Facility Management Program - Eppley...

Facility Management Program

Gap Analysis Study

June 2005

Completed in accordance with Sub Agreement 41 of the National Park Service – Indiana University

Cooperative Agreement CA2670-97-001

Timothy Harvey Elizabeth Dodson Asset Management Program Training Manager Team Leader WASO-PFMD National Park Service National Park Service

Stephen A. Wolter Executive Director

Christy McCormick Christie Wahlert Project Team Project Team

Eppley Institute for Parks & Public Lands Indiana University Research Park 501 N. Morton Street, Suite 100

Bloomington, IN 47404 812.855.3095

Acknowledgements Matthew Berry Graphics Michael J. Lewis Editorial Services Jeri Mihalic NPS Research

Table of Contents Executive Summary............................................................................................1 Performance Gap Analysis Study .....................................................................5

Rationale ..........................................................................................................6 Purpose and Methods.....................................................................................6 Analysis and Results – Phase One: Environmental Scan ...........................7 Analysis and Results – Phase Two: Qualitative Phone Survey ..................7 Summary..........................................................................................................8

Training Gap Analysis Study ...........................................................................11 Introduction ...................................................................................................12 Regional Representation ..............................................................................12 Quantitative Analysis – Training Gap Survey.............................................13 Additional Discussion of Quantitative Question Results ..........................16 Current Training Available............................................................................17 Qualitative Analysis – Training Gap Survey ...............................................19 Summary........................................................................................................26

Competency Gap Analysis...............................................................................27 Introduction ...................................................................................................28 Training and Education in D.O.I. Facility Management..............................30 University Distance Education Programs and Certificates in Facility Management ..................................................................................................31 Professional Association Course Offerings ...............................................32 Miscellaneous Resources Available to Facility Managers ........................33 Summary........................................................................................................33

Conclusions and Recommendations..............................................................35 Appendix ...........................................................................................................41

Performance, Training, and Competency Gap Analysis

June.2005 1

Executive Summary


2 June.2005

Executive Summary The Performance, Training, and Competency Gap Analysis was conducted by the Eppley Institute for Parks and Public Lands beginning in November 2004. The purpose of the analysis was to conduct an evaluation of National Park Service (NPS) facility management performance, training, and competencies in order to identify performance gaps that could be addressed with further training, development activities, and cost-effective strategic actions in the Facility Management Program (FMP). An initial needs analysis was conducted, and it was determined that three separate studies would be required to fully evaluate these populations. Several research methodologies were used throughout the gap analyses, including environmental scans, qualitative telephone surveys, and web-based quantitative and qualitative surveys. The use of multiple research and evaluation methods provided a greater level of detail concerning performance levels and training needs and allowed for triangulation from these various methods that more accurately described the actual workings of the NPS while pointing toward needed modifications. Performance Gap Analysis In order to get a baseline understanding of how the Facility Management Software System (FMSS) is being used at the park level, the Eppley Institute for Parks and Public Lands conducted research and analysis of 20 randomly selected parks throughout the system and 29 parks where a collateral-duty trainer was employed. Phase One consisted of an environmental scan of actual asset management tools used within the FMSS, including Work Orders, Labor Utilization Records, and Condition Assessment. Telephone interviews with 12 of the randomly selected parks’ facility managers comprised the Phase Two analysis. The data analyses of Phase One and Phase Two indicated that there is little consistency in the degree the FMSS is used at the park level. The Performance Gap Analysis helped identify the disparity between what park employees are trained to do in the FMSS and their actual performance. Training Gap Analysis The purpose of this analysis was to identify training needs in the FMSS as identified by two populations within the Park Facility Management Division of the NPS: park account managers and chiefs of maintenance, also known as facility managers.


June.2005 3

The Eppley Institute designed and conducted a web-based survey of approximately 350-400 current park account managers and chiefs of maintenance to assess individual training and development needs of these populations. The analysis of the responses from those surveyed served to refine and shape both recommendations for future training programs and the direction these programs should take to address the needs of park account managers and chiefs of maintenance. Competency Gap Analysis A number of key reports, such as the NPS’s Facility Management for the 21st Century and the Department of the Interior’s Strategic Human Capital Management Implementation Plan, as well as independent recommendations from the Servicewide Maintenance Advisory Committee, stated the importance of having competent facility managers to lead parks in best practices in asset management. The Eppley Institute conducted an analysis of the existing NPS facility manager competencies, as well as competencies identified by professional organizations. Utilizing the experience of a work group of subject matter experts within the NPS, the Eppley Institute developed a draft competency document for facility managers. These competencies, once approved, will provide the guidance for a future facility manager qualification program. Conclusions These three analyses, although conducted separately, proved to have a synergistic relationship. Together, they provided a comprehensive description of the use of the FMSS in the field, the need for additional training as identified by two populations within the NPS’ Park Facility Management Division, the development of facility manager competencies, and the identification of the current gap in training available to achieve these competencies. Recommendations Based on the Performance, Training, and Competency Gap Analysis, the following recommendations are made concerning the need for specific training courses.

1. Park account manager training is needed that specifically focuses on roles, responsibilities, and duties, including training others in the use of the FMSS, cost estimating, the use of FMSS reports in asset management, and annual refresher training.

2. Facility manager training is needed that specifically focuses on understanding the

FMSS as a tool for asset management, including leading change, using FMSS reports in asset management, and educating other division chiefs and park managers in FMSS as an asset management tool.

3. Refresher and advanced training must be made available to all NPS users and FMP

staff related to FMSS, cost estimating, and best practices.


4 June.2005

Enhanced communication and change management strategies could be implemented as education and training outreach for the NPS FMP.


June.2005 5

Performance Gap Analysis


6 June.2005

Performance Gap Analysis Rationale The Performance Gap Analysis was built upon qualitative inquiry and grounded theory, which provided the following advantages over quantitative research methods:

1. The researcher can be responsive and adaptive to the respondents. 2. The researcher can focus on holistic elements by asking, “What is the whole story?” as

opposed to analyzing individual facets. 3. This type of inquiry facilitates opportunities for clarification of a problem, as well the

opportunity to explore atypical responses. 4. This approach is used when existing theory or research cannot explain the problem.

