“A Framework to measure performance in an International NGO: AEGEE Case study”

(1)

“A Framework to measure performance in an

International NGO: AEGEE Case study”

September 2010

(2)

2

“A Framework to measure performance in an International

NGO: AEGEE Case study”

Master Thesis

September 9, 2010 Ioana Dinica S1942557

Supervisor: Dr. Mrs. M.A.G. van Offenbeek Referent: Prof. dr. L. Karsten

University of Groningen

(3)

3

Appendix 1: List of AEGEE Groningen board members and functions

Name Position

Martin Pool President

Maaike Wouda Secretary

Liza Mennega Treasurer

Janneke Geerlinks PR coordinator Leonora de Raad Local Affairs Director Niels Martens External Affairs Director

Appendix 2: Questionnaire scheme for AEGEE Groningen board members

Name:

Function within the Board: General overview:

Before becoming a member what was the first impression of AEGEE? What was the main reason you were interested in joining?

Have your perceptions changed? What is your imagine of the organization now? What are in your opinion the strong points of the organization?

What are in your opinion the weak points of the organization? What are the major challenges and threats of AEGEE Groningen? Do you consider AEGEE Groningen to be a learning organization?

Do you consider that you have attained some personal/professional competencies during your membership?

Do you consider that AEGEE Groningen is acting as a professional organization? Do you consider there is cohesion between the activities of AEGEE and its mission? Do you feel the need for AEGEE Groningen to have a vision/mission of its own besides the European one?

(5)

5 How would you grade the communication strategies of AEGEE Groningen (to the members, to the partners, amongst the board members)? (from 1 to 5)

How would you grade the awareness level of AEGEE Groningen amongst the students? (from 1 to 5)

Projects

What do you think about the quality of the projects done by AEGEE Groningen?

To what extent are the projects organized by AEGEE Groningen based on the needs of its members?

How satisfied are you with the results of the project evaluation, in general, in AEGEE Groningen? (from 1 to 5)

Performance

How would you define ‘performance’ when thinking about AEGEE Groningen?

Which are according to your opinion the main ‘ingredients’ of a proper performance measurement system for AEGEE Groningen?

Which of the following features should stay at the core of the performance measurement framework:

o Learning organization

o Member oriented organization

o Strong vision and strategic plan for a longer period o Financial Figures and Results

o Internal Processes

o Feel free to add another if you consider it relevant

In your opinion do you consider AEGEE Groningen should measure performance at an organizational level or at an individual level (project based performance)?

Appendix 3: AEGEE Groningen Questionnaire responses

General Overview:

Before becoming a member what was the first impression of AEGEE? What was the

main reason you were interested in joining?

(6)

6 know very many people in Groningen). I also thought AEGEE organizes a lot of activities within Groningen.

-The travelling, the adventures I would be able to have with AEGEE and the international character where my main reason. When I became a member also the local level, the social meetings and activities became important too.

-I knew something about AEGEE Groningen, but not much. I liked the fact that it was very European organization and that it allowed me to travel to different places and meet new people. It also was not the typical Dutch student organization, where you were supposed to pass different tests to be admitted.

- I did not know anything about AEGEE. I just went with a friend who wanted to join and I liked the atmosphere in the office and I decided to join. Only afterwards I learned more and I became even more interested in taking part.

- I liked the idea of travelling and getting to know other people and cultures. This attracted me a lot and determined me to join.

- I honestly don’t know what was my first impression about AEGEE. I knew many things about other Dutch student organizations, their requirements, and their activity from my friends and I did not feel I could fit in. This is why I decided to join AEGEE Groningen. Have your perceptions changed? What is your imagine of the organization now? -They only got better . Because I do know a lot of people now and I am able to travel easily. I don’t have to be bored at all, so that’s good.

- I think AEGEE Groningen is become much more professional and a better teamplayer. WE are working together with other locals much more this year than before.

- Oh..the perceptions changed a lot as I had the chance to experience what AEGEE is all about and I took part in many projects and develop. My academic background has nothing to do with management, but being part of the board I learn many interesting and helpful things that will help me. I now see AEGEE as an organization which is changing constantly, with each new year and each new generation, an organization that wants to improve and became a real alternative to every student who wants to do more with his time and wants to develop.

- I still like the atmosphere so I think the perceptions has not changed that much. I now see the organization from another perspective, and I understand it differently.

(7)

7 What are in your opinion the strong points of the organization?

-In my opinion the strong points of AEGEE are that there are no obligations, you can just join the activities you want. I like the open-minded attitude. I also think that the broad network, with all those antennae everywhere in Europe, is a big plus compared to other organizations because it creates a lot of opportunities.

