Output STF Exchange 2008

8/14/2019 Output STF Exchange 2008

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/output-stf-exchange-2008 1/55

Goals:

Refresh understanding of who we are and what impact we want to have as

Define the relevance of AIESEC to different stakeholders basing on internal

Outcomes:

Defined AIESEC in Poland relevance in the country

Updated, unified ideal state of the organization in functional subsystems

Reviewed of realization of T-Maps and current state in functional area

Updated initiatives and goals for specific years based on the points mentio

Flow and methodology

1. Building common understanding

a. Presenting the objectives for the meeting and the agenda

b. Our ambitions stated in AIESEC 2010 – how close are we

2. External Assessmenta. Economical, political, social, demography, technology, managem

b. Trends influencing the area, techniques, methods.

c. Characteristics of the market we operate on

d. Relevance of AIESEC

3. Ideal State

a. Numeric Goal reminder

b. Where we want to reach in our area ( KPI & Percentage for CSF –

4. Current State of the Area

a. SWOT of the Area

b. Key Challenges of the area + recommendation/solutions (

c. Realization of the T-Map (SOGA as the source of information)

d. BSC Map Assessment – CSF related to the Area ( refer to KPIs and

e. Topics that need to be addressed

5. Re-Designing The Map

a. Goal, initiatives for each years

6. Recommendations for 6 months

7. Recommendations for the calendar year and brainstorm of the initiatives

b. What will happen beyond 2010 in the area? till 2012 ( we are not using T-

sustainable growth based on health of the organization in the each areaand progress in terms of 2010 ( numeric goals and measure of success ).

Defining key recommendation and areas of attention for second part of the term and each calendar year in each functional areas for MC and LC.



an organisation.

l and external reality

ned above ( discuss)

nt trends shaping Poland today

elated to the area

objectives for each years and ideal state of the area )

Map For that )



GLOBAL:

POLAND:

05-06 06-07 07-08 08

RealizedPlan Realized% RealizRealtive Growth Plan Plan

647 822 459 56% -30% 902 1048

344 482 253 52% -27% 551 634

303 340 201 59% -32% 351 429

850 1010 950 94% 11% 1099 1221

322 200 62% 364 409100 50 50% 112 171

without last 20 days of Dec.



09 09/10

Plan

1197

705

492

1330

455232



TRENDS:

OGXnegatywne pozytywne negaty

otwarcie granic otwarcie granic

latwosc wyjazdu ciezko dostac Wize Sc

popularnosc wyjazdu malo atrakcyjni dla Eu

coraz wiecej dobrych wolontariatu ujemny bilans handlo

Erasmus, Leonardo duzo firm It to firmy m

otwarcie rynków pracy many good, qualified

other student organiza

dynamic market

studia za granica (otwartosc)

duzo mozliwosci naukowych wyjazdu

Wiele nowych korporacji

rozwoj spoleczenstwa i dobrobytu

KOŁA NAUKOWE

AEGEE

ELSA

BEST

IAESTE

Junior Chamber International

1. Dokąd można wyjechać na praktykę?

głównie Europa (ELSA, BEST, AEGEE)

Niedługo możemy odcwzrostu gosp. firmy skpolskim rynku

jako emergingmarket i chca

wyjezdzaja na

inne organizacje studenckie (corazsilniejsze)

wzrost poziomuzycia

słaba pozycja Polski jaatrakcyjnego w BIZ

licencjacie,

zapotrzebowanie

miedzynarodowosc (bliska -WENA,CEE) traci sile jako selling point

-

on ra y m e zyucze n ane po ,lub 1 roku za granica dyplom 2

sytuacja rynku w polsce

(zapotrzebowanie na inzynierow),



szerzej - IAESTE ( 91 krajów)

JCI (100 krajów

2. rodzaje praktyk:

