Theirishscouter has been re-reading ‘Freakonomics’ the Steven Levitt/Stephen Dubner book lately as part of a ‘deep dive’ into consumer behaviour and behavioural economics for a work project.

The book looks at patterns behind things we take as everyday assumptions and sets out to challenge conventional wisdom on a range of subjects. The premise of the book centres on a group of fundamental ideas. One of these ideas is the idea that ‘incentives are the cornerstone of modern life’. To put it another way, every system exists because it benefits a given subset of society. Where the benefits accrued are inequitable, unreasonable or unsustainable, it is not long before that imbalance is rectified.

To give an example, estate agents are assumed to want to get the best possible price for each house they sell. Yet an analysis of data collected in the US market suggests they frequently do not. It turns out, there is frequently not a sufficient incentive for them to do so. Therefore, the agent that you assume is working on your behalf is in fact doing no such thing – they can often be doing the opposite – encouraging you to settle for a lower price, so they can move quickly on to another, more lucrative deal. Not at all obvious, until you dig into the background.

‘follow the money’. Usually, if one can pinpoint who benefits from something, any conflict of interest quickly manifests itself for all to see.

The rise of online realtors (estate agents) in the US market has gone some way towards disrupting what had been a cosy market for the industry for decades. It has led to better outcomes for homeowners in many cases. The realtor industry created a system that benefited them too much and their clients too little. The imbalance in the value equation was unsustainable.

Incentives work across all facets of life. In a murder mystery, the detective looks for motive – who might benefit or profit from the crime? Forensic fraud officers, chasing corruption frequently use the phrase ‘follow the money’. Usually, if one can pinpoint who benefits from something, any conflict of interest quickly manifests itself for all to see.

PROMISES, PROMISES…

We are five years into a structure in Scouting Ireland that the membership voted for in a fairly significant majority. (Co-incidentally, the majority was roughly the same as the majority of members who passed a vote of ‘no confidence’ in the Scouting Ireland’ board at the AGM in 2021). The 2018 structural change was voted in under some duress. Government intervention in the form of a Ministerial threat of funds withdrawal, undoubtedly was a major factor in the decision. Promises and commitments made by vocal proponents of the proposal, were another big factor. Members trusted these well-known figures to ensure the spirit of the proposed changes would be delivered.

The proposal put before the membership promised a volunteer board of directors to oversee the organisation, a volunteer-led structure to ‘run’ the organisation on a day-to-day basis and a bigger, more central role for a senior employee – a ‘Chief Executive Officer’ who would in essence lead the entire organisation and be accountable to the board and by extension, the shareholders (the Scout Groups).

The proposal intimated various other things and made various guarantees about democratic safeguards, youth participation, transparency in decision making, standards of governance, etc some of which have happened in reduced form and others, many would contend have yet to happen/ have been overlooked/ have been wilfully ignored (choose your preferred phrase, depending on how you see things).

So where are we, five years in?

It would be hard to argue that the change in structure (or perhaps to be more specific, the manner in which it has been implemented) has been a success. I am not sure any member would regard the changes made as having delivered any tangible benefits to members generally. (By the way, if anyone reading this feels differently and can argue their case coherently, I am very open to being persuaded). Equally, the victims and alleged victims of multiple historic abuse cases would likely argue (and indeed have argued rather directly in the public domain), that they have not been beneficiaries either. So, who precisely has benefited from the change from association to company?

Whilst many Scout Groups have contracted in size in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic (some deliberately so), a lot of anecdotal evidence suggests that Scouting in communities remains strong. The picture of the national support structure is less encouraging.

EVER DECREASING CIRCLES

In the summer of 2018, there were circa 1,400 volunteers engaged in running national teams, supporting programme, delivering adult training and running national events. (This number was largely consistent each year going back to 2004.) In 2023, the number is closer to 200.

Professional staff numbers in Scouting Ireland have not notably changed. If anything, they had been depleting, although some new appointments were recently announced. There are proponents of the idea that employees lead, and volunteers follow. If the quantity of ‘followers’ is an indicator, it would suggest this approach is not finding favour with scouters.

So, a key question must be: How sustainable is the present system?

