2. INTRODUCTION
Before starting the planning process, remember the TMP/TLP Principles. Why? Because
this is a matter of a team working together to achieve a goal, and if we look at these
principles, we will find that the first and one of the most important elements is to set
clear expectations about the Team Purpose.
Your purpose is your reason for existence.
If you think your team exists to create products, to deliver services or to make money,
you are missing the opportunity to tap into the power of a clear purpose. These questions
will help you surface new ways of understanding your work and new possibilities for
moving forward:
What business are you really in?
What is the real value you offer?
What is the end-result that you offer?
The LCP is the final responsible to establish a space with the whole team and guide the
dynamics of the session until getting the team purpose. It is important to invest all the
time needed for this, since the purpose becomes a driver to keep moving forward during
the whole term, helps decision making within the team and gives clarity about how to
work.
As suggested methodology, the LCP can split the team in 3 working groups to discuss
each of the questions and come up with a proposal. Then, discuss each proposal within
the whole team until getting to a common agreement, and finally translating those
answers into powerful sentences that will define the Team Purpose.
For more information, go to this link: http://seapointcenter.com/identify-team-purpose/
3. PLANNING PROCESS
The planning process is a flow that starts with our BHAG and strategy, and ends with the
operational planning, which allows us to make a plan focused on the delivery of our MoS
(Measures of Success = ELD Programs Realizations). Please, during the whole
process, remember to have the ELD Programs as the main discussion point.
1) BSC: Indicators review & historical analysis.
The BSC in Colombia
The Balanced Scorecard (BSC) is a strategic planning and management system used to
align business activities to the vision and strategy of the organization, improve internal
and external communications, and monitor organizational performance against strategic
goals. The chart below shows the logic behind the BSC:
4. In AIESEC in Colombia we use this tool to track and review 2015 strategy and guarantee
national alignment. That is why the quarter reports and planning process are based on
this methodology
The Strategic Objectives that conform our Strategy Map (as the figure 1 shows), were
defined based on the AIESEC in Colombia’s Roadmap to 2015 (hereafter: understood as
strategic themes or strategic lines), aiming to get closer to our BHAG.
Figure1.
5. According to the logic of the BSC, the strategic objectives have some measurements
(KPI – Key Performance Indicators) with specific targets (Goals), and also strategic
initiatives to achieve them (which are elaborated by each entity). Under this, there is
the operative planning of each LC, as seen in the figure 2:
Figure 2.
HOW TO START?
1. Check and understand each KPI in the format.
2. Fill the blanks with the correct data until the current year.
3. Write down comments (related to the context of the numbers you put, since the
description/explanation of that number is telling us why such indicator behaved as
the number shows – a number itself does not say anything).
The tool to do this is the EXCEL format:
6. Regarding the indicators, let’s explore them a little bit:
# realizations (exchange experiences delivered): this is the realization number
per year in each program (IGIP, IGCDP, OGCDP, OGIP)
# Team Leader realizations (Team Leadership experiences completed): this is
the realization number per year of team leader program.
# Team Member realizations (Team Member experiences completed): this is
the realization number per year of team member program.
# Raised (TN): this is the number of TN raised per year (for IGCDP and IGIP)
# New cooperation agreements: this is the number of cooperation agreements
signed with entities (although they have not risen forms, but support in kind or
knowledge, e.g. universities)
# Re-Raised (TN): this is the number of TN raised by the second time for IGCDP,
IGIP.
Overall Net Promoter Score of the organization (% closed cases):this is the
percentage of closed cases.
% of investments covered by operational revenues: of the total of investments
of the LC which percentage was covered by operational revenues.
# Months of reserves: what is the number of months the LC has with financial
reserves.
# Universities: this is the number of universities we reached and worked with
them.
# Faculties: this is the number of faculties we reached and worked with them.
% members per Faculties: this is the percentage of members that come from each
of the faculties we reach
# market researches: This is the number of market researches in general
(particularly to understand the local market: students, allies etc.)
# new products: this is the number of products that have been developed by the
entity or implemented from the MC (including each program/area).
Average days to raise a form: average of days that takes a form to raise after we
agree to do it (IGIP, IGCDP, OGCDP, OGIP).
7. Average days to match a form: average of days that takes a form to match (IGIP,
IGCDP, OGCDP, OGIP).
Retention rate (%): of the total members what was the retention rate of the year.
# LEC executed (over the planed this year): this is the number of local education
cycle activities executed according to the planed that year.
# LDP activities executed (over the planed this year): this is the number of
leadership development programs executed according to the planed that year.