- The network that is behind it. The options that you have to organize a big event. The European integration. It helps young people appreciate Europe so much more and will definitely have an impact on how you see Europe it broadens your horizon .

- The strongest points are related to the diversity of activities a member has access to, the easy access for every student to join, the possibility for any member to develop and learn a lot on different fields.

- I think the fact that it is an organization entirely run and formed by students gives us freedom and power to do the things we consider useful for our own interests and needs.

- I think that what individualizes us as an organization is the fact that we try to combine both organizing projects based on our own interests and have fun in the same time. - The strongest points are our members and projects. We try to satisfy our interests organizing different projects and have fun in the same time.

What are in your opinion the weak points of the organization?\

-The lack of obligations could also be a weak point, because people could feel less motivated to spend time on organizing events for AEGEE, which is important. Without volunteers, there would be no organization and no activities.

- There are problems in communication. Many other locals don’t have a board like us and do not work with the structure of commissions.

- The weakest point is the fact that AEGEE doesn’t have a strong visibility in the student environment and thus leads to many problems, from few members joining to a lack of access to different funds.

- One of the weakest points I see is the fact that we are not very well known amongst students at RUG. The other student organizations in Groningen benefit from a better visibility and have a strong brand and attract more students.

- The weakest points are related to how we manage to transpose our ideas in reality. We have different ideas but some are very hard to put into practice and we get lost in our initiatives. These are more managerial perspectives.

- The weakest points are the fact that we change strategies too quickly and we don’t have enough time in one year term to finish all the objectives we set.

(8)

8 -The major challenges are to keep up both the contact with the network and the activities in Groningen, so that we can attract enough new active members to stay alive. - Challenges for us is how to get bigher but not more stuck. If we get bigger it is harder to hold members close/participate to AEGEE- Groningen. Further challenges is getting recognized by the CUOS as what we are because we are not just for inhoud bit also fun and this mix is not getting much value. WE are very different from other student vereigingen.

- The biggest threat lies in the sudden decrease in student interest towards getting involved in extracurricular activities. From the information provided by AEGEE Europe this is a general trend that worries us and we should do something to attract more students to come and see what we are doing. A challenge can be represented by the European Union’s funds, which are meant to support us in our project development. It is an opportunity we should fully take advantage of.

- One challenge is to motivate our members to become more involved in our activities. One threat is that we still don’t have a very good awareness amongst students and on the long run this will lead to a deficiency in the number of applicants.

- The biggest challenges for AEGEE Groningen are related to the PR activity, to member motivation in terms of increasing the number of active members and also an increase in the number of committees. The biggest threat we are facing is the government’s proposal to withdraw the grants for students. This would decrease significantly the number of students wanting to join.

- The biggest challenges I foresee are linked to our PR department activities which can help us raise our awareness, while a threat can be an increase of inactive members which will lead to a decrease in the number of projects.

Do you consider AEGEE Groningen to be a learning organization?

-I don’t understand what you mean with ‘a learning organization’. But you can learn things by joining AEGEE-Groningen and AEGEE-Groningen is learning things and improving it, or at least that’s what I believe.

- Of course! Who isn’t? WE are still trying to figure out which direction to take, bigger/smallest/more inhoud/more fun/ a society or not.

(9)

9 - I think of AEGEE as a learning environment, where there are a lot of learning opportunities for those who want to learn.

- I don’t believe there can be learning organizations, but organizations that encourage learning amongst its members. And I think AEGEE is trying to became such an organization.

Do you consider that you have attained some personal/professional competencies during your membership?

-Yes I have

- Yes being in commissions and especially doing a broad function really makes you see the whole picture of the vereniging. It gives you organizational skills and is very much international which no other vereniging in Groningen has.

- I don’t think I am totally aware of everything I learned until now. The personal development is the first to be perceived, as I am more confident in my own strengths and I am more open to other opinions. From the professional perspective, I learned to coordinate a department, to make decisions and to evaluate better the objectives set. I liked that I had the chance to get in contact with different representatives from companies and start my own professional network. These are the first things that come in my mind.

- I surely have enhanced my sales techniques, for example. I like this area and I have learned and practiced a lot and I am very thrilled about it. I feel that also I have become more open to different opinions and I have improved my time management considerably.

- Being president has been the experience of a lifetime. I had to get used to coordinating a team, to be always in charge with everything, to motivate my people, to structure my thinking and improve my presentation and public speaking. Being president had also external implication, as I was the spokesperson. I met many interesting people, I learned a lot from them and this helped me in my board coordination.

