dkurtenbach

If every person in the group brings a candle lantern to put in the center of your ring, and you set some on rocks, cookpots, or whatever is handy so that they are at different heights, you can have a pretty nice "campfire."  And you can turn the "gathering" and/or "dispersing" of the candles into opening and/or closing ceremonies - a new tradition for your group.  

5 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

This seems to align with the 1 hour long video where a patent and trademark attorney essentially say GSUSA lawsuit is weak outside the specific cases of usage of the term “Girl Scouts”.  

It's really hard to assess strengths and weaknesses of the case at this early stage.  In any event, more than 90% of civil cases settle.  The only real question here is how long it will take (years, possibly) and how many millions BSA and GSUSA will pay their attorneys before then.  GSUSA made its point just by filing its complaint:  their organization is still around, still strong, and still fiercely devoted to girls only -- which BSA can never be.  There's not much more they can hope to gain from an arcane trademark dispute, so it is just a money drain for them as long as it goes on.  "Scouts BSA" will be a fact in one week, so BSA has no incentive to do anything fast, and federal court is a great place to string things out (which also keeps the attorney fees down).  So as both a legal and practical matter, the burden is on GSUSA.  

The BSA motion to dismiss focuses on two of the GSUSA claims:  First, the claim that local BSA recruiting efforts that spread confusion and misinformation about girl Scouts / Girl Scouts interfered with Girl Scout recruiting and activities.  BSA's motion to dismiss argues that GSUSA failed to identify any specific instance in which interference actually occurred, or in which BSA members acted with malice, dishonesty, or unfair or improper means:  "The mere possibility of a lost recruit is not enough."  Second, the motion addresses the claim that GSUSA has "common law" (customary and court-made law, as opposed to statutory law) rights to the names "Scout" and "Scouting" in connection with programs for girls.  BSA argues that GSUSA is not actually using "Scout" and "Scouting" alone, without "Girl" in front of them, and actual use is required.  Further, the motion argues that GSUSA has disclaimed any right to those words because it has issued style guides that prohibit the use of "Scout" and "Scouting" alone without the modifier "Girl" -- GSUSA even stating that BSA has the rights to those words on their own.  The motion does not address GSUSA's statutory trademark infringement claims.

. . . that they used in their light sabers.

I've been wondering why the movie was called "Drum Taps," since there are no drums.  Maybe in an earlier script the signalling was to be done with drums, and at some point they decided to switch to the heliograph, but that would not have made a compelling title.

Interestingly, the characters were able to see what appeared to be brief random flashes and interpret them in great detail, including the names of the individuals riding into the pass.

It was also kind of funny that while the hero, Ken, clearly admires the Boy Scouts, his own knot-tying skills are not particularly good.  He surprises and ties up the two outlaw guards of Rocky Pass, and they almost immediately slip out of the rope and ambush Ken.

1 hour ago, desertrat77 said:

I think it's equally important for district/council scouters to receive feedback as well.  Not from peers (the mutual admiration society) but from the units they serve. 

Of course.  Constructive feedback should flow to, from, and within every organizational component and the people and organizations they interact with.  It is the only way to get data needed to improve.  And sometimes, unusual feedback, or feedback back from an unexpected source, is what sparks improvement when nothing else will.  Receiving feedback per se is not a problem for most folks -- we love positive feedback. No one likes feedback that points out mistakes or below-par performance, especially from folks who think they know everything, or aren't getting critiqued in return.  That is a reason why mutual or 360 degree feedback is important -- that we know that those giving feedback are also getting feedback.  As Scouts, our feedback must be given with the Scout Law in mind.  And while we should receive feedback as a gift, it is also true that gifts can vary widely in quality and value; so all feedback should be examined by the one who receives it to pick out what matters and what is actionable, what can be immediately discarded and what should be put on a shelf for consideration later. 

Yes, Scouting is a jolly game.  But it has a serious purpose that can continue to have a major impact on our society.  It is up to each of us to decide if that is something we care about more than the temporary sting of the occasional critique.

41 minutes ago, David CO said:

Just about all of them.

Then they'll just have to suck it up.

13 hours ago, ParkMan said:

Why would volunteers want to be part of a system where they are getting assessed and graded for what they do.  No thanks on that one.

Second - The BSA already has all kinds of systems in place to assist units.  The biggest problem is that many areas don't utilize them well.  So, I'm not sure why we'd want to invent another.

