MC + 1 introduces...
GIP & GCDP report for 2011/2012 Incoming & Outgoing programs Made by Katarina Korcova & Zuzana Saladiakova AIESEC Slovakia
MC PlusOne
Hi AIESEC Slovakia! Welcome to the last Incoming and Outgoing program' program's report for whole term 2011/2012. MC+1 decided to create this report in order to present the reality of incoming and outgoing programs not just on national level but on local as well. By this report, LCs have chance to check their results in 2011/2012 and compare it with other LCs. What is more, LCs can see also their contribution to the results of AIESEC Slovakia. The report is again divided in 3 parts: parts The first part is general so you can find there general statistics statistics of Global Internship Program (GIP) and Global Community Community Development Program (GCDP) (GCDP) mainly from national point of view. The second part is focused mainly on outgoing programs ther except from programs. You can find there general performance of OGP in 2011/2012 also performance of individual LCs. The aim of the third part is to present performance of incoming programs programs in 2011/2012 on national and local level. Furthermore, you will find there interesting rates such as calls/meetings, alls/meetings, meetings/raises etc. and sum up of all data gathered from October O 2011 till May 2012. I hope you will find this report useful. In case you have some feedback towards it, do not hesitate to approach one of the current MC VP responsible for incoming and outgoing programs. Enjoy! ( VP OGP) Katka (exMC VP ICP) & Zuska (exMC
2
AIESEC IESEC Slovakia | DvojkrĂĹžna 47, 82107 Bratislava, Slovak Republic, +421 2 45 52 61 10
MC PlusOne
General part The following graphs are depicting the comparison of terms 2010/2011 and 2011/2012 in both GIP and GCDP realizations. As you can see in GIP area we dropped significantly – there were only 3 months where we either sustained or grew. So this term it was really our weaker side. However, talking about GCDP you can see that it is completely opposite. We managed to grow in almost almo every single month.
GIP RE 20 15 10
GIP 2010/2011 Reality
5 June
May
April
March
February
January
December
November
October
September
August
GIP 2011/2012 Reality July
0
GCDP RE 35 30 25 20 15
GCDP 2010/2011 Reality
10
GCDP 2011/2012 Reality
June
May
April
March
February
January
December
November
October
August
September
0
July
5
Following graphs are showing us the plan vs. reality in all raises, matches and realizations. As I already mentioned GIP was our weaker area and it is strongly visible here as well. The most critical in GIP this term was matching matching as we did not manage to hit our plans in any of the months.
3
AIESEC IESEC Slovakia | Dvojkrížna 47, 82107 Bratislava, Slovak Republic, +421 2 45 52 61 10
MC PlusOne
GIP RA
GIP MA
50
25
40
20
30
15
June
May
April
March
February
January
December
October
November
GIP Reality September
May
0
June
April
March
January
February
December
October
November
September
July
GIP Reality August
GIP Plan
5 July
10 0
10
GIP Plan
August
20
GIP RE 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
GIP Plan GIP Reality
GCDP on the other side was the area that we managed to develop this year. As you can see we were very successful on raising and matching in last quarter what assures healthy pipeline for the next term.
GCDP MA
GCDP RA 50
50
40
40
30
30
4
June
May
April
March
0
February
GCDP Reality
January
10
December
GCDP Reality November
10 October
GCDP Plan
September
20
July
GCDP Plan
August
20
0
AIESEC IESEC Slovakia | Dvojkrížna 47, 82107 Bratislava, Slovak Republic, +421 2 45 52 61 10
MC PlusOne
GCDP RE 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
GCDP Plan GCDP Reality
As per final plan fulfillment, we achieved 58% of the plan what is a bit sad, but on the other hand, we managed not to drop in comparison with previous term. Here you can c see that the performance was much better in GCDP area – 80% plan fulfillment, while in GIP area we did not hit even half of the plan – 39%. 39%
Fulfillment of the plan 11/12 366
214
191
Plan 11/12
175 140
July - June
74
GIP
5
GCDP
GIP+GCDP
AIESEC IESEC Slovakia | Dvojkrížna 47, 82107 Bratislava, Slovak Republic, +421 2 45 52 61 10
MC PlusOne
The highest contributor in GIP area was LC Bratislava, followed by LC Comenius University and LC Banska Bystrica.
GIP Realizations Realizations 2011/2012
15%
33% BB
26% BA
CU
KE
NR
11% 10% 4% TT
In GCDP LC Comenius University was the one that contributed the most, followed by LC Bratislava and again LC Banska Bystrica.
