North Central Texas Transportation Systems Management ... · Improving Transportation Systems Management & Operations: A Capability Improvement Workshop 1 North Central Texas Transportation

Improving Transportation Systems Management & Operations: A Capability Improvement Workshop

1

North Central Texas Transportation Systems Management & Operations Capability Improvement Workshop

Participant Self-Evaluation and Strategy Identification

The material in this memo presents the process and results from the one-day facilitated workshop held at NCTCOG offices on July 31, 2012, focused on the key process and institutional preconditions to improving the level of effectiveness of the Region’s transportation systems management and operations (TSM&O) activities. The material includes:

Assessments and strategy recommendations made by participants in the workshop. These were documented by the facilitators and reported below in the form of tables documenting the views of the participants

A memo describing the concept, intent and structure of the workshop The workshop agenda and participants

The six dimensions used to structure the workshop and the criteria for current level of capability were developed through national research regarding key features of the most effective TSM&O programs. These dimensions and criteria were used to structure the discussion, which included identification of strengths and weaknesses of TSM&O-related process and arrangement in the region, assessments of current capabilities (highlighted in yellow), and strategy priorities to improve capability for effective TSM&O. This material is the product of the participants. A set of links to selected best-practice resources has been added. The workshop was facilitated by Steve Lockwood of Parsons Brinckerhoff and Phil Tarnoff, a private consultant, with assistance from Reno Giordano of Parsons Brinckerhoff. It is part of a series of workshops sponsored by FHWA. Further information on the concepts and guidance used in the workshop is available at aashtosomguidance.org.


2

DIMENSION: Business Processes (Planning and Programming)

Strengths Cited Weaknesses Cited

Ad hoc plans in place at local level and individual initiatives at the regional level

Basic MOUs in place on bilateral basis (although not regional) Draft plan for data sharing under development (e.g. ideal: radio

interoperability) – will lead to formal agreement among transportation entities

Operations plan for Super Bowl was successful model, and demonstrated the value of coordination and regional leadership; netted economic benefit and provides a model, if it could be sustained

Inclusion of the private business sector was key to gaining support RTC has shown the potential to coordinating development

(signals) COG, local governments, and DART all have strong capabilities to

develop and manage significant TSM&O-project-level activities New TxDOT program to identify key areas for improvement and

range of applicable strategies

Projects implemented on an ad hoc basis Lack of consensus-driven regional plan for TSM&O; individual

plans (single function or jurisdiction) result in redundancies and gaps

Region is highly complex with multiple jurisdictions; generally, local jurisdictions do not have capital infrastructure plans for TSM&O or ITS plans

Full range of potential TSM&O strategies (ramp metering, active traffic management, etc.) not yet considered

Dependency on champions to drive focus and processes with risk of turnover

Characterization of implementing improvements is “survival mode” rather than planning – can result in missed opportunities and funding

Often only small portion of TSM&O projects’ budgets allocated to ongoing operations and maintenance – emphasis is on design, construction, maintenance

Data sharing agreement not expected to include law enforcement agencies and local governments

RTC scope very broad – limited focus on TSM&O matters – but has assumed responsibility for signal timing program because of lack of initiative/capability at the local level

Some key operations procedures and protocols reflected in current state-of-the-practice not yet developed among key players who deliver services (incident management)


3

Level Consensus

LEVEL 1 PERFORMED

LEVEL 2 MANAGED

LEVEL 3 INTEGRATED

LEVEL 4 OPTIMIZING

Each jurisdiction doing its own thing according to individual priorities and capabilities

Consensus regional approach developed regarding TSM&O goals, deficiencies, B/C, networks, strategies and common priorities

Regional program integrated into jurisdictions’ overall multimodal transportation plans with related staged program

TSM&O integrated into jurisdictions’ multi-sectoral plans and programs, based on a formal, continuing planning processes

Consensus 1.5

Action

Actions to Advance to the Next Level

TxDOT: Move “Operations” (TSM&O) out of Maintenance and into Planning allowing consideration of TSM&O solutions on a corridor basis alongside other “traditional” planning considerations: toll roads, transit, freeways, etc.

