From <@tcuavm.is.tcu.edu:owner-scouts-l@TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU> Mon Dec 8 20:31:59 1997 Return-Path: <@tcuavm.is.tcu.edu:owner-scouts-l@TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU> Received: from tcuavm.is.tcu.edu (TCUAVM.IS.TCU.EDU [138.237.128.148]) by cap1.CapAccess.org (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id UAA29271; Mon, 8 Dec 1997 20:31:59 -0500 Received: from TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU by tcuavm.is.tcu.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 5198; Mon, 08 Dec 97 19:25:05 CDT Received: from TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@TCUBVM) by TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3254; Mon, 8 Dec 1997 19:25:25 -0500 Received: from TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU by TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3248 for SCOUTS-L@TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU; Mon, 8 Dec 1997 19:23:37 -0500 Received: from TCUBVM (NJE origin SMTP@TCUBVM) by TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3247; Mon, 8 Dec 1997 19:23:35 -0500 Received: from ALPHA.IS.TCU.EDU by tcubvm.is.tcu.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Mon, 08 Dec 97 19:22:43 CDT Received: from mx1.dynasty.net (mx1.dynasty.net) by ALPHA.IS.TCU.EDU (PMDF V5.0-5 #20456) id <01IQXXQKKPLC0028D2@ALPHA.IS.TCU.EDU> for scouts-l@ALPHA.IS.TCU.EDU; Mon, 08 Dec 1997 19:22:13 -0500 (CDT) Received: from jessica ([208.205.50.132]) by mx1.Dynasty.Net (Netscape Mail Server v2.02) with SMTP id AAA164 for ; Mon, 08 Dec 1997 19:22:03 -0600 X-Sender: blkeagle@mail.dynasty.net MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19971209012146.00705d5c@mail.dynasty.net> Date: Mon, 8 Dec 1997 19:21:46 -0600 Reply-To: "settummanque, or blackeagle (Mike Walton)" Sender: Scouts-L Youth Group List From: "settummanque, or blackeagle (Mike Walton)" Subject: Re: About Professional Scouters (1/2) *long* X-To: scouts-l@tcu.edu To: Multiple recipients of list SCOUTS-L Status: RO X-Status: *This posting is LONG* and comes in two parts because I couldn't respond to the posting in our 200 line cut-off. I'm going to try and respond to several comments and questions in the same posting. Here goes.. Paul Meyermann started the string with asking a series of questions: >In conversation with scouters absent any professionals, I have noticed a >theme of negative attitudes regarding the professionals they must deal >with. I have always thought that this was counter productive and often >unwarranted. > > Why is this? Many professionals, Paul, are viewed as "excess" and "not important" to the overall District management. Many volunteers see their professional in one or two "roles": that of being the "head fundraiser, youth recruiter, and paper-pusher" of the District and only looks to them to solve problems or questions dealing with those areas; or that of being the "person that gets all of the problems that we can't answer ourselves and the person that insures that we're doing "Boy Scouts" whenever we meet" because in many of those Districts, they have either a poor or non-existant Commissioners' staff and that professional must assume much or all of the District's Commissioners' staff roles. And yes, both points-of-view are counterproductive and also borderline discriminatory. > Is it because as volunteers working for free, there is a resentment that > they "do it for the money" while volunteers work for free and therefore > have noble motives? Only until those volunteers find out that their professional or professionals also work "for free" as volunteers for units that cannot or will not provide their own adult leadership because "the boys need Scouting here". There's a lot of pros out there that will literally overturn stumps to find volunteers....they are members of several organizations outside of Scouting and will find themselves constantly "networking" to find that Scoutmaster or that Cubmaster or that committee to get new or dead units going. Very few of them are sitting at their homes in the evening, watching "Wheel" and yelling at the screen "Say R!!". They are too busy eating a fast meal, catching up with their spouces on what happened during the day while he or she was "at the office" and before kissing the spouse, telling him or her "Hey...I'm going to be in late...don't wait up...I love you!" before running to the car, uniform or bookbag in hand. It's a part of their job to be "out in the field" and depending on how the professional worked their schedule, you can find a professional in a given Council out "in the field" as late as midnight...and then, having to rest at home only to come into the "office" the next morning at 6:30 or 7:00 am. >Is it because they are not providing the support and services actually > needed by scouters? Some of us, Paul, have already raised our hands up high and have told our professionals "Just do it....I don't have time nor the desire to do it". And those