Adult Mandates vs. Boy Led

[Stosh 3452]

While listening to many of the posts being discussed on this forum it has come to my attention the number of times adults "mandate, direct, guide, etc." policies that are not required by national or council directives.

 

This leads me to wonder just how much authority the boys do have in attempting to lead themselves in the program. Surely every attempt is made to assist the boys in taking responsibility, but without any authority to do so, it's a rather unproductive effort. Basic management techniques teach that without any authority to make changes, having been the responsibility to make those changes is a formula for failure. Are we setting our boys up to fail and how quickly do they pick up on this process and give up in frustration?

 

I know as an adult how difficult it is to allow the boys to run with their own program. Loss of control may produce a total disaster, but then by adult micro-managing everything may produce a similar disaster.

 

Thoughts?

 

Stosh

[gwd-scouter 11]

Since this thread was spun from my post about budgeting, guess I'll wade in first. I do not see how having a budget for food purchases (even if adult mandated) in any way takes away from attempts to be a boy-led, patrol method troop. I just don't see what the problem is in teaching the boys to work within a budget. I daresay budgeting is a lesson many Americans were not taught well.

 

Boy-led does not mean the adults abdicate their responsibilities to teach, nor does teaching equate to adults micromanaging. I would wager that everyone on this forum in some way guides their scouts in things that are not written by national or council.

 

Having said that, I'm sure someone will post here about how perfect his/her troop is and how it is so wonderfully boy-led that the adults would never dream of "mandating, directing, guiding" the scouts.

 

Sorry for tenor of my post. I just get frustrated by the seemingly perfect among us.

[Eamonn 61]

Not sure I like the word "Mandate"?

I know I have and can point a PLC in the direction I think they should be in.

At one PLC meeting the guys said that they wanted to go to Disney in Florida. (I can never remember which is Land and which is world!)

They expected me to say that this was just a silly idea.

I didn't.

I said it was a wonderful idea. I went on about the Merit Badges that Disney offers and how much fun traveling to Florida would be.

Then I asked them to find out how much it would cost?

Once they worked out how much and seen how much fund raising would be involved they had a change of heart.

I kinda knew this was going to happen.

Rather than a Mandate, I think having the youth find out why something isn't going to work (Or on the other hand is going to work.) Is the way to go.

I have not read the other thread.

But when it comes to a food budget.

I think maybe having it as an agenda item for the PLC is a good thing. Allowing them to look at a menu where the cost is too high and the consequences of this might be? Then looking at a menu where the cost is too low and looking at the consequences of that might be?

How far you want to go with this? Is up to the PLC.

Do they want to visit the local supermarket and price the menus? Or are they going to take the adults word that $50.00 is too high a cost for a weekend and $5.00 isn't enough?

 

There are times when adults unknowingly force what they think is for the best on the youth that they serve.

Almost 100% of the Troops in our Council attend the Council Summer Camp. Just about every unit signs up for the same site, same week next year before they depart this year.

The Scouts are never asked what they want? It's just a given!

Of course I can see that the adults do need to know when to ask for the time off work, they might need to look at the problems transporting a group of Scouts to someplace where parents wouldn't be able to just drop them off might entail and there might be questions about equipment? But I'd prefer if the Scouts were presented with the problems and left to work out what can work and what isn't going to work.

I think if I were the SM, I could sway them to my way of thinking, while having them believe that it was their idea.

 

A little like when HWMBO asks me "What do you want for dinner?" I reply "What have you got?" She answers "What do you want?" and we end up having chicken. -Which she has already pulled from the freezer and is now defrosting!

Eamonn.

 

gwd-scouter,

None of us are perfect.

We all end up doing what works.

What might work today with one group of Scouts, might not work with another group.

A great tool for finding out what is and isn't working is Reflections.

Feed Back really is a gift.

We all do what we can, when we can with the resources available.

Some of the times that I have messed up are still talked about around camp fire around the world.

With the passing of time they are now seen as being funny and the people who re-tell the stories are in no way being unkind.

