moment a press release would be out. We would then get a copy of the action plan and scorecard on how we need to improve.
  8. 1 point
    Interesting discussion. I have seen a few instances in Eagle projects where an adult tries to run the project, NOT a parent, but one with special knowledge; or maybe they think they have expertise. If the candidate is a younger one, they truly have a hard time speaking up, even if it is written and approved by others. That is the time when we, as leaders, might need to step in and suggest the interfering adult rethink their actions, possibly taking them aside and reminding them or simply educating them as to what the intent of the Scout being in charge is. A couple of times, in a review board, when asked about issues with the project, we have had this very discussion. I am one to feel that as long as there will not be any danger or injury, to let them lead and see what happens. After all, that is really what we hopefully strive for.
  9. 1 point
    Strongly disagree, I've raised my kids to do what they're told if it's a good thing, the right thing, and the smart thing. Neither rules nor authority are self justifying, they're means to accomplish ends, and if they're not accomplishing those ends they're due no great deference.
  • Create New...