.jpg)
Do you follow business news? Consolidations and mergers are commonplace. Delta Airlines absorbs Northwest. Whole Foods digests Wild Oats. Television's WB and UPN networks merge to become the CW.
It's not an easy game, merging cultures from different companies. The big goal is to form one larger, more powerful company that can make more money and achieve more in the marketplace. It's not easy, and success is not guaranteed, but the potential is enormous.
Does consolidation make sense sometimes in the world of student organizations?
I was at one campus recently that had four tiny organizations, all trying to serve international students. All four groups had tiny budgets and were cannibalizing each other with competing events aimed at the same small, specific campus population. I asked them why they didn't just merge into one bigger International Student Organization and streamline their leadership, events, and meetings. By merging their budgets and becoming the singular organization representing international students on their campus, they'd have more clout when lobbying for campus activity funding.
As we discussed it, they were skeptical. The Asian students don't necessarily mix with the Latin students, they said. When I suggested that the new organization could have different groups within the same umbrella (still have events for the Asian students, other events for the Latin students, and new events for the African students, etc.), they seemed puzzled. We've somehow accepted that every mission in student activities calls for an independent student organization. This is not the only option.
I recently chatted with an acquaintance about how two struggling fraternities could merge on his campus. The two small fraternities in question got along well, and were very similar in make-up and values. But the groups were struggling because they had a hard time maintaining their respective houses. Why not merge, I asked? Either have two groups sharing one house, or do a true merger and give up one of the charters. Wouldn't it be better to have one fraternity that is able to compete than two that are constantly hovering near demise?
Certainly, merging groups can be a challenge. Some members will never endorse such a move, and they will drop off. There will be leadership challenges. Whose traditions and events survive? How do we put past differences behind us? Do we retain one of the groups' name, or do we come up with something entirely new?
The only way to figure out if it would work would be to begin the "what if" conversation. It can happen confidentially, and it should include key leaders and their advisors. It's important during these discussions to focus on the new possibilities the merger presents. More money, more members, a chance to build a new, stronger organization that can do exciting things.
For advisors reading this blog: is consolidation something we should be encouraging more often? Would it be more productive (and easier?) to advise one effective group rather than four ineffective ones? As advisors, why don't we suggest this idea to struggling groups, then help them figure out how to do it?
