Integrating Business Processes to Improve Travel Time Reliability (2011)

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.

Introduction Reliability is defined in this report as consistency of travel times for a particular trip. Trav- elers tend to estimate how long a trip will take based on parameters such as distance, time of day, and their own experience. Impacts to the transportation network that cause unexpected delays introduce uncertainty in travel time reliability. The SHRP 2 Reliability focus area addresses reliability by developing specific proce- dures, monitoring programs, and exploring alternatives to traditional traffic management strategies. The L01 project focused on processes that directly affect network and travel time reliability, particularly those processes that enable operational functions and in which integration plays a significant part. The project identified the core of operations busi- ness processes within transportation management that had day-to-day influence over operations and network performance and, in turn, had positive impacts on travel time reliability. The project defined “business process” as a series of actions or activities that result in a specific or desired outcome to accomplish a specific organizational goal. There are many definitions of business processes, but in general these emphasize inputs, outputs, sequences of events, and value-added results. The research focused on business process analysis that was narrowed to key operational areas that have the most effect on travel time reliability. These included the following areas: • Incident management; • Work zone management; • Planned special-event management; • Road weather management; and • Traffic control and traffic operations. The following were the key research objectives for this project: • Identify and document practices that successfully integrated business processes to improve travel time reliability; • Define key business processes within DOT and transportation operations that were linked to travel time reliability; • Demonstrate how successful strategies and business process integration activities may be adopted by other entities; • Help agency managers identify critical gaps in their current processes, as well as strategies to address these gaps, including combining and integrating processes to achieve greater travel time reliability; and Executive Summary1

2• Coordinate L01 research activities with other ongoing research within the SHRP 2 Reliability focus area to extract the most innovative case study examples. This research project used three key methods for input: literature review, case studies, and a two- day workshop (1) that involved a panel of experts. Ten case studies were conducted, and they comprised locations throughout the United States and in the United Kingdom. The case studies were selected from an initial list of more than 50 pro- grams and activities that was put together from the literature review, the research team’s knowl- edge of various operations programs, and the input from industry experts. These case studies focused on process development and integration, types of congestion addressed, performance measures, benefits related to reliability, and lessons learned. Table ES.1 describes the 10 selected case studies.Case Study Description Participating Agencies Washington State DOT Joint Operations Policy Statement and Instant Tow Dispatch Program Florida Road Rangers United Kingdom Active Traffic Management North Carolina DOT Traffic and Safety Operations Committee Michigan DOT Work Zone Traffic Control Modeling Kansas Speedway Special-Event Traffic Management The Palace of Auburn Hills, Special-Event Traffic Management (Michigan) I-80 Winter State Line Closures (California and Nevada State Line) AZTech Regional Archived Data Server (Arizona) San Pablo Avenue Signal Retiming (California) Describes one of several programs the Washington State DOT and Washington State Patrol have implemented to support their Joint Operations Policy Statement for incident response and management Describes the use of contracted private tow vendors and sponsors to deliver a freeway service patrol program throughout the state of Florida Describes the pilot corridor for ATM strategies for recurring congestion, as well as the incident response and management program Describes North Carolina DOT’s evaluation process for major work zones and traffic and safety impacts as a result of changes in work zones Describes the microsimulation model developed by the Michigan DOT to model the impacts of freeway construction closures on an entire network Describes the development of traffic management procedures to support large-scale-event traffic at the new speedway facility Describes the traffic signal timing plans developed specifically for events at The Palace Describes the series of processes that are initiated by the Nevada DOT to alert travelers when Caltrans closes the state line on I-80 during winter weather events Describes the evolution of a database initially developed to store freeway data into a central repository for agencies to be able to access real-time incident and traffic operations data Describes a multiagency approach to developing corridor traffic signal timing plans Washington DOT Florida DOT UK Highways Agency North Carolina DOT Michigan DOT Kansas DOT Kansas Highway Patrol Road Commission of Oakland County Auburn Hills Police Department Nevada DOT Maricopa County DOT/AZTech Metropolitan Transportation Commission Table ES.1. Case StudiesA consistent approach to mapping business processes was required to analyze the identified processes and identify key integration points within the processes. Various business processes and their applicability to transportation agency processes were researched and the Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN) was selected. BPMN was developed to improve communication between participants at the design level of a process with those at the implementation stage. It was used in L01 to model the integrated business process for each case study that was considered.

