When it comes to being a member of the Network Commission, good communication is the key. Mareike Ritter of AEGEE-Heidelberg has already proven herself as a member of her own board, and as a SubCommie. Now she is more than ready to take her skills to the next level, to maintain and improve communication, to facilitate NWMs, LTCs and RTCs; in one word, to become a Network Commissioner.

The AEGEEan: Could you introduce yourself?

Mareike: My name is Mareike, I have been a member of AEGEE Heidelberg since June last year, and I started my one-year term as part of the local board shortly afterwards. I am currently doing my Bachelors in Studies of Religion in Heidelberg, but from October on I will continue in Leipzig. When I am not writing papers on the connection between feminism and Neopagan witchcraft, studying Arabic or reading books on ethnicity in the ancient Mediterranean, I love being outside, going for a walk with my dog or taking pictures, or just drinking a cup of coffee with my friends. And of course the biggest chunk of my time is devoted to AEGEE. Especially during the past weeks, I have been so busy organising the Summer University in Heidelberg that all the other things had to step back – and obviously I cannot get enough of it.

What makes you a perfect member of the Network Commission?

I have a lot of respect towards the job of NetCommie; I have a concrete idea of what my tasks will be and how I would like to tackle them – especially as I already gained insights into the job as SubCommie. I learned a lot about teamwork and the importance of good communication during the past year as part of the board and organizer of a Summer University – so I guess I am ready for the challenge. Plus: I would be the third Mareike in the NetCom in a row, so you do not even have to learn a new name – how convenient (she winks).

What have you done in the past that prepared you for the work that you will have to do in the NetCom?

Since February, I have been supporting Mareike Wegener as SubCommie, and through that work I got to learn about the different ways in which antennae work and what difficulties they might face – and of course what possibilities are there to solve them. Also, through being part of the local board in Heidelberg and organising a Summer University, I learned a lot about project management, organisation and teamwork – experiences that I would love to use and share with others. But of course, this is a job where you are constantly learning – that is why you are in a team where you can learn from and support each other.

What made you want to run for Member of the Network Commission?

Being an AEGEE member, you often have to deal with many different kinds of issues. Bureaucracy, recruitment and too much work can easily take over the fun part. The only cure against these struggles is to be shown again what AEGEE is about: to gain skills, exchange ideas, make them concrete while connecting with people from all around Europe. I believe that the Network Commission plays a crucial role in that: Network meetings, LTCs and RTCs, Skype meetings and exchanges – these are the occasions during which one grasps the power of our borderless cooperation. As a NetCommie you are not only taking part in these activities, but actually facilitating them. And you are able to connect the locals, show them that their issues might be shared – and have already been solved! – by others, too. So, I would like to give my best in this important job in order to strengthen and support AEGEE.

What would you like to do as a NetCommie?

As I said above, I think that exchange and cooperation – even if only via Skype – are very important to strengthen the network among antennae. And as our organisation is currently facing a lack of skilled trainers, I consider it one of the goals during my term to promote LTCs and RTCs in order to create a pool of high-quality workshops that can be used among the network. I am also looking forward to organising the two Network meetings during my term, where people can meet, exchange their experiences and collect new ideas together. Besides that, I will try my best to help locals with their issues while being there for new contacts and contact antennae.

How do you want to achieve your goals as a member of the Netcom?

Keeping in touch with each other and a good communication are everything. So I would like to continue with the frequent Skype meetings within the NetCom and SubCom team and with my locals. I would like to use these occasions, as well as the network meetings, to promote LTCs and RTCs, and encourage locals to take part in the twin antennae or mentoring programmes – close relationships that both the local members and our organisation as a whole profit from.

As a member of the NetCom you will have to communicate a lot with different locals, how will you resolve conflicting issues that some of the locals under your care might have?

As I already said, communication is super important. So I want to maintain the regular Skype meetings with locals in order to be informed about such issues. It should be clear that it is my job to help them through, and sometimes it can already help to have someone looking at the issue from outside.
So that is the first step. Second would be that there is no problem that another local has not faced yet. There is a data base – consisting of forms like the monthly activity reports or board activity reports, that a lot of people consider pure bureaucracy – with which we might find a solution or get together with a local that has already been through such an issue. Then, there are workshops for the board or the entire local that might be helpful. And, worst case scenario, there is the Mediation Commission, and an entire organisation with skilled and experienced people – so no need to worry [she smiles, ed].

You can read her full candidature here. 

Written by Willem Laurentzen, AEGEE-Nijmegen

He loves PR and Social Media and you can tell by reading his candidature. Lorenzo Ligas is 23 years old and he is from AEGEE-Cagliari, where he covers the role of PR responsible for the Italian local. He has been working on Social Media and Public Relations for three years now and he is a student of Communication Science at the University of Cagliari. After having covered the task of PR responsible of Cagliari Summer University, he aims to take the next step by managing the PR of the Summer University Coordination Team.

The AEGEEan: Why did you decide to run for a position in the Summer University Coordination Team?

Lorenzo: I want to challenge myself in a great project such as Summer University.

The current team started a sort of Interest Group about Summer University (Supporters)б in which people helped the SUCT. Would you like to keep it alive?

Yes, having supporters for the SUCT can help the team as well as let more AEGEEans be active at the European Level.

You do not have much experience in European bodies, but your working experience outside of AEGEE is impressive. What are the best assets you can bring to the SUCT, provided you are going to be elected?

Thank you! Yes it is true, I do not have so much experience in European bodies, but I could use my years of experience developed outside of AEGEE for the project. I am a Social Media enthusiast and I love creating PR strategies. This year AEGEE-Cagliari socials had an impressive growth: plus 850 on Facebook and plus 300 on Instagram since I started. I’m confident that the experience I gained as PR Responsible, as well as my non-AEGEE experience into festivals, clubs, cultural events and writing, could be helpful for SUCT.

How would you help locals respect Visual Identity?

Giving them the Visual Identity booklet, as well as to provide instructions on how to add the SU watermark to their pictures. Of course I will also respect the Visual Identity for both local and SUCT materials myself.

You were PR responsible for the last Summer University of AEGEE-Cagliari. What was your strategy? Do you think it was successful? Do you think that it can be applied (with the due changes) to all Summer Universities?

I created infographics for the promotion. Sharing them both on Facebook and Instagram with a weekly schedule, using trend hashtags for AEGEE, Summer University and AEGEE-Cagliari. During the event, I used Instagram and Facebook for images. I used Facebook streams for most of the activities. After the event I edited the photos our photographer made, using Lightroom.

I think it was definitely successful, but of course there’s always something to improve. Since I started promoting the Summer University, our social media had a big increase, and we were pretty satisfied about the number of applications. This PR strategy could definitely be applied to the SUCT.

This is a recurring question when it comes to Summer Universities: the decreasing number of applications and local organisers. What do you think about this issues? 

Cheap travelling has become a trend in the last years since the introduction of tools as Hostelworld and Airbnb in Europe. Therefore offering “low cost travelling” is no longer a selling point for a Summer University. I think that personal development has to be an area to focus on, with the same importance of the social programme and entertainment. And we have to spread the AEGEE-spirit more. We should share the idea that being part of a Summer University is a mind-blowing experience, and being an AEGEEan is a lifestyle.

I think that the reason behind the decrease of local organisers could be found behind many aspects: less active members, weak HR and PR strategies, difficulty to contact local istitutions, lack of funds. These aspects scare locals to challenge themselves into organising a Summer University. A possible solution could be creating Facebook working groups in order to share best practices and webseminars to locals. Creating guidelines on how to organise a Summer University, how to fundraise, promote etc. I think SUCT has to become a strong presence in locals’ lives.

In the application process we often see that certain locals are very popular, while others even struggle to find participants and (in extreme cases) are forced to cancel the Summer University. What are your thoughts on that? Do you have any idea to try to level this phenomenon?

Yes, promotion is a problem for some antennae. Some Summer Universities look more interesting than others, maybe because they build a good promotion or because they are settled in more famous locations. It would be useful to work side by side with the PR Responsibles of the SUs in order to give them advice and look at how to promote the Summer University. As SUCT, you can prepare general guidelines for all the locals and then customise them in case of special needs. Every Summer University has strong points and something interesting to offer, you just have to find the best way to show them.

