Institutional Architectures to Advance Operational Strategies Maryland Transportation Operations Summit Steve Lockwood Parsons Brinckerhoff May 1, 2008

Applying Capability Maturity Model to SDOT Operations Programs 1.Identify Effective agencies 2.Determine the combination of capabilities evident in the more effective agencies 3.Determine the institutional architecture to support increased levels of maturity 4.Identify Change Strategies to achieve the supportive architecture

Operations Capability Maturity Levels Ad Hoc Managed Integrated Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Ad hoc operation. Relationships not coordinated Processes fully documented & staff trained Fully coordinated, performance-driven Transitioning Agencies (most) Goal for the future A few Leaders Support Arch. Support Arch. Support Arch.

Major Variables Preconditions for Effective Systems Operations Planning/Programming Scope Concepts/procedures Technology and Systems Measurement Institutional Architecture Dimensions Culture Leadership Authorization Resources Organizational Structure Technical capacities Partnerships

CAPABILITY LEVELS Level 1 Performed Ac Hoc ““We don’t know that we don’t know Level 2 Managed We know that we don’t know” Level 3 Integrated We work at what we don’t know” Correlation between Operations Maturity Levels And Institutional Architecture SUPPORTIVE INSTITUTIONAL ARCHITECTURE Dimensions Architecture A Ad Hoc to Managed Architecture B Managed to Integrated Architecture C Integrated to Mainstreamed Performance Criteria For Levels Performance Criteria For Support Improveimprove Organize

The “Rules” of OCM Continuous improvement (effectiveness) is objective Improvement requires consistent processes (planning, budgeting, best technology), measurement, documentation and training The levels are incremental combinations of processes establishment and measurement Each level builds on that previous via establishing more supportive institutional arrangements. Current OCM level is based on the row with the lowest score.

CAPABILITY LEVELS Criteria For Levels Level 1 Performed Ac Hoc Level 2 Managed Level 3 Integrated Planning/Programming Concepts/procedures/ Technology & Systems Scope Measurement SUPPORTIVE INSTITUTIONAL ARCHITECTURE Dimensions Ad Hoc to Managed Managed to Integrated Integrated to Mainstreamed Culture Leadership Authorization Organizational Structure Technical capacities/processes Partnerships The Operations Maturity Levels Concept

Levels of Operations Maturity Criteria For Levels Exhibited in state DOTSOther Sectors Level 1 Performed Ac Hoc Level 2 Managed Level 3 Integrated/Predictable Planning/ Programming No planning,strategic planning of increments Integrated Program (D/O/M) Concepts/ procedures procedures ad hoc/inconsistent Basic conops documented Basic concepts integrated into maintenance and construction Technology and Systems Inconsistent project level Qualitative Technology evaluation Standardization Scope Narrow/ITS-project based, TMC as operator/integrator Comprehensive integration (all strategies) at SOP Performance Measurement NoneSome Output basedQuantitative/outcome-based General Capability Consciousness Getting organized: project level activities, siloed, hero-driven ““We don’t know that we don’t know” Developing methods and processes, but un- integrated “We know that we don’t know” Best practice installed, documented and measured within program framework “We work at what we don’t know”

Institutional Architectures Associated with Capability Levels Architectural Dimensions Observed in State DOTsOther institutions Supporting Transition from Ad Hoc to Managed Supporting Transition from Managed to Integrated Supporting Transition from Integrated to Mainstreamed Culture Technical understanding limited Ops understanding across disciplines Customer Mobility Management commitment Leadership Champion-basedAgency responsibility acceptedCommitment at agency level Authorization Legal authorities clarifiedRationalization of responsibilities (DOT, PSA, private) Organization with mobility mission/authority Resource Allocation Project level funds, ad hoc,Multiyear Program fundingNeeds-based funding based on C/E Organizational Structure Horizontal consolidationVertical/horizontal alignment (P/B/D/C/O/M) Operations as equal Core program Technical capacities/ processes Reliance on key individualsCore capacities establishedCore capacities institutionalized Partnerships (law, fire, local govt) Non-DOT entities unalignedRelationships personal/informalFormal agreements Institutional Architectures Supporting Capability Levels

Operations Capability Maturity Levels Ad Hoc Managed Integrated Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Ad hoc operation. Relationships not coordinated Processes fully documented & staff trained Fully coordinated, performance-driven Transitioning Agencies (most) Goal for the future A few Leaders Support Arch. Support Arch. Support Arch.

Strategies to Improve Institutional Architecture (Examples Only)

The Potential of Operations Capability Maturity Model Shared vision of what is best practice A common language for discussing the state of play Vertical and horizontal management relationships Formalized, transparent (self) appraisal process Suits any type of organization by size, problems, A framework for prioritizing change management tactics Basis for benchmarking across organizations

CAPABILITY LEVELS Criteria For Levels Level 1 Performed Ac Hoc Level 2 Managed Level 3 Integrated Planning/Programming Concepts/procedures/ Technology & Systems Scope Measurement SUPPORTIVE INSTITUTIONAL ARCHITECTURE Dimensions Ad Hoc to Managed Managed to Integrated Integrated to Mainstreamed Culture Leadership Authorization Organizational Structure Technical capacities/processes Partnerships The Operations Maturity Levels Concept