Implementation ReportMay-June 2014

*In this report you can find information about results of firstnational campaign of Future Leaders executed by 14 LocalCommittees of AIESEC in Poland.

Table of content1. Introduction.2. Our preparations.3. Overall results.4. Campaign sum up.5. Recruitment and Allocation

Report.6. Conclusions.

Dear AIESEC in Poland,

There is strong „why” behind Future Leaders. Main reason to create it was strongwill to communicate AIESEC ‘s fundamental mission which is leadership development.When it all starts? In the moment when we go to our university, to our colleaguesat classes and present AIESEC encouraging them to join. And from this moment we

should with pride and confidence share what AIESEC is about.We believe that Future Leaders, created with solid research and beautiful dream,

is a solution to attract right talents to help us in creation of the most impactfulyouth network in Poland.Please take a look at our report and find your conclusions- yes, there is still a lot to

be done, but you need to admit that we have a great tool- our own brandedprogram with clear and amazing value preposition!

Program Launch atNational

FunctionalSummit

FutureLeaders

EducationDays

Trainings atNational

FunctionalSummit

Talent Management

FunctionalMeeting

Print out of 9000

leaflets for LCs

Wiki with allmaterials

and guidelines

In times of change what organization needs is to engage every member in it through complex education, training

and feedback. Most of LCs were using Local Committee Meetings and information meetings as way to prepare LC

for campaign. From national point of view education especially around value preposition wasn’t enough to see real

change in the way we communicate with our customers.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Informationmeeting for all

members

Valueprepositiontraining for

OCPs

Valueprepositontraining formarketingstructure

Promotiontraining formarketingstructure

Promotiontraining for

OCPs

Inne

How did you prepare your LC to Future Leaders implementation?

Overall results

We achieved 60% plans nationally.

To see more scroll down the report.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Ka

tow

ice

UE

No

wy S

ącz

Kie

lce

Po

zn

ań

Bia

łysto

k

To

ruń U

MK

Lu

blin

UM

CS

Bie

lsko

-Bia

ła

Łó

dź

Wa

rsza

wa

UW

Wro

cła

w U

E

Rze

szó

w

Wro

cła

w U

T

Szcze

cin

Numerical plans realization

plans

results

Overall results

0%20%40%60%80%

100%120%

Ka

tow

ice

UE

No

wy S

ącz

Kie

lce

Po

zn

ań

Bia

łysto

k

To

ruń U

MK

Lu

blin

UM

CS

Bie

lsko

-Bia

ła

Łó

dź

Wa

rsza

wa

…

Wro

cła

w U

E

Rze

szó

w

Wro

cła

w U

T

Szcze

cin

% of plans achieved

We achieved 60% plans, which means we received 392 applications for AIESEC

in Poland.

Only 1 LC achieved more than 100% (Nowy Sącz); Warszawa UW achieved 98%.

5 LCs had struggles to achieve even 50%.

Results per Future Leaders sub-program(application stage)

We achieved 100% of plans only in Social Enterprenuer program (217 people in whole Poland applied for SE).

68%

38%

100%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Marketing Business Sales Social Entrepreneurs

%

We recruited tp AIESEC 121 new members.

74% female, 26% male.

Two LCs recruited only women (Białystok, Łódź).

3 LCs with perfect proportion (50%): Nowy Sącz, Wrocław UT, Szczecin

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Male

Female

*Warszawa UW, Toruń UMK don’t have those information yet

Campaign sum upNational Promotion started on 5th

of May 201414 LCs took part in

implementation

12 of 14 LCs had at least 1 parallel campaign Someof LCs had 6 campaigns

at once

Averagecampaign last 20 days and cost 150

PLN

Average LC engaged 10

members for active promotion.

Campaign duration

1017 18 18

2521 19

2925

2025

1814 14

First local campaign was initiated by LC Poznań on 23rd of April 2014.

Average duration was 20 days.

50% of LCs hadn’t budget for

Future Leaders Campaign (used

free promotion channels and

materials from MC).

Usage of materials:

5 LCs printed posters for FL,

3 LCs used social media ads

(sponsored posts);

Only 1 LC used google adwords

(Warszawa UW).

Campaign budget

0.00

0.00

0.00

149.00

148.99688.80

0.00

100.00

0.00

400.00

620.00

50.00

0.00

0.00

Katowice UENowy Sącz

KielcePoznań

BiałystokToruń UMK

Lublin UMCSBielsko-Biała

ŁódźWarszawa UW

Wrocław UERzeszów

Wrocław UTSzczecin

Average budget per LC is 150 PLN.

Efficiency of our campaign

Most effective channel is FRIEND (50 % of applicants in 9 from 14 LCs admit that AIESEC was recommended by

person they know and trust).

38% applicants got ot know about AIESEC thanks to Facebook.

Only 5 from 14 LCs organized outdoor events.

Katowice UE

NowySącz

KielcePozna

ńBiałys

tokToruńUMK

LublinUMCS

Bielsko-

BiałaŁódź

WarszawaUW

Wrocław UE

Rzeszów

Wrocław UT

Szczecin

How many online media appearances didyou get?

17 0 0 10 40 0 4 5 0 0 1 3 42 10

How many stands did you organise? 2 1 8 5 8 0 6 5 3 0 1 5 1 0

How many classshouts? 0 1 2 0 5 0 0 12 10 0 0 0 0 4

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Efficiency of our campaignWrocław UT had 32%

of all media

appearances;

Bielsko-Biała made

35% of all classhouts..

