OldGreyEagle 5 Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 I should have Spun this off rather than hijacking the original thread. I start with a copy of my original post "Kudu, I have always wondered about something You always talk about the natural leaders and how important it is to identify them and put them in charge or have them be in charge or however you explain it. What so you do with the not natural leader boy, what do you do to mentor him? I am not saying how do you turn him into a leader, but what do you do the less shiny lights in the troop? Some may have great potential but the boy keeps it so locked up its hard for others to identify Its almost as if you are not a natural leader, you get kicked to the curb with nothing in life to look forward to but to be a follower. I know I have missed something and would like to know what I missed" Link to post Share on other sites
OldGreyEagle 5 Posted January 18, 2012 Author Share Posted January 18, 2012 Obviously, anyone can respond, not just Kudu (like I have to say that, sic!; but to be sure) Link to post Share on other sites
DeanRx 69 Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 OGE- I think mentoring the boys is a LOT like managing a workforce. You use leadership opportunities to let the youth "try on" being a leader and then guide them to a role that fits them best. Example: Say a kid is not that outgoing and doesn't like to speak up, but is very organized and neat in the way he keeps his personal stuff. Well, try to coax him out of his shell by putting him in a small leadership role (i.e. leading ONE activity on a campout - like a hike), but then approach him and tell him you noticed his good organization skills... maybe he'd make a great quartermaster for your unit. Have a kid that is great on computers, then he's a good fit for running / helping with the Troop website, etc... Play to a kid's strengths to build their confidence, then use that confidence to encourage them to try on new "hats" or leadership roles so to speak. Another great way to help develop leadership is to run mini-low cope type events at a campout and draw a leader from a hat just prior to the event. This is a tactic used in ROTC all the time with squad level leadership development... everyone in the day will be a leader and a follower. Have an imaginary "river" between two rows of trees they have to cross and give the scouts 4 sections of 2x4 (none long enough to span by itself), they can lay the boards in the "water" and can have as many scouts on each board as they want, but they must get everyone across. Then time it. Or, set up a geocache or other orienteering obstacle, but one boy in charge and time them for how long it takes them to complete the task, etc... All these types of activities grow leadership in small increments. Finally, ALWAYS have a quick debrief (ups and downs) have the leader (with input for the followers) give 3 things that went well in the event and 3 things they would have done differently if they have a redo... this way EVERYONE learns, even when they are not the leader. my 2-cents worth... Dean Link to post Share on other sites
SMT224 10 Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 I believe each and every boy in the Troop should have an opportunity to take on a leadership position and make as many mistakes as possible! Scouting should be a safe place to mess up and learn what works and what doesn't. I'm always delighted to see how well a shy and retiring Scouts can do when he takes on the responsibility of a Patrol or the Troop. We did have a "natural" leader several years ago... he was excellent at leading Scouts -- and they easily became loyal followers. Unfortunately, he lead them to all the wrong places! He was a great leader, just didn't think the Scout Law applied to him! I'd rather have a Scout that stumbles and trips a few times as he learns to lead than a "natural" leader. Link to post Share on other sites
KC9DDI 11 Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 How exactly would you define a "natural leader?" Link to post Share on other sites
Eagledad 2783 Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 >>Its almost as if you are not a natural leader, you get kicked to the curb with nothing in life to look forward to but to be a follower. I know I have missed something and would like to know what I missed Link to post Share on other sites
Kudu 186 Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 OldGreyEagle, That is why elite ad hoc High Adventure Patrols are better than regular Patrols: >> No POR credit. Link to post Share on other sites
Beavah 205 Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 The risk of a program where the adult picks its youth leaders is that the bad adult leaders will pick bad youth leaders. They arent trying to be unfair, they're just inept at picking and developing leaders. At least in troops where the scouts pick the leaders, each scout has a fighting chance. Yah, I reckon da risks run both ways, eh? Especially in units where there isn't yet a positive youth culture or where youth leadership doesn't have real effects/consequences, inexperienced scouts are just as inept at picking and developing leaders. Even in a few troops with pretty good unit cultures we see da "popularity contest" thing go on. Or sometimes the "pick the guy yeh don't like because it's a lot of work" or whatnot. So where I disagree with both Kudu and Eagledad is that I think good adult leaders adjust to the youth they have. They don't just "follow a program" like it's a magic talisman in the old BobWhite way, they meet the boys where they're at and adapt the program. Sometimes, and I think this is true for many troops in early stages of development/recovery, identifyin' the natural leaders and giving 'em responsibility is the right way to go. Yeh have to build the culture first. Kids need to see "right" before they're able to choose "right" on their own. Other times, it's good for da PLC to pick their replacements, when the older boys have figured it out but da younger ones haven't yet. Other times, elections or consensus of the boys is best, when yeh have a strong unit culture that the lads have gotten used to, like what Eagledad describes. Goin' back to OGE's original post, I think that our goal is really to give every boy the opportunity to contribute meaningfully. Being Quartermaster or Webmaster or Scribe is just as valuable (if not more important!) than being SPL or PL. Each boy should find da niche in the group that he is best and identifies with and makes a contribution. Puttin' boys into token leadership positions or worse "rotating" them into positions I've always felt was nonsense. A lazy man's answer to being "fair". Being fair doesn't mean giving each boy the same thing, it means giving each boy what he needs. As good mentors, we should be helpin' lads to discover and grow into their own best selves. For some, that's being PL up in front of the group. For others, it's bein' Top Chef. For others, it's bein' the quiet, thoughtful fellow who just takes care of other members of da patrol and makes sure they're OK. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah) Link to post Share on other sites
Stosh 3452 Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 Boys that are not natural leaders can be trained to be very good leaders. Of course this goes back to the premise that I have always put forward, the definition of leadership vs. management. I think all boys are natural leaders, but not necessarily always good managers. A bully may in fact have excellent management skills. Intimidation goes a long way on getting the job done, but it's not really leadership. If it wasn't for threats most boys wouldn't follow a bully. Leadership in any form requires sufficient skills that one can bring to the table to promote the welfare of others. If I knew someone was looking out for me, I would follow them anywhere. The inverse of this is true, if I have something that will help others, they will follow me. The degree of leadership opportunity is the only variable that has an impact on the scouting environment. The only non-leaders are those that are not given a chance to show what they can offer the group. The kid that can cook well for the patrol is in fact a leader. When he cooks everyone shows up and shows up on time when mess is called. The PL that can organize things is a great leader. An APL that truly assists the PL is a true leader. He may not be able to lead himself, but he helps the PL do a better job than he could have done on his own. Once members of the patrols realize that each of the boys can be reliable on what they have to offer, then true teamwork is possible. The bully that says you do this, next guy does that, and the third guy do something else.... OR ELSE! Will get the job done, but how much more effective the "followers" would be if they took lead on a necessary job needing to be done. John, you're the best cook, would you take lead on grubmaster this weekend? Is John a leader or just best cook, or both???? Naturally all the boys are good at something. A good PL will seek to find what those skills are and encourage them for the welfare of the group. Natural leaders have good skills, but also a strong natural desire to practice those skills! If Tommy can't cook, has no interest in being a cook, hates to cook, why would a good PL ever make him grubmaster for the weekend? As a leader, I would do everything I could to make sure Tommy was never on the patrol duty roster as cook! However, I would find out what Tommy likes to do and wants to work at getting better at doing and make sure every opportunity for him is available on the duty roster to do it. As mentioned on the meek, reserved boy that likes to organize things... why would anyone not want him to take the lead on the QM job? Yes, not every boy has management skills, but they are all natural leaders! They may need to be educated in management/organizational skills, but when it comes to leadership, just providing opportunities to release them in usually enough to have them develop on their own. Stosh Link to post Share on other sites
Tampa Turtle 1011 Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 While I think there are more boys who are natural leaders than natural managers I disagree that *all* boys are natural leaders. Some just aint--ant that is OK. Takes all kinds. What I think Kudu is getting at is that the kind of boy the adults would want -- Early Eagle Scout, All-A's, etc might not be a great leader at all for the other boys. And yes it is situational. A great leader on a long hike may not be the same skill set for organizing the Patrol Box. Most people have a mix of skill and I feel our job is to provide a mix of situations so that a lot of boys get a chance to do what they do best. That usually works best in the Patrol system where complementary skills and personalities can balance out and less so in the Troop level ones. IMHO. Link to post Share on other sites
qwazse 4350 Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 A natural leader either pulls teams together. Sometimes you need to correct "where" they're pulling them, but mostly you need to set them up so that boys know there's something worth imitating there. And that's probably the best thing you can do for the kids who have to learn to be leaders. Keep them in the company of others who are a few paces down the trail. Then when you have a moment to reflect with those kids, you can toss out the managment theory question such as "What do you think makes __ such a good SPL/PL/QM? Do you think you could be like that?" Whatever you do, please don't make them go to a class on the subject! Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now