Transcript Slide 1

Session VIII
Systems Operations
as a Program:
The Process & Institutional
Dimensions
Steve Lockwood
PB Consult
1
“The future has already arrived.
It’s just not very evenly distributed”
William Gibson in Cyberpunk
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
2
Learning Objectives

Understanding of the Role of Systems
Operations and Management within the
Transportation system – and DOT’s mission

Understanding of Process and Institutional
Weakness as barriers/opportunities for
effectiveness

Understanding of Strategies for Change
towards a more effective operations
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
3
Topics Covered
A.
B.
Driving forces for Change
Current System status
C.
The unacknowledged leverage of systems operations
D.
Relevance of systems operations and management
E.
The Challenge/Dimensions of Change
F.
Operations Capability Maturity
G.
Future Vision: The 21st Century Transportation Agency
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
4
Message A. Driving Forces:
Performance of Interest



Customer Mobility (isn't that our business?)
– Impact of SO&M
Performance Features
•
•
Traditional: Improved Capacity, Speed, Safety
Now: Maintenance of capacity, reliability (delay,
disruption, congestion)
Continuous Improvement of Performance
drives all relevant management changes
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
5
Driving Forces:
Loss of Performance
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
6
Driving Forces:
Loss of Mobility
Both Recurring & Non-recurring
congestion
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
7
Driving Forces:
Causes of Performance Loss
Congestion
…indicates...
Higher vehicle
densities
Lower
Lower
speeds
speeds
…which leads to...
…which leads to...
More opportunities
for vehicle
For
conflicts--vehicle
conflicts
Less severe
crashes
…which causes...
• Unexpected queues
• Rubbernecking
• Emergency Maneuvers
vehicle maneuvers
…which produce...
“ Secondary ”
crashes
…increased congestion...
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
8
Driving Forces:
Can We Build Out of Congestion?
70
60
1980-2000
50
40
30
20
10
0
P OP
D rivers
Vehicles
VM T
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
H ighways
9
Driving forces:
Causes for Contexts
RECURRING
CAUSES
Cause of Delay
(%)
Large Urban
Areas > 1m*
Small Urban Areas
0.1-1.0m
Rural
Network Demand >
capacity
29-37
20-26
0
Poor signal timing
4-5
7-13
2
33-42
32-33
2
Crashes
35-36
19-26
26
Breakdowns
6-7
6-10
25
Work zones
8-19
26-27
39
Weather
5-6
7-10
7
Special events, Other
1
TOTAL
RECURRING
NONRECURRING
CAUSES
TOTAL NONRECURRING
58-67
0
67
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
98
10
Driving Forces:
The Serious Challenge: NRC
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
11
Driving Forces: Special Emphasis on
Non-Recurring Congestion
Recurring (more established: signalization, ramp
metering, geometrics)
Major Strategies to Manage Non-Recurring
Congestion
•
•
•
•
•
Incident management
Road weather management
Work zone traffic management
Special events management
Active Traffic Management
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
12
B. Leverage:
Strategy Toolbox
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
13
Leverage: Effective SO&M

“Effectiveness” related to measurable
outcomes in terms of improvements in delay,
disruption, safety

Capabilities needed go beyond knowing
strategies and ITS to needed Processes and
Institutional arrangements that are
preconditions execute strategies effectively

How can they be put into place?
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
14
Quiz

What SO&M strategy has the greatest
potential impact on reducing delay?
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
15
Leverage: Gap Between
Best and Average Practice?
Cause of Delay
In metroaareas

Mainline

%
Related
Operations Strategy
Best
Practice
29-37

Flow control (ATM)
-25%
Poor sig ops
4-5

Traffic responsive
-35%

Breakdowns/
crashes
40-45

SSP/Incident management
-50%

Construction
8-20

WZ traffic management
-30%

Weather
5-7

RWIS, Decision supp
-40%

Poor Info/Misc
2-5

Traveler information
-50%
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
16
Leverage: Long-term Benefits
(Interstate example)
Delay (billions of hrs)
Scenario
Existing
Deployment
Trends @
V/C= 0.95
Aggressive
Deployment
@ V/C =0.60
Recurring
Incident
Total
Safety
Savings
Fatals
Savings
949
203
1,153
-5.6%
195K
-0.7%
685
111
796
-34.8%
179K
-8.9%
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
17
Message C: Status
SO&M Deployment Rate
55% in 2010
50%
44% in2010
40%
30%
22% in ‘2000
20%
16% in ‘97
10%
6% in ‘90
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Year
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
18
Status:
Current ITS Deployment
Area/Technology
(Urbanized Areas)
Percent
Miles --electronic surveillance
38%
Ramps metered
21%
Number of DMS
3,177
Miles covered HAR
22%
Miles incident detection algorithm
16%
Miles covered FSP
48%
Vehicles under CAD
80%
States with 511 (2006)
56%
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
19
Status:
State of Play in State DOTs
FHWA Survey of Technology Strengths % “strong”
Use TMC(s) to coordinate IM
43
Developed S & D infrastructure
30
Have two-way interagency voice comms
19
Provide data/video TMC-CAD integration?
11
Have specific IM policies and procedures
21
Have a real-time motorist information system
24
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
20
Status: Where are we in SO&M?




