AIESEC in Malaysia
SONA 15/16
Q1 Report
introduction statistical information • 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
how is the information organized? • 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)
how to capitalize on sOna to make my lc grow? • 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.
external engagement CU
3 (0%)
JB
48 (9%)
KUC ked-per
55 (10%)
58 (11%)
SUN
0 (0%)
Q4 = 1398 Applications
TU
60 (11%)
UKM 30 (5%)
UM
UPM
33 (6%)
45 (8%)
online (28,5%)
offline (71,5%)
penang UMP 110 (20%)
UNMC 99 (18%)
582 podio applications for am
3 (0%)
UTP
3 (0%)
# of applications for EP 275 EXPA REGISTRATIONS for am
KUCHING
ked-per
51 (19%)
17 (6%)
60 (22%)
JB
42 (15%)
UNMC TU 44 (16%)
PENANG
16 (6%)
OTHER 45 (16%)
3
external engagement CU KED-PER
UNMC
1 (3%)
8 (26%)
5 (16%)
31 podio applications for am Q4 = 80 Applications
PENANG 3 (10%)
offline (67,7%)
UPM
online (32,3%)
CU
14 (45%)
1 (4%)
UPM
# of applications for EP 31 EXPA REGISTRATIONS for am
8 (29%)
PENANG
ked-per 16 (57%)
3 (11%)
4
external engagement UTAR 65 (9%)
KEDAH-PERLIS 98 PENANG (14%) 38 (5%)
KUCHING
63 (9%)
194 (27%)
CU
53 (7%)
712 applications for am Q3 + Q4 = 2462 Applications
# of applications for tmp
UTP
JB
54 (8%)
TU
74 (10%)
UPM
UM
22 28 (3%) (4%)
UMP 23 (3%)
offline (41,1%)
online (58,9%) 5
external engagement outcampus performance
CU 1
penang
MA
3
penang
UNMC
RE
11
4
12 outcampus gcp ep applications
0 outcampus members recruited
3 matches and 4 realizations
2,2% of total applications Q4: 242 applications
0% of total membership Q4: 23 members recruited
1,9% of total matches
LC
operations in…
LC
operations in…
Ked-Per
AIMST
UNMC
UTAR Sg. Long
Penang
Disted College, Equator Academy of Arts, Sentral College, Olympia College
CU
UMS
UTP
Matrics Gopeng, Tenby International, UPSI, Politeknik Ungku Omas
Kuching
Segi, UiTM, UCSI and Sunway
6
external engagement expansion su target(s)
engagement
KedahPerlis
AIMST
Receive verbal agreement from President of Student Council to have booth in AIMST
Penang
Disted College
UTP
UPSI, QUEST
LC
Confirmed a booth and session for EPRD 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 general indicators LC
# of media appearances
# of external events
# 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
0
0 (-1)
social media activity
Instagram, Blog
* Values between parentheses depict absolute growth from last Q
8
external engagement facebook performance
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
* Values between parentheses depict absolute growth from last Q
2000 1500 1000 500 0 Kuching
15
CU
1360 (+83)
JB
UTP
2500
UNMC
0.13
TU
375
Sunway
2969 (+525)
UKM
Penang
3000
UPM
0.02
UM
42
UMP
2014 (+409)
3500
UTP
Ked-Per
engagement rate
Penang
# of Fb likes
Ked-Per
LC
daily average of engaged people
# of FB Likes vs. Daily Average of engaged people
9
external engagement organizational health vs. performance UNMC
UM
JB penang
UMP
UPM
ked-per kuching
UKM
CU
SUnway
TU UTP
10
external engagement overall customized inferences LC
inferences
KedahPerlis
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.