Conduct deficiency analysis to identify priorities – corridor, regional Build on corridor level approach for process model and technical

applications experience (recognizing jurisdictional complexity and differences) – and subsequently build up to broader planning

Consider TRB SHRP 2 program resources (guidebook) on integrating operations into planning and programming, as well as FHWA “Planning for Operations” workshops

Identify performance measures of relevance to private sector business community to develop sustainability of “business processes” (example partners: insurance companies, emergency response, TXU)

Identify other stakeholders in business community to incentivize their participation and stake in operations and develop approach to market and integrate them

DIMENSION: Business Processes (Planning and Programming) - continued


4

Selected Best Practice Resources Planning for Operations: http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/travel/plan2op.htm Includes primers and guidance for both statewide and metropolitan planning and best practices Incident Management Guidance: http://www.i95coalition.org/i95/Library/IncidentMgmtClearinghouse/tabid/86/Default.aspx I-95 Corridor Coalition searchable clearinghouse. See also http://www.transportation.org/Default.aspx?siteid=41&pageid=2757 for Incident Management Coalition resources Strategies for non-recurring congestion: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/program_areas/reduce-non-cong.htm Covers incident management, special events management, work zone management, road weather management and covers technology, procedures and protocols, partners, policy and regulations, best practices and other publications Traveler information: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/travelinfo/index.htm Includes tools and resources and best practices ITS lessons learned in deployment: http://www.itsknowledgeresources.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/LessonHome

DIMENSION: Business Processes (Planning and Programming) - continued

http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/travel/plan2op.htm

http://www.i95coalition.org/i95/Library/IncidentMgmtClearinghouse/tabid/86/Default.aspx

http://www.transportation.org/Default.aspx?siteid=41&pageid=2757

http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/program_areas/reduce-non-cong.htm

http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/travelinfo/index.htm

http://www.itsknowledgeresources.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/LessonHome


5

DIMENSION: Systems and Technology


Draft plan for data sharing under development (e.g. ideal: radio interoperability, center-to-center software) – will lead to formal agreement among transportation entities

Aggressive training: focused on freeway incident management (first responders, police, fire); includes executive program (decision and policy makers) on policy

Well developed ITS architecture, software, imaging, testing of advanced adaptive signal control

TxDOT fiber shared for police and fire use Some cost sharing for communications equipment (e.g. Dallas

district operations staff included in purchase of police radios) Innovative use of Twitter (LBJ project) for managing incidents

and responses

Absence of regional concept of operations to clarify roles, relationships and processes (e.g. conflict on authority for freeway incident diversion to local arterials)

Systems engineering process not used for projects under implementation, TxDOT support/leadership not clear

Lack of multijurisdictional integration and interoperability (e.g. traffic signals, VMS, communication and camera with towing community)

Little interjurisdictional corridor collaboration (but now starting up in the ICM project)

Limited access to real-time technology/data at the local level for police/fire/first responders

Lack of coordination on timing of freeway improvements (esp. between two TxDOT districts)

Level Consensus

LEVEL 1 PERFORMED

LEVEL 2 MANAGED

LEVEL 3 INTEGRATED

LEVEL 4 OPTIMIZING

Ad hoc approaches to system implementation without consideration of systems engineering and appropriate procurement processes

Regional conops and architectures developed and documented with costs included; appropriate procurement process employed

Systems & technology standardized and integrated on a regional basis (including arterial focus) with other related processes

Architectures and technology routinely upgraded to improve performance; systems integration/interoperability maintained on continuing basis

Consensus ConOps: 1.25 Regional arch.: 2


6

DIMENSION: Systems and Technology - continued

Action


Inventory existing municipal agreements to clarify objectives and roles and to harmonize and identify gaps

Develop regional ConOps and relate outcome to multi-year plan and system architecture

Identify universe of systems and technology principles/benchmarks supporting the ConOps especially to support identification of key roles and procedures for each key system/strategy

Update mid-2000s system architecture (underway) Integrate and coordinate websites for traveler information, 511 Develop video sharing protocols (FHWA resources available)

Selected Best Practice Resources Systems engineering, architecture and standards: http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/int_its_deployment/index.htm Includes policy, examples, training resources, guidance and standards FHWA has significant support resources available: http://tmcpfs.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/cfprojects/uploaded_files/conops_tms_handbook.pdf

http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/int_its_deployment/index.htm

http://tmcpfs.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/cfprojects/uploaded_files/conops_tms_handbook.pdf


7

DIMENSION: Performance Measurement


NCTCOG has taken lead on certain broad performance measure reporting with style and content useful for decision makers

