Rankings?

[FuzzieAlum]

I can see the point of ranking specific, objective things - GPAs among chapters, endowment among nationals, number of members, number of chapters, etc. You could even get more subjective and rank, say, housing. (Chapter A has the biggest, Chapter B doesn't have a house, Chapter C's is small).

But how do you rank the more subjective "best"? I know a chapter that has a lot of members, great grades, everything seemingly going for it. The other chapters can't stand them - and it's not jealousy; they like the other chapter with the numbers and grades and leaders. But this one house has a bad reputation for dirty rushing (deserved), being snobs, and bad-mouthing the other chapters. How do you rank something like that?

[CarolinaDG]

Yeah, I'm not sure quite why they did that. It was a big sis's present to her lil sis. What's funny is that the same sorority takes their pledges on a retreat and has them make up skits making fun of all of the rest of the sororities.
The thing about USC, though, is that because it's so big and has so many different fraternities, there is a really big grey area as far as which is the best (we have 15 fraternities officially, and two others that are in limbo). I mean, you have stereotypes, such as KA's are the southern boys, Sigma Nu's are the preppy boys, Sig Eps the more rough, but still good-looking boys, ATO's the dark, preppy boys... I don't know, I could go through all of them, but you get the point. Everyone has preferences, but everyone's different. My roommate's dating a Pi Kapp, so she thinks that they're the best fraternity, but two girls on our hall are obsessed with TKE's, and I usually hang out at a bar where a lot of Sigma Chi's hang out. I mean, someone from USC may disagree, but I've tried many times to figure out what the "ranking" of USC's fraternities are, and I still can't, for the life of me, figure it out. And even as far as sororities are viewed, every person will rank them differently. It's kind of nice that way, though. It's the whole, "we're all greek together" thing.

[justamom]

This thread reminds me of "Name the top 3 sororities on your campus". I am convinced that people who obsess with this kind of stuff (I mean taking it farther than a curious look/discard type of mentality) are unsure of themselves and need the props of an organization-car-street address-logo to give themselves credibility. The sad, sad truth is, you can be a member of the most "prestigious" organization in the world, but if you were a jerk before you joined, most likely you wll be a jerk AFTER you join.
Most people can recognize this.

Kappa Sig has recetly returned to campus at LSU. Their numbers aren't as high as some, but not as low as others yet, they have the VP of the student body in their organization as well as numerous young men who strive to hold leadership positions on campus. Two fraternities have a reputation for mixing predomnately, but not exclusively, with 2 sororities, yet the other fraternities prefer to mix with some of the OTHER sororities because they feel more comfortable and think the girls are a lot more fun to be with. The ONLY absolute one can garner from this question is "Who's the BIGGEST". There is NO LITMUS TEST that absolutely defines THE best GLO (IMO). If you use the concept of a chain being as strong as it's weakest link, it's easy to see EVERY GLO has a link that could be considered weak. Even within the individual chapters some person or clique can waver from the "standards" and weaken the whole.

Sheer numbers are not important unless quantity has surpassed the importance of quality.
Power and money??? Take a look at the stock market and tell me that it hasn't devastated lives and turned prominant people into paupers.

Anyone who would SERIOUSLY use these concepts to choose or rank an organization, is far too contriving for me and appears to need validation in their lives.
End of rant!

[Erik P Conard]

Originally posted by justamom
This thread reminds me of "Name the top 3 sororities on your campus". I am convinced that people who obsess with this kind of stuff (I mean taking it farther than a curious look/discard type of mentality) are unsure of themselves and need the props of an organization-car-street address-logo to give themselves credibility. The sad, sad truth is, you can be a member of the most "prestigious" organization in the world, but if you were a jerk before you joined, most likely you wll be a jerk AFTER you join.
Most people can recognize this.

