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.
13 BASIC GUIDANCE STEPS For use as guidance in improving the effectiveness of systems operations and manage- ment (SO&M), the Institutional Capability Maturity Model is presented in a series of steps and strategy matrices, one for each element (culture/leadership, organization and staffing, resource allocation, partnerships). The use of the model is a four-step process. Step 1 Identify the element of interest (e.g., see Table 2.1: Operations Maturity Framework). Note that all elements are necessary, but the agency may be at a higher level of matu- rity in certain elements. Priority focus should be on the element at the lowest level of maturity. Step 2 Self-evaluate the agencyâs current level of maturity to determine the point of departure (current level). Use the model criteria for each element to determine the agencyâs cur- rent level of maturity (e.g., see Table 2.1: Operations Maturity Framework). Step 3 Identify the target level and inspect the numbered strategies for each element to move up to the next level (e.g., see Table 2.2: Levels and Objectives for Improvement). Each element has several associated maturity improvement strategies. Determine the prior- ity strategy based on the current circumstances and the amount of change needed to get to the next level. 2 GUIDANCE TEMPLATES
14 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT Step 4 Review each general strategy table for guidance to move to the next level: Level 1 to Level 2, or Level 2 to Level 3. Following each general strategy table are separate num- bered detailed strategies in a standard format. The strategies include the following: ⢠Relationship to program and process; ⢠Identification of how the institutional change supports improved SO&M business processes and more effective strategy applications; ⢠Points of departure (levels of capability); ⢠Additional criteria or descriptions for the user to determine the current level; ⢠Description of the ultimate target level (Level 3); ⢠Capability improvement strategies; ⢠Strategies for moving from Level 1 to Level 2, or Level 2 to Level 3; and ⢠Responsibilities.
15 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT CULTURE/LEADERSHIP TEMPLATE This section discusses the culture/leadership element of institutional architecture (Table 2.1). Table 2.2 illustrates the levels and the objectives for the next steps to improvement. TABLE 2.1. CULTURE/LEADERSHIP: OPERATIONS MATURITY FRAMEWORK Institutional Architecture Elements Level 1 Ad Hoc Level 2 Rationalized Level 3 Mainstreamed Culture/ leadership Mixed, hero driven Championed/ internalized across disciplines Commitment to customer mobility Organization and staffing Fragmented, understaffed Aligned, trained Integrated Resource allocation Project level Criteria-based program Sustainable budget line item Partnerships Informal, unaligned Formal, aligned Consolidated
16 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT TABLE 2.2. CULTURE/LEADERSHIP: LEVELS AND OBJECTIVES FOR IMPROVEMENT Strategies to Advance Level Level 1 Ad Hoc Level 2 Rationalized Level 3 Mainstreamed 1. Undertake educational program Value of SO&M not yet widely appreciated. Role of SO&M in providing service improvements widely understood. SO&M fully appreciated. From L1 to L2: Role of SO&M in providing service improvements widely understood. Drill down regarding the relevance of operational performance to the DOT customer service mission. From L2 to L3: SO&M fully appreciated. Undertake persuasive âroad showâ to communicate new DOT focus to customersâpolicy makers and the public. 2. Exert senior leadership Lack of management priority. Visible senior support agencywide. Stable SO&M leadership. From L1 to L2: Visible senior support agencywide. Exert senior management leadership visibly throughout organization and across disciplines regarding SO&M leverage and cost-effectiveness. From L2 to L3: Stable SO&M leadership. Identify and accept risks associated with expanding and intensifying new mission. 3. Establish formal core program SO&M is a set of ad hoc activities. SO&M is a formal mission and program with supporting policy. New state DOT business model. From L1 to L2: SO&M is a formal mission and program with supporting policy. Update mission in light of SO&M business case for mobility in light of minimum new capacity. From L2 to L3: New state DOT business model. Introduce SO&M as formal core DOT program, at the same level as project development and maintenance. 4. Rationalize transportation agency authority SO&M ambitions limited by legacy assumptions. Effective span-of-control needs identified. Effective span of control negotiated. From L1 to L2: Effective span-of-control needs identified. Identify and describe opportunities to rationalize current presumed legal or regulatory constraints regarding DOTâs activities. From L2 to L3: Effective span of control negotiated. Legitimize SO&M and partner role rationalization via policy and legislative initiatives. 5. Internalize continuous improvement as agency mode or ethic Limited progress orientation. Adoption of continuous progress concept. Continuous improvement approach internalized. From L1 to L2: Adoption of continuous progress concept. Develop concepts of continuous improvement with examples toward achieving performance-driven best practice. From L2 to L3: Continuous improvement approach internalized. Support culture of continuous improvement with clear targets and incentives for individuals and units.
