Page 282 - Performance Leadership

Chapter 15 Telecom Performance Network • 271

be fast, right, easy, and cheap. The process also doesn’t drive growth,
optimize profit, lead to a positive customer opinion, or build trust.

Building the Performance Network
The only real solution for telecoms to offer good customer service is to
define an internal performance network based on joint-value relation-
ships. Within joint-value relationships, there are no internal customers
or internal suppliers, just colleagues sharing the same goals and objec-
tives geared toward customer service and needs, instead of their own
service level agreements. Colleagues each contribute unique skills and
resources to service joint customers.
The joint-value relationship defines success in terms of results for
the consumer of the service. Within the joint-value relationship, there
most likely still are departments and divisions, but they do not each
own a part of the process. The involved departments act more as a
resource pool in a process-oriented organization. The planning, fulfill-
ment, and billing systems are not connected to the department, but to
a certain product group or set of services. Where work needs to be
handed over from one department to the next for the process to con-
tinue, there should be a focus on the business interface metrics as well.
However, most performance indicators should be focused on the results
for the joint customers, the consumers. These performance indicators
should also be co-owned by the involved departments.
Table 15.1 shows an overview of reciprocal performance indicators
between divisions of a telecom. The table lists which performance indi-
cators are needed to drive and evaluate the different types of relation-
ships. In the performance networks for insurance and retail, the types
of relationships are descriptive. They are all good, as long as the choice
for a certain relationship is made explicit. In managing internal rela-
tionships within the telecom industry (and other divisionally organized
companies), the relationship style is normative. Transactional relation-
ships lead to dysfunctional behavior and local optimizations; a joint-
value relationship is needed to optimize the overall process. This is also
the reason why the added-value relationship is missing in Table 15.1.
The performance indicators in a joint-value relationship are co-owned
between the two departments that are interfacing.