i like the premise of your idea, but in a way it seems like it would be a punishment for the big chapters.

Not only that, you get into freedom of association issues (if the chapters in question haven't done anything to be punished for). The HQs of the sororities effected would be running to the ACLU before you could say Green Book!

Plus, at a school where being super selective is part of the allure of the Greek system, this could backfire - "oh you can pledge ABC first semester, but to pledge XYZ you have to WAIT because we're WORTH it."

The other thing is where to draw the line. I realize many systems there's a huge gap between the large sororities and small sororites and there's hardly middle groud, but when there is middle ground, who gets to recruit in Fall and who has to wait?? If you have 2 groups at 100+, 2 at 60, 2 at 40 and 1 at 20, where do you draw the line??

I understand what you all are saying, and that it's unfair to the bigger chapter, but how could we work it out to help the smaller chapters recruit more women? Coming from a small chapter (~50) at a school of huge chapters(most 100-150+), it's almost impossible to compete with these chapters, and due to this, our chapter closed. We couldn't pledge quota during FR, nor could we reach total through COB. Quota and total have both risen significantly recently, despite attempts to keep it downfrom us and our Greek Advisor, because it is a vote from all chapters. The solution in this case (of high total and quota), is NOT to add another sorority to keep down total so chapters can have real sisterhood, because if one chapter is struggling now adding another sorority would just worsen the problem, and either make the small chapter smaller, or both the small chapter and the new chapter small. What is the answer though? Allow the small chapter to close, sadly enough, and move on, add another GLO like the problem never existed?

Sometimes I think the answer IS to close a struggling chapter. Every now and then chapters get into a hole that they can't get out from, or at least not without a LOT of panhellenic support. If that support isn't ever going to be there, it may be better for the chapter to close, and recolonize later. It is NOT what is best for the sisters there, but it may be the best thing for the chapter as a whole.

Unfortunatly, this happens rather frequently.

Did you have open bid events throughout the year or just following formal rush?

We COB'd throughout the year, at least one a week. We pledged women in every two weeks, and still could no get to where we needed to be.

Here's my HO

1) GLO members of the male persuasion do not seem to understand the way Panhellenic is set up - nor can they seem to understand why it is set up the way it is. So, MEN don't worry about it . . . I know it bothers you that we do it this way and totally different from IFC, but this is the way that it has worked for a long time. (My brother (a KA from B'ham Southern) thinks the whole panhellenic recruitment thing is a ridiculous set up - but I tell him it is what is necessary to "recruit" mostly 17-19 year olds - to help them the most.)

2) And, women, come on, ya'll all know why we have to have these "green book" rules - we are women - Sometimes, the older ones of us have to make sure that the younger ones of us don't mess up too much. We have to set up a way to help the strong chapters and the "transitional" chapters alike. These new release figures are for sure the right direction if the various "hired greek advisors" follow the rules accordingly.

3) Also, I think what some people are missing is there are different reasons for different "terms" - I don't think and Panhellenic is trying to drive us crazy with "fuzzy math."
a) Panhellenic quota (and reaching Panhellenic quota) determines alot of things as far as the individual sorority goes - like national awards and so forth.
b) quota additions geared more towards the pnm then greek system.
c) snap bids are for the individual sorority
d) total is for the greek system (to grow or know what to do next year)
e) COR's are set to get the sorority to total

So, knowing all of that should help to understand why some sororities have quota plus (to help the pnm's) and why some sororities have snap bidding (so they don't have to COR)

- Reading back through this I sound like I am trying to be mean but I promise I am not, so please try not to take it that way, these are just the way I see things -

Panhellenically Yours
Connie

Interested in how this actually works.
 

This question goes way beyond the scope of anything I'm really entitled to know, but could an official rush advisor anonymously post modified data on a school's rush to basically show how different systems work?

Like make up group names and return rates, and walk us through what happens at schools with different systems?

Again, I'm simply an alum, not any kind of advisor, and I don't really need to know any of this, but I'm curious about how things have actually worked. Quota additions and release figures seem like they would be wonderful, and yet schools (it seems based on threads from the last few years) seem to have trouble implementing them in a way that works.