% membership participation in education activities: of the total number of
members which is the percentage of them participating in education activities in that
year.
% activity in PODIO spaces: just for 2012.
2) Internal and External analysis.
We must assess (internal and external assessment) our current situation, and then
analyze it (strategic analysis) from different perspectives.
2.1) Internal assessment.
When looking at the inside of our entities, we must analyze the current situation of the
two main resources that AIESEC has as organization: human resources and financial
resources.
8. Human Resources analysis:
It is required to make a membership pipeline review, going through each single member
in the LC and evaluating the following criteria per each:
Member Performance Capacities
Which skills does
Which level (%) of performance does Pepe have?
Pepe have?
Pepe (according to the performance evaluation made in the
What is Pepe good
LC)
at?
With this information we should know:
- Which members are high, medium and low performers?
- What decisions we must make regarding the medium and low performers?
As outcome we are going to have the exact quantity and quality of human resources that
we can count with to begin the next term.
Financial Resources analysis:
Regarding finances, we must be clear on some specific indicators that will let us know
which are our financial restrictions to start operating and executing the strategic
initiatives for the next term, and so it allows us to make proper decisions about how to
spend and invest.
The indicators are:
- Amount of money in the Local Operative Fund.
- # of months of operations that can be covered with the Local Operative Fund.
- Accounts receivable.
As outcome we are going to know exactly how much money we can count on in cash and
in the bank account to start executing our plan.
The outcomes from both analyses will be the main inputs to develop your operative
planning at the end of this process.
9. 2.2) External assessment.
Our entities are part of an environment that influences it. Environment is defined as all
external factors that an organization cannot control, and that highly influence the success
of our strategy. We can assess the environment in a generic way and a specific way.
2.2.1) Generic Assessment: it refers to analyze tendencies in the environment
related to themes such as politics, economics, legality, sociocultural,
technological, and others; that can influence the ELD programs delivery of our
entity. If you want to implement a specific methodology for this assessment, the
PEST analysis can be a good tool: http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newTMC_09.htm
(Remember you should adapt it, not all factors in the PEST analysis may influence an AIESEC Local
Committee).
2.2.2) Specific Assessment: it refers to analyze the different stakeholders that have
to do with the ELD programs delivery at some point. It includes our clients
(students and organizations), supporters, enablers, our competition, etc. The
suggested methodology for this assessment is the implementation of the
Empathy Map analysis (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMN7vkE4csg), which helps us
understand the behaviors and perspectives of each stakeholder.
2.3) Strategic analysis
Data itself is not enough to help us create a proper plan. We need to make deep analyses
in order to come out with intelligent conclusions that will lead us to establish effective
strategies. Two methodologies are suggested, however LCs are completely autonomous
about how to do it, just guide discussions always focused on ELD programs delivery (and
not so much in support strategies):
- SWOT Analysis: this technique combines both internal and external factors to
obtain an overall picture of the entity and to make strong conclusions. It identifies
4 main aspects:
Strengths: internal factors of the organization that may influence in a positive way.
Weaknesses: internal factors of the organization that may influence in a negative
way.
10. Opportunities: external situations that may influence in a positive way the
development of the organization.
Threats: external situations that may influence in a negative way the development
of the organization.
Then, by doing crossed analysis we can define initial inputs for our planning process:
Threats Opportunities
Strengths Defensive initiatives: Offensive initiatives:
usage of strengths to usage of strengths to
avoid threats. take advantage of
opportunities.
Weaknesses Survival initiatives: Reordering initiatives:
reduce weaknesses overcome weaknesses
and avoid threats. by taking advantage
of opportunities.
- Organizational Octagon: it’s a tool that assesses the strengths and weaknesses
of an organization, and allows identifying the necessary actions to make work more
efficient.
It evaluates 4 variables in a systemic way: organizational basis, organization activities,
organization capacity and organization relations.
For a complete explanation and tools provided go to this link:
http://books.google.com.co/books?id=r_H3dpKH5kMC&pg=PA89&lpg=PA89&dq=octagono+organizacional&source=bl&o
ts=AaMS2BjFTl&sig=M8H3-
6v6JWPrpdeKy7qzBz7UhS4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ByCSULXtI5H29gSMjIHoCQ&ved=0CEoQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=octagono%
20organizacional&f=false.
11. 3) Goals Setting (MoS, KPI’s).
Accordingly to what is mentioned in the beginning, the EB team has to define which is
going to be their focus exchange program for the term.
Why do we need to focus?
