Stosh

I think it might have something to do with the various councils. I have held Cub, Boy Scout, and Venturing positions each over 10 years and haven't noticed the difference in how one is treated. I get more hassle out of the council personnel than I do the other volunteers. Stosh

Welcome, jump right in and don't let the distractors get to you. Stosh

To a certain degree, some kind of vision is necessary for every troop. To hand the reins over to the boys who have no idea where to direct the horse is a rather useless goal. Once the boys get through to FC, they are ready to start dreaming about all that they might be able to do now that they have the basics down. Now the adventure can begin in earnest. However, if everyone's going to sit around and ask, "Whatcha wanna do?" and the answer comes back, "I dunno, whatcha you wanna do?" That's not the program that was promised in the BSA pamphlet they got in the first place. For the adults out there, there is a big difference between setting the agenda for the boys and suggesting the agenda to the boys. "Wanna go skiing?", "How 'bout camp?", "Okay, kayaking or canoeing might be fun." If all the boys want to do is sit around play computer games, listen to their MP3's and talk on the cell phones, then they have joined the wrong program. Find the boys that want to do scouting and have them design a program around their interests. Stosh

Just because it says BSA on it doesn't mean it can't be sold to the public. Lodge has had the #12 dutch oven with the BSA logo on the box for years sold in a ton of stores throughout the country. As a matter of fact I don't think you can buy a Lodge dutch oven #12 without the BSA logo on the box. Stosh

Of course every scout that trades patches falls into this problem. OA patches for non-OA members? OA patches being sold to someone not a member of that particular chapter? The list goes on and on and yet... the list goes on and on. Not much anyone can do about it. Non-BSA or former BSA collectors are around and there are those who are willing to sell. If BSA had a legal department large enough to handle the problem, BSA would financially collapse. Stosh

qwarse, One of the reasons today's youth do not define themselves in leadership terms is because the world around them doesn't define leadership properly around them. Maybe this gal does leadership, but no one ever defined it properly for her. If she is capable of organizing a group to go out into the woods, she's a good manager. If 10 of her friends want to go along with her, she's a leader. If 10 of her friends don't want to go along, she might still be a good manager, just a poor leader that could have inspired and excited her followers to come along. Maybe it is something as simple as picking the wrong activity for her "followers". Her leadership may have been more successful had she found out what activity her friends wanted, then organized things, she would have been a better leader. I see this all the time when troops organize grand programs, i.e. Philmont and Sea Base or Jamboree and then struggle with getting people onboard. I realize how over-used the term servant leadership is, but servant leadership starts at finding out what the people want and then organizing the tasks around that. Followers have an ownership in the process right from the beginning and are less likely to drop out or less reluctant to step in and help out. Taken to the extreme, a group of true leaders is what is necessary for a well oiled team. Maybe no one person actually leads, but at various times, each of the team members leads, taking turns in the areas they are best suited to. Old patrols had PL (organizer), activity-master who's job was the identify and initiate activities, grub master to make sure people were fed, quartermaster to insure the gear was available, scribe to do the paperwork, etc. etc. They all lead so that the team will succeed. Is the PL the only leader? Heck no. At meal time, the grubmaster rules! Diverse leadership in a patrol also reduces the friction between competing egos. There should be one go-to guy for meals, one go-to guy for gear, one go-to guy to do the paperwork. When a patrol has two of such leaders, there will be friction between the two. Can the PL trump the grubmaster? If one wants good meals, I wouldn't try it. The PL is there to make sure he has good leadership in his group. Can the PL put together a great meal? Not as good as the grubmaster. Can the PL fill out the forms and get the permits and collect the money? Not as good as the scribe. Can the PL organize the gear for everyone? Not as good as the quartermaster. So what good is the PL? He's the glue that holds all the other leaders together. If every leader is focused on what it takes to make others look good, and when they do they follow, does the leader ever think of themselves as the actual leader? In our society, not very often. Do people follow them? Yep, sure do. Again, always ask the question who's following and you will quickly find out who the true leaders really are. Stosh