IAESTE (techniczne (inzynieryjne, maszyny, architektura, ma

AEGEE (cos podobnego do CEEDow, wakacyjne, summer cam

ELSA (banki, kancelaria, firmy konsultingowe, kilkaset prakty

BEST (kursy inzynierskie prowadzone prze osoby wyjezdzajac

JCI (rozwoj umiejetnosci trenerskich)3. zasady wyjazdu, członkostwa itp. itd.:

AEGEE( składka członkowska, legitymacja członkowska, do 3

ELSA (2-78 tygodni -praktyka, ludzie z zewnatrz wyjezdzaja, o

IAESTE (wyjazd do 3 razy (przed 2 i 3 odpowiednio 200% i 30

BEST (zapisac się na konkretny kurs, poza organizacja BEST, l

4. jak wygląda matchowanie?

ELSA, BEST - mają swoje intranety

reszta nei wiadomo

5. recepcja:znacząco rozwinięta tylko w IAESTE - wygląda podobnie jak u

OUT TOOLS AND RESOURCES

ICX OGX

- + - +

myaiesec.net myaiesec.net

EVS Erasmus Program EVS

more leverages promotorzy cultural sensitivity

Grants, UE grants Leonardo Program Biura Karier

Alumni

positioning

CRM

Chambers of Commerce

AIESEC doingobligatoryinternships forstudents

Businessorganizations

Corporations (likePwC and China)

współpraca zorganizacjami

studenckimiInternetmarketing

niewykorzystujemyszkół językowychdo promocjipraktykmini TN forms on

websitecooperation withuniversities

benchmarkingpraktykantów



Finance sector

IT sector

AIESEC relevance

OGX ICXbringing know-how and experience for students bringing the missing "

giving unforgetful memories - cultural, using own youth e having great impact o

building cultural understanding building cultural under

increasing internationality indicator bringing young talents

promotion of Poland (being ambassador)

educational factor

using theory in practise

responding to labour market needs



ICXne pozytywne

engen Szerzenie się idei networkingu

ropy Wschodniej granty, fundusze - łatwość dostępu

y duze pieniadze z Urzedow miasta

ikro wiza Schengen (UE)

tudents in Poland

tions

UE mocno stawia na rozwoj SMEs

IT boom

Euroregiony

bliska wspolpraca PL z sąsiadami

współpraca międzynarodowa Polski

marketing miejsc

duze BIZ globalnych marek

dynamic market

Euro 2012

development of finance sector

zuc, ze z powoduupiają się na

Wzrost gospodarczy - obecnie firmyotwierają się na nowe rynki, chetniejinwestują

ko kraju duzo konkretnych programowrozwojowych

,

-

firmom brakuje wykwalifikowanychpracowników

,



agement-brak chętnych, 5 tys. Wymiany, ok.. 60% krótszych niż 3 miesiące)))

ps, selling point - poznanie innej kultury, 2-3 tys. Wymiany, wspierają bardzo Erasmu

)

e, nie ma praktyk w firmie)

lat)

płata: ,

% opłaty), do 32 roku zycia, srednia ocen za ostatni rok, działalność w AIESEC, min,

ist motywacyjny na dany kurs, maksymalnie 40 euro)

nas.



iece" to the organization

development on different sectors (so called issues)

standing

to the organisation





s)

4.0, nie trzeba być członkiem, do 79 tygodnia od 220 do 780 zł za wyjazd)





GLOBAL EXCHANG

2007

Q-1 Q-2

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun JulTOTAL 302 350 298 281 294 535 670

