Weak Committees

[CommissionerTim]

Is your unit committee struggling to make things happen? Is everyone on your committee doing 3 or more jobs? Is your unit chartered with another unit by the same charter? Is there less than 6 committee members that meet regularly?

If you have answered yes to all the above questions, then there is an answer for you and your unit committee...

Since a Pack Committee and a Troop Committee have similar operations, I suggest the two committees join forces.

I am making this suggestion because my units have done this and it is working for us. The steps for making this happen are as follows:

#1 Get approval from the COR (chartering organization rep.)
#2 Get approval from both CCs (committee chairperson)
#3 Ask Unit Commissioner for guidance
#4 Schedule meeting with both committees to meet together
#5 Discuss leadership positions
-- CC oversees both units
-- one secretary for both units
-- one treasurer for both units (only works for units with membership less than 20 boys) otherwise 2 treasurers are needed.
#6 Fill out adult applications for both units... (on paper there still needs to be ONLY one committee--so each leader will need to fill out 2 adult applications, one for each unit)
#7 Scoutmaster will need to fill out adult application as committee member for the Pack, and still be scoutmaster for troop
#8 Cubmaster will need to fill out adult application as committee member for the Troop, and still be cubmaster for pack
#9 No need to fill out extra paperwork for other committee members.
#10 Adopt by-laws to regulate operations of the committee.
#11 Schedule a monthly meeting, plan for 2 to 3 months ahead of current calendar month.
#12 Write up a 12 month calendar for both units to be included on the same calendar

What this has done for my units is brought us closer... the older boys help the younger boys during SOME of the outings... communication between the units is stronger than it would be if there was only two committees... The troop attends the blue and gold and the pack attends the court of honor... The troop helps with the cubs in camp and the webelos attend and sometimes participate during the camporees... membership has doubled...

Today the unit committee is known as the parent committee and is much stronger than in the past. So are both units... one more thing.. and I'm not bragging about this... today both units are quality units, they have done what they need to do to meet the requirements to be quality units.

This worked for us... It may or may not work for your units... you won't know for sure unless you start communcating with your leaders. It will not work for two units of two different charters. The key is to have the same charter.

If you try this and it does or does not work... please bring it back to this forum thread and let us know about it.

Download a copy of our bylaws from here (http://boyscouts.svchurchofchrist.org/bylaws.zip).

Good luck and happy scouting,

[FRUSTRATED SCOUTMASTER]

Your ideas are fantastic. As a Scoutmaster myself, I have been working with the Cubmaster to try and coordinate events and schedules. The Pack currently has no Committee. It is run by the Cubmaster and the Den Leaders.
I stuggle to try and get events coordinated betwen the two. It seems as if the Pack does their own thing and the Troop does their own thing. It has been a hassle to try and coordinate the Campout required for the Outdoorsman pin, arrangements for the Arrow of Light and Bridging Ceremony.
I Have preached to the Cubmaster about starting a Committee and that the Troop Committee would assist in any way. I think that they are going to be starting a Pack Committee shortly. I will share your ideas with both Committees. You have hit on something that is a hot button withj me.
Only thing, I could not access your by-laws. Please tell me how I can get a copy of them.

Bob Klimas
Scoutmaster
concord, N.C.

[CommissionerTim]

Your ideas are fantastic. As a Scoutmaster myself, I have been working with the Cubmaster to try and coordinate events and schedules. The Pack currently has no Committee. It is run by the Cubmaster and the Den Leaders.
I stuggle to try and get events coordinated betwen the two. It seems as if the Pack does their own thing and the Troop does their own thing. It has been a hassle to try and coordinate the Campout required for the Outdoorsman pin, arrangements for the Arrow of Light and Bridging Ceremony.
I Have preached to the Cubmaster about starting a Committee and that the Troop Committee would assist in any way. I think that they are going to be starting a Pack Committee shortly. I will share your ideas with both Committees. You have hit on something that is a hot button withj me.
Only thing, I could not access your by-laws. Please tell me how I can get a copy of them.

Bob Klimas
Scoutmaster
Troop 38
concord, N.C.

Sorry about the link to the bylaws... It is fixed now... if you need help please feel free to contact me.

[CommissionerTim]

This is an attempt to keep this thread alive... please vote on this poll.

Thank you,

[1st Mate]

Tim I respectfully disagree with the premise that Pack and Troop coimmitees do similar things. If you review the Cub Leaders Handbook and the Troop Commitee Guide you will see that while there are a few things in common their role in unit operations is VERY different.

The most significant being that Pack Committees determine the program. In Troop the youth Patrol Leaders Council has that role. That is a huge fdifference that cascades through to effect all other commitee responsibilities. Each troop commitee member should be mentoring a youth in a parallel position, Pack committees have no such function.

Thes two things alone are good enough reasons to meet separately. Now is it more convenient for adults to do it the way you suggest?P Probably, but a good scouting program has very little to do with adult convenience, a trait that more often then not interferes with boy growth and youth leadership.

The BSA has spent years in developing methods that work best to deliver the mission of scouting. The best thing a unit can do is to take those lessons to heart and follow the program as it is outlined and supported in the BSA training and resources.

JMHO

Fair Winds and Following Seas,
1st Mate

[slyfox736]

As "First Mate" noted, the Pack and Troop Committees have different functions & roles (when properly operating). I am intrigued by the idea of joining forces on some points, though. The Pack may be in need of Den Chiefs, older scouts to assist with training or modeling behaviors at certain functions and events, guidance for less experienced Webelos leaders in the transition to Boy Scouts, and coordination of resources when being used by both units (people, space, financial assistance). The Troop may have a need for leadership position opportunities for rank advancement, a "recruiting source" (scouts and adults), and resource coordination. Consider representation from each unit participating at an approropriate time, such as before unit planning conferences to share activity needs and interests, calendar options, requests for assistance, and such. Modeling successful committee functioning could be another potential benefit if needed, to be used as a training/coaching opportunity.

My goal is to effectively use the available resources, and I keep finding BSA gems like this site! (Unfortunately, via another council's site and not my council leadership!)

Melinda
Cubmaster, Troop Committee Member
a good ol' Fox and Staffer!

[1st Mate]

I believe you will find that the role of representaive that links these two committees is The Charter Organization Representative.

[WB Bear]

Yep, a COR on top of things would be great. Packs and Troops are great resources for each other, but we must remember they are 2 separate entities.

[A J Mako]

The BSA has spent years in developing methods that work best to deliver the mission of scouting. The best thing a unit can do is to take those lessons to heart and follow the program as it is outlined and supported in the BSA training and resources.

