Build Smart, Build Steady: Winning Strategies for Building Integrated Corridor Management Over Time

Chapter 3. Getting Started in ICM - Key First Steps

This chapter is intended for Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) stakeholders who are either exploring the ICM concept as a possible solution to their corridor problems (Aspirational ICM Deployments) or are relatively early-on in the process of creating and implementing an ICM capability (Early ICM Deployments). This chapter discusses the actions needed to build ICM capability and begin to evolve from an early/aspirational deployment. This chapter also provides an ICM Strategic Planning exercise for the emerging or early deployers to surface points of agreement and disagreement regarding the nature of ICM. This chapter provides a set of homework assignments prior to coming to a joint meeting, a sample joint strategic planning meeting agenda, and specific exercises for stakeholders to follow with a focus on creating a shared vision of ICM, a minimal set of institutional documents (institutional capital) and a set of concrete steps that can lead to an early "win" for the ICM deployment.

ICM Task Forces

For ICM deployments to sustain interest and generate forward momentum, there is need to establish task forces that take on assignments to coordinate, create, investigate, and enhance institutional, operational and technical capabilities, and report out at periodic Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Strategic Planning meetings. The ICM strategic planning effort should be coordinated and consistent with the regional planning process and Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSMO) activities. The ICM task forces should operate within the context of the broader planning and operations processes established for the region.⁽¹³⁾ For example, the ICM vision, goals, and objectives should be consistent with the regional transportation goals and objectives. In an early deployment stage, there may be a limited number of task forces focused on key areas, while in durable deployments, there may be a more comprehensive list of task forces working on all key aspects of the ICM deployment. Table 4 provides a summary of responsibilities for the task forces for early, durable, and transformative ICM deployments.

Table 4. Potential ICM Task Forces

ICM Task Force	Early Deployment	Durable/Transformative Deployment
Performance Measurement	Identify actions for building/enhancing performance measurement capability.	Identify actions for building/enhancing performance measurement capability. Communicate required actions with the ICM Corridor Manager and the corridor's Software Engineering and Systems Engineering Teams. Measure performance periodically using data-driven approach and report out at ITS Strategic Planning meetings.
Applications/ Strategies	Identify actions for building/enhancing applications and strategies.	Identify actions for building/enhancing applications and strategies. Communicate required actions with the ICM Corridor Manager, the corridor's Systems Engineering and Software Engineering Teams, Data Sharing Task Force, and DSS Task Force
Decision Support Systems (DSS)	Identify actions for building/enhancing DSS capability.	Identify actions for building/enhancing DSS capability. Communicate required actions with the ICM Corridor Manager, the corridor's Software Engineering and Systems Engineering Teams, and the Analytics Task Force
Data Sharing	Identify actions for building/enhancing data sharing capability.	Identify actions for building/enhancing data sharing capability. Communicate required actions with the ICM Corridor Manager, and the corridor's Software Engineering and Systems Engineering Teams
Institutional/ Operational/ Technical Arrangements	Identify actions for creating/ updating the arrangements.	Identify actions for creating/updating the arrangements.
Investment Planning	None	Use a data-driven approach to assess what specific enhancements (DSS, Performance Measurement Approach, Applications/Strategies, Data Fusion) can be implemented incrementally, and when. Communicate this information to the Analytics Task Force. Document how improvements/enhancements to capabilities can be programmed.
Analytics	None	Use data-driven approach to periodically conduct a benefit-cost analysis of competing alternatives for a no-resource constrained scenario as well as a resource-constrained scenario and report out at ITS Strategic Planning meetings.

Building ICM Capability

This section discusses the actions required for building institutional, operational, and technical arrangements and capabilities to lead to early wins. The actions (adapted from NCHRP 899⁽¹⁴⁾) are defined with respect to each of the three phases in the continuous improvement cycle (see Chapter 2).

A: Conceptualize/Adapt

The goal in this phase is to either create a new ICM corridor community or to significantly adapt an existing community to incorporate a new set of stakeholders. The reason for bringing in new stakeholder groups could be to address a particularly challenging corridor problem or to create a revised corridor concept for pursuing external funding. The key steps are:

