Auburn Recruitment 2012

[AnchorAlumna]

The weakest chapters do not necessarily have the biggest NM classes.
If you have space - from members graduating, transferring, dropping out, whatever - you can pledge up to average chapter size. Sometimes the "biggies" get more NMs, too.
Just depends on circumstances that year.

[Greek_or_Geek?]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

And it would be such a shame if we let weaker recruiting chapters enjoy a positive moment rather than making sure everyone understood that their QAs were just because their previous stats were bad.

Good grief. That's not what I said. The chapters that had the lower return rates end up with the largest PNM pool at preference so they have the chance to get the most QAs. It's exactly what RFM was designed to do, level the playing field.

Originally Posted by AnchorAlumna

The weakest chapters do not necessarily have the biggest NM classes.
If you have space - from members graduating, transferring, dropping out, whatever - you can pledge up to average chapter size. Sometimes the "biggies" get more NMs, too.
Just depends on circumstances that year.

There is no automatic mechanism in the way QAs are assigned to accommodate for current chapter size.

[Titchou]

From the NPC MOI (aka Green Book):

In the quota addition assignment process at the conclusion of regular bid matching, fraternity/sorority advisors are encouraged to distribute quota additions as evenly as possible among the chapters. The goal is to achieve as much parity as possible among the new member classes while matching the remaining potential new members who completed the process in good faith.

[DubaiSis]

Thanks Titchou. I'm always interested to learn what the rules literally say. In this case, the rules say "do your best to make everyone happy." It does NOT say it goes to the weakest chapter or the one with the worst RFM percentages or the biggest or the rushee's first or last choice.

Do some schools' Panhellenics have a written policy in place to further clarify the Green Book's intentionally vague answer? I've heard different things here (if you don't match, you get your first choice, you get the smallest chapter and the one with the weakest RFM percentages seems to be the most common responses).

[gatordeltapgh]

Originally Posted by DubaiSis

Do some schools' Panhellenics have a written policy in place to further clarify the Green Book's intentionally vague answer? I've heard different things here (if you don't match, you get your first choice, you get the smallest chapter and the one with the weakest RFM percentages seems to be the most common responses).

The local CPH can't have a policy about how to distribute QA's because RFM is a proprietary NPC program. The policy is written so that it allows the RFM specialist and FSA to do what is best for the community in each situation. RFM is also evolving over time based on years of data and trends. For example no more 5% rule. The best bet is to know the distribution of QA's is different in each instance and is based on data and each individual scenario. Specialist are trained each year, senior specalists are there to consult, and the RFM leadership team is always working to optimize placement and parity. We are all in very good hands.

[Titchou]

Originally Posted by gatordeltapgh

The local CPH can't have a policy about how to distribute QA's because RFM is a proprietary NPC program. The policy is written so that it allows the RFM specialist and FSA to do what is best for the community in each situation. RFM is also evolving over time based on years of data and trends. For example no more 5% rule. The best bet is to know the distribution of QA's is different in each instance and is based on data and each individual scenario. Specialist are trained each year, senior specalists are there to consult, and the RFM leadership team is always working to optimize placement and parity. We are all in very good hands.

Amen! Every RFM specialist I've worked with/met/known has always tried to be as fair as possible within the constraints of the rules and program. They aren't going to overload one chapter with NMs if there is another way to do it and be fair to all.

[Greek_or_Geek?]

But that's not what I am saying. The RFM specialist has the constraints of the party invites to work with. The more PNMs who attend your chapter's parties, the bigger the pool of QAs you have to work with. The chapters that have to make harder cuts have fewer PNMs in their pools.

[Titchou]

Originally Posted by DubaiSis

Thanks Titchou. I'm always interested to learn what the rules literally say. In this case, the rules say "do your best to make everyone happy." It does NOT say it goes to the weakest chapter or the one with the worst RFM percentages or the biggest or the rushee's first or last choice.

Do some schools' Panhellenics have a written policy in place to further clarify the Green Book's intentionally vague answer? I've heard different things here (if you don't match, you get your first choice, you get the smallest chapter and the one with the weakest RFM percentages seems to be the most common responses).

You should be able to download a copy of the MOI from your national web site. That's where I got mine.

[KSUViolet06]

Originally Posted by HQWest

No worries, I looked at the math again and found that if quota is set a little low then more women are matched with their first choice but that might not always be the case.

I deal with MUCH smaller scale recruitments in my volunteer role (where total is usually in like, the teens and 20s), so that is typically the case with my schools.

[dukedg]

I have a QA question for situations where size is considered. Let's say you have two chapters ABC and XYZ. ABC has 94 members and XYZ has 100. You have 10 QAs to place. For simplicity's sake, all 10 put XYZ as their first choice.

In theory, you'd place 8 of these 10 at ABC to bring them to 102 and 2 at XYZ to bring them to 102. But, how in the world would you pick which 8 don't get their first choice compared to the 2 who do?

[dukedg]

Originally Posted by Low C Sharp

By their placement on XYZ's second list?

That's what I was wondering. Or, by their placement on ABC's? Again, someone would be given an advantage.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by dukedg

I have a QA question for situations where size is considered. Let's say you have two chapters ABC and XYZ. ABC has 94 members and XYZ has 100. You have 10 QAs to place. For simplicity's sake, all 10 put XYZ as their first choice.

In theory, you'd place 8 of these 10 at ABC to bring them to 102 and 2 at XYZ to bring them to 102. But, how in the world would you pick which 8 don't get their first choice compared to the 2 who do?

Well, assuming only two chapters on campus, all ten women probably attended both prefs, and listed both on their bid card to be eligible for QA's, so raising quota by one or two solves this.

More than two chapters on campus? Then it depends on which women have both ABC and XYZ. If you are assuming these are not the only two chapters, but you have ten women who listed XYZ and ABC and didn't match, it's fuzzy on what to do. Some GA's would check the position on XYZ's bid list, others would just throw all ten at XYZ, and both answers are perfectly acceptable.

[dukedg]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

More than two chapters on campus? Then it depends on which women have both ABC and XYZ. If you are assuming these are not the only two chapters, but you have ten women who listed XYZ and ABC and didn't match, it's fuzzy on what to do. Some GA's would check the position on XYZ's bid list, others would just throw all ten at XYZ, and both answers are perfectly acceptable.

This was the scenario I was referring to. Thanks for the information - I find QAs to be among the least transparent part of an already non-transparent process

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by Greek_or_Geek?

But that's not what I am saying. The RFM specialist has the constraints of the party invites to work with. The more PNMs who attend your chapter's parties, the bigger the pool of QAs you have to work with. The chapters that have to make harder cuts have fewer PNMs in their pools.

This is correct. You can't really distribute
QAs evenly if each chapter doesn't have the same number of left over PNMs after filling quota. Statistically, the weaker recruiting chapters who have higher carry numbers will have more PNMs on their bid lists resulting in more opportunities for QAs. Stronger chapters could luck into these large numbers by some how picking a lot of girls that got cut from everyone else or weren't felt to be desirable by other strong recruiting chapters (which usually is not the case.)

[Titchou]

Originally Posted by dukedg

This was the scenario I was referring to. Thanks for the information - I find QAs to be among the least transparent part of an already non-transparent process

It's actually very transparent. Check the MOI (Green Book) for hand bid matching and all will be revealed to you - or should be. The computer does it the same way. For those of us old enough to have done hand bid matching for many years, it really isn't compllicated.