Huge, unrealized, cost-effectiveness
potential in modest deployment
Major gap between conventional practice
and state-of-the-art practice
…despite heroic efforts of program staff
Overcoming technical and institutional
barriers
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
21
Message D: Relevance
We need to Tell the Story: SO&M Can Make a
Real Difference
What transportation agencies (should) do?:
•
•
•
•
We are a just-in-time society, accustomed to service and
accountability – even in Mobility
In most urban contexts very limited improvements from
capacity are being made
Congestion management – as a major program -- is
therefore essential to (at least) maintain level of service
Otherwise DOTs become increasingly irrelevant
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
22
Relevance: Performance Improvements
Process/Institutional Capability
Problem IS NOT: do we know state-of-practice in
strategy applications
Problem IS: lack of preconditions/support for
implementation that improves performance
(continuously)
And money IS NOT the major problem
What does SO&M lack that OTHER DOT
PROGRAMS ALREADY HAVE?:
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
23
Relevance: How to Close the Gap
between “Best” and “Average “
Practice?

Top and middle managers need some
guidance re what changes in processes and
organization/institutions will move the
SO&M “program” in the direction of
improved effectiveness and efficiency
•
•
Changes may be proactive, deliberate and incremental
Changes may be (often are) in response to major events
that focus on SO&M
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
24
Relevance: Technical Process
Challenge

Getting SO&M on an institutionalized
sustainable path to improvement
• Scope: Full range/core program
• Business Processes: Effective
•
•
implementation, integration, documentation
Systems and Technology:
Interoperable/standardized/cost effective
Performance: Measured, utilized, reported
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
25
Relevance : Supporting Institutional
Challenge

Developing arrangements that support
the needed technical processes
• Culture: Understanding/committing to mobility
• Organization/Staffing: aligned,
•
•
professionalized
Resource Allocation: criteria-based,
sustainable
Partnerships: Aligned, Consolidated
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
26
Relevance :
Long Story Short
Process and Institutional barriers are the
principal reason that systems operations
and management has not come close to
reaching its potential
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
27
Message E: Dimensions of Change:
Overarching Learning Objective

•
•
•
“Institutionalizing” Systems Operations and
Management to its full capability means:
Recognize criticality to relevance of agency mission,
legitimacy regarding mobility (if the DOT really cares)
Create supporting process and institutional features that are
part of any serious agency program (we already know what
they are)
Achieve equal agency status with construction and
maintenance
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
28
Dimensions of Change:
Can we learn from private sector ?
(Time out for a broader perspective)
Customer Service in Free
Enterprise Society
Transportation Service
Public Agencies

Service is sales driven

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Price/service (performance)

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
VS.

Competition spurs better
service

Tangible rewards for success,
innovation
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
29
Message E: Dimensions of Change
(From a Product Entity to a Service Entity
(QUIZ)
(Time out for a broader perspective)
Customer Service in Free
Enterprise Society

Service is sales driven

Price/service (performance)
Transportation Service
Public Agencies
 ????-driven (who’s the
customer?)

customer service based on
????

????? suppliers/???? spurs
better service

???? rewards for success,
innovation
VS.

Competition spurs better
service

Tangible rewards for success,
innovation
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
30
Dimensions of Change:
SO&M is different

Orientation to customers and their service needs

Focus on now rather than future

Focus on performance outcomes not outputs

Emphasis on managing rather than development

A service (24 X 7), not an office (9-5)

Scaled to trip – not just my jurisdiction
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
31
1. Scope:
(Implications of “Mainstreaming”

