Rankings? Part 2
 

Bolingbaker said it exactly right:

"It's wrong to think that a good fraternity chooses between quantity and quality. On a campus with large chapters, there's no such thing a a small fraternity that's perceived as competitive."

The biggest chapter is usually the top ranked chapter.

The small, quality chapter exists only in mythology and small people's minds.

This is a non-gender statement, applying to fratenities and sororities.

I agree. My argument to the people that argue that there should be more quality over quantity is, "Why can't there be a quantity of quality?". When it comes to programming and executing events it is always a percentage of people involved actually doing that. If you have the same percentage of peole working really hard to get events going, but it is a percent of 100 people as opposed to a percent of 40 people, then you will have that many more working for a great chapter.

Exactly. I've always believed that there is quality WITHIN quantity. The more of something you have the greater chances you have in finding something good. Yeah yeah, I know, you'll also have greater chances in finding something bad. But, I believe the risk is worth it.

I would like to point out, though, that achieving quantity alone does not mean quality. A chapter can consistently be the biggest on campus and yet win no laurels for academics, athletics, or inter-Greek competitions, and produce no campus leaders. I've seen it happen. (I'm not suggesting that anyone was saying quantity is enough - just pointing this out, perhaps unnecessarily).

Generally, when I have heard a chapter claim, "smaller is better," they mean that their sister/brotherhood is "more real." I'm not sure how anyone can really make that claim unless they have been in both a large and a small chapter (they transferred?).

We are the Biggest
 

Not my chapter, we are the biggest and the best we won 2/3s of the awards at our Greek Banquet.....Greek God, IFC Athelete, IFC man of the year, Spirit Award, Sports, Leadership, and Greek Week.....and without our size we wouldnt have the man power to compete......Sigma Nu tried the quality BS there and now they are coming to us for help in saving their chapter of 6 guys........We will help, but that quality stuff doesnt work, their is a point to take it to, dont take any wing nut off the street, but trying the whole quality thing is BS, you take everyone who seems to be allright and cut the ones who turn out to be Tools, but size solves everything...........

I agree that you can be the biggest and the best, but I don't feel that the two must go hand in hand, or be mutually exclusive of each other. BoilingBaker is exactly right that on a campus with large chapters, no one percieves the small ones as competition...though they can sneak up on you, and occasionally pass you by (Example: My chapter went through reorg in 1996 - dropped from 86 to 13 members, and 7 years later won grades both semesters [Fall 3.443 and Spring 3.510] , won homecoming, Anchor Splash, and our numbers are back up to where they once were at 83 brothers strong.)

I think however if you recruit quality, you naturally limit the number of PNM's you are going to look at. If you say that we only want PNM's with at least 26 on their ACT's, a 3.5 HS GPA, and involvement in 6 things (or whatever your chapter decides for a definition of quality: looks/grades/involvement/partying/religion/etc.) then automatically there are going to be rushees who don't measure up. Put those definitions of quality so high and you may only have 1 or 5 or 10 rushees that have the right stuff. Obviously this limits the quanity.

The key is to find the proper balance. And keep in mind that not all chapters are striving for the same thing, nor are all rushees trying to be in "that" house. That I think is one of the best things about the greek system: you can find a house that fits you, no matter what your criteria are.

I think the quality vs. quantity issue comes fromt he fact various chapters in organizations get closed down just because they dont have numbers like another chapter in their org does, yet they have just as strong of a sister/brotherhood. And many don't agree with this. Some would say (and Ill use my org, just as an example) that you can't expect Alpha Gam at ohhh lets say, SUNY Cortland (we dont have a chapter there and its a small school) to get the numbers that the Alpha Gam chapters at Auburn or Bama get. Why yank Cortland for having 13 sisters and a great sisterhood, because the dont have the 250 that Bama does? I also see this argument going because I have known many girls from larger chapters that complained about knowing all of their sisters. My one friend when she was a soph in XYZ told me she barely knew the juniors in her house and had no clue who the seniors were at all. The argument seems to be that with a quality chapter that's small, you'd know everyone and that makes a stronger sisterhood. But as Fuzzie Alum said, you can't say that unless you've been in both a small and larger chapter. Personally, I'd rather see quality rather then quanity, but I also don't mind having 100+ sisters either. Either way in all honestly, you have a bond cuz your all brothers and/or sisters, but your not going to like or get along with all of them.
I will say though at UM, there were plenty of small chapters were ahead and beat many big ones. So depending on your campus, sometimes quality can beat quantity :)

Never, long term
 

Sure, a small chapter might include several "great" members that every other chapter would want, but smallness limits everything: money, manpower, widespread involvement, and "power, prestige, and prominence."