• Prioritize Top Corridor Needs. Each stakeholder in the ICM coalition should identify their top five corridor issues/problems that need to be resolved. A scenario-based approach can be useful to frame this needs discussion. The stakeholders should seek to integrate the needs into a comprehensive list of no more than 5 top needs. When identifying the needs, stakeholders should consider whether corridor performance related to these top needs can be measured.
• Identify Potential Stakeholder Impact and Coordinated Response. For each need, stakeholders should jointly determine the potential impact and corresponding actions required for a coordinated response.
• Create/Update Corridor Vision, Goals, and Outcomes. In this step, stakeholders should use the products from the previous two steps to create or update the vision, goals, and outcomes of the ICM deployment.
• Create/Update Institutional Arrangements. If institutional arrangements (see Table 1) are already in place, then in this step stakeholders should review them to see if there are any limits to shared actions in the arrangements. If yes, then these need to be documented. If institutional arrangements have not been defined, then these need to be discussed, agreed upon, and documented. If there are any new funding requirements from the Build/Enhance phase, those need to be documented as well in the Financial and Capital Planning Arrangements.

B: Build/Enhance

The goal in this phase is to identify the technical capabilities that need to be built or enhanced for addressing the top five needs identified in the previous phase (A: Conceptualize/Adapt). The key steps are:

• Identify New or Enhanced Performance Measurement Approach. Stakeholders should assess if performance is being measured for the corridor using at a minimum historical data. If this capability doesn't exist, then stakeholders should identify the actions required for building a performance measurement capability. If the capability exists, stakeholders should identify actions for enhancing the capability to measure performance using real-time data for one or more modes.
• Describe New or Enhanced Applications/Strategies. Stakeholders should assess if new applications or strategies are needed for the planned coordinated responses identified in the previous phase (A: Conceptualize/Adapt). If new or enhanced applications/strategies are needed, then stakeholders should document actions for building this capability.

• Identify New or Enhanced DSS. Stakeholders should assess if there is ongoing communication among the ICM stakeholders for a coordinated response or if there are written pre-agreed response plans when there is an incident. If this bare minimum of DSS does not exist, then this capability needs to be built. If this capability already exists, stakeholders should identify steps for building a tool that can automatically select the pre-agreed response plans under various conditions. A more advanced DSS capability would be to build a model that can be used in real time to validate the response plan selection.
• Identify New or Enhanced Data Sharing. Stakeholders should assess if data are being shared between stakeholders participating in a coordinated response to an event. At a minimum the data sharing needs to be done manually or through a data feed. If this capability doesn't exist, it needs to be built and arrangements for ensuring these data flows should be agreed upon and documented. If this capability exists, then the stakeholders should identify actions for building a central system where near real-time data from multiple sources are integrated.
• Identify Gaps and Required Technical Integration. Stakeholders should rate each of the new or enhanced capabilities (performance measurement, applications/strategies, DSS, and data sharing) as a major, minor, or no gap compared to current deployed capabilities. For each gap, it should also be noted which stakeholder groups would need to be involved in deploying the technical solution — and if there are arrangements for coordinating an integrated solution. Stakeholders should also assess the funding required for addressing each gap. These should be documented as part of the institutional agreements.
• Create/Update Technical Arrangements. If these arrangements (see Table 1) are already in place, stakeholders should review this step to see if there are any limits to data sharing and systems engineering arrangements for deploying a common solution. If there are limitations in the agreements, then these need to be documented. If technical arrangements have not been defined, then these need to be discussed, agreed upon, and documented.

C: Operate/Monitor

The goal in this phase is to identify the operational coordination required to realize the technical capabilities identified in the previous phase (B: Build/Enhance). The key steps are:

• Rate Operational Readiness. For each technical capability, stakeholders should rate the readiness of stakeholders to realize this in operational form as a major, minor, or no operational gap and should document the rationale/barrier to realize this capability.
• Create/Update Operational Arrangements. If operational arrangements (see Table 2) are already in place, then in this step stakeholders should review them to see if there are any limits to modes of operation and responsibilities for deploying a common solution. If yes, then these need to be documented. If operational arrangements have not been defined, then these need to be discussed, agreed upon, and documented.

Strategic Planning Exercise for Early Deployers

This section provides a structured all-day exercise for ICM stakeholders who either are early deployers or may be considering ICM as a solution for managing their corridor. For example, the stakeholders may be investigating the ICM concept as a solution to managing the corridor for an upcoming event (e.g., hosting the Olympics), which could become a transportation nightmare if prudent and proactive steps are not taken to plan for the event. The exercise described in this section is for these ICM stakeholders who are motivated to find an integrated solution but have limited institutional capital, operational integration and technical capabilities.

Exercise Purpose

The purpose of the exercise is to reach consensus on the joint vision, goals and outcomes of the ICM deployment and collectively determine the key actions for building institutional, operational, and technical arrangements and capabilities required for an early "win."

