Fixing Commissioner Service

[Eamonn 61]

Many of us have great stories that we can tell and re-tell about Commissioners.

Some of us have been around the brightest and best, while others might not have been so lucky.

A few might think that a Commissioner is a rare bird only found on the BSA web site.

Looking at:

http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/14-975_08_FallWinter.pdf

 

I see that we have 24,195 Unit Commissioners.

We should have 39,251

Meaning that we need 15,056.

 

A shortage of over 15,000 seems like a lot to me.

 

I know in the area where I serve Commissioners are not easy to recruit and the ones we have seem to spend a lot of time doing tasks that maybe don't fall within the job description, that I'd think a Unit Commissioner should be following.

 

My question is how do we fix this?

 

As I look at the options, I come up with:

1/ Do nothing and accept that this is just the way it is.

2/ Change some of the rules that prevent Unit Scouter' serving as Commissioners.

3/ Rethink the idea of Commissioner Service and maybe think what the most important tasks are with the idea of having different groups cover these tasks. For example pass rechartering on to the Membership Committee and so on.

 

Eamonn.

[scoutldr 726]

After almost 40 years of wearing the uniform, I'm still not sure what a UC is supposed to do. They keep claiming that "we are not spies for the Council". So then they show up with a clipboard and a checklist that they then file with the Council. (DUH...we're not stupid). Any time someone says "I'm from Council and I'm here to help you", I hold on to my wallet and run.

 

No, seriously...I do understand what a UC should do...just never met one who did it. But the above is a WIDELY held perception. And perceptions are reality. When the District Advancement Chair reports to the District Committee..."troop XX has not filed an advancement report in 2 years"...there should be a UC at the next troop committee meeting. And the UC assigned should have enough experience with running units that they can diagnose problems and recommend solutions.

[rkfrance 11]

My 2 cents.

 

I think it would be much easier to recruit spies. Too young, too old, too pushy, too quiet, too nosey, too much information, not enough. Who do you recruit to be a commissioner? What experience should they have? Do you go for the wise old owl that can't get around, but when he does, he sits in the corner chatting with Mr X about the way things used to be? Or do you go for the young buck that was a den leader for a year but really didn't enjoy that, but if you ask right, he'll run out in front of a moving car for you (once)?

 

Commissioners have NO authority within the unit. They can recommend, coach, and advise, but unless the receiver is open to the suggestions, the information given is pointless. How long do you continue to offer help when no one wants it? Wait. When there's a problem, who should be the first step (going up or down the ladder)? The commissioners. Too often the commissioners get grilled, side-stepped, stepped on, and ignored. Lot's of gratitude.

 

Commissioners should have a good relationship with the leaders AND the chartered organization. Most effective commissioners have an influence with the leaders. How many EVER meet with the CO or COR? Well, who's responsibility is it? The DE's? Council's? The commissioner's the one that could or should be but do they? And again, if they do offer advice or bring an issue to the CO's attention, how many CO's care or will respond? We come back to the issue that CO's have the responsibility and authority to handle ALL unit issues. Too many across the country are apathetic to their responsibility, and waaaayyyy too many have no idea they have that responsibility.

 

So the commissioner takes the info to the ADC, DC and/or DE. They get advice and maybe some help to try to fix the situation, but the responsibility lies with the CO. Back to step one.

 

The reality is not what a commissioner should do, but what can they really do? Can they make a difference?

 

When you figure that out, maybe we will be able to recruit more commissioners.

[Eamonn 61]

The BSA has or seems to have put a lot of time and effort into resources as to what Commissioner Service should be.

I think the fact that there are so few U/C out there doing what they are supposed to be doing has given them a bad rap.

 

IMHO The "Spy" thing is a thing of the past! Most volunteers know that unless the CO gets a bug up his or her nose, they can continue doing what ever it is they have been doing (Good or bad) No matter what the guys from the Council or District say. Till they decide to quit or go visit that Great Scoutmaster.

 

The basic idea of having a friendly outsider who can help is a good idea.

With the lack of people providing this service, we are losing units, losing youth members and placing a bigger burden on the professional staff. This leads to a bigger turn-over in professional staff and a professional staff who really don't have very much experience.

Surely if the District Advancement Chair gets a report that shows little or no advancement in a unit, he or she should be capable of visiting or sending a member of the Advancement Committee to visit and have a word.

Scout-Net can kick out all sorts of reports and Districts know without sending in a U/C what is happening.

