NYLT - Rethinking support...

[Stosh 3452]

I have a masters/professional degree in business management and yet I have worked with volunteer groups for over the past 40 years (both adult and youth) as well and there is a big difference between leadership and management skills.

 

Managers can "manage" either tasks (Theory X) or people (Theory Y). Leadership can only lead people. A good manager is able to translate the goals, expectations, and directives of the leader into reality. He is an excellent follower! A rare individual may be able to be both. A good manager with a bit of leadership can accomplish some great things. However, a great leader may be a terrible manager. He may inspire, motivate, excite, and challenge, but he may not know how to put that into reality without a manager or two giving him support.

 

I'm thinking that the reason NYLT is so successful for some troops (and here's where I'm going to draw flack big time!!) is the fact that the leadership is coming from the adults and the youth are thus directed, coached, mentored, etc. into managing, (aka following directions). The good SPL is able to functionally get the boys to do the program given to him by BSA/adults and coordinate the boys (management of people) into accomplishing it (management of the tasks). They don't need leadership skills to do this. All they have to do is follow the taught processes of management (i.e. EDGE, for example)

 

However, I don't see leadership in those terms and although I teach the management skills to my boys I also take them back to the original dynamics of BSA and teach them real leadership. That is quite a bit different and has no curriculum capable of being written to do that. Everyone has a slightly different leadership approach, a slightly different leadership style, and to teach an EDGE skill in that situation is trying to get everyone to be the same and that just isn't going to happen.

 

As I mentioned on the forum before, I had one Eagle candidate really screw things up and I sat blocking his EBOR for 6 months. During that time I stripped him of his SPL position, and made him just another member of the patrol. He was then directed to prove his leadership or I would continue to block the EBOR. He only wanted to get his Eagle so he could quit the troop at age 16. Well, since then he learned to lead from the backseat. He figured it out, he struggled and he taught and he took care of the boys as he never did before (servant leadership). The boys looked to him as SPL even though he didn't wear the patch anymore. Basically he convinced everyone, including himself that he was indeed a leader. Well, he's had his ECOH and when he tearfully pinned his mentor pin on me, it got to me as well. He's my JASM (who is basically working as a functional TG!) and working on his palms while training the next SPL what leadership is all about.

 

All of this had nothing to do with how well he was trained in management skills!!!!

 

"There is nothing in the NYLT syllabus about management. There's developing a vision, goals, planning, problem solving, EDGE, conflict resolution. All put into practice with hands-on outdoor activites. No management."

 

So what was his vision? He didn't have one, the SM basically took that away! His goals, getting his Eagle and the SM was blocking him? Survival in the troop and program was his challenge. Planning? Fish out of water, this gentleman didn't even have a Plan Z. Problem solving? Okay, he had to figure out how to lead from the backseat, lead by having others lead. EDGE? Not even in his vocabulary! Conflict resolution? How am I going to win back the troop and have the SM get out of my way and let me really lead. Nothing in NYLT would have been much use to this boy because he didn't need management skills, he needed heart, and the confidence and opportunity to find out how to use it for the betterment of others. The others followed him because they began to realize that for the first time this boy actually cared about them and not just himself and his Eagle.

 

One can't always define the difference between leadership and management, but like the fire alarm, once you experience it, you know what it is.

 

Stosh

[jhankins 10]

I think it depends on the age and leadership development cycle of a troop to see how NYLT affects the culture and use of the theories from the course.

 

While one boy may jumpstart the use of the theories and begin to start the changes within the troop, a few years later another boy may buy-in to the youth-led method and begin to vision-cast for the entire group. I've seen this in several troops where the ultimate goals for the troop are set with the committee, but the SPL shapes his vision within that context and away the boys go!

 

Let me state clearly this is a difficult culture to foster in today's society and it does require the leaders to take more of a backseat. It can be done, though, and all of the tools taught at NYLT merge with the tools taught at Wood Badge (oh no, I said it!). The boys are then truly youth leaders and the adults become the support for that effort.

