The PLC Has Decided: Mixed Aged Patrols in May

[Eagle94-A1 2687]

That's an issue when scouts are TG/PLs for younger guys. One of the job responsibilities of the SM is to train youth leaders. That may be directly though coaching, it may be indirect through Troop Instructors, SPL's or NYLT. 

 

One of the challenges with this troop is that we are growing our own leaders.  Troop is approx. 5 years old now. Out of the initial group that restarted the troop, only 1 scout remains, the IH's son. The rest have quit, transferred, or moved.

 

IMHO, This is why one is to teach leadership instead of management.  Pure and simple.  Teaching the boys that bossing people around is not taking care of them and sooner or later that whole process is going to come back and make life miserable.  Obviously one can see this happening in this situation. 

 

If this is the "leadership" that's being taught in the troop, the problems one is identifying simply aren't going to go away anytime soon regardless of how mix and match the adults and/or boys scramble the patrol memberships.

 

The really sad part of this whole process is that the BOYS are blamed for poor adult leadership instruction.  All these discipline problems, these attendance problems, these whatever problems are most often the result of poor adult leadership.  The adults aren't taking care of their boys nor are they teaching the boys to take care of other people at all times, instead they are teaching them only to take care of jobs and solve the problems that they have created for themselves because of poor leadership training.

 

Mea Culpa on this one. Not so much the bossing around, but teaching the "management" instead of true, servant leadership.  Although I've been doing my best to model servant leadership. And yes, ILST is mostly management and not leadership.

 

Good news on that front is that the issues with ILST,  has been recognized, and a plan is being developed to improve youth training. One of our committee members is a retired Army SNCO, who has experience training NCOs in leadership. Once he's finished with the SM Specific course he will be doing next week, he will take some time off of district training duties, and come up with a way to combine the ILST syllabus with the servant leadership info he used at the NCO academy. He did something like this  previously in addition to the ILST stuff we did.

[Stosh 3452]

One of the challenges with this troop is that we are growing our own leaders.  Troop is approx. 5 years old now. Out of the initial group that restarted the troop, only 1 scout remains, the IH's son. The rest have quit, transferred, or moved.

 

 

Mea Culpa on this one. Not so much the bossing around, but teaching the "management" instead of true, servant leadership.  Although I've been doing my best to model servant leadership. And yes, ILST is mostly management and not leadership.

 

Good news on that front is that the issues with ILST,  has been recognized, and a plan is being developed to improve youth training. One of our committee members is a retired Army SNCO, who has experience training NCOs in leadership. Once he's finished with the SM Specific course he will be doing next week, he will take some time off of district training duties, and come up with a way to combine the ILST syllabus with the servant leadership info he used at the NCO academy. He did something like this  previously in addition to the ILST stuff we did.

 

With all the military talk about "getting the mission" done, every officer knows that taking care of his people is vital in successfully doing that.  Which comes first?  The mission priority or the care of the soldiers?  If one were to seriously consider that, without the people the mission is doomed.  People come first!  #1 Rule of Servant Leadership.  The Army Manual on officer training I read did use the term servant leadership in the book.

[Sentinel947 1205]

One of the challenges with this troop is that we are growing our own leaders.  Troop is approx. 5 years old now. Out of the initial group that restarted the troop, only 1 scout remains, the IH's son. The rest have quit, transferred, or moved.

 

 

Mea Culpa on this one. Not so much the bossing around, but teaching the "management" instead of true, servant leadership.  Although I've been doing my best to model servant leadership. And yes, ILST is mostly management and not leadership.

 

Good news on that front is that the issues with ILST,  has been recognized, and a plan is being developed to improve youth training. One of our committee members is a retired Army SNCO, who has experience training NCOs in leadership. Once he's finished with the SM Specific course he will be doing next week, he will take some time off of district training duties, and come up with a way to combine the ILST syllabus with the servant leadership info he used at the NCO academy. He did something like this  previously in addition to the ILST stuff we did.

I don't agree with the prevailing view that management is a derogatory term. The world needs competent managers, and even more, managers who also lead with people at the center of what they do. 

