National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Chapter 1 - Introduction and Background
Page 8
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Literature Review." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Accelerating Transportation Project and Program Delivery: Conception to Completion. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14405.
×
Page 8
Page 9
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Literature Review." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Accelerating Transportation Project and Program Delivery: Conception to Completion. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14405.
×
Page 9
Page 10
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Literature Review." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Accelerating Transportation Project and Program Delivery: Conception to Completion. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14405.
×
Page 10
Page 11
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Literature Review." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Accelerating Transportation Project and Program Delivery: Conception to Completion. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14405.
×
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.

8Overview The literature search revealed many articles, theses, and dissertations, which provided the research team with a start- ing point of what information was already documented. While certain subject areas had extensive information about topics such as design–build, fast-track construction, project management, and environmental streamlining, other areas were not so well documented, such as the impact of organiza- tional structures on project delivery, risk management and use, and application of performance measures. Other topics—such as build–operate–transfer (BOT) models/projects, Enter- prise Resource Planning (ERP) systems, and constructabil- ity reviews—consistently revealed published articles that could provide insight to accelerating projects from a broader perspective. The literature search was categorized into four broad areas that would facilitate the research efforts: (a) acceler- ation through improved delivery processes; (b) acceleration through improved program structures; (c) acceleration through internal and external relationships and partnerships; and (d) acceleration through organizational issues. Acceleration through Improved Delivery Processes The delivery of a project can be accelerated through vari- ous means. One of the most commonly known processes is the design–build delivery of projects. Certainly the design– build process has proven to accelerate the completion of projects much quicker than traditional methods. However, other undocumented methods may exist that relate to the expedited delivery of projects. Some of these methods may not be so popular or may require greater risk. It may be the case that such methods are only applied to a very specific part of the project and hence do not yield an appreciative decrease in schedule. Previous research also indicates that transporta- tion projects often take on a very segmented approach going from planning to design to permit approvals by a multitude of various agencies prior to construction. The lack of a seam- less continuity in a project burdens the overall process and raises the final cost of completing the project. An improved delivery process that addresses all the phases and constraints of a project is required to allow for quicker delivery of projects. Items in this section focus primarily on project-level how-to methods and innovations. They may include planning, engi- neering, administrative, program implementation, or other types of process details. Particular attention is given to proj- ect events and the application of techniques that intend to enhance the performance of various tasks to ultimately accel- erate project delivery. Acceleration through Improved Program Structures Many DOTs across the United States are structured in func- tional units, areas of specialization (e.g., planning, engineer- ing, construction, environmental, maintenance, accounting, community outreach) that provide services to internal units and external clients. Each unit also has its own internal pro- cesses that serve to “move things along” within the unit. Part of the concern is that these units function independently. If information is needed from another unit, requests are trans- mitted up to the unit head who then communicates it to the other unit head. Projects are slowed down because the prior- ity of one group may not necessarily be the priority of another group. This independence limits the project’s ability to move seamlessly from one phase to the next. Improved program structures may allow a project to advance quickly through the pipeline of planning, design, and construction. Re-engineering and reorganizing DOT operations and programs within a structure may be a step to reduce the amount of time preced- ing project delivery. Items in this section focus primarily on C H A P T E R 2 Literature Review