The 25-person chapter can't have people in "everything", spreading the word about their chapter, while the 100-person chapter can have people in almost everything. It creates synergy, which is the ability of a chapter with several people active in a specific campus-wide activity (say the Homecoming planning committee) to get one member as chairman or major committe head, and that member can funnel lessor jobs (asst. chr., etc.) to his chapter buddies.

The small quality chapter (existing mostly in mythology) may win a few things (usually the "highest percentage contributing to the blood drive"), but the large chapter will wins lots, and attract even more members - the wonderful quality and quantity.

Never, long term, will a small chapter enjoy "power, prominence, and prestige."

well, all I can say is-----------------------------

*HEIL HELLER"

Just Joking, now don't get mad!:D

Thanks
 

Thanks for the compliment Baker, I find that on this sight you have three kinds of people.
1. People in touch with reality within the Greek system. ie Us and Conard.
2. People who love their orgs and just want to say how they are better than everyone....Not gonna name them.
3. People who are either out of touch with reality, or dont want to bring the skeletons out of their org, or greek systems closet. It would be good if they would tell the truth about what goes on, so maybe they can improve their sitution....But thats not likely to happen, they will just keep their heads in the sand......

All of the chapters in the system could use a little more guidence from their respective Alums, and real chapter advisors....We cant even get our chapter advisor to attend our meetings.....But we have a strong Alumni system, and a lot of guys includng me in our chapter that have been in the Greek system at one place or another since 96. So we kind of keep our guys in check and steer them into venting their energy into positive things........Thats why we are the strongest on our campus, that and #s, sheer man power, we are playing cards with everyone else, we have deck of over fifty, Pkt has 35, KA 25, theta xi 15, sigma nu has six and have to fold next hand, so the odds are in our favor, plus fifty guys recruiting will get you a lot more men than 35, and we have a bnch of trump cards our Alumni system........Blaise

Re: Never, long term
 

Maybe I'm missing something, but who gives a shit?

I joined a sorority to make lifelong friendships and have fun...not to get on some campus committee or build up my resume.

Different strokes for different folks.

I totally agree with Bolingbaker

I think this is a really interesting discussion and I'm glad that it came up.
I dont see anything wrong with ranking organizations. It lets you know where you stand and what you can approve or are successfully accomplishing. I wish I could look at these rankings. I bet the discoveries would be amusing for anyone to read.

I'm going to generalize here but I've always felt that chapters who say "quality over quantity" are really just hiding behind an excuse to not rush more aggressively. Or worse, hiding behind the fact that they cant recruit more members. There are some exceptions (NPHC organizations for example).

Keep in mind that quantity is relative to a campus's greek system's average size. Relatively small chapters (at IU, 30 would be very small) can be successfull at schools were small is the norm.

You're welcome to disagree...

XP2k

Being Nasty
 

33girl Nasty language.......I like it.....But I think his point was not to join a stupid commitee but too be involved in your Farternity in a positive manner, that makes up for the times you get drunk, make an ass out of yourself, and pass out in your own vomit.....I do stupid shit all the time, but I am a respected member of my Fraternity because I also am VP of IFC, Historian for my chapter, and Alumni and housing chairman.....So basically I fulfill my obligation to keep up the good reputation of my Chapter, and get sloshed, and have a fun time with friends too......

PS they used to have a term for me when I got really shitty, they would say you are all knawed up like Blaise, cause my hands would clench up like I was handicapped.......

I'm posting this in both threads of this topic.

I think that everyone is missing somethng here. I think it is silly to think that a group doesn't know it's rank on it's own campus. If there are a large number of groups they at least know if they are on the top, middle or bottom of the group. It's also silly to think that the national oraganizations don't know this information also. As sororities we all have consultants of some form who visit chapters. Usually they visit chapters with problems - not the perfect ones. A national fraternity never wants to lose a chapter whether it be on a campus that has 2/3 groups or one that has 25 groups.

Someone was talking earlier about closing a small chapter. If they can sustain themselves and they WANT

I'm posting this in both threads of this topic.