3The final step in the research and analysis portion of the project involved a two-day workshop with selected representation from across the country (1). The individuals who were invited were from the management level of their respective organizations but were for the most part still closely and integrally involved with operations and processes that could affect travel time reliability. The invitees represented various roles in the agencies where they worked, including planning, opera- tions, and program management. The following were the participating agencies in the workshop: • American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials; • Arizona EMS Bureau; • CH2M Hill; • Kansas DOT; • Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.; • Maricopa County DOT/AZTech; • Michigan DOT; • Nevada DOT; • North Carolina DOT; • North Central Texas Council of Governments; • Oregon DOT; • Transportation Research Board/SHRP 2; and • Wisconsin DOT. The workshop involved a significant amount of conversation related to the issues and challenges in the participants’ departments or agencies. There also was significant conversation about the enablers identified in each case study and about how these enablers could be categorized and shared to assist other agencies in integrating their processes. The participants evaluated the applicability of the findings from the case studies and identified the information that could benefit the opera- tions of other agencies. Findings The initial intent of this project was to identify clearly defined integration points in successful busi- ness processes that demonstrated a link to improved travel time reliability. As the case studies evolved, it was found that there were two distinct aspects to process integration that were critical to support reliability-focused operations: process integration at the operations level and process integration at the institutional or programmatic level. At the operations level, various processes and activities evolve and are coordinated among those who are responsible for overseeing or car- rying out operational initiatives. There is often a direct link between the process and the outcome. Process integration at the programmatic or institutional level is a much more complex undertak- ing. Not only are there different constraints to be worked through, but there is also a much less direct relationship between programmatic processes and their contribution to travel time reliabil- ity. Yet, institutionalizing processes so that they influence training, managing staff and resources, planning, programming, and policy making is essential to effective business process integra- tion. In order to assist agencies in implementing business process change and integrating business processes, the key influences and obstacles were identified. Based on the analysis of the case studies and the feedback from participants at the L01 workshop (1), influences on business processes were categorized into specific groups according to the event or directive that initiated the process change or process development. The categories were devel- oped into the following three tiers: • Major-directive, or “top-down,” approach: This category includes influences that involve legislative requirements or management-level goals or directives.

4• Event-driven approach: This includes cases in which a specific event or hazard prompts the need for improving operations. • Needs-based, or “bottom-up,” approach: This includes cases in which process change or devel- opment is initiated or coordinated at the operations level, often in response to specific activities or needs. Whatever the influence, it was found that all agencies encounter obstacles when they begin to evaluate, implement, or modify a process. Some of these obstacles are common among agencies, while others are unique to individual agencies. Some of the obstacles can be conquered through modifications to the process; others may require institutional changes. The obstacles listed below were identified from the interviews and the L01 workshop. They were among the most common obstacles to integrating business processes to improve travel time reliability. • Departments of transportation historically are construction and maintenance focused and not operations focused; • Although reliability is emerging as an important metric among agencies, often it does not spur process implementation or integration; • The agency stakeholders or partners who contribute to reliability-focused strategies often have different motivations and approaches to process implementation and process change; and • The process modeling that was mapped out in the case studies may not be at a level that is typ- ical of how a DOT or other stakeholder agency would view individual operational processes, creating a challenge in identifying critical gaps or breakdowns in specific processes. Conclusions The case studies included in the research represent a broad range of potential processes and inte- gration strategies and include process integration at both the operations and institutional levels. There are benefits to be derived from these case studies that could be applied in other areas as well. Guidance from the L01 workshop participants indicated that there would be more benefit in gen- eralizing outcomes and deriving common elements from across the profiled processes. Figure ES.1 provides a representation of the generalized steps that can be referenced for mapping out business processes, showing common elements and factors to successfully integrate and institutionalize business processes.Figure ES.1. Steps in business process mapping.

