The Best Strategy for a "Weak Recruiting" Chapter

[Titchou]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

Yes, I assumed that there was an obvious PNM hierarchy, which is an extreme example, and certainly QA's could mess this up. I think that what the WRC would have to be pretty sure that the women they were cutting would not be carried through to prefs at any other chapter.



Why take an okay PNM if you can take an awesome one?



What does this have to do with FR?



But in general, it benefits the WRC to have a lower quota, I think.

Some chapters don't mind getting fewer at FR because they know they'll get to quota during COB. And my experience has been that the WRC on RFM get more pledges than the higher recruiting ones. It's harder sometimes for them to keep them but they do initially seem to be on more equitable footing as RFM adjusts quota automatically until it is pretty balanced across the board. That's esp true on a smaller campus.

[LAblondeGPhi]

I think this is a fascinating idea.

I disagree with some of the comments on how impossible it is to judge all PNMs on a universal scale. Of course some PNMs will fit/gravitate/be loved by some chapters more than others, but this is about averages.

The main problem I see is whether the RFM specialist will allow carry figures to adjust according to the forced release of 20% of the PNM population by one chapter. Since Panhellenic groups have very little real ability to enforce adherence to RFM, I would think that this would be one area they could use to punish a chapter for not abiding. If you don't adjust the carry figures to account for a Q=20 instead of a Q=25, you screw Chapter 1 into a pledge class of 5 new members when everyone else has 25.

The second issue is whether one chapter has the ability to skew the PNM population like that - if there's another WRC, they might be encouraged to carry most of those PNMs, thus keeping all of the original quota figures intact.

There's another interesting question in here: do the WRCs in a Greek system benefit when there is some selectivity of the WHOLE Greek system? I'm thinking of an Indiana vs. the rest of the world kind of scenario. Are the WRCs better off on campuses where being any kind of Greek is prestigious? Some schools consider being independent better than being in a WRC, so where is the incentive for PNMs to stick it out when that's all they have left?

[dukedg]

I'm so glad you started this thread, DBB. I have long thought about this as a strategy that in my mind would definitely benefit the WRC, but I never put in the work to really think through an example.

The way I have always thought about it, you would take this gamble only on day one and remove the PNMs that no one else wants and that give you the reputation of taking "anyone". After that, you would go back to maximizing your list for the rest of the days of RFM. The risk is you are now competing with stronger recruiting chapters for the same PNMs, so you will have to convince them to stick with your chapter rather than drop out.

As an added bonus, I think it starts to counter some of that argument that you take everyone and builds your chapter's morale while it makes the Greek community stronger (caveat: I do not believe that there is a place for everyone in the Greek community).

ETA: One thing that has to be factored in is the group of PNMs that drop out when they don't get invited back to their favorites. I would hazard to say the biggest drop outs occur at the 40 - 60 range in your example, not 1 - 20. That's the one thing I can't figure out. Will this large cut and them dropping lead to a total pool of only 60 PNMs instead of 100? If so, Chapter 4 would get 100-85, Chapter 3 85-71, Chapter 2 70-61 and 40-36 and Chapter 1 35-20.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

I want to be clear that, when I say not-so-great PNM's (WRPNM's?), I'm not talking about women who are fashion-challenged or terribly shy or whatever. Obviously, those women can be great sisters if you take a chance on them, just as much as a WRC can have a great sisterhood if a PNM takes a chance on it.

I'm talking more about the women who come through rush, but you get the distinct impression they won't be able to handle the finances, or their grades are *just* high enough but they are CC transfers, etc.

[carnation]

..or they pulled a train at a fraternity house over the summer or slapped their boss at camp or have a notable police record (a few true examples).

[LAblondeGPhi]

Originally Posted by carnation

..or they pulled a train at a fraternity house over the summer or slapped their boss at camp or have a notable police record (a few true examples).

... or are in the adult entertainment industry (also, sadly, a true example)

[Titchou]

Originally Posted by LAblondeGPhi

... or are in the adult entertainment industry (also, sadly, a true example)

You had one too???? Isn't that fun when her place of employment is where all the frat guys go? Ugh!

[Mevara]

I think this scenario only works if there is only 1 WRC, because if WRC cuts those PNMs then they are cut out of Formal. If there are 2 then the ones that WRC#1 drops just go to WRC#2.

[HQWest]

^^^ It depends on the size of the school. In the example with only five chapters it is easier to see how changing quota will work.

I have often argued that for the all but the lowest recruiting chapters, you want quota to be as high as possible. The top chapter gets their top girls.
The middle chapters may not get all of their top girls, but they will only need a couple of girls to catch up at COB. They also don't get as many girls "cried" by the top chapter wandering around pissed off on bid day.
The problem is when there is a big disparity between the chapters and then the lowest chapters have to do a lot of catching up in COB. Making quota lower so everyone gets quota doesn't really help if it means one or two chapters wind up with a TON of QAs. (more than 4 or 5). They might not have to have COB, but they will have to work really hard to keep those girls (some of whom may not be all that happy bid day).

