Terrorist parties

I've been noticing a proliferation of terrorist theme parties on Facebook. As I look at the pictures of turbans, patterned bandanas across faces, fake machine guns, etc., I worry that the students promoting these parties are soon going to find themselves protested by Middle Eastern and Muslim student organizations.

This is something I remember well from my undergraduate days at Indiana.

Back in the mid-80's, the Phi Kappa Psi Fraternity chapter at Indiana had, arguably, the year's biggest and most lavish party – Arabian Nights. They had been having this party for years, and it was a well-known event. Women would come dressed in veiled garb. Men would dress like sheiks. They even rented camels. How the hell they found camels within driving distance of Bloomington, Indiana, I'll never know.

They would import tons of sand. Kegs were delivered by the truckload. For an entire week prior to the party, they would play Arabian music from the windows.

But, then one year, the crap hit the fan. Indiana's sizeable Middle Eastern student population decided to file formal complaints against the event for its promotion of stereotypes. The campus became polarized, primarily between the Greeks who defended the party, and everyone else who found it sophmoric, culturally insensitive, and a glaring example of the ridiculous expenditures of money made in the interest of reckless alcohol consumption.

It was front page news in the Indiana Daily Student for a month. Administrators got involved. Marches and protests were held. Even the animal rights activists got involved on behalf of the camels.

In the end, the party went on, but it was permanently shelved after that. The firestorm had been too consuming and the toxic repercussions outweighted the fun. I recall many sensitivity workshops that followed, lots of apologies by the Phi Psi's, and declarations of the value of the teachable moment by the campus faculty and administrators.

Which brings me back, 20-some years later, to the terrorist parties I'm starting to see online.

If you think there was an uproar about veils, turbans and camels, imagine the uproar that is coming for fatwah parties with machine guns, hostages, and suicide bombers.

I advise you to immediately confront these theme parties immediately, even going so far as to outlaw them premptively. Some dummy will have the idea, if it hasn't happened already. As a general rule, any party theme that centers on a societal subculture is a bad idea. In this case, you run the risk of pushing some very sensitive buttons and becoming the center of a huge debacle like the one at Indiana in the 80's.

It's just not worth it. Address it now, aggressively.

Be very careful not to "annoint" your successor

I know it's only September, and elections are months away. But, here's a warning. Don't get too excited and start grooming the person you think should succeed you. That doesn't always turn out well.

Fact is, many organizations like to mix it up. If you are a serious, practical person, they are likely to elect someone totally different from you in the next cycle. They'll elect the fun-loving jovial person who isn't terribly serious. If you're an emotional person, they'll probably elect the intellectual next time. If you're an extrovert, they will choose the quieter guy. If you were incredibly focused on one thing, they'll elect the person who criticized you the most strongly.

It's a "democracy" thing. Many members feel like they are exercising their right to choose when they make a more brazen choice. That's why both presidential candidates are so different from George W. Bush. People like change. They get motivated by change. They are sensitive to choosing too much of the same thing.

So, here's my warning. You would probably like to see someone succeed you who will build on what you have accomplished. You would choose someone who will firm up your legacy by validating your priorities and leadership style. That's natural. However, it you let that show to your members, it might be the kiss of death to that person's chances.

Best thing you can do is to simply stand up at a meeting and let everyone know that you will be happy to spend some time with anyone who might be interested in running for president. Be conspicuous about being neutral.

Closer to elections, when people ask you for your opinion, remain neutral, and praise all candidates. As tempting as it might be, don't weigh the pro's and con's for them. The most you should ever do is make sure people understand what the job is like.

If you did a good job and your "approval rating" is high, they might choose the person you would have chosen. But nothing pushes people toward "change" like the feeling that you've hand picked your successor and taken away their choice, so play your hand close to your chest.

If indeed your choice is the right choice for the organization, people will probably want to select him/her because you've been such a good, supportive leader.

Resumes: What stands out?

I am busy reviewing resumes tonight. There's nothing quite like sitting in front of a stack of 30 resumes to remind you why people get paid good money to do human resources work. It makes my head hurt. As I look through pages and pages, I have very little confidence that the typical resume package tells you any of the things you REALLY need to know about a person you plan to hire. It's a crap shoot, at best.

But, since I just spent the better part of three hours poring through these resumes, I thought it might be worthwhile to share some of my observations. Maybe as you do your job search this year or next, you'll keep a couple of these observations in mind.

