https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2024/06/04/what-is-the-scouting-edge-here-are-some-key-findings-from-the-latest-research/?

[skeptic 1059]

This triggered a long ago memory when I was a new district commissioner and attended a cub recruitment at a local elementary school (when we were still invited).  The person in charge got up in front and welcomed them all, then immediately began separating the kids, and their were a number of them then, into age groups.  Once that was done, he turned to the parents and adults and asked.  Okay, who is going to give their time to make these excited youngsters have their program?  A couple hands went up, but that was it.  So, since there was far too many for two people to handle, he again turned to the group and said something to the effect of; " So who here will explain to these children why they cannot have their new experience because no adults will step forward".  Guilt seemed to work at the time, but that was the seventies.  Not sure it will anymore.  Just a membory.

[Tron 117]

On 6/10/2024 at 2:51 PM, Eagledad said:

Lol. Hmm, in theory? Whose theory?

I learned these facts from interviewing hundreds of scouters, parents, and scouts. And, the experiences of scouters in other states verify my results. So, I'm confident with my analysis. 

The prime reason for the burnout is Tigers. The number of volunteers, including the parents, nearly doubles the desired number of volunteers to manage the whole pack program.

If you read the present discussions on the forum, you find that many units are not recruiting even the minimum ideal number of volunteers for their program. So, they don't have a pool of non-burned-out adults they can alternate into the program. What you often see is dens doubling up to take up slack for the burned out volunteers or just finding warm bodies to basically babysit through meetings. Either way, the meetings aren't fun and families are too busy to endure boring programs that keep asking for their time and money. 

Whats really bad about the problem is that even if a family sticks it out to finish the cub program, they have such a bad taste of scouting that they done even consider continuing to a troop. Which, is why the national average of crossovers to troops is less than 50 percent.

In my opinion, to even try and approach the problem, National has to cut the Tiger program from the Cub program. But, the number losses are too scary, so the whole BSA program continues to bleed.

Barry

 

So how do you reconcile your findings against nationals findings? 

[Tron 117]

7 hours ago, swilliams said:

This is one of the "lightbulb" moments that come from this forum that make it so helpful.  At our Court of Honor last night, the plea went out again to the new parents to step up and help.  This is probably the third or fourth time it has been said.  That simple statement above will help redefine how we ask for help and what we're asking for help with.

When you asked those people to step up did you provide any written position descriptions? In my experience literally taking the position descriptions out of the leader guides and providing them works wonders. Written position descriptions sets fair barriers for people. Did you explain that volunteering for the position is not forever and is a 1 year obligation that they can renew or walk away from? 

I am involved with several units and I will compare and contrast the best functioning to the worst functioning.

The best functioning literally just runs the program;  no "we do it this way because" no "we've always done it this way" no "well the unit leader likes it this way" its we're doing it by the book. This is your position description, we want you to do your position specific training so you have a baseline idea of what the unit leaders do, we're asking you to do this for 1 calendar year, and if you want to stay on after that for another year, great; if things are not working out and you want to try something else great. This unit has every position filled except FOS chair.

Contrast that to the unit that is the worst functioning: it's a mixture of some book stuff, some a unit leader 20 years ago made up stuff, the new unit leader wants to put his stamp on it made up stuff, position descriptions are made up and barely recognizable to the literature, people outright refuse to do training, and there are people guilted into staying involved after their kids leave the program and EVERYONE sees that and is scared of stepping up. This unit has about half the functional roles filled and of those roles there are multiple that are filled by people who start every parent meeting with "my kid is no longer in the program I am leaving at X date!" which turns into X+N when that date hits and no one has stood up. The unit is going to implode, just totally collapse if one of these parents gets a new job, or get sick, just has one of those really good only a monster would blame them for quitting reasons. 

 

Edited June 12 by MattR
removed inappropriate adjectives

[Eagledad 2808]

2 hours ago, Tron said:

So how do you reconcile your findings against nationals findings? 

Apples and oranges. My polling was between 1995 to 2005. Nothing has changed that would affect my conclusions. Several events have occurred in the last 15 years to draw National’s conclusions today. But, the burnout problem is still there and not being addressed.

Barry