based on

FHWA Capability Maturity Model Workshops

Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSM&O) State of the Practice

The Challenges/Opportunities for TSM&O

Challenges

• Congestion and delay are increasing as economy and population grow but capacity is constrained

• High value placed on reliability

• Existing TSM&O versus state of practice – unsystematic and developing with “pockets of excellence”

Opportunities

• Unexploited potential of aggressive, integrated, collaborative TSM&O applied to existing roadways

2

Recapturing Lost Capacity

3

Causes of Delay and Unreliability

40%

25%

15%

10%

5%5%

Bottlenecks

Traffic Incidents

Bad Weather

Work Zones

Special Events

Poor Signal Timing

TSM&O Strategy Delay Reduction

Flow Control/Ramp Metering 7-8%

Traffic Responsive Signals 10-12%

Incident Management 10-15%

Work Zone Traffic Management 3-4%

Weather Information 2-3%

Traveler Information 1-2%

Active Traffic Management 15%

Pricing 20%

Remedies to ReduceDelay and Unreliability

5

Potential Contribution of TSM&O Strategies

Capability Maturity Model for Effective TSM&O

6

Key barriers are not funding or technology – rather policy, process, and institutional arrangements

The “Program”

Processes that Support the Program

Supporting InstitutionalFramework

The “Dimensions” of Capability

7

Bu

sin

ess

Pro

cess

es

Organization and Staffing

Culture

Sys

tem

s an

d

Tech

no

log

y

Per

form

ance

M

easu

rem

ent

“Cap

abili

ties

” Business and technical processes support strategies

Organization and relationships support processes

EffectiveTSM&O Strategies

Collaboration

The 6 Dimensions of CMM

Business Processes, including planning, programming and budgeting (resources) and project development and procurement;

Systems and Technology, including use of systems engineering, concepts of operations, systems architecture standards, interoperability, and standardization

Performance Measurement, including measures definition, data acquisition, analytics, communication and utilization.

Culture, including technical understanding and business case, leadership, outreach, and program legal authority;

Organization and Staffing, including programmatic status, organizational structure and accountability, staff capabilities, training/development, and recruitment and retention

Collaboration, including relationships with public safety agencies, local governments, MPOs, and the private sector. 

The Capability Maturity Model

9

LEVEL 1

Performed

• Activities & relationships ad hoc

• Champion-driven

LEVEL 2

Managed

• Processes developing• Staff training• Limited accountability

LEVEL 3

Integrated

• Process documented• Performance measured• Organization/

partners aligned• Program budgeted

LEVEL 4

Optimized

• Performance-based improvement

• Formal program• Formal partnerships

Most Agencies Today

Goal for the Future

Capability Maturity Criteria

Level 1 – “Performed.” Activities and relationships largely ad hoc, informal, and champion driven, substantially outside the mainstream of other DOT activities.

Level 2 – “Managed.” Basic strategy applications understood; key processes’ support requirements identified and key technology and core capacities under development, but limited internal accountability and uneven alignment with external partners.

Level 3 – “Integrated.” Standardized strategy applications implemented in priority contexts and managed for performance; TSM&O technical and business processes developed, documented, and integrated into DOT; partnerships aligned.

Level 4 – “Optimizing.” TSM&O as full, sustainable core DOT program priority, established on the basis of continuous improvement with top-level management status and formal partnerships.

Dimensions Level 1 – Performed

Level 2 – Managed

Level 3 – Integrated

Level 4 – Optimizing

Business Processes

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’ multisectoral plans and programs, based on formal continuing planning processes

Performance Measurement

Some outputs measured and reported by some jurisdictions

Output data used directly for post 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

Organization and 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

Example: TSM&O Capability Level Criteria

11

Capability Improvement Workshops

Objective: “Mainstreaming” continuous improvement

Key Differentiators: Not projects -- but improvements in processes and institutional arrangements

Workshop Process: Agency staff evaluate capabilities and improvement implementation plans