17 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT Culture/Leadership Strategy 1: Undertake Educational Program Relationship to Program and Process Often, stakeholders and transportation professionals have little knowledge of the potential service impact of SO&M. Significant changes in program or process that require resources, special authority, or custom-tailored approaches cannot be imple- mented without gaining support both internally or externally. Internally, leadership and other staff may have limited exposure to the strategies and are therefore unaware of their customer service potential (compared with other ongoing agency investments) or are not prepared to modify existing priorities, programs, and actions. Externally, policy makers may also have limited exposure. Therefore, it is important to undertake an educational program to create a broad understanding of SO&M and its potential impact on congestion, as well as its cost-effectiveness. Points of Departure (Levels of Capability) and Related Improvement Strategy Level 1: Value of SO&M Not Yet Widely Appreciated In a Level 1 organization, the impacts and benefits of SO&M strategies are not well understood or quantified by agency staff or leadership. Therefore, there is limited sup- port for devoting staffing and funding resources to SO&M, especially in competition with other presumed state DOT priorities. Because the DOT or operating agency itself is not aware of the impacts, there is not likely to have been an effort to expose policy decision makers to them. The following strategies can help raise a Level 1 organization to Level 2: ⢠Drill down via discussions and formal meetings within the agency regarding pro- grammatic response to the importance of operational performance to the DOT mis- sion and the role of SO&M and its potential to improve performance and customer responsiveness. Build on the broad momentum regarding performance reporting and accountability. ⢠Prepare and circulate existing technical and peer materials explaining roles and benefits. ⢠Prepare illustrative analyses from examples within the state for external circula- tion to policy and stakeholder groups. Level 2: Role of SO&M in Providing Service Improvements Widely Understood A Level 2 organization has a technical appreciation of potential performance lever- age on recurring and nonrecurring congestion relative to other programs within the agency. The role of SO&M is appreciated by policy makers and key stakeholders (commission, governorâs office, and legislative committees), including both expecta- tions and willingness to support it at the level where there is active cooperation in fostering improved SO&M.
18 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT The following strategies can help raise a Level 2 organization to Level 3: ⢠Undertake a persuasive road show to communicate the importance of an SO&M focus to customers (both public and specific stakeholder groups)âto demonstrate their stakes in improved SO&Mâby participating in meetings and conferences. ⢠Develop policy-maker briefings using understandable examples of the limitations of capacity and the opportunities with SO&M. ⢠Develop regular aggressive public outreach programs (media) focused on benefits, accomplishments, and issues. Level 3: SO&M Fully Appreciated In a Level 3 organization, SO&M is fully appreciated in terms of value and potential within the agency and understood at policy, professional, and public levels. DOT focus on SO&M becomes part of normal expectations in a Level 3 organization.
19 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT Culture/Leadership Strategy 2: Exert Senior Leadership Relationship to Program and Process Middle management champions have limited leverage and span of control over insti- tutional change. Furthermore, their position and career longevity are often limited. Therefore, significant changes in program or process (see Strategy 3) are not possible without continuous and aggressive senior management support and direction. Points of Departure (Levels of Capability) and Related Improvement Strategy Level 1: Lack of Management Priority In a Level 1 organization, existing senior and middle management staffs are often preoccupied with competing priorities (or lack technical knowledge regarding SO&M [see Strategy 1]). At the same time, CEOs often come from an outside sector with little understanding of the program. There is no visible leadership at the agency level to mainstream SO&M. The following strategies can help raise a Level 1 organization to Level 2: ⢠Develop and articulate support for operations and take visible steps to clarify SO&M in statements of mission, vision, and values throughout the organization via discussion and task forces at both the field and central-office levels. ⢠Indicate the relevance and role of SO&M with regard to capacity, safety, and maintenance activities across internal divisions via targeted meetings and briefings. ⢠Select middle managers with SO&M background for program development. Level 2: Visible Senior Support Agencywide In a Level 2 organization, top management is visible in supporting and articulating SO&M leverage, cost-effectiveness, and risks across disciplines in the DOT. Top man- agement also supports strategic SO&M program development. The following strategies can raise a Level 2 organization to Level 3: ⢠Take action at the top management level to include SO&M staff leadership in all program discussions. ⢠Make a commitment to SO&M at the agency level in policy documents with ex- plicit (internal and external) acknowledgment of risks of expanding and intensifying a new mission (despite the lack of total control over outcomes because of partner differ- ences and variations in demand). ⢠Establish a succession plan for SO&M leadership at the central-office and regional levels. Level 3: Stable SO&M Leadership In a Level 3 organization, SO&M is understood and supported by stable career leader- ship as a key mission.
20 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT Responsibility The CEO and immediate headquarters executive staff (division heads), as well as dis- trict leadership, can undertake this strategy within their span of influence over staff.
21 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT Culture/Leadership Strategy 3: Establish Formal Core Program Relationship to Program and Process If SO&M is not a program, improvements in capabilities are uncertain, management responsibilities are unclear, the organization framework is subsidiary to other pro- grams, and key processes are outside the conventional framework. Resource competi- tion is informal, and internal and external performances are not judged. The role of the DOT in relation to other partners in service delivery is unclear. Points of Departure (Levels of Capability) and Related Improvement Strategy Level 1: Vague Mission and SO&M Subsidiary to Other Programs In a Level 1 organization, SO&M is a set of activities conducted by certain districts, based on district leadership priorities and inclination. The mission is vague regarding SO&M, and SO&M activities are parts of other programs. There is no DOT-wide strategy, budget, or accountability. The following strategies can help raise a Level 1 organization to Level 2: ⢠Update the mission in light of the SO&M business case for mobility; current ca- pacity expansion limitations; and increased congestion, incidents, and emergencies. ⢠Consider development of an SO&M policy board to legitimize and guide the pro- gram and to budget with policy, with the board being composed of agency division heads and external industry and other stakeholder members. ⢠Articulate a formal SO&M policy and develop a strategic plan for SO&M, includ- ing all standard features of a formal program (e.g., management, budget, objectives, authorities). Level 2: SO&M as a Formal Mission and Program with Supporting Policy In a Level 2 organization, SO&M activities are established as a formal program with all program attributes of capital and maintenance tailored to the special needs of operations. The following strategies can raise a Level 2 organization to Level 3: ⢠Articulate a business model regarding the roles and relationships of the DOT, its partners, users, and other stakeholders and the value proposition regarding the state DOT role in discussions at the agency level and with external partners and policy makers. ⢠Introduce SO&M as a formal core DOT program with remaining key features of a core program: mission and policy, strategic plan and program, eligible funding, budget, and transparent criteria. ⢠Expand the program to all regionsâurban and rural.
