aiesec in malaysia - sona q1 2016 report
DESCRIPTION
Data compilation for AM's performance and health indicators.TRANSCRIPT
SONA Q1 Report 15/16
AIESEC in Malaysia
introduction
• All information in the current document refers to the timeframe between the 1st of January and the 31st of March of 2016, more commonly known as Quarter 1 (or Q1) of 2016. • The information was provided by the 13 LCs through the AIESEC in Malaysia Q1 SONA Survey and also by the 1 OE and 8 SUs through the Q1 SONA for SUs Survey. • Other information sources used in the present document:
• LC XPP and Team Minimum trackers • National S&S Tracker • Monthly Finance Trackers
• The information was collected by functional area but is presented through broader organizational elements. This is because JDs are integrated in different roles from LC to LC (i.e., AIESEC in TU has a BD department whereas other LCs integrate it either in iGTP, MarComm or the LCP herself) and also because it gives you, the reader, a better big picture understanding of the state of AIESEC in Malaysia iregardless of what functional area you are currently allocated to. • The elements are the following:
• External Engagement (p.3-11) • Talent Capacity (p.12-17) • Sustainability (p.18-23) • Exchange Management (p.24-35) • Specialized Units (p.36-38)
• You should not just read and think alone about the results; • All results should be discussed in EBs – the mindset should be “how can I improve” instead of justifying the
reason why those are your results. If you justify you are not being constructive and you’re just deceiving yourself. This will not lead to growth.
• Each element should also be discussed by the teams in the functional areas which concern them. By doing this we are including all the members of AIESEC in Malaysia in the way we work in our LCs and in cultivating awareness towards the overall organizational reality.
statistical information
how is the information organized?
how to capitalize on sOna to make my lc grow?
external engagement
# of applications for EP
offline (71,5%)
online (28,5%)
582 podio applications for am
UTP 3
(0%) TU 60
(11%)
penang 110
(20%)
ked-per 58
(11%)
UMP 3
(0%)
UM 33
(6%) UPM
45 (8%)
CU 3
(0%)
SUN 0
(0%)
UKM 30
(5%)
UNMC 99
(18%)
JB 48
(9%)
Q4 = 1398 Applications
3
KUC 55
(10%)
275 EXPA REGISTRATIONS for am
ked-per 17
(6%) PENANG 60
(22%)
KUCHING 51
(19%)
UNMC 44
(16%)
JB 42
(15%)
TU 16
(6%)
OTHER 45
(16%)
external engagement
# of applications for EP
offline (67,7%)
online (32,3%)
31 podio applications for am KED-PER
5 (16%)
CU 1
(3%)
PENANG 3
(10%)
UPM 14
(45%)
UNMC 8
(26%)
Q4 = 80 Applications
4
31 EXPA REGISTRATIONS for am
ked-per 16
(57%)
CU 1
(4%)
PENANG 3
(11%)
UPM 8
(29%)
external engagement
offline (41,1%) online
(58,9%) 712 applications for am
# of applications for tmp
Q3 + Q4 = 2462 Applications 5
KUCHING 194
(27%)
KEDAH-PERLIS 98
(14%)
UTP 63
(9%)
PENANG 38
(5%)
JB 54
(8%)
TU 74
(10%)
CU 53
(7%)
UPM 28
(4%)
UM 22
(3%)
UMP 23
(3%)
UTAR 65
(9%)
external engagement outcampus performance
penang 11
CU 1
12 outcampus gcp ep applications
2,2% of total applications Q4: 242 applications
0 outcampus members recruited
0% of total membership Q4: 23 members recruited
3 matches and 4 realizations 1,9% of total matches
LC operations in…
Ked-Per AIMST
Penang Disted College, Equator Academy of Arts, Sentral College, Olympia College
UTP Matrics Gopeng, Tenby International, UPSI, Politeknik Ungku Omas
LC operations in…
UNMC UTAR Sg. Long
CU UMS
Kuching Segi, UiTM, UCSI and Sunway
penang 3
UNMC 4
MA
RE
6
external engagement expansion
LC su target(s) engagement
Kedah-Perlis AIMST
Receive verbal agreement from President of Student Council to have
booth in AIMST
Penang Disted College Confirmed a booth and session for EPRD
UTP UPSI, QUEST Virtual engagement, Physical
engagement haven't started yet.
