Performance Management In The Production of Geospatial Data

1. Performance Management In The Production of Geospatial Data Mark Guttmanmguttman@costquest.com

2. The questions: • There is a perception that the public sector’s production of geospatial data is wasteful… • Is this true? • Can the perception be clarified and can a clear, reasoned response be delivered?

3. The questions: • Geospatial data supports multiple endeavors within private / public sectors • Because it’s development is rarely the business objective it is difficult to quantify the value it produces. • What is geospatial data? • What are the processes of producing it? • Can the downstream value it creates be measured? • Can the assets consumed during it’s production be measured?

4. The questions: • Geospatial data are special • In terms of economic value and organizational strategy how special are they? • With respect to the questions and issues posed earlier, can models and tools from other business areas be helpful? • Or, are these perceptions and questions not yet significant enough to drive action?

5. As practitioners, what should be done? • Maintain Present Mode of Operation (PMO) • Panic, Hide, Obfuscate (PHO) • Develop something before something is developed for us…

6. Themes for this presentation • Establish the perception • Define the problem • What questions could be asked? • What thought models could be helpful?

7. Historical Background-Development of NSDI • Establishment of NSDI (1996) • Executive Order 12906 • “to implement the recommendations of the National Performance Review; to advance the goals of the National Information Infrastructure; and to avoid wasteful duplication of effort and promote effective and economical management of resources by Federal, State, local, and tribal governments” [emphasis added]

8. Historical Background • NSDI • FGDC coordinates • Two highly visible components • Data Sharing • Geospatial One Stop-allows for publication of metadata records • Data Acquisition Marketplace • Allows for shared acquisition of data

9. NSDI -Partnership portal yields 3000 acquisition records with ~1000 contacts FGDC 2006 Annual Report

10. What is the problem? • From GAO, June 2004 • “… FGDC and GOS have taken actions to coordinate government geospatial investments…However these efforts have not been fully successful” • “Until these problems are resolved duplicative investments are likely to remain”

11. What is the problem? • From NGPO Geospatial Investments (Geospatial Investments) work group (Dec 2004) • “Little evidence of governmentwide management” • “Total annual investment is “guesstimated” to be somewhere in the range of $4‑8 billion annually and up to 50 percent of this amount has been asserted to be duplication.” • Views on expenditures and duplication are based on anecdotes or assertions that are unsubstantiated

12. Summing Up… • A number of different factors make us say spatial data are special • But, in terms of how we develop the data which drives our industry, there seems to be a problem • …the problem is a perception that we are not particularly efficient • …as geospatial data begins to drive solutions outside of the traditional geospatial realm, perceptions of quality/value could become increasingly negative • …for a technology which sells it’s ability to help make better decisions as a benefit, why can’t we consistently quantify and defend benefits?

13. Does this sound familiar? • Huge investment • Presumption of inefficiency in resource utilization. • Benefits are not disputed but are difficult to quantify • Little ‘real evidence’ for decisions. Lots of normative statements. • “In the computer industry…failures are covered up, ignored, and/or rationalized. As a result, we keep making the same mistakes over and over again” (Standish Group CHAOS report, 1994)

14. Where do we go from here? • Practitioners who produce Geospatial Data need a means to… • Justify initial investments which start projects • Compare rival proposals and select those which produces the greatest benefit in light of organizational goals • Manage existing resources and demonstrate increasing efficiency over time • We need to focus not just on the data, the production/distribution technologies and legalities—we need to look at how we manage the production process.

15. The foundational management issues • How are we selecting the correct geospatial data projects? • Costs/Benefits, ROI/IRR tools • How are we managing our existing projects? • A performance management question These are very similar issues but I’ll draw a distinction upon the point in time the question is asked and to whom it is relevant. To answer these questions: Is it possible to apply lessons, tools and techniques from other areas to the geospatial data industry?

16. What is Performance Management? • A data driven organizational process designed to improve how the organization works. • Uses transparent methods to objectively measure how we are doing today versus how we want to be doing. • It’s an umbrella term for a number of different ideas: Quality Management, Six Sigma, Balanced Scorecards, CMMI, Value Management…

17. I’m not selling consulting hours, please, don’t leave now • It’s not reporting for reporting sake; not methodology for the sake of the methodologist. • Bottom line: What you can’t measure, you can’t manage…what you can’t manage you can’t improve.

18. In terms of Geospatial Data Development… • Two questions for my research • 1) How do some basic data development processes work? • A process modeling question • Can UML or other process modeling tools be used to explore what is happening? • With process models, can firms begin to see how assets are consumed, where duplication exists and where there exists comparative advantage? • 2) Is our work helping to advance/achieve specific goals? • A process alignment question

19. To understand our data development processes • We need to categorize the data development work which consumes geospatial investment: like hardware, human capital, existing geospatial data, software and networks. • Proposal: define a geospatial process, model it, demonstrate work and asset flows

20. A Business Process Model

21. Quantifying Work Process Improvement Benefits (CMMI example) • As our people get better trained, their work ‘quality’ improves

22. Is our work helping to advance/achieve specific goals? Purpose: How are we demonstrating this linkage? Strategy Plan Teach\Learn Proposal: Within a geospatial data framework, is it possible to use existing alignment tools to show that the right things are being done? Outputs Scope Design Model Requirements Cost/Benefits Implementation Plan From Tomlinson (2004)

23. Are we doing the right things? • Doing it right vs. doing the right things? • Or, it isn’t if we have x million more metadata records in our clearinghouse, it’s what are those metadata records helping us do.

24. Project Alignment Example • Critical To Quality (CTQ) diagram (ASQ, 4/07)

25. Balanced Scorecard Alignment Example 2006-Defense Finance and Accounting Services Strategic Plan 2006-2011

26. Conclusions • In terms of business management, geospatial data development projects seem to have ample opportunities to improve. • Although I began exploring issues on Federal level, the concepts are applicable for State/Local and Private organizations • Not dissimilar to issues that framed development of PMBok or SWEBok

27. Conclusions • Industry needs to explore ways to demonstrate maturity and efficiency before someone else does. • Existing tools and practices from other industries may be helpful. • Although the tools may exist elsewhere, is it worthwhile to marry geospatial language and work patterns with established management frameworks? If it’s going to work the incentive has to be created for it to be used and the organization’s culture needs to accept it.