professionals have indeed "done it", and we're now complaining that "That's not the way it should have been done." And you know what?? Those professionals turn around, look at us, and tell us "remember, *I* asked you to do it your way....and what did you say to me?? Something like "I don't have time to do this"??? At least it's getting done. As far as services and support, he or she (or both) are supposed to be there to "train and coach a volunteer support structure". That's you and me, Paul....not him or her. WE are the "support and program services" that the District and Council uses to run their programming by. Those few professionals serve as "consultants" and "managers" for us when we can't do it.....and there's a lot more of them "doing our jobs for us" than it is us doing the jobs called upon by our job descriptions and guidance from our Council Presidents and District Chairs. >Is it because there job description calls for them to cajole volunteers >into giving ever increasing amounts of time to the program and then to >also support it financially? EVERYONE in the District (INCLUDING THE PROFESSIONAL(S)) are expected to support Scouting financially......and believe me, those professionals do give their fair share of their income and time toward the success of the District or Council. As far as cajoling us into giving more time and energies, I don't know of a professional that doesn't look at a volunteer and honestly told him or her "Look Mike, I really would like you to do this....but only if you're going to do a good job at it". Maybe you do. All I know that if there's a pro out there that constantly moves you further and further when you really don't want to move, is one that is constantly looking around for new volunteers for key jobs! >Is it because as a group they do not have the skills and experience >needed to be successful? Some may not have the skills and the experience needed. Some have a lot more than the average volunteer. Some professionals bring to the Scouting movement in America an unusually high amount of experience and training and dealing with volunteers; it's all in what you get and what that local Council demands of what they hire. Remember, it's not an issue of National "pushing someone" to serve as District Executive or Associate District Executive. It's a matter of the Council knowing what they are wanting and going to their Region and seeing that they get what they've asked to interview and not "just a list of names" and blindly (okay, they have ONE interview) picking one name from the list! >Is it because we wish that they would take responsibility for the making >sure that volunteer run activities run smoothly and successfully? There's just *so much* that our pros can do, Paul. Professionals cannot MAKE us "do our jobs", and that's why they must come in and "take up our slack" and do (or redo, in some cases) what we are supposed to be doing...what we "raised our hands up and VOLUNTEERED TO DO. A lot of us volunteers look at our volunteer roles in Scouting as something close to a hobby....we do it "because we like it, and because it's something I'm interested in", not because it's a task which MUST BE DONE in order to keep the program going. There's nothing wrong with enjoying what we do....we're supposed to enjoy what we're doing in Scouting. But we also have to look at the "bigger picture", the one that if we don't what we volunteered to do...that it brings the program down *just that little bit*. Enough people "not doing what they volunteered to do" and it brings the program down far enough to whereby the professional either HAS to step in to hold it back up or he or she will find it harder to bring Scouting to that community or neighborhood in successive years or even months!! Ian added from the point-of-view of the British Scouting Association: >If you look at the equivalent of " Scout Executives " there are NO >professionals at district or county level unless the district or county >raises the money to employ someone. There may be a paid administator, >camp site warden or an outreach worker developing Scouting in particular >communities, but they are not " policy makers " and there is no career >structure. They are not employed by Headquarters, and do not report to >anybody other than the County or District Executive Committee. That's the way the BSA was in it's younger days, Ian. However, as the BSA quickly moved to well over a million boys nationally, and as the sheer numbers and kinds of questions in American society was raised ("Can we have separate programs for Blacks and the Indians?", "Can we run Scouting like a youth club?", "What are the rules for awarding the Eagle to people that have given our Troop money...can we make them "honorary Eagles?", "We want to wear the official uniform....how can we make our own or where can we purchase the official uniform and add our own "local badges" to it??" and more...), the BSA quickly knew that doing it all from New York City or from North