TMP RCTM reportAutumn 2014

AIESEC in Slovakia

Applications plan fulfilment (overall)

154%522/340

Applications plan fulfilment (LCs)

• PO: 47/20 - 235%

• KE: 138/60 - 230%

• CU: 93/66 - 141%

• TT: 39/28 - 139%

• BA: 80/58 - 138%

• BB: 65/58 - 112%

• NR: 41/50 - 82%

LCs absolute contribution

NR 8 %BB

13 %

BA 16 %

TT 8 % CU

18 %

KE 27 %

PO 9 %

Members plan fulfilment (overall)

98%167/170

Members plan fulfilment (LCs)

• PO: 17/10 - 170%

• BA: 32/29 - 110%

• KE: 31/30 - 103%

• TT: 14/14 - 100%

• BB: 26/29 - 90%

• CU: 28/33 - 85%

• NR: 19/25 - 76%

LCs absolute contribution

NR 11 %

CU 17 %

BB 16 % TT

8 %

KE 19 %

BA 19 %

PO 10 %

Conversion rate (overall)

32%1 out of 3 people

Conversion rate (overall)

32%1 out of 3 people

Conclusions:

• promotion did earn sufficient number of applications on every LC except for LC Nitra

• conversion rate of 32% may suggest either less efficient targeting of campaign or increased focus on quality this year

• according to information from VP TMs, the selection of only the most qualitative members was the case

Applications per weeksBA CU TT NR BB PO KE

week 1 11 (14%) 6 (6%) 2 (5%) 6 (15%) 3 (5%) 6 (13%) ?

week 2 12 (15%)

34 (37%) 4 (10%) 3 (7%) 18

(28%) 3 (6%) ?

week 3 20 (25%)

13 (14%) 4 (10%) 5 (12%) 18

(28%) 6 (13%) ?

week 4 14 (17%)

16 (17%) 9 (23%) 5 (12%) 15

(23%)19

(40%) ?

week 5 23 (29%)

24 (26%)

20 (52%)

22 (54%)

12 (16%)

13 (28%) ?

Applications per weeksBA CU TT NR BB PO KE

week 1 11 (14%) 6 (6%) 2 (5%) 6 (15%) 3 (5%) 6 (13%) ?

week 2 12 (15%)

34 (37%) 4 (10%) 3 (7%) 18

(28%) 3 (6%) ?

week 3 20 (25%)

13 (14%) 4 (10%) 5 (12%) 18

(28%) 6 (13%) ?

week 4 14 (17%)

16 (17%) 9 (23%) 5 (12%) 15

(23%)19

(40%) ?

week 5 23 (29%)

24 (26%)

20 (52%)

22 (54%)

12 (16%)

13 (28%) ?

Suggestions:

• take these distributions into consideration when planning your next RCTM activities

• do not rely on last week to deliver you most of your applications, it may not (case of Nitra this year)

• try to balance your application numbers amongst the weeks (like BA and BB this year)

Year of study distribution• Bachelor 1st: 304

• Bachelor 2nd: 88

• Bachelor 3rd: 43

• Master 1st: 53

• Master 2nd: 20

• Graduate: 18

Relative distribution

Gr 3 %

Ma 2 4 %

Ma 1 10 %

Ba 3 8 %

Ba 2 17 %

Ba 1 58 %

Year of study distribution• Bachelor 1st: 304

• Bachelor 2nd: 88

• Bachelor 3rd: 43

• Master 1st: 53

• Master 2nd: 20

• Graduate: 18

Relative distribution

CU 3 %

Ma 2 4 %

Ma 1 10 %

Ba 3 8 %

Ba 2 17 %

Ba 1 58 %

Conclusions:

• year of study based targeting worked

• we can see a decreasing trend with each next year of study (except for an anomaly with first year master students

• the anomaly may be caused by students previously studying on a different university who were not in touch with AIESEC before

