Leadership Development, Adult Association, and Responsibility

[John-in-KC 311]

I was a youth program member 1968 to 1974 or so. 11 to college. Back then, I remember learning a lot of skills, but JLT? No. Brownsea? No. It was all about the outdoors. I was a PL to get to Star, an instructor and Scribe to get to Life, and SPL at some point after Life.

 

Now, it''s still about the outdoors, but we''ve been pushing more training on adults, and more formalization of methods and implementations on the youth. We have lots of folks saying Scout Run now... we want to emphasize the Patrol Method, we talk lots of leadership development and adult association.

 

Over the years, beyond Scouting, leadership pscyh has appeared in my army schools time and again. I got it in ROTC, again before I went to my first assignment, and regularly thereafter. It was also part of training in my units, both on active duty and after I reverted reserve.

 

Without regard to BSA current policy, I think our job is raise up young men, using "the game with a purpose." I want them to make good judgment calls, to get things done, to learn that teamwork pays off. I want them to learn to enjoy the outdoors... the computer will always still "be there."

 

From my experience, maybe 10 per cent of all the youth we touch will be self-starters on Scouting tasks inside PORs. They''ll already have a fundamental interest. Most, perhaps 70%, will learn quickly (Quadrant 1 (High Direction, Low Support) of the leadership quadrant model) and finish their terms in Quadrant 2 (High Direction, Low Support). Another 15% will never get out of Quadrant 1. They''ll get it done, but the SPL, ASPL, or adults will have to nag them throughout their tenure.

 

The last 5% are the tough cases. They cannot or will not perform. They will occupy an inordinate amount of leader time. Some we will get through, by sheer brute energy, but the last two per cent or so are the ones who just may fail, no matter what we do.

 

We''re never going to have perfection. The Models are there for a reason, they are exemplars to us, so we can help the youth. I''ve been fortunate along the trail, a couple of youth who I thought were in the 80-95 range got into the 10-80 range, and there was more encouragement. I''ve told, in the thread I spun this off, of the one young man we had to send home. That was a sadness... it was his last time in Scouting. He has since been in Juvenile Hall and recently encountered the adult courts.

 

We''re here to make a difference, and each of us has to decide for himself how to make best use of the 3 aims and the 8 methods. I''ve learned, the hard way, that at the unit level, we constantly have to balance the Methods to get the most out of each young man.

 

YIS

[Eamonn 61]

John,

We are about the same age!!

I was a youth member back in the UK about a year or so before you.

While things are(or were at that time?) different over there.

Especially when it came to what was needed for advancement.

 

For my sins I was a PL and later a SPL.

Maybe the passing of time has clouded my memory? But for the life of me I can''t remember any sort of "Formal Leadership" Training''s.

Being a PL had a lot to do with caring for the other members of your Patrol. I''m almost sure that the term "Servant Leadership" had never been thought of at that time.

As a PLC, we the PL''s came up with ideas and activities that we wanted to do. The main focus being that the activities were fun.

The adult leaders had along the way helped us acquire skills that opened more and more doors and gave us opportunities to use the skills, practice the skills and teach others the skills.

Leadership had more to do with leading your Patrol build a great pioneering project than knowing what Ken Blanchard had to say about it!! (I have read most of what Ken Blanchard has written and learned a lot from it.)

Our Summer Camp was a Troop activity that lasted two weeks. I never seen or heard of any Scout being homesick or wanting to leave camp. Looking back I think this was in part due to the fact that most times the PL was acting like a big brother.

When I became a Scoutmaster (Still across the pond) I used the PLC meetings to train the PL''s. Not in "Leadership" but in activities that they in turn would pass on to their Patrols. If a PL had something he wanted to do (Sometimes the ideas even did come from the Patrol members -But not very often!! Representing the group was never a strong point!) I seen my role as helping him, help himself to get the job done.

All of our Patrols held Patrol Camps. I''d look in unannounced every now and then to see if everything was OK. Or if they were a long way from home the local District Commissioner would pay a visit and report back to me.

Did it always work?

Of course not!! Sometimes it would take me months to find out what "Really happened" (Yes we had the Patrol that went away for five days and lived on Fish and Chips!!) Of course they knew that in time I''d find out what went on.