You can read his full candidature here.

Written by Erika Bettin, AEGEE-Verona

Luca Bisighini, Italian from AEGEE-Brescia, is a 27-year-old travel addict and weird, as he defines himself. He has an MBA with a specialisation in International Trade and Business and he currently lives in Krakow, Poland doing an internship. He joined AEGEE two years ago and he became active both on the local and European level. After being elected as the third member of the Audit Commission during Spring Agora Bergamo, he decided to go for a second term to finish and/or implement what has been started in this term, but he also wants to bring new ideas.

The AEGEEan: Why did you decide to run for a position in the Audit Commission again?

Luca: As I said in my application I promised it in Bergamo and I am not running away from my promises. Moreover, I liked this term as Audit and just five months seemed too short to me. I have ambitious plans and enough motivation to be a part of the Audit again. I want to continue working on plans for facilitating the life of Auditors in the future and give opportunities to lots of future students of economics.

According to you, what has been your biggest achievement in the Commission and what was the biggest of the entire Commission?

Personally I’d say getting more in touch with the finances of AEGEE, realising how locals behave by looking at the numbers, by what they present. This is fundamental if you want to set up criteria and make guidelines to allow people to analyse what locals are doing. I have been helped a lot by the previous two Audits who were in charge for a whole year: Mateusz Muszalski (AEGEE-Krakow) and especially Deborah Pistori (AEGEE-Cagliari), the spinal cord of this 2015/16 Audit Commission, God bless her. The biggest achievement of the Commission this Summer was to define our ideas more clearly and decide what we want to do together. We had some serious problems, but we solved them.

You seem to have a clear communication strategy in mind. Can you explain it, with a clear separation between internal communication and external communication?

First of all, during this term we had some kind of communication troubles within the Commission. I appreciate it to be among people who try to save the ship and lead it to safe waters. The issue I am referring to was mainly caused by continuous miscommunications. Also, during these months I had no opportunities to talk to any of the Job Shadowers. None of them showed up, which is kind of weird especially taking into consideration that in Bergamo I ran with one of them.

Actually I wasn’t leading the Audit, but this situation pissed me off (and I wasn’t the only one) due to the lack of basic organisation and leadership. Leadership is fundamental in the European bodies of AEGEE. If you are not a good leader, or a good organiser, well, you are wasting time. Because this was such a huge issue I mainly referred to an internal problem in answering your question.

We will implement the move to Podio, which I find fundamental to make this whole thing work. I would love to have a group of Job Shadowers: people eager and ready to be in a team, to learn lots of things and share their knowledge with me! That’s why we constantly need to be in touch with locals who are asking questions, with FATF, the CD, and the Medcom. Our credibility pass through our complete transparency, and precision in our work and in time.

Can you explain your idea about creating a set of criteria to analyse locals’ Financial Reports in more detail?

When I applied in Bergamo I already discussed my idea of making an Intertemporal Register of the finances of the locals. It’s something really basic in the world of accounting, and it is used to discover the right course of action in a multi-year period, to analyze risks, to prevent them by analysing economic behaviours, justifications to the numbers you see. We can do this for any kind of economic sector and for AEGEE branches too. We can even use these kinds of analyses within our locals. 

If we will analyse the behaviours of different antennae, we can easily establish which ones are at risk, which ones are less at risk and we can find the things they have in common. By adding the international standards “ISO 19011:2011: guidelines for auditing management systems” in the process of our work we can make a professional jump that this body has never experienced before. We need a Task Force for this step forward, so we need more auditors – I hope at least two will join – and a lot of Job Shadowers who have to become like Subcommies for Netcoms. That’s why I am excited and eager to have a Task Force ready to work with me if I will be elected.

You put a lot of emphasis on educating locals. How would you implement this in an efficient way?

One of the things I want to do this year is to explain to every single local that made some kind of mistakes what it is they did wrong. Also, explaining in detail how to fill out a Financial Statement and how to do bookkeeping will be fundamental. It will be one of the first things to implement during the first months of the next term. From Chisinau to Enschede we need to do a lot of educating and talking to locals. We should also try to provide them with more unconventional and non-formal educational tools, even though I am sorry to say that economic education is usually pretty formal. 

You mentioned that you will avoid “stealing problems” in locals. Not going too much into detail, why do you think this problem exists? Is it a big problem or is it limited to specific cases?

There are free-riders in our world in general, not just in AEGEE. There are people and locals who do not follow the main rules of the CIA or their own country’s national (and/or) European law. That’s absurd.

When I joined Audit I heard some vague stories from the past about “hey in this local XYZ ten years ago this happened”, or “this person used the locals’ money to buy the kitchen of his/her flat”. I mean, it might be funny at first, but it’s not funny in the end. Several antennae died due to debts, and were then born again like a Phoenix. Luckily it’s not a big problem,  but we need to take clear and really serious actions to prevent this from happening again. Maybe we can propose some solutions at the Spring Agora in Enschede.

Currently you are Audit Commissioner, Coordinator of the Migration Interest Group, part of the Finance/Fundraising/Social Media team of Europe on Track and Subcommissioner of the Rainbow Area. Considering the workload of the Audit Commission, do you think that you are involved in too many projects? How would you be able to manage everything without neglecting any of your positions?

Anna Bortoletto from AEGEE-Udine asked me the same question in Bergamo, and I managed to find time to do each single thing in this term since then. Team work and effective, precise use of the tools and time we have is the answer. Even if it makes me sleep a few less hours, working for all these AEGEE projects is rewarding to me.

Lisa’s Subcommie Team this year was probably the strongest and the one that worked the most. I have no doubts about it. We made inquiries first, then we tried to improve a lot of the weaknesses we found. We discussed problems and areas where every single local can look for improvements, such as IT areas and ways to improve HR and recruitment. Next year, I’m certain a lot of antennae will adapt their strategies based on our advise. 

The Finance Team of Europe on Track is something lot of antennae/projects in Europe should be jealous of. I love the project, it’s utterly brilliant and fascinating, but since this year’s edition it was troubled. I wanted to contribute with my expertise to make it work better, and make it more digital: an edition to remember.

The Migration interest group grew because of a series of events. We were able to exploit in such a great way: a great edition of the EPM, a really active Facebook group and in the end my Policy Paper on Migration were such great catalysts. We are growing and raising awareness on such a difficult topic. People in the group have great enthusiasm and a lot of creativity, attention, passion for the topic. I almost have goosebumps all the time, I am proud of every member of MIGR. And they represent the perfect AEGEE spirit I hope is alive in other groups and projects too. If I have to list one problem, I would say that I won’t have enough time to go to Brussels for the live meetings for all these projects. Of course, the Audit Commission will have the priority.

You have been very open about your plans in AEGEE. Would you push your ‘career’ further by running for CD in Enschede? If so, do you think this would be wise considering there are no other candidates for Audit as of now?

I am really grateful for having received so much positive feedback regarding my work, about what I do, and about what I say. I really think that this year I will work in the Audit in order to create something worth remembering which can facilitate and inspire a new generation of Auditors to have the kind of financial discussions we have been missing. With regard to my intentions toward running for CD, 2017 will just be a year devoted to the Audit Commission for me. I know more or less 20 people who are not in the CD now that might be new CD members in the very near future. I don’t know what my future holds, but, if something should change in my intentions: since I was born on June 18th and my name day is on October 18th and generally 18 is my favourite number … What about Luca, CD 20…18? [he smiles, ed.]. For now it is Luca, Audit Commission 2017, it sounds wonderful to me.

You can read his full candidature here. 

Written by Erika Bettin, AEGEE-Verona

“I got to know AEGEE almost more than one and a half year ago, and since then I’ve always felt like it was meant to happen”. In his own words, Stefano Dal Farra is a 23-year-old Italian AEGEE enthusiastic from AEGEE-Udine. He graduated in Cultural Mediation and after a sabbatical year, where he discovered new realities and started to work within the field of the Erasmus+ programme as a facilitator, trainer and group leader, now he is back in University for a master’s degree in European Studies. As it happened to many, he fell in love with Summer University and now he is running for a position in the Summer University Coordination Team, aiming to cover the task of Content Manager and Fundraiser.

