Fraternity Dues and Fees

[FratAmerica]

All,

How isthe second year of PiKA's new dues structure affecting you - particularly in regards to rush?

The benefits were supposed to be cost breaks for bigger chapters and having a clearer idea of what a chapter was to pay each year (since their are less per-man charges).

Who is using it to their competive or economic advantage?

Thoughts?

[Firehouse]

Our guys (FSU) think it's a much better deal for us because of the size.

[PiKAMu]

I am glad its better for all of yall at big schools but its a hell of a burden for us at small schools

[AymanKappaGamma]

1

[Firehouse]

I wouldn't say that Sig Ep was "one of the top fraternities in the world", or if they are, they haven't been there for long. Traditionally, Sig Ep was not one of the major players. They call themselves the "largest fraternity" because they have a huge number of chapters and so their undergraduate population may be larger.
Sig Ep has been very aggressive and has had a lot of success, albeit recently. You have to give them credit for their ambition.

I like having pledges, but I want us to eliminate hazing. I'm not in favor of numbers above all things, but the big fraternities do feast on the smaller ones, and I don't want to be the prey.
You'd be surprised about chapter size at small schools. A school with 2,000 students as you cite is most likely a private school. Let's say 1,000 of them are men. If there are four fraternities, two will be rivals, and strong. They should easily maintain 65 men. If the 2,000-student school is a public institution without a student body that can financially or socially support fraternities, then we shouldn't be on that campus.

I guess what I'm telling you is: don't be concerend that Pike national is patterning themselves after Sig Ep. That is not happening. Pike is, and should be, comparing themselves to peers like SAE and Sigma Chi.

[FratAmerica]

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.

[Firehouse]

Wow.
Didn't mean to fire up the engines, but I am glad that you're passionate about the Fraternity. Nothing ever improves unless someone is unhappy. PiKA has benefitted over the years from passionate hell-raisers who pushed for better performance and a grander vision. You are obviously up on the latest developments.

I didn't know that SAE was in financial trouble. How did that happen? They have large, strong chapters in great houses, which is pretty much the definition of enduring strength. I have noticed that more Sigma Chi chapters are in trouble, but still, thay have the same string of great chapters, well housed.
And you are right about Sig Ep's ambition. They are building great houses and they emphasize size. On the other hand, I much prefer our cornerstones program to their balanced man. Am I wrong in thinking that Pi Kappa Alpha still has the largest average chapter size? That's important.

I have been disheatened to see some of our traditionally great chapters at major schools lose their competitive standing. Back in the day, Texas Tech, U-Texas, U-Florida were among the best. I agree that we could, we should, try to do better. There's no point in playing if we don't try to win.

[AymanKappaGamma]

What you say is very true, WE do decide the fate of this fraternity and the stance nationals takes. I just see some actions being taken that I don't remember ever voting on. The new garnet and gold's for example don't have a textual preamble, only a picture of it. They also ommitted the ode to a pledge.

I'm completely against hazing and feel as we continue to recruit prouder and more distingued men it's complete demise is inevitable, but to remove traditional information from our pledge manuels is a bit unnecessary.

Also, it is true that we do have the healthiest chapters of any national fraternity for the past 20 years. Our expansion teams are the greek world's standard and our continued education and university events are amazing. Pike is moving in the right path and the number one spot is within reach.

[Firehouse]

Sorry to hear about the pledge manual. Memorizing the Preamble and the Greek alphabet is something that everyone had in common.

Glad to hear good news about our overall strength, but I am still disappointed in the state of some of our grand old chapters who set the standard for so long.

[KEPike]

Essentially what this boils down to is the integration between the practices of individual chapters and the International Fraternity's policies as delivered by the Memorial Headquarters. In simpler terms, do we practice what we preach?

It is obvious to me that a top rival, SigEp, does not have total integration due to the dichotomy of balanced man vs. traditional chapters. Nevertheless, we need to keep them a part of our reference group because they are competitive on many levels. What Ayman is saying is correct about their campus standing, but couldn't you say the same about Pike? We have many chapters who on paper have lots going for them but do not represent the fraternity in the truest light.

