Improving Business Processes for

More Effective Transportation 

Systems Management and Operations
 

Notices 

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. 

Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. 

The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of information 

contained in this document.

The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. 

Trademarks or manufacturers' names appear in this report only because 

they are considered essential to the objective of this document.

Quality Assurance Statement

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides high-quality 

information to serve Government, industry, and the public in a manner 

that promotes public understanding. Standards and policies are used to 

ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its 

information. FHWA periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its 

programs and processes to ensure continuous quality improvement.

Cover Picture Source: Crestock
i 

Technical Report Documentation Page

1. Report No.

FHWA-HOP-16-018

2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No.

4. Title and Subtitle

Improving Business Processes for More Effective Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations

5. Report Date

January 2016

6. Performing Organization Code

7. Author(s)

Lisa Burgess, Thomas Fowler, Amy Minowitz, and Louis Neudorff

8. Performing Organization Report No.

9. Performing Organization Name And Address

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

7740 N. 16th Street, Suite 300

Phoenix, AZ 85020

Under contract to CH2M. CH2M is under contract to American Association of State 

Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO)

10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)

11. Contract or Grant No.

DTFH6110H00008

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address

Federal Highway Administration, Office of Operations

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20590

13. Type of Report and Period Covered

Final Report

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

FHWA-HOP

15. Supplementary Notes

The task manager for FHWA is Wayne Berman.

16. Abstract

Many agencies are shaping their Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSMO) programs to more effectively address 

those planned and unplanned events that affect road and travel conditions and can have an effect on overall system reliability. Business 

processes, in the context of TSMO, refers to activities such as planning, programming, agency project development processes, and those 

organizational aspects that govern various technical or administrative activities (such as training, human resource management, or 

agreements). Business processes get at the heart of many of the organizational issues that can influence TSMO. This primer presents 

business processes across several TSMO areas, including traffic incident management, planned special event traffic management, road 

weather management, work zones, and freeway traffic management. Case studies in each area illustrate where agencies have made 

concerted changes to their respective business processes, and modified aspects such as contracting, training, resource allocation, 

planning and other business processes. The primer also highlights available tools and resources to help assess business processes, 

provides strategies for engaging the right stakeholders, and provides a guide to next steps. 

17. Key Words

Transportation Systems Management and Operations, TSMO, business 

process, improving processes, planning, programming, budgeting for 

operations. 

18. Distribution Statement

No restrictions

19. Security Classif. (of this report)

Unclassified

20. Security Classif. (of this page)

Unclassified

21. No. of Pages

60

22. Price

Free

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized
This page intentionally left blank.
 

iii

SI* (Modern Metric) Conversion Factors

APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS TO SI UNITS

SYMBOL WHEN YOU KNOW MULTIPLY BY TO FIND SYMBOL

LENGTH

in inches 25.4 millimeters mm

ft feet 0.305 meters m 

yd yards 0.914 meters m 

mi miles 1.61 kilometers km

AREA

in2 square inches 645.2 square millimeters mm2

ft2 square feet 0.093 square meters m2

yd2 square yard 0.836 square meters m2

ac acres 0.405 hectares ha

mi2 square miles 2.59 square kilometers km2

VOLUME

fl oz fluid ounces 29.57 milliliters mL

gal gallons 3.785 liters L 

ft3 cubic feet 0.028 cubic meters m3

yd3 cubic yards 0.765 cubic meters m3

NOTE: volumes greater than 1000 L shall be shown in m3

MASS

oz ounces 28.35 grams g 

lb pounds 0.454 kilograms kg

T short tons (2,000 lb) 0.907 megagrams

(or "metric ton")

Mg (or "t")

TEMPERATURE (exact degrees)

o

F Fahrenheit 5 (F-32)/9

or (F-32)/1.8

Celsius oC 
SI* (MODERN METRIC) CONVERSION FACTORS

iv

APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS TO SI UNITS

SYMBOL WHEN YOU KNOW MULTIPLY BY TO FIND SYMBOL

ILLUMINATION

fc foot-candles 10.76 lux lx

fl foot-Lamberts 3.426 candela/m2 cd/m2

FORCE and PRESSURE or STRESS

lbf poundforce 4.45 newtons N 

lbf/in2 poundforce per 

square inch

6.89 kilopascals kPa

APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS FROM SI UNITS

SYMBOL WHEN YOU KNOW MULTIPLY BY TO FIND SYMBOL

LENGTH

mm millimeters 0.039 inches in

m meters 3.28 feet ft

m meters 1.09 yards yd

km kilometers 0.621 miles mi

AREA

mm2 square millimeters 0.0016 square inches in2

m2 square meters 10.764 square feet ft2

m2 square meters 1.195 square yards yd2

ha hectares 2.47 acres ac

km2 square kilometers 0.386 square miles mi2

VOLUME

mL milliliters 0.034 fluid ounces fl oz

L liters 0.264 gallons gal

m3 cubic meters 35.314 cubic feet ft3

m3 cubic meters 1.307 cubic yards yd3

MASS

g grams 0.035 ounces oz

kg kilograms 2.202 pounds lb
SI* (MODERN METRIC) CONVERSION FACTORS

v 

APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS TO SI UNITS

SYMBOL WHEN YOU KNOW MULTIPLY BY TO FIND SYMBOL

Mg (or "t") megagrams (or 

"metric ton")

1.103 short tons (2000 lb) T 

TEMPERATURE (exact degrees)

o

C Celsius 1.8C+32 Fahrenheit oF 

ILLUMINATION

lx lux 0.0929 foot-candles fc

cd/m2 candela/m2 0.2919 foot-Lamberts fl

FORCE and PRESSURE or STRESS

N newtons 0.225 poundforce lbf

kPa kilopascals 0.145 poundforce per 

square inch

lbf/in2
This page intentionally left blank.
vii

Contents 

Chapter 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Managing Congestion with Transportation Systems Management and Operations ................... 1

1.2 Business Processes........................................................................................................................ 2

1.2.1 Why Focus on Business Processes? ............................................................................... 2

1.2.2 The Role of Business Processes in a TSMO Program ..................................................... 2

1.2.3 Benefits of Improved Business Processes...................................................................... 3

1.2.4 Impacts of Ineffective Business Processes..................................................................... 3

1.2.5 Business Process Improvement Examples from Other Industries ................................. 3

1.3 Primer Focus and Audience .......................................................................................................... 5

1.4 Primer Organization...................................................................................................................... 6

Chapter 2. Business Process Development............................................................................. 7

2.1 Identifying Business Process Issues .............................................................................................. 7

2.2 Engaging the Right Stakeholders .................................................................................................. 9

Chapter 3. Traffic Incident Management.............................................................................. 11

3.1 Traffic Incident Management Business Processes...................................................................... 11

3.2 Traffic Incident Management Business Process Case Studies.................................................... 14

3.2.1 Joint Operations Policy Statement Encourages Innovative Approaches to 

Collaborating on Effective Incident Management Strategies in Washington State .... 14

3.2.2 Florida Road Ranger Program Expands Using Alternative Funding Sources ............... 14

Chapter 4. Work Zones........................................................................................................ 17

4.1 Work Zone Business Processes................................................................................................... 17

4.2 Work Zone Business Process Case Studies ................................................................................. 20

4.2.1 Work Zone Traffic Control Modeling Provides Valuable Insight to Construction Staging 

and Scheduling in Michigan ......................................................................................... 20

4.2.2 Maryland Work Zone Performance Management Program Uses New Data Sources to 

Monitor and Analyze Work Zone Impacts................................................................... 21

Chapter 5. Planned Special Events ....................................................................................... 23

5.1 Planned Special Events Business Processes................................................................................ 23

5.2 Planned Special Event Business Process Case Studies................................................................ 27

5.2.1 Kansas Speedway Special-Event Traffic Management Planning Reduces Patrol 

Resource Requirements for On-Scene Traffic Management....................................... 27

5.2.2 Special Event Cost Management Strategy Results in Improved Cost Tracking and 

Asset Allocation in Los Angeles, California .................................................................. 27

Chapter 6. Road Weather Management............................................................................... 29

6.1 Road Weather Management Business Processes....................................................................... 29

6.2 Road Weather Business Process Case Studies............................................................................ 33

6.2.1 Improved Coordination on I-80 Provides More Advanced Notice to Travelers and 

Freight Movers of Winter Closures in Nevada and California ..................................... 33

6.2.2 Maintenance Decision Support System Helps Winter Maintenance Budget in 

Indiana ......................................................................................................................... 33
CONTENTS

viii

Chapter 7. Traffic Management ........................................................................................... 35

7.1 Traffic Management Business Processes.................................................................................... 35

7.2 Traffic Management Business Process Case Studies.................................................................. 39

7.2.1 Colorado Elevates TSMO as an Essential Function and Establishes New Units to be 

Responsive to Corridor Management Priorities.......................................................... 39

7.2.2 Maryland’s Coordinated Highways Action Response Team Business Plan and Business 

Processes Emphasize Implementation-Ready Projects to Improve Freeway 

Operations ................................................................................................................... 40

Chapter 8. Checklist for Getting Started ............................................................................... 41

8.1 Assemble Available and Relevant Documents............................................................................ 41

8.2 Identify Stakeholders—Who Needs to Be at the Table? ............................................................ 41

8.3 Facilitate Forum for Examining Business Processes ................................................................... 41

8.4 Develop Action and Strategy Plans for Improving or Enhancing Business Processes ................ 42

Chapter 9. Available Resources to Support Business Process Improvements......................... 43

9.1 AASHTO TSMO Guidance............................................................................................................ 43

9.2 FHWA Business Process Frameworks ......................................................................................... 43

9.3 One-Day Workshops................................................................................................................... 43

9.4 Second Strategic Highway Research Program Materials............................................................ 44

9.4.1 SHRP2 Guidance and Case Studies (L01) ..................................................................... 44

9.4.2 SHRP2 Organizing for Reliability Tools (L06)................................................................ 44

9.4.3 SHRP2 Presentation Materials: “Operations in the 21st Century – Meeting Customer 

Needs and Expectations” (L31).................................................................................... 44

9.4.4 SHRP2 eTool for Business Processes to Improve Travel-Time Reliability (L34)........... 45

List of Tables

Table 1. Examples of business process related questions.............................................................. 8

Table 2: Traffic incident management business process challenges............................................ 13

Table 3: Work zone business process challenges......................................................................... 19

Table 4: Planned special event business process challenges....................................................... 26

Table 5: Road weather management business process challenges............................................. 32

Table 6: Traffic management business process challenges.......................................................... 37

List of Figures

Figure 1: Photo. Example of incident management activities...................................................... 11

Figure 2: Photo. Example of work zone management activities.................................................. 17

Figure 3: Map. Example of planned special event information.................................................... 23

Figure 4: Photo. Example of weather management..................................................................... 29

Figure 5: Photo. Example of freeway active traffic management ................................................ 35
1 

Chapter 1. Introduction 

1.1 Managing Congestion with Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations 

Congestion and delay on the road network are common attributes in today’s transportation 

systems, particularly in urban areas and often during peak driving times such as morning or 

afternoon commutes. When travel conditions are worse than expected (from random or 

unusual circumstances like a crash, work zones, planned special events (PSEs), or bad weather), 

these conditions directly affect the networks’ reliability that travelers may have come to

expect. An important focus for many local and state transportation agencies, as well as the 

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), is to better manage and operate a transportation 

system to improve travel reliability.

