Whose Troop is it?

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Well, this certainly didnt go the way I planned, but as I have said before the course of these threads are not unlike Forrest's Gump's feather, they drift to where they will. My intention for starting this thread was to repeat something I wrote about a year ago, here goes:

 

Every year when we get our new scouts, at one of their first meetings, I do a scoutmaster minute (or 2-3) on the meaning of the word stewardship. I ask who's troop is it, who owns it. I eventually get around to its the church's troop, the members of the troop are just stewards, taking care of the troop during our time there and its every member's reponsibility, adult or scout to leave the troop better than we found it. The boys run the troop, the adults provide support, but we only care for the troop, its not really ours. Then I compare that with humans being stewards of the planet, we dont own it, we just live here, same as the troop, we dont own it, we just hang out here. And we need to do what we can to make it better.

 

Now, do I flip out when I hear "my troop"? No, I am with Ed that taking ownership can be a good thing, But (and you had to know that was comming) taking ownership is fine as long as its realized that all members are a shareholder as well. Its fine for the SPL to think of it as "his troop" as long as he realizes that its the brand new just registered not even a "scout" 10.5 year old's troop as well, and that the new member may have some good ideas. A good leader will listen to all ideas, not just those that fit his idea of what "his troop" should look like.

 

 

[evmori 11]

OGE,

Thanks for clearing that up. Sorry I got carried away. I get that way sometimes.

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Its ok Ed, wanna know a secret? between just us two? sometimes I get carried away as well

[buffalo2 14]

As we once more are led away from the descending spiral...

I like the concept of "our" Troop - kinda like "our" Church

And I'm quite clear as to who owns it and who is responsible for it

Maybe I'm just simple though

[Bob White 20]

At least "our" shows a little more awareness of others than "my" does.

 

Bob White

[Rooster7 11]

I do not assume that "my troop" is anything but a simple reference. It's a lot simpler than "the troop that I am associated with" as FOG tried to point out earlier. The vast majority of folks that make such references are not self-centered. Theyre merely trying to tell a story that involves the troop that they are associated with. Inferring otherwise is a ploy to discredit that person and/or his point of view. That's how I see it...In fact, that's how I saw it months ago when this "debate tactic was first employed on this board. Its bad enough when folks accredit you with words that you never said, but now we have to contend with the thought police. I probably have said my wife ten thousand times, but those words were never meant to imply that I own her. Nor do I think that by saying those words, one day, I will come to believe that I do own her.

 

As to OGEs point (which does not appear to be the same one being argued here), I believe the CO owns the troop and has a legal right to run it as they please so long as they do not contradict the charter that they signed with the BSA. I believe the boys own the troop in the sense that they should have more input than anyone else as to how the program is implemented. I believe that the SM corps owns the troop in the sense that they have an interest (and probably the most expertise) in ensuring that the Scouts experience the program as it ought to be. I believe the troop committee owns the troop in that they have an obligation to provide the troop with what it needs. I believe the parents own the troop in the sense that they have a moral and legal obligation to ensure that their children are treated properly. In short, I dont really like the question. Everyone involved should feel some sense of ownership (as Ed pointed out). We should presume that most folks have good intentions until they prove otherwise.

 

[packsaddle 753]

Wow, Rooster, I agree with you. They need to be like us and lighten up a little. Let us be united in our 'ownership' by duty, loyalty, and a sense of responsibility toward one another.

[Bob White 20]

"You need to get a life Bob. If you actually searched through all those posts then you need to get out more. I was just remembering what you had posted."

 

Ed the comment you made was false and baseless. I took a few minutes to gather some facts. Had you done so first perhaps you would not have presented your statement as truth.

 

 

The difference I am trying to express is that of leader and participant. I see an adult WB patrol member as I see a youth patrol member. It is indeed their patrol if they belong to it. FOG or you can say "my wife" unless she is married to someone else as well that would seem to be an accurate statement right?

 

But an adult leader is not the sole owner of the troop, and to say so on a regular basis really does affect how you view your relationship to the unit. Saying that you get to serve as Scoutmaster of Troop 215 will give a person an entirely different view of thier role. When you say "My troop" often enough you act as if you are "the boss". The Scoutmasters who say say "if you don't like the way I do it find someone else" see it as "my troop". The leaders who set their own rules rather than follow the scouting methods see it as "my troop". The SM who takes offense to scouts who are absent due to school, family, or sports conflicts see it as "My troop". The SM who "tells" the committee what to do sees it as "My Troop". When you say "my troop" you behave like it's "My Troop".

 

The SM and other adults are not there to be troop members but to develop the troop members. You are there to serve the needs of the boys not to be one, or to own their program. A boy is a leader in the troop. The adults are leaders of a troop. There is a big difference. Attitudes affect actions. No one has said you have to change what you say. I am saying that what you say can change how you lead.

 

What harm can exchanging an attitude of ownership with an attitude of service do to the program?

 

Bob White

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[NJCubScouter 1389]

I think I see the problem here. It is a question of logical reasoning. Bob says:

 

When you say "My troop" often enough you act as if you are "the boss". The Scoutmasters who say say "if you don't like the way I do it find someone else" see it as "my troop". The leaders who set their own rules rather than follow the scouting methods see it as "my troop". The SM who takes offense to scouts who are absent due to school, family, or sports conflicts see it as "My troop". The SM who "tells" the committee what to do sees it as "My Troop". When you say "my troop" you behave like it's "My Troop".

