AIESEC in Hungary Story Book. 2012-2013. It’s a collection of stories we lived and the summary of what happened in our term. If you are reading this book, you are holding the conclusions, successes, mistakes and learnings of the Generation of 12/13 in your hand.
„A people without the knowledge of their past history, origin and culture is like a tree without roots.” Marcus Garvey Please read this with compassion, with enthusiasm, and with a will to learn from what we have seen, tried, sometimes failed, sometimes succeeded, but definitely built the knowledge and drew the conclusions for the further betterment of AIESEC in Hungary and all generations to come after us.
TABLE OF CONTENT 1. Our Clarity of AIESEC in Hungary 2. Our understanding of programs 3. Management framework 4. Program growth projects & initiatives a. oGCDP b. iGCDP c. iGIP d. oGIP 5. The Collaboration Project
Our Clarity of AIESEC in Hungary The question of the clarity of our why is not a project, because I don’t think it will ever be closed or finished. AIESEC as an organization (and for that matter, every other organization as well) should always revisit and put in stone it’s essence, it’s way of creating its impact and it’s way of fulfilling its mission. Ever since the beginning of the term and even before – when we were MC elects – we had a very strong doubt – even within ourselves – whether we understand truly what do we stand for, what kind of impact we are creating. Through the process of exploring that, clarifying and making sure every member understands it, there were two major phases, which I believe needs to be told and explained. Direction 12/13 Even before our term, I think most of you remember at SNP we started a major creation process of defining what does AIESEC Hungary 2015 mean to us as an organization and on the path towards 2015, what should be our clear direction and strategic focuses, not only based on the current gaps and bottlenecks of our operation, but also based on our ambition and path we want to take towards AIESEC fulfilling AIESEC 2015. So we created a process, which by the MC-LCP meeting, concluded the Direction 12/13 with 3 key strategic elements. The logic of the process can be seen on the chart below.
AIESEC Hungary 2015 - What does it mean when it's fulfilled?
Startegic elements needed for that to be fulfilled
Role of 12/13 What are our main priorities now?
We came up with the Direction in an attempt to connect our annual strategies and operation to be based on longterm goals AIESEC Hungary wants to achieve.
Some key things to be pointed out: As you know, after CEC we stopped talking about the Direction as a main element of our annual plan for 12/13. The reasons behind that we found to have some key elements not falling into their place. Alignment of strategy creation to international level Differences between the logic of AIESEC 2015 and AIESEC Hungary 2015 Need to clarify the direct connection between strategic elements and MoS If you take AIESEC 2015 and AIESEC Hungary 2015 there is a major difference between the logic of how it was created.
AIESEC 2015 - Built on what we are good at (Roots of Success) and where would replicating that would lead (Images of the Future)
AIESEC Hungary 2015 - Built on what we envision for AIESEC Hungary in 2015, and how can we reach that
This is not at all a bad thing – the advantages taken from the creation process of AIESEC Hungary 2015 in 10/11 are numerous – it gave AIESEC in Hungary an understanding beyond a lot of other entities about its reality, values, current state and potential. On the other hand the organizational Measures of Successes (GIP, GCDP, TMP, TLP, Quality Index) were created as a derivation of AIESEC 2015. So here comes the question – if we measure our activities and have goals as the organization MoS but using a different midterm ambition to create strategies how does it all add up? The answer is: it doesn’t.
Therefore, after IC, having a clear frame globally of the organizational impact, all aspects put into its place – if you remember for the Executive Meeting, we talked a lot about that there – we decided not to emphasize the Direction anymore – as it would cause more confusion – but defined clearly what is our impact we want to have in Hungary. „Impacting lives, creating a better Hungary” This sentence is not just a fancy phrase for the organization. It connect the impact model of the organization (Creating change agents to have a better world) with the customized ambition what AIESEC in Hungary wants to have in it’s environment – reacting to the needs of the Hungarian society and economy. One thing to point out here: AIESEC in Hungary’s role is not to be directly involved in social and economic issues – we don’t run our projects to solve the minority problems for example. That’s a market need that we base our products on. AIESEC in Hungary’s role is to provide Hungary with the needed leadership – people who will be able to solve social and economic issues later on. That’s why it’s „Impacting lives” and therefore later on by the people impacted „Creating a better Hungary”. It’s not „Impacting Hungary to create a better country” Our focus of impact are the people, their focus of impact later on will be Hungary. We want to create leadership in Hungary which is responsible and entrepreneurial, who are aware of their impact, who are proud to be Hungarians and who are equipped with the needed leadership skills and knowledge to be able to make a different. Change agents for Hungary. This is what we, as an organization stand for. Knowing that is the fundament of creating the right strategies, tools and projects to be able to provide Hungary with the leadership it needs. Knowing that is the fundament of wanting to provide as many experiences for people to live and wanting to grow as an organization.
