Stosh

I did a follow up on this and one does NOT have to register as a volunteer, just have a parental permission signed and a photo waiver signed.

I checked with our local council and there is such a thing as a Red Cross Club that allows members to register and get ongoing partnership communications with the local chapters.  Learning for Life and/or Venturing could easily be set up for this (keep the 16 year age limit in mind).  First Aid/CPR/AED instructors can be as young as 16.  18+ year old volunteers who register with ARC get all training for free and are allowed to be deployed to national disaster relief operations anywhere in the US.  First Aid/CPR/AED instructors can be as young as 16. Sign up, get the background check, watch the training videos, mark your profile available, you get a call and within 24 hours you are fully immersed in the real world of floods, hurricanes, wildfires, earthquakes, etc. to "help other people at all times."  It'll let you know in the first day, whether or not your Eagle rank is for real.

My council is looking seriously into partnering with the Red Cross for Blood Drive contacts, Wilderness First Aid, First Aid/CPR/AED, Fire Campaign, Life Saving, etc. 

In our conversation, a Fire Campaign neighborhood survey would work well as an Eagle Project,  "Here's a neighborhood, community, town, etc. we need to know who needs smoke alarms and what kind, knock yourself out."  It would take a lot of organizational leadership logistics to pull it off.  It's not like a blood drive where all the work is being done by someone else and the Eagle candidate shows up at the end of adult organization and hands out cookies and welcomes people at the door.

You have to register as a volunteer, have parental permission, be over 16, and be accompanied by your parent when installing smoke alarms.  If scouts cannot use power-tools they can't participate in the actual installation but all other help is appreciated.

If they wish to canvass neighborhoods on their own and report their survey findings, that is great, but check with the local chapter personnel to coordinate efforts with them and to make sure those that wish to get the alarms actually get them.

There is a major push twice a year for installations, one in the fall before the winter fire season and again in the spring.  In spite of what people read in the news and see on TV, the #1 activity the Red Cross is involved with is the response of Disaster Action Team members to single family fires.  

Scouts can also help with the Blood Drives by making phone calls and staffing the on-site donation centers.

Yes, the scouts will be limited with what they can do, they probably not going to be able to make an Eagle project out of it, but as a service project, it offers a good opportunity to get out and serve in their communities.

or the WB beads?

https://www.google.com/search?q=ojibwe+pictures&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=6QC3uvvHpjwCQM%3A%2CtJ9YyDuS0AEGxM%2C_&usg=__gJZvB61xXTHHb_nIbBZYDAO3p7U%3D&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjnxaDa3PDYAhVr34MKHd1-DCYQ9QEIKzAB#imgrc=6QC3uvvHpjwCQM:

How many of your OA boys look like the real Ojibwe (Chippewa) Hiawatha's native tribe?  Unfortunately they tend to look like what we think they should look like and don't do the real research.

The Buffalo Bill Museum in Cody, WY has displays of the various Indian traditions.  No two are alike, but NONE of them look like Hiawatha a fictional character from Longfellow's poem.  The real Winnie the Pooh does not look anything like the real Winnie.

I have 2 wool Pendleton red jac-shirts.  I also have 1 BSA red jac-shirt.  I always have to look closely to make sure I grab the right one.  If I grab the wrong one, no one has ever noticed. 

Have the boys pick their group of friends for a patrol and all this drama goes away.

And if everyone knew and used Robert's Rules of Order, there would be no need for any stick.

Over the course of about 13 years of running a Venturing Crew, I had 7 boys Eagle.  Of all the boys with Scouting backgrounds, i.e. dual registered, troop/crew, only one did not Eagle.  I did not have any that earned any Venturing awards.

The boys knew I was dual registered as Venturing/Scouting and respected my promptings to stick with the troop and get their Eagle. I didn't need to pressure any of the boys, we were picking up some of the top scouts in the council and surrounding councils and I didn't really need to push any of them along.  I simply stated my preferences and like I said 7 Eagled, one did not.

We live in a competitive society.  Caring community went out the window back in the '60's.