TSM&O measures lack comprehensiveness – either output or outcome measures

Some incident response/clearance time recorded, but not reported, utilized; minimal post-major incident debriefings

Some use of Bluetooth data collection (LBJ, NTE, ICM) Good processes and measurement on managed lanes not

currently applied to other corridors or beyond project limits Sheriff’s Office performs comprehensive data measurement and

reporting Useful examples provided by toll facility operators COG incident management training provides framework for

addressing performance management

Lack of data/performance reporting from some agencies/jurisdictions; quality and depth

Some incident management performance data collected but uneven and not reported, utilized

Few cities collect performance measures on arterials Limited incident data and reporting No model or training established to frame consensus approach to

performance management Lack of performance accountability for incident response

(incident identification is good, but response is delayed) Gap between public policy makers and private towing community

regarding most effective improvement of performance; no incentive/disincentive approach to towing performance

Level Consensus

LEVEL 1 PERFORMED

LEVEL 2 MANAGED

LEVEL 3 INTEGRATED

LEVEL 4 OPTIMIZING

Some outputs measured and reported by some jurisdictions

Output data used directly for after-action debriefings and improvements; data easily available and dashboarded

Outcome measures identified (networks, modes, impacts) and routinely utilized for objective-based program improvements

Performance measures reported internally for utilization and externally for accountability and program justification

Consensus 1


8

DIMENSION: Performance Measurement - continued

Action


Inventory what performance measures and data are currently collected across agencies and jurisdictions (TxDOT, DART, NTTA, private sector, law enforcement) and share among all (what is it?, fidelity, cost to collect, what do you do with it?)

Consider statewide pavement asset management as a model for establishing and implementing a defined set of significant performance measures

Define and reach consensus on performance measures and utilization, determine necessary data collection methods, analytics, presentation, and communication; create performance measurement plan

Consider benefits of outsourcing performance measurement and analysis Identify performance measure best practice (via FHWA) for peer

exchange

Selected Best Practice Resources Performance measurement: http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/perf_measurement/index.htm Includes statistics, technical resources, measures, and other publications Performance Measurement Library: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Accountability/Publications/Library.htm Developed by WSDOT contains a list of 51 state and federal entities and their online performance measurement and strategic planning mechanisms. Planning for Operations: http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/travel/plan2op.htm Includes primers and guidance for both statewide and metropolitan planning and best practices

http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/perf_measurement/index.htm

http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Accountability/Publications/Library.htm



9

DIMENSION: Culture


Professional staffs “get it” regarding the value of TSM&O COG provides important leadership/focus/convening and staff

support for regional operations consideration Good understanding of private business stake in effective

operations with tradition of business involvement Toll road customer service orientation and DFW experience with

public-private partnerships provides potentially transferrable example of strong operations culture

TxDOT statewide level projects have minimal visibility and support for regional TSM&O

Strong professional staff culture is not supported/shared by elected officials (lack of budgetary support); political gain not apparent

Lack of sustainable resource base: no line item for operations in TxDOT or local jurisdictions’ budgets

Some jurisdictions don’t believe operating their existing systems is a high priority (given competing priorities, demands)

Weak communication of performance and pay-offs to public Lack of TxDOT formal inclusion for operations in new project

development

Level Consensus

LEVEL 1 PERFORMED

LEVEL 2 MANAGED

LEVEL 3 INTEGRATED

LEVEL 4 OPTIMIZING

Individual staff champions promote TSM&O – varying among jurisdictions

Jurisdictions’ senior management understands TSM&O business case and educates decision makers/public

Jurisdictions’ mission identifies TSM&O and benefits with formal program and achieves wide public visibility/understanding

Customer mobility service commitment accountability accepted as formal, top-level core program of all jurisdictions

Consensus Elected officials: 1 Agency staffs: 2


10

DIMENSION: Culture - continued

Action


Integrate policy makers in executive training course or create task force for their participation to increase visibility and impact of operations strategies and programs

Get business community and potentially chambers of commerce to lobby and make case to elected officials – determine national best practice on using private sector in this manner

Involve private sector (insurance companies) in responding to non-injury crashes, rather than law enforcement

Persuade TxDOT Executive Director to lobby TTC on significance of resource support for operations

Compare toll road vs. freeway performance on procedures and costs to make case for cost-effectiveness

