Quota Additions
 

So, sometime between my collegiate years and now, NPC did away with the rule that QA's could not exceed 5% of quota. Any idea why they did this? Why bother having a quota if chapters can go way over it?

And if this was discussed to death when the change was made, I apologize.

When RFM was instituted it was felt that by restricting the number of invitations that could be given by the more successfully recruiting chapters would ultimately result in those chapters having attendance at their pref parties and thus on their bid lists in numbers that would lead to fewer QA for those chapters.

In campuses that use RFM (with the exception of some in the south), I've mostly observed this to be true. That the large QAs seem to go to smaller chapters.

By lifting the QA restriction, it was felt, that there would be a better chance to place every woman who played by the rules and attended all possible events.

The problem, as I see it, is that there seem to be huge numbers of QA's at the same time there are chapters not making quota. I am really torn on this, because I don't want women to go bidless, but on the other hand, it really hurts the smaller chapters.

I also don't know if there have been changes to the RFM over the years. As I understood it, back when I was in school the formula was:

invitations = (number of women still in recruitment/number of chapters) *(number of parties in the round/average return rate of the last three years)

So, if there were 500 women going to pref, and each woman could attend two prefs, and ten chapters, a chapter with a 100% return rate could issue 150 pref invitations, and a chapter with a 50% return rate could issue 300 invitations.

the new RFM (release figure method) has a new formula which also takes into account the number of women likly to accept a bid from a chapter and restricts the number of preference inviations the strong recruiting chapter can issue even more that the old formula which was based more on statistical equality.

Do you know how it's calculated?

Demand forecasting is one of my areas of expertise, and I always thought the old system was flawed because a three-year average ignores trends. If your return rates over the last three years were 85%, 75%, and 65%, it's not likely this year will be 75%. The same is true for a chapter on the upswing.

Perhaps the best thing would have been to work all the bugs out of RFM and get rushees/chapters used to it, and THEN up the quota additions. (The result being, theoretically, that quota additions wouldn't be needed.)

The purpose of RFM is to keep invitations in line with the precentage of acceptances a chapter gets, on the average, by lowering the number that successful chapters can issue and allowing the underperforming chapters to issue more. This applies to every round of recruitment and so forces the bigger, better chapters to release women earlier rather than string them along till they dump them before pref. Also, it allows the system to place ALL women who "maximize their options" (that is, accept all invitations that they are able within their schedule to accept). And there are no restrictions on where those women can be placed except that that be on the sorority's list. The reality is that the chapters are thereby restricted as they are not going to put additional women on their bid list who were not invited to pref (these extra women are known as being on a "flex list"). And the women will not put a chapter they haven't preffed on their list. So they've already excluded each other thru the course of the week.

Hope that makes sense!

That's what I'm saying. I understand why we want to place as many women as possible, but I'm not certain that QA is the way to do it.

Obviously I am a small-chapter advocate, and we've talked before on here about the way to make 18-year-old women consider the smaller chapters or chapters that may not be viewed as "top-tier". But with QA's as they are, aren't we effectively telling them that there is less reason to consider the smaller chapters? If a bid were less of a sure thing, would women be more honest with themselves about where they belong?

On the sororities' side, we very often have to gauge a PNM's interest, and release women who we'd love to have in favor of women we think are more likely to join. For example, the triple XYZ legacy whose sister is the current president may not get invited back while a grade risk who we know wants to be in our chapter would. Shouldn't we put PNM's through the same type of thinking process?

I have not seen QAs hurt small chapters at my alma mater. In fact, the two NM classes that I saw at my time at UMD with the most QAs were from small chapters.

QAs are obviously unfair if a campus isn't using RFM. However, with RFM, chapters will be issuing the number of invitations that will most likely result in all chapters making quota. However, if a middle tier chapter does significantly better than in previous years, they are likely to make quota plus because their bid list is longer than RFM "thought" it needed to be. Simply put, large numbers of QAs are the result of a chapter doing better than expected per RFM.

I believe that a PNM should be guaranteed a bid from ONE of her preference party chapters as long as she has maximized throughout recruitment and ranked all her chapters. Say a PNM is invited to 3 "top tier" chapters for pref at a large campus, but she's near the bottom of all three lists. Since such chapters must make huge cuts, they have a fairly short bid list because they have a high acceptance rate. Said PNM probably does "belong" in a top tier chapter if she was invited to 3 top tier chapters. Is it really fair to her or the chapters to not get a bid to any of those? Do you really think said PNM would consider or fit in the small struggling chapter? I doubt it.

If a chapter has higher than expected success one year, they will have to release more PNMs next formal recruitment due to RFM. I think it all evens out. You shouldn't see the same chapter getting large numbers of QAs year after year. I see no reason to punish PNMs when a chapter does better than expected.