22 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT Level 3: New Transportation Agency Business Model In a Level 3 organization, the new state DOT business model accepts maintaining the operational level of service as a program objective and is fully mobilized, program- matically, for continuous improvement. Responsibility CEO action is required to lead these changes, most of which are top down.
23 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT Culture/Leadership Strategy 4: Rationalize Transportation Agency Authority Relationship to Program and Process Effective SO&M requires highly coordinated real-time actions among several partners (public safety, other state agencies, local governments, and private service providers) if on-the-road activities are to be conducted in a manner that minimizes disruption and maximizes customer service. In many cases, the DOTâs highway service management role is unclear or unnecessarily confined to legacy roles that limit leverage on opera- tions because of presumed legal constraints or the lack of necessary authorities (such as quick incident access and clearance). Points of Departure (Levels of Capability) and Related Improvement Strategy Level 1: SO&M Ambitions Limited by Legacy Assumptions In a Level 1 organization, the DOT role, especially in the field, is based on accepting existing or presumed legal constraints or traditions regarding roles of partners in areas relating to incident response and traffic management, such that the full benefits of SO&M strategies cannot be realized. Issues are left to resolution on a personal basis in the field. The following strategies can help raise a Level 1 organization to Level 2: ⢠Identify and describe opportunities to generate support for changes in state law and regulations regarding the roles of the state DOT in traffic and incident manage- ment in relation to other state agencies and private-sector players to improve effective traffic management. ⢠Review and publicize national best practice regarding interagency roles and their advantages. ⢠Seek partner consensusâat the agency and association top-management levelâ for procedural improvements or legislative reform initiative, if necessary. Level 2: Effective Span-of-Control Needs Identified In a Level 2 organization, the DOT works with partners to identify common interests and means of rationalizing roles that meet a range of interests. The following strategies can raise a Level 2 organization to Level 3: ⢠Legitimize SO&M and partner role rationalization via policy development initia- tives with policy makers. ⢠Seek legislation or regulatory clarificationâincluding reallocation of authority that may improve operations. ⢠Develop new formal agreements and contracts as appropriate with external agency partners.
24 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT Level 3: Effective Span of Control Negotiated In a Level 3 organization, the roles of public- and private-sector players are rational- ized through legislation, regulation, and new contractual agreements. Responsibility Top management works with policy makers in cooperation with other service pro- viders, public (PSAs) and private (e.g., contracted Transportation Management Center [TMC] operators, safety service patrol providers, asset managers, towing and recovery entities).
25 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT Culture/Leadership Strategy 5: Internalize Continuous Improvement as Agency Mode or Ethic Relationship to Program and Process With an objective of building toward best practices, cost-effective process and program improvements are necessarily incremental. Continuing improvement to and beyond the state of best practice requires development and management of a continuous im- provement process built around performance measurement, analysis, and procedural improvement. Points of Departure (Levels of Capability) and Related Improvement Strategy Level 1: Limited Progress Orientation In a Level 1 organization, activities are started (set and forget) without regard to the potential for improving effectiveness through learning and are likely to plateau at modest levels, given the lack of performance feedback and improvement. Lack of ideal performance measurement often is used as an excuse for business-as-usual approaches. The following strategies can help raise a Level 1 organization to Level 2: ⢠Identify long-range ideal practice concepts as targets for improvement. ⢠Identify basic performance measures, both activity based (to start) and outcome based (ultimately). ⢠Establish a standardized performance-based continuous improvement process, in- cluding documentation, performance monitoring and measurement, postevent brief- ing, and process adjustments. Level 2: Adoption of Continuous Progress Concept In a Level 2 organization, the DOT is broadly committed to improving SO&M in terms of both technologies and procedures on a continuous incremental basis. The following strategies can raise a Level 2 organization to Level 3: ⢠Support a culture of continuous improvement with clear policy and incentives for an individualâs and unitâs performance or innovation. ⢠Set incremental performance improvement targets, measure effectiveness, and im- prove approaches to all services, both in office and in field. ⢠Use performance to determine program modifications and resource allocation. Level 3: Continuous Improvement Approach Internalized In a Level 3 organization, the presumption is that continuous improvement is desirable and sustainable. Responsibility This strategy must be initiated in a top-down manner and be a shared approach in- volving all staff.