I'm trying to figure out exactly what you mean so I can maybe provide a response. When you say "official rush advisor," I'm assuming you mean a chapter's recruitment advisor, right? Not a campus' Greek/Panhellenic Advisor, or person administering recruitment? If you're asking to get a mockup from a campus perspective, I'd be willing to share how it works at my university (using made-up names/return rates, etc.) if no one is opposed to it.

Exactly!
 

I don't need to be able to match the data to any one school or group, but I'd like to read about how the quota additions and release figure recruitment system works.

I wanted it to come from someone who had actual knowledge of one system's result, rather than just someone making something up about how they thought it should work.

A campus greek advisor would be ideal, but I doubt they'd be willing to post on greek chat.

As an advisor to one chapter, do you get to see other chapters' return results and releases?

Ok, that makes sense then...

I work as my campus' Panhellenic Advisor, so I see all of the figures and know how it works from the "inside." Again, if no one objects, I'm willing to make up some sample figures to explain. I don't think it would be a problem to do this, but I'd like to get some thoughts from others before posting how it works on GC.

Advisors for individual chapters should not see other chapters' return results and releases. Those are confidential, so I don't and cannot share that information as Panhellenic Advisor. I treat release figures the same as I do PNM rankings/pref cards. But if chapters want to share, that's their perogative (not that they do on my campus).

Excellent!
 

I understand wanting to get some feedback first.

You sound like the perfect person to do this.

Were you the advisor before the era of release figures and quota additions so you can contrast the old and new? I'm thrilled if I get to hear about the new alone, but I'd be interested in the comparision too.

Thanks!

Last year was my first year as the Panhellenic Advisor and our campus' first year with the new release figures, but I had to pull together the previous 3 years of release figures info in order to be ready for the new method. I also assisted my chapter for 2 years on the alumnae side before that, so I know how the old method worked as well.

Just from a general perspective, the new method is awesome- not only does it make parties smaller and easier for chapters to manage (there may be some disagreement with me on this part, esp. from larger campuses), it also gives a PNM more realistic choices throughout the recruitment process and keeps a larger percentage of PNMs in the process longer. We saw a lot of great results from it last year, though some of our chapters were hesitant and worried with their release numbers. In the end, 5 of the 6 chapters ended up making quota (4 of them with QAs) and the one that didn't make it was only off by 2 members. It was the best turnout in terms of chapters making quota (and getting close to it) that our campus has had in at least 10 years.

Those results sound great!
 

It sound like it's working perfectly at your campus!
Are there groups who still resist using the release figures?

I have to admit, I was very much against release figures - too much control and all that.

But our campus used it this year. There are eleven constant sororities - just enough that a twelfth one comes on campus as regular as clockwork, and another one goes under. This year, NINE out of eleven sororities made either Quota or Quota Plus. This was astonishing, given the school's greek history.

So, I'm a convert. Another year or two of these Formal Recruitments, and maybe a twelfth sorority can return - to stay!

Yes, it's working wonderfully for our campus. I'm hoping we get great results again this year.

No one really resists release figures on my campus. When we were on the old method, some chapters wouldn't follow their recommended figures; this ended up helping the chapters in terms of getting more PNMs to maintain their interest, but didn't always help the PNMs (i.e. they'd get cut later in the process which led to hurt feelings and more withdrawls). The chapters weren't all thrilled with the new method last year; chapters that have strong recruiting skills were bothered with having to cut so many in the beginning and less strong chapters were bothered with not having the option to be as selective as they'd like to be. So there are pros and cons, but it works out in the end for everyone.

Can't they choose to not invite people back, even if they do end up with a smaller group? I thought the release figure methods were to keep the bigger chapters from going overboard, not to force any chapter to invite women they don't want.

This was just one of the drawbacks we saw last year. From what I recall, chapters who were "instructed" to release few PNMs ended up cutting a little anyway, to the dismay of our NPC Area Advisor. I completely agree that even if a chapter is not a strong recruiting chapter (large or small) they should be able to cut as they please because they do have standards and all. I think the chapters with this dilemma ended up cutting for grades (regardless of what the release figures demanded).

