Organizing for Reliability – Capability Maturity Model Assessment and Implementation Plans
|Arizona||NOACA (Cleveland, Ohio)|
|Florida District 5 (Orlando)||Pennsylvania|
|Kansas District 5 (Wichita)||Tennessee|
|New Jersey||Washington, D.C.|
|Missouri||Whatcom (Whatcom County, Washington)|
|NITTEC (Buffalo, New York)|
The CMM workshops are intended to improve the effectiveness of TSM&O applications and activities by assisting staff and management who are central players in statewide and regional TSM&O agencies. The workshop framework provides a structured focus on the six dimensions of capability, together with a facilitated self-assessment process in which participants evaluate their current activities and arrangements according to criteria from the CMM framework defining levels of capability. The current challenges and problems identified by workshop participants are used to identify actions needed to improve capability and are subsequently embodied in an implementation plan to improve the effectiveness of TSM&O.
Given the self-assessment focus, workshop participation includes agency middle management: the unit managers and key technical staff with day-to-day oversight of TSM&O-related activities. Senior management are involved in a pre-workshop briefing, referred to as the Senior Leadership meeting, and their approval of the implementation plans are required as a precondition of Federal financial assistance. Workshops are limited to 20 to 25 participants selected by the host agency to represent the most important players at central office and district/regional units, as well as their partners in the delivery of TSM&O, including public safety agencies, MPOs, local governments, and the private sector.
The CMM self-assessment framework is structured in terms of six dimensions of capability. Three dimensions are process oriented:
Three dimensions are institutional:
For each of these six dimensions, the self-assessment utilizes four criteria-based “levels” of capability maturity that indicate the direction of managed changes required to improve TSM&O effectiveness:
Table 1.2 illustrates the basic CMM self-assessment framework of dimensions and levels of capability.
|Dimensions||Capability Level Criteria – Level 1 Performed||Capability Level Criteria – Level 2 Managed||Capability Level Criteria – Level 3 Integrated||Capability Level Criteria – Level 4 Optimizing|
|Business Processes (Planning and Programming)||Each jurisdiction doing its own thing according to individual priorities and capabilities||Consensus regional approach developed regarding TSM&O goals, deficiencies, B/C, networks, strategies and common priorities||Regional program integrated into jurisdictions’ overall multimodal transportation plans with related staged program||TSM&O integrated into jurisdictions’ multi-sectoral plans and programs, based on formal continuing planning processes|
|Systems and Technology||Ad hoc approaches to system implementation without consideration of systems engineering and appropriate procurement processes||Regional ConOps and architectures developed and documented with costs included; appropriate procurement process employed||Systems and technology standardized and integrated on a regional basis (including arterial focus) with other related processes and training as appropriate||Architectures and technology routinely upgraded to improve performance; systems integration interoperability maintained on continuing basis|
|Performance Measurement||Some outputs measured and reported by some jurisdictions||Output data used directly for after-action debriefings and improvements; data easily available and dashboarded||Outcome measures identified (networks, modes, impacts) and routinely utilized for objective-based program improvements||Performance measures reported internally for utilization and externally for accountability and program justification|
|Culture||Individual staff member champions promote TSM&O, varying among jurisdictions||Jurisdictions’ senior management understands TSM&O business case and educates decision makers/public||Jurisdictions’ mission identifies TSM&O and benefits with formal program and achieves wide public visibility/understanding||Customer mobility service commitment accountability accepted as formal, top level core program of all jurisdictions|
|Organization/Staffing||TSM&O added on to units within existing structure and staffing – dependent on technical champions||TSM&O-specific organizational concept developed within among jurisdictions with core capacity needs identified, collaboration takes place||TSM&O Managers have direct report to top management; Job specs, certification and training for core positions||TSM&O senior managers at equivalent level with other jurisdiction services and staff professionalized|
|Collaboration||Relationships ad hoc and personal (public-public, public-private)||Objectives, strategies, and performance measures aligned among major players (transportation and public safety agencies (PSAs)) with after-action debriefing||Rationalization/sharing/formalization of responsibilities among key players through co-training, formal agreements, and incentives||High level of TSM&O coordination among owner/operators (State, local, private)|
Levels cannot be skipped as an agency improves its capability since each level builds on the technical and/or organizational readiness of the previous level. The dimension at the lowest level of capability is usually the principal constraint to improvement in program effectiveness and therefore the highest priority focus for capability improvement.
The full CMM self-assessment workshop sequence conducted for the 23 agencies summarized in this report consists of four steps. The first step involves pre-workshop preparation by the facilitators to review key documents provided by the State or region documenting current TSM&O initiatives and activities, programs, and priorities in the host area. Facilitators review items such as ITS strategic plans, concepts of operations, long-range transportation plans, agency organization charts, and other relevant plans and documents. A pre-workshop conference call with the lead and/or core team from the host State or region also helps to identify current issues and challenges.
The second step is a senior leadership meeting held a day in advance of the workshop at which senior agency leaders are briefed to explain the process and its value and to obtain their perspectives on important issues.
The third step is the facilitated self-assessment workshop involving the essential TSM&O-related managers from State DOTs and their partners. This workshop starts with a facilitated self-identification of current strengths and weaknesses in each dimension and a consensus determination regarding their current levels of capability. These assessments serve as the basis for participants’ identification of the actions needed to improve to the next level of capability in each dimension and the priorities on which to focus.
The fourth step consists of implementation plan development. Based on workshop results, the facilitators suggest work program tasks for the priority dimensions, starting with those at the lowest level of capability. The host agency then produces a detailed implementation work program to improve capabilities in these priority dimensions and makes adjustments to the recommendations as they see fit. Upon FHWA and host agency management approval, the implementation plan is eligible for both financial and technical resource support from FHWA and AASHTO under the SHRP 2 Implementation Assistance Program. The support includes training, workshops, peer exchanges, technical assistance, collaboration activities, and additional progress assessments and meetings.
The CMM concept including the dimensions and levels utilized in the TSM&O program level assessments presented in this report have also been adopted by FHWA for utilization in developing application-specific self-assessment tools and activities.
United States Department of Transportation - Federal Highway Administration