The AEGEEan: Why did you decide to run for a position in the Summer University Coordination team?

Stefano: I decided to participate in my first Summer University almost randomly. I left for the SU without knowing anything about this project, without even knowing how to pronounce AEGEE. Once back, I joined the SU of my local as a helper. I really liked the project that I felt like I had to give, I could and I should have given much more to the project, so I decided to become the main coordinator of the SU of my local for this year. In this year, I got to know all different aspects of this project, its strengths and its weaknesses, and I still feel like I can give much more to the project to make it better and to improve it. They key to this decision is the passion. The same passion that gave me the chance to bump into the project, the same passion that drove me to become helper and help my local with their SU, and the same passion that has pushed me for almost more that seven months, to drive once per month for almost more than 100 km from my city to Udine to organise an unforgettable SU for my participants, because I really wanted them to live their best summer of their lives. This is why I decided to run for a position this year in the SUCT.

The current team started a sort of Interest Group about Summer University (SUpporters) where people helped SUCT. Would you like to keep it alive?

Yes, of course. I think that external supporters, along with new and fresh ideas, and external help are essential for the project. The SU doesn’t just belong to SUCT or CD, but to everyone, and everyone should feel free to contribute to the project with their ideas and suggestions. As we say, the more, the merrier, but I would also add the better.

What is your most relevant experience when it comes to Summer University?

I got involved in a SU in all the three possible ways: as a participant on the first time, as a helper on my second time, and this year as the main coordinator. I grew up inside of this project, getting to know it better and better, under every nuance and aspect. I have been to a SU living it in different ways, so I know what every position is about, what to expect or what to do. I attended this year SUPS in Catania, which also helped me a lot for my own SU.

How would you foster good communication/cooperation between locals and Working Groups, The Academy and Projects?

I would set a better and more intense communication with them in order to understand what they would like to do, and what they expect from SUCT, maybe through Skype call or in any other possible way. I would like to set with them some strategies in order to cooperate more closely for this project, underling the fact that the results of the SUs could also be seen and used as results for them.

How would encourage locals to bring more content in their SU? And how would you make participants understand that content is not necessarily boring?

Content is actually of the things I am more concerned about. I got to understand how difficult it is nowadays to provide some content in the SU because it is seen as something boring and useless. I thought the same too, but when I became a trainer I changed my mind. I think that one of the reason for this is that not everybody is aware of the meaning of non-formal education and how it works. I would actually prepare some booklets or any other kind of material to make everybody understand how non-formal education works in the first place. I would like to take care of the main coordinators during the first months of the preparation, setting some Hangouts or personal Skype calls to discuss the objectives of their SUs, to understand what they would like to do, because sometimes people start thinking about the SU without having clearly in mind the message or the objectives that should be behind the project. Then I would give them some suggestions during this initial part about possible content. But most importantly, I would like that all the four areas of the working groups could become compulsory sessions during the SU, maybe for one hour or so, in order to give the possibility to every participant of getting to know what are the focus and the topics AEGEE cares about these days, and then for each session they could do something realistic that can be sent to SUCT as proof that they did it, as well as new and fresh material for the working groups.

In the application process we often see that certain locals are very popular, while others struggle even to find participants and (in extreme cases) are forced to cancel the Summer University. What are your thoughts on that? Do you have any idea to try to level this phenomenon?

I think that this is because people think too much about the destination and not about the content of the SU. I would try to help these locals promoting their SU as much as possible underlining the good aspects of it. Sometimes the local itself is to blame for not being able to promote its SU in the right way, and maybe with some suggestions and little help, things could be different.

Your application is very focused on content, yet you are applying as Fundraiser, task that is not mentioned in your program. Do you have any idea on how to develop a fundraising strategy for SUs?

First of all, I would help locals to develop their techniques of fundraising giving them some suggestions and tips. Sometimes they just don’t know where to start or they don’t have any idea, but maybe they just haven’t thought about other possible ways to fundraise.

Do you have previous experience in fundraising for associations? As Main Organiser of SU in Udine, did you use some sort of fundraising strategy (i.e. for goods, gadgets, funds or grants)?

We decided to fundraise by contacting all the associations and organisations in the region that could help with food or drinks. There were some people who had contacts with some associations and we were able to fundraise a lot last year. I fundraised for some Erasmus+ projects where we needed to have some sponsor for food and gadgets.

You can read his full candidature here.

Written by Erika Bettin, AEGEE-Verona

27 years old and from France, Damien Latacz from AEGEE-Aachen is ready to run for a second term in the Mediation Commission. He has been living in Germany for the past four years and he is studying Metallurgical Engineering. He loves to cook and hike, and he loves winter. One term in the Mediation Commission was very satisfying for him and he found that it was “the balance between self-development and helping the network”. 

The AEGEEan: Why did you decide to run for a position in the Mediation Commission?

Damien: I like working in the Mediation Commission. It is both challenging and rewarding. Challenging because you have to adapt yourself to others and modify your perception to be able to help. And rewarding because you can actually help people in difficult situations. This is a job I like, and I want to continue it.

What is the thing (or are the things) you are most proud of in your previous term?

Without hesitation, the team. We are really different people, with different ways of thinking, and we complement each other to get an impartial and objective understanding of situations.  I am also quite proud that we started developing trainings and visuals, but that is more for the long term, and I hope the next teams will continue in this direction.

For several years now, candidates for the Mediation Commission have put “Visibility in the Network” in the programme, without reaching apparent results. What is your feasible idea to reach this visibility?

It is indeed difficult to be visible when we are not allowed to talk about much of our work. This year already, thanks to our workshops, more people know that we at least exist! This year, I would like to find a way to make Data Privacy more interesting. Not just the DPPS, but in general. I hope when people will realise how important and impactful data privacy is, and how knowing about mediation can improve your daily life, they will be more interested in the MedCom. It is something we have to change in our association in the long run, and knowledge about it will bring visibility.

An interesting point of your candidature is “Improve the knowledge of the network about basic mediation techniques” stating that you have already started this in some NWMs. Can you please explain it further?

Mediation is a huge field, with many different theories and techniques. It is a mix between communication, psychology, languages, etc… We all do it at some point, especially in AEGEE, but we don’t realise it. If you know about it, you can improve your work, and the satisfaction you get from it. The workshop we created is really about the basics, but hopefully it helps people think actively about it, not just in AEGEE, but in their everyday life.

Do you think that mediation skills are underestimated in an association like ours?

Absolutely! People usually think of mediation as the last solution in case of a serious conflict, but you can use it every day. In our association, we work in teams a lot, with people from different cultures, and this can lead to some misunderstandings. We also work on Facebook a lot, where the things you can say are limited. Mediation skills help you detect this, and work towards better communication, which means better work.

Once again, there are not enough candidates for Medcom. Since probably this interview will go out when you will still be the only candidate, explain why (motivated) people should apply for Medcom.

Because it is something you cannot have anywhere else in AEGEE. You do not just help people, you also learn a lot yourself. Skills that will be valuable for your employers, for relationships, or even just for yourself. And the challenges and cases we have, push us to improve ourselves to be able to help. If you do your job well in MedCom, you will help the Network and come out a better person! Who would not want that?

Related to that, why do you think people are not applying for such a position?

As I mentioned in previous questions, I think it is a combination of not knowing what we do, and not seeing how impactful it can be on our work in general. I hope that by improving the knowledge of the network about the topics we work on, more people will be interested.

DPPS is very complicated to understand and to develop. What is the status now? Do you think that the timeline you set in Agora Bergamo is feasible? Do you think that, provided that you will be elected, you can push the implementation further?

First of all, a reminder that MedCom is not responsible for the implementation, we just help people respect the rules. Currently, the Commissions do follow the DPPS. The OMS is late, but when it will be there, it will solve many problems. Maybe some parts of the timeline will be a bit delayed, but in general, it is feasible.

The OMS has always been the main problem, because we don’t have that many people interested in creating it, and it is a huge workload. But we are one of the biggest associations in Europe with an IT system that is completely outdated. It holds us back, we need to realise this, and MedCom will surely continue lobbying for a better structure.