- My academic background is not related to business or management area but being a part of the board of AEGEE I became familiar with a managerial way of thinking which has helped me. I can structure better my personal objectives, I can respect better my deadlines, I can work better in stress conditions and take quick decision. This year I was responsible of looking after the development and implementation of the projects and I had to report to the board everything. I had to resume the most important things and also find solutions to different problems that appeared. Perhaps these are not that important things for some people but I really see a difference from how I was when I joined AEGEE and how I am now.

(10)

10 -Yes, I think we are well organized and that we can communicate in a professional way with a lot of different organizations and stake holders.

- Yes, for a big part we do but still we work on basis of volunteers. So it has to be fun still you can’t let people do stuff they don’t like for nothing that’s why motivation is so important.

- I would day that the situation has improved, and we tried to do our best to behave at a very professional level. Professionalism can be seen in the relationship with our partners, in the quality of our projects, in the effectiveness of our procedures and regulations and also in the many new elements we included from board member selection to know-how transfer.

- I consider that we don’t have the same level of professionalism constantly. We behave more professional when we interact with external factors, and we lower our standard when we handle internal affairs. Perhaps this is due to the fact that we act on voluntary base and we don’t have the same level of interest and dedication all the time.

- I am aware that we still have some job to do in this respect, but this year we introduced some procedures to help us became more professional in our activities. The know-how process from one board to the next helped to better organize and avoid doing the same mistakes all over again. Also the project evaluation helped us to determine which projects were better and why. We still have to come up with procedures to fill committee positions, or establish training schemes for our members. - We set as an internal objective to increase the level of professionalism and we did this by setting some internal rules and regulations which were meant to avoid repetitive mistakes. As a board, we came up with other solutions but we did not manage to implement them because we had other priorities.

Do you consider there is cohesion between the activities of AEGEE and its mission? -Yes of course! Our activities aim at intercultural exchange (not all of them, but the social interactivity between our members is necessary to create a basis for our own association).

- Yes for the most part it is.

- I think our actions are in line with the overall mission of AEGEE. I personally think that the mission has to be maintained but we can extend and diversify our interests in terms of projects.

- I consider that by means of some of the projects we organize, especially the intercultural exchanges we keep close our mission.

(11)

11 - I think that every organization should do everything to achieve its mission and with every activity done the organization should come closer to achieving it.

Do you feel the need for AEGEE Groningen to have a vision/mission of its own besides the European one?

-Partly, because we are a little bit different from most of the AEGEE-antennae. In Groningen you have a lot of students’ associations and AEGEE-Groningen has to compete with them.

- Of course. We do not only look at the European one we want to get better in our Groningen more known under students, have a good local level of activities etc.

- I think that for one organization there has to be only one mission, but this does not imply we cannot have our own features that individualize the Groningen antenna. - I think that AEGEE mission, vision and objectives should be maintained and only local strategies and objectives have to be set. These should have the role of helping to a better quantification of the activity.

- I don’t think we have to get stuck in this kind of concepts. We have to have a good long-term strategy and set some clear objectives and with that we are on the right way to developing ourselves.

- We did not feel the need to establish our own vision, but we did set some internal objectives. These objectives were meant to help us to organize better and to evaluate our results afterwards.

What is AEGEE Groningen’s main goal, in your opinion? -Intercultural exchange by the means of non-formal learning.

- Showing Groningen students what Europe is and can be and how easy it is to get in contact with other nationalities and how friendly people are and wanting to know more about the world and your own.

- I think AEGEE should be the place to be for students who want to develop themselves using extracurricular activities and also to allow easy travelling conditions for our members everywhere in Europe.

- In my opinion, the goal of AEGEE is to be a tool for every student who wants to develop to achieve it.

- Our goal is to bind people locally enhancing the interaction amongst them on both professional and personal level.

- The goal of AEGEE Groningen is to offer an opportunity to the students interested in doing more than their studies the chance to do so.

(12)

12 How would you grade the communication strategies of AEGEE Groningen (to the members, to the partners, amongst the board members)? (from 1 to 5) -4

-2, we still have much to do. Website needs to be better updated. More naamsberkendheid overall. For the Zernike students for instance the HBO etc.

- An overall grade is around 3, with a very high mark for internal communication but a very low grade for the external one.

- I would grade the communication strategies with an average 2, due to the problems we have with external communication.

- This is one area where we still have a lot to learn, implement and analyze. For this year I can give a 3, for the struggles made by the PR committee and I hope that we will do better next year.

