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 7
CHAPTER 2. RESULTS OF LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
To establish a solid foundation for Me NCHRP 1~12 project, a comprehensive
search for information on highway maintenance quality management was conducted.
This search consisted! prunarily of on-line queries of the Transportation Research
Information Service (TRIS), National Technical Information Service (NTIS), and E!
(Engineering Index) Compendex computer data bases, and searches of He
Tr~nc=~rt~ti~n R~nrrh Boarc] and America Society for Oualitv Control (ASQC)
1 _ _
libraries. Over 100 references were acquired from these sources, and another 50 or so
references were obtained from various SHAs-consisting largely of agency
performance standards, maintenance management and QA procedure documents,
~ ,.-~^ ~ ~_~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ J - J
condition survey manuals, and pavement management reports.
The following subjects were targeted in He literature search:
Maintenance management and MMS's.
Maintenance QA and quality improvement (Q1) programs.
Construction (highway and bridge) and safety QA procedures.
Quality, quantity, and performance standards in maintenance.
Indicators of quality at He network, project, and activity levels.
Quality control (QC) procedures.
PMS's, BMS's, and SMS's.
Customer-based quality.
Market surveys.
Statistical applications ~ quality assessment.
Each document obtained for use in this study was carefully renewed. As usual,
some references contained a lot of valuable information to He project work, whereas
many over references contained little or no pertinent information. Nevertheless, a
short summary, or annotation, was prepared for each document describing its content.
Appendix A contains an annotated bibliography of the references selected for use in
this project. The bibliography is arranged by topic for easy referencing. A glossary of
terms was also prepared in the NC~P 14-12 project and can be found at He back of
the QA program Implementation Manual.
This chapter contains a short sununary of the information obtained from He
literature review. The information is presented according to He following topics:
Maintenance management/MMS's.
Quality management.
7
OCR for page 8
Maintenance Management/MMS's
A number of MM~related articles and reports were found In Me literature search.
The content of this literature ranged from describing procedures for developing an
effective MMS, to descriptions of the key components of a MMS, to specific examples of
anyplace MMS. These articles and reports were reviewed to establish the purpose and
objectives of a successful MMS, Me elements of an effective MMS, Me benefits of an
MMS, and finally, the identified recomanendations for improving the quality of current
MMS's. Each of these four items is discussed in the following sections.
Purpose and Objectives of a Successful MMS
MMS's have taken on different definitions over Me years as maintenance engineers
have obtained additional experience, and access to computer technology. The
definition of an MMS has moved toward being a systematic methodology of achieving
predetermined levels of maintenance service In Me most cost-effective manner. In
general terms, an MMS administers the organization, planning, scheduling, budgeting,
performance evaluation.' control, and reporting of highway maintenance activities
(Greitzer, 1977~. An MMS specifically allows a maintenance manager to do Me
following (O'Brien) 1989):
· Quantify maintenance needs.
· Identify resources to meet these needs.
· Detenrune standards to measure accomplishments and set priorities.
· Monitor performance.
· Exercise program, budget, and expenditure controls.
Elements of an Effective MMS
Following the guidelines presented above, a review of Me literature showed Mat
current MMS's are commonly made up of 10 key elements. These elements were first
outlined In NC=P Report 131 (Roy Jorgenson Associates, 1972), and most were
summarized in NCHRP Report 363 as follows (Markow et al., 1994~:
1. Feature inventory.
2. Work activity definitions.
3. Work activity standards.
4. Work programs.
5. Performance budget.
6. Work calendars.
7 Resource requirements.
8. Work scheduling.
9. Work reporting.
10. Management reports.
8
OCR for page 9
Each of these elements is detailed in the sections below.
Feature Inventory
A roadway feature inventory database identifies (type and location) maintenance-
related road features and their respective quantities.
The database provides Me
physical basis for estimating annual maintenance work requirements by activity. Some
specific examples of items contained in this database include section identification,
district, road class, lane width, number of lanes, traffic levels, number and location of
signs, drainage information, pavement material, and bridge locations (Zaniewski and
Wiles, 1990).
Work Achviby Definitions
Work activities are specific functions performed by maintenance crews. Work
activities need to be specific (including the definition of appropriate accomplishment
and inventory units) in order to facilitate planning, scheduling, and control
requirements. All specific work activities may be classified under one of the following
major categories as described In NCHRP Report 363 (Markow et al., 1994):
Maintenance of roadway and shoulder surfaces Joint and crack sealing, premix
leveling, milling, seal coats, fog and slurry seals, short bituminous resurfacing,
Cat ~ ~ ~ c_ ~ - _
_ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ · t · 1 1 1 _ _ _ _ ~ ~
patching of spells, partial slab replacement, slan~ac~mg, olaamg, ana rep alrmg
and reconditioning unpaved shoulders.
Maintenance of drainage facilities Periodic structural inspection, manual
cleaning, and removal of debris from culverts, catch basins and inlets. Also,
replacement of culvert pipes, installing underdrains, and cleaning, reshaping,
and restoring ditches.
Roadside maintenance Bow hand and machine mowing, brush cutting,
herbicide treatment, fence maintenance, and litter pickup.