Purpose and Methods The purpose of this analysis was to examine actual FMSS records currently in production in 20 randomly selected parks. Three parks from each region with varying numbers of assets (small, medium, and large) were randomly selected. Also examined were 29 parks where a collateral-duty Facility Management Program Qualified trainer was employed. Phase One involved an environmental scan of these parks by an NPS training supervisor. Specifically, a matrix was developed that outlined the specific areas within the FMSS that were examined. These were:

• Labor Utilization Records • Condition Assessment • Planning • Facility Operation Work Orders • Maintenance Work Orders

o Preventive Maintenance o Recurring Maintenance o Corrective Maintenance

After the preliminary analysis of the parks was complete, an email was sent to the 20 random parks’ facility managers, asking if they would be willing to take part in a short phone survey, administered by an Eppley staff member. Twelve facility managers agreed. The phone survey, representing Phase Two of the research design, included open-ended questions, which solicited further comments from the participants. The following questions were asked:

1. How often do you use the FMSS? 2. How do you use the FMSS in everyday activities?


June.2005 7

3. How do you use work orders? 4. What do you see as the most important training needs for facility managers in your

park/unit? Analysis and Results – Phase One: Environmental Scan After a review of the work orders and labor utilization reports for 53 parks, including the Facility Management Program Qualified trainers’ parks and 20 randomly selected parks, the following themes emerged. There was some confusion at the field level as to which work activities were considered facility operations and which were considered facility maintenance. The definitions and differences were discussed in the Asset Management Process/Facility Management Software System (AMP/FMSS) class and in the FMSS e-course, but the importance of the difference in these two work types had not been effectively communicated to the employees in the field. There was also some uncertainty as to which sub-work types to use when the work type was classified as facility maintenance. These sub-work types were not addressed in the FMSS classes, but they were added to the FMSS program after the fiscal year 2004 training cycle. The review also showed that the park account managers were not doing adequate data validation to verify that information had been entered properly into the FMSS. Many of the work orders with problems were not generated by a trainer or park account manager but by another FMSS user in the park. Finally, the scan indicated that very few parks were doing work planning. There were few instances of estimated amounts being entered into the system other than the identified deficiency work orders, in which the estimated amounts came from the Cost Estimating Software System (CESS). Analysis and Results – Phase Two: Qualitative Phone Survey Frequency of FMSS Use: Most of the participants indicated that either they or their staff use the FMSS daily, although a few said that they only used the system once or twice a week. Use of the FMSS in Everyday Activities: The most frequent comment from the field was that the FMSS was used first and foremost to satisfy Washington Service Office (WASO) requirements. However, there were a few parks that were more sophisticated in their use of the system. For example, one facility manager indicated that other division chiefs were required to enter all work order requisitions into the system before any maintenance work would be performed. Other parks indicated that the FMSS was being used for Project Management Information System (PMIS) projects. One respondent indicated that he “dumped” the FMSS fields into Access and generated work orders and reports through that software. Finally, many parks indicated that they used the system to track labor. Use of Work Orders:


8 June.2005

The results from Phase One indicated that work orders were not being used properly or as extensively as they could be. In one instance, work orders, standing or otherwise, were not being used at all, while another respondent indicated that work orders were actually loaded into the system after the work had been completed. Some respondents indicated that work orders were a regular function of the park, used as a means of tracking labor costs and routine operations. Most Important Training Needs in Park Unit: Some of the facility managers that were interviewed had not attended training, but they had taken the e-course and the Facility Condition Assessment Survey (FCAS) instructor-led class. Some of the participants had taken the original AMP/FMSS class and felt that the training they received was no longer relevant. Several respondents indicated that follow-up training was needed, particularly for front-line supervisors. Several of the people surveyed said that other divisions, as well as the superintendent, needed to be trained in the FMSS, particularly in report generation and management. Summary The data analyses of Phase One and Phase Two indicated that there was little consistency in the manner the FMSS was used at the park level. The Performance Gap Analysis helped to identify the disparity between what parks were trained to do in the FMSS and their actual performance. In addition to the analysis of training needs as identified in the phone interviews and the data provided from the Training Gap Analysis, there were fairly strong indicators that other non-training related issues were hindering the successful utilization of the FMSS in the field as a management tool and a means to address issues that have been identified in the document Facility Management for the 21st Century. A strategy listed in the document states, “Establish a national policy for facility management processes within the NPS.” The data collected in this analysis suggested that facility management is still very much directed at the park level. This creates confusion among facility managers, who attempt to comply simultaneously with two sets of guidelines that sometimes conflict: WASO requirements and the administration standards set by the park superintendents. The following recommendations are proposed:

1. Develop a segmented e-training program that would allow parks to review concepts such as:

a. Facility Maintenance vs. Facility Operations Work Types b. Facility Maintenance Sub-Work Type Definitions c. Quality Control and Data Validation d. Tracking and Planning Work

2. Provide follow-up training for those facility managers and park account managers who have not received training in the past four to five years.


June.2005 9

3. Steps have already been taken to clarify sub-work types under maintenance at the most recent Facility Management Program Qualified Trainer Annual Workshop and have been added to the fiscal year 2005 training curriculum.


June.2005 11

Training Gap Analysis


12 June.2005

Training Gap Analysis Introduction The purpose of this analysis was to identify training needs in the FMSS as identified by two populations within the Park Facility Management Division of the NPS: park account managers and chiefs of maintenance, also known as facility managers. The Eppley Institute designed and conducted a web-based survey of approximately 350-400 current park account managers and chiefs of maintenance to assess individual training and development needs. The number is approximate because often the chief of maintenance also held the title of park account manager. In such cases, he or she received two email requests to complete the survey. The protocol indicated two follow-up email requests after the original inquiry, resulting in a response rate of 217, which is representative of the population surveyed. The survey instrument, comprised of 16 quantitative questions and four qualitative questions, was sent to the park account managers and facility managers or chiefs of maintenance. The 16 tools listed in the quantitative portion of the survey were those that subject matter experts identified as particularly important tools in the complete utilization of the FMSS. A copy of the survey may be found in the appendix. All quantitative survey data were analyzed for frequencies, while the qualitative data were evaluated for emerging themes and common issues regarding the training needs in the field. Regional Representation To ensure a balance of geographical regional representation, the participants were asked to select their region from a drop-down menu at the start of the survey. All regions were fairly evenly represented, as illustrated in the following table. The smallest representative groups were from the Washington Service Office (WASO), the National Capital Region, and the Alaska Region, which have the fewest number of park account managers and chiefs of maintenance in comparison to the other regions listed.


June.2005 13

Region Absolute # of Respondents

Percentage of Respondents

WASO 4 1.8%Alaska 6 2.8%National Capital 8 3.7%Southeast 31 14.3%Midwest 34 15.7%Northeast 39 18.0%Pacific West 44 20.3%Intermountain 49 22.6%

Table 1: Regional Representation of Respondents

Quantitative Analysis – Training Gap Survey The participants were asked to examine 16 tools within the FMSS and choose from the following training priority levels for each of the tools:

• High Priority Training • Somewhat Important • Low or No Priority Training

The following tools were listed in the following order:

• Current Replacement Value • New Asset Priority Index Process • New Asset Status Choices • Equipment Hierarchy • Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) Field in FMSS • Work Types and Sub-Work Types • Data Validation • Cost Estimating • Tracking Costs for PMIS • Job Plans • Purchasing to Track Contracts • Preventive Maintenance Hierarchy • Routes • Tracking Hourly Costs of Equipment • Labor Records for Hourly Employees • Labor Records for Volunteers in Parks

The results of the respondents’ ratings of the training priority for each of these tools are presented in the following tables and charts.