- Because we have limited resources in one year.
- Because we must have a long-term picture in mind to develop all of our programs
in a smart way according to their Product Life Cycle stage, taking into account
that we cannot pretend that all programs evolve at the same rhythm in the short-
term (during one year).
The Product Life Cycle is a marketing theory that describes the stages that any product
will pass through since it is developed and launched to the market, until it is finally
removed from the market, or improved in order to keep the market share. For more info:
http://www.netmba.com/marketing/product/lifecycle/.
To do this in a proper way, take into account the following steps:
Start by modeling the possible MoS goals for the next term and for 2014 and 2015
(realizations in the ELD Programs – “The way we do it” perspective in the BSC), use
the tool GOAL SETTING to do so, and follow this steps:
- Review the percentages of growth that the local committee has had in the ELD
Programs during the past years and calculate the overall percentage. Then, multiply
the overall percentage of growth in the past years with the results in 2012, this
data shows what the LC should be capable to perform next year.
- On the other hand, set with the team the ambition that the LC has regarding each
program for the next term taking into account: which program should overcome
stages according to the Product Life Cycle (to know this, check the specific
KPIs of each program), and by establishing a certain percentage of contribution
12. to the national ELD goals (defined in the Roadmap to 2015). This data determines
which programs will have to be challenged the most in the next year.
- The team must agree on which is the exchange program that will be the focus for
next year because based on that the operative planning of the whole team must
include it as a priority. To speed-up the decision, prioritize the programs according
to the “Impact-Feasibility”, which will help the team answer the next questions for
each program:
Has the program already reached a high level of impact? Or it still needs
more effort to have a bigger impact? (by Impact, we refer to the quantity of
realizations in 2012).
How feasible is it to run the program? (by Feasibility, we mean the
complexity to run the program).
The answers to these two questions help the team decide which will be the
focus program.
- Once this decision is made, the next outcome is to set the first draft of what the
MoS goals (realizations in ELD Programs) for the next year should be in the GOAL
SETTING tool, and what growth percentages each program will have.
Once the team has defined the goals for the MoS and which are the focus programs
according to the expected growth, the next step is to set goals for each KPI in all
the strategic objectives from the other perspectives of the BSC. Take into account
the cause-effect connections among the strategic objectives: if the LC wants to
achieve X ELD realizations in the first perspective, it determines what should be the
goal in other KPIs from the rest of perspectives in order to achieve it.
13. 4) Strategic Initiatives.
At this point, the team has already defined:
- The exchange program that will be the focus for the next term.
- The goals for the MoS in the next term (ELD programs realizations).
- The goals for all the KPIs in each strategic objective of the BSC for the next term.
The next step is to define specific strategic initiatives to achieve those goals.
First of all, we need to understand the difference between “Back Office strategies” and
“Front Office strategies”.
- Back office is related to the support strategies such as: brand positioning,
education, financial sustainability, knowledge information, etc.
- Front office is related to direct strategies that impact on the delivery of the
program such as: sales force enhancement, delivery efficiency, showcasing impact,
etc.
Now, there has to be both kind of strategies to support the achievement of the focus
program already defined. It means that the LCP has to guarantee that the whole planning
is oriented to this, and all individual plans from each VP has to include either back office
or front office strategies to boost the focus program.
During the discussions within the team to define this, as leader the LCP must guarantee
two things:
- Challenge ideas, not people. We want to have the BEST strategies, so the
challenge is: are those ideas the best ideas? Can they be even better? Some
insights:
14. You should encourage comments and suggestions, and hand them out to your coworkers.
Ideas are often improved by challenging them, but you must take care in how the idea is
challenged.
There is a distinct difference between challenging the idea itself and challenging the person
who presented the idea. Phrasing a challenge that criticizes the person rather than focuses
on the idea creates animosity and leads nowhere.
Managers need to create an atmosphere in which people are free to challenge ideas and in
which individuals are receptive to feedback.
- Validate the strategies. Each strategy proposed must fulfill the next parameters:
Alignment with the AIESEC in Colombia’s Roadmap to 2015.
Alignment to the national focus areas.
Transversality: must encourage working in synergy. It’s not about one
strategy in one area, it’s about one strategic initiative executed by several
areas according to the synergies needed.
Consistency with the assessments and analysis done in the step 2 (Internal
and External analysis).
It’s important to take decisions as a team regarding the strategies. According to the
complexity of the EB team and their internal decision making process, two methodologies
are suggested for this:
Case 1 – Simple decision making: for every strategy, answer the next questions
and decide if it is suitable or not in the plan for the next term:
- Is there a better way to fulfill the goals proposed?