More like the other programs re

Effectiveness related to measurable outcomes in
terms of improvements in delay, disruption, safety
• Statewide & Comprehensive
• Needs driven
• Geography
• Problems
• Network
• Standardized, sustainable, aligned
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
32
2. Business Processes: What’s Different
About Operations?
Actions taking place in Administrative Time
Accommodate
Program in portfolio
Interagency
coordination
Plan
Plan and program
Systems engineering
Infrastructure for
situational
awareness
Deploy
Infrastructure
for control
Maintain
Asset Management
Actions taking place in Operations Real time
Real time
mobilization of
program support
systems
Operate
Interagency coordinated execution of event response activities
Situation status reporting (internal and external)
Performance monitoring
Basic Logic: Traceability between the strategies
(that we know) and their effective application
Types of congestion and typical tactics to minimize
Actions needed to develop and implement strategies
Barriers
Programs to mainstream
needed processes
Institutional arrangements
to support programs
Managed Change Strategies needed to achieve
appropriate institutional architectures
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
34
Institutional Preconditions to
Realize SO&M Strategies
Plan
Implement
Program accommodation in portfolio
Planning and programming
Systems engineering technical capacity development
Regional situational awareness
Real time mobilization of program support systems
Interagency operational management
Operate
Coordinated execution of event response activities
Synergy among reinforcing strategies
Performance monitoring
Sustain
Asset Management
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
35
Beyond ITS: Balancing
Procedures with Systems
ITS Systems
Procedures and Protocols
• Lane/speed/ramp controls
• Local acceptance, cooperation
• Systematic deployment of
• Inter-jurisdictional consistency and
traffic responsive tech
• Full detection and
• 24X7 response
• Formal IM programs
surveillance
• Workzone &Incident Traffic
control
• RWIS and driver info
• Special routing (guidance
info)
sharing
• Upgrade standards beyond MUTCD
• Prediction/advisory/control regimes
• Liaisons with intermodal players
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
36
3. Systems and Technology





Technology Selection
Qualitative/quantitative
Warranted applications consistency
Platform Standardization
Incremental Improvements (bite size)
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
37
Beyond ITS



First Generation – Building on Traffic Engineering
•
•
Transportation System Management
Congestion Management Systems
Second Generation – ITS Focus
•
•
•
•
ITS Early Deployment Plans
Long Range ITS Plans
Built Around ITS; but adds real time activities
Emergency Response element added
Third Generation – New Blend
•
•
•
•
Focus on System Operations and Management (SO&M)
Emphasis on developing integrated core program
Balance between systems and procedures/protocols
Strategic, sustained development on performance targets
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
38
4. Performance


You have heard a lot about this.
Key issues for capability maturity:
• Output Measures
• Implementation feasibility (data, devices)
• Utilization: feedback and tailoring for
•
continuous improvement
Reporting and Accountability
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
39
Dashboarding Systems Operations
(outputs or outcomes?)
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
40
5. Culture and Leadership



What is “culture”? (sounds like academic
jargon)
Think about shared engineering culture
(mission, values/presumptions, training,
standards, conventions, career style,
public expectations)
Who are the external stakeholders in
capacity development vs. Operations?
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
41
What are the characteristics of an
operations culture? QUIZ
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
42
What are the characteristics of an
operations culture? QUIZ

What about:
• Explicit focus on mobility
• Developing public understanding
• Orientation of Leaders
• Acceptance by rest of agency
• Incentives for change
• Laws, regulations to support effectiveness
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
43
Legacy Stakeholders

Facility mission perspective (in law)

System development stakeholders

Industry, developers, unions

Organization around capital projects (design,
construct, maintain)

Focus on on-time/on-budget delivery
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
44
“External Authorizing Environment
(Laws and Procedures)
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
45
A Change in Basic Culture Needed
DIMENSION
Mission and
Vision
Professional
Orientation
20TH CENTURY
21ST CENTURY
System Development
Operating the system
Engineering expertise
Performance Management
Authorizing
Environment
Development interests Users needs
Jurisdictional
Roles
Minimal interaction
Continuous partnering
Drivers of
Change
Budget constrained
Learning based
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
46
6. Organization and Staffing:
Institutions Fragmented at two levels


Operational responsibility is fragmented at
two levels -- internal (DOTs) and external
(partners)
Shared responsibilities for roadways
•
•
•
•
•
Standard setting for safe operations
Provision and maintenance of facilities
Law enforcement
Emergency response
Operational performance support
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
47
External Legacy:
Players in Highway Operations
Private
services
• Who is in charge of
State/
Regional
ER
entity
State DOT
Coordinated
services??
• Can law enforcement and
Local govt
Fire & EMS
Local police
“service” in customer terms
• What are the priorities of the
players?
life safety be less traffic
disruptive?
State police
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
48
Internal Legacy: (Organizational Scale)
State DOT Structure

Organization (“standard” model?)

Traditional divisions:
• Decentralized (now)
• Hierarchical
• Central office functions
• Planning
• design/construction
• Maintenance
• “Operations” (not system)
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
49
Internal Legacy: (Organizational Scale)
Can you find systems operations?
CEO
Staff
functions
Design and
construction
design
districts
DE
ADE
Maintenance
Staff
functions
Maintenance
Asset
management
Other DEs
Traffic
& safety
ITS
Admin &
Finance
Planning
Operations
Traffic
Engineering
Contract
Services
Snow &
ice control
FSP
Other
ADEs
TMC
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
50
Research
&
Technology
Operations and Management as
a “Core” Program
Maintenance
CHART Organization &
Work Flow Diagram
Districts
3,4,5,7
MSP
CHART BOARD
Deputy Administrator &
Chief Engineer for
Operations
Traffic
Information
Technology
Chair
Other MDOT
ITS Programs
MdTA
Director
Office of CHART &
ITS Development
ITS Development
Team
Integration
Team
Traffic Engineering
Design Division
Operations
Team
Traffic Operations
Division
Administrative
Team
TOD &
Office of
Maintenance
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
51
Outsourcing staff functions