5Each of the steps in the business process mapping process is crucial to fully implementing a busi- ness process. Of all these steps, it is perhaps the institutionalization of the process that is most important in successfully translating a process into a core process within an organization. The research from the case studies suggests that implementing a process change and integrating vari- ous processes often occur at the operations level, but institutionalizing the process typically requires the participation and support of higher levels of the organization. Proven processes can benefit the organization and the participants for a few years, but institutionalization of a process is important to guarantee that the process will sustain and evolve beyond the current players and champions. Enablers that led to the successful integration and institutionalization of business processes were identified in many of the case studies. Among these enablers were the following: • Clear identification of performance measures and targets to provide senior-level managers with an incentive for process change; • Implementation of effective evaluation and reporting abilities to clearly demonstrate the success of a process and communicate the benefits to the public; and • Development of formal agreements to demonstrate buy-in of each participating agency and ensure consistency as personnel change over time. Institutionalization is the final stage for implementing a process change. It should include clear documentation of the process, the roles and responsibilities of the players, and the perfor- mance metrics used to evaluate effectiveness. The level of documentation will be unique to each organization but should reflect the complexity of the business process and the level of commit- ment from senior management. Recommendations As noted earlier, process integration can be divided into two distinct aspects: at the operations level and at the institutional level. Through the case study development process, unique benefits were identified that result from process integration at both the operations level and the programmatic and institutional levels. Benefits can include increased efficiency, more savings in financial and staff resources, greater scalability and flexibility of systems, and more integrated institutional processes. It is recommended that process integration be considered at the operational level to improve an agency’s ability to effectively use its resources. Process integration can provide financial savings as a result of improved cooperation, reduced capital expenditures, and efficient use of staff. Process integration can allow agencies to plan for an integrated system that can be implemented in a scal- able format that can grow commensurately with needs. By integrating agencies and processes early in the planning process, agencies are less likely to miss opportunities for integration and are more likely to build systems that can expand to meet future needs. Finally, the formal documentation of a process and of changes to the process will allow agencies to identify any correlation that might exist between changes to the process and performance metrics. As changes are made to a process, it is important to determine if those changes resulted in any measurable difference in performance. By documenting a process and any resulting change, agencies can keep a record of the processes they follow and compare changes in the process with changes in the performance metrics. It is recommended that process integration be considered at the institutional level to allow agen- cies to define clear agency responsibilities that can improve cooperation and trust, because each agency and department understands its role and its partner agency’s role in effectively carrying out a process. Documentation of these roles and responsibilities can provide additional benefit, inas- much as it records the roles and responsibilities that should not change even if personnel change. Buy-in from higher-level management at agencies is a key to establishing a process that is effective and remains in place. Processes that have support from the upper levels of management are more likely to remain in place and be viewed as a high priority by all levels of staff within an agency.

6The challenge that remains is to take the lessons learned from the case studies and workshop and to use them to assist other agencies in examining their own business processes and in looking for gaps and opportunities in process integration. It was evident, through development of the case studies, that there is no single approach to business process integration that will work for all agen- cies. The factors that led to process changes varied among three categories: major directives, event driven, or needs based. The differences in agency organization, institutional arrangements, politi- cal climates, and other variables mean that process integration will happen in different ways and at different paces in different areas. It is recommended that greater focus be placed on assisting agencies to integrate business processes at the institutional or programmatic level rather than at the operations level. At the oper- ations level, processes vary widely and are usually coordinated among those who are responsible for carrying out operational initiatives. One forum to help elevate process integration within agencies could be a training course or workshop based on case studies across the country with a focus on the elements that led an agency to implement and institutionalize a programmatic change. Focus could be on both general case study reviews and specific needs in a region. Action plans for implementing and institutionalizing specific business processes for better travel time reliability would be the goals of the workshops. The workshops or training courses should teach a method of documenting business processes, such as BPMN. They should also emphasize the enablers that lead to the institutionalization of business processes, such as performance measures, evaluation methods, and formal agreements. Finally, workshops or courses should emphasize the role of business processes in developing regional ITS architectures and systems engineering analysis. Both the architecture and system engineering analysis efforts can be effective methods of assisting agencies in developing more efficient and inte- grated processes. Reference 1. SHRP 2 L01 Workshop: Integrating Business Processes to Improve Travel Time Reliability. Phoenix, Ariz. May 5–9, 2009.