A strong link exists between how the transportation system is managed and operated, and how 

reliable it is to the users of the system (for example, 

motorists and shippers).1 To fully appreciate and build 

on this link, decision makers and agency managers must 

understand that the effectiveness and long-term 

sustainability of any Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations (TSMO) strategy depends 

on the supportive nature of the agency’s business 

processes devoted to implementing TSMO programs. 

TSMO is focused on actively managing and improving 

the transportation network by bringing together partner 

agencies, systems, and operational strategies as part of 

an integrated program and overall operational 

philosophy. Examples of TSMO strategies include traffic 

incident management (TIM), road weather 

management, and freeway traffic management.

Many agencies are shaping their TSMO programs to more effectively address those planned 

and unplanned events that affect road and travel conditions and can have an effect on overall 

system reliability. Through improved business processes, practices, and policies, agencies can 

collaborate and implement more effective operations strategies that help minimize the effects 

of those events on the transportation system. This Primer, which has been developed under the 

Second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP2) L01 (Businesses Processes for Reliability), 

provides information on these business practices as they relate to the aforementioned TSMO

strategies. 

1

Second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP2). 2013. A Framework for Improving Travel Time Reliability. SHRP2 L17 Final Report.

Available at http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/shrp2/SHRP2prepubL17.pdf. June. [Note: This publication asserts that reliability can be 

improved through the application of TSMO strategies, because these strategies focus directly on the root causes of unreliable travel, such as 

incidents, weather impacts, and work zones.]

Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations 

(TSMO) is defined as integrated 

strategies to optimize the

performance of existing 

infrastructure through the 

implementation of multimodal and 

intermodal, cross-jurisdictional

systems, services, and projects 

designed to preserve capacity and 

improve security, safety, and 

reliability of the transportation

system management.
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

2

Operational strategies alone will not solve the congestion management challenge. Effective 

business processes must be a key part of the institutional environment necessary to support 

and enable a wide range of TSMO program elements and priorities. 

1.2 Business Processes

1.2.1 Why Focus on Business Processes?

Effective business processes are essential in supporting an effective and sustainable TSMO

program. They reflect leadership support, internal and external cooperation, and fiscal 

efficiency and responsibility, as well as placing a priority on an overall “customer service” 

approach. Business processes for TSMO are different than for traditional transportation agency 

functions of design, construction, and maintenance. Many agencies today face budget 

challenges, staffing and resource shortfalls, increased competition for project dollars, and 

potential customer satisfaction issues because of increasing travel delays experienced on 

transportation networks. 

The key to innovative partnering strategies, purposeful strategic planning for short- and longterm system management needs, identifying resource requirements and how those resource 

needs could be addressed is through effective business processes. Research shows that 

agencies with strong commitments to business processes—such as programming, procurement, 

staffing, planning, and collaboration—have demonstrated benefits of improved system 

management and operations.2 

1.2.2 The Role of Business Processes 

in a TSMO Program

Business processes, in the context of TSMO, refers to 

activities such as planning, programming, agency 

project development processes, and those 

organizational aspects that govern various technical or 

administrative activities (such as training, human 

resource management, or agreements). Business 

processes get at the heart of many of the 

organizational issues that can influence TSMO. In many 

cases, the business process elements go beyond the 

day-to-day operational activities, and require broader 

institutional support and involvement. Aspects such as 

training, contracting, and procurement, or information 

technology policies, might be well outside of the sphere of influence or control of the groups 

that are involved in the hands-on, daily transportation system operations and management.

Business processes, like planning, programming, training, or establishment of partnerships and 

agreements, are fundamental to the success of operational and management activities. 

2 Second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP2).2012. Institutional Architectures to Improve Systems Operations and Management. 

SHRP2 L06. SHRP2 Report S2-L06-RR-1. Available at http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/shrp2/SHRP2_S2-L06-RR-1.pdf. Prepared by 

Parsons Brinckerhoff, Delcan, Philip J. Tarnoff, George Mason University School of Public Policy, and Housman and Associates. Prepared for 

Transportation Research Board, Second Strategic highway Research Program, Washington, D.C.

Business processes are challenging 

because no two agencies or regions 

are alike. Each agency has its own 

institutional policies, rules, culture, 

and structure. Although some 

standards are in place that help to 

promote consistency (such as 

procurement requirements), each 

agency executes its processes 

differently. As a result, when looking 

at business processes, each agency 

may have a set of unique 

requirements and approaches and a 

unique set of stakeholders that will 

need to be involved.
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

3 

The lack of effective business processes for TSMO can also hinder an agency’s ability or 

readiness to advance to more complex and proactive operational strategies (such as variable 

speed limits, advance traffic management and information systems, and dynamic parking 

management). Without the right procurement processes, partnering commitments, 

sustainable funding, internal awareness and support, an agency would have limited capacity to 

implement more complex TSMO programs and activities.

1.2.3 Benefits of Improved Business Processes

The following are several benefits in implementing improved business processes into 

transportation systems:

• Developing an integrated TSMO Program Plan that addresses key business processes can 

enable the identification and prioritization of key needs, projects, partnerships, 

implementation strategies, and planning level costs, which can be used to quantify TSMO

budget and resource needs, as well as leverage planned capital improvements.

• Allocating resources, both funding and staff, can be more effectively targeted to priority 

operation needs.

• Creating procurement processes and strategies that respond to the unique needs of TSMO

can streamline acquisition and implementation and result in cost savings to agencies and 

operations programs.

• Procuring improved and sustainable alignment of equipment, staff, and resources can help 

to more effectively manage and operate the system over time.

1.2.4 Impacts of Ineffective Business Processes

The following are ineffective business processes that can impact transportation systems 

planning:

• Limiting or having no business plan for TSMO will result in ad-hoc and incremental 

implementation of technology and equipment, with little consideration for longer-term 

needs.

• Lacking a defined or sustained budgeting process limits the ability to deploy needed 

solutions.

• Providing unstructured training programs can overlook key partners and result in 

uncoordinated responses to incidents on roadways.

• Not integrating system or strategy performance information into operations can limit the 

effectiveness of equipment and staff investments.

1.2.5 Business Process Improvement Examples from Other Industries

Two case studies—United Parcel Service (UPS) and Charleston (South Carolina) Water Systems 

(CWS), a water utility company—provide a successful example of how improved and integrated 

key business processes helped them reach their goals. Both case studies provide evidence that 

considering and analyzing underlying business processes can and do work to improve 

operations and produce monetary and efficiency benefits to the organization. 
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

4 

1.2.5.1. United Parcel Service 

In 2011, UPS underwent a business processes transformation to shift from being a primarily 

U.S.-based, small package-focused business to becoming an end-to-end global operation that 

can handle the needs of companies worldwide. UPS took a variety of approaches to ensure that 

their business and management processes were compatible with their new vision and goal. One 

initiative was to create a centralized process group called the Program Management Group – 

Process Center for Excellence, whose task was to ensure that the company stayed processoriented. This group also was tasked with documenting, reviewing, and standardizing 

processes. They also worked with the American Productivity and Quality Center to become 

experts at benchmarking. As a result, they developed a framework known as the Core Process 

Framework. Their goal for this framework was to have metrics and scorecards available so they 

could benchmark UPS process management against what other companies were doing, so they 

may continually improve and elevate their process maturity. UPS changed their business plan 

and approach by implementing a ‘We Love Logistics’ campaign to emphasize that the company 

was explicitly aware of the full set of logistics behind their end-to-end process of package 

transport in the global arena. 

As a result of these efforts to become—and be seen as—process-oriented, UPS now operates in 

200 countries and has vastly expanded their shipping capabilities. They have established their 

process analysis as a core value in the company and trained more than 700 of their employees 

worldwide in creating process maps for analysis and process improvements. Overall, their focus 

on business process improvements has allowed them to outgrow the confines of the smallpackage business and become a truly globalized company. 

1.2.5.2. Charleston Water System 

CWS oversees one water treatment plant and two wastewater treatment plants in South 

Carolina that serve approximately 400,000 customers. CWS was treating excess water in its 

wastewater collection system because rain and groundwater were entering the system through 

cracks and cross-connections. CWS set out to address the problem by improving predictive 

maintenance and investigations so that effective infrastructure improvements could be made. 

To achieve this goal, CWS used a combination of management frameworks and business 

practice tools to analyze their water treatment system and ultimately reduce waste and 

improve their operations’ overall efficiency and effectiveness. 

CWS applied different components of Lean Six Sigma process and project efficiency toolkits.3

For example, they implemented mentoring and training programs for a multidisciplinary project 

team to ensure the team properly understood the Lean Six Sigma processes. They also 

established process goals and metrics—including value stream mapping, statistical process 

quality control and variation analyses, cause-and-effect diagrams, and root-cause analysis 

problem solving—to measure progress and results of their process changes. By using these 

process tools and analyses, CWS recommended improvements that were implemented and 

subsequently adopted within CWS operations. After CWS implemented the recommended 

improvements, the company was able to increase its wastewater treatment capacity by 

 

3 Lean Six Sigma comprises process improvement and process efficiency approaches that promote more efficient, streamlined ways to 

collaborate, reduce lags in projects and process implementation, and improve how tasks and work are accomplished.
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

5 

2.62 million gallons per day and see a savings of $1.3 million per year in operations and 

maintenance costs. CWS also realized a $9.17 million fee savings from their increased 

treatment capacity. The efforts to provide their operations with better performance data has 

helped CWS reach its goals of reducing waste and improving overall efficiency and 

effectiveness, which resulted in large-scale annual savings.

1.3 Primer Focus and Audience

This primer is focused on helping transportation agencies accomplish the following goals: 

• Understand the importance of creating and developing sustainable business processes to 

effectively advance TSMO as a mainstream, core agency function. 

• Assess agency business processes related to TSMO, and identify their unique requirements. 

• Identify constraints and gaps within agencies’ current business processes.

• Engage the right stakeholders to identify needs and develop actions and strategies that can 

improve business processes to support more effective TSMO programs. 

This primer will help readers understand the context and role of business processes in a TSMO

program. The primer differentiates supporting business processes—including program 

planning, procurement, and resource allocation—from those operational activities typically 

associated with TSMO, yet it makes a firm connection between business processes and 

operations functions. 

The following audiences will benefit from the concepts presented in this primer:

• Agency transportation operations managers—These managers have programmatic 

authority to prioritize reliability-focused strategies within operations programs and budgets, 

assign and supervise staff responsible for operations, and coordinate with agency and 

partner peers to evaluate broader business process issues and work toward solutions. 