Validation: Forty FHWA-sponsored state DOT and regional workshops nationwide

12

Workshop Locations to date

13

Workshop Capability Self-Assessments

14

Dimension

Capability Self-Assessment

Level 1 Performed

Level 2 Managed

Level 3 Integrated

Level 4 Optimizing

Business Processes 11 10 2 0

Systems and Technology 7 12 3 1

Performance Measurement 9 11 3 0

Culture 8 11 4 0

Organization and Staffing 8 9 6 0

Collaboration 4 12 6 1

General Findings for Capability Levels

1. Most agencies: capabilities between “performed” or “managed”

2. Collaboration and Systems/Technology: strongest dimensions

3. Organization/Staffing and Culture: wide variation

4. Performance Measurement and Business Processes: increasing awareness

5. Within each dimension: gaps between best and average practice

6. Individual States: progress across dimensions is uneven

15

Synergism among Dimensions

16

Culture

Organization/Staffing

Collaboration

PerformanceMeasurement

BusinessProcesses

Systems/Technology

Capability Maturity Workshop White Papers

One Executive Summary (covers all dimensions)

6 reports – one on each capability dimension

For now -- go to:

http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/news/news_detail.asp?ID=962

State of the PracticeCulture

Legacy civil engineering culture with a capital project orientation

“Can’t build our way out of congestion” accepted but TSM&O business case not widely understood

Few agencies using operational objectives at policy level

TSM&O not a “program” – no line item budget/division status

New technology raising profile of TSM&O (and public expectations)

18

based on

FHWA Capability Maturity Model Workshops

Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSM&O) Elements of the Culture Dimension

20

What is “Culture”?Why is it Important?

Perception: sounds fuzzy, but is the most basic institutional dimension

Definition: shared values, vision, and beliefs, experience

Attitude: “taken for granted” (not managed)

Influence: impacts all other dimensions of capability

21

Culture Permeates the Agency

22

Junior Status of TSM&O within Legacy Culture

Occasional major incidents and events focus attention on

basic TSM&O strategies (pile ups, weather, major sports)

Lip service given “We can’t build our way out of congestion”

Modest executive support regarding operational

performance

“TSM&O” not yet conceived of as separate program

23

TSM&O vs. the “Legacy” Culture

Civil Engineering focus – facility design, maintenance,

traffic engineering orientation

Professional engineering training/orientation

Shared assumptions about agency mission

Reflections in agency organization, program, life style

24

What’s in a name: “TSM&O”

Conventional strategies often separate freeway operations, incidents, traveler information, weather, arterials, etc.

Synergism now recognized – coordinated, comprehensive development and operational management (a “program”)

But Program concept needs a name (“ITS”, “congestion management”, “operations”, “mobility services”, and so on)

TSM&O includes a mission, strategies, program, career, curriculum, and so on

25

“Culture” reflected in CMM dimensions

Vague mission statement

Subsidiary organization position

Absence from planning

Lack of program/budget status

Shared operational authority (public safety, local jurisdictions)

Synergism

26

State DOT CMM Workshop Capability Self-Assessments

DimensionCapability Self-Assessment

Level 1 Performed

Level 2 Managed

Level 3 Integrated

Level 4 Optimizing

Business Processes 11 10 2 0

Systems and Technology 7 12 3 1

Performance Measurement 9 11 3 0

Culture 8 11 4 0

Organization and Staffing 8 9 6 0

Collaboration 4 12 6 1

27

Culture Dimension – CMM Workshop Results

Summary in slides to follow· Typical state-of-play

· Progress being made

· Self-improvement actions suggested by workshop participants

The key elements of Culture· Business Case

· Leadership and Champions

· Outreach – Internal and External

· Policy and Program

· Needed Actions

28

State of Play: The Business Case

Importance: Presents convincing justification for DOT program

Limited leadership appreciation for concept of TSM&O as a “program” of organized, managed activities

Business case not made for formal TSM&O program –except by negative events

Lack of documentation – data, analysis, and cases regarding payoffs from effective TSM&O

Modest commitment by management for improved operational performance

29

Progress: The Business Case

Impact of FHWA performance measurement requirements

Understanding by workshop states of need for business case

Potential of National Operations Center of Excellence (NOCoE)

Emerging top management commitment

Examples provided by leading MPOs

30

Actions: The Business Case (1 of 2)

Establish working group to develop business case based on performance data.