I'm sure half of what I'll tell you here flies completely in the face of what they tell you at the career center. But, oh well. I'm the one offering a job today.

• I liked the resume packages that came in the mail better than the ones that came to me via email. They showed more effort and care. I know it's "old school," but I liked the texture of a nice piece of stationery paper that an applicant picked out. I liked that they took the time to assemble a package and mail it to me. You just don't get that in a resume that is sent via email.

• I enjoy a little color when I'm digging through 30 resumes. A few of the packages were a bit more colorful and lively, particularly when it came to the work samples. I liked that.

• Four resumes came without a cover letter. I tossed them. If you can't even bother to write a basic cover letter, then you don't want to work for me. Also, I had a couple whose idea of a cover letter was a three line email that said, "Please find my resume attached..." No, thanks.

• If you don't specifically refer to the position I'm offering and explain why it interested you, then it's obvious that you're applying to 100 jobs, and mine is just one in the pile.

• Several of the cover letters said "Dear T.J.". Hey, if you don't know me, would it kill you to call me "Mr. Sullivan?" I'm not a super-formal guy, but it seems like a good rule of thumb to refer to the person hiring as "Mr." or "Ms." until a level of familiarity is established. And, as for that argument of not knowing whether "T.J. Sullivan" was a man or woman, a quick Google or visit to my company's website would have answered that question.

• I like letters of recommendation a lot, but I like them even more when the person writing explains why you are special. It's not much of a recommendation when they just said you did your job. If you ask people to write letters of rec, make sure they dig you enough to write a letter that makes you sound like a truly amazing person.

• I had one woman who didn't capitalize "I" in her materials. It wasn't a typo. She just hates capital letters, I guess. Of all the ways to show some individuality in a resume package, that's a pretty dumb one.

• Another woman told me her salary qualifications, and they happen to be $20,000 more than what I'm offering. The salary range I'm offering is in the published job announcement. That one was a head-scratcher.

• I really, really like it when people explain in their cover letter why this job interests them. Everyone tells me that they are qualified, would be a good fit, and have lots of special skills. But, I want to know why THIS JOB. How does it fit into your goals, your dreams, your plans for your career?

• Tell me something from your life that you ENJOY. I guess there are career advising types who would tell you to keep the personal stuff out. But, I love it when people tell me they are passionate about water skiing, or writing poetry, or raising guinea pigs. It gives me a glimpse into who you are as a person, and since I'll be working with that person every day, I like these sort of things.

Who's qualified to be president?

This isn't a posting about Sarah Palin. But, all the talk about who is and who is not qualified to be president got me thinking this week about how student organizations pick their leaders.

Do your group's bylaws dictate who can and cannot run for the top spot? I find many student organizations start thinking about putting these sort of limitations in effect before election season comes in late Fall. We want to make sure we don't leave the organization in the hands of someone who's going to completely screw it up.

Some groups require that all candidates for president must have served in another officer position. Some require that those running for president be at least a junior. Others require a certain grade point average.

Others leave it entirely wide open. The group chooses whomever they think will do the best job regardless of any criteria. So, which is better?

I'm a big fan of the free market deciding. Qualifications for office are certain to come up among those voting when the discussion happens. Should we vote for someone who has a 2.3 over the person with a 3.4? Would someone who chaired a committee be better than this other person we all think is a lot of fun?

If experience is important to people, then their votes will follow the person with the most experience. Others will want change, and they will vote purely on personality over experience. That's the beauty of a democracy. People can vote based on anything they like.

I find that the more you limit people's options on whom they can select, the worse it goes. It might be tempting to lay out a bunch of restrictions on who can run for office, but that means limiting your members' choices at election time. Why do that? An organization is made up of its constituency, and to assume you know "who is qualified" more than the membership paying the dues is arrogant. The best thing for you to do is to make sure that those voting clearly understand the job responsibilities. Then, let them decide who they are going to trust with the position.

Sarah Palin is all the rage in the media again this week, and the focus is on her qualifications. Does being a small town mayor and the governor of Alaska qualify you to be inches from the Oval Office? I have a friend who calls her an "evil joke," completely unqualified. Some other friends find her refreshing because she's so different from all the other candidates.

I suppose the framers of the Constitution could have said that only past Representatives, Senators, or two-term Governors could run for President and Vice President. Nothing was stopping them.

