AIESEC in Malaysia - SONA Q1 2016 Report

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