Quote:
Originally Posted by lucgreek
But that's implying by that group being small they can't achieve great things. Some groups have no desire to grow to the 50-60 limit because that's not the audience they cater to. Smaller groups can and DO achieve great things. For some groups, life is better smaller and continually adding small amounts of incredibly active members rather than being a large group where you have a 50% active-rate.
Groups cater to different interests. That's what you're not understanding. To say that this group can only achieve great things and be successful if they balloon up to 50-60 people is wrong. I'm not saying adding more members is bad, but if the group is historically small and operates very well as a small group and has been successful filling their niche, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that (and to suggest otherwise is dumb).
|
Also, throwing more resources at a problem/opportunity does not necessarily result in a better outcome. It's the old cliche, "work smarter, not harder". If you have twenty guys running a philanthropy tournament that appeals to the whole campus and gets tons of non-greeks to sign up, it will be better than fifty guys running a tournament that only appeals to other greeks. The difference is only that the first group came up with a great idea for a broomball/chili-cooking/pingpong tournament that is really exciting to the campus community, while the bigger group was complacent and just went with softball.