Building a Business Case for Bridge Maintenance - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
building a business case for bridge maintenance
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Building a Business Case for Bridge Maintenance - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Sep 21, 2023 289 likes •672 views

Building a Business Case for Bridge Maintenance

slide-1
SLIDE 1
  • Building a Business Case for Bridge Maintenance
slide-2
SLIDE 2

I. Run a good program

  • II. Know your decision makers
  • III. Speak their language
  • IV. Case study

Making Your Business Case

  • IV. Case study
slide-3
SLIDE 3

Clients

Alaska DOT New Mexico DOT Arizona DOT Oregon DOT California DOT Hawaii DOT Colorado DOT Utah DOT Colorado DOT Utah DOT Idaho Dot Washington DOT Montana DOT South Dakota DOT

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Dye Management Group, Inc.

  • Management consulting firm – transportation

agencies

  • Business process improvement
  • Policy and planning
  • Policy and planning
  • Information technology
  • Leader-Linking technical work to decisions
  • President-Former state budget director
slide-5
SLIDE 5
  • I. Run a Good Program
  • I. Run a Good Program
slide-6
SLIDE 6

Comprehensive Maintenance

Planning Evaluating Budgeting Performing Reporting Scheduling

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Tools and Techniques

  • Maintenance quality assurance
  • Preventive maintenance
  • Asset management/life-cycle cost analysis
  • Maintenance management systems
  • Maintenance management systems
  • Bridge management systems
  • Budget models
  • Citizen surveys
slide-8
SLIDE 8

Maintenance Quality Assurance

  • Approach Slabs

– Percent of approaches with a differential height greater than ¾-inch

  • Deck Spalling / Potholes
  • Deck Spalling / Potholes

– Number of holes and spalls with a depth of 1 inch or more.

  • Deck Cracking
  • Linear feet of cracking at least ¼-inch wide
slide-9
SLIDE 9

Maintenance Quality Assurance

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Customer Surveys

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Customer Surveys

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Asset Management

  • Replacement
  • Rehabilitation
  • Preservation
  • Maintenance
  • Maintenance
slide-13
SLIDE 13

Asset Management

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Why a Good Program?

  • Verify you are using best practices
  • Demonstrate you can perform as promised
  • Show that you are delivering consistent with

citizen priorities citizen priorities

  • Establish credibility
  • Maintain trust
slide-15
SLIDE 15
  • II. Know Your Decision

Makers Makers

slide-16
SLIDE 16

The Legislature

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Typical House of Representatives

  • 26 have no degrees
  • 21 Lawyers
  • 11 Business/Finance/Accounting degrees
  • 9 Education degrees
  • 9 Education degrees
  • 4 Criminal Justice degrees
  • 2 Engineering degrees
  • 2 Political Science degrees
  • 30 Other degrees
slide-18
SLIDE 18

Decision Makers

  • DOT

– Secretary/Director – Transportation Commission – Budget Staff – Budget Staff – Planning – Other

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Decision Makers

  • Governor’s/Executive Office

– Governor – Budget Office

  • Legislature
  • Legislature

– Members – Staff

slide-20
SLIDE 20

“Hot Buttons”

  • Key issues
  • Analysis
  • Examples/anecdotes
  • Consistency with Department, Administration,
  • Consistency with Department, Administration,

Legislative Direction

  • Past performance
  • Objections
slide-21
SLIDE 21

Discovering “Hot Buttons”

  • Management meetings
  • Interviews
  • Site visits
  • Publications
  • Publications
slide-22
SLIDE 22
  • III. Speak Their Language
  • III. Speak Their Language
slide-23
SLIDE 23

What They Want

“It is not what it is, it is what it means (to them)” it means (to them)”

slide-24
SLIDE 24

What It Is

  • Bridge Approaches

– Average vertical shift below deck grade – LOS 5 0 – ¼” – LOS 4 < ¼” – LOS 2 < ¾” – LOS 1 > 1 – LOS 4 < ¼” – LOS 3 < ½” – LOS 1 > 1

slide-25
SLIDE 25

What it Means

  • !"#
  • $"
  • %!
&'
  • (!"#
  • )
)!" #* #
slide-26
SLIDE 26
  • IV. Case Study
  • IV. Case Study
slide-27
SLIDE 27

Maintenance Accountability Process

MAP

slide-28
SLIDE 28

1996

  • Maintenance budget constantly cut
  • Legislators did not understand maintenance
  • Mistake in legislative testimony
  • Lack of credibility and trust
  • Lack of credibility and trust
  • Legislature commissioned study
slide-29
SLIDE 29

