TMP analysis KEYNOTE
-
Upload
jakub-slamka -
Category
Documents
-
view
205 -
download
0
Transcript of TMP analysis KEYNOTE
![Page 1: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
TMP RCTM reportAutumn 2014
AIESEC in Slovakia
![Page 2: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Applications plan fulfilment (overall)
154%522/340
![Page 3: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
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 %
![Page 4: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Members plan fulfilment (overall)
98%167/170
![Page 5: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
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 %
![Page 6: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Conversion rate (overall)
32%1 out of 3 people
![Page 7: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
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
![Page 8: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
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%) ?
![Page 9: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
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)
![Page 10: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
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 %
![Page 11: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
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
![Page 12: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
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
![Page 13: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
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)
![Page 14: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
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
![Page 15: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
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
![Page 16: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Areas of interest
• international projects: 236
• event management: 127
• sales: 86
• marketing: 68
Relative distribution
13 %
17 %
25 %
46 %
international projects event managementsales marketing
![Page 17: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
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
![Page 18: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
What did we use?
Newly re-branded FLAT posters
Available here: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4Bo0HCF9diTSUx3TXNUeTdFTm8/edit
![Page 19: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
What did we use?
Newly re-branded FLAT leafletsAvailable here: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4Bo0HCF9diTTTlNWHk4UFJFRDg/edit
![Page 20: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
What did we use?
Planned content in Social media calendar across Facebook, Google+, Twitter and our own Blog
![Page 21: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
What did we use?
Hootsuite - social management tool in order to manage all these online channels
![Page 22: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
What did we use?
Redesigned webpage of aiesec.sk
![Page 23: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
What did we use?
Application form embedded in the webpage, unified across all LCs
![Page 24: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
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
![Page 25: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
What did we use?
Simple, branded enrolments presentation slides with instructionsAvailable here: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1R1zhjqWBXuMpRvJLvev9gZ_rCG8DXqI8jHCasJ0Vx90/edit?usp=sharing
![Page 26: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
How much did it cost?rough estimate
Posters: 354,78€
Leaflets: 156,19€
Facebook: 166,06€
Web page: 34,3€
711,33€
![Page 27: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
How much did it cost?rough estimate
4,26€per member
![Page 28: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
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…
![Page 29: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Was it worth it?
24,55€per member for 1 quarter
PROFIT
![Page 30: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Was it worth it?
8,18€per member for 1 month
PROFIT
![Page 31: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Was it worth it?
3388,52€for 1 quarter
PROFIT of campaign
![Page 32: TMP analysis KEYNOTE](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022042517/5883412c1a28abbe6b8b4ca9/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Was it worth it?
YES, it was