Skip to main content

CISV Surveys

Go Search
Home
  
CISV Surveys > Performance Evaluation  

Performance Evaluation

Modify settings and columns
  
View: 

1. Dear CISV Volunteer

We are six Human Resource Management (HRM) students at Newcastle University . As part of our degree programme, we are doing a research project with CISV. The aim of the project is to examine the possibilities for a new performance evaluation process for the organization.  We are looking at what other volunteer organisations do, but we would really like to hear from you. We know that CISV’s current Strategic Plan includes a desire to investigate a range of human resource policies that may be relevant to volunteer organizations. This questionnaire is looking at what kinds of evaluation processes CISVers think might work well for their teams within CISV.  It will be used only for educational purposes. All the results will stay anonymous and confidential. We kindly request you to fill in the questionnaire by 18th of March. It will not take you more than five minutes. Your help is very important for the project.

Thank you


1. Your CISV National Association is:

 25
 (2%) 
 
 Norway
 (2%) 
 
 israel
 (2%) 
 
 Austria
 (3%) 
 
 Brazil
 (3%) 
 
 USA
 (9%) 
 
 CISV Italy
 (2%) 
 
 Israel
 (2%) 
 
 Portugal
 (7%) 
 
 Denmark
 (9%) 
 
 Colombia and Italy
 (2%) 
 
 Italy
 (3%) 
 
 Mexico
 (2%) 
 
 Honduras
 (2%) 
 
 Vice President, CISV International
 (2%) 
 
 Canada
 (10%) 
 
 GB
 (2%) 
 
 Finland
 (2%) 
 
 Sweden
 (2%) 
 
 Lebanon
 (2%) 
 
 Egypt
 (9%) 
 
 The Netherlands
 (2%) 
 
 US
 (2%) 
 
 Spain
 (5%) 
 
 Germany
 (2%) 
 
 Argentina
 (3%) 
 
 Australia
 (2%) 
 
 Colombia
 (2%) 
 
 Greece
 (2%) 
 
 GBR
 (2%) 
 
 Netherlands
 (2%) 
 
 germany
 (2%) 
 

Total: 58

2. 2. Which International Committee do you belong to now?

 822
 (2%) 
 
 ITC
 (3%) 
 
 GPS
 (5%) 
 
 Mosaic
 (2%) 
 
 Interchange
 (2%) 
 
 ORC
 (3%) 
 
 RDT
 (3%) 
 
 ICC
 (2%) 
 
 IMC
 (7%) 
 
 IEC
 (5%) 
 
 YMC
 (2%) 
 
 ITC, IVC
 (2%) 
 
 Seminar Camp Committee
 (3%) 
 
 Seminar Camp
 (3%) 
 
 Leadership
 (2%) 
 
 IRMC
 (3%) 
 
 Risk management
 (2%) 
 
 PRC and IPT
 (2%) 
 
 IMC and IJB
 (2%) 
 
 IPP
 (3%) 
 
 IJB Team
 (2%) 
 
 ISU
 (2%) 
 
 Spain, Madrid
 (2%) 
 
 IJB
 (7%) 
 
 IPT
 (3%) 
 
 Leadership Trainina
 (2%) 
 
 LTC
 (2%) 
 
 International Technology Committee
 (2%) 
 
 YMC
 (2%) 
 
 PRC
 (3%) 
 
 Junior Branch
 (2%) 
 
 EVR
 (2%) 
 
 Youthmeeting
 (2%) 
 
 International finance committee
 (2%) 
 
 IIC
 (2%) 
 
 International Pool of Trainers
 (2%) 
 
 IJB Committee
 (2%) 
 
 ymc
 (2%) 
 
 Youth Meeting
 (2%) 
 

Total: 58

3. Please answer the following questions based on your international committee experience.

3. The introduction of an evaluation system will help CISV achieve its purpose more effectively

 Strongly Agree
 22 (38%) 
 
 Agree
 28 (48%) 
 
 Neither Agree / Nor Disagree
 (12%) 
 
 Disagree
 (2%) 
 
 Strongly Disagree
 (0%)  

Total: 58

4. 4. The introduction of an evaluation system will help my team fulfil its purposes

 Strongly Agree
 12 (21%) 
 
 Agree
 33 (57%) 
 
 Neither Agree / Nor Disagree
 10 (17%) 
 
 Disagree
 (5%) 
 
 Strongly Disagree
 (0%)  

Total: 58

5. 5. The introduction of an evaluation system will help my team to identify its strengths and weaknesses

 Strongly Agree
 21 (36%) 
 
 Agree
 30 (52%) 
 
 Neither Agree / Nor Disagree
 (10%) 
 
 Disagree
 (2%) 
 
 Strongly Disagree
 (0%)  

Total: 58

6. 6. The introduction of an evaluation system will enhance cooperation and effective communication in the team