Kappa Sig has recetly returned to campus at LSU. Their numbers aren't as high as some, but not as low as others yet, they have the VP of the student body in their organization as well as numerous young men who strive to hold leadership positions on campus. Two fraternities have a reputation for mixing predomnately, but not exclusively, with 2 sororities, yet the other fraternities prefer to mix with some of the OTHER sororities because they feel more comfortable and think the girls are a lot more fun to be with. The ONLY absolute one can garner from this question is "Who's the BIGGEST". There is NO LITMUS TEST that absolutely defines THE best GLO (IMO). If you use the concept of a chain being as strong as it's weakest link, it's easy to see EVERY GLO has a link that could be considered weak. Even within the individual chapters some person or clique can waver from the "standards" and weaken the whole.

Sheer numbers are not important unless quantity has surpassed the importance of quality.
Power and money??? Take a look at the stock market and tell me that it hasn't devastated lives and turned prominant people into paupers.

Anyone who would SERIOUSLY use these concepts to choose or rank an organization, is far too contriving for me and appears to need validation in their lives.
End of rant!

momma--Heller undertook his rankings on a grandiose scale;
obviously some folks would disagree with him, but in the overall
picture a desired profile emerged.
Sometimes in order to move ahead you must generalize and continue to refine. Without it, you'd go nowhere.
So, in defense of Heller, he did just this and filled a need.
You have read the will and taken the class picture, but otherwise done nothing but gripe and stood still.
There is room for you, too. Help the Kappa Sigs...

[bolingbaker]

Thanks for explaining the usefulness of rankings. Most fraternity/sorority members don't care about such things, but they are very useful to those members who structure the rush program and market the name. "Justamom" makes the mistake most people make when they hear about rankings. If all the greek outfits on a given campus are about the same size and operate at the same level, then there's not much to distinguish them one from another. However, most fraternity systems have an established heirarchy. Some chapters are consistently strong, while others never seem to get off the ground. If you outline the characteristics of the consistently strong, and compare them to the characteristics of the consistently weak, a solid picture emrges of how to create a chapter that will be immediately defined as a winner.
It's interesting that "Justamom" refers to Kappa Sigma at LSU. Heller's Survey reported that over the life of their chapter, Kappa Sigma was probably the all-time leader at LSU. Good genes count. If they have good leadership, Kappa Sigma has a great chance to return quickly to the status they used to enjoy. They have a great house, and a prestige reputation that resonates among the families who send their kids to Baton Rouge.
Unless a particular school makes an effort to make everyone the same, there will always be chapters whose ambitions rise above the others. People miss the point. Just because a fraternity is "more powerful, prominent and presitgeous" does NOT mean that all its members are superior to all members of other fraternities. It just means that the organization itself has a solid name built on performance, and as a consequence they have a much better chance of getting who they want.
It's wrong to think that a good fraternity chooses between quantity and quality. On a campus with large chapters, there's no such thing a a small fraternity that's perceived as competitive.

[Erik P Conard]

Originally posted by bolingbaker
Thanks for explaining the usefulness of rankings. Most fraternity/sorority members don't care about such things, but they are very useful to those members who structure the rush program and market the name. "Justamom" makes the mistake most people make when they hear about rankings. If all the greek outfits on a given campus are about the same size and operate at the same level, then there's not much to distinguish them one from another. However, most fraternity systems have an established heirarchy. Some chapters are consistently strong, while others never seem to get off the ground. If you outline the characteristics of the consistently strong, and compare them to the characteristics of the consistently weak, a solid picture emrges of how to create a chapter that will be immediately defined as a winner.
It's interesting that "Justamom" refers to Kappa Sigma at LSU. Heller's Survey reported that over the life of their chapter, Kappa Sigma was probably the all-time leader at LSU. Good genes count. If they have good leadership, Kappa Sigma has a great chance to return quickly to the status they used to enjoy. They have a great house, and a prestige reputation that resonates among the families who send their kids to Baton Rouge.
Unless a particular school makes an effort to make everyone the same, there will always be chapters whose ambitions rise above the others. People miss the point. Just because a fraternity is "more powerful, prominent and presitgeous" does NOT mean that all its members are superior to all members of other fraternities. It just means that the organization itself has a solid name built on performance, and as a consequence they have a much better chance of getting who they want.
It's wrong to think that a good fraternity chooses between quantity and quality. On a campus with large chapters, there's no such thing a a small fraternity that's perceived as competitive.