One of the lessons, and part of the program outlined and supported in the BSA training and resources is that packs and troops should be working together. Take a look at the BSA materials on Webelos-to-Scout transition and it's obvious. Develop a pack-troop relationship. Troops provide Den Leaders, packs provide Scouts with opportunities to be leaders. Den Leaders act as the "demonstration model" in selling Boy Scouting to Cub Scouts, encouraging more Webelos to make the transition. Webelos dens and troops hit the outdoors together; the Webelos get a taste of what Boy Scouting is all about, the Boy Scouts get a chance to teach and prepare the next group of new Scouts.

This doesn't work without troop and pack committees working together. Tim's suggestion isn't abhorrent to the BSA's normal method of doing things. It's entirely possible for leaders to be registered in both units at the same time, and there are no BSA rules prohibiting one person from being both pack and troop secretary. There are no BSA rules prohibiting the pack and troop committees from meeting in the same place at the same time. And I don't think a group of reasonably intelligent, well-trained Scouters are going to have trouble dealing with the difference in rolls for the committee.

As a COR, if asked, I would make sure the CC's understand the implications of such a move, make sure they've thought about all the pitfalls they may encounter, but I wouldn't discourage them from trying to make it work. The only line I would draw is that there would still have to be two distinct committees, and it wasn't just one small group of people running both units.

[1st Mate]

I think a Webelos transition sub-committee is a great way to go.

Two complete committees with differnt responsibilities under two different chairs, meeting together and separately???

Sounds like more meetings... and long ones at that. I think I will stick with the program administration plans as they are designed

Perhaps a compromise would be a monthly meeting of the CR with the two committee chairs, and the two program heads, to communicate any shared info, and coordinate any shared program needs.

[WB Bear]

BSA has done an outstanding job outlining the Webelos to Scout Transition. It lays out the responsibilities for the Pack, Troop, Commissioners and District. Check it out at http://www.scouting.org/boyscouts/resources/18-086/.

Yes there are no rules about serving in different roles in different units. Unfortunately there are many Scouters have that “Multiple Hat Syndrome”. The problem with that is very difficult to “wear” those hats correctly. It involves significant time involvement and there can be many complications as a result. One that really stands out to me is it makes is difficult to really “Do Your Best” in your position. So instead of spending our time wearing all those hats, we really need to use some time now to find others to wear those other hats and enjoy Scouting also.

One of the initiatives of National Strategic Plan that was unveiled last May was to increase the number of adult volunteers. You will find that is an item for the Centennial Quality Award for Units, Districts and Councils. BSA has also done an excellent job putting together a guide for Selecting Quality Leaders at http://www.scouting.org/commissioners/resources/18-981.pdf. There is also a video that is available.

[CommissionerTim]

I think a Webelos transition sub-committee is a great way to go.

Two complete committees with differnt responsibilities under two different chairs, meeting together and separately???

Sounds like more meetings... and long ones at that. I think I will stick with the program administration plans as they are designed

Perhaps a compromise would be a monthly meeting of the CR with the two committee chairs, and the two program heads, to communicate any shared info, and coordinate any shared program needs.

With committees with 3 or 4 adults running things... I suggested combining the pack and troop committees in the interest of bringing both units closer together and having more people doing jobs only the 3 or 4 from one committee would be doing. We all know it is hard to convince parents to actively help out and participate during monthly meetings. Really the hardest part of supporting a unit is organizing a fundraiser 3 or 4 times a year. Some units are extremely fortunate to have a CO that will fund the unit completely, but we also know that there are more units that do not have that financial support from the CO, therefore the units must raise the funds to provide the program to the boys.

Also, this combined committee would really be useful if the unit is small in membership ie 5 to 15 boys... any bigger then yes, I would agree that the unit committee should be self sustaining and seperate from the other unit committee, which brings me to 1st Mates suggestion of having a monthly meeting with the COR, 2 CCs, Unit Leaders and UC to keep the scouting movement tied and moving forward and communication lines open.

There are many ways to save the dying unit and when a committee is small then it's very possible the unit leaders are doing practically everything including what the committee should be doing.

The fact of the matter is that this does work for small/weak committees... and it does bring the troop/pack closer and allows them to do more activities together throughout the year. Please keep in mind that people are intellegent and will be able to keep the two programs seperate... it's not hard to do.

Here's a sample of an agenda that works great for this type of committee...


AGENDA


Welcome to all parents and introduction of new attendees


Approval of last months minutes


Reports
Commissioner –



Treasurer –


Cubmaster –



Scoutmaster –


Old Business



New Business

For The Good Of The Order

Adjournment




Next Meeting

You'll noticed that the UC is at the top of the list... this is because he/she needs to report what is happening within the district/council... yes the report may overlap with the Cubmaster or Scoutmaster, but only if they are attending the roundtables... this is good too, because sometimes the unit leaders may not get all of the information or the information has changed and they do not know about it...

The point is, get the most out of your leaders while keeping the workload to a minimum... and if you have more parents involved on the committee the better... and when the workload is to big for one person then it's time to split the job in half ie pack / troop and have two people doing the same job... one for the pack and one for the troop. It only gets too big when there is more boys in the program.

Remember, give it a KISS (Keep It Simple Simon)

[A J Mako]

Sounds like more meetings... and long ones at that. I think I will stick with the program administration plans as they are designed

I'm curious to see how you got that.

2 committees X 1 meeting > 2 committes X 2 meetings:confused:

Just taking my job into consideration, two units having committee meetings once a month for an hour, each on different nights means I have to make sure I'm available one hour (actually 1.5 hours counting drive time and networking time) two nights a month. Doesn't sound like much, but then we have to add in 2 hours one night a month for the district committee meeting, and another 1.5 hours one night a month for the post meeting. Check my math: 4 meetings, 6.5 hours.

If the two units held a joint committee meeting for 1.5 hours (actually 2) one night a month it works out to 3 meetings, 5.5 hours. As long as I've been alive 3 has been less than 4 and 5 has been less than 6.

Perhaps a compromise would be a monthly meeting of the CR with the two committee chairs, and the two program heads, to communicate any shared info, and coordinate any shared program needs.

Which brings the total to 5 meetings, 7.5 hours. And I haven't even thought about the occasional troop meeting, pack meeting, and Roundtable I might have to go to. What happened to the "1 hour a month" I was promised!;)

Let me say this, I'm happy to do it, if that's what it takes. Keep in mind, though, I'm an experienced Scouter who has been promised it's only one hour/meeting a month more times than I can count. I'm just saying you just know with that many meetings in that many entities there's going to be a conflict eventually. Now, if your compromise is that I can meet once with the two CC's and not have to attend both committee meetings, then we might have a deal. But then, I don't expect the units to schedule their committee meetings around my schedule.

[A J Mako]

Note: I moved this question to How to Inject Life Into the Unit Committee (http://www.forum.scoutparents.org/forum/showthread.php?t=151)

I guess the original question was how do you strengthen a weak committee. I think Tim's idea has merit, at least on a temporary basis. So what other ideas are there?

