Selecting a Unit Leader

[Beavah 205]

Not everyone has the skills and characteristics to be an effective scout leader, just as not everyone has the skills and charcteristics to any job you can think of.

 

I both agree and disagree with BobWhite's notions here, I think. Certainly there are folks who don't have a knack for workin' with kids. B-P often talked about da need for scouters of the "right sort." And certainly there can be some terrible tension introduced when a "warm body" with a different vision than other folks takes a position in a unit. In units I work with, I always coach takin' a "long, slow, look" before puttin' anybody in a kid-contact position.

 

So, I'm curious how different units have gone about selecting/approving unit leaders and assistant unit leaders. Yah, yah, we all can read da BSA pamphlet on "how to select," with needs assessment and steering committees and all that. Just go to scouting.org in da supplementary training modules section. No need to quote it to everyone here, eh?

 

Just real stories/suggestions/policies on how your units have done it.

 

Beavah

 

[Stosh 3452]

I just recently switched from ASM of one troop to SM of another. I needed a new challenge and I approached the DC to see if there were other opportunities in the district/council. He said there was a troop that was in need of new blood and I should consider it.

 

I first visited with the SM that was already there and reviewed with him the problems, frustrations, etc. he was experiencing with the troop and why he thought it was in the situation it was.

 

Then the SM gathered up the other troop adult leaders and parents for a second "interview" with me to discuss my skills, talents, goals, etc. and how they fit with what they wanted their troop to be.

 

Then I met with the boys and "interviewed" once more. I had a chance to ask them questions and they me. Then one of the boys wanted to visit the troop where I was coming from to see how they ran their program. He and his dad came for a visit.

 

After all this research it was up to everyone to make a decision. Now if the SM called and said it would be good for me to take over, I could take it or leave it. If the parents called, I would have refused, but instead, taking their cue from what had been discussed, the boys selected one from their midst who called me and said they wanted me as their SM. That same boy then relayed that information to the SM and adult leadership who relayed the request on to the CC for official processing.

 

It was not necessarily along any "proper lines" of officialdom with BSA policy, but it was a process that allowed everyone input and the final decision making in the hands of the boys themselves. Everyone is onboard with the results, everyone is already in the loop as to expectations and goals, and everyone has made a lot of changes, both on my part and the boys and things have been steadily improving. The older boys are no longer talking about quitting, the younger boys are exciting about coming on board, parents have repeated commented on how much easier it is to get their kids to scouts, etc.

 

The #1 emphasis throughout the whole process was: No surprises! Everyone was on the same page, everyone knew what was happening and everyone had a voice in the process.

 

After I took over, I immediately turned to all my leaders, including the former SM and said I expected every one of them to stay on as adult leaders. I also went to some of the parents (who had shown up for the interiewing process) and notified them they need to get on board with the "new" troop. Two came forward. My Eagle scout who was just turning 18 but had another year of high school, signed on as an ASM and is working on working with the boys organizing summer camp next summer.

 

Will this process work for everyone? I don't know, but it sure was a smooth transition for my situation.... Well, I thought so at least. :^)

 

Stosh

 

[Lisabob 13]

What my son's troop does is not strictly by the book. Reality for us is that we have an out of touch CO that neither wishes to be more engaged nor wishes to relinquish their hold on our charter to allow a friendly transfer to a different CO. So the business about the CO making careful selection isn't realistic since they (CO) have very little idea who we are or how the program works. This, despite my efforts to the contrary.

 

Anyway. The troop has a tradition that people serve as CC and SM for a two year period. THis isn't in writing, it is just the way things have been for the last 6-7 years or so, mostly as a reaction to a couple of people who practically "took over" the unit in previous times, and the disruptions that occurred when those two families (husband & wife teams) both left around the same time. So this summer we were in a position to choose a new SM. We were fortunate in that we had two people who really wanted the position, both of whom were long-time ASMs with the troop, well-known and seasoned, and both of whom would have been excellent choices. The two submitted written info about their background and their vision for the troop (which were actually quite similar) to the PLC, ASMs and the committee. All three groups had a chance to ask questions. The committee, plus the SPL, then voted.

 

This has since come under discussion, as some ASMs felt they wanted to have a more formal voice in choosing (I agree). Some committee members also didn't feel the boys should have any voice in the matter (I disagree). And of course it does not bear close resemblance to the official way of doing things. But it is how we've done it, which is what Beavah asked for. It isn't a method that I would recommend in all cases, but (at least this time) it worked pretty well for us.