You have responded with a succinct yet thorough analysis of what Heller was trying to do. He fought for the underdog to rise
to prominence. He gloated "I told you so" when one slipped and
another did not. Naw, nobody could have put it better than you
did. Wilson would say "Thanks, pal."

[Pi Kapp 142]

I beleive that rankings also serve to drive others to be better. Would you think it was wrong for LL baseball teams to not be ranked, i.e. first, scond, third, etc? If one wanted to be a better chapter, i.e. higher ranked, in serving brotherhood/ sisterhood why not compare yourself to others to how well you are doing? If your chapter was last among others in GPA don't you think it would be a good motivation to work on the acedemic side of life? Competition is a healthy when it serves a purpose.

[justamom]

Would you think it was wrong for LL baseball teams to not be ranked, i.e. first, scond, third, etc?

Don't EVEN get me started on this topic. Coming from an area with one of the THE most "successful" LL programs in the US, you can be assured I have very strong opinions on this subject. LOL!

All points made are well taken and are of some consequence in the larger scheme of things. However, with all due respect to Mr. Heller, and the opinions posted,I have seen the unhappiness that results from those who allow rankings to influence their lives or are motivated by said labels. I also have seen giant corporations falter when newer (better mouse traps) nips at their heels. I love the old adage when you're number two, you try harder. Of course this implies a rank of some sort.

It's just that quite honestly, it doesn't seem to be of any real benefit to anyone other than those who refer to it as a "credential". If there was a benefit, wouldn't those that, upon publication, were ranked 3 and 4 or 5 and 6 have MOVED up or down on the list? Perhaps it has and I a unaware.

It feels more like comparing religious organizations. Well, the Catholic Church has a ton of land, INTERNATIONAL connections and there are a ZILLIONS of us( NO BIRTH CONTROL!) ...lots of little chapters all around the world. But around here, those Baptists give us a real run for our money. Sure are getting a lot of new recruits... I know this is a simplificaton and I hope you see the jest. I just happen to be one of those peope that believe a business model is great on paper, but a successful company is not necessarily judged by it's size, rather it's product. I hope you would agree that the Greek system as a whole produces a very good product in a market environment that is challenging.

[Erik P Conard]

Originally posted by justamom
Would you think it was wrong for LL baseball teams to not be ranked, i.e. first, scond, third, etc?

Don't EVEN get me started on this topic. Coming from an area with one of the THE most "successful" LL programs in the US, you can be assured I have very strong opinions on this subject. LOL!

All points made are well taken and are of some consequence in the larger scheme of things. However, with all due respect to Mr. Heller, and the opinions posted,I have seen the unhappiness that results from those who allow rankings to influence their lives or are motivated by said labels. I also have seen giant corporations falter when newer (better mouse traps) nips at their heels. I love the old adage when you're number two, you try harder. Of course this implies a rank of some sort.

It's just that quite honestly, it doesn't seem to be of any real benefit to anyone other than those who refer to it as a "credential". If there was a benefit, wouldn't those that, upon publication, were ranked 3 and 4 or 5 and 6 have MOVED up or down on the list? Perhaps it has and I a unaware.

It feels more like comparing religious organizations. Well, the Catholic Church has a ton of land, INTERNATIONAL connections and there are a ZILLIONS of us( NO BIRTH CONTROL!) ...lots of little chapters all around the world. But around here, those Baptists give us a real run for our money. Sure are getting a lot of new recruits... I know this is a simplificaton and I hope you see the jest. I just happen to be one of those peope that believe a business model is great on paper, but a successful company is not necessarily judged by it's size, rather it's product. I hope you would agree that the Greek system as a whole produces a very good product in a market environment that is challenging.

