Improving CO relationships

[OldGreyEagle 5]

OK, from the parent thread its obvious that the BSA and they chartering organizations could stand some help to get on the same page. So, how do we do that?

[GernBlansten 10]

Our CO charters a pack, troop and crew. Our SM, CM, and CA met with the church board recently to discuss our relationship. Lets just say we should have let sleeping dogs lie. They were shocked that they had any more role than providing us a meeting space. They had no idea that they owned our units. The meeting really jeopordized our relationship. As crew advisor, I really wanted the church to integrate the crew with its youth program and promote it with the girls. Not interested. They saw it as a dilution of the youth group, not an enhancement.

My advice to others in the same boat, go very carefully. Chances are your CO doesn't have the slightest idea of its real role in your units and probably doesn't want that role.

[evmori 11]

We were always there for our CO. We had a Scout Sunday service every year. When we did Scouting for Food, all the food we collected went into the church food bank. If they needed our meeting room, we happily gave it to them & changed our meeting place. Our relationship was good, but the CO was virtually uninvolved.

 

Some CO's don't want to be involved! Why? Dunno. Maybe that is where the councils need to start their investigating.

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10

[Bob White 20]

Gern no relationship was jeopardized since no relationship exists. You are not "their' Scout unit, you are only the scout unit that meets "there". You could go meet somewhere else and be ingored just as easily. You have no relationship to damage.

 

At some point when a unit is started a charter organization head knows of the relationship betwen the CO and Scouting. They are reminded each year when they sign the Shared Responsibilities cointract of the annual charter. The Institution Head is responsible for selecting the Charter Organization Representative (preferably from the Board), and a Committee Chair from its membership to represent the CO to scouting and the unit to the CO.

 

Over the years where the first thing usually goes wrong is that the committee tkes it upon themselves to distance the uit from the CO, by selecting theior own chair thus shutting out the CO , and not properly enaging the Charter rep in his or her duties.

 

So without owner representation and without a communication link, the relationship quickly dies.

 

Other units do not want a relationship because God forbid the charter actually sees what is going on and realizes they could be held responsible. This situation comes from the unit having no oversight in the selection and performance of its leaders.

 

Scout leader was never intended to be a papal ordaination where you got the office until you died.

 

Units with strong CO relationships have longer lives, more resources and usually a better program than units with weak or non existent relationships.

 

The key is to understand what a relationship means, mutually beneficial behaviour. The best definition of love I have heard is "the overwhelming desire to do what is best for the other person." But it is a two way street.

 

Most units do nothing to engage the CO and then say that they have no relationship with their charter organization. Why should the unit at this point have to make the first move or moves? Because the unit needs the CO mor than the CO needs the unit, and because the unit is supposed to have TRAINED people in charge.(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[GernBlansten 10]

BW, I think our units are holding up our side of the relationship. Its the CO that is not. We attempted to be closer aligned with their organization but they didn't reciprocate. So as a result, our committees have taken ownership of the units, doing what the CO should be doing, purely out of survival of the units.

But its working out for us. We are doing well and have been chartered for 50 years.

[Beavah 205]

Some things I've seen that have helped build relationships:

 

* unit presents an annual report to CO board (which includes an intro remindin' 'em of ownership, etc.)

 

* unit reaches out to provide support/unskilled labor/service for CO events or members.

 

* CC or SM attend youth ministry team meetings.

 

* CO pays recharter fees or some fraction. (I'm a big believer in this, eh? It's all make-believe unless you've got some financial skin in the game).

 

* CO finances camperships

 

* Unit puts "blurbs" or news items in CO newsletter/bulletin on a monthly basis.

 

* Unit puts CO announcements / relevant events in unit newsletter/website/email list.

 

* Unit holds "thank you"/get to know you luncheon for CO staff once a year.

 

* Unit actively recruits from CO.

 

* Unit plans and runs joint activity with other CO youth ministry activities (or other ministry activities, period).

 

* Unit invites IH to fair-weather, local campouts.

 

* Unit invites IH and other CO officials to all courts of honor and uses/recognizes them in some official way.

 

* CO invites unit leaders to annual volunteer thank-you suppers.

 

etc.

 

[Bob White 20]

By "taking over" you only prove that you do not wsee this as the charter organizaations unit, you see it as yours.

 

if the church doesn't want a choir the choior director doe not get to take it over he or she works for the church. if the School decides not to support the art deptartment the art teacher doesn't get to take it iver, the teacher works for the school. if the chaterter organization doesn't want a scout unit then nobody gets to "take it over", you all work for the chartering organization, it is their scouting progran to support or not support.

 

If you have chosen to volunteer for an activity that the charter organizatiuon does not want then that is a personal problem you will have to deal with but taking over the unit is not an option offered to you by the charter contract held by the BSA and the Charter Organization. You have bit by bit distanced yourselves from the CO until they no longer see or understand their role.

 

By doing so you have poisoned the relationaship. Rather than keep the CO responsible for their role i scouting you have taken their responsibility away, and then you complain they do not fulfill their responsibility...you usurped their authority and hikacked their scout program claiming it as your own.

 

[GernBlansten 10]

Wow BW, strong words for a dedicated volunteer who like many here are just trying to provide our sons a scouting experience.

If we didn't take ownership (I think your word was hijack) of the unit, the unit would dissolve at the next re-charter. Why do you associate us dedicated volunteers with terrorists?

 

Our CO doesn't want to be bothered with owning and running a scout unit. They don't mind us being there (most of the time). If we suddenly disappeared, it would take them a very long time to realize it, if at all.

