February march recruitment report 2014

TMP Recruitment
February/March
2013
Report

Recruitment
process
AIESEC in Poland | Recruitment Report | February/March 2014
Page2
TMP recruitment
report
Promotion Internal
recruitment
Recruitment

Recruitment
process
Page3
17 Local Committees and 1 Initiative Group created Talent Plan based on their exchange plans for Q2 & Q3
2014
Results of last promotion campaign Create your own story was result of 1370 applications for AIESEC in
Poland  it’s 89,72 % of plan realization
8 from 18 entities achieved more than 100% of promotion plan realization: Gdańsk, Olsztyn, Warszawa UW,
Wrocław UT,Lublin, Kraków, Poznań i Łódź
0
50
100
150
200
250
Applications : Planned vs achieved
Number of planned applications Number of achieved applications
Promotion

Recruitment
process
Page4
Local Committee /
Initiative Group
Number of planned
applications
Number of
achieved
applications
% plan realization
March/ February
2014
% plan realization
October 2013
Trend
Katowice UE 95 55 58 99
Kraków 160 210 131 136
Poznań 120 127 106 113
Warszawa UW 80 97 121 121
Warszawa SGH 120 77 64 143
Average : group IV 115 113 96 125
Gdańsk 60 87 145 107
Łódź 90 107 119 122
Lublin 112 114 102 113
Toruń UMK 60 48 80 52
Wrocław UE 125 91 73 201
Wrocław UT 80 91 114 82
Average: group III 88 90 106 110
Białystok 40 33 83 97
Kielce 50 34 68 108
Olsztyn 40 54 135 69
Rzeszów 150 58 39 51
Szczecin 80 68 85 62
Average: group II 72 50 82 66
Nowy Sącz 35 10 28 31
Average for group I 35 10 ? 25
Bielsko- Biała 30 9 30 27
Average : Initiative
Group
30 9 30 27

Recruitment
process
Page5
Average promotion activities took 19 days and average cost was 418 zł. 1 LC used materials from previous
promotion and 1 LC couldn’t count costs of TMP promotion (2 pararell promotions in same time- TMP &
OGX).
Group Average cost of promotion
IV 126,47
III 933
II 139,83
I 270
Initiative Groups 30
The most successful channel for promotion which got the biggest number of applications was on first
place facebook ( 17 from 19 Local Committee , on second Friend/Acquitance from AIESEC (11f rom 19)
and on third place was Friend/ Acquitance (10 from [in this question was possible to choose more than 1
option]
Facebook gave us more than 306 applications, Friend / Acquitance from AIESEC 217 applications and
Friend/ Acquitance around 29 applications  it’s 40 % of total number of applications.
LC Łódź only from those 3 channels received 101 applications – 94, 39 % of plan.
Facebook (14 from 18 Local Committees) Friend / Acquitance from AIESEC (10)
Friend/ Acquitance (6)
Promotion

Recruitment
process
Page6
0
1000
270
433.86
0
100
1500 1500
200
600
300
30
99.14 72
0 0
1000
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
Cost of promotion
Cost of promotion
Promotion

Recruitment
process
Page7
Faculties from which were the biggest number of applications. Number in every square shows how many Local
Committees mention this faculty.
It means that still the biggest potential we have in students of Management and Economy faculties
Management
13
Economy
10
Finance and
accounting
4
English
filology
5
Tourism &
recreation
2
Sociology /
Psychology
4
Promotion

Recruitment
process
Page8
It’s 18,3
member
per LC
331
Members (except EB) was
engaged in promotion
activities
It’s
17member
per LC
313
Members (except EB) was
engaged in Assesment
Center & Reviev Board
process

Recruitment
process
Page9
In 3 from 19 committees more than 50% of members in Local Committee was engaged in Recruitment
Processes -> it is progress to comparison in October, where 6 entities engaged more than half of LC
But still it means that we are putting BIG effort and engage a lot of our human resources into recruitment
process. In result a lot of other processes don’t have enough capacity to work- people are focus on another
activity.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
5
32
44
14
60
50
40
47
66
32
49
35
100
30
20
30
21
13
% of commitee engaged in AC/ RB excluded EB
% members enagaged on RB