1 hour ago, skeptic said:

Since we are speaking of various scouting related books, I am finally getting around to actually reading a few of the lesser know ones I have.  Yesterday I read My Boyhood in the Sixties and Seventies Murray, who was on the original executive board and wrote the first official history at the anniversary in 1935.  It was put out in 1940 by BSA in his honor.  Interesting, but short.  He admits to some less than Scouting activities as a youth, but mentions that he hopes not too many would do similar things "today".    He talks about his experiments with smoking, and says "we knew where babies came from", which made me chuckle.  Today I started reading the book on Frederick Burnham written by West, He Who Sees in the Dark.   Am about half through it and I learned a few things.  One, that West was not a bad writer, though not on the level of the great authors.  Maybe I will take up his Lindberg book next, or the one he wrote on the first world jamboree.  

Are you sure this was written by Murray?  It sounds like something my wife would write in my biography now that I'm 67 years old.

7 minutes ago, TAHAWK said:

I take it you mean communication of care by displaying care.

Kinda, but I would phrase it, being caring thus doing caring things (for others).  The first step then is being a caring person.  Fits well into the Scout Law.  The doing caring things for others fits into the Scout Oath "help other people at all times".

But is "caring" is all that is required?  I suggest more is needed.  The "helicopter parents" so decried here all care. 

Is it always safe to say that the caring is solely about the boy or do they also want their son to be successful because if not it would reflect poorly on their parenting skills.  Or they are vicariously reaping "good things" from making sure their son is successful, especially when striving for Eagle.  Could also be a competitive thing of keeping up with the Joneses.

The Scoutmaster I noted above - the one man band - cares a great deal. 

About the boys or his own image/success?  Remember Servant Leadership is all about service/caring for others, not oneself, i.e. back to help other people at all times.  At all times doesn't leave much room for caring about oneself.

He devotes many hours each week to "his" troop.  However, he simply does not have a clue about what goals Scouting says he is supposed to be working towards, much less how to get there.  But he cares.  And from caring does everything "for the boys." 

If that be the case, why all the bling on the shirt?  Each one earned by the boys to make the SM look good.  Sorry I don't buy it "for the boys." 

He had told me if would be "cruel" to expect the Scouts to plan and lead program. They "are just kids."   Scoutmaster of the Year.

And as long as they stay that way, he stays in the limelight.  Just kids?  Ooooh such arrogance.  His job, if he is caring FOR THE BOYS, shouldn't his efforts be towards helping them be leaders rather than stealing their opportunities to grow and mature?  Yes, my former SM that I worked under was exactly like this man and he was finally removed from his position by the COR because of abuse.

Just because management requires some of the same skills as leadership, does that mean they are the same?  If so, skill in chopping wood makes you a headsman.  

No, going out into the ax yard and chopping up enough wood so the GrubMaster can do up a nice DO dinner and enough wood for a nice evening campfire is what leadership is all about.  That scout will make himself indispensable to the others and will look to him for help and support (obviously taking him up in popularity points for one thing.)  That likability factor alone may cause another to come around the next day asking the leader if he can help cut wood too.  Just because he had a likeability to him.

Some of my scouts figure this out and really capitalize on it, others get stuck in their own concerns and really don't worry about anyone other than themselves and their perceived image.  This is why older scouts don't like babysitting the younger ones because they don't care.  Every older boy that even so much as handed out helping bread crumbs to the younger boys will find himself sought after on a regular basis.

Bill thought leadership was accomplishing a "job" through others.  So did Ike.  Bill speaks with some authority as he pretty much invented what we call Boy Scouting here in the U.S.A., inclusive of elected leaders.  He was "the foremost influence on development of the Boy Scouting program."  Boy Scouts of America, Scouting, September, 1985 at p. 26.  "Scoutmaster to the World"  Journal of Scouting History (1993)   Ike?  Well, he accomplished some remarkable things as a leader.

And of course we can all see in a heartbeat that he went and did this all for his own personal glory and fame!  I don't think so.  GBB did it for others, look at his pictures of his uniform, tell me he did all this for his own benefit!  NO, he was a walking talking example of Servant Leadership is all about, he served every boy that signed up for the program.  He dedicated his life to the boys and the people at that time knew it.

Bill cared, and so he planned and led a massive leadership training program (Brownsea Double Two) as part of his effort to save Scouting from the awful "Improved Scouting Program" of 1972, and he actively supported Wood Badge, despite misgivings, for twenty years after it shifted from his preference of all Scoutcraft T-F to a focus on "leadership skills." (I suspect he would be horrified by the third, indoor version.)