26 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING TEMPLATE This section discusses the organization and staffing element of institutional architec- ture (Table 2.3). Table 2.4 illustrates the levels and the objectives for the next steps to improvement. TABLE 2.3. ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING: OPERATIONS MATURITY FRAMEWORK Institutional Architecture Elements Level 1 Ad Hoc Level 2 Rationalized Level 3 Mainstreamed Culture/leadership Mixed, hero driven Championed/ internalized across disciplines Commitment to customer mobility Organization and staffing Fragmented, understaffed Aligned, trained Integrated Resource allocation Project level Criteria-based program Sustainable budget line item Partnerships Informal, unaligned Formal, aligned Consolidated
27 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT TABLE 2.4. ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING: LEVELS AND OBJECTIVES FOR IMPROVEMENT Strategies to Advance Level Level 1 Ad Hoc Level 2 Rationalized Level 3 Mainstreamed 1. Establish top-level SO&M executive structure Leadership subordinate and top-level accountability absent. SO&M at top level of program management. Integrated, with organizational equivalency. From L1 to L2: SO&M with top management position. Establish first-tier executive in central office and districts with program responsibility, reporting directly to CEO. From L2 to L3: SO&M at organizational equivalency of other core programs. Establish appropriate and parallel relationships and positions regarding reporting relationships, chain of command, unit levels, authorities, and responsibility. 2. Establish appropriate organizational structure Functions fragmented and unclear. Functions consolidated and aligned. Integrated. From L1 to L2: SO&M organizational issues identified. Develop organizational concept of operations, rationalizing roles and relationships to key functions. From L2 to L3: Efficient and appropriate organizational structure established. Implement appropriate structure of units (custom tailored). 3. Determine core competencies and training needs Needed core capabilities unknown. Aligned, trained. Key positions filled. From L1 to L2: SO&M core capacities identified. Analyze program and organizational needs to develop appropriate knowledge, skill, and ability needs and position descriptions. From L2 to L3: SO&M core capacities staffed. Develop recruitment, retention, training, and succession program to fill needed positions. 4. Establish accountability system Accountability vague and conflicting. Responsibilities clarified within SO&M. SO&M responsibilities clarified within all DOT units. From L1 to L2: Clarified responsibilities. Use organizational structure and concept of operations to identify nature of accountability in chain of command for units and individuals. From L2 to L3: Organizational units and staff objectives clear. Develop an approach to accountability- related process and measures between top management and program managers in central office and districts.
28 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT Organization and Staffing Strategy 1: Establish Top-Level SO&M Executive Structure Relationship to Program and Process Executive leadership at the central office and in the field needs to be equivalent to other programsâ (capacity, maintenance) leadership for appropriate representation in policy, resource, staffing, and related decisions. Points of Departure (Levels of Capability) and Related Improvement Strategy Level 1: Leadership Subordinate and Top-Level Accountability Absent In a Level 1 organization, all core programs, by definition, require equivalent status and level of influence in statewide and district program development, including par- ticipation in policy and program development and resource allocation. This implies that SO&M management should be at the first tier of both headquarters and district management. The following strategies can help raise a Level 1 organization to Level 2: ⢠Establish first-tier executive responsibility in the central office for the SO&M pro- gram, reporting directly to the CEO (this executive may also have responsibility for other programs). ⢠Establish an assistant to district executives with appropriate reporting to both district executives and statewide program leadership (this executive may also have responsibility for other programs). Level 2: SO&M at Top Level of Program Management In a Level 2 organization, the status of the operations organization is equivalent in reporting relationships and chain of command, organizational unit levels, authorities, and responsibility at both the central office and districts. The following strategy can raise a Level 2 organization to Level 3: ⢠Establish appropriate reporting and chain-of-command relationships and full-time position status (parallel to construction and maintenance), organizational unit levels, authorities, and responsibility in both the central office and districts. Level 3: Integrated, with Organizational Equivalency In a Level 3 organization, a top-level management position with SO&M orientation is established in the central office and districts. Responsibility Reorganization at the top level may be a prerogative of the CEO within the central office, although state administration or legislative committee support or both may be necessary.
29 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT Organization and Staffing Strategy 2: Establish Appropriate Organizational Structure Relationship to Program and Process Organizational structure supports efficient and effective program delivery in the field through clear and efficient disposition of responsibilities and capabilities, with appro- priate authority at district and central-office levels and between them. Points of Departure (Levels of Capability) and Related Improvement Strategy Level 1: Functions Fragmented and Unclear In a Level 1 organization, SO&M units are fragmented and responsibilities are unclear at the central-office, division, or branch level and at the district level, with unclear divi- sion of authority, responsibility, and support. Coordination and provision of service to districts is difficult. The following strategies can help raise a Level 1 organization to Level 2: ⢠Develop an organizational concept of operations for key processes, roles, key functions, and geography within and between levels (central office, districts, TMCs) regarding responsibilities, scope, chain of command, span of control, and vertical and horizontal relationships. (Note: There is no standard modelâorganizational struc- tures can vary in how they mediate between function and turf.) ⢠Clarify boundaries between central-office and district responsibilities and identify central-office support functions needed from a district point of view. Level 2: Functions Consolidated and Aligned In a Level 2 organization, the functions and related responsibilities and authorities have been clarified and established (e.g., ITS, systems operations, traffic engineering, TMC management, contracting, asset management). The following strategies can raise a Level 2 organization to Level 3: ⢠To achieve management control and accountability, consolidate central-office di- visions or units and reporting relationships that are directly responsible for real-time performance. ⢠Document roles with related procedures within the central office and districts and between them. Level 3: Integrated In a Level 3 organization, an efficient and appropriate organizational structure has been established. Responsibility CEO and senior SO&M management are in consultation.