Our Understanding of Programs Upon clarifying why we do AIESEC and how do we do AIESEC to create the needed leadership for Hungary the next obvious step and challenge we faced was to align our program values and our products so we become more relevant, we are able to scale up our activities and we create a higher value for the individual. What is very important here is to understand: we align products to be relevant to the market, SO we can aim for providing Hungary with the needed leadership, not so that our products are „Creating a better a Hungary�. We combine the organization value of AIESEC with the market value our economy and society needs. So we identified the need for Product Development of our programs. Below should stand the principles, the process and the conclusions. The 3 pillars of the product development:
Market relevance
Scalability
Impact
SEPTEMBER
Org. Value (Program)
Market value (Product)
Personal Value & Needs
During IC we got a lot of inputs for executing a product development and also gained GCPs from other entities. During the Executive meeting in September we launched the initiative of delivering a product development for the exchange programs. Also in September we started to work on this with the National Departments and with the involvement of the local level. OCTOBER-NOVEMBER oGCDP: From the beginning of the term we wanted to connect the program with the external reality in a way that it creates impact on the EPs by providing exchange opportunity, but for this first we needed to understand the market itself. For understanding the market we needed to analyze the past performance and the student pool, which determines the customer needs. After having an understanding in the Hungarian higher
education, we came up with a hypothesis regarding the value proposition of oGCDP. Later we tested this with several focus groups in different universities, on different faculties. Besides this, we also interviewed returnees, to understand the impact the program had on them. After all these, it was clear, that the experience the EPs live by a GCDP is something forming their mindset and making them understand the need of actions to make a change in their environment. iGCDP: The main problem of iGCDP what was needed to be solved is the lack of connection between the 3 aspects: market value, organizational value and personal value. The experience of the EPs and the students of the schools are driven by the school teachers. AIESEC in Hungary does not have an effect on it practically. Its cause the lack of usage of the essence of the organization: the selfdriven personal development and the leadership opportunities. That was the starting point what made us starting the product development to change these and raise the 3 aspect of the product value. The basis was the experience of the student, how we can have bigger direct impact on them. We made researches about the Hungarian system and we collected the inputs of the teachers and school directors. Based on this the biggest problems what we defined are the lack of language knowledge, the closed mindset and short scale of thinking instead of being global minded. The last and one of the biggest problems was the lack of career objectives and future perspective. The product packages what we created are reflecting on these problems. oGIP: For oGIP we tried to use the same frame as for oGCDP, but as the program is not at the same place in the product life-cycle as GCDP, it did not bring much result. We mainly collected information about the market, but we still need to move forward with program and sub-product understanding and create the product packages.
The Management Framework After gaining clarity on the organizational ambition, the way of delivering AIESEC’s impact, going deeper to define how our AIESEC XP programs’ value proposition are aligned in Hungary to create the leadership we need, we faced the next barrier. If we know WHY we work with our programs, we need to make sure that our way of organizing our activities are so, that all levels and areas of the organization and all different functions are contributing towards our goals and we don’t have activities, positions, members who are doing something which are not linked directly to program growth. We are one AIESEC in Hungary – all of the levels (national, local) and all of our functions (TM, ICX, Comm, Finance) are building blocks of one entity as a whole. That’s not the questions. The question is how do we sustain a management framework which actually enables the organization to organize its activities around its impact while connecting all functions for the common purpose. What was the reality of our operation until Q2: Lack of measurability and conscious tracking of team/LC/MC initiatives Lack of initiatives for program growth (only operation and tracking) Alignment of EB team/functions to support key strategies and programs Too much MUST-DOs and not enough time for program growth (linking relevant activities) Clear definition of role of levels in organizational context That’s why before the EB Q2 evaluations we introduced the new program management framework. Key points which the management frame gave an answer: 1. Understanding that products should be managed based on the framework – providing a structured frame to not only track and manage the RA-MA-RE process,
