Guide to Accelerating New Technology Adoption through Directed Technology Transfer (2014)

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.

57 Tier 2: Knowledge Building • Conduct demonstrations/ showcases • Educate, inform, and provide technical assistance Description of a Demonstration/Showcase A demonstration project or showcase is an information exchange mechanism that can reduce or eliminate the financial, professional, and political risk public agencies face when committing hard-to-come-by funds implementing technology when little or no practical field experience exists. The process allows hands-on experiences for the participants who interact with knowledgeable peers and others experienced in the technology application. (Harder and Benke, 2005) A demonstration project is considered another successful strategy for facilitating T2, espe- cially demonstrations that have hands-on learning. While demonstrations and showcases are most often thought of as events that are attended in person, technology may allow them to be conducted remotely. If a demonstration project is broadcast in the proper digital format, it may be viewed remotely via Skype, iPhone, or smart phone. The demonstration can also be recorded in the appropriate digital format for viewing at a later point. If not live, participants may have challenges with the hands-on aspect or asking live questions, but asking questions remotely is a possibility. Note that the demonstrations or showcases described here are part of the Innovation Adoption Process as defined in this guide. They occur after testing and evaluation in the R&D phase of the Innovation Adoption Process. For example, once a need has been identified as a problem to be solved, and a solution has been found internally, externally, or through research, an agency must show that the solution is feasible to implement within their organization. This might involve test- ing within an agency to demonstrate effectiveness in solving the identified problem. Sometimes demonstrating feasibility involves the development of a prototype or early implementation of the innovation as a pilot project. These activities all contribute to answering the question “Can it work here, in this agency?” These activities are briefly described in the blocks representing the phases of “Need” and “Research and Development” in the Innovation Adoption Process shown in Figure 1-3. C H A P T E R 8 Conduct Demonstrations/ Showcases 1. Should this innovation be demonstrated to a live audience? If yes, proceed to the next question. If no or unsure, proceed to the component discussion. 2. Is the audience chosen and able to assemble? If yes, proceed to the next question. If no or unsure, proceed to the component discussion. 3. Are take-home materials available for the audience? If yes, proceed to the next component. If no, proceed to component discussion.

58 Guide to Accelerating New Technology Adoption through Directed Technology Transfer Demonstration of Feasibility Assessment—Caltrans’ Pilot Vehicle Assist and Automation Program A case example from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) shows how a rigorous pilot testing process can help move a potential innovation—vehicle assist and automation (VAA) technology applied in a transit setting—toward more widespread deployment by demonstrating its practical feasibility. The Innovation VAA is a particular application of the more generally defined Intelligent Trans- portation Systems (ITS) technology for vehicle control and is being applied in this case example for transit bus guidance. These technologies can help the driver maintain lateral control of the bus, for example, for vehicle guidance and precision docking. With fully automated control of both longitudinal and lateral movement of the bus, platooning and full automated operation are possible. Caltrans’ pilot program for transit bus guidance is applying VAA. In this program, two VAA sensing technologies are being used: magnetic marker sensing and a differential global positioning system (DGPS) with inertial navigation sensors (INS). In magnet systems, the bus follows a trail of magnetic nails, disks, or tape embedded in, or on, the pavement. In DGPS systems, on-board equipment guides the bus movement using differential GPS to determine the location and an on- board map to determine the path. The Pilot Test U.S. DOT and FTA seek generally to promote the development of innovative ITS applications. Through university-based research, initial small demonstration projects, and limited international applications, VAA has been shown to be con- sistent with the agencies’ aims and potentially to meet an important need. While initial research has shown that VAA technologies have significant promise, the U.S. DOT perspective was that in most cases, the technologies’ full technical fea- sibility and benefits had not yet been adequately quantified. Therefore, a pilot program was initiated to demonstrate the benefits of VAA applications for full- size public transit buses in revenue service. The main objectives of the pilot program are to determine the technical feasi- bility, benefits, and costs of VAA in revenue service. VAA in this application has been shown to be a mature technology that has the potential to • Improve vehicular safety in traffic • Reduce travel times • Provide better ride quality and improved passenger cabin safety • Permit narrower dedicated bus lanes, and thus reduced right-of-way • Aid level boarding • Create narrow horizontal gap at boarding platform to comply with Americans with Disabilities (ADA) requirements