Sigma Chi, on the other hand, has tremendous coordination whether it be through Derby Days, their alumni programming (similar to our Loyal Order) and their annual giving. Simply put, everyone seems to know who they are and what they are about. Plus, on many campuses, they are very strong and as pointed out, have had a small number of discipline problems in the past.

Many of the things that we are discussing are outcomes of the "quality growth" stance set forth by this Supreme Council. Even though the dues structure is several years old, it is proof that chapters need to practice quality growth. Revamping pledge education, Cornerstones programming and improving our standing on many campuses are examples of why we need quality growth. But how do chapters from Washington to Florida practice this?

I am excited to hear that MHQ is presenting a series of regional recruitment workshops, which are coordinated by the recruitment department. Essentially, they are bringing the successful expansion program down to the chapter level to adapt best practices on different campuses so that quality growth can be practiced. There is one coming up in Texas here in a few weeks and I am fortunate that the chapter I advise will be attending. It is a great example of a coordinated effort to ensure that Pike chapters receive the right message and are given the tools to succeed.

[Firehouse]

Well articulated. I hope you'll be leading some of the sessions.
I know your boys are doing well. If you can find out what the hell happened at Texas and Texas Tech let me know (?)

[FratAmerica]

Well, I must have barked a little louder than I realized. My apologies. I do appreciate everyone's perspectives, dedication and passion.

KEPike, it's great to hear about these regional recruitment seminars. That should help provide some much needed grassroots horsepower.

Firehouse, to you accurate observations of the demise (or lack of success) at flagship institutions, I tend to believe the cause is a lack of local alumni support. And I don't need the number of alumni in a particular area, or their willingness to volunteer. Most important is their ability.

Building, maintaning and enhancing our alumni assets is a shared responsibility - but HQ is the party best equipped to lead. I'm not sure if it's HQ lack of success or a true lack of quality prospects, but I believe our alumni assets are in dire straits. This, I believe, speaks directly to your campus observations. No where have we been able to maintain success without able alumni leadership. No where. This, of course, isn't the appropriate forum to engage in an analysis of individual campus and alumni groups, but I firmly believe our troubles are related to a lack of competent and consistent alumni support. (I'm not pointing fingers at alumni, I'm just saying that they ain't there! It's up to chapters, HQ and other alums to find 'em, train 'em and reward 'em!) Just like with chapters, it's not all about numbers. We might have 200+ chapter advisors, but how many really fit the bill? And, why does HQ and some of our chapters tolerate that?

I believe we have and will again kick some real ass in the interfraternity world. As we engage in that battle for supremacy, we have to take stock of our assets. My view is that we have several investments to make if we're going to win this battle and then protect the hill.

I would be very interested in seeing chapters share their recruitment plans in some type of confidential or consultative manner. Maybe inCircle is the way. Do we have a template that we give to chapters to help them build a plan? If so, maybe we could create some way of giving rush chairmen feedback on their plan along with customized solutions. Sort of a recruitment consulting function.

But... all the information in the world isn't going to advance IIKA until we are ready to 1) challenge assumptions and 2) work our rears off!

[PiKA2001]

Originally Posted by Firehouse

Sorry to hear about the pledge manual. Memorizing the Preamble and the Greek alphabet is something that everyone had in common.

Is the memorization of the Preamble and the Greek alphabet no longer allowed in the new member education program? If so, thats wrong. I still to this day can recite the Preamble.

[Firehouse]

I couldn't tell you what they do now...but I know I can say the Preamble and the Greek alphabet before a burning match hits my fingers.

[RosePike]

would be very interested in seeing chapters share their recruitment plans in some type of confidential or consultative manner. Maybe inCircle is the way. Do we have a template that we give to chapters to help them build a plan? If so, maybe we could create some way of giving rush chairmen feedback on their plan along with customized solutions. Sort of a recruitment consulting function.

This would be great, but many times recruitment is very different at different institutions. Variables like informal or formal recruitment periods, the timing of the recruitment period, the institutions policies on recruitment can greatly affect the way each chapter conducts recruitment. From reviewing the materials provided by nationals, I think nationals has firm grasp of the standards which can be applied by any chapter. However, I do agree that it requires the wisdom of able alumni to help each chapter use this information to take recruitment to the next level.

In my humble opinion three ingredients are needed for a great recruitment, innovation, persistence, and enthusiasm.