University of Texas-Austin Roundup

[33girl]

Originally Posted by dnall

As far as deferred recruitment, that's a money thing. You miss out on a semester of dues from X number of people every year. And, you spend a ton on events all fall with a lot of non-members (with limited insurance coverage) at your functions.

This point is moot for NPC groups. It's also moot at schools where non-fraternity members are actually allowed to attend fraternity parties (which has been stamped out in many places - necessary evil per whack ass insurance policies, but one which only fosters the Greek vs. non-Greek animosity).

This point is incorrect for NPC and NIC groups if deferred rush leads to greater member satisfaction and greater member retention (i.e. it does no good to have the biggest pledge class every year if 1/2 of them are gone by the time they're seniors).

[dnall]

Originally Posted by 33girl

This point is moot for NPC groups. It's also moot at schools where non-fraternity members are actually allowed to attend fraternity parties (which has been stamped out in many places - necessary evil per whack ass insurance policies, but one which only fosters the Greek vs. non-Greek animosity).

This point is incorrect for NPC and NIC groups if deferred rush leads to greater member satisfaction and greater member retention (i.e. it does no good to have the biggest pledge class every year if 1/2 of them are gone by the time they're seniors).

Kind of... I mean I understand what you're saying and I do want to agree with you, but there's two sides to every coin.

NPC groups in that enviro (from my experience) do still spend money. Not on big social events like a fraternity wouls, but more on a lot of little philanthropy &/or ice cream social kind of things in order to keep their name out there and create contact opportunities. It becomes like low-key rush all fall, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but is a lot of work & some expense.

Enforcement on a given campus is a different topic, but as far as insurance... open-parties are for sure not allowed by any national's policy I know of. Which is fine. I didn't like paying for randoms anyway. There are supposed to be guest restrictions - other org (mixers) or 1-2 guests per member. Nothing says all those guests have to be the opposite sex though. You should still be able to invite prospects by name. If there's a school saying otherwise, I'd like to get a look at that policy.

I really really do appreciate the view about satisfaction/retention. I believe values based recruiting leads to pledges who matched up closely with the org philosophy/mission prior to showing up on campus. That produces greater satisfaction, dedication, and retention. I absolutely do thing deferred has the most potential to accomplish that, but there's also a lot of problems with it in practice from a business perspective.

Fall vs Spring pledges don't directly impact house occupancy. It may have a slight impact on parlor fees & meal plans. Dues is a bigger debate. For sure you're giving up the JI semester for two-thirds plus of your members. You can make an argument that if you slide that to the end and you retain more in the last semester of their senior year that it'll end up even. I don't necessarily disagree with that, but there's just so much else that far into a greek experience that can impact satisfaction/retention. I feel like if retention is that big an issue than there's a laundry list of other things you can do before you get to deferred.

The biggest impact though is the rush pool. Admittedly this is more an issue for fraternities, but the net effect is the same.

There's people that don't make grades or get in trouble first semester. So they want to rush but can't. For sure there is an argument that you don't want those folks anyway, cause they're likely to have grade/behavior problems later as an active. There's some truth to that, but I'd like to give the benefit of the doubt given it's first semester away from home and w/o the org structure forcing them to get their stuff done.

There's also the new guy factor. A lot of people rush cause they're new to campus and don't know many or anyone else. If you give them a semester to settle in, a lot of those people will make their own friends and not see the need for a greek org by the time the chance to rush comes around.

The net effect is the rush pool drops. That does translate to chapter total/avg, and does effect occupancy/finances.

There's a debate to be had if it's worth it or not. I've seen it work okay in a few places. Those were mostly smaller schools with a very high greek percentage in towns where there isn't a lot else to do unless you're greek. The majority of campuses though, I just don't know if it's the best move. Like the example I gave, there's a lot potential negative side-effects too. That's just got to be a really individual decision for each campus.

I do really hate the way sorority rush works though (no offense). I would be a lot more supportive of deferred for them than for fraternities.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by dnall

Enforcement on a given campus is a different topic, but as far as insurance... open-parties are for sure not allowed by any national's policy I know of. Which is fine. I didn't like paying for randoms anyway. There are supposed to be guest restrictions - other org (mixers) or 1-2 guests per member. Nothing says all those guests have to be the opposite sex though. You should still be able to invite prospects by name. If there's a school saying otherwise, I'd like to get a look at that policy.

That's what I'm talking about. Bobby Beta should be able to invite his friend Eddie Engineering Major who's a senior who never had time to pledge a fraternity between his major and being an R.A., but he's a good guy that all the brothers like. It's not necessarily a rush thing, just being able to invite people who aren't your brothers (and showing you can have a life/friends outside your org).

Originally Posted by dnall

I really really do appreciate the view about satisfaction/retention. I believe values based recruiting leads to pledges who matched up closely with the org philosophy/mission prior to showing up on campus. That produces greater satisfaction, dedication, and retention. I absolutely do thing deferred has the most potential to accomplish that, but there's also a lot of problems with it in practice from a business perspective.

It depends what you consider "values based recruiting." Quite frankly, all those mission statements and taglines sound a lot alike anyway...I know we had a thread about this a while back. Basically: people join GLOs that have people they like in them. GLOs choose people they like to be in their organization. (as far as NIC and NPC, anyway) Until we stop rushing the way we do, that won't change - i.e. you're not going to pick the saint if no one can stand him/her. I mean if I would have rushed based on the philanthropy, there are other groups on campus that would have spoken to me more than mine did. I know you said your group still has a strong Christian focus, so you most likely have a far different perspective on this concept than most people do.

