Advancing Organizational 

Capabilities for 

Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations 

February 2018 Peer Exchange Report
Notice 

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) in the 

interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of the 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 the 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.
1. Report No.

FHWA-HOP-19-009

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

4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date

November 2018

Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations. February 2018 Peer Exchange Report

6. Performing Organization Code

7. Authors

Michael Grant (ICF), Beverly Bowen (ICF), Taylor Gestwick (ICF)

8. Performing Organization Report 

No.

9. Performing Organization Name and Address

ICF 

9300 Lee Highway

Fairfax, VA 22031

10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)

11. Contract or Grant No.

DTFH6116D00052-0005

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address

United States Department of Transportation

Federal Highway Administration

1200 New Jersey Ave. SE

Washington, DC 20590

13. Type of Report and Period 

Covered

June 2017 – November 2018

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

HOTM

15. Supplementary Notes

Mr. Joseph Gregory, Federal Highway Administration Project Manager 

16. Abstract 

This report summarizes the findings of a peer exchange that brought together transportation agencies to discuss 

challenges, best practices, and lessons learned related to advancing organizational capabilities for transportation systems 

management and operations (TSMO). The peer exchange was held in Arlington, Virginia on February 7 and 8, 2018. 

Participants from twelve (12) State departments of transportation (DOTs), two (2) metropolitan planning organizations 

(MPOs), one (1) county-level DOT, and one (1) regional operations organization discussed the six dimensions of the 

TSMO Capability Maturity Model, and efforts being undertaken within each of their agencies. Discussions addressed 

topics including making the business case for TSMO, changing agency culture, integrating TSMO into business 

processes, staffing and workforce development, financial planning, and performance management, as well as 

implementation strategies.

17. Key Words

reliability, transportation systems management and 

operations, organizing, capability maturity, 

institutionalizing, peer exchange

18. Distribution Statement

No restrictions. This document is available to the public 

from the National Technical Information Service, 

Springfield, VA 22161.

19. Security Classif. (of this report)

Unclassified

20. Security Classif. (of this page)

Unclassified

21. No. of Pages

34

22. Price

N/A

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized

Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

ii

Table of Contents

Executive Summary............................................................................................................................................ 1

Key Takeaways................................................................................................................................................ 1

Peer Exchange Sessions...................................................................................................................................... 5

Capability Maturity Model Results Overview................................................................................................. 5

Participant Agency TSMO Highlights............................................................................................................. 5

Communicating the Value of TSMO / Making the Business Case.................................................................. 9

Iowa DOT Peer Presentation ...................................................................................................................... 9

Discussion ................................................................................................................................................ 10

Changing Agency Culture ............................................................................................................................. 11

Business Processes: Integrating TSMO into Planning and Project Development ......................................... 12

Maryland DOT Peer Presentation............................................................................................................. 12

Florida DOT District 4 Peer Presentation................................................................................................. 13

Washington State DOT Peer Presentation................................................................................................ 14

Emerging Transportation Technologies and TSMO...................................................................................... 15

Staffing and Workforce Development........................................................................................................... 15

North Carolina DOT Peer Presentation.................................................................................................... 16

Tennessee DOT Peer Presentation ........................................................................................................... 16

Discussion ................................................................................................................................................ 17

Financial Planning and Funding TSMO........................................................................................................ 17

Performance Management............................................................................................................................. 17

Breakout Group Discussions ......................................................................................................................... 18

Business Processes................................................................................................................................... 18

Integrating TSMO into Project Development ........................................................................................18

Funding and Budgeting ..........................................................................................................................19

Promoting TSMO in Rural Areas...........................................................................................................20

Leveraging Opportunities to Advance TSMO.......................................................................................... 20

What is TSMO?......................................................................................................................................20

Motivating Agency Staff........................................................................................................................22

Emerging Partnerships, Opportunities, and Coordination......................................................................23

Implementation: Making it Happen............................................................................................................... 23

Niagara International Transportation Technology Coalition Peer Presentation ....................................... 24

AZTech Partnership Peer Presentation..................................................................................................... 24

Discussion ................................................................................................................................................ 25

What’s Next? Priorities and Resource Needs................................................................................................ 25