- The communication within the board members, within the board and the committees, in general the communication within the organization was very good. We experienced some difficulties with the external communication with our target, students interested in extracurricular activities. I would grade with a 3.5.

How would you grade the awareness level of AEGEE Groningen amongst the students?

(from 1 to 5)

-3

-2 very low and I just don’t get why!

- Unfortunately, this is one area where we still have to make serious improvements and I have to give only a 2.

- I can only give a 2.5, because I know that many students don’t know about us and what we are doing.

- Unfortunately, if you say AEGEE in Groningen, it does not ring a bell to many students. The only ones that seem to know about us are international students who have been in contact with other AEGEE Antennas.

- This is one of our biggest flaws so I can only give a 2. Projects

What do you think about the quality of the projects done by AEGEE Groningen? -I think the quality of the project done by AEGEE-Groningen is usually quite high, because we have pretty high standards. But it’s not very easy to compare with the projects of other associations within Groningen.

- Very high.

(13)

13 - I consider that overall our projects are very good, from the ideas behind them, to the implementation elements.

- I think that the quality has increased but there is always room for better. We had excellent projects that received very good feed-back from all the participants and factors involved, while others did not reach our expectations.

- As the biggest responsibility of my term was to look after the projects related to external affairs, I can affirm that we have organized very good projects. Our partners, our participants, the team members were satisfied.

To what extent are the projects organized by AEGEE Groningen based on the needs of

its members?

-Our members are taking part in organizing the projects, so they have lot of influence. Of course we organize projects while being aware of the needs of our members, because we would not want to lose them.

- The local ones are. The European ones aren’t that is more on the projects and of course we choose projects that we find interesting.

- I think that the majority of our projects are based on the interests of our members. I consider that we should organize more projects, which will contribute to a better inclusion of inactive members and to a higher satisfaction level amongst our members. - As we are an organization formed entirely from students, there are common needs that our projects satisfy and we usually encourage new initiatives.

- In my opinion all our projects are based on our ideas. And ideas usually come from needs, so every project most definitely has at least a member’s need at its core.

- The idea for any project is the result of a brainstorming amongst the members of a committee, so it is a close link between the needs of our members and our projects. How satisfied are you with the results of the project evaluation, in general, in AEGEE Groningen? (from 1 to 5)

-4

-5 very very goood. WE evaluate everything with forms and a guide so you won’t forget mentioning things.

- I am aware that many things still have to be done in this area to offer relevant and conclusive results, but we have tried to improve the way we evaluate the projects we do each year. It is a very difficult task as we do not really know very well how to do it and how to include every aspect in our evaluation. Still, the current system is applicable and I can grade it at 3.5.

(14)

14 - The system we use now is acceptable and helps us draw some conclusions regarding the development and implementation of a project, but we could use more data. So, I would give a 3.5.

- The current system is the first attempt to try and evaluate the results of the projects. It has offered some useful results but I think there can be improvements so that we have an overall picture. A 3.5 is the score I give.

Performance

How would you define ‘performance’ when thinking about AEGEE Groningen? -For me performance is our activities and how our activities are being received and joined by our members. (So in what way they are taking part and how active they are and how they see AEGEE).

-I can’t say.

- From what I know, performance shows how a certain organization is performing at a certain point in time. If I transpose this to AEGEE I consider that performance can represent how we are behaving at the moment looking at all the features of the organization.

- For AEGEE performance means how our activity is perceived in the exterior and also a tool we need in order to have a competitive advantage.

- I will include this answer in the next question’s one.

- Performance is what others see about what we do internally. It represents the element that portrays our organization to the external environment.

Which are according to your opinion the main ‘ingredients’ of a proper performance measurement system for AEGEE Groningen?

-Collecting a lot of data and doing surveys about how people see the organization and how they experience our activities.

- I don’t know.

- I think that such a system should look upon all elements that individualize us as an organization-the projects, the members, the internal processes, and the board.

- In order to offer the competitive advantage the project evaluation should be the most important element, but also features related to our members or our financial figures should be integrated.

(15)

15 - When I think of how I would measure performance I would look at the activities of our organization and at the feed-back from our participants and I would link them to some quality indicators and try to give an overall grade for AEGEE.

Which of the following features should stay at the core of the performance measurement framework:

-Member oriented organization, Strong vision and strategic plan for a longer period, Internal Processes.

- All.

- Member oriented organization. - Member oriented organization. - Member oriented organization. -Member oriented organization.

In your opinion do you consider AEGEE Groningen should measure performance at an organizational level or at an individual level (project based performance)? -I guess both would give a different but nevertheless interesting result. So in my opinion you should try both.