 

In reality, I think most troops, most of the time, are crossing their fingers that somebody will step forward and volunteer to take on the job of SM. We were incredibly lucky to have two such well-qualified individuals this time around.

 

 

[Eamonn 61]

I'm all for using the nominating committee and all that good stuff.

However in the "Real World" (Whatever that might mean?).

Most of the adults who serve as Boy Scouters in our District have been around for a very long time, their number grows when Cub Scouter's (As a rule Dads) cross over with their son.

When a SM is ready to call it a day, there normally is a ASM waiting in the wings ready to come on and take his spot.

There have been times when this newly "Promoted" ASM is just not the right person for the job.

Sometimes he kinda knows this and will come up with a reason why he can't continue. Again as a rule someone else from the unit is willing to do what is needed. But there have been times when even in a Troop with a lot of adult help, no one is willing to step up to the plate. When this happens having and using the nominating committee to give someone a nudge is a good thing.

I have had ASM's who were great assets to the Troop and a great help to me, who just didn't seem to get on with the Scouts. Some of these guys had outstanding outdoor skills and had been through the Scouting program, they just didn't have the people skills. A couple of them were fathers of Scouts or ex-Scouts, some were leaders from failed Troops (Surprise, surprise!!)

Our organization is big enough to accommodate just about everyone, but at times is not big enough to accommodate everyones ego.

Eamonn.

[MarkS 11]

Our committee starts of by putting together a list of desired qualities for a postion, individuals are graded 1 thru 10 for each quality by each member of the committee, the grades from the committee are averaged and then multiplied a weighting factor based on the importance of the quality to the committee, finally the grades are added up and to deteremine which candidate has the highest score (just like any other trade study)... then we usually choose the one guy willing to do the job (just like most scouting units it seems).

 

The last time we had two candidates for SM and the qualities we graded on were as follows...

 

Commitment to the ideals of scouting

High moral standards

Ability to relate to boys

Ability to relate to and interact with adults

Ability to keep a "cool head" under pressure

Good organization skills

Flexibility and the ability to compromise

Good planning ability

High energy level

Attention to detail

Comfortable in the outdoors

Training

Experience(This message has been edited by MarkS)

[infoscouter 11]

We've gradually come around to something close to the suggested procedure. We create a prospect list, rank them as to first, second, third choice,etc.

 

We then offer the job to the first choice. This applies to all positions - including den leaders. If that means that a pack committee member operates the den for a while while the selection process takes place, so be it.

 

It has also meant that the committee chair has performed the Cubmaster's job for one or two months during the selection process, but that's just what is supposed to happen (it's in the CC's job description).

 

[Bob White 20]

Good for you infoscouter. The other thing I would suggest is to get three references from every person selected as required on the application and follow up on them. Ask about their knowledge of the candiates temperament, their behavior around Scout age children similar to those they will be working with, their trustfullness, their ability to work as a team member. And ask if there is any reason they would caution you about having this person as a scout leader.

 

Our committee also has a requirement that the adult leaders be members of the charter organization, though not all COs require that.

 

 

[FScouter 24]

"Yah, yah, we all can read da BSA pamphlet on "how to select," ... No need to quote it to everyone here, eh?"

 

We get a lot of misinformation on these forums, so it's always good to get good information straight from the source to balance the personal opinions from the myriad names that post here, ehh? Real stories from real units are interesting too, and hope we hear too how the leaders selected really worked out.

[Beavah 205]

Yah, MarkS and infoscouter, I'm curious. In your methods of goin' about things, how is it that da committee is able to rank the various candidates? How many of the committee are both trained and experienced? Have they really watched each candidate in action so as to be able to make an honest evaluation? Do all your committee members go campin' and sit in on TLT and such?

 

In my experience, the people who really get to see a potential adult leader in action are their fellow scouters and the scouts. They've seen 'em "under fire", they've seen how they live the ideals even when tired and deprived of coffee. They've seen 'em make safety decisions. And they've seen their level of real commitment to youth leadership.

 

A lot of times MCs seem to make decisions based on whether he/she looks nice and is polite at committee meetings. Or at least they'd have a real hard time bein' accurate in rating more than half of MarkS's example categories.

 

How do you avoid this trap in your approach?