Conduct Demonstrations/Showcases 59 Caltrans and other stakeholders—Alameda County Transit (AC Transit), Lane Transit District (LTD) in Oregon, the University of California Partners for Advanced Transit and Highways (PATH) Program, and several private sector companies— agreed that these potential benefits could be realized with the application of VAA technologies along AC Transit’s M line, including the toll plaza, and LTD’s Franklin EmX Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) route that includes a dedicated bus lane with eight stops and two terminal points. Following the identification of a need to pilot test VAA, resources were made available from FTA for tailoring VAA to the test situation and test bus instru- mentation. Additional funding was provided for this project and supplemented with resources from Caltrans, AC Transit, and LTD. Decision makers at Caltrans, AC Transit, and LTD had to approve the installation of the technology in their buses. Champions at AC Transit and LTD promoted the use of the VAA technology. In the case of LTD, the transit bus trainers served as champions before introduc- ing the technology to the bus operators. The trainers themselves completed an extensive training program on the use of the technology, safety and operational benefits, override capabilities, and test runs, which convinced them of the viability and safety of operation. This exposure to the technology was vital to the effort, because, from a human factor standpoint, convincing the trainers (and bus drivers) to relinquish control of the wheel and allow the technology to provide lateral guidance was difficult. Once the trainers became convinced, they became champions, subsequently training bus operators in the operation of the technology. Anecdotally, the Caltrans project manager indicated that although initially the trainers and operators were quite nervous about the technology, they are now advocating for all buses to be equipped with VAA technology. During the pilot, with VAA-equipped buses running in revenue service, quanti- tative data are being collected on lateral accuracy, passenger counts, and dwell time to characterize significant aspects of system performance, along with quali- tative measures (such as ease-of-use, human-machine interface design, and ride comfort) gathered through interviews with drivers and passengers. The Results At the end of 2013, the pilot test was not complete but results have been promis- ing. The in-service demonstration is providing evidence to both operating per- sonnel and transit users that this VAA technology can be move from research to practical application. In designing an adequately funded pilot, recruiting cham- pions among the demonstration’s participants, and providing effective training, Caltrans and its partners exhibited good guided T2 practice and enhanced the likelihood of the pilot’s success.

60 Guide to Accelerating New Technology Adoption through Directed Technology Transfer PennDOT Showcases Tow Plows In 2012, PennDOT adopted the tow plow as its newest piece of storm-fighting equipment on Pennsylvania roads. A tow plow is a snow plow towed by a plow truck. When combined with a standard V or swivel blade front plow, this device (manufactured by Viking-Cives, LTD) increases plowing width to 25 feet, or two full lane widths. When activated, the wheels of the tow plow turn up to 30 degrees to the right, causing the tow plow to steer out to the right of the plow truck. The tow plow was piloted successfully in 2009 on a major Interstate. According to one county maintenance manager, “The tow plow allows the operator to clear two lanes simultaneously, reducing route time by half. This enhances productivity and saves fuel.” He added it can be equipped with tanks and/or hoppers to spread liquid, granular, or a mix of material, and also can be used as a pre-treatment trailer. He noted that the feedback from early adopters of this technology was very positive. At PennDOT’s annual maintenance managers meeting in June 2009, the tow plow was a featured technology that was demonstrated and showcased. It was available for managers to inspect, discuss, and try out during this 3-day meeting. The benefit of the showcase was that attendees could see and experience how the tow plow works, get technical advice on how it would apply to their particu- lar user environment from trusted peers in highway maintenance, and get prod- uct information from the technical experts available at the event. A demonstration or showcase undertaken as part of the guided T2 phase of the Innovation Adoption Process is different in purpose. At this point, the innovation will have been deter- mined to be feasible, available, and ready for use. Documentation of sufficient evidence of the benefits must also be available. The questions “Does it Work?” and “Could it Work Here?” have been answered in the affirmative, so the innovation should not require further develop- ment, testing, or evaluation. A T2 demonstration or showcase should answer several different questions: • What will be different or what will change as a result of deploying the innovation throughout the DOT? • What can be learned from the demonstration/showcase that can be applied to full-scale deployment? • What are crucial elements to success of the demonstration and how can these be identified and transferred to full-scale deployment? Thus, demonstrations or showcases for T2 can display the merits of a product or service to a number of different audiences: • Upper management, decision makers, or other stakeholders to obtain support for deploying and implementing an innovation • Technical staff or other “end users” within a DOT for whom this product/technology may be new • Local agencies looking to implement a new technology that has been utilized on the state level • Other states looking for solutions to their problems (T2 between agencies)

