• Default document

• Features
• Home
• Money Managers
• Making Cisco Sizzle
• Mobile
• Small Business
• Bartter Enterprises
• Ethical Investment
• Out to Lunch
• Business Improvement
• What a Gem

• Departments
• News
• News

• In the Pipeline
• Pipeline

Public transport systems worldwide are under increased scrutiny with regard to minimizing their impact on the environment, providing value for money and a sustainable service. Thinking Business looks at how one of America’s largest transit authorities is effectively using management systems to cope with such pressure.

> Profile

The Utah Transit Authority (UTA) provides public transportation services to the region known as the Wasatch Front. The service area is 116 miles long, 50 miles at its widest point, two miles at its narrowest and encompasses over 1,633 square miles. UTA serves more than 60 municipalities with a population of over 1.7 million people which is about 80 per cent of Utah’s total population. UTA’s current operating budget is approximately $130 million. The majority of UTA’s funding comes from city and county local option sales tax. UTA operates 129 bus routes and over 20 miles of light rail service with approximately 1750 employees. In 2005, UTA provided over 35 million passenger trips.

In 2003, UTA had a major reorganization and it now operates under a decentralized business unit structure. There are three bus operating business units, one rail services business unit, a support services business unit, a Capital Development Office, an Operations Performance Office, a Communications Office and an Office of the General Manager. In addition to traditional operations and maintenance functions, each operating business unit is responsible for the planning, marketing and implementation of its respective transit service. Coordination between the operating business units and administrative functions takes place through a Policy Forum which includes all Corporate Officers as well as all Business Units Managers.

UTA has a long tradition of environmental stewardship and, in 2003 UTA was selected to be one of ten transit agencies to participate in a series of workshops sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration to implement the ISO 14001 environmental anagement system standard. As the UTA team worked on its ISO 14001 environmental management system (EMS) in 2004, it became clear to management that the ISO framework would be a perfect fit for the decentralized, performance-oriented rganizational structure UTA implemented in 2003.

So following completion of its EMS for one operating division in 2004, an executive decision was made to develop an ISO 9001 quality management system and receive certification from SAI Global for ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 14001: 2004, in all of its operating facilities and activities.

> A Best Practice Approach

While UTA’s approach to developing its EMS was typical of most organizations, the approach to implementation of the ISO 9001 quality management system was unique. Since UTA had no external pressure to implement a quality management system, certification was secondary to the creation of a management system that truly improved performance. UTA assembled a cross functional team to create a management system that supplemented current best practices with ISO 9001. The team systematically reviewed each element of the standard, applying the following questions:

• What do we currently do that addresses the requirements of each element of the standard?
• What would we have to do differently to satisfy the standard?
• How can the standard be applied to more effectively organize our current activities?
• How can the standard be interpreted and applied to add value and improve performance?

For example, as the team considered quality objectives, they started with the current performance objectives of UTA. Since UTA already had many performance objectives at the corporate and unit level, the task was not to create new quality objectives but to select a few objectives for emphasis within UTA’s management system. Since the objectives covered financial performance and operational efficiency, UTA calls its management system the Quality and Performance Management System (QPMS). UTA’s QPMS is an integration and augmentation of existing management systems, goals, measures and procedures, rather than a new program or initiative alongside existing management systems.

> Key Drivers

UTA identified several key drivers for adopting an EMS which included the following:

• Avoidance of environmental disasters
• Development of better day-to-day management systems
• Enhanced awareness of employee environmental impact
• Paradigm shift from “reactive” to “proactive” management
• Creation of a more efficient system.

Drivers for UTA’s adoption of its QPMS include:

• Improvement of service quality across business units
• Better management of expenses
• Efficient top management oversight of decentralized units
• Better coordination of tasks across units
• Improved trustee and public confidence in management oversight.

> The Green Ticket

The key drivers guided the identification and evaluation of significant environmental aspects and impacts. The core team analyzed the organization’s activities and evaluated the potential for adverse environmental impacts, the extent of those potential impacts, environmental controls already in place and the ability of UTA to manage and/or influence those impacts. UTA initiated an extensive, internal outreach program designed to inform personnel about the EMS program and solicit input and help in dentifying potential environmental aspects and their associated impacts.

UTA conducted surveys of all operations and maintenance personnel to collect information on environmental aspects and their associated impacts. They followed up on the surveys with open houses and presentations to UTA management and staff. Members of the EMS team then rated aspects identified by employees based on severity, frequency and control criteria. The aspects with the highest scores became the focus of the EMS.

Here is a snapshot of some of their objectives and outcomes of some of the main aspects:

> QPMS Objectives

The QPMS team compiled an inventory of current goals, objectives, projects and standards from all operating business units and support departments. They then evaluated each of the goals, objectives, projects and standards for its influence on the overall corporate goals established by the UTA Board of Trustees. These corporate goals included specific targets for ridership, investment per rider, and revenue. In one of the most valuable lessons of the QPMS initiative, the inventory and evaluation of current objectives revealed that many of the objectives, projects, etc. were irrelevant to the overall corporate goals. Many departments tracked local standards, relevant to their operation but not considerate of the impact of their performance on downstream activities or overall performance.

Furthermore, the QPMS team recognized that some critical objectives were absent from the inventory. For example, an essential requirement for achieving the investment per rider goal is effective management of operating costs. Several operating units had exceeded their budgets in the prior year, but UTA had identified no objectives related to better expense management. The QPMS team proposed 12 objectives to the UTA executive team. Ultimately, 15 initial QPMS objectives were adopted, some of which were:

> Performance Delivered

In addition to the measurable outcomes listed above, implementation of ISO management systems has improved UTA effectiveness in many areas. UTA’s management system now has more robust measurement and accountability. Yet the strengthened accountability has come without the negative stigma so often associated with efforts to increase accountability. With measurement, corrective action and internal audit for all controlled processes, process owners are empowered to improve their own processes. At the top management level, UTA’s management reviews are more focused and productive. Everything top management commits to accomplish in the EMS and QPMS is reported back in management review. While there is full accountability for performance objectives, top management’s emphasis is on improving the management system, not on placing (or avoiding) blame.

UTA’s QPMS is integrated across all units. This integration brings better coordination and synergy as the organizations works together toward a set of overall objectives. Integration also facilitates lasting, systemic solutions to performance problems; such as, the improved expense management system. UTA’s management systems force its managers to be proactive and process oriented, instead of reactive and incident oriented. This is a big change for UTA, since it had highly-developed systems for reacting to problems or failures. However, without losing its responsiveness, UTA has been able to eliminate many of the problems it previously had to react to. Failures are now evaluated as potential system nonconformities, requiring system fixes.

> Next Steps

During the next year, UTA will integrate its EMS, QPMS, and Safety Management Systems into a comprehensive business management system that will streamline internal audit, nonconformity, and management review activities. UTA has already introduced a second set of EMS aspects, objectives and targets. New QPMS objectives will be adopted with the beginning of the calendar year. At the process level, UTA is instituting a series of workshops pairing process owners with their customers to refine the process objectives and measures in alignment with customer requirements. Finally, UTA is instituting training in root cause analysis to help managers and process owners more effectively assess and improve their processes.