For purposes of discussion, let's assume the following:

Committee is struggling to make things happen Everyone on the committee is doing 3 or more jobs There are less than 6 committee members

It has already been pointed out that pack committees have quite different responsibilities than troop committees, but there should be some things that can be done with either type of unit to strengthen the committee. If your suggestion is specific to a type of unit, please make that clear. I know the obvious--recruit more committee members--so if that's your answer tell me how you would do it (in the spirit of the mission of ScoutParents). That is the ultimate goal, so what about temporary means of injecting life into the committee, making it easier for them to get their job done, and getting them to a place where recruiting more committee members isn't just another thing tossed on the pile.

[1st Mate]

The problem here is one of volunteer recruitment and retention. Combining committees will not only muddy the administrative waters but add more work to those who are already overworked.

The BSA has developed an excellent process for selecting and recruiting quality leadership. It is encapsulated in easy to follow brochure called "Selecting Quality Leaders" http://www.scouting.org/commissioners/resources/18-981.pdf

I have seen many units follow this process with excellent results. Like many projects the preparation is the most important part. If a unit does a conscientious effort in the preparatory phase then they will have great success.

After reviewing the link if anyone has any questions specific to the process I would be happy to help explain the steps.


Tim
As a unit commissioner I am sure you are familiar with the resources the BSA has developed for unit administration. For example the Troop Committee Guide, The Cub Leader Handbook and the Venturing Guide, ALL have within them recommended committee meeting agendas that have been very well developed over the decades of BSA experience. Readers will note that they contain many important meeting points that do not appear in the agenda you have offered.

It might be of greater service to direct people to the actual BSA resource for program support since they are readily available and work in tandem with other BSA training and resources.

[CommissionerTim]

I am familiar with all of the BSA resources, and none of them require units to have a committee exclusively for the troop or pack or crew... the resources tell us what we need on a committee. Committee Chairperson, Secretary, Treasurer... are the three persons that are required for the charter paperwork, and their titles are only suggested except for the CC. All other committee members are only suggested committee members that a unit should have.

I'm not willing to argue the specifics of my idea of combining unit committees... there's only a couple things that need to be done to make it work... have the CC, secretary and treasurer have dual-membership with both units... this will fulfill the requirement on paper... any extra committee members from either unit don't need to have a dual-membership. Since both units must have 3 committee members, you now have 6 committee members for each unit. Now the committee can function with less stress because with more people on the committee, there is less work for each committee member.

Since there are no BSA policies against this, the only thing that would stop a unit from combining forces would be the COR... only because the CO owns the units and the units must abide by the CO policies.

Yes my suggestions of combining unit committees is rather unorthodox, but when it comes to saving a unit from failure then unorthodox is another way of thinking outside of the box.

I'm all for following BSA policies, because BSA has spent so much of our money in developing a great program the past 100 years. However, if there is no real policy, but rather suggested ideas, then that leaves me to think of other ways that might be a better solution, and this my friend is what being a unit commissioner is about... "HELPING UNITS SUCCEED".

[1st Mate]

One of the greatest benefits of a "national" program are the national practices. Things that are known to work best and can be utilized across the scope of the program. One of the purp[oses of commissioner services is to provide that standardization of quality through the support of the programs best paractices as outlined in the natioanl resources. It would be difficult to maintain a national standard using unorthidox practices that were based on perosnal opinion rather than on BSA training and resource materials that are available to evryone.

This is not a policy matter it is more of a "best practices" matter.
For instance while the charter requires each unit to have a a committee chair and two committee members, there is nothing in any BSA training or resources (or policy) requiring that those two be the secretary and treasurer, nor is it suggested anywhere that you stop at two. The charter does not specifiy the committee positions beyong Committee chair and Committee member(MC). Those two MC's could hold any or all committee functions as far as policy is concerned. But as far as best practices are concerned you should have one area of responsibility to a person.

The root problem here is an insufficient number of adult volunteers and the solution is recruitment. While combining committees may appear as a good band-aid, it does not solve the problem. Even under Tim's recommendation of only doubling the work of three members It would be much easier to simply recruit three new members than to have to overburden three existing members.

The closer you follow the official resources, the fewer problems you will have.

[CommissionerTim]

Even under Tim's recommendation of only doubling the work of three members It would be much easier to simply recruit three new members than to have to overburden three existing members.


I'm very sorry, but I don't understand your math 1st Mate... if I combine two committees of 3 members each, then I would end up with one committee with 6 members, therefore splitting the workload in half.

Yes I agree this is a temperary solution... and only a solution for small, weak committees. Yes, recruiting is necessary, but when you cannot make the parents volunteer or even if you ask them to help, and they refuse, then you're still relying on those that have committed themselves to the program.

Sometimes "Best Practiced" policies are not the best policies, and unorthodoxed policies are the best solutions.

Yes 1st Mate, you do have 38 years over my 9 years, but it also took BSA 100 years to perfect the program and they are still perfecting it... changes will continue to happen whether they are fundamental changes in the program or changes to work out the kinks.

I whole heartedly agree with your point of view... the unit should start and stick with the best practiced policy, however, if that is no longer working, then it's time to make changes. Maybe a change of leadership or a change in leadership styles or a change in committee structure. Changes will happen and that's just a fact of life.

[WB Bear]

I whole heartedly agree with your point of view... the unit should start and stick with the best practiced policy, however, if that is no longer working, then it's time to make changes. Maybe a change of leadership or a change in leadership styles or a change in committee structure. Changes will happen and that's just a fact of life.

I feel if you find the system not working for you doesn't mean you have to change it so it does work for you. BSA's basic program is quite effective and successful. Changes are a part of life and I am not against them. But are changes the answer when a 97 year program isn't running well for you or is trying to correct what you're doing and bring it into line with BSA a better solution?

[1st Mate]

I am glad you agree that using the BSA best paractices is the best way to go, especially as a commissioner that is charged by the BSA to support the program methods, policies and procedures to see that quality scouting happens in a unit.

WB Bear is correct, when the individual or unit is unsuccessfully employing those methods then the thing to do is get them back on track and help them understand how to make the procedure work correctly, not create a different procedure.

Now a quick lesson in math.
Tom takes one hour to wash a car, and is then given a second car that takes an hour to wash, then it will take Tom 2 hours to wash the cars.

If Tom has the troop books to do and the pack books to do, it will take Tom more time than if he just had one of them to do.

If Tom got his brother to help they could each wash a car and be done in half the time.

If Tom did the troop books and someone else did the Pack books they would each have a smaller work load.


If it takes 60 minutes to cover all the information specific to a troop committee, and 90 minutes to cover all the information specific to a pack committee, then combined it would take 2 1/2 hours to do a combined meeting REGARDLESS of how many people sat on the committees or how many were duplicates.

Think of the information in a meeting like the information in a book. If it takes 400 pages to tell a story the it takes 400 pages regardless of how many people read the book.

Combining the committees makes for a longer meeting much of which will be irrelevant to half the members.