Brunswick, New Jersey would not work. They needed that LOCAL OPERATION to insure that the volunteers were running Scouting in the way the national organization says and to allow for *local variations* as to how the BSA and its programs are run *in our particular area of the country*. District and Council Executives are NOT employees of the BSA, Inc...they are employees of the local Council ("Cardinal Council, BSA, Inc.") and therefore while having national standards of practice and behavior, can be hired or fired by either National or the local Council Executive Board. >Depending on how you define " field " staff, a figure of one to every >50,000 members might be about right. The BSA defines "field staff" as those professionals working directly or indirectly with local Council or regional program development or execution. So, this means that everyone with the exeception of the Council Scout Executive, the Associate Council Executive, and perhaps the senior program directors at the local Council level in larger Councils, are considered "field executives". There's a forumla that is followed pretty closely in most Councils that basically state that for every 1200 youth members, that there should be about a quarter of that number that are volunteers (about 300 or so) and one professional supporting that number. As the number of youth increases, the number of volunteers must increase to support those youth and therefore, the support that a professional provides must increase either with more responsibilities or an increase in the number of pros. >I'm not sure if the BSA figure included just " executives " or their staff. The BSA includes ALL of their professional members...those working in Irving, Texas, as well as those that are "detailed" to work as part of the World Association of Scouting Movements Regions in countries around the world, those four Regional Directors and their staffs, and the 237 or so local Councils and their professional staffs. That number does NOT, however, include clerical staff, nor does it include Rangers and workers at the four National Outdoor Adventure facilities, nor does it include part-time professionals and other employees at the Distribution Center, what the BSA calls "professional-technical" staff members. More in the followup.... Settummanque! (c) 1997 Mike Walton ("no such thing as strong coffee,...") (502) 827-9201 (settummanque, the blackeagle) http://dynasty.net/users/blkeagle 241 Fairview Dr., Henderson, KY 42420-4339 blkeagle@dynasty.net kyblkeagle@aol.com or waltonm@hq.21taacom.army.mil ---- FORWARD in service to youth ---- From <@tcuavm.is.tcu.edu:owner-scouts-l@TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU> Mon Dec 8 20:35:51 1997 Return-Path: <@tcuavm.is.tcu.edu:owner-scouts-l@TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU> Received: from server1.capaccess.org (server1.CapAccess.org [207.91.115.5]) by cap1.CapAccess.org (8.6.12/8.6.10) with ESMTP id UAA00215; Mon, 8 Dec 1997 20:35:51 -0500 Received: from tcuavm.is.tcu.edu (TCUAVM.IS.TCU.EDU [138.237.128.148]) by server1.capaccess.org (AIX4.2/UCB 8.7/8.7) with SMTP id UAA07792; Mon, 8 Dec 1997 20:28:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU by tcuavm.is.tcu.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 5200; Mon, 08 Dec 97 19:28:16 CDT Received: from TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@TCUBVM) by TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3280; Mon, 8 Dec 1997 19:28:35 -0500 Received: from TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU by TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3253 for SCOUTS-L@TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU; Mon, 8 Dec 1997 19:25:48 -0500 Received: from TCUBVM (NJE origin SMTP@TCUBVM) by TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3249; Mon, 8 Dec 1997 19:25:16 -0500 Received: from ALPHA.IS.TCU.EDU by tcubvm.is.tcu.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Mon, 08 Dec 97 19:22:47 CDT Received: from mx1.dynasty.net (mx1.dynasty.net) by ALPHA.IS.TCU.EDU (PMDF V5.0-5 #20456) id <01IQXXQV969C00240N@ALPHA.IS.TCU.EDU> for scouts-l@ALPHA.IS.TCU.EDU; Mon, 08 Dec 1997 19:22:27 -0500 (CDT) Received: from jessica ([208.205.50.132]) by mx1.Dynasty.Net (Netscape Mail Server v2.02) with SMTP id AAA117 for ; Mon, 08 Dec 1997 19:22:21 -0600 X-Sender: blkeagle@mail.dynasty.net MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19971209012204.0071a140@mail.dynasty.net> Date: Mon, 8 Dec 1997 19:22:04 -0600 Reply-To: "settummanque, or blackeagle (Mike Walton)" Sender: Scouts-L Youth Group List From: "settummanque, or blackeagle (Mike Walton)" Subject: Re: About Professional Scouters (2/2) *long* X-To: scouts-l@tcu.edu To: Multiple recipients of list SCOUTS-L Status: RO X-Status: *This posting is LONG* and comes in two parts because I couldn't respond to the posting in our 200 line cut-off. Ian wrote: >What we don't have in UK are paid staff at district and county levels >processing advancement reports, tour