Factors
•
•
•
•
•
Staffing challenge (ex: TMCs, FSP)
Capabilities --Maintenance services (ITS
infrastructure)
Possession of technology: Map Data, 511, traveler
info services
Position in market: In-vehicle services
Other reasons??
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
52
7. Resources

To what degree is funding a constraint
• Are you spending well all you have?
• Do improvements in performance relate to
•
•
capital?
Is there a criteria basis for budget (like asset
management)?
Is the funding sustainable, predictable?
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
53
QUIZ: Resources

How much is your state spending on all
ITS, Freeway Ops, FSP, TMC Incident
Management – per year?

How many of you are having staffing
problems?
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
54
Quiz Answer

No one knows

However, we know what you are spending on
snow and ice control (5-10% of total annual
delay)

More aggressive states: $40-70M (not
including snow/ice control)
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
55
Example Line Item Budget
(CHART ’07)
2007
Capital
Field and IM Equipment
$3,855,000
Network Engineering
$2,687,000
Leased Circuit Costs
$1,000,000
CHART System and Network Connectivity
$4,162,000
Plan., Develpmt, Engrg, & Coord.
$3,000,000
CHART System Integration
$3,100,000
Overhead
$1,157,000
Total Capital
$18,961,000
Staff and Operating Expenses
Operations salaries, overhead, overtime, and expenses (staff 64)
$6,324,742
Systems Maintenance: emergency, preventive, and routine maintenance
$1,200,000
Administrative: supplies and contractual salaries and other expenses
$260,000
Miscellaneous Operating Expenses :travel expenses and meals
$40,000
Total Operating
$7,816,276
Grand Total
$26,777,000
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
56
8. Partnerships (who?, why?)







Local govt
MPOs
Toll authorities
State and Local law enforcement
Emergency response
Private sector by custom (towing)
Commercial Service Providers
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
57
How are are improvements in Operations
limited by partner’s traditional roles
(QUIZ)
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
58
How are are improvements in Operations
limited by partner’s traditional roles
(quiz)







Differing Priorities
Time to respond and act
Geographic coverage
Integration across networks
Jurisdictional fragmentation
Differing Technologies
Capability and Funding levels
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
59
Differences in Orientation Among
Organizations
Agency Orientation
State
DOT/
Authoritie
s
GPLG
Traffic/Transportatio
n Operations Dept)
Law enforcement
L
L
H
M
L
Emergency
response
M
M
H
H
L
Mobility
H
M
L
L
L
Responder
safety
H
H
H
H
H
Minimal
disruptions
H
M
L
L
M
Mission
Law
enforcement
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
Fire and
Emergency
Private
contract
or
60
Types of “Partnerships”
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
61
Message F: Operations Capability
maturity -- Technical Process and
Institutional Arrangements



We need to move beyond the ad hoc stage to
realize effectiveness
Deliberate change management strategies
are required
Must deal with Technical Processes and
Institutional Arrangements
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
62
How to Close the Gap?

Top and middle managers need some
guidance re what changes in processes and
organization/institutions will result in the
capability to move the SO&M “program” in
the direction of improved effectiveness and
efficiency
•
•
Changes may be proactive, deliberate and incremental
Changes may be (often are) in response to major events
that focus on SO&M
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
63
A Promising Approach:
Capability Maturity as Structure for
Change management

IT Industry origin/utilization

A technique for evaluating the effectiveness
of an organization’s processes

Defined in terms of five levels

Objectives include:
•
•
•
•
Repeatability
Effectiveness
Performance measurement
Optimization
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
64
Applying the Capability Maturity Model
Acquisition
IT
Development
•Software Industry
•Carnegie Mellon
•DOD
•Wider Applications
Service
Delivery
CMM
CMM
For
DOTs
Graphic stolen from Phil Tarnoff
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
65
Features of an Operations Capability
Maturity Model

Continuous improvement (effectiveness) requires
replicable, consistent processes and a supportive
institutional structure

There are critical dimensions that can’t be skipped
For sustainable change “institutionalization” is
essential (documentation and training)