There is a reason that the BSA has developed the training and resources that it has. They work, they are easy to understand and explain, they interrelate to each other and to the methods of the programs.

All the BSA asks is that we use and follow them.

That seems a reasonable expectation.

[CommissionerTim]

I have to disagree... when the CC calls the meeting to order and we all go through our reports. I report what is going on with the district and council and mention any important dates that are coming up, then when I'm done I sit back and listen to the others... if they mention something that is questionable regarding policy then I would speak up and remind them of the BSA policy ie filling out tour permits or the money earning permit. When the SM reports, he tells the committee what the troop is doing in the coming month and makes requests for certain committee members to help out... or if he needs committee members to do a BOR for a boy or two or more. When the CM reports, she also tells the committee what the pack and dens will be doing in the coming month and also makes her request for some specific help from the committee if she needs it. Then the CC moves on to specific committee issues that support both units ie fundraising or something more specific to the pack or troop ie BOR or Blue & Gold banquet or Court of Honor.

The greatest thing about combining the two committees is that both units know what the other will be doing and can plan around each other's activities so they can participate together if they choose too. There's no complaints from the unit leaders not knowing what the other unit is doing or not having any support from the committee... and on top of that, the boys from the pack get a chance to know the older boys from the troop... this has been an awesome move for my units I serve because the Webelos II boys that cross over to the troop are not scared because they don't know anyone in the troop... The boys from the pack get many opportunities to mengle with the boys from the troop.

There is no BSA policy prohibiting this method... only opinions.

[1st Mate]

I understand what you do, I just feel it is important for others to understand that that is not what the BSA instructs commissioners to do as part of their role as district volunteers.

That while you express quite clearly what you have chosen to do it is not taught as part of commissioner training, it is not suggested in any way in the any of the Commissioner Guides, it is not a part of any level of Commissioner training.

It is what you do, and it is beyond the duties and responsibilities of unit commissioner service, and it would be unfair and unrealistic for others to think that that was the actual role or responsibility of a unit commissioner.

Commissioners can certainly attend a unit committee meeting at the invitation of the committee on occassion when needed. But the unit is not owned by the district it is owned by the charter organization and the committee is that of the charter organization. They are an independent entity and should be allowed to proceed that way. There are other ways that the unit and the district/council can and do communicate. The role of the commissioner as charged by the BSA is to see that "every available youth has the opportunity to belong to a quality scouting program". In a unit that is functioning the roles of commissioner, if you go by the training on the BSA, is to recognize and inspire its volunteers. In a unit that needs help, the role of the commissioner is observe, evaluate and give aid in the the way of counseling, mentoring and District Resources. At no time is the commissioner advised to become a regular fixture at troop or committee meetings. The commissioner is a district support apparatus and not a unit volunteer.

But that is only according to the BSA program. Rather than go to every committee meeting to share council and district information you could send an e-mail, you could invite the SM to Roundtable with you, you could call the committee chair on the phone to tell him what a nice job the troop did at camporee and share district news with him then. There are lots of quick contact things you could do without infusing yourself into the unit administration.

[CommissionerTim]

Then tell me why BSA is revamping the entire commissioner service to get commissioners to be more of a unit volunteer... this is all part of the Centennial Quality Unit, District and Council award. Seems to me what I have been doing the past 4 years is exactly what BSA wants commissioners nationwide to be doing... be more involved with the units they serve.

What BSA is telling us, is that the commissioner service has to step up and be more involved in the units they serve.

It is what you do, and it is beyond the duties and responsibilities of unit commissioner service, and it would be unfair and unrealistic for others to think that that was the actual role or responsibility of a unit commissioner.


Yes it is what I do... to do help beyond the duties and responsibilities of the UC... for me not to do just that, would be that I am simply wearing the uniform.

For me to simply attend one meeting a month, evaluate and give suggestions on what the unit can do better is no longer enough. This is why the commissioner service is being asked to step up and be more involved in the units, attend the regular weekly scout meetings, the montly committee meetings and as many of the activities/events as possible.

Commissioner service will no longer be the same as it used to be... we will see a whole new movement within the service from now on. I'm not the only one that knew this method is a benefit to the unit... someone at the National level seen this too and got the wheels turning to make the changes necessary.

[1st Mate]

"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime"

By becoming the sole resource of information for the unit rather than teaching them the resources that are readily avaible you deny them the opportiunity to fish for themselves and grow and develop as leaders. As a commissioner you were asked to teach. Rather than be there to tell them the policies the commissioner should be showing them the resources where the policies and be found. Rather than giving the the calendar information you are suppose to be showig them where the information can be found.

The Centennial award has nothing to do with how you have chosen to alter your role as a unit commissioner.

[A J Mako]

By becoming the sole resource of information for the unit rather than teaching them the resources that are readily avaible you deny them the opportiunity to fish for themselves and grow and develop as leaders.

1st Mate, you're making an assumption about what Tim does that is not supported by anything he has said. All he has said is that he goes to unit committee meetings and gives a report. He hasn't said he doesn't tell them about Roundtable or about any of the other sources of information. He hasn't said anything about the unit leaders not knowing about other sources of information. In fact, it sounds to me like he is doing exactly what he's supposed to do--let the unit leaders know they aren't alone, that he can help them, and that there are other places they can get help as well. And like a true friend, he's there even when he's not really needed.

As a commissioner you were asked to teach. Rather than be there to tell them the policies the commissioner should be showing them the resources where the policies and be found. Rather than giving the the calendar information you are suppose to be showig them where the information can be found.

It sounds like you're saying a teacher should just show the student the textbook and let him figure it out for himself. To be effective the commissioner has to be more than a teacher. Before you question my understanding of the commissioner's role I should probably point out that I have served as a commissioner, been trained as a commissioner, and even though my current position is something other than commissioner I am always happy to take on the role when the need arises.

To be effective the commissioner has to develop a relationship with the unit. One of trust. When it comes to the district/council communication system, the commissioner is vital. He or she isn't there to just give the information, they are there to make sure the unit leaders understand the information. The commissioner has to be more than someone who shows up only to ask the unit about FOS or popcorn, and he has to do more than just point unit leaders to a manual or a training course. The more familiar a commissioner is with the unit leaders the better able he is to anticipate their needs or explain a new program.

As far as the Centennial Award and the new strategic plan goes, it absolutely does have something to do with the way any commissioner does his or her job. It's an admission that the way we've been doing things hasn't really been getting the job done, so now we need to fix it--here's the fix. Having gotten it straight from the National Commissioner's mouth, in person, I can safely say Tim is right:

What BSA is telling us, is that the commissioner service has to step up and be more involved in the units they serve.