 

There are 6 sentences here. Sentences 2, 3, 4 and 5 are in the form, "If you say (or do) this, then you must believe that." (The belief being that "they" "see it" as "my troop.") These 4 sentences make perfect sense. The statements or actions in the first part of the sentence flow logically and inevitably from the second part. I am sure they are true at least 99 percent of the time.

 

However, these sentences are not what this thread is about (or what it has come to be about.) This thread is about sentences 1 and 6 above. They are in the form, "If you say this, you act (or behave) like that." These statements are not necessarily true. They are probably true sometimes and untrue other times. The second part of the sentence does not flow logically or inevitably from the first.

 

That is how discussions on here go off track so easily and quickly.

[Bob White 20]

NJ, according to the orginator of the thread, the purpose was "I was just looking for reactions to the "my" troop mentality and if it is good or bad or what.

 

I think we have stayed on topic according to that explanation. I think it's bad because the terms you use create the mindset that affects your behavior.

 

Bob White(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[Laurie 10]

If I refer to an organization as mine, I am saying that I identify with that particular group of people, that I will do all I can to serve same group, and that I have great pride in the participants in the group. So, my mindset when saying "my troop" is very much a postive thing, for as an adult leader I have no desire to tell anyone what to do, but I very much hope to fit into the program in whatever way I can best serve so that I see the boys learn and grow. I have no desire to make their choices for them, to hand them the program, to take charge--but I will do all within my power to protect them, their reputations, their self esteem (and hopefully won't need to do that). That is what saying "my troop" means coming from me. Yes, I have a sense of ownership in it, but it comes as a team player among the adults who work together to make sure the boys have the freedom along with any needed guidance to create new and exciting opportunities for themselves and their troop. I just don't see that as bad, though reading how others view "my troop" does show how that can sound bad. Could it be a mere matter of perception--an area where personality will dictate word usage rather words dictating actions?

 

p.s. Sorry for the edit and for mixed up wording; I type fast, think faster, and talk even faster still unless I remind myself to slow my tongue down (This message has been edited by Laurie)

[OldGreyEagle 5]

A little insight on the my people etc thing. I used to be the manager of a fairly large Radiology Dept. The head Radiologist (X-Ray Doctor) and I were often at odds over personnel matters. He thought of it as HIS department and HIS employees. When the hospital installed its first MRI Scanner, the Doc and I went over all the employees who had expressed interest in running the scanner. The person I thought would be best for the lead position was Jim. The Doc was adamant that it couldnt be Jim, Jim was the best CT tech we had, and did everything so wonderfully that the Doc didnt want to see Jim get transferred. It didnt matter that the new position was a promotion, meant better pay, better hours, the Doc saw the department as HIS and didnt want Jim to leave his position because it was bad for the department. It didnt matter Jim was always at work on time, always cheerful, always willing to help things out. In fact, thats why the Doc didnt want him to be transferred. He couldnt conceive we could train another Jim from the employees we had, or that Jim had earned this promotion, it didnt fit in with how he saw HIS department operating.

 

The same often happened with the reception employees, a predominantly female group. He saw them as his girls. We had several entry level reception and file clerk positions. It was not at all unusual for us to hire an employee and after the 6 month probation was over that employee would transfer to another department in a better position. This was after establishing a good on time record, able to follow directions, etc. The Doc was livid the hospital was raiding his employees. It didnt matter the employees were bettering themselves, he wanted them to stay put in his department. Personally I saw it as a compliment to the department that we developed people other departments wanted.

I tried to upgrade the positions a few times but was told no by the hospital management, they were entry level positions and that was the breaks. It got to the point if we had an employee for 2 years, we tried to figure out what was wrong so they could move up.

 

Now this is an extreme example, but it all came about from the Doc thinking it was HIS department.

 

I can see that its OK for a senior patrol leader to think of it as HIS troop, as long as he realizes its as much his troop as it is the just signed up not even at scout level 11 year olds troop. Its as much the older scouts in the Venture patrol troop as it is every scout in the New Scout Patrol. The danger of say MY troop is that SOME people (Not all I agree) tend to forget other people are involved when they think of MINE and MY. I think thats all this is about. If you can say my and mine etc and never forget that every one is a shareholder, its fine, but sometimes the mine and my sticks.

 

I hope I explained my position so you understand what I mean, I dont expect everyone to agree and I respect that.

 

[evmori 11]

"You need to get a life Bob. If you actually searched through all those posts then you need to get out more. I was just remembering what you had posted."

 

"Ed the comment you made was false and baseless."

 

What did I say that was false & baseless?

 

My Woodbadge troop? My course director? My son's troop? These are all statements you have made! Do you own your Woodbadge troop? Do you own you course director? Do you own your son's troop? I don't think so & I don't think anyone thought you did! It's sort of like saying my house knowing full well you still pay the bank each month & until it is paid off it is the bank's house.

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

 

 

[Bob White 20]

Ed, after reading your last post I have a far better understanding of what causes our differences. I will no longer challenge the things you post. I will ask the same courtesy of you.

 

Bob White

[keschmahalen 10]

FOG,

 

Sorry, I was wrong, my is not a pronoun. You were right. And I thought I was being careful about my wording! The wording should have been MINE. YIS, paul e. conley