Performance Levels are incremental combinations
of processes and measurement

Each level builds on organizational readiness of
previous.
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
66
Maturity Levels Full IT Version
Level 4
Goal for the future
Predictable
Level 3
Most of today’s
agencies
Established
Level 2
Managed
Level 1
Performed
Level 0
Incomplete
Processes fully
documented & staff
trained
Fully coordinated
operation.
Performance data
systematically
collected and applied
Strong sense of
teamwork, with full
understanding of
processes and
performance
objectives
Ad hoc operation.
Relationships not
coordinated
Disorganized
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
67
Interpretation of Levels (Phil)
Level
Name
1
Incomplete
2
Performed
3
Managed
4
Characteristics
Ad hoc processes
Procedures defined &
tracked
Process is managed &
measured
Established Continuous analysis
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
68
Identifying a Level
Characteristic
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4
People
Process
Technology
Measurement
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
69
Example:
Application to Incident Management
Characteristic
Level 1
Level 2
Level 3
Level 4
Fire fighting
Uncoordinated
Trained
Expectations
understood
Work as
integrated
teams
Process
Few stable
processes
Processes
documented
and stable
Integrated with
Understood &
other
systematically
organizational
improved
processes
Technology
Intro of new
technology is
risky
Technology
used to
support stable
activities
New
technologies
evaluated
qualitatively
New technologies
are evaluated
quantitatively
Ad Hoc data
collection
Performance
measured
selectively
Performance
systematically
measured for
all processes
Data used to
understand and
improve the
process
People
Measurement
Strong sense of
teamwork
Dimensions of Change:
Adapting CMM to State DOT Operations
Internal to DOT
Technical
processes
1.
2.
3.
4.
Institutional
arrangements
1.
2.
3.
4.
External to DOT
Scope
Business Processes
Systems & Technology
Performance
measures
Culture/leadership
Organization/Staffing
Resources
Partnerships
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
71
Structuring the Operations Maturity Model for
operations: technical processes and Institutional
Architecture (three-level approach)
Goal for the future
A few Leaders
Integrated
Transitioning
Agencies (most)
Level 3
Managed
Level 2
Fully coordinated,
performance-driven
Ad Hoc
Level 1
Ad hoc operation.
Relationships not
coordinated
Processes fully
documented & staff
trained
Support
Arch.
Support
Arch.
Support
Arch.
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
72
Levels of
Technical Process Maturity
Criteria
For Levels
PROCESS/
CAPABILITY
LEVELS
Reflecting agencies
ability to perform
effectively
Level 1
Performed Ac
Hoc
Getting organized:
unique activities at
project level, siloed,
hero-driven
Level 2
Managed
Level 3
Integrated
Developing methods
and processes:
Capabilities developed
at the unit level but
program unstable
Best practice
installed and
measured
consistently
within program
framework
Scope
Transition States
Concepts/
procedures/
protocols
Transition
organizationsLeading states
Technology and
Systems
Measurement
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
Leading
organizations
73
Levels of
Technical Process Maturity
Basic
Dimensions
L-1
TRANSITIONING
Getting organized:
unique ad hoc activities
at project level”
Scope
Narrow and
Opportunistic
Business
processes
Informal,
undocumented
Technology
and systems
Project oriented,
Qualitative
evaluation
Performance
Outputs reported
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
74
Levels of
Technical Process Maturity
L-1
TRANSITIONING
Getting organized:
unique ad hoc activities
at project level”
L-2
MANAGED
Developing and
processes: capabilities at
the strategy level, but
un-integrated
Scope
Narrow and
Opportunistic
Needs-based and
Standardized
Business
processes
Informal,
undocumented
Planned,
mainstreamed
Technology
and systems
Project oriented,
Qualitative
evaluation
Platforms based
quantitative
evaluation
Outputs reported
Outcomes used
Basic
Dimensions
Performance
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
75
DOT operations program maturity:
technical processes and capabilities
L-1
TRANSITIONING
Getting organized:
unique ad hoc activities
at project level”
L-2
MANAGED
Developing and
processes: capabilities at
the strategy level, but
un-integrated
L-3
INTEGRATED
Best practice integrated,
documented and measured
consistently within
program framework
Scope
Narrow and
Opportunistic
Needs-based and
Standardized
Full range Core
Program”
Business
processes
Informal,
undocumented
Planned,
mainstreamed
Integrated and
Documented
Technology
and systems
Project oriented,
Qualitative
evaluation
Platforms based
quantitative
evaluation
Standardized C/E
systems/platforms
Outputs reported
Outcomes used
Performance
Accountability
Basic
Dimensions
Performance
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
76
Operations Capability Maturity Levels
Goal for the future
A few Leaders
Integrated
Transitioning
Agencies (most)
Level 3
Managed
Level 2
Fully coordinated,
performance-driven
Ad Hoc
Level 1
Ad hoc operation.
Relationships not
coordinated
Processes fully
documented & staff
trained
Support
Arch.
Support
Arch.
Support
Arch.
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
77
Organization/institutional arrangements
supporting capability levels
Basic
Dimensions
I-1
LEGACY-BASED
Hero-driven--on
regional basis
Operations
Culture
Mixed, unfamiliar—
Event/Hero-driven
Organization,
management
and staffing
Fragmented,
Understaffed
Resource
allocation to
Operations
Project -level
Partnerships
Informal, unaligned
Organization/institutional arrangements
Supporting capability levels
I-1
LEGACY-BASED
Hero-driven--on
regional basis
I-2
RESTRUCTURING
Supports transition from
Managed to Integrated
Operations
Culture
Mixed, unfamiliar—
Event/Hero-driven
Championed/Internal
ized across
disciplines
Organization,
management
and staffing
Fragmented,
Understaffed
Aligning, trained
Resource
allocation to
Operations
Project -level
Criteria-based
program
Partnerships
Informal, unaligned
Formal, aligned
Basic
Dimensions
Organization/institutional arrangements
Supporting capability levels
I-1
LEGACY-BASED
Hero-driven--on
regional basis
I-2
RESTRUCTURING
Supports transition from
Managed to Integrated
I-3
SUPPORTIVE
Supports Transition from
Integrated to Mainstreamed
Operations
Culture
Mixed, unfamiliar—
Event/Hero-driven
Championed/Internal
ized across
disciplines
Mobility Committed
Organization,
management
and staffing
Fragmented,
Understaffed
Aligning, trained
Professionalized
Resource
allocation to
Operations
Project -level
Criteria-based
program
Sustainable Budget Line
Item
Partnerships
Informal, unaligned
Formal, aligned
Consolidated
Basic
Dimensions
–
PROCESS AND INSTITUTIONAL ARCHITECTURE DIMENSION DETAILS
Dimensions
LEGACY-BASED
RESTRUCTURING
SUPPORTIVE
Activities initiated on
regional basis
Supports transition from
Managed to Integrated
Supports Transition from
Integrated to Mainstreamed
Dimensions
L-1
L-2
L-3
TRANSITIONING”
MANAGED
INTEGRATED
Operations
Culture
Legacy—Hero-driven
Operations acknowledged,(including
value of reliability) but without strategic