• Agency traffic engineering managers—These managers are close to the day-to-day 

operations, systems, and staff that operate various traffic management programs. They can 

identify gaps and deficiencies, facilitate collaboration, and help elevate issues that require 

funding, resources, or departmental approval for changes. 

• Transportation planners—Planners typically focus on broader regional issues and longer 

term transportation system needs. This important audience can help effect change by 

modifying planning and programming processes to better support longer-term operational 

needs. Planners often coordinate with multiple groups, entities, or agencies and can help 

identify cross-jurisdictional business process gaps. 

Because this primer highlights different nonrecurring congestion business process issues, it also 

benefits multiple stakeholders within an agency. The primer also benefits agency partners, 

including transportation system maintenance managers, regional planning organizations, senior 

law enforcement representatives (particularly those involved in TIM and PSE programs), and 

those entities involved in agency administrative functions, including contracting and 

procurement, information technology, and training. 
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

6

1.4 Primer Organization

This primer is organized into the following key sections:

• Chapter 1: Introduction—This chapter defines business processes in the TSMO context and

sets the stage for their role in supporting the institutional components of TSMO activities.

This chapter also provides examples of companies from other industries that improved or

better coordinated their own business processes.

• Chapter 2: Business Process Development—This chapter provides some guidance and

methods for agencies to begin to identify business process issues, as well as strategies for

stakeholder engagement in the process.

• Chapter 3: Traffic Incident Management; Chapter 4: Work Zones; Chapter 5: Planned Special 

Events; Chapter 6: Road Weather Management; and Chapter 7: Traffic Management. These

chapters outline business process issues in the context of specific operational activities.

Each chapter presents case studies of agencies or regions that have helped elevate the

effectiveness of their TSMO programs or activities by addressing certain business processes

to promote more effective system operations. Each chapter also provides example

questions to consider in identifying specific business process issues, as well as stakeholders

who could or should be involved to help address them.

• Chapter 8: Checklist for Getting Started—This is a one-page quick guide for agencies to use

to begin evaluating their business processes. It provides recommendations for assembling

available plans and documents, guidance on identifying the right stakeholders, types of

forums that are conducive to business process discussions, and recommended steps in the

process.

• Chapter 9: Available Resources to Support Business Process Improvements—This chapter

provides information on related tools, guidance, and publications to support agencies in

their business process analysis and improvement strategies. 
 

7 

Chapter 2. Business Process Development

Lack of effective business processes is often at the core of any operational challenge. Keeping in 

mind the institutional focus of business processes—such as strategic and program planning, 

programming, contracting, procurement, and project management activities—it may not 

always be obvious that an operations challenge is largely attributed to gaps in, or lack of, 

effective business processes. Strong business process development relies on two important 

actions: 1) Identifying Business Process Issues, and 2) Engaging the Right Stakeholders. 

2.1 Identifying Business Process Issues

Agencies can begin identifying key business process issues in several ways. One effective way is 

asking the right questions. Capability maturity model frameworks for various Transportation 

Systems Management and Operations (TSMO) approaches and strategies4 can help provide 

prompting questions to focus the discussion on business processes, including their strengths, 

weaknesses, and gaps. Chapters 3 through 7 of this primer also provide the reader with some 

example business process issues. 

Another method of identifying key business process 

issues involves analyzing operational activities and 

identifying weaknesses or gaps where potential 

business process issues could affect their 

effectiveness. For this kind of analysis, discussions 

typically focus on a specific problem with incidents or 

work zone operations, road weather management, 

information sharing, or other operational issue and 

associated “breakdowns” in effective operations. 

These issues can be addressed as part of an afteraction review or debrief. Getting the right stakeholders 

involved in these analyses will provide valuable 

information about different TSMO partner perspectives, activities, and potential constraints. 

As part of these discussions, key questions should be asked that can help identify various issues 

and whether or not a business process could be improved to help address them. Table 1 

provides examples these types of questions, in the context of various stages of an event 

response. At each stage in this example, various business process issues and considerations are 

presented that could enable more effective operations actions (right column). This example 

uses response steps that would be consistent with responses to an incident or weather event. 

 

4 FHWA has developed several capability maturity model frameworks to support improvements at the program level, including Traffic 

Management, Traffic Incident Management, Planned Special Events, Work Zone Management, Road Weather Management, and Traffic Signal 

Management. These are available on the FHWA website. 

Business process issues or 

weaknesses can often be addressed in 

a cost-effective manner; a process 

improvement does not always need to 

translate into a major capital 

expenditure. Process change can be a 

challenge for agencies, simply 

because such change could affect 

several groups or divisions, as well 

as require modifications to longestablished processes and levels of 

authority. 
CHAPTER 2. BUSINESS PROCESS DEVELOPMENT

8 

Table 1. Examples of business process-related questions. 
CHAPTER 2. BUSINESS PROCESS DEVELOPMENT

9 

Visualizing steps from an operations standpoint can identify the synergies between operations 

activities and business processes that can enable or improve those activities. Involving multiple 

stakeholders and their perspectives in the discussion can raise awareness of issues that might 

not otherwise have been identified within traditional operations roles or functions.

An important aspect in identifying business processes is that the business process issues or 

weaknesses can often be addressed in a cost-effective manner; process improvement does not 

always translate into capital expenditure. The following are examples of relatively cost-effective 

process improvements:

• Establish a new line of communication among

partners.

• Develop a new agreement.

• Modify construction review processes to

include operations representatives.

• Revise operating procedures.

• Increase collaboration with agency and

metropolitan planning organization (MPO)

functions to integrate TSMO priorities into

established agency and regional programming

processes.

More effort-intensive business process changes 

would include the following:

• Develop a TSMO strategic or implementation

plan.

• Revise procurement or contracting language.

• Implement a performance management program that aligns with goals and objectives and

with budgeting and resource allocation processes.

2.2 Engaging the Right Stakeholders

Once specific issues are identified at the operations level, engaging the right stakeholders is 

important. The specific stakeholders to get involved depend on the specific issues that need to 

be addressed.

Business process stakeholders may be outside of the typical operations stakeholders and 

partners and could include representatives from any of the following groups:

• Information technology

• Construction and project development

• Maintenance

• Safety

E-Tool: This helpful tool was developed by

SHRP2 and FHWA to support groups and

individuals wanting to assess and improve

TSMO-related business processes. The ETool includes excerpts and examples from

original SHRP2 research, to help provide

context for the different stages of business

process analysis, change, and

implementation. Users are guided through the

seven steps identified in the SHRP2 research,

beginning with identifying the causes and

influences for business processes, all the way

through the steps to assess, develop, and

implement business process changes. The ETool allows users to capture key points at

each stage, and generates a summary of the

discussions and action items identified for

implementing changes to TSMO business

processes. The link for accessing the E-Tool is

provided in Chapter 9 – Available Resources.
CHAPTER 2. BUSINESS PROCESS DEVELOPMENT

10

• Capital program planning and project development

• Statewide, regional, and metropolitan planning

• Long-range planning

• Traffic engineering and control

• Traffic Incident Management (could be multiagency)

• Legal and policy

• Human resources

• Procurement

• External partners for operations (for example, neighboring agencies, enforcement and 

emergency service providers, or other affected agencies)

• Contractors that serve in key roles

• System vendors or operators

• Venue managers (for Planned Special Events)

• Others to be determined based on priority issues and outcomes

In many cases, these stakeholders will require focused outreach to engage them in discussions 

that will influence change or modify supportive business processes. The following are some 

strategies that can help engage nontraditional stakeholders:

• Initiate one-on-one conversations to get them involved, state the case and issues, and 

explain why they are important to the conversation and outcomes. 

• Convene a workshop that involves the appropriate stakeholders to allow multiple 

perspectives to be shared and partners to collaborate on specific actions, strategies, and 

next steps. This will also help identify any additional constraints and promote discussion on 

how to mitigate or resolve those constraints. 

• Follow up on issues discussed, action items identified, and next steps. Effectively document 

issues and action items to help keep all stakeholders focused on the issues and required 

actions, particularly for those business processes that might take some time to modify or 

resolve. 

Chapters 3 through 7 focus on business processes within several core TSMO strategies, 

particularly for managing nonrecurring congestion. Operations activities—and their supportive 

business processes—vary widely from region to region or from state to state. The examples 

provide a starting point for agencies to examine their operational processes and potential 

business process improvements. Case studies provide examples of successful business process 

changes initiated in other areas, as well as the impetus for examining the need for changing or 

modifying business processes. Chapters 8 and 9 provide helpful resources for agencies to use as 

part of their business process improvement strategies.
11

Chapter 3. Traffic Incident Management

3.1 Traffic Incident Management Business Processes 

Traffic Incident Management (TIM) consists of a planned and coordinated multiagency process 

to detect, respond to, and clear traffic incidents so that traffic flow may be restored as safely 

and quickly as possible.5 TIM includes notifying proper responders to arrive at the scene, 

assisting involved motorists and conducting necessary investigations, minimize travel 

disruptions and delays, and restore the roadway to normal conditions (as shown in Figure 1). 

Effective TIM also involves planning, preparing, and developing procedures to educate and 

inform motorists of crashes and any associated restrictions. Several regions have active TIM 

coalitions or programs that bring together a wide range of partners from the TIM community, 

including law enforcement, transportation officials, emergency responders, towing providers, 

and information providers and disseminators. 

Figure 1. Photo. Example of incident management activities. 

(Source: Florida Department of Transportation) 

TIM is one of the core strategies within Transportation Systems Management and Operations 

(TSMO) to help preserve capacity and improve the reliability and safety of the transportation 

system. Established TIM programs, have proven to be low cost and cost effective, produce 

results in a short amount of time, and result in economic, mobility, reliability, and safety 

benefits. 

 

5 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Undated. Traffic Incident Management. Accessed at 

http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/eto_tim_pse/about/tim.htm. Accessed March 12, 2014. Federal Highway Administration, Emergency Transportation 

Operations. 
CHAPTER 3. TRAFFIC INCIDENT MANAGEMENT

12

The following business processes are integral to the success of TIM programs:

• Establishing strategic goals and objectives

• Funding and programming for program and strategies

• Contracting and procurement processes to support programs and strategies

• Establishing a link between TIM, operations, and the regional and statewide transportation 

plans

• Measuring performance based on TIM objectives

• Maintaining a relationship of performance management and measures with regional and 

statewide TSMO performance management programs

• Providing policies to enable program objectives and partnerships

The following are guiding questions that can be used to identify business process issues and 

potential action items for improving TIM business processes. These questions can apply to 

several partners involved in TIM:

• On a routine basis, are TIM needs collectively assessed, reviewed, and acted on?

• Are funds available for TIM activities?

• Are multiagency, multidiscipline incident debriefings held?

• Do multiple participating agencies formally plan or participate in the planning and training 

for TIM activities?

• Do standardized TIM response systems (protocols) exist?

• Is TIM performance measured and then used to influence and/or improve operations?

