Team Effectiveness Leadership Model (TELM) explained Submitted by Sam Sooialo on Fri, 06/18/2010 - 07:38 Input, process, output;

these are the three fundamental components of the TELM model. These three components must work together to yield the best desired results. For without input and process, there is no output. However producing an output does not guarantee effective performance, hence monitoring and critiquing must take place to ensure the best performance is gained from members of the team. Hughes et al (2006) cite Hackmans argument that an effective teams output is realised when the product or service provided meets the expectation of the person using it in terms of quality, quantity and timeliness (p. 310). Furthermore the process that occurs while the group is carrying out the task enhances the individuals within the team allowing them to work as members of the team in the future (p. 310). In addition it also allows the experience to enhance the personal growth of the person who created the team (p.310). Historical Example When I first arrived at the organisation that we will call Company A, there was an after sales support team providing a support services. However this service had no focus nor was it being measured. Support was provided

by two different groups; namely helpdesk and field engineering. The relationship between these two groups is one of blame and there was a definite lack of communication. Helpdesk would often comment that Field Engineering never responded to their questions and Field Engineering suggested that Helpdesk were lazy. The environment as you can image was not the ideal for providing a service worth mentioning. This however was the internal happenings; external customers were happy with the service being provided but there were obviously a few complaint every now and then about misplaced calls etcetera. Identify the Issue My initial approach was to understand the difference in opinions between the two teams. Although these departments were separate internally, the customers view of this service is singular; hence it was imperative to act as such. During conversations with Helpdesk, they were frustrated because they were constantly told that they were not available to answer phones calls. Yet they were often on the phone to a customer anywhere between five to two hours trying to solve an issue. There was no system to log calls and there was no way of knowing which customer had a service agreement and which one didnt. They were also frustrated that when an engineer was required, the paper given to Field

Engineering was misplaced; resulting in abusive calls from the customer. The Field Engineering department on the other hand also had their own share of complaints about Helpdesk. Often an engineer was sent to site only to find out that the issues could have been solved on the phone. Individuals within the same team would also blame each other for issues or cases where they had expected the other to do something for a particular client fault. To add into the mix, the accounting department were also unhappy due to parts going missing or job logs being misplaced. It was obvious that there were many issues which needed to be addressed as team members both within and cross departmental were unhappy. As a result, the service being provided to our customers was abysmal in opinion compared to other organisations that I had worked for in the past. Business Process Improvement It was obvious from the conversations and observations that the biggest issue contributing to this case was a lack of processes. Lack of process therefore contributed to the lack of clear communication and a culture of blame. With this information in mind, one proposed a solution. First, existing processes were to be mapped using a third party consultancy company so that they would be impartial to the internal politics. On the completion of this project we sat down and discuss how these

processes could be improved and what technology could be used to automate and aid these processes. Processes were then changed to account for improvements made by the use of a customer relations management (CRM) system. I also created a customer services team to answer all incoming calls both for sales and support issues. This ensured that the Helpdesk would have time to talk on the phone while customer services would ensure that all calls were answered and logged. The process of support was explained to the customer and they were given a reference number allowing for prioritisation. Clear service level agreements were also published and communicated. Purchase history was now available between an integrating from the CRM into the enterprice resource planning (ERP) system. Obviously during this project all members of each team were involved in the design of processes and systems. Training was provided that they all agreed to the changes proposed. Using a combination of technology enhancements and process reengineering, we were now able to operate a paperless system. Each communication that took place between team members and clients were recorded and time stamped as comments. Each visit is recorded and any details about the customer and their product can also be checked. New process maps were also drawn up and published on the CRM library facility

so that they could be accessed by all those responsible for providing the after sales service. In addition I also introduced reports produced by the system on performance such as first times fixes, number of issues, re-visits and so on. With this information in hand, we were able to meet on a monthly basis as scheduled to discuss any issues or future improvements to both processes and systems. Although this group consists of the line managers responsible for these different teams, each manager had also relayed this information to their own team. In addition to the above changes, we also introduced a job swap process so that each member of each team is able to view the environment from anothers perspective. Output With the improvements made as mentioned above, the atmosphere changed considerably for the better. There was definitely more accountability! But most importantly, the communications channels had been opened and had allowed clarity of responsibility and team work. Each team is able to see the performance of the other by way of crystal reports that can be run at any time within the CRM. The introduction of the Customer Service team has also eased some of the stress and processes have brought the team together to form one virtual after sales team. In addition to all this, service

level agreements are now being met and exceeded. More and more customers are choosing to renew their service agreements and word spread within the industry of our unmatched service responses and first time fix rates. Ultimately, the P&L also looks very positive as a result and we continued to reinvest into our people and the after sales area of the business as a whole. Input Another side affect of these activates is renewed faith in the organisation by service personnel. Of course there will always be issues to deal with and there are certain individual who need to be micromanaged. But individuals are now freely making suggestions on improvements as well as making constructive feedback on areas that we could improve on. They also showed their willingness to learn by requesting additional training in areas outside of their specialties showing signs of personal growth. Conclusion Often people assume that differences of opinions within a working environment occur because individuals just dont see eye to eye. Where an environment is out of someones direct control it is very easy to start blaming others. Group or team processes or lack thereof; contribute to these differences of opinions and cause conflict within team. An effective team leader should be

able to identify the route cause of these issues and address them so that the teams performance is not restricted by such blockages. As stated by Hughes et al (2006) leaders must look to solve the cause of the problem which directly affects the behaviours and attitudes of team members. References Hughes, R.L., Ginnett, R.C., Curphy, G.J. (2006) Leadership: Enhancing the lessons of experience. 5th ed. McGraw Hill: Singapore.