commitment or top level leadership
Adherence to legacy roles among
transportation and public safety entities
Championed/Internalized across disciplines
Mobility Committed
Visible agency leadership citing Operations
Customer mobility service commitment
leverage,
cost-effectiveness
and risks across
accessibility
accepted as core program
Narrow
and Opportunistic
Needs-based
and Standardized
Full range Core Program
disciplines
-Clear legal authority for operations roles, actions
Ad hoc operations activities based on
Operations as needs mobility- based
Full staged program of synergizing
Rationalization of responsibilities by formal
among transportation
agency, PSAs,functionalities
Local
regional initiatives, with limited
multi-strategy
program
agreements
institutions (transportation Standardized
government
clarified
central across
office support
agency
programs or
Operations as key trade-off investment
agency,
PSAs, private)
Narrow/ITS-project based, low
strategies related to specific
with other improvements in terms of
hanging fruit
problems, desired outcomes
“mobility management”
Organization
and staffing
for
Operations
Fragmented, Understaffed
Some fragmentation of key functions and
boundaries - horizontal and vertical
Reliance on key individual for technical
knowledge and champions for leadership
Aligning,
trained
Professionalized
Informal,
undocumented
Planned
Integrated and Documented
TMC
focus with Vertical/horizontal
Topplanning
level management
position
operations
Projects/issues
handled on fire fight
Strategic
and budgeting
of with
Integrated
operations-related planning,
authority/responsibility
alignment
established
in central office
and staffing, deployment and
basis with only modest
formal for operationsstagedorientation
improvements
including
budgeting,
including
P/B/D/C/O/M
districtsand construction
regional/district
planning i(but no
maintenance
maintenance both within operations and
Core
capacities
established with KSA specs, implications
Professionalization and certification
of SW and metro planning
standard
template)
with
training
and performance
incentives
operations
capacity
positions Full documentation of key conops,
Minimal
conops, architecture;
Architectures
andcore
related
processes
procedures ad hoc/no consistency
developed, including major
architecture, procedures and protocols
communications structure
Resource
allocation to
Operations
Project -level
Funds at project level, ad hoc,
unpredictable
Ad hoc resource allocation with
operations as secondary priority
Criteria-based program
Sustainable Budget Line Item
Qualitative, opportunistic
Evaluated platforms
Standardized, interoperable
Budget allocation for operations driven by
Operations is formal visible sustainable line item
Technologies selected at project level
Basic stable technology for existing
Systematic evaluation/application of best
transparent criteria on life cycle needs basis
in agencies’ budget -- capital, operating and
Limited understanding of operating
strategies evaluated on qualitative
available technology/p[procedure
Operations claim on agencies’ resources for
maintenance
platform needs
basis
combinations
mobility support established on timing, extent,
Trade-offs between operations and capital
Identification of standardized,
Standard technology platforms
cost-effectiveness
expenditure considered as part of the planning
statewide interoperable operating
developed/maintained
process
platforms and related procurement
procedures
Partnerships
for
Operations
Informal, unaligned
Non-transportation entities unaligned
with transportation objectives, procedures
relying on informal personal basis
Private sector utilized for isolated
functions
Formal, aligned
Scope
Business
processes
Technology
and systems
Consolidated
Outcomes
used
Performance Accountability
High
level of measured
operations coordination
among improvement perspective
Outcome
measures
Continuous
partnerships
via formal written, agreements withdeveloped
owner/operators:
state, local privateadopted
with TMC
limited analysis/remediation
and used for improvement
(requires intra and interagency
PSA,Output
EM, measures reported
consolidation
Outcome
measures reported
after action analysis
Private sector capabilities in technology,
Clear outsourcing role developed, while
Accountability and benchmarking at unit
management tapped
maintaining agencies’ core capacities
and agency level via regular outcome
performance reporting – internal and
public
Outputs reported
Performance Transportation
agencies
assertonly
leadership
Measurement
of outputs
with in
Basic
Dimensions
LEGACY-BASED
Activities initiated on
regional basis
RESTRUCTURING
Supports transition from
Managed to Integrated
SUPPORTIVE
Supports Transition from
Integrated to Mainstreamed
Operations
Culture
Legacy—Hero-driven
Operations acknowledged, including
value of reliability) but without strategic
commitment or top level leadership
Adherence to legacy roles among
transportation and public safety entities
Championed/Internalized across disciplines
Visible agency leadership citing Operations
leverage, cost-effectiveness and risks across
disciplines -Rationalization of responsibilities by formal
agreements across institutions (transportation
agency, PSAs, private)
Mobility Committed
Customer mobility service commitment
accessibility accepted as core program
Clear legal authority for operations roles,
actions among transportation agency, PSAs,
Local government clarified
Organization
and staffing for
Operations
Fragmented, Understaffed
Some fragmentation of key functions
and boundaries - horizontal and vertical
Reliance on key individual for
technical knowledge and champions for
leadership
Aligning, trained
TMC focus with Vertical/horizontal
authority/responsibility alignment for
operations including P/B/D/C/O/M
Core capacities established with KSA specs,
training and performance incentives
Professionalized
Top level management position with
operations orientation established in central
office and districts
Professionalization and certification of
operations core capacity positions
Resource
allocation to
Operations
Project -level
Funds at project level, ad hoc,
unpredictable
Ad hoc resource allocation with
operations as secondary priority
Criteria-based program
Budget allocation for operations driven by
transparent criteria on life cycle needs basis
Operations claim on agencies’ resources for
mobility support established on timing, extent,
cost-effectiveness
Sustainable Budget Line Item
Operations is formal visible sustainable line
item in agencies’ budget -- capital, operating
and maintenance
Trade-offs between operations and capital
expenditure considered as part of the planning
process
Partnerships for
Operations
Informal, unaligned
Non-transportation entities unaligned
with transportation objectives,
procedures relying on informal
personal basis
Private sector utilized for isolated
functions
Formal, aligned
Transportation agencies assert leadership in
partnerships via formal written, agreements
with PSA, EM,
Private sector capabilities in technology,
management tapped
Consolidated
High level of operations coordination among
owner/operators: state, local private with TMC
consolidation
Clear outsourcing role developed, while
maintaining agencies’ core capacities
The Implications of OCM