[SMT224 10]

Thanks for all the thoughtful responses to my post. I especially appreciate the excellent discussions on management vs leadership. I will certainly be taking this material to our Troop Leadership Training, as well as using in my discussion with those who have completed NYLT. Clearly the material presented in NYLT is only part of what maps out the leadership trail.

Thanks again for your responses.

[CalicoPenn 729]

The best definition of Leadership I ever heard is a paraphrase of a saying by a Supreme Court Justice:

 

"I can't define what Leadership is, but I know it when I see it".

 

 

FScouter states: "There is nothing in the NYLT syllabus about management. There's developing a vision, goals, planning, problem solving, EDGE, conflict resolution. All put into practice with hands-on outdoor activites. No management."

 

However, all of that is Management. None of it is Leadership. Now before anyone get's excited about that statement, let me be clear about what I mean by that. A successful Manager needs to be able to utilize all of those skills to be successful, whether managing people or tasks. What makes it different for Leaders is that a successful Leader may use any or all of those tools, but only one of those tools is truly required - and thats developing a vision. Being a successful Leader does not mean that one neccessarily advances visions and goals of the group, company or organization. A person who succeeds in undermining the group's goals by convincing his peers to follow his own personal vision is a successful Leader - whether we recognize him as a leader or not.

 

Leadership cannot be taught - whether at NYLT or at a Scoutmaster's knee. If you are sending Scouts to NYLT expecting them to learn how to become Leaders, you will be disappointed. Leadership is modeled - and there is a big difference between something being taught and something being modeled. You can read all the Leadership books on the planet, and they won't teach you how to become a Leader, Those leadership books tend to make people more critical of other's leadership skills than improve one's own. Unless someone you have close, regular contact with models any of the behavior in the books, you won't pick it up.

[Eagledad 2779]

>>Leadership cannot be taught - whether at NYLT or at a Scoutmaster's knee.

[Thomas54 10]

 

To me the vision, mission and EDGE taught at the NYLT is beginning to look like the Montessori school of management.

 

From Wikipedia

"Applying this method involves the teacher (SCOUTMASTER)in viewing the child (SCOUT) as having an inner natural guidance for his or her own perfect self-directed development.[4] The role of the teacher (sometimes called THE SCOUTMASTER) is therefore to watch over the environment to remove any obstacles that would interfere with this natural development. The teacher's (SCOUTMASTER'S) role of observation sometimes includes experimental interactions with children, commonly referred to as "lessons, OUTINGS" to resolve misbehavior or to show how to use the various self-teaching materials that are provided in the environment for the children's free use.[5]"

 

The ALL CAPS are my additions.

 

A working duty roster, daily schedule and check list are far more valuable to a patrol then the vision, and perceived mission of the 13 year PL. Dirty pots and pans can get in the way of "the vision" thus the go back into the patrol box. The vision of a fun outing over rides the all other elements of a tidy tent and campsite.

 

Self discipline would seem the biggest shortcomings of today's youth. There seems to be plenty of vision. Scouts seem to be well focused on tele-vision and always looking for pro-visions.

 

 

 

 

[jhankins 10]

Internet rule of etiquette #3, the first person to quote wikipedia loses.

 

 

[Thomas54 10]

 

Dab-gum-it. I am out! But I just made it to the second round.

 

 

 

[Eagle92 110]

But Looking at the citations that Wikipedia uses, if given and reputable, is OK.

[LIBob 10]

I am not even remotely familiar with NYLT.

 

But (recollecting back 25 years or so)my old troop sent three of our boy leaders to something called "Brownsea Double 2" and it was the best thing that had happened to the troop since its formation.

 

Now,

maybe those three particular boys were the exception,

maybe "Brownsea Double 2" had little or no effect on most participants,

but from my limited perspective I cannot imagine why scouting would want to change something that worked so phenomenally well.

[Eagle92 110]

LL,

Brownsea 22 is completely different than NYLT is today as it was written by GBB and emphasized not only leadership, but also basic scout skills. We did the backpacking, camping, orienteering, pioneering, wilderness survival, etc etc. It was comparable to WB in my council growing up, and I was the only adult on JLT staff who had not gone through WB because I went through BA22 instead.

