MAKING AN IMMPACT BUILDING THE BEST MANAGED CITY Presenters: Howard Lazarus, Public Works Department, Director Annie Van Zant, Capital Program Manager 1 Austin by the Numbers 11 th most populous City in the US 3 rd fastest growing large city in the nation 9.3% population increase between 2011 13 885,000 within the City limits (2013 est) 1.883M in the MSA (2013 estimate) 5 taxing jurisdictions per rate payer 2 Challenges facing the PWD Expand City infrastructure Preserve existing assets Increase level of services to citizens Accommodate growth while protecting character and quality of life Address multiple users of the ROW Efficiently schedule work 3 1
Special Events Challenges 4 Stakeholder Community Residents and Businesses Public Works Department Other City Agencies County Agencies (5) School Districts (6) Transit Agencies Utilities Providers Telecom Installers Private Developers Special Events 5 Challenges facing PW Leadership Multiple source data sets with multiple owners Lack of data standards Coordination among CIP projects, special events, operations & maintenance, work by others Tool has to fit the business need and be accepted by staff Reliance on elevator coordination Limited funding systems internally developed 6 2
How did we get started? Launched a project to align data standards. Looked for a quick win to get over the hump initially used an externally hosted software solution. Data security challenges and user licensing Access to all applicable databases Cost: both dollars and staff time Reached out to other ROW users. Worked from within the utilities coordination process and stakeholders. Had to complement existing workflow, not create new requirements. 7 Solutions Liberate and consolidate key coordination information Data influenced decision making through visualization Time and space parameters Commonalities between activities Start and deepen conversations 8 CIP O&M ROW Permits Special Events Right of Way Activities Common Key Coordination Information: Activity ID, Activity Name, Activity Type, Construction Dates, Point of Contact, Activity Description, Status, Phase, Sponsor Name, Location (GIS) 9 3
Technology GIS platform Source data ecapris, AMANDA, Maximo, Hansen, Banner, GIS, Excel, Access Extract, Transform, Load Tool (ETL) Auto Magical Processes 10 Project Development Proof of concept Executive stakeholder input Agile development framework User interviews Single product owner Scrum with iterative releases Culture of ownership and accountability 11 IMMPACT Infrastructure Management, Mapping, Planning, And Coordination Tool Activities Land Reclaimed Water Roadway Storm Drain Transit Wastewater Water Annual Valet Film Street Event Street Excavation Street Vendor Temporary Use Utility Coordination Reference Layers Asset Management Districts Green Building Mandatory Neighborhood Plans Watershed Zoning Protected Streets Street Condition Street & Bridge Work Orders Site Plans Subdivision Cases Small Area Plans 12 4
IMMPACT SCREEN APPEAL 13 Results Dig once coordination opportunities Data standards Saving resources Culture of collaboration and cooperation Monthly Coordination Meetings New resources and tools 14 Success Factors Transparency Efficiency Collaboration First Time Quality Enhancing the Public Trust 15 5
Lessons Learned Need a culture that buys into the vision Data, data, data Information architecture Content strategy Product owner Stay focused on business needs Complement don t replicate systems Users have the best insights and will be your champions 16 Next Steps Provide information to the public www.austintexas.gov/civic Mobile device accessible Registered views Create new subsets of CIP data Maintenance and Operations work Development review cases 17 Presenters: immpact@austintexas.gov Howard Lazarus, PE, PWLF Director 512 974 7190 Howard.Lazarus@austintexas.gov Annie Van Zant Capital Program Manager 512 974 2825 Annie.VanZant@austintexas.gov City of Austin Public Works Department Your Department with a Heart!!! 18 6
CONFLICT IDENTIFICATION 19 CONFLICT RESOLUTION 20 REPORTING SCREENS 21 7
Work Coordination in a Complex Organization: Are We Ready? This heuristic includes general areas to consider when deciding your organization s readiness for cross-agency work coordination efforts, particularly with a geospatial IT solution. These considerations are not meant to be exhaustive, nor are they a substitute for deep research and collaboration into deciding your next steps. Instead, they should be treated as accessible conversation starters to get stakeholders thinking and hopefully kick-start your efforts. Directions: There are three statements for each topic below. Circle the number of the statement that most closely resembles your organization. Once complete, review and see which topics may need more thought, analysis, and discussion relative to the others. 1 s represent a lower level of readiness, and 3 s represent those areas with higher capability and/or capacity. Collaborative Culture Environment for Coordination 1 Work is completed in a silo with very little transparency. 