Bridge maintenance Painting of steel components; cleaning and flushing bridge
deck surfaces, bridge seats, drain holes and sidewalks; and rep airing and
replacing handrails, curbs, sidewalks, joints and supports.
Winter maintenance Stockpiling deicers and sand, plowing snow and ice,
applying abrasives and chemicals, removing ice on stmchlres, and post-storm
cleanup such as opening waterways and washing down equipment.
· Maintenance of traffic control devices Repair and replacement of signs,
directional markers, delineators, guardrails, crash attenuators, traffic signals,
controllers, flashing signals; initial painting and repainting of pavement stripes
and messages; and installation and replacement of raised pavement markers.
· Emergency maintenance Temporary repairs, traffic control and cleanup in
response to emergency conditions Mat storms, floods, traffic accidents, or other
disasters cause.
· Public services~are and cleaning of roadside parks, rest areas, and weigh
stations.
9
OCR for page 10
Other maintenance Equipment repair and maintenance, building and grounds
maintenance, materials handling and storage, and supervision and training.
Markow, et al. (1994) describe the importance of defining work activities by stating:
Activity definitions are the building blocks of the MMS, dictating the measures
used for accomplishments andforfeature inventories. Important activities are
defined primarily by technical purpose and then by any addled factors affecting the
conditions under which the activity is planned or scheduled. For less significant
activities, broader measures are often used. Overhead activities are also included
in the list so that work programs and budgets will be inclusive.
Research has shown Cat these major categories include more Man 100 individual
work activities performed by highway maintenance crews. It is recommended that a
practical MMS only include Me 35 to 45 work activities that represent 80 percent of Me
agency's maintenance work, reducing both confusion and paperwork (Zaniewski and
Wiles, 1990~. Each individual maintenance activity must be wed defined in order to
determine when it is used, exactly how it Is to be performed, and how much resources
must be devoted to completing the activity. These questions are answered by Me
development of Me standards (quality, performance, and quantity) described below.
Work Achvity Standards
For the maintenance crews to perform quality work, the agency must first identify
desired quality levels for each work activity and communicate these to Me
. ~
, ,
maintenance personnel. these desired quality levels are defined In the following three
types of standards:
Quality standards~uality standards define the physical conditions that
indicate a need for maintenance and repair activities and prescribe the character
of workmanship and the properties of Me completed product (AASHTO, 1987~.
The agency must establish LOS for each Individual work activity In order to
accomplish the following (Miller, 1989):
Provide direction to field personnel to ensure uniformity of maintenance
effort throughout Me agency.
Provide a tool for scheduling and budgeting.
Define a uniform maintenance quality level to which Me highway user is
entitled.
The literature has shown that the definition of a LOS may take one of the
following forms (Miller, 1989~:
-
A specific ~reshold value that tri~ers the reauirement of a maintenance
activity.
10
OCR for page 11
-
A wri~en description ~at states the maintenance effort author~zed for a
specific activity.
A defined frequency of a maintenance effort or a predetermined number
of inspections In a specified time.
A policy of replacement of the missing, repair of the damaged, or
elimination of the undesirable.
Historically, LOS's were based on past practices of Me agency. They were
highly subjective since Hey were based on a cumulation of He experience of a
group of knowledgeable personnel, including operators, crew leaders,
supervisors, and engineers. NCHRP Report 273 (Kulkarni and Van Til, 1984)
provides an objective methodology for establishing op~num maintenance LOS,
given resource constraints of labor, material, and equipment.
· Performance standards Performance standards describe a general memos of
performing a task, He resources required, and the rate at which He work is to be
performed (Miter, 1989~. More specifically, performance standards provide the
foDow~ng:
A description of the work and the purpose of the activity.
The general procedure to be followed ~ executing He work.
The resources required (personnel, equipment, material).
A rate at which He work is to be performed (production).
A statement of desired quality (sometimes).
All of this information assists in the effective planing, budgeting, and
scheduling of maintenance work.
· Quantity standard~Quantity standards specify how often a work activity
should be performed to maintain He road feature at He desired LOS (Zaniewski
and Wiles, 1990~. For a given maintenance activity, He specified rates may
differ between road classes. Quantity standards give managers He information
needed to develop efficient work schedules by balancing estimated resource
requirements against available resources. Typically, quantity standards have
been developed (in conjunction win performance standards) from past
performance records or the experience of maintenance personnel (Miller, 1989~.
Work Programs
As a first step in the planning process, the agency must develop an annual work
program Hat defines the maintenance objectives. One objective in this plaruiirLg
nines is usualIv to "achieve a consistent maintenance program from district to
_ _ ,
. _ _ ~ e ~ e- . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ITEM 1 _ _ _ 1 ~ 1~ 1 ~ _ _ ~ ~ _ ~ _ (1~ _
dissect Hampton and Trend, LIEU). ine Dual work proms snout estate ups
required maintenance activities and related resource needs for the entire fiscal year.
Specifically, He work programs give the following (Markow et al., 1994~:
1 1
OCR for page 12
· Estimated work quantities, stratified by management unit, road classification, or
other appropriate division.
Projected daily production of each activity, In work accomplishment units.
Resulting program requirements In terms of crew days and labor hours by
activity.