It is hard to adequately articulate the resentment felt within groups towards Scouting Ireland as a national entity (in effect, the ‘service company’ Scouting Ireland Services CLG). Most volunteers have retreated into local scouting after Covid and have effectively stayed there. Levels of interest in the affairs of National Scouting or the concept of a national entity have dwindled to a handful of political types, half of whom are actively opposed to the board and the structure. Many others are simply biding their time in the wings, waiting for the whole thing to collapse. 

“We simply have the wrong people in key roles – they have completely misunderstood the role of an oversight board”

There are differences of opinion about how workable the company structure actually is. Whilst some dismiss it out of hand and seek a return to an ‘association’ model (entirely possible), others argue the problem is not the structure but how it is being managed that is the issue. An old acquaintance of theirishscouter, a central player in Scouting Ireland at the outset, recently remarked drily “We simply have the wrong people in key roles – they have completely misunderstood the role of an oversight board” Some board members might beg to differ, but it would be hard to argue that the board is a ‘hands off’ group. 

There has been no real effort made to put a strong operational structure in place to provide services to local scouting and of the sort that paid professionals would be there to support. 

The recent ‘Crinniu’ event in Larch hill, billed as the national conference, had around 200 people in attendance. National Councils of Scouting Ireland (admittedly a completely different type of event, but at its core, conceptually similar) typically had between 1,200 and 2,000 delegates in attendance (and plenty of non-delegates too).

It is possible that members are less interested when there is no scope for input or opportunity to shape national policy. Certainly, feedback theirishscouter has received seems to support this view.

FREE MARKET ECONOMICS

There is also a question of value for money. Scout groups presently pay a fee to Scouting Ireland Services CLG each year of €65 per member (including adult members) for ‘services’ which include the provision of insurance (around €11 per member) and membership of WOSM (around €5 per member). Most of the bill for professional staff salaries is covered by the grant provided by the Irish government which is around €1.5m per year. Where the remaining (circa) €49 goes is less clear. With 47,000 members (according to the Scouting Ireland website), that is annual revenue from membership fees of €3,055,000. The board needs to get better at explaining where that money is allocated and how it translates into ‘services’ for members.

One has to wonder in the event of a second provider of Scouting ‘services’ entering the market, how long Scouting Ireland Services CLG might retain its customer base. When the value equation is stacked too much in the direction of one party to a business arrangement, it is usually not long before alternatives are sought or manifest themselves. 

TROUBLE AT MILL

The Scouting Ireland board and its Chief Executive Officer have of course a series of significant issues to address. Not least, indeed perhaps most importantly is the on-going matter of several historic safeguarding cases and the likely financial implications of settling these cases. 

There are other legal issues piling up also, with several former members dumped out of the association pursuing cases through the courts and – if a recent board announcement is to be taken at face value – yet another director consulting legal eagles having been suspended from the board*.

_{*There is no legal mechanism under Irish corporate law to ‘suspend’ a director of a corporate entity, therefore whilst this is the report theirishscouter received in the topic, it cannot be correct as that would be a breach of corporate law. It would be illegal. It might also render any decisions taken by the board to which this ‘suspended’ director was not party, vulnerable to legal challenge.}

Other, disturbing disclosures suggesting a ‘weaponization’ of ‘safeguarding’ procedures (people in positions of authority deliberately mis-using the safeguarding processes to fabricate complaints against members who ask awkward questions about finance and other matters), sound so outrageous, so incredibly dangerous – one finds it hard to believe they could possibly be true. To wilfully and nefariously generate a vexatious and baseless safeguarding complaint against any person working with or close to young people would surely rank among the vilest, the most despicable of acts. It would be (to put it mildly) morally bankrupt. It would amount to wilful sabotage of an already tarnished process. It would, in recklessly undermining said process run a risk of putting young people in harm’s way in the future. It would (also) be highly defamatory of the targeted person. 

A recent media report indicated that the financial situation of the Scouting Ireland Services CLG company is unclear. When such reports manifest themselves in the public domain, one finds oneself wondering precisely where the stories are leaking from and where a proactive media strategy and PR representatives are. More to the point though; why the lack of clarity?

Stories emulating from Northern Ireland in recent weeks hint at turbulence on the Scout Foundation NI board (an entity established to help channel funding received from the UK Government into local groups) and intervention (rightly or wrongly) from ‘down South’.