UNMC UTeM (Melaka) UTeM = Person in charge pulled out
UTAR Sg. Long OCR still having engagement with PIC
CU UMS Waiting for approval from UMS for
outcampus recruitment
Kuching SEGI, UCSI and
Sunway SEgi, UCSI and Sunway (all engaged
for oGCP)
7
external engagement
LC # of media appearances
# of external events
social media activity
# of partners
participation in external
events
Ked-Per 0 2 (+1) 0 (-1) 2 (+2)
Penang 1 (+1) 2 (-1) 0 (-3) 2
UTP 0 0 (-1) 0 1 (+1)
UMP 0 0 Instagram, Blog 0 0
UM 0 1 (+1) Twitter, Blog, Instagram
0 0
UPM 0 0 (-3) 0 (-1) 1 (-2)
UKM 0 6 (+1) 1 (-2) 2 (-3)
Sunway 0 0 0 0
TU 0 (-3) 0 (-5) Instagram, Blog 1 (-7) 0 (-5)
UNMC 3 (+1) 3 (-1) Instagram, Blog 5 (+4) 2 (+2)
JB 2 (+2) 1 (+1) 15 (+13) 2 (+2)
CU 0 0 (-1) 0 (-1) 0 (-3)
Kuch 0 (-1) 1 Instagram, Blog 0 0 (-1)
general indicators
* Values between parentheses depict absolute growth from last Q 8
external engagement
LC # of Fb likes daily average of engaged
people
engagement rate
Ked-Per 2014 (+409) 42 0.02
Penang 2969 (+525) 375 0.13
UTP 1360 (+83) 15 0.01
UMP 1691 (+187) 900 0.53
UM 3119 (+221) 60 0.02
UPM 2137 (+670) 53 0.02
UKM 1639 (+98) 50 0.03
Sunway 1186 (+142) 190 0.16
TU 1185 (+97) 137 0.12
UNMC 1548 (+131) 1400 0.9
JB 1241 (+274) 64 0.02
CU 525 (+31) 0 0.0
Kuching 2425 (+186) 255 0.11
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
Ke
d-P
er
Pena
ng
UTP
UM
P
UM
UPM
UK
M
Sunw
ay TU
UN
MC
JB
CU
Kuc
hing
# of FB Likes vs. Daily Average of engaged people
facebook performance
* Values between parentheses depict absolute growth from last Q
9
external engagement organizational health vs. performance
UMP
UTP
TU
penang
ked-per
SUnway
UPM
CU
UKM
UM JB
kuching
UNMC
10
external engagement LC inferences
Kedah-Perlis
Absence of investment in online communication channels, when SONA is showing a trend of higher weight of online promotion every single quarter. Frequency of posting on Facebook is ok, but the outreach is very low. You can ask members to share, boost
some important post and create more attractive post to drive more traffic. Please change Aiesec to AIESEC on your page.
Penang Please change Aiesec to AIESEC on your page. Frequency of posting on Facebook is good, but the outreach is low. Even better if you can integrate your online marketing with physical event.
UTP LC indicators are collapsing, reflecting the fact that it is the only of 2 LCs with negative growth in Realizations in relation to last year. LC should proceed to getting MC support for Talent Planning for Marketing. In terms of recruitment, should focus more on
execution and less on planning (internal communication and efficient event and activities scheduling over department meetings). Stop using offline interested form. Use the correct AIESEC logo. Showcase and promote your physical event on your page.
UMP Another Quarter with inactivity from Promotion side. It is imperative to institute a doer and execution-minded culture in the LC, in particular in the functional areas running recruitments. It’s good to run online campaign like photo contest. But you need to make
sure the instruction is clear and the topic is interesting,
UM Mediocre results across all engagement indicators but shows potential in increasing weightage of online marketing, as it can combine the big number of Facebook followers and avoid the problem of its lack of HR, which is not enough to accomplish
Summer Peak goals. The frequency and quality of posts on your page are good! Try to integrate your physical event with online campaign.
UPM Facebook Engagement rate dropped significantly from last Quarter, which forces the need to review online communication strategies and campaigns. Increased results in oGTP engagement but should focus all resources on the last sprint of EPRD for oGCP
UKM Direct people to www.aiesec.my/global-citizen to get more information about GCP. People won’t apply for GCP because of one post.
Sunway Please keep your page alive. You can showcase and promote your physical events on your page. External engagement indicators are dropping at all fronts, any kind of activity from MarComm’s side is needed.