1 hour ago, MattR said:

Nobody wants to volunteer if they're going to be tested and quizzed and have to fill out reports. The other side is we have little improvement in scouters, a few that bring horror stories to this forum, and a continual erosion of the methods of scouting.

Feedback is a gift, they tell us in Wood Badge.  This is about the youth in our programs, and whether they are getting what the Boy Scouts of America has promised them -- what we, as the unit Scouters who signed them up, promised them.  With keeping our promise on the line, what unit Scouter would not want to receive objective feedback on the strengths and weaknesses of their unit program?

I'm for any system or process that motivates or inspires Scouters to focus on improving the quality of unit programs.  How do we fix the failure to properly implement the systems already in place to assist units?  If that failure can be fixed, why hasn't it been fixed already?  Because (it seems to me) the systems we have in place right now -- like most of the suggestions in this thread -- are variations on, "Gee, maybe we should talk to the leaders who aren't taking training and aren't going to roundtable and aren't trying to implement the program as written."  One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

As of the end of 2017, BSA had:  266 local councils.  99,814 units.  1,245,882 Cub Scouts.  834,142 Boy Scouts and Varsity Scouts.  87,827 Venturers and Sea Scouts.  114,751 Explorers.

The mission of the Boy Scouts of America is to prepare young people to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes by instilling in them the values of the Scout Oath and Scout Law.

It's a very simple equation:  The more youth who are active in a BSA program, and the longer they are active in a BSA program, the more likely they are to have absorbed the values of the Scout Oath and the Scout Law, and the more successful BSA will be in accomplishing its mission.

So how do we get more youth to be active in BSA programs, and how do we get them to stay active in those programs longer?  Another simple equation:  All recruiting into the Boy Scouts of America is by local units and the adult volunteers and youth in those units.  All retention of youth members is by local units.  The more units that have high quality programs, the more members we will recruit and the longer those members will stay -- resulting in more youth being "Prepared for Life."

Bottom line:  The degree to which the Boy Scouts of America is successful in its mission is in direct proportion to how many of its units have high quality programs. 

If you want the Boy Scouts of America to produce more great citizens who live the values of the Scout Oath and Law, then expanding the number of high quality unit programs is what you have to care about and what you have to convince your fellow volunteers to care about.  It all starts in our own units, but it doesn't stop there.

33 minutes ago, TMSM said:

Almost all disputes are solved by looking up the rules in GTA or GTSS. This allowed comittee members to give feedbook based on the rules and less on personal opinion.

I think the best kind of feedback on program quality (including how the leaders are doing) is objective, meaning:  First, there are concrete standards derived from current BSA publications, and it is easy to determine whether they are met or unmet.  Second, the assessment is done by experienced but disinterested reviewers.  All it takes is widely publicizing the standards, with a year for units to get in shape before the assessments start. The assessment teams could be made up of unit Scouters from other districts.  The written report would grade the unit's compliance with the standards, and would be provided to the chartered organization, the unit leaders and unit committee, and the district Key 3.  Then the district folks can be the "How can we help your unit" good guys.

Just watched the cowboy short movie "Drum Taps," (1933) starring Ken Maynard. It is one of those movies (like those of Roy Rogers) set in present day (as of when it was made), but still involves lots of riding horses, six shooters, and cowboy garb (including gigantic hats). As synopsized on IMDB.com:  "Skinner and his gang are grabbing land from the ranchers. When they go after Kerry's ranch Ken stops them. Skinner frames Ken for rustling but the Sheriff is on Ken's side, and with the help of his brother Earl's Boy Scout troop they go after the gang."  The Scouts are instrumental in helping round up ranchers for the Sheriff's posse, treating men who have been shot, and posing as the Army when riding with Ken to the rescue of the Sheriff and his men, who have been trapped by Skinner's gang.  A key plot point is the use of a heliograph, a signaling device by which sunlight is reflected in flashes from a movable mirror.  The outlaw lookouts in Rocky Pass use it to signal the rest of the gang when someone is coming, Ken uses it to signal the Sheriff that the pass is clear for them to come through, and a Scout uses one to signal Ken that they are on the way.

55 minutes ago, MattR said:

I hate to say this but for an organization that prides itself on leadership development, it doesn't really work for their own volunteers. The BSA tends to lean on training as opposed to on the job improvement. Training is one and done. Continuous improvement gets much less emphasis.