Performance Budget
Performance budgets are work programs win cost estimates tied to individual
activities and to work quantities (Markow et al., 1994~. Unit costs for each maintenance
activity, combined win We projected amount of each work activity from the annual
work programs, allows for the creation of a performance budget.
Work Calenders
The second step in Me maintenance planning process is Me creation of an annual
work calendar. The work calendar shows Me estimated crew days for each
maintenance activity over the entire fiscal year. These projections of maintenance work
serve as a "guide to Me development of schedules plus it provides the basis for
evaluating progress throughout the year" (Markow et al., 1994~. Work plans are
updated throughout the year to include leftover work from Me previous reporting
period, updated inspection data (condition surveys), service requests, and emergency
and urgent repair needs (Hymen and Alfelor, 1995~.
Resource Requirements
An estimate of the annual resource requirements labor, equipment, and
materials for each work activity is computed from the activ~ty's work program and
associated performance standard. Overall resource requirements are obtained by
summing Me specific resources for all work activities.
Work Scheduling
The main function of an MMS is to schedule Me most effective maintenance
activities, given limited resources-materials, equipment, labor, and funding. The
combination of defined LOS and quantity standards typically determine Me majority of
Me activities to be accomplished. The scheduling process is dynamic due to a number
Of variables, including the need for emergency or urgent repairs and Inclement
weaker.
Work Reporting
An essential part of a successful MMS is Me process of reporting and monitoring
work accomplishments. As stated by Hyman and Alfelor (1995~:
12
OCR for page 13
Daily work reports provide maintenance headquarters with a basis for comparing
planned work with actual work and assessing the adequacy of the maintenance
budget. These reports also provide data for evaluating the productivity of
maintenance jurisdictions; keeping track of labor, materials, and equipment use;
and determining whether adjustments to quantity and performance standards are
necessary. In many States, daily work reports are combined with time sheet
preparation, payroll documentation, and accounting.
One method of daily work reporting is the crew-day card. The use of crew-day
cards is explained by Zaniewski and Wiles (1990) as follows:
Crew-day cards is a report that summarizes the time involved in performing the
activiby and the amount of material used. Management gives each crew a crew-
day card specifying the amount of work to be completedfor that day. At the end
of the day the crew specifies the amount of work completed and the amount of
hme and material used for the work activity. Management reviews the crew-day
card to determine if the crew is on schedule.
The last step In the reporting and monitoring process Is to update the Inventory
databases. Hyman and Alfelor (1995) stated:
budgets.
Regular updating of maintenancefeatures inventory allows an accurate
accounting of the quantity and status of all maintainable elements throughout the
State. This inventor' is open the ma jor input for annual work programs and
~, - ~, ,
In addition to updating the maintenance features, the constant monitoring of the
resources used (labor, material, equipment) and LOS provide the agency with
information needed to update Me planning and scheduling of work.
Management Reports
It is important for management to monitor the progress of work throughout the year
In relation to Me annual work program and performance budget. This monitoring
process is accomplished by analyzing a number of management reports. Many typical
management reports were summarized in NCHRP Report 363 (Markow et al., 1994) as
follows:
· Performance budgets tabulating, for each activity, projected labor hours,
workloads' and costs; equipments rental' and material costs; contract workload
and costs; and total costs.
· Reports of force account (i.e., State forces) labor: workload, hours, and costs by
activity. (These data may also be summarized by district.)
· Monthly or periodic labor requirements by activity.
13
OCR for page 14
· F.auinment and matenals analyses,
~ ~ ~ showing Me projected usage and associated
costs of each class of equipment and material, and distinguishing between State-
owned equipment versus rented units. (These data may be stratified by activity
or summer! within the management unit for all activities).
Work accomplishment reports, detailing actual accomplishments versus
planned.
· Resource usage reports, comparing planned labor, equipment, and materials
requirements versus actual usage to date.
. ~. .
con
Work production analyses, comparing actual production versus the standard or
average production rate.
Benefits of an MMS
Research has shown that a successful MMS results in a number of benefits to an
agency. These benefits include the following (Burke, 1984~:
· Improved standards.
· Increased use of automated data processing to speed up the handling of cost and
performance data.
· Better facility maintenance data that promote improved understanding of
highway performance.
· Increased use of system components to analyze performance of field units and
measure effects of preventive maintenance activities.
The redefinition and redistribution of maintenance activities.
The definition of areas for contract maintenance.
A new focus on equipment use and requirements.
· Improved work program development and adjus~anents.
AD of these unprovements ultimately result in cost savings, improved LOS, and an
overall improvement in the quality of service provided by the agency.
Identified Recommendations for Improving the Quality of Current MMS's
A number of reconunendations for improving Me quality of an MMS were
identified In the literature. NCHRP Report 363 (Markow et al., 1994) was the source for
most of Me information concerrung Me recommendations. The following three
categories of recommendations were identified:
1. Conceptual changes.
2. Integration win over management systems.
3. Incorporation of new technologies.
Each of these categories is discussed in detail below.
14
OCR for page 15
Conceptual Changes
A number of changes In Me current concepts that define MMS's can lead to more
effective and efficient management systems. Some of these conceptual improvement
areas include the following:
Customer involvement In Me establishment of LOS-This method allows
agencies to determine what quality means to customers and how well the agency
is satisfying and accomplishing Me customers' needs.