permits, membership applications >etc. As a Group Scout Leader my " advancement reporting " consisted of >a form to be completed once a year that said that my group had awarded >a certain number of each award, and a breakdown of membership by age >and gender. Of course, in a typical local Council, there's much more reporting going on to support the program. Off of the top of my head, I can remember making reports on program accomphishments, number of advancements broken down by Cub, Scout and Explorer, by unit, by community, by chartered partner; I can also remember additional work reports on how much money was raised each quarter, where did it come from, who spent it, and what the program outcomes were; I also had to make a report on how much money I spent, how did I spend it, if it was for materials, why didn't I get it from National....a District's Executive has a lot of stuff that he or she has to keep track of each month. >As District secretary I collated these figures, added some information on >leader training and district leaders and passed it to county, where >another volunteer would collate ther district replies and pass then to HQ, >where presumably a clerk was paid to enter them onto the database. At the Council level (the American equal to the District for this discussion), not only is there someone there to input the data and get it ready to be sent to its servicing Region, but also the Council Scout Executive or a member of his or her staff has to explain WHY the increase or decrease was there, and has to explain it to both the Region AND to the volunteers in his or her Council (through the Council's Executive Board). >In twenty five years as a British Leader I have had one visit from a >professional to my unit. This was exceptional ... most youth will never >see a professional apart from staff at a jamboree or large event. This is why, Ian, I am ALWAYS encouraging professionals whereever I go to GET OUT THERE AND SHOW THEMSELVES TO UNITS AND YOUTH!! The first time I saw Ted Taylor (the first BSA employee I had ever met) was during a campout in Europe. He was there and introduce himself to my Troop as their "District Executive". I didn't even KNOW what a "District Executive" was and really, at that age....even if he told me that he worked for the BSA or the Council, I wouldn't understand it. But I never saw another DE until Doyle Fuller showed up at my Troop meeting and introduced himself..and then stuck around to answer questions about what he did for a living....which was different than "being in the Army" and assigned to a unit as a "umpty-umpt with the 14th Mess Kit Repair Battalion"!! >There are no " membership drives " organised by professionals, and no >" Friends of Scouting " solications either. Professionals' salaries are >costed into the annual membership subscription, and depending on the >budgets set by the leaders in each district and county this may be >between $20 and $30 per member. This includes a substantial liability >insurance and a limited accident insurance. Again, "membership drives" are SUPPOSED to be organized by VOLUNTEERS, not by the professional...he or she should be coordinating the volunteers' drives and insuring that schools and other facilities are open and available for the volunteers' drives and programs. And he or she should ONLY be there AS A SPEAKER and not as a "organizer" nor "developer". While the Friends of Scouting (or Sustaining Membership Enrollment in some Councils still) campaigns are COORDINATED AND DIRECTED by the Council, those drives are too, should be organized and managed and ran by the volunteers. It works better that way, and in those Councils that actually allow their volunteers to run and manage the campaign with little professional "nosing-in", they raise MORE MONEY. It's a matter of seeing volunteers out there truly rasing money instead of standing beside the pro while he or she is "making the pitch". Professional salaries are set annually by the Council's Executive Board, and take in account the seniority of the professional, the roles and responsibilities that the professional has to perform and support (hence, a District Executive that does not serve as Council staff advisor to a program or program emphasis gets paid less than those that are also advisors to the Order of the Arrow, Exploring, camping program, in-school Scouting or Leearning for Life, special Council programs, and other additional duties). Salaries are taken from the total amounts that the Council raises from Friends of Scouting/Sustaining Members, as well as from camping and outdoor programs, special events, project sales, gifts and development grants, and other sources. There is a national "scale" that actually says what a given professional should get in general terms depending on their title and scope of their roles; but a local Council can add to or take away from that scale depending on *locality*. >That does not mean that " Headquarters " is not available ... to the >contrary, any