30 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT Organization and Staffing Strategy 3: Determine Core Competencies and Training Needs Relationship to Program and Process SO&M requires technical specialties regarding planning, engineering, TMC, field op- erations, and contract management. The management of SO&M is also a specialty requiring a broad acquaintance with both the state of the practice and with state DOT administration. Points of Departure (Levels of Capability) and Related Improvement Strategy Level 1: Needed Core Capabilities Unknown In a Level 1 organization, there is no identification of needed core capabilities; staffing plan or job specifications and key capacities may be missing or their need simply not recognized. The following strategies can help raise a Level 1 organization to Level 2: ⢠Determine essential core technical, SO&M (TMC or field), and management capabilities needed in the central office and districts. ⢠Consider options of internal staffing versus outsourcing for key functions on the basis of a clear business model regarding interagency/partner roles. ⢠Assess training resource potential (internal and external) and establish formal ac- tivity related to position requirements. Level 2: Aligned, Trained In a Level 2 organization, SO&M has been professionalized via identification of needed core capabilities, a program to develop and retain the needed capabilities, and a clear succession path. The following strategies can raise a Level 2 organization to Level 3: ⢠Develop a clear plan regarding recruitment and training versus outsourcing. ⢠Establish a succession path, certification, and performance incentives for technical and management staff that are parallel and equivalent to those of other core program areas. ⢠Develop a human resources dimension for SO&M, including career options and conditions of employment that will attract and retain technical specialties. Level 3: Key Positions Filled In a Level 3 organization, SO&M has been professionalized. Responsibility This strategy requires task forces of senior staff from headquarters and district man- agement with possible support from industry associations and training entities.
31 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT Organization and Staffing Strategy 4: Establish Accountability System Relationship to Program and Process As a service focused on system performanceâmuch of it in real timeâthe SO&M program must justify its claim on resources through performance accountability, at the scale of the entire DOT and its component units. Points of Departure (Levels of Capability) and Related Improvement Strategy Level 1: Accountability Vague and Conflicting In a Level 1 organization, there is little if any accountability for the service impacts of SO&M activities within TMCs and districts or between districts and central-office management. The following strategies can help raise a Level 1 organization to Level 2: ⢠Use organizational structure and concept of operations to identify the nature of performance accountability in the chain of command for units and individuals. ⢠Scan (survey) internal customers to determine the clarity of responsibility among stakeholders. ⢠Identify reasonable performance measures (beyond project development measures) for staff and units. Level 2: Responsibilities Clarified Within SO&M A Level 2 organization has clarified performance accountability in the chain of com- mand based on program, unit, and individual responsibilities related to SO&M effec- tiveness. Both units and the DOT, overall, are prepared to report performance publicly. The following strategies can raise a Level 2 organization to Level 3: ⢠Develop reporting systems within districts and with top management and program managers in the central office and districts. ⢠Use performance measures and incentives to improve measurable performance of both key unit activities and strategic applications. ⢠Report performance to the public in a manner that displays status over time and report current DOT improvement activities in response. Level 3: SO&M Responsibilities Clarified Within All DOT Units A Level 3 organization accepts accountability for its SO&M activities (recognizing that the DOT does not control all the variables that affect performance). Responsibility Responsibility falls to senior management and unit leaders in cooperation.
32 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT RESOURCE ALLOCATION TEMPLATE This section discusses the resource allocation element of institutional architecture (Table 2.5). Table 2.6 illustrates the levels and the objectives for the next steps to improvement. TABLE 2.5. RESOURCE ALLOCATION: OPERATIONS MATURITY FRAMEWORK Institutional Architecture Elements Level 1 Ad Hoc Level 2 Rationalized Level 3 Mainstreamed Culture/leadership Mixed, hero driven Championed/ internalized across disciplines Commitment to customer mobility Organization and staffing Fragmented, understaffed Aligned, trained Integrated Resource allocation Project level Criteria-based program Sustainable budget line item Partnerships Informal, unaligned Formal, aligned Consolidated
33 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT TABLE 2.6. RESOURCE ALLOCATION: LEVELS AND OBJECTIVES FOR IMPROVEMENT Strategies to Advance Level Level 1 Ad Hoc Level 2 Rationalized Level 3 Mainstreamed 1. Develop program- level budget estimate Ad hoc project funding. Criteria-based program- level needs estimated. Sustainable budget line item. From L1 to L2: Program-level needs estimates. Conduct analysis of staged needs-based implementation costs, based on priority problem locations, network or corridor applications, infrastructure, and staff costs. From L2 to L3: Staged, needs-based program cost estimates. Develop program plan and related resource requirements to upgrade program by stages, including systems, staffing, and maintenance. 2. Introduce SO&M as a top-level agency budget line item Outside of standard budgeting process. Consolidated program budget developed. Sustainable budget line item. From L1 to L2: Sustainable SO&M budget development. Incorporate SO&M budget as part of annual and multiyear budgeting process. From L2 to L3: SO&M as first-tier budget item. Treat SO&M budget on a parallel basis with other core programs. 3. Develop acceptance of sustainable resourcing from state funds SO&M lacks clear position in state funding. SO&M costs as eligible use of state funding categories. State budget for operations. From L1 to L2: SO&M costs as eligible use of state funding categories. Consider SO&M to be an eligible use of state funds (with or without separate dedicated category). From L2 to L3: Sustainable resource provision. Incorporate into state funding. 4. Develop methodology for trade-offs SO&M cost-effectiveness ignored across programs. Criteria-based program. Rational performance- based investment. From L1 to L2: Rational performance-based investment trade-offs. Make costâbenefit material available to support investment needs via transparent process. From L2 to L3: Efficient resource allocation across programs. Consider SO&M in rational process of performance-based resource allocation.