14 June.2005

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

New API process

CRV

New Asset Status Choices

Equipment Hierarchy

WBS fie lds in FMSS

Work types and Sub-work types

Data Validation

Cost Estimating

Tracking Cost for PMIS

Job Plans

Purchasing to track contracts

PM Hierarchy

Routes

Tracking Hourly costs of equipment

Labor records for employees

Labor records for Volunteers in Parks (VIPs)

Missing-No reply

-High Priority Training

-Somew hat Important

-Low or No Priority Training

Chart 1: Reported FMSS Training Priority Needs

Chart 1 provides an overview of replies from 217 respondents in all categories.


June.2005 15

Table 2: High Priority Training Needs as Reported by Park Account Managers and Chiefs of Maintenance

The information in Table 2 shows a clear priority for additional training in cost estimating and PMIS issues for FMSS users. The demand represented in these data is high in comparison to the remainder of items in the table. It is important to recognize that this data may have been skewed due to the fact that this survey was conducted around the PMIS request; therefore, respondents may have been more likely to cite the PMIS as a high training priority. However, because cost estimating and the PMIS are somewhat related and are directly tied to funding requests for projects, these results are to be expected. The second tier of training needs is judged to be important but not as urgent a priority as cost estimating and PMIS training. Clearly, however, training is perceived to be needed in purchasing, WBS fields, preventive maintenance hierarchies, equipment hierarchies, and the current replacement value calculator.

Tools within the FMSS that participants indicated as a high

priority need for training

Percentage (Ranked from Highest to Lowest)

Cost Estimating 75.0%Tracking Cost for PMIS 71.2%Purchasing to Track Contracts 50.5%WBS Fields in FMSS 49.1% Preventive Maintenance Hierarchy 46.2% Equipment Hierarchy 45.8%Data Validation 44.3% Current Replacement Value 43.9%Routes 38.2% Job Plans 34.9% Work Types and Sub-Work Types 33.5%Labor Records for Employees 33.0% Tracking Hourly Costs of Equipment 31.6% New Asset Status Choices 30.7% New Asset Priority Index Process 22.2% Labor Records for Volunteers in Parks 21.7%


16 June.2005

Table 3: High or Somewhat High Priority Training Needs as Reported by Park Account Managers and Chiefs of Maintenance

Table 3 illustrates a combination of responses by the survey participants in which they either indicated a high priority or somewhat important training need. As indicated in Table 3, over 80% of those surveyed specified the following tools as having some level of importance in training, either by choosing the high priority or somewhat important response:

• WBS Fields in FMSS • Preventive Maintenance Hierarchy • Equipment Hierarchy • Current Replacement Value • Work Types and Sub-Work Types • Data Validation • Purchasing to Track Contracts • Job Plans

Additional Discussion of Quantitative Question Results A significant number of students attending the AMP/FMSS training in fiscal year 2004 indicated that hierarchies, as presented in the course, were a source of confusion. These data may serve to further substantiate the assumption that additional training or an alternative method of

Tools within the FMSS that participants indicated as a high or

somewhat high priority training need

Percentage (Ranked from Highest to Lowest)

Cost Estimating 95.4%Tracking Cost for PMIS 92.1%WBS Fields in FMSS 88.0%Preventive Maintenance Hierarchy 86.6%Equipment Hierarchy 84.8%Current Replacement Value 84.4%Data Validation 83.9%Work Types and Sub-Work Types 82.9%Purchasing to Track Contracts 82.5%Job Plans 82.1%Routes 77.0%New Asset Status Choices 77.0%Labor Record for Employees 74.2%Tracking Hourly Costs for Equipments 72.3%New Asset Priority Index Process 65.0%Labor Records for Volunteers in Parks 58.6%Labor Records for Employees 33.0%


June.2005 17

teaching the concept of hierarchies is needed, including asset hierarchy, equipment hierarchy, work order hierarchy, and preventive maintenance hierarchy. The Current Replacement Value e-course is a potential solution to the expressed need for additional current replacement value training. The content contained in the e-course is current and requires approximately an hour to complete. Work type and sub-work type definitions were not completed at the time of the last manual revision and were added after the training cycle of AMP/FMSS classes began. An introduction to work types is outlined in the Foundations of Asset Life Cycle Management e-course. Current Training Available The following table lists the FMSS tools that were selected for the survey, along with current training courses for each tool where available. Four of the tools (Purchasing to Track Contracts, Preventive Maintenance Hierarchies, Data Validation, and Routes) are considered advanced topics and may or may not be taught in the instructor-led classes. Three of these four are in the top ten training needs as identified by those participants with a high priority or somewhat important response. Tracking costs for the PMIS has no current training program, but an e-course is currently being developed by the Eppley Institute. Information detailing equipment hierarchy is taught in the Foundations of Asset Life Cycle Management e-course and in the AMP/FMSS course. The Foundations of Asset Life Cycle Management e-course introduces work types and WBS fields in the FMSS; these topics will be expanded in future courses to provide students with a greater depth of knowledge concerning these important concepts.


18 June.2005

Table 4: Current FMSS Training Available

FMSS Tools Available Training and Type Cost Estimating Instructor-led FCAS course Tracking Costs for PMIS Memo directive, E-course in

development Purchasing to Track Contracts Advanced Topic—Taught at the

discretion of the instructor in the instructor-led AMP/FMSS course

WBS Fields in FMSS Partial content is covered in the Foundations of Asset Life Cycle Management e-course

Preventive Maintenance Hierarchy Advanced Topic—Taught at the discretion of the instructor in the instructor-led AMP/FMSS course

Equipment Hierarchy Foundations of Asset Life Cycle Management e-course

Data Validation Importance noted in the signature security section of the instructor-led AMP/FMSS class, but no instruction regarding actual procedure

Current Replacement Value E-course Routes Advanced Topic—Taught at the

discretion of the instructor in the instructor-led AMP/FMSS course

Job Plans Instructor-led AMP/FMSS course Work Types and Sub-Work Types Foundations of Asset Life Cycle

Management e-course Labor Records for Employees Instructor-led AMP/FMSS course

and FMSS e-course Tracking Hourly Costs of Equipment Instructor-led AMP/FMSS course

and FMSS e-course New Asset Status Choices A list with definitions is now included

in the instructor-led AMP/FMSS course and in the Asset Priority Index course, with examples

New Asset Priority Index Process E-course Labor Records for Volunteers in Parks Currently no training available


June.2005 19

Qualitative Analysis – Training Gap Survey The quantitative portion of the survey allowed the respondents to rank 16 different tools within the FMSS according to their perceptions of the training priority for each tool. The qualitative section of the survey allowed respondents to list their own training needs as park account managers or chiefs of maintenance (a.k.a. facility managers). Most Frequently Cited Training Needs for Park Account Managers There were 158 responses to this question, and the replies were grouped into broad classifications based on areas of need. For example, the largest number of responses identified cost estimating and the Cost Estimating Software System (CESS) as the most important training needs.

