Improving Transportation Systems Management and Operations – Capability Maturity Model Workshop White Paper – Business Processes
5. Implementation Plan Capability Improvement Actions
More than one-half of workshop sites identified the development of some kind of plan (or “program plan”) at one scale or another as an implementation plan action to improve capability in Business Processes. Among these sites, approximately one-third are also integrating TSM&O into the State standard project development process. Many workshop locations also included development of a business case as part of – or closely related to – plan development, or as an action within the Culture dimension.
Typical participant-suggested actions for advancement to the next level of capability are presented below in order of frequency of inclusion:
- Develop regional/statewide “TSM&O Program Plan” that includes TSM&O business case, concepts of operation and architecture, specific business and field process for TMCs and in the field, organizational and staffing needs, operations and maintenance costs – in addition to the capital costs that are normally the focus of statewide plans
- Integrate TSM&O into TIP/LRTP and other statewide or regional plans and related planning processes
- Develop TSM&O business case for various key stakeholder audiences
- Develop methods to evaluate TSM&O versus capacity options, including B/C
- Modify project development process to include TSM&O considerations or needs
- Develop statewide TIM plan/program as standalone activity
- Establish forum to discuss/evaluate/recommend promising technologies, processes, and policies
- Identify institutional mechanism to shorten planning horizons to facilitate TSM&O solutions
- Develop corridor performance-based improvement projects
- Develop internal and external communications plans (leveraging TSM&O business case to explain TSM&O strategies and benefits)
- Develop/update existing ITS Strategic Plan (incorporate districts)
- Develop process to integrate signal/ITS maintenance and upgrades into asset management
- Seek opportunities for greater involvement with planning partners
- Establish a pool of funding for TSM&O
- Apply FHWA INVEST model for operations and maintenance sustainability assessment
The appendix presents the key implementation plan work tasks commonly identified for these priorities. The highlights of the most commonly identified actions are discussed below.
5.1 Development of a TSM&O Program Plan
The term “TSM&O Program Plan” emerged during the course of the workshops as a term that inclusively captures the appropriate content of a specific activity and product to support improved TSM&O. Thirteen of the workshop locations identified development of a Program Plan as a key priority for their implementation plans. It would including the following: TSM&O mission and policy statements; objectives and related performance measures; key related business process specifications for planning and project development; strategies/projects/services required to improve TSM&O alongside their capital, maintenance, technology upgrades and operating costs; related (non-capital) resources; and identification of leadership and needed organizational changes. These features distinguish a “program plan” from conventional “plans” that are typically limited to project capital investments. In addition, these components should be addressed as part of an ongoing, iterative process that is mutually supported by other departmental plans and initiatives, builds on established relationships with other TSM&O stakeholders, and is adapted to the unique characteristics and circumstances of each DOT (This concept was further elaborated in a special workshop, NCHRP 20-07, Task 345, Program Planning and Development for Transportation System Management and Operations in State Departments of Transportation.).
5.2 Focus on a Specific Corridor Plan
Several States, especially those with larger multi-metro regions, focused on development of a “corridor” plan as an initial effort, rather than grappling with the complexities implied by the program plan concept at a statewide level. The concept seemed to be that corridor planning – typically multi-jurisdictional – provided a “test bed” for the various components involved in the program plan concept noted above, but in a context that was more concrete, focused on one or two strategy applications to address some specific needs and issues, and involving a well-defined group of stakeholders with some common objectives. The corridor approach also coincided with staff recognition that, having focused largely on State freeway network strategies, the next logical step would be tackling a more complicated environment involving integrated corridor management and coordination with local governments and MPOs. This approach would involve making the business case, developing common performance measures, and communicating with stakeholders – steps that would be “hard enough” even when confined to a single corridor.
The lack of a persuasive business case to justify TSM&O as a program (staffing, organization, and resource needs) was an issue that arose under Business Processes as well as the Culture and Collaboration dimensions. Development of a business case was typically conceived of as a distinct work effort, requiring collaboration among those involved and those who needed persuasion. The common implementation plan work tasks typically had education, evidence, and persuasion components. Workshop participants recognized that custom-tailored cases had to be made for specific stakeholder audiences – in particular, senior management, policy makers, and key partners in TSM&O execution. There was concern that as a new program, TSM&O had to meet a higher standard of justification than a legacy program and that development of persuasive performance data, B/C data, payoffs, and anecdotal experience (nationally and locally) was an important task yielding peer exchange and lessons learned. As a result, implementation plans related to business case development typically included an effort to identify and document cases where the payoffs could be described, especially in comparison to conventional improvements. Several workshops raised the need for compelling data on benefits.
