Quote:
Originally Posted by ta kala
Depending on the expectations from their (inter)national organization, chapters are "required" to follow the numbers to a T - and for chapters recommended to invite "all in pool" or close to that number, they often invite back women who they don't want, but are not in a position to be picky if the expectation is to "play the game" to make quota/total. They then get women they don't want (who may or may not want them) and they get stuck in a cycle of admitting women who don't meet their membership criteria and women who won't help a struggling chapter change.
And I realize each organization is different and has different policies, philosophies, etc. This is my own personal opinion about our formal recruitment process. For every member who might hold a chapter back, there is an equally awesome woman who will be the next great leader. It's such a tricky balancing act.
|
I know EXACTLY what you're talking about, and I bet we all have a line or two in our recruitment policies that says essentially the same thing. I find it ridiculous, though, because usually, the chapters that cut HARD and perhaps cut for more shallow reasons are the ones who have no problem retaining PNMs from round to round. The struggling chapters are usually the ones who are more open - in other words, you REALLY have to be a piece of work to get cut from there - and telling that chapter that they have to invite back a girl who got them to that point and possibly even bid her, does NOT help the chapter to get stronger. It just kills it more quickly.
We say over and over to NMs that sisterhood doesn't happen overnight, that the best years are often as an alum, etc etc - in effect, that it TAKES TIME and that you can't force it. Why does that go out the window when it comes to chapters in general - especially if a costly house isn't involved?
Hybrid Mode
