nsc2015 - q3 ta
TRANSCRIPT
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
3,5
4
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Talent Chart
Low Performance, Low development High Performance, Low development
Low Performance, regular development
Low Performance, high development High performance, high development
High performance, medium development
Medium performance high development
Medium performance, High development
Medium performance, medium development
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
0 20 40 60 80 100
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
0 20 40 60 80 100
UNS UNILA UNHAS UGM UA PMBS UNDIP UB PU Surabaya UI
• Better performance rather than Q2
• Only little improvement of performance even it’s already 3 quarters
• This condition will affect a lot Marketing/PR/IM in the next quarters since they need to catch up what’s left in Q3
• Be aware for next term, related to the condition of our HR, current TMP will continue the organization and this is how the condition of our marketing/PR/IM condition for 3 quarters
33
,88
47
,18
39
,13
70
,08
41
,71
71
,71
42
,5
55
,49
90
,52
67
,96
65
,46
52
,53
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
UNS UNILA UNHA S UGM UA PMB S UND IP U B PU SUR A B A Y A UI UMM
Performance
6,6
%
28
,5%
28
,0%
58
,0%
18
,0%
44
,0%
0,0
%
22
,0%
82
,0%
57
,0%
65
,0%
58
,0%
93
,4%
71
,5%
72
,0%
42
,0%
82
,0%
56
,0%
10
0,0
%
78
,0%
18
,0%
43
,0%
35
,0%
42
,0%
0,0% 20,0% 40,0% 60,0% 80,0% 100,0% 120,0%
UNS
UNILA
UNHA S
UGM
UA
PMB S
UND IP
UB
PU
SUR A B A Y A
UI
UMM
Performer Under Performance
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
0 20 40 60 80 100
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
0 20 40 60 80 100
UNS UNILA UNHAS UGM UA PMBS UNDIP UB PU SURABAYA UI
• Better performance rather than Q2
• Only little improvement of performance even it’s already 3 quarters
• Condition of marketing really effect the condition of oGCDP
• Clear borders of JD is needed in order to ensure the development of members in oGCDP (how their KPI focus on matching and not affected by the result of marketing)
65
,24
82
,93
91
,5
75
,97
50
,64
61
,64
60
,81 65
,74
75
,69
78
,75
76
52
,28
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
UNS UNILA UNHA S UGM UA PMB S UND IP U B PU SUR A B A Y A UI UMM
Performance
37
,50
%
89
%
98
%
84
,62
%
35
,29
%
53
,85
%
25
%
75
%
83
,33
%8
7%
70
,97
%
78
%
62
,50
%
11
%
2%
15
,38
%
64
,71
%
46
,15
%
75
%
25
%
16
,67
%1
3%
29
,03
%
22
%
0,00% 20,00% 40,00% 60,00% 80,00% 100,00% 120,00%
UNS
UNILA
UNHA S
UGM
UA
PMB S
UND IP
UB
PU
SUR A B A Y A
UI
UMM
Performer Under Performance
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
0 20 40 60 80 100
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
0 20 40 60 80 100
UNS UNHAS UGM UA PMBS UNDIP UB PU SURABAYA UI
• Performance in Q3 is decrease rather than Q2
• Have more performing members, so it’s a good sign for oGIP next term in terms of HR capacity, needs to ensure the pipeline of performing members
49
,2
1,7
61
,79
33
,71
70
,42
73
,98
49
,64
93
,53
71
,81
73
,27
60
,37
5
52
,28
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
UNS UNHA S UGM UA PMB S UND IP UB PU SUR A B A Y A UI UMM UMM
Performance
20
,0%
0,0
%
28
,0%
8,0
%
60
,0%
60
,0%
25
,0%
80
,0%
78
,0%
78
,0%
61
,0%
78
%
80
,0%
10
0,0
%
72
,0%
92
,0%
40
,0%
40
,0%
75
,0%
20
,0%
22
,0%
22
,0%
39
,0%
22
%
0,00% 20,00% 40,00% 60,00% 80,00% 100,00% 120,00%
UNS
UNHA S
UGM
UA
PMB S
UND IP
UB
PU
SUR A B A Y A
UI
UMM
UMM
Performer Under Performance
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
0 20 40 60 80 100
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
0 20 40 60 80 100
UNS UNILA UNHAS UGM UA PMBS UNDIP UB PU Surabaya UI
• The 2nd highest underperforming members among the functions
• Sales and macthing also late timeline become the bottleneck
• The 2nd highest critical performing members among the functions
• More attention is needed for iGCDP members in order to ensure the experience
30
,62
59
,87
49
,33
48
,43
20
,62
70
,6
65
,72
67
,66
81
,51
74
,4
64
,1
52
,73
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
UNS UNILA UNHA S UGM UA PMB S UND IP U B PU SUR A B A Y A UI UMM
Performance
0%
10
%
0%
15
,30
%
0%
69
,20
%
41
,17
%
61
,50
%
77
,70
%
54
,54
%5
0%
48
%
10
0%
90
%
10
0%
84
,70
%
10
0%
30
,80
%
58
,83
%
38
,50
%
22
,30
%
45
,46
%5
0%
52
%
0,00% 20,00% 40,00% 60,00% 80,00% 100,00% 120,00%
UNS
UNILA
UNHA S
UGM
UA
PMB S
UND IP
UB
PU
SUR A B A Y A
UI
UMM
Performer Under Performance
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
0 20 40 60 80 100
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
0 20 40 60 80 100
UNHAS UGM UA PMBS UB PU SURABAYA
UI PMBS UNDIP UB PU SURABAYA UI
• The 3rd highest underperforming members among the functions (after iGCDP)
• Matching become the bottleneck of iGIP• The highest critical performing members among the
functions• Overall, ICX members are more low performing than the