What is, according to you, the job of a good Mediation Commissioner?

First, you have to be open minded and patient, to help people in conflict understand each other and work together towards a resolution. Second, you have to keep updated on Privacy laws and agreement, to check if the DPPS is still up-to-date, and help people in AEGEE understand and follow the rules. Two sides of the same job: one more neutral and helping, the other one more active and explanatory.

You can read his full candidature here.

Written by Erika Bettin, AEGEE-Verona

You might have seen him on stage during the Agora in Bergamo, or most probably if you organised or attended a Summer University. Philipp Blum, 25 years old and living in Aachen, is doing it again. After a term in the Summer University Coordination Team as Publication and IT responsible, he is running for a second one aiming to cover the tasks of Information Technology and Materials. “Sometimes serious, but mostly a child” as he described himself, he is in love with with coffee, travelling, photography, design, coffee, music and much more.

The AEGEEan: Why did you decide to run again for a position in the Summer University Coordination Team?

Philipp: Because the work was more fun than I thought, and it’s a really good feeling to help people to have the Summer of Their Lives. Also, due to the knowledge I gained this year, I could start to actually improve the functioning of the website right away instead of figuring out where the files are.

You said that there is always room for improvements. What would you change (or improve) for next term, provided you will be elected?

• Simplified (digital) guidelines to make it easier for organisers to see what should be done when.
• Easier overview pages that show if you forgot to fill something instead of yet another reminder email.
• A streamlined/shorter application process for participants.

Your team put a lot of effort in giving content to SUs. Do you think you managed to change the direction? Would you consider it fulfilled?

I wouldn’t consider it as fulfilled at all. Many people I spoke to still consider two (!) hours of content a day as too much. But if you want travelling completely without content, I wonder why you would need AEGEE for this. With simplifying the booklets and website for organisers, as well as providing more help, I hope we can show that two hours of content a day is not much at all and that it actually improves the experience of the participants.

I think that organisers felt that we made some “unfunny” changes, but I also believe they recognise our good intentions behind it.

You said that you “use the impact of the project to get more information about our members (impact measurement)”. Do you think it is SUCT’s responsibility to work on the general IM or should this be done in cooperation with/by other bodies?

I don’t think it’s SUCT’s responsibility to work on Impact Measurement per se, but the possibility to ask 3.000 people about their opinions shouldn’t be wasted. So if the CD, ACT, the Working Groups or someone else can actually use this data for improving AEGEE and/or Europe, I’d love to help with gathering the data. The answers might be more representative than our 2013 Impact Study [he winks, ed.].

Last year you and your team improved the website, making it mobile friendly. Have you already thought about how to upgrade it more?

Yes, there are things we definitely want to improve. This year most work lay in the re-design, which didn’t allow for much time to actually change the logic in the system. I would like to have visual landing pages for organisers, participants as well as the admins. That means that you have exactly one page you can always go to, and it will show you the status of your SU / application, and what is expected until when. So, for example, for organisers it would show until when it’s expected to submit the program, with a direct link to do so. No more combining mails with ten different links.

Another, more unclear aspect is the development of the OMS. If it’s actually coming, it requires a redesign of a huge part of the SU System – including all applications. It’s something that shouldn’t be done in the middle of the process, and will require quite some preparation. On the other hand, it will allow for new possibilities, such as developing native apps for the project.

We are witnessing a constant drop of applications and organising locals. Do you think it is something related with the Summer Universities’ appeal? If yes, do you have concrete actions in mind to reverse this trend?

I think it’s related to the fact that cheap travelling becomes more and more normal. People buy a 10€ flight with Ryanair, sleep at couchsurfers.. Travelling with AEGEE becomes less distinctive to normal travelling. But maybe that is just my imagination? Here lies another connection with the Impact Measurement we could do.

My ideas include a better, consistent level of content on all SUs, as well as a better fostering of expectations by Outgoing Responsibles. If SUs are advertised with “Cheap, drinking and girls on a beach”, of course participants don’t want to see the city and learn the local language. If SUs are only advertised with “All day classes”, you might want a bit more relaxing in your summer vacation. Of course, a big part of SUs is about young people relaxing and partying, but there’s way more to the AEGEE spirit than just this.

Besides, since I joined AEGEE all I heard was “shrinking” of the network and how to avoid it. First of all, those numbers are not the only thing that measures the success of our organisation, and secondly, the numbers aren’t shrinking that much (source). We still have 50% more applications than spaces for Summer University, and I would rather concentrate on strengthening the weaker SUs (which don’t have enough applications) than on the overall numbers.

How would you improve the cooperation with Working Groups and Projects?

Well, for some Working Groups there’s the need to start a cooperation before we can improve it. Seriously, it’s a shame if a WG can’t even provide a compulsory session. Luckily, not all is bad. For example, I am really impressed by the cooperation of the Civic Education WG in Warszawa, which provided the entire content of the SU, and I think it could be a great example for other cooperations. I am sad that the ES SU didn’t work out this year due to lack of applicants, but I believe there’s lots of potential here.

To improve, I would start even earlier with sending emails to Projects (etc.) and Locals with suggestions of cooperation, directly showing benefits of cooperation, so the local doesn’t decide to do it on their own before a request for cooperation arrives.

How would you reduce the waiting time during the online processes?

We could implement some kind of games on the website to speed up the waiting time. Tetris, anyone? No, to be honest, there’s not so much that can be sped up by the SUCT. All in all, I could imagine to shorten the application period a bit, but I think the overall process is already pretty quick.

A real speed-up would be if tasks by organisers would be done in a day, which is highly unrealistic. Because there are so many organisers from so many countries, and the fact that we’re all volunteers, we can’t just give one day to approve participants. Some locals meet during the week, others on weekends, some might have exam periods…

Another way to speed up the process would be to remove the role of the Outgoing Responsible, which would speed up the process by around a week. It’s an idea we talked about already, but we still believe in the important role of the Outgoing Responsible. As I said, I think a right expectation of SUs is important, so I would rather work on improving the work of the ORs than to remove it yet.

In the application process we often see that certain locals are very popular, while others struggle even to find participants and (in extreme cases) are forced to delete the Summer University. What are your thoughts on that? Do you have any idea to try to level this phenomenon?

It’s certainly true that the location is a major factor for a Summer University to be more popular. Not only because a well-known location attracts more people, also because of the costs of travelling there. Opposite examples are “extreme” destinations, like Transiberian Railway, or something new, like Ireland this year.

I think there are three aspect to easily distinguish yourself from the other SUs: 

• Do your SU in a time where there are not many other SUs. I heard enough people that wanted to attend a SU in September (because of their possible vacation), but there simply was no offer.
• Offer unique content. A city tour, beach party and small language course is nothing differentiating. Offer extreme sports, offer long travels, offer specific topics like photography or a larger language course – anything to separate yourself from the rest!
• Do something new, something more extreme. Why not have a SU solely on a boat? Why not go hiking for two weeks? What about including a flight in your Summer University or make Hitchhiking not a part, but the topic of your SU? (PS: If this has been here before, I’m sorry. I’m not as wise as Gunnar yet [he winks, ed.] )

You can read Philipp’s full application here. 

Written by Erika Bettin, AEGEE-Verona

If you need someone who will take good care of your members, look no further than Alejandra Piot Pérez-Abadín of AEGEE-A Coruña. In her previous functions, she has frequently been regarded as someone who puts effort into listening to people and who remains patient and takes all the time required in order to help members with their problems.

The AEGEEan: To all those who don’t know you yet, Alejandra, who are you?

Alejandra: I’m Alejandra, a member of AEGEE-A Coruña since September 2013, and president during the term 2015/2016. I’m an active and hard working girl, with a lot of compromise with what I’m doing and always with a smile. Also, I’m finishing my degree in audiovisual communication and I work as a waitress. As you can see, I’m multifunctional!

Do you already have similar experience that would make you an ideal member of the Network Commission?

Not at that level, but during my term as president I had some functions such as taking care of the members of my antenna, help them with every problem or anything they needed. Also, I tried to talk to almost all the new members when they joined our antenna to motivate them to be more involved with us. I love taking care of people and help everyone with everything I can. Also, the ones who know me better said that I’m very patient and understanding with everyone.

