Jump to content
SouthScout

BSA Executive Salaries

Recommended Posts

yes, I knew all of that about Bear Gryls.

Yes, a person like that may not know how to run a board room meeting....but in my opinion they'd still make a good functional head in that they could steer things in a good direction for the youth.... keep things grounded so to speak.  they can always have accountant types or whatever supporting and advising them....

And call him a fake adventurer if you want... the guy was British special forces till he broke his back (that was my understanding anyway)...and he's on camera on his show all the time rappelling, climbing, scrambling, jumping off cliffs into lakes, paragliding, demonstrating scout-skills, and all sorts of stuff.  Often with a little scout pin on his lapel....  sure he has a support crew, and it's all staged.  So what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, blw2 said:

yes, I knew all of that about Bear Gryls.

Yes, a person like that may not know how to run a board room meeting....but in my opinion they'd still make a good functional head in that they could steer things in a good direction for the youth.... keep things grounded so to speak.  they can always have accountant types or whatever supporting and advising them....

And call him a fake adventurer if you want... the guy was British special forces till he broke his back (that was my understanding anyway)...and he's on camera on his show all the time rappelling, climbing, scrambling, jumping off cliffs into lakes, paragliding, demonstrating scout-skills, and all sorts of stuff.  Often with a little scout pin on his lapel....  sure he has a support crew, and it's all staged.  So what?

I don't think kids would much care about the possibility it is all staged.  What they more care about is if the person is 'cool'.  I've met some Scouters with what I consider really awesome pedigrees (several trips to Philmont, Northern Tier, several 50 milers, go on shorter treks each year, really get the patrol method, etc.), but then see them around youth and they are awkward as heck and the youth don't really connect with them.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, regardless of whether having a Chief Scout (or something similar) would be good for the BSA - and I am not convinced it would be - it is not going to happen because the CSE and other top guys at National would not want to be upstaged.  Kind of like James E. West in ancient times. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, blw2 said:

And call him a fake adventurer if you want... the guy was British special forces till he broke his back (that was my understanding anyway)...and he's on camera on his show all the time rappelling, climbing, scrambling, jumping off cliffs into lakes, paragliding, demonstrating scout-skills, and all sorts of stuff.  Often with a little scout pin on his lapel....  sure he has a support crew, and it's all staged.  So what?

It's not that he himself is a fake, it's the silly stuff he did on his show. If I were him, I'd lay awake every night worried that someone would believe my "techniques" like running straight down a mountain or swimming under a logjam were good ideas in a real survival situation and get themselves killed in a very unhappy way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NJCubScouter said:

Well, regardless of whether having a Chief Scout (or something similar) would be good for the BSA - and I am not convinced it would be - it is not going to happen because the CSE and other top guys at National would not want to be upstaged.  Kind of like James E. West in ancient times. 

Interesting.

In the UK the Chief Scout used to be the figurehead AND run the Association but about 15 years ago The Scout Association split the role into a firgurehead Chief Scout and a UK Chief Commissioner who runs the Association. People within Scouting in the UK still know who the UK CC is and are relatively excited to meet them and have them attend an event (more so adults than kids) but that is not their primary role which is overseeing the  Associaiton's stratergy and programme development and the wider national volunteer team. i dont think any UK CC would see the Chief Scout as upstaging them as opposed to fufilling their figurehead role.

I note that your National Presdient role has recently been renamed National Chair. Seems to me like the title of President of the BSA might have just been freed up ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Peter1919 said:

I note that your National Presdient role has recently been renamed National Chair. Seems to me like the title of President of the BSA might have just been freed up ;) 

I did not realize they had done that.  But here it is: https://www.scoutingnewsroom.org/about-the-bsa/national-leadership/national-president-elect/

In fact, they seem to have renamed it retroactively, because it says Randall Stevenson became National Chair in 2016.  He didn’t, because it was called President then.

i cannot find any explanation for the change, but if I had to take a guess it would probably be that it was a little confusing to have both a President and a Chief Scout Executive.  (In most nonprofit organizations the CSE position would be called Executive Director, which fits in with President (unpaid or at least non-full time, usually the head of the board of directors or trustees) a little better.) If that’s the case, the title President is gone, and isn’t coming back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, NJCubScouter said:

... it says Randall Stevenson became National Chair in 2016.  He didn’t, because it was called President then.

i cannot find any explanation for the change, but if I had to take a guess it would probably be that it was a little confusing to have both a President and a Chief Scout Executive. ...

The king is gone, long live the king.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, NJCubScouter said:

Well, regardless of whether having a Chief Scout (or something similar) would be good for the BSA - and I am not convinced it would be - it is not going to happen because the CSE and other top guys at National would not want to be upstaged.  Kind of like James E. West in ancient times. 

Then call it something different - ambassadors or the like.  If the national professionals have this much authority, we much have a remarkably weak board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Saltface said:

It's not that he himself is a fake, it's the silly stuff he did on his show. If I were him, I'd lay awake every night worried that someone would believe my "techniques" like running straight down a mountain or swimming under a logjam were good ideas in a real survival situation and get themselves killed in a very unhappy way.

Yeah...I concede that point.