GCDP Realizations 2011/2012
18%
21% BB
6
30% BA
CU
KE
15% NR
10%
TT
AIESEC IESEC Slovakia | Dvojkrížna 47, 82107 Bratislava, Slovak Republic, +421 2 45 52 61 10
MC PlusOne
Outgoing Programs Programs Within the area of outgoing programmes we will start with checking how the LCs contributed towards the results of AIESEC Slovakia as well as how much they were capable to fulfill their LC plans. As you can see we have an LC that managed to fulfill their plan on 100% - LC Trnava. Moreover majority of the LCs managed to fulfill more than 50% of their plans, what is also reflected in final results in the area of outgoing programmes. In terms of contribution towards results in OGP in general, there are two LCs that contributed the most m – LC Comenius University,, closely followed by LC Bratislava. LC
Fulfillment towards LC plan (2011/2012) (2011/2012)
Bratislava Comenius University Banská Bystrica Košice Nitra Trnava
35% 35% 69,8% 69,8%
Fulfillment towards Skia reality (2011/2012) (2011/2012) 25,7% 25,7 % 26,4% 26,4%
59,5% 59,5% 28% 28% 70% 70% 100% 100%
15,7% 15,7% 5% 15% 15% 8,6% ,6%
2011/2012 general performance elow you can see how the LCs as well as Slovakia stands in terms of achieving their plans in Below GIP and GCDP. This term we were more successful in GCDP area fulfilling 66% of our plan. We have three LCs that performed very well in this area – LC Trnava overachieving their goals, LC Nitra hitting it and LC Banska Bystrica missing only 1 realization.
Plan vs. Reality GCDP 2011/2012 Number of GCDP OGP
140
126
120 100 80
83 63 GCDP plan
60 40
33 21
20
17 16
21
12
14 14 2
GCDP reality 8 9
2 0
0
BA
7
BB
CU
KE
NR
TT
PO
Skia
AIESEC IESEC Slovakia | Dvojkrížna 47, 82107 Bratislava, Slovak Republic, +421 2 45 52 61 10
MC PlusOne
In GIP area we clearly underperformed – we fulfilled our plan only on 44% 44%.In this area we have two LCs that performed relatively well – LC Trnava missing 1 realization and LC Comenius University missing 4 realizations. realizations.
Plan vs. Reality GI P 2011/2012
Number of GCDP OGP
140
119
120 100 80 60
52
GIP plan
40
40
20
15
20
6
20 16
13
16
GIP reality
5
7
4 3
0 0
KE
NR
TT
PO
0
BA
BB
CU
Skia
2011/2012 LCs LCs performance LC Bratislava
LC Comenius University
BA OGP OGP 102
CU OGP OGP 70
103
95
55
64 42
Raised
8
Matched
36
Realized
59
53 37
Plan
37
Reality
Plan Reality
Raised
Matched
Realized
AIESEC IESEC Slovakia | Dvojkrížna 47, 82107 Bratislava, Slovak Republic, +421 2 45 52 61 10
MC PlusOne
LC Banská Bystrica
LC Nitra
BB OGP
NR OGP
46
43 37
48
37 23
22
29
Plan
30
30 22
21
Reality
Raised
Matched
Plan Reality
Realized
Raised
Matched
Realized
LC Trnava
LC Košice
KE OGP
TT OGP 23
36
20
28
14
18
Plan 9
Raised
19
25
Matched
12 12
Reality
7
Plan Reality
Realized
Raised
Matched
Realized
IG Prešov
PO OGP 4
4 3 2
Plan
2
Reality
0 Raised
9
Matched
Realized
AIESEC IESEC Slovakia | Dvojkrížna 47, 82107 Bratislava, Slovak Republic, +421 2 45 52 61 10
MC PlusOne
Skia OGP 309 280 245
236
157
140
Plan Reality
Raised
Matched
Realized
Raising: As you can see on the results, raising was the most successful area out of the three. three We managed to achieve 76% of our plan, what as I already mentioned also secured very nice pipeline for upcoming term, leaving 61 available forms forms in the system for next term realizations. Most successful LC in raising was LC Trnava,, that overachieved their raising plan, followed by IG Prešov,, managing to hit their raising plan.
Matching: Fulfillment of plan in matches is the lowest from the three. We achieved 56% from the plan we set. As mentioned in almost every report, matching was our significant problem in the term. As you can see that are two LCs that managed to overachieve their plans – LC Trnava and IG Presov followed by LC Nitra and LC Comenius University managing ing to fulfill over 50% of their matching plans.