· Customer satisfaction win agency performance This Includes an assessment of
how well customer needs (LOS) are being met, customer satisfaction with
maintenance crew response times, and perceptions of how well the agency
listens to customer needs.
Decentralization Traditionally, most of the planning and scheduling of
maintenance activities has been Me responsibility of a central office. A
recommended unprovement is to shift the authority and responsibility to levels
that are closer to where actual work is accomplished. Field-leve! planning is Me
most effective, since the field personnel have Me best understanding of Me
condition and maintenance needs of Me roads Mat they maintain (Markow et al.,
1994).
· Estimation of routine maintenance based on condition surveys-There is a need
to conduct more condition surveys In order to assess present LOS conditions.
Most current systems estimate maintenance needs on historical average quantity
standards, whereas they could more effectively be based on condition survey
data (Sinha et al., 1990~.
Expert systems Many MMS's currently use knowledge-based expert systems to
translate assessed road conditions Into estimated work loads. The user (unit
foreman) answers a series of questions which identify Me condition of Me road.
The provided answers are then used by the expert system to determine needed
maintenance activity types and amounts. The subjectivity In a unit foreman's
estimation of work loads can be eliminated by using an expert system (Sinha et
al., 1990~.
· Life cycle cost based maintenance management-MMS's currently rely on Me
"assumption of steady-state work requirements from one year to Me next, as
embodied in Me quantity standards" (Markow et al., 1994~. MMS's need to
follow the lead of most BMS's and PMS's and move toward scheduling work
activities based on life cycle cost analyses.
· Optimal programming and scheduling-Optimal progratrun~ng models can be
developed to aid in the timing, frequency, extent, and type of routine
maintenance required.
Pr~vatwation of work performed by government employees-In some instances,
agencies can benefit from letting certain maintenance activities to private
contractors. Agencies should take advantage of the fact Mat many contractors
already have special equipment and trained personnel needed for some
activities. It would especially be prudent for agencies to contract peak work
15
OCR for page 16
loads (mostly activities that are seasonal), avoiding a surplus labor force during
slack periods.
Integration with Other Management Systems
The effectiveness and efficiency of MMS's can be greatly improved by integrating
win other management systems. Integration not only eliminates Me duplication of
collecting and reporting data, but makes better use of shared information In Me
coordination of decision making (Markow and Hyman, 1995~.
Some of the systems Mat may be useful for Integration with MMS include Me
following (O'Brien, 1989~:
.
Materials inventory system (MIS)-A database of material types, amounts, and
locations. l~tegration with MMS allows for daily updates of Inventory reflecting
material usage documented in crew reports.
EMS A database of pavement (surface-related) conditions used to document
and predict pavement performance and schedule appropriate periodic
maintenance and rehabilitation treahnents.
BMS A database of bridge characteristics including type, size, location, and
conditions of aD maintainable features. Bridge condition surveys are used in
conjunction with performance standards to communicate bridge conditions and
recommend repair procedures (O'Brien, 1989~.
Accident analysis system (AAS) Database of important accident cluster data
about locations where accidents may have involved maintainable features or
services. Integration win an MMS allows for Me possible identification of areas
why unsafe conditions (O'Brien, 1989~.
· Equipment management system (EMS)-A database of equipment types, age,
location, usage, and equipment maintenance history.
· Construction program management system (CPMS)-A database of new
construction features and rehabilitation practices. Integration with MMS allows
for easy addition or updating of maintenance features (type, condition, and
location) inventories.
· Payroll and accounting- Integration with MMS allows for direct updating of
employee work hours reported. This eliminates the repeated entering of
employee time by Me clerical staff.
To integrate many management systems, data must be maintained using consistent
formats to successfully share data between systems. Important factors include type of
data to be recorded, frequency of updating, storage and retrieval method, usage of the
data by function and line unit, and updating procedures (Sinha et al., 1990~.
The location of all Information must also be referenced using consistent
identification methods. Some agencies use location reference numbers which designate
Me county, State route, segment, and offset of a point or feature (CumberIedge et al.,
16
OCR for page 17
1995). Other agencies make location references using a geographic information system
(GIS) Cat uses digitized maps of maintenance areas and section boundaries (Day and
Martin, 1990~. Finally, many agencies are now identifying roadway feature locations
using global positioning systems (GPS) technology (see description of GPS In Me
section "Incorporation of New Technolog~es"~.
Markow and Hyman (1995) recommended an approach to Integrating management
systems which used a hub-and-spoke concept. An illustration of Heir approach is
contained in figure 1. Even though this figure shows more integrated systems Han
described above, He concepts still hold true. The hub represents all of He data and
analytic capabilities shared by a particular organizational unit (or level of
management). The information in the hub is accessed only by analytic programs, data
reporting tools, and data entry routines that exist at the terminals or the satellite hubs at
He end of He spokes (Markow and Hyman' 1995).