 

Often the troops like jblake's and Lisabob's that really 360 the thing do the best jobs with sceenin' and selection, IMO. Yeh need ways to get substantial input from kids and adults with more contact and experience than the average MC.

 

Beavah

 

[MarkS 11]

Beavah asked, "How is it that da committee is able to rank the various candidates? How many of the committee are both trained and experienced? Have they really watched each candidate in action so as to be able to make an honest evaluation? Do all your committee members go campin' and sit in on TLT and such?"

 

Beavah... what we did is steps 2 thru 5 as described in Ch. 5 of the Troop Committee Guidebook (our CO is the PTO of a local elementary school so CO involvement was, well, you know).

 

It's important to note that our unit of 20+ boys has a group of six highly motivated scouters where thru mutual agreement, four became the selection committee and two the candidates. Myself and another guy were the candidates. We're a typical unit where 10% of the people do 90% of the work.

 

How did the four rank candidates?...

 

Well, they didn't. They subjectively scored the qualities, discussed which qualities were most important and weighted them accordingly, filled the numbers in a spreadsheet, and it scored and ranked the candidates.

 

How many of the committee are both trained and experienced?...

 

All of them consisting of the CC, outgoing SM, and two MCs, were trained. The CC and outgoing SM are Woodbadgers. The CC with 10+ years of experience, served in several unit and district positions, and has earned our district award of merit. The outgoing SM had 30 years of experience, served in several unit, district, and council positions including district training and woodbadge staffs, and has earned our district award of merit and the silver beaver award. Both MCs have nearly ten years of experience in unit positions and have received our district training for their positions.

 

BTW, both candidates were ASMs at the time.

 

Have they really watched each candidate in action so as to be able to make an honest evaluation? Do all your committee members go campin' and sit in on TLT and such?...

 

Well, we all attended several campouts and activities together over the year leading up to the selection of the new SM. It was a planned transition.

 

A lot of times MCs [would] have a real hard time bein' accurate in rating more than half of MarkS's example categories. How do you avoid this trap in your approach?...

 

Some of those example categories come from Ch. 5 of the Troop Committee Guidebook but the evaluation process is really a hiring best practice. The only difference is the candidates aptitude for a quality was gleaned from observation and simply knowing the candidate rather than an inverview.

 

Start by discussing one of the qualities as a committee. Figure out what it means, talk about examples, lay down the criteria for good and bad scores. Then score it individually and save secret ballots for the scores but don't look at the results. Repeat for the next quality and so on.

 

After all of the qualities have been scored. Talk about them as a skill set. Figure out which ones are more important than the others and define a weighting factor.

 

Once the weighting factors have been decided. Fill in a spreadsheet with the weighting factors and scores. The spreadsheet multiplied the score for each quality by it's weighting factor and then added the scores for the qualities up to provide a score for each candidate. The scores were discussed as a committee to determine if they are or are not representative of the committee's opinion. If they are, you have your selection. If not, then do over.

 

How do I know what they did? Well, all six of us put together the process before choosing candidates. The way we work, the SM and ASMs need to function as part of the committee in order to make more sound decisions.

 

Yeah, a bit overkill for a small unit with not a lot of candidates but a solid way to to make a subjective evaluation process as objective as possible.

 

BTW. The other guy was selected. He had more experience and scored a lot higher in that quality.

 

(This message has been edited by MarkS)

[Beavah 205]

Yah, thanks MarkS. Small committee of only three plus scouters in committee roles makes that really tight. Selecting from just ASMs makes it even tighter, eh?

 

Was there any youth or parent input? Or didn't yeh see that as bein' valuable?

 

What do you do for selecting an ASM?

 

Beavah

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[MarkS 11]

Beavah asked, "Small committee of only three plus scouters in committee roles makes that really tight. Selecting from just ASMs makes it even tighter, eh?"

 

Yep and there was some thinking of looking outside the current adult leadership for a new scoutmaster but it was decided that the few available would serve well--even if there might be a little bit of a learning curve to climb.

 

Beavah asked, "Was there any youth or parent input? Or didn't yeh see that as bein' valuable?"

 

Didn't ask the youth but did ask (frequently and extensively before the process started) for parent input but they didn't help.

 

Beavah asked, "What do you do for selecting an ASM?"

