In what circumstances would you support reorganization or closing?

[UGAalum94]

Let me preface this by saying I don't speak for my organization; I'm just going to share my thoughts and ask for others'.

The DePauw situation made me think a little bit about the circumstances under which I think chapters should be closed or reorganized. All I come up with are financial insolvency or risk management/moral standards issues.

While I think it's okay for IHQs to put pressure on chapters to maximize membership size and to offer support to help them achieve the increase, I don't think the chapters should be re-organized or closed and brought back while former members are still on campus. And I don't think they should be closed until they are actually running in the red, not in anticipation of financial trouble. If a group can be small but stable, then, while I think GLOs should do what they can to make that chapter want to grow, they ought to be glad to have the chapter.

Basically, I think the GLO should have to decide if it's better not to have a particular chapter at all than to keep the members they have. The idea of dumping some of the girls you've got to change the reputation of the chapter shouldn't even be discussed.

As far as risk management or standards issues, I'd like to see them only revoke the membership of the guilty individuals, but if there was a pervasive or continual problem with a chapter, then I think revoking the charter is understandable.

What do you think? Especially those of you who have served the organization in a way that let you see the more businesslike side of things?

[adpiucf]

I don't think there is any hard and fast solution to when it is best to close a chapter. Having been involved on the collegiate and alumnae local and international levels, each and every situation is so unique. We lend the chapters resources, ensure regular touches and trainings and do as much as we can to ensure their long-term success. I think if there are a string of circumstances, that might impact a chapter closure. However, it also depends on the available resources to rehabilitate that chapter, as well.

The DePauw issue was not handled well, but I like to think this is atypical of the sorority in question, and of all sororities.

I do think if you're going to close a chapter, immediately reopening it is not a good solution. Like it or not, the chapter's reputation as an unsuccessful chapter is going to carry on campus and it needs time to go away from the campus consciousness.

There's nothing overtly wrong with cancelling a group of members who are not maintaining sorority standards, but it is foolish to think that these actions won't have repercussions or lead to multiple voluntary cancellations amongst other members. Even when only one or two people are laid off from a job, there are long-term and deep rifts within the company and the company's confidence is shaken-- the same is true within a student organization like a sorority. People are scared, start leaving, rumors begin swirling-- it's rarely a winning situation.

Like it or not, sororities are very much a business-- a non profit, but a business. I think we do the best we can, but mistakes happen and human nature happens.

[ΑΓΔSquirrelGirl]

-Risk management/safety issue: Repeated instances of dangerous activity, repeated alcohol/drug infractions, safety emergency.
-Hazing: Major hazing infraction or repeated hazing infractions.
-Financial loss: The fraternity cannot possibly support an ailing chapter anymore financially.
-Moral standards issue: Repeated standards infractions on a large scale.

[AnatraAmore]

Originally Posted by Alphagamuga

Basically, I think the GLO should have to decide if it's better not to have a particular chapter at all than to keep the members they have. The idea of dumping some of the girls you've got to change the reputation of the chapter shouldn't even be discussed.

I completely agree. If you really feel the need to take action against the chapter because it's struggling that badly, then it should be all or nothing. IMHO, if a chapter is so small that it can not support itself financially, then it's either time to step in and restructure or close it completely, especially if there is a house involved.

On the other hand though, what if a chapter is on a campus with no houses, where total might be 60 or so. At what point would it be time to step in? A chapter of 10 members could support itself financially, but would not be flourishing or reaching even close to its full potential. What should be done then?

[ΑΓΔSquirrelGirl]

Originally Posted by sangers

I completely agree. If you really feel the need to take action against the chapter because it's struggling that badly, then it should be all or nothing. IMHO, if a chapter is so small that it can not support itself financially, then it's either time to step in and restructure or close it completely, especially if there is a house involved.

On the other hand though, what if a chapter is on a campus with no houses, where total might be 60 or so. At what point would it be time to step in? A chapter of 10 members could support itself financially, but would not be flourishing or reaching even close to its full potential. What should be done then?

I think they should leave it open.

If yoy have strong, comitted women who love their organization and sisters...when there's little financial issues involved...chapters with smaller numbers should be allowed to stay. Quality is always more important than quantity.

[TSteven]

A chapter (the full chapter) should be closed only when the whole - as a charter - can no longer meet the standards and obligations as set forth by the fraternity/sorority as a whole.

Also, and from an NIC/IFC perspective, individual membership review may be necessary when certain members of the chapter may no longer be able to meet the standards and obligations set forth by the fraternity/sorority as a whole. Those that can - and do - meet the standards and obligations should not be punished for those who can not. Or will not as the case may be.

To be clear, individual membership review should be a last resort for any GLO and should never be taken lightly. But in many (most?) cases, and when possible, it seems like it might be advantageous to do so prior to closing the whole chapter. Again, I understand this isn't how most NPCs work. Just saying.

[KSUViolet06]

If a chapter commits a MAJOR act of hazing, then they should lose their charter.

If a chapter repeatedly hazes despite intervention by HQ.

If a chapter is financially delinquent over a couple years despite the best efforts of HQ to keep them out of the red.

As far as numbers, I think that steps like reorganization or closing should be considered when a chapter is SEVERELY & CONTINUOUSLY deficient in numbers. Everybody is entitled to a "bad recruitment year", it just happens. For example,if one year XYZ is just having some issues and they take 10 girls through formal while quota is 20. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about when quota is 20 & XYZ has NEVER managed to take more than 2 or 3 for the past 5 years. When total is 70 and XYZ has never surpassed 10 girls. Then it's time to think about reorganizing. If the reorganization fails, then a closure may be best.