I think that everyone is missing somethng here. I think it is silly to think that a group doesn't know it's rank on it's own campus. If there are a large number of groups they at least know if they are on the top, middle or bottom of the group. It's also silly to think that the national oraganizations don't know this information also. As sororities we all have consultants of some form who visit chapters. Usually they visit chapters with problems - not the perfect ones. A national fraternity never wants to lose a chapter whether it be on a campus that has 2/3 groups or one that has 25 groups.

Someone was talking earlier about closing a small chapter. If they can sustain themselves and they WANT to keep their chapter, then my organization will do whatever it takes to help them. Sometimes the women just don't want to fight the uphill battle anymore or they cannot afford to keep their house etc. and the chapter must close.

I know that chapters can be turned around. When I first became and advisor the chapter I work with returned with 35 women (total is 100), had the worst grades on campus and had huge financail problesm. At recruitment that year they pledged quota at bid match for the first time ever. In doing so they doubled their sisterhood. 9 years later (yes it has been a long and REALLY bumpy road) they are returning with the second largest amount of women for recruitment, received top honors on campus, were ranked 1st in the fall and 3rd in the spring for grades and are now financially sound.
Back to my original comment - the national fraternity knew that this chapter was in trouble and gave them the help they needed to get back on track. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. This information is not received from some super-secret newlsetter, it is sent in by the chapters in their reports to the fraternity. We try to see when it looks like a group is starting to slide and stop it before it snowballs.

You also have to think about regional popularity. Some sororities are seen as traditionally southern and do better in these areas than others. Where as others (mine included) are stronger northern sororities. No one group is going to be strong or weak on every campus that it is on.

If you really wanted a "rank" go by total (living) membership of each group - initated only please.

Of course as Justamom said, these should not be used by collegiates for picking a group. Ideally, they should choose their group for the sister/brotherhood found there - ha . . . if only it were a perfect world!

Just my two cents and something no one has brought up in this discussion. :)

Re: Never, long term
 

If I were to use your premise that bigger is better then your 100 person chapter must suck compared to a chapter with 200 members because of the reasons that you have mentioned.

What if the chapter with 100 members has 100 losers vs the chater that has only 50 members who are all the cream of the crop?

If your 100 member chapter get 40 members or 40% to show up at all of your events and the 50 person chapter gets 45-50 members to show up at their events then I think the 50 member chapter is actually doing a better job.

Dear Madmax
 

You've come late to the discussion, but let me offer an answer to your legitimate question. You asked whether a 100-man chapter is inferior to a 200-man chapter. You asked if the 100-man chapter is superior to the 50-man chapter if the 50 men are "the cream".
The answer is that it's less important how many members a chapter has than where it stands vs. its competition. If the leading fraternities - the ones that win in intramurals, have the top campus leaders, date in the top sororities - all have over 100 members, then you cannot compete effectively against that with fifty men.
Ambitious men tend to want to be with others like themselves. Men who want success will be drawn to successful groups. A chapter with more manpower has a much better chance of winning. The large, powerful, successful chapters will fight hard for what you call 'the cream', and they have more weapons to fight with. On a campus where the 100-man chapters dominate, there is no 50-man chapter that can compete consistently over time, much less draw "the cream". What really happens is that they tend to make up reasons for their place in the heirarchy, telling themselves that they "have more brotherhood" than the top groups, or that they "have the cream" or somesuch nonsense. Most likely they'll just turn inward and quit trying altogether. And at the moment they quit caring about the competition, they're out of the game.
This does not mean they cannot have a good fraternity experience. They can return again and again to campus for the rest of their lives and reunite with their friends from the chapter. But it does mean that their experience will forever be marked as an underachievement. It just means that they will never know what it's like to be on top, to compete for the most desired trophies, to move among the top sororities with familiarity. It means, frankly, that the future leaders of business, government, entertainment, the professions, will all be coming back to other fraternities at Homecoming. The top fraternities recruit and produce leaders in far disproportionate numbers to the chapters that are less competitive.
Now, what if you're a 50-man chapter on a campus of 100-man leaders and you want to improve and become one of them. Let me offer you the best advice you will ever get on this subject: 1) ignore what the chapter thinks . They have already convinced themselves that small is good, and you cannot change their minds by talking to them. You must decide to lead. 2) Pledge more guys, A LOT MORE guys. The chapter will never AGREE to go out and recruit enough men to make them competitive, BUT if you orchestrate a large pledge class, the Brothers will congratulate themselves on their success. It's Human nature. You chapter will be energized and enthused by their "success" (that you have created), and all the new guys will bring a welcome infusion of new blood. 3) keep doing this over and over until the chapter changes into a competitor. You'll know you've arrived the day one of the big chapters takes you seriously, or says something that gives you the impression they think you're a rival.
Understand that this can be done fairly quickly if you are committed. It can be done quickly becuse hardly anone knows how the mechanics work.