MT 175 180 167 151 152 225 326

TT 30 27 31 33 32 45 43

DT 74 130 77 76 91 186 262

ET 23 13 23 21 19 79 39

Rank Country Total EP TN TN EP TN EP

1 INDIA 1018 829 189 394 54 73 29

2 CHINA, MAINLAND 699 192 507 46 226 60 31

3 GERMANY 547 320 227 46 10

4 TURKEY 487 313 174 129 54 8 4

5 POLAND 485 300 185 81 15 56 12

6 NETHERLANDS 451 130 321 171 21

7 UNITED STATES 372 81 291 3 96 2 87

8 BRAZIL 260 122 138 51 29 2 5

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

Series1

Series2



9 ROMANIA 236 65 171 34 6 2 10

10 CANADA 235 95 140 1 60 9

11 UNITED KINGDOM 211 78 133 9 53 17

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

375

400

425

450

475

500

525

550

575

600

625

650

675

700

725

750

775

800

825

850

522 528

811

553

Total Management ExchangesComparative Quartely Performance

2002 vs. 2003 vs 2004 vs. 2005 vs. 2006 vs. 2

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

80

85

90

95

100

105

110

115

120

125

130

135

140

145

150

155

160

165

170

175

180

88

110

121

134

Total Technical ExchangesComparative Quartely Performance

2002 vs. 2003 vs. 2004 vs. 2005 vs. 2006

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

550

600

650

700

750

800

850

900

950

1000

1050

1100

1150

1200

1250

1300

1350

1400

1450

1500

950

1110

1464

960

Total ExchangeComparative Quartely Perfor

2001 vs. 2002 vs. 2003 vs. 2004 vs. 2005



E STATE

GN Growth

TNs Realise 2007 2006 Growth

Africa 256 233 9.9%

AP 1437 1257 14.3%

CEE 1139 1083 5.2%

MENA 100 87 14.9%

IGN 390 364 7.1%

WENA 1162 1068 8.8%

Grand Total 4484 4092 9.6%

2007 2006 Growth

Africa 150 138 8.7%

AP 1145 723 58.4%

CEE 1173 1198 -2.1%

MENA 80 37 116.2%

IGN 452 408 10.8%

WENA 1491 1552 -3.9%

Grand Total 4491 4056 10.7%

Q-3 Q-4

Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total349 445 480 271 209 4484

210 275 289 157 107 2414

32 46 60 45 29 453

78 86 48 48 63 1219

29 38 83 21 10 398

TN EP TN EP

323 66 39 40 11.35%

65 209 21 41 7.79%

261 148 59 23 6.10%

146 78 30 38 5.43%

152 140 11 18 5.41%

101 125 29 4 5.03%

67 92 9 16 4.15%

42 63 27 41 2.90%

(EP)Realised

% of

Global X



27 126 2 29 2.63%

69 53 25 18 2.62%

50 57 19 6 2.35%

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

75

100

125

150

175

200

225

250

275

300

325

350

375

400

425

450

281

353

426

194

Total Development ExchangesComparative Quartely Performance

2000 vs. 2001 vs. 2002 vs. 2003 vs. 2004

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

59

119

106

79

Total Education Exchanges

Comparative Quartely Performance

2003 vs. 2004 vs. 2005 vs. 2006



2007 Total DT ET M

Country Total EP TN TN EP TN EP TN

POLAND 485 300 185 81 15 56 12 152

Exchange results:

2007 Total MT:

TNs: realised 300 152

raised 518 276

Eps: realised 184 138

raised 242 185

Jul 07-Dec 07 Total MT TNs: realised 170 113

raised 258 127

Eps: realised 98 77

raised 75 65

Relisation Rate:

MT TT ET DT

2007

TN 54% 47% 70% 36%

EP 55% 66% 66% 75%

overal 54% 56% 69% 40%

TN 39% 18% 62% 17%

EP 22% 66% 50% 0%

overal 33% 28% 62% 16%

Jul 07 -Dec 07

Total Available Form

144

16

6

100

111

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

MT TT

Natio

36

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Matched



TNs older than 6 months in the system: 105

Eps older than 6 months in the system: 51

SWOT

weak stronglow re-raising growth in no of TN raised

no graduates recruitment

delivery of contracts

lack of individual apprach towardscompanies - not offer adjustment

existance of internationalpartnerships

2004 2005 2006 2007

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

150

160

170

180

DELIVERY TIME TN SIDE

ET

MT

TT

DT

YEAR

D A Y S

110

120

130

140

150

160

170

180

190

200

210

220

D A Y S



common induction

well developed TM proccesses

low matching tools diversification

Poland as a growth centre

low quality of OPS country focus on exchnage

no quality measurment in X area

ddelivery system of Eps

reintegration

delivery time

quality of Eps

some ideas and recomendation for challen

Schengen visa

we need to adjust and revise whole law manual

formalities working group

changes checking

correct messages to students that are matched to our intern

how it is influencing visa procedure

lack of proper X brand amongstudents and companies

lack of culture of execution(formalities, contracts, delivery)