Exercise Outcomes

The expected outcomes of the exercise are to:

1. Improve the level of engagement among all stakeholders in a shared ICM vision.
2. Have a common understanding of the key issues facing the corridor.
3. Create a punch list of high priority actions to be taken over the next 18 months that would demonstrate the most significant benefit of implementing ICM.

When to Conduct This Exercise

This exercise (or something similar in intent) can be incorporated into a periodic (annual) meeting of ICM stakeholders. This exercise is needed to identify the key areas of improvements in terms of institutional, operational, and technical arrangements and capabilities for an early win and to begin to progress towards an intermediate deployment. Although the structured event is held only once a year, the task forces should coordinate more frequently (e.g., quarterly or semi-annually) among themselves and with the ICM deployment teams.

Target Audience

The target audience is the same as that for the ICM Maturity Assessment exercise (see Chapter 2).

Event Type

The event type is the same as that for the ICM Maturity Assessment exercise (see Chapter 2) if the ICM stakeholders are early deployers. If the corridor does not have an ICM system in place, then participation must be in-person since the exercise will include brainstorming on the vision, goals and outcomes based on the corridor and stakeholders' needs, which will mostly be a whiteboard/flip chart exercise.

Handouts for Event

Prior to the event, exercise organizers should compile the following handouts for participants:

1. High-level definitions of institutional, operational, and technical arrangements and summary tables showing the types of these arrangements (see Tables 1 to 3 in Chapter 2).
2. Corridor map and current corridor problems.
3. Current ICM Vision/Goals/Outcomes for the corridor (for Early ICM Deployers) or Strawman ICM Vision/Goals/Outcomes (for Aspirational ICM Deployers) that will be supplemented during the meeting.
4. Current technical capabilities of the ICM corridor — high-level list as well as summary descriptions of performance measurement approach, applications/strategies in place, DSS and data sharing capabilities (if these exist).
5. Task Force Memos identifying specific actions in the areas of performance measurement, applications/strategies, DSS, data sharing, institutional/operational/technical arrangements (see Table 4).

If there is virtual participation, these handouts must be sent electronically at least two weeks prior to the event.

Homework

As homework assignment, prior to the exercise, it is suggested that all participants read the Executive-Level Primer on Mainstreaming ICM⁽¹⁵⁾ and the handouts, and prepare up to five bullet points on each of the following discussion items:

1. What do you think are the attributes of a high functioning and efficient corridor? What does good look like to you?
2. What are some of the issues facing the corridor? Where do you think is the corridor failing to meet the attributes of a high-functioning/efficient corridor?
3. If the corridor is an Aspirational ICM Deployment (i.e., there is no ICM system currently in place), what do you think should be the vision, goals and outcomes of a future ICM deployment in your corridor?
4. If the corridor is an Early ICM Deployment, what are the institutional/operational/technical challenges facing the current ICM deployment?
5. What constitutes an Early Win for issues faced by your corridor? What should the ICM coalition of stakeholders do over the next 18 months and under what conditions should these actions be taken to demonstrate the most significant benefit of implementing ICM?