2 There is some transparency and coordination, but it is difficult to share data and get on the same page with how we do business. 3 We have firmly established partnerships both internally and externally, and willingly share data and workflows. Stakeholders 1 I am not quite sure who all I need to talk to get coordination efforts started. I wish I had better relationships with my counter-parts and customers. I am not sure if they will be on-board. 2 I know who all needs to be involved and I already have some stakeholders with buy-in. All roles and responsibilities are not clear, however. 3 There is a clear vision to which most stakeholders throughout the organization buy-in. A project roadmap and an engagement plan would be relatively easy to construct and agree to. Accountability 1 People can, and often do, get away with not following standards or meeting goals. We have no way to monitor them or hold them accountable during performance reviews. 2 We have a strong culture of following standards and meeting goals, but few ways to track and report on metrics and performance. City of Austin Work Coordination Heuristic 1
3 We have very specific ways of doing business and strong systems in place to monitor. We employ responsible people and are able to hold them accountable. Resource Requirements Budget 1 I have no money for this and doubt anyone does either. 2 We have some money or can begin to work it into our budget. We are starting to determine how much it might cost to contract or do in-house. 3 We have scoped out our needs and have sufficient funds approved to spend. Staffing 1 Unfortunately, we don t have the right people with enough time now. 2 We probably have the right people (or could contract them) to make this successful. Now we need to prioritize their time and work with their teams to see how we can make this possible. 3 Fortunately we have the right people in the right places and with enough bandwidth to make this happen. Management Competencies 1 Our managers prefer to work in silos and are not interested in change. They are not the most technical people. 2 Our managers are willing to work outside their comfort zones, but could do more to encourage their teams to work with others throughout the organization. 3 Our managers are experts in what they do. They are tech-savvy, take ownership of their work, and are always looking for opportunities to partner with others to achieve success. Administrative and Support Capabilities 1 Trying to work with other departments will only increase our administrative workload. There is also no way we could support another system. 2 We have competent support teams, but our track record for responding to customers could be a lot better. We also see a lot of turnover. City of Austin Work Coordination Heuristic 2
3 We are able to establish new ways of collaborating and understand the give-and-takes of bringing new IT solutions online. We are able to maintain the institutional knowledge and oversight for this to be a success. Technology Landscape IT Systems 1 Many work groups track their work separately with no real systems of record or interoperability. 2 We have good systems of record that can talk to each other, but without a geospatial component. 3 Our work activities are all tracked through one or two robust systems of record, including a strong geospatial component. Data Standards 1 Users are able to be creative with their data entry. We have disparate systems with no data standards. 2 Our systems have field-level definitions for the important things, but they are not monitored or governed by an overall architecture. 3 We apply full data standards for all our systems and have compliance built-in to our performance measures. Political Environment Council/Executive Management 1 We are generally off the radar unless something bad happens, which we then use a bandaid approach as quick as possible. When we do start to go down the path of improving the way we do business, leadership changes. 2 Our political leaders are sympathetic to our needs, but would not be too willing to spend more money or be public about getting behind anything that might require us to change the way we do business. 3 Despite elections or change in executive management, we have a record of getting political support through solid business cases supported by evidence. City of Austin Work Coordination Heuristic 3
Public Interest 1 The public has very little interest in the work we do. 2 Our more transformative projects garner a lot of citizen interest, but not the least publicized or more routine work. 3 Our Council meetings almost always have citizens speaking about the work we do. We have very active neighborhood associations and development communities. They want to know about everything and are supportive when we attempt to improve the way we work. City of Austin Work Coordination Heuristic 4