2 LCs (Warszawa UW

and Toruń UMK) hadn’t

done any of those

activities.

8 LCs didn’t make

classhouts, 3 stands, 5

LCs didn’t get any media

appearance.

10 7 10 818

6 7 6

20

3 410 13

6

Ka

tow

…

No

wy…

Kie

lce

Po

zn

ań

Bia

łys…

To

ruń…

Lu

blin

…

Bie

lsk…

Łó

dź

Wa

rs…

Wro

cł…

Rze

sz…

Wro

cł…

Szcze

…

How many people from the LC was engaged in promotion of Future

Leaders?128 people were

engaged in FutureLeaders promotion

(average ~10).

7%

29%

64%

Did you have an event on facebook or did you use only the

fanpage to promote FL?

event fanpage both

Most committees had used both events and

fanpage. Only 1 LC usedonly event.

Engagement (online and in the LCs)

Talent Management

Recruitment and allocation part of the report.

To recruit 127 newies we engaged 151 current members(to run interviews, group exercise and screen apps).

Are we successfull already?

Recruitment and allocation

151 people were engaged in recrutiment process (average ~11).

In 71% LCs by now was no skips (10/14); 4 LCs noted 1-5 skips.

Most of the members was allocated to Social Enterprenuer

program

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

Mkt SE BS

Allocation per each program

%

72% of LCs made allocationafter interview.

Only 14% had pre-allocationon each step.

7%

36%

21%

29%

7%

How did you allocate people?

Withengagement ofOCPs

Final decision ofVP TM

Final decision ofVP TM and LCP

Final decision ofEB

Mostly, the final allocationdecision belongs to VP TM

(36%) or VP TM and LCP (21%).

Engaging EB in decisionmaking process is not

standard.

14%

72%

7%7%

When did you allocate people?

Pre- allocation oneach step of theprocess

After interview

On LCC

After LCC

Group Exercise lasted in71% around 45 min - 1h.

4 Committees preparedit for 1h-1,5h

71%

29%

0% 0%

How long was Group Exercise?

45 minutes-1 h

1h-1,5h

1,5h-2 h

Over 2 h

14%

57%

22%

7%

0%

How long was average interview?

30 minutes

30-50 minutes

60 minutes

60-75 minutes

Over 1,5 h

Average interview was ( in57% LCs) around 30-50

minutes.

12

9

13

5

12

2

Membershipprofile

Subprogramprofiles

Groupexercises

Value BasedRecruitment

FileGenerator

Assessmentsheet

Inne

What kind of materials you used?

64%

22%

14%

How much time did you spent on Interviewing all candidates?

1-3 days

3-5 days

5-7 days

7-10 days

Over 10 days

02468

101214

Number of people

How many people resigned after: application

How many people resigned after: Group Exercise

* Toruń doesn’t have those inf. yet

Resignations

Resignations

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

% of general results

How many people resigned after: application

How many people resigned after: Group Exercise

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

How many people resigned after:RB

How many people didn't comefor LCC

Chart shows number of people who:

• resigned after: RB (They were selected but didn't come to LCC )• didn't come for LCC (They were selected & allocated and didn't come)

According to our information no one of new recruits resigned rightafter LCC.

*Toruń, Warszawa UW don’t have those information yet*Szczecin, Katowice didn’t organise LCC

ResignationsNumber of people

Those charts show us if communication is clear and matched to ourexpectations. f numbers of rejection is huge it means that we need to changesomething in our promotion.

*Toruń and Warszawa UW doesn’thave those information yet.

Rejections

05

10152025303540

How many people we rejected after: application

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

% of general results

%

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

How many people werejected after: GroupExercise

How many people werejected after: RB

Challenges we faced creating report

• Mistakes in providing data for campaigns results, sub-programs results-different answers in different questions

•Not filling in full report

•Some misunderstandings happened related to names (for example for stepsof recruitment process etc. )

•A lot of LCs missed DDLs, including 2 LCs send data 3 weeks after DDL

•Lack of basic tracking in the LCs – as outcome we had estimated data notreal data (LCs had difficulties to find data for us)

•Lack of LC controlling of each part of campaign and recruitment (generaldata accessible but lack of specific information)

Not all of data sent by LCs was used in the report. In some cases it isimpossible to create statistics.

Overall Challenges

No strategy and correct bakward planning

Lack of understanding of value preposition of

Future Leaders

Too many campaigns to run at the same time

Targeting and findingnew ways to reach

target

Difficulties buildingcooperation in EB

LC engagement

Building too long applications

Are you innovative in the way youapproach customers?

Do you position all sub-programs?

Do you connect with customer? Do youmake this process joyful for them?

Do you know who is your target and where to find them?

Do you communicate value prepositionof Future Leaders?

How much you demonstrate out valuesand leadership development?

Thoughts to consider

AIESEC in Poland exists to develop responsibleand action-oriented leadership in youth toaddress social and economic issues byempowering collaboration across sectors.

Only in 2013 year we realized 2962 amazing leadership development

experiences for our members. In 2014 year (until 1st of July) it was over 1800

experiences.

This is impact we create, let’s make itBIGGER and BETTER with Future Leaders

program which purpose is to positionAIESEC with it’s true mission. and deliver

develpment of certain amount kind of useful skills with focus on leadership.