desertrat77

I saw this dynamic last summer during little league baseball. A friend approached me. The city called him and said "If you don't coach a team, there will be a dozen boys that won't play." No volunteer parents or adults. Well, my friend wasn't planning on coaching but he volunteered anyway. He asked me to help. I guessed the parents were absent, or too busy, or something. Okay, why not, for the good of the kids. Result: every game, there were a dozen able-bodied parents that showed up to watch the games. Some of them had sports backgrounds. But they a) did not offer to help in any way b) showed up late to games with their kid and c) rarely got their kid to practices. One dad volunteered to help when the season started. I see the same with scouting. Some parents don't have time because of work. But many are just plain cussed lazy, and there ain't no other way to put it. They refuse to volunteer for the simplest task. They are the ones that outsource their parenting to the community--church, scouting, sports, school. The kids get nothing at home. JoeBob is spot on--the BSA does an outstanding job of running off volunteers. Interested adults are shunned (new guy/gal at RT? No time to talk to them!), ignored (no WB beads, you don't exist), loaded up like pack mules (red tape, long-winded/low value training, bad software, lots of liability, little/zero support). Some tough it out, but others say no thanks and do something else.

I concur with Packsaddle, but wanted to highlight these areas specifically. If an apology is not in order, don't offer one just to smooth things over. I can't think of any job in scouting that would be worth the scar on the conscience, particularly the ones you mentioned. If you get the chance to meet, test the waters. If it's a genuine effort on the council's part to resolve things, fine, it will be obvious early on in the meeting. However, if it seems they are trying to just humiliate you, or string you along ("we'll think about it"), cut bait and go home. Again, no job in scouting is worth that heartache, particularly a volunteer one.

Very true--the meeting with the SE would have been your very best avenue to stay in scouting. It would have been unpleasant at first, as Twocubdad said, it may have ended with an olive branch. If you follow the formal grievance process, my hunch will be the BSA will side with the council, offering your refusal to meet as further proof of a long personal feud that was not in the best interest of scouting. My humble two cents: because this seems to me (reading between the lines) a longstanding feud, if you want to stay in scouting, in some capacity, reach out to the SE and ask if he/she will still agree to meet. If so, go the meeting and take the spanking. No quibbling--yes sir/no sir/three bags full. Apologize where apologies are due, bury the hatchet and ask to press forward. If you can't see your way clear to do that, then JoeBob said it best--enjoy the time off. The formal grievance process will be long, painful, expensive and will not result in anything positive for any party involved. Best wishes.

Deal!

+1

Eagle, I'm all for those young adult scouters getting Vigil...but it seems to be quite rare these days. In fact, that should be the bulk of the Vigil candidates. Just seems that Vigil has turned into another Silver Beaver or "gold watch for the old guy" award.

Okay: very few young people, scouts or scouters, are Vigil. Most seem to be of the "very seasoned" set.

That is true!

That's even better...we'll get a battery of dutch ovens fire up, cooking all kinds of good stuff!

I'll RSVP right now! Open bar? Exactly...just because someone has the title of "executive" or "director" or "commander" doesn't necessarily mean that person has the executive skills needed to really make an organization perform at its best. Sublime!

Amidst the exciting verbiage about innovation and technology, I didn't see a single mention of improving the dismal annual unit rechartering process. Or did I miss it? The process is a blend of the worst aspects of needless paperwork and clunky software. Unnecessary pain for the units. As I learned during my military career, all strategic plans are declared "successes." Even if they aren't. You can't have a fancy powerpoint presentation with senior leadership present at the big strategic plan wrap-up gala if you failed to achieve a goal or objective.

Twocubdad, congratulations and well done, I wish you the very best.

LeCastor, this is the best news I've heard today--thanks!