- What are we better trained at?
- Is it going to be acceptable for the members?
- Is it consistent with the environment analysis?
- Is it related to the organization’s objectives?
- Which risks does it implicate?
- Does it take advantage of opportunities and strengths, and avoids weaknesses and
threats?
Case 2 – Complex decision making: use of a multi-criteria decision system. It
helps evaluate each strategy according to specific criteria, as follows:
- First, the team has to agree about the criteria that will be used to take the
decisions. There are three possible criteria
suggested (the team can add more):
15. Consistency criteria: it’s about analyzing how the strategy can fit the internal
and external diagnosis, how it faces the identified difficulties, how it takes
advantage of strengths and opportunities, and how it suits with the mission
and vision.
Feasibility criteria: it’s about analyzing the operation of the strategy, trying to
meet the possibilities of implementing it, resources availability, capabilities,
etc. Answer the question: can the strategy be implemented with the current
resources (human and finances) and capabilities?
Acceptability criteria: it’s about evaluating if the consequences of the strategy
are acceptable or not for the organization (in terms of sustainability, values,
etc.). Usually criteria such as: benefits that it contributes, what is the cost-
benefit effect, the risks implications, reactions from stakeholders, etc.
- Second, not all criteria have the same relevance; it is needed to prioritize which
are the most determinant criteria.
- Third, the system must reflect the levels of relevance (weight). To do so, each
criterion must be assigned a percentage from 0% to 100%, until completing the
100% with the sum of all criteria.
- Fourth, as well, it is needed to set a rank of punctuation for the strategies,
normally in a scale from 1 to 10.
- Fifth, for all strategies proposed, the team makes the evaluation assigning the
punctuation.
- Sixth, the punctuation is multiplied then by the percentage of relevance in the
specific criteria.
- Seventh, sum up the punctuation weighted in each criterion for each strategy.
- Eighth, the strategy with the highest score in the weighted punctuations is the
most proper one.
16. The next chart can be useful for this:
Criteria Strategy 1 Strategy 2 Strategy 3 Strategy 4
Weight Direct Weighted Direct Weighted Direct Weighted Direct Weighted
Criterion
value Punctuation Punctuation Punctuation Punctuation Punctuation Punctuation Punctuation Punctuation
Criterion
30% 5 1,5
1
Criterion
40% ... …
2
… … …
Criterion
10% … …
N
TOTAL
… …
VALUE
5) Review of Strategic Objectives by each area.
At this point, there is a clear focus program supported by back office and front office
strategies, as well as the goals for the MoS and KPIs in each strategic objective of the
BSC.
Now we must guarantee that each area has clarity about what are the strategic
objectives in the BSC that they are impacting directly, and what is the specific
contribution for them. This will help the team’s performance tracking when analyzing the
BSC execution, since we will know who is the direct responsible to impact on a specific
strategic objective.
After this we open the door to the operational planning!
17. 6) Operational Planning.
The final step is to translate all the strategic initiatives into daily operations.
Activities:
- Each strategic initiative is composed by several activities.
- Each activity has a direct responsible who will execute it.
- Each activity is impacting one strategic objective of the BSC.
- Each activity has a deadline to be executed.
Standards of performance:
- Each operation area (TM, iGCDP, oGCDP, iGIP, oGIP) has specific KPIs that help
evaluate their constant efficiency.
- Each KPI should have a standard defined (e.g. # of sales meetings per week = 10).
- Each standard should be tracked monthly, weekly and sometimes even daily.
Budget:
- The execution of most of the activities has a cost.
- If you don’t make a conscious and proper budgeting of the operative planning,
probably you will face problems to execute all you planned during the year.
It’s up to the EB the format they want to use to make this plan, and how specific they
want it to be. However, we have a basic suggested format for the LCs that want to
implement.
No matter which format you use, remember that it is part of the LCP’s MoF to track the
whole strategic planning and the operative planning in a determined periodicity:
- Quarter reviews.
- Monthly reviews.
- Weekly EB Meetings.
- Daily calls and mails.
18. Finally, have clear expectations on the process:
- Our suggestion is to have the first 5 steps done before NPM,
and do the 6th step (operative planning) after NPM. However,
you are free to manage the process.
- During NPM you will collect feedbacks to your planning, as well
as you will align your planning to the national focus strategies,
so please be flexible and open enough to take the most out of
this conference.