34 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT Resource Allocation Strategy 1: Develop Program-Level Budget Estimate Relationship to Program and Process The development of a continuing and sustainable program involving multiyear capital and operating costs requires a rational and transparent budget process equivalent to those used in other core programs. Points of Departure (Levels of Capability) and Related Improvement Strategy Level 1: Ad Hoc Project Funding In a Level 1 organization, SO&M strategy applications are often at the project level and funded on an ad hoc, unpredictable basis, or are buried in other projects (capital or maintenance) and subject to other priorities. There is often no knowledge of how much (or how little) is being spent on SO&M. The following strategies can help raise a Level 1 organization to Level 2: ⢠As a start, identify a priority, immediate action plan budget with the most visible short-run payoffs, prioritized in response to varying overall agency resources. ⢠Develop a formal planning process for SO&M, working within the DOT plan- ning and budgeting framework. Analyze costs associated with a long-term strategic program, responding to customer needs at the state-of-practice level, to establish a needs-related baseline for a continuing program. ⢠Determine regional and strategy-specific investment implications. Level 2: Criteria-Based Program-Level Needs Estimated In a Level 2 organization, there are cost estimates for a staged statewide program, in- cluding capital, operating, and life-cycle maintenance costs with clear priorities. The following strategies can raise a Level 2 organization to Level 3: ⢠Develop a staging plan and budget based on priority problem locations and net- work or corridor applications, including infrastructure and staff costs. ⢠Develop a program plan and related resource requirements to upgrade the pro- gram by stages, including systems, staffing, and maintenance. Level 3: Sustainable Budget Line Item At Level 3, the agency has a needs-related and prioritized, staged program. Responsibility Strategy 1 requires a combination of headquarters planning and SO&M program staff, working with districts and MPOs.
35 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT Resource Allocation Strategy 2: Introduce SO&M as a Top-Level Agency Budget Line Item Relationship to Program and Process SO&M cannot be established as a mainstreamed, long-term, sustainable, continuously improving activityâa programâunless it is part of the formal budgeting process for capital, operations, and staff resources. Points of Departure (Levels of Capability) and Related Improvement Strategy Level 1: Outside of Standard Budgeting Process In a Level 1 organization, funding levels for SO&M are unpredictableâand typically not known in the aggregateâbecause funding is from multiple sources at the project levels. There is often no knowledge of the level of funding for comparison with poten- tial benefitsâor in comparison with other programs. The following strategies can help raise a Level 1 organization to Level 2: ⢠Develop a budgeting process for SO&M resources that is consistent with general agency practice and involves key players. ⢠Incorporate the SO&M budget in the annual and multiyear budgeting process. Level 2: Consolidated Program Budget Developed In a Level 2 organization, SO&M-related costs are aggregated for full accountingâ capital, operating, and staffing. The following strategies can raise a Level 2 organization to Level 3: ⢠Show the relative level of investment in SO&M in the published budget. ⢠In the budget cycle, report the cost-effectiveness of past and current investments. Level 3: Sustainable Budget Line Item At Level 3, SO&M becomes a first-tier budget item. Responsibility The CEO and senior staff are responsible for this strategy.
36 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT Resource Allocation Strategy 3: Develop Acceptance of Sustainable Resourcing from State Funds Relationship to Program and Process There are often categorical constraints on the use of state funds (capital and mainte- nance) that restrict use for SO&M directly. The lack of a viable source of funding leads to ad hoc and nontransparent approaches and limits the ability to plan. Furthermore, it is an indication that there is no public policy about, or accountability for, SO&M expenditures. ⢠Predictable resource flow is essential to rational program planning. ⢠Transitioning from ad hoc funding (from capital and maintenance programs) re- quires development of dedicated funding. Points of Departure (Levels of Capability) and Related Improvement Strategy Level 1: SO&M Lacks Clear Position in State Funding In a Level 1 organization, resources are suballocated from other program categories. The following strategies can help raise a Level 1 organization to Level 2: ⢠Develop a clear DOT position on SO&M (mission, vision, strategy, long- and short-range needs estimates). (Note: It may be necessary to develop an outside stake- holder support entity.) ⢠Explain the value of sustainable resources to policy makers and seek adjustment in state practice and law, as appropriate, regarding the eligible use of funds or the cre- ation of a separate budget category. Level 2: SO&M Costs as Eligible Use of State Funding Categories In a Level 2 organization, SO&M is included in state transportation budgeting proce- dures as a stand-alone category. The following strategy can raise a Level 2 organization to Level 3: ⢠Develop and submit SO&M budget needs to the legislative committee as part of the routine planning and budgeting process. Level 3: State Budget for Operations At Level 3, SO&M becomes a separate budget category for state funding. Responsibility Responsibility in this strategy is with the highest state policy-making entity (e.g., com- mission, secretary), with recommendations and staffing from DOT top management.
37 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT Resource Allocation Strategy 4: Develop Methodology for Trade-offs Relationship to Program and Process In the competition for scarce resources, certain missions related to congestion and safety are most cost-effectively achieved by SO&Mâcompared with other capital invest ments. However, this fact is not made explicit in the resource allocation processâ internally or externally. Points of Departure (Levels of Capability) and Related Improvement Strategy Level 1: SO&M Cost-Effectiveness Ignored Across Programs In a Level 1 organization, there is no rational analysis that relates performance to type of investment. SO&M is not consistently considered in the conventional highway project development process for both budget and investment trade-offs. The following strategies can help raise a Level 1 organization to Level 2: ⢠Develop the policy case for the need for more explicit allocation of scarce DOT resources for each major DOT objective (performance-based allocation). ⢠Develop criteria to evaluate the payoffs from varying investment types (capital, maintenance, operations, etc.) and levels across an array of appropriate objectives, and accounting for the time stream of benefits. ⢠Develop cost-effectiveness material for key agency performance objectives and demonstrate relative payoffs of different investment mixes. Level 2: Criteria-Based Program In a Level 2 organization, performance-related cost-effectiveness is a major factor in resource allocation. The following strategy can raise a Level 2 organization to Level 3: ⢠Use performance-related criteria in a rational process of performance-based resource allocation. Level 3: Rational Performance-Based Investment At Level 3, the trade-offs between SO&M and capital expenditure are considered as part of the planning process. Responsibility The CEO is responsible for this strategy, supported by planning and program staff.