-We need both, I think.

- I think that performance should be measured from both perspectives, because the projects are a very important side of our organization and we cannot overlook the results of this side, because the results are inconclusive this way.

- I think that first and for most such a system should look at an individual level, as projects are very important for us, but the organizational level should not be neglected. - I think that this system should integrate both levels of measuring performance, because in that way it could offer a picture more close to reality.

(16)

16

Appendix 4: Rich Picture

(17)

17

Appendix 5: List of AEGEE Europe and other youth NGOs representatives

Name Organization Position

Anita Kalmane AEGEE Europe Network Director

Nico Huurman AEGEE Europe Financial Director

Nicolo Wojewoda Yparticipate Coordinator

Jan Tillmann IntiWawa President

Adelina Bizoi Volunteers for Ideas and Projects

President Fadua El Akchaoui Unity is Strength Foundation Vice-president

Mark Dorfried Institute for Cultural

Diplomacy

President

Appendix 6: Questionnaire scheme for AEGEE Europe Board members and other

youth NGOs representatives

Name: Position:

1. Do you consider that a general performance measurement framework for all youth NGOs would prove effective and efficient and provide conclusive results?

2. In case you answered positive to the previous question please detail your reasons and shortly present how you would design such a framework (main criteria/indicators to be included).

3. In case you answered negative at the first question, please detail your choice and shortly present your perspective on how performance should be measured in this category of NGOs.

4. Do you consider that learning processes and activities are important for youth organizations (including student organizations)?

5. If you were to design a performance measurement for AEGEE/your organization, which would be the main features you would include?

6. Do you consider that the results provided by the performance measurement framework should be kept only for the organization or should also be presented to external factors (partners, local government)?

(18)

18

Appendix 7: AEGEE Europe and other youth representatives Questionnaire

responses

Question 1: Do you consider that a general performance measurement framework for all youth NGOs would prove effective and efficient and provide the desired results?

Answers:

I cannot say that I agree totally with a generalized international performance measurement framework, as there are extraordinary differences between student organization at a country level and international ones. For example, the NGO I represent could benefit from a generalized national framework as all student organization in Romania have approximately the same features and face the same challenges. A performance measurement system which can be applied for example for the AIESEC network will most definitely not be suitable for VIP, as there are international characteristics which have to be taken into consideration. The idea is good in theory but from an implementation perspective it is difficult, if not impossible.

From the foundation I represent such a generalized framework could not provide the results needed, because even if we are a youth NGO there are some specific characteristics that cannot be evaluated the performance measurement framework. A very broad framework could be useful to guide small youth organizations in order to build their own system.

No, such a general measurement framework could not work. I cannot think of somebody to design it and think about all the features that differentiate us to be included in such a framework.

Probably, depending on the workload and bureaucracy that comes with this framework. Its thoroughness should be adaptable to the size of the organization.

I’m not sure. What are the desired results? What particular characteristics do youth NGOs have, that require the application of performance measurement frameworks other than the general ones adopted in organizations of all kinds?

(19)

19 Question 2: In case you answered positive to the previous question please detail your reasons and shortly present how such a framework should look like.

On a theoretical level, the framework would have to measure the elements related to the members’ activity, the learning capabilities and also the impact and results of the projects conducted by the organization. But, still there are many aspects related to each organization in particular that have to be taken into account. Looking at the organization I represent one important aspect of performance is closely related to the results of the projects developed, because they are our most important assets and what our brand stands for.

No clue, I think you’re the expert in that.

I think the resulting framework that could take all youth NGO’s into account would have to be too broad to be considered as a framework.

Question 3: In case you answered negative at the first question, please detail your choice and shortly present your perspective on how performance should be measured in this category of NGOs.

Each NGO, even if they are included in a certain category, have particular features that individualize an organization which are relevant for their respective performance and that cannot be included in a generalized performance measurement system.

I cannot think the ICD could benefit from such a generalized framework, as we are somehow a unique organization and elements that are important to us, are irrelevant to other NGOs. For example, an element of performance important for ICD is represented by the speakers and guests who give lectures to the forums, seminars and conferences. The speakers attract the participants who pay the fee that allows us to exist and function, so they must be included when evaluating the performance of the ICD.

(20)

20 Within our work at IntiWawa, we found that true performance measures can only come from the inside of our organization and by benchmarking to comparable Ngo in the same country and with the approximately same size. Only our volunteers, coordinators or people in similar positions really know what is possible with the given amounts of funds in the specific areas where our projects are running. It does not make sense to judge our work in a small village in Peru along a framework that was developed by a charity in New York.