[1st Mate]

The new emphasis is on rebuilding the commissioner rank which is a worthwhile and laudible goal. But the role of commissioners has not changed one iota. Their purpose is to observe. evaluate, and share resources to units. Not to become a unit member. It is necessary to maintain a level of objectivity in order to evaluate cleary and objectively. It is also import to teach by exposing the units to the resources of the BSA where the answers are found. Don't tell them what the Advancement policy is, expose them to the manual where advancement policies are found so rather than come to you they can go to the resources thenselves.

One reason that this is important is that sometimes as commissioner you might be wrong with your personal information, where as if they learn what resources are available through the BSA they can always get accurate information. The resources are updated far more routinely then the commissioner is.

What would be lost if instead of being at the committee meeting the commissioner e-maied an invitation to the CC and Unit leader, why not a phone call, why not talk to them at a Roundtable, or at another activity?What is the need for the commissioner to inpose himself into the unit agenda?
You can have as much contact as you want in the background, but it was never intecded for the commissioner to be a regular attendee to all meetings. Like a parent to a child you need to allow them some room to grow. No one is suggesting abandoning them or never visiting.

And when you go it should be to represent the BSA methods, policies and procedures, not your own personal methods...shouldn't it?

BSA has not REVAMPED unit commissioning, they have merely remphasized it. Except for the new requirements in the Quality Unit Award (centennial award) nothing has changed in commissioning, The methods, the structure, the training ,are identical to what they were 15 years even 20 years ago, the only thing that has changed is the color of the cover on the Commissioners Guides.

What makes a commissioner effective is their ability to evaluate a units health, their knowledge of the BSA programs and resources, and their ability to relate one to the other and communicate it effectively.

[A J Mako]

Not to become a unit member. It is necessary to maintain a level of objectivity in order to evaluate cleary and objectively.

From what I've read Tim hasn't become a member of the units he serves. It sounds to me like he maintains enough objectivity to be able to evaluate unit performance while being close enough that he can actually help them when necessary.

One reason that this is important is that sometimes as commissioner you might be wrong with your personal information, where as if they learn what resources are available through the BSA they can always get accurate information. The resources are updated far more routinely then the commissioner is.

What? I don't know about what happens in your district, but in mine the commissioners meet at least once a month to discuss what's happening, what's coming down the pike, and to review any new policies or changes to the various resources. The reasources themselves are only updated about once a year. A commissioner who doesn't know the right answer to a question is a commissioner who isn't doing the job.

The first thing I learned as a commissioner was the right answer to any question you're not absolutely sure of the answer to is: "I don't know, but I'll find out and get back to you." This is always followed up by actually finding out and getting back to them with words to the effect: "The answer is... and you can find that in the Scoutmaster's Relaxation Guide, page umptysquat." (you know what really goes there, I just went with a little levity)


What is the need for the commissioner to inpose himself into the unit agenda?

Again you assume the commissioner in question imposes himself into the unit agenda. What exactly should the commissioner do if he gets a standing invitation to every unit committee meeting? Say no thanks. I think we should be quite happy to see a commissioner whom the unit thinks highly enough to add him to their agenda.

BSA has not REVAMPED unit commissioning, they have merely remphasized it. Except for the new requirements in the Quality Unit Award (centennial award) nothing has changed in commissioning, The methods, the structure, the training ,are identical to what they were 15 years even 20 years ago...

Which you once told me were broken--have been broken all those years--and no one knows how to fix.

What makes a commissioner effective is their ability to evaluate a units health, their knowledge of the BSA programs and resources, and their ability to relate one to the other and communicate it effectively.

Yeah, and? This is different than anyone else has been saying how? All I know is that the commissioner's first role is that of friend. He or she is a friend to the units they serve long before they are teacher, "doctor," representative, or counselor.

Bold text under 6-Providing Unit Service:
Your contacts with units must be as a friend, not as the district "superspy." Find out how you can help if help is needed. Always keep in mind what is best for the success of the units. As a friend and counselor of unit leaders, the commissioner operates quickly, generally in the background.

Friend means if they invite you, you go. It means "background" isn't deep background. It means not jumping all over them whenever they think of doing something that isn't exactly the way the book says to do it--unless it's bold text. It means remembering that, just because they do it differently than you would, they're not necessarily wrong. Results-oriented, not process-oriented. It means giving them a few words of encouragement and looking for ways to help them even before a problem arises. It means helping them learn that it's sometimes a good idea to take a step back and look at the unit from a different perspective, just to make sure where you are is where you need to be to get where you want to be. Oh, but of course, there's really no reason to do that.

[1st Mate]

First
I am not sure why you are so upset about this. You will find nothing in the Commissioners Guides or in commissioner training that contradicts anything I have said.

Attending and being a part of every committee meeting is not working in the background.

Telling them to combine the committees is not supported in any BSA training or resource, and in fact the better you understand the differences in the programs the more you realize that at is not the right solution. The solution to not enough help is better recruitment, and the BSA has a very successful method that the commissioner could have shared with both committees and coached them on. That is the role of the commissioner.

My entire focus in this thread has been "follow the BSA program and its resources". As someone with commissioner experience I do not understand what you could possible find wrong in that, or why you are so hostile in your opposition to my posts?

A commissioner should be a friend to the Unit, but also be a friend to the BSA program they represent. Be trustworthy and loyal to those who gave you the commission and do what commissioners are charged with doing. A commissioner should use and follow the BSA programs and resources. The unit is better served when the commissioner follows the program.

How can you possibly disagree with that?

[CommissionerTim]

In the Commissioner Fieldbook for Unit Service on page 21-22 starting with the paragraph labeled "Major Deviations"... I quote

"The BSA Scouting program is broad and flexible in operation. There is no canned program, and units do not operate under a rigid system. However, you must learn to tell the difference between creative programming and major deviations from Scouting methods.

For example, when a Cub Scout pack substitutes a theme of its own that doesn't appear in any of our program material but has activity for everyone, that's creative programming. But when a pack committee decides that Tiger Cub dens will operate like Webelos dens, that's a major deviation from the Scouting method.

If a troop that has the capability decides to camp on its own halfway across the country, that's creative programming. If a troop becomes a drum and bugle corps, eliminating the patrol method and advancement, that's major deviation.

Often it is best to involve the district committee in such situations. You, as a friend of the unit, provide help and counsel through others as you deem necessary."

So when a unit committee of a charter organization combines forces with another unit committee of the same CO to strengthen the committee support for both units, then it's creative programming. But when a unit committee combines forces with another unit committee from a different charter... well, even I don't recommend this because it is questionably borderline major deviation of the Scouting method. However, there is NOTHING in any BSA guide that says this method is prohibited. The only thing I just quoted is we need to tell the difference between creative programming and major deviations.

If I am wrong, please let us all know and post your proof.

[1st Mate]

However, you must learn to tell the difference between creative programming and major deviations from Scouting methods.

There is a lot instruction and information provided by commissioner service such as Roundtable that explains the Pack's ability to deviate from the national themes (they also point out how other support tools are based on those thems and how you stand a risk of losing those supports when you customize so you want to do so selectively).

