NUMBERS - NUMBERS - NUMBERS
TOM BENNETT (TBENNETT@MEDIA.AVS.UAKRON.EDU)
Mon, 23 Nov 1992 21:50:00 EST
Dear All Professionals and Past Professionals,
I would be interested in having as many of the Pro/ExPro folks as are willing
to tackle the issue as possible talk about why the emphasis is on "Balanced
Growth" instead of retention. Growth assumes the need to recruit more. I could
point out that if we retain (don't laugh) 100% of the Scouts recuited we only
have to recruit 1 to achieve balanced growth.
In my humble opinion the way to look at a program is retention. Why are the
folks at national/region/council/district looking at the bottom line and not at
the numbers that make up the bottom line?
If there is not a change in the system at some point all of the youth would be
past Scouts and there would not be a large enough pool of youth to recruit from
to maintain balanced growth.
Develop retention figures for the end of one year, the second year, the third,
etc. (90% of the scouts recruited last year rechartered with us). Then to be
sure that these numbers are meaningful lets bolt on a quality standard - maybe
advancement at a rate of not more then 2 times the minmum time possible. Or
some other meaningfull measure.
Maybe the number of Webelos that bridge over into the Scout program would be a
good measure of the program.
I know this might be a somewhat volitile issue. It is out of frustration that
I am writing this not out of anger. Programs, plans, everything stops for 30
days so we can recruit, recruit, recruit, recruit. I think that this is a
matter of knowing how big we want the organization to be and not working to
make it as big as it can be! That means that if the program is not in place to
support 100 Scouts maybe we shouldnot try to get 100 scouts into the program!
Great Trail Council
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City