1997

  • Study Recommendations

– Maintenance Accountability Process - MAP – Develop measures of conditions and accomplishments – Establish a better way to communicate with the – Establish a better way to communicate with the legislature and other decision makers – Link budgets to quality levels – Obtain citizen perspectives

slide-30
SLIDE 30

1998-2003

  • Increases to maintenance budgets when other

DOT programs received none

  • No cuts to maintenance budgets when other DOT

programs got cuts programs got cuts

  • Supported by headquarters and field management
  • Used as example for governor’s performance

program-described by governor’s budget staff as “elegant”

slide-31
SLIDE 31

2004-2008

  • +
' ' ,
  • )#./-
1 2-)''
  • 1
  • 3
1
  • )'.4
  • 3!
  • !
  • 3!
  • !
  • &5/
  • $6
  • !
  • 3&'-
  • /0
3! 3! 3!
  • 237'
  • 3!
  • 1
  • !
  • &3'7
3
  • 3
2-$4'
  • /
30 3! &3$-
  • !
3!
  • !
)3)8#8.7
  • !
3 3 3 3)-1 !
  • 3
3 3
  • !
239:
3 3 3 3 3 23)'
  • !
3!
  • 23&7;7
  • 3
  • !
  • $3<+
  • !
3! )3&' !
  • 10
  • !
9-)73
  • !
  • )3'
  • 3
30
3 30 30
  • +
' ' ,
  • )#./-
30 3 30 2-)''
  • !
  • /0
10 ! !
  • )'.4
3! 3
3 3 3
  • &5/
  • $6
  • 3&'-
  • 1
30 10 /0 / /0 237' 1
1 1! &3'7
  • 3!
3 3 30 3 3 2-$4'
  • !
3 3! 3 1 3! &3$-
  • 10
  • /0
)3)8#7.'
  • !
  • 3!
  • 3)-1
  • !
! 3!
  • !
1 239: 3
  • 3
  • 30
23)' ! !
  • !
!
  • 23&7;7
  • !
30 / /0
  • $3<+
  • !
/! 3 1
  • 30
! 9-)73
  • !
  • !
  • )3'
30 30 3 3! 3 3 &3)1
  • !
3
  • 30
  • )3'
  • 3
30
3 30 30 &3)1
  • 3
3! 3
  • 2-&=>
  • 3
3! 3
3 3 232:8 10 10
  • !
!
  • )-)'8
  • 3
! 1
  • !
&3&# 10
  • !
  • !
2-8
  • 23$8#
10
  • !
$3&?
  • 3
3 3 3 3! )3$'
  • !
23:'
  • !
3
10
3!
  • !
&31-
  • 3$-
3!
3!
$3$?
  • !
3! 3 3!
  • !
$3> ! !
  • !
$3)> 10 /0
  • 1
  • 1
!
  • &3)1
  • !
3
  • 30
2-&=>
1 10
  • 1
  • 3
232:8 ! 10 10
  • 1
/ 1 )-)'8
  • !
  • !
  • &3&#
  • /0
/0
  • 1
1 / 2-8 23$8# ! ! 10 1
  • $3&?
  • 3
3 30 30 10 10 )3$'
  • !
3 3
3 !
  • !
23:'
  • !
  • 3!
3
  • &31-
  • 3$-
  • !
  • $3$?
  • !
30
  • 30
10 3! $3> ! 1 ! 1 10 ! $3)> ! 1 10 1 1 1
  • '@ )7! )A

'@ )27! B

' 7

5C

slide-32
SLIDE 32

2009

  • WSDOT as a whole had a very difficult year in the

legislature

  • Required to make budget cuts including loss of

positions positions

slide-33
SLIDE 33

2009

Maintenance obtained $18,000,000 additional to meet backlog!

slide-34
SLIDE 34

The DOT View

  • “MAP…created a greater sense of partnership

between the program and the legislature… Now that we have tools to better communicate with each other, it feels more like partners working each other, it feels more like partners working together to plan and finance the best program we can.”

  • Rico Baroga, WSDOT Maintenance
slide-35
SLIDE 35

Award 2009 International Road Federation Global Road Achievement Award for Maintenance Maintenance

slide-36
SLIDE 36

Making Your Business Case

I. Run a good program

  • II. Know your decision makers
  • III. Speak their language
slide-37
SLIDE 37

City Center Bellevue Suite 1700 500 108th Avenue NE Bellevue, WA 98004-5500 T: (425) 637-8010 F: (425) 637-8020 www.dyemanagement.com

Bill Dye bill@dyemanagement.com