I am sure you will do well in the teachers' lounge, but out here
we don't seem to grasp what you are trying to say.

[Pi Kapp 142]

It is about your continouiong struggle to get there. If you work on your product (your chapter) and continually improve upon it, eventually you will be number one. Of course people should not just worry about the number they are, that is just a side effect of what they are doing.

[bolingbaker]

a different angle. It's not about WHERE you rank in a given cycle, it's about KNOWING where the chapter ranks, and what that means to the marketing plan. Again, most members of most chapters never heard of Wilson Heller, never saw the results of his surveys, and couldn't care less about what he said. Those of us who did care used that information to create a better, more competitive chapter, and drive toward higher status. Why is this important? Well, it's important to ME. From the responses in the very small universe of this board, it appears to be important to others as well.
To understand the principals, to understand the value of rankings obtained in this manner (and so far none of us have discussed the mechanics of how he did it, although I'm sure Conard and others of us know), let's create a model. Let's look at a typical fraternity system of twenty chapters. Let's say the largest groups range in membership between 65 and 80, and the smallest run somewhere in the 20s. A typical survey will show that there are four, five at the most, chapters considered to be in the top circle of "power, prominence & prestige". It will also show that two or three chapters are among the perennial celler-dwellers. The rest of the chapters are in a large middle ground. It's not really important that a chapter rose from 15th to 8th. The rankings among the middle-level groups will fluctuate wildly because there's so little to distinguish among them.
What you'll find is that the top five will remain the Top Five, although the #1 ranked group may drop to #5 over a period of several years. But they're very likely to bounce back as their competitors cycle down. The trend is that they do not settle down into that middle level. The bottom groups likewise never seem to rise about their low status. The #20 ranked chapter may rise up to #18 in a year, but they are just as likely to drop back to the bottom.
What you'll find to be consistent is that the Top Five will very likely also be the five largest fraternities year in-year out. Reputations lag a few years behind, so they have the luxury of a year or two to recover from a bad year. The worst-ranked fraternities will nearly always be among the smallest.
If one of the Top Five ever drops into that middle level, then it is very difficult for them to rise back to the top circle. It's difficult because whatever caused them to lose membership and status for a long enough time to tumble them from the elite, is probably still afflicting them.
HERE'S HOW HELLER-TYPE RANKINGS CAN HELP: If you are a middle level chapter and you wish to elbow your way into the top circle, THAT CAN BE DONE. The trick is to know how. Heller was one of those who provided a road map. There were/are others as well.
WHO IS IT IMPORTANT TO STRIVE TO BE THE BEST? Life is always sweeter when you're a member of the winning team. Fraternities thrive on success and momentum. Years ago, my own fraternity had large numbers of chapters stuck in the middle level on their campusses. Today, we have many chapters in the top circle. We know how to do that now, and the benefits include enthusiasm, excitement and prosperity of the national organization.
Justamom, I think you have the impression that these rankings are a tool to be used to impress rushees. I'm sure that's been done, but that's not an effective use. Rushees don't understand, and certainly don't care even as much as the members. It's the leaders and the visionaries who use these rankings to succeed.
ONE LAST POINT: I don't agree with every one of Heller's principles. I have my own way of working the system. But Heller was correct in all his fundamental views.

[Erik P Conard]