But I know deep down they really enjoyed the trust I placed in them. They knew what they could "Get away with" and not to cross the line.

We used reflections a lot. Not to place blame or pat people on the back, but as a tool to see what had worked and what hadn''t and more importantly why? (This does away with the nagging!!)

Every Scout who became a PL was different.

We had the quiet guys who never made a move without thinking about it.

The loud rush ahead at full speed guys.

The PL''s who tried to rule by force.

The PL''s who ruled by committee and the list goes on.

My role was to see what was happening and deal with each PL as an individual (Not an easy task when we had 14 Patrols!) while he learned a lot from at times failing. My goal was for him to succeed.

My greatest joy was seeing a Lad who was a poor PL become better.

I have to admit that at times I think we spent way too much time on this formal leadership training and not enough time passing on skills which the PL''s can pass on to the other Scouts, which can along the way introduce the younger Scouts to the fun, adventure and challenges which Scouting does offer.

Standing a distance away and watching Mr. Patrol Leader have his Patrol get ready for the night. Having the water ready, the wood collected and covered, making sure the site is in ship shape order and then having the entire Patrol sit around the the campfire with mugs of hot chocolate, tells me more about leadership than any course.

Yes I''m proud when it happens and yes there is a certain amount of "That''s My Boy" involved.

The best part is knowing that he did it because it was the right thing to do. - Not to please me or for my approval. Sure I played a part in all of this somewhere back along the line and I''ll gladly accept that responsibility.

Eamonn.

 

[LongHaul 10]

John-in-KC, I was a youth member from 1960 Thur 1967 and our troop was entirely Boy Run. We had adult support but the boys ran the meetings,taught the skills, and the SPL evaluated youth leaders. If someone was not doing their job the SM (my father so I know) was asked to formally remove that boy from office. Yes before the SPL got to that point efforts were made by the SPL to have some youth member help the problem scout and yes on occasion an adult was asked to 1 to 1 mentor the scout but that was a decision made by the SPL not the adult leadership. Back then the average scout looked differently at scouting and the POR. Back then the POR requirement read "Serve to the satisfaction of your Scoutmaster in one or more of the following positions of responsibility" so we didn''t have the time in grade problem. If being removed from office is the difference between a scout staying or leaving a lack of responsibilty is not the problem.

Reaching out to youth is the adult members number one responsibility. Helping them make ethical decisions and accept responsibility. Getting them to develop a moral code and values worthy of passing down to others. But empowering them to make these decisions and helping them to realize their plans is what the job calls for up front. The original post was about a group of youth leaders that wanted to implement a system of quality control and the initial responses were to suggest methods for the adults to resist those efforts by the youth and deal with the situation from an adult level.

 I remained active after turning 18 and when I turned 22 was asked to take over a troop whose SM had suffered a heart attack, so the COR could find a suitable replacement. My biggest job was to stay out of the way and allow the Senior Patrol to run their troop as they had been doing and not try and turn them into my old troop. They did things very different but after a few months I realized they did the same things we had and got them done just differently. What I saw also is that both sets of Youth Leaders got them done without Adult interference but with adult support. In soccer we teach support from the rear, works well in Scouting too.

 LongHaul

[John-in-KC 311]

LH,

 

Some ideas are fantastic... need no comment from the leader, and run.

 

Some ideas are good ... the leader stays quiet, but he sees where the tweaks can be.

 

Some ideas are not good ... the leader has to decide if there is merit in allowing failure and then drawing the lessons.

 

Some ideas are out and out toxic and deserve a quick death. Formal evals of youth leaders by folks not well trained in how to evaluate people is a toxic idea, from all my professional experience. The risk of inappropriate failure outweighs any possible benefit.

 

 

[LongHaul 10]

Just wondering here if this extends to advancement. Does your unit allow youth to sign off on requirements or is all testing/evaluating done by adults?

Also how do you reconcile the idea that the youth are supposed to be competent enough to elect a person to office, or in the case of some offices appoint this person with the advice and consent of the SM, but not competent enough to admit they made a mistake and remove that person from office?

LongHaul