No offense to this conversation and I am playing devils advocate a lil, but..... when did going greek become a "competition"? Isnt the point that most of us picked houses that we felt would be right for us and comfortable in? I mean yeah, some look at well is it one of the better houses on campus, how many members etc.? But if it was the best looking house or campus, with almost the best grades, 200+ members, but yet all of them were either (scuse the language)..a$$holes or b!tches, wouldnt you leave b/c their personalities sucked? I mean I would.
I know quanitity does matter, but I think that when you use it as the MAJOR factor, I think you lose some of the value that your org. stands for. Which for most was to bring quality people together who shared some common thoughts, etc.
Playing devil's advocate...someone might have said this also, but isnt it possible that some chapters are bragging about having high numbers, cuz they have a foot to stand on besides that? Just using UM as an example, but many of the so-called biggest and popular greek orgs are also ones with the highest deactivation rates. Kind of like guy and girls who think highly of themselves and bring down others to make up for their small or zero "package" they have.
Im not saying anyone's opinion is wrong, and this is only mine, but it seems this numbers and whos the best and strongest thing is being blown to a certain extreme.

I agree with UMGirl. "Power and Prestige" can bite me as far as Greek life is concerned. If prestige is so important, I guess everybody should go to Harvard, even if they would be much happier and feel more at home (and probably learn just as much) somewhere else. Everybody I've encountered on GC loves their alma mater like crazy and wouldn't trade their Bama or Wofford or Arkansas experience for a Harvard degree if you paid them.

This is even truer for GLOs than it is for universities. If you choose Princeton for its prestige and you're miserable there, that's a terrible loss, but at least you'll have a Princeton degree. Whereas if you don't like or respect your brothers/sisters and chose them for their "prestige," what do you get when you graduate? Just a bunch of lost opportunities for friendship and memories...and that's if you don't disafilliate.

IvySpice

To IvySpice & UMGirl:
 

You are both correct, of course. Too much emphasis on competition can be destructive within the Greek system. It can also lead to arrogance, which weakens the good relations between chapters.
As you can tell from reading these threads, those of us who really focus on this subject are very much the products of our own experience. We're interested in the mechanics of how to move our chapters in a specific direction. Most members of most chapters don't care, never hear about these things and wouldn't understand it if they did. We can teach the leaders how to accomplish what they want, what they should. This forum is a good place for us to interact.
But you are absolutely right. If this becomes the main emphasis & subject of discussion among the chapters, Greek life will cease to be fun for a lot of members. No real danger of that happening.

Re: Dear Madmax
 

So basically your 100 man chapter is inferior to a 200 man chapter for all the reasons that you just gave.

Are You Asking Sincerely,
 

or do you just not understand? I don't think there are any 200-man chapters anymore, although there were scores of them in the 1980s.
The answer to your question depends on the specific circumstances of your specific campus. If the big dogs have 100 and you have 25, you're toast. If ALL the major houses had 200 men and yours only had 100, then you'd be at a disadvantage. If all the good ones were in the 100-man range and there was just one that somehow had inflated to 200, they might not necessarily be superior to everyone else.
However, I am unaware of any 200-man chapters in the country today. Penn State has more than fifty fraternities, and I doubt that any of them have more than 65 members. Most of the good ones have 45-55 men. If you have the quality and the numbers you can compete with the top names. At other schools, the top chapters are disapointed if their fall pledge classes do not have 45-55 men. You have to consider the context of the individual campus.
What is the situation on your campus?

Re: Are You Asking Sincerely,
 

**sigh** the 200 man chapter is a hypothetical, dude. Because after you said all you said you pretty much seemed to end up saying "bigger is always better."

I would far rather have only 30 sisters who all participate regularly and care about the other women in the chapter, than say "we have 100 sisters" but have to make excuses in my heart for half of them. I've seen people dump the sorority they really wanted for the "prestige" group and they were miserable. Go for it if you want, but if prestige is all you want, it's most likely all you'll get.