TU Heavy drop in External Relations-related indicators, which can maybe translate into an unsuccessful attempt to simplify Marketing strategies. Ensure you appoint a PIC for PR and EwA to prevent this from escalating.
UNMC Can assign someone who will be PIC for BD to further grow on B2B indicators.
JB Sharing posts from others is good. Even better if you can have more customized content for students in JB.
CU Absolutely no engagement on Facebook. Try collecting best case practices to make campaigns more attractive.
Kuching Is not exploring its Facebook potential – has a high audience with low engagement. Should request aid in creating attractive campaigns that appeal directly to UNIMAS’ youth needs.
overall customized inferences
talent capacity
am has 857 members
KEDAH-PERLIS 133
(+64)
back office
(39,8%) front office
(60,1%)
highest front office weight
1. UTP (75% vs. 25%)
2. UMP (71,4% vs. 28,6%)
highest back office weight
1. UKM (30% vs. 70%)
2. Sunway (32,7% vs. 67,3%)
289 members (33,7%) attended
induction during q1
TOTAL # OF LC MEMBERS
decreased by 3 since Q4 12
penang 71
(+18)
UTP 51
(-31)
UMP 35
(-10) UM 42
(-14) UPM 72
(+0)
UKM 66
(+3)
sunway 49
(-23)
TU 40
(-53)
UNMC 76
(-13)
JB 65
(-23)
CU 43
(-4)
kuching 92
(+52)
UTAR 22 (-2)
talent capacity
LC oGCP productivity
igtp productivity
igcp productivity
ogtp productivity
overall productivity
Ked-Per 0.06 0 0.22 0.12 0.13
Penang 0.21 0 0.41 0 0.24
UTP 0.83 0 0.16 0 0.45
UMP 0 - 0.04 - 0.03
UM 0.06 0 0.12 - 0.07
UPM 0.24 0.14 0.17 0.2 0.19
UKM 0.21 0.17 0.03 - 0.11
Sunway 0.53 0.5 0 0 0.24
TU 0.43 0.3 0.57 0.5 0.45
UNMC 0.28 0.66 0.32 0.2 0.3
JB 0.13 0 0.07 0 0.06
CU 0.19 - 0.04 - 0.09
Kuching 0.05 - 0.16 - 0.11
lc productivity
National Productivity:
0.18 oGCP
Productivity:
0.22
iGTP Productivity:
0.14
iGCP Productivity:
0.17
oGTP Productivity:
0.11 13
talent capacity team minimum fulfillment
team
64,7%
Decrease from 83% in Q4 Most: CU (85,7%) Least: UPM (23,6%)
training
68%
Decrease from 76,2% in Q4 Most: Sunway (100%) Least: UPM (33,3%)
plan
70,6%
Decrease from 82,8% in Q4 Most: CU (100%) Least: UPM (27,6%)
jd
68,9%
Increase from 87,5% in Q4 Most: CU (100%) Least: UPM (31%)
tracking & coaching
55,3%
Decrease from 65,9% in Q4 Most: UKM (100%) Least: CU (0%)
evaluation & reflection
42,1%
Decrease from 51,8% in Q4 Most: Penang (87%) Least: UTP, UPM, CU (0%) 14
talent capacity general indicators
LC # of total IXPs
1. CU 20
2. Penang 12
3. UTP 7
Total # of IXPs
77
membership retention
80% 0
10 20 30 40 50 60
tlp positions vs. applicants National Average: 1,2
In Q4: 1,26
34 Eps recruited as members
25 tmp on exchange
18 tlp on exchange
CU 9
penang 5
UTP 5
kuching 7 penang
5
CU 9
UTP 2
UNMC 6
Q4: 90,9%
penang 2
15
CU 2
sunway 4
talent capacity organizational health vs. performance
kuching penang
UNMC
UPM
UTP
CU
UMP
jb
SUnway
ked-per
UM
UKM
TU
16
talent capacity LC inferences
Kedah-Perlis
Increasing the productivity on the programs by , but upscale its structure (check the JD & tracking) to support a continuous and long-term potential for growth in your LC.
Penang Increasing the productivity from current members can be complemented with diversification of L&D strategies and allows for focus on LC upscaling in the next quarter.
UTP Should seek MC and external support for implementation of Evaluation and Reflection Team Minimum.
UMP Should invest more on LnD implementation to improve number of trainings delivered for new members.
