AIESEC IN VIETNAM 2015 – 2016
Sub-product development
Talent capacity
CLO CLS
Commission management
Legacies
1
Financial Sustainability
iGIP Contribution 144 Re ~ $57600 revenue ($25920 to MC bank account) NPS Intern = 55 Response Rate = 80%
2
3
Talent Empowerment
External Relevance
ME = 1.2/member/6 months Retention Rate (6 months) = 80% NPS TMP/TLP = ???
iGIP Legacies ET English Development MT Japan Refreshed Sub-product Innovation Standardized EP LEAD journey Intern LEAD Framework iGIP Talent recruitment process standardized LEAD delivery for OCP/LCVP SAP & SDP revision
70% OC plan reflect Entity plan
National working timeline 2.0
80% of partners satisfied in delivery & engagement
Delivery: CLO Engagement: Event organizing management (Minimum standard)
Increased value positioning to international students
iGIP Vietnam positioning
1. General Performance 2. Relevant Benchmark
# of X 1415 App 1516 App 1415 Re 1516 Re $
Quarter 3 39 25 48
Exchange Contribution
Finance Contribution
118 Re, 11%
$24800 45%
308 Re, 28%
75 Re, 7% 580 Re, 54%
Quarter 4 Quarter 1 Quarter 2 31 19 18 16 17 12 26 20 24 545.514.000 VND (~ $24.800)
Total N/A 107 70 118
*Disclaimer: X
$21580 40%
number is taken from EXPA.
oGCDP
oGCDP
oGIP
oGIP
iGCDP
iGCDP
from the official
iGIP
bank statement
iGIP $2640, 5%
$5260, 10%
Financial data is
estimated, NOT
• •
Asia Pacific Approve: 5th
Realize: 5th
Global Network Approve: 16th
Realize: 14th
Growth Vietnam Indonesia MoC Approve 48 29 150 Realize (68.6%) (26.1%) (49.2%)
COMMITTEE
Panama 33 (28.9%)
*Why these entities? We compare ourselves with entities sharing the same LC capacity (Panama), market size (Indonesia) and iGIP growth path (MoC)
Approve Realize
Abs. Growth 48
Rel. Growth 68.6%
INDIA COLOMBIA BRAZIL CHINA, MAINLAND TURKEY EGYPT GERMANY Mexico JAPAN Hungary UNITED STATES PANAMA Indonesia VIETNAM CZECH REPUBLIC POLAND BELGIUM
APPLICATION
ACCEPT APPROVE REALIZE
39027 9338 22795
1819 687 722
1374 627 565
1119 658 439
25057
728
455
372
22680 9918 43241 9005 18033 14973 14913 14216 5564 5556 10508 18773 14683
479 709 307 350 236 231 186 169 253 133 166 214 128
375 442 273 297 213 209 161 147 192 107 129 154 106
304 234 231 212 195 190 148 142 140 118 110 104 104
Compared with 1516 Goal
Actual
39
31
19
18
Gap
19
33
0
47
Goal
34
40
21
49
Actual
48
26
20
24
Gap
-14
24
1
25
Goal
55
55
55
55
-
-
-
-
Gap
-
-
-
-
Goal
80
80
80
80
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
NPS Actual
RR (%) Actual
Gap
52% App
82% Re
NPS
RR
118
65
71
19
48
64
41
58
47
Goal
24
Q2
24
Q1
24
Re
Q4
10
App
Q3
*No NPS and Response Rate result due to the shutdown of the system, resulting in no survey data
07-08 08-09 09-10 1 0-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 14-15 15-1 6
Amount (VND)
Amount (USD)
INCOME GIP ICX Revenue LC GIP TN realization MC GIP TN realization
517,776,000.00 0.00
23,535.27 0.00
Total GIP ICX Revenue
517,776,000.00
23,535.27
517,776,000.00
23,535.27
Total Income EXPENSE iGIP Manpower Expense MCVP Salary MC Manager Salary HR Subsidy Personal Development
26% 66,000,000.00 33,000,000.00 2,400,000.00 2,000,000.00
3,000.00 1,500.00 109.09 90.91
101,400,000.00
4,609.09
iGIP Program Expense Print IC Booklet Subsidy for iGIP Summit
688,181.75 7,044,000.00
31.28 320.18
Total iGIP Program Expense
7,732,181.75
351.46
EXPENSE
iGIP Functional Development Functional Visit Q3 Functional Visit Q1 Functional Visit Q2 (iGIP Summit)
2,236,818.00 3,484,000.00 8,271,000.00
101.67 158.36 375.95
10%
13,991,818.00
635.99
Total iGIP Manpower Expense
Total iGIP Program Expense iGIP Investment Portfolio Country Visit to Japan Matching Campaign Total iGIP Investment Portfolio Total Expense TOTAL
INCOME
Profit 74%
Manpower
10%
Program Expense
6% 6,600,000.00 6,600,000.00
300.00 300.00
13,200,000.00
600.00
136,323,999.75
6,196.55
381,452,000.25
17,338.73
Expense
Functional Development 74%
Investment Portfolio
Success Summary
• Entity Development contribution: term 1516 witnessed some significant achievements: o
The highest relative growth (68.6%) & absolute growth (48 X) in the past 10 years.