They decided that you had to be 35 years old. After that, they trusted that the people would choose who they really wanted – based on qualifications, or based on personality. The Framers decided to let the people work it out. If you want to base it on your love of youth hockey, then go for it.

If it's good enough for our country, then I suppose it's good enough for your organization. Get rid of the restrictions. Encourage everyone to think about running. It's the sign of a vibrant student organization when you give your members the maximum number of possibilities.

Sitting in an airport on 9/11

It's been seven years since 9/11, and on this anniversary, I find myself sitting in an airport. Baltimore, to be exact. On my way to Atlanta. It occurs to me that it's the first time I've flown on the actual date since the national tragedy all those years ago.

Everyone remembers where they were when it happened. I was on the very last plane they let continue beyond Europe, headed to the U.S. It was a Delta flight from Shannon, Ireland to Atlanta. We would be the last of 38 planes that would be diverted to Gander, Newfoundland. They didn't tell us what happened until we landed. With all the other jumbo jets already landed beneath us, we thought there had been a catastrophic Y2K failing of the air traffic control system.

The previous night, I had treated myself to a hotel night in a former castle in Ireland. The rest of the nights that week – seven – I would sleep on the floor of a Canadian elementary school, waiting to be allowed back into the U.S.

I was traveling alone, and that made for a very strange and disconcerting week. We were the final plane evacuated from the Gander Airport. We sat on the plane for 36 hours waiting, watching movies, worrying. When we were finally evacuated, we were taken to a very tiny town named Lewisport more than an hour away. They wouldn't let us have our luggage or our toiletries.

All the video that you watched seven years ago today – we first saw it on 9/13. Two days later. Everyone still cried. We knew the entire world had changed.

I played cards. I waited in line for my turn at the one pay phone so I could call the CAMPUSPEAK office where Tracy held things together like a champ. We waited. I flirted mercilessly with a hot gym teacher at the school.

After three days in the same clothes, a group of men and I hitched a ride in a pickup truck to a mall (honestly, by American standards, not really a mall) and bought them clean out of socks, t-shirts and boxer shorts so that most of the 330 passengers from my flight could have at least one clean article of clothing.

We were the last plane to land, and the last to be released from Gander. Seven days stranded in a remote area of Canada. The people had been nice to us, but our patience was long gone. Seven days of mass produced spaghetti, donated blankets and nasty clothes. Our senses of humor felt distant and unfamiliar.

They came around 3 a.m. to wake us and load us on buses. Our plane was finally headed to Atlanta. The Delta crew had spent the week in hotel rooms, and we hated their guts for it. How nice it must have been to shower whenever you wanted, instead of during a 5-minute pre-assigned time slot.

In the scheme of things, I know we should have felt lucky. We could have been passengers on the planes that flew into buildings. But, when you're stressed, uncertain, and frightened, you want to be home. We wanted to be home.

When we landed in Atlanta, the plane erupted in applause.

As we pulled up to the gate, hundreds of Atlanta based Delta workers were gathered on the tarmac at the gate. They were waiving American flags and cheering. Hundreds of them. Their final plane had come home. For the second time that week, I sobbed. The whole plane sobbed.

Today, I'm landing in Atlanta. I'll be welcomed by the typical surly, disinterested airport employees. But, I'm going to think about that day, the flags, the cheering. Today, I'm going to be thankful, and introspective, and calm. I'm thankful that we haven't had a repeat of 9/11, and I'm going to be a little more patient as I navigate the TSA security line.

Life goes on, even after the most devastating moments. Doesn't it?

Recommended anti-hazing video to show your members

National Hazing Prevention Week is September 22-26.

If you do nothing else, show this video to your fraternity/sorority members, new members, prospective members, and other new students joining clubs/organizations and joining sports teams.

The video is called "Enough is Enough." It's not perfect, but I liked it. Like so many of these projects, it came about because of the senseless death of a fraternity new member – in this case, Jack Phoummarath, a fraternity pledge at the University of Texas.

The video is 18 minutes long. To watch the video, click on the link for "educational video" at the bottom left of the screen.

Nominate an anti-hazing hero

Do you know someone – a student, a volunteer, or a professional – who has gone to heroic lengths to combat hazing? Perhaps a team leader who stood up and said, "No!" Maybe a sorority president who changed harmful traditions. Maybe someone who got your college community talking about the issue?