Following on from this, the National Management Committee resigned en-masse. This might have come as a surprise to members who have not voted anyone on to the NMC for at least six years, but this entity was apparently engaged in critical work for Scouting – although quite how critical if the entire committee are now out of office, remains to be seen.

Amidst all this, a rumour persists that a new Scout Association, completely unaffiliated with Scouting Ireland Services CLG and with a democratic, youth focused constitution is on the verge of launching in Ireland.

Whatever the facts behind any of this might be, the on-going turbulence inside Scouting Ireland and the litany of negative stories in the press, have taken a toll on the name ‘Scouting Ireland’ and the reputation of the entity, the brand and by extension, the reputation of Scouting in Ireland more generally. Theirishscouter regularly talks with people in corporate Ireland and was dismayed over the summer when no less than three separate senior figures from different corporations, all raised ‘Scouting Ireland’ in negative terms in conversation, completely unprompted (obviously knowing however theirishscouter is involved in Scouting). The situation is little different in political circles, with even a serving T.D. delivering a withering assessment in another summer conversation. Five years on, this is all the more worrying. It suggests deeply embedded viewpoints.

Where the institutions of state are in all this remains to be seen. The Charities Regulator, the Director of Corporate Enforcement, TUSLA (the Child and Family Agency) and the Department of Children are all stakeholders in Scouting Ireland, which itself is a major beneficiary of funds from the Irish taxpayer/exchequer.

The board of directors whilst working hard and trying its best in difficult circumstances, does not seem to have a full picture of how the organisation is run, who is running it or how much it costs. Theirishscouter has spoken to several members of the board (present and recently past) and none know the details of (for example) staff salaries, staff KPIs or the granular details of company finances. I mention these particular metrics because they are among those which come up regularly at board and executive meetings in large commercial corporations that theirishscouter advises in his day job.

The whereabouts of the company’s CEO (an Interim CEO is presently in place) is a mystery and different board members have given different explanations. If they do not know these details (and theirishscouter did not ask for the details, just confirmation that they were known), then WHO DOES?

WHERE TO NEXT?

There is a saying that in order to effect change, focus not on changing the old, but on building the new. That, for what it’s worth, looks like it is already happening. Let’s consider however what might be possible if ‘changing the old’ is in fact a runner.

Scouting in Ireland needs an ambitious, clearly articulated vision for the future

VISION FOR THE FUTURE

Scouting in Ireland needs an ambitious, clearly articulated vision for the future. It is not clear what the end game is with regard to the present quagmire. 

We have had ‘visions’ previously. The most recent (Vision 2020) failed because it was merely a thinly disguised power-grab. Members are not stupid. A vision should be well, VISIONARY. It should be bold, inclusive, exciting, newsworthy. It should energise youth members, scouters, employees and external stakeholders. It should have near universal buy-in across the entire organisation.

Our last great piece of visionary action as an entity was the formation of Scouting Ireland, two decades ago. Scouting in Ireland was (deservedly) held up as a progressive, forward thinking organisation, willing to think the once unthinkable and devise a vision that the overwhelming majority of members not only supported, but actively engaged in. (If everyone knew then, what we know now it is perhaps questionable whether the whole thing would have gone ahead, but we will never know…).

We need a story to get behind, a trail to follow, a leader (or leaders) we can trust and believe in to get us there.

POWER IMBALANCE

Scouting Ireland Service CLG is owned by Scout Groups. In 2021 a majority (indeed close to 80%) of scout groups passed a motion seeking a change of direction to how the entity is managed. To date, no change has been made, nor has any substantive reasoning been proffered for the seeming inaction thus far. 

Apart from being quite extraordinary, this raises genuine questions about precisely who is in control of the company. In whose interest is it to resist or ignore a majority of the shareholders? The board’s? Surely not. The board were elected by the shareholders. It also raises questions about governance processes. If the owners of the business cannot effect change using the democratic mandate of a correctly submitted motion voted upon at a properly held Annual General Meeting, then how exactly can change be effected?

To give the board their due, they seek to undertake a truly unenviable task and it is not clear that any of their critics would be willing to take their place. The challenges being faced by the board are so seemingly insurmountable, many competent potential directors have opted to stay away. In several cases, it is intervention by the employers of potential volunteer directors to ask or simply tell them not to run – Scouting Ireland is not regarded in corporate Ireland as an entity to associate oneself with. The public sector assessment is little different. We should all be concerned about this and we should all be thinking about how to address this toxicity openly, honestly, positively – and quickly.