 

[Buffalo Skipper 13]

Ten years ago I worked for Delta Airlines as an ticket/gate and baggage agent. As such I (and all the other agents/co-workers) had to make decisions about a wide variety of issues. We had a policy called RAA, which stood for Responsibility, Authority, Accountability.

 

It was our Responsibility to resolve any issue (with a customer).

We had the Authority to resolve it in the best manner, as we saw fit.

We were Accountable (to our supervisors) for our decisions.

 

That is not to say that we were not given guidelines on how to resolve situations or complaints. But within those "limits" (and they were fairly broad) we were given the lattitude to make our own decisions. And and there were even circumstances in which we could work outside those boundaries. Yet we were accountable for our actions and had to justify our decisions. If we exercised poor judgement, there was a consequence. This is life.

 

I always liked this policy, and I have tried to apply this to the leaders in my troop. I feel that giving our leaders (primarily PLs and SPL, and less frequently QM, Scribe, etc) the ability to handle the problems we they encounter, they are truly placed in a position of leadership. As of this writing, all these leaders have been on only one campout, so I can offer little accountablity of its success.

[gwd-scouter 11]

As I said in another post, I am taking things much too personally these days. Time for me to go away for a while.

[Beavah 205]

Yah, stosh, relax a bit, eh?

 

All of us provide some structure for da boys to work within. Call that "mandates" or call it "guidance", it's definitely our contribution to the program. Adult relationships method and all that. There are some adult-driven things which you've described in your programs over time that I personally wouldn't do, but it's part of the structure you provide that allows the boys freedom in other areas.

 

If we're smart about it, we tailor the guidance to the ability of the lads. A younger group might get some fairly firm parameters; an older or more capable group should get less.

 

We should always be willing to examine our assumptions about the boys' capability, and about the sort of "troop traditions" which crop up. Some continue to be helpful, and some should probably be faded out or re-examined. Just because we used imposed budgets to start teachin' the boys that aspect of planning doesn't mean we should keep 'em forever. Just because we haven't imposed budgets doesn't mean that we shouldn't, if the current crop of guys needs that to help learn.

 

Beavah

 

[Stosh 3452]

I was hoping that the thread wouldn't get bogged down into just one or two examples of specific issues that require adult intervention. Obviously safety issues, application of the Scout Laws, and other programatic requirements will all apply.

 

I was also hoping the thread would avoid any troop competitions as to who's got the better troop, too.

 

I do find that there is a fulcrum point at which adults and boys take the initiative of actual leadership of the program. A troop could start out with high expectations of boy-led and yet a bit here, a piece there where adults step in and take over initiating a slippery slope dynamic that eventually has the boys doing less and being more and more restricted in their options. Every troop has this internal issue, not "is my troop more boy-led than the next".

 

Budgeting food might be a positive issue from an adult perspective, but do the same "mandates" apply across the board for all patrols? Or could the same be said for a "goal" or "target" budget level that will assist the boys in making wise choices for food purchases. Does it have to be an adult specified mandate? Maybe the venture patrol will need to go over budget to purchase specialty back-country meals whereas the NSP might find the budget goal an appropriate target to shoot for when learning how to set up food purchases. These issues, too, teach boys how to make responsible choices within certain guidelines/goals.

 

The question for me always goes back to the issue of who has the authority to make responsibile decisions? Do the adults make authoritative mandates and then expect the boys to fall into line by being responsible? How can one ever learn leadership responsibility if all they do is follow adult mandates/directives? It kinda reminds me of the great artist who got where he/she is today because they learned how to color outside the lines of conventional norms.

 

I, too, often fall prey to the "my way or the highway" mentality of the average parent/adult. But if the goal is to develop leadership responsibility for their parol/troop members if all they ever do is follow along the lines of adult mandates. I guess in the long run I would rather have the boys learn from the mistakes of the older boys rather than the adults. If the NSP PL is teaching meal budgets to his patrol, would it not be better to have the PL tell the boys that certain purchases are not a good idea because he tried it and it didn't work rather than having an adult (who of course knows it doesn't work) stepping in and saying "No can do!" without the boys experiencing the why's and wherefore's?

 

Is true leadership being taught if every time the boys ask "Why?" the standard answer is "Because I said so."?