Appendix A – Peer Exchange Agenda............................................................................................................. 27

Appendix B – Peer Exchange Participants..................................................................................................... 29

Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

1

Executive Summary

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Office of Operations hosted a peer exchange on 

the topic of “Organizing for Reliability” in Arlington, Virginia on February 7-8, 2018. The twoday peer exchange built upon earlier efforts conducted under the second Strategic Highway 

Research Program (SHRP2) Reliability focus area, which developed a Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations (TSMO) Capability Maturity Model (CMM) and provided 

workshops and financial and technical support for CMM implementation activities. Research 

done for SHRP2 found that agencies with the most effective TSMO activities were not 

differentiated by budgets or technical skills alone but by the existence of critical processes and 

institutional arrangements focused on TSMO. This finding led to the development of the CMM. 

A sampling of agencies that implemented the CMM were invited to participate in this peer 

exchange.

The purpose of the peer exchange was to enable agencies to: 1) learn from each other about the 

challenges, opportunities, and effective practices that transportation agencies have employed to 

improve their capabilities related to institutionalizing TSMO; and 2) brainstorm future needs for 

continuing to advance organizational capabilities for TSMO. The peer exchange agenda (see 

Appendix A) focused on topics identified by participants prior to the workshop as most 

beneficial for discussion, building on the six dimensions of the TSMO CMM: 

• Business processes,

• Systems and technology,

• Performance measurement,

• Culture,

• Organization and workforce, and 

• Collaboration.

Representatives from seventeen (17) organizations participated in the peer exchange, including:

from twelve (12) State departments of transportation (DOTs), two (2) metropolitan planning 

organizations (MPOs), one (1) county-level department of transportation, and one (1) regional 

operations organization. In addition, representatives from the American Association of State 

Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), FHWA, and facilitators and note-taking 

support from ICF were in attendance (see Appendix B for a list of participants). 

Key Takeaways

Although participating agencies differed in context, geography, and organizational structures, 

several themes emerged from the discussions:
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

2

Defining TSMO – TSMO includes many different strategies and components. 

While the term TSMO is defined in Federal legislation, as participants shared experiences, they 

recognized that the term TSMO is applied differently across their organizations. TSMO 

encompasses overall approaches to moving people and goods as well as many different 

strategies, such as incident management, work zone management, and freeway management, and 

there is a need to clearly communicate the meaning of the concept. Some agencies, for instance, 

include demand management and transportation planning activities that support reliability within 

the context of TSMO, while others do not. The question of “What is TSMO?” was significant 

enough to be chosen by the participants of the peer exchange as a breakout group topic. The 

consensus definition from this breakout was “Practice of managing traffic, technology, systems, 

and people to reduce congestion and emissions, and improve reliability and safety.” The 

participants recognized that regardless of what terminology is used and what strategies are being 

deployed, it is important to be able to clearly convey the concept of TSMO within the 

organization and to stakeholders. 

Telling the TSMO Story – Agencies need to be able to communicate the value of TSMO to 

varying audiences, including in rural areas, in order to foster a reliability focus and culture.

Changing agency culture continues to be a challenge for many agencies, and the topic of greatest 

interest to participants at the outset was “making the business case” for TSMO. This interest led 

to the question of “how do we tell the TSMO story?”, both within the agency and to external 

partners. Participants created a list of “soundbites or hashtags” to quickly express the key 

messages, highlighting concepts such as efficiency (“squeezing more capacity out of existing 

infrastructure”, “do a lot for a little”), getting to destinations on-time (“trips you can count on”, 

“know before you go”, “door to door”), and economic benefits. Communicating the value of 

TSMO is important for leadership buy-in, as well as for stakeholders. Given the focus on traffic 

congestion in most discussions of TSMO, participants felt there is a particular need for agencies 

to find effective methods of making the case for TSMO in rural areas. Some applications of 

TSMO, such as road weather management, special events management, and freight management 

strategies, can provide important benefits in rural areas by improving safety and helping to 

support tourism and the economy. Identifying gaps in awareness through communication with 

rural partners can help agencies better implement TSMO in rural areas. 