• Are performance-based contracts, agreements, guidelines, and/or specifications used for 

TIM? Is there an opportunity to do so?

• Does agency leadership understand TIM, and is leadership aware of the link between TIM 

and TSMO? 

• Is agency leadership actively involved in TIM program decisions?

• Is the TIM program supported by a succession plan, or is it dependent on a limited number 

of champions?

For example, if responses are inconsistent between partner agencies that are part of the same 

TIM program, then implementing an interagency training program to give all agencies the same 

information and training methods would be beneficial. FHWA’s National TIM Responder 

Training Program has helped to standardize multiagency TIM training in areas around the 

country. 

Table 2 outlines potential business process challenges for various elements of TIM. These 

challenges can be examined during the course of incident management operational discussions 
CHAPTER 3. TRAFFIC INCIDENT MANAGEMENT

13

that would identify potential limitations or issues that can be addressed through improving 

corresponding business processes. 

Table 2. Traffic incident management business process challenges.

Traffic Incident 

Management Program 

Elements

Traffic Incident Management Potential Business Processes Challenges

Coordinated Partnership • Consensus on incident management priorities, goals, and objectives is not 

achieved or documented.

• Formal agreement for mutual aid or coordinated incident response is not 

reached.

• Traffic Incident Management (TIM) partners provide inconsistent or limited 

participation.

• Program direction is at risk of being lost if champions leave or transition to 

different roles.

• TIM is not integrated into agency core mission.

• Multiagency incident debriefings are not part of the standard process. 

Training • Coordinated training or multiagency training among TIM partners is lacking.

• TIM training has limited or no funding.

• No formal training program (such as the FHWA National TIM Responder 

Training) is in place. 

• New TIM techniques or processes are unable to be integrated into 

established agency training programs.

Funding • TIM funding is not sustainable.

• Funding commitments or funding levels vary among incident management 

partners.

• Ability to procure needed tools, technologies, or integration for more 

effective TIM or coordinated communications during TIM are limited.

Response and Management • Interoperable communications among partners are not in place because of

funding or policy limitations.

• Communication processes do not include all required partners.

• Response and on-scene procedures are not defined, documented, or known 

by all partners.

Performance Improvements • Goals, objectives, and associated performance measures for incident 

management are not defined, tracked, or reported.

• Policies limit effective sharing and reporting of TIM-related data.

• Performance data needs are not defined or identified.

• Lack of a coordinated performance monitoring strategy limits effectiveness.

• Performance data are not used to identify needed process improvements.
CHAPTER 3. TRAFFIC INCIDENT MANAGEMENT

14

3.2 Traffic Incident Management Business Process Case 

Studies

3.2.1 Joint Operations Policy Statement Encourages Innovative 

Approaches to Collaborating on Effective Incident Management 

Strategies in Washington State

This case study addresses the following TIM business processes:

• Policies to enable program objectives and partnerships

• Strategic goals and objectives and corresponding strategies

The State of Washington has developed one of the most comprehensive and effective incident 

response programs in the United States. Washington State Department of Transportation 

(WSDOT) and the Washington State Patrol (WSP) are the two primary agencies responsible for 

incident response on highways in Washington State. WSDOT and WSP have a long history of 

working together to improve incident response and reduce incident clearance times. 

In 2002, WSDOT and WSP developed a Joint Operations Policy Statement (JOPS) Agreement 

that formalized each agency’s roles and responsibilities for freeway operations, including 

incident response. This document is signed by the Washington State Secretary of

Transportation and the Chief of the WSP and is updated each year. It now includes the 

Washington Fire Chiefs. The JOPS Agreement clearly defines how incident response will be 

conducted in Washington State, identifies a specific employee from both WSDOT and WSP 

responsible for each program, and sets program performance measures. 

Having this coordinated policy has elevated the importance of collaboration, as well as made 

each of the partners accountable for achieving a set of standard, consistent objectives. This 

agreement also provides an important policy to support future programs that help the TIM 

program. For example, the “Instant Tow” program is one of the innovative approaches used by 

Washington State to streamline response to freeway incidents. The Instant Tow program 

changed WSP’s policy for rotational tow dispatch and on-scene verification before calling for 

tow support. With Instant Tow, agreements are established that outline required timeframes 

and required equipment for tow operators. It is estimated that the new program saves up to 15 

minutes in tow response time. This translates into several million dollars saved in delay and 

wasted fuel, as well as improves the safety for responders and travelers by reducing clearance 

time. 

3.2.2 Florida Road Ranger Program Expands Using Alternative Funding 

Sources

TIM business processes addressed in this case study are as follows:

• Funding for program and strategies

• Contracting and procurement processes to support programs and strategies

The Florida Road Ranger program uses private tow vendors and sponsors to deliver a freeway 

service patrol program throughout the state of Florida. The Road Ranger program includes the 

participation of Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), Florida Highway Patrol (FHP), 

private service patrol providers, and private sponsors. The Road Ranger program is coordinated 
CHAPTER 3. TRAFFIC INCIDENT MANAGEMENT

15

through the FDOT Central Office and operated by the FDOT districts and the Florida Turnpike 

Enterprise. The program began in 2000 and at that time was completely funded by the State of 

Florida. Because of budget cuts, FDOT was forced to look for funding or consider reducing the 

hours and miles of service covered by the Road Ranger program. As a result, FDOT successfully 

established a sponsorship program to provide supplemental funding to the Road Ranger 

program through corporate sponsorship. This marked a significant change at FDOT but one that 

made financial sense in terms of being able to sustain and expand this important incident 

response program. With the additional sustainable funding from outside sources, the Road 

Ranger program was able to grow from a local program that was only offered in a few districts 

into a statewide program with deployments in every district.
This page intentionally left blank.
17

Chapter 4. Work Zones

4.1 Work Zone Business Processes 

Work zones are defined as any construction activities that result in physical changes to the highway 

environment, such as reductions in the number or width of travel lanes, lane shifts, lane diversions, 

and temporary road closures.6 Work zones will often reduce the capacity or flow of the roadway 

because of lane closures, work activity, or ingress and egress of construction vehicles, and they can 

experience higher crash rates. Managing traffic in work zones (see Figure 2) is necessary to 

minimize delays and maintain access to and around the site, ensure the safety of motorists and 

workers, and ensure that the work is completed effectively and as quickly as possible. 

Figure 2. Photo. Example of work zone management activities. 

(Source: Michigan Department of Transportation) 

Work zone management strategies are often complex and can change frequently based on varied 

circumstances such as the space needed for work operations, funding, weather, and the roles of 

the various agencies involved. Work zones can present challenges for the larger transportation 

network in terms of their effects on alternate routes, transit operations on routes with a work 

zone, or multiple concurrent events in the work zone area or corridor. 

Work zones can last for several months or a few days, depending on the construction or 

maintenance activity. Long-term work zones, such as for major reconstruction projects, provide an 

opportunity for improved coordination among affected agency partners, more lead-in time for 

planning, and typically result in more regular communications among partners about work zone 

changes through construction partnering meetings. Furthermore, there are opportunities for more 

sustained motorist awareness and education campaigns for those longer-term work zone activities, 

although day-to-day changes in work zones still require specific onsite mitigation measures and 

motorist safety messages. Those activities with a limited duration impact might not have the same 

level of advanced coordination among affected partners or the same level of motorist information 

about the work zone or restrictions. 

 

6 Second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP2). 2011. Integrating Business Processes to Improve Travel Time Reliability. SHRP2 Report S2-

L01-RR-1. Available at http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/shrp2/SHRP2_S2-L01-RR-1.pdf. Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. in 

association with PB Consult. Prepared for Transportation Research Board, Second Strategic Highway Research Program, Washington D.C.
CHAPTER 4. WORK ZONES 

18

Business processes affect work zones at every stage—from initial considerations during the project 

development and planning stage, to the transportation management plan (TMP) developed during 

design, procurement and contracting processes, as well as during work zone implementation and 

active work zone activities. 

The following are business processes for work zones:

• Contracting strategies to enable effective and efficient implementation

• Planning processes 

• Coordination involving multiple divisions or groups

• Program plan and review processes

• Performance measures, metrics, and data informing practices and procedures

• Documented procedures, including planning, implementation, and conflict resolution

• Management policies 

The Work Zone Safety and Mobility Rule (69 Federal Register 5462) provides provisions and 

guidance for states to address work zone safety and mobility at the policy level and throughout the 

planning, design, and implementation process. Agencies develop their respective work zone 

policies and guidance based on this rule. It also requires agencies to conduct a process review, at 

least every 2 years, with the goal of assessing the effectiveness of its work zone program and the 

effect on safety and mobility of work zones. The intent of the process review is to improve work 

zone processes, procedures, and training through a multidisciplinary review, input, and analysis. 

This review provides an opportunity to examine key business processes associated with the various 

stages of work zone planning, implementation, and evaluation. Outcomes of work zone 

performance and safety assessments can help to identify important considerations that could 

result in improved coordination and communication processes, contractor requirements, and 

updates to agency processes or policy. 

The following are some guiding questions that can be used to identify issues and potential action 

items to improve work zone business processes. These questions, based on the work zone business 

process framework and work zone process review, can apply to several partners involved in work 

zone planning, implementation, coordination, and evaluation:

• Are the project significance and needs known and considered throughout the project 

development process?

• Are the user costs considered during the decision-making process?

• Are procedures in place to use innovative contracting strategies to address work zone needs? 

Are there certain projects (large/complex) that warrant extra consideration?

• Are contractor requirements and agency work zone policies aligned?

• Are TMPs developed, and do they provide strategic support during the project development 

process?

• How are work zone safety and mobility performance measures tracked and incorporated into 

process improvements?

• How are multiple projects coordinated to achieve work zone management objectives? If so, 

does this process include methods for addressing conflicts? 
CHAPTER 4. WORK ZONES 

19

• Is there a process for developing and distributing training for work zone management?

• Is there a formalized process for succession planning and cross-training for work zone 

management within the agency?

• Are there established processes for coordination among divisions and/or offices within the 

agency (for example, design and traffic, construction, transportation management center) with 

respect to work zone management? Are the right staff involved at the right stage?

• How is the work zone management policy implemented and evaluated throughout the agency?

An example of a change in business process to help improve work zone management would be to 

ensure that changes in work zone configuration are communicated to all parties involved, rather 

than just those onsite. Staff, such as operations, can help disseminate information regarding work 

zones and manage roadway capacity. Failure to inform all parties of changes would hinder effective 

roadway management. 

Another example of a business process is to consider managing work zone(s) on a regional scale at 

the planning stage, especially in identifying possible conflicts with concurrent work zones nearby 

(such as on parallel routes and modes). Transportation Systems Management and Operations 

(TSMO) strategies could also be used on other corridors, to help facilitate any additional traffic flow 

that may divert to avoid the work zone. Taking a holistic view and coordinating regionally would 

help bring about the most effective management. 

Table 3 outlines potential business process challenges for various elements of work zone 

management. These challenges can be identified during work zone planning and operational 

discussions regarding potential limitations or issues that can be addressed through improving the 

corresponding business processes. 