Conduct Demonstrations/Showcases 61 Demonstration of the Fitch Barrier Proves Potential to Save Lives John Fitch, legendary race car driver and inventor was so convinced that his barrier system could successfully save lives on the highway that he insisted on a demonstration during which he tested the innovation on himself to demonstrate its effectiveness. Following this demonstration, the Fitch Univer- sal Module System (Fitch Barrier) gained more widespread acceptance as an impact attenuator designed to reduce damage or injury from motor vehicle collisions by absorbing or redirecting the kinetic energy of vehicles colliding with the attenuator. The Fitch Barrier uses sand- or water-filled plastic barrels set in a triangular array with less sand or water in the front barrels and more sand or water in the barrels toward the back of the array. The kinetic energy of a colliding vehicle is dissipated by the scattering sand or water, allowing the vehicle to decelerate quickly but smoothly. The Fitch Barrier’s popularity is due to its low initial cost, its low maintenance costs, its ease of setup, and most importantly its success. The Fitch Barrier is estimated to have saved 17,000 lives since its implementation in the late 1960s. The deployment of the Fitch Barrier was aided by two key T2 elements: an effective champion and a successful demonstration. (Grinnell, 1993) Considerations for Conducting Demonstrations/Showcases What Actions Should Be Considered? To conduct a successful T2 demonstration project or showcase, there are eight critical elements or actions: Involve innovation champion (refer to Chapter 3 for more details) • Innovation champion should take a lead in helping to organize and run the demonstration project. • Often, there may be several champions involved. A technical champion should be avail- able to answer technical questions and take a lead on organizing proper responses to tech- nical issues that may arise during the demonstration. There may also be a champion from upper management/decision maker levels that would lend support to the demonstration project to show other management level employees that the DOT has bought into the innovation. Define audience • Upper management to obtain support for implementing an innovation • Technical staff within a DOT for whom this innovation may be new • Local agencies who are looking to implement a new technology that has been utilized on the state level • Other states looking for solutions to their problems (T2 between agencies) Establish objectives • How are you communicating the benefits to the targeted audience? – Plan the event with the target audience in mind

62 Guide to Accelerating New Technology Adoption through Directed Technology Transfer • What will be different or what will change as a result of implementing the innovation? • What can be learned that can be applied to implementation? • What are crucial elements to success and how can these be identified and transferred? Confirm decision maker endorsement (refer to Chapter 4 for more details) • Be sure that upper management is supportive of conducting a demonstration project Obtain necessary resources (refer to Chapter 7 for more details) • Funding • Technical Communication and logistics • Identify person or organization that will handle logistics of the demonstration project • A neutral sponsor could be helpful • Location • Personnel – Administrative – Technical • Contractors/consultant participation • Timing • Travel • Take-home materials. Participants should have materials with highlights to take away from the demonstration. Iowa DOT Successfully Demonstrates Several Accelerated Bridge Construction (ABC) Technologies The U.S. 6 bridge replacement over Keg Creek in Pottawattamie County utilized several innovative methods incorporated into a single bridge project to reduce bridge closure time: prefabricated superstructure and substructure systems, ultra-high-performance concrete (UHPC), self-consolidating concrete (SCC), and fully contained flooded backfill. The Iowa DOT partnered with the FHWA and the Strategic Highway Research Program 2 (SHRP2) to promote the innova- tions used in the US 6 over Keg Creek bridge replacement project through a 1-day showcase in Council Bluffs, Iowa. The showcase included presentations by representatives of the FHWA, Iowa DOT, SHRP2, Iowa State University, HNTB Corporation, and the construction contractor. The presentations were followed by a field trip to the project site to observe the forming of deck joints using UHPC. Benefits of the showcase were directed to facilitating T2: attendees got questions answered about their potential applications of the technology, saw the resources required for such technology to be applied in their contexts, and networked with peers and experts that gave support and built confidence in attendees’ ability to also use the technology. Eighty attendees from 14 states participated in the showcase. These attendees represented other state DOTs, transportation authorities, and the construction industry. (Interview with Sandra Larson, Iowa DOT, on July 1, 2013)