Realization: This term we fulfilled 57% of our plan for realizations. As the matching was not as successful as we hoped, it directly influenced the realizations. Therefore we were not even capable to sustain in the number of OGP realizations from last year – we dropped by 11%. 11% In terms of realizations we have one LC that hit their goals – LC Trnava and one that achieved 70% of their plan – LC Nitra. Nitra
10
AIESEC IESEC Slovakia | Dvojkrížna 47, 82107 Bratislava, Slovak Republic, +421 2 45 52 61 10
MC PlusOne
Incoming Programs Programs As in Outgoing Programs also in Incoming programs we will firstly check how the LCs contributed towards the results of AIESEC Slovakia as well as how much they were capable to fulfill their LC plans. LC
Fulfillment towards LC plan (2011/2012) (2011/2012)
Bratislava Comenius University Banská Bystrica Košice Nitra Trnava
36% 36% 135% 135%
Fulfillment towards Skia reality (2011/2012) (2011/2012) 23% 23 % 31% 31%
100% 100% 25% 25% 60% 60% 67% 67%
20% 20% 12% 12% 8% 5%
As you can see, LCs which fulfilled their plan are LC BB and LC CU that even overachieved the plan by 35%. LC TT and LC NR managed to fulfill the plan at 60% and more.. In terms of results of AIESEC Skia from the beginning of the term, LCs which mostly contributed to the results sults are LC CU with 31%, LC BA with 23% and LC BB with 20%.
2011/2012 general performance
Plan vs. Reality GCDP 2011/2012 65
Number of GCDP IC
70
55
60 50 40
GCDP plan
30 20 10
20
16 8
8 10
10
20 6
8 6
4 4
KE
NR
TT
GCDP reality
0 BA
BB
CU
Skia
To sum up general eneral performance of LCs and SKia in 2011/2012, 2011/2012 you can see that LCs performed in GCDP quite well as most of the LCs fulfilled ¾ of their plan, plan even 2 LCs (BB & CU) overachieved it. Although though MC plan was not fulfilled and there is missing 10 more realizations, it can be said that this area can be identified as one of the strongest in 2011/2012.
11
AIESEC IESEC Slovakia | Dvojkrížna 47, 82107 Bratislava, Slovak Republic, +421 2 45 52 61 10
MC PlusOne
In terms of GIP, only LC BB fulfilled the plan for more than 50%. 50%. The biggest gap records LC BA with 22 realizations and LC KE with 13 realizations.. Generally speaking about GIPi' performance, the first irst 8 months was really weak, as there was almost no results resul but finally in March, it moved on and LCs started s to produce some results.
Plan vs. Reality GI P 2011/2012 56
Number of GCDP IC
60 50 40
31
30 20
16
20 9
10
GIP plan GIP reality
7 5
7
3
3
2 1
2 0
BB
CU
KE
NR
TT
0 BA
LC Bratislava
LC Comenius University
BA 11/12 ICP ICP 54
53
CU 11/12 ICP ICP 32
47
29
26
35 26
Matched
23
20
Plan 17
Raised
Skia
17
Reality
Reality
Realized
Raised
LC Banská Bystrica
Matched
Realized
LC Nitra
BB 11/12 ICP
NR 11/12 ICP 11
10
9
29 20
Plan
7
23 21 15 15
Plan
5
6
Reality
Raised
12
Matched
Realized
Plan Reality
Raised
Matched
Realized
AIESEC IESEC Slovakia | Dvojkrížna 47, 82107 Bratislava, Slovak Republic, +421 2 45 52 61 10
MC PlusOne
LC Košice
LC Trnava
KE 11/12 ICP
TT 11/12 ICP
44
7
38
6
36
6 4
Plan 12
Raised
8
Matched
9
Realized
6 4
Reality
Plan Reality
Raised
Matched
Realized
verachieved their plans are LC CU, Raising: In terms of raising, the strongest LCs which overachieved LC BB, LC BA did not achieved the plan but contributed to national national results with 35 raises and LC TT that fulfilled the plan at 100%. 100%. Raises were mainly for GCDP projects organized on LCs and nationally. The strongest LC in GCDP raising was LC CU and in GIP raising LC BA. And what is more, we managed to do more than 100 raises in ICP so Congratulation guys!!