 

A definition of management is: "Management includes planning, organizing, staffing, leading or directing, and controlling an organization to accomplish the goal or target." It's about processes and structure. Goals

 

Leadership is about people. 

 

It doesn't automatically mean one cannot be a leader, or cannot be a servant leader just because they are a manager in some or many aspects.

 

IMO, Training my youth leadership to be effective managers and good leaders is a goal of mine in this program, even if it's not explicitly stated in the Mission or the Aims. If a Scout wants to be a effective patrol leader, they need to pick up on some basic principles of management and leadership. Some people learn these lessons intuitively in life, and most don't. 

 

TL:DR One can be a good manager and a leader. One can be a servant leader and still be a manager. If we continue to define management as a cutthroat results at all costs attitude, then that's all it will ever be. 

 

Not attempting to be a contrarian, and I know it's not popular to defend management. I guess it's what happens when you work in HR.   

 

Edited April 4, 2016 by Sentinel947

[TAHAWK 1420]

Be careful and be on the lookout.  If you have shy scouts, those who have trouble making friends, every time you mix up the patrols and don't let him hang out with the one friend he has, you risk losing him.

 

 

[Stosh 3452]

I don't agree with the prevailing view that management is a derogatory term. The world needs competent managers, and even more, managers who also lead with people at the center of what they do. 

 

A definition of management is: "Management includes planning, organizing, staffing, leading or directing, and controlling an organization to accomplish the goal or target." It's about processes and structure. Goals

 

Leadership is about people. 

 

It doesn't automatically mean one cannot be a leader, or cannot be a servant leader just because they are a manager in some or many aspects.

 

IMO, Training my youth leadership to be effective managers and good leaders is a goal of mine in this program, even if it's not explicitly stated in the Mission or the Aims. If a Scout wants to be a effective patrol leader, they need to pick up on some basic principles of management and leadership. Some people learn these lessons intuitively in life, and most don't. 

 

TL:DR One can be a good manager and a leader. One can be a servant leader and still be a manager. If we continue to define management as a cutthroat results at all costs attitude, then that's all it will ever be. 

 

Not attempting to be a contrarian, and I know it's not popular to defend management. I guess it's what happens when you work in HR.   

 

 

I've never tried to demonize management, but I don't put it in a category of where it can totally operate in a vacuum.  Unless one is managing a task that doesn't require assistance from other people, there has to be a strong leadership component or one will end up doing it by themselves anyway.

 

A good manager needs to be a better leader than they are a manager.

 

If all one is doing is teaching management skills, organizing, prioritizing, persuasion, Theory X and Y, etc. then they might get the job done and people kept their jobs.   But if one wants those people to be around for the next project, they had better figure out what people skills are needed or the people won't be there when they are needed.

 

Teaching management skills is far easier than teaching leadership, so leadership gets doled out to a secondary role in the whole process.

[Sentinel947 1205]

I've never tried to demonize management, but I don't put it in a category of where it can totally operate in a vacuum.  Unless one is managing a task that doesn't require assistance from other people, there has to be a strong leadership component or one will end up doing it by themselves anyway.

 

A good manager needs to be a better leader than they are a manager.

 

If all one is doing is teaching management skills, organizing, prioritizing, persuasion, Theory X and Y, etc. then they might get the job done and people kept their jobs.   But if one wants those people to be around for the next project, they had better figure out what people skills are needed or the people won't be there when they are needed.

 

Teaching management skills is far easier than teaching leadership, so leadership gets doled out to a secondary role in the whole process.

In that we agree. We do a disservice to our scouts if we teach them to manage processes and call it leadership. 

 

Both management skills and leadership is important for our Scouts to learn in their POR's and Patrols. 

[Eagle94-A1 2687]

Regarding Management vs Leadership, I'm going to quote Juan Sánchez Villa-Lobos Ramirez, "B-A-L-A-N-C-E balance."

[Stosh 3452]

Regarding Management vs Leadership, I'm going to quote Juan Sánchez Villa-Lobos Ramirez, "B-A-L-A-N-C-E balance."

