National Academies Press: OpenBook

Information Technology for Efficient Project Delivery (2008)

Chapter: Chapter Two - Data Collection and Criteria for Identification of Advanced Processes

« Previous: Chapter One - Introduction
Page 9
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Two - Data Collection and Criteria for Identification of Advanced Processes." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Information Technology for Efficient Project Delivery. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14213.
×
Page 9
Page 10
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Two - Data Collection and Criteria for Identification of Advanced Processes." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Information Technology for Efficient Project Delivery. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14213.
×
Page 10
Page 11
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Two - Data Collection and Criteria for Identification of Advanced Processes." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Information Technology for Efficient Project Delivery. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14213.
×
Page 11

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

The intended methodology of data collection associated with this study consisted of an initial survey questionnaire that would identify DOTs for successive in-depth interviews. A draft questionnaire was created and distributed to DOTs of the Synthesis Panel participants. The draft questionnaire was then refined with Panel member recommendations and approved for dissemination to the entire pool of DOTs. This questionnaire is Appendix A. The final survey consisted of a series of redundant ques- tions grouped by DOT functional areas (planning, design, procurement, construction, and operations/maintenance). The intention was to plant the survey initially with a “champion” who could route the survey to persons knowledgeable to complete their specific functional area’s questions. Once all survey questions were answered by all five functional area sections, it was to be returned to the consultants for review and compilation. This plan required persistence to ensure that the question- naire was partially completed and routed through several func- tional areas, to the appropriate personnel, gaining acquired information throughout its route within the DOT organization. This was originally to be performed with a web-based survey software application provided by NCHRP. Technical difficul- ties with serving the application and problems with persistence issues forced the survey to another format. The survey questionnaire was converted and delivered in an Adobe Acrobat Version 8 file. This format was chosen for its ability to provide the persistence feature and a unique fea- ture that allowed the questionnaire data (not the file itself) to be forwarded to the investigators by means of e-mail once the entire survey was completed. Nonetheless, there were considerable issues with the survey and the responses to it. The Adobe file itself may have been too large for sharing through e-mail between departments, some were returned only partially completed, there were multiple responses from the same business function with differing answers, and there was inconsistency with how the survey was returned to the investigators. The survey was initially sent by means of e-mail broadcast to members of the AASHTO Committee on 10 Construction, and then to DOT contacts who were not mem- bers of the committee. The response to the survey, after five e-mail campaigns and four months, is shown in Table 1 and Figure 4. As a result of the survey data and recommendations from Synthesis Panel members, the following four states were initially selected for detailed interviews and data- flow diagramming: • Florida DOT (FDOT), • Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KYTC), • Minnesota DOT, and • New York State DOT. In an attempt to save time and get the synthesis project back on schedule, the decision to contact these four agencies was made before all of the survey questionnaire data were received. Therefore a disparity exists between agencies that were actually interviewed, and some of the final survey results that reveal several agencies with high digital scores which would have been included in the study given more time and resources. The consultants weighted the agency responses and developed a digital score based on the number of func- tional areas reported and the instances and magnitudes of digital data transfer. This methodology can be viewed in Appendix B. Based on the survey responses, an interview form was generated for the in-depth interviews (see Appendix C). Oklahoma DOT was interviewed in an effort to develop a standardized interview form and generic Integrated Defini- tion 0 (IDEF0) diagram for each functional area; however, this was dropped once the interviews began as the processes were not necessarily matching generic or functional area formats. This report uses the IDEF0 flowcharting method. IDEF methodology is a suite or family of methods that is capable of modeling activities, functions, information, and processes of an enterprise and its business areas. An example of IDEF0 flowcharting can be seen in Figure 5. CHAPTER TWO DATA COLLECTION AND CRITERIA FOR IDENTIFICATION OF ADVANCED PROCESSES

Responses Received by Functional Area Agency Planning • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Design Procurement Construction Operations and Maintenance AK DOT AL DOT AR DOT CA DOT CT DOT FL DOT GA DOT HI DOT IA DOT IN DOT KS DOT KYTC MD DOT MI DOT MN DOT MT DOT NE DOT NH DOT NM DOT NY DOT OK DOT OR DOT PA Turnpike SC DOT SD DOT TN DOT TX DOT VA DOT WADOT Survey Prototype Only WI DOT WY DOT Total Agencies Totals by Functional Area 30 23 23 25 26 22 TABLE 1 AGENCY SURVEY RESPONSES BY FUNCTIONAL AREA FIGURE 4 Agency survey responses with functional area completions in parentheses.

12 For IDEF0 diagramming purposes in this study, a func- tion will be defined as primary tasks performed by the functional units or an activity that transforms inputs into outputs. • Input is defined as information (data) that is required to perform a function. • A control is a condition or circumstance that constrains a functional activity. • A mechanism is a person, machine, or software applica- tion that performs a functional activity. • An output is the product of a function and possibly the input to a successive function. FUNCTION MECHANISM CONTROL OUTPUTINPUT FIGURE 5 IDEF0 charting example.

Next: Chapter Three - Information Technology for Planning »
Information Technology for Efficient Project Delivery Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB's National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Synthesis 385: Information Technology for Efficient Project Delivery explores "best practices" for the seamless sharing of information throughout all phases of the project delivery process.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!