Multi-Disciplinary Teams in Context-Sensitive Solutions (2007)

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.

Although transportation agencies use different terms to char- acterize the principles and philosophy of context-sensitive solutions (CSS), the underlying theme is one of developing transportation solutions that improve the quality of life for the communities being served by transportation agencies. The CSS philosophy has continued to evolve over the last 10 years; however, the inclusion of multiple perspectives and disciplines in the decision-making process has remained a fundamental principle in defining CSS. The CSS approach to transportation decision making suggests that multi-disciplinary teams: • Fully represent the natural and human context as well as the community’s perspective of a good quality of life. • Have a set of ground rules by which they operate to ensure inclusiveness of ideas. • Have a transparent, systematic process in place that allows team members to review how their input is being used to make project decisions. This includes the pres- ence of sincere feedback loops. • Promote an atmosphere of collaboration that strives toward consensus. • Exemplify a sense of trust among team members. • Provide ownership of the outcome. • Use good information-sharing practices. A review of current practices and literature related to using multi-disciplinary teams to reach CSS for transporta- tion projects found only a few publications, guidelines, and examples. The survey results provided insight into under- standing state departments of transportation (DOTs) percep- tions about CSS and multi-disciplinary teams. The survey revealed the following CSS policies, guidance, and directives related to multi-disciplinary teams by state DOTs: • A majority of the states surveyed have an adopted CSS policy and almost half (47%) have guidelines for using CSS. • Most states are using internal multi-disciplinary teams as a CSS application. If external team members are accepted on the teams, they most often come from fed- eral and state agencies. • Most states have offered some type of CSS training; however, the total numbers trained are very low and the engineering profession represents the primary disci- pline receiving the training. Representatives of local 42 government are the external group most frequently trained. • Composition of the multi-disciplinary team is most often determined by the context of the project. • The decision to use multi-disciplinary teams is based primarily on the size of the project and the expected level of public controversy. When considering the integration of public involvement into multi-disciplinary teams the following practices were reported as part of the survey: • The survey suggests community perspectives are repre- sented most often by a summary of public comments and from local government input. In addition, the majority of state DOTs use public comments presented by DOT staff to the multi-disciplinary team as the spe- cific approach to ensuring that public interests and needs are considered by the team during the decision- making process. • The process for selection of community representation is predominantly through state DOT management selection and local government input. • Only half of the responding states use a well-defined process that clearly specifies roles and responsibilities, set time limits, review periods, and critical milestones for multi-disciplinary teams. • State DOTs rely on open forum meetings, websites, and newsletters as the primary methods to convey informa- tion between the general public and multi-disciplinary teams. When evaluating the multi-disciplinary teams and the decision-making process, the following state DOT practices were revealed as part of the survey results: • State DOTs are using multi-disciplinary teams for large projects and they are formed at the purpose and need and the scoping stages of project development. • Few states are using a process to gauge the satisfaction of the multi-disciplinary team members during project development, with post-project critiques reported as the most common method. • State DOTs are using metropolitan planning organiza- tion or regional planning organization representatives as the primary link between long-range planning and the project development process. CHAPTER FOUR CONCLUSIONS