Question 4: Do you consider that learning processes and activities are important for youth organizations (including student organizations)?

I definitely believe and argue in favor of looking very carefully at the learning processes and activities as they represent the most important, if not the only means of progress and performing for student organizations.

For any organization, for profit and non profit, the learning processes and the learning activities should be highly important. If in a for profit organization, the processes are very well established and at any time there is the possibility to hire professionals, in the non-profit sector everything is in dynamics and the need to learn is increasing for the people involved in this sector.

Learning is the most important process we rely upon. Everything about ICD is related to different types of learning, from individual to collective, learning from each other or from professionals.

Yes, self development is one of the main reasons to be active in NGO’s.

I think they’re fundamental for two main reasons. Firstly, youth/student organizations have usually a very quick turnover, with people in positions of management changing every 1 or 2 years – therefore, there is a need for the learning to happen in a relatively short period of time if the organization is to develop and grow as a learning organization, and a need for that learning to be quickly consolidated and transferred to the next generation of leaders within that organization; all that requires a very strong learning process in place, and a solid knowledge transfer system as well. Secondly, youth organizations are usually one of the first ways for young people to be active in a professional capacity, and as with any startup effort, a lot of the effort should be directed towards learning how to do better work and how to better understand one’s unique strengths and weaknesses, and how to develop them – whether as an individual or as a project team.

(21)

21 Question 5: If you were to design a performance measurement, which would be the main features you would include?

I would look into focusing on the results of the projects developed, like the impact on the participants, if the objectives were achieved , the impact on the society and also on how the members benefited from the experience of being a member of the organization and of the project organizing team.

I would look at the objectives set and how they were achieved, at the results of the activity and also on how the cause the NGO serves it is served.

I am not an expert and I am aware that there are many delicate aspects that have to be taken into account so I cannot outline all the features. I can think of evaluating the projects in terms of the impact the project had on the participant, the quality of the speakers invited or the awareness given to the concept of cultural diplomacy. There are also many other financial elements that have to be included and that can portray the reality of the institute.

Don’t know.

Organization/team based measurements, as well as individual ones. Measurements related to the objectives of the organization, as well as some perhaps less tangible objectives that relate with teamwork and personal/professional development.

It is very important to focus the performance evaluation on developments over time rather than current snapshots of the actual situation. NGO’s face numerous challenges in their host environments that require adaptations, which can easily take a couple of months to settle. IN terms of variables, it is not to name a fixed set of those. We change an adapt these for every project we start and run.

Question 6: Do you consider that the results provided by the performance measurement framework should be kept only for the organization or should also be presented to external factors (partners, local government)?

I argue in favor of a very sincere relationship with the partners. Perhaps this is related to the strong bonds we managed to create with our partners, without whom we would not be able to exist as an organization and moreover to organize projects. We always try to gain as much experience and knowledge from our partners and for that we have to be very open and present them the facts as close to reality as possible.

(22)

22 There are results that have to be available to external factors, but there are also figures and facts that must remain for the management of the organization and used by them for future improvements.

It’s good to be open, and hopefully other NGO’s will implement similar frameworks, to be able to compare results.

I think it’s important to show partners and other stakeholders that such processes are in place, but I don’t see the need of sharing the results of those measurements unless when the partnership requires so (e.g. the organization is given a grant and is asked to report thoroughly on the way the money was spent and on the way it has impacted the organization’s performance).

This depends on the sources of donations for the NGO. If all donors agree that numbers should be kept confidential to avoid misinterpretations by the public, that’s totally fine.

Question 7: What is your opinion about the designed performance measurement system for AEGEE Groningen? (Only for AEGEE Europe representatives)?

I found the framework interesting and exciting, as I think it is a little bit complicated to use. From what you described it manages to include all the important aspects: members, projects, internal stuff and also issue related to how we learn and grow.

I liked the framework you sent. I liked that it included also the project evaluation in the part related to the internal processes. This is really important for AEGEE Groningen, from what I can remember because they develop many projects. Still, I think this framework even if it seems simple, it would be difficult to apply because there have to be members who not only know how but also be interested in the topic. That’s how we, student organizations work-we rely on our members interest towards one area and leave others uncovered.

(23)

23 Ideally, if this framework or any would allow enough flexibility to permit different cultural backgrounds and different approaches and would also be efficient for small antennas, then it could be implemented generally. But, from what I have learned about the network there are very strong antennas that are proud of their activity and results and would never accept something from the center. It’s perhaps stupid, but this is how we work and one needs courage to try and change things.

