Jump to content

ParkMan

Members
  • Content Count

    2293
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    52

Everything posted by ParkMan

  1. Any organization that wants to accomplish a goal uses metrics to force focus and measure progress. In the case here, non-white ethnic groups are underrepresented in the BSA. Similarly, the BSA put a lot of energy into developing programs for girls and so it is natural to want to bring more girls into the program. It is correct and appropriate for the BSA to challenge councils to develop concrete plans to achieve these results. A councils plan to increase membership in these groups needs to be based on actionable strategies. They should not simply look at a DE or a district and say "rec
  2. Pretty sure that National intends for councils to develop recruiting strategies that increase the number of "youth of color" and girls. Why is it dumb for them to encourage councils to develop proactive strategies that increase membership among demographics that are underserved today? Biggest problem in our council today with membership is that we have effectively don't have a proactive strategy.
  3. In this process, did you learn how to determine an amount for the claim? I gather that one has to file a claim for a set amount. However, how does one determine an amount for claim that may or may not one day be filed for an event that may or may not have occurred? As I've looked this process, that's been one of my lingering questions.
  4. Your council is one that continues to break my heart. I have a pretty good council - sure, it's not perfect and I've been known to grumble and have a rant or two. But, all in all, it's a pretty capable group and everyone - professionals and volunteers alike are working to make it a good place where Scouting can flourish. Your council though just continues to sound absurd. I sincerely hope that this new effort leads someone at the territory level to recognize the problems with the professional overreach in your council. I hope this results in some changes in the makeup to your counci
  5. Nice idea. I'd be up for making council names be more community oriented again. I don't mind the administrative ideas here. Organizations need structure and goals to help them work efficiently and effectively. Not every decision in Scouting can be about unit level activities. However, I find that many of the issues in Scouting today stems from the simple reality that the administrative structure is preventing concerted effort on the core issues that are hampering membership in the program. Until we figure out how to deal with local membership losses, the program will continue to
  6. The logic behind not merging weak units is that it doesn't really address the underlying problems - a lack of organizational strength in the unit. Most units that fail do so because they don't have the sufficient structure to support the unit leaders. Unit leaders get burned out and then the programs shrink and eventually go away. It's seen it time after time after time. When I see a unit that has a weak leadership team, I know it's days are numbered. Putting two weak units together rarely results in a strong unit - it just delays the inevitable. The better approach is to help the
  7. I think it's just not something that is terribly relevant at the district level and below. I'm fine that the region/area level is taking this on - and I commend them for doing a thorough job at it. It's just difficult for that level to have an impact on trends like recruiting and volunteerism without some larger, increasingly bold moves. They really have to dig down into the hard problems such as why districts and councils struggle and come up with concrete solutions to those problems. Perhaps their lighthouse council notion is sufficient for this - it just strikes me as too subtle a chan
  8. Which is the core issue with the management of the professional. There is too much pressure on professionals to meet metrics. Aside from shady accounting, the current manifestation of this pressure is that professionals have a tendency to make numbers however they can without fixing the core issues. In our district, 20% of the units account for 80% of the membership. As such, professionals squeeze the performing units to add a few more scouts while no one is addressing the issues that are preventing the small units from growing.
  9. Interesting observation. I'm going to guess that it is because they know that national doesn't possess the technical capabilities to do a council turn around. I've argued a few times that they best thing national could do is to establish a consulting group within the BSA that can go out and work with target councils on how to improve operations. For example - as a district leader, I would welcome the availability of a group of experts that I could work with on improving district operations. I would rather fix our operational issues than continue to just apply band-aid after band-aid. But,
  10. That will be an interesting thing to watch. I can see your point - simply making larger, less manageable councils won't necessarily solve anything. Yet, I look around the map and see lots of small councils with probably just a couple thousand Scouts. I suspect that in some of the less well managed councils one of the primary issues is the lack of operational knowledge. Lots of inefficient, mismanaged teams - council boards that don't know how to build council & district teams to accomplish their goals. I believe the core theory is that by merging an underperforming council with a
  11. Where this has the potential to help is that it will lead to weak councils being merged together. Where this will not help is that it's not proscriptive. It doesn't add much in terms of new ideas on how districts & units operate any differently. As this is where the magic needs to happen, I am not optimistic. One big concern about the new 16 territory structure is that it will funnel territory support through council boards and professionals. As the real challenge is in the districts and units, I don't see how the new structure will actually help resolve problems. Council board
