Are student organizations subject to the 80/20 rule?
Twenty percent of a student body is involved in student organization, while 80% either don't have time, or have not figured out what they perceive the cost/benefit ratio for participation is.
Twenty percent of participants in student organizations do 80% of the work. Or, is it more like 95/5?
Twenty percent of organizations are viable, while 80% tetter on the precipice of irrelevance.
My Story
I've spent the past seventeen years in and around college and university student organizations. My entrance into college employment required me to create and develop a student leaders program at a small college. For three years, I tried and failed to develop a program that all the leaders on campus wanted to participate in. Rather, let's just say that NO ONE wanted to participate. They weren't really interested in leadership. It was pretty pathetic.
These student leaders were interested in what their organizations did, and leadership, for them, was how they participated. Leadership was some abstract academic subject that really didn't hold much interest for them.
So, after some further education, reflection and a number of "aha" moments, I came to the realization that it is better to focus on involving a whole group/organization in doing something leadership wise, than just trying to extract the "key" leaders of the campus into a program that was basically an information brain dump.
So, we create two programs. One to serve the elementary age children of local adolescent mothers, and the other, a Habitat for Humanity campus chapter. Both programs took off like rockets. I'd ask the baseball team, the German club and a fraternity to program an afternoon event for these kids. They loved doing it. After a few weeks, there were a handfull of students who would show up every week.
The Habitat chapter partnered with an affiliate that was about an hour away. It was great. We had fun, did good work, and provided the impetus for a local affiliate to get started in our town.
I tell you this because the problem that student organizations have in building participation doesn't have to be that way. It is all in how you approach their purpose, and how you structure the interaction between members.
Student organizations should be a place where students are learning how to lead, organize, manage, market, conduct and evaluate a small business or organization. These are skills that make them more attractive to future employers. "Oh, we went from 3 active members to 36 in a year and a half."
Is this a realistic prospect on most college and university campuses? I don't know. It is from a logistics, programmatic approach. But that really isn't the problem.
The problem is believing that campus organizations can effectively serve 80% of the campus instead of being satisfied with just 20% or 5%.
A campus culture is driven by the social gathering points of students. Student organizations, like resident halls, like Greeks, like apartments, like the library, like the local watering hole, have an unrealized potential that is waiting to be reached.
What is the purpose of all that unrealized potential? Well, that is a good place to start a discussion on your campuses.
A campus culture is also driven by non-student participants involved in the social gathering points of students.
Who are they? Faculty, staff, local alumni, local organizations that have a common interest in specific student organizations - all have an interest or a basis for an interest in the welfare of students and in their organizations.
How do you do address this situation?
It starts in believing that things can be better, and becoming passionate about making it happen. Start talking with people about it. Tell your story. Don't settle for the 80/20 rule.
Then you look for some help, both internally and externally.
For example, do the campus organization advisors ever meet as a group? What good are they? Does the 80/20 apply here? Twenty percent of advisors are effective, while 80% have no more than one contact with the president of the organization a semester?
We can always do better. It comes down to a matter of leadership. Leaders initiate to do the right thing to move forward the progress of their organization. It may create more work. It may create conflict. It may not be easy. However, if you can find a 20% improvement in 20% of your organizations, you have laid the ground work for 20% improvement in 80% of your groups.
It is just like eating an elephant. Its one bite at a time. And you have to take the first bite.
Recent Comments