Release figures

owlie33 · #1 08-29-2006, 01:49 PM

Is anyone's campus using the new method of determining release figures? If you've used it - how did it work?

AlphaFrog · #2 08-29-2006, 01:53 PM

I PMed you.

PenguinTrax · #3 08-29-2006, 02:52 PM

UF has been using them for a couple of years now and had some of the highest % of women placed. FSU started using the new figures last year and every chapter that invited the max allowed had very good return rates. 13 of 15 made quota this year, and quota was up, too.

owlie33 · #4 08-29-2006, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PenguinTrax

UF has been using them for a couple of years now and had some of the highest % of women placed. FSU started using the new figures last year and every chapter that invited the max allowed had very good return rates. 13 of 15 made quota this year, and quota was up, too.

13 of 15 is pretty good -- what had it been in the past? Were the chapters that fell short of quota significantly below? Or did some chapters not invite the max?

I'm thinking the new RFM is very good.

SoCalGirl · #5 08-29-2006, 09:18 PM

Penguin, what's new about the new release figure system? The old system, at least the way I understood it, seemed excellent. Maybe schools were just awful at enforcement of the figures?

AGDLynn · #6 08-29-2006, 10:47 PM

University of West Georgia is using them for the 1st time this year so I'll let you know next week.

Last couple of years, I know we were told a range that we could invite invite back but this year will be more drastic, I'm assuming.

KSUViolet06 · #7 08-30-2006, 12:14 AM

We're using it for the first time this fall. We'll see how it goes!

PenguinTrax · #8 08-30-2006, 09:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by owlie33

13 of 15 is pretty good -- what had it been in the past? Were the chapters that fell short of quota significantly below? Or did some chapters not invite the max?

I'm thinking the new RFM is very good.

In the past we'd had as few as 10 of 14 or 12 of 15 making quota. The numbers falling short of quota varied to just a few, to 2 dozen. It all depends.

I will say that the smallest chapter on campus doubled their chapter size this year and may COB to quota early in the semester, due in large part to the new RFM. Everyone on campus is ecstatic about this, especially the chapter and the local alumnae.

My opinion is that the new RFM works and works well, when implemented properly.

PenguinTrax · #9 08-30-2006, 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoCalGirl

Penguin, what's new about the new release figure system? The old system, at least the way I understood it, seemed excellent. Maybe schools were just awful at enforcement of the figures?

The new system, while more complicated, takes more into account and allows for more flexibility. For example, some chapters may only invte 1.5 times quota back to preference, others may invite 2x or 3x. The system also helps the PNMs stay realistic, I believe. On a a lot of campuses, chapters would invite everyone back until right before preference, then make a huge cut at that time. The new system asks for larger cuts earlier into the process. I think it gives PNMs and chapters a more realistic outlook of what to expect down the road. I think that everyone can agree that heavy cuts early in the week are much easier to handle than later in the week, after a PNM has built up significant hope at *a* particular house, only to be let go right before preference.

owlie33 · #10 08-30-2006, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PenguinTrax

In the past we'd had as few as 10 of 14 or 12 of 15 making quota. The numbers falling short of quota varied to just a few, to 2 dozen. It all depends.

I will say that the smallest chapter on campus doubled their chapter size this year and may COB to quota early in the semester, due in large part to the new RFM. Everyone on campus is ecstatic about this, especially the chapter and the local alumnae.

My opinion is that the new RFM works and works well, when implemented properly.

Excellent! I am hoping this will be the answer on our campus as well.

In the past we've had as many as almost 10% not match.

SoCalGirl · #11 08-30-2006, 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PenguinTrax

The new system, while more complicated, takes more into account and allows for more flexibility. For example, some chapters may only invte 1.5 times quota back to preference, others may invite 2x or 3x. The system also helps the PNMs stay realistic, I believe. On a a lot of campuses, chapters would invite everyone back until right before preference, then make a huge cut at that time. The new system asks for larger cuts earlier into the process. I think it gives PNMs and chapters a more realistic outlook of what to expect down the road. I think that everyone can agree that heavy cuts early in the week are much easier to handle than later in the week, after a PNM has built up significant hope at *a* particular house, only to be let go right before preference.

That sounds like the "old" system that I'm familiar with. So either we were using the old system for quite a while or I'm not understanding.

Either way, I'm glad it seems to work.

carnation · #12 08-30-2006, 10:43 PM

The system is certainly better than what happened back in the day: first, the bigger chapters would invite back girls they knew they'd never pledge just to have full parties and seem desirable. Also, quota was often set the first day of rush so if 400 girls came through recruitment and there were 10 sororities, they'd set quota as 40. Then maybe 320 girls would stay in rush so let's say that 6 of the groups would get quota (240 girls) and the other 80 girls would be divided between 4 sororities. Definitely a way to keep the big groups big.

PenguinTrax · #13 08-30-2006, 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by owlie33

Excellent! I am hoping this will be the answer on our campus as well.

In the past we've had as many as almost 10% not match.

FSU matched 100% of those that completed Pref cards this year and there were very few quota additions.

OtterXO · #14 08-31-2006, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoCalGirl

Penguin, what's new about the new release figure system? The old system, at least the way I understood it, seemed excellent. Maybe schools were just awful at enforcement of the figures?

They changed the release figures a couple years ago, if I recall correctly. I know it freaked out some chapters (including my own, where I still help with recruitment) to have to release SO many girls early in the process. But overall it's better because it's based on the chapters' prior performance.

As I recall it's pretty complicated, but basically the theory behind it is that (as Penguintrax said) chapters are told the percentage of PNMs that they must release each night. Chapters who "perform" better during rush release a higher percentage and the chapters who may struggle with numbers during rush release a lower percentage. In some ways it reminds me of the tax brackets for our Federal taxation system....LOL.

owlie33 · #15 08-31-2006, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoCalGirl

That sounds like the "old" system that I'm familiar with. So either we were using the old system for quite a while or I'm not understanding.

Either way, I'm glad it seems to work.

The old system had a set formula and assumes all chapters are equal:

Quota x number of events / by %return = number to invite

The new system uses algorithms, prior performance, number of women listing you #1 on preference card, etc. This forces higher cuts for more "popular" chapters during recruitment earlier in the process, thus allowing those women, who never really had a chance of making the cut for the "popular" chapter to explore their options a lot earlier in the process. Essentially the number of women receiving their #1 choice remains the same, but more women are matched and fewer drop out due to unmet expectations.

The new system is not mandatory yet, but it is going in that direction, so your campus may have already implemented it.