other functions, deeper evaluation needed to know reason behind the number
8,8
1
60
,78
14
,8
75
,83
61
,88
76
,9
65
,53
51
,94
67
,7
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
UNHA S UGM U A PMB S UB PU SUR A B A Y A UI UMM
Performance
0,0
%
30
,0%
0,0
%
60
,0%
57
,0%
80
,0%
70
,0%
25
,0%
68
,0%
10
0,0
%
70
,0%
10
0,0
%
40
,0%
43
,0%
20
,0%
30
,0%
75
,0%
32
,0%
0,0% 20,0% 40,0% 60,0% 80,0% 100,0% 120,0%
UNHA S
UGM
UA
PMB S
UB
PU
SUR A B A Y A
UI
UMM
Performer Under Performance
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
0 20 40 60 80 100
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
0 20 40 60 80 100
UNS UNILA UGM UA PMBS UNDIP UB PU SURABAYA UI
• The highest underperforming members among the functions
• The highest critical performing members among the functions
• Most of BD are focus on financial partner/LCs partners, meanwhile we don’t consider the condition of the city/market. Evaluation of the opportunity in city is needed. If the city is not really potential for financial partner, etc, Sales focus on exchange support for raising
54
,53
56
,85
57
,67
35
,68 3
9,9
8
62
,75
63
,43
26
,12
74
,38
42
,88
51
,49
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
UNS UNILA UGM UA PMB S UND IP UB PU SUR A B A Y A UI UMM
Performance
43
,0%
0,0
%
23
,0%
13
,0%
9,0
%
25
,0%
44
,0%
0,0
%
67
,0%
19
,0%
51
,0%
67
,0%
10
0,0
%
77
,0%
87
,0%
91
,0%
75
,0%
56
,0%
10
0,0
%
33
,0%
81
,0%
49
,0%
0,0% 20,0% 40,0% 60,0% 80,0% 100,0% 120,0%
UNS
UNILA
UGM
UA
PMB S
UND IP
UB
PU
SUR A B A Y A
UI
UMM
Performer Under Performance
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
0 20 40 60 80 100
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
0 20 40 60 80 100
UNS UNILA UNHAS UGM UA PMBS UNDIP UB PU SURABAYA UI
• Performance are decrease in Q3, most of the reason is because of HR fulfillment after re-planning (from the individual PA) and realization time
• KPI is really depends on the other functions
• CE is having problem in the transition so the execution of the JD is not well done. Please be focus on summer preparation based on our S&S standard
• The highest performing members compare to other functions
38
,09
72
,67
72
,09
72
,14
60
,68
74
,75
66
,76
73
,77
66
,66
62
,85
60
,37 6
5,5
2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
UNS UNILA UNHA S UGM UA PMB S UND IP U B PU SUR A B A Y A UI UMM
Performance
0%
50
%
75
%
53
,80
%
45
%
72
,72
%
60
,00
%
50
,00
%
66
,66
%
42
,80
%
57
%
68
%
10
0%
50
%
25
%
46
,20
%
44
%
27
,28
%
40
,00
%
50
,00
%
33
,34
%
57
,20
%
43
%
32
%
0,00% 20,00% 40,00% 60,00% 80,00% 100,00% 120,00%
UNS
UNILA
UNHA S
UGM
UA
PMB S
UND IP
UB
PU
SUR A B A Y A
UI
UMM
Performer Under Performance
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
0 20 40 60 80 100
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
0 20 40 60 80 100
UNS UNILA UNHAS
UGM UA PMBS
UB PU+Sheet1!$A$38:$A$41 SURABAYA
UI UNDIP UB
PU SURABAYA UI
• APPRECIATION for FINANCE and GOVERNANCE for the improvement of performance in Q3
• But, the performance only come from a half of finance members. Activate internal circle of finance to learn and share GCP is needed
64
,31
80
,64
71
,28 7
6,1
1
63
,42
81
,74
73
,49
69
,7
60
,75
52
,25
61
,95
80
,55
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
UNS UNILA UNHA S UGM UA PMB S UND IP U B PU SUR A B A Y A UI UMM
Performance
25
,0%
71
,0%
68
,0%
80
,0%
25
,0%
80
,0%
80
,0%
60
,0%
33
,0%
25
,0%
0,0
%
78
,0%
75
,0%
29
,0%
32
,0%
20
,0%
75
,0%
20
,0%
20
,0%
40
,0%
67
,0%
75
,0%
10
0,0
%
22
,0%
0,00% 20,00% 40,00% 60,00% 80,00% 100,00% 120,00%
UNS
UNILA
UNHA S
UGM
UA
PMB S
UND IP
UB
PU
SUR A B A Y A
UI
UMM
Performer Under Performance
Related to development of our members, our entity is still use personal/ subjective sensing related to development
We drop in almost all functional in Q3 in terms of member performance
Performance of Marketing and sales really affect the performance of exchange department
Lose focus in Q3, really affecting performance of members
Only several entities implement KPI of team leader, we increase
in middle management performance but we drop in executive body and staff
performance
Unideal timeline in Q3 effect a lot in members performance.
High potential of having a lot of lose members in Q4
Big Problem in Sales almost in all entities
Implementation of membership regulation (minimum experience delivery for TMP TLP)
Put more attention to members in facing (since in Q3, less job done meanwhile we need to be fast and focus in last sprint of our term). Performance and development needs to be there and our responsibilities to ensure both are happening)
Needs to ensure the borders between sales marketing and exchange. So we can ensure one experience is not really affected by others experience
Increase the capacity of Staff to ensure we prepare the next term with HR who has enough
capacity
KPI focus on strategic result for Q4
Find out the root problem of sales and find the most effective way for selling (B2B/B2C)