Appendix 8: General data about AEGEE and AEGEE Groningen

AEGEE, as a student organization promotes co-operation, communication and integration amongst the young people, all around Europe. It is dedicated entirely to students, no matter their academic background and their field of study. It is a non-governmental, apolitical and a non-profit organization with over 15 000 members, in 240 university cities. It was founded in Paris, in 1985 and it promoted ever since the idea of a united Europe. It rapidly spread and become a vivid network of students who were eager to join forces and work together on different activities from conferences, seminars, exchanges, training courses, Summer Universities, Case Study trips and Working Group meetings. AEGEE Europe has a European structure, with the European Board of Directors and the 240 antennae which form the network. At the central level, in Brussels, there is the Board, four Commissions, 11 Working Groups and nine multinational Project Teams.

AEGEE Europe and implicitly AEGEE Groningen strive for:

An open and integrated Europe, with a sense of common identity, defined and united by shared values, taking diversity as its source of strength;

A society where all young people are provided with diverse learning opportunities, to become competent professionals in international settings;

(24)

24 A diverse network of young people; based on trust and mutual understanding, where they join and enrich each others’ interest and work together for the interest of the society. (AEGEE-Europe's Strategic Plan 2009-2011).

Appendix 9: Balanced score card strategy map

Figure Nr. 2 Balance Score Card Strategy Map Source: Kaplan, R. 2005

Appendix 10: New project selection mechanism

List of requirements for a project:

1. The project is complex enough for at least 3 members to work on it. 2. Feedback from the organizing team and the participants is obligatory.

3. The project must raise at least the amount mentioned in the minimum budget. Otherwise it is stopped by the board.

(25)

25 5. All activities have to be organized at the highest professional standard and do not harm

AEGEE’s image in any way.

6. Every Project Manager is obliged to communicate any problems, issues of importance to the project to the evaluator and also complete de evaluation form for his team members and for the evaluator.

FigureNr. 3: Projects selection process. Source: author.

(26)

26 enhancer. In order for the data provided by the framework, each project evaluation should be done by the project manager and only a part should be the input of the project evaluator. The design of the evaluation form for each of the project was realized to be coherent with the overall framework, so that it would not confuse the users and also so that the results could be transferable and aggregated in the overall framework.

Appendix 11: Project evaluation form

Project

characteristics:

Objectives Measures Targets Initiatives Objectives Organizing team Participants Finance Other remarks Evaluators comments

The following questions are examples a project manager could ask himself in order to set the objectives for each of the lines and to find measures for quantifying them.

Objectives:

-how many objectives were achieved? -were the objectives SMART?

-shortly present the reasons why some of the objectives have not been accomplished (for know-how transfer).

Organizing team:

-was the project successful according to your standards and AEGEE standards? -do you feel you have acquired new knowledge on the fields of your interest? -were there conflicts inside the team?

-was there a good time management and a good work division?

(27)

27 -after this project are you more confident in your abilities?

-would you assume a leadership position in AEGEE Groningen?

-how would you grade the level of professionalism of the activities? (from 1 to 5, where 5 is the highest grade)

Participants:

-how many applicants did the project have? -how many participants did the project have?

-what was their overall feedback? (depending on the project this can vary)

-what was their feed-back regarding the activities, the organizing team, the conditions, and the outcome of the project?

Finance:

-what was the initial budget of the project? -what was the minimum budget?

-what amount was collected?

-which were the sources for the funds collected? -were the funds rationally used?

Others:

-you can include here any other element which you consider to be relevant and has an influence on the project (e.g. improvements, suggestions).

Evaluator’s remarks and evaluation:

(28)

28 their skills, if there were conflicts, disagreements, good time-management and equal work division. The participants section will offer significant results by presenting number of participants, their feedback on specific aspects like accommodation, food, speakers, conditions or any other particular features of the project. The financial part will provide with the necessary data related to the budget, if the project managed to gather more than the minimum amount, which provided the funds, the relationship status with the donors. The open part of the form is available to make any other suggestions, notes, useful information.

Appendix 12: Evaluation diagram

(29)

29

Appendix 13: Overall performance measurement system

Perspectives of the Balanced Score Card

Objectives Measures Targets Initiatives

‘Member’ Perspective Learning Perspective Internal Process Perspective

The following questions are examples which are meant to help the board, more precisely the president to set some objectives on each of the three perspectives and some quantifying measurements and also the targets. For example:

Strategic objective Measurement

Member perspective Increase member satisfaction Satisfaction survey or questionnaire

Learning and growth perspective

Develop “…” skill Members questionnaire Internal process perspective Efficient know-how transfer Feed-back meeting with the

new board

Member Perspective:

- How many new students became members of AEGEE Groningen? - How many of the active members last year are still active today? - How many passive members became active?