Central
£ainknance
Function
-
~ Management ~
\
-
Pavement ~
Management ~<
Transportation
Planing
Permits
Equipment
\ Management
~ o b D
Maint~ce Areas Maintenance Areas
Finance/
Accoundug
\~ /~_
Hub |
\ \ \< Contract
\\ ~
Distnct Satellite Hubs ~
Program
L Development/ )
laterials )
_:
b D
Maintenance Areas
Figure 1. MMS concept: hub-and-spoke approach (Markow and Hyman, 1995).
17
OCR for page 26
accomplished (objectives for the organizations and a timetable for reaching these
goals.
· Organizing- The establishment of a grouping of activities and authority
relationships in which people know what Weir tasks are, how their tasks relate
to each over, and where authority for decisions needed to accomplish these
{asks rests, including staffing to carry out tasks.
Directing The issuance of policies, procedures, instructions, and plans in order
Cat He orgaruzation's efforts can be directed toward the accomplishment of
established goals.
Controlling The measuring and correcting of activates of workers to ensure
Cat their activities are contributing to Be achievement of planned goals. The
information obtained in the controlling process is fed back into the planning
process, completing Me continuous management cycle.
Quality Assurance
QA represents all of He admmistral:ive procedures and field activities that an
agency specifies in order to ensure quality in maintenance. Many definitions found in
He literature review define the goals and purpose of QA plans in more detail. For
instance, QA was described In the Quality Improvement Resource Guide (Greenhome &
O'Mara, 1993) as:
An effort to employ acceptance procedures and measurements for quality before
the production process is engaged. The QA program includes aZZ the planned and
systematic activities employed to anticipate quality issues before a process is
completed. There is established both product and process sampling and an
ongoingfeedback loop to infonn management of adherence [to expectations. The
combinedieatures of product and process evaluation, and reporting results
strengthens the environmentfor improving the process through corrective action.
Miller and Kin (1992) defined QA as:
The process that delennines the effectiveness of the quality system, appraises the
current quality, determines quality problem or potential problem areas, and
assists in [he correction or minimization of these problem areas.
A good description of He goals of QA was enunciated by Afferton, et al. (1992) as
follows:
In the fieZ] of transportation, the [enn "QA" is generaZZy associated with a
comprehensive program to achieve conformance with established desired quality
levels for design and construction. This program involves people, materials,
equipment, procedures, and the optimal use of these resources.
26
OCR for page 27
Even though this quotation refers specifically to "design and construction" in the field
of transportation, the ideas relate to maintenance as well. Maslin et al. (1983) stated
Hat "QA refers to all activities necessary to verify, audit, and evaluate quality." And,
finally, the British Columbia Ministry of Transportation and Highways (MTH) defined
QA as "all those planned and systematic actions needed to provide adequate
confidence that works and services satisfy specified requirements" (British Columbia,
1991).
It can be seen from these definitions Cat a major part of QA Involves methods of
assessing or evaluating quality at all levels-activity, project, and network. The
evaluation data at each level are analyzed, and He analysis results are used as feedback
for He overall evaluation of He QA plan. The definition of a QA plan constantly
. . .
changes as this feedback is Incorporated, or as the definition of desired quality is
changed due to changing public and agency perceptions. Discussions of quality
evaluation procedures at each level, as well as examples of in-place QA plans, are
presented below.
Quality Evaluation at the Activity Level
The quality evaluation at the activity level is very similar to He QC processes
employed by the maintenance crews, in that they both inspect a maintenance crew's
compliance with performance and quality standards. The major difference is that the
quality evaluations for QA are performed by an independent supervisor or engineer.
These activity-level quality evaluations allow an agency to evaluate the performance
and production of specific crews, as well as to evaluate current defined methods and
LOS. If problems are identified with the crew, causes can be identified (lack of proper
equipment, lack of training) and specific needs can be addressed in order to improve
the crew's overall quality of work. Performance and quality standards (LOS) can also
be updated to reflect the collected data.
Some agencies have begun conducting random inspections of individual work
activities to judge the compliance with performance standards. The Florida DOT uses
quality assessment reviews to evaluate the entire scope of an activity being performed.
These reviews provide a means by which to compare different units. Pennsylvania
conducts field QA evaluations on a number of different activities. These evaluations
are conducted by central office, district, and county personnel. Formal QA checklists
are used to evaluate management and work activities by applying numerical ratings to
the Individual steps making up a work activity. The work activities that are evaluated
using the checklists include pothole patching, shoulder cutting, pipe installation,
surface treatment, mechanized patching, leveling, joint sealing, crack sealing, stockpile
management, and work zone traffic control (Miser, 1989~.
27
OCR for page 28
Quality Evaluation at the Project Level
The quality evaluation at the project level is concerned with identifying the overall
quality of a particular section of highway. This overall quality may be determined by a
process that directly considers Me measured conditions of all of the individual work
activities required for that specific section of roadway. The measured conditions are
compared with defined quality standards and LOS to determine quality. This data is
collected by independent agency supervisors, engineers, or personnel specifically
trained for We task. These project-level quality evaluations allow a central agency to
evaluate the performance and production of specific districts. A comparison of districts
is helpful in identifying specific districts exhibiting substandard quality. Causes of
~ ~ ,
problems can be identified and specific needs can be addressed in order to improve the
district's overall quality of work.