  12. From what I can see, these things are all fine. The issue isn't that the council has a strategic plan with lots of business jargon. The issue is that councils don't know how to use them to achieve the results they desire. Similarly, this national plan is fine and it's probably marginally better than what we have now. It is however lacking a key understanding of how councils will operationalize all of this. They appear to be setting up a big stick approach by holding the threat of merging councils out there as incentive to meet these objectives. The plan is lacking two key component
  13. My primary concern with the "advanced scoutmaster" label is that is too niche. The Scoutmaster role is one of many in Scouting. It is important - sure. But so too are Cubmasters, Crew Advisors, Den Leaders, Committee Chairs, Committee Members, District volunteers, OA advisors, etc... When I view the Wood Badge curriculum I see an attempt to impart skills that help a volunteer in how they approach their volunteer role. Wood Badge really isn't trying to teach anyone what their job is, it's trying to impart skills that help in how you approach the role you have. How to try to raise the
  14. The BSA needs both courses - a leadership development course and a Scoutmaster course. What problem does making Wood Badge into an advanced Scoutmaster class really solve? I'd argue that our most underprepared position in Scouting today is that of our Committee Chairs. These are the people who need to be building strong packs, troops, and crews and in many instances are simply not prepared to do that. As such, you've got overloaded Scoutmasters and Cubmasters who simply don't have enough adult help to make the programs work. You have unit organizations that don't know how to onboard
  15. If the issue is lack of basic leadership training, then lets augment Wood Badge to cover that. I don't think creating more obstacles to attending is going to resolve that issue. That, and I think you'll find that youth signing off adults is inherently not practical. I'm all for focusing on youth leadership, but I don't think Wood Badge is the place for that. Put that in an advanced Scoutmaster course.
  16. I think we're mixing a couple of things. First, and my primary point - regardless of whether Wood Badge is the best designed course or not, it doesn't justify the level of negativity that the course receives. It's a course designed to help us be better Scouters. On the averages, Wood Badge courses are better organized and better put on than probably any other training course in the BSA. Yes, it's easy to find things that could be done better. Yes, there have been jerks that have take the course. But, it doesn't justify the open hostility that the course receives. On your sugge
  17. My kids swim team did this. At swim team sign up, they had large boards where everyone had to volunteer twice. My wife wasn't interested, so I became a lane timer. It was fun and a I volunteered a few more times too.
  18. I've always been a big believer in the notion that the troop adults have to really cultivate adult involvement. It's not the CC's job alone to find more volunteers. It's not the fault of the parents for not stepping up. At every turn, the leaders have to be asking themselves - "How do we get more parents involved volunteering?" It starts with the little things. When a parent makes a comment about something small - the signups for an event or whether an email went out or not, then invite them to take on a little project. Get parents out camping with you. Can parents to hang out at me
  19. I can imagine that - makes sense. Why teach a class to those who are going to leave. Wherever it comes from, there is far too much criticism of and around a course that is intended to help leaders be better Scouters. Whatever the course is - basic training, IOLS, Powder Horn, or Wood Badge - taking a course is a good thing. I've said this before - but I get the sense that in the Scouter ranks we've created something of a culture where it's considered OK to be critical of those that are perceived to not be a "real Scouter". Wood Badge, too many knots, silver tabs, whatever - we spen
  20. I don't know the mindset at the time as it predates me, but I can only guess it had something to do with making the course seem desirable by making it exclusive. By creating something with status that can be seen as an award, it then makes it something to strive for. The OA isn't all that different for youth. By creating an honor, we make it more desirable. There's probably some logic about human nature in that, but it seems to have created a bunch of issues amongst the volunteers by doing it. Today that fill the class mentality is an unfortunate by product of the process. It makes s
  21. I rarely check Facebook anymore. Sorry that a bunch of folks were critical over there. What I always dislike about Wood Badge threads is that they always result in a whole bunch of comments about whether WB is good or bad. WB is just a course, a tool so to speak. People take it, some learn some things, some don't. It doesn't make you a better person or worse person. 30 years ago it was an invite course, and so it meant something to be invited to the course. It was like receiving an award or recognition. But that's not how it works today and that's a good thing - Scouting doesn't ne
  22. I'm sorry if you ever got that message here. I'm probably the biggest WB cheerleader here and I've never once thought anything even close to that. Anyone who tells you that completing Wood Badge means anything about you as a person is full of crap. If your pack is telling you that, find a new pack. It breaks my heart to think that you ever internalized that message. I wish I knew you outside of some forum posts so that I could express how earnestly I mean this. We are all lucky to have you involved in Scouting. Don't give up on Scouting and know that you've got a number of friends h
  23. I've heard of other, similar places. BSA is missing an opportunity to incorporate this into the program.
×
×
  • Create New...