 

I realize that it's rather uncomfortable for SM's with helicopter parents, but doesn't the same dynamic occur when the boys have a helicopter SM?

 

Stosh

 

added comment: Buffalo, I like that RAA policy, I hadn't always added the second A onto it, but I'll be using all three from now on, great idea!

 

Stosh

 

(This message has been edited by jblake47)

[Gunny2862 11]

Haven't read the other thread yet so I'm just looking at the question asked.

 

There are things that need to happen whether National mandates them or not.

Among them: Someone needs to have checked the weather., Someone needs to know where you are going, when you anticipate returning, that you HAVE returned, that you have the capability to function where you are going, that you have collected funds to operate with, that shopping has been conducted that food storage was done properly, that such trash as is generated is properly handled/ disposed of. And many others...(interesting to me the Tour Permit doesn't set off a S&R when people don't return inside their window)

 

Of all of these things, each one is not just a single teaching opportunity. Many times,(for those of us who are less gifted and need reminders) in order to facilitate the things each of us finds important, a checklist (or teaching points) list develops and as these things go occasionally someone comes along and sees the list and it becomes a Requirement rather than a reminder of a teaching moment.

 

If the boys don't know what needs to be done I don't see that letting them continually flounder without at least guidelines(or possibilities lists - whatever you want to call it) to show them the right direction is the right thing to do. And giving them a checklist(guideline resource) seems reasonable.

 

It's when a martinet sees the checklist and decides that item 7c isn't clicked off(even though it only applies when the tents have all been drenched and doesn't occur until after return to the origination point and the Scouts are still camping) and item 8 has, so we need to stop everything and correct that. That it becomes an issue - usually in our case, between the SM and the Adult who hasn't grasped the spirit of things.

 

Frankly, unless they've been exposed to a Boy-led program(that is at a minimum at our current level - and IMHO we are at the bottom of what one should call Boy-led - but we will continue to push in that direction) they NEED the direction to have the confidence that they are doing the right thing so that they WILL step forward and lead. No one likes to fail, especially publicly and the checklist may be a crutch but for early or young developing leaders who aren't "natural leaders" they are necessary tools.

 

While the natural leader theory may be a great one to work with, in our troop it's about developing EACH boy to the level they are willing to work to, not to simply give the experience to one or two leaders for each "Class year" or in some cases for that periods dynastic leader who didn't leave the opportunity open for anyone else.

(edit: I would have been the third poster had work not intervened sorry if any is inapplicable or after the fact now.)(This message has been edited by Gunny2862)

[Nike 94]

Know why our troop has bylaws, rules, regs, etc?

 

Parents. (And lawyers.)

 

I prefer that adult leadership be there for Safety and Sanity as well as some older wisdom, resources, and interpretation of BSA policies.

[Mafaking 10]

 

gwd-scouter, At times these threads can get personal. Our minds twist these responses into more than what they are, just black ticks on a grey background.

 

I know less about what boy led means now than I did five years ago. After reading several thousand scouter.com posts and hundreds of debates on these forms I am much more cynical when a scouter comes up and says "we are boy led". As a discussion group we have our norms and debates flow and turn on each others expectations. I am more kind and forgiving of boy-led statements made in person than I am on this forum. Just one of you step out of line and I'll send my black ticks after you.

 

Buffalo Skipper has a good parallel. I think a lot of companies use this sort of approach. Walmart seems to have various levels of approval for their cashiers. First degree cashiers just push buttons. Lead cashiers can make over-rides up to $25. Head cashiers $100 and so forth. The level of responsibility is matched to the authority.

 

I think to some extent the BSA program leadership element is over the heads of the bulk of the youths in our troop. The 12 & 13 year olds are just now coming into who they are as a person. Leadership is smoke, it can be seen but not held. The High school boys get into the leadership much more than the middle school scouts. But the the high school scouts lose some of the passion that the younger ones have.

