|
I've never understood - or had much patience for - the second-person "nationals" references. WE are a national fraternity and WE make decisions through governance and legislative processes WE have developed. WE vote for the board of directors (Supreme Council) and WE vote for legislation (like the change in the dues structure - which was only voted on by chapter delegates by the way). To point fingers at "nationals" is misguided. So, this is OUR policy - until WE change it.
I also don't agree that WE are becoming too myopic in the pursuit of chapter size or scholastic achievement. WE are focused on both, but I think WE'd all agree that the "Cornerstones" program - which is the basis for OUR awards - goes further and does better than any other fraternity awards program to recognize achievement across the board and in the areas that matter most, like character and conduct.
Finally, I must respectfully disagree with Firehouse about fraternity standings. SAE and Sigma Chi would only be considered our peers if we were doing a 20 year analysis. SAE, in particular, has fallen on hard times and I know that even recently their national finances were in ruins. (Their CEO is an academic for crying out loud.) Sigma Chi doesn't face those types of issues, but they are no where near where they used to be.
For at least the past ten years, SigEp has been the competition - and, for most of those years, they've been winning. We've kept the per-chapter pledging and initiation statistic leads, which is important, but they are kicking our butt in almost every other metric. Total chapters, total members, educational programs, industry image/PR, innovative programs, national fundraising, etc. It doesn't sadden me to say this, because I think we need a kick in the rear, but they are Number One.
|