This is the output of the analysis process of AIESEC in Portugal, part of our planning process.

1. Planning for 2015
Organizational Analysis
December 2013

2. What is the content of this document?
• External Analysis of AIESEC in Portugal
and sources of information used;
• Internal Analysis of AIESEC in Portugal
resources;
• Results Evolution from the last 4 years

3. External Analysis
PESTL Analysis
• Analyzes 5 different influence factors:
–
–
–
–
–
Political
Economical
Socio-cultural
Technological
Legal
• Main Output: Top external trends that
affect our organization

4. PESTL

5. PESTL
Sources of information
Political Factors
•
http://ec.europa.eu/
europe2020/index_pt.htm
•
ODCE Annual Report
Economical Factors
•
•
•
http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/europe-2020-in-yourcountry/portugal/index_en.htm
http://www.ine.pt/xportal/xmain?
xpid=INE&xpgid=ine_publicacoes&PUBLICACOESpub_
boui=157543613&PUBLICACOESmodo=2
http://www.bportugal.pt/pt-PT/OBancoeoEurosistema/
ComunicadoseNotasdeInformacao/Paginas/
combp20130326.aspx

6. PESTL
Sources of information
Technological Factors
•
•
•
•
•
http://arquiteturadeinformacao.com/2011/07/24/o-que-e-ozero-moment-of-truth/
http://www.11changes.com/the-11-changes/educationredefined.html
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterhigh/2013/10/14/gartnertop-10-strategic-technology-trends-for-2014/
http://www.alibabaoglan.com/blog/gartners-technologypredictions-2014-2015-2016/
http://www.baselinemag.com/it-management/ten-tech-trendsthat-will-change-it-in-2013/
Socio-Cultural Factors
•
•
•
•
•
•
http://www.sescsp.org.br/online/artigo/
5648_CRISE+INVERTE+FLUXO+MIGRATORIO#/
tagcloud=lista
http://www.ilo.org/global/about-the-ilo/newsroom/
news/WCMS_212848/lang--en/index.htm
http://www.11changes.com/the-11-changes/thewar-for-talent.html
http://www.slideshare.net/fullscreen/
trendwatching_com/trendwatchingcoms-10crucial-consumer-trends-for-2013/5
http://www.ey.com/Publication/vwLUAssets/
Tracking_global_trends/$FILE/Tracking%20global
%20trends.pdf
http://www.voluntariado.pt/
preview_documentos.asp?r=1954&m=PDF

7. External Analysis
5 Forces of Porter
•
Analyze what is the influence in the market of 5 different forces:
–
–
–
–
–
•
Competitors Rivalry
Consumers’ Power
Suppliers’ Power
Threat of new entrants
Threat of substitutes products
3 different industries were analyzed:
– Exchanges for Portuguese Students
– International Interns for Portuguese Companies
– Social Projects with International Volunteers
• Main Output: Attractiveness of each market

8. 5 Forces of Porter
Exchanges for Portuguese Students (OGX)

9. 5 Forces of Porter
Exchanges for Portuguese Students (OGX)

10. 5 Forces of Porter
Exchanges for Portuguese Students (OGX)

11. 5 Forces of Porter
Exchanges for Portuguese Students (OGX)

12. Exchanges for Portuguese Students (OGX)
Since there are not many
restrictions or costs
associated with this kind of
XPs there is high probability
to have more organizations
working in it
Due to the high number of
choices available the
customers have much
power to influence how the
market is shaped
High number of organizations
working with this kind of
experiences with high
differentiated offer
We did not consider suppliers
because organization create
independently what they
offer to students
Many substitutes (national
internships, academic years
abroad) are available with
lower prices and/or better
financial support conditions

13. 5 Forces of Porter
International Interns for Portuguese Companies (GIPi)

14. 5 Forces of Porter
International Interns for Portuguese Companies (GIPi)

15. 5 Forces of Porter
International Interns for Portuguese Companies (GIPi)

16. 5 Forces of Porter
International Interns for Portuguese Companies (GIPi)

17. International Interns for Portuguese Companies (GIPi)
Customers have a high power of
influencing the market since
the differentiation of the
experience between different
organizations is not relevant
and they attribute a lot value
for quality
Besides the importance of brand
identification, all other factors
contribute to a high level of
this threat since there are
few restrictions in entering
the market
Although there is not a high
number of competitors,
having a low differentiated
product makes a fierce
competition through price
We did not consider suppliers
because organization create
directly the experience with
the final customers
Portuguese interns subsidized by
the government constitute
one our biggest threats

18. 5 Forces of Porter
Social Projects with International Volunteers (GCDPi)

19. 5 Forces of Porter
Social Projects with International Volunteers (GCDPi)

20. 5 Forces of Porter
Social Projects with International Volunteers (GCDPi)

21. 5 Forces of Porter
Social Projects with International Volunteers (GCDPi)