Of course he would, it's a management course, not a leadership course.  It's all focused on getting the job done. 

"Again and again we come back to the important point that you can’t expect a gang of boys to build a good Patrol without a boy leader who has been trained to lead."  Boy Scouts of America, Scoutmaster's Handbook, (1953), W. Hillcourt, Ed.

And here's where I stumble a bit with the comment.  After working with mission minded church youth, service minded scouting, and such, I really don't think one can train leadership.  How does one train someone to care about helping other people at all times.  It's a lot easier to teach them management skills, like measuring goals, identifying problems, etc, kinda things.  Those are teachable, but how does one teach someone to care?

As for Ike, he said “Leadership is the art of getting someone else to do something you want done because he wants to do it.”  Eisenhower.  I think that's a pretty good few words that means a lot to me, especially the "because he wants to" part.  

Aha, here one is mixing leadership with management.  If I want something done, I can pay someone and they will want to do it.  Or the reverse, If you don't do it, I won't pay you, i.e. could lose your job.  I can threaten someone and they will want to do it (to avoid any pain).  I can lie to them so they do it thinking there's something more there.  There's a lot of ways "leadership" is acted out and each of these examples focuses on getting the job done, and in this case with willing human resources that are motivated in many positive and negative ways, but it doesn't really matter as long as the task gets done.  I will assure everyone that if there's any other motive beyond helping other people at all times, it will run afoul of the Scout Law.

If they don't follow for whatever reason(s), the job will not get done.  (That is especially true in Scouting where most of the "players" can "vote with their feet.") 

You are correct, but the issue here is not just getting the job done, but the fact that no one is following.  LEADership means there's people out there following.  If no one is following, the job can still get done, you just have to do it yourself because you have no followers.  And keep it in mind that voting with feet works both ways.  Follower feet walk towards the leader and now what in the world would motivate that?  He's a good planner?  The job's pleasant?  or I like that leader and want to do nice things for him because he as done nice things for me.  We're back at square #1, caring.

Ike had six "rules" for the leader that sound pretty good, some of the same stuff you have taught us over the years, Stosh, if in different words.

1. Don’t take yourself seriously

Eisenhower said, “Always take your job seriously, never yourself.”

If you are going to help other people at all times, don't take your job serious, take other people's concerns seriously and help them at all times.

His first priority was getting the job done, and he knew that humor helped. He said, “A sense of humor is part of the art of leadership, of getting along with people, of getting things done.”

A corps of people around you that like you because you're nice to them will do more for you getting the job done than people who don't like you because you don't care about them in the first place.

Leaders need to be serious and focused when pushing (or shared agendas because people want to be part of what you're doing) agendas, even agenda's that have strong support from the players, but they must have a sense of humor - especially at their own expense - throughout the process. Humor helps smooth the inevitable bumps in the road.  But everyone can be dead serious when tasked with a difficult task when everyone cares about each other.

2. A leader doesn’t simply order people around

Eisenhower believed that leadership didn’t come from barking orders or mandating action. He said, “You do not lead by hitting people over the head. That’s assault, not leadership.” At the core of this sentiment is the idea that leadership isn’t about simply pushing your own ideas. It’s about a conversation that demands respect and listening--from both sides.  If you care first, they will respond in like kind.  One doesn't need to demand respect, it is freely given because they received it first, and they will thus want to listen and share in the experience.

Getting people to move to where you want them to go is a subtle process that involves dialogue and interaction. It’s not about defining what you as a leader want, but discovering what everyone wants and fighting for that. BINGO, a good leader already knows what everyone else wants because he cared enough to find out first.

Leaders must appreciate that leadership is about continually searching for common needs and involves conversation, both listening and talking.  Yes, that goes without saying!

3. Know that coalitions are vital

Eisenhower knew the value of patience, and that coalitions and "political" sway were necessary to accomplishing the mission - the value of building consensus. One looks pretty crumby if the leader cares about you and you don't care about him. If you have the power now to impose your will on the group now despite what they want. No, you have the power because you are doing what they want done in the first place.  You have beat them to the punch. will that power last and what price will you pay later for using that power now? Nope, you've already got them on your side because you are doing it for them.  (My first SM said bossing is like pinching a watermelon seed; the harder you squeeze, the less control you have of where it will go when it pops.)  That is true, but if that seed is entrusted with real trust to someone else, it will get to where it is supposed to without needing to pinch anything. 