Table 3. Work zone business process challenges.

Work Zone Program 

Elements

Work Zone Potential Business Processes Challenges

Planning • Work zone needs, issues, and constraints are not identified early in the project 

development process.

• Project cost estimates and budget do not include (adequate) funding for traffic 

management.

• Affected partners or agencies are not involved in work zone planning or TMP 

development.

• The established work zone policy does not adequately specify requirements for work 

zone plans and/or TMPs.

• Work zone planning and design do not involve staff from operations to identify 

potential operational issues or modifications to operational strategies as a result of 

the work zone.

• No standard process is used for modeling potential effects of large-scale or longterm work zones.

• Potential concurrent events in the work zone area (such as a recurring special event 

or other work zones nearby) are not adequately addressed in the early planning 

stages.

• Adoption of innovations or changes is hindered because no established process is 

used for evaluating new devices, technologies, or processes that could reduce work 

zone duration or impacts.
CHAPTER 4. WORK ZONES 

20

Table 3. Work zone business process challenges. (continued) 

Work Zone Program 

Elements

Work Zone Potential Business Processes Challenges

Contracting, 

Procurement, and 

Contract 

Administration

• Selected project delivery method does not adequately capture requirements for

work zones.

• Innovative or alternative contracting methods are not routinely considered or are

only reserved for major projects.

• Safety and mobility metrics are not clearly identified in the contractor requirements.

• Schedule incentives in the contractor requirements do not adequately address

safety and mobility requirements.

• Lack of knowledge of options available to the agency may limit different project

delivery methods and their potential impacts on work zones.

• Training may be inadequate for contracting staff on the different delivery

performance-based methods and the relationship to work zone requirements or

contract administration.

Implementation and 

Monitoring

• Current processes do not adequately involve or inform affected agency groups, such

as operations.

• Processes for notifying other affected agencies of work zones or changes in work

zones are not in place or are not consistent.

• No policy exists that enables off-peak work hours for contractors or maintenance

staff to limit disruptions to travel lanes during peak hours.

• No process or technologies are available to update motorist information systems as

work zone configurations change.

• Established processes and procedures do not adequately address work zone incident

management or contingency planning (for a conflicting event).

• Work zone performance measures are not established, or no process exists for

collecting data and assessing the measures.

• Regular communications about work zone performance are not consistent during

project review meetings.

4.2 Work Zone Business Process Case Studies

4.2.1 Work Zone Traffic Control Modeling Provides Valuable Insight to 

Construction Staging and Scheduling in Michigan

Work zone business processes addressed in this case study are as follows:

• Planning processes

• Coordination involving multiple divisions or groups

Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) has established processes for using modeling to 

evaluate the impacts of upcoming work zones and to develop work zone traffic control plan 

alternatives. Traditionally, long- and short-range planning activities and project-specific work zone 

planning functions do not intersect; however, in this case, some innovative analysis from the MDOT 

Planning Division was able to provide valuable input to the group implementing a significant 

project work zone on Interstate 75 (I-75) through metropolitan Detroit. 
CHAPTER 4. WORK ZONES 

21

MDOT was able to leverage an existing model to analyze the potential impacts of the I-75 

Ambassador Bridge Gateway Project to develop network microsimulation models years before 

construction started. The model was originally developed as a tool for helping facilitate MDOT 

project funding decisions for southeast Michigan. MDOT Metro Region Planning repurposed the 

model and applied it to work zone modeling of the I-75 Ambassador Bridge Gateway Project. This 

marked the first time that network microsimulation had been used in an operations analysis, as 

opposed to planning applications. The model also had to consider numerous planned closures of I75 and surrounding roads both because of the I-75 Ambassador Bridge Gateway Project and other 

planned construction projects. 

Using this tool, MDOT Region Construction and Engineering staff were able to see the work zone’s 

influence on the surrounding network and see how different closure and traffic control scenarios 

would affect mobility on other corridors. As a result, the work zone mobility plan was developed 

considering impacts beyond the work zone. Model outputs were also used to inform the public 

outreach and involvement strategy, traffic incident management (TIM) planning, and traveler 

information program. This change in business processes brought together groups that did not 

typically collaborate on work zone planning and implementation. It also provided MDOT with delay 

measures based on project design and construction staging, as well as informed operation 

processes for other corridors affected by the work zone. 

4.2.2 Maryland Work Zone Performance Management Program Uses New 

Data Sources to Monitor and Analyze Work Zone Impacts

Work zone business processes addressed in this case study are as follows:

• Coordination involving multiple divisions and groups

• Program plan and review processes

• Performance measures, metrics, and data informing practices and procedures

The Maryland State Highway Authority (MDSHA) wanted to use probe data already integrated into 

the Regional Integrated Transportation Information System (RITIS) to help measure work zone 

performance, as well as to improve work zone planning and management. To reach this goal, they 

contracted with the University of Maryland Center for Advanced Transportation Technology to 

develop a real-time performance monitoring tool specifically for work zones. This project would 

also help the MDSHA assess the traffic impacts of upcoming projects. 

One of the main outcomes of the project was a real-time performance dashboard that computes 

mobility performance measures for active work zones from RITIS probe data and displays it on 

dashboard in the MDSHA website. The RITIS data include information from fixed sensors and a 

third-party probe data provider. Computed performance measures included mobility measures 

such as delay, congestion, and queue length, and programmatic performance measures, such as 

number of days when queuing occurred, average queue during and length, and vehicle/hours of 

delay. 
This page intentionally left blank.
23

Chapter 5. Planned Special Events

5.1 Planned Special Events Business Processes 

Planned special events (PSEs) can bring rapid fluctuations in roadway demand from what is 

typically seen in an area; therefore, it can be a challenge when an agency is seeking to maintain 

or improve travel-time reliability. PSEs can include recurring events, such as seasonal sporting 

events or concerts, or annual events such as marathons or parades. They can also be one-time 

specific events, such as political conventions or the Super Bowl. In all cases, PSEs cause areas to 

experience greater-than-normal traffic flows in and out of the area, potentially during a 

compressed timeframe. They are often accompanied by lane or road closures, detours, and 

parking overflow, all of which need to be considered to manage traffic to and from the event 

and reduce its impacts on local traffic and travel. 

Successfully executing PSE traffic management requires extensive planning and coordination in 

addition to actual day-of execution. Preplanning activities may include multiagency and 

multijurisdictional coordination for operations involving police and emergency services or 

transit availability. Preplanning may also include plans to disseminate traveler information 

through the media or other outlets to inform people about upcoming changes to traffic flow (as 

seen in Figure 3). Post-event debriefings can provide valuable lessons learned to incorporate 

into future PSE strategies. For those recurring events, such as those at fixed venues that occur 

on a fairly regular schedule (for example, sporting events at arenas and annual parades), event 

planning and day-of-event activities might become somewhat routine. Operational partners will 

some historical experience and established roles and relationships and “lessons learned” are 

typically applied from past events at that location. 

Figure 3. Map. Example of planned special event information.

(Source: Kansas Department of Transportation) 
CHAPTER 5. PLANNED SPECIAL EVENTS

24

A unique kind of special event is a national special security event (NSSE), which is designated by 

the Secretary of Homeland Security and led by the Secret Service. NSSEs are often characterized 

by the presence of certain factors, such as anticipated attendance by U.S. officials and foreign 

dignitaries, and event size and significance.7 In the cases of an NSSE, the Secret Service 

coordinates advance planning and liaison for venue and air space security, training, 

communications, and security credentialing. They also coordinate and conduct liaisons with 

other federal, state, and local agencies, primarily law enforcement entities that are relevant for 

the operations. Examples of NSSEs include presidential nominating conventions, presidential 

inaugurations, or gatherings of many heads of state (for example, North Atlantic Treaty 

Organization, Group of Twenty, and Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation). 

Business processes for PSEs span each stage of the process, from early planning, coordination, 

and event management strategy development to day-of-event traffic management and postevent debriefings. Furthermore, these business processes span several different partners, and 

each partner is responsible for allocating some level of resources to plan for, manage and 

execute, or follow up on special event traffic management activities. 

Key business processes for PSEs include the following:

• Program plan

• Budgeting 

• Resource management

• Contracting and procurement for resource needs

• Informed programming and resource needs through lessons learned

The following are some guiding questions that can be used to identify business process issues 

and potential action items to improve business processes related to PSEs. These questions, 

based on the PSE business process framework, can apply to several partners involved in 

planning and managing special event traffic:

• Are mechanisms in place to effectively plan for special events? Do plans correspond to 

unique event needs?

• Do agency budgets adequately account for resource needs to support PSEs? Are effort 

levels and resources identified? 

• Do strategies require equipment or resources from other departments, and can the needed 

resources be acquired?

• Is the traffic and guidance information provided to the public consistent among those 

entities that are disseminating the information? Is there a central resource for traveler 

information for PSEs? Is there a single public information officer to provide a single, 

coordinated message to the public?

 

7 Congressional Research Service (CRS). 2009. National Special Security Events. CRS Report for Congress. Available at 

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RS22754.pdf. Accessed on March 12, 2014. Prepared by Shawn Reece, Analyst in Emergency Management 

and Homeland Security Policy. March 24.
CHAPTER 5. PLANNED SPECIAL EVENTS

25

• Are resources within agency departments responsible for PSE-related transportation 

operations?

• Do partners have access to real-time operations information to better manage special 

events in real time?

• Do partners know other partners’ roles and responsibilities? Are these roles and 

responsibilities documented or otherwise agreed to?

• Is formal, multiagency training for PSEs available to key partners? 

• Are event metrics tracked and is performance information applied to future event planning?

• Are lessons learned captured and documented through after-action reports and/or postevent debriefings and used to modify or improve traffic management strategies for future 

events? 

Most business process issues affect pre- and post-PSE stages, where stakeholder involvement 

and up-front planning and strategy development activities occur. Limited or fragmented 

processes in the early stages of planning can impact day-of operational activities. Potential risks 

in PSE planning include lack of involvement of the right stakeholders in the event planning 

process or not providing partners with critical information to support their resource allocation 

for event traffic management. Another potential risk is having multiple sources of traveler 

information without a clear plan for consistent messaging disseminated by the media, 

transportation agencies, or event venues or promoters. Important business process 

considerations for PSEs include processes for coordination and agreements, preparing clear 

plans and procedures (including contingencies), and identifying and allocating adequate agency 

funds for needed equipment and resources. Documenting and applying lessons learned to 

future events is also an important business process consideration. 

Table 4 outlines potential business process challenges for different stages of PSE traffic 

management. These challenges can be examined during the course of planning for PSEs or 

after-action reviews to identify potential limitations or issues that can be addressed through 

improving the corresponding business processes.
CHAPTER 5. PLANNED SPECIAL EVENTS

26

Table 4. Planned special event business process challenges.

PSE Elements PSE Potential Business Processes Challenges

Preplanning • Planning for Planned Special Events (PSEs) does not include all key 

partners.

