OldGreyEagle 5 Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 I have tried to stay out of this one because until recently I wasnt sure I understood the question. I beleive a good leader must be a good follower. Everyone has a boss, in the military there is always someone who outranks you. Even the Pentagon's Chief of Staff has a boss, the president, who has roughly 260 million bosses. As adult scouters we train the boys to have charactor, citizenship and to improve their physical fitness. To be a good citizen one must at times follow and other times lead. Its with charactor development the scout learns when its a good time to lead and when its appropriate to follow. Learning to lead and follow are not mutually exclusive. A brand new scout is ready to learn how to lead and how to follow. You dont have to complete one before you start on the other. Much has been made of the military boot camp model, where the emphasis is on following, but even in this environment, each new group of recruits will have a squad leader, choosen from within the group. Seems like the military like to train leaders even as that leader is learning to follow. Link to post Share on other sites
evmori 11 Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 Actually what it seems like here is we have one Scouter who fails to see the point! We as Scouters follow the Oath & Law. We also follow the rules & regs of the BSA. We are followers. The Scouts in our units see that we follow the Oath & Law along with the rules & regs. If we as adult leaders don't follow the Law, Oath, rules & regs how can we expect the Scouts in our unit to follow them. We set the example. The Scouts follow our example. Ed Mori 1 Peter 4:10 Link to post Share on other sites
NJCubScouter 1389 Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 Bob, while I agree that one should not use an accepted meaning for a word as an excuse not to follow the program, the real issue is following the program, not what words one uses. Your first response in this thread was that the saying about leaders and followers was a cliche that was irrelevant to the program, and I agree with that, but you then challenged the cliche itself. The bottom line is that the program should be followed. In terms of the PL position in a New Scout Patrol, if one wants to be literal, it is really only an issue when the patrol is first formed. The first boy elected PL is the ONLY one in the patrol who will have been a "leader" without first being a "follower." (Note "follower" is in quotes, as a shorthand. Anyone who wants to substitute "non-leader" or "person who has not been a patrol leader" or whatever else, can do so without changing the meaning of what I have said.) Everyone else will have been a "follower" for at least one month. Even then, if the "first PL" was in the Cub Scouts, then by definition he was a "follower" because the leader was an adult. Also, the NSP PL (including the "first") has training wheels (if you will) attached to his leadership, primarily in the form of the Troop Guide and the NSP ASM. There is a progression in leadership roles, to a PL position without training wheels, to (sometimes) a staff position for the whole troop (ASPL or other), to SPL, where the boy is "working without a net." (Except of course, there is always a "net" if there needs to be.) So I don't think the cliche of "good leaders must be good followers" would be any reason to avoid using the NSP or any other parts of the BSA program. Link to post Share on other sites
OldGreyEagle 5 Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 Let me try this one more time, I think the following quote is what got this thread rolling, or at least is the reason for this whole argument, A poster wrote "...To be a good leader you must 1st learn to follow. If you can't follow or won't then you can't expect people to follow you..." What I think Bob White is saying, and of course Bob, I am only trying to help, tell me where I am wrong, is that leadership training doesnt have to wait until the scout is a good follower you can train a person to lead and follow at the same time, completion of "following school" is not a prerequisite for "leadership school" Link to post Share on other sites
SR540Beaver 116 Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 OGE, I don't disagree with what you said. However, (and this may be a shock to some) life does not begin when you become a Boy Scout. The boy has had 10 1/2 to 11 years of following leaders (hopefully 4 to 5 in Cub Scouts) and learning something of what a leader should be. Perhaps we need to find a more politically correct description to use other than "leader". Leader infers follower. Since there should be no "followers" in scouting, perhaps there should be no one called "leader" or "master". Even "guide" might be to strong for some folks. To be more accurately descriptive, perhaps we could use "non-gender specific registered adult" or "person who sets an example for peers to foll.....", well never mind that last one. Link to post Share on other sites
evmori 11 Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 OGE, I would concur. Ed Mori 1 Peter 4:10 Link to post Share on other sites
Bob White 20 Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 Thanks OGE sometimes it just takes a different voice to sing the same tune in order for some people to listen. Bob White Link to post Share on other sites