Just to be clear, I have no dreams of changing anything at national but it would be nice to create a round table topic that I could get the bulk of SM's and ASM's to go to.

It's not just this.  It is almost every aspect of organization and operations, from the chartered organization relationship to district operations right on down to things like the Webelos/Arrow of Light - to - Scout transition.  BSA dreams up a model organization and process and then just expects that everyone will do exactly what the model anticipates.  Chartered organizations will carefully select leaders; leaders will enthusiastically take training, read all the literature, attend roundtable every month, go to supplemental training like University of Scouting, go to Wood Badge, and conform their behavior to what they have learned; every unit will have a Unit Commissioner with intimate knowledge of the unit and its operations who can influence the leadership.  BSA's models are out of touch with reality, and simply don't anticipate inadequate resources, real-life obstacles, and folks acting in their own self-interest. 

9 hours ago, SSF said:

The advice in these situations is always the same. "Find a new troop, vote with your feet" but that doesn't address the root of the problem. 

The BSA needs to maintain greater due diligence in ensuring that BSA programs are being administered properly.

Good scouts are suffering and bad scout leaders are continuing to be bad scout leaders.

BSA used to have a manual called Commissioner Helps for Packs, Troops, and Crews, no. 33618.  The last version I have was updated in January 2011.  It is organized as a number of unit operational elements, with each element having one or more standards to be used by Commissioners in assessing a unit.  It also includes a number of suggested actions Commissioners can take to help the unit achieve each standard.  The standards for "Top Unit Leader" are:

     1.  The unit leader is fully trained, is respected by youth and other adults, and has a keen interest in youth.

     2.  [Troops and Crews] Youth have a major role in leadership.

     3.  The unit leader has a trained assistant leader for two-deep leadership and shares the leadership responsibilities.

     4.  [Crews] The crew Advisor is strictly an adviser and coach; Venturers run meetings and activities whenever possible.

The listed "Commissioner Actions" are mostly what you would expect (take the leader to training and roundtable, for example), but no. 9 states:  "Work closely with the head of the chartered organization to see that leaders are the type of persons you would choose to lead your own children."

Useful feedback would be a checklist of specific standards that shows whether the unit is in compliance.  The problem, as @SSF has noted, is that BSA isn't doing enough to ensure that units are doing what they are supposed to be doing.  BSA doesn't have a mechanism for enforcing quality standards in units.  For all of its hand-wringing about membership numbers, BSA seems to ignore the direct relationship between unit quality on the one hand and member recruitment and retention on the other.  All recruitment is by local units. All retention is by local units.  Membership numbers could be improved substantially if the vast majority of those units met quality standards of the kind found in the Commissioner Helps book.

A patrol is a team in the game of Scouting.  Nothing more, nothing less.  Patrols will have the same experiences as sports teams: they'll win some and lose some, have good performances and poor performances, succumb to failures and overcome failures.

The Patrol Method is a special kind of team building process that uses small groups, hands-on learning, concrete tasks, and (most importantly) flexibility in task completion.

• Small groups (6 to 8 members) make hands-on learning possible and require that each patrol member be given real responsibility in order for the patrol to successfully complete its objectives.  
• Hands-on learning is best for the many physical skills necessary for Scouting, and is much more fun than sitting and listening.
• Concrete tasks are easy for youth to understand, and are easy to check for degree of success.
• Flexibility means that within certain boundaries (for example, safety rules, budget, park use rules, schedule, available equipment, etc.), the patrol is free to decide how to accomplish a task or achieve an objective.  It is the difference between a football team where the coach sets the game plan, scripts the plays, and specifies where each player is supposed to go on each play, and a football team where the players, as long as they follow the rules, can come up with a game plan and improvise plays in the huddle. 
• In the Patrol Method, successful completion of an outing or activity by a patrol is the secondary goal.  The primary goal is the development of skills, problem-solving, responsibility, and teamwork in the patrol members.

Each patrol must have (in no particular order):

• Concrete, specific, measurable objectives, which usually involve organizing and executing successful outings and activities. 
• Rules and requirements the patrol must comply with in doing its work. 
• Room within those rules and requirements to come up with its own plans, approaches, and methods for completing its work.
• Resources (including advice and expertise) at its disposal for carrying out its objectives.  
• Organization and division of responsibility among patrol members.
• A process for training and developing each patrol member so that he or she will have the skills necessary.
• A process for planning its work that includes all patrol members.
• A process for reviewing and evaluating its performance that includes all patrol members.
• A patrol identification different from those of other patrols.
• Its own place to meet separate from other patrols.
• A reliable method of communication within the patrol.  
• Regular communication among patrol members outside troop meetings.
• Longevity, so there is a chance for all the other conditions of patrol success to develop.

