National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

SHRP 2 Report S2-L06-RR-1: Institutional Architectures to Improve Systems Operations and Management (2012)
Strategic Highway Research Program Reliability Focus Area (SHRP2REL)

Citation Manager

Tarnoff, Phil, Lockwood, Steve, O'Laughlin, John, Thatchenkery, Tojo, Transportation Research Board. "Step 3: Analyze Data, Survey, and Interviews." SHRP 2 Report S2-L06-RR-1: Institutional Architectures to Improve Systems Operations and Management. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2012.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
33
bottomleft bottomright
Page
33
Front Matter (R1-R10)
Purpose of the Project (1-1)
Systems Operations and Management (2-3)
Application of the Capability Maturity Model (4-4)
Research Findings: Processes and Their Institutional Support Implications (5-6)
Key Findings Related to SO&M Institutional Architecture (7-7)
Capability Improvement Strategies at Each Level (8-8)
Using the Model as Guidance (9-11)
Managing Improvements in Institutional Maturity (12-13)
Institutional Innovation and Alternative Models (14-15)
Bringing the Future Forward Faster (16-16)
Organization of the Report (17-17)
Effective Strategy Applications to Reduce NRC (18-18)
Systems Operations and Management (19-19)
Commitment to Improving SO&M (20-21)
Institutional Reality (22-22)
Basic Hypothesis of the Report (23-23)
Study Methodology (24-25)
Previous Institutional Research Within the Transportation Arena (26-26)
Private-Sector Contributions to Organizational Theory and Process Management (27-28)
Applicability of Maturity Approach to Transportation Agencies (29-30)
Step 1: Identification of More Effective States - Reliance On Indirect Indicators (31-31)
Step 2: State DOT Management Interviews and Survey (32-32)
Step 3: Analyze Data, Survey, and Interviews (33-33)
Strategy Application Features That Impact Performance (34-34)
Key Findings Related to Process (35-35)
Program Scoping (36-36)
Technical Processes (37-37)
Performance Measurement (38-38)
Levels of Process Maturity (39-41)
Process Implications for Institutional Architecture (42-42)
The Key Categories of Institutional Characteristics (43-48)
Summary Conclusions Regarding Key Institutional Characteristics Supporting Effective Business Processes (49-49)
Process Maturity as a Bridge to Identifying Levels of Maturity (50-52)
The Improvement Strategies (53-53)
Basic Guidance Steps (54-57)
Change Management Modalities: Contribution of Theory (58-60)
Change Management Tactics (61-62)
The Models (63-63)
Implications of Alternative Models Regarding Key Institutional Issues (64-65)
The International Perspective (66-67)
References (68-69)
Glossary (70-70)
Appendix A - U.S. Institutional Arrangements Compared with England and Australia (71-73)
Appendix B - State DOT Process and Institutional Interviews (74-75)
Appendix C - AASHTO Subcommittee on Systems Operations and Management (SSOM) Questionnaire (76-79)
Appendix D - Examples of Regional Operations Collaboration (80-82)
Appendix E - Example of Change Management Program for a State DOT (83-86)
Reliability Technical Coordinating Committee (87-88)

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 33
33 · Partnerships--degree of formality with PSAs, level of Step 3: Analyze Data, Survey, outsourcing and private-sector contract management and Interviews approach. The empirical data, survey, and interviews were conducted The interviews were designed to determine the presence or to identify key relationships between SO&M programs and absence of these features and their basic qualitative character- business processes, comparing mature states with transition- istics, based on the personal views of the interviewee. Because ing states to determine key institutional characteristics that interview responses were not for attribution by individual support effective programs. To relate institutional architecture or specific state, the candid responses provided previously to the apparent level of SO&M program impacts, the approach undocumented perspectives on strengths and weaknesses needed to identify the key business processes that appeared of the agency's programs and business processes and the to be essential to effective programs, as well as to distinguish institutional context to draw general conclusions about the varying levels of effectiveness. Therefore, in this step, the range transportation agencies. of responses in the survey was analyzed in two parts. The first In addition to the selected interviews, a brief written response part determined the range of practices in the business processes survey was administered to 22 state DOT representatives at that directly supported the SO&M program. This included the 2008 annual meeting of the AASHTO Subcommittee an identification of the institutional implications of the key on Systems Operations and Management. The same basic processes. This analysis was then used, in the second part, to questionnaire structure was used for both the interviews consider the institutional differences among the state DOTs and the survey, addressing both program/process and surveyed to more rigorously determine the key institutional institutional issues, but the survey only required yes/no or differences and their relative roles in supporting improved short-phrase answers. The survey instrument is included as business processes. Appendix C. These two analyses are discussed in the next chapter.