• CESS: More participants listed this as the top priority of training for park account managers but did not provide additional details or comments. This topic is taught in the instructor-led FCAS course. It is possible that the FCAS course needs to be revised, or a stand-alone cost estimating class could be developed to meet this training need. There is also the possibility that a number of respondents did not attend the training class.

• Reporting Capabilities: A considerable number of respondents cited reporting as a

major need for park account managers. Specific report names were listed, such as labor reporting and utility cost reporting. Along with the requests for additional training in how to run reports, there were many requests regarding the use of reports as management tools.

Comments regarding Reports: I want to . . . o Learn about “[r]eports and what they do and which are most effective.”

o “Understan[d] how to run reports. There are 10,000 reports that we can run, but

nobody has ever sat down and told us how to enter the correct info to get the report we would like to run.”

o Learn about “[r]eports and what they can do for you.”

o Learn “[h]ow to use the reports and which reports are the best to use.”

• PMIS: Many participant comments fit within the broad category of PMIS. Most

commonly cited was the need for a better understanding of the relationship between the FMSS and the PMIS. Many of the respondents simply listed the term “PMIS” as a training need without any further elaboration.


20 June.2005

Comments regarding PMIS:

I want to know about . . . o “PMIS to FMSS cost and project requirements (how do we match this information

for funding?).”

o “[PMIS/FMSS] interface and project formulation with [FMSS] data.”

o “[T]he link between PMIS and FMSS [and how it] is important for all park account managers when prioritizing work and funding.”

• Work Orders: This tool within the FMSS has been noted by respondents as an area in

which further training is necessary. This area overlaps with PMIS, project tracking, and advanced training needs, all of which are listed below.

Comments regarding Work Orders:

I want to learn more about . . . o “Standing Work Orders.”

o “[A]dding cost to the [Work Orders], Closing [Work Orders].”

o “[F]leet equipment tracking to [Work Orders].”

o “Work Order hierarchy with equipment/feature records.”

• Refresher Training Courses: Refresher training in the FMSS was frequently requested.

The benefits of refresher training are well documented, particularly in computer-based training programs; this type of training often acts as a method to bridge performance gaps.

Comments regarding Refresher Training: o “I would recommend a refresher type training annually to keep our skills up to

par.” I would appreciate an “annual or semi-annual refresher training on system as a whole.”

o “Refreshers [would be helpful]. We all asked that a refresher be given after our

first class. The information was too much too fast and we could better absorb after some hands on experience.”

• Regarding being a Park Account Manager: A large number of comments fit into this

particular category. There were two specific issues, however, that became apparent in


June.2005 21

the analysis of the qualitative responses to this question. One addressed a critical understanding of the FMSS as a tool for the overall Asset Management Process. Specifically, there were questions regarding how the FMSS integrates with other systems as it relates to project management and shapes the program, with limited resources, to fit the individual needs of the park. The second area of need that was identified by the participants was training in the practicalities of the program, such as reporting, equipment/feature records, data validation, training of others, and the data entry and tracking of contracts.

Comments regarding Park Account Manager Roles and Responsibilities:

o “[Park account managers] need all the training they can get. An Advanced

Course would be great and also more cost estimating experience.”

o I would like the “[a]bility to train others properly, [and help] [k]eeping up with changes.”

o I want more information regarding “[park account manager] responsibilities &

duties (signature authority levels).”

o “Not sure what access the [park account manager] actually has within the entire FMSS and associated programs.”

• Managing Change and Updates within the System: There was a large number of

respondents who indicated that the dissemination of information regarding changes in the system was not efficient. Most organizations experience change frequently. The manner in which an organization manages and adapts to change helps to determine its success or failure.

Comments regarding Management of Changes and Updates:

I would suggest that you . . . o “Clarify new and recurring requirements each year.”

o “[Keep] current on changes in FMSS. Where is the program headed?”

o “[K]eep us trained on all the changes, and not with yet another computer

training.”

o “[P]rovide training before new requirements are instituted, not after.” The corresponding table identifies several broad categories of need as identified by the participants. Accompanying each broad category is a list of descriptors that more specifically outline the specific problems and needs of each topic area. To complete the analysis, responses were sorted according to theme and content.


22 June.2005

Topic Descriptors CESS 1. Using CESS. Reporting Capabilities

1. The pick list is too large to find the necessary reports. 2. Specific reports needed. 3. Not enough attention paid to reports in FMSS training. 4. Utilizing, reviewing, and analyzing reports. 5. Identification of “best” reports to use. 6. Ad-hoc reports. 7. Availability and correct use of parameterized reports.

PMIS 1. Connection between FMSS and PMIS. 2. Tracking costs in PMIS. 3. Integration of other divisions into the system for PMIS

tracking and requests. Work Orders 1. Standing work orders.

2. Closing and completing work orders. 3. Work order structures. 4. Deficiency work orders. 5. Work order hierarchy. 6. Creating work orders from preventive maintenance.

Refresher Training Courses

1. Annual refresher training for system updates and software upgrades.

2. Many feel that a refresher would be helpful after actual hands-on experience.

Being a Park Account Manager

1. Park account manager roles and responsibilities. 2. Critical/overall understanding of the Asset

Management Process. 3. Practicalities (“nuts and bolts”) of the program. 4. Role of park account manager with regard to other

divisions within the park/unit. 5. Training others to use the FMSS.

Managing Change within the System

1. Conflicting information from regions and the Washington Service Office (WASO).

2. Managing the flow of software updates. 3. Managing the change in requirements from WASO.

Table 5: Descriptions of Specific Training Needs for

Park Account Managers by Topic Area NPS park account managers identified their specific needs with regard to reporting, PMIS, and work orders. They expressed a desire for such details as which reports to generate, how to manage work orders, and how to track costs in PMIS. Additionally, they cited that refresher training was needed, as well as practical training in the daily duties of park account managers. Finally, they also said they needed training in the management of software changes and requirement changes from WASO.


