2. Goals year progress
Total X realized Q3 2013:
150
Total X realized Q3 2012:
124
> 23 % of term
So far, we have achieved around 26% of our
yearly results. Taking into consideration that we
passed through 23% of our term (by days), we are
ahead. Looking at results of the last year, we
achieved 38% or our yearly results in Q3. This
means that with this pace, we are bound to
achieve around 400X in the term.
There is only one solution how we can still reach
our targets: making the winter peak bigger than
ever.
3. Total plan fulfillment Q3:
69%
Last year Q3:
87%
GIPo: 69%
GCDPi: 71%
GCDPo: 70%
GIPi: 39%
In terms of plan fulfillment,
our most successful area is
GCDPi, but closely followed
by OGX. GIPi is the weakes
program in Q3.
Comparing to last year, our
plan achievement is almost
20% lower.
Plan fulfillment
Plan Q3
Reality Q3
Year plan
252
158
114
80
39 27
GIPo
71
56
87
62
13 5
GCDPo
GIPi
GCDPi
4. LC plan Q fulfillment
LCs have been growing through the
summer comparing last year. We do
not have an LC that would achieve
its Q3 goals, but we would like to
congratulate to LC Nitra for having
88% plan fulfillment! Great job
Barbari!
When it comes to plan fulfillment in
GIPo, LC Bratislava reached 82% of
their goals, with LC CU and LC Banská
Bystrica with 75% achievement. Thank
you guys for your contribution.
Driver Q plan fulfillment
5. Comparison to last year
2012-2013 Q3
13-14 Q3
Growth
GIPo (Re)
18
27
50%
GCDPi (Re)
41
62
52%
GIPi (Re)
16
5
-68%
GCDPo (Re)
49
56
14%
124
150
21%
This year Q3:
Absolute growth: 26X
Relative growth: 21%
Last year Q3:
Absolute growth: 53X
Rerlative growth: 75%
Comparing to last year, we had a much more successful
summer in GIPo area, since we saw growth of 50%. The
same growth followed in GCDPi, since we have been
focusing on upscaling of our projects since last year.
However, the areas which were quite self-sustainable last
year are becoming weaker-we dropped in GIPi and we
are still growing, but barely in GCDPo.
The biggest issue in GIP og as we overachieved RA in
each month of Q3 but countrywide we had very low
matching rate. Did we recruit right people? Did we
use supply and demand? Did we have well defined
sub-products which we targeted for specific country?
How many people are involved in delivery of GIPo?
Do you plan and track results using RA to MA, MA to RE
retention rate? It’s time answer clearly to this questions
and put extra focus to this program.
80
60
12/13
40
13/14
20
0
GIPo
GCDPi
GIPi
GCDPo
6. Even though the performance of Q3 is higher comparing to previous
years we should always strive to be as good or even better than we
planned to be.
We are not growing fast
enough
•Expected growth at the end of the year comparing to goals achieved
in 2012-2013 73%. It means that it should be our average growth
throughout a year •Growth in Q3 – just 21%
7. Successes
Country results
+ growth in GCDPi
+ growth in TMP/TLP
+ growth in GIPo Re
Strategic innovation
+ new ES concept
+ starting of EP lead & new OPS
+ AI-> strategic focus for IT
+Youth Talent implementation
International positioning
+ GIP IT summit
+ cooperation with CZ & AT
Other
+ LCs alignment (LIC, RCTM
timeline)
+ progress with MC legality
+ ministry negotiation
+ delivery of CEC & Energize
+ fixed venue for all national
conferences
8. Challenges
Others
Results
- growth rate
MC->LC and LC->MC
- GCDPi not planned according communication
to S&D
Košice situation
RCTM - execution
HR
- lack of HR in LCs in summer
webpage
- losing VPs -> LC and MC level NDK
- NST delay and promotion ->
not fulfilled positions
- lack of transition/preparation
in LCs
9. Pipeline building
Plan Q4 Gap Q3
Existing
pipeline
Need to
RaMaRe in
Q4/Q1
MA AV
20
12
28 (36% MR)
4
11
47
GCDPo 7
27
18 (71% MR)
16
8
13
GIPi
18
8
9 (30% MR)
17
4
16
GCDPi
15
25
34 (78% MR)
6
5
37
GIP o
135 X in Q4
85X in Q4 (if we replann all GCDP
for Q1)
Taking into considerations our matching rates
for all programs, we still need to raise, match
and realize extra 48X in Q4 (possibly replan
some for Q4) and realize all forms we have in
our pipeline in order to achieve the plan until
the end of December.
The question is as well: why have our matching
rates dropped so rapidly? (15-20% drop from
prev. year))
10. Plan
Reality
Ra
179
120
67%
Ma
166
89
54%
Ma rate
93%
74%
Goal for Q4:
If we matched just 58% should we expect
just 58% of realization coming during this
Q? Or what should we do different in
order to manage our pipeline for this Q,
fulfil realizations and build strong legacy
for Q1? Which process is bottleneck in
your performance? And don’t forget
that there is GAP in most LCs, how we
can encourage collaboration us as a
country so we can reach results
together? What should be the program
where
you
have
potential
to
overachieve results? Some LCs are
struggling
in
processes
and
performance, what are you doing to
make our country better?
11. Focuses for Q4:
Raising like never before
Matching everything we got
October
November
December
GIP matching of all
current pipeline in the
system (60 forms)
GCDPo raising of under
Global Citizen umbrella
GCDP matching
finalization for a
strong winter peak
Induction of new
members with othe
concept of learning in
practice
GIPi raising in
marketing and BA
segment+ GCDPi
matching with country
partners for ES winter
edition
GIPi Raising in
marketing and BA
segment final sprint
GCDPi raising Educate
Slovakia winter edition
NPS usage and
Customer Experience
Management
All in all Q3 brought a lot
of results our country
didn’t have before for this
time period. Now it’s time
to put all our efforts to the
right focus. In order to be
aligned here are main
country focuses.
Remember that 20% of
efforts bring 80% of results.
We truly believe that this is
the year, this is the period
where we break through
our limits and become
unstoppable..
We can impact our
people, our country and
to
get
desired
development which will
lead to success and pride
as an amazing AIESEC
country.