43 • State DOTs believe that CSS multi-disciplinary teams generally have a positive effect on the outcome of the project; specifically, greater public acceptance and expedited project delivery. The information from the survey was helpful in gauging the general perception of state DOTs concerning CSS and multi-disciplinary teams, but not that helpful with under- standing the inner workings of multi-disciplinary teams. Four case studies for multi-disciplinary teams were selected that demonstrate effective practices for a range of projects including one program-wide approach. These case studies provided valuable lessons learned through notable practices that can be transferred to project development processes of other state DOTs. These notable practices include: • Establishing a multi-disciplinary team early enough to have it involved in developing the project purpose, and needing to ensure that the project outcome will truly reflect the context. • Convening a fully representative team, including exter- nal stakeholders and members of the community, so that project context can be fully understood and reflected in project outcomes. • Bringing the multi-disciplinary team into the decision- making process so that the project outcomes are gen- uinely an asset to the community, in addition to meeting the transportation need. • Spending the time upfront getting the right people in- volved in the team, but remaining flexible so that others may be added as necessary to reflect stakeholder inter- ests and needs. • Using robust information-sharing and information- dissemination practices that promote a sense of trans- parency in information exchange and decision making. Because the survey results revealed that most state DOTs are using multi-disciplinary teams in some form (see chapter two), these guidelines drawn from the case studies can dis- close areas where practice can be revised to make multi- disciplinary teams an even more effective part of achieving CSS. Taken together, the four case studies provided some basic tenets that DOTs should keep in mind when using multi-disciplinary teams: • Gain consensus on the vision, objectives, and ground rules for the multi-disciplinary team at the outset. • Establish a robust, on-going connection between the multi-disciplinary team and the public. • Empower the multi-disciplinary team to provide more meaningful input by providing specialized training on technical and procedural issues. • Demonstrate commitment to the team by responding to their input and connecting them with high-level deci- sion makers. • Build flexibility into the process, whether the team is operating at the programmatic or project level. • Make continuity of the team a priority to build trust among team members and continue to address project/program contexts through project delivery and beyond. The following questions and respective discussion pro- vide some suggested practices and future study topics that can advance the current practice of using multi-disciplinary teams for CSS. • How can CSS policies speak directly to the use and composition of multi-disciplinary teams? Nineteen surveyed state DOTs reported having a CSS pol- icy and many mention the importance of utilizing multi- disciplinary teams for CSS. However, few specify a core team of professionals that should be involved on the teams. The results of this synthesis suggest that the following disci- plines be systematically engaged for project development and considered a core team: – Transportation planners, – Highway and traffic engineers, – Environmental and social scientists, – Land-use planners, – Cultural resource managers, – Urban designers and architects, – Landscape architects and urban foresters, – Construction and maintenance engineers, and – Public involvement specialists. This list should be expanded as needed to reflect the project context and stakeholder interests. For states that use internal teams as their primary multi- disciplinary teams (the majority of responding states), this practice may not capture the full context of a project and may not include even the core disciplines suggested previously. These internal teams may not represent the full range of view- points because DOT staff does not necessarily represent all contextual elements such as community values. Post-project surveys could provide more definitive conclusions on the per- formance of these internal multi-disciplinary teams and the degree to which they accurately reflect the human and natural environment context, as well as the community’s perspective of a good quality of life. All four of the case studies provide excellent examples of multiple disciplines representing a wide range of stakeholder issues. • Who should be trained in CSS? Although most state DOTs responding to the survey believe that their training is representative of a multi-disciplinary team, most individuals being trained work in the area of project development and represent the engineering, planning, and environmental science disciplines. In addition, the group outside of state DOTs most likely to receive training is local government officials and staff. Although this technically does