Illegal? Trustworthy? What makes one think that the person selling the BSA restricted item is or ever was a Scout? Once again we have a few that jump to conclusions. Maybe mom and dad are cleaning out their son's room and instead of just throwing it away, sell stuff on E-Bay. Or sell it to some unknown person at an auction or antique dealer in a whole house full of stuff from someone's attic. There are clearing houses of BSA stuff on the internet that make it a business of buying and selling in BSA items, some restricted, some not. They have no idea where the items come from nor do they care where it goes. It's a business. One can tell that some of these people have no idea on the stuff they sell. I don't know how many JASM pins from the 20's and 30's get sold out there. Heck, they didn't have JASM's back then, it's a SPL pin! These people aren't abusing anything, they are only in the business of selling stuff that other people want in many cases. There is nothing on the books about someone selling a Congressional Medal of Honor on E-Bay. It is only illegal if one wears it. The same holds true for any military medal of any sort. Does anyone think anyone cares if the US government isn't going to regulate military medals, that someone's going to get bent out of shape because someone sold an old Eagle pin on E-Bay? Stosh

Natural leaders have followers. It has nothing to do with will they lead for the good or for the bad. Either way, whatever their goal, people follow. It has nothing to do with the task at hand. Will they follow even if there is nothing to be done? If one talks about good/bad it is a moral issue. If one talks about getting a task done it is a management issue. If one talks about people following it is a leadership issue. Business spend a lot of time training their managers to make ethical decisions. That combines two of the above, but has nothing to do with leadership. It doesn't guarantee that an ethical manager will have ethical subordinates. Too often we incorrectly define such things calling it leadership when it has nothing to do with leadership. The gal that liked to camp, be outdoors, etc. doesn't mean that Venturing has gained a good or natural leader, it means the gal likes to camp, be outdoors and so she joined a Venturing Crew. General George B. McClellan was a business man prior to the Civil War. He owned a major railroad company. He was an excellent organizer and accomplished a ton of good things in his lifetime. However, when asked to overall lead the Union troops, he built up a huge army and when it came time to lead them into battle, he couldn't do it. He couldn't destroy that which he built. He was loved by his men, but when he ran against Lincoln for the presidency, his men didn't vote for him. General Grant on the other hand had an alcohol problem earlier in life, failed at business, and accomplished very little before the war. But when he refused to back down even after a major defeat in battle, the men followed. Why? Never mistake management for leadership. They are not the same thing. Just because your boys are experts at management, know how to tie all the knots and teach them, too, doesn't mean these boys are leaders. It means they are experts at management, know how to tie all the knots and teach them too. If he says, Hey boys, lets go camping this weekend and every has an excuse not to go, it speaks loudly of his leadership skills, natural or not. Attendance problems, discipline problems, etc. all have their basis in the lack of leadership. No one wants to go camping. No one listens when I tell them to do something, etc. all means no one is following. Stosh

Definitely worth the trip! Great program. Stosh

It is always difficult to give up one's baby to the care of someone else. I worked for 2 years developing Exploring posts for a council back in the 70's. I formed over 40 new posts while going to school. After those two years, I had to go on a year long internship and when I returned I went back to visit and see how things were going. Only 3 posts were still active. While living in a small town, I worked to start up an ambulance service because they had no medical response people within 20 miles. When I left it had a full blown ambulance service staffed 24/7 with a nice unit. 5 years later they were struggling to maintain personnel to man a first response rescue team out of the volunteer fire department. The unit had been sold within 2 years of my leaving. Not everyone has the same priorities and there is basically nothing one can do about it. Fortunately it was a lesson I learned early in life and have seen a lot of my work "go down the drain" after I left. But it would seem that that is just the way life is and one must not spend a lot of time worrying about spilled milk. On the other hand things that I started, the next person picked up and improved upon and made it even better. So it's not always a negative thing. It is just the chance one takes when they move on. You win some, you lose some, but stay focused on today and tomorrow, you don't need Tums as much. Stosh