38 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT PARTNERSHIPS TEMPLATE This section discusses the partnership element of institutional architecture (Table 2.7). Table 2.8 illustrates the levels and the objectives for the next steps to improvement. TABLE 2.7. PARTNERSHIPS: OPERATIONS MATURITY FRAMEWORK Institutional Architecture Elements Level 1 Ad Hoc Level 2 Rationalized Level 3 Mainstreamed Culture/leadership Mixed, hero driven Championed/ internalized across disciplines Commitment to customer mobility Organization and staffing Fragmented, understaffed Aligned, trained Integrated Resource allocation Project level Criteria-based program Sustainable budget line item Partnerships Informal, unaligned Formal, aligned Consolidated
39 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT TABLE 2.8. PARTNERSHIPS: LEVELS AND OBJECTIVES FOR IMPROVEMENT Strategies to Advance Level Level 1 Ad Hoc Level 2 Rationalized Level 3 Mainstreamed 1. Agreement on operational roles and procedures with PSAs Informal unaligned relationships. Aligned objectives and roles. Rationalized roles. From L1 to L2: Agreements on DOT/PSA roles and responsibilities. Rationalized roles and responsibilities in light of agency priorities, resources, and effectiveness. From L2 to L3: Rationalized state DOT/PSA roles and responsibilities. Formal interagency-level agreement to develop cooperative approach respecting the objectives of all parties. 2. Identify opportunities for joint operations activities with local government and MPOs Limited interactions with local government. Cooperative planning, programming, and operations. Regional cooperative mechanisms in place. From L1 to L2: Cooperative planning, programming, and operations. Cooperative interagency plan for operations (short and long range). From L2 to L3: Regional cooperative mechanisms in place. Integrated strategies with role adjustments for efficiency. 3. Develop procedures that accommodate partnersâ goals and maximize mobility (minimum disruption) Inconsistent application of nominal procedures. Traffic impact-oriented procedures. Aggressive procedures to maximize mobility- based performance measurement activity or outcome measurement. From L1 to L2: Traffic impact-oriented procedures. Development of (new) concepts of operations and related procedures that minimize delay and disruption, irrespective of conventional approaches. From L2 to L3: Aggressive procedures to maximize mobility. Consistent applications of traffic- optimized approaches. 4. Rationalize staff versus outsourcing activities, responsibilities, and oversight Inconsistent approach to outsourcing. Basic business model for service delivery. Clarified, rationalized business model for publicâprivate partnerships. From L1 to L2: Basic business model for service delivery. Policy on in-house staff roles in service delivery versus outsourcing or devolved roles. From L2 to L3: Clarified, rationalized business model for publicâprivate partnerships. Consistent approach to outsourcing regarding contracting procedures, performance management, time frame of contracts.
40 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT Partnerships Strategy 1: Agreement on Operational Roles and Procedures with Public Safety Agencies Relationship to Program and Process Effective delivery of key SO&M strategy applications requires close cooperation be- tween DOTs and public safety agencies (PSAs). Cooperation involves shared priorities, clear roles, and consensus practices that can substantially resolve issues with changes in conventional procedures that may support DOT objectives without compromising those of the partners. Points of Departure (Levels of Capability) and Related Improvement Strategy Level 1: Informal Unaligned Relationships In a Level 1 organization, there is a modest level of SO&M cooperation and coordina- tion between the state DOT and PSAs. Roles and procedures are informal, personal, and subject to uncertainty with turnover. The following strategies can help raise a Level 1 organization to Level 2: ⢠Conduct regional-level joint workshops to develop consensus on goals, best prac- tices, and general procedures. ⢠Conduct co-training in field procedures and protocols. ⢠Establish regular debriefings related to major events. Level 2: Aligned Objectives and Roles In a Level 2 organization, there are formal, agency-level agreements regarding roles and procedures. The following strategies can raise a Level 2 organization to Level 3: ⢠Develop a formal interagency-level agreement (MOU) for the cooperative ap- proach respecting the objectives of all parties and build it into agency policies and plans (especially incident management, work zone traffic control). ⢠Establish policy evolving toward operations centers and possibly co-location of partners. ⢠Cooperate with PSAs in support of necessary changes in state law to support im- proved effectiveness of roles and procedures related to congestion and safety. ⢠Develop a joint formal commitment to procedural improvement based on perfor- mance (such as application timeline targets). Level 3: Rationalized Roles At Level 3, roles of agencies are organized for maximum strategy effectiveness. Responsibility Some issues can be resolved at the regional level. Major changes in procedures (e.g., Incident Command System or towing) require top management peer-to-peer dialogue supported by examples from other state contexts.