talent capacity TOTAL # OF LC MEMBERS
kuching 92 (+52)
CU
UTAR 22 (-2)
KEDAH-PERLIS 133 (+64)
43 (-4)
penang
JB
back office front (39,8%) office (60,1%)
71 (+18)
65 (-23)
UTP
51 (-31)
UNMC 76 (-13)
UMP UM
TU
40 (-53)
sunway UKM 49 (-23)
66 (+3)
UPM 72 (+0)
42 (-14)
35 (-10)
highest front office weight
highest back office weight
1. UTP (75% vs. 25%) 2. UMP (71,4% vs. 28,6%)
1. UKM (30% vs. 70%) 2. Sunway (32,7% vs. 67,3%)
am has 857 members decreased by 3 since Q4
289 members (33,7%) attended induction during q1
12
talent capacity lc productivity 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
National Productivity:
oGCP Productivity:
iGTP Productivity:
iGCP Productivity:
oGTP Productivity:
0.18
0.22
0.14
0.17
0.11
13
talent capacity team minimum fulfillment
64,7%
70,6%
68,9%
team
plan
jd
Decrease from 83% in Q4 Most: CU (85,7%) Least: UPM (23,6%)
Decrease from 82,8% in Q4 Most: CU (100%) Least: UPM (27,6%)
Increase from 87,5% in Q4 Most: CU (100%) Least: UPM (31%)
68%
55,3%
42,1%
training
tracking & coaching
evaluation & reflection
Decrease from 76,2% in Q4 Most: Sunway (100%) Least: UPM (33,3%)
Decrease from 65,9% in Q4 Most: UKM (100%) Least: CU (0%)
Decrease from 51,8% in Q4 Most: Penang (87%) Least: UTP, UPM, CU (0%)
14
talent capacity tlp positions vs. applicants
general indicators
membership retention 80% Q4: 90,9%
kuching penang 7 5
CU sunway 9 4
34 Eps recruited as members
60 50 40 30 20 10 0
CU 9
National Average: 1,2 In Q4: 1,26
penang 5
UTP 5
25 tmp on exchange
CU penang 2 2 UTP
Total # of IXPs Â
77
2
UNMC 6
18 tlp on exchange
LC
# of total IXPs
1. CU
20
2. Penang
12
3. UTP
7
15
talent capacity organizational health vs. performance
UNMC ked-per kuching
penang
TU UTP
SUnway CU
UKM jb
UMP
UM
UPM
16
talent capacity overall customized inferences LC
inferences
KedahPerlis
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.
17
sustainability payment times and financial health GCP TN Takers
EPs
LC
current net asset
cluster (Q1)
health (fcm)*
Ked-Per
59,6 K
III
Over
National Average:
National Average:
Penang
39,9 K
IV
Over
28,3 days
5 days
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
Last Quarter: 28,5 Days Best: CU (3 d) Worst: Kedah-Perlis (90 d)
Last Quarter: 5,6 Days Best: UPM (2,5 d) Worst: UNMC (10 d)
GTP TN Takers
sponsors
National Average:
National Average:
21,9 days
18,7 days
Last Quarter: 17,4 Days Best: CU (3 d) Worst: UM (79 d)
Last Quarter: 18,7 Days Best: Ked-Per, UMP (14 d) Worst: UKM, TU, CU (30d)
* FCM = Finance Clustering Model
18
sustainability LC Cash
UMP
Kuching Penang
UTP
UUM
CU
Johor Bahru
TU
Sunway
UM
UPM
UKM
UNMC
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
External Receivables
-
Internal Receivables
17,750.00
Other Assets
0
0
Others
-
0
0
-
2000
0
6979
2000
-
6479
-
500
5913.54
0
4479
3374
4479
3374
250 250
5913.54 8,515.10 10,903.00 32,050.00 3,246.00 15,505.00 8,515.10
-
8,450.00
421.00
10,903.00 23,600.00 2,825.00 0
15,505.00 -
-
8,450.00
421.00
15,505.00
-
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 Internal Liabilities External Liabilities Other Liabilities
0
3600
2,253.30
0
185.6
8465.45
-
3600
2,253.30
-
-
8465.45
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0
235.9
-
8,527.41
616.65
450.00
-
8,527.41
616.65
450.00
185.6
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
235.9
0
19
sustainability revenue and expenses
LC
expenses (operations)
expenses (nonoperations)
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
915.44 RM
6,650 RM
3,490 RM
Johor Bahru
2,934.49 RM
CU
---
8,189.40 RM
---
1,500 RM
Kuching
716.50 RM
1,775 RM
1,367 RM
1,200 RM
non-x (32.0%) exchange (68.0%)
revenue streams
non-ops (62.3%)
operations (37.7%)