o
iGIP becomes the biggest revenue generator among 4 Exchange program.
• In the network, iGIP Vietnam is positioned as a sustainable fast-growing entity compared with entities sharing the same reality. We maintain the same ranking (5th) in the region and jump to top 15 in the global ranking. • As a result, LC FTU Hanoi is awarded with iGIP Excellence award in Asia Pacific Conference 2016, China.
Gap Analysis
Even though we achieve 82% of term goal, there’s a gap between planning and implementation:
• # of Approved only reached 52%, which results in a lack of projection for term 1617. This was due to (1) lack of conversion data from App Re in planning and (2) talent capacity to achieve big ambition for # of Approved. • No measurements for Customer Service (NPS & RR), which make it difficult to work out on
strategies to improve our X standards and satisfaction.
1. General Performance 2. Strategic Projects Review
Good Performing ≥80%
Fair Performing 50% ≤ & <80% Alert Performing <50%
# of Re
1st
2nd Total
1st
2nd Total
1st
2nd Total
1st
23
35
58
5
20
25
12
11
23
6
4
10
-
-
-
1415 Actual 19
15
34
9
2
11
8
9
17
5
3
8
-
-
-
Goal
2nd Total
1st
2nd Total
Gap
4
20
24
-4
18
14
4
2
6
1
1
2
-
-
-
Goal
45
37
82
5
5
10
14
6
20
5
7
12
5
15
20
1516 Actual 51
28
79
6
3
9
10
8
18
7
1
8
0
4
4
9
3
-1
2
1
4
-2
2
-2
6
4
5
11
16
Gap
-6
Opportunity Demand (Sub-product) 7% 3%
â&#x20AC;˘ Language Teaching in English Center (ET) is still #1 focus, which accounts for 67% of national
Language Education
15%
performance (48% last year).
Marketing in Japan Sector
8% 67%
â&#x20AC;˘ Term 1516 also experience diversified EP profile.
Marketing in Other Sector
Big CEE entities (Ukraine, Russia) are the main
IT
supplier. Czech Republic emerges as a new key
Global Entrepreneur
player in this term.
EP Supply Pool (Nationality) 15
10
6 4 1
1
1
1
2
9 7
6
5
3 1
1
2
4 1
1
4
3 1
1
1
1
1
3 1
1
1
4
3 1
5
1
2
2
1
Supply-based raising
iGIP Vietnam positioning IR partnership development
Revise sub-product package
GIP for MNCs
Revise CEEDership model
GE Piloting & Sustain current MT
Knowledge Management system
Refreshed Value Communication
Supply-based Raising
iGIP Vietnam Positioning
Complete (100%)
Complete (100%)
100% Opportunity raised according
50% of Approved coming from key entities with right value proposition
Standardized aligned
with
RMR
operation
oGIP
1.
timeline
(Latam, CEE, WENA, Oceania) 2.
3.
Complete (50%) 80 Approved
to peaks
1.
IR partnership development
76% #Re follow the timeline:
2.
Marketing framework for iGIP
1.
IR manager position opened in
with branding package, channel
LC to focus on partnership with
analysis and utilization guideline
key
iGIP website created for LCs
Republic, Canada, Mexico, etc.)