Continuous improvement (effectiveness)
requires replicable, consistent processes as
baseline for next step
Within a large agency, this requires
documentation and training
The levels are incremental combinations of
processes establishment and measurement
Each one builds on that previous via
establishing organizational readiness.
OCM level is based on the row with the lowest
score.
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
83
Correlation btwn Operations Maturity Levels
And Institutional Architecture
PROCESS/
CAPABILITY
LEVELS
Level 1
Transitioning
“We don’t know that
we don’t know
Dimensions
Dimensions
Level 3
Integrated
We work at what
we don’t know”
Performance Criteria For Levels
Ad Hoc (legacy)
SUPPORTIVE
ORGANIZATIONAL/
INSTITUTIONAL
ARCHITECTURE
Level 2
Managed
We know that we don’t
know”
Restructuring to
Supportive
Architecture C
Supportive
(Mainstreamed)
Performance Criteria For Support
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
84
Correlation btwn Operations Maturity Levels
And Institutional Architecture
Criteria
For Levels
Level 1
Performed Ac
Hoc
Level 2
Managed
Level 3
Integrated
Ad Hoc to
Managed
Managed to
Integrated
Supportive for
to
Mainstreaming
Scope
PROCESS/
CAPABILITY
LEVELS
Business
Process/Capabilities
Systems and
Technology
Performance
Measurement
Dimensions
ORGANIZATIONAL/
INSTITUTIONAL
ARCHITECTURE
Culture/Leadership
Organization/Staffing
Resource Allocation
Partnerships
The Potential of Operations Capability
Maturity Model

Shared vision of best practice

A common analytical language

Vertical and horizontal management relationships

Formalized, transparent (self) appraisal process

Suits any type of organization by size, problems,

Framework to prioritize change management tactics

Basis for benchmarking across organizations
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
86
G. Change Management: How Does
(Needed) Change Happen?