I'm not entirely sure what the protocol for matching QAs is; I've understood it varies from campus to campus and depends on current chapter size, PNM's preference, and where she falls on the chapter's list.

Also, with the advent of the quota range, quota is set such that it balances the number of chapters making quota, and the number of PNMs being placed, to ultimately equalize Panhellenic chapter size. If quota is too high, more PNMs are placed (likely in their first choice chapters) but smaller chapters are less likely to make quota. If quota is too low, more chapters are likely to make quota, but there will be a lot of PNMs unplaced, and matched as QAs, which will still result in massive inequality in NM class size. Quota ranges are used to find the best scenario.

Yes, the new release figures force higher performing chapters to release far more than in DBB's example.

I do not know the actual formula, but it takes into account not just return rates but relative recruiting strength, which is probably calculated by priority rankings, or number of PNMs that put a certain chapter in their top 8 (or whatever number) for the next round. "Return rates" don't really show the whole picture. Though a weaker chapter may have 80% return, I guarantee not all 80% put that chapter in their top 8. They return because other chapters cut them and they need to have a full schedule.

Using DBB's numbers, 500 PNMs, 10 chapters, projected quota at 50, and 3 pref parties (I think DBB meant 3 though she wrote 2 because of her math)...

The highest performing chapters (those with 100% or close to it return rates) do not need to invite 3x projected quota to pref to make quota. It's probably more like 1.5x projected quota. Because top chapters are forced to trim their bid lists to only what is necessary to make quota, if other top chapters outcompete them in one year, they sometimes miss quota (though spots are usually filled quickly with snap bids).

Yup, typo.

It sounds like they are trying to make it as equitable as possible, which I certainly support, and I totally get your point about not punishing PNM's because a few chapters exceeded expectations.

But then I see something like these posts in the NPC recruitment results thread:

At CNU, these were the final numbers
Quota was 25 (I'm pretty sure)

Alpha Phi- 28
Gamma Phi Beta- 29
Alpha Sigma Alpha-29
Zeta Tau Alpha-29
Phi Mu- 30

WTF? How can every chapter take QA? Why isn't quota just 28?


And this:

W&L - Quota = 30
KKG - 24
KD - 30
Pi Phi - 37
Theta - 32
XO - 32
ADPi - 34

I can't help feeling like Kappa is getting kinda screwed, here. Fifteen women were placed as QA's. I know NOTHING about this campus, but are we really saying that of those fifteen women, none of them would be happy in the chapter that didn't make quota?

The problem with your assumption is that by moving the Quota to a lower number you think that Kappa would suddenly make Quota. That is not necessarily true. Quota ranges are used to make the most chapters reach total and the most woman get placed. The woman who were QAs may not have had Kappa on their list for prefs and Kappa may be a top chapter at W&L who miscalculated when releasing women. I've seen several top chapters NOT reach total while "lower tier" chapters make way over so you can't assume anything. I don't know this campus, so I don't know if Kappa is struggling or not.

At CNU, changing Quota to 28 may have actually disrupted how many women were placed because of shifts in the lists. It's hard to look back and understand the reasoning when you can't see how the Quota ranges change the field.

RFM
 

With RFM you are given a number to rank on your first bid list...use 50 as an example. But, when everyone's lists are matched on the computer, 53 PNMS matched right away for all chapters or the vast majority of chapters.

The RFM specialist for that campus would then look at all the stats and decide if quota was 53, 54, etc....as a way to maximize the PNMs match potential. So, many times when quota is announced on GreekChat it is based on what the chapter was told to rank on the first bid list prior to matching...and is often not the case in the end. If one chapter only matched 40, then only 40 women were a possible match for them prior to quota additions. They have the opportuity to snap bid and COB. Other PNMs who maximized their choices but did not match initially are placed with another of their choices who has the next smallest membership number..even if they made quota.

RFM really does maximize the PNMs chances to match with a chapter. And I agree that usually the smaller chapters are able to pledge more than the old 5% standard..which helps them and the Greek system in the end.:D

No, you misunderstand me. I am not suggesting that quota be changed. I am suggesting that, rather than a huge number of QA's, there are women who go bidless, and then have the chance to take another look at the chapters that are below quota or total.

I am also wondering if (but this is far more conjecture) women would think harder about what chapters wanted them as well as what chapters they want if they knew they weren't guaranteed a bid just by making it to pref.

Sort of related question that I never thought of until now...

What happens if panhellenic estimates the lowest quota should be is 40, so chapters submit first bid lists in alphabetical order and then wants to lower quota? Is panhellenic then locked into a minimum quota of 40? If not, and they want to test out the effects of a lower quota, how do they know which PNMs would make it onto the chapter's first bid list if quota was only 37, let's say?

Large numbers of women going bidless leads to large numbers of women who are anti-Greek life.

