ParkMan

Respectfully - this is simply not true. Any differences that we bring to Scouting because of gender are far outweighed by differences in upbringing, family influence, schooling, and career. Some of the absolute toughest, practical, most no-nonsense leaders I know are women. I don't doubt that you mean no disrespect to either gender by your comments. I am not looking to turn this into a political correctness discussion either. If it had not come up in the topic, I probably would have not commented myself. But, since it has come up, I would suggest that as adult leaders in a deve

Fully concur. There are countless examples of more proactive marketing than the BSA does. It's like we're not even trying. If I were the BSA leadership, I'd be looking for every opportunity to get our message out there. We need to be making the case that for youth protection, there's no better champion than the BSA. I'd even consider taking 75% of the money we spend on executive salaries and hiring one really good PR person. Pay that person 2 million dollars a year if you have to - but we've got to change the conversation here.

HI @jsychk I'd recommend that someone just have an honest conversation with the guy - sort of like what you've done here. "Hi Bob, It's been great having your son in the pack. He's an awesome kid. I noticed that you put him in for 17 adventure badges last month. As you can imagine that many badges all at once was unusual and raised the question of if he really earned them. If he did, no problem - but you can imagine how this seems like something we should check on. What do you think?" Then let the guy explain. If he's sticking to his story - then move on. Part of the ris

I don't mean to make light of it. But, taking a step back to where this started. I think this is a place where the CSE could choose to get involved. We all hear these horror stories of bad councils. Frankly, these are the kinds of problems that are killing Scouting. The CSE could by all means start an effort to fix the professional/volunteer chaos.

I think many SEs are clearly in over their heads. I think we've had this discussion before. But, if a professional overrules a volunteer and the volunteer has the ability to do so, the volunteer should nicely tell the professional to back off. That's Bob for the input, but I've got this. We've met for months and made decisions about the plan for the event. Of course, it strikes me as off that you've got a situation where the professional isn't in the loop on the event planning. If the volunteer can't stand up to the DE for whatever reason - then the volunteer need to go to the

This all seems very probable from a system which has grown a out of control. It's too simplistic to say that "they can't or won't care about unit level scouting." We volunteers throw phrases like this around, but it can mean so many different things. To me, a DEs job is to provide professional support such that a district functions at maximum potential. That's where their focus should be. A typical DE has something like 50 units in their district. That gives them time for what - 30-45 minutes a week per unit? I think that we've all been abusing the DE role for a very long t

I think we have a different view of professionals in Scouting. Professionals do not run Scouting - volunteers do. We hire professionals because we recognize there are roles that benefit from having someone there full time to do them. For example - if there are issues with the camporee - it should not be a professional's job to fix it. That's the job of the district program chair or district chair. Of course the professional should want to see it fixed - but that's why we have a Key 3. The professional can sit down with the district chair and district commissioner and bring it up as

Your list is somewhat making my point: "Camporees, timely processing of paperwork at the council office, training schedules, the quality of food at the council camp." Camporees & training schedules are volunteer responsibilities. Timely processing of paperwork (registrar) & food at the council camp (summer camp director) are professional responsibilities. Getting unit volunteers talking to district/council volunteers would be a good thing. It would help unit volunteers to understand the path to having an impact on things like camporees and training. I think the CSE could guide

I'll admit - I don't see quite the same thing. In our council, our professional staff is quite busy. But, for the most part, the things they worry about are things that most volunteers don't care that much about (fundraising, membership, etc...). The bigger issue I see is that ownership at the council level really isn't clear. We don't do a really good job of letting folks know who is responsible for specific things. So, we have lots of volunteers with ideas that get given to the professionals. Yet, many of those ideas have little to do with professionals and are really volunteer fun

If it's this - I'm not impressed. National needs to be more aggressive. As the new leader, now's the time to set the tone. "Staff, I want a message out tomorrow."

Does someone have a national org chart they can share? EDIT: still looking, but found that the BSA hosts the 990s at: https://www.scouting.org/about/annual-report/

Thank you very much @4CouncilsScouter for following your convictions and making the tough choice. Thank you for the many years of service and attempting to fight the good fight and the politics that do exist. I have no idea where we'll end up nationally, but thank you for sharing with us some of your observations of what is happening within the national organization. It really does help us to be more informed volunteers.

What problems do you think they need to solve that they are not? Why do you think that they are inefficient? Why do they need a shake up?