Each patrol member must learn (in no particular order):

• The patrol's objectives -- what the patrol is trying to accomplish, and why.
• The rules and guidelines for the game of Scouting generally, and the specific rules and internal guidelines that apply to the patrol's objectives, including patrol organization, procedures, and schedules.
• The resources (equipment, supplies, materials, advice, expertise, etc.) available to the patrol and to each member of the patrol, and how to access those resources.
• His/her specific role or responsibility, and the skills and knowledge necessary to carry out that role or responsibility.
• The roles and responsibilities of each of the other patrol members.
• That patrol members don't need to be friends, they just need to be teammates.
• That he or she is just as responsible for attaining the patrol's objectives as any other member.
• That the patrol's objectives can only be accomplished when all the patrol members work together.
• That success belongs to the patrol as a whole, and failure belongs to the patrol as a whole.
• That failure is inevitable, and overcoming failure is necessary in order to succeed.

The biggest obstacles to successful implementation of the Patrol Method are:

• Failure to impress upon troop adult leaders and parents that in training youth through personal experience, we must embrace inefficiency, mistakes, re-starts, and try-agains.  "Efficiency" is an adult value that can lead to adults telling patrols and patrol members exactly how to do things (that is, how the adults would do them), adults taking over tasks because patrol members aren't doing it the way the adults would, and adults not letting patrol members do things because they won't do it "right."
• Failure to provide patrols with what they need.  For example, many troops may organize patrols, give the patrols names, elect patrol leaders, and have the patrols meet, but don't actually give them any responsibility because the outings and activities are planned and executed by others or through a different troop process.   Or troops may set aside time for patrols to meet, but don't train patrols in what they are supposed to do at patrol meetings.
• Failure to teach each patrol member what he or she needs to learn.  For example, patrols may not assign specific responsibilities in advance of an outing or activity or teach the needed skills in advance, so patrol members don't have the chance to do something meaningful for their patrol at the outing or activity.

Another approach is to just change the last letter of "Boy" and see if anything works (excluding potentially offensive terms):

• Boa Scouts (neckerchief alternative)
• Bob Scouts (I think someone already suggested this - nickname for Sir Robert Baden-Powell)
• Bog Scouts (camping in the rain)
• Boo Scouts (according to the Urban Dictionary, "boo" means someone you love, someone who is always there for you)
• Bot Scouts (autonomous youth who can execute commands, reply to messages, or perform routine tasks)
• Bow Scouts (can refer to shooting sports or watercraft)
• Box Scouts (advancement-oriented, as in "checking the box")

What's in a name?  If the Girl Scouts of the USA are unsuccessful in their trademark lawsuit, it will be "Scouts BSA" with members who are "Scouts."  If they are successful in getting BSA to add a modifier before "Scout" or "Scouts," and BSA doesn't want to just stick with "Boy Scouts," options might be:

Varsity Scouts (it's available)

Khaki Scouts (it would be hilarious)

Highlander Scouts (kilts are official uniform pieces for males)

#Scouts (current, relevant, trending)

Q Scouts (don't know what it means, but its kinda cool)

53 minutes ago, Sentinel947 said:

We can see by Scouting's global reach, that Scouting's message and ideals are about as close to universal as we could hope for.

I think there are many folks who see Scouting as it is practiced (oaths, uniforms, knot-tying, badges, ranks, patrols, hand signs, etc.) as quaint and old-fashioned, and therefore not really relevant to the three things that seem to be frequently touted as what young people need for success in life:  a formal education, a career path, and a "passion."   As for the message and ideals, I think that to a lot of parents, the development of good citizens who are ready, willing, and able to help others and come to the aid of their country just seems too general and abstract in the 21st Century.  Yet if you change something in the traditional Green Bar Bill Scouting program, you are ripping out a piece of Scouting's soul -- so "adaptations" meet a lot of opposition.

2 hours ago, Eagledad said:

As someone with experience in something like this, what about the units that don’t want to participate? And, who maintains quality control several generations of district leaders down the road? Couple of examples of the challenges that pop up.