Recruitment
process
Page10
Entity Number of planned NEW members Number of recruited NEW
members
% plan realization
Katowice UE 21 24 114
Kraków 53 77 145
Poznań 48 43 90
Warszawa UW 30 35 117
Warszawa SGH 36 38 106
Average for group IV 46 43 114,4
Gdańsk 28 33 118
Łódź 37 33 89
Lublin 64 47 73
Toruń UMK 38 29 76
Wrocław UE 46 48 104
Wrocław UT 45 54 120
Average fro group III 43 40 96,66
Białystok 18 13 72
Kielce 43 27 63
Olsztyn 18 26 144
Rzeszów 75 45 60
Szczecin 47 26 55
Average for group II 40 27 78,8
Nowy Sącz 14 8 57,14
Average for group I 14 8
Bielsko- Biała 14 9 64,29
Average for Initiative Group 14 9
New members :

Recruitment
process
Page11
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
21
53
48
30
36
28
37
64
38
46 45
18
43
18
75
47
14 14
24
77
43
35
38
33 33
47
29
48
54
13
27 26
45
26
8 9
New members: plans vs realization
Number of planned
new members
Number of recruited
new members

Recruitment
process
Page12
Local Committee / Initiative Group Number of planned
members to reallocation
Number of reallocated
members
% plan
realization
Kraków 64 45 70
Poznań 18 26 144
Warszawa UW 19 8 37
Gdańsk 30 30 100
Łódź 7 12 171
Lublin 0 0 -
Toruń UMK 4 5 125
Average fro group III 13 16 149
Białystok 5 9 180
Kielce 15 19 60
Olsztyn 7 6 86
Rzeszów 9 9 100
Szczecin 12 13 109
Average for group II 10 11 107
Nowy Sącz 6 8 133
Average for group I 14 8
Bielsko- Biała 5 4 80
Average for Initiative Group 14 9
Reallocation:

Recruitment
process
Page13
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
24
64
18
19
15
30
7
0
4
20
6
5
15
7
9
12
6
5
20
45
26
8
13
30
12
0
5
20
15
9
19
6
9
13
8
4
Realloction : plans vs realization
Number of plannes
members to
reallocation
Number of
reallocated members

Recruitment
process
Page14
Local Committee / Initiative Group Number of planned people Number of recruited
people
% plan
realization
Kraków 117 122 104
Poznań 66 69 105
Warszawa UW 49 42 86
Gdańsk 58 63 109
Łódź 44 45 102
Lublin 64 47 73
Toruń UMK 42 34 81
Average fro group III 54 54 100
Białystok 23 22 96
Kielce 58 36 62
Olsztyn 25 32 128
Rzeszów 84 54 64
Szczecin 59 39 66
Average for group II 50 37 83,2
Nowy Sącz 20 16 80
Bielsko- Biała 19 13 68
New members + reallocation

Recruitment
process
Page15
45
117
66
49
51
58
44
64
42
66
51
23
58
25
84
59
20 19
44
122
69
42
51
63
45
47
34
68 69
22
36
32
54
39
16
13
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Talent plan in total: plans vs realization
Number of
planned
people
Number of
recruited
people

Recruitment
process
Page16
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Relation of new members to reallocation in recruitment
Reallocation
New members

Recruitment
process
Page17
In total AIESEC in Poland became bigger for 615 new members. It means that we realized our National Talent
Plan (only for new members) in 91,11% <yay>
During this recruitment we were also focus on Internal recruitment. We realized 94,36% of those plans and
251 members get new TMP positions and in result stayed in organization.
So in total we realized 92,03% our plans.
The lowest realization rate was in the Initiative Groups – around 60 %. Other LC’s achieved more than 80%.
8 LCs realized 100% or more of Talent Plan – Kraków, Poznań, Warszawa SGH, Gdańsk, Łódź, Wrocław UE,
Wrocław UT i Olsztyn
Biggest LCs achieve better results in external recruitment -> more than 114%
III cluster achieved the best results in internal recruitment -> almost 150%