Again - my suggestion is that we focus on the problems that we they need to solve. To help, here are the positions on that list: Chief Scout Executive Chief Financial Officer Chief Technology Officer General Counsel Deputy Chief Scout Executive Asst. Chief Scout Executive of Development Asst. Chief Scout Executive of Outdoor Adventures Director of Human Resources Director of Information Technology Director of Marketing Director of Outdoor Adventures Director of Supply Director of Support Services Director

Maybe it's just me - but continuing to criticize the national salaries like this feels good, but isn't really bringing constructive ideas to the table. I don't even see how this impacts just about anything I do either. Say we reduce all the above salaries and then pass all the savings on the Scouts. That does what - reduce the national budget by 5 million a year? While that's a lot - it's not going to fundamentally change anything for us. I think if we really want to engage with the CSE in a constructive way, we've got to focus on issues that are either a) painful to us as Scouters, o

I'd suggest that one thing we could do to encourage Mr. Mosby's involvement (directly or indirectly) is to tone down some of the national/council/<whatever group> criticisms. I'm not for a moment suggesting that we lessen the critiques of what is happening. There is a very high level of competence and accomplishment within the volunteers in this forum - we are capabale of having frank conversations. However, I am suggesting that we can be more careful in reaching conclusions about their motivations. It's been my experience that pretty often the people we criticize are much like

A chief executive needs to be both a good idea person, but also someone capable of leading the organization. The right candidate will understand the challenges going in and develop strategies to address them. It sounds to me like Scouts Canada picked someone who could not effectively deal with the challenges and as such was a poor choice. I do not think that should deter the BSA from making the right decision.

I'd encourage you to think as big as you can. There's really no set rule for things like scout involvement in the budget process. If you can define a way for the Scouts to be involved in that process, then go for it. Define the kind of involvement you wants the Scouts to have in running the troop, get the adults on board with that vision, and then have at it. I would encourage you though to define terms like "budget". I was a Troop Committee Chair for a number of years. To me, a budget is set at the level of "$1,000 for new equipment purchases, $3,000 for national dues, we want to m

Did you all ever revolt? If I were a UC and it was just about that every month I think I'd go batty!

Why is this a bad thing? The merit badge program adds to the richness of Scouting. For 99% of Scouts (and maybe more) it serves as another approach to learning and growth. In a setting where most everything else is patrol or troop based, here's a part of the program that is individually driven. What you learn is driven by you. What skills you add is driven by you. I think this is a health mirror to the rest of the program. It's important in life to be able to work as a team to accomplish things. It's just as important in life to recognize that you need to take responsibility

Certainly - if there is a mathematics merit badge and a Scout is working on it, then yes - support that Scout in working on those math problems. Since you're trying to define boundaries here, I'd say that supporting Scout's interest in earning merit badges is good because it's a core part of the program. Doing math problems with your scouts is out because it is not part of the program. While you could make a case that there is a role for math problems in the context of earning a badge, I'd argue that there is a difference. Forcing a scout to do work on a specific Merit Badges should not be

Well - to an extent. Math problems help my daughter to grow, but I wouldn't subject Scouts to that. Within the context of the Scouting type activities - merit badges, camping, leadership opportunities, patrol activities, etc. Yes - even if they don't bring specific value to the troop or community, yes - we should support them.

In our results oriented world of today, I think we have to be careful how much we try to find the "value" in what Scouts do. Scouting is a youth development activity with four aims. All of those aims are targeted at developing the individual - they don't worry about how much value that individual then adds to the group. I think this is the right model. Since development of youth is the point, helping them develop along the four aims is the purpose. So, if a youth earns 8, 18, or 80 merit badges and it helps the scout to grow then we're succeeding. So, I wouldn't try to stop a Sc

It's probably worth restating the aims: character development, citizenship training, personal fitness, and leadership. I see that merit badges accomplish a few things: they help a scout explore an area of interest they provide some adult/youth interaction they are (can be) fun The more areas you learn about as a kid, the more prepared you are as a citizen. Along the way, you get to interact with more adults which might help you in developing your own character (aka adult association). Oh yeah, you get to have some fun too.

What was the significance of 1992? Baring some sort of legal change of status, I'd think the rule still apply. These are the rules that governed incorporation of the BSA. Someone who has standing to sue over those rules could.