 

 

eagle92

Cocky Curlew

[sherminator505 10]

"The current curriculum is designed for Boy Scouts and Venturing both. One of the main problems is making the lectures and examples relevant to both groups."

 

One thing in favor of this approach is the fact that both groups are older youth. Unfortunately, this also leads to watering down of the curriculum, which in the end benefits neither group.

[AvidSM 11]

I support NYLT because I have seen SPLs and ASPLs return from it with a lot of good ideas and a lot of scout spirit. The boys that run NYLT in my Council love to sing, cheer and do all the rah-rah stuff. The Scoutmaster that leads the course gives them full reign and they don't disappoint. Does it teach management or leadership? I think a little of both.

 

To me, management chooses the right people for the job, tasks them and gives them the tools and training they need. It's more about the process and less about the people. Leaders provide direction and motivation. They are less process orientated and more people driven.

 

I'll use the example of the scouts assigned to clean up after their patrol's dinner. A Patrol leader uses mostly management skills to assign the task to a few of his patrol members, and lists their names on the duty roster. He reminds these boys that it is their job to clean up after dinner. Before his patrol left for the campout, he made sure his patrol box was not missing anything - wash tubs, soap, scrubbing pads, disinfectant, etc. He watches over them to see if they actually do the job. He inspects their work afterward. Very little leadership skills required, in this example.

 

Now, lets use the same example, except one of the boys assigned to cleanup is sick in his tent and the patrol box is missing the cleaning tubs and there is no dish soap. Now that same patrol leader has to convince some other boy in his patrol to do cleanup. He has to be a leader and somehow get someone else to do something for the good of the patrol and that is not their job. He may do this by asking a favor, using his charisma, pleading, promising something in return, etc. Also, he has to improvise by finding some other containers to do cleanup in. He also has to talk to another patrol leader about using some of their dish soap, most likely in trade.

 

Leadership is a dynamic, where as management is static. An assembly line is managed -it's a set of repetitive tasks that are profit motivated. A scout troop is lead - rarely do you do the same thing twice, in the same way and you have to be very creative in motivating the group.

[Stosh 3452]

AvidSM,

 

Using your example?....

 

"I'll use the example of the scouts assigned to clean up after their patrol's dinner. A Patrol leader uses mostly management skills to assign the task to a few of his patrol members, and lists their names on the duty roster. He reminds these boys that it is their job to clean up after dinner."

 

He's there to babysit? He's taken away their opportunity to lead, instead he takes the time to remind them that they are following.... Unnecessary and somewhat condescending towards his patrol members.

 

"Before his patrol left for the campout, he made sure his patrol box was not missing anything - wash tubs, soap, scrubbing pads, disinfectant, etc."

 

That's what he has a Quartermaster for. Again, he's taken away an opportunity for his Quartermaster to step up and lead. Again, he is managing and keeping his patrol members under his control and away from leadership.

 

"He watches over them to see if they actually do the job."

 

Again, he's managing to convince the boys they can't be trusted with doing it and doing it right. Lovely adult technique to be passing on to the boys. I always love it when my boss hovers over my shoulder to make sure I do my job. I don't know why he just doesn't just cut to the chase and say "I don't trust you!" That'll make my day for sure and endear me to my boss.

 

"He inspects their work afterward. Very little leadership skills required, in this example."

 

I would say NO leadership skill is needed, but a good dosage of distrust, bullying, intimidation could easily be accounted for.

 

"Now, lets use the same example, except one of the boys assigned to cleanup is sick in his tent and the patrol box is missing the cleaning tubs and there is no dish soap."

 

Obviously the Quartermaster has not taken care of his buddies by providing any leadership and made sure the boys were ready with a properly outfitted chuck box.

 

"Now that same patrol leader has to convince some other boy in his patrol to do cleanup."

 

A manager would do that, a leader wouldn't.

 

"He has to be a leader and somehow get someone else to do something for the good of the patrol and that is not their job. He may do this by asking a favor, using his charisma, pleading, promising something in return, etc."

 

I'm thinking intimidation, coercion, threats and such would be much better than begging and pleading, bargaining and indicating to the patrol members they hold the upper hand. I'm not seeing any leadership yet.