Exercise Agenda and Instructions

1. Introduction and Purpose (15-30 minutes)
   • Welcome and introductions.
   • Exercise Purpose and Exercise Outcomes.
   • Ground rules for virtual participation (if there are virtual participants).
2. Brainstorm on Attributes, Needs, and Early Wins (60-90 minutes)
   • Facilitated discussion on the attributes of a successful corridor, needs, and what constitutes an early win.
     • Display questions 1, 2, 4, and 5 from the homework assignment
     • Give each stakeholder up to 5 minutes to talk about their responses and another 5 minutes for Q&A. If there are virtual attendees, unmute a stakeholder when it is his/her turn.
   • Identify top five corridor needs, potential impacts and coordinated responses.
     • Facilitate discussion on integrating the needs into no more than 5 critical needs. For each need, discuss potential impacts and coordinated responses.
3. Brainstorm/Reach Consensus on ICM Vision/Goals/Outcomes for Corridor (90-120 minutes)
   • For Early ICM Deployments:
     • Display the needs identified in the previous session.
     • Display the current ICM Vision/Goals/Outcomes for the corridor
     • Ask each stakeholder if the vision/goals/outcomes need to be revised. If there are virtual attendees, unmute a stakeholder when it is his/her turn.
   • For corridors that are exploring ICM as a possible solution:
     • Display the needs identified in the previous session.
     • Display question 3 from the homework assignment.
     • Give stakeholders 5 minutes each to talk about their responses and another 5 minutes for Q&A. If there are virtual attendees, unmute a stakeholder when it is his/her turn.
     • Display the preliminary version of the ICM Vision/Goals/Outcomes.
     • Facilitate discussion on revising the preliminary version of the ICM vision/goals/outcomes.
4. Brainstorm on Technical Integration Needs/Gaps and Operational Readiness (90-120 minutes)
   • Facilitated discussion on Performance Measurement Approach to address the following questions:
     • Is performance being measured for the corridor using at a minimum historical data?
     • If this capability exists, should the current capability be enhanced to measure performance using real-time data for one or more modes?
   • Facilitated discussion on Applications/Strategies to address the following questions:
     • Are new applications or strategies needed for the planned coordinated responses identified in session 2? What are these?
   • Facilitated discussion on DSS to address the following questions:
     • Is there ongoing communication among the ICM stakeholders for a coordinated response?
     • Are there written pre-agreed response plans when there is an incident?
     • If these capabilities exist, should the current capability be enhanced to build a tool that can automatically select the pre-agreed response plans under various conditions? Should a more advanced DSS capability be built for validating the response plan selection in real time?
   • Facilitated discussion on Data Sharing to address the following questions:
     • Are data being shared between stakeholders participating in a coordinated response to an event?
     • Do corridor stakeholders share a common operating view of the traffic conditions in the corridor?
     • Is data sharing being done manually or through a data feed?
     • If this capability exists, should a central system where near real-time data from multiple sources are integrated be built?
   • Facilitated discussion on Technical Integration Gaps:
     • Ask each stakeholder to rate each of the new/enhanced capabilities (performance measurement, applications/strategies, DSS, and data sharing) as a major, minor or no gap compared to current capabilities.
     • For each gap, discuss which stakeholder groups would need to be involved in deploying the technical solution.
   • Facilitated discussion on Operational Readiness:
     • For each technical capability, ask each stakeholder to rate the readiness of stakeholders to realize this in operational form as a major, minor, or no operational gap and discuss the rationale/barrier to realize this capability.
5. Wrap Up and Next Steps (20-30 minutes)
   • Establish multiple task forces from volunteers to work on specific focus areas (see Table 4):
     • Establish a Performance Measurement Task Force to identify actions for either building a new or enhance existing performance measurement capability.
     • Establish an Applications/Strategies Task Force to identify actions for either building a new or enhance existing applications and strategies.
     • Establish a DSS Task Force to identify actions for either building a new or enhance existing DSS capability.
     • Establish a Data Sharing Task Force to identify actions for either building a new or enhance existing data sharing capability.
     • Establish an Institutional/Operational/Technical Arrangements Task Force to identify actions for creating or updating the arrangements.
     • Each task force should agree to coordinate among themselves to identify actions for their specific focus area, to generate a memo and to report out at the next ICM Strategic Planning meeting. The memos should also be sent electronically to the ICM coalition (ICM Strategic Planning attendees) at least two weeks prior to the next meeting.
   • Schedule the next annual ICM Strategic Planning Meeting.
   • Schedule the next annual ICM Maturity Assessment Meeting.

Next Steps

The task force members should coordinate among themselves to identify actions for their specific focus area and generate a memo documenting the detailed actions as well as changes to agreements. Each task force should designate a representative who will report out at the next ICM Strategic Planning meeting. In subsequent meetings, the time allocated for sessions 2 (Brainstorm on Attributes, Needs, and Early Wins) and 3 (Brainstorm/Reach Consensus on ICM Vision/Goals/Outcomes for Corridor) should be reduced to 30-45 minutes each to allow the task forces a maximum of 120 minutes to report out.

The outputs from the Strategic Planning meetings should be vetted for buy-in from management of each of the ICM stakeholder groups. The outputs should be translated into modifications to existing arrangements or creation of new arrangements to ensure that the following set of questions are addressed:

• How do we ensure that funding is committed commensurate with the activities proposed by the ICM task forces?
• Do participants need to have the authority to commit their agencies to specific plans?
• Does there need to be another follow-up meeting with a smaller group of people to better understand agency commitments? For example, agency attorneys will want to review specific language for agreements that are being proposed.

The exercise in this chapter should be repeated at each subsequent ICM Strategic Planning meeting until the ICM deployment matures to the next level, which is determined at the annual ICM Maturity Assessment meeting (see Chapter 2). Once the deployment is judged to be a Durable ICM Deployment, the reader is asked to refer to Chapter 4.