progress in working withcompanies

not effective usage of matchingtools

concept of usage of targetted

recruitment

lack of innovation and creativity indelivery

low quality of preparationfo Xstage

existance of delivery tools (whatwith usage?)

low interns and retirneesengagement

exchange again as a hot andimportnat topic

lack of knwoledge and GCPs aboutinterns enagagement

poor (or lack) of companiespreparation

lack of diverse message adjustedaccording to students profile,years, university)

coaching and internal selection forX stage

conctact of Eps woth home LCduring internships

lack of usage of global trends inAIESEC and supply and demand



Poland not so attractive for Eastern countries

Poland promotion directed especially to Ukraine and Russia

targetted recruitnemtn

raising quality forms directly for those countries

international cooperation

sending members to those countries for conferences and cee

LC-LC partnerships

sending our facis to OPS to those countrieschecking trends among students in those countries.

Blonia system

think about apprach towards graduates - bechelors

sending those sutedents for summer holidays (1st and 2nd y

connecting possibility of studying abroad nad having AIESEC i

fast track development

EP raising

working on messages - getting feedback from some of the stgetting to know what kind of opportunities would be attractiv

increasing efficeincy of internal recruitment (taking older me

internal X positioning

graduates recruitment (targetting students aLumni organisati

targetted recruitment (revising whole concept - recruiting for

PwC China example

University problems

cooperation with KRASP

development of LC-university cooperationuniversity representatives in BoA

introducing our plans and development opportunities for stud

AIESEC internships credited as obligatory students traineeshi

cooperation with other students organisation and science circ

university representatives on our events

regular meetings with close representatives

OGX performance

right X positioning among students - clear materials and selli

promotion of initiatives like CEE the summer

separate promotion of pools (e.g. DT - voluntary work and de

Erasmus - cooperation, studying and internship in the same ti

socrates people engaged in our reception activities

usage of leanardo programs

sponsorship of OGX (City Halls, Universities, companies)

better information on our website about exchange - that it'ss

cooperation with big companies that have internal exchange

Selling



product portfolio - building and education on local level

increasing ER knowledge and skills

cooperation with media - X positioning

messages adjusting to different market sectors

education about working with TT and NDO sector

targetting technical companies and internships - getting to k

Deliverydiversification of countries that we are cooperating

market research

taking care about awareness of global trends and supply and

documents on conferences

innovative ways of hitting countries and Eps

LC stars



T TT

EP TN EP

140 11 18

- Current

27

1 4

DT ET

TN

EP

National TN Supply

36

246

Available

Total



ANALYZE:

opportunities treatslook at possitive trends in externabigger and bigger competition am

cooperation with GO - grants, X pl inteinsive promotion of other stud

NGO sector exploring offer of some of them is truly sim

Schengen - for UE competition on lobour market

004 2005 2006 2007

DELIVERY TIME EP SIDE

ET

MT

TT

DT

YEAR



socrates programs taking away a l

attractive university opportunities

Schengen for countries not in UE

blonia system

negative trends in external persp

es/weaknesses:

hips about applying

exchange programs (bigcompanies) job abroad not only throughAIESEC



ds

ar)

nternship.

dents, some marketing agniecies or companies that work with certain group of studefor IT students - how to work with them

bers that left organisation)

ons, "promotor" usage etc.

sepcyfic countries, projects - exchange realisation taken out from general one)

ents to univeristy represntatives

s

les on university

g points

elopment with AIESEC or similar)

me.

easy to go with us, it's simple, clear rules and possibilities.