Scout-Net can't kick out a report that informs anyone that the SM and the CC are at each others throats and without some sort of friendly advise someone is going to quit.

Ea.

[Twocubdad 665]

Unfortunately, Ea, the current commissioner model doesn't really build that friendly outsider relationship either. Commissioners are supposed to visit a unit, what, a couple times a year? On that basis, how will the UC know if the CC and SM are at each other's throats?

 

I've always thought that the "arm's length" approach unit commissioners take to with their units is over done. For the majority of units in good shape, having a permanently assigned UC is a wasted resource. Many struggling units need more than advice. I would prefer to see commissioner SWAT teams trained to go into struggling units, roll up their sleeves and help run the unit. After a certain period of time, the units need to either stand on their own or be taken off life support.

[Eamonn 61]

"I would prefer to see commissioner SWAT teams trained to go into struggling units, roll up their sleeves and help run the unit. After a certain period of time, the units need to either stand on their own or be taken off life support"

I have tried this in the past and so far it has never worked.

Of course that doesn't mean it will never work.

 

The problem with leaving successful units alone is that no one is around when they stop being successful!

The Pack I was CM for isn't there any more.

During my term we had about 70 Cub Scouts, the next 3 CM's did a great job until number 3 split with her husband and everything fell apart.

I will take some of the blame as I was then District Chairman. I seen a great group of kids, Den Leaders and a good program. I failed to notice that the Pack Committee wasn't meeting and was in fact just names on paper.

 

Identifying the problem is easy.

We just don't have enough man power.

I just don't know what can be done to improve things?

Sure, saying "Recruit more Commissioners is easy to say.

But the numbers prove this isn't happening.

Shame is that in the District I serve we do have units that seem to have an over abundance of experienced, trained adults. But for one reason or another these people are unwilling to serve anywhere but in the unit which they serve.

We also have a fair number of younger guys who are on the edge.

I think given a push they might be willing to help, but I can hear some of the units complain that they are still wet behind the ears!!

Ea.

[scoutldr 726]

A few years ago, our District tried to convince some of our units that they really didn't need more ASM's than they had boys, and maybe some of them could become Unit Commissioners. That wasn't successful, either.

[DenZero 10]

Here are my thoughts on how we might maximize benefit from limited commissioner resources.

 

Given that there are not enough commissioners to assign commissioners to all units, and that commissioners may already have too many units assigned, or be suffering from scouting burnout; we need to assign commissioners temporarily where they are needed and capable of helping.

 

I am proposing that councils have units submit a unit health questionnaire at least a couple times a year; at least in autumn and spring. This questionnaire would ask about things like leader training, communication, planning, advancement, recruiting, leaders serving multiple positions, functioning committee, meeting and outing frequency, etc. These could be scored to identify units that have problems that can be fixed.

 

Once savable units are identified, unit commissioners could be assigned.

 

Three years ago, the pack that I am currently trying to run looked to the district like it was doing well. It had grown substantially for three years in a row, and participated strongly in popcorn sales. It had earned a strong reputation in the past, with more than 50 years of tenure. Digging deeper would have revealed that the Cubmaster was doing the committee chairs job as well, there was no pack committee, only a couple leaders had any training, and some were not even registered. Parents were frustrated by lack of planning and poor communications. The Cubmaster was not able to delegate, and was in burnout.

 

In this case, while there were still enough families in the pack, a commissioner could have stepped in and recruited parents to form a functioning pack committee. Small improvements could have been made to the program, and with a good looking program, new cubs and parents could have been recruited.

 

In our case, the district exec. didnt notice until the pack was late with recharter the following year. By that time, too many people had left, and since then, we have not been able to recover. We will likely fold this year.

 

With early detection and intervention, units like ours could have been saved.

 

 

[dawnydiesel 10]

am proposing that councils have units submit a unit health questionnaire at least a couple times a year; at least in autumn and spring. This questionnaire would ask about things like leader training, communication, planning, advancement, recruiting, leaders serving multiple positions, functioning committee, meeting and outing frequency, etc. These could be scored to identify units that have problems that can be fixed.

 

There IS a form like that specifically for Unit Commissioners. I use it everytime I do a pack meeting visit. I believe it's called Unit Commissioner Worksheet (pack). There's one for each unit type.

 

Once savable units are identified, unit commissioners could be assigned.

 

Who determines which units are salvageable? What are the determining factors? That seems too subjective for me.