Mainstreaming TSMO – There is a critical need to mainstream TSMO throughout 

transportation decision making and to imbed TSMO into a full array of agency functions.

TSMO can be integrated into an organization in many different ways: planning, project 

development, programs, performance measurement, and funding. When participants were asked 

to highlight a key theme that emerged after Day 1 of the workshop, the word “mainstream” rose 

to the top, as shown in the word cloud on the following page (Figure 1). Participants reported on 

efforts to integrate TSMO into planning and project development and identified a range of 

effective practices. For instance, Florida DOT’s District 4 held a Value Engineering workshop, 
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

3

which identified how TSMO 

could be integrated into projects 

and resulted in development of a 

Scoping Form to be used in 

project development. Although 

some agencies, such as Arizona 

DOT, have found success in 

elevating the role of TSMO 

through creation of a TSMO 

Division, others such are 

Maryland and Washington State have worked to integrate TSMO into agency practices without 

an agency reorganization. 

Partnerships – Working together yields benefits.

Beyond integrating TSMO into their own agencies, partnerships among agencies are important 

for a successful and sustainable TSMO program. Successful examples of State DOTs and MPOs 

working together, regional operations organizations that bring together multiple stakeholders, 

and engagement of different partner organizations (e.g., law enforcement) were highlighted 

throughout the workshop. AZTech and the Niagara International Transportation Technology 

Coalition (NITTEC) demonstrated the power of partnerships in advancing TSMO on a regional 

scale. These agencies are fostering communication and collaboration in their regions between 

agencies that normally may not interact. The increased collaboration raises general knowledge of 

projects and resources within the region.

Funding – There are a variety of funding sources being used for TSMO.

Agencies use a broad range of funding sources for TSMO activities, including funds generated 

from advertisements, regional taxes, State Planning and Research (SPR) funds, safety funds, 

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds, and Federal grants, among others. In 

some cases, TSMO activities are also funded as part of construction projects. One example of a 

dedicated funding source is in Nevada, where it was legislatively mandated that funds from blue 

interstate signs be used for traveler information services, providing an on-going source of 

revenue to that program. Although a couple of agencies mentioned having some dedicated 

funding for TSMO, most agencies do not have dedicated funding for TSMO but compete for 

funding with other needs. 

Participants pointed to the challenge associated with competing priorities within agencies, 

especially with regard to funding TSMO projects and services. However, the participants noted 

that obtaining funding is easier when TSMO is identified as an agency-wide priority. Still, the 

lack of maintenance funding for ITS equipment is a common challenge faced by agencies, and 

participants noted the need to take a life-cycle approach to TSMO infrastructure. 

Figure 1. Word cloud showing participants’ responses to the question 

"What was a key theme or take away?"
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

4

A key recommendation for agencies emerged over the course of the peer exchange: develop 

policies and procedures for identifying lower cost TSMO projects that address transportation 

needs and then finding the appropriate funding mechanism, rather than allowing the funding 

mechanism to dictate the type of projects pursued.

Changing Agency Culture – It takes time, persistence, and patience.

The full integration of TSMO requires changing agency culture, which is not a simple or quick 

process. Although executive leadership or a high-profile incident often has been an impetus, in 

some cases, bottom-up approaches have been driving TSMO within agencies. Participants

identified motivation, partnership, and coordination as necessary for success. Participants noted 

that it is essential that “TSMO thinking” and a focus on improving system reliability permeate 

the organization, and successes help to demonstrate the power of TSMO solutions.

The Value of Peer Exchange – Sharing ideas and practices is valuable.

Although not a direct point of 

discussion in the workshop, the peer 

exchange itself highlighted the 

value of bringing diverse agencies 

together to discuss common 

challenges and successes, and to 

learn from each other. Participants 

highlighted the value of hearing 

about practices from other agencies 

and noted that they came away with 

new ideas. 

What’s Next? A desire to keep the 

momentum going.

Participants repeatedly asserted the value of the second Strategic Highway Research Program 

(SHRP2) and the desire to continue the momentum for TSMO. In thinking about what’s next, the 

general opinion was “We’ve accomplished a lot, but there is still a lot to do.” With the SHRP2 

Program coming to its end, participants are looking for new opportunities to keep the focus on 

TSMO, and are seeking opportunities to continue to advance TSMO innovations. 