programs



ow how to do so (JDs, companies etc)

demand









nt





GO usage for X planning and growth

BoA usage for X growth

leverages usage

low changes supporters -> enablers

Exchnage positioning

organisations - we do not position our X op

positioning in media (papers, diffe

positioning in bussiness andspecy

students

we have t choose the targetts

proper messages building

diversification and adjusting tools

internal communication

positioning in AIESEC networksX promotion among members

new system usage for communication and

planning

to complicated planning proccess,

differen plans not coherent with each othe

lack usage and working with plan

transition

low X transition EB-EB

executing transition in projects

No of TN takers

good treng of growth

we have to work on quality f TN raised

we need bigger usage of smart raising - ac

education about supply and demand

work on re-raising

education about targetting differe



projects efficiency

we need to increase raising in projects - egood performance of NGO projects

very low raising on national lelvel

bigger Alumni engagemet - not we have to start usage for X gro

education cycle

ops redefinition

existance and usage of edu cycle on LC lel

education about X management

preparation for X stage redefinition

development on X stage

reception

engagementof interns

preparation for X stage redefinition

reintegrationCEEDs usage for exchange development

ceederzy przyejzdzajacy

ceederzy wyjezdzajacy

zaczyna się to dziać, pottzeba wiedzy, prz

coaching

potential members for X

Eps

not proactive attitude in motivating and managingwe lost contact with good, potential members who

low awareness and building this awarnes about goi

induction

sometimes taken just as Induction LCC an

not focused on goals

very long and not efficient

selection:

we neet to revise need of usage of all sele

application seems to be to difficult

efficiency and results of selctin steps

we need to revise profile of potential EP

a lot of members do not have proffessional

recruitment

not enough people on fast track and to fo

small diversification of student!



wrong diversification of students year duri

graduates recruitment

targetted recruitment

we have to capitalize more on younger pe

Building strong culture of X

it's better- improvingwe have big focus on raising, we lack whol

projects as X growth tool

IBXP

members are not aware that the end goal

lack of understanding of X as higher goal a

international partnership

existance

execution

right organisation of execution

delivery

no tracking of EPS

low quality and efficiency of self-matchin

low usage delivery tools

low education about delivery and exchang

delivery is not a topic that is raised in orga

VP X tracking

number of members angaged in delivery

no culture of deliveryno specilists in delivery

IBXP

people from proejcts are not going for X

we stoped focusing on that

strong push on X made that we forget abo

we stoped talking about issue learning



portunities among companies and organisations almost at all

rent specydic sectors magazines,

fic organisations newsletter, papers etc

and channels according to student group

knowledge management

r,

cording to what we have in the system

nt students profiles



pecialy those connected with bussiness market

wth

vel

kladow

members"made a break" for e.g. socrates etc.

ng for X as a part of my proffessional development

nothing further

tion steps

l experience

or X in short time



ng recruitment (not meeting targets)

ple that can go for internships as well.

istic view on X

of their activities, work and initiatives should be X

nd way to develop (being on X and managing X))

e in general

nisation

ut issue X



Statement

P r o c e s s e s

each LC is educated about new IS system

73% of LCs have structured transition over X area

LC structures assure X growth and X management

each LC is fully using effectively exchange module and tools

100% of LCs have structured transition over X area

other things that should happnen

Each LC invests in exchange area

Members go through internal selection for X

Each LC plans X results, tracks them and presents tomembers

each LC uses at least 2 tools for selling (media, calling, businessorganizations)

X education cycle is created and adjusted to role a personplays in the organization



M e m

b e r s :

LCs target students suitable for at least 3 pools

Internal X promotion in each LC

Graduates recruitement

X long term talent plan created

each member raises according to the TN taker flow

each LC identifies and addresses relevant market segments

All incoming interns are presented opportunities to beinvolved in LC

Each member is aware of value of X in their @XP(leadership development)