UM Check the JD of Marketing & oGCP, because the productivity is lower than last Q4. More allocations into front office are needed to support quality in experience delivery, especially for GCP.
UPM Should invest more on LEC implementation and bringing in learning partners or externals to improve education and number of trainings delivered for members in UPM. Then start to do exit interview for members who are not continue in AIESEC to get their
review about their members’ experience.
UKM Should seek MC and external support for implementation of Evaluation and Reflection Team Minimum. And be more proactive to approach to brainstorming some ideas.
Sunway iGCP productivity Sunway is the lowest one for this Q1. Should check the team minimum implementation of this department. .
TU In Q1 TU productivity is one of the good one compare with others LC. But in terms of the healthiness it is not high one. Check the Team Minimum implementation in each function in your LC, especially JD, tracking & coaching as well as the reflection part.
UNMC In Q1 UNMC is one of in the good heath & good performance indicators. And all of the productivity of the programs are consider ok. But something need to consider is the treatment for members to reflect on their experience. And everything must be back on
development for members.
JB iGCP productivity in JB is only 0.07. As we know that JB is one of the top contributor for iGCP in Malaysia. So, please check the
structure and exchange goals of your iGCP (Lesson learn for Summer Peak, more aware with NCR versus PBoX)). And encourage to have RnR / bonding within your iGCP member to get their feedback and reflection after their experience.
CU CU is one of the potential LC for IXP implementation both reintegration and integration, however the process of tracking &
coaching is super low for this quarter. Encourage these IXP members to get some coaching from TLP or TM. So that it will be easy to track and increase their productivity. Ask and brainstorm with MCVP TM.
Kuching Kuching has the second highest number of membership in AIESEC Malaysia. However the productivity for is low especially for oGCP. Go and review the current JD & KPI of your members. Because it will affect the performance of members in summer
operation, and don’t forget to constantly giving the training for your new members.
overall customized inferences
17
sustainability payment times and financial health
GCP TN Takers
National Average:
28,3 days Last Quarter: 28,5 Days Best: CU (3 d) Worst: Kedah-Perlis (90 d)
GTP TN Takers
National Average:
21,9 days Last Quarter: 17,4 Days Best: CU (3 d) Worst: UM (79 d)
EPs
National Average:
5 days Last Quarter: 5,6 Days Best: UPM (2,5 d) Worst: UNMC (10 d)
sponsors
National Average:
18,7 days Last Quarter: 18,7 Days Best: Ked-Per, UMP (14 d) Worst: UKM, TU, CU (30d)
LC current
net asset
cluster (Q1)
health (fcm)*
Ked-Per 59,6 K III Over
Penang 39,9 K IV Over
UTP 27,1 K IV Good
UMP 17,7 K IV Under
UM 37,6 K IV Over
UPM 86,2 K IV Over
UKM 36,1 K IV Over
Sunway 30,4 K IV Good
TU 29,2 K IV Good
UNMC 78,1 K III Over
JB 23,8 K IV Good
CU 34,1 K V Over
Kuching 9,6 K IV Under
* FCM = Finance Clustering Model
18
sustainability LC UMP Kuching Penang UTP UUM CU Johor
Bahru TU Sunway UM UPM UKM UNMC
Cash 17708.53 9653.89 22,153.63 27137.81 57313.65 34132.92 12357.42 19881.44 21,924.21 26,654.23 45,716.17 32,404.96 47,109.69
Bank Account 17078.53 9653.89 22,153.63 16513.41 53508.1 32138.92 12357.42 11437.56 20,667.71 26,562.09 45,716.17 31,824.96 47,088.89
Petty Cash 630 - 10624.4 3805.55 1994 0 8443.88 1,256.50 92.14 - 580.00 20.80
Receivables 0 0 17,750.00 0 2000 0 6979 5913.54 8,515.10 10,903.00 32,050.00 3,246.00 15,505.00
External Receivables - 2000 - 6479 8,515.10 - 8,450.00 421.00 15,505.00
