tmp oct 2014
TRANSCRIPT
Future leaders Recruitment report October 2014
* In this report you can find information about results of October recruitment of AIESEC in Poland
Dear AIESEC in Poland,
With huge pleasure, we would like to inform you about results of one of
the biggest recruitment in AIESEC in Poland in this year – our second
Future Leaders Recruitment in October 2014. As members of AIESEC
we spent a lot of time in preparation to this process, we were
promoting FL for long hours, preparing a lot of assessement sheets,
providing knowledge about this process to LCs, but now we should be
proud that we gave an opportunity to so many young people who
want to be part of our amazing organization.
We want to thank all LCVP TMs and LCVP Communications for your
work, engagement and effort during these intense months of
preparation and work. We are really proud of you !
Yours,
Karolina & Ola
MCVP TxP AIESEC in Poland & National Recruitment Coordinator
This Report containS Information About* :
Recruitment process
Result of FL campaign
Internal recruitment
*One LC didn’t fill in this report – LC Nowy Sącz
OVERALL RESULTS
We achieved
110 % plans nationally of
recruitment new members
Further information on next pages
OVERALL RESULTS
We had 1826 applications
We allocated 783 new members, including 31 returnees
We allocated 125 TMP-TMPs
General we allocated
908 people
Realization plans of number of applications
44
110 102
48
246
122
72
19
52
158
60 44
66
156
128 124 126
28 46
161
83
27
304
111
86
13 20
135
45 49
75
264
185
152
67
3
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Plan Realization
Number of applications per Future Leaders sub-program
542
337
947
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
Business Sales Marketing Social Entre.
Results per Future Leaders sub-program (applications stage)
136%
68%
104%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
140%
160%
Social Entre.. Marketing Business Sales
We didn’t achieve 100% of plans only
in Marketing program
(337 people in whole Poland applied for Marketing).
Campaign duration
19
14 14
28
17 14
17 15 15
21
28 26
14
18
25
10
25
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
How many days did the campaign last?
Average duration was 20 days.
Campaign duration • The longest campaign has 2 LCs :
LC Szczecin – 28 days
1,75 applications per day
LC Kielce – 28 days
0,96 applications per day
• The shortes campaign has one LC:
LC Wrocław UT – 10 days
6,7 applications per day
Campaign budget
1282
1448
1000
100
1000
200
0
60
1050
300
200
1612
500
0
600
300
100
Białystok
Gdańsk
Katowice UE
Kielce
Kraków
Lublin
Łódź
Olsztyn
Poznań
Rzeszów
Szczecin
Toruń UMK
Warsaw SGH
Warsaw UW
Wrocław UE
Wrocław UT
IG Bielsko-Biała Only 2 LCs didn’t
have budget for Future Leaders
Campaign - they used materials from last campaign
LCs used the following materials: posters,
leaflets, FL graphics, gadgets, stickers.
Average budget per LC was
634 PLN
Efficiency of our campaign The most effective
channel was FRIENDS – more than 450 apps
The second effective channel was FACEBOOK
8 LCs organized outdoor
promotion
What channels did we use during our campaign?
0
5
10
15
20
25
Stands
Events
Classshouts
Media release
LC Warsaw UW didn’t use direct promotion and didn’t have media releases
Efficiency of our campaign
LC Lublin organized the most number of classshouts
The most number of stands were organized in LC Kielce
LC Białystok and LC Gdańsk had the most number of media releases
Only in Białystok, Katowice, Szczecin, Toruń UMK , Warsaw UW didn’t
organize outdoors events
Campaign sum up
233 people was engaged in Future Leaders promotion
Avarage 29 people was engaged in each LC
One people provided 8 applications
9 LCs had event on facebook to promote FL
The biggest potential we had still in students of
Management and Economy faculties
11 of 18 LCs had at least 1 parallel campaign
We achieved 110% of recruitment plans and 11 LCs achieved
more than 100% (Gdańsk, Kielce, Kraków, Nowy Sącz, Poznań,
Rzeszów, Szczecin, Toruń UMK, Warsaw SGH, Warsaw UW, Wrocław
UE). Situation in LC Szczecin was result of wrong planned Talent Plan
and plan of promotion.