Why, specifically, are you running for Member of the Network Commission?

Because during this term I realized that what I like the most is to help and take care of everyone who needs it. And this is the aim of the Network Commission, to take care of the Network. I see that this is an interesting and productive task and I think I will learn a lot from this experience. I will be in touch with different antennae, helping and also learning from them, because we are always learning!

Can you already share some of your policy ideas with us?

I want the antennae to organise more activities and events related to the Action Agenda. For this, it will be so helpful to have a subcommie who is also involved in ACT and for sure to be in touch with the ACTie of the Network. Also, I want a more personal contact, so, besides the monthly reports, I want to have monthly skype meetings with the antennae, to get more information and help them with anything they need. I even want to encourage every member that is motivated enough to get involved not just at a local level, also at the European level.

How do you want to implement these policies?

As I said, about the Action Agenda activities, the idea is to use the ACTie of the Network to show everyone that it’s not so complicated as it seems, to talk about that in Network Meetings and to be in touch with the antennae, suggesting them kinds of activities they can do… These are some of the ways to improve this. About the monthly skype meetings, I know that at first it could be complicated, but I believe it will be so useful for the antennae and for us, to get more information besides the monthly report. Speaking of being involved at the European level, I think that introducing people from the Network who is involved and to have them show what they do and how they feel doing it could be so motivating. Also, doing sessions as AEGEE Inspire at the Network Meetings could be very useful too.

What qualities do you possess that make you an excellent member of the NetCom?

As I said before, I really love to take care and help everyone with anything. I’m a patient girl and I will answer questions almost 24/7. I know how to be objective in different situations if there is any problem. I have enough experience in AEGEE to know how to solve almost any doubt. During this year I needed to look out for help for my antenna because the board (including me) were almost new, and it was successful, so I learned how to solve every problem even if at first I don’t know what to do.

How do you resolve tricky issues, such as opposing views or a lack of motivation of members, and can you provide an example of when you tackled this flawlessly?

About opposing views, I will try to be objective with the situation. For example, if in one antenna there is a problem about the behaviour of one member, I would try to get the middle point, no one is 100% guilty of something, both parts always have a part of the blame, so based on this, talking with both parts, I would try to solve the problem, without harming anyone.

About the lack of motivation, for me the best thing that I can do it’s to convince this person to talk to someone who had the same problem in any moment. Sometimes all of us had some lack of motivation because of different reasons, but normally, we go to an event or we talk with someone and we regain this motivation. Also, I will talk to other members of the same antennae to organise activities to motivate this member again. If we talk about new members who need to take the first step, it is important to encourage them to go to different events in their local and also organised by another antennae. Meet people out of their city and discover how big AEGEE is.

You can read her full candidature here. 

Written by Willem Laurentzen, AEGEE-Nijmegen

Just like we did for the last Agorae, for Spring Agora Bergamo we want to provide you with a short and easy summary of the proposals submitted for the Agora again. In this first round, we will be explaining you four proposals that are aimed at changing the elections and the work of Juridical Commission, namely “Requiring support of two bodies besides the submitting body to discuss a proposal at the Agora”, “A new procedure for elections and polls, part I (public ballots)”, “Appointing instead of electing the Secretary of the Agora” and “Giving the Juridical Commission the power to fix small mistakes”. 

Now you may wonder: “What is this CIA you are talking about? Is AEGEE-Europe secretly American?” Simply said, the CIA (Corpus Iuridicum Aegeense) is a document with over a hundred pages containing all the rules which govern AEGEE-Europe. It is therefore considered as the legal framework of the association, and all members are obliged to follow its provisions. Although no secret agents are involved in it, it is one of the most important documents. In the CIA, which you can read here, you can find, for example, the Statutes of AEGEE-Europe and all kind of rules (like the antennae criteria and financial rules), and, in another document, the Working Formats of the different bodies.

Requiring support of two bodies besides the submitting body to discuss a proposal at the Agora

This proposal was submitted by Lucas Zoetmulder on behalf of AEGEE-Delft and by Wietske Jousma on behalf of AEGEE-Enschede, but it was conceived by the Agora Reform Task Force, which has been working since Autumn Agora Kyïv on improving our Agorae. The proposers want to reform how a proposal is submitted to the Agora. Currently, every member and organ of AEGEE-Europe can present a proposal by themselves on behalf of their body, resulting sometimes in easy withdrawing of proposals. This proposal therefore aims to have two additional bodies or locals to support the proposers. The principal submitter is still the one defending the proposal in front of the Agora, but they can be assisted by the supporting members or organs.

Appointing instead of electing the Secretary of the Agora

This proposal will be presented by Svenja van der Tol, the Secretary General of AEGEE-Europe, on behalf of the Agora Reform Task Force. This proposal starts from the assumption that the elections of the Secretary of the Agora cost time not needed, since normally there is only one candidate for the position and often even less, forcing the Chair Team to appoint anyway an interim Secretary. With this proposal, the Autumn Agora only elects the Chair Person and the Vice-Chair person and the Secretary is appointed following the same procedure of the IT assistant for a period of one Agora. S/he can extend his/her term for more Agorae if the Chair and Vice-Chairperson appoint her/him to. These proposals won’t change the accountability of the Secretary who is still required to send minutes two months after the Agora – not receiving any reimbursement if s/he is not in time with the delivering – and remains in charge of all the changes until the Agora approves them.

A new procedure for elections and polls, part I (public ballots)

Eveline Joore, Evelien Kroon and Wietske Jousma on behalf of AEGEE-Enschede are the proposers of the proposal that aims to change how the votings are conducted. The suggestion of the proposers is to replace the current run-off voting system with the Schulze method. This method allows voters to order candidates according to a preference order, resulting in having as a winner the candidate, who is preferred by a majority over every other candidate in pairwise comparisons. According to the proposers “AEGEE should move beyond the traditional practises of democratic decision-making that have proven to be unsatisfactory”, without any specific reference on when the system we have now proved not to be up to expectations. Proposers specify that they want to apply it, in the beginning, to public ballots, such as EPM topics. There, with a list of topics, delegates would rank the topics according to their preferences, instead of voting for only one topic. According to the Schulze method, the k top-ranked topic will be the winner.

Giving the Juridical Commission the power to fix small mistakes

This proposal will be presented by the Secretary General of AEGEE-Europe, Svenja van der Tol, on behalf of the Agora Reform Task force and it was developed by Lucas Zoetmulder of AEGEE-Delft. The aim of this proposal is to give the Juridical Commission the possibility to intervene directly in the CIA for changes, as it happens now, but without having to prepare a proposal to be voted on. Instead, the Juridical Commission will present the changes to the Agora in order to be ratified by our General assembly. All the changes must be notified to the Network one month prior to the Agora. The system will be the same as the one already used with the minutes of the Agora, and, in case the changes are not ratified, the non-ratified version of the CIA is still the one to be considered valid. According to the proposers, this can ease the work of the JC and remove long-lasting discussion during prytania, making them more accessible to new members. Of course, the JC will have the power to fix minor mistakes and inconsistencies and they can not altered the text by any means.

Written by Erika Bettin, AEGEE-Verona

Maryana Semenyak is a candidate for a position of Member of the Comité Directeur (CD), preferred task External Relations Director. She is 28 years old and joined the organisation almost eight years ago (also being the President of AEGEE-Lviv for three years). Nowadays our current CD member is responsible for our Network Development and is willing to stay in office for a second term, but with other responsibilities. Check out her interview!

The AEGEEan: One year in the Comité Directeur can be very long, but now you are running for a second term. How did it happen? Is your motivation still as high after one year in Brussels?

Maryana: Indeed, it has been a very long and tiring year. On the other hand, I’ve had lots of experiences, challenges and emotions, that is impossible to find in any other place. When I just moved to the house in July last year, I heard two comments about living here: one was – “You will be happy to leave this house in one year”, another – “Living here will be the best year of your life”. I followed the second suggestion. People who knows me can confirm that I’m energetic, positive and a smiling person. The good example about my never-ending motivation could be the time that I’ve spent in AEGEE-Lviv as president for three years. I joined my local when it was a Contact Antenna, and I wanted to leave the board being sure that my work there was already done.