• Roles and responsibilities are not documented and distributed to all 

partners involved in PSE traffic management.

• Specific resource, staff, or equipment needed to support a PSE traffic 

management strategy is not identified or included within agency 

budgets.

• Appropriate buy-in from agency managers is not received for 

required resources to support event traffic management strategies.

• Impacts (such as work zones) on event route corridors or event 

adjacent corridors are not forecasted or factored into event traffic 

management strategies.

• A consistent motorist information strategy is not developed and 

shared with all partners.

• Cost recovery strategies are not discussed or explored to offset 

agency resource requirements.

Event Strategy Implementation 

(Event Management)

• Roles and responsibilities that were not communicated to all 

partners lead to miscommunications in the field.

• Lack of consistent or centralized motorist information messages 

provides conflicting information to travelers.

• Local traffic is impacted as a result of event traffic ingress and egress.

• Partners lacking access to real-time information are not able to 

effectively respond to traffic needs.

• Contingency plans were not developed to account for changes in 

operations as a result of an incident or other unforeseen effects on 

event routes.

• Traffic incident management (TIM) plans were not developed for 

specific PSE phases.

Post-Event Debriefing • Real-time performance information during event ingress and egress 

was not collected and is not available for post-event analysis.

• Key partners were not part of a formal post-event debriefing.

• Lessons learned to incorporate into future events are not captured or 

documented.

• Costs for resources and equipment are not tracked and/or 

documented to be able to better budget resources for future events 

exists.
CHAPTER 5. PLANNED SPECIAL EVENTS

27

5.2 Planned Special Event Business Process Case 

Studies

5.2.1 Kansas Speedway Special-Event Traffic Management Planning 

Reduces Patrol Resource Requirements for On-Scene Traffic 

Management 

PSE business processes addressed in this case study are as follows:

• Planning and program plan

• Resource management 

• Lessons learned to inform programing and resource needs 

In 2001, the Kansas Speedway opened for its first major NASCAR race. With attendance 

exceeding 110,000 people, the event set a record as the largest single-day sporting event in the 

history of Kansas. Attendance has continued to grow and now exceeds 135,000 for most major 

races. The traffic control strategies to handle these major events were the result of years of 

planning between the Kansas Speedway, Kansas Highway Patrol (KHP), Kansas Department of 

Transportation (KDOT), and the Kansas City Police Department. 

By collaborating on improved traffic management and operations processes, KHP and KDOT in 

partnership with local agencies, were able to implement several operations and coordination 

improvements that minimized delays during traffic ingress and egress on race days. Both KHP 

and KDOT have access to cameras to monitor traffic approaching the race and leaving the 

parking lots. Local agencies were involved in the planning and are part of a real-time 

communications strategy on event days to share information through the Web Emergency 

Operations Center. 

By developing coordinated plans and implementing connectivity among key agencies, traffic 

control plans have resulted in reducing the number of KHP troopers required to monitor traffic 

in the field (from 25 to 14), a significant cost and resource allocation benefit to the KHP. 

5.2.2 Special Event Cost Management Strategy Results in Improved Cost 

Tracking and Asset Allocation in Los Angeles, California

This case study addressed the following PSE business processes:

• Programming and budgeting 

• Resource management 

• Contracting and procurement for resource needs

• Informed program and resource needs through lessons learned

The City of Los Angeles (City) hosts several major special events each year. With a complex 

network of freeways, arterials, and event venues, attention to cost and resource requirements 

with the volume of events hosted in the region is an essential component of the City’s business 

processes. Recognizing that the City was recovering very minimal costs from event organizers, a 

special task force assessed true costs to the City. 

The Los Angeles Department of Transportation has a Special Event Traffic Operations Division 

(the Division) with assigned staff to PSEs; these staff are experienced in cost needs and cost 
CHAPTER 5. PLANNED SPECIAL EVENTS

28

planning requirements. By carefully documenting event costs (including traffic control and 

traffic management, security, and other elements), the Division was able to justify an increase 

in the allocated budget to support effective event operations. Further, the Division also 

develops individual cost estimates for events and completes an after-action review of actual 

costs. Event planning costs are also are included. 

Several permanent venues (such as the Dodger Stadium and Staples Center) have established 

contracts with the City so that reimbursement costs are handled appropriately for recurring 

events. This attention to budget detail helps ensure that the required resources to support 

special events in the City are included in annual budgeting processes. 
29

Chapter 6. Road Weather Management 

6.1 Road Weather Management Business Processes 

Weather events and their impacts on roads are often viewed as sources of nonrecurring 

congestion that can affect the safety, productivity, and reliability of roadways. Inclement 

weather (seen in Figure 4), can negatively affect driver behavior and vehicle and roadway 

performance, and these can increase risks of crashes, cause vehicle delay because of reduced 

speeds, reduce roadway capacity, or result in roadway closures. Weather effects are not 

constrained by artificial boundaries (jurisdictions), and they can occur on all types of roadways, 

including both urban and rural roads. Weather effects also span town, county, and state 

borders, which pose unique challenges for managing large-scale weather events like snow, 

floods, wind, fog, and heavy rain. 

Figure 4. Photo. Example of weather management. 

(Source: Virginia Department of Transportation) 

Effective road weather management includes multistate coordination and complex cooperation 

and partnerships between traffic operations, maintenance units, and public safety 

departments. Strategies for road weather management include advisory, control, and 

treatment strategies.8 

Advisory strategies provide advance notice and up-to-date information about roadway 

conditions to transportation managers and travelers so that management and traveling can be 

planned accordingly. Control strategies regulate roadway capacity and traffic flow by reducing 

 

8 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2014. What are the Benefits of Using Road Weather Management Strategies? Available at 

http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/weather/q2_benefits.htm. Accessed March 12, 2014. U.S. Department of transportation, Federal Highway Administration, 

Office of Operations.
CHAPTER 6. ROAD WEATHER MANAGEMENT

30

vehicle speed and volume. Treatment strategies minimize or eliminate weather impacts, such 

as applying sand or salt to icy roads to improve traction. 

All three strategies will involve business processes to effectively implement and manage 

roadways in inclement weather. Moreover, business processes would address management 

activities and operational strategies before the weather event (during evacuations), during the 

event (treatment), and following the event (when returning to “normal” as soon as possible 

following the weather-based disruptions). 

Often, road weather management is largely the responsibility of maintenance units, because 

they typically have access to real-time information from road weather sensors, are responsible 

for the equipment used in weather response, and have staff resources who are trained in 

responding to road weather events. Operations staff, such as those at a Transportation 

Management Center, also have a key role in monitoring road conditions. They issue 

notifications through traveler information systems, implement traffic control strategies, or 

directly coordinate with or request support from other entities during a road weather event. 

Large-scale events will likely involve public safety and law enforcement, and partner 

transportation agencies (within a region or across state lines), as well as the media to help 

broadcast alerts and warnings to the public.

Key business processes for road weather management are as follows:

• Program plan

• Funding and resource needs identified as part of program budget

• Defined roles and responsibilities 

• Performance outcomes informing program needs

• Framework or agreements for multiagency coordination 

Several strategies and processes within road weather management leverage similar 

relationships and response coordination for traffic incidents or work zones. Modifying or 

changing business processes for road weather management will typically extend to multiple 

groups or partner agencies to be effective. 

The following are guiding questions that can be used to identify business process issues related 

to road weather management:

• Is specific funding identified for agency road weather management programs? 

• How are emergency funds allocated for responding to sustained or significant annual 

weather events? 

• Are processes and assets scalable to address needs when complexity and scale of response 

increases? 

• Is there a strategic plan for road weather management within the agency?

• How are Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSMO)-related technologies 

and centers kept operational during major weather events, including back-up plans and 

capabilities?
CHAPTER 6. ROAD WEATHER MANAGEMENT

31

• Do procurement or contracting processes support acquiring new equipment or enhancing 

existing equipment and resources for road weather management?

• How are multiagency partners engaged in the planning for road weather response 

strategies? Are these strategies and partnerships documented or formalized in an 

agreement? 

• Are lines of communication established within the agency for large-scale responses to road 

weather events? Are similar lines of communication with external partners involved in the 

response?

• Can agencies actively influence traffic and travel behavior—via TSMO strategies and 

supporting technologies—before, during, and immediately following a road weather event?

• Are processes in place to share real-time weather data with operations staff and divisions?

• Do staff have resources, such as decision support tools, to implement specific responses to 

different weather events?

• Are road weather management performance metrics incorporated into future planning 

needs, including staff resource needs? 

• Are training opportunities for road weather management available to agency or partner 

staff? 

• Are processes available to integrate road weather management into broader corridor 

operations strategies and procedures?

Examples of where failed business processes lead to ineffective road weather management 

includes situations where information regarding weather management strategies, such as road 

closures or detours, is limited or not shared between states. This can result in some travelers 

not being aware of a closed road and the creation of extensive traffic delays. Similarly, 

availability and sharing of data within and between agencies are imperative for effective 

roadway management (for example, between traffic operations center and maintenance unit or 

between state departments of transportation). 

Table 5 outlines potential business process challenges for various stages of road weather 

management. These challenges can be examined during the course of road weather strategy 

planning or weather event debriefings to identify potential limitations or issues that can be 

addressed through improving the corresponding business processes.
CHAPTER 6. ROAD WEATHER MANAGEMENT

32

Table 5. Road weather management business process challenges.

Road Weather Management 

Elements

Road Weather Management Potential Business Processes Challenges

Program Planning • A road weather management plan (or similar strategy) is not in place 

or does not fully address activities before, during, and immediately 

following a weather event.

• Roles and responsibilities are not documented or distributed to all 

entities involved in road weather management.

• Multiagency road weather coordination planning and training are not 

routinely conducted or updated based on lessons learned.

• Annual budgets are insufficient for unplanned or extreme weather 

seasons.

• No process exists for adequately maintaining (including “hardening”) 

the equipment so it can remain operational during a weather event 

or for replacing equipment essential to road weather management.

• Annual budgeting processes do not capture the full range of staff or 

contractor resources required.

• Planning for enhancing the road weather program over time is 

limited.

• Coordination between operations and maintenance staff to clearly 

define roles and responsibilities is minimal.

Strategy Implementation • Communications among multiple partners involved in road weather 

response are neither consistent nor do they have clear lines of 

authority.

• Adequate supplies of needed road weather treatments are not 

available because of budget shortfalls or unexpected delays.

• Lack of a communication plan leads to conflicting information being 

provided to travelers through multiple channels (such as agencies 

and media).

• Contingency plans are not in place to address multiple impacts of 

weather events.

• Real-time weather data are not available to all divisions or groups 

that need it for their operations and response decision-making.

• Decision are made ad-hoc with limited scenario planning, training, or 

decision support capabilities.

Post-Event Documentation and 

Debriefings

• No consistent procedure for multiagency debriefings following 

significant weather event response is available.

• Resources used are not well documented or accounted for, which 

limits lessons learned from being applied to future weather event 

planning.