Barry

There would be many challenges, not least the problem of units that don't want to participate -- and likely many of them would be units that need the help most.  And given the natural turnover of leadership in districts and units and the resulting changes in direction, it would be a wonder if the exercise lasted even five years.  About all we can do is gently persist in our efforts, or, in the words of Tennyson, " . . . by slow prudence to make mild / A rugged people, and thro' soft degrees / Subdue them to the useful and the good."  On the other hand, if the work contributed to even a 5% increase in membership in the district, it would be considered wildly successful. 

2 hours ago, Jameson76 said:

If you want to grow, figure out what the top units are doing, then objectively determine what can and what cannot be replicated.  Likely it will come down to motivated adult leaders, engaged youth, and supportive families.

4 hours ago, shortridge said:

Let’s put our energy into program-side unit support with tangible results: 
- Compelling training 
- High-quality Roundtables

So, suppose we have a district like the one described in @ParkMan's original post, and the district leadership agree on the goal of significantly improving retention and recruiting.  They agree that great unit programs are the key to successful retention and recruiting.  Following @Jameson76's suggestion, they agree on an approach:  identify what works and replicate it in other units.  And, they agree on a method based on @shortridge's suggestion about training and roundtables:  regular monthly gatherings of unit Scouters holding specific unit positions for targeted "How We Do It" discussions on specific unit program and operations topics.  These sessions would have two objectives:  Get the units to tell each other what works for them in a particular area, and inspire units struggling in that area to adopt approaches that work.  Then follow up with additional "how to" materials provided by the units (like @Gilwell_1919's Troop Book), and even additional sessions on a topic, to continue promoting adoption of successful approaches.  In effect, the district asks the units to train each other.  To figure out where to start, they survey each unit, asking two questions:  "What does your unit do really well?" and "What would you like your unit to do better?"  

5 hours ago, LeCastor said:

We are veering off the subject at hand: leadership through service. Let's try to steer back on course. Otherwise, I can split off several of these posts into another topic for the Order of the Arrow sub-forum.

*********

Each year about this time, I reread selected Klondike stories by Jack London. In reading "In a Far Country" this morning I was moved by a specific passage that I think is a supplement to the initial post outlining key aspects of servant leadership. Describing the hardships of living in the cold North, London says this of an individual:

"For the courtesies of ordinary life, he must substitute unselfishness, forbearance, and tolerance. Thus, and only thus, can he gain that pearl of great price, --true comradeship. He must not say "Thank You;" he must mean it without opening his mouth, and prove it by responding in kind. In short, he must substitute the deed for the word, and spirit for the letter."

I don't think the original Order of the Arrow induction ceremony as depicted in the video really has anything to do with "leadership," and doesn't really address "service" either, at least directly.  Rather, all three tests were about what London called "true comradeship," or in OA terms, "brotherhood," and how that bond multiplies our ability to overcome difficulties, how far we can reach, and our strength.  If you take Scouts who are already living the Scout Oath and Law individually, and mold them into a brotherhood, the ability to collectively carry out ideals such as the Good Turn is magnified far beyond what the same number of Scouts could do individually.  That's what I got from it, anyway.  

A past Scout Executive in our council had a formula that he used to repeat that went something like this:  A unit with trained leaders, and a strong outdoor program, supported by a good Unit Commissioner, will attract and retain youth.  And he's right, at least in my experience.

The underlying premise, of course, is that BSA is structured in a way that practically all of the recruitment and retention responsibility and burden is on the adult volunteers and youth members in individual units.  The Boy Scouts of America can retain existing Scouts and recruit more Scouts only when unit adults and youth take their program seriously (the only way to retain Scouts) and take recruitment seriously.  That gets us to the role of the district in growing Scouting in a community.  It really comes down to:  (1) processing unit paperwork (and its electronic equivalent) quickly and accurately; (2) responding to unit questions and requests quickly and accurately; (3) proactively providing units with resources, such as training opportunities and information about places to go and activities units can participate in; and (4) convincing / encouraging / inspiring unit adults to take the steps necessary to put on great programs and actively recruit youth.

That doesn't necessarily take a lot of people at the district level.  You just need (a) a District Executive who will process paperwork and requests quickly, and (b) a small cadre of experienced volunteer Scouters who are always on the lookout for information, have multiple ways of disseminating that information, are happy to field questions, hold training sessions, and visit units to talk about Scouting, and are happy to help units solve problems. 