Selected Best Practice Resources Systems Operations Process and Institutional Guidance: http://www.aashtosomguidance.org/ Provides self-evaluation-driven detailed guidance based on users current level of capability, covering, business processes performance measurement, systems and technology, culture, organization and workforce and collaboration ITS benefits: http://www.itsknowledgeresources.its.dot.gov/ Provides current data on benefits and costs of ITS on transportation operations by applications areas according to the six goals identified by the U.S. Department of Transportation: safety, mobility, efficiency, productivity, energy and environmental impacts, and customer satisfaction. Also available as http://www.its.dot.gov/press/2011/its_deployment.htm Outreach and marketing: http://www.itsa.org/advocacy/materials ITS advocacy materials The Role of Transportation Systems Management and Operations in Supporting Livability and Sustainability: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/news/news_detail.asp?ID=802

http://www.aashtosomguidance.org/

http://www.itsknowledgeresources.its.dot.gov/

http://www.its.dot.gov/press/2011/its_deployment.htm

http://www.itsa.org/advocacy/materials

http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/news/news_detail.asp?ID=802


11

DIMENSION: Organization/Staffing


Initiative-specific groups in place (technology, incident response) NCTCOG RTC/technical committee provides potential forum for

technical exchange and coordination NCTCOG incident management training programs effective NCTCOG-led multi-committee approach to Super Bowl, provides

important examples of model of collaboration Strong role of local government in some areas (e.g. Dallas County

MAP program) TxDOT works with municipalities on maintenance agreement basis

(for cities 50,000+)

Lack of identified responsibility for operations and performance improvement for many common or multijurisdictional activities

Lack of resources, positions for staff strengthening Need felt for many local TMCs – absent resource-sharing approach Lack of integration among various operations-related groups,

each with their own focus NCTCOG technical committee structure lacks police and fire

participation No forum or entity in place to establish performance measure

parameters No committee on signal timing protocols No identified responsibilities for effective operations from the

public point of view (who to call?)

Level Consensus

LEVEL 1 PERFORMED

LEVEL 2 MANAGED

LEVEL 3 INTEGRATED

LEVEL 4 OPTIMIZING

TSM&O added on to units within existing structure and staffing, dependent on technical champions

TSM&O-specific organizational concept developed within/among jurisdictions with core capacity needs identified; collaboration takes place

TSM&O managers have direct report to top management; job specs, certification and training for core positions

TSM&O senior managers at equivalent level with other jurisdiction services and staff professionalized

Consensus 2


12

DIMENSION: Organization/Staffing - continued

Action


Consider staff needs in region for new activities such as ConOps development

Develop regional coordination entity (at NCTCOG) focused on TSM&O policy and program development – including all key players, transportation, public safety, private sector

Revisit successful structure and goals of Super Bowl committee; TSM&O committee could have subgroups for specific activities

Given complex/overlapping jurisdictions/functions, consider new institutional model to advance regional policies and program (such as “regional operating authority”)

Selected Best Practice Resources Detailed guidance on organization and staffing: http://www.aashtosomguidance.org/guides/OW_L3.pdf

http://www.aashtosomguidance.org/guides/OW_L3.pdf


13

DIMENSION: Collaboration


Performance contracting for private sector concessionaires TxDOT contracts with state police – one entity approach, easy to

negotiate with Fire entities work well together Previous success with corridor committees incorporating TxDOT

and incident response community Dallas ICM demonstrating one model of collaboration

No single entity or forum to discuss and coordinate regional operational issues

Lack of corridor collaboration Performance standards not applied to public projects as they are

to CDAs Gaps and inconsistencies above level of interagency fire

collaboration Local jurisdiction concern for being measured against regionally

developed benchmarks that may not be relevant or achievable

Level Consensus

LEVEL 1 PERFORMED

LEVEL 2 MANAGED

LEVEL 3 INTEGRATED

LEVEL 4 OPTIMIZING

Relationships ad hoc and on personal basis (public-public, public-private)

Objectives, strategies and performance measures aligned among organized key players (transportation and public service agencies) with after-action debriefing

Rationalization/sharing/ formalization of responsibilities among key players through co-training, formal agreements and incentives

High level of TSM&O coordination among owner/operators (state, local, private)

Consensus 2-


14

DIMENSION: Collaboration - continued

Action


Formalize strategies related to collaboration that are currently on an ad hoc, hand-shake basis

Establish understanding of collaborative needs by extent (corridor, district, region)