41 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT Partnerships Strategy 2: Identify Opportunities for Joint Operations Activities with Local Government and MPOs Relationship to Program and Process At the state-of-the-art level, most SO&M strategies involve both state and local gov- ernment. An essential component of developing a program in a multijurisdictional environment is a strong and institutionalized working relationship among state, local, and regional entities (MPOs) that supports effective regional SO&M planning, pro- gramming, and implementation. Points of Departure (Levels of Capability) and Related Improvement Strategy Level 1: Limited Interactions with Local Government In a Level 1 organization, there is a modest level of SO&M cooperation and coordina- tion between state and local governments (uneven, informal) in terms of developing regional operations solutions and in terms of the capacity (fiscal, technical) of local jurisdictions to play a significant role. The following strategies can help raise a Level 1 organization to Level 2: ⢠Develop an interagency task force on SO&M at appropriate geographic levels (region, corridor). ⢠Prepare a cooperative interagency plan for phased improvement of operations (short and long range). ⢠Execute agency-level formal agreements with local governments and MPOs regarding rationalized roles and responsibilities in cooperative delivery of SO&M-related services. ⢠Standardize cooperation mechanisms on a statewide basis. Level 2: Cooperative Planning, Programming, and Operations In a Level 2 organization, SO&M is included in the MPO regional plan and programs. Active regional task forces focus on operations issues. The following strategies can raise a Level 2 organization to Level 3: ⢠Pursue reorganization of federal and state funding categories and responsibilities at the regional level to include operations. ⢠Develop multijurisdictional programs (interlocal) for funding and operating non- state facilities and for integrated corridors. ⢠Consider use of state funds, cost sharing, and technology transfer to incentivize regional cooperation. ⢠Share or consolidate real-time operational coordination and oversight via TMC, co-location, and staffing. Level 3: Regional Cooperative Mechanisms in Place At Level 3, there is an integrated SO&M program at the regional level.
42 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT Responsibility The district level has the lead responsibility for planning and programming, with sup- port from headquarters.
43 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT Partnerships Strategy 3: Develop Procedures That Accommodate Partnersâ Goals and Maximize Mobility (Minimum Disruption) Relationship to Program and Process Nominal applications of SO&M strategiesâbased on narrow roles, mixed priorities, traditional roles, limited ITSâare likely to have little impact on performance. Points of Departure (Levels of Capability) and Related Improvement Strategy Level 1: Inconsistent Application of Nominal Procedures In a Level 1 organization, there is a lack of agreed-on concepts of operations for all strategy applications and no consistent effort to measure and improve effectiveness. The following strategies can help raise a Level 1 organization to Level 2: ⢠Develop external stakeholder (system users) support for substantial improvements in congestion-related procedures and protocols. ⢠Develop (new) concepts of operations and related procedures that minimize delay and disruption and are beyond conventional roles and practices. ⢠Agree with partners (e.g., PSAs, local governments) to commit to continuous improvement. Level 2: Traffic Impact-Oriented Procedures In a Level 2 organization, there is agreement among partners (public and private) on improved procedures, with performance-based benchmarking against best practice. The following strategies can raise a Level 2 organization to Level 3: ⢠Identify and analyze state-of-practice procedures for strategy applications and commit to apply traffic-optimized approaches. ⢠Develop a mechanism to maintain awareness of industry best practice and new developments beyond existing conventions. ⢠Cultivate DOT partnersâ willingness to modify traditional approaches to achieve minimal disruption via demonstrated payoffs in cost, safety, and mobility. Level 3: Aggressive Procedures to Maximize Mobility-Based Performance Measurement Activity or Outcome Measurement At Level 3 there is acceptance of a performance-driven process of refinement and up- grading of procedures. Responsibility The responsibility should be developed on a statewide basis, although individual dis- tricts can take the lead.
44 GUIDE TO IMPROVING CAPABILITY FOR SYSTEMS OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT Partnerships Strategy 4: Rationalize Staff Versus Outsourcing Activities, Responsibilities, and Oversight Relationship to Program and Process Efficient organizational planning is dependent on a clear business model regarding the role of the public and private sectorsâincluding the roles in relation to in-house staff and the approach to managing outsourced activities to meet DOT objectives. Outsourcing may be considered as a strategy to increase or maintain SO&M in light of staffing or hiring constraints. The private sector may possess unique technol- ogy, cost advantages, or management capabilities. Points of Departure (Levels of Capability) and Related Improvement Strategy Level 1: Inconsistent Approach to Outsourcing In a Level 1 organization, the DOT uses outsourcing without clear policy or strate- gic context regarding the impact on retention of core competencies and without the special skills or procedures needed to manage outsourcing. The existing outsourcing arrangements may lack consistency, performance orientation, and clear interagency understanding. The following strategies can help raise a Level 1 organization to Level 2: ⢠Identify issues and options regarding outsourcing (TMC, service safety patrol, towing and recovery, asset management, private data) to meet overall agency techni- cal, staffing, and management objectives and core capacity retention. ⢠Develop policy on in-house staff roles in service delivery versus outsourcing or devolving roles. Level 2: Basic Business Model for Service Delivery In a Level 2 organization, essential core agency capabilities have been identified and a consistent statewide performance management approach to outsourced services has been developed. The following strategies can raise a Level 2 organization to Level 3: ⢠Establish a consistent statewide approach to outsourcing with regard to procure- ment, contracting procedures, performance management, and time frame of contracts. ⢠Identify and develop a sustainable business model regarding field activity roles (state personnel versus external) that considers all factors of cost, core capacity, ac- countability, and so forth. Level 3: Clarified, Rationalized Business Model for PublicâPrivate Partnerships At Level 3, the DOT has a clear and sustainable business model regarding in-house versus outsourced roles and how they are managed. Responsibility The central office is responsible for this strategy.