June.2005 23

Most Frequently Cited Training Needs for Chiefs of Maintenance Of the 173 responses to this question, 33 respondents, or approximately 20% of the respondents, said that training needs for a chief of maintenance were the same as training needs for a park account manager. This may be due to the fact that in some cases the chiefs of maintenance may also be responsible for park account manager duties, particularly in the smaller parks. There were also 33 people surveyed who indicated that cost estimating with CESS was a top priority for chiefs of maintenance. Keeping in mind that both park account managers and chiefs of maintenance answered this question, it is interesting to note the two trends that appeared. Park account managers in larger parks stated that chiefs of maintenance needed to be more involved and knowledgeable about the FMSS. In smaller parks, however, individuals perceived the chiefs of maintenance to be generally more familiar with the system because they were often responsible for much of the data entry and day-to-day management of the system. As with the training needs for park account managers, the top two training needs identified for chiefs of maintenance were cost estimating with CESS and reporting capabilities. Reporting capabilities were cited in several ways. First, many deemed it important to understand the types of reports that the FMSS is able to generate. Second, many respondents wanted to use reports as management tools to track present work and plan future work. Other needs emphasized by both populations were PMIS training and refresher training. Finally, the need for FMSS update training was mentioned as a priority. There were several differences in training needs for chiefs of maintenance versus park account managers. More respondents expressed a need for training for other division chiefs in the FMSS, mainly for PMIS purposes. Also noted was the need for additional condition assessment training. With regard to overall management issues, the replies also reported a need for training in areas such as project management, labor management, planning, and budgeting. Finally, many of the fundamental tools of the FMSS were noted as chief of maintenance training priorities. Among these were:

• Routes • Job Plans • Preventive Maintenance • Current Replacement Value Calculations • Work Orders and Work Types


24 June.2005

Topic Descriptors

CESS 1. Comprehension of the cost estimating process and the use of the CESS.

Reporting Capabilities 1. See Management Issues. Training of Others 1. Training of chiefs of other divisions

for assistance in PMIS. 2. Communication strategies for

chiefs of other divisions in FMSS practices.

3. Training of superintendents in the basic use of the FMSS.

Management Issues 1. The use of reports to assist a chief with management decisions and to affect change at the upper management level, specifically for funding.

2. WASO requirements for park compliance in business practices for the FMSS.

3. Writing appropriate scopes of work.4. Leading change throughout the

maintenance division in the park from outdated business practices to using the FMSS as an effective management and planning tool.

Table 6: Descriptions of Specific Training Needs for

Chiefs of Maintenance by Topic Area

NPS chiefs of maintenance, as demonstrated by the table above, feel that the FMSS can be an effective management tool, but additional training is needed in broad management issues, such as the use of reports, leading change, and introducing other division chiefs to the FMSS. Additionally, they expressed a need for more training in the CESS, as well as the overall cost-estimating process. Please Provide Any Additional Comments Regarding Training Needs There were 97 responses to the request for additional comments. Many of the comments were supplemental to information provided in the first two qualitative questions.

• Training Refreshers: More detailed information was provided regarding training refreshers and why participants felt that this type of training was needed. Some respondents talked about the need to communicate with other park personnel to ascertain how they handled work requests from other divisions, or to share success or failure stories.


June.2005 25

Comments regarding Training Refreshers:

o “It’s complex and time consuming and, if we're going to stick with it, we need to

make an even greater commitment to training our field people. Maybe annual week-long refreshers that are mandatory for all users. Costly? Yes. But otherwise it will be decades before we're fully engaged.”

o “Ongoing training—both refreshers and updates—are critical. As the program continues to be modified and as additional modules of the program are implemented, it is vital for folks to get training, not just memos.”

• Management and Updates in the FMSS: There was a notable level of frustration among

some of the respondents regarding the lack of available time in which to manage the FMSS and the number of updates and changes in the system. Some interesting solutions to these problems were suggested, which appear in the quotes below.

Comments regarding Management of the FMSS and Updates in the System:

o “In a small park scenario, the [facility manager] is the only one entering data and this at times is cumbersome as time doesn’t always allow for daily inputs. [We] need some one-on-one workshops to discuss shared problems with small parks chiefs and [facility managers].”

o “From a facility management perspective, it is difficult to keep up on the ever

changing face of the FMSS/FCAS program while trying to complete other work too. There needs to be field FMSS professionals that can travel to zone parks and assist park staff with program challenges.”

o “The entire process needs to slow up (put a hold on implementing new FMSS

programs). We need time to start auditing what we have entered into the system (clean-up and field verify condition inventories on our assets).”

o “As a facility manager at a small/medium park, my workload is such that I cannot

keep up with Upgrades to system and find the ‘User Manual’ incorrect or out-of-date when data entry in FMSS is required. ‘The plane is flying while still being constructed,’ which is unfair to those users who are part-time in the system. I suggest a current user manual be linked via the FMSS website and [be] updated immediately as changes are made so it is a viable guide for infrequent users of the FMSS system. Most of my problems with the system last [fiscal year] were directly related to incorrect information in the user guide.”

• Training Other Divisions: There were also many comments stating the need for other

divisions and management personnel to learn the FMSS.

Comments regarding FMSS Training for Other Divisions:


26 June.2005

o “[The training] need[s] to show entire park, not just maintenance—what FMSS

can do [is] still seen as a ‘facility’ thing.” o “It is time to start training staff in other divisions of the park to incorporate the

asset types and inspection criteria.” Summary In a large agency such as the NPS, it is difficult or unlikely that a single person, or even a small group of persons, will have a complete understanding of the agency's training needs regarding the FMSS. Incorporating suggestions from the field as a supplement to internal training evaluation added an additional component to understanding training needs. This information should be viewed as supplemental because the information may be based on respondents’ wants as opposed to respondents’ needs. Regarding the qualitative information, there was an overriding theme of resentment concerning the manner in which system and policy updates were communicated to the field. A short needs analysis could be implemented before any change is made to the system and sent out to the field. A set of business practices could then be created to manage the communication strategy and change management strategy. Based on the data collected, the following recommendations are proposed:

1. Implement a separate course in cost estimating and the CESS, possibly in addition to the current FMSS classroom course.

2. Provide refresher courses, either in the form of e-courses or instructor-led training,

which would enable the end-users of the system to use the system more effectively for making business decisions.

3. Develop a communication strategy for system upgrades, updates, and changes. A short

needs analysis should take place before any change is communicated to the field.

4. Consider an e-course or other training delivery method, specifically addressing the hierarchical concept with regard to location/asset, equipment/feature, and preventive maintenance.

5. Implement a communication strategy to the field, reminding them that e-courses in

Asset Priority Index, Current Replacement Value, and Asset Life Cycle Management are available as refresher information.