Buffalo, I agree with you on most of the points you made, but the thread was focusing in on the SMC for rank advancement. Then I would think it would be good for BOR preparation as the focus. Yes, there are a ton of other SMC's one does as a SM in a variety of different settings as you have indicated. Some make take but 5 minutes and others up to an hour. I see SMC as anytime the SM (adult) has interaction with a scout (youth). I have had some of the most effective SMC's sitting at a campfire or in the river where my canoe partner and I have dumped. I may define it a bit different than others but to me the word conference indicates an interaction between two people rather than me (SM) telling the scout what to do or say. That's not a conference. If every time I address a scout the word conference is in the back of my mind, I approach it differently than I would if the word instruction is there. Then I would be tempted to keep the conversation only one way. I make it a habit to start every conference with a question so as to involve the other person right from the git-go. Even if the question is "What in hell were you thinking?!!" I try to use that one very sparingly. A SMC is an opportunity to inspire, encourage, suggest, and support the boys. A SMC for rank is to fire him up for the BOR which may in fact intimidate him. When I was SM I even had a BOR for the Scout rank so the boys could go through a BOR as practice, introduce himself to some of the adults, and not have it count as anything other than experience. It wasn't required, but along with a SMC for rank, I also had a SMC with the boys to review how the BOR went and if they were please with how it went. Stosh

The first and usually only question I began every SMC with was: Are you ready for your BOR? If he says yes, I have him outline all the good things he is going to impress the board with. It usually is followed up with: You were a PL, what are you going to tell the board about how that went? On the other hand if the boy says no, then it is followed up with: Okay, what areas are you struggling with and how can we help? I have always used the SMC as an opportunity for the boy to do self introspection on his progress. I never tested the boys, but if one approaches it correctly, the boy can mentally process a self-test of his own. I held SMC's all the time for the boys and distinguished clearly the difference between an advancement SMC and a mentoring kind of SMC. Stosh

If one is to take seriously the BSA motto of "Be Prepared", one must always be vigilant of what they are carrying that could be used in a serious situation. With that being said, I never leave the house without such things as a pocket knife, clean handkerchief, belt, fingernail clipper, P-38 can opener, lighter, small flashlight, and knowledge on how to use them in ways not normally thought of, i.e. fist full of car keys as "brass knuckles" to use in self defense. An education in "survival" always depends first on how one can make-do in a tough situation with what one has with them or can quickly gather up in a moment's notice. In my car I carry certain items that pertain to travel, at work I have other items readily available, etc. etc. One can have all the tools necessary for every emergency and go around with a daily backpack of assorted items, but unless one has a basic knowledge of all their many uses, it is a total waste of time. Add to the basic gear one carries and the ability to "think-outside-the-box" and those few basic items can turn into a huge tool box of available items necessary to see one through a difficult situation. Be Prepared is the motto, not: Have the right tools to Be Prepared. I carry a CPR certification card in my billfold. There are no tools necessary to perform CPR, and the card is totally useless. The knowledge of how to do CPR is all I need and I don't need a pocket to carry that in. Stosh(This message has been edited by jblake47)

And of course one must also realize that if the boy has his SMC with a quiz and fails it terribly, he still moves on to the BOR. There is nothing in the requirements that says the boy has to "pass" a SMC, he just has to have one. Stosh

Along with Joe Bob's issue, one can also add weather. Not all survival situations occur on a sunny summer afternoon. The dead of winter in North Dakota where survival is a daily concern, one must also "Be Prepared". Surviving inside a car for 24 hours at -25 with wind chills at -80 is always a strong possibility for those traveling every day there. As a former school bus driver in ND, one can be assured that on certain days school was called off because the bus kids lived so far out. If the bus broke down, even with 2-way radios, a rescue bus couldn't be sent out in time before the kids froze. Urban survival skills too could be considered. What would happen if one lived in New York or Miami and the power went out for 3-4 days. Food would freeze in NY, but spoil in Miami, cooking options? Can't build a fire in Central Park. There are a lot of survival skills needed for various emergencies no matter where one is. One is not always going to need skills just for getting lost in the woods on a summer afternoon. Stosh

It kinda reminds me of some of the scouters' uniforms. The more "stuff" you have on it the more impressive it is supposed to be.... Rev. Stosh, AA, BS, MDiv, EMT-A, ERT, etc. etc. etc. After reading all that alphabet soup, I bet the only letters that jump out are BS.