Recruitment
process
Page18
More than 73% of new members were women
For AIESEC in Poland in every LC we recruited 27 women and 10 men
Mostly in every committee female members were more than male but in LC Wrocław UT was perfect
proportion: 50% females and 50% males.
In IG Bielsko Biała 89% of recruited members are women.
165450

Recruitment
process
Page19
254
Candidates resign form taking
part in recruitment process It’s was more
than 16% of
total number
of
applications
191
People was rejected
after application
Average – in
every LC we
lost potential
14 candidates
It’s was
12,5% of
total number
of
applications
4 LC’s :
Toruń UMK,
Wrocław UE,
Olsztyn,
Bielsko Biała,
Białystok,
Katowice UE
didn’t reject
925 people we observed during
Assessment Center.
We reject 169 candidates
after this part of process.
It was almost
61% of
applications
which we
received

Recruitment
process
Page20
78 % of new members took part in Local Conferences (the same level of % was in October 2013).
35
54
8
38
47 45
77
29
33
26
48
26
9
13
43
27
24
3335
44
3
33
47
30
66
19
32
26 26
11 0 12
38
20
12
25
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Recruited members vs LCC participants
Recruited members Participants in newbies track

Recruitment
process
Page21
Internal
Recruitment
Internal
Recruitment
We spend more than 145 hours in
preparation whole recruitment process. But a
lot of LC couldn’t write even average number
of hours which they spend. The record-holder
spend more than 48 hour (LC Kielce).
If we add all days spend on recruitment
process as AIESEC in Poland we spend around
172 days in recruiting great people into
organization. It means that every LC spend
around 9,5 days on Assessments and
Review Boards, selection and allocation
(maximum was 18 days, minimum was 2 days).
53%
29%
6%
12%
Allocation
Before LCC
During LCC with earlier
preparation
During LCC
After

Recruitment
process
Page22
Local Committee Plans for
reallocation
Potential for
reallocation
Reallocated
people
Used potential(in %)
Białytstok 5 11 9 82%
Bielsko – Biała 5 0 4 400%
Gdańsk 30 36 30 83%
Katowice UE 24 30 20 67%
Kielce 15 15 9 60%
Kraków 64 70 45 64%
Łódź 7 30 12 40%
Lublin 0 7 0 0%
Nowy Sącz 6 8 8 100%
Olsztyn 7 9 6 67%
Poznań 18 40 26 65%
Rzeszów 9 9 9 100%
Szczecin 12 15 13 87%
Toruń UMK 4 12 5 42%
Warszawa SGH 15 130 13 10%
Warszawa UW 19 10 7 70%
Wrocław UE 20 30 20 67%
Wrocław UT 6 30 15 50%
Sum up 266 492 251 51%
Reallocation : detailed information

Recruitment
process
Page23
Internal
Recruitment
Only in Katowice UE and Kraków all old members were allocated to team without new members. In Rzeszów
and Wrocław UE some teams were created only from TMP-TMP, some were mixed: new members with TMP-
TMP. In other LCs AIESECers were mixed- new with experienced.
To promote possibilities to experienced members mostly we were using google group.
Yes, most of
them
45%
Yes, most of
them (more
than 90%)
44%
Yes, but
only
half of
them
11%
No
0%
Allocation according to members
preference
25%
14%
15%
12%
16%
14%
4%
Internal recruitment channels
Emails of gmail group
Booklet with
information
Promotion campagin-
own idea
Caoachin/mentoring
meeting
Individual talks with
people who are
finishing their TMP
LCM
Promotion campagin-
idea from MC

Recruitment
process
Page24
Difficult situation in
LC
Poor / short
promotion (not
enough ppl )
People resign from
LCC
huge number of
people resign from
taking part in
recruitment and
LCC
AIESEC is not
recognizable on the
university
Applications were
not as qualitative as
in October, even
though there were a
lot of them
Reallocation
Decreasing
number of
members in
teams
Small additional
recruitment (for
5 ppl) - Kraków
Project
comparision
Solutions:
Main reason not achieving Talent Plan goals:

February march recruitment report 2014

More Related Content

Similar to February march recruitment report 2014

More from Karolina Mlenko

February march recruitment report 2014