The Guild Counsel: Want to join my guild?

Out of all the issues involved with guild management, there's nothing more important to a long-lasting guild than a solid, time-tested process of screening potential members.

Surprisingly, when you look at many of the traditional methods of filtering potential members, very few of them actually succeed in rooting out whether an applicant will be a good fit or not. Sure, a guild and its applicant both want to progress, they both want loot, and they both want to succeed. But when it comes to things like pace, behavior, playtimes, or guild culture, it suddenly becomes a lot harder to find that perfect match.

I've seen many ways to screen applicants, and believe me, I've let some real stinkers into guilds I've led. Let's look at some of the more popular screening techniques and see why they're not always the best ways to evaluate applicants.

The application

One of the most common ways of screening potential members is to ask them to fill out an application on your guild's website. Questions can range from "name your class and level" to "if you were a tree, what tree would you be?"

The positive -- An application is a way of finding out whether potential recruits will be willing to take the time to fill out a questionnaire and show commitment to your guild. If they can't be bothered to fill out a simple form, they're probably not going to be loyal when things get rough.

The negative -- It's not necessarily going to screen bad applicants out, and it might actually drive away good ones. In a way, the application is a form of hoop jumping. Savvy recruits already know the answers that guilds want to hear, so you're not necessarily screening out potential problem members. On the other hand, good people who are put off by the task might have some less-than-enthusiastic replies (or not respond at all) and end up screening themselves out. If you do go with an application, really ask yourself why you're asking the questions that you demand applicants answer.

Mentor/sponsor

Some guilds will require a current member to take an applicant under his wing, to teach her guild rules, answer her questions, and vouch for her when it comes time to make a decision on whether to invite her or not.

The positive -- Asking members to mentor or sponsor an applicant will open up interaction and gives guild members a chance to "kick the tires" of a recruit. It also helps introduce the applicant to guild rules, gets her used to the culture of the guild, and gives her a person to contact when she has questions.

The negative -- It's very labor-intensive. This is one of those tasks that leads to members feeling like their guild is a second job. It's a lot of work to take a recruit under your wing, made even more tedious because so few end up sponsoring or mentoring. Those active few end up getting bogged down with multiple recruits and risk feeling burned out on the whole process.

Also, it's still not the best way of screening an applicant. When the camera is turned on, everyone behaves, and it's very easy for a sly recruit to charm her way past the mentoring process.

Trial period

One method of screening is to have a trial period, when someone is invited to the guild but is not recognized as a full member with equal privileges.

The positive -- Trial periods give the guild a chance to have buyer's remorse about an applicant. If someone's invited to the guild and turns out to be a bad fit, a guild has one last chance to screen him before granting him full member benefits.

The negative -- I used to use the phrase "anyone can be a peach for 30 days," but it's true. Whatever the length of your trial period, any smart applicant is going to be on his best behavior during that time. And on day 31, when that recruit is promoted to member and suddenly becomes a maniacal drama magnet, you've handcuffed yourself. Another problem with the trial period is that it really isn't easy to remove someone once you've invited him in, no matter what rank you give him. Very rarely do you have a case of someone blatantly deserving to be kicked out of the guild during the trial period. More likely, you'll be faced with a situation in which you feel that someone doesn't quite match well with your guild, but he's not doing enough to warrant being removed. As a result, you're faced with an extremely difficult decision, due to an arbitrarily assigned date that does nothing to effectively screen out applicants.

Voting

What better way to decide on a recruit than letting the entire guild have a say?

The positive -- Democracy is great right? Everyone has the chance to voice his say on an applicant. What could be more effective than having every set of eyes in the guild judging and evaluating a potential member?

The negative -- Again, it can be very labor intensive. Usually, voting polls are done on guild websites, and as all guild leaders know, not everyone will visit the forum, no matter how much you prod and poke. Also, many members just don't care about the whole task of voting. They came to play a game, not take part in a weekly election. Often, you'll get a flood of rubber stamp votes, which do nothing to actually filter out potential members. In addition, all those voting threads quickly become a burden for whoever is assigned the job of culling them and tracking down applicants with the final tally. Lastly, if someone goes to the length to fill out an application, attend events for a certain length of time, and endure a trial period, it's not easy to have to tell him that he didn't make the cut because the votes didn't end up in his favor. That's too long of a process to put someone through.

Mortal enemy

Some guilds have a special clause by which one member can single-handedly veto an applicant. Sometimes a reason will be required, sometimes not; but once a member uses the mortal enemy clause, the screening process is over and the applicant is rejected.