Since I was a scout 50 years ago, I have never gone on an outdoor activity without using at least a dozen of the skills I learned in scouting. I backpack, hike, kayak, canoe, camp, reenacting, just to name a few. I go out with inexperienced others and spend more time doing what needs to be done for them than they do for themselves. There's a strong possibility that the scouts today that don't enjoy the out-of-doors are those that didn't really learn their scoutcraft skills. Sure they got their rank, but they didn't get their education. 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)

If one goes back to the subject of the thread, we have addressed a number of differing opinions on the SPL some saying it's bad, some saying it's good, etc. However, it varies considerably. If one has a small troop, 1 maybe 2 patrols, having an SPL for the purpose of giving POR credit when no work is necessary makes SPL a luxury and kind of circumventing the purposes of the POR requirement. However if one has 4-5 patrols in a larger troop, an SPL may in fact be a necessity, keeping the PL's supported in their developing roles. I have always always supported the concept of a older boy patrol made up of the troop officers that was PL'd by an ASPL or two. Those "troop leader" patrols, then support the various patrols depending on their POR assignment. Keep it in mind, with the responsibility of supporting others from a leadership position, one cannot have more than 6-8 others to support or the task becomes overwhelming for even the most experienced boy. Professionally trained school teachers like to keep their class enrollment numbers around 20. One would think it within the realm of sanity to keep the numbers for fledgling leaders to handle well less than half that, i.e. 6-8 To have one patrol with an extra SPL and the PL is rather superfluous. There's nothing in the book that says an experienced older boy APL can't mentor the PL's leadership development from within the same patrol. After all every drivers' education instructor does sit in the passenger seat. Stosh

acco40 Should the analogy be Principal = SM or should it be Principal = SPL with PL's as the teachers of a class (patrol). If the second holds true, the person who is actually doing the work in the school is the teacher (PL) and that the principal (SPL) is there to offer support. Too often I see the "chain of command" being SM -> SPL -> PL -> patrol. There's a lot of directive and following going on, but no leadership needed because the SM really runs the program. Turn it around PL is on top running his patrol, the SPL supports him in his efforts and the SM supports the SPL. All directives come from the PL's At least this way one has multiple leaders being developed and experienced leaders supporting the new ones in training. To often I see the SPL being commander in chief (if not the SM) and everyone has to do what they are told. Tyranny at it's worst. Thus one gets the popularity votes for SPL and other politically run troops rather than a incubator for developing leadership in the small groups of the patrols which Boy Scouts was originally founded as. Stosh

desertrat77, just a quick question. Do you think you would have learned just as much as SPL if your SM would have constantly been at your side asking what he could do to help make you a better SPL instead of directing you every step of the way? Sure, you learned to follow his directions, but only after he was out of the picture were you able to apply what you learned. I'm suggesting it may have been more helpful had he assisted you in being a better leader as you lead rather than directing you to eventually lead at some future date. The boys that progressed in leadership did so far faster being helped rather than directed whenever I have had the opportunity to support them in that process. The boys that have shown the greatest leadership are the ones that have directly expressed to me they appreciated all the suggestions I gave them as they learned rather than being told what to do. They felt they had ownership in their leadership and when they hit a roadblock, came to me for "suggestions" on what they might try to get around them rather than me pointing out the roadblock and telling them what they had to do to get around it. Teaching leadership requires the mentor to not direct, but offer options for the budding leader to consider within their own style of leadership as they develop it on the fly. My boys knew that their PL was really running the show and for them to ask me what was going on was a total waste of time. The best I could do was ask the PL for them and they often found it quicker to do it themselves. Stosh