 

I'm not so sure I would go so far as to balance them out as equals.  I know a lot of people who are terrible about organization, know very little about problem solving, yet have a knack of knowing who to talk to and who to seek help from to somehow miraculously "get the job done."  Terrible task managers, but fantastic people person leaders. 

 

Good leaders that lack management skills can always find good people to fill in their management shortcomings.

 

Good managers that lack leadership skills generally end up doing it themselves, "because if ya wanta have it done right, yas do it yaselves!"  (aka "Ya just trust 'em to do it right the first time")

[TAHAWK 1420]

Regarding Management vs Leadership, I'm going to quote Juan Sánchez Villa-Lobos Ramirez, "B-A-L-A-N-C-E balance."

I thought it was "There can be only one."

[Eagle94-A1 2687]

A good leader does need to have some management skills in order to get things done. Part of that is using your resources, i.e. those Scouts in our case who are better at planning to do so. You can have a great leader, but if he is unorganized, waits to the last minute, has poor time mangement skills, etc, eventually frustration will ensue with the group.

 

And a good manager knows they have to take care of his team in order to get the job done.  If your team isn't happy, then the job will not get done. As others have pointed out, folks quit if they are not happy.

 

I thought it was "There can be only one."

 

Just don't lose your head.

 

Hence the need for balance

[blw2 433]

 

 

To me these designations of the 3 patrols established by the BSA are merely indicators to let everyone know that 1) the new guys might need some special attention, 2) the regular guys should be able to sail along pretty much on their own, and 3) the older guys are needing some special attention, too, to help keep their interest in something more exciting other than babysitting some new guys at council summer camp yet one more time.

 

I agree.

I have been doing a whole lot of thinking on this topic on and off over the last year or so.  It really does seem to me that strict interpretation and rigid implementation of this concept is just asking for trouble.

 

On a whole, i think this is a major reason for troubles that we get from adult over-involvement.  Take rank requirements as another example.  All too often I'm seeing adults (committee as well as SM/ASM) hyperfocus on "requirements".... getting the boy through.... making that rank by such and such date....all the while taking the reigns and forgetting that this is the scouts' journey, not ours.  That we need to just let the scouts "do what scouts do" as Clarke Green puts it.  Just doing that stuff is fun, but doing the same thing as fulfillment of some requirement just simply isn't.  Scouts should be learning and doing this stuff without even knowing that they are.

 

Same for patrols and structure.

[fred johnson 936]

I agree.

I have been doing a whole lot of thinking on this topic on and off over the last year or so.  It really does seem to me that strict interpretation and rigid implementation of this concept is just asking for trouble.

 

On a whole, i think this is a major reason for troubles that we get from adult over-involvement.  Take rank requirements as another example.  All too often I'm seeing adults (committee as well as SM/ASM) hyperfocus on "requirements".... getting the boy through.... making that rank by such and such date....all the while taking the reigns and forgetting that this is the scouts' journey, not ours.  That we need to just let the scouts "do what scouts do" as Clarke Green puts it.  Just doing that stuff is fun, but doing the same thing as fulfillment of some requirement just simply isn't.  Scouts should be learning and doing this stuff without even knowing that they are.

 

Same for patrols and structure.

 

Excellent answer.  

[fred johnson 936]

To me these designations of the 3 patrols established by the BSA are merely indicators to let everyone know that 1) the new guys might need some special attention, 2) the regular guys should be able to sail along pretty much on their own, and 3) the older guys are needing some special attention, too, to help keep their interest in something more exciting other than babysitting some new guys at council summer camp yet one more time.

 

Agreed.  I just want my sons to be able to spend their time with their friends as part of scouting.  Building friendships and relationships.  Scouting being the safe harbor through which he can explore many different activities.

[Stosh 3452]

  The reason I follow the principles of:

 

1) Patrol Method

2) Servant Leadership

3) Rule #3 - Have fun

4) Adults drink coffee and do nothing else

 

is because over the years, it produces the least amount of hassle to keep the program viable.  99% of the problems I have encountered over the past 45 years of working with youth is ADULTS!  The kids are great, the adults are a pain in the a$$.