Well, of course
 

I think the sooner that you cut girls that you would not or could not offer bids to, especially for something objective like grades, the better. It doesn't seem to me that you'd want to give them false hope if you knew earlier on there was no way to have them as new members.

I wouldn't expect anyone to have too many of these girls, but large or small, all chapters will probably have a few.

Can you give us a sense of what the release figure range is?

I would love to hear the "new release figure method" from a greek/panhellenic advisor point of view. (I am a recruitment advisor) - AND I AM TOTALLY biased for ADPi - so I can only visualize - any rules - from my chapters or my sororities point of view.

panhellenically yours
connie

I think I've said it before, but there does come a point when you look at the recommendations (which may say to cut no one) and choose to cut anyway, not just for grades. If you don't want a girl on your bid list, leaving her on your bidlist just because someone else said percentages work is not a good idea.

Choosing to COB to quota over being less selective can often be a better choice, I think. One of the ways chapters can fail is being very un-selective, and taking girls who end up being uncommitted. And when the uncommitted ones withdraw from the chapter, you feel even more pressure to take quota and the cycle continues until you close.

/I do think that that the new figures are a good thing, but they are recommendations, not requirements

I absolutely agree with this, though I think there is pressure in COB for some chapters as well.

Alphagamuga- I'm not sure if I should share the range given a few GCers know what campus I work at. Not to mention I'd have to check the figures from last year which I wouldn't be able to get to until at least a week from now (fall quarter has definitely eaten me alive already). I'll see what I can share in terms of a "mock" range, maybe?

That sounds great!
 

A mock range, a range from several years ago, a range from a different campus. . .

Anything you feel comfortable with is okay with me.

I've heard rumors about how some of the really amazing groups at UGA have to release at percentages that I'm not sure could work out mathematically to have full parties and yield quota. (Many of the groups are so strong that no matter how many they had to release, close to 100% of the PNMs they invited back would eagerly accept bids, I think, except in the years when it turns out that three of the top chapters all invited the exact same girls back, even though there were more than 1000 who rushed.)

Lately, I've started to wonder if complaining about release figures isn't a new way for the chapters to compete with each other.

For example, member of group QRS*, " Gah, release figures are the devil. Sooo many girls want us that we have to cut 80% after first round."

Member of group XYZ replies, "I knoooww, we have such great returns that we have to release 87%.*"

Not that every member of the chapter even knows how many were released, but I'm curious about how it really works.

* Note, this is a totally fictionalized conversation. No girl from a truly top house at UGA would talk this way or say anything about the girls they released except that the chapter was heartbroken to see them go.

Not true. If you expect that few women will accept invitations, you invite them all. You do not want the girls who you DO want showing up and seeing that your party only has 20 PNM's when every other chapter's party has 30.

Yes, but if one of the girls came to a previous party and was all "I'm going ABC and the only damn reason I'm here is because they told me I had to come" you want to release her butt as soon as humanly possible. People with bad attitudes aren't something you want around as they can "infect" the other rushees with and then you're doubly SOL.

As far as the grades question, you literally may not be allowed by your national bylaws to ask them back.

Also, you may want to leave the freakshows (you know, the ones that came in hungover and puked in the foyer, jumped up on the table and did a striptease, etc.) off your invite list, even if you need bodies. PNMs are going to see that girl back and think "Gee, if this sorority invited HER back, I sure don't want to be a part of it...".

I certainly agree with this. I am just saying that when a chapter has the option of inviting back girls they can't take due to grades, or having empty parties, you shouldn't assume that they are always going to err on the side of sparing the PNM's feelings.

I think I am very cynical about the process, because I notice I am playing devil's advocate an awful lot.

A couple of comments...
 

1. No, it does not say anywhere in the green book that you are guaranteed a bid if you attend and rank the maximum number of pref parties. Some campuses have this rule, but NPC does not.