In the example with 15 schools - you also run into problems like this skit night. Suzi Q ranks her top 6, and gets them, but then finds out that her friends are all excited about her number 7 which is their number 2 or 3). Number 7 is better off focusing on the girls that ranked them higher than to try to get more girls to their parties.

[OneHeartOneWay]

Originally Posted by redlady2

We felt that inviting back fewer would mean smaller parties for us than for other houses but that we'd have a better chance of retaining them if we weren't double and triple rushing them,

I realize this isn't the topic of the thread per say, but I've often thought that this is a the crux of the problem for WRCs. In my experiences with WRCs, it's the double and yes, sometimes triple, rushing that really hurts them. It's near impossible to do matching so that you get two (three) PNMs who may actually be interested in your chapter together with a strong recruiting sister. More often than not, you get an interested PNM, a bored/rude/mean PNM, and a sister who is frantically trying to hold the three of them together in some semblance of normal conversation, thus losing that connection with the interested PNM. I think the best thing a Panhellenic could do to aid a WRC (or WRCs) is to add additional parties for them- I realize this is a logistical nightmare, especially at larger schools, but I think this combined with RFM is what could REALLY help the WRCs get back on their feet.

[AZ-AlphaXi]

^^^^ this !!!! Especially if the WRC is double rushing for preference.

[redlady2]

To Mevara: The way it worked out was that we had to stick to RFM. Our national org was adamant that we stick to the figures (I think someone from our GLO was involved in the system's development and it would have been controversial for us in particular to break? That was what we were told at the time, anyhow.) We were in a total panic, because we were only allowed to release a handful of women out of a pool of nearly a thousand, and we knew Round 2 would be a total mess. As we expected, our invitation acceptance rate had spiked that year because our rush chair had done such a fabulous job prepping our ladies to recruit well, and we were then left with the entire house double rushing. I think that after the advisors all saw how Round 2 went, they relented and allowed us to release more, but the "damage" had been done, and we still were double rushing into Round 3 and pref.

Looking back, I can understand why our HQ and Panhellenic said "stick to the figures." I'm sure every exec board at a WRC thinks they are the special snowflakes that are going to "turn the house around" and so our protests of "no, but really, I think our return rates are going to be much higher this year, our girls are vastly more prepared to successfully recruit" were probably not taken seriously.

To OneHeartOneWay and AZ-AlphaXi: You're right, I think the double rushing was brutal. We were able to spin it into a plus for morale for our women ("look how many are back! Our return rates are breaking chapter records!") but I'm sure the message it sent PNMs harmed us. We were not the weakest recruiting chapter on our campus, but I'd say we were maybe the third or fourth weakest out of a competitive system of sixteen.

However, I'm not sure how I feel about adding extra parties, either. Our campus did this as well, and it was a really obvious signal for which chapters were and weren't strong recruiting chapters. About ten chapters out of sixteen got to have one party "off" and it was a little rough on morale for our women to see the houses next door with an empty tent for a party because they didn't need to have one.

[redlady2]

To Mevara (again!): One more note on how things turned out. We did make quota, and we actually got a number of our "rush crushes" which was pretty astonishing. However, I still think we achieved this in spite of our release figures, not because of our release figures. And I do think that the system helped our chapter the next year, because it adjusted to our increased strength, yet still required the stronger chapters to release more women, leaving us with fuller (but manageable!) parties.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by redlady2

However, I'm not sure how I feel about adding extra parties, either. Our campus did this as well, and it was a really obvious signal for which chapters were and weren't strong recruiting chapters. About ten chapters out of sixteen got to have one party "off" and it was a little rough on morale for our women to see the houses next door with an empty tent for a party because they didn't need to have one.

Back in my day at Illinois, the first round had 23 parties. You visited 19 NPC groups and 4H, then spent the other three parties in rooms in the union where the associate CPH members told you about their groups. This was changed to just 20 my junior year. It was bad for the smaller groups, no doubt.

[ladybug12]

I think most of us would agree that RFM has been successful in that it forces stronger recruiting chapters to release women they were not really planning to pledge early in the process. Many of these women are great PNMs who are a better fit for other groups (but can't see that initially). The WRCs benefit by having more of these PNMs in their next round of parties. Thus their chance of pledging these women goes from 0% to maybe 25%. Over time, that adds up.
I also agree that WRCs need to have the flexibility to release some women who do not meet the scholarship and/or leadership standards of their chapters. Sometimes letting a WRC "over-release" by just a few numbers does wonders for the morale of a chapter. I have seen this personally!