leader, and youth member for that matter, can call or write >to Headquarters. As with the BSA. >However, the National Commissioners for each program >area are volunteers ; they have a paid support staff. Which is the same here in the States...our National President, his five National Vice Presidents, our International Commissioner, and Chairs of each of our programs have professional counterparts that serve as Directors of those programs and advises the volunteer and answers much (not all) of the mail that comes into that division or program. And the BSA has been pretty good about letting us know how to reach those volunteer chairs WITHOUT sending mail to the National Office, BSA. While they don't release the actual "mailing address" of the Chairman, Boy Scout Division, they do inform us through the BSA's publications of the name and "civilian occupation" of each Chairholder of the BSA's programs and support positions. (but no, I don't know who is the Chair of the Boy Scout Division is presently...I should, but I don't know.) >Nearly twenty years >ago the rule was that Cub Scouts had to wear short trousers, and most of >the members disliked this. So we had our regular Sixers' Council ( a >meeting of the Sixers (denners) and Leaders ) and one of the boys wrote a >letter to the National Commissioner for Cub Scouts. A few weeks later we >had an acknowlegement. Two years later there was a change in " Policy, >Organisation and Rules " in response to pressure from units. That Sixer >was by now a Scout, but when the rules were changed I told the Cubs >that " our Sixers Council helped to change that "... a practical lesson in >the democratic process. The same has happened here in the States with regard to WEBELOS badge colors, with training awards for Cub Scouters and Roundtable staff members, with bringing back the Exploring Green uniforms and insignia, and recently with bringing back the older Exploring Silver Award and the older boy/girl rank structure that we'll see after the first of the year. While we all don't like the "bureacracy" of the BSA's National Office, we can all rest assured that they don't just "read and toss" our letters, faxes (and now) emails sent to them "roundaboutly". I would love to see the BSA finally come alive and join us all in the 90s and give us the opportunity to send emails directly to the National Office....but until then, we -- the volunteers out in the field -- are still able to "effect change" if we lobby for it in sufficent numbers and send our requests to the appropriate office at National! Norman also noted that: >Another point to consider is that, in most Scout Associations, the rules >governing Scouting (most often referred to as something along the lines >of "Policy, Organisation, and Rules) is made available to any adult >member or parent who wishes to look at or purchase a copy. Well....I can't argue that the BSA Rules and Regulations and the Charter and By-Laws aren't available to the "Joe or Jane Scouter" or the parents of "Bob Scout" without some waiting...but they *are available* through the local Council office (and eventually, given someone's time to scan/type/post it all, on the World Wide Web). But in addition to those basic rules, there's about 12 or so *other booklets* or manuals that explain other aspects of the BSA's many rules and policies and regulations. >The rules to play by in the BSA are, I understand, much more difficult to >come by, which can easily lead to the rapid development of an "us in the >trenches" vs "them what are keeping the rules from us" mentality. A lot of that doesn't come from the *professional* saying that, as much as it from *other volunteers* that choose to make themselves "powerful" by keeping others from knowing the same level of information that they know. That's why this list and lists like it have been a boon to BSA volunteers and some professionals because unlike that person, there's now hundreds of others that can explain to you the policy and even send you an electronic copy of the policy or procedure...therefore "knocking down" that person that feels that "since *I'm* the so-and-so, only *I* know the answer and way it should be done!!" >Please note that this situation would appear to come from a corporate >policy, rather than anything at the local council level. (Not too long ago I >observed a BSA professional holding up a red three-ring binder during a >training session and telling the course attendees that it told him how to >accomplish any aspect of his job...perhaps the Red Binder is the BSA >version of the POR?) Nope...it's the BSA's Administration Manual or the Scout Executive Manual, depending on the level of the professional holding the binder up. The color doesn't matter....the BSA professionals (and some former professionals that have "squarreled away" a copy to refer to later) use that manaul to work with volunteers and others....but it's NOT the complete BSA "POR". I would love to write one someday, but it won't even apply to