There are training courses that teach troops how to spice up their trips and outdoor program without deviating from the BSA program.

Commissioneres are trained in how to use the resources of the BSA to support units. Resources such as the "How to Select Quality Leaders" plan. So that they can help units that lack enough adult help can use the availble methods and procedures to solve their problems without DEVIATING from the program.

But commissioners are warned that you must learn to tell the difference between creative programming and major deviations from Scouting methods. I agree and accept that warning and while I disagree that the program in anyway supports such a diviation as combining two committees that have totally different responsibilities, I agree that the prose you selected is directly relevant to the situation.


Tim
Let's take a different approach.
Given the choice. would you rather see that each unit had a separate functioning committee or would you rather the two committees always stay combined?

If you would rather see them have their own functioning committee then what have you done as the unit commissioner to make that happen as soon as possible?

If you would rather see them stay together, then what BSA program resourse or training can you sight that supports that?

[A J Mako]

There is a lot instruction and information provided by commissioner service such as Roundtable that explains the Pack's ability to deviate from the national themes (they also point out how other support tools are based on those thems and how you stand a risk of losing those supports when you customize so you want to do so selectively).

Well, no, actually. National themes are merely suggestions. The pack can develop a program that: 1) follows the national themes entirely, 2) follows most of the national themes with selective changes, or 3) chuck the national themes entirely if they want. Roundtables follow the national themes--they're supposed to anyway--because most pack programs fall into (1) or (2) above. A pack that chucks the national themes and does their own thing doesn't loose the support of Roundtable. In fact, I can't think of a single support tool or resource a pack would loose if their program fell into (3) above.

It's true the Roundtable program won't follow their chosen program for the next month, but there's plenty more to get out of Roundtable than just program ideas, and nothing says the pack leadership can't get those ideas just because they aren't going to use them right away. So exactly what risk is there of losing support tools, resources, or anything by not following the monthly themes? Did I miss the training session on the Cub Scout Program Police or something?

Let's take a different approach.
Given the choice. would you rather see that each unit had a separate functioning committee or would you rather the two committees always stay combined?

If you would rather see them have their own functioning committee then what have you done as the unit commissioner to make that happen as soon as possible?

If you would rather see them stay together, then what BSA program resourse or training can you sight that supports that?

I'm not Tim, but if I was the COR of those two units I would rather see them do whatever they need to do to provide a quality program. You can point at the books all you want, but you still haven't shown where a combined committee violates any rules or deviates from Scouting methods. Yes, you've show where it doesn't match the model presented in training and the books, and you've made your point about recruiting more adults, but that's it. The models and processes presented in the books and training aren't regulations or rules, they're suggestions. Granted, they have the benefit of being well thought out and tested suggestions, but that doesn't mean a different model or process can't work. Process isn't what makes Scouting work, so please don't confuse the Methods of Scouting with the processes found in the manuals.

As the representative of a chartering organization I'm looking for results, not process. If the committee follows the BSA rules and regulations and provides a quality program, I don't care how they set up the committee. And I certainly expect the unit commissioner to be focused on results as well. If it becomes a problem I expect the commissioner to say something, and if it comes to it, I'll back him up. Until then I'll let the committee(s) figure out how to provide a quality program and stay out of their way. After all, when it comes right down to it, those aren't my units--they belong to the boys.

[1st Mate]

Hi AJ
No one said the themes were mandatory. I said they were national themes which they are, and that other BSA resources are coordinated with them, which they are. (and it is more than just the Roundtables.)

I do not believe that program quality was ever mentioned as a problem in this situation, only the lack of committee members, I think it is important in identifying the proper solution that we focus on the core problem.

[CommissionerTim]

The lack of committee members is directly related to the quality of the program. 3 committee members is what is required by BSA, but it only works for units of 5 boys. On top of that, when only one or two committee members are doing practically all the work... then recruiting more volunteers is necessary, but when that pool of volunteers are scarce within the CO then it's time to have "creative solutions" to bringing in help to a committee that is breaking down because of the workload required of them.

BSA gives us the latitude to make adjustments to the program to give the boys a quality program. Without this latitude, the boys might as well be in the military from the time they turn 7 years old.

[1st Mate]

The lack of committee members is directly related to the quality of the program.

Then as a unit commissioner teach them how to recruit more committee members.

3 committee members is what is required by BSA, but it only works for units of 5 boys.

I know of nothing in the BSA program that says that 3 committee members only works with 5 boys. What happens when a 6th is added that so drastically changes the needs of the unit?

The numbers you refer to are simply the minimums required to charter.

but when that pool of volunteers are scarce within the CO then it's time to have "creative solutions" to bringing in help to a committee that is breaking down because of the workload required of them.

Is creativity the goal of commissioning, or is it a tool used to help the unit follow the BSA program?

The creativity comes in finding ways to keep units following the program. Finding ways to recruit more volunteers is creative. If you have enough families to have two units then you certainly have enough adults to support them, your problem remains volunteerism and the solution is still recruitment. Your creativity is misdirected. Why not apply it to recruiting?

Changing the committee structure and function is deviation. Pack and troop committees are very different in the function. If you only had a few boy scout and a few cub scouts would you consider combining their meetings as well? There is no real difference between the two scenarios.

My question remains unanswered. As a commissioner would you rather see the units have separate functioning committees as the BSA structure teaches and supports, or would you rather they continue to follow your 'creative' method.

Isn't a commissioner "commissioned" to support the BSA program not to deliver their own versions?

Without this latitude, the boys might as well be in the military from the time they turn 7 years old.

I am sorry I see no relevance between that statement and the situation being addressed.

[A J Mako]

No one said the themes were mandatory. I said they were national themes which they are, and that other BSA resources are coordinated with them, which they are. (and it is more than just the Roundtables.)

Sorry, the way you worded your post it sure sounded like you were implying packs had very little wiggle room as far as deviating from the monthly themes. You also implied, no actually you came right out and said, packs risk losing "other support tools" by deviating from the monthly themes. I realize program support "tools" are tied to the national themes, but a pack doesn't lose those tools just because they choose a different theme.

I do not believe that program quality was ever mentioned as a problem in this situation, only the lack of committee members, I think it is important in identifying the proper solution that we focus on the core problem.

Hey, I was just answering your question from the perspective of a COR. From my point of view what Tim originally described solves the important part of the problem--the committees' ability to do their job effectively. It at least insures the Scouts in each unit will continue to get a quality program while the committee sorts out and addresses the core problem. Without a quality program the units can't attract more youth and they tie their own hands in attracting more committee members.

The primary focus of my organization with regard to our unit is that the youth in our community benefit from our support of Scouting--we want results. The next important thing to us is that our support of Scouting complies with our responsibilities under the charter agreement--we want to follow the rules and regulations. How the unit leaders we selected go about doing those two things is all process, which we consider secondary. We don't care how the unit committee is organized and run as long as it follows the rules and does the job.

