Jump to content
CynicalScouter

Scouting Forward: A Plan to Lead Announced

Recommended Posts

Trying to review this, but cannot get a link for it, and the part shown does not fit screen properly.  Where is this from?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was a screen shot posted on another (non-official) BSA posting board.  Poster is identified as verified as National Training Staff.  Link is here: https://www.reddit.com/r/BSA/comments/ho9w9z/the_bsa_plan_announced_on_ceo_town_hall_today/

 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Looks mostly like administrative tidying up -- much of which should have been done long ago.  Innovative?  Visionary?  Well, they are combining the National Annual Business Meeting and the Top Hands Meeting.  🤪  It is quite a boring document, really.  Not Churchillian.  But, it is pure BSA.  For example:  "Create a membership executive position within councils focused on growth and paid on performance."  How many hundreds of times has that been tried in councils all across the United States over the last forty years of declining membership?  Maybe tens of thousands, if you count District Executives and Field Directors.  

Survival of the Boy Scouts of America is entirely dependent upon membership growth, but the folks from the National level all the way down to councils and even districts simply can't grasp the notion that they are powerless to do anything about membership growth,** despite more than forty years of contrary evidence.  Retaining youth who are already Scouts and attracting youth who are not currently Scouts is entirely dependent upon how well the local moms and dads who are the unit adults execute an active, interesting, challenging Scouting program with a strong outdoor component.  If BSA decided to create an executive position within councils focused on inspiring unit adults, then maybe they would be on to something.

** BSA National initiatives, policies, and program changes have caused significant membership losses over the years, however.

Edited by dkurtenbach
To add footnote.
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, adding more local professional staff is the answer?  Color me skeptible.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, I filled out at least 3 buzzword bingo score cards on that one!

  • Nimble and Flexible (uh, look at that process flow on the left!)
  • Data-based decision making
  • Value-based delivery
  • Collaboration and teamwork
  • World-class
  • Shared accountability
  • Areas of Focus
  • Facilitate!
  • Action Steps!

Biggest red flag to me is this one:

Hire a youth adolescence expert at the national level to guide program development.  I have a sneaking suspicion it won't be Lenore Skenazy!

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, walk in the woods said:

Biggest red flag to me is this one:

 

Hire a youth adolescence expert at the national level to guide program development.  I have a sneaking suspicion it won't be Lenore Skenazy!

for me,  Consistent brand standards.

Whenever I hear babble-speak about brand ,... ugh  :blink:

BTW, how old is a "youth adolescence expert" ?

Edited by RememberSchiff
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trying to find the LEAD part in this consultant produced PLAN.

Members of this forum could do better than this but the folk in Texas wouldn't like what we came up with.  

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Create a membership category for youth and families with no advancement program"

 

You mean like how was Venturing was supposed to be? High Adventure emphasis with an OPTIONAL advancement program. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, David CO said:

This part doesn't make any sense to me.  Why would we need a separate membership category?  Advancement is voluntary.  If a scout doesn't want to advance, he doesn't have to.  He doesn't need a special membership category.

Good question. 

 

13 hours ago, carebear3895 said:

"Create a membership category for youth and families with no advancement program"

 

You mean like how was Venturing was supposed to be? High Adventure emphasis with an OPTIONAL advancement program. 

No. This is the next step of "Family Scouting" implementation. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 7/9/2020 at 11:04 PM, dkurtenbach said:

Survival of the Boy Scouts of America is entirely dependent upon membership growth, but the folks from the National level all the way down to councils and even districts simply can't grasp the notion that they are powerless to do anything about membership growth,** despite more than forty years of contrary evidence.  Retaining youth who are already Scouts and attracting youth who are not currently Scouts is entirely dependent upon how well the local moms and dads who are the unit adults execute an active, interesting, challenging Scouting program with a strong outdoor component.  If BSA decided to create an executive position within councils focused on inspiring unit adults, then maybe they would be on to something.

** BSA National initiatives, policies, and program changes have caused significant membership losses over the years, however.

This is so true.  I have long thought that our pros focused on the fundraising at the expense of the program.  Fundraising is important but the Director of Program should be more important than the Director of Developement.  If we really invested in Program pros we could have folks accountable for helping/guiding/training volunteers.  We could also have folks who make sure our camps are used year round. We could make sure our units have affordable access to great outdoor adventures. Just my thoughts.

Edited by ALongWalk
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/10/2020 at 10:13 AM, carebear3895 said:

 

"Create a membership category for youth and families with no advancement program"

 

You mean like how was Venturing was supposed to be? High Adventure emphasis with an OPTIONAL advancement program. 

 

No, not at all like joe Venturing was supposed to be. 
 

Right now if a district or council wanted to do a 6 week stem program (and be coved by insurance), there is nothing to fit the current model. 

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

×
×
  • Create New...