[21201] in APO-L
Re: [APO-L] Rush Ideas
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Patrick Thompson)
Tue Sep 19 16:23:55 2000
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <001501c02277$a5ae73a0$1a223b81@vanderbilt.edu>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 15:24:40 -0500
Reply-To: Patrick Thompson <patrick.h.thompson@VANDERBILT.EDU>
From: Patrick Thompson <patrick.h.thompson@VANDERBILT.EDU>
To: APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cynthia Maxton" <cem_apo@YAHOO.COM>
To: <APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 9:43 AM
Subject: Re: [APO-L] Rush Ideas
> I have heard quite a few comments and concerns
> regarding the NUMBER of pledges. The running theme is
> that we are in a bad situation because the numbers are
> down.
>
> I have yet to hear anyone concerned about the QUALITY
> of their pledges. What I have discovered is that with
> a large pledge class, the chapter will be lucky if
> even half of them are around a semester later. With a
> smaller pledge class, the percentage of brothers that
> remain is higher.
But, as others have pointed out, half or fewer of a large class can often be
equal to or more than a greater percentage of a smaller class.
> I had an advisor tell me once that an organization
> should never try to grow by more than 20% in a year.
> This was after our chapter had doubled in size in less
> than a year. Any chapter that has had this type of
> 'blessing' knows that, in reality, it is anything but
> that. The term 'growing pains' is not just a
> fictitious construct. It can be as difficult for a
> chapter to handle as declining membership can be.
Yes, large pledge classes can be difficult--our largest pledge class here at
Theta Mu (Vanderbilt) a few semesters back is notorious for almost all the
members rapidly going inactive. However, in my view, the problem was not
the size of the pledge class in and of itself-it was that some of the
pledges weren't given a good impression of the chapter during their pledge
semester, and during the subsequent semester there was an ongoing problem
with the board, caused by the fallout of a newly elected president having to
leave school, and the restructuring of the board becoming personally hurtful
in a very public way. However, it's easier to look at numbers as the
problem, rather than focusing on how to make sure all the new recruits are
shown the best taht the chapter can offer them. It's a challenge, but not
an insurmountable one.
As for the advice given by your advisor, I'd suggest to ignore it. Remember
that since the average active lifespan is three semesters, replacement rate
recruiting is about 33% a semeste--if every semester about a third of the
chapter is disappearing, you need to have an equivalent number of new
actives just to maintain the same size.
You want quality members? I think they're made as much as they're
recruited--if a chapter is promoting growth in the members then the quality
of the actives will improve, while a chapter that's apathetic or foundering
will get weak members, because the people who are already actives will lose
interest, ad they in turn will fail to motivate new members. A quality
chapter will find it easier to get rather large pledge classes, by
projecting confidence, interest, and effectiveness--and that same chapter
will do better at keeping more of those members on as truly active members.
Patrick Thompson