OGE, the point being most cut-ups in the back of the room don't need to learn the skills to lead, they already have them, just listen to the boys going along with it and laughing and encouraging them. The point being, how does one channel that talent into a more positive focus as you indicate. There is nothing wrong with the boy using the EDGE method of management to do the teaching, he just may not have the leadership skills to affect the boys to follow. This is the problem with management vs. leadership, they are two entirely different set of skills. Management accomplishes a task, maybe even directing others to assist in that accomplishment. Leadership doesn't need to direct others, just lead them in assisting that accomplishment. A skilled leader can do both, but has two sets of skills. Sure a strong manager can insist that others follow... or else. But the first second he turns his back, everyone heads out for parts unknown. They would rather find out what "or else" is than follow. The cut-up in the back doesn't need a task, but is surely adept at getting others to follow. I constantly hear of SM's complaining that the boys don't listen, etc. They go to great lengths to put together a great program, but the boys don't follow. They have management skills up the whazoo, but the boys don't show up. On paper he/she has a great program, but for some reason the boys don't follow, because that SM hasn't figured out the difference between management and leadership. If WB is going to go to great lengths to teach management, that's fine, but it really doesn't answer the leadership situation. Not many SM's are going to turn their program over to the cut-up in the back of the room, but they haven't the foggiest idea of how they might do just that if they knew the secret to real leadership. Stosh

How does one define that 5%??? Those the others follow because they want to or because they have to. A boss can get their employees to do just about anything if they fear losing their job, but that same employee has their ear to the ground looking to go someplace else as fast as they can arrange it. That's not leadership. Like Kudu says, boys will chose whom they will follow, for good or bad, and it's not SKILLS that sets them apart in as much as it is attitude. Big difference in definition here. A tyrant/bully has the skills to manipulate and force their will on others, but by no means are they leading anything. So much for the SPL who dictates, do this or else! There are a lot of things out there masquerading as leadership when it has nothing to do with it. Even the BSA has fallen victim to thinking management is leadership when it isn't at all. Just ask the cut-up in the back of the room disrupting the SPL's attempts to use the EDGE method and see who gets all the attention. Kudu is right. Stosh

Oak Tree, it would all depend on whether one is using the troop method or the patrol method of running a troop. If you are using the troop method, then the SPL is in charge of everything and the PL's are nothing more than ASPL's doing what the SPL directs them to do. However if one is using the patrol method, then the SPL, if necessary assists the PL's do their job in the patrols. After all he is senior not because he ranks higher but because he has the most experience to be able to assist them. When in doubt, stop and think, if the SPL runs the troop, then one is using the troop method with a bunch of assistants to help with the shear number of scouts. On a campout that has to be horrendous having all those patrols 300' apart and the SPL trying to run the show. Can't have it both ways. Either the patrol method is used and the PL runs his own little show or he does what he is told by the SPL who is usually just parroting back what the SM told him to do. Of course under these circumstances only the SM is the only real leader. Everyone else follows. Under BP's model the PL's would have 6-8 boys for him to lead and the SPL would have 6 PL's to lead. Otherwise with the troop method the SPL theoretically would have 36-48 boys to lead. Shoot, even a highly trained adult school teacher can't handle that many at one time, how would one think a 16 year old boy could do it. Stosh(This message has been edited by jblake47)

Once a troop gets to 4-5 patrols and the PL's may need help coordinating inter-patrol activities, one might consider having an SPL. Until then it's just a hindrance to PL leadership development. I have always looked at the SPL as a PL Guide rather than some celebrity that runs the show. The only question that SPL should be allowed to ask would be to a PL when he says, "What I can I do to help you be a better PL?" Other than that, he's a screen door on submarine. Stosh