Performance Measurement of Transportation Systems: Summary of the Fourth International Conference (2013)

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.

28 BREAKOUT SESSION 2-C Lessons Learned Lance A. Neumann, Cambridge Systematics (Moderator) Patricia G. Hendren, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Daniela Bremmer, Washington State Department of Transportation Lisa Klein, Metropolitan Transportation Commission Thomas Jeffrey Price, Virginia Department of Transportation Mara K. Campbell, Missouri Department of Transportation Shintaro Terabe, Tokyo University of Science This breakout session included brief comments from panel members and an open discussion among all participants. The summary of the panelists’ main points below is followed by a list of the major discussion topics. Patricia G. Hendren spoke about the experience of the Office of Performance, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA): • WMATA’s Office of Performance was established in 2009. It focuses on providing performance products for departments within WMATA, the general manager, the board, the media, and the public. • The office developed a Vital Signs Report that focuses on the key performance measures. There was concern at first that the media and other groups would be critical of WMATA regarding the information pro- vided. The reaction has been very positive, however. The report has been well received both inside the agency and by outside stakeholders. • The performance measures and the Vital Signs Report focus on how performance has changed and on what WMATA is doing about the change. Information is provided at the department level, to the general manager, to the board, and to external groups. • The plans in the various departments link day-to- day work to agency goals (Figure 3). The performance measures help build support from line personnel, includ- ing bus operators and maintenance personnel, for agency goals. The performance measures also provide a link to the capital program. The goal of the Office of Perfor- mance is to use performance measurement to inform, promote, and unify. • Four challenges were highlighted. The first is mak- ing the agency’s goals meaningful for all employees, including bus operators, maintenance personnel, and other front-line staff. The second challenge is that the office had to show its work quickly as well as on an ongoing basis. When funding is limited, performance measures are often viewed as an easy area to reduce or eliminate. The third challenge is that transit agencies in general are data rich but information poor. WMATA collects extensive data, but resources for analyzing that data are very limited. The fourth challenge is that data and information are sometimes seen as taking power away from other agency personnel and the board. Daniela Bremmer spoke about the experience of the Washington State Department of Transportation (DOT): • The Washington State DOT has extensive experi- ence in the use of performance measurement and man- agement. The Gray Notebook, the quarterly performance report that contains the performance measures publicly reported by the department, has been published for 10 years. The department links performance measures with strategic planning and investment decision making. Per- formance measurement has become part of the culture of the Washington State DOT. The use of performance mea- surement is expected and is no longer viewed as a special activity. Performance measurement is also part of the cul- ture of the Governor’s office and the state legislature.

29lessons learned • Many lessons have been learned over the years from the use of performance measures. The Gray Note- book created a brand for performance measurement at the Washington State DOT. The data in the Gray Note- book are just the beginning of the story, however. It is the use of that data in decision making and in reporting results to policy makers and the public that is critical. Performance measurement is not static. It is an ongoing interactive process. The specific metrics may not always be as important as the process. • The current budget situation presents a challenge. Maintaining performance measurement practices during a time of constrained funding is difficult but critical. Doing more with less continues to be the new normal. Addressing hard-to-measure goals and objectives also continues to be a challenge. These goals and objectives relate to sustain- ability, livability, and economic competitiveness. Lisa Klein spoke about the experience of the San Fran- cisco Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commis- sion (MTC): • MTC’s long-range plan includes performance mea- sures at both the scenario level and the project level. The San Francisco Bay Area is a multimodal environment, and 60 percent of MTC funding goes to transit. • The use of performance measurement and perfor- mance measures at MTC has evolved since 2001. Per- formance measures were initially introduced at MTC in response to a legislative mandate. The first performance measures focused on travel time, trip time reliability, and state of good repair. The state legislation on green- house gas emissions included other requirements. This legislation and other factors resulted in more of a focus on housing, health, and preservation of open space as well as on transportation in the new long-range plan. This shift in focus evolved and has been reflected in new goals, objectives, and measures over the past decade. • MTC is facing three challenges associated with the use of performance measures: better understanding of the outcomes of broader measures, creating a level playing field for all modes and topics, and better understanding of the impacts of specific projects. Identifying appropri- ate performance measures and data for objectives related to health, housing, and the regional domestic product has been challenging. Different tools and different part- nerships are needed for performance measures in these areas. The use of different data sources to comparing a wide range of projects over different time periods has also been challenging. Tracking the impacts of projects and programs through before-and-after studies repre- sents still another challenge. Thomas Jeffrey Price spoke about the experience of the Virginia DOT: • The Virginia DOT uses performance measures in several different ways. Performance measures are used to FIGURE 3 Components of WMATA execution plan.

30 performance measurement of transportation systems evaluate maintenance and operation needs every 2 years and to evaluate safety projects. • The Virginia DOT’s Dashboard is a visual tool that is accessible to the public. The Dashboard is used to graphically track project delivery, including measures for being on time and on budget. • One challenge is the lack of comparable perfor- mance measures for use in the project selection pro- cess. Another challenge is obtaining and using customer input as part of the performance measures process. Still another challenge is that employees begin to manage to a measure, which results in unintended behavior and out- comes. Measures may need to be modified to address this issue. A final challenge is institutionalizing performance measurement so that performance measures remain in place even when agency leadership changes. Mara K. Campbell spoke about the experience of the Missouri DOT: • The use of performance measures is well estab- lished at the Missouri DOT. Performance measures are used in all areas of the department. • One challenge in using performance measures is that personnel want to perform in the middle; that is, no one wants to be at the bottom or the top. Another chal- lenge is maintaining performance measurement when there is a change in leadership at an agency. Shintaro Terabe stated that obtaining the support of agency leaders for developing and using performance measurement is a major challenge. Performance measure- ment is often viewed as an area that can be cut back or eliminated when budget reduction is necessary. Another challenge is maintaining existing performance measure- ment programs when changes in political leadership or agency personnel occur. oPen disCussion • Another challenge with regard to nontraditional performance is that the transportation or transit agency does not have responsibility or control for programs and projects. Establishing partnerships with the agencies responsible for these areas is important. • Different techniques for obtaining input from cus- tomers were discussed, along with how this informa- tion is used in performance measures. Various measures of customer satisfaction, from roadway smoothness to on-time trains, were highlighted. Obtaining informa- tion from truckers and freight users was also noted as important. • The need to present information on performance measures to decision makers and the public in easy-to- understand ways was discussed. Avoiding jargon and providing information that resonates with different groups were two strategies noted as being important. • Different technologies and methods for data col- lection, including new and evolving technologies, were discussed. It was suggested that although these new tech- nologies can provide a wealth of data, it is important to determine that the data are needed and will be used. Collecting data for data’s sake is irrelevant; what matters is obtaining data that yield information that can be used to make decisions.