Cover Image

Not for Sale



View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( R2


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
REPORT S2-L06-RR-1 Institutional Architectures to Improve Systems Operations and Management Accelerating solutions for highway safety, renewal, reliability, and capacity

OCR for page R1
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2011 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE* OFFICERS CHAIR: Neil J. Pedersen, Consultant, Silver Spring, Maryland VICE CHAIR: Sandra Rosenbloom, Professor of Planning, University of Arizona, Tucson EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board MEMBERS J. Barry Barker, Executive Director, Transit Authority of River City, Louisville, Kentucky Deborah H. Butler, Executive Vice President, Planning, and CIO, Norfolk Southern Corporation, Norfolk, Virginia William A. V. Clark, Professor, Department of Geography, University of California, Los Angeles Eugene A. Conti, Jr., Secretary of Transportation, North Carolina Department of Transportation, Raleigh James M. Crites, Executive Vice President of Operations, DallasFort Worth International Airport, Texas Paula J. Hammond, Secretary, Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia Michael W. Hancock, Secretary, Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, Frankfort Adib K. Kanafani, Professor of the Graduate School, University of California, Berkeley (Past Chair, 2009) Michael P. Lewis, Director, Rhode Island Department of Transportation, Providence Susan Martinovich, Director, Nevada Department of Transportation, Carson City Joan McDonald, Commissioner, New York State Department of Transportation, Albany Michael R. Morris, Director of Transportation, North Central Texas Council of Governments, Arlington (Past Chair, 2010) Tracy L. Rosser, Vice President, Regional General Manager, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Mandeville, Louisiana Steven T. Scalzo, Chief Operating Officer, Marine Resources Group, Seattle, Washington Henry G. (Gerry) Schwartz, Jr., Chairman (retired), Jacobs/Sverdrup Civil, Inc., St. Louis, Missouri Beverly A. Scott, General Manager and Chief Executive Officer, Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, Atlanta, Georgia David Seltzer, Principal, Mercator Advisors LLC, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Lawrence A. Selzer, President and CEO, The Conservation Fund, Arlington, Virginia Kumares C. Sinha, Olson Distinguished Professor of Civil Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana Thomas K. Sorel, Commissioner, Minnesota Department of Transportation, St. Paul Daniel Sperling, Professor of Civil Engineering and Environmental Science and Policy; Director, Institute of Transportation Studies; and Interim Director, Energy Efficiency Center, University of California, Davis Kirk T. Steudle, Director, Michigan Department of Transportation, Lansing Douglas W. Stotlar, President and Chief Executive Officer, Con-Way, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan C. Michael Walton, Ernest H. Cockrell Centennial Chair in Engineering, University of Texas, Austin (Past Chair, 1991) EX OFFICIO MEMBERS Rebecca M. Brewster, President and COO, American Transportation Research Institute, Smyrna, Georgia Anne S. Ferro, Administrator, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation LeRoy Gishi, Chief, Division of Transportation, Bureau of Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior John T. Gray, Senior Vice President, Policy and Economics, Association of American Railroads, Washington, D.C. John C. Horsley, Executive Director, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C. Michael P. Huerta, Acting Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation David T. Matsuda, Deputy Administrator, Maritime Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation Michael P. Melaniphy, President, American Public Transportation Association, Washington, D.C. Victor M. Mendez, Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation Tara O'Toole, Under Secretary for Science and Technology, U.S. Department of Homeland Security Robert J. Papp (Adm., U.S. Coast Guard), Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Department of Homeland Security Cynthia L. Quarterman, Administrator, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation Peter M. Rogoff, Administrator, Federal Transit Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation David L. Strickland, Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation Joseph C. Szabo, Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation Polly Trottenberg, Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy, U.S. Department of Transportation Robert L. Van Antwerp (Lt. General, U.S. Army), Chief of Engineers and Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, D.C. Barry R. Wallerstein, Executive Officer, South Coast Air Quality Management District, Diamond Bar, California Gregory Winfree, Acting Administrator, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation *Membership as of December 2011.

