View
222
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
22
Second Recommendation First
If you are going to really make a change, this is where it really
happens!
33
One State Board, nine Regional Boards, and 12 offices – this is a highly distributed structure.
Regional Boards are semi-autonomous Top down structure does not work
The Water Boards
44
A Management Problem
Problems with CIWQS was as much a management problem as anything else Implementation – all Executive Officers
opposed system release, saying to ready yet.
Buy-in – program units not able to use to manage business
55
Panel Recommended Restructure CIWQS project management
A CIWQS lead has been identified and empowered within a month of this report
The new project structure is fully operational, with CIWQS team members identified and assigned project responsibilities
66
Water Quality Data Team
Reassigned Deputy Director to be Team lead Business/Program management of CIWQS
Formed a project Team Combination of program and IT staff Given formal role in Governance structure Each team member given specific
assignments and responsibilities Role is to guide and assist business areas
77
Project Management Contract management given to business
units In charge of schedules Prioritizing decisions based on business
needs Incorporate input from User Groups
88
Project Management Moving Ahead
Recruiting for permanent leader Making Team a permanent group
Shifting some staff to have dedicated role in group
Combining program staff and IT staff together Emphasizing the collection, management, and
dissemination of water quality data and information
99
Need More Than a Team
Have to tie this into the overall business/program management If CIWQS is a tool for the business staff, then
they need to use it. External users have a big role too
Our biggest data flows come from them. If they are going to be users, have to have
input as well.
1111
Classic three level management: Strategic, Tactical, and Operational But how does this apply to Water
Boards?
New Approach
1212
New Approach Strategic
Management Coordinating Committee (MCC) (all Executive Officers and Deputy Directors)
Tactical Normally would be middle managers Instead using a subgroup of executive
leadership Operational
Managed by programs at business level
1515
Steering Committee Was a big component of the Panel’s
recommendations (8/22 bench marks) – we heard that!
Panel envisioned as single overall steering committee
CIWQS has different areas for different users CIWQS bigger than most people realize Some areas needed detail work by the people that
use that area Most users only use one area and not as interested in
the others
1616
User Groups and Steering Committee
Adopted two-tiered approach User Groups
• eSMR – wastewater treatment plant dischargers• SSO – sanitary sewer operators• Storm Water – industrial and construction
permitees• Public Reports – broad interest• Internal – Water Board’s staff
Steering Committee• Two members from each User Group
1717
User Groups and Steering Committee
User Groups work directly with business units Deal with the details that make a system work Provide direct input to projects Help prioritize effort
Steering Committee has advisory role directly to Executive Management (MMC) Finds and deals with cross-linking issues Provides overall guidance
1919
Its Not All CIWQS Water Board has several large systems or
families of systems serving different business needs
Each area needs its own unique governance, but can follow the same structure as CIWQS
2121
Systems Working Together
Water Board adopting Portfolio Management in new Agency Information Management Strategy This will require more coordination between
business groups and systems
2222
Summary Formed Project Team
Leading to restructuring Formed User Groups and Steering
Committee Put most of them to work right away
Took governance beyond just CIWQS