Members see the role of creating X for others in their own@ XP

Creating high quality opportunities for engagement of long/short term EPs

each account in the LC is properly serviced



E n a b l e r s

each LC uses CRM

Organizations are educates about value of interns’ competencies

diversification of TN raised

effective usage of re-raising

I m p a c t

All X related formalities are implemented in each LC

Each LC has Alumni database

60% of LCs learned to package and sell IBXP

Each LC has international exchange promotion (promote PBoXes)

Reception and preparation is organized according to IXPQS

each member can sell each element of @ product according tocompany’s needs

each LC has adjusted product portfolio for every segment of themarket

Delivery is imporved thansk to international cooperation anddelivery planning

Each members understands the role of Measurement System andprocess is being implemented

Each LC has plan for reception area for whole term (+peopleresponsible)



Each LC effectively uses delivery tools (including self-matchers)

Capitalizing on Alumni Network and 60th anniversary

Polish outgoers and internships are recognized for high quality

Measurement system is implemented in each LC

Coordinators for specific Region

The Map:

International cooperation ( 20% of realized exchanges inPoland through international cooperation)

Sending our members to key countries in order to strikepartnerships.



Commnets

2007

2008

as above

2009

more details

2007

.SHUOLD GO TO 2008

current state:ere is no usage of TN raisign plan and X plan, different numbers are notcoherent with each other. Whole planning is to complicated

current state:alot of education (KK, commission, other), low usage

we need to give X transition not only X responsible but as well to EBimprovements: executing transition in projects

dividing OGX / ICX- Coo. tu support VP in their activities- teams for raising, exchange- putting stress on PBoX to support X mainly- tracking ICX/OGX commission

we mean exchange module:e.g. XMI analyzeravailable forms trackerreports and statistic

star system etc.

Adjusting changes in compendium to MoSLC invests in exchange area (finance support priorities realisation and X growth) - moredetails

Positioning X internally (usage of new system, - check if it;s in communication map

Current State:.there are review boards focused mainly on matchability and cultural preparation

Conclusion:External partners not needed so much during selection (maybe during AC, however thisis not that important at that pointof time).We have no external partners during selection when it;s divided.We need to simplyfy application and selection process



.SHOULD GO TO 2008

STILL RELEVANT

2008

2009

2007

2008

Current state:much bigger focus on X in most of LCs There are opportunities to interact with interns.No usage of coachning, PGS, career planing for X promotionno direct tools used to motivate members to for XConclussionsstart puting X in coaching, PGS, career planing

.put X in coaching, PGS, career planing

.profiling ex-interns (I am an Intren campaign)

.Usage of bologna systemuse university authorities for promotion and students alumni groups.attracting 5th year students and ex-students:)

.Education cycle adjusted. Trainings on: delivery, role of X

.Structure customized to support X (X teams, X coordinators, X responsibles in projects)

.Defined profiles and needs of members

.Opportunities created and presented % executed

.planing recruitment of students from 1-3 year from diversified backgrounds - building Xpipeline for the next few years

current state:no knowledge about TN raising flow - raising is more randomgrowth in TN raises more as an outcome of general focus than of skills and abilitiesoften low quality of TNs raised

currrent state:most of LC do market researchthere is problem with proper usage of it and quality

we are not taking to much learning from itmany projects did not target proper segmentNEED IMPROVEMENTS

current state:there is almost no knowledge about servicing and its not a topicservicing is more random than planed and standarazed or adjusted to company workstylelow retentiona rate of partnerssHOULD GO TO 2008



2009

2007

2008

members are educated about TN flowfurther education about sellingmembers know their LCs portfolioMembers know how to ensure quality of raised Xes

gathering feedback and CRM improvementsmembers education about it;s usageexecuting usage

Each LC promotes Xes in external environmenInterns participate in LC networking meetings

LC helps new companies to network with current LC partners (?)members are skilled to sell C in proper way

each LC has raising plan that is concerning pool diversificationeach LC has it's markets segmentedkey segments are targetted

going and exploring NGO marketeducation about technical internships, prfiles, students, companeis, JDstargetting IT sector

re-raising cmapaignsmembers able to built long relationships with companies.