/jmo

That's where we disagree. Having women who rank all their pref chapers go bidless because of a strict cap on QAs seems totally unfair. I don't feel bad for the women who suicide or rank 2/3 chapters if they don't get a bid, because you're not eligible to be a QA then. Having QAs is an incentive for the PNM who has a "bottom" chapter as one of her pref chapters to rank it, because she's guaranteed a bid somewhere, and at some schools, it may be her one good shot at going Greek.

Going back to my example with a PNM being invited back to all top chapters for pref, if all she has left is top chapters, she probably does fit into a top chapter. Just because she got numerically screwed shouldn't mean her options should be the chapters who didn't make quota or are not at total. Chances are she isn't going to want them, and they might not want her. Nobody wins.
I guess it's a chicken-egg scenario, but because a PNM from anywhere on the bid list could match thanks to QAs, chapters that invite a woman to pref DO want that woman in their chapter. Just because a PNM is at the "bottom" of the bid list does not mean that she is not wanted, and the difference between being on the first bid list and the bottom may be relatively small, especially for a top tier chapter with a shorter bid list. QAs tend to benefit the middle and low tier chapters because their bid lists are longer than top tier chapters.

I believe Kappa is a strong, popular chapter at W&L. They may have had a dip from past high-performance, therefore having to release a lot more women than other chapters, which doesn't give them much room for error. They will probably snap bid to quota and be fine.

Exactly. An incentive not to suicide.

There is a flex list that goes with the bid list and it's like the old second list and that is ranked also in the order in which you want them. And the chapters are giving a "quota range" and the list is submitted with the lower number and the flex list takes precedence after that to allow for a higher quota.

While I suppose it could happen, it seems that the lowest quota estimate is usually way lower than what quota ends up being. For the chapter I work with, this year we were asked to set our A list at 33 and we ended up with 48 new members. I'm guessing panhellenic would probably call the chapter president and just ask.

As for PNMs going bidless rather than matching as a QA...I know that any woman who gets invited to pref at the chapter I advise is very much wanted, regardless of her position on the list. I'd hate to see PNMs who are liked by all of their preffing chapters go without a bid. And I really think the removal of the 5% QA cap HELPS smaller chapters, rather than harming them.

I can't help thinking of all the women who would now be Greek had QAs been in place back in the day. I knew so many who went to 2 prefs and didn't match, including direct legacies.

Not to mention, if RFM had been in place back in the day.

Were there no groups on their campuses that were below total? Or were they against looking at those groups post-bid day? Or just so burned out after rush that they were done with the whole thing?

I'm a believer that, on campuses with chapters larger than, say, 80 women, we could use a random number generator to throw women in chapters and it would work just as well as formal rush. That's why it is hard for me to understand how someone "belongs" in a top tier chapter and is too good to be in the smaller one.

This may be true, but you can't convince an 18 year old of this...as much as we would like to.

Maybe all of the above. There were groups below total, especially at Auburn in the seventies (where quota was given after first or second parties, resulting in huge pledge classes for about half the groups and a year of COBing for everyone else). However, I don't think it would have gone over too well for someone to be told that she wouldn't be getting a bid to her mom's sorority, where she'd attended prefs, but that a sorority that she hadn't seen since the first of seven sets of parties wanted to give her a bid.

Looking back over years of recruitments, I can only think of one woman who accepted a bid right off from a third group after attending 2 prefs and not getting a bid from either. The rest either went through formal rush again the next year (some of those went Greek then) or never rushed again.

I strongly disagree. Just because a campus has large chapters does not mean that any PNM would fit into any chapter. At least at Maryland, this is certainly not the case because I feel like chapters have their own distinct "identities" and it's not just based on how "hot" chapters are perceived by guys. Out of the 14 chapters (chapters are 140ish after spring FR) at my alma mater, I still say that I would be a good fit in only 4 of them (all of which invited me to pref, one of which I joined), an okay fit in 4 more, and definitely not a fit in the remaining 6.

Could I have found SOMEONE to be friends with in any of the remaining 6 chapters? Of course, but I would feel like an outsider if I were in any of those 6. And in case it matters to you, 5 of those 6 are considered "top" or "middle" chapters, all of whom cut me at some point in the process, and the other is still a strong, viable chapter that doesn't have problems with numbers.

I would agree with DBB if that number was doubled to 160 - 175.

