The AASHTO Guide to Systems Operations Management

1. The AASHTO Guide toSystems Operations & Management NCHRP 3-94 Steve Lockwood – PB Phil Tarnoff – University of Maryland Rich Margiotta, Erin Flanigan – CSI John Conrad – CH2MHill Scott Rawlins – SSOM and Panel Chair Basic Mitigation Strategy

2. Effective Strategies are evolving to maximize performance of existing system 2

3. State of the Practice is Advancing 3

4. Supporting Effectiveness Through Maturing Processes and Institutional Arrangements 4 Research indicates that effective programs require the support of specific business and technical processes – and, in turn that these processes must be supported by institutional and organizational arrangements For example: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxResearch indicates that effective programs require the support of specific business and technical processes – and, in turn that these processes must be supported by institutional and organizational arrangements For example: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

5. The Need for SO&M “Green Book” Objective: maximizing the effective use (performance) of existing system Research shows that top management actions regarding processes and institutional arrangements are key to effectiveness Guidance to Indentify steps managers can/should take designed to improve SO&M programs Develop existing material into an accessible and user-friendly product Web-based approach with self-evaluation point of departure 5

6. The Operations Capability Framework: Key Elements Business/Technical Process Capabilities: Scope of Activities Business Processes Technology/Systems Performance Measurement Institutional/Organizational Arrangements: Culture/Leadership Organization/Staffing Resources Partnerships 6

7. Concept of Capability Maturity Levels 7

8. Maturity Model Framework(Has now been applied in practice) State DOT experience indicates that certain process & institutional features are closely linked to effective programs and their maintenance of continuing improvement Key is internalizing continuous and measurable improvement in customer-related performance across complete range of operations needs Point of departure self-evaluated Defines next level of arrangements to improve effectiveness (stepwise) and strategies to achieve it 8

9. Substantive Structure: 9

10. Levels of Maturityfor Each of the 3 Dimensions Level 1 (L1) - characterizes agencies that have not yet begun to develop an SO&M program Levels 2 (L2) and 3 (L3) - describe the level of maturity found in the top 10 percent of State DOTs Level 4 (L4) - an ideal target for achievement in terms of institutionalized, sustainable, continuously improving SO&M activities 10

11. 11

12. 12

13. 13

14. 14

15. User-based Self-Evaluation Indicate User’s position (check one): Top management (CO or District) Program manager (CO or District) Project manager (CO or district) 15

16. “Black Box” Determines Users current level and next steps to improved capability 16

17. Standard Strategy Templates for Each Element/Level combination (100+) 17

18. Process is repeated for next element of capability “Model” uses user self-evaluation to determine current level Model defines next steps (based on current best practice User only sees material related to her agency level 18

19. Benefits of Web-Based Approach Avoids lengthy paper documents with big charts Relationships among elements built in Custom tailored to user Users self-evaluate SDOT state of play Increasing levels of detail displayed on automated basis Hyperlinks to supporting documents 19

20. Need for Senior State DOT Input Importance of SO&M to your program? Your management objectives related to SO&M? Principle challenges you see Lessons you have learned to date Utility of Guidance to you We look forward to follow-up with you 20