 

Last week I went for the first time to a new church youth program I have been invited to work with.  I get there and the one leader tells me I should do the Bible study part for the evening because I "should be able to handle it being a former pastor."    Yeah right, thanks for the Lion's Den introduction to the kids.

 

Well we get to the Bible study part.  I picked the topic Servant Leadership.  I had seen one of the kids helping another on crutches get her dinner and carry it over to the table for her.  She was in the group so I singled her out for her leadership qualities, etc. and built on that for the message.  After a half hour the Youth Director came in and was wondering why the kids weren't out playing games with the older kids.  The kids told her they were having fun with the Bible study.  It was supposed to only last 5 minutes.  No one told me.  They made me promise I would pick up where we left off next week.  The other adult leader was amazed that the kids sat still and paid attention.  He has them in Confirmation class and they don't behave that well for him.  He wanted to know my secret, he tried for the whole half hour to figure it out.  I told him, all I did was get the ball rolling and then got out of the way.  When things started to slow down, I bumped it along.  It was THEIR Bible study, not mine.

 

Youth at this age see through adult manipulation almost instantly.  They're good at it, it's their job!  When an adult trusts them as a peer, they know that and appreciate it.  They will return respect for respect given.  That's probably why boy-led/run/controlled works for me.  I give all kids that opportunity.

 

Tonight I have a 30 minute presentation for 20+ high school students interested in starting a Venturing Crew.  The DE said I should come prepared to tell them about what the Venturing Program is.  Sorry, my 30 minutes will be focused on finding out what THEY WANT THE VENTURING PROGRAM TO BE.  Big difference! 

Edited April 5, 2016 by Stosh

[Eagle94-A1 2687]

I am going to quote my son regarding last night's meeting, and, upon reflecting, the entire situation with the troop: "The adults are the problem, Dad."

 

Long story short, what should have taken about 10 minutes, took 45 because adults kept interfering. The parents/adult leaders didn't trust their sons to be able to pay the camp fee to their PLs. Very frustrating. I had to tell the 2 parents to let the Scouts to handle it, and one was adamant that only he could handle it because "it's special situation."  Yes, the PL was out sick and his mom gave the money to the dad. The son could have handled it.

 

And we have a situation as a result of adult interference. Same "it's a special situation" dad above convinced his son that he and another Scout they were not ready for BORs a month ago, they needed to work on a few things. Long story short, the kids are ready now, but we may not be able to get a BOR in time for them to be recognized at the Court of Honor in two weeks since the next time the committee can not meet next week.

 

Then the adults ate up time trying to solve a "perceived" problem. Again money was being collected, and instead of an orderly way of collecting it and  parents got involved, and scouts were throwing money to the PLs.  NSP had issues keeping track of who paid what as a result. Took a total of 45 minutes, and the TG having the patrol leave the room with the adults in it to solve the matter. Ok I admit when I went to see how they were doing, and saw the handbook being thrown out of the room and folks not listening to the APL and TG and seeing the "I need help look in son's eye." I intervened. 

 

Now they were not the only patrol that had issues, another one had similar issues, just not the adults interfering. SPL was frustrated, so I asked if I could take a minute or two when the troop got back together after game time. I asked why did it take so long to figure out who paid. I got the answers of people not knowing how much to pay, and people throwing money. I asked for ways to communicate better, got facebook and texting, but I mention how the PLs need to call their patrol members, as not everyone has textable phones, nor is on facebook. Also stated how calls give you confirmation they got the info. Then I asked about handling money. While they did not mention adult interference, they did mention a solution the throwing money problem.

 

I was over and done with in about 2, maybe three minutes. Then one of the leaders out of nowhere came up with menus and duty rosters, issues that have been problems previously, but was settled over the weekend. At that point it was a non issue, but apparently he thought that was what took so long, and not the money.

 

Oldest talked to me on the ride home, thanked me for getting adults out of the way as best I could, and said, "The adults are the problem, Dad."