There is a difference though...in his case he's not out there primarily representing or showcasing scouting on his shows.  I do think I remember seen and episode where he ran face down a mountain in a semi-rappel sort of thing on a line.  Is that what you mean?  i'd take that as more likely representing military techniques...but sorta speaks to that 'cool' factor that hashtagscouts mentions.  I mean really if you think about it, if a tv show had to fallow the Guide to Safe Scouting 100%, it would probably make for a pretty boring show... 

Another point about the bear G example... he sort of does his show as a caring nice-guy with character....although I'll say I don't really like some of the sensitive interview stuff.

Yeah, I think hashtagscouts nailed it.... someone that seems cool and connects vs some upper middle aged boardroom guy in a starched shirt.  My point wasn't to build up or support Bear G in anyway really, it's more about the folks that are getting paid high salaries and the kind of job they do and the image they project.... it could be better spent on folks that will keep the program grounded and cool, more so than the way it has been...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, blw2 said:

it could be better spent on folks that will keep the program grounded and cool, more so than the way it has been...

Want to know whose job it is to keep the program grounded and cool?  Not the executives at the BSA Corporate.  Not the members of the Board or Executive Board.  Not some figurehead like a Bear Grylls (and lets be very honest here - Bear Grylls is in that role for one purpose - and one purpose only - marketing - to sell the Boy Scouts to boys and their parents in the UK).

Every volunteer Scouter should look in the mirror if they want to know who is responsible for keeping the program grounded and cool.  When it comes right down to it, the Scouts in your units aren't looking at Surbaugh - most have never heard of them.  They are looking at US.  WE are the ones that put on the program on a day to day, week to week, month to month, year to year basis.  If the program is not grounded and cool, its out fault.  Even in the "infamous" 1970's program, the Troops that thrived were the ones that kept on providing cool outdoor programming.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My apologies to the fine folks in the UK - I meant to say that Bear Grylls job is to sell Scouting to Boys AND Girls in the UK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/4/2018 at 5:26 PM, HashTagScouts said:

To me, this is the type of advertising that is needed and been desperately needed here in the USA for some time.  I recall as a youth in Scouts, there were some national ads. I vaguely recall sporadic TV commercials on Saturday mornings, but also radio ads.  This particular video was from the 70's, but the quality from the 80's ads weren't much better (and used that same jingle).

Yeah, that was pretty pathetic. I know it's been posted before on this forum, but I am still really impressed with this add from Scouts South Africa:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, CalicoPenn said:

(and lets be very honest here - Bear Grylls is in that role for one purpose - and one purpose only - marketing - to sell the Boy Scouts to boys and their parents in the UK).

yeah, of course....kind of my primary point....but no reason a knowledgeable and personable person couldn't advise too.  And certainly no reason a capable person sorta like that couldn't lead, too.  I'm just suggesting that it could be taken to a different level.  And yeah, I do think I'd a whole lot rather someone like him sit at the head of the table when they are devising changes to the program, requirements, or whatever.... as opposed to a starched shirt business guy that's probably more comfortable in a suit than he is in a tent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, blw2 said:

yeah, of course....kind of my primary point....but no reason a knowledgeable and personable person couldn't advise too.  And certainly no reason a capable person sorta like that couldn't lead, too.  I'm just suggesting that it could be taken to a different level.  And yeah, I do think I'd a whole lot rather someone like him sit at the head of the table when they are devising changes to the program, requirements, or whatever.... as opposed to a starched shirt business guy that's probably more comfortable in a suit than he is in a tent.

I hear ya.  

I do doubt though that the CSE ever looks at the program decisions.  For example, I'm pretty sure he was nowhere near the Eagle Palm decision.

I think there is indeed a great role for someone with more program vision to have a stronger role.  I suspect that many of our program decisions are made by high level volunteers or staff folks in Irving.  I expect there is some sort of Boy Scout program committee somewhere that makes much of this stuff up. 

Would a Chief Program Officer with a clear vision by helpful - you bet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Challenge is that we are not getting more and more high level volunteers and staff with little to know experience AS YOUTH (emphasis), making decisions on program and they do not know what they are talking about.

On example I can give is my national supply division boss. She had no experience with Boy Scout summer camp, except hearing stories about it from her brother. Long story short, when I came up with the summer camp trading post schedule for the experimental program the store was in, she questioned every thing I proposed. I explained how things worked at camp, and she ignored me. Funny thing is, she asked one of my coworkers what she thought about her ideas, and my coworker told her, "How would I know, I've never been to summer camp. Ask [Eagle94-A1]. You hired him because he's been to camp before and staffed it." We did it her way that summer, and I racked up so much comp time that I never used it all before I quit. It was only after camp was over and we reviewed the sales log that I was proven correct, and things changed the second year.

But that was minor compared to some of the things I am reading and hearing.  BSA is hiring "experts" in various areas with no Scouting experience whatsoever. They are taking things from education and applying it to program. Sorry Scouting was never meant to be school. Or they are taking corporate management training courses, and trying to apply it to Cub Scout and Boy Scout training, and neglecting key aspects of program as a result. Take the Patrol Method for example. SM Specific dedicates 5.5 pages of syllabus and 35 minutes of time to it. THE PATROL METHOD IS THE HEART AND SOUL OF SCOUTING AND NEEDS MORE TIME THAN THAT TO EXPLAIN IT! (emphasis). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×