UK,
Czech
Aug, Sep (Peak 1) – Nov (Peak
(integrate with national website)
2) – Jan (Peak 3) – Jun (Peak 4)
applied by the insight from
EY partners for partnership
Output:
Matching
marketing survey – 70% done
delivery (Matching mania, LC
Winter
peak
Recommendation for LC HR
partnership
structure: marketing JD with IR
activities)
Campaign
and
ILEAD
3.
commission time
manager) The whole commission should apply
3.
Insight on communication with
division,
Synergy
8% Re coming from partnership
The marketing output MUST
MC should put more resources (HR,
have insight from EY partners.
investment) in MC2MC partnership
•
Build up marketing talent for iGIP
management. Work out on mutual
•
Implementing output from 1516
understanding between 2 entities.
•
and constantly revise their operation management to ensure performance
2.
partners:
Revised sub-product package
Revise CEEDership model
KM System
Complete (100%)
Complete (0%)
Complete (100%)
5 Ra from new SP package
70% of Approve from CEED
All knowledge of working with AIESEC in Japan stored
1.
2.
2-month MT Japan piloted and
N/A
legislated
The project was cancelled due to the
drive with all working details
Compendium – page 17.
downsize of oGIP Japan and not a
from Mar 2014 in storage.
10 Opportunity Raised. 4 of
key focus for any LC in the 2nd half
them are successfully approved
of the term.
and realized.
in
the
National
1.
2.
1 KM folder in iGIP Google
Partnership Report from 1314 – 1516
3.
Japan Business understanding: Slide here
4.
Website
foundation
for
promotion: HERE
•
MC: should not keep it as a National Sub-product due to small volume (10-12 Re per term). Consider to have 1 NST to manage MC Japan and support LC (preferably coming from LC HCMC or LC FTU Hanoi).
•
LC: should utilize LC partnership with 2 key LCs: Keio & Doshisha to manage CEEDers and do matching. Small LCs such as Hanoi & Danang consider take over this SP to build LC foundation.
GIP for MNCs
GE Piloting & Sustain current MT
Refreshed Value Communication
Complete (30%)
Complete (100%)
Complete (100%)
10 Re
40 Re
Leadership-centered iGIP proposal
1 piloting GE report
Communication education for members
1. 2.
5 co-sales meeting with MCVP
1.
Specify and sustain current LC
1.
1 final proposal updated
BD 1516
sub-product: IT with FPT for
2.
Training delivered to MCVP &
1 National product portfolio
FTU HCMC, MT Japan for FTU
LCVP iGIP 1617 in iGIP Summit
with BD-iGIP integrated.
Hanoi, MT other for Hanoi
2016
2.
GE guideline 2.0 with product package, pricing, and incentive
initiative to drive big deal. • •
Revise National BD focus on
•
Implement GE output of 1516
Integrate the training content into
supporting X program
•
Conduct market analysis
MEC for Salesman
Work out on iGIP National deliver
nationally to come up with MT
model (BD-iGIP) if necessary
Other long-term direction.
1. KPIs 2. Strategic Projects Review
Talent Capacity result is reflected through 4 main criteria
Member Efficiency
HR Allocation
3,4 Ma/ma./6m
115 members
0,8 Re/mem./6m
25% TLP
0.78 Re/6 months (Globally 0.4 Re/6 months)
81 (AIESEC VN 623) 19 TLP â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 62 TMP
Member Activeness
Retention Rate
80%
80%
N/A
75%
3.5 3
3.4 App/mem./6m
3.2
0.8 Re/mem./6m
2.6
2.5 2
1.8
1.6
1.6
1.5 1
1
0.8
0.6
0.5 0
0
0
APPROVE HCMC
ALL FTU HCMC
FTU HN
Hanoi
Danang
*National Average (by 6 months): APPROVE = 2.4 App/matcher/6 months
REALIZE = 0.78 Re/member/6 months
2.5 2 2
1.5
1
1.3 1
1.3
0.9 0.6
0.5
0.6 0.3
0.425 0.2
0 APPROVE Q3/2015
ALL Q4/2015
Q1/2016
Q2/2016
Average
*National Average (by quarter) APPROVE = 1.3 Ma/matcher/quarter
REALIZE = 0.425 Re/member/quarter
SALES → No measurements are we do not track the conversion rate from Ra – Re anymore LC are recommended to measure the Sales Efficiency to keep track salesman performance
APPROVE & REALIZE • Approve result is 0.6 higher than the same period previous year as the result of:
1.3 Ma
o
National direction to drive results through IR & matching consultancy space.
o
Fully implemented iGIP Refreshed Process to minimize effort on Ra & shift into Matching.
o
LC structure support a big focus on matching with at least 1/3 members doing matching JD
o
We have fewer members (65 on average, compared to 80 last term) but deliver more results.