 Strongly Agree
 10 (17%) 
 
 Agree
 20 (34%) 
 
 Neither Agree / Nor Disagree
 20 (34%) 
 
 Disagree
 (9%) 
 
 Strongly Disagree
 (5%) 
 

Total: 58

7. 7. The introduction of an evaluation system will improve my own skills

 Strongly Agree
 13 (22%) 
 
 Agree
 26 (45%) 
 
 Neither Agree / Nor Disagree
 11 (19%) 
 
 Disagree
 (14%) 
 
 Strongly Disagree
 (0%)  

Total: 58

8. 8. The introduction of an evaluation system will encourage me to increase my efforts to accomplish my CISV responsibilities

 Strongly Agree
 (14%) 
 
 Agree
 23 (40%) 
 
 Neither Agree / Nor Disagree
 16 (28%) 
 
 Disagree
 (16%) 
 
 Strongly Disagree
 (3%) 
 

Total: 58

9. 9. The introduction of an evaluation system will make me more enthusiastic to volunteer towards achieving CISV’s purpose

 Strongly Agree
 (2%) 
 
 Agree
 21 (36%) 
 
 Neither Agree / Nor Disagree
 22 (38%) 
 
 Disagree
 11 (19%) 
 
 Strongly Disagree
 (5%) 
 

Total: 58

10. 10. Styles of evaluation :
Please choose up to TWO of the following evaluation styles which you think could work well for your team in CISV

 The team evaluation in a group discussion
 (7%) 
 
 A combination of self-evaluation and evaluation by team leader (individually)
 (12%) 
 
 The team leader for each team member (not self-evaluation)
 (0%)  
 The team leader for the whole team
 (0%)  
 Individual self – evaluation only
 (0%)  
 A combination of self-evaluation and evaluation by team leader (individually); The team leader for each team member (not self-evaluation)
 (3%) 
 
 The team in a group discussion
 (2%) 
 
 A combination of self-evaluation and evaluation by team leader (individually); Individual self – evaluation only
 (3%) 
 
 The team evaluation in a group discussion; The team leader for the whole team
 (2%) 
 
 The team evaluation in a group discussion; A combination of self-evaluation and evaluation by team leader (individually)
 32 (55%) 
 
 The team evaluation in a group discussion; The team leader for each team member (not self-evaluation)
 (3%) 
 
 A combination of self-evaluation and evaluation by team leader (individually); The team leader for the whole team
 (3%) 
 
 The team evaluation in a group discussion; The team leader for each team member (not self-evaluation); Individual self – evaluation only
 (2%) 
 
 The team evaluation in a group discussion; Individual self – evaluation only
 (7%) 
 

Total: 58

11. 11.Any other comments: (no more than 250 words)

 259
 (11%) 
 
 always open to suggestions, but not excited about more tasks being imposed on us without our input; implementation of any new "system" should be done cooperatively among committee, EEC and IO
 (11%) 
 
 It should be and individual evaluation and a 180 degrees evaluation, which means that not only thecoordinator evaluates but the other team member evaluate too!!
 (11%) 
 
 A formalized evaluation will help recognize the excellent work being done by most CISV volunteers, and will help CISV determine where to focus its individual and professional development activities. Up-to-date evaluations would also help write reference letters for volunteers, when requested.
 (11%) 
 
 To be able to discuss within the group is of importance but hard since there are no meetings but virtual between the whole committee.
 (11%) 
 
 I strongly believe that we need an effective evaluation system. But my fear regarding evaluations is that we put a check list to what we should be achieving and concentrate too much on it. this would result into either neglecting other important humanistic aspects of experiential learning that cannot be simply put on a check list. and the scond main reason is that it leads also to somehow manipulate (unconsciously maybe) the results in order to check one of the goals off. for example just make an activity to reach a goal, while to actually reach the goal you need to create an educational environment and there is a chain of activities needed to be taken. so lets not turn people into simple machines that their behaviour could be assessed by a check list and forget the complexity of the individual. then a simple check list as an evaluation method should not be a solution for our problems, yet we need to think beyond that. whether it needs not to be a simple 'yes' and 'no' answers as a graded evaluation or a more complicated system... thanks = )
 (11%) 
 
 360o evaluation would be a great evaluation Been evaluated by peers, leaders and down level
 (11%) 
 
 An evaluation system for volunteer tasks seems inappropriate and completely de-motivating.
 (11%) 
 
 This is something we already do, and I don't know that a homogenous system would be better for us, although the data might be interesting. If the purpose is to help committees help themselves, this is a nice idea. If the idea is to create a way to invite volunteers to leave, I think it could be very detrimental to motivation. Besides, we can't blame volunteers for having lives. The degree of dedication someone can offer is something they can set with their chair, but a top-down approach imposing universal standards could overall create more issues than it solves.
 (11%) 
 

Total: 9