Quality Evaluation at the Network Level
The quality evaluation at the network level is concerned with identifv~n~ the overall
~ v
quality for Me entire network. This overall quality may be determined by a process
Cat directly considers Me evaluated quality levels of each district. The analyses of
quality at the project and district levels provide feedback that the central agency may
use to update QA procedures or quality, performance, and quantity standards as part
of its continuous quality improvement (CQ1) process (described in more detail in Me
section "Q1"~. An example of a program developed to evaluate quality at the network
level is presented below.
The Virginia Deparll~ent of Transportation (DOT) began developing a maintenance
quality evaluation (MQE) program In 1987. The program was created around Me
following three objectives (Kardian and Woodward, 1990~:
· Monitoring the overall quality of highway maintenance.
· Identifying areas of inconsistent performance.
· Providing a more formal process for assuring that consistent LOS are provided
statewide.
Quality standards were developed for each identified work activity. Computer-
generated maps were created to identify sample sites. A statistical method of randomly
sampling all types of roadway systems on a Statewide basis was created and validated.
Inspection teams of two trained individuals rated 45 maintenance characteristics for
each randomly selected sample sections. Overall quality ratings for Me sections were
obtained by using a procedure Mat weighted Me importance of Me 45 individual
activity ratings. Numerical LOS ratings for the entire State were obtained on a scale of
~ to 100. A LOS rating of 80 for Interstate and primary systems and 75 for the
secondary system was desired. The system was formally implemented in Virginia in
1989 (Kardian and Woodward, 1990~.
28
OCR for page 29
Obstacles to Oblaining a Successful QA Program
A number of commonly encountered obstacles to a successful OA program were
identified by Afferton, et al. (1992~. These include the following:
.
.
Lithe demand for excellence.
Complacency about existing State QA practices.
Uncertainty about effectiveness of State QA melons.
Inadequate procedures and practices.
Poor teaching of statistical mesons.
Resistance from within the transportation agency.
Opposition from Me construction industry.
Political factors.
Work epic and cultural attitudes.
Conveying Me wrong messages.
Quality Improvement
_ ~v
V J
QI can be defined as the set of techniques associated with the management of
quality that provide for continuous performance improvement of all maintenance-
related activities and procedures. These techniques are applied In all areas of
maintenance including QC and QA, as well as operations of organization such as
human resource development, accounting, tecnmca~ Design, and construction
operations. The purpose of QI is to "look for waste in every corner of the operation"
and to then "address the causes rather than limiting itself to treating the symptoms"
(Miller and Krum, 1992).
A number of articles and reports related to QI were found in the literature search.
The content of this literature ranged from describing philosophies of QI, to general
methods of QI currently used by agencies, to descriptions of different QI concepts (or
avenues for improvement) within an agency. A summary of these articles and reports
is contained below.
QI Philosophy
QI has been practiced in industry for decades. A number of quality experts, such as
W. Edwards Deming, Joseph M. Juran, and Philip B. Crosby, have developed a series of
philosophical points concerrung QI In management. Although most of Weir
philosophies were developed win industry In mind, many are considered to have
potential application in highway maintenance. Presented in table 2 are Me
philosophies and concepts espoused by Deming, Juran' and Crosby.
29
OCR for page 30
-
c~
-
so
-
-
·
-
co
· -
o
In
-
a;
ho
'e
'e
-
cn
o
a
-
ct
·~
hi
I , ,, i, 6 . it E ~
. .
o
pi
U)
o
An
_ l
~ :
~ .
~ :
~ .
~ .
~ .
In
_.
·=
Pa
In
=
._
i
·.·.
~U. ~
~ ~ ~ o
C 93 D , 3 .
· · , 3 3 a 9 9 8, E
· e e ~ ~
~ ~ ~ 00
~ ~ ~ ..cn
~ 0, .5
o ~ 3 ~ ED ~
.E ~ ~ o C,~ ~
eit~1li
~ ' -S2~ ' '
~ ED ~ ' , ~
31 ~3~ 1'249' z-7
en- hi 1 · ~ i
SO ,~ ~ ~6 6 5 =0 SO 5 CO => I: e 'S
o ~ 8 5 5 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ =m w~ ~ 5 ~ u
30
OCR for page 31
Methods of Improving Quality
A number of methods are currently employed by agencies Hat provide a means of
- e He , ~
Improving overall quality In maintenance. two specific metnous, Incorporation of
public feedback and team methods, are described in more detail below.
· Incorporation of public feedback-Many agencies are finding value in obtaining
public (customer) opinions of He current maintenance LOS provided by He
agency. This has conunonly been accomplished using a number of different
methods, including focus groups, formal surveys, informal surveys, customer
panels, formal feedback from customers, and informal feedback from customers
(Ste~n-Hudson et al., 1995~.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Focus groups-defined by Stein-Hudson, et al. (1995) as ~a carefully-
planned discussion of a selected list of topics by a group of 10 to 12
people.,' A typical set of questions that may be answered in focus groups
include He following: What do our customers want and need? Do
different sets of customers want or need different things? What do Hey
expect of a DOT in terms of the quality of service? What does "quality"
mean to ~em? What are the characteristics and indicators Hey use to
judge top quality? How well do they think a DOT has met their needs?
What do Hey need in He way of more, less, better, or different
performance from a DOT to be satisfied customers? (Ste~n-Hudson et al.,
1995).