Originally posted by bolingbaker
a different angle. It's not about WHERE you rank in a given cycle, it's about KNOWING where the chapter ranks, and what that means to the marketing plan. Again, most members of most chapters never heard of Wilson Heller, never saw the results of his surveys, and couldn't care less about what he said. Those of us who did care used that information to create a better, more competitive chapter, and drive toward higher status. Why is this important? Well, it's important to ME. From the responses in the very small universe of this board, it appears to be important to others as well.
To understand the principals, to understand the value of rankings obtained in this manner (and so far none of us have discussed the mechanics of how he did it, although I'm sure Conard and others of us know), let's create a model. Let's look at a typical fraternity system of twenty chapters. Let's say the largest groups range in membership between 65 and 80, and the smallest run somewhere in the 20s. A typical survey will show that there are four, five at the most, chapters considered to be in the top circle of "power, prominence & prestige". It will also show that two or three chapters are among the perennial celler-dwellers. The rest of the chapters are in a large middle ground. It's not really important that a chapter rose from 15th to 8th. The rankings among the middle-level groups will fluctuate wildly because there's so little to distinguish among them.
What you'll find is that the top five will remain the Top Five, although the #1 ranked group may drop to #5 over a period of several years. But they're very likely to bounce back as their competitors cycle down. The trend is that they do not settle down into that middle level. The bottom groups likewise never seem to rise about their low status. The #20 ranked chapter may rise up to #18 in a year, but they are just as likely to drop back to the bottom.
What you'll find to be consistent is that the Top Five will very likely also be the five largest fraternities year in-year out. Reputations lag a few years behind, so they have the luxury of a year or two to recover from a bad year. The worst-ranked fraternities will nearly always be among the smallest.
HERE'S HOW HELLER-TYPE RANKINGS CAN HELP: If you are a middle level chapter and you wish to elbow your way into the top circle, THAT CAN BE DONE. The trick is to know how. Heller was one of those who provided a road map. There were/are others as well.
WHO IS IT IMPORTANT TO STRIVE TO BE THE BEST? Life is always sweeter when you're a member of the winning team. Fraternities thrive on success and momentum. Years ago, my own fraternity had large numbers of chapters stuck in the middle level on their campusses. Today, we have many chapters in the top circle. We know how to do that now, and the benefits include enthusiasm, excitement and prosperity of the national organization.
Justamom, I think you have the impression that these rankings are a tool to be used to impress rushees. I'm sure that's been done, but that's not an effective use. Rushees don't understand, and certainly don't care even as much as the members. It's the leaders and the visionaries who use these rankings to succeed.
ONE LAST POINT: I don't agree with every one of Heller's principles. I have my own way of working the system. But Heller was correct in all his fundamental views.

Again, a complete (and brilliant) presentation. I would not change a word in your excellent explanation.....A+ on this EPC

[bolingbaker]

Thank you.

[TKEmz894]

Its interesting......That you brought up Kappa Sig at LSU, I live in Thibodaux, and have a brother in the Greek system there, and also many friends.....Kappa Sigma was one of the top orgs there, and alot of other Fraternitys gained from them and SAE getting kicked off a couple of years ago...ie Lamda Chi, Sigma Nu,Pi Kap, and Acacia. The Kappa Sigs there definately benifit from a beautiful house, and a large Alumni group. But I am wondering if they might have lost some reputation( Two things TKE at LSU has a major lack of), with all the chapters closing in the state in the last 7 years.....They lost LaTech, ULM, ULL, LSU, and SLU.....All from pretty badly embarrasing actions.....They have since rechartered ULL, but I really think their rep hurts them some times.....and it might hurt them at LSU at first....The other thing I have heard from people at LSU is that the guys they got from putting adds in the LSU student paper where mostly Juniors who had quit other Farternities for different reasons, and just joined to have a place to belong, people have said what happens when these guys all graduate in a year, they will have to recruit Kappa Sigs future in a year, or those #s will drop significantly....so those initial #s they have put up are inflated for the moment, but with all of that I wish them luck, cause I never met a Kappa Sig I didnt get along with........and plus it helps one of the biggest Greek communities in the US become stronger....

[bolingbaker]

and that would be very unfortunate given their past and their alumni. The truth is that they'd have to make an effort to screw it up. TKEmz894, I've seen some of your other posts and I see that you understand the way it really works. We both know that if SAE comes back to LSU and knows what they're doing, they'll be right back where they were within a year, maybe two. Other fraternities on that campus could never even dream of such a thing.