many of the local Councils....for they are STILL ALLOWED to "modify" or "extend" the BSA's many policies and procedures locally. Hope that ALL of this adds to our discussion...its a good one! Settummanque! (c) 1997 Mike Walton ("no such thing as strong coffee,...") (502) 827-9201 (settummanque, the blackeagle) http://dynasty.net/users/blkeagle 241 Fairview Dr., Henderson, KY 42420-4339 blkeagle@dynasty.net kyblkeagle@aol.com or waltonm@hq.21taacom.army.mil ---- FORWARD in service to youth ---- From <@tcuavm.is.tcu.edu:owner-scouts-l@TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU> Fri Dec 12 10:47:19 1997 Return-Path: <@tcuavm.is.tcu.edu:owner-scouts-l@TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU> Received: from server1.capaccess.org (server1.CapAccess.org [207.91.115.5]) by cap1.CapAccess.org (8.6.12/8.6.10) with ESMTP id KAA29363; Fri, 12 Dec 1997 10:47:19 -0500 Received: from tcuavm.is.tcu.edu (TCUAVM.IS.TCU.EDU [138.237.128.148]) by server1.capaccess.org (AIX4.2/UCB 8.7/8.7) with SMTP id KAA24538; Fri, 12 Dec 1997 10:40:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU by tcuavm.is.tcu.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 8785; Fri, 12 Dec 97 09:39:58 CDT Received: from TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@TCUBVM) by TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4546; Fri, 12 Dec 1997 09:40:17 -0500 Received: from TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU by TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 2915 for SCOUTS-L@TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU; Fri, 12 Dec 1997 09:39:10 -0500 Received: from TCUBVM (NJE origin SMTP@TCUBVM) by TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2914; Thu, 11 Dec 1997 22:51:34 -0500 Received: from ALPHA.IS.TCU.EDU by tcubvm.is.tcu.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Thu, 11 Dec 97 22:51:30 CDT Received: from mx1.dynasty.net (mx1.dynasty.net) by ALPHA.IS.TCU.EDU (PMDF V5.0-5 #20456) id <01IR2BWG1I7400302M@ALPHA.IS.TCU.EDU> for scouts-l@ALPHA.IS.TCU.EDU; Thu, 11 Dec 1997 22:50:58 -0500 (CDT) Received: from jessica ([208.205.50.96]) by mx1.Dynasty.Net (Netscape Mail Server v2.02) with SMTP id AAB210; Thu, 11 Dec 1997 22:50:40 -0600 X-Sender: blkeagle@mail.dynasty.net MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19971212045025.0072f174@mail.dynasty.net> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 1997 22:50:25 -0600 Reply-To: "settummanque, or blackeagle (Mike Walton)" Sender: Scouts-L Youth Group List From: "settummanque, or blackeagle (Mike Walton)" Subject: Re: Is an Exodus of DE's a sign of a unhealthy Council? X-To: Ed Henderson , scouts-l@tcu.edu To: Multiple recipients of list SCOUTS-L Status: RO X-Status: Big Ed asked: >In the last 14 months all five DE positions have switched (I realize it is >common, even positive, when DE's move on to bigger councils and more >responsibilities) but this past week three of our five DE's have all >resigned from the Professional Ranks entirely (one in particular had >excelled in his district winning the strong support of volunteers, >financial backers, and being the catalysts for Exploring's renaissance in >our council - and has achieved Quality District for several years). The >other two were newer but had put in solid performances. This happens frequently, Ed, at three big times during a year. The first is when a person has completed NEI/PEI (National Executive Institute/Professional Executive Institute...the first is the old name and the other is the current name) and has been interviewed for "tenure" by the Area Director and the (Council) Scout Executive. During this "heart-to-heart", the Area Director and/or CE will lay it on the line: You've done well, but from now on, the BSA expects more from you and you'll have to perform better than ever. Hearing this, Ed, many professionals leave the profession shortly after obtaining "tenure" status. They can "reenter the profession" later on, which gives them the flexibility to return to graduate school, to work for REAL MONEY, or to spend more time with their family and children before re-entering. Once leaving, though, many don't come back to the BSA. Lots of former professionals have very fond memories and experiences working as the career counterparts to so many volunteers; but they are past ready to move onward to another chapter in their lives. The second big time is during "reorganization" and "Council evaluation" time, usually in May or December. Your Council -- all Councils -- have to constantly reorganize itself to better serve the youth in their territory. New positions are created, and old ones are torn up or divided. Professionals, as part of their career advancement and training, are given new and different responsibilities, which may involve movement to another District or to another part of the Council's territory to carry out those roles. There's a lot of professionals that resent having to move from a place that they are confortable