4. There are smarter people out there.

Leaders need to stop protecting their egos and learn from whomever they can.  My first Scoutmaster blessed me with a profound gift when he taught me "You don't have to always know the answer." A good leader is an even better follower.  Teamwork is knowing which person is the best leader for the task at that precise moment.  The PL lets the Grubmaster "run the show" at meal time, DUH!

5. A pat on the back is all you need

Eisenhower boosted morale not with inspirational speeches, but with simple, honest, straightforward face-to-face conversations. Instead of handing out trophies, he gave his soldiers encouraging pats on the back. It was a humble, direct way of reaching out, and it made him a favorite of the troops. is a pat on the back nothing more than letting someone know you recognize them and care about them?

6. Be cheerful

Eisenhower made it his business to be a positive, cheery, and upbeat. He knew optimism, like pessimism, was contagious. By remaining positive and trying to “reflect the cheerful certainty of victory” he believed he could boost individual and team morale.

Leaders shouldn’t glower, whine, complain, or pout. They must demonstrate that they are excited about the larger organizational mission and work to cultivate a sense of optimism. Dour behavior from leaders has the potential to incite organizational malaise that can spread like wildfire. Be like Ike and make sure your mannerisms and speech reflect a positive attitude.  B-P too was big on "Cheerful."

LOL!  Who wants to follow a grumpy nay-sayer?  How is that taking care of your people?  Grumpy people are the classic example of self-indulged immaturity.  That is not in the formula for leadership or even management for that matter.

(With thanks to Samuel Bacharach, co-founder of the Bacharach Leadership Group)

(With thanks to Robert K Greenleaf, founder of the Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership)

Good post @TAHAWK, we agree more than you think we do and I realize it too.

 

 

14 minutes ago, CalicoPenn said:

I had a 1975 Ford Maverick - inherited it from my sister - when I finally got rid of it by calling Victory Auto Parts (Yeah - I got a whole $35 for it), the tow truck driver took it in to the street, drained the oil, then spent the next 30 minutes revving the engine trying to get it to seize.  The drivers were having a contest 0 the first person to get a Maverick to seize within 30 minutes won $100.  Apparently Mavericks had a bit of a reputation for loose pistons.

I had a Ford Explorer Sport Trac - I traded it in with 225K miles on it - I changed the oil regularly - just don't tell my mechanic that regularly was about once every 75K miles.

Now  I change the oil as soon as the car yells at me to change the oil.

I had a '70 Maverick ($1,995 new) the floorboards gave out before the engine. 

It is recommended that one change the oil every 3,000 miles.  Like that's going to make it easy to keep track of.  So I change my oil every 5,000 miles.  That's easy to keep track of.

1) '74 Chevy Nova 78,000 miles

2) '87 Dodge Class-B Camper 115,000 miles

3) '98 Saturn 155,000 miles

4) '06 Honda CR-V 198,000 miles

5) '04 Ford F-150 220,000 miles

The Mrs. wants a new CR-V.    I might have to break down and get her one.  She says the new ones have more features and cup holders. 

I knew a guy who drove a car 45,000 miles and just kept adding more and more oil as needed.  He sold it in running condition.  Be thankful you didn't buy it.

16 minutes ago, TAHAWK said:

"There are many ways Leaders communicate without verbalization."

And so Bill taught.  And so Wood Badge has taught in all three versions (I have staffed each.) - especially explicit in the second version. And it's still the leadership skill of communicating.

 

No, it's the leadership skill of caring.  Take care of your boys.  If your boys know you care about them, they are more apt to follow and thus tasks will get done.  If they don't follow because the leader doesn't care, the task is more apt to not get done.  See it all the time with bossy "leaders".

So just because leadership and management require communication, they are one and the same thing? 

42 minutes ago, Chadamus said:

Is that their ambition when they join? Should it be?

Is Eagle a Scout's ambition? Should it be?

 

There are thousands of young men and women who join the military to serve their country, not earn rank.  To those I offer my deepest and most sincere appreciation.  But then there are those that feel self promotion is what the military is all about, a means to personal success, i.e. getting Eagle to jump a rank out of Basics.

