View Single Post
  #6  
Old 11-03-2015, 05:18 PM
Griffins&Quills Griffins&Quills is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,204
Interesting. That makes sense but it seems like it's an inflated version of total. I could be wrong, but to me, adjusting at the end of each semester seems like it would give a more accurate picture of total.

It's great to give more women the opportunity to join but at certain campuses, where non-primary recruitment still has a stigma, I feel like it ends up hurting chapters. Because total is falsely inflated it ends up forcing groups to recruit who don't really need to because the average chapter size is in reality, slightly lower than it was when total was determined. And then it can also make it seem like a campus is ready for expansion when they're actually not.

I'm not sure I'm explaining my thought process well, but I guess what I'm getting at is that total isn't accounting for retention.

Why bother having total or formal recruitment at all, if the goal is to have chapters recruiting year-round? Because total is adjusted too early, you're creating a false environment, basically forcing chapters to COB. Why not just do away with formal recruitment and move entirely to COB, or remove the total "ceiling" and allow groups to pledge as many as they want, within a +/- percentage of average chapter size?

Maybe total should be total range, instead of quota range.
Reply With Quote