Conduct Demonstrations/Showcases 63 Marketing • Re-confirm audience • Determine marketing methods • Create materials – Materials should be meaningful enough to attract participant attention and get them to want to attend – Should include registration information – Should not include too much information to overwhelm a potential participant who may then ignore the opportunity – Ensure materials highlight what the participants will get out of attending the demonstration • Distribute information Evaluation • Effectiveness of a demonstration, showcase, or other educational activity could be evaluated in terms of Kirkpatrick’s (1998) criteria for training evaluation. Developed in 1959, Donald Kirkpatrick’s four-level evaluation model is a sequential model for evaluating the effective- ness of a training program. The four levels of Kirkpatrick’s model are reaction, learning, behavior, and results: – The first level of evaluation in Kirkpatrick’s model, reaction, focuses on the affective response of participants to a training program. In other words, did participants like the instructor and the content? Most training programs include this level of evaluation. – The second level of Kirkpatrick’s model, learning, focuses on the change of knowledge experienced by participants as a benefit of their exposure to a training program. The most common methodology to measure this uses a pre-training exam and a post-training exam, also known as pre-test/post-test. These exams may be conducted corporately or individu- ally. Even if administering a pre-test is not practical, a post-test is useful for measuring the level of participants’ knowledge after the training. – The third level of evaluation, behavior (called “transfer” in some documents), is more dif- ficult to assess, but may be the most useful level of evaluation for instructors because it measures the application of new knowledge where participants work. This level of evalu- ation measures changes in trainees’ behavior as a result of the training event. The respon- sibility for gathering data about pre-training and post-training behavior often falls to the supervisors of employees. – The fourth level of evaluation, results, focuses on changes in business measures as a result of the training. If trainees are able to work more efficiently, lowering costs and raising profits, then the training may be deemed successful from a business perspective. This is the most difficult change to measure; data may be gathered through follow-up surveys or interviews. (Kirkpatrick, 1998) • Although it enjoys wide use, Kirkpatrick’s model is not the only training evaluation model available. Other models include Stufflebeam’s Context, Input, Process, Product Model (CIPP); Stake’s Responsive Evaluation Model; Stake’s Countenance Model; Kaufman’s Five Levels of Evaluation (modeled after Kirkpatrick’s four-level model); Context, Input, Reac- tion, Outcome (CIRO); Program Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT); Scriven’s Goal- Free Evaluation Approach; Provus’ Discrepancy Model; and Illuminative Evaluation Model (U.S. Office of Personnel Management, n.d.). These models present differing specific uses or perspectives but most, at their essence, compare knowledge or performance pre- and post-treatment. For most training programs or demonstrations, Kirkpatrick’s model will be useful. However, one of these other models may contain features or qualities that are useful for a specific need.

64 Guide to Accelerating New Technology Adoption through Directed Technology Transfer What Are Some of the Challenges and Barriers to Conducting Effective Demonstrations or Showcases? Barriers associated with demonstration projects include the following: • No champion to lead the demonstration effort • Decision makers not engaged or supportive • Poor or insufficient marketing to end users • Innovation not adequately tested • Benefits of innovation not readily apparent or communicated • High cost of demonstration efforts (also a resource barrier) • Insufficient personnel resources to organize logistics • Insufficient technical resources to answer questions • Poor or insufficient demonstration opportunities Note that some of these barriers are similar to challenges that may be encountered when conducting a pilot demonstration project during the research and development phase of the Innovation Adoption Process.