Tahawk, thanks for sharing this, it really struck a cord. With your permission, I'd like to add a couple thoughts as a scout who came up in the ISP era.... When I crossed over from Webelos to Boy Scouts in '74 (a very hot humid evening at Howard AFB, Panama...no AC in that particular building), I saw both influences--the old outdoor program and the new indoor one. My first handbook was the 8th edition, 1972. Compared to the Fieldbook, the scout handbook struck me as kind of weak. Anemic. Then one day I got ahold of a handbook from the early '60s, and even as a young scout, I was shocked at the difference. I thought "I want to be in THAT BSA!" Well, you play the cards you are dealt. Fortunately, as I moved with my family, I was in four different scout troops. To varying degrees, I still received the benefit of the old program, with the emphasis on patrols being outdoors. Sure, we wore those funky berets, and earned Camping MB with the not-required-for-Eagle-colored edging, etc. But we still hiked, camped and cooked as patrols, all months, in all weather. There was adult, but not nearby. Unless it was one particular SM who ran the troop like a reform school, but that is another story. True, many of the old timers voted with their feet and left the program. I was lucky enough that a few of them stayed, and kept real scouting alive, while the BSA floundered thru the '70s. So the ISP was discarded, and Green Bar Bill rewrote the handbook (a superb one at that). However, many of those old timers that stayed the course thru the '70s eventually retired. We have people of like spirit in the BSA, who stepped up and filled their shoes, to carry on in the traditional outdoor manner. But not enough to overcome the inflow of many sedentary, indoor minded scouters who influence the program away from the outdoors. They like paperwork, metrics, long meetings, MB fairs, top down direction, zero risk tolerance--everything that runs contrary to a successful, memorable scouting program. There have always been scouters that didn't like the outdoors. In the past, they respected the program enough to let the troops do their thing, and they themselves took care of managerial tasks that didn't require camping. That's quite alright, and bless them. However, over the last decades, this dynamic has changed. The indoor types actually wanted to call the shots and move the program from the woods to the briefing room. Ironic that this was allowed to happened in an outdoor organization.

You know, I've wondered the same thing. There may be a few of the upper level pros that read this forum. More than likely, if anyone at National reads it, they'll be mid-level folks in the cubical farms. I hope they get something out of it.

Dave, Meeting Green Bar Bill...SPL training...at Schiff..... Doesn't get much better than that!

+2

LeCastor, good questions.... The next GBB? I thought about it this afternoon, and I'll admit I'm stumped about a specific name. However, they should be someone with extensive outdoor experience, ranging from high adventure to the basic skills needed to earn First Class. They need to be outgoing and inspiring. They need to be as comfortable helping a troop build a monkey bridge as they are in a board room. This person can serve as the roving ambassador of the National staff. A kind of Johnny Appleseed, roaming about, spreading the message of scouting and encouraging traditional, outdoor scouting. The kind of person that scouts can look up to, and that unit level scouters feel has their best interests at heart.

This is true. Patrols are shuffled, re-shuffled, and many times just holding pens. Sit in this row, be quiet, hey you, hold this flag. Instruction, communication, decision making, etc., is all top down. PL may be just a name on a piece of paper. Boredom ensues. Be it the ideal from the old '48 handbook, or the BSA thoughts from 2015 that Tahawk shared yesterday, it seems the true patrol method is based on a certain degree of autonomy. Patrols can't build their identity, maturity, pride, or skill level by being lorded over by senior scout or adult leaders. Nor from sitting in a row of metal chairs, or a picnic bench, passively listening to someone tell them about being a patrol. They need the basic concepts, and then they need to get outdoors. I've seen this at camporees. Patrol competition is hamstrung not only by lack of skills, but of no patrol identity. The cool thing is the scouts figure it out quickly once they get the chance. But many don't because they are treated like elderly cub scouts and told when/how to do everything.

LeCastor, I'm all for the next GBB! What intrigues me is the possibility that several people out there in the BSA, right now, could take on that role. It's just a matter of the BSA adopting a strategic sense that such a person--and their commitment to the BSA's outdoor heritage--would be welcomed and championed. It would be a challenge because the BSA gave a lot of ground over the last couple decades to scouters at all levels that favor meetings, indoor activities and paperwork.