In the last nine months, as Network Director, you spent the biggest part of your time with the Network Commission. How was this collaboration and what did you achieve as the Network Director?

Due to my task portfolio, I’m in constant communication with the Network Commission and the locals. Certainly a person who is holding this position should like to be in contact with people almost 24/7! Luckily, I do like this part of my tasks. It’s interesting to work with Network Commissioners because during one year you have possibility to work close with more than 20 people, as half of the team change in December and later in June after Agora elections. We have daily communications and Skype meetings a few times per week. I was very happy to have the possibility to gather all 10 Network Commissioners at a live meeting in Brussels in December. In my work I wanted to get focused mainly on sustainable and health development of the Network. Even though Antenna Criteria does not always show a complete picture of the status of the Locals, we can take a look at some statistics: more than 50% of the Locals fulfilled all Antenna Criteria, around 30% were missing only 1-2 criteria, like report, list etc, what was submitted after reminders, approximately 15% – were facing different small or bigger problems.

And what about the other task of your portfolio, the Human Resources management? What is the best result you got in this field?

Apart from Network Development and Network Commission, I’m also appointed to HRC (Human Resources Committee), YMWG (Youth Mobility Working Group) and SUCT (Summer University Coordination Team). Due to my portfolio and personal interests, I was also involved in work with other bodies. We are changing now Speaker team of HRC, and I hope soon with new members we’ll be back on track in HR field, although a big research and development was already done in previous years. According to YMWG, we have organized trainings about funding possibilities. Of course work towards Visa Directive is very complex and bureaucratic, and one NGO can’t really change the whole system, but we should keep working on that field. Third part of the Network is from non-EU countries. The last but not least body, where I’m appointed, is SUCT. I suppose you’ve already heard about new elected team and their work. They are very active and implementing many new ideas this year. For more detailed descriptions of my tasks, I would suggest to check my personal Activity Report for Agora Bergamo.

According to your candidature, your preferred task in the future CD would be the External Relations and you understood it during the last year. Is it not a contradiction for someone who was Network Director, therefore more focused on internal issues?

It would be a mistake to say that I understood to apply for External Relations during last year. It could sound like I’m not satisfied with position that I’m holding now. I like being in constant contact with Locals and work with different bodies. But when I started to consider about applying for the second term, I decided that I’d prefer to work with a new portfolio as doing new tasks in the Head office will keep my motivation very high. I like to learn new things and challenge myself. Second, external world was always interesting to me. I studied International Relations at university. I was always taking active role in society. During this year I was also attending events and conferences in Brussels and sometimes helping in contacting another NGOs and partners. I don’t see these tasks as contradiction, as internal world of any institution or organization, including AEGEE, doesn’t exist apart from external world. Being involved in internal work for nine months already, I believe that I have gained the necessary skills to hold external work of association.

You uploaded a candidature program four days after the deadline expired. Why did it happen? Was it a last minute decision?

My final decision was made on the last day. I applied being in my room, as I was looking for some personal time and space in the house, and connection wasn’t the best. As I was copying and pasting my candidature from word document, the last part wasn’t submitted successfully on time. But the same night I sent the missing part directly to JC asking to upload it, as I didn’t have access. Apparently, it took some days to communicate, and at the end it was uploaded.

What are the things you want to achieve, carry on or change in AEGEE external representation?

Our organization has multiple contacts with different NGOs, institutions and platforms. The role of External Relations is to monitor and to have an overview of the benefits and different opportunities, what AEGEE can have collaborating with them, and vice versa – contribution that AEGEE can provide to them. We should keep introducing AEGEE and its achievements to partners and another organizations, in order to maximize our impact.

You want “to strengthen the cooperation with NGOs like ESN, BEST, JEF, JADE and others” and “bringing External work closer to the Network”. How are you going to do it? Why should AEGEE locals be interested?

It’s not the first year that we are focusing also on closer cooperation with students and youth organization that have the similar scope to AEGEE. With BEST, for instance, we keep very good collaboration, our members are attending each other events. Together with other NGOs, we can organise common projects, share experience and ideas, best practices and knowledge, learn from each other. There are fields, for example Youth Mobility, where only by working together we can achieve some changes in Europe. At the end members of other organisations are also volunteers who are taking active role in European society like us. We should take advantage of this collaboration, not only between boards of listed NGOs, but also between our branches.

In your online candidature, you stated that you plan to contribute “in such crucial areas such as Youth Participation, Youth Employment and Youth Mobility“. Can you be a little bit more specific on what should be done and why are these issues related to the External Relations position?

These areas, apart from being focused on our current Strategic Plan, are also hot topics in Europe. The work on developing policy paper in Employment field is already done, in Youth Mobility – still in progress. As you might know, final task distribution is happening after knowledge transfer, depending on abilities of the team, and working in Comité Directeur obliges you to be diverse in your portfolio. These fields, that I’ve already mentioned in my candidature, are my preferences, where I would like to contribute. I would also like to empower AEGEEans being more involved in policy issues and active citizenship.

Five out of seven current CD members are running again for a position, how do you feel about the possibility of sharing the CD house with them again? Would you define the last year in the CD house a brilliant one?

Living in the house is quite challenging itself. You should learn how to respect each other’s needs and to compromise almost always. I would like to mention that I’m differentiating very clearly my working and personal space. And I felt myself comfortable in both. Probably my 7 years’ working experience is helping to organise and to structure my life in the house.

You needed a visa to stay in Brussels, but you had a lot of problems about this issue and still you don’t have it, missing also NWMs and EPM Leiden. Is it going to be solved if you get elected as External Relations Director? Are you going to be present in Bergamo?

When I was answering questions to my candidature at Agora Kyiv, I’ve received only one question: “How are going to work in Brussels if you are from Ukraine, as probably you will need visa?” Apparently it will stay the most popular question to me.

I would like to ask people stop perceiving it as my problem, as far as it is visa and residence permit bureaucracy problems in Europe. We are forgetting that Europe is not only EU countries, and main idea of AEGEE since the very beginning was Borderless Europe. I got the feeling (I hope I’m mistaken) that members are not giving enough patience, empathy and support in Visa issue.  The procedure of gathering all needed documents for long-stay is very complex and complicated. It started in August, and basically finished only half a year later in March. In total I prepared more than 50 documents. All my documents are successfully submitted, and I’m in the status of waiting for 2 months already, which is nothing in such situation.

If I would stay one year longer in CD, then procedure is easier – I’m just adding few updated documents to previous one. For Belgian authority positions that we are holding in CD are not specifically important, for them crucial document is our official registration in Belgium as Board members of NGO.

Of course my mood was very down in February knowing that I won’t be able to go to EPM Leiden or Spring NWMs. I was blaming myself that I applied for CD and now I need to go through this procedure. But then I realised that barriers concerning mobility of youth, and mine mobility in particular, cannot discourage me from my tasks and I can work being in Head office in Brussels.

I hope to see you all in Bergamo! But if not – then I hope my case will bring visibility to Visa issue in Europe and AEGEE members will work together in this field. We should bring awareness, deliver knowledge regarding the procedure, build understanding among members and support for documents of your friends around the Network.

State a thing you like and one you don’t like about AEGEE!

Pros: Possibilities and challenges

Cons: Misunderstanding

QUESTIONS FROM THE READERS:

How could you work in Brussels for one more year if you don’t have the permit to live there after nine months? Do you think it’s wise to apply for another year before settling this issue?

I arrived in Belgium with Schengen Visa, that I could use for my stay for the first few months. But according to 90-days stay regulation in EU countries, I was supposed to apply for residence permit. I was elected at Agora Kyiv in October, so I have received official registration as member of Board Directors in Belgium in December. Only starting from that month I could officially work on gathering all needed documents. I finished and submitted the documents in three months. Currently I’m waiting for a positive answer. Applying for second or more times for residence permit, or long-term Visa, costs less time and documents, and it requires only copy of already existing one and updates of relevant information. Actually another year should be much easier than the first time. More details about my document status are in my personal Activity Report for Agora Bergamo.
In case you once again don’t manage to receive your papers in time during a potential second term, how do you plan to go to external events in Brussels where your ID will have to be controlled (especially in the last months with the increase in control due to terrorism)?