6. Develop an advanced topics course for park account managers or chiefs of

maintenance covering the following tools: a. Purchasing to Track Contracts b. Preventive Maintenance Hierarchy c. Routes


June.2005 27

Competency Gap Analysis


28 June.2005

Competency Gap Analysis Introduction The NPS’s Facility Management for the 21st Century, written in 2002, provided a framework for the development of goals and strategies for the successful implementation of a Servicewide facility management program. The first need that was identified in the document was the “Recruitment, Retention, and Support of a Diverse and Highly Skilled Facility Management Workforce.” The Department of the Interior’s Strategic Human Capital Management Implementation Plan, also written in 2002, outlines the following:

Maintenance and repairs to our facilities have not kept pace with growing facility needs. Costs to complete deferred maintenance on DOI’s large and aging inventory of schools, office buildings, bridges, dams, irrigation systems, roads, and historic buildings and structures are currently estimated to range from $7.2 billion to $11.3 billion. Our ability to effectively fulfill maintenance responsibilities, and provide easy access to employees and the public, has been inhibited by the lack of adequate maintenance management systems, practices, and processes. As facility use grows, and maintenance is deferred, our facilities deteriorate at an increasing pace, often becoming unsafe. This increases maintenance costs at a time when outdated systems are consuming more energy than modern (or modernized) structures.

In order to meet the current and future challenges we will face in this area, we must concentrate on developing/evaluating facilities management skills and competencies, and training our facilities managers in the use of systems that will enhance their ability to perform effectively and efficiently.

The specific responses that will help us meet our HR needs in this area are as follows:

Facilities Management Competency Identification and Skills Management We must have access to the facilities management skills we need, skills with both old and new technology, equipment, and management practices. Employment data indicate that our facility management workforce is aging and rapidly approaching retirement age, making it critical to determine how best to maintain the skills we need. To meet this human resource challenge, we are working cooperatively within the Department to establish core competencies and professional certification incentives, and enhanced performance measures for our facilities management staff.

Through the initial phases of analysis, discussion with subject matter experts, and research, the authors recognized additional training was required to implement the FMP and asset life cycle management. Separately, the Servicewide Maintenance Advisory Council identified distinct needs to develop new facility managers as a large number of experienced facility managers approach retirement. Based on the information gathered in the research process, the Eppley Institute conducted an analysis of the existing NPS facility manager competencies, as well as competencies identified


June.2005 29

by professional organizations, such as the International Facility Management Association and the Association for Facilities Engineering. After a preliminary report was drafted, a work group consisting of members of the Servicewide Maintenance Advisory Council, the NPS facility management training community, NPS chiefs of maintenance, and Eppley personnel was formed to draft a document of competencies for facility managers, using standards and best practices identified by organizations in the private sector. The first draft was completed in October of 2004. The work group met a second time in January of 2005 to revise the document and make initial recommendations for a training program for new facility managers. The document first identified six metacompetencies, which appear below:

I. Asset Management

II. Operations

and Maintenance

III. Project Management

IV. Resource

Stewardship

V. Business Management

VI. Supervision

and Leadership

A. Planning and Procedures

A. Service Scheduling, Performance, and Tracking

A. Project Management

A. Cultural Resources

A. Plan and Organize the Facility Function

A. Leading Change

B. Property and Structure Ownership Management

B. Facility Management Software

B. Programming and Design

B. Natural Resources

B. Budget and Finance

B. Leading People

C. Life Cycle Management

C. Health, Safety, and Environmental Factors

C. Construction and Relocations

C. Environmental Leadership

C. Assessment and Innovation

C. Results Driven

D. Inventory and Condition Assessment

D. Emergency Preparedness

D. Human Resource Management

D. Business Acumen

E. Technology E. Building Coalitions and Communications

Table 7: Metacompetencies with Corresponding Competencies

As shown in Table 7, each metacompetency identifies three to five competencies. The competencies are then further categorized into tasks, conditions, and criteria as illustrated in Figure 1 below. It should be noted that the Supervision and Leadership metacompetency does not follow the same structure as the other competencies, due to the fact that these had already been drafted by NPS Training and Development.


30 June.2005

Figure 1: Illustration of Competency Matrix

The draft document was sent out to a number of external reviewers, including team leaders and training managers from other NPS divisions, for their input. It was also sent to information technology specialists for My Learning Manager to ensure compatibility with existing competencies in other divisions. After the completion of the draft document, a scan of existing training programs within the NPS, Department of the Interior, colleges, universities, and professional organizations was conducted to identify courses and educational opportunities that exist to fill NPS facility manager training gaps. The Department of the Interior Training and Education Courses in Facility Management A scan of the Department of the Interior training site, DOI University, yielded a number of courses that could be included in a facility management training program. The NPS offers several courses as well. The FMSS-related courses listed in this report are joined by other courses that are facility management-related, as identified in My Learning Manager. They include:

• Integrated Pest Management Principles (NRS5020)-CLASSROOM • Historic Structures Maintenance (MNT4501)-CLASSROOM • Health and Safety Course for Federal Agencies (RSK0600)-CLASSROOM • OSHA Health and Safety for Construction (RSK1510)-CLASSROOM • Fall Protection Awareness (RSK6110)-TEL • Personal Protection Equipment (RSK6120)-TEL

Additional public agency courses, including NPS courses, may exist, but are not listed in My Learning Manager.


June.2005 31

University Distance Education Programs and Certificates in Facility Management Several universities offer distance education degrees and certificate programs in facility management. An example of course types and programs offered are listed below. Eastern Michigan University Facility Management Courses FMGT 202 Introduction to Facility Management (3 hrs) The student will gain an overview of the facility management profession. The following topics will be introduced: history of the facility management profession, organizational structure, property management, facilities planning, maintenance and operations, managing support services, managing construction projects, strategic planning and budgeting, and conducting a facilities audit.

FMGT 230 Facility Operations and Maintenance (3 hrs) This course provides the student with an introduction to the operation and maintenance of facility systems. These systems include: heating, ventilation and air conditioning; elevators; grounds; building exterior and roof; interior walls and floors; plumbing; electrical; telecommunications; fire safety; and security. Prereq: FMGT 202, CNST 229.

FMGT 416 Managing Utilities, Lighting Systems, and Code Compliance (3 hrs) This course covers utility rate structures and their effect on building operation strategies, building code requirements, and managing lighting systems for cost efficiency and code compliance. Prereq: INDT 201, FMGT 202, FMGT 230.

FMGT 417 Computer-Aided Facility Management (3 hrs) This course teaches the student how to use software that is dedicated to managing facilities. Prereq: INDT 201, FMGT 202, FMGT 230, CNST 229, IDE 313.

FMGT 418 Building Automation Systems (3 hrs) This course teaches the student how computerized control systems work in a building. The principal systems covered will be: heating, ventilation and air conditioning control; lighting systems-switching and dimming; elevators-optimum scheduling; security-access control and monitoring; and fire safety-air flow controls, alarms and sprinklers. Prereq: INDT 201, FMGT 230.