It doesn't take a lot of thought for me to see the difference.  I am exposed to it all the time in Scouting.  How many young people join scouts to do their duty to God and Country and help other people at all times and how many join to make it to Eagle.  This is the rub that chafes me.

3 minutes ago, TAHAWK said:

So Scouting in the 1950s was about "management"?  Funny how well we did since "management" is now the label for utter EEEVVVIIILLL.

Illustrates my point quite well.

What you label a thing is neither here nor there.  Blanchard - and the U.S. Military - call it "leadership," not "management."  My employer sent all of us to a Blanchard course 22 years ago on the grounds that "management" was out and "leadership" - "bottom up leadership" at that - was in.

I would like to see the servant leader perform his/her leading without communicating/communication.  I know.  So very 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, 21st century! But, I submit, so true.

Oliver Swift had it right.  People kill over labels without even considering substance.

_____________________________________

Don't use a demonstration if the boy can do the thing.

The secret of success as a Patrol Leader?  Be a Leader.  Be a Friend.  Be ahead. 

Bill Hillcourt.

 

Hillcourt is right, he omitted be a Manager. 

There are many ways Leaders communicate without verbalization.  Someone's picking on of his patrol members and the PL comes up and gives the traditional Mom Stare until the bully backs off.  Yep, that's communication.  What is also "communicated" to the young victim is his PL has his back when things get dicey.  Young scout is at the campfire making pancakes looking frantically around, the PL smiles and hands him the spatula from the chuck box he had forgotten to get.  So what's the tasks being done here?  I see it as building a relationship whereas others rely on the choices, insights and strength of the leader.  So when it comes time to react, those that have seen this work, will take on those leadership traits of caring as well, thus the phrase lead by example, another non-verbal teaching moment.  There are others out there watching and when the recognize a caring person, they will naturally follow regardless of the task at hand.  People who are only interested in themselves make terrible leaders, but maybe rather good managers.  Just look at all the great Eagle projects that are spelled out in fantastically great detail, only to have no one show up to help on the day it's to be done.

That's the little nuance I see between leadership and management.  Of course there's a task to be done and the SM (i.e. Adult Extraordinaire) shows up and puts his foot down on Eagle project attendance.  The ultimate management directive is intimidation and threats.     It works, but it's not leadership.

Not really, Servant Leadership has very little to do with the mechanical management of tasks.  Of course if there's a task to be done and the person votes with their feet, one can pretty much be assured they are not a leader.  Teaching is a task even though it involves people, but does one teach because the student needs to get the knowledge for a grade or check box checked, or is the teaching so that it becomes something helpful in that person's life.  I havent used French since high school, but to this day I still use my Latin.

5 hours ago, skeptic said:

I discovered that my info is slightly inaccurate, as Rockwell did a couple of very early illustrations for two other books just prior to the Cave books, though they appear to have been just illustrations and not the myriad examples throughout the Scouting related books.  Many of the drawings are simple line type and have his initials on them.  Of course, that was when he was acting as Boy's Life art editor.  He also did illustrations for a number of the Every Boy's Library volumes according to one researcher's details.  There is little doubt in my mind that Rockwell's work had a very big influence on the public acceptance of the formative decades and the hay day of the fifties and sixties.

The two books from the Scouting EVERY BOYS' LIBRARY that Rockwell illustrated are "Scouting with Daniel Boone" and "Don Strong of the Wolf Patrol".

Other Interesting books from the EBL collection are "Crooked Trails" written by Frederick Remington, and of course, illustrated by him.  Same for Zane Grey's "The Last of the Plainsmen".  Grey used photographs to illustrate his book. "Handicraft for Boys" and "Boat Building and Boating" were written and illustrated by Dan Beard (D. C. Beard).  "Biography of a Grizzly" was written by Ernest Thompson Seton and illustrated by his wife Grace.  This comes as a surprise in that Seton was an award winning wildlife illustrator. I guess like every good scouter, one has to keep the Mrs. happy.

And one must remember that Servant LEADERSHIP focuses on others and their welfare, whereas Explain, Teach, Application and Communicating are MANAGEMENT of a task at hand.  Two entirely different animals in my zoo.

I had a scout who's mom kept track of his calendar of events so he would be sure to show up for everything.  I wonder if he remembers to go to work everyday now that he's an adult?