[ForeverRoses]

risk management, and hazing. I am a little leary of saying financial problems because if a chapter doesn't have a good financial advisor, it is really easy for even the "best" chapter to have problems with finances. Remember- the treasurer is usually only 20 years old and a full time college student.

I remember when I was in college and a sorority decided to close, the remaining "actives" were given alumnae status, however I believe that the national officers that worked on the closing helped the women form into an official "club" on campus. So while they were no longer a member of the WPA (the NPC org on campus), they still had club meetings and had activites as a group. The club ended up disbanding when the last alum graduated. basically they turned into a mini-alumnae chapter (since we were a small college town with no real alumnae chapters within an hour of us).
I was always impressed that the national officers helped them do this, rather than just dropping them cold (as we all know sometimes happens).

[LPIDelta]

I think all the posts are good food for thought, but sometimes its not so cut and dry--especially when there is a house involved.

Having been involved in some of these decisions, I can tell you they are heart wrenching, especially at older or single letter chapters. Leadership does the best they can with the information they have--and that is all we should really expect.

[33girl]

I don't support immediate recolonizations or reorganizations ever, unless it can be shown that the chapter members are agreeing to it VOLUNTARILY. "Turn in your charter or we'll close you" is not voluntary. "Pay off your $6000 debt in 3 months or we'll close you" is not voluntary. "Triple your chapter size in a semester or we'll close you" is not voluntary. "We're all seniors and juniors and happy to go alum early because we're completely burnt out" is voluntary.

And if your group does do one of these - YOU NEED TO TREAT THOSE NEW ALUMS LIKE GOLD. Don't tell them to not wear their letters. Don't tell them to stay away from the house. Don't say you want them involved and then flip the script when you realize, duh, they really are going to participate! If this truly is a voluntary closing, the new alums will be GLAD to step back and not rush or do stuff like that. The "new" active chapter will have to learn their history and who their alums are sooner or later - to try and hide it from them by doing the above things is disrespectful to the new girls as well as the old.

Hazing, risk management, etc - these should be dealt with by expelling the individuals that did it. If it keeps happening after that, close it up.

And as far as numbers are concerned, if there's not a huge house to fill, if there are enough to operate the chapter, and they manage to stay at that size, it shouldn't be an issue. Keep it open. Not everyone wants to be in a big chapter.

[honeychile]

Originally Posted by ForeverRoses

I remember when I was in college and a sorority decided to close, the remaining "actives" were given alumnae status, however I believe that the national officers that worked on the closing helped the women form into an official "club" on campus. So while they were no longer a member of the WPA (the NPC org on campus), they still had club meetings and had activites as a group. The club ended up disbanding when the last alum graduated. basically they turned into a mini-alumnae chapter (since we were a small college town with no real alumnae chapters within an hour of us).
I was always impressed that the national officers helped them do this, rather than just dropping them cold (as we all know sometimes happens).

In a perfect world, no chapter would ever be closed. Everyone's dues would be paid on time, everyone would be presentable every time she left the house, everyone would show spirit 24/7, no one would ever even dream of hazing, and everyone would have high moral standards.

We don't live there.

Sororities are becoming more of a business - the amount of litigation alone has raised the cost of each chapter & each GLO to almost prohibitive levels. That leaves the GLO putting more stress on each chapter to produce, however that GLO defines it. From what I hear, closing a "weak" chapter and recolonizing is becoming the wave of the future. In regards to DePauw, I'd be interested in knowing if the sorority involved would have lost their charter completely had the entire chapter been given alumnae status, or would the University have allowed the chapter to close and recolonize.

With all of this in mind, I think that the chapter ForeverRoses mentions handled the situation is by far the best I've ever seen or heard. Kudos to whichever GLO was involved in that!

[AlphaFrog]

Originally Posted by 33girl

"Triple your chapter size in a semester or we'll close you" is not voluntary.

I <3 You.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by honeychile

From what I hear, closing a "weak" chapter and recolonizing is becoming the wave of the future.

Doubtful, unless it's a "do or die" sort of school, and as we've seen here, that may not even be worth the effort. I doubt very much that my sorority will ever try an immediate recolonization again unless there are very special circumstances. And now that this practice has been brought to light on a nationwide basis, any group that tries it would just be foolish.

Originally Posted by honeychile

In regards to DePauw, I'd be interested in knowing if the sorority involved would have lost their charter completely had the entire chapter been given alumnae status, or would the University have allowed the chapter to close and recolonize.

I think the university would have allowed a recolonization if it would have happened immediately (i.e. this spring) and if the women would have had their housing question taken care of by the national sorority and the Delta chapter house corp. This whole thing just showed a serious lack of planning.

[Kevin]

Whenever it's in the best interest of the national organization or chapter to close/reorganize, I'm for it.

As to what constitutes that "best interest" standard, I'll know it when I see it.

[honeychile]

Originally Posted by 33girl

Doubtful, unless it's a "do or die" sort of school, and as we've seen here, that may not even be worth the effort. I doubt very much that my sorority will ever try an immediate recolonization again unless there are very special circumstances. And now that this practice has been brought to light on a nationwide basis, any group that tries it would just be foolish.

In this exact way, having a review etc, a GLO would have to be crazy to try that again. To wait until the end of the school year, that would be a different story. I can name at least 5 GLOs who consider that policy.

I think the university would have allowed a recolonization if it would have happened immediately (i.e. this spring) and if the women would have had their housing question taken care of by the national sorority and the Delta chapter house corp. This whole thing just showed a serious lack of planning.

Last year, one of our chapters was closed with a definite recolonization date set, with cooperation of the local Panhellenic. I feel that's the way any chapter closing/recolonization should be handled - unless there's a house or such involved. I honestly don't know how that could/should be handled.

And I agree - this specific example shows a definite lack of planning!