 

One of the biggest problems I run into as UC, is that we're not really wanted. That is, until we're needed. The assumption that the UC is a "spy" and trying to push their weight around is one I run up against with practically every unit I service. I have but one pack that genuinely appreciates what I have the ability to do for them and welcomes me.

 

[Eamonn 61]

dawnydiesel,

I kinda think many of us who have served as Commissioners have at one time or another ran into the "Spy" thing.

It's kinda hard if you really are the "Eyes and ears" of the District? Not to be seen as a spy.

 

The Commissioner Worksheet isn't a bad tool.

But it only works if there are Commissioners around to visit the units.

My point is that we just don't have them.

 

 

Maybe? The reason why we don't have the staff we need is because people don't want to be known as spies?

Our Council Commissioner is a super nice guy.

I did at one time ruffle his feathers a little, when I wrote an article for our Council Newspaper and refereed to my Commissioner Staff (I was then a District Commissioner) as being "Warm and Cuddly". He seen this as going a little too far! I thought and still think that Commissioners should be warm and cuddly types.

We need to push the idea of being the Friend to the unit and put everything else on the back burner.

Just recently in this forum someone mentioned that a Commissioner was able to shut /close a unit down.

Thinking like this really hurts and harms the image of Commissioner service. -I'll stick with warm and cuddly.

Ea.

 

[deanr 10]

When I became a unit commissioner the pack that I'm assigned to had some leaders who asked "What's a unit commissioner?" I tried my best (pun intended) to make a positive impression on the pack. So far, I've been invited to every leader's meeting and pack meeting. I've even gone on hikes, helped with Pinewood Derby, attended Blue & Gold (even gave the opening benediction), and attended a bowling night. If I notice a problem, such as holding off on rank to wait for a major event, I'm not afraid to speak up. I don't attack the unit but I do offer a suggestion.

 

I know of some people who wanted to help a unit but were treated as a cast-off or worse, before they even got to know the unit. No wonder some areas have a hard time recruiting. If you follow the national guideline to attend a unit meeting and leave after 15 minutes, what does that say about you? You are doing nothing more than taking mental notes and leaving when you've had your fill. I prefer the method recommended by a local district commissioner and stay for the whole meeting that you are invited to unless you are asked to leave so they may have a private conversation.

 

Some people think that I do too much for the unit. I feel better about what I do when I am treated as a friend of the unit and not someone who only makes enough contact to make the district commissioner happy. I feel that the BSA is wrong about the 15-minute policy.

 

One way to fix the problem... let the unit commissioner be a value-added component of the unit.

 

Dean Roberts

[jr56 92]

That would be nice. I have yet to meet a unit that really wants to have a unit commissioner. My last unit would invite me to a meeting, change the time and place of the meeting, and then forget to inform me. So I would show up, and be the only one there.

 

[AvidSM 11]

I heard our Council Commissioner say that National will be shifting it's policy of one UC for every three units. That the new policy will require so many visits to each unit in a year and that I doesn't matter how many UC's it takes to do this. I think that National finally got sick and tired of pushing for UC recruitment when it just was not happening. The goal was too high and was not realistic.

 

There is a policy that UC's should not also be unit leaders, but that one is not strictly followed in my Council. I have several UC's on my staff who are also either a SA, CC or even a CM, they just can't serve as a UC from their own unit.

 

If a UC is doing their job right, there is really no reason to rethink it. A UC's focus is to be a friend to a unit and help it succeed. For units with rouge leaders, a UC could be seen as a spy, but there is nothing that can be done about that.

[Eamonn 61]

One slight problem I can see with having Unit Leaders serve as U/C's is maybe when the Commissioner for the unit makes a report about the unit at the Commissioners Meeting.

For example I don't believe in forced advancement, that is to say I'm happy as long as the Scout is happy for him to advance as and when he wants.

Mr Unit Commissioner might report to the meeting that the unit I serve is not advancing. This might be true.

Of course I don't really care, but if I did?

Maybe if I was attending the meeting I'd get upset.

Not a good thing.

 

Ea.

[HICO_Eagle 93]

My current unit has an excellent relationship with its unit commissioner but I've always been a little unclear on the benefit to the unit. In times and units past, I never ever saw a unit commissioner, this guy shows up 4-6 times a year (sometimes more) but I'm not really sure what he DOES.

 

Having those materials online is a huge help so I can look and figure out what he's supposed to do and try to use him most effectively.