The board need to find a way to reach out to the members and seek their support. Scouting Ireland needs a radical re-think on how things have been managed to date.

Some want to see the entire board resign. The 2021 motion of no confidence stopped short of a demand for the board’s resignation, in part because the proposers (and many supporters of the motion) wanted to give the board time to act.

One could argue at this point, plenty of time has been allotted. However, for reasons set out above, there is a paucity (as opposed to a total dearth) of credible, interested talent.

PROFESSIONAL INPUT

The present power imbalance (and status imbalance) between employees, paid by the company (owned by the members) and the members themselves now regarded merely as a labour and funding source, was a knee-jerk reaction in the middle of a power vacuum. It was endorsed by a government minister who was not in possession of the full picture. It was always unsustainable. It is hobbling the entire enterprise. It deepens mistrust and resentment the longer it continues. 

There are historic reasons for this lack of trust between paid staff and volunteers that stretch back a decade or so (it would take an entire separate article to explain the background fully), but regardless of the origins it is clear that it needs to change if things are to move forward in a positive manner.

Notwithstanding the fact it was hard to find any scout group that would claim to have noticed a drop in ‘service’ when National Office went on a three-day week (nor did many report seeing any difference during COVID when National Office was closed for large periods), most reasonable people would nonetheless see that there is a need for a professional presence in Scouting Ireland.

There can be debates about how that resource is deployed, about recruitment and selection processes, competence levels, qualification levels, impartiality, motivation, etc but much of this will come down to the Board of Directors hiring the right manager or CEO and the CEO being of a calibre capable of hiring the right people for the right reasons and knowing how to manage them.

An experienced CEO will understand that culture begins at the top and that tone is as important as the message. The CEO of an organisation like Scouting Ireland will see themselves as leading a multi-disciplinary and multi-talented team, comprising volunteers and paid professionals. 

The best CEO’s theirishscouter has worked with are thoughtful leaders with a strategic mindset, humility and integrity. They balance a deep knowledge of the entire organisation (often learned fairly quickly) with a confidence to build a strong team who think independently and challenge, but also remain focused on the reason they are there. All senior staff, voluntary and paid must be willing and able to earn the respect of key stakeholders (members, colleagues, board members and external stakeholders).

A skilled CEO will be able to balance the competing forces of having to lead a team, even when they did not get to select everyone on the team. Chief Scouts did it for decades. Political leaders and plenty of corporate CEO’s must do it too. Scouting is volunteer led. This means heavy hitters elected by members and at every level – accountable to the CEO and in turn the CEO accountable to the board. 

Professional staff should not be involved in recruiting any volunteers for any national roles, nor should any volunteer ‘report’ to an employee, (apart from the CEO). Equally, no employee should report directly to a volunteer, with the sole exception of the CEO, who reports to the (volunteer) board.

Also important is a better deal for employees of Scouting Ireland. Salary alone is not enough to attract and retain top talent. Clarity about expectations, the right tools to deliver on those expectations and a viable career path would help. A positive and collaborative working environment between volunteers and salaried staff would contribute immeasurably to productivity and energy levels.

At present Scouting Ireland Services CLG appears to have a CEO who is absent and an interim CEO responsible for (presumably) the CEO workload in the CEO’s absence. The sooner some stability is applied to this state of affairs, the better for all involved. 

The organisation needs a member-facing figure who is there to listen, advocate and has the influence and electoral or other mandate to be able to act upon their concerns.

THE AIRING OF VIEWS

Face to face engagement between board, senior staff and members is rare and when it happens is very tightly controlled. What are people afraid of? If the board believes in its agenda – engage with members and sell the vision if you have one, answer the questions, take the flack.

The organisation needs a member-facing figure who is there to listen, advocate and has the influence and electoral or other mandate to be able to act upon their concerns. Is this the Chairman of the Board? Is it the Chief Executive Officer? Is it the Chief Scout? Is it all three or someone else entirely? Whoever it is, the present perceived lack of accountability is a problem.