I would have prefered a larger chapter with the same quality that we had. Total was 85 and we had fewer than 50 sisters. I'm not sure why. Everyone who knew us liked us. There were six NPC sororities plus one local which has since closed. It seemed four of the sororities had quota and total every year very easily while the rest had to work very hard to get new members. They would have 85 sisters with 32 pledges, and we would have 45 to 50 sisters with half as many pledges even with COB. In terms of visibility and division of labor, it was very difficult to compete with sororities twice our size.

Fortunately the chapter turned things around with a large pledge class of nearly 30. That was the shot in the arm that my chapter needed. I wish that I had known about Mr. Heller back then. We had the quality, we just needed more of it. :)

I beg to disagree
 

The 200 man chapter is not a Hypothetical. Back in the 80s, 200 men chapters were common in fraternities as well as in sororities.

And if there is any chapter of any organization that could do it, Bolingbaker's could. Just you wait.

On my campus (Rockhurst University) with just over 1500 undergrads, our chapter is nearing 100 men. Within two years, we will reach that goal. That's not just competing with other organizations, it's domination.

My view on quantity vs. quality is that the only way you can have quality is through quantity. Not the other way around.

/
 

I think many huge chapters suck. Just look at their turnover rate. Some of those chapters have 100 members but they get 50 pledges a semester. That tells me that many of the pledges either drop out , transfer or go inactive right after they get in. That sucks.

If your chapter is so great then why the huge turnover?

Re: Are You Asking Sincerely,
 

Why is that? Is it because your 100 man chapter is doing a half ass job compared to the scores of 200 man chaters of the 80's?

All I have to say is, what the hell??? Are we joining GLOs or huge Corporations??? All this talk is in my opinion a smack in the face to the reasons that greek orgs exist. The whole point is brother/sisterhood, not cut throat, dog-eat-dog politics! And I have to tell you, that point about "all the leaders coming from big chapters" um no. I know so many people in big chapters that just sit back on their arses and let the 10 people on E-board and committees do all the work! When you're in a smaller chapter(not TINY, but smaller), everyone is motivated, everyone knows eachother inside out, everyone is learning and working for a common goal. Is that not what the whole premise of being Greek IS? I think that 20 is good, so is 30, 40, 50 is pushing it a little bit, but once you get to 100, that's burdensome in terms of becoming close with all of the members. And it may or may not be great in other areas, but again, I've never heard of a 100 person chapter where each person is invovled, or even more than 30 people are truly dedicated members. Which isn't a horrible thing really, but that PLUS the loss of strong sister/brotherhood isn't worth it to me.

I think A LOT of you are missing Bolingbaker's point ,as well as blowing them out of proportion.

First of all you have to ignore exact numbers because they're relative to your campus (i.e. the 50 man, 100 man, 200 man argument). At some schools, a 60 man/woman house will do it (be more competitive then a 40 man house).

He also is not suggesting that prospective members choose their organizations based on size. Nor is he saying that your organization is weak because you arent the biggest.

He is saying that houses that have numbers are at an advantage and USUALLY are the strongest on their respective campuses. Look at your campus HONESTLY and see.

Do you find your organization involved (or seeking involvment) with the smallest groups on campus? The average sized? The larger ones?
(*note, I'm not asking you if you choose who you associate with based on size, I'm asking what the size is of the people that you tend to associate with).

Look at it from the other side. Do the larger, average, smaller sized units do much with you?

Ask your peers at other schools the same questions. I know that at Purdue, the larger sororities deal with/favor the larger fraternities. Same thing at IU.

I also think that this post is aimed more at those who want to IMPROVE their GLO locally...or possibly even nationally. Look at Pi Kappa Alpha. Dont you wonder why they put such an insane emphasis on rush nationally? It's because of Heller's finding, and as far as I can tell, its worked for them.

I have a feeling that a lot of these disgruntled replies are coming from people in smaller chapters who may have gotten their feelings hurt. This whole "rankings/size matters" topic isnt a personal attack on anyone. These are just observations.

Being small does not make an organization bad, it just means that they probably wont have the resources a bigger organization has.

Yes, there are advantages to having a smaller chapter...but like someone said earlier, if you havent been in a large chapter, dont knock it.

So please stop attacking Bolingbaker with all of these wierd, hypothetical situations...

thanks

XP2k