This is what I see in this discussion. Tim provided a rather detailed description of a joint pack/troop committee and suggested it as a way of overcoming a lack of committee members (that wasn't the only reason). You quite rightly pointed out that this does not fit the BSA model and so far no one has actually disagreed with you on that point. You went on to suggest that such a joint committee was wrong, that Tim was wrong for suggesting it, that Tim was fulfilling his commission all wrong, and anyone who agreed with Tim was wrong. This is your opinion, which you are entitled to. It's clear as a commissioner you wouldn't suggest such a thing; as a committee member you wouldn't vote for such a thing. That does not automatically make everyone else wrong.

As I said, I find nothing abhorrent to the rules and regulations or the desired result of Scouting in the idea of a joint committee. I can see plenty of potential for trouble in the idea, but I can also see plenty of potential for greatness in the idea. Which you get depends on the people involved in making it work, not in the process itself. On its own a process is neither good nor bad; it's just a list of steps to take to accomplish a job. The thing that makes a process good or bad, effective or ineffective, are the people working to accomplish the steps. In my opinion it's far better in the long run to modify a process to fit the people than it is to modify the people to fit a process.

[1st Mate]

but a pack doesn't lose those tools just because they choose a different theme.

Yes they do for that month.

Hey, I was just answering your question from the perspective of a COR.

Thank you but it was not asked from that perspective. Commissioners are not CRs and they do not have the same responsibilities as a CR. The question was specific to unit commisisoners.

Here is the bottom line and I apologize for not being able to make it more clearly.

The problem that was established was overloaded committee members. The solution suggested by Tim was to combine committees. That simply does not work. If it takes X amount of work to do a Pack committee's work, and Y amount of work to do a Troop committee's work, Then combining that work is X+Y there is no work that gets subtracted. Your work load INCREASES.

Combining manpower does not reduce workload because you have also combined the workload.

The only thing that reduces workload is either reducing work or increasing manpower.

For all of the "creativity" being excercised by the commissioner, nothing was gained other than cosmetic changes.

I never said it was abhorrent. I said it is not what the commissioner role is or the purpose of their commission.

We all agree that a strong scouting program is the goal. Do you not also agree that the best way to a good scouting program is through the methods, procedures and policies of scouting?

Would you agree that the training and resources of the program that have been developed bt the BSA to help units succeed all support separate committees for the various programs?

Would you agree that the goal of the unit commissioner is as a coach and counselor helping the units to follow the BSA program?

If so, then combining unit committees does not meet any of those goals.

I have no expectation of changing your mind or Tim's. I can only hope that I have explained the situation clearly enough so that others do not choose that same course.

Thanks for the discussion.
1st Mate

[A J Mako]

I know of nothing in the BSA program that says that 3 committee members only works with 5 boys. What happens when a 6th is added that so drastically changes the needs of the unit?

I can safely say, from personal experience, a committee of three members barely works with 5 boys. The reason the minimum number of committee members is 3 is because 3 is the fewest people who can form a committee. Less than 3, it's not a committee. The minimum number required has nothing to do with the minimum number needed to support a unit program. That depends partly on the number of Scouts, but mostly on the intensity of the program.

Changing the committee structure and function is deviation.

This, apparently, is the point of major disagreement. Tim's suggested joint committee does not change the committee structure or the functions the committee performs for each unit. There is potential the functions might be changed if the members of the committee lose their focus and forget the reason they are there, but that potential exists whether the committees are joined together or kept seperate.

If you have enough families to have two units then you certainly have enough adults to support them, your problem remains volunteerism and the solution is still recruitment.

I don't want to make any assumptions about your experience as a Scout leader, but from my own experience I can say it's not always true having enough families to have two units means you have enough adults to support those units. I spent six years working with a troop that averaged 15 Scouts--13 different families. The unit was in an inner city neighborhood and exactly 1 of the families was fully intact (both parents present in the home). You might assume that means 14 potential recruits for the committee, and to a certain degree that's a good assumption. The problem I had was that most of the 12 parents who didn't sign up to form the committee had to choose between their second job and being on the troop committee. Sadly, the ones who didn't have to choose between a job and the committee and still refused to volunteer wouldn't have been very good examples of good character for the Scouts.

Having enough families to form two units could mean most of the families involved in one unit are also involved in the other unit--having one or more sons in the pack and one or more sons in the troop at the same time. In that case you actually have fewer potential recruits for both committees unless there are many dual registrations. A joint committee would actually be more effective for those units. Even more effective if the troop committee reduces its responsibilities to the bare minimum and lets the Scouts do as much as they can.

[A J Mako]

Yes they do for that month.

Only if those tools dissolve into nothingness at the end of the month! If the national theme for the month is sports and my unit chooses to do citizen instead I can still make use of the support materials. The information provided in training, the program source books, at Roundtable, in supplemental training, in Scouting and Boys' Life magazines, and in the heads of commissioners doesn't disappear when the month is over. When my unit gets around to doing the sports theme those support tools are still available to me.

Thank you but it was not asked from that perspective. Commissioners are not CRs and they do not have the same responsibilities as a CR. The question was specific to unit commisisoners.

There's one person who has the clout to make sure the unit commissioner even bothers to answer your questions. That's me--the COR. The UC's boss, the District Commissioner works for me--at least he depends on my support to keep his job. More importantly, I represent the guy who signed the charter agreement, so it's my job to make sure what the unit does follows the rules. It's also my job to make sure the unit commissioner follows the rules as well.

We all agree that a strong scouting program is the goal. Do you not also agree that the best way to a good scouting program is through the methods, procedures and policies of scouting?

Let me put it this way: I agree that a good Scouting program is achieved through the Methods of Scouting. I agree that BSA registered Scout leaders have an obligation to follow BSA rules, regulations and official policies. I agree that some BSA procedures are codified--they have the force of rules and regulations. So far, so good. Our disagreement is over a process, and it happens to be a process that is not codified. The process isn't a Method of Scouting.

Would you agree that the training and resources of the program that have been developed bt the BSA to help units succeed all support separate committees for the various programs?

Yes. I believe, however, that the BSA wants Scout leaders who are results oriented rather than process oriented. In other words, they want Scout leaders to think first of the result they want to achieve and not follow processes blindly.

Would you agree that the goal of the unit commissioner is as a coach and counselor helping the units to follow the BSA program?

No. The unit commissioner's goal as a coach and counselor is to help the units present a quality Scouting program following BSA policies, procedures, rules and regulations. This may be what you meant by "BSA program," but the emphasis on "healthy" and "quality" is important. How the unit committee chooses to organize itself isn't mandatory. What the unit committee is responsible for doing is. To achieve a quality Scouting program all that matters is that the unit committee does the job it is responsible for doing.