Irish Scouters generally are not renowned for self-effacing compliance. People like to kick up when unhappy. They like honest, strident debate. They like to see elected officials and senior staff squirm at conferences. It is steely eyed, often unvarnished, but it is open, clear and uttered without personal malice. When the debate has been had, good nature returns, and foes become friends again. We are after all, supposed to all be on the same side, are we not?

Social media has brought benefits, but it has also increased the ease with which debate can become fraught, polarised, even vexatious. This is not exclusive to Scouting of course. Many people sound off (in writing) before they have considered the ramifications. The unvarnished, when indelibly presented in ink can look starker versus delivery from a podium in a private room. Of course, there are no podiums in private rooms open to members anymore. One way to stem the flow of public dissent, would be to restore channels of open, private debate, minus the North Korean style stage management.

The Irish constitution guarantees the right of freedom of expression. This is not unqualified nor is it untrammelled – defamation laws exist to temper things. The board of Scouting Ireland have presided over the deployment of tactics designed to discourage freedom of speech and intimidate those who ask difficult questions in public. Theirishscouter knows who advocated for this and so is not surprised, but it’s a lazy way to manage dissent and it is highly counter-productive.

Theirishscouter has a fundamental problem with the use of the term ‘disciplinary code’ or ‘process’ to describe the organisations (on paper) steps to protect members from bad actors. That this specific code only applies to volunteers (and not employees) is no doubt linked to one or more of the various employment acts, but it is presentationally problematic in the current rancorous environment.

Remove the word ‘Disciplinary’. Scouters are passionate, committed, enthusiastic pillars of their local community or they are inspirational young people on a mission to share their energy and ideas for the betterment of even younger people. The use of the word ‘Discipline’ is insulting and patronising. This is not a 19th century borstal – it is an entity that cannot survive without the goodwill of volunteers – people working for free and doing so with the best of intentions.

Bad behaviour should be tackled. Anyone who poses a risk to the safety of children should not be working with them – volunteer or otherwise. That is blindingly obvious. However, using a process ostensibly designed to protect children in order to jump on members who say ill-considered things via social media is disproportionate. 

Receiving strident critique and having to answer awkward questions is the price of power, but it also delivers incredible insights.

Theirishscouter has counselled various board members to embrace public comments and critique. Receiving strident critique and having to answer awkward questions is the price of power, but it also delivers incredible insights. Being honest – in particular about failings and errors actually BUILDS trust – counter intuitive as that might seem.

If, in the public domain, a member defames another member or an employee, there are defamation laws to deal with this. Use them. Everything else is simply opinion and bruised ego.

LAST CHANCE SALOON

Some feel Scouting Ireland as a national entity is fading away. A shadow of its former self, the contrast with local Scouting with all its focus on young people, positivity, openness and vibrancy is stark and depressing.

The credibility and reputation of Scouting as a positive force for good in Irish society has been severely tarnished. To many, the damage is irrevocable. No amount of mildly patronising pontification via emails from senior figures will move the dial on this perception, if the values being preached are not seen to be practised over a sustained period by those who are espousing them. 

Theirishscouter would like to think that if everyone just stopped for a moment and thought about what could be achieved through some genuine inclusiveness and unity, a pathway back from this slow and ignominious decline is still possible.

Whoever has truly benefitted from the mess we are in – and some members have very clear views on this, the victory could surely not be more Pyrrhic, if all we are left with is a set of smouldering ruins. Board members: ask yourselves if the advice you receive (from whoever you receive it) is in the long-term interests of having a viable Scouting entity in Ireland. 

It feels like the final window of opportunity to steady the ship, create a new narrative and build for the future, is closing.

All is not yet lost. Scouting in Ireland can re-build its reputation. The service and transformational change volunteers drive in their communities each week, can be amplified through an open, focused national entity. There are relationships to rebuild and new alliances to establish with corporate entities, non-profits, political parties, government agencies and the civil service. 

Scouting Ireland can get back to being a driver of change. The organisation and its leadership can become regarded as inspirational. Members countrywide can once again feel proud to be part, not just of their group but of a national entity that inspires confidence and exudes professionalism and positivity. 

It can sometimes seem very far away, but it is attainable. Do we have the will?

The Department of Children meets with Scouting Ireland as questions are raised over delays in accounts and AGM