Zahnada 11 Posted November 19, 2003 Author Share Posted November 19, 2003 Bob, you wrote: ""Everyone seems to agree that the term "follower" has a negative connotation." I really didn't want to get back into this topic, but this is the kind of misleading stuff that drives me nuts. Show us any evidence as to the validity of that statement. I find few if any posters in this thread who have even hinted that "follower" is negative. So where do you come up with everyone? My own stand has been that it is neither positive or negative as a term, just that it is unrelated to whether or not a boy can be taught how to lead. Bob White" I was hoping the word "seems" would keep the statement from being too definitive. It should have conveyed that it was all my observation and opinion. I wrote "negative connotation." I didn't say that posters feel being a follower is negative. Many poster have in fact said that they feel there is a negative connotation to the word. Our society has often turned "follower" to mean things like spineless, or incapable of leading, or other negative traits. And so the word has a negative connotation in that it can create negative imagery. This was stated in the third post to this thread and I felt many posters agreed with it. Apparently you disagree. In which case I change the statement "Everybody seems" to read "Many people seem." Is this more agreeable to you? Link to post Share on other sites
Zahnada 11 Posted November 19, 2003 Author Share Posted November 19, 2003 I think the conflict in this thread is from two different interpretations of the original quote (and the confusion on whether the "original" quote comes from this thread or another thread). Some are arguing for and against the quote, "Before a person can become a leader, they must be a follower." Some are using the quote, "Being able to follow is a necessary part of leadership." Does this distinction make sense? Are my observations correct? Then the argument is becoming circular because two different things are being argued. It's like the gay topic (and NO! I'm not trying to send this thread in that direction) when some people argue about the moral reasons for the policy and others focus on the legal part of BSA's right to make that policy. The argument doesn't move forward because not everyone is starting from the same place. Link to post Share on other sites
NJCubScouter 1389 Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 It's like the gay topic (and NO! I'm not trying to send this thread in that direction) when some people argue about the moral reasons for the policy and others focus on the legal part of BSA's right to make that policy. Did someone say "Niagra Falls"? Slowly I turn... Just kidding. I'll restrain myself. Link to post Share on other sites
Bob White 20 Posted November 19, 2003 Share Posted November 19, 2003 No Zahnada. What I would be agreable to is if you stuck to the facts. Everyone did not seem.... Some did not seem..... ONE seemed. Out of 54 posts ONE person made a reference to followers in a negative vein that I could find. Armed with that ONE post you came up with EVERYONE. What I would agree to Zahnada is an attempt at an honest representation of the circumstances. I do not find evidence of that in your posts in this thread. Bob White Link to post Share on other sites
Eagledad 2784 Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 >>"Good leaders must first be good followers" (or some variation of the quote). What does this quote mean to you? Do you agree with it? How does it apply to scouting?> What does this quote mean to you?>? Do you agree with it?>? How does it apply to scouting? Link to post Share on other sites
Eagledad 2784 Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 >>Did someone say "Niagra Falls"? Slowly I turn... Link to post Share on other sites
Zahnada 11 Posted November 20, 2003 Author Share Posted November 20, 2003 Bob, I believe we have a misunderstanding. I'm saying that the word "followers" can have a "negative connotation" in our society. I'm not saying it is negative. I'm not saying that others think following is negative. I'm saying that it's unfortunate that when you say "follower" it can sometimes be seen as a negative trait. As for agreement, why on the first page of this thread there are three posters who say that the term "follower" can have negative connotations. "I think "follower" has a negative connotation. "Our modern society has exhaulted the word "leader" while applying a negative connotation to the word "follower."" "Follower has taken on poor connotation, no one seems to want to be a follower." When I posted the remark you are referring to, this seemed to be one somewhat consistent thoughts that people had on the subject. So I'll admit that the word "everybody" was ill placed because obviously you don't agree. However, it is more than one post or one person who feels that our society has attached a negative connotation to the word. I think you must have read something wrong because I never said (or meant to say) that following is negative. I actually don't know what you mean by, "What I would agree to Zahnada is an attempt at an honest representation of the circumstances. I do not find evidence of that in your posts in this thread." What do you mean by this? Does this help explain what I have said? Link to post Share on other sites
evmori 11 Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Barry, Great post to a great question! Bob, Since you never answered my question, I'll ask again - Do you have any examples of poor followers being good leaders? Ed Mori 1 Peter 4:10 Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now