cost structure
20
sustainability LC
UMP
oGCP - Profit/Loss
-146.1
Kuching Penang
UTP
UUM
CU
Johor Bahru
TU
Sunway
UM
UPM
0
-448
0
1800
1900
3000
-797
1655.6
1080.3 18414.99
1800
1900
3000
4850 4850
400 400
600 600
797 0
1800 144.4 500 500
1200 119.7 0
19650 1235.01 2700 2700
3000
-540.81
742.05
1162.8
2048.67
3000
931
1642.54
1306
17320
1471.81
900.49
143.2
15271.33
300
713.24
-62.77
0
-1255.02
300
750 36.76
0 62.77
0
0 1255.02
-216.5
8119
146.1 0
216.5 0
9000 881 8022
0
iGCP - Profit/Loss
5677.53
700
5402.48
-45
iGCP - Income
8793.5
1200
8022
iGCP - Expenses
3115.97
iGTP - Profit/Loss
0
0
iGTP - Income iGTP - Expenses
0
0
oGCP - Income oGCP - Expenses oGTP - Profit/Loss oGTP - Income oGTP - Expenses
500 2619.52
1800 2248 1000 1000 4413.15
0
0
-2934.49 -4540.77
10150
3050
45
5736.85
2934.49 7590.77
-78.89
-181
-141
0
0
0 78.89
0 181
0 141
0
0
-1700 200 1900
UKM
UNMC
21
sustainability organizational health vs. performance UPM
TU UTP
UKM UM
SUnway JB
CU ked-per penang UNMC
kuching
UMP
22
sustainability overall customized inferences LC
inferences
KedahPerlis
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.
exchange management global citizen outgoing
application
Conversion Rate:
20,8% Last Quarter: 28,3% Top: CU (64%) Bottom: UPM (8%)
open/IP
Conversion Rate:
Average # of days (App -> Open/IP):
10,1 days Last Quarter: 11 days
32,5% Last Quarter: 77,7% Top: Kuching (100%) Bottom: Pen, UKM (25%)
match
Conversion Rate:
Average # of days (Open/IP -> MA):
13,3 days Last Quarter: 15 days
76,1%
realization
Last Quarter: 85,7% Top: UMP, UM, JB(100%) Bottom: Penang (17%)
Average # of days (MA-> RE):
30,5 DAYS Last Quarter: 27,8 days
24
exchange management global citizen incoming
meeting
Conversion Rate:
6,23% Last Quarter: 42,1% Top: UPM (50%) Bottom: 10 LCs(0%)
open
Conversion Rate:
34% Last Quarter: 40% Top: UNMC (87,1%)
Average # of days (Meeting -> Open):
16,4 days Last Quarter: 13,8 Days Average # of days (Contract signed -> MA):
40 days
Bottom: UMP, TU (0%)
match
Conversion Rate:
Average # of days (MA-> RE):
65,5%
27,9 days
Last Quarter: 63,1% Top: Penang, UPM,
realization
UKM, TU, UNMC(100%) Bottom: UMP, JB, Kuching (0%)
26
exchange management global talent incoming
meeting
Conversion Rate:
8,33% Last Quarter: 41,1% Top:
open
UNMC (40%)
Bottom: Pen, UTP, UM, UPM, UKM, JB (0%)
Conversion Rate:
40,4%
Average # of days (Meeting -> Contract signed):
20,9 days Last Quarter: 17,4 Days Average # of days (Contract signed -> MA):
Last Quarter: 33,3% Top: UPM (100%)
60 days
Conversion Rate:
Average # of days (MA -> RE):
Bottom: Pen, UTP, UM, JB (0%)
match
38,3% Last Quarter: 53,4% Top: UKM (100%)
realization
78,3 days
Bottom: Pen, UTP, UM, JB (0%)
25
exchange management global talent outgoing
application
% of Podio applications from planned background:
Conversion Rate:
52%
23% Last Quarter: 43% Top: TU(100%)
)
Bottom: Pen, UTP, UPM, Sun, JB (0%
open/IP
Conversion Rate:
# of people at Info Sessions:
23
48% Last Quarter: 27,1% Top: UNMC (200%)
Bottom: Ked-Per, Pen, UTP, Sun (0%)
match
Conversion Rate:
43%
realization
Last Quarter: 12,5% Top: UNMC (150%) Bottom: UTP, Sun, JB (0%)
# of people at selection meeting:
12 Average # of days (IP -> MA):
46,4 days Average # of days (MA –> RE):
55,4 days
27
exchange management
45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
100% of Total iGTP
75% of Total iGTP
# of meetings for GE:
# of TN forms open for GE:
OPEN
MEETINGS
incoming global entrepreneur
19 14,8% of Goal Achieved for Q1
21 39,6% of Goal Achieved
25 20 Planned Meetings
15
Planned Open
10 Achieved Meetings
5
Achieved Open
0
28
exchange management MATCHES
incoming global entrepreneur 33,3% of Total iGTP # of Matches for GE:
