stream introduction 1 9 may 2013 stream: systematic technology reconnaissance, evaluation and...
TRANSCRIPT
STREAM Introduction 1 9 May 2013
STREAM: Systematic Technology Reconnaissance, Evaluation and
Adoption Methodology
Enhancing Technology Assessment and Adoption by Transportation Agencies
Steven W. Popper
FHWA Transportation “Data Palooza”9 May 2013
Washington, DC
STREAM Introduction 2 9 May 2013
• They face many obstacles, but not all of them are technical– Many technology alternatives; uncertainty over potential results– Most DOTs & MPOs are not well suited for technology assessment
• Internal culture; institutional barriers; information
– Agencies operate in complex public/private environment– “If you’ve seen one DOT… you’ve seen one DOT.”
• NCHRP: Need ways to evaluate technologies that– Are relevant to agency missions– Overcome barriers to technology adoption and inherent uncertainties– Can be more easily used and shared collaboratively by DOTs and MPOs
Transportation Agencies Appear to be Slow Adopters of Innovations
STREAM Introduction 3 9 May 2013
Example: Bridge Deck Inspection Technologies
• Not only are they different technologies . . .
STREAM Introduction 4 9 May 2013
…but, Some Cost More Than Others…
STREAM Introduction 5 9 May 2013
…Current Availability Differs…
STREAM Introduction 6 9 May 2013
…They Come From Different Technology Sectors…
STREAM Introduction 7 9 May 2013
…and They’re All At the Mercy of Other Factors
For example…
STREAM Introduction 8 9 May 2013
Financial Obstacles are Present
STREAM Introduction 9 9 May 2013
Some Tech Challenges Agency Hierarchies More Than Others
STREAM Introduction 10 9 May 2013
Technology and Performance Uncertainties are Always Present
STREAM Introduction 11 9 May 2013
And Agencies Face Complex External Environments
STREAM Introduction 12 9 May 2013
• How well will they help in practice?• How will they contribute to mission goals?• Will they work in our state?• How do they compare to current practice?• What changes do they require?• How difficult are they to implement?• What do they cost? How are costs distributed?
Who pays?• How long will they last?• How flexible can we be?
Is There a Way to Compare Apples and Oranges…
STREAM Introduction 13 9 May 2013
There Is.
S T R E A M
STREAM Introduction 14 9 May 2013
STREAM Creates Common Basis for Analysis
STREAM Introduction 15 9 May 2013
1. Frame the Overall Functions, Goals, Objectives
Technology in application to specific FUNCTIONS…
…Added value assessed in terms of agency GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
STREAM Introduction 16 9 May 2013
2. Identify the Relevant Technologies
STREAM Introduction 17 9 May 2013
Increasing agency mission value
Fewer anticipated obstacles
3. Characterize against criteria
STREAM Introduction 18 9 May 2013
3. Characterize against criteria
STREAM Introduction 19 9 May 2013
3. Characterize against criteria
STREAM Introduction 20 9 May 2013
3. Characterize against criteria
STREAM Introduction 21 9 May 2013
3. Characterize against criteria
STREAM Introduction 22 9 May 2013
3. Characterize against criteria
STREAM Introduction 23 9 May 2013
4. Compare Analysis Results
Implementation harder Implementation easier
More missionvalue
Lessmission value
} More uncertainty
Less uncertainty {Equivalent trades between characteristics displayed on the axes
STREAM Introduction 24 9 May 2013
5. Decide on Technology Choice
STREAM Introduction 25 9 May 2013
RAND Created a Software Tool to Facilitate Analysis
STREAM Introduction 26 9 May 2013
…and Incorporate Expert Input
STREAM Introduction 27 9 May 2013
STREAM Assists Not Just Individual Agencies
• Establishes common vocabulary• Incorporates and diffuses best practice• Allows easier sharing & application of results• Provides basis for formal collaboration to share effort
― First four steps can be carried out jointly― Last three steps tuned to individual conditions― Assumptions and inputs to analysis are explicit
and may be changed to suit local circumstances
STREAM Introduction 28 9 May 2013
With Thanks to NCHRP and Our Project Study Panel
• Ted Trepanier [Chair] WashDot; Inrix, Inc.
• Patricia Hu RITA
• Mark Muriello NY/NJ Port Authority
• Marco Ruano CalTrans
• Richard Schuman Inrix, Inc.
• Wei-Bin Zhong University of California, Berkeley
• Linda Watson
• James Wright MNDOT/AASHTO
• Lawrence Yermack Telvent Transportation
• Joseph Peters [FHWA Liaison] FHWA
• Rick Pain [TRB Liaison] TRB
• Ray Derr [NCHRP staff] NCHRP
STREAM Introduction 29 9 May 2013
STREAM Introduction 30 9 May 2013
Conducted Workshop with MN DOT Planning and Operations Staff