In 2011, I was initiated as a sister in Alpha Omicron Pi fraternity at East Carolina University. I had never planned on “going Greek” but I was forging my own path and thought “why not?” After joining, I was consistently reminded that my actions as a sister, but as a collegiate on ECU’s campus, should always be for the “good of the order.” My actions were not just my own and my words represented a body of women much larger than myself. I was held to a new standard, one that I was expected to uphold.

In reading this week’s text, I could think of no better example of a “community of memory” than my own organization (Arnett, Fritz, & Bell. p. 145). Established originally at Barnard College in 1892, Alpha Omicron Pi has a longstanding history of ambitious and extraordinary women graduating wearing the letters. Which, as of 1960. includes a number of women graduating from ECU, including my mother. My mom was a sister of AOII in the 70’s and graduated with an entirely different experience than myself, just as many others have.

I was raised with some of her sisters in my life. One was the mother of my first babysitter, another was a consistent visitor at birthday parties but not many other times. I would often hear about the days spent at the sorority house or when they’d go on road trips with friends. However, after I joined, my memories differed substantially from hers. Our sense of “good” was much different from theirs and our expectations were completely flipped.

This became apparent my senior year, while holding my final officer position. It was made known throughout the chapter that a high ranking officer had not met grades for the semester and as per our rules, should be expected to step down from their position. This was an expectation that many, if not all sisters, were aware of and understood as a consequence of not making grades. Not only this, but there had been some questionable actions as well that many were holding against her as well. It seemed like a ethical choice per our standards and our understanding of the organization, that she step down and another take her place while she gets her grades up.

News spread around the chapter and it eventually became a topic of conversation at meetings. Sisters were divided, some believing that she should step down, some believing that we should lower the grades requirement because it was too high anyways. It eventually was decided that she would not give up her position and that she wouldn’t be held accountable. No reason was ever provided after this news spread and many sisters found this to be concerning. This led many sisters to become frustrated and eventually distanced themselves between the sister and even the chapter.

In this situation, the best option for communication with the chapter would have been best handled through dialogic ethics as our text states, specifically, “Dialogic ethics listens to what is before organizational members, attends to the historical moment, and seeks to negotiate new possibilities (Arnett, Fritz, & Bell. p. 153).” This moment for our chapter has been a defining one as time has gone on. There have been sisters who have left the chapter, others who refuse to support the chapter as it is, and others who couldn’t care less and still show up every year for Homecoming. In speaking with my mom, who had also had her share of frustrations, she explained that at this point in our chapter, the change of a new officer could’ve done more harm than good. She referenced a moment when she was a collegiate when another high officer was removed due to her actions and it tore the chapter in two during the re-election. This history of our chapter isn’t foreign because it is apart of our organization, however, without proper communication and handling, the same cycle will repeat. “In organizational communication ethics, the responsible organization follows what Seeger (1997) calls a sense-making model of organizational communications – in this case connecting one’s responsibility to a particular understanding of a given dwelling place (Arnett, Fritz, & Bell. p. 153).” If we had demanded our chapter done things a certain way or “my way” we could’ve done what was not in the best interest of the order and it’s members and ultimately done more harm than good.

References:

Arnett, R.C., Harden-Fritz, J. M. & Bell, L. M. (2008). Communication ethics literacy: Dialogue and difference. Los Angeles: Sage.