Cover Image

Not for Sale

View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( 30

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 29
29 new values and norms, changing the functional organiza- Within this framework, four standard rules of maturity mod- tional design or the internal and external relationships, or els are applied: shifting/modifying the power and locus of decision making. Each incremental level of maturity within a given element establishes the basis for the entity's ability to progress to the Process Improvement and Maturity Concepts nexthigher level of effectiveness. The most relevant of the private-sector change management Levels cannot be skipped. approaches is the capability maturity model (CMM), devel- Each level of technical and business processes needs spe- oped in the IT industry. The CMM is based on the recogni- cific institutional support. tion that specific process features--such as performance The overall level of maturity for an organization is defined measurement and documentation--are essential for pro- by the lowest level of institutional maturity of any element. gram effectiveness and that they must be present at defined levels of criteria-based maturity to be acceptably effective Applicability of Maturity Approach (based on software quality and a low likelihood of error, for to Transportation Agencies example). In the CMM, organizations that want to optimize their systems must evolve on a self-evaluation basis--via per- In this project, the concept of capability maturity has been formance measurement--toward processes that are increas- extended to fit the transportation service context. Both process ingly consistent, repeatable, reliable, and efficient in support and institutional elements are addressed, defined, and struc- of systemwide effectiveness. tured to fit transportation agency practice and context--with The CMM concept was initially developed by Carnegie each element definition determined in the survey and research. Mellon University for the U.S. Department of Defense. Sub- Incremental levels of improvement are defined for all elements. sequently, the Project Management Institute (PMI) has Importantly, the research identified the apparent correlation adopted organizational maturity as a concept, known as between processes improvements associated with increased OPM3, for assessing and improving the performance of an program effectiveness and institutional configurations (also organization's project management capabilities. The OPM3 called levels). Figure 3.1 diagrams this basic concept of the model and the British Office of Government Commerce's model adaptation to include and relate both process and Project Management Maturity Model (PMMM) have been institutional characteristics. adapted to numerous different disciplines in both the public This concept also included a focus on the key elements of and the private sectors, including product development, the process dimension and of the institutional dimension. service delivery, and systems acquisition. These elements (shown as rows in Table 3.2) are presumed to The key features of the CMM approach include the be the key features that make up the dimension and which following: vary with increased process maturity and with changes in institutional architecture. Specific criteria define the levels, Goals: The conditions that must exist for key process areas/ derived from their relationship with program effectiveness as elements to be achieved in an effective and lasting way. determined in the state DOT survey and analysis. Maturity levels: Levels of achievement, defined by specific criteria, toward a desirable end-state in which processes are Advantages of the CMM Approach managed by continuous improvement, typically struc- tured from the ad hoc through increasing levels of defini- The CMM approach combines many features that make it tion and reliability to fully manageable. attractive for application in the public sector SO&M arena, Process elements: The related activities that, if performed including the following: well, will achieve the goals. Strategies/practices: The means by which higher maturity Building on the real-world experience of user entities levels are achieved for each process area. across a range of achievement; Identification of key features of process that must be In the absence of benchmarks, and given substantially dif- addressed to achieve definable performance-related targets; ferent points of departure, continuous improvement requires A self-evaluated point of departure, with clarity about the identifying improvements based on self-evaluation. This con- direction of change; cept has been used as the basis for standardized steps, com- Provision of clear incremental levels of maturity toward a mandments, or stages as problem-solving recipes. Based on vision of best practice; the research, general criteria have been identified for incre- Provision of a standard language and framework for iden- mental levels of process capability for each process element. tifying and prioritizing actions;

OCR for page 29
30 Integrated processes Managed processes Ad hoc Ideal processes architecture Supportive Level 3 architecture Level 2 Current architecture Level 1 Figure 3.1. Institutional architecture maturity relationship to increasing process capability. Potential for collaboration within and among agencies and working--and how to build on such strengths to reach an individuals, vertically and horizontally; improved level of capability. This aspect of the CMM approach Scalable applications that can be viewed and used at vari- also reflects the spirit of the appreciative inquiry approach in the ous levels of detail; and organizational development field and offers the advantage of A positive approach that establishes defined benchmarks shifting focus from evaluation of past problems and apportion- for future development, as opposed to a backward-looking mentofblametoexisting strengths, future potential, and oppor- (problem solving) approach that by its nature seeks to tunities for collaboration (Thatchenkery, n.d. [a]). Such an identify causes of past shortcomings. approachemphasizesidentifyingthechallenge (documentation, performancemeasurement),appreciationofthe positive (build- Another key feature of the CMM approach is that it is based ing from the current level of maturity) and seeing the improved on an appreciation of an entity's strengths--what appears to be target ahead by being able to trace a clear path to best practice. Table 3.2. Relationship Between Process Capability and Institutional Architecture Increasing Levels of Process Capability to Support Effective Programs Process Elements Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Element A Criteria Criteria Criteria Element B Criteria Criteria Criteria Element C Criteria Criteria Criteria Changes in Institutional Architecture Support of Process Levels Institutional Elements Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Element A Criteria Criteria Criteria Element B Criteria Criteria Criteria Element C Criteria Criteria Criteria