Source: ICF

Figure 2. Participants engaged in large group discussions during the 

peer exchange
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

5

Peer Exchange Sessions

Capability Maturity Model

Results Overview

Joe Gregory of FHWA welcomed participants 

and framed the context for the peer exchange on 

“Organizing for Reliability,” as focusing on how 

to advance organizational capabilities for 

transportation systems management and 

operations (TSMO). He noted that 

reassessments under the TSMO capability 

maturity model (CMM) from the past year 

showed increased overall scores across the six 

dimensions of the CMM. The overall trend for 

the CCM assessment scores was upward and 

TSMO activities have increased across the board. Agencies have seen significant progress on 

many of the TSMO activities they included in their action plans from the CMM workshops.

There are some individual agencies that saw their scores increase marginally or decrease slightly. 

These lower scores were attributed to increased agency awareness and understanding of TSMO 

and better recognition of their own levels of maturity during the reassessment. As a result, the reevaluated scores are considered a more accurate score for the agency than was obtained during 

the original assessment. For the overall effort, he noted that high-level trends are emerging: 

• Agencies are having more success in gaining buy-in for TSMO-related activities and 

efforts, especially from senior leadership and key stakeholders,

• Some State DOTs are reorganizing to make TSMO a higher priority and some are 

creating new positions within the agency to lead and coordinate TSMO efforts, and

• Agencies are using a combination of strategic, programmatic, and tactical planning for 

TSMO that has resulted in more comprehensive plans for TSMO.

Participant Agency TSMO 

Highlights 

Participants were asked to create an 

introductory presentation to share 

agency actions, successes, and 

challenges with regard to TSMO. These 

presentations were shared toward the 

beginning of Days 1 and 2. A summary 

of each participant presentation can be 

found in Table 1.

Figure 3. Six dimensions of the TSMO CMM

Source: ICF

Figure 4. Peer exchange participants shared individual stories of 

successes and challenges
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

6

Table 1. Round Robin Introduction Presentation Summaries

Participant Agency Summary

Melissa 

Ackert

Florida DOT 

District 4

Florida DOT’s District 4 conducted a Value Engineering Workshop, 

which multiple agency offices attended to discuss successful TSMO 

efforts, unsuccessful TSMO efforts, and ways to further TSMO efforts. 

The result of this workshop was 42 specific recommendations for 

implementing TSMO in Florida DOT’s District 4. Notably, this 

included a project scoping form which has helped identify projects 

where TSMO can be “tagged on,” or added to the original scope of a 

project. Current challenges faced by FDOT are finding methods to fund 

projects through traditional planning processes.

Brent Cain Arizona DOT Arizona DOT has taken a top-down approach to TSMO, with the DOT 

director creating a division within the agency focused on TSMO. Of the 

roughly 3,700 DOT employees, around 300 are within this TSMO 

division. Current challenges faced by Arizona DOT include: increasing 

awareness and understanding of TSMO across the department, and 

establishing business processes to incorporate operations.

Solomon 

Caviness

North Jersey 

Transportatio

n Planning 

Authority 

(NJTPA)

NJTPA is an MPO which helps to support New Jersey’s TSMO 

programming efforts by planning for workshops on TSMO topics, such 

as Smart Cities, Connected and Autonomous Vehicles, and others. 

Since supporting NJ DOT’s CMM assessment in 2014 and 

reassessment in 2017, NJTPA has used the results to create The 

Connected Corridor, New Jersey's ITS Architecture maintenance and 

multi-agency collaborative framework for ITS & TSMO program 

planning. Current challenges faced by the NJTPA are getting buy-in 

and commitment from New Jersey agencies for TSMO.

Nick 

Compin

Caltrans Caltrans is currently developing a “TSMO Umbrella” as a visual tool 

(see Figure 10), illustrating how institutional, technical, and operational 

integration efforts are all TSMO efforts. Current challenges faced by 

Caltrans include: agency culture where more experienced staff are 

“stuck on the old way” of operations management, and existing 

processes which limit funding for TSMO activities.