First of all, I would like to clarify that I’m successfully managing my documents, but this procedure requires a lot of time due to EU and Belgium law regulations. And as I’ve already mentioned a few times, I have been waiting for the answer for two months. Applying for the second time is always less bureaucratic and much faster. I don’t have any problems with attending events in Brussels. I’m using my ID and I have Schengen Visa in my passport. But in order to be eligible to stay longer than 90 days in EU country, I was obliged to apply for residence permit. Once I arrived to Belgium last year I was registered in the municipality. And currently I also have registration number for my documents.

Will you be so active on Facebook during working hours again next term?

What is working hours? We are supposed to work 8 hours per day. But average time in the office is at least 60 hours per week. Responding to your question, it’s not a news that Social Media is a working space nowadays. Currently I’m using more than 10 groups, five chats and five pages regarding my work. I assume that external position requires less contact through Social Media, as Network Director. It will depend on where I could catch potential members of my bodies, share and find information, events and contacts relevant to my tasks. As an official communication channel, I still prefer email.

How quickly do you answer e-mails?

I’m receiving approximately 30 emails daily, that I should respond, find the solutions or prepare some tasks regarding requests. Of course I’m trying to respond as soon as possible to everything, but due to workload and big amount of requests, it could take also more time.

You bring up your “perfect understanding of the structure, our strengths and weaknesses” but you didn’t give any examples. Can you please shortly describe our two biggest strengths and how we could use it more? and our two biggest weaknesses and how we could improve it?

Did I say perfect? There is nothing perfect in this world, but we should keep working on it. To me, as I have already mentioned in my candidature for Agora Kyiv, one of the biggest power, that we have in our organisation, is diversity! It can bring us achievements in different areas, establishing new projects, breaking stereotypes and building understanding, collaboration among us. Another big strength that I would like to name is opportunities, that AEGEE members can get through our organisation, opportunities in participation, in experience, and at the end in big changes.

Despite the fact that we are an amazing organisation, of course we are facing many different problems. Digging in archives I could assume that we have improved our administrative part of association. But unfortunately, we are working less with political impact. It could be only my opinion, but I would like to see us working more on hot topics that are happening in Europe and beyond, on different crisis and conflicts, elections and referendums, etc. The initiative should come from WG, Project teams, Locals and of course from CD members. The other weakness, that I would like to point, however it’s also common for another organisation, is non-recognition of volunteer practices. Currently we are working on it.

If you could only make one big change in AEGEE’s current state, what would you want it to be and how would you contribute to it in the position you are running for?

No barriers! No physical or participation borders, language or cultural borders. Nowadays we are still facing many barriers concerning Mobility of Youth in Europe. We should work towards educating and bringing awareness to our members about current problems, organising different activities and discussion tables, fighting against it. It’s a long term process, and sometimes our impact could be very small, but to me this is what AEGEE was doing and should continue. After receiving personal experience in field of Youth Mobility I would like to work more on Visa Directive inside the Network and participate in that field.

What part of your task as CD member did you manage to accomplish and fully fulfill during this year?

The main task of my portfolio was to supervise the sustainability of the Network, support locals and assure constant communication, what also required a big amount of my time for the administration, such as Antenna Criteria. I have focused on stable and healthy development of the Locals. It would be quite impossible to measure whether it was fulfilled or not, as far as this task should always be in progress. All detailed explanation about my tasks you can find in Personal Activity Report. Some examples that come to my mind are below:

• Ensuring the same quality of sessions and implementing new application procedure for NWMs, together with Network Commission and CD;
• Improvement of SU project, thanks to the members of new elected SUCT;
• Printing Key 2 Europe in Kyiv within the budget and delivering it to Brussels;
• Representing AEGEE and organising events in Brussels;
• Support of Think before you Vink campaign;
• Applying for residence permit, which is a very difficult and long procedure;
• Improvement of living condition of the house!

You mention that you were the “main responsible for all external events in Brussels this year”. Can you please elaborate? How many events? What was the content? How many externals were present?

So far three main external events were held: Handover ceremony, Back to Brussels and the AEGEE Day. I was responsible for the event for our alumni Network Les Anciens “Back to Brussels” in September, which is happening once a year in Brussels, we had more than 50 members participating in it. In April, I organised the event presenting AEGEE Day project for partners and externals in Brussels. It was very well-organised event. We combined three topics: presenting the history of AEGEE and its main projects during 31 years of existence, launching the AEGEE Day project and Europe on Track 3^rd edition. We had more than 50 guests representing 15 different NGOs, institutions and companies. I was coordinating also some internal events in the house, such as the AEGEE Day activity on the 16^th of April. I was responsible for organisational part of the Leadership Training Course.

Definitely I’ll be responsible for future events till the end of July, or longer if I’m elected.

If elected for external relations, will you be responsible for fundraising? What is your experience with corporate and institutional funding?

As you might know, task division is taking place in August, once all team finish their knowledge transfer, tasks are divided for new term. For instance, in our team we have three members who are in charge on fundraising. I have experience in fundraising on local level. I can’t assure now who will be main responsible, but I can contribute in this task.

Was your team aware that you decided to rerun?

Since the very beginning I announced to my team, that my decision had not been taken yet, and regarding this decision I’d need more time to think and to consult with my family and friends. Final decision was taken on the last day after conversation with them.

You can read her full candidature here. 

Written by Mattia Abis, AEGEE-Cagliari

Tekla Hajdu, a 24-years-old Hungarian student of Leadership Management, is one of the candidates for a position as Member of the Comité Directeur. She joined AEGEE-Budapest almost four years ago becoming their PR responsible and then Vice President. She got elected as Network Commissioner during Autumn Agora Cagliari and chosen as NetCom Assistant from Agora Kyïv until now. Preferred task? Network Director but not only…

The AEGEEan: Many people already heard your name: former PR responsible and Vice President of a big local, former Network Commissioner and Vice Speaker of the team, currently NetCom Assistant. Now you are running to become our new Network Director or, if needed, Communications Director. Why would you prefer to cover the first one? What motivations lie behind that preferred task?

Tekla: I applied as a Member of the Comité Directeur, where there are no fixed positions, but of course we can have preferences about the tasks that we would like to cover. My European Bodies experience as former Network Commissioner and Vice Speaker mostly covers tasks connected with the position of Network Director. I am currently also a member of the NetCom team, where I really enjoy the work and the initiatives of the team, so further supporting them and the newly elected Network Commissioners is the main motivation that encouraged me to apply. Also, I have now a deeper understanding of the problems and challenges the Network is facing, and together with the Network Commissioners, I would like to continue working on the projects. However, due to not having fixed positions I would also be open to accepting other tasks, if the team requires me to do, and my local level experience and educational background allows me to take over some Communication tasks as well.

As mentioned before, you covered several task related positions and your deep NetCom experience must be a good starting point for this new possible adventure. What do you think you achieved during your NetCom term? What did you achieve during your NetCom assistant  experience?

I honestly think that I developed a lot during my NetCom term, as the position is challenging, but very rewarding: I started as a person with a lot of enthusiasm, but with less general knowledge about what the locals are facing, and I have ended my term as a member of a team who is always thinking about new ways how to improve the work of locals with many initiatives and successful projects – I am glad that I could be a part of such an awesome team like ours was. I think my biggest personal achievement, during my term, is that my former locals have started to regain their trust in the Network Commission and their assigned Network Commissioner. In this part of the Network there were many resignations and changes, and I was the first one after a long time to fulfill my term and provide continuous support for the locals. My experience as NetCom Assistant rather deepened my knowledge in the overall situation of the Network, and my focus is more directed to the internal work of the Network Commission, of the current NetCom team, so my biggest achievement in this period is rather learning how to support them and with what tasks I can ease the enormous amount of work that is facing Network Commissioners, as working with the locals is only one (but very important) part of NetCom work.

One of the most immediate task you would take care of is our Network Development. There are different ways of development, probably the most taken paths have been found new locals or strengthen the existing ones. In your program you looked more oriented in opening new ones. Is this the best path at this moment for AEGEE?