[hops_scout 9]

Our CO is the local VFW. We meet there, store our trailers there, and have a shed full of gear there. They also give us part of a storage closet inside and we do some physical activity out in the open field next to the building. They'll have members wander through to work in the kitchen, etc sometimes during meetings. For the most part, they let us do our thing and they do theirs. We provide a color guard for Memorial Day, Veterans' Day and parades. We are always included when we show up at their ceremonies. I think, from a financial standpoint, we are pretty well a stand-alone unit. I don't know how much (if any) they pay for throughout the year. We have some pictures from different ceremonies where there are scouts included in the pictures and the charter certificates from years past sit in the trophy case where we meet. The troop has been around for nearly 80 years straight.. with a one year lapse or it'd be closer to 95 I think.

[Bob White 20]

Not a terrorist, but you did take something that does not belong to you. The unit belongs to the chartering organization, You are "their" volunteer leader. You agreed to lead the scouting program for "their" unit, not take their unit from them, no matter how good you believe your reasons are.

 

While you might find these strong words you need to understand they are not my words, they are the BSA's, I am simply explaining the facts of the situation.

 

I appreciate that you want to enjoy scouting with your son. Think how much more enjoyable it would be if you were with a CO that wanted a scouting program?

 

Taking over has not solved your problem has it? You did not have a good relationship with the CO before you took over or you would not have needed to, and you have only grown further away from them since the take over.

 

The fact is the actions of the adult leaders took a bad situation and made it worse.

 

Why not sit down with the DE and the IH and re-establish who is responsible for what? Let the IH know that the leaders are willing to continue to volunteer to work with the COs scouting program IF the CO will once again take over their responsibilities, otherwise there is little use volunteering to help with a program that the CO doesn't want to have.

 

You cannot make them keep a scout unit they do not want...and why should you?

 

Are there other troops in the area that have a good CO relationship and good leaders? If so why not go there?

 

But give the unit back to the people that own it, and that's the charter organization.

 

 

 

 

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[GernBlansten 10]

BW, I think the relationship that our units have with our CO are the norm, not the exception I.E. hijacked by the volunteers.

 

In your mind, what percentage of units have been hijacked vs those actively managed by the COs?

[Lisabob 13]

I have to back up Gern's perception that his unit's relationship with their CO is the norm. This might not be the ideal we strive for, but if it is reality for a great many units then I think it is less helpful to berate leaders, and more helpful to ask tough questions about why it is the norm. Some of this may indeed come down to the unit leaders being more proactive about building relationships. But at least as often, it comes down to COs who are not holding up their end of the deal. Then it becomes a question of whether we do more harm by reminding the CO of their obligations, or of letting things be. I'm sorry but I don't see a simple and realistic answer to this.

 

I know for a fact that if my DE started making the rounds, telling all the COs what they were supposed to be doing and really expecting them to do it, we'd lose COs. Or there might be COs like one I got to know, who neither want to be active in supporting their units (in fact this notion made them angry), nor are they willing to relinquish their charter and let the unit move (tradition, history, service obligation, etc.). It's their unit and they'll hold it captive if they want to. In the absence of active or at least, positive COs, what on earth is a unit to do?

[SR540Beaver 116]

Bob,

 

With all due respect, there are countless CO's who want to have their cake and eat it to. They like having a feather in their cap by owning a unit, but they totally abdicate any resposibility to warm bodies willing to operate it. To many of them, supplying a meeting place and signing the annual charter is as far as they want to be involved. Strange I know, but that is the reality that many volunteers are used to regardless of what the model is supposed to be. When the volunteers make an effort to create some connection and build a more meaningful relationship, they are rejected. Use our space, do your thing, but don't ask for more. Many successful programs have existed under such conditions. The CO isn' hostile to you being there, they simply want you to run it and leave them alone except for what they need to sign once a year. I hear you that it is their program and they should want more out of it, but many don't. As for the DE getting involved, it all depends on whether or not they have met their FOS goal as to whether they have time to get involved. Sometimes operating a unit is a lonely proposition, but the only way to keep moving forward.

[Bob White 20]

Reality is what you make it in Scouting. You can choose to create a healthy relationship and make it work or choose not to support the unit owned by an organization that has no ontention of supporting you.

 

There are lots of good charter organizations that would love to see their scouting program grow work with the parents to influence your current CO or move the scouts to somewhere where they are wanted.

 

I can tell you that in the units I have served they all had outstanding support from their CO. They included a Public School PTA as a scout (sorry Merlyn),a radio station as an Explorer, A presbyterian Church as an ASM, another Presbyterian Church as a SM, A Lutheran Church as an ASM, another public school PTA as a Cubmaster, a Protestant Church as an ASM, and a private Yacht Club as a Mate on a Ship.

 

If there weren't a lot of good COs out there it would seem very coincidental that I was never in a unit with a bad one.

 

But then in each unit we worked at maintaining and nurturing that relationship.

 

Not every unit has a good CO, but the ones that have a bad one all share something in common...they all CHOSE to stay there. No one made them do it.

 

 

 

 

[GernBlansten 10]

Am I to understand that if the unit my son chose to cross-over to, which has a good program but an inactive CO, we should leave that unit and find a unit with an active CO?

 

If by joining a unit with an inactive CO and working on making that unit functional and flourish without the help of the CO, we are stealing it from them and hijacking something from them something that they really don't care about? Now I'm really confused. I'm a scoundrel if I don't get involved, I'm a thief if I do.