Video: Should Culturally Based Orgs Recruit?
 

One of the blogs I read posted a link to this video of one of the spotlights at the AFLV conference that discussed the idea of members of culturally based GLOs being more active in bringing members into their organizations.

Link: http://vimeo.com/21153537

I'm not a member of a culturally based org, so while I find this interesting, I don't really have an opinion of it. I'm curious to know what those of you in such organizations think...

Some LGLOs actively recruit and some don't. It's really expected that you do your research before pursuing membership, though, so I don't think there will be a massive change in the way things are done.

I'll have to check out the video later on.

I should mention that I used the term "culturally based" because that's what the speaker used. In all actuality she talks more specifically about NPHC organizations.

Ahhh, ok.

Didn't watch the whole thing because I wasn't anticipating it being as long as it is, but I don't think the two "methods" are mutually exclusive (personally and based on her proposition), but I will have to view the entire video later.

I'm sensing something going on under the surface here with her personally, but I could be wrong.

If those 4 people stay active for all of their lives, they're doing better than many chapters of NIC or NPC groups, as far as I'm concerned.

I don't see why a system that has worked pretty well for years needs to be changed to fit the current "you need to put it on a plate and serve it to me" mentality. The more you do that for people, the less they value the thing on the plate.

Yea, I didn't watch the video at all. I'm going to check it out after work.

In my experience, most of the non-NPC/IFC hosted "Get To Know Us/Our Organization" events as opposed to "Meet Us So We Can Tell You About Pledging" events.

Co-sign.

I haven't watched the video because of the length, but if she is proposing that we do recruitment then I have to question why.

As always, :rolleyes: @ "culturally based orgs" (no slight to the OP ;))

The white diaspora also has a race, ethnicity, and culture. Even if people claim that NPC and NIC do not have an intent and foundation in said race, ethnicty, and culture, it is no coincidence that NPC and NIC sororities and fraternities are predominantly white and generally service a predominantly white environment (unless they intentionally go into more diverse environments such as "my chapter tutors underprivileged kids in the inner city").

As for the topic at hand, I never believed in recruiting PERIOD. But, my opinion on that only matters for NPHC orgs and REALLY only matters for Delta. As long as Delta doesn't formally recruit, I can sleep at night. What individual members and chapters do to attract members isn't the same as a formal recruitment process. NPHC orgs, and especially the larger ones like Delta, are not suffering for aspirants and financial members. We don't need to go looking for people. It's enough that collegiate chapters do programs and post "rush/informational" fliers. It's enough that alumnae chapters do programs and advertise "rush/informational" in local newspapers. The End.

I had this thought while I was walking to class this morning:

Ms. Guobadia's statement is heavily based in the idea that the NPHC is "statistically irrelevant" on (PWI) campuses. Statistics are only as important as the interpreter views them so be, so if members of these "statistically irrelevant" chapters don't consider this statistical statement important to their organization/mission/values/intake process/etc. then it doesn't need to be.

Also, sorry I didn't warn you all about the length! For those of you who haven't watched it is fifteen minutes long.

I watched it. Yay, therefore I get to have an informed opinion.

She was right. She is also a director of Greek life.

And if folk had WATCHED the video, she is not talking about NPC formal recruitment, or even "recruitment" at all. She is talking about good public relations, how to make friends, and being nice.

Watch the fucking video.

Finished the video and I stand by my first statement: "doing research" and "recruitment" (not formal recruitment/rush) aren't mutually exclusive.

Watch the video?

Next thing you know, you gonna be asking for informed opinions.

LOL

I have some free time so I'm about to watch it now.

Watching the video isn't necessary to answer the question that was asked at the beginning of the thread. Also, I don't think anyone has discounted her stance -- we've been commenting on our individual organizations'/councils' policies.

I watched it and I agree with you. She conceded that the "ask" (Step 5) isn't as important as the first four steps of "recruitment." I'm am 100% with her there.

I especially liked what she said about sending formal letters to quality prospects as well the concept of reaching out to women (in my case) whom I believe to have exceptional qualifications. I have personally been known to introduce my organization to women I have believed would be worthy of consideration.

On the other hand, I have never provided a written recommendation to any woman for membership. Once I open the door, I want to see her shine. If she doesn't, so be it.

I do believe that 1) nasty attitudes never have a place in any activity related to my organization and 2) making life difficult for interested women simply for the sake of doing so counterproductive and childish.

I see it in my own organization and I don't like it.