qualify as a multi-disciplinary team, the question remains as to whether it represents human and natural context as well as community perspectives. The Minnesota DOT represents a notable practice of including community groups other than local officials as participants in their training program. Rela- tively low numbers of community participants in training pro- grams suggest that state DOTs may want to expand such train- ing programs to include more community members. • What process/method can be used to select participants of a multi-disciplinary team? Most state DOTs decide who participates on a multi- disciplinary team based on the context of the project. Although this appears logical, the question of how that context is initially defined is of utmost concern when understanding if this is an appropriate method of participant selection. Further studies could examine how state DOTs define the context in the early stages of project development and how that information is used to select stakeholders and multi-disciplinary team members. Some states have adopted approaches that use context auditing tools to identify issues early. Combining a study that assesses how state DOTs define context in the early project develop- ment phases with how they use that information to select multi- disciplinary team members could provide invaluable know- ledge to state DOTs desiring the most efficient and effective teams. • How should public involvement be integrated into multi-disciplinary teams’ decision making? The role of public involvement and community participation in CSS is widely regarded as one of the most important ele- ments in ensuring that a solution is context-sensitive. Consequently, the role of public involvement within the constructs of a multi-disciplinary team is of critical impor- tance to the project development process and is confirmed by the state DOTs’ responses related to using public controversy as a primary trigger when deciding whether or not to use such a team. This leads to the question of whether state DOTs are fully engaging members of the public in a meaningful way in the project development process. Based on the survey, pub- lic comments are the primary means by which community interests and needs are represented on multi-disciplinary teams. Furthermore, the survey results revealed that state DOTs are relying on open forum meetings, newsletters, and websites for information dissemination and collection of pub- lic comments. Although these techniques may be effective in certain communities, they do require that persons be mobile, literate, and have access to the Internet. Therefore, close examination of meaningful public involvement techniques is critical to support the CSS qualities of open, honest, early, and continuous communication. Although no strong conclu- sions can be made based on the results of this synthesis, this information does indicate that further study is needed to understand how state DOTs are ensuring early and continu- ous public and stakeholder involvement in CSS. Further 44 research is needed to determine the efficacy of using public comments as a primary means of representing community interest and needs on multi-disciplinary teams. In addition, research that focuses on methods that create reliable infor- mation bridges between the general public and the multi- disciplinary team is critically needed to advance CSS. All four case studies provide good examples of integrating pub- lic involvement into the work of multi-disciplinary teams. • For what type of projects can multi-disciplinary teams be used for in the project development process? According to the survey, state DOTs are primarily using multi-disciplinary teams for large- to medium-sized environ- mental studies (National Environmental Policy Act studies). No other questions in the survey or literature review infor- mation provided any substantive reasoning for the use of multi-disciplinary teams on these larger studies, with the pos- sible exception of the decision trigger question involving public controversy. The deductive logic tying public contro- versy to larger projects holds that larger projects tend to affect more people and therefore have the potential to attract more controversy. However, the CSS philosophy applies to all types of projects. The responses to the survey suggest that state DOTs may not be using multi-disciplinary teams for smaller projects and perhaps may not be fully applying the principles of CSS to these projects. Unfortunately, the survey does not provide further detail in this area; therefore, further study is needed to understand the barriers to using multi- disciplinary teams for smaller projects. • How do we know if team members are satisfied with the process? Gauging satisfaction of multi-disciplinary team members during the project development process is critically important to improving processes. Unfortunately, many state DOTs did not respond to this question, which may imply that they are not using a performance measurement system. For the state DOTs that did respond to this question, post-project critique/ “lessons learned” discussions were the favored method of gauging satisfaction. More probing into this area is necessary to understand what types of discussions are taking place to critique team members’ satisfaction. Florida is the only state that has a structured approach to evaluating its multi-disci- plinary teams’ performance as part of the Efficient Trans- portation Decision Making process. DOTs that want to im- prove the effectiveness of multi-disciplinary teams should consider establishing a methodology for evaluating team ef- fectiveness and the satisfaction of team members. In the short term, such evaluations can highlight areas where the procedures of the team should be adjusted. In the long term, evaluations can uncover areas where more systemic change is needed. • What are the benefits of multi-disciplinary team use for CSS?

45 The results of this synthesis show that state DOTs value multi- disciplinary teams. Greater public acceptance, expedited proj- ect delivery, and shared funding through partnerships were rec- ognized as positive benefits of multi-disciplinary teams by the majority of state DOTs responding to the survey. Information from four case studies provides further evidence of the bene- fits of using multi-disciplinary teams to advance project deliv- ery. Specifically, the Florida case study reveals tangible bene- fits of reduced costs and quicker project delivery. State DOTs understand the value of using multi- disciplinary teams and are making progress with utilizing such teams. Continued use of multi-disciplinary teams for achieving more efficient and effective solutions is essential for the development of CSS. This synthesis provides useful information to move the state of the practice forward for using multi-disciplinary teams as a method to develop solu- tions that reflect the human and natural environment as well as communities’ perspectives of a good quality of life.