Q1 PROJECTION
4 Congratulations to TU, our only GE Matcher!
Planned Goals for GE Incoming for Q2
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
Meetings
Open/IP
MA
RE
90
27
23
28
Planned for Q1
50 40
Meetings
30
IP
20
MA
10
RE
0 Kedah-Perlis
Penang
UM
UPM
UKM
TU
UNMC
29
exchange management EXPA expertise Kuching National Average for oGCP:
CU
7,2 / 10
JB UNMC
National Average for iGCP:
TU
Sunway
oGTP
UKM
iGTP iGCP
UPM
oGCP
UM UMP
7,2 / 10 National Average for iGTP:
4,5 / 10 National Average for oGTP:
UTP
4,4 / 10
Penang Kedah-Perlis 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
30
exchange management value delivery indicators
OGCP IGCP
break match
break re
8
2
Sunway- 3
UPM, Kuching- 1
7
7
UMP- 3
UTP- 3
igcp
igcp
66
83%
EPs went on a border run for VISA extensions.
EPs had full preparation for the experience.
igCp
IGTP
OGTP
3
4
TU- 2
UPM, UNMC- 2
1
1
Kedah-Perlis- 1
Kedah-Perlis- 1
igTp
78
2
LC buddies were recruited for the EPs.
Re-Raises with previous TN takers.
31
exchange management lead for eps implementation
66,8%
Last Quarter: 69,7%
Last Quarter: 76,3%
Top Implementer: UMP, CU (100%)
Top Implementer: Ked-Per, UMP, UNMC (100%)
Focuses for Q2: Matched (8 LCs) Application (4 LCs) In Progress (1 LC)
73%
IgCp
Ogcp lead flow
Top Implementer: JB (80%)
Top Implementer: Pen, UKM (100%)
igTp
Focuses for Q2: Matched (6 LCs) In Progress (2 LCs) Realized (1 LC)
lead flow
lead flow Last Quarter: 18,4%
Last Quarter: 37,4%
56,2%
Focuses for Q2: Matched (8 LCs) In Progress (4 LCs) Realized (1 LC)
46%
Focuses for Q4: In Progress (4 LCs) Application (4 LCs) Matched (1 LC)
OgTp lead flow 32
exchange management overall performance open/ APP
match
realize
OGCP
742 +194%
71
202
-34%
+31%
IGCP
222 +204%
63
-24%
140
IGTP
28
12
10
OGTP
+25%
+17%
-25%
-29%
55
7
11
+400%
+75%
+450%
*values below final results represent growth or decrease from q1 of 2015
33
exchange management organizational health vs. performance UNMC ked-per
kuching UPM CU
penang
SUnway
UM
TU
UKM
UMP JB UTP
34
exchange management overall customized inferences LC
inferences
KedahPerlis
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)
specialized units performance & health indicators
swinburne 20 UNIMAP 16 uthm 18 USMEC hw 49 6 inti 13 heLp Pekan 12
45
back office (35,2%) front office (64,2%)
# of applications for GCP EP
UNIMAP 48
20
9
4
3
HW 18
19
INTI HELP pekan 25
UNIMAP USMEC
UTHM swinburne 27
USMEC
UTHM 25
17,6% of AM membership
17
# of applications for GLP
swinburne
151 su members
26,8% of AM Total
INTI 30
5
pekan 14
exchange performance Su
Open /IP
MA
RE
UNIMAP
6
6
11
OGCP
USMEC
5
0
9
0
1
11
OGCP iGCP
UMP Pekan
0
0
0
OgCP
HELP
0
0
1
OGCP
INTI
1
1
1
OGCP
Heriot-Watt
15
3
0
OGCP
UTHM
0
0
6
OGCP
0
0
6
iGCP
27
0
2
OGCP
Swinburne
help 66
28,7% of AM Total
36
specialized units organizational health vs. performance
swinburne
unimap help
USMEC
UTHM
pekan
inti
heriot-w
37
specialized units overall customized inferences 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.
HERIOTWATT
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.
38