Matching: Generally, we are missing 4 matches to magical 100 but apart of that we did great job in comparison with 53 matches of previous term.. The only LC with 100% fulfillment (even more ☺) of the plan is LC CU. CU The prevalence was clearly on GCDP side. On GIP, there were even 4 months (from Oct to Jan) without any match. The strongest LC in GCDP matching was again LC CU and an in GIP matching LC BB.
etween matches and realizations. realizations Realization: Generally, there are difference 21 internships between It means that there is quite good pipeline for or next term, what is really positive positiv even during the term there were few broken matches. matche But ultimately it did not influence the results so much. Again, most of realizations were on GCDP side in a ratio of 55 GCDP and 20 GIP realizations. LC CU realized the most GCDP internships and LC BA the most GIP internships.
13
AIESEC IESEC Slovakia | Dvojkrížna 47, 82107 Bratislava, Slovak Republic, +421 2 45 52 61 10
MC PlusOne
Slovakia
Skia 11/12 ICP 142
135 121
120 96
75
Plan Reality
Matched
Raised
Realized
In the following charts you can see some indicators of performance performance which were recorded r from October till May.. Generally, we can say that during the term, there were 2 selling waves – the first and at the same time the biggest is from October till December with November as the strongest month and from February till April with March as the strongest month. During this period, Skia managed to make 1168 calls, calls 352 meetings and so 120 raises (GIP+GCDP). (GIP+GCDP).
Calls GIP+GCDP 341
400 300 200
141
135
114
100
190
147 62
38
0
All meetings 60
53
50 40
27
30 20 10 0
14
1st GIP MTG
39
16 10
1st GCDP MTG
26 16 4
36
12 2
10 7
8 0
AIESEC IESEC Slovakia | Dvojkrížna 47, 82107 Bratislava, Slovak Republic, +421 2 45 52 61 10
MC PlusOne
GIP: LCs managed to go for 207 207 meeting
from October till May, from which 157 were 1st
meetings and 50 follow up meetings. meetings The strongest month was November with 65 meetings. The average rate between 1st and follow-up follow meeting is 3, it means that to set 1 follow-up follow GIP meeting, there is need to experience at least 3 first meetings. The average rate between meetings meeting and raises is 11. need to attend in at least 11 meetings. You can see 11 It means that for 1 raise, we needed more detailed statistics below.
Meetings
70 60
12
Follow up GIP MTG 1st GIP MTG
50 6
40 30
53
20
6
10
16
39
7 5 3
0
16
6 12
3 10
5 8
Ratio First MTG/Follow UP
Ratio All MTGs/RA
Ratio First MTG/Follow UP
6,5 4,4 2,3 2,0
Ratio All MTGs/RA
23,0
3,3
2,7
32,5
1,6
0,6
7,5
4,0
8,0
2,6 2,6 4,3
GCDP: LCs managed to go for 146 meetings from October to April, April, from which 82 were 1st meetings and 64 follow ups. In this case March was the strongest month with 40 meetings. The average rate between 1st and follow-up follow meeting is 1,20, follow GCDP 20, it means that to set 1 follow-up meeting, there is need to experience at least 2 first meetings. The average rate between meetings and raises is 3,1 r we needed to attend at least 4 meetings. meetings Again, in case 3,1. It means that for 1 raise, you are interested in detailed statistics, check the charts below.
15
AIESEC IESEC Slovakia | DvojkrĂĹžna 47, 82107 Bratislava, Slovak Republic, +421 2 45 52 61 10
MC PlusOne
Meetings
50 40 8
30 20
12
10
Follow up GCDP MTG 1st GCDP MTG
14
27 5 4
10 0
26
10 6
4 2
11 7
Ratio First MTG/Follow UP 4,0
3,4
Ratio First MTG/Follow UP
3,0
1,9
2,0 1,0
Ratio All MTGs/RA
0,8
0,8 0,6 0,5
Ratio All MTGs/RA
6,0 3,7 3,5 2,3 2,0
0,6
3,1 1,3
0,0
Finally,, I would like to highlight some more statistics.. LCs Cs organized for interns from October till April 106 reception activities and 44 different kinds kinds of activities supporting ICP area generally such as competitions, trainings, LC visits, etc.
Furthermore, LCs managed to attend in
mentioned period 8 networking events. events
That’s it from our side! We hope you found these reports reports useful for you and your LC and we wish you all the best in your term. Katka & Zuska
16
AIESEC IESEC Slovakia | Dvojkrížna 47, 82107 Bratislava, Slovak Republic, +421 2 45 52 61 10