22. Social Projects with International Volunteers (GCDPi)
Having no cost nor legal
restrictions in this area, the
threat of new entrants is
high. What prevents, to
some extent, new entrants is
the fact that projects are
highly differentiated
The clients power is not very
distinctive, because there is
a high differentiation between
projects. However, there no
relevant costs associated
with change and quality play
a big role.
There are few organizations that
work with a similar
framework as ours,
increasing rivalry, but being a
highly differentiated market
contributes for a less
competitive situation
We did not consider suppliers
because organization create
directly the experience with
the final customers
There is a vast number of
organizations who develop
social projects without
providing the international
component

23. Market Attractiveness
Social Projects with International Volunteers: 1,3 *
Exchanges for Portuguese Students:
1,2*
International Interns for Portuguese Companies: 0,9*
* On a scale from 1 to 5

24. Internal Analysis
MOST Analysis
• Existence, Clarity and Implementation of our
Mission, Objectives, Strategies and Tactics
Main Output: Are our MOST adequate
and impact the organizational
performance.

25. MOST Analysis
Mission
What?
Clarity
OUR ESSENCE & PROGRESS"
"Peace and fulfillment of humankind's
potential" (AIESEC provides its members with an
integrated leadership development experience
comprised of leadership opportunities, international
internships and participation in a global learning
environment)"
Yes
&"
Engage and develop every young person in the
world."
We have clear and defined Mission for the
Organization.
Communication
Organizational
Commitment
In some cases our mission is confused
Our members agree, are committed
by the BHAG, mostly in 1st line
and very supportive with the Mission."
members or 2nd line members less
experienced."
Some members believe in the mission
but don't have it as the main person
The information is available online in
driver to work in the organization.
wikis and documents, inter/national
Some members are motivated by
conferences and local events."
"mastery" - the possibility of
developing soft skills/ personal
Members who attend international
development/ CV. "
conferences are more aware. Members
who don't attend national conferences
A few percentage challenges the
have a lower awareness, understanding
Mission or, even, don't believe on it.
and commitment.

26. MOST Analysis
What?
Strategy
Objectives
At international level we have MoS for 2014 and 2015."
TMP 126.000 & 155.000"
TLP 42.000 & 52.000"
GIP 13.000 & 17.000"
GCDP 30.000 & 38.000"
Quality NPS"
There are no objectives for Quality."
Clarity
Communication
Organizational
Commitment
The information is available online
in wikis and documents, inter/ AIESEC in Portugal is poorly
national conferences and local
committed with the
events."
International Objectives. "
Measures of Impact "
Midterm Ambition Statements:"
Yes, by knowing the MoS per year EBs and most experienced 2nd LCs are strongly committed
- Our growing physical and virtual reach makes us the most
we can plan how much we want to line members are aware of the
with local short-term
credible and diverse global youth voice."
do as well."
MoS and Statements but dont
objective.
- We are recognized across serctors as the first-choice partner for
know it by heart.
our ability to develop responsible and entrepreneurial."
We can also create KPIs and
- Our collaborative environment empowers every member to live a
milestones or images that
high-quality AIESEC experience, creating a cross-generational
demonstrate this. Even tough the
positive impact on society.
MoS achievement should by itself
demonstrate the Objectives
At national and local level we have MoS only for 13.14. We have
achievement
goals for Quality
Midterm Ambition Statements:"
- Our growing physical and virtual reach makes us the most
credible and diverse global youth voice."
- We are recognized across serctors as the first-choice partner for
our ability to develop responsible and entrepreneurial."
- Our collaborative environment empowers every member to live a
high-quality AIESEC experience, creating a cross-generational
positive impact on society.
The information is available online
in wikis and documents, inter/
national conferences and local
There is implementation of
events."
some of the strategies, but
not oriented towards the
Most of our membership dont
goal achievement of 2015
see it has a strategy to follow
even tough they might do it
some times.

27. MOST Analysis
What?
Clarity
Communication
Organizational
Commitment
Tactics
Growing Physical and virtual reach"
Expanding our Operations"
1. MC/LC expansions"
2. Market penetration"
3. Specilized Units"
EwA"
1. Micro experiences"
2. Public Relations"
3. Marketing
Our ability to develop responsible and entrepreneurial leadership"
Talent Capacity"
1. TMP&TLP driving GIP & GCDP"
2. Integrated XP"
Programme Development"
1. Programme Packaging into Sub Products"
2. Programme Innovation
Our collaborative environment empowers every member to live a
highquality AIESEC XP"
Customer XP"
1. CEM Implementation (CLO & CLS)"
2. Fire fighting"
3. Customer-based programme and processes evolution"
Collaboration"
1. Team XPs"
2. Internal Collaboration"
3. Internal Supply & Demand for X"
4. External Collaboration
Yes. The tactics are very clear. It Our membership is aware of Yes. Not aligned with the
states the focus that the
these strategies and have strategy from 2015 but as
organization should have
access to all this information.
parts of own local strategy.