Sources of information• enrolments: 182

• friends: 154

• posters: 149

• Facebook: 97

• web page: 70

• other: 57

• university web: 46

• other social media: 14

Relative distribution

2 %6 %7 %

9 %

13 %

19 %

20 %

24 %

enrolments friends postersFacebook web page otheruniversity web other social media

Sources of information• enrolments: 182

• friends: 154

• posters: 149

• Facebook: 97

• web page: 70

• other: 57

• university web: 46

• other social media: 14

Relative distribution

2 %6 %7 %

9 %

13 %

19 %

20 %

24 %

enrolments friends postersFacebook web page otheruniversity web other social media

Conclusions:

• for the first time our planned and executed activities (enrolments and events) beat the word of mouth (friends)

• activities executed solely by the MC contributed for 43% (posters, social media, web)

• LCs major focus should be proper execution of enrolments presentations and powerful each-one-get-one campaigns (enrolments and friends)

Sources of motivation• new experiences: 403

• new people: 353

• contacts: 336

• internationalism: 318

• english: 317

• theory in practice: 255

• leadership: 227

• other: 28

Relative distribution

1 %10 %

11 %

14 %

14 % 15 %

16 %

18 %

new experiences new peoplecontacts internationalismenglish theory in practiceleadership other

Sources of motivation• theory in practice: 255

• new experiences: 403

• english: 317

• new people: 353

• internationalism: 318

• contacts: 336

• leadership: 227

• other: 28

Relative distribution

1 %10 %

15 %

14 %

16 %

14 %

18 %

11 %

theory in practice new experiences englishnew people internationalism contactsleadership other

Conclusions:

• motivational factors are distributed very evenly -> we’re offering good value to our target group

• highest contribution had the factor of new experiences -> focus on this when building next campaign

• lowest contribution had the leadership factor, which demonstrates intangibility of this word to our target group

• theory in practice often used in the past was also amongst the lowest of the contributors

• only 1% of our target group wanted something else entirely from AIESEC

Areas of interest

• international projects: 236

• event management: 127

• sales: 86

• marketing: 68

Relative distribution

13 %

17 %

25 %

46 %

international projects event managementsales marketing

Areas of interest

• sales: 86

• international projects: 236

• marketing: 68

• event management: 127

Relative distribution

25 %

13 %

46 %

17 %

sales international projectsmarketing event management

Conclusions:

• very uneven distribution of interest

• goals were not planned for each sub-product separately and thus the campaign was not adjusted according to this

• we strongly suggest to do this during the next campaign

What did we use?

Newly re-branded FLAT posters

Available here: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4Bo0HCF9diTSUx3TXNUeTdFTm8/edit

What did we use?

Newly re-branded FLAT leafletsAvailable here: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4Bo0HCF9diTTTlNWHk4UFJFRDg/edit

What did we use?

Planned content in Social media calendar across Facebook, Google+, Twitter and our own Blog

What did we use?

Hootsuite - social management tool in order to manage all these online channels

What did we use?

Redesigned webpage of aiesec.sk

What did we use?

Application form embedded in the webpage, unified across all LCs

What did we use?

Editable social media posts templates on canva.com + branding guide on ISUU

Available here: http://issuu.com/aiesec.slovensko/docs/rctm_book

What did we use?

Simple, branded enrolments presentation slides with instructionsAvailable here: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1R1zhjqWBXuMpRvJLvev9gZ_rCG8DXqI8jHCasJ0Vx90/edit?usp=sharing

How much did it cost?rough estimate

Posters: 354,78€

Leaflets: 156,19€

Facebook: 166,06€

Web page: 34,3€

711,33€

How much did it cost?rough estimate

4,26€per member

Was it worth it?Calculations:

• Based on data from last 2 years of SONA, quarterly revenues, costs and numbers of members, the quarterly profit of 1 autumn member is…

Was it worth it?

24,55€per member for 1 quarter

PROFIT

Was it worth it?

8,18€per member for 1 month

PROFIT

Was it worth it?

3388,52€for 1 quarter

PROFIT of campaign

Was it worth it?

YES, it was