 

I'm the newest adult leader in the unit coming over from cubs almost two years ago. In that time, we haven't added any other uniformed adult leaders. What we've been trying to do is communicate with parents that they are welcome to participate in program activities and encourage them to come camping with us and share some time with their boy. If things work out with their participation (i.e., they don't do any really bad things), the goal of our SM is to get them in a one-on-one converstation and try to get them more involved eventually leading up to filling out an adult app and getting a uniform. We have our baited hook in the water but they're not biting.

 

Alas, the last couple years I was involved in our feeder pack, I was a one-man show. It may be another year before a boy joins the unit with a parent that has an interest in participating. That interest has to be there. If it's there, you can nuture it. If not, trying to get them to commit to volunteering on more than an occassional task is very difficult and I'm not sure it's worth the effort--it's so much easier to find it in another unit than to create it where it doens't exist.(This message has been edited by MarkS)

[kb6jra 10]

LOL, This cracks me up. I must have been at the right place at the right time, or the wrong place at the right time, or...well you get the picture.

 

The first time I was asked to be a SM, my own Scoutmaster, then the District Chairman, asked me to help out a troop accross town who's SM had moved away. That little job lasted 4 or 5 years.

 

This time I was asked to take on the job by the previous and founding SM. I love the kids and spending time with them so according to him I was the perfect choice. I had no intention of being the SM of this troop when I joined, I was happy to be a helper bee.

 

I'm a member of our CO (Rotary), and became one after taking the job of SM. That has seemed to work out for the best of both organizations. We support each other fully.

 

I wonder how many unit leaders are chosen because they have the uniform and the time and meet no other qualification? I'd bet it's more than half at least.

 

 

[MarkS 11]

kb6jra asked, "I wonder how many unit leaders are chosen because they have the uniform and the time and meet no other qualification?"

 

Given that our current SM's youngest ages out in October combined with the fact we haven't been able to recruit additional leaders in the last couple years, you might be describing my fate. What we did last time was a luxury.(This message has been edited by MarkS)

[infoscouter 11]

Beavah asked about how we go about observing people in action. For Cubmaster, our candidates have been Asst Cubmasters, fellow committee members or active parents, so we have been able to see how they worked with the Cub Scouts and other adults.

 

For den leaders, during the time the committee member leads the den (usually two to three months), there is an opportunity to interact with the parents, see who does well in shared leadership (for Tigers), who steps up for field trips etc.

 

As to are we trained - yes we have 100% trained leadership.

 

Since we're a Cub Scout pack, we don't get input from the kids, except the indirect input you observe when you see the kids flock around a particular adult. I would endorse that idea for a troop.

 

As to Bob White's comment - we do also check references. In addition, we run our own criminal background check at the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension.

 

These are our volunteer standards from our Parent Handbook:

 

"Pack 512 appreciates all of those who want to volunteer. Unfortunately we cannot accept everyone who applies. All volunteers must complete the Boy Scouts of America Volunteer Application prior to serving as a volunteer.

 

Den Leaders and other volunteers who work directly with the scouts must complete both the BSA application and Pack 512s Application and Background Check. Pack 512s application authorizes the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension to provide extended criminal background information.

 

The Boys Scouts of America and Pack 512 have high standards that determine who is eligible for leadership. The goal of these standards is ensure the safety of the Scouts. As parents, we want you to be confident that adults who are working with your sons are providing a safe and well-run program. To make sure this is the case, all registered leaders attend Cub Scout Leader Training and Youth Protection Training.

 

Once Pack 512 has received the application, Pack 512s Chartered Organization Representative will perform background and reference checks. Based on this information, the application is approved or denied.

 

Applicants may be turned down or removed from a volunteer position based on any of the following reasons:

 

1. Information contained in their Criminal Background report.

a. Any Crime Listed as a Felony or Gross Misdemeanor.

b. Any Crime prohibiting the applicant to work in childcare, health care or volunteer position within the Anoka Hennepin School District.

2. Failure to meet the qualification standards of the Boy Scouts of America, the Northern Star Council, or Cub Scout Pack 512.

3. Bad chemistry of the applicant with the pack. (One who cannot get along with others.)

4. Being a poor team player. (One who prevents others from being effective.)

5. Inability to serve in their position effectively.

6. Failure to complete leader training within one year of registration.

 

Those who cannot serve as a leader or work directly with the Scouts, may still qualify for other positions within the pack. All applications will be handled in the strictest of confidence.

 

Please consult the Cubmaster or Chartered Organization Representative for any questions regarding the volunteering process."