Originally Posted by dnall

I would be a lot more supportive of deferred for [sororities] than for fraternities.

It's horribly un-PC, but I completely agree. Boys and girls are different because they are different. Period.

[dnall]

Originally Posted by 33girl

That's what I'm talking about. Bobby Beta should be able to invite his friend Eddie Engineering Major ... It's not necessarily a rush thing, just being able to invite people who aren't your brothers (and showing you can have a life/friends outside your org).

I don't know of any fraternity or school where you couldn't invite that guy. It may cut into the number of girls you can invite is all. If there's some rule out there about only opposite sex guests, please send it to me so I can share it with some lawyer friends of mine.

You absolutely can have a life outside your org, which doesn't occur at org functions. Take your buddy to the bar with your brothers in tow. A lot of inter-fraternity relations happen that way too.

In the end though it should be limited. Not even really for insurance purposes. If I invite a guy from work out with my buddies, he better not expect we're going to pick up his bar tab. But you invite someone to a fraternity function and they just assume your stuff is their stuff. That's really not fair to the dues paying brothers. It's theft really. Rush invites are fine. A friend from out of town every now and then is ok. Some buddy here or there if chapter agrees to it. But, stuff like that shouldn't be habitual. It's just not fair. Plus, why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free.

It depends what you consider "values based recruiting." Quite frankly, all those mission statements and taglines sound a lot alike anyway...I know we had a thread about this a while back. Basically: people join GLOs that have people they like in them. GLOs choose people they like to be in their organization. (as far as NIC and NPC, anyway) Until we stop rushing the way we do, that won't change - i.e. you're not going to pick the saint if no one can stand him/her. I mean if I would have rushed based on the philanthropy, there are other groups on campus that would have spoken to me more than mine did. I know you said your group still has a strong Christian focus, so you most likely have a far different perspective on this concept than most people do.

I do mean a certain thing about my org when I say values based recruiting, cause the kid that already basically believes in our philosophy/mission is going to take to it more easily than the kid who we tell to throw out everything he believes and shape the rest of his life around what we're about to force him to learn. But that's a deeper level than what I was actually going for.

Regardless what an org is about, the members share more than clique factors that bind them together. It may be how high they value academics versus intramurals or what kind of people they hang out with or whatever, but there's some things that aren't immediately obvious, and that rush is probably the very worst place to figure out with any certainty, either for the PNM or the org.

Deferred does have the advantage that those folks are sitting on your campus waiting to be sought out, evaluated, befriended, recruited, and locked in well before sign-up for formal is ever announced. Traditional - I mean targeting those kids in high school over break is a lot harder to do, but is worthwhile if you have the resources/logistics.

I just think deferred is great in theory and very problematic in practice. As much as I want to like the concept, I can't see the situation where I'd propose it as policy on almost any campus.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by dnall

I don't know of any fraternity or school where you couldn't invite that guy. It may cut into the number of girls you can invite is all. If there's some rule out there about only opposite sex guests, please send it to me so I can share it with some lawyer friends of mine.

You mentioned "prospects" which made me think you were only looking at inviting guys to a party as a rush tool.

[dnall]

Originally Posted by 33girl

You mentioned "prospects" which made me think you were only looking at inviting guys to a party as a rush tool.

That would be prob the main reason I'd tolerate that kind of thing on a semi-regular basis. Cow & the milk thing again.

There shouldn't be a rules about it, but fraternities shouldn't give it away like that either. Girls abuse it enough already.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by dnall

That would be prob the main reason I'd tolerate that kind of thing on a semi-regular basis. Cow & the milk thing again.

There shouldn't be a rules about it, but fraternities shouldn't give it away like that either. Girls abuse it enough already.

Yeah, see, that's exactly what I meant about fostering animosity. Then again, we paid to get into parties. I can see where if you were silly enough to have free parties all the time it would breed resentment.

[dnall]

Yeah, that's a really bad idea. For a whole lot of reasons.

[AlphaFrog]

Originally Posted by dnall

That would be prob the main reason I'd tolerate that kind of thing on a semi-regular basis. Cow & the milk thing again.

There shouldn't be a rules about it, but fraternities shouldn't give it away like that either. Girls abuse it enough already.

Yes, how terribly unfair that the boys have to pay up to get the girls drunk and loose. Obviously, the girls should be responsible for that themselves, eince it's really only to their benefit.

[Low C Sharp]

NPC groups in that enviro (from my experience) do still spend money. Not on big social events like a fraternity wouls, but more on a lot of little philanthropy &/or ice cream social kind of things in order to keep their name out there and create contact opportunities.

Is this the case at SMU? I'm trying to come up with the deferred-rush schools that are most similar to Texas socially. Maybe SMU and UVA.
________
\

[dnall]

Originally Posted by Low C Sharp

Is this the case at SMU? I'm trying to come up with the deferred-rush schools that are most similar to Texas socially. Maybe SMU and UVA.

Yeah I was thinking about SMU when writing that, but I didn't want to get too far down in the weeds about just them when we were trying to talk about the broader concept of deferred.