You don't need a bifurcated Committee / Commissioner structure or a bunch of committees with bulleted lists of responsibilities.  You don't even need anyone registered in a district position other than as placeholders.  All of that formal structure and their associated meetings are wasted energy and a distraction from the real objective.

2 hours ago, Gilwell_1919 said:

 [A]nd, of course, there was the sea of online resources out there that was like trying to take a drink from a fire hydrant.

And . . .

9 minutes ago, Gilwell_1919 said:

Maybe I am a bit idealistic... but I would like other leaders and scouts (across the world) to add information to this. Cooking recipes, camping tricks, etc. Little nuggets of info that can be passed down to future scouts. 

But . . . 

11 minutes ago, Gilwell_1919 said:

The goal of this digital troop book is more of a "how to"... All of my scouts and their parents have complete access to this book, Scoutlander, and Scoutbook.... so they have as much info at their fingertips as the could possibly want.  

(Emphasis added to the last quote.)  Now I'm just a little confused about what and who it is for and how it would be used. 

Great work.  I always thought a "pocket guide" to troop operations would have been a useful tool when I was Scoutmastering.  This comes about as close as anything I've seen.  I think the key is going to be how much it actually gets used by the youth and adult leaders and (even if it isn't really intended for them) the parents:  The more that people rely on it, the better chance it will have of being updated over the years and integrated into troop practices, rather than becoming an electronic version of those outdated binders in the closet. 

You may already have some kind of new parent information guide with troop meeting time and location, where to get uniforms, troop dues and fees, how to get troop email, and a complete calendar (all school dates, all troop, PLC, and Committee meeting dates, Courts of Honor, service projects, campouts and other activities, summer camp / high adventure), and everything that needs volunteer help.  If you do, I'd suggest integrating that into the Troop Book.  If you don't, I'd suggest adding a new "Parents" section right at the top.  When one of your experienced parents -- unprompted -- tells new parents that the first thing they need to go is get the Troop Book, you're there.  And the parents will love you for making this available to them.  Not only does it answer a lot of their questions, it will help enlist them into supporting what you are doing, and will lead to some of them volunteering.  

On 12/29/2018 at 10:39 PM, sst3rd said:

The OA has become the BSA's "service club." I can't promote that in the troops that I serve. I can't defend the fact that it's all about free labor. The scouts aren't dumb. They have better things to do on a weekend.

Yeah, how often I have heard things like, "We'll just have the Order of the Arrow do it.  They're supposed to give cheerful service."  And how often I have seen the chapter (the OA group within a district) and the lodge (the OA group within the council) struggle to make their Brotherhood numbers (Brotherhood being the second level of OA membership) because after their Ordeal, many new inductees see the OA as being about doing hard, dirty jobs for someone else -- and they never come back.  The sash is just another doodad for the uniform, not a symbol of a commitment.

What I see as problematic is that the Order of the Arrow operates as a separate organization outside the troop (and, as of February 1, outside the Venturing Crew and Sea Scout ship).  For many youth, that is a great thing because it gives them activity and leadership opportunities in addition to those available in the troop.  I have seen many youth blossom through active participation in the OA who weren't getting much out of the troop.  But with the OA having no official role in the week-to-week life of the troop, and a mission that simply emphasizes two of the twelve points of the Scout Law (Helpful and Cheerful) -- the 'honor camper' attribute having been de-emphasized, as @desertrat77 mentioned -- it is difficult to show other Scouts how OA membership has value.

35 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

I'd also have the BSA then put the challenge out to local councils.  Have troops around the country develop and submit their own BSA advertisements that can be released on social media.  Get real Scouts selling the program to their peers.  

The biggest problem with BSA marketing is that neither National nor councils teach units how to market themselves effectively.  They produce lots of good marketing materials, and make that material available to units, but don't follow through by training units in the best way to use those materials.  Given that signing up new members is almost entirely in the hands of individual units and the volunteers and youth members of those units, this is a critical failure.  Scouting is competing against a wide variety of other activities available to young people, and needs every possible edge.  Yet BSA doesn't seem to understand how its own member acquisition process works.

30 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

Marketing, local recruiting, and program quality are the key things here. 

Scouting is structured so that new members individually join specific units.  National-level policies and program choices can’t do much to help a local unit sign up a new member, but they can hurt local recruiting by maintaining barriers to people with particular characteristics or views.  National may feel that local units have the best chance of showing off their programs and signing up new members if National policies and program choices are a non-factor — youth join a local unit because of its program.