 

If we gave more authority to the scout would they respond? I haven't loaded them up on a lot "can't" right now and they aren't coming to me saying they need more authority. Could a stepped and well defined authority level be developed and clearly presented to the youth leadership such as the head cashier approach? Perhaps a road map would make it clearer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Eagledad 2779]

I guess I dont understand the question. It appears that we are given the choice of the two extremes when just about all troops work somewhere in the middle. Surely even that adults gets some time to learn from the experience as well.

 

I enjoyed your post Mafaking. There was a time that I sure could sure relate to it.

 

Barry

 

[Lisabob 13]

Mafaking expressed something I've felt, but not fully realized, for some time too; that idea that I "know" less now than I did a little while ago. It can be easy to look for a nice, clear-cut, definition yet in reality, "boy led" probably means different things in different circumstances. I too am a lot more skeptical of leaders who claim to have "boy led" troops. If they're really glib about it or if their troop sounds picture perfect, then I tend to take such assertions with larger and larger doses of salt.

 

This also resonates for me: "If we gave more authority to the scout would they respond?"

 

That's a question I've been struggling with myself, and we adults in my son's troop grapple with it as a group too (sometimes more successfully, sometimes less). In large part because of this forum, I frequently find myself on the side that answers that question with a conditioned "yes." It seems like this is a touch-and-go subject. Some boys might respond, others might not. Some boys might respond if they truly feel secure in the knowledge that they won't get hammered for responding in ways that turn out not to work as planned the first time they try something. Some boys might take a while, maybe longer than we'd like, to respond. Maybe they're just cautious (I'm really amazed at how cautious and conservative teenage boys are!) or maybe they are waiting to see if the adults really mean it. Some boys might respond in baby steps, with a lot of hand holding along the way, while they gain confidence.

 

And what to do if or when they don't respond, or they take too long a time to respond? I think that's where many "adult mandates" come in, sometimes as ways to encourage fledgling leadership, sometimes as more overt ways of trying to move the program along. The balance point between intentions and outcomes is tricky sometimes.

[Beavah 205]

Yah, Amen Lisabob.

 

Kids are funny. They're all different. Adults are funny. They're all different, too. Programs are funny, they're all different.

 

When anyone claims there's a program that produced magical results for all kids given all adults and all circumstances, they're worthy of a quiet smile of pity, eh? They haven't developed enough experience yet to understand.

 

B

[Stosh 3452]

I realize that the title of the thread indicates the two extremes in the program, but I also mentioned there is a fulcrum point, i.e. balance point that sits in the middle. Surely we are all tending one way or the other just tipping the balance. At what point does one step in with adult dictates and tip the scale over to a more adult led situation and maybe it might be only one or two small issues that can (as most adults can testify) become major problems, and how can a troop know when they make the effort to be boy-led know that the tables have finally tilted the other way and the ball begins to roll for the boys. This "fine-line" is often difficult to determine for each group and at other times efforts to tilt it one way only to have a small issue convince the boys that they're no longer running the program, so why try.

 

Have we put so many adult mandates/guidelines/by-laws/rules/regulations on the program that we in fact convince the boys that it's never going to be enough to become a boy-led program so they quit before they even start? Or have we relaxed our adult efforts in certain areas and reinforced the boys' side to help tip the effort of leadership over to their side of the balance sheet?

 

To worry about the extremes isn't very productive, but worrying about the balance point just might be enough to trigger some real growth for the boys if we as adults can help shift the weight over to their side. How is that done in your troop or is there no effort on the part of the adults to do so because things are going smoothly with the adults running the show?

 

Stosh

[sheldonsmom 10]

I think it is much like raising our own children. We have set rules(mandates if you will) for our younger children. As they have grown, we have relaxed or released them to where they are accountable to God and themselves. We have an adult child (oxymoron, I know) living at home while she attends college nearby. The only requirements upon her are to do her assigned household duties and let us know when she is going to be in or out. Our almost adult son is on about the same system but must still ask for final approval. Our 12 year old has many more restrictions upon her behavior and activities.

Shouldn't we treat the scouts the same way. Our NSPs should have guidelines and budgets to help them learn. Our Venture Patrols should have nearly complete autonomity. They will usually live up to your expectations. Not always, but usually. "If you want your children to keep their feet on the ground, put some responsibility on their shoulders" Abigale Van Buren