Identify key audiences and “hot button” issues, along with promising media formats and communication strategies

Review peer experience and use available materials regarding identification and presentation of costs & benefits

31

Actions: The Business Case (2 of 2)

Identify data, analytics, project-types for full range of cost and benefit categories

Develop both internal and external “stories” based on past successes (project, major events) and national best practice

Look for opportunities to present materials at special events that attract TSM&O stakeholders

32

State of Play : Leadership and Champions

Limited top management leadership

TSM&O at mid-level in hierarchy

TSM&O reports to executive with other preoccupations (often maintenance)

Dependency on committed champions – able to work around existing structure

Vulnerability to staff turnover

33

Progress: Leadership and Champions

NOCoE and AASHTO activities are building TSM&O community

Some top management leadership set examples

Growing external interest in more TSM&O

http://www.transportationops.org/

35

Actions: Leadership and Champions

Present business case materials to executive leadership

Designate regional champions to advocate TSM&O during the planning process

Involve regional champions in Headquarters (HQ) TSM&O strategic planning and performance strategy

Leverage current efforts (TIM training, TMC management) to engage stakeholders

Manage the manageable aspects of Culture

36

State of Play : Outreach - Internal and External

Field staff understanding often stronger than HQ

Planning/project development staff often unrelated

Reliance on persuasion rather than authority (with public safety entities, local government)

Collaboration often personal – not organizational – by middle management (peer-to-peer)

37

Progress: Outreach – Internal and External

Some integration of TSM&O into standard project development process

Improved cooperation with public safety (TIM training)

NOCoE to provide community-building

38

Actions: Outreach - Internal and External(1 of 2)

Design a TSM&O internal/external program communications strategy to promote activities and achievements

Identify and select case study opportunities to document success stories and support outreach materials

Establish a “brand” – based on business case

39

Actions: Outreach - Internal and External(2 of 2)

Develop materials to address different audiences, such as internal staff, the public, and political leaders.

Identify opportunities to promote a TSM&O program, activities, success stories through meeting presentations

Bring additional stakeholders into TSM&O discussions to help promote the TSM&O program and objectives 

40

State of Play : Policy/Program Status (1/2 )

Policy level – TSM&O not a formal “program” (no budget, division status)

TSM&O – a collection of separate minor activities

Legal status – some specific – others dependent on public safety entities

Hierarchy – TSM&O is three or four levels down in the organization

41

State of Play: Policy/Program Status (2/2)

TSM&O frequently stovepiped into engineering and operational functions

Not competitive for resources, funding, staffing (stealth funding)

TSM&O units not held to account for operational performance

Ambivalence regarding private sector support role, outsourcing

42

Progress: Policy/Program Status

TSM&O mission penetrating: some states now citing focus on “congestion reduction,” “efficiency,” and “mobility”

Basic legal authorities achieved (quick clearance type programs)

Specific initiative funding available in several states

Program structure models emerging – stand-alone vs integrated model

Performance regulations increasing focus on TSM&O

Dependency on private sector growing for technical support

43

Actions: Policy/Program Status

Promote TSM&O as a separate formal top-level agency program -- using business case materials,

Establish specific mission, goals, performance measures, and capital and operational budget

Obtain legal authorization for a greater range of TSM&O strategies and increased state DOT authority on the road

Examine appropriate role/structure for improved public-private partnerships

44

Addressing Needs on a National Level

Action Culture Element Sponsor(s) Comments

Develop resources and collect examples of TSM&O business cases

Business Case and Technical AppreciationOutreach – Internal and External

FHWA, AASHTO, National Operations Center of Excellence (NOCoE)

Build on material already included in the NOCoE website knowledge resources and incorporate case studies and B/C material from ITS Joint Program Office and FHWA websites

Establish regular forum among state DOT leadership to discuss TSM&O-related issues

Leadership/ Champions

FHWA, AASHTO, NOCoE

No TSM&O forum for agency leadership exists (top management is not often involved in any peer-to-peer discussion in AASHTO, Regional Operations Forums, etc.)

Identify and communicate payoffs from new forms of public-private partnerships,

Policy/Program Status/Authorities

FHWA, AASHTO, NOCoE

Many DOTs remain unaware of the dramatic payoffs from these types of arrangements

A CASE STUDY: AGENCY CULTURE AT COLORADO DOTRyan Rice

Director of Transportation Systems Management & Operations for the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT)

45