OCR for page R1
The Second S T R A T E G I C H I G H W A Y R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M REPORT S2-L06-RR-1 Institutional Architectures to Improve Systems Operations and Management PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF with DELCAN PHILIP J. TARNOFF GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY HOUSMAN AND ASSOCIATES TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2012 www.TRB.org

OCR for page R1
Subscriber Categories Administration and Management Highways Law Operations and Traffic Management Policy

OCR for page R1
The Second Strategic Highway SHRP 2 Report S2-L06-RR-1 Research Program ISBN: 978-0-309-12905-3 America's highway system is critical to meeting the mobility and Library of Congress Control Number: 2077945094 economic needs of local communities, regions, and the nation. Developments in research and technology--such as advanced 2012 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. materials, communications technology, new data collection technologies, and human factors science--offer a new opportu- nity to improve the safety and reliability of this important Copyright Information national resource. Breakthrough resolution of significant trans- Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for portation problems, however, requires concentrated resources obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copy- over a short time frame. Reflecting this need, the second Strate- right to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. gic Highway Research Program (SHRP 2) has an intense, large- The second Strategic Highway Research Program grants permission to repro- duce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Per- scale focus, integrates multiple fields of research and technology, mission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to and is fundamentally different from the broad, mission-oriented, imply TRB, AASHTO, or FHWA endorsement of a particular product, method, discipline-based research programs that have been the mainstay or practice. It is expected that those reproducing material in this document for educational and not-for-profit purposes will give appropriate acknowledgment of the highway research industry for half a century. of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the mat- erial, request permission from SHRP 2. The need for SHRP 2 was identified in TRB Special Report 260: Note: SHRP 2 report numbers convey the program, focus area, project number, and publication format. Report numbers ending in "w" are published as web Strategic Highway Research: Saving Lives, Reducing Congestion, documents only. Improving Quality of Life published in 2001 and based on a study sponsored by Congress through the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21). SHRP 2, modeled Notice after the first Strategic Highway Research Program, is a focused, The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the second Strategic Highway Research Program, conducted by the Transportation Research Board time-constrained, management-driven program designed to with the approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. complement existing highway research programs. SHRP 2 focuses The members of the technical committee selected to monitor this project and to on applied research in four areas: Safety, to prevent or reduce the review this report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for severity of highway crashes by understanding driver behavior; appropriate balance. The report was reviewed by the technical committee and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by Renewal, to address the aging infrastructure through rapid design the Transportation Research Board and approved by the Governing Board of the and construction methods that cause minimal disruptions and National Research Council. produce lasting facilities; Reliability, to reduce congestion through The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the incident reduction, management, response, and mitigation; and Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program Capacity, to integrate mobility, economic, environmental, and sponsors. community needs in the planning and designing of new trans- The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National portation capacity. Research Council, and the sponsors of the second Strategic Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers' names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of SHRP 2 was authorized in August 2005 as part of the Safe, the report. Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). The program is managed by the Transportation Research Board (TRB) on behalf of the National Research Council (NRC). SHRP 2 is conducted under a memorandum of understanding among the American Associ- ation of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and the National Academy of Sciences, parent organization of TRB and NRC. The program provides for competitive, merit-based selection of SHRP 2 Reports research contractors; independent research project oversight; Available by subscription and through the TRB online bookstore: and dissemination of research results. www.TRB.org/bookstore Contact the TRB Business Office: 202-334-3213 More information about SHRP 2: www.TRB.org/SHRP2

OCR for page R1
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. On the authority of the charter granted to it by Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achieve- ments of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, on its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of the National Research Council. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisci- plinary, and multimodal. The Board's varied activities annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transporta- tion, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org

