Quote:
Originally Posted by 33girl
^^^Exactly what I meant - why are GLOs spending money on something so ineffective when it could be going to philanthropy or scholarships for members?
I was thinking about this, and maybe part of the branding is an effort to create a clear nationwide identity in the same way NPHC groups have among their intended membership (and therefore hopefully create the same degree of alumnae support). But until NPC and NIC completely change the way they rush - that just ain't gonna happen. Even if rushees go into rush saying they want to be a PQR, it's usually because they're a legacy or because of the group's reputation on that particular campus. It's usually not because they've researched the group or felt a connection to the philanthropy.
(The above statement may contain sweeping generalizations.)
|
When I first read the entries in the thread, a thought I had was that maybe because of the superficial (read surface and not unimportant) similarities between groups from an outsiders/non-members perspective, in conjunction with the way recruitment operates, NPC groups have felt the need to brand themselves to "set" a (national) identity to distinguish themselves from the other groups. It may not be working, because as Mystic Cat pointed out, many organizations may have used the same firm and as a result have ended up with similar identities. So the question maybe should not be are taglines/branding working, but if the tagline/branding that ABC org has chosen is working.
Personally, there are a few NPC brand identities that I am familiar with because of my contact with them (their existence on my UG and Grad campuses; knowing members of said org, etc.) Because I'm familiar with these organizations for a myriad of reasons, I am familiar with their identities. For example, Delta Gamma, whenever I see an anchor anywhere, I think of them, and I know they used the anchor well before branding, but specifically, I think of the current logo/set of related images when I think of DG (and the Gamma they often make in pictures). It may be that they chose a "brand" that had a strong foundation in their identity an this is why it "works", idk.
As members of an NPC org you'd have better insight into this than I would, but for well informed and/or mature decision makers, the brand might have an impact not so much in the first rounds of recruitment, but maybe when it comes to prefs and selecting a final group. If what they "feel" about the org comes from the brand, and I don't mean colors but how for example, "imagine.believe.acheive" vs let's say "connect.impact.shine" resonates with them, it "may" help. Particularly when paired with their experiences during recruitment. For me it would, but I come from a different "paradigm" if you will. But who knows if/how many women think like this when making their decisions.