Hoping you enjoy your planning process,
The LCD Team 12.13 of AIESEC in Colombia – MC BOOST.
19. Information for resource point (Annexes):
What is the Balanced Scorecard?
The balanced scorecard is a strategic planning and management system used to align
business activities to the vision and strategy of the organization, improve internal and
external communications, and monitor organizational performance against strategic
goals.
t was originated by Drs. Robert Kaplan (Harvard Business School) and David Norton as a
performance measurement framework that added strategic non-financial performance
measures to traditional financial metrics to give managers and executives a more
'balanced' view of organizational performance. While the phrase balanced scorecard was
coined in the early 1990s, the roots of the this type of approach are deep, and include
the pioneering work of General Electric on performance measurement reporting in the
1950’s and the work of French process engineers (who created the Tableau de Bord –
literally, a "dashboard" of performance measures) in the early part of the 20th century.
The balanced scorecard has evolved from its early use as a simple performance
measurement framework to a full strategic planning and management system. The “new”
balanced scorecard transforms an organization’s strategic plan from an attractive but
passive document into the "marching orders" for the organization on a daily basis. It
provides a framework that not only provides performance measurements, but helps
planners identify what should be done and measured. It enables executives to truly
execute their strategies.
This new approach to strategic management was first detailed in a series of articles and
books by Drs. Kaplan and Norton. Recognizing some of the weaknesses and vagueness of
previous management approaches, the balanced scorecard approach provides a clear
prescription as to what companies should measure in order to 'balance' the financial
perspective. The balanced scorecard is a management system (not only a measurement
system) that enables organizations to clarify their vision and strategy and translate them
into action. It provides feedback around both the internal business processes and
external outcomes in order to continuously improve strategic performance and results.
When fully deployed, the balanced scorecard transforms strategic planning from an
academic exercise into the nerve center of an enterprise.
(Source: balanced score card institute)
20. Perspectives
The balanced scorecard suggests that we view the organization from four perspectives,
and to develop metrics, collect data and analyze it relative to each of these perspectives:
The Learning & Growth Perspective
This perspective includes employee training and corporate cultural attitudes related to
both individual and corporate self-improvement. In a knowledge-worker organization,
people -- the only repository of knowledge -- are the main resource. In the current
climate of rapid technological change, it is becoming necessary for knowledge workers to
be in a continuous learning mode. Metrics can be put into place to guide managers in
focusing training funds where they can help the most. In any case, learning and growth
constitute the essential foundation for success of any knowledge-worker organization.
Kaplan and Norton emphasize that 'learning' is more than 'training'; it also includes
things like mentors and tutors within the organization, as well as that ease of
communication among workers that allows them to readily get help on a problem when it
is needed. It also includes technological tools; what the Baldrige criteria call "high
performance work systems."
The Business Process Perspective
This perspective refers to internal business processes. Metrics based on this perspective
allow the managers to know how well their business is running, and whether its products
and services conform to customer requirements (the mission). These metrics have to be
21. carefully designed by those who know these processes most intimately; with our unique
missions these are not something that can be developed by outside consultants.
The Customer Perspective
Recent management philosophy has shown an increasing realization of the importance of
customer focus and customer satisfaction in any business. These are leading indicators: if
customers are not satisfied, they will eventually find other suppliers that will meet their
needs. Poor performance from this perspective is thus a leading indicator of future
decline, even though the current financial picture may look good.
In developing metrics for satisfaction, customers should be analyzed in terms of kinds of
customers and the kinds of processes for which we are providing a product or service to
those customer groups.
The Financial Perspective
Kaplan and Norton do not disregard the traditional need for financial data. Timely and
accurate funding data will always be a priority, and managers will do whatever necessary
to provide it. In fact, often there is more than enough handling and processing of
financial data. With the implementation of a corporate database, it is hoped that more of
the processing can be centralized and automated. But the point is that the current
emphasis on financials leads to the "unbalanced" situation with regard to other
perspectives. There is perhaps a need to include additional financial-related data, such
as risk assessment and cost-benefit data, in this category.
Strategy Mapping
Strategy maps are communication tools used to tell a story of how value is created for
the organization. They show a logical, step-by-step connection between strategic
objectives (shown as squares on the map) in the form of a cause-and-effect
chain. Generally speaking, improving performance in the objectives found in the
Learning & Growth perspective (the bottom row) enables the organization to improve its
Internal Process perspective Objectives (the next row up), which in turn enables the
organization to create desirable results in the Customer and Financial perspectives (the
top two rows).
For more information about BSC: http://www.balancedscorecard.org