IG Bielsko-Biała achieved only 30%
77% 116%
95% 129% 119%
93% 88%
150%
84% 104% 119%
480%
167%
103% 103% 122% 79%
30%
% of recruitment plans achieved
ALLocation Plans vs Realization
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
100
LC B
iały
sto
k
LC G
dań
sk
LC K
ato
wic
e
LC K
ielc
e
LC K
rakó
w
LC L
ub
lin
LC Ł
ód
ź
LC N
ow
y Są
cz
LC O
lszt
yn
LC P
ozn
ań
LC R
zesz
ów
LC S
zcze
cin
LC T
oru
ń
LC W
arsa
w S
GH
LC W
arsa
w U
W
LC W
rocł
aw U
E
LC W
rocł
aw U
T
IG B
iels
ko-B
iała
Plan
Realization
Allocation Results per Future Leaders sub-program
121%
85% 80%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
140%
Social Enter… Marketing Business Sales
Still we had the worst results in Business Sales sub-program, but they were better than during last recruitment
We allocated in AIESEC 908 members.
65% female 35% male.
Warsaw UW allocated less than 20% of women
3 LCs allocated almost equally of women and
men: : Warsaw SGH, Wrocław UE, Wrocław UT
65% 67% 63% 70% 80% 77% 83% 80% 77% 79%
71% 70% 59%
19%
57% 57%
25%
35% 33% 37% 30% 20% 23% 17% 20% 23% 21%
29% 30% 41%
81%
43% 43%
75%
Women Men
Recruitment and allocation
To recruit 783 people
(new members + returnees)
we needed 346 members.
Most of the members was allocated
to
Social Enterprenuer program
(page 22)
How Many people We Reallocate
5
22
14
0
20
0
5
2
13
8
0
9
4
0
13
5
1
5
18
10
0
15
0
4 3
12
6 8 7
2 0
12
5
1
Applicants Allocated members
Only 4 LCs provided more than 10 TMP-TMP Experiences.
In LCs members didn’t leave for other team experience.
Relation of new members to reallocation in recruitment
17
64 43
22
87
58
32 16
71
25
48 47
79 57 61
42
3
4
18
12
5
15
0
4
1
9
6
10 7
2
0 13
10
1
New Members Reallocation
We can notice that we based most on new members during recruitment
How Many returnees we recruited
0
4
6
0
8
3
1 2 2
0 1 1
11
7
1 1 0 0
2 1
0
8
3
1 1 2
0 1 1
9
4
1 1 0
Applicants Allocated returnees
Only 2 LCs provided more Integrated Experience than 5 per recruitment.
12%
88%
When did you allocate people?
Pre- allocation on each step of the process
After interview
Nobody in AIESEC
in Poland allocated
people on LCC !
It means that OCPs went to LCC
prepared to their structure
33%
39%
22%
6%
How did you allocate people?
Final decision of VP TM and LCP
Final decision of VP TM
Final decision of EB
With engagement of OCPs
Only Warsaw SGH engaged
OCP to allocation. It means that
in most LCs TM had final
decidion about allocation
35%
65%
How long was Group Exercise?
30 min 30 min-60 min
23%
71%
6%
How long was average interview?
Less than 45 min 45 min- 1h 1h -1,5h
In every
LC Group Exercise lastsed
less than one hour
Most of LCs conducted interviews
less than one hour ! (In 94% of LCs RBs lasted less than
45min
and 45 min-1 hour)
It means that whole recruitment process was well-planned
and materials created by MC helped LCs running recruitment.
Preparation to Recruitment
17
10
1
Training for assessors
Simulation of recruitment
Other
How did you prepare people to recruitment process?
Number of LC which use each materials
14 11
15
10 13
5
What materials did you use during recruitment process?
No of LCs which use each materials
Every LCs organized training for assessors and
10 LCs tried to prepare them in practice way.
During recruitment in most of cases used materials prepared by MC
How many people RESignED AFTER EACH ELEMENTS OF RECRiUTMENT PROCESS
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Bia
łyst
ok
Gd
ańsk
Kat
ow
ice
UE
Kie
lce
Kra
ków
Lub
lin
Łód
ź
Ols
ztyn
Pozn
ań
Rze
szó
w
Szcz
ecin
Toru
ń U
MK
War
saw
SG
H
War
saw
UW
Wro
cław
UE
Wro
cław
UT
IG B
iels
ko-B
iała
After application
After Group Exercise
After RB
After LCC
15%
1%
25%
22%
11%
20%
3% 0%
13%
22%
0%
28%
5%
12%
18%
7%
0%
% of people who resigned
% of people who resigned
What was the relations between people who resigned and numer of applications
OUR CHALLENGES during creating report
Not all of data sent by LCs was used in the report. In some cases it is impossible to
create statistics.
Mistakes in providing data for campaigns results, sub-programs results - different answers in different questions
Not filling in full report
Some misunderstandings happened related to names
A few of LCs missed DDLs, that’s why we have to postpone date of published report