Formal surveys typically include written surveys, face-to-face
interviews, and telephone surveys (Ste~n-Hudson et al., 1995~.
Formal surveys typically Include customer complaint letters/calls,
customer ~ank-you letters, day-to-day conversations with customers, and
surveys at roadside welcome and tourist booths (Stein-Hudson et al.,
1995~.
Customer panels methods of "obtaining opinions and guidance from
either Individuals or representatives of customer groups" (Stein-Hudson
et al., 1995~. These panels are typically appointed to give advice on
programs or projects. Corridor committees are typically self-selected
individuals or representatives of groups affected or interested In a project
or program for a specific area (Stein-Hudson et al., 1995~.
Formal feedback from customers-may take He form of public hearings,
open houses, or customer meetings (Ste~n-Hudson et al., 19951.
v ~
bifocal feedback from customers- generally obtained Trough face-to-
face contact with customers, or via 1-800 lines. This feedback is
31
OCR for page 32
commonly received by front-l~ne staff (Stein-Hudson et al., 1995). The
most important concern when dealing wad informal feedback Is making
sure Mat customer comments or suggestions get recorded and "funneled"
up through the chain of command (Ste~n-Hudson et al., 1995~.
· Team methods A number of different team approaches have been used in the
area of Q1. Four types of teams are described below.
-
-
-
-
Quality circles (productivity teams) first developed in Japan to improve
workmanship and production. Specifically, Hey were formed to "find
something Hat needs improvement and a way to accomplish He
improvement" (Miller and Mum, 1992~. The basic principle of a quality
circle Is Hat workers and their immediate supervisors can use Heir
knowledge about assigned work activities to develop improvements in
quality or production.
The Pennsylvania DOT Implemented productivity teams In 1981. The
goals of this program included greater involvement of employees in
decisions affecting Heir work activities; creating a shorter chain of
command for implementing changes, and unprovement In performance.
QI teams~escribed by Miller and K~un (1992) in the following
manner:
Ql [cams are assigned to investigate a specific
problem area. They lookfor causes, select one or
morefor action, and develop means to solve
problems, eliminate waste, and improve quality.
They recommend solutions, implement approved
solutions, and laterfoZIow up lo measure the extent
of the gain.
Special task teams used "to develop and unplement already identified
solutions." They may accomplish this task by building a database,
formulating standards, or ~rutiating over selected solutions to eliminate
waste or delay (Miller and Krum, 1992~.
Self-directed work teams described by Miller and Krumm (1992) as
follows:
A group of employees that takes responsibiZityfor a
whole process that delivers a product or service to
an internal or external customer. Cross-training
facilitates professional growth of the members and
coverage during absences. Mulli-skilled! members
32
OCR for page 33
assume and share some responsibilities previously
assigned to supervision.
Conceptsfor Improving Quality
A number of general concepts used for ---rip = ~ ~
literature. SO concepts are discussed in furler detail below.
.
uncrovin~ auali~v were identified in We
Better employee training-Better training "will increase an employee's ability to
do the task" (Miller and Krum, 1992~. People must know what Hey are
supposed to do and how Hey are supposed to do it. Training represents a
needed too! In completing any task. The following example illustrates this fact
(DeVor et al., 1992):
An employer decides to reward one of two employees, let's call
them Bill and Jack, with a lavish vacation at company expense.
The two were to competefor the prize. The employerfirst called
Bill into his ounce and described the trip, detailing the many
extravagantieatures of this perk. Needless to say, Bill became very
enthusiastic, with great motivation to compete to his best ability to
win the trip. The employer then called lack in and proceeded to get
him quite excited and motivated about winning the trip. The day
came for the competition and both Bill and Jack were eager to
perfonn. The employer told both that the [ask they were to
complete was to secure six screws into a piece of wood. The
employer gave Bill the screws, the piece of wood, and a nice
screwdriver to aid in completing the task He turned to Jack, gave
him the screws and the wood but told him he would not have the
use of a similar tool. On the count of three, both men
enthusiastically began to complete the task. In a matter of a couple
of minutes! Bill was done, with little effort. In the meantime, Jack
broke threefingernaiis, cut open the palm of his hand, and was
unable to get even one screw into the board. It is clear that both
Bill and Jack were highly and about equally motivated to do the
work assigned to them. Both wanted to do a good job. However,
only one of them was given the tools to by his manager to do the
job properly. Motivation and desire are clearly not enough; people
must be given the proper tools to do their work effectively.
Knowledge gained Trough better Gaining is one of the needed tools for Q].
· Better equipment The example presented above literally applies to the use of
the correct equipment. The quality of completed work is only as good as He
quality of equipment provided to He employees completing the work.
33
OCR for page 34
Therefore, it is up to management to constantly Took for the best (or better)
equipment for the workers to use in completing their work.
Improved communication For the CQl philosophy to be employed, good
communication must be achieved. ~ highway maintenance, this requires good
communication between all transportation personnel from design engineers, to
maintenance personnel, to QA personnel, to Me people answering We phones
taking customer complains.