Actually, opening new locals is the third pillar of my programme. My first and most important initiative would be to evaluate how the Network’s current situation is, as within the Commission we have certain knowledge and information regarding how we see it, but it would be also important to know the Networks’ input regarding their roles and their perception of the current situation of the Network. The NetCom team has already started to take initiatives towards this (come to our Progress Meeting at the Agora where we are going to talk about the current situation and number of members plus active membership in AEGEE). I would like to continue with this direction and make a research out of the information I can get with the survey I plan to launch together with the NetCommies. I would also like to look for more opportunities to support current locals with looking for other ways of financial support and improving the Internal education within AEGEE. But to answer your question, I believe that especially in the recent political atmosphere and situations that we are facing it is important to welcome people who would like to join our organisation with open arms and give more support to Contacts to be able to become Contact Antennae (and later Antennae).

In case you will find yourself in opening a new antenna, do you have any previous experience? What are in your opinion the problems a new contact or you and the Netcom can face?

During my term with my SubCommissioners we have started to map the possible locations and finding interested people to found a new contact, but at the end we did not reach any concrete outcome by founding a new local. However, due to the preparations we have made I am well aware of the process that a person has to go through when founding a new local, and I have been part of the Pro-active local founding NetCom project where we were looking for ways to actively support opening new contacts, so I believe that with the knowledge transfer received in case I get elected I will be able to participate with sufficient knowledge and experience. Also a lot depends on the founding team’s enthusiasm and former AEGEE knowledge when they decide to open a new contact in a city within Europe. In my opinion, the biggest problems are lack of support from the University at the early stage for getting new members for the contact, and local regulations regarding the Statues and the operation of the contact– in some part of the Network legal environment and regulations are still a problem for even Antennae and Contact Antennae as well. If the Network Director, the Network Commissioners and other bodies and locals of AEGEE can provide support for contacts to overcome these problems, I think they can develop faster and tackle these challenges.

Some time ago the NetCom and CD faced some problems about using logos and AEGEE related names for contacts, that was banned. Will you be strict or do you think something should be changed in this procedure?

I think that recently there is an improvement in this field: contacts are now provided a toolkit that contains not just information, but also visual elements that they are allowed to use thanks to the collaboration with PRC. The key factor here is informing the contacts: in some cases they are not entirely aware of the elements of AEGEE they are allowed to use (such as logo, and AEGEE- name), but we should definitely watch over this carefully and remind them what is correct and what should not be followed. In general I would like to be rather strict about this, but it depends on the situation, and the NetCommies’ (and other European Bodies’) input about the status of the case is also quite influential, so I would consult with the relevant European Bodies in each case to be sure in making the best decisions.

One of the biggest problems of a Network Director is the definition of its role and it got frequently confused with the NetCom Speaker. Are you going to better define what is your role maybe with the Network Commission in order to work better during the year? Or maybe it is possible to find a balance without creating new rules and definitions?

I personally think that the Network Director should be also part of the NetCom team, not just the CD member appointed for Network Development and communicating CD decisions to the locals. However, Network Commission is an individual body, and the Speaker team is the one who is responsible for managing the Team. Therefore, I believe that the Network Director’s role should be rather an observer regarding internal decisions of the NetCom and a link between NetCom (and the locals) and CD to provide the interest of the Network to CD decisions and get information, but also to give information and the necessary materials to the NetCom and the locals (so to have this link for both ways). In my opinion new rules are not necessary to set in case this agreement is made at the beginning of the term and respected throughout the collaboration.

Talking about Antenna Criteria: the number has increased in the last years. Are the locals respecting them or are they struggling? Are you going to be strict or flexible about their fulfillment?

Due to my Non Disclosure Agreement, I cannot fully answer this question – what I can tell is that in general I would say the locals are trying to respect them with their available resources and capabilities. I am in favour of pursuing the locals to fulfill most of them, but, if the exception request is viable, I am of course going to grant it.

Since the Local Training Courses (LTC) are now Antenna Criterion, as Network Director how will you encourage local in organising them? Will you solicit the Financial Director to grant more money to locals in need of trainers or funding?

In my opinion, organising an LTC can help the local educate their members, train new trainers and develop the local activities of the antennae, contact antennae and contacts. They are already used as recruitment tools in some locals, others consider them as an educational tool for members, while some of the locals have just started to put emphasis on organising them. However, apart from being an Antennae Criteria, I would try to provide financial help (to see a way to give financial support to LTCs as well, not just to Regional Training Courses (RTC)) and giving more support for how to hold trainings (as sometimes this is the biggest problems for locals) with improving the current internal education guidelines for LTCs in collaboration with the Academy and other European Bodies (such as videos, suggested session outlines, etc.).

How do you plan to bring Action Agenda closer to the Network initiatives?

How I see it currently is that some locals who are interested in/well-educated in the Action Agenda are contributing a lot to it with many events, others have even problems with grasping the concept of it. The key again, in my opinion, is information and education, and with a strong collaboration with Action Agenda Coordination Committee (ACT) I think this can be improved – also relying on the locals’ input and giving the chance of changing a field, if the Network does not find it viable.

What do you think about the current Network Meetings (NWM) situation? Should its definition be modified again or do you think too much standardisation can also be dangerous in such a beautiful and multi-coloured network?

With the former and current team, we have already worked on reforming NWMs in terms of content and organising, and I believe that we are going in the right way, but I think the definition since Agora-Cagliari does not need to be changed much as it is quite clear and distinguishable from other events (such as RTCs). I think that in regards of NWMs the most important should be always the locals’ needs: there should be some sessions which would be the same in other NWMs as well, but the program should always adapt to the participants’ needs regarding sessions.

There are five candidates but only four positions as members of the Comite Directeur. It means at least one of you will be out: why should our readers vote for you?

Because I am a reliable and a hard-working person who strives for the best to achieve in her work, and has sufficient experience in the organisation’s functioning, how to lead a team and how to be a good team player. Also I would like to see AEGEE as a wonderful place for finding what you like to do most, and I am willing to devote my energy to make this dream come true for others as well.

QUESTIONS FROM READERS:

How quick do you answer e-mails?

Usually within 24 hours due to being used to NetCom policy and the internal policy we used in our Board in Budapest, and when I’m abroad or less available, I try to check them as much as I can and respond if super urgent (depending on wifi connection). In general I try to be as available as I can in many communication channels.

If you could only make one big change in AEGEE’s current state, what would you want it to be and how would you contribute to it in the position you are running for?

I would try to bring the members and the European Bodies closer. I really liked the period when the CD was able to visit the locals personally, I feel like that currently the European Bodies are sometimes further away from the locals then ideal, and I would really like to have this approach back to the Network. I would try to have more occasions for European Bodies to meet with locals, not just mostly Network Meetings and Statutory events such as case study trips or providing financial opportunities for organising international teams to be able to meet face-to-face more often, not just virtually.

From your own experience, you know that NetCom is a huge amount of work. If you’re elected as Network Director (ND), what ideas do you have to improve the cooperation between ND and NetCom?

In general due to being aware of the workload a NetCom is facing, I would try to have the cooperation as supportive as possible depending on the Network Commission’s request. I also think that appointing Assistants for coordinating the internal work of the Network Commission helps to ease this workload (in our case it worked well). I have some other suggestions as well, but I think this is a topic which should be discussed with the Network Commission first before coming up with more concrete ideas.

In your candidature we can read a lot about researching, evaluations, etc. Don’t you think that we already had enough about this kind of reporting and control during the last years? Why should the Network again be handled in this bureaucratic way? Is it the solution or the cause of our issues?

I think that for my plans my research would be necessary to make in order to get an objective overview of the Network’s current status and to make statistics that have not been done for a while. I believe that in order to keep objectivity and be able to rely on data and facts, not just assumptions, sometimes we need tools that are more strict and reporting. I would try not to do too much controlling as we also have to respect that we are volunteers and contributing to many things out of our own interests, but there are some things where you can only get input by using more bureaucratic tools or sticking to the rules.

You can read her full candidature here. 

Written by Mattia Abis, AEGEE-Cagliari