 

"Also, he has to improvise by finding some other containers to do cleanup in. He also has to talk to another patrol leader about using some of their dish soap, most likely in trade."

 

Yeah, right. There is very little if no leadership in this process as well. Sorry, it doesn't work for me. Where's the QM in all of this? Nope, I'm seeing no leadership in the second example either.

 

Okay, John is sick and he's responsible for cleaning up supper. PL realizes everyone in the patrol has been given duty sometime for cleanup and to add and change would be unfair to someone else on the roster. Okay, roll up the sleeves and get to work leading!

 

PL: Hey, APL, give me a hand, we need to cover for John, he's sick. (Translated: Hey APL, come and join in the fun I'm going to lead in!)

 

APL: okay, but there's no soap or wash bins.

 

PL: Find the QM and get him over here. I'll get the water heating. (Translation: Take the lead on getting the QM, I'll take the lead on getting the task done.)

 

APL: Okay.

 

QM: What's up?

 

PL: Need some dish soap and pans, do your magic and round some up. John's sick and we need to cover for him.

 

QM: Got it covered. (Translation: I'll take the lead on solving the problem that I've created.)

 

APL: I'll wash, you dry. (Translation: I'll take the lead on the chore.)

 

PL: No problem... here comes the QM

 

QM: The other patrol's QM had soap, dump some in a cup, I got to get the bottle back to him. He said we can use the pans, but need to get them back before the next meal. Sorry for the mixup. Anything I can do to help? (Translation: I screwed up, I fixed it, life goes on.)

 

PL: No problem, we got it covered now. (Translation: All's forgiven, forget it.)

 

QM: You check on John, see how he's doing. I'll wrestle with the APL for the dishrag. (Translation: You're the PL, get back to your duties, the APL and I'll cover this situation.)

 

 

It's called teamwork and everyone looking out for the other guys to make things happen (Leadership). The only thing that was managed in this scenario was the problem they faced and it was managed as different people took ownership of it and resolved it. When confronted with a problem, everyone stepped up (Leadership) and took a share in it's resolution (Leadership). It's also known as taking the lead and all three of them took the lead and passed around the leadership opportunities amongst each other as they did so.

 

It is for this reason I find it a lot easier to teach boys leadership than management. It is also the same reason my boys basically don't give me grief because of my leadership.

 

Example:

 

Summer camp last week... The latrine was a mess, it hadn't been cleaned since last summer. We were the first in the site this year. When the boys went off to MB classes on Monday a.m., the latrine was still a mess. SM (me) went in and swept it out, dragged out the fire ring that was stored there, put up the TP on top of the partitions, swept it out, including all the cobwebs, then took the hose and rinsed everything down. Was that the SM's job? Nope, but then one leads by example, (so we've all been told!) it's what leadership is all about. Did I take away someone's opportunity to lead? Yes, but because they had all day Sunday to do this and didn't, it was time for a lesson/demonstration in leadership.

 

Well, from that point on all the rest of the week, that latrine stayed absolutely spotless. On the last day, just before we left I made one last visit to the latrine before heading out, it had been swept out and hosed down for the next troop. They had learned their lesson well. No one in the troop is so goodie two shoed that they can't take the toughest job and do it up right.

 

The boys knew it was me who had cleaned out the latrine in the beginning (no one else was in camp at that time) and yet by setting the bar high, they stepped up and maintained the standard throughout the week without me ever having to say a word. As a matter of fact, I never did say anything about camp chores and when it came time to leave the site, the SM does one last walk through the site. Well even after having a raccoon raid the camp one night and the boys had garbage all over the place, when I walked through I found one black twist tie that needed to be picked up. I was impressed with their leadership and LNT attitude that I didn't have to even remind them, and I don't think I'll even have to checkup on them next time either.

 

None of these boys are over the age of 14. When one expects miracles, sometimes they actually get one or two along the way.

 

Leadership is an attitude, not a skill.

 

Stosh

[jhankins 10]

Leadership is really an art form. It takes creativity, patience, flexibility and inspiration. But the most important thing to learn about leadership is that by leading first by serving, you'll be more accepted in your leadership role.