28. Resource Audit
Resource Audit
•
•
•
•
•
Financial
Physical
Human Resources
Reputation
Know-How
Main Output: Picture of where the org. stands
right now

29. Financial Resources

30. Physical
Offices
• 13 Local Offices
• Presence in 12 Universities
Assets:
• Computers
• Printers
• Projectors

31. Human Resources
HR analysis
Members in front office
52%
Members in back office
48%
Area
% newies
% oldies
GCDPi
48%
52%
GCDPo
48%
52%
GIPi
51%
49%
GIPo
56%
44%
TM
41%
59%
Back office areas:
TM
29%
Comm/Mkt
29%
F
17%
ER
21%
IM
2%
Comm
55%
45%
Other (internal conferences)
2%
F
52%
48%
ER
38%
62%
Front office areas:
GCDPi
31%
GIPi
18%
GCDPo
26%
GIPo
25%
"Age" of oldies
6-12 months

32. Human Resources
HR Analysis
Top reasons for people applying to TLP positions:
1. Personal development
2. Want more responsibility
3. Creating own projects
Top reasons for people not applying to TLP positions:
1. Not enough time - TL role perceived as something that requires a lot of availability and
commitment
2. Lack of confidence/fear of not being good enough (knowledge of the area of organization,
leading a team)
3. TL promotion timeline too short, no time to do a good application
Pros of our TLP experiences (as seen by TLs)
1.Personal development
2. Developing others
3. Learn about time management
Cons of our TLP experiences (as seen by TLs)
1. Fear of failure/pressure
2. Not being able to manage a team well
3. Time management is hard
Average # applicants per position opened: 1,1

33. Know-how
Know-How analysis
Area of knowledge
Level (scale 1-3)
GIPi process
GIPo process
GCDPo
GCDPi
Market knowledge
Online communication
1,7
2,1
2,0
1,8
1,1
1,4
Offline communication
1,7
PR
1,2
Product positioning
Member recruitment
Members development
Backoffice linked to frontoffice
Accounting
Financial management
Legal
IM
1,3
1,9
2,2
1,7
2,1
1
1,2
1,3
IT/Business Intelligence
1,3
Sales
1,4
Customer Experience Management (students)
1,5
Customer loyalty for organizations
1,4

34. Reputation
What?
GCDPo
GCDPi
GIPo
GIPi
Characteristics
NPS: 40
% of Promoters: 56%
% of Passives: 31%
% of Detractors: 13%
NPS: 43
% of Promoters: 56%
% of Passives:
% of Detractors: 18%
NPS: 100
% of Promoters: 100%
% of Passives: 0%
% of Detractors: 0%
NPS: 62
% of Promoters: 69%
% of Passives: 23%
% of Detractors: 8
NPS: 43
TOTAL
% of Promoters: 56%
% of Passives: 31%
% of Detractors: 13%

35. Reputation
Top of mind words associated with AIESEC
Boring; 6
Daring; 21
Fun; 57
Intercultural; 181
Challenging; 154
Impactful; 134
Inclusive; 28
Dynamic; 111
Diverse; 60
Practical; 62
Inaccessible; 2
Passive; 4
Theoretical; 11

36. Reputation
250
200
150
In AIESEC
100
50
0
Outside AIESEC

37. Boston Box
What?
The Boston Box works to aid portfolio management. The box is a 2x2 matrix with four
quadrants. The axes represent low to high market growth and low to high market share. The
quadrants represent the following areas:
Dogs
These are business units or products that have low relative share and are in unattractive, lowgrowth markets.
Cash Cows
These are low-growth business units of products that have a relatively high market share.
These are mature, successful products that can be sustained without large investment.
Stars
These are high-growth business units or products with a high percentage of market share.
Question Marks
These are the business units or products that low market share, but operating in high-growth
markets.

38. Boston Box
The size of each
product circle is
according to volume
of XP delivered

39. Boston Box
The size of each
product circle is
according to the
revenue received

40. Results Evolution
Exchange Program Results Evolution
250
202
200
174
170
150
132
GIPo
GIPi
GCDPo
100
GCDPi
67
50
36
67
31
27
25
58
64
58
21
10
14
0
2010
2011
2012
2013

41. Growth Evolution
Growth Evolution per Exchange program
600,0%
500,0%
400,0%
300,0%
2010 - 2011
2011-2012
2012-2013
200,0%
100,0%
0,0%
GIPo
-­‐100,0%
GIPi
GCDPo
GCDPi

42. Results Evolution
TXP Evolution
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
TMP
TLP
2010
2011
2012
2013

43. Results Evolution
GCDPi Evolution
60
50
40
2010
2011
2012
2013
30
20
10
0
UM
FEP
PC
AV
NF
LX
XX
LC
NV

44. Results Evolution
GCDPo Evolution
40
35
30
25
2010
2011
2012
2013
20
15
10
5
0
UM
FEP
PC
AV
NF
LX
XX
LC
NV

45. Results Evolution
GIPi Evolution
14
12
10
2010
2011
2012
2013
8
6
4
2
0
UM
FEP
PC
AV
NF
LX
XX
LC
NV

46. Results Evolution
GIPo Evolution
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
2010
2011
2012
2013
UM
FEP
PC
AV
NF
LX
XX
LC
NV