• Statistics and performance metrics are not captured to be able to 

better inform resource needs or changes to strategies for future 

weather events.
CHAPTER 6. ROAD WEATHER MANAGEMENT

33

6.2 Road Weather Business Process Case Studies

6.2.1 Improved Coordination on I-80 Provides More Advanced Notice to 

Travelers and Freight Movers of Winter Closures in Nevada and 

California

Road weather management business processes addressed in this case study are as follows:

• Defined roles and responsibilities

• Framework or agreements for multiagency coordination 

Managing traffic on Interstate 80 (I-80) during winter conditions—and, in particular, during 

“traffic holds” at the California/Nevada state line—has been the basis of several key planning 

strategies between the Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT) and California 

Department of Transportation (Caltrans), as well as law enforcement from both states. 

For Nevada, the need to inform westbound travelers (particularly freight travelers in winter) 

has been the impetus for NDOT installing traveler information infrastructure (including dynamic 

message signs, warning beacons, and highway advisory radio) in advance of key decision points 

along westbound I-80 to allow travelers to choose an alternate route. Freight drivers can either

decide to find allowable parking at suitable off-highway facilities further east on I-80 or use 

alternate routes to reach their westbound destinations. Multistate coordination with Utah and 

Wyoming means that significant traffic holds lasting several hours will initiate notifications as 

far east as Wyoming.

During winter months, Caltrans opens its Winter Operations Center in Kingvale so that 

resources can be based near the I-80 corridor to better respond to weather-related conditions 

and incidents during winter. Caltrans and NDOT also have established agreements and policies 

for traffic holds at the state line when winter weather makes it unsafe for freight to travel over 

the mountain pass. Winter operations needs determine the staff resource requirements for 

both agencies. Caltrans uses temporary employees to help with chain requirements on I-80 

during the winter driving season. Historical data from prior driving seasons are used to estimate 

resource needs (staff and funding), and Caltrans budgets annually for staff hours and housing at 

the Kingvale Winter Operations Center. 

6.2.2 Maintenance Decision Support System Helps Winter Maintenance 

Budget in Indiana

Road weather management business processes addressed in this case study are as follows:

• Funding and resource needs identified as part of program budget

• Performance outcomes informing program needs

The Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT) uses a maintenance decision support 

system (MDSS) to integrate relevant weather forecasts, winter maintenance rules of practice, 

and maintenance resource data to recommend appropriate road treatment strategies during 

winter weather. INDOT underwent program pilot testing in 2002, as part of a pooled study with 

other states (North and South Dakota, Minnesota, and Iowa) using a federal prototype MDSS. 

INDOT implemented the program statewide in 2008 and 2009, which required significant 

changes in INDOT’s winter maintenance procedures and the mindset of employees. 
CHAPTER 6. ROAD WEATHER MANAGEMENT

34

An important part of the MDSS program is the outreach plan. INDOT developed and provided 

training to winter maintenance personnel throughout the state using the MDSS. INDOT also 

developed and implemented change management strategies to understand how the program 

will affect a large organization and communicated the reasons for the change throughout the 

organization to gain early acceptance of MDSS at all levels. Implementing the MDSS has led to 

significant fiscal and resource benefits for INDOT, including savings of more than $12 million 

from reducing salt use by more than 228,000 tons (40.9 percent) and close to $1.4 million by 

reducing overtime compensation by 58,000 hours (27.5 percent). 
35

Chapter 7. Traffic Management

7.1 Traffic Management Business Processes 

Traffic management encompasses several strategies often focused on in urban areas. The 

freeway system (and other limited-access facilities) is the backbone of a regional transportation 

network, providing connectivity to other freeways as well as arterial systems. Many agencies 

across the United States have implemented some level of traffic management and operations 

system, ranging from basic freeway and traffic monitoring capabilities to 24/7 traffic 

management centers, ramp management, active traffic management systems (shown in Figure 

5), or integrated corridor management systems. The focus of this chapter is on freeway traffic 

management. 

Figure 5. Photo. Example of freeway active traffic management. 

(Source: Washington State Department of Transportation) 

Similar to the other strategies previously discussed, freeways and freeway operations pose 

several challenges where effective planning and procurement processes ensure viability of 

equipment and system investments. The inability to replace or update equipment and systems 

could limit an agency’s ability to implement more responsive strategies, such as active traffic 

management or integrated corridor management. Staff, whether agency or contracted, also 

need the training, expertise, and authority to be able to implement more demand-responsive 

strategies based on network conditions. The absence of a comprehensive operations plan or 

strategic plan represents key business processes that could hinder the overall effectiveness of a 

freeway operations program. 

Within the full range of traffic management, business processes have a few common 

denominators: equipment and infrastructure in the field to monitor and control traffic; 

integrated systems to facilitate monitoring and control; and staff resources to monitor the 

network and implement strategies. In addition, operational policies, such as ramp management 

(coordinating policy and operations with adjacent arterial corridors), and traffic incident 
CHAPTER 7. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

36

management (such as quick clearance practices) can also influence freeway and traffic 

management and operations.

The supporting business processes also vary widely, and range from strategic planning to 

coordinating among partners for operations and effective equipment procurement and lifecycle 

management practices. As such, business processes will be somewhat unique to each agency or 

region. 

Key business processes for traffic management include the following:

• Program plan and priorities

• Budget and programming to support program needs

• Program alignment to agency and regional transportation mission, goals, and objectives 

• Coordination among program planning to other key planning activities (such as a long-range 

plan)

• Process to integrate regional- and network-based operations strategies (such as active 

traffic management and integrated corridor management)

• Performance outcomes to influence program plan and programming

The following are guiding questions that can be used to identify business process issues and 

potential action items related to traffic management business processes: 

• Is a formal and collaborative process available to support traffic management system 

planning, programming, or budgeting?

• Are priorities established for traffic management, and are these priorities reviewed and 

updated over time?

• Is there alignment between agency mission, goals, and objectives, and traffic management 

goals, objectives, and priorities?

• Are goals and objectives for traffic management coordinated and supported by a 

performance monitoring program, including the establishment of performance measures 

derived from outcome objectives?

• Do traffic management priorities reflect immediate needs and longer term or regional 

transportation objectives?

• Are there corridor-specific traffic management processes or priorities established, 

considering unique corridor characteristics?

• Do the needs of operations programs, such as traffic incident management, road weather 

management, planned special event management, or work zone management, provide 

input to traffic management activities or strategies?

• Are traffic management priorities established using a network-based approach (such as 

integrated corridor management)?
CHAPTER 7. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

37

• Is there institutional initiative or support to advance new Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations (TSMO) strategies and approaches in your traffic 

management program? 

• How integral is life-cycle management to the traffic management program? Are needs for 

longer-term systems operations or expanded TSMO strategies able to integrate into formal 

planning and programming processes?

Traffic operations are typically handled by one agency in a region, although in some areas there 

could be multiple traffic and freeway operators (such as areas with tollways or turnpikes 

operated by entities other than the state’s DOT). However, freeways represent a significant 

part of most regional transportation systems, so operations and management are most 

effective when they consider the freeways interactions with other modes and systems, such as 

transit and arterials. Examples of some gaps in business processes that impact freeway 

management and operations include lack of coordination with other transportation agencies, 

limited strategic planning for system operations or future system expansions, firewalls or 

stovepipes within organizations that limit effective coordination across multiple divisions and 

departments, and reluctance to examine new TSMO strategies to elevate the current level of 

freeway operations.

Table 6 identifies potential business process challenges at various stages of a traffic 

management program. These challenges can be examined as part of program reviews or 

strategic planning discussions to identify potential limitations or issues that can be addressed 

through improving the corresponding business processes.

Table 6. Traffic management business process challenges.

Traffic Management Program 

Elements

Traffic Management Potential Business Processes Challenges

Planning and Programming • No short-term or long-range strategic plan exists for the traffic 

management program.

• Traffic management priorities are not developed collaboratively with 

key partners or with a network perspective.

• Budget planning for traffic management enhancements does not 

factor in new strategies or approaches.

• Traffic management system life-cycles and asset management needs 

are not adequately addressed in agency budgets.

• Mainstreaming traffic management capabilities into capital 

programming (such as for traditional capacity enhancements or 

rehabilitation projects) is not always considered.

• Coordination between agency planning processes and operations 

program priorities or activities is limited.

• Agency programming cycles and planning horizons do not provide 

enough flexibility for near-term traffic management initiatives or 

needs.
CHAPTER 7. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

38

Table 6. Traffic management business process challenges. (continued)

Traffic Management Program 

Elements

Traffic Management Potential Business Processes Challenges

System Operations • Traffic management processes have limited coordination with other 

partner operating processes (for example, law enforcement and 

arterial management agencies).

• Operations are largely static or by time of day and are not always 

able to respond to actual traffic conditions.

• Operations strategies are not scalable.

• Traffic management strategies do not incorporate decision-support 

tools or system performance data or analysis.

• Coordination among centers or systems in a region for traffic 

management is limited, particularly in a real-time context.

• Operational gaps are not addressed as part of the traffic 

management program, leading to business-as-usual operations 

approaches.

• Policy constraints limit implementation of more active traffic 

management strategies.

• Staff capabilities or skill sets are not aligned with traffic management 

performance needs.

• Training in advanced TSMO strategies for freeway traffic 

management is limited or unavailable.

• Outcome objectives have not been developed.

• Few or no performance measures—based on objectives—have been 

established and adopted for freeway operations.

Asset Management • A preventive maintenance program is nonexistent or is not adequate 

to address reliability of traffic management assets.

• Priorities compete within the agency for maintenance resources.

• System maintenance, repair data, and device performance trends are 

not routinely used to inform budgeting processes.

• Maintenance and asset management responsibilities are distributed 

among multiple groups or divisions.

• Coordination between freeway operations staff and maintenance 

staff is limited.

• Processes are not in place to accurately track and analyze device and 

equipment performance, which could provide valuable inputs to 

budgeting and life-cycle planning.

Expansion and Enhancement • Strategic planning for system expansion or future needs is limited.

• New strategies are not easily integrated into current freeway 

operations and management program.

• Viable funding sources are not in place to address operational needs 

of system expansion (such as training for new strategies). 
CHAPTER 7. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

39

7.2 Traffic Management Business Process Case Studies

7.2.1 Colorado Elevates TSMO as an Essential Function and Establishes 

New Units to be Responsive to Corridor Management Priorities

Traffic management business processes addressed in this case study include the following:

• Budget and programming to support program needs

• Program alignment to agency mission, goals, and objectives

• Coordination among program planning to other key planning activities (that is, long-range 

plan)

• Process to integrate region- and network-based operations strategies (that is, active traffic 

management, integrated corridor management)

The Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) has gone through a significant 

organizational change and recently implemented a Division of TSMO, which helps recognize and 

elevate TSMO to a core function within CDOT but also necessitated a close look at how to 

sustain and manage a TSMO division that did not have a business model internally to do so. 