• However, the results come mainly from LC HCMC and LC FTU Hanoi who achieved massive growth
0.4 Re
in ME. All other LC are below national average. • Also, the Matching & General efficiency does not increase much compared to last year.
We’ve grown in the Efficiency, but we will need more members in the long run to avoid heavy workload.
Improving matching efficiency should be a focus for LC FTU HCMC & Hanoi.
65 members LC JD Allocation 20 18
16
3
4 3
14 12 6 10
7
7
8
2
6 4 4
8
7
6
0
5
2
3
0
HCMC
FTU HCMC
FTU Hanoi Salesman
Matcher
Hanoi ExM
Danang
65 members Q4/15 (Matching + Realize peak)
Q3/15 (Raising peak)
HR allocation movement •
19%
21%
Gradually growing in ExM members
and decrease slightly in salesmen.
33% 49%
•
The HR allocation does not go accordingly with peak focus (Q3-Q4)
18% 32% 46%
45%
•
13%
15%
Reallocate Matching & ExM job to salesmen after finishing sales peak in
Q2/156 (Matching + Realize peak)
Q1/16 (Raising peak)
37%
Suggestion
November. •
# of matchers should account for at
least 40% of total members in LC to 43%
Salesman Matcher Exp Manager
35%
52%
handle the big peak. •
42%
LCVP should constantly revise the talent plan monthly to have accurate prediction for recruitment & training.
65 members LC Leadership Position 20 18
16 4
5
14
4
12 10 8 6
3 13
13
12 1
4 6 2
4
0
HCMC
FTU HCMC
FTU Hanoi TMP
TLP
Hanoi
Danang
65 members Q4/15 (Matching + Realize peak)
Q3/15 (Raising peak)
HR allocation movement • Increase (but not significantly) in the number of leadership position for
31%
31%
members to take. • One of the key reasons why member
26%
69%
69%
reallocate/head for future is lack of career path in iGIP Commission.
Q1/16 (Raising peak)
74%
Q2/16 (Matching + Realize peak)
Suggestion • For members not selected as OCP: provide a more intensive functional
21%
(sales/matching) experience.
21%
• For members not selected as LCVPs: adjust new OCP JD to reallocate with
TMP TLP
79%
79%
different learning points. • Work with MCVP to recommend new
national leadership position.
65 members LC Member Level Criteria 20 18
16
1
2 2
14 12
7 6
5
10
0 8
3
6 4
9
10
0
9 6
2
5
0
HCMC
FTU HCMC
FTU Hanoi Newbie
Junior
Hanoi Senior
Danang
65 members Q4/15 (Matching + Realize peak)
Q3/15 (Raising peak)
HR allocation movement Newbies account for more than 50% of the commission due to August pocket
8
8
recruitment of LC HCMC (GCP to 34
5
23
41
prepare for winter). Suggestion
38
• 21 39
sustain results in the next batch.
Q2/16 (Matching + Realize peak)
Q1/16 (Raising peak)
Maintain the number of Oldies to
•
Create and provide more intensive working experience during peak time
2
2
to develop newbies into oldies level.
17
Newbie Junior Senior
• 22
Encourage potential newbies to join ReCo & NatCo to equip them with
26
sufficient skills to perform.
33
•
Work with MCVP to finalize regional training timeline.