The positive -- The mortal enemy clause puts value on actually being a member in a guild. In theory, someone who worked hard enough to merit an invitation to the guild deserves the right to reject players whom he strongly dislikes.

The negative -- The potential for abuse is huge, and in the end, the mortal enemy clause does nothing to properly screen applicants. What happens when someone "M.E.s" a recruit and the guild doesn't agree with the reasoning behind it? Now you have a situation in which, as guild leader, you have to either make the unpopular decision to turn away an applicant, or go against the wishes of the member and against the mortal enemy clause itself. Every time I've seen the mortal enemy clause used (and luckily it was only a couple of times), the end result was that the people invoking it were questioned on their decision and pressured to the point that they backed down and retracted their "M.E." Unfortunately, everyone involved ended up feeling bad about the whole experience, and the mortal enemy clause did nothing but cause drama and fracture the guild.

So what's the best way to recruit?

Let's look at a few simple ways to screen out potential members.

First off, do your homework. It doesn't take a lot of time, but researching an applicant is the most valuable part of evaluating applicants. If your game has a site that tracks players' levels, skills, and gear, go take a peek. If you're a casual raiding guild and you have an applicant who's decked out in top-tier raid armor, you might want to follow-up with the applicant to make sure he's satisfied with a less-than-hardcore pace. Does he have listed alts, and if so, are those alts tagged with other guilds? If your guild has a policy on having all characters in your guild, this is definitely something you want to discuss.

Chat with the applicants. I handle all recruiting in-game, so when someone contacts the guild about joining, my application process is done through tells. I ask a few brief questions, and it's amazing how quickly you can get a feel for an applicant just based on those replies. A formal application might be tedious to some, but if a player can't take a couple of seconds to form a complete sentence to my simple tells, the red flag goes up immediately. I'm not looking for a Shakespearean soliloquy, but some sign of a personality would be nice.

You might also want to talk to guild leaders of past guilds your applicant has been in, or just touch base with others about any potential behavior problems in general. You might not know that JohnnyBard is a huge nuisance in pick up groups, but another guild leader might have a few stories that would help shed some light on that and help make your decision a little easier.

Listen to members, but don't burden them if they don't have an opinion. Again, people log in to play the game, so don't nag them with questions about applicants. But when someone does have an opinion, make sure that you take it seriously. By not pestering the guild for feedback, you have less rubber stamping, but it also means that any feedback you do get will usually be well-thought-out and carefully considered. Make sure you weigh it accordingly.

Undersell your guild. Any time I'm speaking to applicants, I stress who we are, and I downplay what we do. I'm very lucky now because the guild is full of people who seem to be comfortable with the relaxed pace and seem happy to play with each other. The last thing I want to do is invite someone who will put pressure on everyone to change the pace or disrupt the low-key atmosphere we have.

Never rush to invite someone who gives you that funny feeling. If your gut is telling you that there's something amiss with a potential member, pay attention to that. Unless you have policies in place that push you to make a decision by a certain deadline, you should go slow until you are comfortable with your feelings towards an applicant. That's the beauty of not having an arbitrary trial period -- since applicants don't know how long they need to "behave," you will eventually see one way or another what they're like. Just make sure you stay in contact with them along the way, keep them informed if you do feel you want to go slow, and don't string them along too long.

Recruit the player, or recruit the class? This is a tough call, but I tend to feel that the player is more important than the class. The caveat is that you absolutely need to be upfront with the applicant and let him know what the chances are of participating in guild events, if it happens that someone is playing a class you don't need. That player might be willing to switch or might have an alt of a class you do need. There's always a chance that the player will decline the invitation, but if someone's a quality player and a good person, you should never turn the applicant away outright.

Ultimately, the tough thing about screening potential members is finding people who are loyal to the guild, rather than loyal to progress. If you really want to find the best matches for your guild, you need to know who you are as a leader and what type of guild you are running. Those qualities should be at the forefront of any screening method you use. It's not easy, but the better you are able to match your guild with an applicant, and the better you're able to root out the differences, the happier everyone will be in the end.

Do you have a guild problem that you just can't seem to resolve? Have a guild issue that you'd like to discuss? Every week, Karen Bryan takes on reader questions about guild management right here in The Guild Counsel column. She'll offer advice, give practical tips, and even provide a shoulder to lean on for those who are taking up the challenging task of running a guild.