Determine if this outcome implies a need for new institutional structure Consider committee/subcommittee structure to prioritize and delegate

applications and strategies on a entity or corridor basis – would address issue of how to “strategically” collaborate rather than “comprehensively” collaborate (institutional models for this include 1) delegation and authority and 2) prioritization)

ConOps consideration could be outcome-based but applied on corridor basis Investigate success of I-95 Corridor Coalition, which has common goals and

outcomes but different means (structures, relationships, etc.) of achieving them

Consider FHWA resources/peer exchange on this topic Consider FHWA course on incident management training Investigate Atlanta region heavy towing program as a model for North Texas

region Collaborate and agree on performance definitions

Selected Best Practice Resources Regional operations and collaboration material: http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/travel/plan2op.htm



15

Concluding Additional General Discussion Points 1. “Walk the walk”: we must hold ourselves accountable for operational performance the way NTTA and private partners do; do this in a

sustainable business sense that incorporates business community partners, potentially in a new institutional structure 2. Development of business performance measures is essential (like ISO fire) 3. Working with district engineers, develop a pilot initiative to move operations out of maintenance and into planning to consider “triage”

approach to corridors in terms of financial strategy 4. Establish financial incentives for partners (as with CMAQ program) to implement operational policies 5. Examine issue of operational plans vs. regional goals; determine balance of dictating the “how” versus the “what” 6. Review and prioritize other items in the action plan


TSM&O Capability Workshop Page

Improving Transportation Systems Management & Operations A Capability Improvement Workshop

July 31, 2012 North Central Texas Council of Governments

Transportation Council Room 616 Six Flags Drive, Centerpoint Two

Arlington, Texas 76011 8:30 AM – 4:00 PM

Purpose of the Workshop

The purpose of this Workshop is to raise awareness of the opportunities for improving the effectiveness of state, regional, and local Transportation System Management and Operations (TSM&O) activities. The Workshop is sponsored by the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) with support from FHWA.

The Dallas-Fort Worth region continues to be one of the fastest growing urban areas in the Nation. Roadways in both Dallas and Tarrant Counties are among the most congested in the state. While important major improvements in capacity are under development in the region, congestion, delay, lack of reliability and related safety problems continue to increase. Maximizing the efficient use of the existing infrastructure is an essential part of addressing these problems.

The state of the practice in TSM&O is advancing in many states and metropolitan areas around the Nation. The Dallas-Fort Worth region is making significant progress in certain TSM&O activities. This workshop builds on this progress and introduces a specific focus on how to mainstream TSM&O activities as a program at the state and regional level. Its focus is not primarily on project specifics. Rather, the focus is on the broader program, process, and organizational capabilities that are essential to “mainstreaming” effective TSM&O strategies as an integral part of the region’s transportation improvement program. It is aimed at program and activity level managers responsible for TSM&O-related activities in state, regional, and local agencies.

Research shows that moving beyond a collection of strategy applications to an effective TSM&O program requires a set of deliberate change management actions to improve agency capabilities in six specific dimensions. An “operations capability” approach utilized in the Workshop (discussed below) focuses on the key dimensions that impact program effectiveness: business processes, systems and technology, performance measurement, culture, organization/staffing, and collaboration. Improving these capabilities are essential to continuous improvement of TSM&O and its performance impacts.

The Workshop is not a consultant presentation—it is a structured dialogue among key transportation agency staff in the region.



Background Basic Transportation Systems Management and Operations Strategies – As congestion spreads and intensifies and the level of incidents, delays and disruptions increase, the level of service and reliability of the roadway systems in many areas continues to deteriorate. In large metropolitan areas over half of the total delay and most of the system unreliability results from disruptions and incidents, many of which are not substantially dealt with by adding new capacity. The contribution of these problems to congestion is shown in Exhibit 1. Exhibit 1. The six causes of congestion and delay

Transportation Systems Management and Operations – Given the constraints on the provision of significant new capacity, it is increasingly important to operate the existing network to its fullest service potential, especially “taking back” the capacity lost to congestion, incidents, construction, weather, poor signalization, etc. TSM&O is an integrated program to optimize the performance of existing multimodal infrastructure through implementation of systems, services, and projects to preserve capacity and improve the security, safety and reliability of the transportation system. TSM&O capitalizes on the full service potential and cost-effectiveness of the complete range of the well-known strategies such as:

Traffic incident management Integrated corridor management Work zone management Traveler information services and demand management Road weather information Freeway management and managed lanes Traffic signal operation Electronic payment/toll collection Emergency response Active traffic management Freight management

The logic for aggressive pursuit of TSM&O is compelling. TSM&O strategies are extremely cost effective (and low cost) with relatively short lead times. Exhibit 2 illustrates this range of potential.