I also really disagree except in the cases of huge (more along the lines of what 33girl said) chapters. in my (admittedly limited) experience, very few people, chapters or rushees, benefit from shoehorning girls in where they don't fit. yes, a few girls might give a "middle" sorority a second shot and find that's where they belong, but lots of girls would rather rerush or not be greek than belong to certain chapters, and not just because of tiers. there's a chapter on my campus with a very distinct identity - quirky, girls who probably wouldn't be Greek and wouldn't want to be on a bigger campus. but they love it - it's a strong, close-knit sisterhood who are active on campus and who do almost everything together, and their sisters wouldn't trade it for any of the "top" sororities. honestly, they would be miserable at some of the other sororities on campus, and some of the members of other sororities would be miserable there. they made quota this year, but barely. they do much better at COB. the reason why? when pnms feel forced to go somewhere where they react poorly. girls complain about "having" to go back to places where they have had forced, awkward, shallow conversations with girls they have nothing in common with. whereas in COB, only girls who want to go do, and so they only get the really interested girls who will be committed members.

the girls who get bids during formal who don't feel they fit mostly don't even go to bid day, and either rerush next year, or become very anti-greek. maybe there are a few, but i've never heard of a girl who went bidless COBing this group because they feel they have had enough experience with them to realize that they don't fit in. I don't think it's fair to say to them, "Yes, you played by the rules but this chapter needs numbers so you should go there or else not be Greek." That makes girls feel like numbers, and like the whole process of rush is pointless if in the end how you felt about chapters is irrelevant. Yes, they are 18-year-old girls who sometimes are silly or tier-focused or full of themselves, but lots are not, and it's unfair to completely disregard their feelings and how well they get along with sisters with the assumption that they all must be pig-headed or wrong if they don't feel comfortable with certain sororities that happen to have smaller numbers.

if those girl who get bids who don't want to be in the quirky chapter do give it a shot, the sorority has to put up with sullen, tearful girls on bid day who drop out shortly afterward. then there's disappointment because they technically receive quota or close to it but initiate far less and have much worse retention rates. I think it's doing the chapter a disservice and being condescending, even, to think they need numbers so badly they should take such miserable members.

another point, there are two chapters considered "lower" on my campus, but only this chapter really has struggled for numbers in the past. the other chapter is seen as much more desirable simply because they are more selective. the other chapter only asks girls back that they think would be a good fit and that they think they have a chance of getting. girls getting asked back here think the sorority thinks they are a good fit, whereas girls asked back to the first chapter assume it's because they ask almost everyone back (which they do). girls who get asked back are much more willing to consider this chapter simply because there is a reason they get asked back.

I think sometimes we make recruitment too much of a numbers game. While totally unequal numbers isn't a good thing, I think some chapters benefit from being smaller instead of having girls pushed in that they don't want and who don't want them. These girls rarely make good members, they trash-talk being forced to go here, and the sorority's reputation falls. I feel that a smaller group (within reason, drastically smaller presents more of a problem) with more dedicated girls who love each other and their sisterhood is infinitely happier than girls who don't fit and don't want to fit. This year, the group I'm talking about did well with recruitment, both formal and informal, with no one dropping out, and I really believe it's because they were a little more selective.

In the end, I think we rush to assume that girl who don't feel comfortable in smaller chapters just think they're better than them and need to be forced to reconsider them by being made bidless. Sometimes there are just girls that you don't get along with. I personally felt that way about the "top" and "bottom" sororities at my school, and I still feel that I would have been miserable and dropped from either of them had I shown up there on bid day. We can recognize how superficial some 18-year-olds are and take some precautions, like stressing the maximization of options, without totally disregarding the feelings and preferences of all of them, actives and rushees alike.

For your "limited experience", you have made some great points! Thank you!

sorry that turned out to be such a letter, haha. that was a bit more obnoxiously long then I intended!

I'll be blunt here. I get the idea that someone is upset that a certain chapter closed and is trying to point the finger at "the system" instead of considering the possibility that the chapter gave up/weren't motivated/didn't understand the importance of recruitment while working within a system that actually does help struggling chapters. It's easier to blame something that seems to be our of her control. You can't look at every QA a chapter gets as a woman who could have been in said small struggling chapter. It's delusional to think such a plan would work and unfair to the women who play by the rules. You also can't look at formal recruitment as the only solution to a struggling chapter's low membership numbers.

BTW, I say this coming from a chapter that had to and still has to work hard to achieve quota and total, which we usually do. Last spring we were reminded what can happen if we get caught napping.

RFM allows struggling chapters to max invite to pref. They are set up to succeed. If they don't make quota, it's because the women who preffed there only ranked their other choice(s) and left that chapter off their MRABA. It has nothing to do with Perfect Polly preffing at Popular Pi, Super Sigma and Top Tier Tau, being too low on all three to match during regular quota, and being rewarded by matching as a QA because she played by the rules and maximized her options.

You don't agree with some of the things I've said in the thread, so you insult the women in the collegiate chapter from which I'm almost a decade removed? Uh, stay classy; I'm out of here.

Where the hell was the insult there? Your reading comprehension skills need serious work.

I don't think that.
I know chapters that have, yes, benefitted greatly from the system. Yet they still have NMs who don't show up on bid day, or drop after the first meeting.
It's very discouraging.