FMGT 424 Industrial Plant Facilities and Planning (3 hrs) Planning procedures related to small plant and heavy industrial production. Mass production layout methods, machine and production equipment arrangements, types of plant architecture and related facilities, transportation and handling facilities, lighting, sewerage, ventilation, water supply, electrical power and personal facilities are included.

FMGT 432 Senior Seminar in Facility Management (3 hrs) This course is a capstone experience that considers and integrates special problems in facility management. Prereq: IDE 364, FMGT 416, senior standing, completed or concurrent co-op.

Michigan State University Facility Management Courses Course: HED 845 Facility Management: Theory and Principles Semester: Fall of every year. Credits: Total Credits: 3 Lecture/Recitation/Discussion Hours: 3(3-0) Description: This course focuses on the theory of facility management as it relates to long range and master planning, space forecasting, planning and management, design-build cycle, project management, managing the design team, standards, justifying budgets and project estimating, major procurement, and specifying and ordering. It is offered using web-based technology George Mason University Facility Management Program Designed for both the public and private sector, the George Mason University Professional Certificate in Facility Management offers an opportunity for those in the field of facility management to upgrade their management skills. With emphasis on management aspects, this program provides an opportunity for professionals in related fields such as architecture, interior design, administrative management, property management, or engineering to pursue a career in facility management.


32 June.2005

Completion of the program prepares the student to function as a facility manager in a small to mid-sized organization or as a division director within a larger facility. All students completing the program are eligible for a free six-hour prep class for the Certified Facility Managers (CFM) exam. This is offered in partnership with the Capital Chapter of the International Facility Management Association. Adjunct professors with extensive professional and local experience teach seminar-style courses. Guest lecturers and appropriate site visits increase the breadth of exposure to good facility management practice. University of Washington Certificate Program in Facility Management Faced with increasing pressures to make the most of finite (or even reduced) resources, successful organizations are recognizing the key role that professional facility management plays in securing a return on the original investment. Two web-based Certificate Programs in Facility Management provide a solid foundation in facility management principles and practices in a format that allows talented individuals to stay on the job while they learn.

Life cycle cost analysis, value engineering, energy efficiency, sustainability and green design, security issues and emergency preparedness – these are only a few of the startling range of facilities issues confronting many chief financial officers today. These programs address these and other issues through dynamic and interactive course materials that draw on a variety of media (video, print, web and e-mail). Participants learn proven techniques for improving safety and efficiency, for protecting and enhancing a facility's value, and creating a people-friendly work environment that improves personal productivity.

University of California, Berkeley Certificate Program in Facility Management The mission of this program is to provide the knowledge, tools, and skills needed for successful facilities management along with a thorough understanding of and practical experience in the critical business decision-making process of the facilities manager. An International Facility Management Association (IFMA) recognized program. The curriculum consists of eight (8) required courses for a total of 18 units and 270 instructional hours. Professional Association Course Offerings in Facility Management Examples of professional organizations that offer maintenance-related courses and certification programs are listed below. International Facility Management Association (IFMA) On-line self-study courses IFMA's Online Learning Center features competency course modules developed from the nine facility management competencies and performance skills, as well as workshops, On-Demand Audio Seminars, and FM resources. All IFMA self-study course modules are approved for Continuing Education Units (CEU) as well as credit towards the FMP (Facility Management Professional) credential. Association of Dam Safety Officials (ASDSO): http://www.damsafety.org/ American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. (ASHRAE): http://www.ashrae.org/ Associated General Contractors (AGC) of America: http://www.agc.org/index.ww Sample Events:

• AGC ASPE Estimating class • Construction Project Managers Course • Leadership in Construction Workshop


June.2005 33

Association for Facilities Engineering (AFE): http://www.afe.org/ International Code Council (ICC): http://www.iccsafe.org/certification/ Miscellaneous Resources Available to Facility Managers There are also other organizations that provide support or training in areas that are not maintenance-specific. Below is a partial list. Today’s Facility Manager (TFM): http://www.todaysfacilitymanager.com/ TFM is an on-line magazine devoted to facility management issues. Project Management Institute (PMI): http://www.pmi.org/info/AP_IntroOverview.asp?nav=0201 PMI is a website that addresses training needs for project management. Summary The development of the draft facility manager competency report and a scan of programs offered both in the public and private sectors is only a first step in the conception of a comprehensive facility management certification program. This report identifies the gap in existing programs currently offered by the NPS and the training that is needed to enable a facility manager to function at a full performance level. In order to achieve the goals outlined in Facility Management for the 21st Century, an investment in training opportunities for facility managers in the NPS should be made. Three strategies that should be considered by the NPS are:

1. The creation of a standardized curriculum comprised of classes and programs that are currently available through colleges and universities or professional organizations could serve as the foundation for a facility manager training program, with the development of NPS-specific classes to supplement that training or certification.

2. A comprehensive qualification program for facility managers could be developed, using

a NPS-specific curriculum. This could be referred to as the NPS Facility Manager Qualification Program.

3. As part of either strategy, a review board of NPS personnel could be established to

sanction any courses that a facility manager wishes to take, whether at a local college or university, or through a professional organization in his or her effort to complete the qualification program. My Learning Manager could be used to facilitate and organize this process.

There are advantages and disadvantages to each of these three strategies, and further analysis would need to be undertaken before any of the three strategies or combination of strategies is adopted.


June.2005 35

Conclusions and Recommendations


36 June.2005

Conclusions and Recommendations Performance Gap Training Gap Competency Gap A combination of three gap analyses provided a more comprehensive picture than a single study alone. Triangulation between the results from the three analyses provide a more accurate and reinforced set of conclusions that support a comprehensive list of recommendations based on the findings listed below. Park Account Manager Training Needs According to the results of the Training Gap and Competency Gap Analyses, park account managers and chiefs of maintenance appear to have different training needs, which contain a few areas of overlap. Therefore, it is recommended that two separate curricula be developed. The park account manager course curriculum should contain:

1. Park account manager roles and responsibilities, including descriptions of duties, authorities, and job aids for educating park and unit employees.

2. Training others to use the FMSS through training and job aids. 3. Cost estimating concepts and the use of CESS in regular duties. 4. Information about reports and how to use these reports for the management of assets.

5. Refresher and advanced training courses for the FMSS (see below).

Facility Manager and Chief of Maintenance Training Needs The three gap analyses strongly pointed to the conclusion that there is insufficient training available to prepare facility managers or chiefs of maintenance to function at full performance level. With regard to the FMSS, they could benefit from refresher or advanced training courses and elements of the park account manager training classes proposed above, such as cost estimating. However, facility managers are also in need of training and education in the following areas of the FMSS:


June.2005 37

1. Leading change throughout the maintenance division in the park, from modifying business practices to using the FMSS as an effective management and planning tool.

