Fraternities and sororities are integral parts of many college campuses, providing opportunities for leadership, service, and community building. However, their unique structure and dual identity—having both individual members and operating as a collective organization—create complexities in how conduct is evaluated and addressed. It is vital to critically consider the differences in organizational and individual conduct when handling behavioral issues involving fraternities and sororities.
This distinction is not just a matter of fairness; it also ensures that accountability is appropriately assigned and that interventions can be effective in remediating behavior and fostering a positive organizational culture. Below, we explore the key differences between organizational and individual conduct, why the distinction is important, and how we can approach these processes more intentionally.
Defining Organizational and Individual Conduct
Individual conduct refers to the actions of a single student. This could involve behaviors such as underage drinking, academic dishonesty, or personal misconduct that violates any law or policy applicable to them. In these cases, accountability rests solely with the individual involved.
Organizational conduct, on the other hand, involves actions that are endorsed, facilitated, or sponsored by the fraternity or sorority as a collective entity. Holmes Murphy Fraternal Practice provides a document outlining What Constitutes an Event, which helps to distinguish between organization events and individually-organized activities.
Why the Distinction Matters
Accountability and Fairness
Holding an organization accountable for an individual member’s isolated actions can unfairly penalize the group, especially if the incident is not representative of the organization’s culture or leadership. Conversely, addressing only individual behavior in cases of systemic organizational issues can overlook broader patterns and allow harmful practices to persist.
Tailored Interventions
Organizational misconduct often requires a different approach than individual violations. While individual behavior may be changed solely through educational sanctions or restorative justice programs, organizations may need structural changes, leadership development, or external oversight to address underlying issues. Effective organizational sanctions should aim to facilitate change in organizational practices and culture.
Conduct Processes: A Different Approach
Given these distinctions, the processes for addressing organizational and individual conduct should also differ:
For Individual Conduct
Investigations should focus on the specific actions and intent of the individual. Sanctions might include educational programs, community service, or changes in the individual’s status as a student or member. Importantly, these processes should avoid implicating the broader group unless there is evidence of systemic complicity.
For Organizational Conduct
Investigations should examine the culture, policies, and practices of the fraternity or sorority. This might involve reviewing leadership decisions, event planning processes, and member education programs. When considering prior misconduct, campuses and inter/national organizations should be mindful of the changes in members that occur over time. Sanctions for organizations could range from mandatory event procedure reforms to a pause of operations, depending on the severity of the issue.
Recommendations
Ensure You Have Clear Policies
Campuses and inter/national organizations should articulate the distinction between organizational and individual conduct in their codes of conduct. This clarity will help students, organizations, and administrators understand the expectations and processes.
Invest in Education and Prevention
Providing training on risk management, anti-hazing practices, and ethical leadership can help organizations proactively address potential issues before they escalate into conduct violations.
Establish Separate Processes
Campuses and inter/national organizations should have distinct procedures for addressing individual and organizational conduct. While a combination of these processes may be necessary in some cases, separate, distinct processes could offer a more nuanced and effective approach.
Conclusion
The distinction between organizational and individual conduct is essential for promoting fairness, accountability, and effective interventions in fraternities and sororities. By recognizing and addressing the unique dynamics of these groups, colleges, universities, and inter/national organizations can empower both individuals and organizations to learn, grow, and contribute positively to the community.
About the Authors
Ryan Lugabihl serves as the Chief Collegiate Officer at Pi Kappa Phi Fraternity, where he oversees the collegiate services department supporting Pi Kappa Phi’s student experience, including the education strategy, volunteer efforts, member development, harm reduction and accountability. Prior to joining Pi Kappa Phi, he previously worked throughout the industry, including at The Catalyst Agency and Holmes Murphy Fraternal Practice. Ryan also serves as the Vice Chair of the AFA Foundation Board.Â
Dr. Bailey Mitchell is the Managing Director of Standards and Accountability at Pi Kappa Phi, where she leads the team to manage all aspects of the student and chapter conduct process, including investigation, adjudication, sanctioning and sanction follow-up of alleged violations of Pi Kappa Phi’s risk management policy and standards of conduct. She holds a doctorate in educational administration from Virginia Commonwealth University, a master’s degree in higher education administration from Florida International University, and studied technical communication at Mercer University, where she joined Alpha Gamma Delta Fraternity. She has previously served as the coordinator of student conduct and academic integrity at Virginia Commonwealth University and as the collegiate support manager of risk management at Sigma Kappa Sorority.