No Data tracking from national level
LC should retrieve data from LC management tool
18
82%
89%
Avg. Response Rate = 83% # of promoter = 28 # of passive = 15 # of detractor = 11
88%
16 2 14 2 12
4 2
6
10
67% 3
8
80%
6
1
10 4
8
7
3
2 2 0
HCMC
FTU HCMC
FTU Hanoi # Promoter
# Passive
Hanoi # Detractor
2 1 1
Danang
LC FTU HCMC
LC HCMC
LC FTU Hanoi
13%
14%
29% 14%
50%
20%
50%
37% 72%
21%
52%
LC Danang
LC Hanoi
28% 17% 25%
33%
Promoter Passive Detractor
50%
50%
25%
Retention Rate 20
82%
18 0 16
3
78% 69%
1 3
1
14 2 12
4
67%
5
10
3
0
8 6
3 12
1 9
4
60%
8
2 5
2
0 1 2
0
HCMC
FTU HCMC
FTU Hanoi Stay
Reallocate
Head
Hanoi Leak
Danang
80%
Retention rate reached 75% thanks to: Maintain the organic # of “Head for future” and reduce # of leak with higher member learning & development.
6%
Higher RR for middle managers: 6/10
OCP & Managers will be likely to stay
20%
Stay
with iGIP (rotate OCP position, NST
Reallocate
recruitment)
Head
Recommendation: • Apply the recruitment and development timeline effectively to retain the best talents
55% 19%
Leak
Recruitment
Development
Management
Complete (70%)
Complete (100%)
Complete (0%)
1.
Std. recruitment process
1.
MEC for sales & match
1. Member management
2.
Assessor pool training
2.
MEC for LCVP
3.
National education timeline
115 members recruited
system integration
Member Efficiency = 0.78
2. Revise member level criteria N/A
RE/member/6 months 1. 2.
Implementing
1.
Functional visit & regional
recruitment in Aug 2015
training customized based
iGIP Talent profile revised
on LC reality
for sales & marketing JD.
2.
Matching
auditing
N/A
fully
implemented Revise timeline for 2nd batch
Empower LC for sales auditing
Revise TM-iGIP synergy
Assessor pool â&#x20AC;&#x201C; skillset building
MEC implementation for
Integrate iGIP Activeness
Talent profile for HR & Faci
incoming LCVP
tracking into TM operation
1. CLO & CLS 2. Strategic Projects Review
National CRM Workspace
NPS System
S & S Implementation
Complete (50%)
Complete (100%)
Cancelled
1.
System set-up
Integrate the offline NPS
1. Burning issues waterfall
2.
Intern legality information
system into Intern Workspace
2. Revise JD, Logistics and
monthly report
to centralize all information
Living block 3. Exp & learning foundation
100% intern database updated
1 NPS system
NPS = 55 Response Rate = 80%
1.
Workspace simplified
1.
EP journey map completed
2.
50% Commission Update
2.
Questionnaire for 3 status
with built-in apps.
Approved,
Realized
Completed done
Consider developing it into the
Review AI system and revise
official working channel for
integration flow
Experience Management
&
*Due to the introduction of new system on EXPA, we wait for the
data analysis function to work*
our service delivery to interns because: o
Lack of data analysis due to the shutdown of CustomerGauge system & myaiesec.net
o
Lack of HR capacity in the national level to create more strategic projects.
• Also, no strategies are created for business sectors as not a focus block in the context of 1516. • Two important things are maintained for customer service throughout the term: o
TN Quality Standards as a part of legal contract & JD approval.
o
Bulk sales policy for ET Sub-product to provide more values to business partners.
16 Standards for X
• During term 1516, there’s no strategic plan to improve
1. Commission Development 2. National iGIP Timeline 2.0
0
1415
0
1314
0
DN
DN
1516
10
1415
1
1314
5
HCM
1415
12 6
FHCM
24
1415 4
10
1415
1 5 32
1415
16 6 31
1415
17
1314
1516
42
1415
12 9 10
4
1516
FHN
FHN
0
1516
17
0
1314
1314
1516
1314
0
1516
FHCM
HCM
31
1314
1415
1314
1516
1314
0
1516
HN
HN
1516
1516
45
1415
10
1314 20
30
40
50
7
0
10
20
30
40
50
NATIONAL IGIP TIMELINE 2.0
Entity Timeline
MC2MC Indvl Transition OPS Engagement
Apr
NPM May
IGNITE Jul
IC Aug
Sep
Ma
Jun
Jul Sales Pocket Recruitment
OCP Recruitment
Role Preparation Indvl Transition OPS Engagement MEC Delivery
LC Transition
MEC Delivery
Dec
IPM
Jan
Feb
APC Mar
Ma
Ma
May
Nov
ILEAD
Ra Re
Re Apr
Oct
F(x)
NPM
ReCo
Q1 Visit
Succession Planning Role Selection
MC Replanning F(x)
Ra
Ra
Q4 Visit
Succession Planning Role Preparation
F(x)
Jun
Induction Camp
LC Timeline
Q3 Visit
Succession Planning Role Marketing
MC Planning
F(x) ReCo
iGIP Operation
Q2 Visit
Aug Induction Camp
Sep
Re Oct
Fall Recruitment
OCP Camp
Nov
Role Preparation LC Review MEC Delivery
MEC Delivery
Jan
Feb
Induction Camp
LC Planning
MEC Delivery
Dec
Re
MEC Delivery
MEC Delivery
Mar Spring Recruitment
OCP Recruitment LC Replanning
OCP Camp Role Marketing & Preparation
LCVP Recruitment MEC Delivery
(2) Planning & Implementation
THE LOGIC BEHIND: *Facts: •
•
We spend on average 4-5 months on planning & review, another 1.5
•
Plan must be made/revised at least 6 months before peak.