OCR for page R1
SHRP 2 STAFF Neil F. Hawks, Director Ann M. Brach, Deputy Director Kizzy Anderson, Senior Program Assistant, Implementation Stephen Andrle, Chief Program Officer, Capacity James Bryant, Senior Program Officer, Renewal Mark Bush, Senior Program Officer, Renewal Kenneth Campbell, Chief Program Officer, Safety JoAnn Coleman, Senior Program Assistant, Capacity Eduardo Cusicanqui, Finance Officer Walter Diewald, Senior Program Officer, Safety Jerry DiMaggio, Implementation Coordinator Charles Fay, Senior Program Officer, Safety Carol Ford, Senior Program Assistant, Safety Elizabeth Forney, Assistant Editor Jo Allen Gause, Senior Program Officer, Capacity Abdelmename Hedhli, Visiting Professional James Hedlund, Special Consultant, Safety Coordination Ralph Hessian, Visiting Professional Andy Horosko, Special Consultant, Safety Field Data Collection William Hyman, Senior Program Officer, Reliability Linda Mason, Communications Officer Michael Miller, Senior Program Assistant, Reliability Gummada Murthy, Senior Program Officer, Reliability David Plazak, Senior Program Officer, Capacity and Reliability Monica Starnes, Senior Program Officer, Renewal Noreen Stevenson-Fenwick, Senior Program Assistant, Renewal Charles Taylor, Special Consultant, Renewal Onno Tool, Visiting Professional Dean Trackman, Managing Editor Pat Williams, Administrative Assistant Connie Woldu, Administrative Coordinator Patrick Zelinski, Communications Specialist ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work was sponsored by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) in cooperation with the Amer- ican Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). It was conducted in the second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP 2), which is administered by the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies. The project was managed by William Hyman, Senior Program Officer for SHRP 2 Reliability. The principal author of the report was Steve Lockwood of Parsons Brinckerhoff, with significant contribu- tions from the project team: Phil Tarnoff, John O'Laughlin of Delcan, and Tojo Thatchenkery of George Mason University. Housman and Associates also contributed to this project. Alan Lubliner and Amy Zwas of Parsons Brinckerhoff provided important editorial and administrative support throughout. Researchers in related SHRP 2 projects, FHWA Operations Division staff, Institute of Transportation Engi- neers staff, and AASHTO staff were an important source of consultation throughout. The AASHTO Subcom- mittee on Systems Operations and Management provided an essential sounding board at key points in the project.

OCR for page R1
F O R E W O R D William Hyman, SHRP 2 Senior Program Officer, Reliability A large number of strategies aimed at improving travel time reliability focus on highway operations. To be successful, operational strategies often require a collaborative and coor- dinated effort among many transportation organizations and within their key units. For example, effective work zone management within a transportation agency cuts across orga- nizational boundaries and involves construction, maintenance, safety, and operations person- nel. More significantly, many operational strategies, particularly traffic incident management, require strong cooperation from many different organizations, such as transportation depart- ments, police, fire, emergency medical services, and towing and recovery. The objective of this research was to undertake a comprehensive and systematic examina- tion of the way agencies should be organized to successfully execute operations programs that improve travel time reliability. The following types of questions were examined at the outset of this research: How does operations fit into a transportation agency's overall pro- gram? What changes can be made in agency culture and training to promote operations? Which local and regional public agencies and private-sector organizations are essential to the various aspects of operations? Are there emerging technologies, systems, or organizational structures that can be used to advance intra-agency and interagency communications and therefore operations? The research addressed a large number of topics concerning organizational and institu- tional approaches that could enhance highway operations and travel time reliability. The most fruitful investigation was identification of the Capability Maturity Model, used exten- sively in the information technology field for organizational self-assessment and continu- ous improvement of quality and reliability. The researchers recognized that a version of the Capability Maturity Model could be developed and applied to highway operations and in turn travel time reliability. Elements defining different levels of maturity include culture/ leadership, organization and staffing, resource allocation, and partnerships. As a part of the research, two companion publications were produced--this report and a guide--and refined through workshops involving operations managers, executives, and others.