but to aim for continuous growth and improvement of the programs and products based on its markets, customer segments, the product package, the channeling and sales of the products, delivery and showcasing impact. 2. Ensuring differentiation of national growth initiatives (projects delivered by the national level only, aiming to influence the market and the product as a whole), national growth initiatives (projects, pilots where the national and local level is working together) and local growth projects (which should be delivered by the local level only, reflecting on the customization of the products to the given reality) 3. Call to action other than just managing volume and “doing more”. Though it might seem simple, the tendency previously was to do more exchanges by either raising more from the same markets or expanding. Growth comes from the smart solutions of the program where bottlenecks are met. 4. Connection of AIESEC in Hungary as an entity – ensuring clarity on the interconnections of entities and functional areas and how we are all part of the same goal. We needed to do that not just on a theoretical level, where we plan together, and say we want to make it happen together, but on operation level as well. 5. Channeling all activities towards the growth of the programs – therefore aligning everyday activities within the frame of AIESEC’s impact model
Program growth projects and initiatives
WINTER PEAK
GOAL: The goal of delivering the winter peak was to build belief for the country, that we can be dependent not only in one peak, while also keep in mind creating stories for those students who can and want to go abroad during this period. WHAT HAPPENED: During summer some LCs decided to plan with it, later a few gave up, while some joined the winter paradise team. In October we had less focus on it and we failed in delivering the promotion due to lack of focus from national level. Later, in November we gave a bigger push to it and defined LC specific support from the department side. With the department and the local focus we were able to raise 48 EPs and realize almost all of them by ensuring the satisfaction of our customers: whoever wants to go, will go and gain experience.
Winter peak in numbers 48
45
Raised
Matched
43 Realized
Growth 43 25
2011-2012
2012-2013
Top performer LCs: Debrecen, Gรถdรถllล , Miskolc, Szeged. And by delivering 46 oGCDP exchanges since 1st January, we could grow 78% and show to the network how to make a peak for a country, where there is no long winter break, but there are VPs who can focus on specific markets and put their energy into building belief and bring the winter paradise. CONSLUSIONS: 1. Market focus: After the first, failed promotion it was clear for the country to choose specific markets and focus only on them while delivering promotion activities. Also some of the LCs had innovative ideas how to reach the students and provide needed experience for them. 2. Commitment: After failing first it was clear for me to put more effort in engaging the LCVPs and making the country understand the importance of delivering this peak. From the department side the main principle was to not to let anyone give up and provide continuous support for everyone to believe in themselves and succeed.
SOCIAL STUDIES SEGMENT
GOAL: To gain information about the market to increase the summer peak results. WHAT HAPPENED:
Defining LC participation.
Collecting market information.
Defining the main conclusions and delivering recruitment.
After the market research we had during the product development, it was clear that we have market relevance on the social studies market (checked with the focus group interviews), that’s why we started to put effort in expanding to this market. After we defined the goal of the project we started to work with those LCs who decided to expand to this market and to have realization for the summer. We had a centralized expansion strategy for this by having a person responsible for it from the national department who supported the LCs in information gathering and summarizing it. Now we have conclusions defined and recruitment started. CONSLUSIONS: 1. “Nationalized” market expansion With the focus from the national level we could support the LCs in expanding to this market for the summer oGCDP promotion. Having a responsible person from the national level who can summarize the information and take actions for program delivery based on specific market needs is important. 2. LC focus With defining the growth project of social studies segment development, several LCs took the step and started their expansion with a focus and collected much information in order to boost their GCDP results for the summer.
GOAL:
MOBILITY FAIR
To have an event what we can use mainly for GCDP promotion and partner with other organizations in delivering it to increase reputation. WHAT HAPPENED: After having a draft event idea we started to negotiate with Frissdiplomás Kft. who is the main organizer of HVG job fairs. They understood our point of how to develop the student organization section (called Diáksziget) on the event and soon we started to contact the other organizations and defined our strategy how to catch the visitors’ attention and make them apply mainly for the Experience project. The event itself went smoothly with a lot of interested people who came to us with exact questions and we closed the 2 day-long job fair with 151 contacts collected and gained an excellent reputation within the exhibitors and the organizers (HVG and Frissdiplomás Kft.). Thanks to the event we had several media appearance on frissdoplomas.hu, hvg.hu and offline media. CONSLUSIONS: During this common event with other student organizations we realized the importance of having common goal with them in order to have an event organized by us, but delivered by all of us. After some time we knew that we cannot build on their ideas and contribution anymore, so we had to solve the promotion and preparation alone. For the next time it is highly suggested to have a contact or agreement with them on paper. Also it is important to have responsible from national level separately for the Mobility Fair and for the other activities Frissdiplomás required, such as the usual interviews, but have someone who coordinates the whole.
