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.
N A T I O N A L C O O P E R A T I V E H I G H W A Y R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M NCHRP REPORT 768 Guide to Accelerating New Technology Adoption through Directed Technology Transfer Mark M. Hood Stephen R. Thompson Pennoni AssociAtes, inc. Philadelphia, PA Robert J. Vance Michael S. Renz VAnce & Renz, LLc State College, PA Barbara T. Harder B.t. HARdeR, inc. Philadelphia, PA Joseph Toole Alexandria, VA Samuel T. Hunter PennsyLVAniA stAte UniVeRsity University Park, PA Subscriber Categories Administration and Management ⢠Education and Training ⢠Research TRANSPORTAT ION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2014 www.TRB.org Research sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed research provides the most effective approach to the solution of many problems facing highway administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local interest and can best be studied by highway departments individually or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the accelerating growth of highway transportation develops increasingly complex problems of wide interest to highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. In recognition of these needs, the highway administrators of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials initiated in 1962 an objective national highway research program employing modern scientific techniques. This program is supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of the Association and it receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of Transportation. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies was requested by the Association to administer the research program because of the Boardâs recognized objectivity and understanding of modern research practices. The Board is uniquely suited for this purpose as it maintains an extensive committee structure from which authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; it possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, state and local governmental agencies, universities, and industry; its relationship to the National Research Council is an insurance of objectivity; it maintains a full-time research correlation staff of specialists in highway transportation matters to bring the findings of research directly to those who are in a position to use them. The program is developed on the basis of research needs identified by chief administrators of the highway and transportation departments and by committees of AASHTO. Each year, specific areas of research needs to be included in the program are proposed to the National Research Council and the Board by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Research projects to fulfill these needs are defined by the Board, and qualified research agencies are selected from those that have submitted proposals. Administration and surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the National Research Council and the Transportation Research Board. The needs for highway research are many, and the National Cooperative Highway Research Program can make significant contributions to the solution of highway transportation problems of mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program, however, is intended to complement rather than to substitute for or duplicate other highway research programs. Published reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from: Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet at: http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore Printed in the United States of America NCHRP REPORT 768 Project 20-93 ISSN 0077-5614 ISBN 978-0-309-28418-9 Library of Congress Control Number 2014942934 © 2014 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FTA, or Transit Development Corporation endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program, conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The members of the technical panel selected to monitor this project and to review this report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, and the sponsors of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturersâ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report.
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. On the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, on its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academyâs purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of the National Research Council. The mission of the Transporta- tion Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Boardâs varied activities annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individu- als interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org
C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP REPORT 768 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Christopher Hedges, Manager, National Cooperative Highway Research Program Andrew C. Lemer, Senior Program Officer Sheila A. Moore, Program Associate Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Ellen M. Chafee, Editor NCHRP PROJECT 20-93 PANEL Field of Special Projects Shane Brown, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR (Chair) Mohamed AlKadri, California DOT, Sacramento, CA Michael Bonini, Pennsylvania DOT, Harrisburg, PA Kathy L. DesRoches, Manchester Community College, Manchester, NH Patricia L. Lees, E. Norriton, PA Terance L. McNinch, ACUS Learning Systems LLC, Houghton, MI Ned Parrish, Idaho Transportation Department, Boise, ID Richard Y. Woo, Maryland State Highway Administration, Baltimore, MD Joseph Conway, FHWA Liaison James W. Bryant, Jr., TRB Liaison