· Increased employee motivation Motivation can be defined as "~at which
initiates, directs, and maintains behavior" (Knouse, 1995~. Generally, Me
foDow~ng Free types of needs tend to motivate most employees to work (Brewer
et al., 1990~:
Physical and security needs-basic survival aspects of life such as food,
water, and sheller.
Social needs physical, emotional, and spiritual aspects of a person's life
Cat can only be met in communication and interaction win other people.
Egotistic needs a desire to be independent and successful on a person's
own merit rawer than in a social context.
Every worker is motivated by a different prioritized se! of needs. Therefore, it is
management's responsibility to determine what tvDes of motivational strategies
J 1
to employ in order to get Me best results. One philosophy is to respond to
employee needs win rewards and recognition (Knouse, 1995~. Mere are a
number of principles for an effective reward system. These are presented as
follows (Knouse, 1995~:
-
-
-
-
The reward is valuecl employees must have a preference for ~e type of
reward being offered, whether it be cash, a plaque, their name in Me
company newsletter, or an award given at a ceremony.
The system is simple to understand Me system must be easy to
understand if it is to be used effectively. Avoid elaborate procedures for
evaluating performance, filling out forms, and reviews by several
management levels.
Levels of performance are within the control of Me team performance
levels must be realistic; challenging yet attainable.
Supervisors are motivated to maintain Me system supervisors should
view Me system as fair and effective and work to maintain it, rather than
manipulate * for personal purposes.
Employees have input Into installing the system employee participation
in Me process and empowerment to change the process are major
components of quality management.
There is open communication employees are encouraged to share ideas
and information.
34
OCR for page 35
Four basic types of rewards are used to motivate employees. Each of Me four is
described below (Knouse, 1995~.
Cash- most employees react favorably to cash. Cash rewards can be In
We form of bonuses or raises.
Gain sharing versus profit sharing-some companies reward employees
win a percentage of the share of cost savings or profits from incurred
from quality management efforts. Gain sharing gives only Me specific
teams that make improvement suggestions a percentage of the resulting
cost savings. Profit sharing gives percentage shares of company profits to
all individuals or teams equally.
Nor~nonetary rewards Tree types of nonmonetary rewards include
symbols, Wings people use, and over forms of recognition. Symbols
include praise from supervisors and co-workers, badges that denote
accomplishments, and awards given at award ceremonies. Things neoole
use include tokens such as pens, calculators, pins, and other jewelry.
Over forms of recognition can represent anything used Mat does not fit
into Me first two categories.
Team rewards team rewards represent awards given to each member of
a team that has produced Me best performance.
· ~
C,- L - - 1
· Increased worker involvement Maintenance employees represent a large
potential for information on how to improve Me overall quality of service being
provided by Me department of transportation. It is important for management
to recognize this potential and take advantage of it by making * easier for
employees to express Weir op~rnons and make proposals (Chantereau, 1990~.
Instituted and improved management-A very good description of ideas for this
topic were presented by DeVor, et al. (1992) as follows:
A supervisor must be a coach and a leacher, nof a watchman. A
supervisor must continually seek ways to provide his or her people
with the tools to do an effective job and the opportunity to use
those tools. Continua! improvement requires the "catching
someone doing something right" mentality, not "catching someone
doing something wrong."
He goes on to explain Cat leadership is a critical part of the unprovement
process by stating:
Too many management systems today are oriented toward the
management of things, not of people Leadership in management
should have as its primary goal to motivate people to work to their
maximum levels of performance, but too open the management
system being used does nothing more than foster mediocrity.
35
OCR for page 36
These statements illustrate Me need for a strong, yet flexible management system
Mat looks at employees as its greatest assets.
Summary
Over 150 articles and reports were reviewed as part of the literature search. All
were renewed while paying close attention to their discussion of quality and their
connection to QA programs.
The majority of the identified sources were related to MMS's. These included
various topics, such as MMS development; current structures and components; quality,
performance, and quantity standards; recommended improvements; integration win
other management systems; new technologies to be incorporated; and specific examples
of anyplace MMS's.
A fair number of articles and reports were related to quality programs. These
included various tOpiCSf such as QC and quality evaluation at Me activity, project, and
network levels; QA methods and procedures; obstacles commonly encountered In QA
plans; Ql philosophies and practiced methods; incorporation of public feedback; and
underlying concepts for a successful QI program.
Only a few of Me reviewed sources discussed construction QA procedures. These
reports were typically very specific to new construction practices, and therefore,
provided very little useful information to this study. No sources were found Mat
specifically relate to safety QA procedures.
Based on a review of the literature, * is apparent Mat quality is becoming a driving
force in highway maintenance. Agencies are recognizing the benefits of a
computerized MMS, the importance of collecting data, and the need for sharing those
data win over anyplace management systems.
An evolving QI philosophy In highway maintenance Is We collection and use of
customer feedback as a basis for defining Me quality levels (LOS) provided. QA
programs continue to be improved as Hey are beginning to incorporate customer
feedback. In addition, new technologies are being incorporated into maintenance
applications.
Much of Me information summarized in this chapter was used in Me development
Of Me prototype QA program. The ideas and methodologies contained In Me literature
meshed well win those reported in Me upco~riing chapter and were quite useful in Me
accomplishment of Me remaining project tasks.
36
Representative terms from entire chapter:
work activity
