Its now that time when Scouting reviews its membership numbers in the annual census. After a period of decline things are looking up - last year saw a small increase in overall numbers and hopes that this will continue this year.
Its too easy however to look at overall numbers without understanding whats really happening 'under the hood'. For example, the Scout Association has been pushing the idea that when a section running weekly runs out of space then open a second and meet both sections on alternate weeks - more members enjoying Scouting. But wait, the volume of Scouting is still the same - our young people experience 50% less Scouting and core activities such as camps are more difficult as the pool of adult leaders vs number of members is halved. Great for census numbers, great for national income (more capitation) but good for Scouting? I think not.
In my District we are seeing a increasing polarisation of Groups. We have a core of successful groups that have always been of a certain size and whilst their numbers fluctuate they are generally strong. The smaller groups however seem to be getting weaker - less new Leaders, decreasing numbers and gradual, slow deaths. So whilst overall District numbers are up (just), it isn't a uniform growth. Once a group falls below a certain size they struggle to regenerate and are at risk of closure - once closed it is too easy for Districts to never visit Scout provision in an area again. Reopened and new Groups are not everyday occurrences and certainly in my District closures are more common (the last new Group was about 30 years ago but we've had 2 closures in the last 5).
Being positive about our Scouting and understanding what our members expect are the keys to our survival. HQ have done much in recent years with branding, making programme easier to deliver and communicating this to the general public but for struggling groups and overworked leaders it doesn't help. Its easy to fall back on weak programme and bad habits but at the same time this is when members get bored and leave.
Districts need to be aware of this - the District team is key to providing support, maintaining standards and stepping in when the danger signs are posted - their role is as hard and challenging as running a section and one that is easy to overlook. Visiting sections to see what is going on, turning up at camps and making Leaders feel good is crucial. There role is far more than offering advice - it is about active, practical support - it should never be passive.
Districts shouldn't see the census as the only health check method and shouldn't wait for the crys of help from Groups before they act. If they do then they and not the Groups are the one's that are failing...
Its too easy however to look at overall numbers without understanding whats really happening 'under the hood'. For example, the Scout Association has been pushing the idea that when a section running weekly runs out of space then open a second and meet both sections on alternate weeks - more members enjoying Scouting. But wait, the volume of Scouting is still the same - our young people experience 50% less Scouting and core activities such as camps are more difficult as the pool of adult leaders vs number of members is halved. Great for census numbers, great for national income (more capitation) but good for Scouting? I think not.
In my District we are seeing a increasing polarisation of Groups. We have a core of successful groups that have always been of a certain size and whilst their numbers fluctuate they are generally strong. The smaller groups however seem to be getting weaker - less new Leaders, decreasing numbers and gradual, slow deaths. So whilst overall District numbers are up (just), it isn't a uniform growth. Once a group falls below a certain size they struggle to regenerate and are at risk of closure - once closed it is too easy for Districts to never visit Scout provision in an area again. Reopened and new Groups are not everyday occurrences and certainly in my District closures are more common (the last new Group was about 30 years ago but we've had 2 closures in the last 5).
Being positive about our Scouting and understanding what our members expect are the keys to our survival. HQ have done much in recent years with branding, making programme easier to deliver and communicating this to the general public but for struggling groups and overworked leaders it doesn't help. Its easy to fall back on weak programme and bad habits but at the same time this is when members get bored and leave.
Districts need to be aware of this - the District team is key to providing support, maintaining standards and stepping in when the danger signs are posted - their role is as hard and challenging as running a section and one that is easy to overlook. Visiting sections to see what is going on, turning up at camps and making Leaders feel good is crucial. There role is far more than offering advice - it is about active, practical support - it should never be passive.
Districts shouldn't see the census as the only health check method and shouldn't wait for the crys of help from Groups before they act. If they do then they and not the Groups are the one's that are failing...
1 comment:
Good post.
Post a Comment