A Guidebook for Airport Winter Operations (2015)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

33 Investment in winter operations to improve performance requires the identification of, col- lection of, review of, and action-oriented response to relevant data. Data is information, and a lack of good information leads to uninformed decisions and failure to meet expectations. This chapter presents a framework for making informed, defensible decisions based upon clear per- formance goals and objectives, sound data, documented baseline performance, and established winter event-based performance targets. 6.1 Identify Performance Goals, Objectives, and Measures Many of the airports surveyed during research conducted for this guidebook had not estab- lished clear winter operations performance goals, were not measuring program elements having strategic importance to their performance, and were not using measures to guide and adjust their operational performance. Accomplishing these actions requires a struc- tured system for goal setting and performance measurement. ACRP Report 19: Develop- ing an Airport Performance-Measurement System defines performance measurement as “measurement on a regular basis of the results and efficiency of processes, services and programs” (12, p. 8). ACRP Report 19 offers guidance and step-wise instruction on how to establish a formal, documented performance-measurement system. The fol- lowing sections of this chapter touch on some of the many concepts presented in ACRP Report 19. These concepts represent key con- siderations for planning winter operations programs. Readers are encouraged to incorpo- rate a performance-measurement system into the overall management system approach to winter operations outlined in this guidebook. C H A P T E R 6 Winter Operations Performance Measurement

34 A Guidebook for Airport Winter Operations 6.1.1 Performance Goals Goal setting for an airport winter operations program is a crucial first step toward managing performance. High-level goals should reflect the following characteristics: • Identify a broad, desired end result; • Originate from an airport-wide strategic goal setting process, if one exists; • Reflect highest-level priorities for which the airport is willing to invest its resources; • Align with other high-level airport goals; • Reflect the input and interests of the winter operations stakeholders (see Chapter 2); • Require the coordinated efforts of winter operations stakeholders to achieve; and • Apply to the organization over an extended duration. It is important to set a manageable number of goals for a winter operations program. Three to four well-conceived goals may be all that are necessary depending on airport size and complexity. Each goal may be supported by multiple related objectives, which are described in the next section. Figure 6-1 provides three examples of high-level winter operations program goals. 6.1.2 Performance Objectives The terms “objective” and “goal” are often considered to be synonymous; however, for the purpose of this guidebook the terms are assigned unique meanings. Objectives are a subset of high-level goals. As presented earlier, a goal represents a broad, desired end result. An objective is more specific than a goal, represents a pathway to achieving a goal, and will typically be imple- mented over a shorter time interval. Multiple objectives may be required to support a single high-level goal (see Figure 6-2), so the total number of goals set by an airport will be driven by the number of supporting objectives. However, the total number of objectives will typically be constrained by the availability of resources (i.e., resources, capital, time) required to implement the objectives. Figure 6-1. Example high-level winter operation program goals. Figure 6-2. Relationship between goals and objectives.

Winter Operations Performance Measurement 35 When setting objectives, apply “SMART” criteria. While there may be alternate words assigned to each letter of this acronym, the following version is well-suited to winter operations: • Specific—Is the objective specific enough to ensure consistency and avoid confusion? • Measurable—Can a quantifiable measure be assigned to the objective to track progress? • Assignable—Is the objective assignable to an individual or group to ensure ownership and accountability? • Realistic—Is the objective within the collective capability of the airport and its stakeholders given available time and equipment, human, and financial resources? • Time-Based—Does the objective have a predefined period of time during which it is to be achieved? Figure 6-3 provides the same high-level winter operation program goals presented in the previous figure with associated example objectives. 6.1.3 Performance Measures Once objectives to support each high-level winter operations program goal are set, determine how performance can be measured so that progress toward goals and objectives can be quan- tified. The inability to identify clear performance measures for a goal or objective is a strong indicator that the goal or objective is not specific enough and may require further refinement. Nearly every aspect of airport winter operations can be measured, and some airport operators collect large amounts of data over the course of a winter season. However, just because an activ- ity can be measured does not mean that it should be. Collecting data with no pre-established purpose for how the data will be used, or how it will relate to operational goals or objectives, may result in an inefficient and ineffective use of airport resources. A fundamental concept of performance-measurement systems is to select measures that will be useful to the intended user Figure 6-3. Example objectives associated with high-level winter operation program goals.

36 A Guidebook for Airport Winter Operations and will offer insight into operational performance so that adjustments can be made to achieve desired results (12, p. 10). Performance measurements may not be useful for all audiences within the airport organiza- tion or for airport stakeholders. For example, the average speed of a snow team on a runway covered with one inch of wet snow may be clocked at 15 miles per hour. This measurement may be useful to an airfield maintenance manager who is looking for opportunities to increase the average snow team speed. However, this measure may be of little value to the FAA ATCT or airport operations. Instead, a more useful measure may be the average SRE runway occupancy time to clear one inch of wet snow. This measure is also an indicator of snow team performance, including operating speed, but better meets the needs of this audience. The bottom line in selecting performance measures is to make sure they meet the needs of their intended audience. As will be described later in this section, direct measures of individual activities may be most use- ful to personnel within an airport organization directly responsible for those activities. Measures that can serve as performance indicators for broader operations may be most useful to personnel in the organization tasked with managing overall performance to meet established goals and supporting objectives. The most beneficial strategic measures of air- port winter operations are referred to as “airport performance indicators” (APIs) and are synonymous with the more familiar term “key performance indicators.” The term API is used in this guidebook to facilitate consistency with ACRP Report 19A: Resource Guide to Airport Performance Indicators, which describes numerous performance indicators covering most facets of airport operations. Determining which measures will be useful and offer insight requires an understanding of the various types of measures and where they originate. Figure 6-4 classifies the sources of potential measures as inputs, outputs, out- comes, and efficiencies according to their relationship to airport winter opera- tions activities, which are driven by winter event meteorological conditions. Each classification of measure is defined below. • Inputs—The resources utilized to conduct an activity (e.g., equipment capi- tal investments, number of pieces of equipment used, number of operators required, gallons of pavement deicer applied, gallons of fuel consumed, etc.). • Outputs—The results of the operational activities (e.g., square feet of pave- ment treated, duration of runway closures, number of aircraft operations during event, etc.). Figure 6-4. Relationship of input, output, outcome, and efficiency measures to operational activities driven by winter event meteorological conditions.