Internal Receivables 17,750.00 - 500 5913.54 10,903.00 23,600.00 2,825.00 -
Other Assets 0 0 - 0 250 0 4479 3374 0 - 8,450.00 421.00 15,505.00
Others - 250 4479 3374 - 8,450.00 421.00 15,505.00
Total Assets 17708.53 9653.89 39,903.63 27137.81 59563.65 34132.92 23815.42 29168.98 30,439.31 37,557.23 86,216.17 36,071.96 78,119.69
Total Liabilities 0 3600 2,253.30 0 185.6 8465.45 0 235.9 0 - 8,527.41 616.65 450.00
Internal Liabilities - 3600 2,253.30 - - 8465.45 235.9 - 8,527.41 616.65 450.00
External Liabilities - - - - 185.6 - - - -
Other Liabilities - - - - - - - - -
19
sustainability
LC expenses (operations)
expenses (non-
operations)
revenue (exchange)
revenue (non-x)
UUM 8,125.85 RM 9842.40 RM 12,950 RM 4,222.45 RM
Penang 3,579.41 RM 9,221.52 RM 17,022 RM 7672.05 RM
UTP 226 RM 7,591.24 RM --- 5554.54 RM
UMP 3,262.07 RM 29.90 RM 500 RM 8,793.50 RM
UM 1,587.57 RM 3,159.14 RM 1,681 RM ---
UPM 1,044.89 RM 9,761.78 RM 3,942.54 RM 2,757.45 RM
UKM 262.90 RM 12,382.41 RM 2,506 RM 821.03 RM
SU --- --- 6,900 RM 2,586 RM
TU 9,400 RM 6,979.79 RM 5,550 RM 10,473.50 RM
UNMC 17,761.36 RM 12,455.65 RM 39,670 RM 9,480.72 RM
Johor Bahru 2,934.49 RM 915.44 RM 6,650 RM 3,490 RM
CU --- 8,189.40 RM --- 1,500 RM
Kuching 716.50 RM 1,775 RM 1,367 RM 1,200 RM
revenue and expenses
exchange (68.0%)
non-x (32.0%)
revenue streams
operations (37.7%)
cost structure
non-ops (62.3%)
20
sustainability
LC UMP Kuching Penang UTP UUM CU Johor Bahru TU Sunway UM UPM UKM UNMC
oGCP - Profit/Loss -146.1 -216.5 8119 0 -448 0 1800 1900 3000 -797 1655.6 1080.3 18414.99
oGCP - Income 9000 1800 1800 1900 3000 1800 1200 19650 oGCP - Expenses 146.1 216.5 881 2248 797 144.4 119.7 1235.01 oGTP - Profit/Loss 0 0 8022 0 1000 0 4850 400 600 0 500 0 2700 oGTP - Income 1000 4850 400 600 500 2700
oGTP - Expenses
iGCP - Profit/Loss 5677.53 700 5402.48 -45 4413.15 0 -2934.49 -4540.77 3000 -540.81 742.05 1162.8 2048.67
iGCP - Income 8793.5 1200 8022 10150 3050 3000 931 1642.54 1306 17320
iGCP - Expenses 3115.97 500 2619.52 45 5736.85 2934.49 7590.77 1471.81 900.49 143.2 15271.33
iGTP - Profit/Loss 0 0 -78.89 -181 -141 0 0 -1700 300 713.24 -62.77 0 -1255.02
iGTP - Income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 200 300 750 0 0 0 iGTP - Expenses 78.89 181 141 1900 36.76 62.77 1255.02
21
sustainability organizational health vs. performance
ked-per
UTP SUnway
TU
kuching
UPM
penang
CU
UMP
UKM JB
22
UNMC
UM
sustainability LC inferences
Kedah-Perlis
Excellent pay-off of high investments, as value delivery indicators for iGCP are at an extremely high level. Definitely an example that you should always be risk-taking, as Q4’s loss became Q1’s great gain. Repeat the high investment to
drive Summer Peak – Q2 is the time to spend so that in Q3 you can reap the rewards!
Penang First LC to achieve Tier II status in oGCP means that investments should be solely focused on upscalling it. It’s time to make big and bold investments that show that Penang is the leading LC in the network!
UTP Another Quarter where almost no X-related investment was made (according to monthly Financial Survey), so should increase investment in operations and LC development to grow outgoing exchange and quality for ICX.
UMP Talent Capacity critical situation in oGCP demands for investment into what can be the cash cow of your LC.
UM UM is overall at a breaking even point, which is stable, but with very few funds make their way in and out of the LC. Should focus investments on a single program to amplify the fund flow and break the cycle.
UPM Is sitting on a lot of reserves for another Quarter that should be invested to drive more initiatives or projects. Investment on Exchange growth should be mandatory on the LC’s agenda as it just grew into a Cluster III entity.