National Hazing Prevention Week is only a couple of weeks away (September 22-26, 2008), and one of my favorite programs sponsored by HazingPrevention.Org is the Anti-Hazing Hero contest. Each year, the organization recognizes individuals who showed courage and determination in standing up to hazing. Each year, they pick some pretty great people of all ages who took a personal stand.

You don't need to do some glorious, complicated nomination. You don't need audio-visuals and a PowerPoint presentation. Just write in and nominate a deserving person, and share the story. You can even nominate yourself (no shame in that!).

You can find the nomination information here.

For all the educational programs, posters, and tragic stories, the real "change" in stopping and preventing hazing comes from individuals of great character who put themselves on the line and say, "Enough!" This is a wonderful way for you to help recognize someone who did that.

Deadline is September 26.

It's not about "inviting" the Black Greeks

This is a repost from last year, by request.

----------------

It blows my mind how often I still hear IFC or Panhellenic officers say, "We invite the NPHC to do things with us, but they don't want to!" Let's get this straight, once and for all. It's not about inviting the Black Greeks to things. If you truly want a more cooperative relationship among your diverse councils, it's about sitting down with a clean slate and starting from square one. It's about asking, "What things could we do together that would be meaningful and appealing to all of our organizations?"

Also, get out of that IFC and Panhellenic mentality that any activity you do has to involve thousands of people. You could have a very meaningful activity with a few leaders from each of the councils. You don't have to jam 1,000 people into a room to have a leadership experience that's worthwhile. Start thinking "efficient and meaningful" instead of "large, loud, and well attended."

Put yourself in the shoes of a Black Greek organization leader. When your organization has fewer than 10 members, you need everyone pitching in to make the organization work. So, priorities have to be chosen carefully. The number one challenge NPHC student leaders tell me they have is getting their members to step up after crossing over (joining as an initiated member). When you have four members, every person's participation makes the difference between a successful year and a weak one.

As an IFC or Panhellenic leader, you might have dozens or hundreds of people that you can get to some random event. This is not possible for an NPHC leader. Each of their members is already overtaxed with duties and obligations. Come to the table with that understanding and respect for the nature of their organizations, and you'll make some progress this year.

20 people from different councils coming together for a service project one morning on campus could be wonderful. Perhaps you could form a joint committee of 6-8 people to make a presentation to the alumni association about the future of Greek Life. The possibilities are endless.

But, if your idea of working with the Black Greeks is to invite them to field a team at your Greek Olympics, you're way off the mark. It's not about getting invited to their step shows. It's not about forcing them to join Homecoming pairs.

It's about working with them from SQUARE ONE and finding something that is worth everyone's time and that fits with the demands of the daily life of all of your organizations.

Photo is of the 2004 NPHC officers at Oklahoma, by the way. Thanks, Sooners.

When plastic cups become the enemy

Sitting in my staff meeting today, one of my interns informed me that her sorority has an appointed leadership position they call the "Facebook Creeper." This young woman spends time each week cruising every sister's Facebook profile, looking for any picture that sheds a negative light on the sorority.

You know, like a sister vandalizing public property, snorting cocaine, showing her breasts at a street festival, or holding a Solo cup.

Yes, a Solo cup.

Seems that holding a blue or red Solo cup is now on the list of things that reflect negatively on the sorority. We all know what goes in Solo cups, right?

When I expressed disbelief, my other intern (from a completely different school) assured me that, indeed, their chapter had their charter threatened because there were Facebook pictures of sisters holding Solo cups.

Maybe it's just me, but perhaps we've gone a tiny bit too far. I could understand frowning upon a picture of a sister holding a bong. Pretty clear what that's used for. But, I buy Solo cups at my local grocery store. My son drinks milk and Crystal Light out of them.

I really hadn't realized that fraternity and sorority risk management had matured to the point of banning plastic cups. I sure hope those wiley Greeks don't figure out how to drink beer out of something else! What if they discover styrofoam? Or wait, maybe they'll wash out milk cartons! Someone should warn America's dairy farmers.

You don't fight drunk driving by banning cars. You don't prevent arson by banning matches. To successfully prevent abuse, you need to go after the behavior and the person's desire to abuse.

Not sure about the pink Solo cups that benefit breast cancer research (pictured) – but I guess they're banned, too.

Start hiding your ping pong balls. They're next.