GOAL:
MANAGING CEEDER
To have a person from the partner entity to support promotion activities by knowing the product itself and also fasten the selection process to increase the realization between Hungary and partner entity. WHAT HAPPENED:
Defining partner country.
Selecting the CEEDer.
Preparing the CEEDer.
Managing the CEEDership.
Tracking results.
In October I was sure that without having a CEEDer it is really hard to succeed in the winter peak recruitment as the students need exact information about projects and countries and their first priority as channel are those people who have experience in this. So with the combination of having a person who has already went on exchange and has proper knowledge on the Italian iGCDP projects, we selected a CEEDer who arrived in November. He visited 7 LCs and supported their promotion, chaired the Outgoing Preparation Day, participated at WNP and also did selection interviews and pre-selected EPs for LCs in Italy. As a result we had 20+ EPs applied for Italian projects and 13 got realized so far. CONSLUSIONS: 1.
Timeline and preparation
The whole project execution is needed to be started on time as the CEED promotion and selection takes time. Also even we had the agreement not only with Italy for the second semester, the project failed as they did not put effort in CEED promotion and partnership delivery. 2.
Clear measurements with CEEDer and MCVP
Always having clear expectations towards the CEEDer is very crucial in order to realize the set goals, but it is not enough as the MCVP has the bigger role in delivering a country2county partnership. We need to select a person who has the reputation within the partner entity and can fasten the matching process with having the network and knowledge on selection.
GOAL:
PROMOTION PROCESS OPTIMIZATION
Based on the previous experience where the planning and execution of the OGX promotion didn’t go smoothly due to the lack of clear responsibilities for the COMM and the OGX areas, HR and preparation, we have decided to set common planning time in one meeting where the entire flow was covered according to the needs of each of the LCs. WHAT HAPPENED: Market analysis: Collecting inputs and information to determine the potential of a market (Exam period, competitors, perception of the program, profiles). Market definition: Selecting the markets with biggest potential and defining the Experience issue they can be targeted with. Goal setting: Determining the number of exchange realizations, matches, raises and application forms expected from each market for each of the issues covered (according to LC plans and market potential). Promotion process optimization: Customizing the elements of the promotion process optimization according to the goals and market profiles. Promoters: Showcase the stories of people who already lived the experience based on the specific issue. Taste the world: Create an agenda with events where the trainee can develop the awareness of the specific issue. Ambassador program: Create corporate programs to build the partner’s employer Brand at the same time that LC use that space to promote the oGCDP program. Youth Discussions: Increase the program credibility by workshops or events around issues delivered by the partner (alumni, teachers, local partners, national partners). HR Management: Providing advisory about the local structures management based on the specific capacity and goals of the given LC. CONCLUSIONS: LCs still need to innovate in the way they do promotion as it was hard for them to find local initiatives directly contributing to the promotion process optimization where they base on promotion on the project value proposition. Leave behind the mindset of class visits and info sessions as the only way to promote.
UMBRELLA BRAND
GOAL: Once the oGCDP national product development was done, the Umbrella Brand project was created to improve the messages and value proposition being promoted during the oGCDP recruitment.
WHAT HAPPENED: 1. Brand Positioning The Experience brand positioning aims to describe the project by explaining what is the project and how should it be recognized by the Hungarian people. The brand positioning contains: • What is it? • Who is the target? • What is the purpose?
The description above should be the selling speech used while selling the program. • Global volunteering program: Work abroad for social and community development projects that lead to self-development and skill enhancement. • Young students: People between 18 and 30 years old who graduated less than two years ago or are currently attending high school or any higher education institution. • Experiment: Gain experience by experimenting and trying yourself in different situations and challenges.
2. Brand Promise The Experience brand promise role is to answer the question “Why should I have an Experience internship?” by highlighting the value of the program.
3. Brand Experience As mentioned before, in our brand we promise an opportunity for program participants to experiment a change. The brand experience explains how that promise is lived during the internship. Change mindsets: Get to know other cultures and understand their way of living by putting yourself in their context and environment. Become a Hungarian ambassador and promote your culture. Change your future: Get international professional experience, develop your skills and explore your future profession. Change lifestyles: Have an impact on the people you interact with and improve your sense of your own reality. CONCLUSIONS Although the LCs had a fast and good implementation of the visual elements of the umbrella brand, generally the messages during promotion were still not being based on its elements. The local promotion preparation should measure the LC member’s knowledge and readiness to explain the Experience project based on the brand strategy explained here. In general, LCs have the need to customize specific messages to their profiles and markets based on the umbrella brand. This is something that should be managed by the LCVP COMM and the LCVP OGX.