UKM Another Qwhere the growth rate is slowing down. May be in danger of not having a good enough relative growth in 2 Q’s time to keep membership, so should stop sitting on its reserves to make smart investments for oGCP growth drive.
Sunway Did not spend any money in Q4 (according to monthly Financial Survey), so should increase investment in operations and LC development to grow outgoing exchange and quality for incoming exchange.
TU Another Q where the LC has failed to leverage on good health indicators to improve performance. Has a lot of room for risk-taking in the investment arena with both financial and HR talent capacity to push oGCP growth and
experience quality.
UNMC Has the financial resources of a Cluster II entity but is currently not performing like one. Should be more risk-taking in investment planning especially to support future defining programmes, such as oGTP.
JB Has stabilized LC’s financial situation but should still focus solely on spending money to drive oGCP operations, not iGCP.
CU Another Quarter where it has given no sign of actually investing its resources in quality strategies for operations.
Kuching Should focus its investment strategies on combating the inferences made in the External Engagement inferences, as it is the key to unlock oGCP performance that will serve as a cash cow for the LC. Focus iGCP on
selling national PBoXes to make it easier to get partnerships, as it is a national brand.
overall customized inferences
application
open/IP
match
realization
Conversion Rate:
20,8%
Conversion Rate:
32,5%
Conversion Rate:
76,1%
Last Quarter: 28,3% Top: CU (64%) Bottom: UPM (8%)
Last Quarter: 77,7% Top: Kuching (100%) Bottom: Pen, UKM (25%)
Last Quarter: 85,7% Top: UMP, UM, JB(100%) Bottom: Penang (17%)
Average # of days (App -> Open/IP):
10,1 days
Average # of days (Open/IP -> MA):
13,3 days
Average # of days (MA-> RE):
30,5 DAYS
exchange management global citizen outgoing
24
Last Quarter: 11 days
Last Quarter: 15 days
Last Quarter: 27,8 days
meeting
open
match
realization
Conversion Rate:
6,23%
Conversion Rate:
34%
Conversion Rate:
65,5%
exchange management global citizen incoming
26
Average # of days (Meeting -> Open):
16,4 days
Average # of days (Contract signed -> MA):
40 days
Last Quarter: 13,8 Days
Last Quarter: 42,1% Top: UPM (50%) Bottom: 10 LCs(0%)
Last Quarter: 40% Top: UNMC (87,1%) Bottom: UMP, TU (0%)
Last Quarter: 63,1% Top: Penang, UPM, UKM, TU, UNMC(100%) Bottom: UMP, JB, Kuching (0%)
Average # of days (MA-> RE):
27,9 days
meeting
open
match
realization
Conversion Rate:
8,33%
Conversion Rate:
40,4%
Conversion Rate:
38,3%
Average # of days (Meeting -> Contract
signed):
20,9 days
Average # of days (Contract signed -> MA):
60 days
exchange management global talent incoming
25
Last Quarter: 41,1% Top: UNMC (40%) Bottom: Pen, UTP, UM, UPM, UKM, JB (0%)
Last Quarter: 33,3% Top: UPM (100%) Bottom: Pen, UTP, UM, JB (0%)
Last Quarter: 53,4% Top: UKM (100%) Bottom: Pen, UTP, UM, JB (0%)
Last Quarter: 17,4 Days
Average # of days (MA -> RE):
78,3 days
exchange management
application
open/IP
match
realization
Conversion Rate:
23%
Conversion Rate:
43%
Average # of days (IP -> MA):
46,4 days
Average # of days (MA –> RE):
55,4 days
Last Quarter: 12,5% Top: UNMC (150%) Bottom: UTP, Sun, JB (0%)
# of people at Info Sessions:
23
# of people at selection meeting:
12
% of Podio applications from planned background:
52%
global talent outgoing
27
Last Quarter: 43% Top: TU(100%) Bottom: Pen, UTP, UPM, Sun, JB (0%)
Conversion Rate:
48% Last Quarter: 27,1% Top: UNMC (200%) Bottom: Ked-Per, Pen, UTP, Sun (0%)
exchange management incoming global entrepreneur
# of meetings for GE:
19 # of TN forms open for GE:
21
100% of Total iGTP
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Planned Meetings
Achieved Meetings
28
14,8% of Goal Achieved for Q1
MEE
TIN
GS
0
5
10
15
20
25
Planned Open
Achieved Open
OPE
N 75% of Total iGTP
39,6% of Goal Achieved
exchange management incoming global entrepreneur
# of Matches for GE:
4
33,3% of Total iGTP
Meetings
90 Open/IP
27 MA
23 RE
28 Planned Goals for
GE Incoming for Q2
29
Congratulations to TU, our only GE Matcher!