2. If your campus has spring rush, the chapters under total can do COR in the fall, unless a specific campus rule prohibits it.

3. Release figures are recommendations. However, some campuses have the rule that if a chapter does not abide by suggested release figures, they are not eligible for quota additions, which, at 5%, can be 4 girls on larger campuses.

Hmmmmm...couldn't one way around this be to have fewer parties for that sorority? Example, if there are 7 time slots for parties on that night, and in order to have fuller parties a group needed to have 6, wouldn't that be an option? Or, if there were an extra slot built in for each sorority to have a break anyway, who would know for sure if a group got an extra break time? Then, the parties would be fuller, even though the sorority is cutting harder.

The problem with that would be coordinating the scheduling w/ the rushees' other parties. I'm sure it could be done with a smaller rush, but at places where 2000 girls are going through it would be a nightmare.

Hmmm...are any of the software vendors paying attention? This could be done pretty easily programmatically.

Assuming the computer does the scheduling, I think this would be a great idea.

I can see your point from a rush PR view, but I was really thinking in terms of what was good for PNMs. It seems to me like it's better to let them know where they stand with your group sooner rather than later so that they can be realistic about where they might join.

The flexible number of parties sounds like a good idea.

Doesn't the small party thing work itself out though because the groups with low returns are smaller in number themselves? Is it better to have a small number of guests but at least one rusher per guest or is it better to have crowded parties and maybe have to double rush?

releasing a certain amount of girls could work in a chapters favor, making them appear more desirable to the girls who were invited back to that chapters next round.

I like the new release figures system as it is used at UGA. It has worked on our campus. No, not every house is making quota, but many more are than have in the past. I honestly think that with a few more years of using this system that all of our houses will be consistantly making quota.

The main reason that I like this system has nothing to do with quota, party size, or release figures. I know that this system helped us to place many girls. Before, houses could continue to invite PNMs to parties so that they would have high return rates, or for whatever reason, and then release them before prefs. Girls would be devistated that they were released from their favorite houses and withdraw from recruitment. If larger houses have to cut up to 70% of PNMs after round 1, it gives the PNMs a realistic view of recruitment. It is easier to convince them to give houses that weren't their number one a second chance after round one than after they have just been dropped from their favorite house right before prefs. I hope that makes sense...

This sums it up. The release figures are mainly to benefit the RUSHEES, not the sorority chapters. People have finally wised up to how damaging it is to have women who were previously pro-Greek turn anti-Greek because they got screwed at rush.

This is partly why I'm asking for the mock range
 

I think it's a great system. I don't know that the numbers will ever work so perfectly so every group makes quota every year, but I think it's helping.

(I'm afraid that girls dropping out after quota is set will always make it hard for it to be perfect, but it will be greatly improved. Everyone will be a lot closer to quota even if they don't have it on bid day.)

I went to Georgia back in the 1990s, and I know that you are completely right about the old days.

I'm still confused about one aspect, though, and this is why I was hoping that we could get walked through a mock release figure rush.

I don't see how a group can cut 70% of the PNMs and still have 12 full parties the next day. I thought everyone got to invite at least estimated quota back to each event at each round, and that your previous return rates determined how much over that you could go.

So let's pretend at UGA during second round, 1000 girls were still in rush, and some groups had to cut 70% of them. That would leave only 300 girls to fill 12 second round parties. Do these groups have 25 girl parties?

I absolutely know that there are groups at UGA that if they only got to pref quota, could probably still have everyone they preffed want bids from them.

But I just don't see how the numbers work through all four rounds.

Anyone?

My response to that is - There are still some pnm's that get released from ALL or MOST of the sororities on the first/second night. The same girls are more then likely released the same days - except for the girls that everyone wants.

Therefore it doesn't effect quota. (if quota is set after theme or prior to pref)

I mean, lets say 200 girls go through and there are 4 sororities. . . it is very likely that 10 of the pnm's will be released from all four sororities the 1st night. (at the university that I work with these pnm's that were likely to be released early on were warned that this could happen [grades])

I hoped that helped a little or maybe I am way off base on your question.