9program-level methods and innovations associated with inte- grating project processes to support broader organizational objectives. Visioning, management of material, fiscal and human resources, management of risks, training, simulation techniques, environmental factors, and regulatory priorities are examples of program areas where integration may accel- erate project delivery. Acceleration through Internal and External Relationships and Partnerships One element of a project as it moves through the different phases is stakeholder involvement. Both internal and exter- nal stakeholders have some concern regarding the way a proj- ect progresses. These partnerships become key elements that can either hinder a project from advancing or stimulate a proj- ect to be accelerated. These relationships are also an important aspect of the funding arrangements for a project or program. Similarly, an influential stakeholder or agency could effec- tively champion the project from beginning to end. Program- matic agreements have also been used as a tool to streamline the environmental permitting process. Studying these rela- tionships and different types of partnering agreements will provide insight as to how a project can be completed rapidly. These items include information about key relationships at various contextual levels pertaining to areas such as contract- ing, scheduling, community relations, project team members, political partners, and administrative processes. Through trust building and effective communication, as well as resource sharing, project delivery may be accelerated. Acceleration through Organizational Issues that Are Not Project Specific In many instances, projects are accelerated because of ex- treme circumstances, such as rehabilitations after a hurricane or repairs of structures after a collapse. Agencies prioritize a project and it is propelled through all phases until it is com- pleted. Crisis management invokes a different set of princi- ples by which engineers and designers are guided to complete tasks. These organizational issues can be studied to uncover what aspects of the process lead to an accelerated project. Similarly, such projects have a higher risk factor that DOTs are willing to accept as a project takes shape and begins to move forward. Although crisis management and related items will not be the focus of this category, methods and practices that surfaced during the crisis and were continued and weaved into existing programs, even after the crisis was under con- trol, can be identified. Other factors such as management styles and methodologies of project managers, team member organization, and political support may make the difference between a project that takes a normal course and a project that is accelerated. These items include organizational theory and learning strategies for enhancing project performance through development of cultural dynamics responsive to sce- narios involving multiple projects, decision trade-offs, the use of incentives, senior management perspectives, and theories of practice. Defining Project and Program Project States have a clear understanding of what a transporta- tion project means to them. A transportation project is a set of distinct activities, tasks, processes, or initiatives that result in a product or service and has a finite timeline. The end product may be a bridge, highway, railroad, tunnel, dam, or airport. Undertakings like these can be classified as large (or mega- project) investments. But in today’s environment, smaller projects, such as those involving maintenance, minor repairs, resurfacing, and similar types of engineering and planning projects, have been taking center stage. A project may also be undertaken to provide a service. Research-type projects often lead to a state offering a new service or implementing a new program. For example, a DOT may find through surveys and empirical data that passenger safety can be increased if it creates a greater awareness of the importance of wearing seatbelts. A study project may find that customers feel safer and more secure because of the roadside emergency service that some DOTs provide. Projects may be viewed as piecemeal systems; however, this approach fails to tie projects to the overall strategies of the organization. The specific goals of individual projects may fall short of balancing with the organization’s culture and mission. This is where programs fill the gap. Program The definition of a program varies among the state DOTs that were studied. To many, it meant a collection of similar- type projects grouped together. To others, a program was an endeavor to deliver a range of improvements. For instance, a state implements a program to improve the condition of their bridges, increase the pavement condition or ride quality, reduce congestion in construction zones, or reduce traffic- related fatalities through a guiderail installation program. A broader approach to defining the difference between a project and a program is that a project delivers outputs while a program delivers outcomes (2). Programs seek to deliver long-term improvements and are aligned to an organization’s strategic goals.