LeCastor, good points all. Change is necessary. But my beef with many of the BSA's changes over the years is that the changes dispensed with traditional, outdoor-oriented, successful aspects of scouting (think '72/ISP, and plenty of stuff like it since), and then adopted uninspiring/indoor/top-heavy programs. The kicker: though many of these initiatives didn't work by any objective, measurable standard, the BSA would double-down and kept them anyway (just changing stage scenery a bit)...and then proceeded to move further away from its successful yet timeliness selling points. True, bringing in an outsider is tough. I'd really like to see it, but given that the BSA is a huge bureaucracy above the unit level, there would be a lot of passive-aggressive foot dragging and sabotage by staffers, just enduring the new guy/gal till his/her tenure was over. Then back to the old agenda. I hope Mr. Surbaugh can balance it all.

Bad Wolf, good morning, wish I had read your post above before I posted mine, because you are right. If the BSA wants a true fresh start, they'd bring an innovator from outside. Still, I'm moderately impressed that National actually chose a younger exec over the long list of more senior execs who are probably more entrenched and thought they had a shot at it because "it was their turn."

Skeptic, I'm tracking with you...I'm a skeptic and cynic as well. Based on what I've read in the thread thus far, I'll put on my "positive" hat for a moment and say that Mr. Surbaugh's selection seems like a good thing. His background and age indicate he was chosen over a large group of more senior execs (who were no doubt groomed/posed for "their turn" as chief exec), who are probably all a) older and b) set in their ways (for good or ill). If this is the case, the selection process showed courage in not selecting several old timers whose careers were all supposed to culminate with a shot at or selection as chief exec.

Tahawk, darn good, thanks for sharing them. It's good to see that there is an effort at the BSA level to utilize our successful past.

Good points all.... But are we striving to scientifically describe something that has already been successful, pre-1972 ISP and White Stag-style WB? When the BSA moved away from traditional patrols, it threw out the proverbial baby, bathwater, and the tub as well. So I found an old classic, sitting quietly on the shelf, minding its own business...from the golden era of scouting and true patrol method...the Handbook for Boys, fifth edition, copyright 1948. Your thoughts please..... Page 5: "As a scout you will belong to a Patrol, which is the Scout name for a small gang of your best friends in the Troop you join. Every week, probably, you will have a Patrol and Troop meeting. Here there will be time for games and contest, and songs and stunts--lots of fun. You will plan and get ready for hikes and camping trips--learning how to pitch a tent, pack your knapsack, how to use a compass and read a map; how to tie useful knots and bandage a wound. There's always plenty to do." Pages 56-57 (in part): "Your Patrol is your gang, with whom you scout, hike and camp. Each Patrol has its own name, flag call and badge...Your Patrol flag displays the emblem of your Patrol. How proud you feel to belong when you see it fluttering in the breeze! You wear your Patrol badge on your right sleeve for the same reason--to tell the world where you belong, who your buddies are, and what you stand for. Probably you stencil it on your pack, your tent and other equipment. The best Patrol in the Troop--you are part of it!...The strength of your Patrol is the strength of each Scout. Do your share to make it strong." Pages 57-58 lists leaders in the patrol: "Your Patrol Leader is a First Class Scout, or working towards it rapidly, because part of his job is to help train others. He leads the Patrol at Patrol and Troop meetings, on hiking and camping trips." The other duties mentioned: APL, scribe, treasurer, quartermaster; optional duties: grubmaster, song/cheer leader, hikemaster. And last but not least, page 60: "Much of your advancement work for Second and First Class Rank will be done in your Patrol, at Patrol meetings, and on Patrol hikes and camps. Your Patrol Leader, with the approval of your Scoutmaster, can pass you on any of your requirements for these two ranks, if he has already completed the requirements himself. This advancement opportunity makes your Patrol work of real importance to you as you go forward in your Scouting progress." ----------------------------------------------------------------