CDOT realigned and consolidated operations within its department to be more responsive to 

corridor management needs and priorities; previously, these functions had been distributed 

across multiple divisions and regions. 

One of the earliest activities of the new TSMO Division was to develop a reorganization action 

plan. Within this plan, CDOT identified which specific functions would now be part of the new 

TSMO Division (for example, Intelligent Transportation System operations, high-occupancy 

vehicle and high-occupancy toll maintenance, freeway courtesy patrol and heavy tow 

programs, fiber network operations and maintenance), as well as what changes in reporting 

structure would happen at the regions to allow for direct lines of reporting to the TSMO

Director. 

The TSMO Division also created three new units to respond to CDOT’s corridor management 

priorities: Corridor Management, Incident Management, and Event Management. This 

represents a high-impact organizational change to better equip CDOT’s focus on TSMO. 

Although this is a relatively new division at CDOT and a very recent reorganization action plan, 

CDOT is using outputs from this effort to identify regional and headquarters resource and 

staffing needs to support its TSMO objectives, inform performance measures, and streamline 

coordination between operations and maintenance needs. By articulating these key TSMO

needs within one document, the Division can make a solid business case to CDOT for resource, 

budgeting, and process improvements. 
CHAPTER 7. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

40

7.2.2 Maryland’s Coordinated Highways Action Response Team Business 

Plan and Business Processes Emphasize Implementation-Ready 

Projects to Improve Freeway Operations

The following traffic management business processes are addressed in this case study:

• Program plan and priorities

• Budget and programming to support program needs

• Program alignment to agency mission, goals, and objectives

• Coordination among program planning to other key planning activities (that is, long-range 

plan)

• Performance outcomes that influence planning and programming

The Maryland State Highway Administration Coordinated Highways Action Response Team

(CHART) has a long history of strategic and tactical planning to guide investments in Intelligent 

Transportation System (ITS) and freeway operations, resource needs, and freeway incident 

management. CHART was among the first programs to develop a business plan that outlined 

key objectives, operational needs, and deployment and implementation priorities. CHART also 

has integrated its line-item budget needs for TSMO into the Maryland Statewide Transportation 

Improvement Program and the Maryland Department of Transportation Consolidated 

Transportation Program. 

CHART derives its program, resource, budget and maintenance needs from a comprehensive 

process that considers key stakeholder and committee input, ITS architecture, and its ongoing 

performance monitoring and management program. Although most TSMO plans and programs 

are focused on near-term operation needs, CHART has developed a unique non-constrained 

deployment plan, which outlines a vision of how CHART should be operating several years into 

the future. This non-constrained deployment plan identifies key priorities, planning-level cost 

estimates, and implementation strategies and essentially provides an opportunity-based 

project list. As opportunities arise, such as close-out funding or federal grant funding, key 

opportunities can be advanced. 

CHART has expanded with the support of top management at Maryland State Highway 

Administration in large part to the compelling business case CHART makes for the network 

improvements. Using the annual performance management program, CHART has demonstrated 

benefits in reducing incidents, reducing delay, improving incident response to freeway 

incidents, and improving customer service through enhanced traveler information. 
41

Chapter 8. Checklist for Getting Started 

This chapter provides some guidance to begin evaluating business processes and developing 

action plans to address business process improvements.

8.1 Assemble Available and Relevant Documents

• Planning documents—strategic plans, long-range plans, Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations (TSMO) plans, congestion management processes, 

transportation improvement plans, capital improvement plans, state transportation 

improvement plans (and the organizational entities responsible for managing those 

processes), and Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) architecture 

• Internal organization—organizational chart, lines of communications, levels of authority

• Agency mission statement, goals, and outcome objectives

• Performance measures and data—trends, outputs, outcome measures

• Agreements, policies, and guidelines

• Project development resources—manuals, review processes, standards

• Any past reviews

• Available sources of funds (existing and future)

• Expenditures and available financial reports (relevant to TSMO program elements)

8.2 Identify Stakeholders—Who Needs to Be at the 

Table?

• Identification of a champion and core team of partners

• Availability of key stakeholders

• Level of authority of key stakeholders to influence process change

• Champions at management level for implementing process changes

• Appropriate external partners (for example, law enforcement, local transportation agencies, 

MPOs, key contractors and consultants)

8.3 Facilitate Forum for Examining Business Processes

• Workshop or series of working sessions

• Timing aligned with important agency processes, such as strategic plan update, major 

project planning, or other appropriate activity

• Structured discussion using appropriate capability maturity model framework 
CHAPTER 8. CHECKLIST FOR GETTING STARTED

42

8.4 Develop Action and Strategy Plans for Improving or 

Enhancing Business Processes

• Key actions (for example, ‘low-hanging fruit’, outreach, additional research)

• Timeline for identified accomplishments

• Partners and resources needed to accomplish the tasks

• Strategy for assessing effectiveness of business process change

• Methods to monitor and track TSMO activities
43

Chapter 9. Available Resources to Support 

Business Process Improvements 

The Second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP2), American Association of State 

Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and 

other national entities have developed a suite of tools and resources to help agencies examine 

and improve their business processes to support improved Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations (TSMO). The entities described herein are available to assist state 

and local agencies and their partners.

9.1 AASHTO TSMO Guidance 

(http://aashtoTSM&Oguidance.org/) 

AASHTO created this web-based guidance to help transportation agency managers improve the 

performance and effectiveness of their transportation systems management and operations 

(TSMO) activities. This guidance is an online tool that uses self-evaluation and best practices 

that managers can use to identify key programs, processes, and institutional preconditions to 

achieve effective TSMO. The foundation of the guidance is that effective TSMO requires special 

technical and business processes, organizational structures, and relationships, and it guides 

users through an evaluation framework to identify an agency’s capabilities in six key processes 

and institutional dimensions using a capability maturity model structure. Based on the 

evaluation results, the guidance suggests ‘next step’ action plans that will help an agency 

improve the levels of agency capability to develop and implement more effective TSMO. 

9.2 FHWA Business Process Frameworks

FHWA developed several business process frameworks that agencies can use to assess various 

aspects of their operations programs. These frameworks are to be used to facilitate a group 

discussion focused on traffic incident management (TIM), work zones, planned special event 

(PSE) management, road weather management, traffic management, and traffic signal 

management. The frameworks were developed based on a similar structure and approach to 

the AASHTO TSMO guidance and the associated capability maturity model (CMM) structure. 

Agency self-assessment is also available, along with recommended strategies on how to 

improve capabilities within those operational areas.

9.3 One-Day Workshops

Building from the AASHTO and FHWA resources noted previously, FHWA’s capability maturity 

workshop and business process workshop are aimed at facilitating a multi-perspective 

assessment of business process issues and gaps. It also identifies priority action items to 

address those gaps. A capability maturity workshop provides broader agency group discussion, 

with business processes as one of six dimensions that are assessed. A TSMO business process 

workshop focuses on business processes within specific operations areas, such as TIM, work 

zones, road weather management, PSEs, and freeway traffic management. A TSMO business 
CHAPTER 9. AVAILABLE RESOURCES TO SUPPORT BUSINESS PROCESS IMPROVEMENT

44

process workshop also introduces additional tools to discuss specific action items. These tools 

are described herein. 

9.4 Second Strategic Highway Research Program 

Materials

9.4.1 SHRP2 Guidance and Case Studies (L01) 

(http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/goshrp2/Solutions/Available/L06_L01_L31_L34/Organizing_for_Reli

ability_Tools) 

SHRP2’s Integrating Business Processes to Improve Travel Time Reliability (L01) is a guide 

developed to assist transportation agency managers in assessing and integrating key business 

processes for transportation systems operations to improve travel-time reliability. The guide 

also provides best practices and case studies from around the world to exemplify how agencies 

are using business processes at both a programmatic and institutional level to help improve 

traffic flow and travel-time reliability with respect to four challenging areas: TIM, work zone 

management, PSE management, and weather operations and management. The guide 

proposes a seven-step integration approach to analyze, implement, document, and 

institutionalize business processes to guide managers to better understand and improve their 

businesses processes for transportation management. 

9.4.2 SHRP2 Organizing for Reliability Tools (L06) 

(http://www.transportationops.org/research/institutional-architectures-improve-systemsoperations-and-management) 

SHRP2’s Institutional Architectures to Improve Systems Operations and Management (L06),

provides research and guidance relating to the institutional characteristics of TSMO, including 

culture, organizations, and staffing, resource allocation, and partnerships that facilitate 

effective management of nonrecurring congestion. The research evaluates current practices in 

systems management and operations, as well as the institutional features that are associated 

with the more effective programs. The research also introduces a CMM that helps agencies 

connect the necessary institutional changes that will increase levels of business maturity. This 

capability maturity model is recommended to identify strengths and weaknesses in an agency’s 

business processes and is based on self-evaluation. The model also provides subsequent 

guidance for agencies to undergo changes in their institutional architecture with the goal of 

developing more effective TSMO programs. 

9.4.3 SHRP2 Presentation Materials: “Operations in the 21st Century – 

Meeting Customer Needs and Expectations” (L31) 

(FHWA site at 

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/goshrp2/Solutions/Available/L06_L01_L31_L34/Organizing_for_Relia

bility_Tools; or AASHTO SHRP2 site at http://shrp2.transportation.org/Pages/Reliability.aspx) 

These presentation materials help support a capability maturity model by engaging an agency’s 

senior leadership and decision makers (for example, DOT secretary or chief executive officer, 

chief engineer, budget and programming director, maintenance head, and other executive 

staff). Two presentations are available: one for Departments of Transportation (DOTs) and one 
CHAPTER 9. AVAILABLE RESOURCES TO SUPPORT BUSINESS PROCESS IMPROVEMENT

45

for Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs). The DOT presentation is geared towards 

senior managers and focuses on the value of mainstreaming operations as a core mission, 

business practice, and investment priority in their respective agencies. The MPO presentation is 

best suited for MPO officials and board members and provides information on the value of 

mainstreaming operations as a core component and investment priority in the regional 

transportation planning process.

9.4.4 SHRP2 eTool for Business Processes to Improve Travel-Time 

Reliability (L34) 

(http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/goshrp2/Solutions/Available/L06_L01_L31_L34/Organizing_for_Reli

ability_Tools) 

As a follow-up to the research undertaken in Guidance and Case Studies (L01), eTool for 

Business Processes to Improve Travel-Time Reliability (L34) was developed as an interactive 

eTool that transportation agencies can use to evaluate their current business processes and 

identify and remove barriers to implementing and maintaining improved processes to advance 

operations for improving travel-time reliability. The eTool is intended to help users identify 

business processes that will improve operations of their highway systems. It also provides 

examples of how to undertake the recommended business processes. The eTool can be used to 

succinctly capture key action items and next steps. 
This page intentionally left blank.
This page intentionally left blank.
U.S. Department of Transportation 

Federal Highway Administration 

Office of Operations (HOP)

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590

Office of Operations Web Site

www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov

February 2016

FHWA-HOP-16-018