Exhibit 2. TSM&O Strategy impacts

TSM&O Applications Benefits and Benefit-Cost Ratios Safety Impact

Mobility Impact

Energy/ Environment

Impact

Traffic incident management Incident duration reduced 30–50% High High High

Safety service patrols 2:1 to 42:1 High High High Surveillance &

detection 8:1 High High High

Road weather information systems

2:1 to 10:1; crash rates reduced from 7–80% High High High

Traveler information dynamic message signs

3% decrease in crashes; 5–15% improvement in on–time performance Low High Low

Work zone management 2.1 to 40.1; system delays reduced up to 50% High Medium Medium

Active Traffic Management Throughput increased by 3–7%; decrease in incidents of 3–30% High High Medium

Improving TSM&O program effectiveness – There is a wide gap among regions between state-of-the-practice applications and average practice. Exhibit 3 illustrates examples of the wide variation among regions regarding the effectiveness of their TSM&O activities, reflecting differences in the degree of commitment in terms of organization, resources, program, and innovation.

Exhibit 3. Best practice incident management delay reductions

Recent research by SHRP2 and AASHTO suggests that the key challenges to improved effectiveness are no longer primarily related to technology or understanding of best practice. The effectiveness of DOTs appears to be closely related to development of equivalent specific processes and institutional arrangements for TSM&O in six key dimensions:

80

60

40

20

0Ave

rage

Red

uct

ion

inIn

cide

nt D

urat

ion

(%

)

Fairfa

x, VA

Marylan

d

Atlan

ta, GA

Albuqu

erque

, NM

San A

ntonio

, TX



Planning and programming Systems and technology Performance measurement Culture Organization/staffing Collaboration

Exhibit 4 illustrates these interdependencies between the “program” (specific applications) and the business and technical process dimensions and supporting institutional arrangements needed for achieving full effectiveness and continuous improvement.

Exhibit 4. Relationships among program, processes and institutional framework

Especially for agencies and regions with basic TSM&O strategies already in place, reaching full potential requires that these supportive processes and institutional arrangements be put in place and managed at the program level, just as has typically already been done for the other formal core programs of DOTs, such as construction and maintenance.

Operations Capability The Operations Capability Workshop – The purpose of the TSM&O Capability Workshop is to provide a mechanism by which management personnel of the various transportation agencies in the region can assess the current state of play regarding these key dimensions and help identify the key next steps to beginning a path of continuous improvement. The workshop concept is based on extensive research in states and regions around the country and has been validated in 11 previous workshops.

The Structure of the Workshop – Research in TSM&O effectiveness has resulted in the development of a framework for assessing a region’s capabilities to support improving TSM&O. The concept of capability improvement is supported by self-evaluation and identification of critical priority “next steps” to placing TSM&O activities on a path to improved outcomes on a continuing basis. The concept of “capability improvement” was originally developed for the information technology industry and is widely applied in the U.S. and internationally as a



means of improving products and services. Key features of the Operations Capability concept are:

It focuses just on six key dimensions needed for improving efficiency and outcome effectiveness It recognizes that improvements must be implemented in incremental and “doable” levels that can be managed—

with clearly identified criteria that build on previous activities to reduce the risk of failure It identifies priorities for management in terms of the most highly leveraging actions that improve efficiency and

effectiveness up to the next level Key Dimensions: Processes – Predictable and repeatable processes—both business and technical—within an organization are the key to effective, “surprise free” TSM&O. Achieving predictability and repeatability requires planning for standardization and documentation of systems and technology, training and performance measurement. These features are also the tools required for continuous improvement: putting the program on a stepwise path to improved effectiveness. Many of these considerations have long been embodied in how regional transportation agencies do their other core business such as capital project development and maintenance. But the requirements of a high-tech, real-time customer service activity like TSM&O are different and need to be specifically accommodated with appropriate processes. Organizations that want their TSM&O processes to be predictable and repeatable and tailored to the incremental high-tech, low-cost nature of the improvements, must evolve through identifiable levels of capability from informal (at the lower end of the scale) to highly routinized and with continuous improvement embedded at the higher end. As each process develops in this way, its capability will improve.