SUMMER CAMP
GOAL The country did not have much product for the summer peak besides Summer for Youth and the group of flexible and operating GlobeKids partners. We wanted to create more products for this peak and reach new partners to cover more fields of the Hungarian market and society. WHAT HAPPENED In the beginning of Q2 we created the guideline for the projects. The timeline was the following: Month Activities
Feb March April May June Database Ra Ra Ma Re RA Ma
Most of the LCs participated in the projects and altogether our plan is 43 realizations. Everybody built up a database for the project. The problem was that we allocated the responsibility mainly to the Magellan project teams on local, and different Summer Camp teams where not created. They had other focuses and it caused the delay with the raising. Currently we have only promises what makes the project’s result risky. CONCLUSIONS The problems we faced: Low budget of the camps Less focus because of responsibility allocation on the project Short term camps – less than 6 weeks. This project should be started earlier to be able to manage the different short term camps to have more of them taking interns together. The responsibility allocation should happen in a way that the team has enough resources to deal with the project without harming the other roles of the team, or separate teams should be created. On a long run it will need a solution to be able to find supporters for these camps, or have agreements that they built in there price the cost of the interns.
GOAL:
PROJECT ACTIVITY DEFINION
The project was part of the product development. To make sure that the worked out value proposition will come alive we had to develop the actual activities and flow of the internships. We were seeking to have a clear Job Description for the interns coming to our country. The most crucial part is the role of the different entities and people. The successful execution was depending on the MC as the provider of the flow, general JDs, preparation. It’s also depending on the LCs, how they are specializing the execution of activities with their partners in their reality. And the last element of this process is the intern itself who will make the entire model alive - they are working out the small details and the delivering the sessions events. It was also a goal to make it clear who will be responsible for what. WHAT HAPPENED On WNP we already got feedbacks and on WNC we can crosscheck the first results of the process with the LCs. Since that the national level was working on with the involvement of externals (professionals and alumni) we worked out the JDs for the 4 Magellan Sub-Issues and for GlobeKids. The bigger question was the next step. With the LCs we will do piloting in April-May. Based on the result of this piloting we will be able to give inputs for the sales in May-June and also for the realization in September. CONCLUSIONS The biggest conclusion currently is the timing. This project needs a lot of research and information from partners, externals what cannot happen with optimal focus on the area. What I consider as a success that the process is not a onetime activity but it’s a part of a continuous development process. We started, the next year will finish the first part and could be capitalized on a lot during the 2014 winter peak!
GOAL:
IT MARKET DEVELOPMENT
Our strategies are to leverage our market presence to a significant level on the given markets (IT and SSC) and with the usage of one network we can channel other markets afterwards. The principles what describes the optimal market presence: Have an appreciated clear product for the participants of the market Have a quality service for the existing partners Have a clear and well-known product on the market. WHAT HAPPENED With the involvement of externals and with the inputs of global level and LC experiences we created the sample JDs what we can use for the sales. With these sample JDs we will have a clear value proposition towards partners. Our further goal is to have a clear knowledge about this market how to have the most effective channeling and sales strategies. AIESEC can provide: Quality interns with relevant background for User application development, Game testing and WEBapplication programming. We can provide the needed HR mainly for junior positions to deliver valuable support for senior employees for a price what can be a competitive advantage for the Hungarian companies. CONCLUSIONS What we need to always keep in mind is that without results or active partnerships you cannot create a system and strategies what is relevant after a phase of product life cycle. The effective channeling and sales strategies is needed after a certain level of market share. We need to have the strategy creation and result generation managed parallel. To work with a market geographically on national level we need to build capacity in those LCs whom are working with the market.