New leadership (from outside?)
Internal champions (middle management heroes)
Natural disasters
Major incident
Special funding
Gradual realization
Any combination of the above!!
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
87
QUIZ: Self Assessment re your
agency
Institutionalization
Get it
Start
1. Improvement in performance articulated in policy
2. Leverage of SO&M widely understood
3. SO&M program development responsibility identified
4. Line item budget/slots for SO&M-related resources
5. Technical leadership at agency and key region positions
6. Formal statewide relationship with PSAs
7. Basic laws and policy in place
8. Existing basic ITS infrastructure in place
10. Traffic eng., safety, ITS, etc. consolidated
11. System performance tracked
12. Consistent Statewide ConOps in place
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
88
Done
Degree of DOT “Management”:
Leverage on Change
Basic
Dimensions
LEGACY-BASED
Culture
Mixed,
Championed/Interna
Education
Mobility
unfamiliar—
& policy lized across Legislation
Committed
Hero-driven
disciplines
Organization/
Staffing
Fragmented,Academy
Outsourcing
Aligning, trained
Professionalized
Understaffed
Resource
allocation
Partnerships
RESTRUCTURING/
TRANSITION
SUPPORTIVE
MAINSTREAMED
Training
Line Item budget
Criteria-basedReallocation
Sustainable
Project -level
Informal,
unaligned
program
Formal
Agreements
Formal,
Budget Line Item
Consolidation
aligned
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
Consolidated
89
Where is my state? (QUIZ)

Technical Process Dimensions:

Institutional Dimensions:

What is your biggest challenge?
• Any at level 1?
• A dimension at 2?
• Any at level 2?
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
90
Institutional Guidance: Alternative
Paths for Consideration
1.
Internal incremental change -- regarding those
architectural dimensions under the span of control of top
management
2.
Major Reorganization with internal change in priorities and
related (may require outside political support
3.
Capitalizing on a major event to make permanent changes
(special event, major disruption, natural disaster)
4.
Consolidation of functions among public agencies in the
form of a new operating entity
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
91
Message G: Vision
Ambitious Long-Term Opportunities

SO&M is entering a new era…

New range of functions:

•
•
•
manage congestion
allocate capacity
provide new services
Highway transportation will be transformed in
the long run
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
92
Vision:
Anticipated Future Leverage
VISION
ACHIEVED BY
1. Highway service reliable
All-Incident management
2. At any V/C, less delay
ATM: Control of flow, speed, lane use
3. Good travel information
Probe-based real time information
4. Premium services available
5. Crashes reduced
Separate, priced, speed limit service
6. Erratic behavior suppressed
Automated enforcement
7. Traveler assurance services
In-vehicle navigation, Concierge
8. Special Truck facilities
Automated regulatory Enforcement
V2V crash avoidance
Bottom Line: SO&M is just getting Started
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
93
Vision: Big Cultural Shift &
Change in Priorities
2OTH
CENTURY
DOT
Systems
management
Demand
Management
21ST
CENTURY
DOT
System Expansion
Systems
Management
System Expansion
Demand
Management
Maintenance
Maintenance
Vision:
Future of State DOTs
EFFICIENCY
COMPLEXITY
20TH CENTURY
DOT
OUTSOURCE
/PRIVATIZE
CO-DELIVER
DEVOLVE
Public safety
agencies
Local
government
21st
CENTURY
DOT
Other state
agencies
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
Private sector
Informed
customers
95
Vision:
Emerging Institutional Arrangements
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
96
The 21st Century OperationsOriented DOT
DIMENSION
Mission and
Vision
Professional
Orientation
20TH CENTURY
21ST CENTURY
System Development
Operating the system
Engineering expertise
Performance Management
Authorizing
Environment
Development interests Users needs
Jurisdictional
Roles
Minimal interaction
Continuous partnering
Drivers of
Change
Budget constrained
Learning based
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
97
Meanwhile (as committed secret agents of the future):
Guerilla Tactics for Change

Insist on technical truth regarding service to customers

Expertise is the scarce resource: Start training staff now

Establish conops with all partners – otherwise ………..

Get planners’ buy-in – they will support

Technology should not get ahead of procedures and protocols

Capitalize on cross-program synergies

Work with geography

$$$$ is not the problem, sustainable $ is

Push for innovation – generate sizzle
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
98
Learning Objectives

Understanding of the Role of Systems
Operations and Management within the
Transportation system

Understanding of Institutional Issues and their
leverage on Operations

Understanding of Strategies for Change
towards a more operations oriented institutional
context
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
99
Good Luck!!!!
Session VIII: Systems Operations as a Program
100