Winter Operations Performance Measurement 37 • Outcomes—The impacts of inputs and outputs on the airport operator and its stakeholders (e.g., increased operating costs, decreased departure delays and cancellations, no runway incur- sions by snow team, no go-arounds due to closed runways, etc.), which are compared to its objectives (i.e., intermediate outcomes) and goals (i.e., end outcomes). • Efficiencies—Relationship of output production or outcomes to the use of inputs (e.g., total cost per square foot of treated pavement, air carrier cost per minute of runway closure, etc.). In addition to considering the classification of measures, also consider whether measures document what has occurred in the past or indicate what may occur in the future. Measures that document what has already happened are considered lag- ging measures and provide data upon which to react. Most winter operations performance measures are lagging measures. Measures that indicate what may happen in the future are considered leading measures and allow proactive course cor- rections, as necessary, to achieve desired intermediate and end outcomes. ACRP Report 19 suggests that few airports recognize and use leading indicators, although it advocates establishing a balance in the use of lagging and leading performance measures (12, p. 20). An example leading measure applicable to winter operations is average “windshield time” for SRE operators dur- ing winter events. This measure represents the average number of hours an equipment operator works during a winter event prior to a substantial rest period. As a well-documented con- cern for airport operators, it is an indicator of potential opera- tor fatigue, loss of concentration and situational awareness, and other safety concerns such as vehicle collisions, runway incursions, or other undesirable performance. To be a leading measure, there should be a reasonable correlation between the measure and potential future performance. Other considerations for selecting performance measures for winter operations include the following: • Primary—Select primary measures that can be measured directly rather than secondary mea- sures that must be calculated from other measures. • Importance—Select measures for an aspect of an activity that is most important to, or has the most influence on, the airport’s performance of that activity. • Control—Avoid measuring activities when the airport does not have primary control over the activity or when the activity may be affected by multiple variables beyond the airport’s control. • Ease of Acquisition—Avoid measures that are difficult to capture as part of normal opera- tions or that are labor intensive. • Accuracy and Precision—Avoid measurement methods that introduce the potential for sig- nificant error in accuracy (i.e., the difference between measured and actual values) or preci- sion (i.e., the inability to replicate measured values under identical conditions) when accurate or precise measurements are required. Conversely, avoid unnecessarily expending resources to collect accurate or precise measurements, when doing so will not increase the usefulness of the data (i.e., an indicator will suffice). Figure 6-5 identifies possible APIs for the example high-level winter operation program goals and associated objectives presented in the earlier figures. Appendix B presents example measures that may serve as useful APIs for seven winter operations performance categories. This list does not represent all possible APIs that may be of interest to an airport. The identified APIs were the most prevalent indicators identified from airport interviews, documents, and discussion during the conduct of research for this guidebook and were included because each enables monitoring of Source: Wausau Equipment Company

38 A Guidebook for Airport Winter Operations airport winter operations performance. The APIs can inform decisions about whether to improve process efficiency associated with activities and/or invest in additional resources (e.g., inputs). The list will enable airports to select APIs based upon areas of interest and their own specific goals. 6.2 Plan Data Collection and Reporting Data collection and reporting requires a potentially significant investment with the expected return being improvement in winter operations performance. The investment will include labor and may also include software and equipment to measure performance. The level of investment may vary greatly between airports based on the number of tracked performance measures. Data collection and reporting costs should be accounted for in the annual winter operations program budget. Additional considerations related to collecting and reporting performance data that may help better define the level of investment required include: • Who is responsible and accountable for performance data collection? This may be the most important question because, if data are not collected as prescribed, the other questions are irrelevant. Avoid naming individuals as responsible and accountable and, instead, name a specific position(s). Staff filling these positions should then be instructed how to fulfill their responsibilities. Figure 6-5. Example APIs identified for objectives associated with high-level winter operation program goals.

Winter Operations Performance Measurement 39 • Where will performance data be recorded and stored? Decide if data will be recorded directly into electronic format or written to hard copy and later entered into electronic format. Strive for collecting electronic data records using the most practical and efficient process possible. To accomplish this, airports need to consider what software will be used for data management and reporting. Chapter 6 of ACRP Report 19 offers insight into software-based performance reporting. • How will performance data be reported? Data reporting decisions, including how data are to be presented to management-level decision makers, are typically linked to data management software platform considerations. At a minimum, performance data should be presented in a manner that facilitates management understanding of performance trends, identifies potential performance issues, and enables management decisions to maintain or improve performance (12, p. 88). This is often accomplished through the use of performance scorecards or dashboards. • When will performance data be reported? The frequency of performance data reporting depends upon the data and intended audience. Reporting “Time to Complete Airside Prior- ity 1 Pavement” to an airfield maintenance department could realistically occur after each winter event, while the same API might be reported to the airport’s director after each winter season. It is important to remember that performance measurements should be reported at the frequency required for decision makers to make timely, informed performance manage- ment decisions.