View Single Post
  #18  
Old 09-27-2018, 07:40 PM
33girl 33girl is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hotel Oceanview
Posts: 34,489
Quote:
Originally Posted by zbxo View Post
Just curious. Those who don't believe in membership reviews.... Are you advisors/House corp for an extended period of time?

Membership reviews do not just come out of nowhere. The risk management job of advisors is enormous. There have most likely been countless meetings with members involving their behavior before their membership revocation. Way before National comes in. We won't hear much from Chi Omega. It would violate their policies. National never wants situations to get to the point of Membership reviews. But it is way better than having a risk management disaster.

The article posted is indeed very one sided IMO. The women interviewed seem like angels but they could have had behavior that would have taken the whole chapter down or worse, someone could have eventually been hurt or killed. Remember, the chapter was already on probation.

Sure the article is of interest, but just remember, it could be any one of our chapters tomorrow.

I can see why AZtheta was a little bothered by the original post. Assuming panhelrose is a recent graduate of that campus, it may have been seen as a little competitive/snarky the way it was just flopped out there without any sort of commentary. But it is a conversation worth having. Risk management always is.
You seem to be confusing “not down with membership reviews” with “not down with closing a chapter for any reason at all.” Yes, there are reasons chapters are a hot mess RFM wise and something needs to be done, but I don’t think a membership review is the way to do it.

I’m not in favor of making members explain why they are worthy of membership. I’m not in favor of making members say who they think who’s a good brother/sister. I’m not in favor of asking someone to inform on their big, or little, or someone else they’re close to. I’m not in favor of a national volunteer who has known members for 2.5 seconds deciding who is “good” and who is “bad.” It usually seems like an effort to not close the chapter and stay open in some fashion, rather than close and have to go back into the expansion churn. But if you’re hanging on to Mount Rushmore with your fingernails, how on earth is that going to be a pleasant or positive experience for the members involved?

If a chapter has a clique or group that is making things awful, maybe HQ coming in and doing a review would eliminate that. But it’s all negative from what I can see; it turns HQ into the bad guy, and it hasn’t helped the members learn how to resolve conflict on their own.

We all need to be honest and realize that a lot of the time, loyalty to chapter sisters/brothers is greater than loyalty to the national organization. And if we have a problem with that, then we (the IFC and NPC) need to radically change the way we select new members.
__________________
It is all 33girl's fault. ~DrPhil