living in because "the BSA wants me someplace else" and leave the professional outright and most wait until "report card time" to do this leaving. Many of these professionals never return to the BSA...they've had enough of what the BSA offers and they find another position, many times thanks to "networking" from the standpoint of the professional talking to partner organizations and key volunteers (which is unethical behavior, but it happens frequently...especially if the professional has been a high performer within that Council or District). The third big time is when there's a vacancy in an adjacent Council for an executive position that fits with their career pattern or their personal interests. For instance, a District Executive "stuck" in the "urban District" of a local Council may find a neighboring Council is looking for a "41" (generic Executive code) to work in a suburban or rural area; a District Executive interested in working in camping operations may interview for Camping Executive or District Executive multiple/person in a nearby Council for the experience (or the money) (or both). Just because all of the field staff is leaving at the same time doesn't mean that the Council has "hit the skids". I get Council newsletters here all of the time, and one of the things I look for are the mastheads within each District's "part" of the newsletter. I use those as informal "heads up" for professionals that may have wrote me and asked me to "let me know if you hear about a..."particular type of District "vacancy". I have here a copy of two Council's newsletters from this summer that has ALL of their professionals turning over....two of the three professionals in one Council leaving the profession totally; the other being promoted to serve as District Director (a professional serving as District Executive for one District with supervisory responsibilities over two or three other District-level professionals within their District or others; a Field Director with a District responsibilty). In the other Council's case, everyone "swapped positions" within the Council except for the Field Director and one District Director....and three Executives said their "goodbyes" to their volunteers in print with only one being replaced. >I am disturbed when half of the professional staff of a council turns in >their resignation and LEAVES Scouting for good all within a week of each >other. Does anyone know if this catches the attention of Area Directors? If a professional resigns from the profession, the letter flows from the Council Scout Executive, whom must either accept or reject the resignation, to the Associate Director of Membership (he or she serves as the senior "personnel manager" of the Region) and makes a copy to the Area Director. Also in three of the four Regions, that notice is made a part of the quarterly or monthly professional management newsletter so that others (particularily those looking to relocate!!) know. Again, just because a person leaves the profession doesn't mean that they leave professional Scouting *for good*. Tenured professionals (those that have completed all three parts of NEI/PEI and have been approved by National) may "return to the profession" within five years (this is the reason why former professionals cannot receive service awards like the Silver Beaver until after five years past their leaving from the Scouting profession) of their leaving. >I can not help but think that we will be at a severe disadvantage in 1998 >as FOS kick off rolls around. Could be. The BSA is predicting that for the first quarter of 1998, that many Councils will be 20 to 25 percent understaffed in the field. This could have some impact on Friends of Scouting (FOS) campaigns conducted during the winter of 1998. >At a council level it is clear that when a DE is not performing there are >all kinds of intervention, training, and when needed chewing sessions >from Field Directors & the Scout Executive to set things straight. What >happens when it is the SE who is faltering or off course? There is that same kind of intervention, training, coaching, and chewing sessions (lots of chewing sessions) from the CE's boss, the Area Director and his or her boss, the Associate National Director for Operations (the Regional Operations Director, the supervisor of the Area Directors). And if neccessary, the Regional Director comes into play (but when that happens, Ed, the Council Scout Executive is "toast" and all parties know this.) The Council's Executive Board also plays key in any kind of "mid-course direction" because it is under their direction that their "executive secretary" functions in their territory. Hope this all helps out, Big Ed! Settummanque! (c) 1997 Mike Walton ("no such thing as strong coffee,...") (502) 827-9201 (settummanque, the blackeagle) http://dynasty.net/users/blkeagle 241 Fairview Dr., Henderson, KY 42420-4339 blkeagle@dynasty.net kyblkeagle@aol.com or waltonm@hq.21taacom.army.mil ---- FORWARD in service to youth ----