The Process dimensions to be considered in the workshops are:

Planning and programming for TSM&O – Programs are planned and executed based on mobility needs. Capital, operating and maintenance costs are properly allocated to ensure that TSM&O has its appropriate place in the agency’s overall improvement programs

Systems and technology – Documentation of systems and procedures, including applications selection, conops, architecture and field procedures, are standardized to ensure consistency and reliability

Performance measurement – Includes measurement, reporting, and use in continuous improvement to achieve customer service outcomes

Key dimensions: Institutional Arrangements – The “architecture” of the organization must be appropriate to promoting the alignment of understanding and objectives, authority and accountability, technical capacity and resources and roles and relationships, as needed for TSM&O. The existing culture and organizational structure of most transportation agencies has been established to support the traditional core programs. It is not surprising that a new program focus, with its service and performance focus and its dependence on external partners, requires certain organizational adjustments.

The Institutional dimensions to be considered are:

Culture – Reflects an understanding of TSM&O potential and its role in the transportation agencies customer service mission and investment context

Organizational structure and staff capabilities – Promotes technical focus, efficiency and accountability Resource allocation process for TSM&O – On a sustainable, transparent and competitive basis Collaboration – Among partners who must be involved in TSM&O service delivery, aligned to ensure effective

application of TSM&O strategies



Capability Levels – Discrete levels (stages) of capability for the various dimensions have been observed and defined from research and an analysis of various existing state and regional TSM&O programs. They have been interpreted in terms of the operations capability concept, ranging from ad hoc/start-up activities to an ideal level. The levels are:

Level 1: Performed – Activities and relationships largely ad hoc, informal and champion-driven, substantially outside the mainstream of other transportation activities

Level 2: Managed – Basic strategy applications understood, but limited accountability and external alignment; processes and support requirements identified; key technology and core capacities under development

Level 3: Integrated – Standardized strategy applications implemented in priority contexts and managed for performance; technical processes developed, documented, integrated and funded into the regional transportation agencies; partnerships aligned

Level 4: Optimizing – TSM&O as a full, formal, sustainable region-wide program, established on the basis of continuous improvement with all partners

The relationships among the levels are illustrated in Exhibit 5.

Exhibit 5. Levels of agency capability

Agency Self-evaluation: The Answers Are Already in the Room

The workshop is a self-evaluation exercise to be conducted by the transportation agency staffs based on their knowledge of the state of play. The consultant is simply the facilitator. The focus of the Workshop is to review the strengths and weaknesses of the current level of the region’s capabilities in each of the six dimensions of capability, using the level criteria in the Operations Capability framework. Based on those levels, the workshop participants achieve consensus on the current state of play in the region. These levels then serve as the basis for the identification of the logical (and doable) “next steps” to improve the region’s TSM&O capability.



One of the key features of the Operations Capability framework is its rules of application regarding the next steps for each of the dimensions. They include the following considerations:

Some of the dimensions are “harder” to deal with than others. However, the dimensions included are all essential

and must be addressed. Omitting improvement in any one will inhibit continuous improvement of program effectiveness.

The dimension at the lowest level is usually the principal constraint to improvement of program effectiveness and therefore the highest priority (and often most difficult!).

For any dimension, levels cannot be skipped. Steps taken for a given dimension need to be in place for a period (one year) to become embedded as the basis of the next level of improvement.

Each level builds on organizational readiness of previous level. Based on the review of the current state of play in the NCTCOG region, an appropriate Operations framework has been established for the Workshop. This framework is attached as Attachment #1.

The draft workshop agenda is attached as Attachment #2.

As an internal agency activity, there are no external judgments. This is not a test!! All comments are confidential. It is essential to be candid about the current state of play.