•
Ideal timeline:
months on conferences & holiday, which means we only have 6
o
W1 May: MCVP 80% equipped with program reality.
months to implement our plan!
o
W2 May: iGIP F(x) Summit (MCVP & LCVP 2 terms):
And…yet we rarely open the plan again during the term. Therefore, all
evaluate performance with inputs from both side. Create
those efforts and perspiration are wasted.
iGIP Program plan 1.0 for next term.
Let’s stop the madness
o
In the next 2 weeks: validate the feasibility of Plan 1.0 with facts & figures. LCVPs start drafting LC plan.
(1) Transition & On-boarding •
Deadline for new MCVP recruited is beginning of Mar. From Mar-
o
term. Clarify the LCP role in driving iGIP plan.
o o o
The same logic apply for LCVP on-boarding process.
•
OCP Recruitment MUST be done before NatCo to align national agenda.
•
o
W1 Jul: OCP Camp. To equip to team selection knowledge for OCP, and need assessment for Commission Time NatCo.
o
W2-3 Jul: IGNITE. Fully educate plan to all members. OC plan done. Training & Auditing timeline until ILEAD done.
10% training, 20% coaching, 70% on-the-job: focus on the 70%
part is the key for a successful transition process.
W4 Jun: LC plan finalized (with LC coach support). OCP for winter peak recruited.
(2) Individual transition topic (sample here) •
W2 Jun: iGIP Function & MCVP indvl plan done. Launch NST (national team) recruitment.
reality inputs and hands-on leadership exp. However, the
current team is still the final PIC.
W1 Jun: MC Planning. Finalize synergy projects with BO (TM, Fin, Mar, BD…). iGIP Program plan done.
May, the elected should do transition by (1) Engaging with summer peak operation: this helps gather
W4 May: NPM. Educate LCPs about draft direction next
o
W4 Jul: iGIP F(x) Summit (if any). Last change to the plan.
(3) Review & Re-planning •
After 2-3 months of implementation, we need to review our performance and adjust the plan accordingly. Ideal timeline: o
W4 Sep – W2 Oct: Quarter 3 Functional Visit. Conduct physical personal coaching for LCVP/OCP. Deliver ReCo, regional training & auditing as a part of MEC delivery. Final touchpoint for winter peak.
o
W3 Oct: MC Quarter 3 Review. Report & review the progress of
plan implementation. Gathering inputs for adjustments. o
W1 Nov: iGIP F(x) Summit. MC-LC gathering physically to review and adjust the plan for next Summer peak.
o
W2 Nov: MC Mid-term re-planning. Adjust synergy projects within MC team to finalize
o
W4 Nov – W1 Dec: NPM. Educate LCPs about adjusted direction for
summer peak. Support LCPs in driving iGIP plan. •
The rest will go the same as the previous 6 months (OCP Camp, iLEAD, F(x) Summit if necessary)
SUGGESTION?
•
F(x) after ILEAD 2016 was removed due to heavy workload and ineffective delivery (both MC-LC are tired after NatCo). Instead, we focus more on the Summit before EY planning.
•
Always ensure timeline and agenda of each event will serve directly the operation performance at that time.
fb.com/vietquangnguyen fb.com/nguyenxuanphatgl
Quang Nguyen, MCVP iGIP 1516 Phat Nguyen, iGIP Manager 1516