MA
TCH
ES
Planned 373,7% Growth
from last Q
Planned 28,6%
Growth from last Q
Planned 475%
Growth from last Q
Planned 600%
Growth from last Q
Q1 PROJECTION
0
10
20
30
40
50
Kedah-Perlis Penang UM UPM UKM TU UNMC
Meetings
IP
MA
RE
Planned for Q1
exchange management EXPA expertise
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Kedah-Perlis
Penang
UTP
UMP
UM
UPM
UKM
Sunway
TU
UNMC
JB
CU
Kuching
oGTP
iGTP
iGCP
oGCP
National Average for oGCP:
7,2 / 10
30
National Average for iGCP:
7,2 / 10 National Average for iGTP:
4,5 / 10 National Average for oGTP:
4,4 / 10
8 Sunway- 3
3
4 TU- 2
exchange management
7
1
7
1
OGCP
IGCP
OGTP
IGTP
break match
break re
UMP- 3 UTP- 3
Kedah-Perlis- 1 Kedah-Perlis- 1
value delivery indicators
66
igcp
EPs went on a border run for
VISA extensions.
78
igCp
LC buddies were recruited
for the EPs.
83% EPs had full
preparation for the experience.
igcp
2
igTp
Re-Raises with previous TN
takers.
2 UPM, Kuching- 1
31
UPM, UNMC- 2
exchange management lead for eps implementation
Ogcp lead flow
66,8%
IgCp lead flow
igTp lead flow OgTp lead flow
Last Quarter: 69,7% Top Implementer: UMP, CU (100%) Focuses for Q2: Matched (8 LCs) Application (4 LCs) In Progress (1 LC)
Last Quarter: 37,4% Top Implementer: Pen, UKM (100%) Focuses for Q2: Matched (6 LCs) In Progress (2 LCs) Realized (1 LC)
73%
46%
Last Quarter: 18,4% Top Implementer: JB (80%) Focuses for Q4: In Progress (4 LCs) Application (4 LCs) Matched (1 LC)
Last Quarter: 76,3% Top Implementer: Ked-Per, UMP, UNMC (100%)
Focuses for Q2: Matched (8 LCs) In Progress (4 LCs) Realized (1 LC)
56,2%
32
exchange management overall performance
742
71
202
222
28
55
63
12
7
140
10
11
OGCP
IGCP
OGTP
IGTP
open/APP match realize
+17%
+400%
*values below final results represent growth or decrease from q1 of 2015
+194%
+25%
+75%
33
-34% +31%
-25% -29%
+204% -24%
+450%
exchange management organizational health vs. performance
kuching
UNMC
ked-per
UPM
UTP
JB
penang
TU UM SUnway
UKM
CU
UMP
34
exchange management LC inferences
Kedah-Perlis
In oGCP, can invest on EXPA training and quality of info session flow to decrease MA breaks and improve on conversion times. Great quality results in iGCP (no breaks, 100% EP LEAD flow delivery) make it possible to share GCPs with the network!
Penang Continued growth in oGCP performance should be sustained through a pioneering Value Delivery SOP. LC should be the frontrunner in the network in oGCP quality, not following only top-bottom instructions.
UTP Dropped 50% in performance compared to the same Q of 2015 (from 46 approved in 2015 to 23 approved in 2016). Needs to seriously reevaluate LC culture and drive behaviors from the EB down while co-creating strategies with MT and even members so
that a spirit of ownership can be created over these collapsing indicators.
UMP Does not have enough Talent Capacity in terms of number of members to achieve oGCP goals, while iGCP has 1200% more members than oGCP.
UM Decreased in both Approved and Realized compared to the same Quarter last year. Hot program is oGCP, where LC is failing to achieve past results. Increasing intensity of EPRD through an immediate ready-to-execute plan and internal communication
oriented towards creating a sense of urgency in the LC is now a must.
UPM Direct correlation between low delivery of EP LEAD flow for oGCP and Break Realizations. Should not overplan for Global Entrepreneur Incoming – has been the LC with the most planned goals but the least results achieved.