GOAL:
SSC SEGMENT
Our operation at the SSC segment has different challenges than IT. HR resource to manage the delivery on national level (Goal of the initiative) Knowledge to manage the delivery on local level Size and number of the partnerships (Goal) On a long run the goal of the IT and SSC project as well was to bring back the iGIP operation to more and more LCs besides the already mentioned goals. WHAT HAPPENED First we had to start to deal with the capacity problem. From local level 3 brave LC members are supporting the delivery process of national TN taker’s needs. On a long run we need to have a coordinator what we wanted to solve from external recruitment but for the rest of the term it does not make sense because of the duration of the education period. The second thing is the number of current partners. The BD department is working continuously on approaching new potential partners. For this we are involving alumni network to use their contacts. The third smaller initiative what is connected here is the SSC conference what we will start to organize with the HVG hopefully. This project is not closed but can be a good start for the next year. CONCLUSIONS The basis of this project is the quality service for the already partnering companies what will makes them our promoters. For this we need further service development, what requires HR, systems (Clear processes, education system, IT system, matching and international promotion systems). The others thing is the synergy between the functional areas. We need to work together with TM on the HR questions, with Marketing on international promotion questions, with Finance on legal and finance questions, and with BD on sales issues.
NATIONAL SERVICE
GOAL The goal of this project is to create a national service principle, frame and activity definition to support national and local activities aiming for programs’ growth. The system needed to be flexible to be able to adapt to changes during the term. WHAT HAPPENED: PRINCIPLES supporting program growth and program management of entities supporting entity development individuals responsible for tangible projects/programs functions working in departments LC responsibles next to other function national service connecting to middle level management as well FRAME DEPARTMENT PROGRAM RESPONSIBLE PROJECTS
CHANGES Before the term no independent LC coaches: independent LC coaches were part of previous years’ operation on national level but their function is not that useful for LCs without having understanding and practice in program management; that’s why only those individuals had the chance to be responsible for LCs who are part of other functional departments
During the term
 role of national department: during the role and function of national departments changed several times as the country needed it
CONCLUSIONS: National service always need to be defined to serve the goal of the given term and operation. It also should be flexible to react to changes constantly throughout the term
CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE
GOAL: The goal of the project is to measure and manage customer experiences through the implementation of the global quality and customer experience measurement frame and system to ensure long term growth of the programs by satisfied customers. WHAT HAPPENED? Global quality and customer experience measurement frame and system GENERAL FLOW: WHY? DESIGN DATA COLLECTION DATA ANALYSIS ACTION On global scale, the organization decided to use Net Promoter Score as the basic frame and system for customer experience management (http://www.netpromoter.com/why-netpromoter/know/). The system is managed globally and different national entities got access to it during piloting period. AI managing global strategy and direction, the online platform and the customer surveys MC managing local access and education creating national customer management strategy
experience
Local
follow up survey fill outs managing local issues (firefighting)
Global piloting AIESEC in Hungary was part of the first global piloting with 12 other countries. During the piloting phase, the followings happened:
Education for LCs to understand and be able to use the system o LC responsibles were identified (mostly VP TMs) o LC logins were created o education about customer management, NPS and the online platform Online system implementation Feedback for AI Showcasing during the implementation, the organization was also able to use data and comments gained via surveys sent to the customers (oGCDP promotion)
CONCLUSIONS: Customer experiences management will be more and more important for the local entities of AIESEC in Hungary as satisfied customers will be the key for constant growth. The organization globally introduced measurements for quality and customer experience:
Response rate Case closed/Case opened % of Promoters
The next step of the project is to figure out how the programs' growth can be supported/guaranteed by customer experience management.
ENGAGEMENT WITH AIESEC
GOAL: The goal of the project is to define Engagement with AIESEC (definition, activities, measurement, connection to ELD programs). WHAT HAPPENED
DEFINITION
ACTIVITIES
MEASUREMENT
CONNECTION TO ELD
Definition: The first steps of the process were to identify why the program is relevant and how it will work in the organization during this term. EwA became a program to ensure experience what TMP and TLP programs cannot and to make customers go for other programs after (GIP, GCDP, TMP, TLP). Activities: The next step of the piloting was to identify the activities and the value proposition of them (AIESEC, customer). The activities were defined under 3 main groups which was created based on their value proposition: Operation: After, the activities need to have their operation frame containing:
value proposition for AIESEC value proposition for customer activity list timeline responsibles (local, national) measurement
Connection to ELD programs: The last step was to decide about the 3 main programs which will be piloted on local level as well:
Host Family Promoters Trainee buddies
The “outsourcing” of these activities has already happened in the previous years so it makes the
implementation for LCs easier also gives us space to study the operation of the program. CONCLUSIONS Local management: as in case of TMP and TLP, it is very important to understand the program management and the activity management should be in different hands on local and on national level as well (as the table shows): TM TMP TLP EWA
ICX x x x
OGX x x x
COMMUNICATION x x x
Commitment: Commitment of local level to the program implementation is key in the whole process