Over the past five years in my role, I’ve supported college chapters in navigating conduct and/or accountability processes conducted by their host institutions. As a headquarters-based professional, I’ve seen varying levels of involvement, collaboration, and partnership. The guidance, suggestions, and, hopefully, encouragement included here, is for campus and headquarters-based professionals to keep in mind when beginning a process to address chapter and/or member conduct.
Please note, this was written with the understanding that expectations (and limitations) of each host institution are unique and any steps towards these practices are steps in the right direction.
Connect early and often.
When it’s determined an institutional process is needed to address chapter or member conduct, prioritize communication with headquarters partners. Throughout this connection, share as openly as possible and be clear about with whom the information can be shared. Oftentimes, organizational volunteers may need to be notified or involved. If there’s a need to withhold or delay information from the local chapter or advisors, make that clear.
Collaborate on investigation preparation.
As preparation for an investigation begins, involving headquarters partners in the creation of questions and/or interview practices can yield more effective questioning, and ultimately, increase the willingness of members to be forthcoming. Working with headquarters partners to create interview questions allows the sharing of terms and verbiage that may be familiar to the organization. Utilizing terms that resonate with members may contribute to increased comfort and create a sense of understanding between institution staff and the interviewee. Headquarters partners may be aware of chapter events and/or traditions that could provide context for the involved students’ behavior. Whenever possible, and with respect to individual student/member privacy, invite headquarters partners to join or sit in on student interviews.
Clarify roles and processes.
In the case of an investigation, if relevant, begin student interviews with introductions that clarify the role of the headquarters partner. Understanding there may be additional discipline or action from the inter/national organization, it’s important to make clear that while a headquarters representative is present, the process is that of the institution. This clarity supports students’ understanding that additional processes and outcomes may be forthcoming from the member organization. Offering students an opportunity to ask process-related questions aims to avoid any unanticipated action or “gotcha” moments.
Confirm outcome capacity.
If outcomes require the support, resources, or people power of the member organization, connect prior to assigning conduct outcomes to the chapter. Confirm that the timeline for completion is reasonable and aligns with the capacity of any involved headquarters volunteers or staff. Whether it’s an educational program, in-person visit from a volunteer, or otherwise, ensuring the appropriate support is available allows for outcomes to be completed in the most impactful manner possible. It’s not uncommon that students are eager to complete their chapter’s outcomes, which is not a bad thing! When a chapter’s desire to complete conduct outcomes is present, but the member organization’s resources aren’t, it can create tension and feel like a barrier to the chapter.
When assigning conduct outcomes that require a chapter to partner with their inter/national headquarters to complete, use verbiage that prioritizes development and opportunities, as opposed to discipline and requirements. Using supportive language can mitigate negative feelings, perspectives, or preconceptions for a chapter working with their organization’s staff and/or volunteers. Of course, it’s the goal that a chapter has already worked with and developed relationships with their inter/national organization’s volunteers. In my experience, working through an institution’s accountability process is one of the first times a chapter’s officers and advisors work closely and in-depth with accountability-related staff and volunteers. Supportive and positive language sets continued relationship-building up for success.
Continue communication.
Following the conclusion of an institution’s process, continue communication! Allowing space for post-process follow-up ensures outcomes are complete, feedback can be shared, and plans for partnership in the future are created.
About the Author
Emma Gibson (she/her) serves as associate director of collegiate services for Kappa Alpha Theta Fraternity, where she oversees the organization’s risk prevention and member accountability programs. Emma was initiated into Kappa Alpha Theta Fraternity at the University of Oregon, where she received a bachelor’s degree in in public relations, with a focus on crisis management and communications. Following her undergraduate experience, Emma served the Fraternity as an educational leadership consultant in both traveling and establishment roles. Emma holds an master’s degree in Higher Education & Student Personnel from the University of Florida, a bachelor’s degree in public relations, with a focus on crisis management and communications from the University of Oregon, and a business management certificate from Vanderbilt University.