2. Using reports to assist with management decisions and to affect change at the upper

management level, specifically in regards to funding.

3. Educating other divisions and superintendents in the use of the FMSS as a business and planning tool.

The development of the draft competencies for facility managers and the analysis of its contents also clearly suggest a need for an overall facility manager qualification program. To achieve the goals outlined in Facility Management for the 21st Century, an investment in training opportunities should be made for facility managers in the NPS. Three strategies that should be considered by the NPS are:

1. The creation of a standardized curriculum comprised of classes and programs that are currently available, either through colleges and universities or professional organizations, could serve as the foundation for a facility manager qualification program. The development of NPS-specific classes would supplement that training or certification.

2. A comprehensive qualification program for facility managers could be developed, using an NPS-specific curriculum. This could be referred to as the NPS Facility Manager Qualification Program. This program would incorporate all existing courses currently available through all bureaus within the Department of the Interior, along with courses developed specifically for NPS facility managers.

3. As part of either strategy, a review board of NPS personnel could be established to sanction and review courses that a facility manager wishes to take, whether at a local college or university or through a professional organization in his or her individual effort to complete the qualification program. My Learning Manager could facilitate this process.

There are advantages and disadvantages to all three options. Factors to consider before implementation would be tuition costs, program development and implementation costs, and consistency among programs, to name a few. Further analysis would be required before deciding to adopt any of these individual strategies or combination of strategies. Refresher/Advanced Training A large number of FMSS users have not attended training since it was first introduced in 2001. In light of the significant changes and developments in the program and the fact that the curriculum is now four years old, it is recommended that the instructor-led AMP/FMSS class curriculum be substantially revised. In addition, extra training should be offered as refresher or advanced training to facility management personnel. Since there are both fewer new FMSS users and more users from non-maintenance divisions attending Washington Service Office


38 June.2005

(WASO) sponsored AMP/FMSS classes, new users could be trained regionally, at the park level by their park account manager, or through short module e-courses. Non-maintenance users may benefit from a separate FMSS for non-maintenance users course. The refresher training could include:

1. Review of best practices in the use of the FMSS. 2. Enhancements to the FMSS. 3. Advanced topics, such as purchasing, preventive maintenance, hierarchies, routes, and

reporting capabilities. Regional Implementation of Nationally Developed Curriculum The analysis of the data from both the Training Gap Analysis and the Performance Gap Analysis indicated that FMSS users, including park account managers and chiefs of maintenance, could benefit from a rapid response approach to training updates in order to respond efficiently to changes in FMP policy and procedure and to specific regional training needs. Asset management and associated programs are dynamic and constantly changing to keep up with technology, industry standards, and management goals. Any education program must keep pace with the dynamic components supporting the FMP, as well as changing performance goals and workforce training and education needs. The following recommendations are proposed:

1. Identify a Regional Training Liaison from the current pool of FMP trainers to: a. Provide feedback to the WASO FMP training manager regarding any new

training needs identified. b. Provide feedback and monthly reports on training delivered in the region related

to FMP topics. My Learning Manager could be utilized as a tool for scheduling students and keeping track of student records using the transcript tool.

c. Serve on training, education, business practice and project implementation work teams, as necessary, to provide training expertise and regional training perspectives.

2. Adopt a “rapid response” strategy to meet short term training needs. Regional training

liaisons could use a web-based conferencing system to respond more quickly and effectively to regional training needs, again scheduled through My Learning Manager.

Communication Strategies and Change Management within the FMP An unanticipated outcome from the analyses indicated that the communication strategy for system upgrades, updates, and changes is ineffective and directly affects the efficiency of the use of the FMSS and asset management in the NPS. Suggestions for development of a successful communication strategy include:

1. Identification of industry standard and/or best practices for communication strategies, including:


June.2005 39

a. Scheduled version control processes and announcements that meet current industry standards to ensure a coordinated approach, thereby reducing confusion among field users of FMSS.

b. Refinement of the process that manages the timelines and schedules for all upgrades and changes to the system.

c. Examination of communication strategies that are currently in place for possible modification or enhancements to ensure that communication to the field is part of ongoing training.

2. Change Management strategies, including:

a. Adoption of policies that require making changes in a planned and systematic fashion.

b. The use of change management strategies that take into account degrees of resistance, adherence to an established timeframe, and the communication of a clear sense of mission and purpose in making the change.


June.2005 41

Appendix: Training Needs Evaluation Web-Based Survey

Training Needs Evaluation

Instructions: Please respond to the survey questions with the appropriate answer and submit the form byclicking on the submit button below. Your responses will be kept confidential and will be used for informationcollection.

Thank you very much for participating in this very important research process.

NPS Survey Created October, 2004Comments: Eppley Institute, Indiana University

Copyright 2003:Eppley Institute For Parks and Public Lands, Indiana University - Bloomington

Training Needs Evaluation

Instructions: Please respond to the survey questions with the appropriate answer and submit the form byclicking on the submit button below. Your responses will be kept confidential and will be used for informationcollection.

Thank you very much for participating in this very important research process.



Confidential LoginPlease Enter Your Name Below

Name.................



Confidential LoginPlease Enter Your Name Below

Name.................



Please choose your region from the drop-down menuWASO

NCR

AKR

NER

SER

MWR

PWR

IMR



Please choose your region from the drop-down menuWASO

NCR

AKR

NER

SER

MWR

PWR

IMR



Which tools within the FMSS do you feel require more training?

New API process

High Priority Training Somewhat ImportantLow or No Priority

Training

CRV


Equipment Hierarchy

WBS fields in FMSS


Data Validation

Cost Estimating


Job Plans


PM Hierarchy

Routes






Which tools within the FMSS do you feel require more training?

New API process

High Priority Training Somewhat ImportantLow or No Priority

Training

CRV


Equipment Hierarchy

WBS fields in FMSS


Data Validation

Cost Estimating


Job Plans


PM Hierarchy

Routes






How long have you been a PAM?How long have you been a PAM?

Please list the top three to five training needs for PAMsPlease list the top three to five training needs for PAMs

Please list the top three to five training needs for ChiefsPlease list the top three to five training needs for Chiefs

Please list the top three to five training needs for other users for FMSSPlease list the top three to five training needs for other users for FMSS

Please provide any additional comments regarding training needs.Please provide any additional comments regarding training needs.

Which FMSS reports do you generate regularly?



Which FMSS reports do you generate regularly?



Thank you for your time and effort filling out this evaluation. We appreciate your comments. Please press thesubmit button when you are done.



Thank you for your time and effort filling out this evaluation. We appreciate your comments. Please press thesubmit button when you are done.



Facility Management Program - Eppley...

Documents

Transcript of Facility Management Program - Eppley...