All I can say is that combining unit committees might achieve these goals in certain very specific situations. I certainly wouldn't consider it a permanent solution, but that really depends on the people involved.

[1st Mate]

As I said before, I have no delusions that anything I offer will change your minds, since nothing the BSA offered has done so. I only hope to dissuade others from following the same course.

The problem here is one of needing additional adults or less work (both of which can be addressed using BSA resources already available). And the combining of committees does neither.

As a clarification to any other CRs who might be confused by the statement that the Unit Commissioner works for the CR, they do not. All commissoners work for the District Commissioner. They serve the BSA by helping units succeed, there is a significant difference.

[Westergaard]

The role of the Commissioner is to be a trouble shooter for units that have problems with any and all phases. That is Commissioners are not problem solvers but assist in helping units solve their own problems.
How a unit runs is up to the unit as long as the guidelines of scouting are followed. A Commissioner then would step in if the unit leaders are heading into an area that might be out of bounds in relationship to the scouting program.

[1st Mate]

It actually goes beyond that Westergaard, The commissioner also looks for symptoms that can lead to poor unit health in the future and redirects the unit toward healthy habits.

But as you suggest the guideline to all this is the the BSA program. Normally Commissioners will use the training and resources provided by the BSA for a quality scouting program as the basis for that help.

[CommissionerTim]

As a clarification to any other CRs who might be confused by the statement that the Unit Commissioner works for the CR, they do not. All commissoners work for the District Commissioner. They serve the BSA by helping units succeed, there is a significant difference.

Actually, we do not work for the DC but in conjunction with him/her... All commissioners no matter what level of authority, serve the units... this includes the CO... To Help Units Succeed.

BSA has a million+ volunteers and even more in youth members... There is no way BSA will make a policy to tie the hands to unit committees to be creative in solving their own problems. If they make policies that do this, then councils will be over burdened with the "Police Commissioner" and his/her citations against the unit because the unit is not following policy to the word.

I will always think creatively and solve problems creatively and it will never deviate from the BSA program. When I suggested this idea to the CCs of both units and the COR, they were all for the idea. If even one of these leaders declined then it would never have happened. That's the beauty and dynamics of each and every adult leader we have in the scouting movement.

The BSA does not own the unit, but rather provide the materials and programming needed to help keep the unit working for the boys. The BSA allows the units to be creative with their programming to allow for the inevitable change that comes when units grow and decline in membership.

No matter whose opinion you choose to go with, just remember you have your own opinion too along with millions of other adult volunteers of the BSA... so remember who you are volunteering for and remember that the only thing the boys want is to have fun and occasionally earn the highest rank in scouting.

Thank you all for your participation and opinions...
This thread is now closed.

[WB Bear]

There is a lot of latitude BSA allows in their program which they allow Chartering Organizations to use as their youth program. You know they do charter each unit individually. However the structure is something that BSA has a tried and proven method of handling it. It also promotes identifying and recruiting effective leadership to fill all positions. There is nothing wrong with being creative or thinking outside the box but I suggest that shouldn’t happen until the basics are accomplished.

[1st Mate]

There is no way BSA will make a policy to tie the hands to unit committees to be creative in solving their own problems.

No one has said they made policies to do that. Had this been the committee's idea rather than yours then as a commissoner you would have hopefuly explained to the committee chairs that the real problem they need to resolve is recruiting and helped them to learn the method explained in the Selecting Quality Leaders plan. But this was a plan they were led to by their commissioner, and to many units the commissioner is one of the few links they have to the official BSA program, and unfortunately they now think that this is an acceptable and supported method, which it is not.

I understand that you disagree and I do not expect to change your mind.

Actually, we do not work for the DC but in conjunction with him/her... All commissioners no matter what level of authority, serve the units This to is a misunderstanding of the contents of commissioner training and the Commissioner Guides.

Who you work for and who you serve are two different entities. Think of yourself as a member of the customer service department of any company. You serve the company's customers, but you work for the department manager. You are chosen and approved by the District Commissioner, you recieve instructions from the District Commissioner. You are responsible to the District commisioner for your performance. You are a part of the Commissioner service of your district which is lead by the District Commissioner.

When you read the guides the Commissioner Fieldbook for Unit Service, and The Commissioner Administration of Unit Service, you will see that this is the case.

[BoatDaddy]

[B]Note: I moved this question to
For purposes of discussion, let's assume the following:

Committee is struggling to make things happen Everyone on the committee is doing 3 or more jobs There are less than 6 committee members



Interesting idea on combining Pack & Troop Committees. In our area the Pack & Troop of the same CO are not actually linked that much. There are 5 Troops & 5 Packs in our school district. There are 5 elementary schools (1 private) and each Pack is loosly associate with one of them. There is 1 middle school and 1 high school that each of the 5 Troops pull from.

Over the years, each Troop has differentiated itself. One Troop is the "camping" troop - they are off in the woods a minimum of 1 time a month year round. One Troop is the "yuppies" - they start a scout account the day you join, you add to it through the years, and in your senior year you take a trip to some place like Hawaii. The others vary as well.

When it comes time for crossover, all the Webelos IIs (from all Packs) "shop around" to figure out which Troop best fits them personally. The boys usually group up some as they transfer. Thus we had boys going to 2 different Troops this year.

In regard to Committees, I think a first step should be recruiting adults before thinking about joining Pack/Troop Committees (if you have reasonable size units).

Having said that, I too got really tired of standing up at each meeting, asking for volunteers, and getting nothing. We took a page from a local Troop that at the beginning of the year has a parents meeting and sybmolically locks the doors until all the positions are filled. The Cubmaster & I went around to each Den meeting and pulled the parents aside. We were prepared with a list of positions we were looking for and EXACTLY what we needed done including time commitment. We started off by thanking those adults in the room who were already volunteers in scouts or school/community. We then explained what we were looking for to the smaller group. Ended up getting great results.

Sorry for the rambling....

[jneuhaus]

Combining the two committees make alot of sense when it come to Transition and activity planning. Our troop always seems to be out of step with the pack when it comes to the transition events. If we were to set common goals at monthly committee meetings I thnk the recruiting and retention would be better because the adults and the boys would get to know one another. The Troop could put more support into the Pack recruiting efforts and the leader transition from Cub to Scout would not be uncomfortable.

John
Good Old Bobwhite 2

[WB Bear]

Packs and Troops are 2 separate groups and programs. One of the problems in combining the committees is that it will be highly probable that you will have a Troop ran similar to a Pack and a Pack similar to a Troop. The structure of BSA program is age appropriate and in boys that age there is a significant difference each year of age.

There does need to be a relationship between Troops and Packs. The COR, UC, the unit’s membership chair and a committee member responsible for Webelos-Scout transition can bring information to the separate committees.

Recruiting leaders can be very tough but I do believe it is easier in the long run to find an adult to take on a small piece of the responsibility as opposed to one “wearing multiple hats”.