SONA Q3

521 views
456 views

Published on

SONA Q3

Published in: Business, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
521
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
175
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

SONA Q3

  1. 1. SONA Q3 :July- September “Health + Performances = Success"
  2. 2. PARAMETERs:  PERFORMANCEs: - Exchange - Exchange + Leadership - Leadership Role - Members - n° of member for each X realized  HEALTH : - costumers relation - Exchange - Communication - Talent Management - Finance - Organizational Structure
  3. 3. Modality of Evaluation: 1. Each Parameter has a score 2. I define the total score for performance and health 3. I calculate an average between performance and health 4. The average is the indicator for the status of each LC
  4. 4. LC’s SITUATION for Q3
  5. 5. ANCONA ANCONA 0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 Customer Relation Exchange Organization alStructure Communicati on Finance Talent Management Serie1
  6. 6. BARI BARI 0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1 1,2 1,4 1,6 1,8 Customer Relation Exchange Organizational Structure Communicatio n Finance Talent Management Serie1
  7. 7. BOLZANO BOLZANO 0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1 1,2 1,4 1,6 1,8 Customer Relation Exchange Organizational Structure Communication Finance Talent Management Serie1
  8. 8. CATANIA: CATANIA 0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 Customer Relation Exchange Organizational Structure Communication Finance Talent Management Serie1
  9. 9. GENOVA GENOVA 0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 Customer Relation Exchange Organizational Structure Communication Finance Talent Management Serie1
  10. 10. MILANO CATTOLICA MILANO CATTOLICA 0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 Customer Relation Exchange Organizational Structure Communication Finance Talent Management Serie1
  11. 11. NAPOLI FEDERICO II NAPOLI FEDERICO II 0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 Customer Relation Exchange Organizational Structure Communication Finance Talent Management Serie1
  12. 12. NAPOLI PARTHENOPE NAPOLI PARTHENOPE 0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 Customer Relation Exchange Organizational Structure Communication Finance Talent Management Serie1
  13. 13. PALERMO PALERMO 0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 Customer Relation Exchange Organizational Structure Communication Finance Talent Management Serie1
  14. 14. PAVIA PAVIA 0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 Customer Relation Exchange Organizational Structure Communicatio n Finance Talent Management Serie1
  15. 15. PISA PISA 0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 Customer Relation Exchange Organizational Structure Communicatio n Finance Talent Management Serie1
  16. 16. ROMA SAPIENZA ROMASAPIENZA 0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1 1,2 1,4 1,6 Customer Relation Exchange Organizational Structure Communicatio n Finance Talent Management Serie1
  17. 17. ROMA TRE ROMA TRE 0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 Customer Relation Exchange Organizational Structure Communicatio n Finance Talent Management Serie1
  18. 18. TORINO TORINO 0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 Customer Relation Exchange Organizational Structure Communicatio n Finance Talent Management Serie1
  19. 19. TRENTO TRENTO 0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1 1,2 1,4 1,6 1,8 Customer Relation Exchange Organizational Structure Communicatio n Finance Talent Management Serie1
  20. 20. TRIESTE TRIESTE 0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 Customer Relation Exchange Organizational Structure Communicatio n Finance Talent Management Serie1
  21. 21. VENEZIA VENEZIA 0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 Customer Relation Exchange Organizational Structure Communicatio n Finance Talent Management Serie1
  22. 22. RANKING Q3 LCs (30 Sept 2010) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ancona BariBolzanoCataniaGenova M ilano Cattolica NapoliFederico 2 NapoliParthenopePalerm o Pavia Pisa Rom a SapienzaRom a Tre Torino Trento TriesteVenezia Serie1
  23. 23. Instructions for graphic  With the graphic you can identify the area that you have to improve  In the next slide you can see the best LCs for each subsystem  You have contact them in order to understand what they did and cover your gaps Try to be RESPONSIBLE
  24. 24. Best LC for each subsystem  Costumer Relation: Torino, Palermo  Exchange: Napoli Federico II, Torino, Trieste  Organizational Structure:Torino  Communication: Milano Cattolica, Pavia  Finance:Venezia  Talent Management:Torino
  25. 25. CLUSTERs Q3
  26. 26. 1th Cluster 8 X 3 X+L 3 LR 15 M 18-24 H AVERAGE 8,9 – 12,6 No one LC is in this cluster for the 1th quarter
  27. 27. 2th Cluster 3 X 2 X+L 1 LR 5 M 12-17 H AVERAGE 5,7 – 8,8 LC: -Milano Cattolica -Napoli Federico II -Torino
  28. 28. 3th Cluster 1 X 1 X+L 0 LR 0 M 6-11 H AVERAGE 0 – 5,6 LCs Ancona Bari Bolzano Catania Genova Napoli Pathenope Palermo Pavia Pisa Roma Sapienza Roma Tre Trento Trieste Venezia
  29. 29. Italian Do it Better… For each question you can contact Silvia, MCVP LCD & Project Silvia.prastani@aiesec.net Good Work…

×