This document analyzes data from AIESEC's Online Global Internship Program (OGIP) from July 2012 to March 2013 to understand satisfaction levels among exchange participants (EPs) in different countries. The main conclusions are: 1. India, Brazil and Germany had the most TN providers and satisfaction was highest in India, followed by Germany then Brazil. Poland had many responses but low satisfaction. 2. Satisfaction varied between EP status - it was higher for "Completed & Recommended" EPs compared to "Matched" in India, equal in Germany, and lower in Brazil. 3. Job description alignment was a key driver of satisfaction. Communication and support from host entities could also impact satisfaction levels

1. Quality Suggestion For OGIP
Data from NPS 2012/07/01 – 2013/03/03

2. GRAPHIC ANALYSIS

3. BRAZIL
CHINA, M
AINLAND
CZECH
REPUBLIC
EGYPT GERMANY GHANA INDIA MEXICO POLAND TUNISIA TURKEY URUGUAY
Response 13 2 1 1 10 1 14 4 5 1 7 1
Total NPS 15 -50 0 -100 40 100 50 50 -60 -100 14 0
Com&Re NPS 11 -100 0 -100 40 100 63 50 -67 -100 17 0
Matched 25 0 0 0 40 0 33 50 -50 0 0 0
13 2 1 1 10 1 14 4 5 1 7 1
15
-50
0
-100
40
100
50 50
-60
-100
14
0
11
-100
0
-100
40
100
63
50
-67
-100
17
0
25
0 0 0
40
0
33
50
-50
0 0 0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
Response Total NPS Com&Re NPS Matched
NPS Based on Countries

4. BRAZIL
CHINA, M
AINLAND
CZECH
REPUBLIC
EGYPT GERMANY GHANA INDIA MEXICO POLAND TUNISIA TURKEY URUGUAY
Response 13 2 1 1 10 1 14 4 5 1 7 1
Total NPS 15 -50 0 -100 40 100 50 50 -60 -100 14 0
Com&Re NPS 11 -100 0 -100 40 100 63 50 -67 -100 17 0
Matched 25 0 0 0 40 0 33 50 -50 0 0 0
13 2 1 1 10 1 14 4 5 1 7 1
15
-50
0
-100
40
100
50 50
-60
-100
14
0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
Response Total NPS Com&Re NPS Matched
NPS Based on Countries
Conclusion 1
• Main TN Providers
• India, Brazil, Germany
Conclusion 2
• Satisfaction between main Providers
• India > Germany > Brazil
• Poland might not be a very good choice
(good amount of response but NPS < 0)

5. BRAZIL
CHINA, M
AINLAND
CZECH
REPUBLIC
EGYPT GERMANY GHANA INDIA MEXICO POLAND TUNISIA TURKEY URUGUAY
Response 13 2 1 1 10 1 14 4 5 1 7 1
Total NPS 15 -50 0 -100 40 100 50 50 -60 -100 14 0
Com&Re NPS 11 -100 0 -100 40 100 63 50 -67 -100 17 0
Matched 25 0 0 0 40 0 33 50 -50 0 0 0
13 2 1 1 10 1 14 4 5 1 7 1
11
-100
0
-100
40
100
63
50
-67
-100
17
0
25
0 0 0
40
0
33
50
-50
0 0 0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
Response Total NPS Com&Re NPS Matched
NPS Based on Countries
Conclusion 3
• Satisfaction change between status
• India: Com&Re > Matched
• Germany: Com&Re = Matched
• Brazil: Com&Re < Matched

6. Conclusion 1
• Main TN Providers
– India, Brazil, Germany
Conclusion 2
• Satisfaction between main Providers
– India > Germany > Brazil
• Poland might not be a very good choice for TN (good amount of
response but NPS < 0)
Conclusion 3
• Satisfaction change between status
– India: Com&Re > Matched
– Germany: Com&Re = Matched
– Brazil: Com&Re < Matched
NPS Based on Countries
What makes this
difference? Mindset
about the two
countries?

7. ISSUES AND COMMENTS ANALYSIS

8. Detractor Issues Level 1

9. Detractor Issues Level 2

10. Promoter Issues Level 1

11. Promoter Issues Level 2
7%
7%
6%
5%
4%
4%
4%
4%
4%
4%
51%
% within Promoters
Job-description aligned with the TN form
Cross-cultural working experience
Education, training and tools to fulfill the job
Living diverse cultures and having a multi-cultural
experience
Matching process explanation
Integration into the local culture
Programme benefits explanation
Objectives of the programme
Exchange participant responsibilities & programme
policies (XPP)
Education about The AIESEC Experience
other 24 issues

12. Comment sum up
• Generally, the host entities are not giving enough support for the
trainees in problem solving, logistics or other services
– Problem solving JD misalignments, salary misalignments etc.
– Logistic: accommodation, legal process
– Other service: LC involvement, city induction, TN taker induction
• Almost all host entities are having communication problems
– Not fast responding for the request, especially with the problem solving
– Messages not clearly delivered
• If TN takers are taking care of trainees, satisfaction will be much
better
– Though Indian LCs are not completely taking care of the trainees, but TN
taker there are taking care.
• If culture aspect is extremely good, even if AIESEC part did
bad, trainees are satisfied with the experience

13. Conclusion 4
• JD is the main issue for satisfaction in all countries
– If the JD is clear explained and the same as stated in the TN form, EP will be
satisfied, otherwise, will not.
– Main detractors complains:
• JD’s clarification before going
• JD is not aligned
• Logistic is another issue but if the culture aspect is very strong, the
experience will still produce promoters
Conclusion 5
• Lots of EPs are complaining about the services. Is it an expectation setting
problem or really the host entities problem?
Conclusion 6
• The culture and other stakeholder like TN takers are also contributing to
the satisfaction of the EPs
Based on Issues

14. • All the countries to some extend, the host entities’ service are
not that satisfying, mainly about communication effectiveness
and JD alignments.
• However, we also need to see more if it is an expectation
setting problems.
• Culture experience and professional experience are making
EP satisfied with the experience.
General Conclusion

15. Suggestion 1 Strong alignment with the country partners
• Make sure the TN form is completely right and aligned and work with the country
partners that can guarantee the JD clarification.
Suggestion 2 Expectation Setting
• Change the mindset with certain countries, like India
• Tell all the truth about all the problems that they might encounter.
Suggestion 3 Culture preparation strengthen
• Culture difference explanation  Get support from country partners.
– For example, Russians are colder than you expected when you don’t know each other. Indians
are more relaxed than even Latinos. Germans care a lot about punctuality. Etc.
• Cross-culture adjustment methodology learning.
Suggestion 4 Strengthen the usage of quality reporting tools
• Make sure the EPs now when they have problems who and where they can turn
for help while how they can help the organization to improve
– NPS surveys
– NCB case report
– LC and MC contacts, etc.
General Suggestions