NCHRP 768: Guide to Accelerating New Technology Adoption through Directed Technology Transfer presents a framework and guidance on how to use technology transfer to guide and accelerate innovation within a state department of transportation (DOT) or other such agency. The guidance will be helpful for agency personnel with any level of experience in adoption of new technology. The guide includes illustrative examples of innovations in organization and policy as well as design, materials, and operations. State departments of transportation (DOTs) and other organizations responsible for development and management of our surface transportation system seek to enhance both system performance and their capabilities to make improvements. Innovation through adoption of new technology is an important way to make improvements. Accelerating the rate of innovation within and among agencies can bring benefits to the public that relies on the transportation system as well as to the agency in pursuit of its mission. The challenges in adopting new technology, however, are widely acknowledged and per- sistent; and much has been written about the innovation process. One of the ways that orga- nizations and professionals seek to meet these challenges is through technology transfer (T2). T2 itself has been the subject of much study and its literature is vast. The term can have different meaning in different contexts. In this guide, T2 is viewed broadly as a way that ideas, knowledge, practices, processes, or techniques are shared between and within organi- zations. This report addresses guided T2, a purposeful activity involving at least two parties engaged in a conscious effort to exchange information intended to encourage adoption and useâdeploymentâof a new idea. The objective of NCHRP Project 20-93, Development of a Guide for Transportation Technology Transfer was to develop a guide that provides methodologies, case examples, and techniques that facilitate transportation T2. The goal underlying this objective is accel- erating the rates of innovation within and among transportation agencies. A research team led by Pennoni Associates, Inc., Philadelphia, PA, conducted the research. The research team started with a review of literature on current T2 practices. The team identified case studies or examples to illustrate how key steps in the technology adoption process have been successfully taken in situations typical of those likely to be encountered in transportation agencies. The team then constructed a highly structured set of guidance components to support agency staff efforts to use guided T2 to encourage adoption of new ideas within their agencies. This document is written to assist DOT staff and others working to encourage innova- tion through the adoption and deployment of new ideas, techniques, or tools. Even when opportunities for adoption may not be immediate, the guided T2 activities addressed in this guide can play a productive role in building awareness of the new ideas and practices that can improve system or agency performance when the opportunity arises. F O R E W O R D By Andrew C. Lemer Staff Officer Transportation Research Board
AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This guide was developed under NCHRP Project 20-93 by Pennoni Associates, Inc., prime contrac- tor. Mark Hood, of Pennoni Associates, Inc., was the Principal Investigator and was assisted by Stephen Thompson. Subcontractors to Pennoni included Robert Vance and Michael Renz of Vance & Renz, LLC; Barbara Harder of B.T. Harder, Inc.; Joseph Toole, consultant; and Samuel Hunter of Pennsylvania State University. Development of the guide utilized the resources and expertise of many professionals from around the country. Input was received from numerous individuals during informal meetings with TRBâs Technology Transfer Committee, the AASHTO Research Advisory Committee (RAC), the National Transportation Training Director (NTTD) conference, and the National Local Technical Assistance Program (LTAP)/ Tribal Technical Assistance Program (TTAP) meeting. The research team would like to specifically acknowledge those who contributed to this guide through an in-person interview, a telephone interview, or by responding to a survey. These individuals and organizations provided material, information for case examples, and input and comments during the development of the guide: Baystate Roads Program Chris Ahmadjian Caltrans Sonja Sun Centre Region Council of Governments Trish Meek Colorado LTAP Renee Railsback Connecticut T2 Center Donna Shea Mary McCarthy Cornell Local Roads Program David Orr Federal Aviation Administration Michael Meyers Federal Highway Administration Mark Sandifer Florida Transportation Technology Transfer Center Nina Barker Illinois Department of Transportation (DOT) Amy Schutzbach Kevin Burke Indiana LTAP John Habermann Iowa DOT Sandra Larson Kentucky LTAP Martha Horseman Louisiana LTAP Marie Walsh Michigan DOT Tracie Leix Dale Lighthizer Michigan LTAP Tim Colling Minnesota DOT Tom Sorrel Minnesota LTAP Jim Grothaus National Institute of Standards and Technology Chris Michaels North Carolina DOT Gene Conti Mrinmay âMoyâ Biswas Northern Plains Tribal Technical Assistance Program Dennis Trusty Pennsylvania DOT Lou Ferretti Daryl St. Clair William Davenport G. Randy Albert Pennsylvania State University Barbara Schaefer Teterboro, NJ Airport Pam Phillips University of California Berkeley Laura Melendy Utah DOT John Njord Cameron Kergaye David Stevens Wyoming LTAP George Huntingdon
1 Summary 4 Chapter 1 Background 6 Defining T2 7 The Innovation Adoption Process and Guided T2 11 Laying the Foundation for Guided T2 17 Using This Guide 21 Chapter 2 Address Societal and Legal Issues 21 Privacy and Security 22 Intellectual Property 25 Intellectual Property Considerations 27 Other Legal Issues: Buy American, Buy America 28 Suggested Readings 30 Chapter 3 Have an Effective Champion 32 Considerations Regarding a Champion 35 Suggested Readings 36 Chapter 4 Engage Decision Makers 38 Considerations Regarding Decision Makers 40 Suggested Readings 41 Chapter 5 Develop a T2 Plan 41 Planning During Research and Development 42 Planning for Full Deployment 42 Planning for a Deployment Decision 42 Considerations for the T2 Plan 45 Chapter 6 Identify, Inform, and Engage Stakeholders 47 Stakeholder Roles in Guided T2 48 Considerations Regarding Stakeholders 49 Suggested Readings 51 Chapter 7 Identify and Secure Resources 51 Categories of Resources 52 Identifying the Resources Required 55 Securing the Resources 56 Suggested Reading 57 Chapter 8 Conduct Demonstrations/Showcases 57 Description of a Demonstration/Showcase 61 Considerations for Conducting Demonstrations/Showcases C O N T E N T S
65 Chapter 9 Educate, Inform, and Provide Technical Assistance 65 Education 69 Information, Content Sharing, and Web 2.0 73 Technical Assistance 76 Suggested Readings 77 Chapter 10 Evaluate Progress 77 Considerations for Evaluating Progress 81 Suggested Readings 82 Chapter 11 Reach Deployment Decision 83 Decision to Deploy 83 Decision Not to Deploy 84 Considerations for Reaching a Deployment Decision 85 References 88 Glossary 90 Appendix A Guided T2 Checklist 93 Appendix B Suggested Readings on T2 Note: Many of the photographs, figures, and tables in this report have been converted from color to grayscale for printing. The electronic version of the report (posted on the Web at www.trb.org) retains the color versions.