still big problem with delivery ofinternshipscontracts exist ut are not executedthere is no delivery planning (2 motnhs planning seems to be irrelevant)should go to 2008

MS - not relevant any morechange to certyfication and surveys in new systemEbs and members education about how is it workingsetting rules and standards about usage

changes in polish low - we need to revise low manualworking group about formalities to adjust manual and educate X commission

STILL RELEVANTnot happening at allrandom reception

Basic things happening, alumni management area more important in each LCgood movement to ER responsiblesupporting enablers

We don’t know how to sell IBXPIBXP is not such a focus and trend anymorewe don;t know how to use NPs and capitalze on them

o Put more stress on country promotion (conferences plus promotion online, WIKIs,forums, etc.)o Each LC has wiki of the LC + website in Englisho Each LC promotes it through different channels in myaiesec.net

o Each project has webpage, wiki in English!!o Running matching manias and promoting them intensively online

o Each intern has an introductory day to the country/LCo Incomming EPs are engaged in LC’s activitieso Each intern has a buddyo PGS with Outgoers and Incomerso Redesigning OPSes and whole preparation concept



2009

2010

o implementation of clear rules of matching (how long form can stay in the database,how many forms they can reject, etc.)o each EP is being trackedo X commission education – more information about innovative ways of matching –transferring the knowledge to the local levelo Implementing new ways of delivery (internet marketing – movies, blogs, etc. )- each LCuses at least 3 innovative ways of matching and as the result we have shorter time of delivery= 70 dayso controlling, tracking of EPs is required, education about clear rules of matching,consequences (fees, financial penalties)

o LC-LC partnerships based on research, mutual needs and market opportunitieso Clear rules of cooperation, contracts, agreements, constant communicationo Focus on delivery of contracts, effective usage of targeted recruitmento C-C partnerships continuing, based on LCs’ needs

o Each LC has a long term relations with alumnio Each LC organizes local initiatives around the anniversary, knows how to capitalize onthem



Additional for 2008

keep tracking the usage andknowledge among LCmemebrs

focus on basic exchnageknowledge that we missed inPoland - TN raising, delivery,building delivery model etc..education cycle includescultual preparation from themoment of joining AIESEC.Using tools like local and

national conferences, LCMs,reception activities, re-integration activities,coaching.Using externas, NGOs,Alumnisl to deliver knowledge





already in ER map

it's in ER map but can stay as well

that should be added

already in ER map

go to processes

there is strong need aboutmembers awarness of oursupply and demand and whatis the situation in the system'we need bigger VP Xeducation about Xmanagement in LC



already in ER map



6 months 2008

EP recruitment

spring realisation rate

graduates Eps

targetted TNs

re-raising Eps

internal projects preparationCEE the summer BDM and CEEDs development

myaiesec.net usage X positioning

non corporate sector exploring

star system exchange

X positioning grants

delivery development leverages

diversyfication

EPs X investments planning

TNsOGX management holidays planning and right usage

raising re-raising

tracking KRASP cooperation

delivery model

coaching law manual revision

contracts

recruitment promotion

raising quality

transition

structure changes

exchangemodule

execution of current

signing up fornext term



OGX

retentiona rate of memebrs

reatlisation rate

ICX

realisation rate



wzratsa raising form, ale nie idzie za tym fakt dobrej edukacji czlonkow i posi

OPS narodowy

elastycznosc

dostosowanie do edu cycle

wiecej,na poziomie lokalnym

przygotowanie dlugoflalowe

na ile znamy model kompetencji\

merytoryka nie przyciaga delegatow

może cos w rodzaju konferencji wymianowej razem z OPS

pozycja Polski

z jednejs trony kraj silny, robiący dużo, majacy duze contribution gl

z drugiej ciagle jeszcze kraj malo proaktywny

nie pozycjonujemy się w networkui



iadanych kompetencji sellingowych - wiele wprowadzanych form jest niejakosciowych

balnie



Date post:	31-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	korzec
View:	221 times
Download:	0 times

Output STF Exchange 2008

Documents