Attachment #1: Workshop Template

CAPABILITY LEVEL DEFINTIONS FOR SELF-EVALUATION OF CURRENT STATE OF PLAY IN THE REGION

DIMENSIONS LEVEL 1 PERFORMED

LEVEL 2 MANAGED

LEVEL 3 INTEGRATED

LEVEL 4 OPTIMIZING

Planning and Programming

Each jurisdiction doing its own thing according to individual priorities and capabilities

Consensus regional approach developed regarding TSM&O goals, deficiencies, B/C, networks, strategies and common priorities

Regional program integrated into jurisdictions’ overall multimodal transportation plans with related staged program

TSM&O integrated into jurisdictions’ multi-sectoral plans and programs, based on formal continuing planning processes

Systems and Technology

Ad hoc approaches to system implementation without consideration of systems engineering and appropriate procurement processes

Regional conops and architectures developed and documented with costs included; appropriate procurement process employed

Systems & technology standardized and integrated on a regional basis (including arterial focus) with other related processes and training as appropriate

Architectures and technology routinely upgraded to improve performance; systems integration/interoperability maintained on continuing basis

Performance Measurement

Some outputs measured and reported by some jurisdictions

Output data used directly for after-action debriefings and improvements; data easily available and dashboarded

Outcome measures identified (networks, modes, impacts) and routinely utilized for objective-based program improvements

Performance measures reported internally for utilization and externally for accountability and program justification

Culture

Individual Staff champions promote TSM&O – varying among jurisdictions

Jurisdictions’ senior management understands TSM&O business case and educates decision makers/public

Jurisdictions’ mission identifies TSM&O and benefits with formal program and achieves wide public visibility/understanding

Customer mobility service commitment accountability accepted as formal, top level core program of all jurisdictions

Organization/ Staffing

TSM&O added on to units within existing structure and staffing -- dependent on technical champions

TSM&O-specific organizational concept developed within/among jurisdictions with core capacity needs identified, collaboration takes place

TSM&O Managers have direct report to top management; Job specs, certification and training for core positions

TSM&O senior managers at equivalent level with other jurisdiction services and staff professionalized

Collaboration

Relationships ad hoc, and on personal basis (public-public, public-private)

Objectives, strategies and performance measures aligned among organized key players (transportation and PSAs) with after-action debriefing

Rationalization/ sharing/ formalization of responsibilities among key players thru co-training, formal agreements and incentives

High level of TSM&O coordination among owner/operators (state, local, private)



Attachment #2: Workshop Agenda

NCTCOG TSM&O Capability Workshop Tuesday July 31, 2012

Session Time Topic Who

1 8:30 – 9:15 Welcome and Introductions

Joseph Gregory - FHWA HQ Michael Morris - NCTCOG

2 9:15 - 9:45 Background on Operations Capability – the concept and how it’s used in the workshop

Lockwood

3 9:45 – 10:30 “The Answer Is In This Room” – Participants’ self-evaluation of current strengths and weaknesses

Participants facilitated by Tarnoff and Lockwood

10:30 - 10:45 Coffee break

4 10:45 - 11:45 “The Answer Is In This Room” – continued Participants facilitated by Tarnoff and Lockwood

11:45 - 12:30 Lunch – Box lunch (provided)

5 12:30 – 2:00 Capability improvement: participants’ identification of current capability level and strategies to get to next level for dimensions 1-3


2:00 – 2:15 Break

6 2:15 - 3:30 Capability improvement continued for dimensions 4-6


7 3:30 - 4:00 Summary and next steps (action items) Lockwood and participants


TSM&O Capability Workshop Page 10

Workshop Participants

Mohammad Al Hweil TxDOT – Fort Worth

Natalie Bettger NCTCOG

Rick Chron Signature Towing

Rick Cortez TxDOT – Dallas

Jason Crawford TTI

Bill Hale TxDOT – Dallas

Robert Hinkle North Tarrant Express

Sonya Jackson Landrum NCTCOG

Marty Legé NTTA

Gary Lindsey Dallas County Sheriff’s Office

Tim Lomax TTI

Mary Meyland TTI

Ron Moore FIM Instructor

Michael Morris NCTCOG

Koorosh Olyai DART

Yang Ouyang NTTA

Andy Rittler LBJ Express

Grover Schretter TxDOT – Fort Worth

Kristen Schropp DFW Connector

Jason Sipes LBJ Express

Scott Thompson City of the Colony

Ralph Volpe FHWA – Resource Center

Daniel Grate FHWA – Resource Center

Joe Gregory FHWA – HQ

Mark Olson FHWA - Texas

Steve Lockwood Parsons Brinckerhoff

Reno Giordano Parsons Brinckerhoff

Gary Euler Parsons Brinckerhoff

Phil Tarnoff Consultant

Documents

North Central Texas Transportation Systems Management ... · Improving Transportation Systems Management & Operations: A Capability Improvement Workshop 1 North Central Texas Transportation