Project and Program Management The use of the words “project” and “program” has changed dramatically as it is now inherently linked to the concept of project management. Project and program management is about integration. While project management is about “doing projects right,” program management is about “doing the right projects” (3). Successful projects are delivered on time and within the budget and meet the needs of the original purpose. The success of a program is evaluated based on the benefits it provides. Program management requires a broader approach to coordinating and prioritizing resources across projects, while weighing their costs and risks. In practice, there is no clear-cut distinction between trans- portation projects and programs in the states researched. Both projects and programs varied in size and complexity. Methods of project and program management varied even more from one state to the next. The definitions above provide a frame- work for how these terms will be used in the ensuing report. The research revealed a common trend in defining the terms “program acceleration” and “project acceleration” among the various state DOTs interviewed. All the groups expressed the idea that the terms meant opening a facility to public traffic sooner or more quickly in one way or another. Some defi- nitions pinpointed specific phases of a project, while others included methods or means for accelerating projects. In the end, it was concluded that finding ways to undertake pro- cesses simultaneously, in parallel, contributed greatly to accel- erating project completion even if the individual processes took the same amount of time. Researchers found that the technical aspects of develop- ing a highway project or transportation program are a rela- tive constant factor among all agencies. The core principles of engineering design do not change. The manuals that agencies follow for designing infrastructure remain relatively constant across the nation. Technological advances that expedite pro- duction are adopted in a relatively uniform manner from one DOT to the next. While geographical and environmental con- straints may vary from state to state, the engineering aspects of project delivery remain the same. Motivational Factors The backbone of the U.S. economy relies heavily on the transportation system that moves people and goods. Four sep- arate spheres make up the transportation industry: Planning/ Engineering/Construction, Social/Community, Environmen- tal and Political. Over the years, these spheres have become so interconnected that in changing one sphere, the other elements are affected, and all aspects of the project have to be consid- ered before a potential project gains momentum. Managers and decision makers have many reasons to accel- erate projects. The research team asked a very fundamental question: What does acceleration mean to you? The question was then varied to ask what acceleration meant to their man- agers or supervisors, to the public/users, to the commissioner/ executive director/secretary. The answers were found in their descriptions of project and program acceleration. Although the responses varied slightly, they all focused on the public welfare as the central reason to get facilities built faster. Figure 2 shows the motivational factors categorized as internal, external, and administrative/political reasons to deliver a facility sooner. In candid discussion with the states that were interviewed, reasons for accelerating projects stemmed from the current climate of the transportation industry. The aging infrastruc- 10 • Schedule driven • Cost savings to program delivery • Inflation / cost of materials • Limited funding / priority projects • Streamlined processes / innovation INTERNAL • Reduced public impact • Stakeholder expectation • Facility opened sooner • Trust EXTERNAL • Improved agency image • Accolades for activity • Risk • Best return on tax dollar ADMIN/ POLITICAL Figure 2. Motivational factors to accelerate projects.

ture that has provided a useful service life beyond the original expectations, a growing population whose mobility needs are increasing, increased congestion—especially in urban areas— that now impact daily traffic patterns, and limited financial funding all set the stage for the current transportation climate. This atmosphere encourages transportation professionals to bring the product or service to the public faster. They recognize the benefits of delivering a facility quickly to the public. Internally, accelerating a project translated to cost savings in the overall program. Those savings could then be applied to other areas within the department or simply allocated to another project that lacked funding. In recent years, man- agers found that their projects were halted because of limited funding at certain stages of a project. For instance, a project could have been funded through planning and feasibility. But no funding was available for engineering and construction and projects were prioritized because of the limited funding. This combination of limited funding and shuffling of project priorities motivated some managers to accelerate their proj- ects before the scenario changed again. Certain processes were designed to streamline critical aspects of a project. These processes assisted managers in expediting some phases of a project, which facilitated the overall delivery of a project. Inflation and increasing cost of materials were also reasons to accelerate a project and have it built sooner rather than later. The increasing cost of fuel and steel prices are evidence of the fluctuating market that influences the engineering and con- struction industries. Externally, departments felt they had an obligation to meet stakeholders’ expectations. The reduced time frames of deliv- ering a project sooner reduced public impact, which translated to reduced user costs. In the eyes of the public, they needed to endure the rigor of sitting in construction-related traffic for only several months instead of a year or more. Departments were motivated to open a facility sooner because their reward was in the trust gained from the public. From an administrative viewpoint, departments felt that accelerating a project meant that the tax dollar was wisely spent. Some states were enjoying the improved agency image from delivering a project ahead of schedule. This improved image allowed them to experiment with different options for other projects during construction. Another reason to accel- erate a project was that not doing so was inherently tied to higher risk consequences. Not wanting to face the potential risk and residual risks were reasons enough to deliver the project quickly. 11

Next: Chapter 3 - Research Findings »
Accelerating Transportation Project and Program Delivery: Conception to Completion Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 662: Accelerating Transportation Project and Program Delivery: Conception to Completion explores the experiences of eight state departments of transportation that made improvements in their project delivery and examines the lessons to be learned from their experiences.

  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!