- How many active members became passive? - What was the result of the evaluation of members? Learning Perspective:

- How much training were held this year? - How many projects were organized this year?

- How many members stated that during this year they have enhanced their knowledge on the field of their interest?

(30)

30 Internal Process Perspective:

- Were the PR campaigns efficient and effective? Did they increase AEGEE Groningen’s awareness?

- Communication: lack of communication on key moments, decisions communicated too late or not clear, were all members reached by the communication channels? - Know how transfer: was it useful? Did it contain the relevant information? Were the

information clear or could they be interpreted?

- Procedures and regulation- projects selection, new board members selection, the decision making process, all regulations clear, understood by members

- Evaluation

The ‘member’ perspective of the balance score card will offer an overview image of the results relevant to this important part of the organization. At the start of each academic year when new members are recruited, the general objectives related to this perspective, the measures and the targets have to be set in order for a realistic and efficient comparison with the results at the end of the year. Also, the different initiatives made to comply with the member needs will be included throughout the year.

(31)

31

Appendix 14: Other materials

AEGEE Groningen has to use some tools in order to gather data. Next, some examples of questionnaires for measuring the level of satisfaction of the members, how the evaluation has to be done are presented.

Questionnaire for assessing a new member

1. How did you find out about AEGEE Groningen? 2. Why did you join AEGEE Groningen ?

3. What are your expectations? (try to be as concise as possible, e.g. to learn how to make a PR campaign)

4. What committee would you like to join? 5. What are your areas of interest?

6. Do you have any idea for projects to be implemented?

7. How much time would you dedicate a week to AEGEE Groningen? Questionnaires:

- for evaluating the board members’ activity

1. Did you manage to accomplish all the objectives for this year? 2. If the answer to Q1 is no, please detail why this happened?

3. How would you characterize the atmosphere in the board this year? - Any conflicts?

- Communication problems?

- Problems with deadlines, time-management, motivation?

4. How would you characterize the working experience with your other board members? 5. What was your biggest success this year?

6. What was your biggest failure this year?

7. Do you consider it was a valuable experience being a part of the board?

8. Please, point out 3 things you learned from a professional point of view this year? 9. Please add any other relevant aspect you feel has to be mentioned.

(32)

32 1. Did he/she communicate efficiently during the process of organizing the project?

2. Did he/she coach you when you needed help? 3. Did he/she motivate you during the process?

4. Did he/she maintain an objective attitude towards you, your activity and project?

5. Did he/she interfere more than necessary in the organizing process or damage your authority?

6. Do you consider the evaluation of your project realistic? Were you satisfied with the results of the evaluation?

-for committee chairman (filled in by the board representative in charge of the committee, the project managers and the members of the committee)

1. Did he/she communicate efficiently the decisions made, the regulations, the requirements needed?

2. Did he/she organize different activities (trainings, social events, parties, seminars) based on your needs?

3. How would you qualify his/hers leadership skills? 4. How would you qualify his organizational skills?

5. Were you satisfied overall with his/hers activity of chairman? -for project managers (filled in by the evaluator and team-members)

1. Did he/she communicate efficiently all the things related to the project?

2. Did he/she managed properly the amount of work and divided it equally amongst the team members?

3. Did he/she motivate the team members to do their best?

4. Did he/she provide support for the team members when the situation asked for it? 5. Did he/she have the control of all the activities necessary for the project?

6. How would you qualify his/hers leadership skills?

-for active members (filled in by the chairman of the committee he/she is member and the Project manager of the projects he/she were involved in)

1. Did he/she do his/her job professional, before the deadline and at high standards? 2. Did he/she communicate properly with you and his other team members?

3. Would you consider he/she evolved professional and personal after being part of the organizing team?

4. Have you seen leadership skills in him/her?

(33)

33 6. Was he/she open to feedback? Did he/she improve his work and behavior after

listening to your feedback? Auto-evaluation form:

1. How would you describe your activity in AEGEE this year?

2. How much time did you dedicate to the activities developed at AEGEE? 3. Did you feel that your initial expectations were reached?

4. Do you feel you have accumulated knowledge, information, experience? 5. How would you grade:

-the communication inside the organization? -the internal processes?

-the interest towards your needs? -the board activity?

-your committee activity? -the project you were part of?

(34)

34

Appendix 15: Phases in developing a performance measurement system

System design Implementation of measures Feed-back Data collection Review of measures Analysis of the data Act Measure Identify key objectives Designing Measures