The Consequences of a Badly Planned Team Chartering Meeting

Catherine Mercer BingManaging Director, ITAP Americas, Inc. (w) 1.215.860.5640http://www.itapintl.com

1©2015 ITAP International, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

The Consequences of a Badly Planned Team Chartering Meeting: A Short Case

http://www.itapintl.com/

Business Goal: Transition Back Office Processing Off Shore


• A global insurance company based in the US pulls together a project team of existing US process owners.

• The process owners are charged with transitioning their back office processing to an off-shoring entity in the Philippines.

The Team Chartering Meeting

• The US process owners convene a team chartering meeting.

• To save time and money, the chartering meeting focuses on the processes that will be transitioned and the order by which the transition will take place.

©2011 ITAP International, Inc. All Rights Reserved.3

Goal vs. Outcome

• The US process owners leave the meeting with an action plan that they expect will take about seven months to achieve.

• But two years later, less than two-thirds of the processes are completely transitioned.


US Process Owners Analysis of the Slow Progress

• The US process owners blame employees in the Philippines for the slow progress. They want the Philippines employees to:– Speak up– Come to meetings with ideas on how to

streamline processes– Come up with ideas on how to meet customer

needs on their own, without checking with the US process owners


The Team Chartering Meeting Had Major Flaws

• Only the US members were invited to attend the team chartering meeting.

• No one at a high level in the organization introduced the employees in the Philippines to how the transitions would happen:– Each process owner took responsibility for

their part of the transition


Employees in the Philippines: What is Our Role?

• Since employees at the off-shoring facility in the Philippines were not part of the team chartering meeting, they were unclear about their role.

• They did not consider themselves part of a team—the team was the US process owners.


Role Confusion

• The employees in the Philippines were confused about their relationship with the process owners:– Did they work for and report to the US

process owners?– Would the US process owners still be in

charge after all the processes will be transferred to the Philippines?

– Were the US process owners clients, leaders, or business partners?


What Can Be Done for this Team?

Join the discussion on:http://www.itapintl.com/index.php/about-us/itap-insights-blog/26-did-something-interesting/134-blog-entry-14 (scroll down) What organizational, cultural, and performance issues can be traced back to the team chartering meeting?______________________________________________

______________________________________________


http://www.itapintl.com/index.php/about-us/itap-insights-blog/26-did-something-interesting/134-blog-entry-14



What Can Be Done for this Team?

Join the discussion on:http://www.itapintl.com/index.php/about-us/itap-insights-blog/26-did-something-interesting/134-blog-entry-14 (scroll down)

What should have been the outcome of the team chartering meeting?______________________________________________

______________________________________________





• This presentation is an excerpt from Many Cultures One Team: Build Your Cultural Repertoire, a new book on teams by Catherine Mercer Bing.

• Enter promo code OneTeam to receive 20% off from Technics Publications website, http://www.TechnicsPub.com


Many Cultures, One Team

http://www.TechnicsPub.com/

Catherine Mercer BingManaging DirectorITAP Americas, Inc.

ITAP International, Inc.353 Nassau Street, 1st floorPrinceton, NJ 08540 USA(W) 1.215.860.5640http://www.itapintl.com


http://www.itapintl.com/

Leadership & Management

The Consequences of a Badly Planned Team Chartering Meeting