UKM Lowest self-assessed EXPA knowledge of the entire national plenary – should invest in bringing MC or oGCP EST support to educate EB and members to ensure proper system administration and SOP management.
Sunway Worst rates of EP LEAD flow implementation for oGCP and iGCP out of any LC. Should ensure that someone in both functional areas is responsible for Value Delivery (delivery plan, LEAD, OPS/IPS delivery, EP Buddy management, etc.)
TU One of the highest drops in performance from any LC (31 Matched in all 4 programs in Q1 2015 against 18 Matched in Q1 2016). Needs to coordinate with TM a rapid, on-hands, practical induction (only one week maximum) for the new members or else it will
be too late to put them in action in time for EPRD.
UNMC Healthy growth in Exchange performance needs to be sustained through emphasis on expansion and outcampus support. LC should allow itself to innovate and be a pioneer in order to not lag behind in the future and serve as a role model for the network,
JB Highest relative performance drop out of any LC (decreased by 75% from Q1 2015 to Q1 2016) needs to be addressed with the LC. Lack of sense of urgency and weak team management may be at the root of this major issue.
CU Performance dropped over 60% this Quarter compared to the same Quarter last year. Has still not capitalized on exchange/outcampus potential and failed to address its completely stagnated External Engagement indicators, especially in social media
engagement.
Kuching Extremely slow conversion process (highest # of days from Application to IP out of any LC in oGCP) brings out the need of investing in targetted EYP promotion and a simpler, more compact SOP (i.e., mass info session and mass assessment on the same day)
overall customized inferences
# of applications for GCP EP
28,7% of AM Total
specialized units performance & health indicators
151 su members UNIMAP
16
USMEC 49
Pekan 17
swinburne 20
17,6% of AM membership
front office (64,2%)
back office (35,2%)
UTHM 25
UNIMAP 48
swinburne 45
# of applications
for GLP
26,8% of AM Total
Su Open/IP MA RE
UNIMAP 6 6 11
USMEC 5 0 9
0 1 11
UMP Pekan 0 0 0
HELP 0 0 1
INTI 1 1 1
Heriot-Watt 15 3 0
UTHM 0 0 6
0 0 6
Swinburne 27 0 2
exchange performance
36
INTI 30
pekan 14
UTHM 3
OGCP OGCP iGCP
OGCP OGCP OgCP
OGCP
OGCP iGCP OGCP
swinburne 27
help 66
UNIMAP 4
uthm 18
hw 6
heLp 12
inti 13
USMEC 19
INTI 25
HELP 20
pekan 9
HW 18
USMEC 5
specialized units organizational health vs. performance
UTHM
USMEC
pekan
unimap
37
swinburne
inti
help
heriot-w
LC inferences
UNIMAP Will cease to be an SU due to its integration with UUM into AIESEC in Kedah-Perlis. Results weight is ok, but oGCP attraction is slumping – should invest in heavy attraction strategies like PR Events, Guerrilla Marketing and engaging
with on-campus student organizations to expand reach. Capitalize on connection with uni admin for increasing credibility and outreach.
USMEC This SU has too many members for very low results – should be a front-running LC in innovation by creating new products, so that the members will have a more challenging and satisfying JD (push the concept of Plug & Play
within the SU).
UMP PEKAN Capitalize on UMP administration move to Pekan campus to improve university relations and support. Need to overcome the mindset of giving up on winter peak despite the lack of 6 weeks holidays.
HELP Should focus on consideration strategies with strategic input from home LC to ensure conversion of large number of oGCP Podio applications.
INTI Positive steady growth in all indicators allow SU to move focus into consideration strategies to ensure mass conversion from Applications to the next stage.
HERIOT-WATT
Needs to increase Talent Capacity by running pocket recruitment to support results growth. Global Leader sales should be supported by the core SU team. High oGCP applications from the past peak needs close follow-up to be
converted to summer peak EPs.
UTHM Slight improvement in winter peak oGCP, could be improved by increasing conversion rate from Open to Approved. Should explore diversifying communication channels (e-mail marketing through student mailing lists,
UTHM Facebook group, university administration and other student clubs)
SWINBURNE First peak of the SU (winter) shows promising result. Talent capacity has increased significantly from past Quarter (7 members to 20). This needs to be accompanied by an on-hands practical education sprint and a focus on
implementation, so that the members are motivated by the results they have to show.
specialized units overall customized inferences
38