How Do You Choose Which Priorities SG Should Take On?

ASGA won’t tell you what issues, causes, or projects to champion (what to work on) for your students.

That choice is completely up to you and your officers, members, and advisors.

With that said, many SGs take on issues/projects/tasks that they have no hope of achieving.

Some SG leaders rush to make statements and pass resolutions on issues they have no authority on and no chance of changing. Often, they can’t even articulate their position, and they can’t prove that students want them to work on it. 

The problem: tackling issues you can’t win AND have no authority to impact dilutes your SG’s effectiveness.

Taking on issues outside of your realm of influence (your SG powers and authority) often will harm your image, lessen your ability to recruit and retain members, and harm your effectiveness long-term. How?

When you lose, you appear powerless to fellow students, the campus media, and even your own members.

There are times that you may need to make a statement as a matter of principle. But don’t rush to judgement or be swayed by the current political climate or social media.

If you hope to truly represent your students and actually make changes/improvements on campus, ask these questions before you take on any issue as your TOP PRIORITY:

 

1. What's your core motivation and rationale? Is this solving a real problem, or it is just a whim?
Ensures the pursuit starts with clarity and purpose, preventing vague or emotion-driven commitments.

 

2. What evidence (beyond assumptions) shows genuine student interest?
Guards against leader bias; if it's not student-driven, it's likely to fizzle out.

 

3. Can you provide concrete data like surveys, petitions, or attendance numbers?

Demands hard evidence to validate demand, avoiding hype-based flops.

 

4. Have you dug into background info and precedents from other campuses?
Promotes informed decisions; skipping research often leads to repeating others' mistakes.

 

5. What's your honest success probability based on facts?
Forces realism—low-odds efforts drain resources better spent elsewhere.

 

6. Can you define a specific, measurable outcome?

Clarifies the end goal; fuzzy wins lead to endless scope creep.

 

7. Is personal gain (résumé boost or spotlight on you) a hidden driver?

Exposes self-serving motives that undermine team trust and long-term impact.

 

8. Is this about conformity or trends rather than student needs?

Prevents bandwagon projects that feel good but deliver nothing tangible.

 

9. Is PR the real priority over actual benefits?
Challenges performative activism; image wins are short-lived without substance.

 

10. What's the historical track record here?
Reveals patterns of failure or success to learn from institutional memory.

 

11. What are the potential ripple effects, positive and negative?

Encourages holistic risk assessment to avoid Pyrrhic victories (won at too great a cost)

 

12. Will it strengthen alliances or create enemies?
Protects key partnerships; damaged relationships can block future initiatives.

 

13. What's the full resource breakdown, beyond just money?

Quantifies hidden costs; underestimating leads to burnout or budget crises.

 

14. What's a realistic timeline?

Aligns with term limits; multi-year slogs often die with leadership turnover

 

15. Are there infrastructure requirements?

Spots logistical barriers early; campuses aren't infinite in space or access.

 

16. Could this invite legal trouble?

Highlights liability risks; lawsuits can destroy reputations and funds.

 

17. Do bylaws, charters, or policies explicitly allow it?

Verifies jurisdiction; overstepping invites shutdowns or invalidation.

 

18. Who else must approve, and how many layers?

Maps the bureaucracy; missing stakeholders equals automatic veto.

 

19. Have you tested the waters informally, and what's the feedback?

Gauges early buy-in; strong opposition signals a doomed effort.