OCR for page R1
C O N T E N T S 1 Executive Summary 1 Background on Research and Guidance 1 Purpose of the Project 2 Systems Operations and Management 4 Basic Hypothesis and Study Methodology 4 Application of the Capability Maturity Model 5 Research Findings: Processes and Their Institutional Support Implications 7 Key Findings Related to SO&M Institutional Architecture 8 Capability Maturity Levels of Institutional Architecture 8 Capability Improvement Strategies at Each Level 9 Using the Model as Guidance 12 Managing Improvements in Institutional Maturity 14 Institutional Innovation and Alternative Models 16 Bringing the Future Forward Faster 17 C H A P T E R 1 Introduction 17 Focus on Reliability and Nonrecurring Congestion 17 Target Audience and Utilization 17 Organization of the Report 18 CHAPTER 2 Background, Hypothesis, and Methodology 18 Focus on NRC 18 Effective Strategy Applications to Reduce NRC 19 The Potential of SO&M Regarding NRC 19 Systems Operations and Management 20 The Level of SO&M Deployment Related to NRC 20 Commitment to Improving SO&M 22 Unique Process and Institutional Demands of SO&M 22 Institutional Reality 23 The Importance of Institutional Architecture 23 Basic Hypothesis of the Report 24 Study Methodology 26 CHAPTER 3 Theory on Process-Related Organizations and Change Management 26 Previous Institutional Research Within the Transportation Arena 27 Private-Sector Contributions to Organizational Theory and Process Management 29 Applicability of Maturity Approach to Transportation Agencies 31 C H A P T E R 4 Survey Research Methodology 31 Interviews and Survey 31 Step 1: Identification of More Effective States--Reliance on Indirect Indicators 32 Step 2: State DOT Management Interviews and Survey 33 Step 3: Analyze Data, Survey, and Interviews

OCR for page R1
34 CHAPTER 5 Research Findings: Processes That Need Institutional Support 34 Strategy Application Features That Impact Performance 35 Common Parameters of Performances 35 Relationships Among Strategy Effectiveness, Needed Processes, and Supportive Institutional Features 35 Key Findings Related to Process 36 Program Scoping 37 Technical Processes 38 Technology and Systems Development 38 Performance Measurement 39 Process Maturity as a Bridge to Defining Improvements in Institutional Architecture 39 Levels of Process Maturity 42 CHAPTER 6 Research Findings: Institutional Architecture Characteristics That Support Effective Programs 42 Process Implications for Institutional Architecture 43 The Key Categories of Institutional Characteristics 49 Summary Conclusions Regarding Key Institutional Characteristics Supporting Effective Business Processes 50 Process Maturity as a Bridge to Identifying Levels of Maturity 53 CHAPTER 7 The Institutional Capability Maturity Model as the Structure for Guidance 53 The Institutional Capability Maturity Model 53 The Improvement Strategies 54 Capability Improvement Strategies at Each Level 54 Basic Guidance Steps 58 C H A P T E R 8 Managing Institutional Change 58 Change Management Modalities: Contribution of Theory 61 Building on Change-Driven Momentum 61 Change Management Tactics 63 C H A P T E R 9 Alternative Institutional Models 63 Evolution or Revolution 63 The Models 64 Combinations and Evolutions 64 Implications of Alternative Models Regarding Key Institutional Issues 66 The International Perspective 68 References 70 Glossary 71 Appendix A. U.S. Institutional Arrangements Compared with England and Australia 74 Appendix B. State DOT Process and Institutional Interviews 76 Appendix C. AASHTO Subcommittee on Systems Operations and Management (SSOM) Questionnaire 80 Appendix D. Examples of Regional Operations Collaboration 83 Appendix E. Example of Change Management Program for a State DOT Online version of this report: www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/165285.aspx.