Hugh 

Conroy

Whatcom

Council of 

Governments

Whatcom Council of Governments in Washington State is the lead 

agency for the region’s U.S.-Canada cross-border planning coalition, 

called the International Mobility & Trade Corridor Program (IMTC). 

Since their CMM, Whatcom COG has included IMTC activities in its 

MPO Work Program, made steps towards adopting a greater emphasis 

on performance measurement related to binational border operations 

and goals, and has increased public use of radio frequency travel 

documents for efficient border inspections. A current challenge faced 

by Whatcom is finding available funding to maintain and validate 

operations data sources.

Monica 

Harwood

Washington 

DOT

Washington DOT was one of the State DOTs which scored lower on its 

CMM re-assessment than it did on the original assessment; however 

staff have attributed this to “knowing a lot more about what they didn’t 

know before.” WSDOT is in good public standing for its day-to-day 

operations and has a strong organizational commitment to TSMO, 
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

7

which has increased opportunities for other partnerships with public 

agencies. The challenges faced by the agency include a culture that 

favors roadway expansion, a lack of an overall common goal, and using

performance reporting data to support decisions.

Tom Hein Kansas DOT Kansas DOT found that a recent budget cut has actually helped increase 

TSMO efforts, since the agency is attempting to increase effective 

capacity in the Wichita metropolitan area without funding new major 

projects. The recent CMMs for Wichita and statewide work zones were

successful in getting transportation planners and designers in the same 

rooms and having conversations that would not ordinarily have been 

had. TSMO efforts at Kansas DOT have mostly been a bottom-up 

effort, and a significant challenge identified was how to gain buy in 

from agency executives.

Athena 

Hutchins

Niagara 

International 

Transportatio

n Technology 

Coalition

(NITTEC)

NITTEC is a binational, multi-agency transportation operations 

coalition in the Buffalo, NY region with 5 policy members, 9 general 

members, and 29 affiliate members. Recently, NITTEC conducted an 

Integrated Corridor Management joint study to inform how joint 

projects are successfully conducted, as well as developed a Regional 

Traffic Signal Operations Plan to increase signal optimization in a 

region where there are many traffic signal owners. Challenges include a 

struggle to engage higher levels of management and a need to increase 

understanding of what TSMO is at the State level. 

Denise Inda Nevada DOT Nevada DOT recently held a TSMO Program Planning Workshop, 

which included a peer-to-peer exchange that informed Nevada DOT’s 

business case. Following the workshop, NVDOT has been working on 

its business case and shifted the TSMO focus to enabling tourism in the 

State. The agency is facing a challenge in keeping internal stakeholders 

involved and moving efforts within the agency from champion-based to 

a more programmatic focus.

Tyler Laing Utah DOT The agency is currently focused on Connected/Autonomous Vehicle 

efforts, developing a TSMO business case, and expanding its fiber 

optics network to help enhance its traffic signal program. Additionally, 

Utah DOT is currently looking to expand variable speed limit corridors 

and standardize ATMS and ITS. The agency’s main challenge is 

communicating TSMO within the department so that everyone 

understands it and knows how it fits within their role.

Subrat 

Mahapatra

Maryland 

DOT

Implementation of TSMO in Maryland DOT has two major tracks –

Planning and Operations. Maryland DOT has successfully undertaken 

organizational modernization efforts, which has created buy-in for 

TSMO from executive leadership and mid-level management. Recently, 

the agency has been able to take advantage of the focus on Connected 

and Autonomous Vehicles in their efforts to implement TSMO. The 

challenges the agency are facing include integrating freeways and

arterials, and taking their organization’s TSMO goals to a broader set of 

external partners.
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

8

Meredith 

McDiarmid

North 

Carolina 

DOT

Key efforts at North Carolina DOT include aligning planning and 

operations functions, increasing TSMO staffing levels, and keeping 

TSMO aligned between regional and field offices via increased 

communication efforts. TSMO staffing levels on both the DOT and 

contractor side have increased, and recently the ITS Planning and 

Design division was merged with the Traffic Operations division under 

a single manager which has helped (enter what). A significant challenge 

at North Carolina DOT is that TSMO projects are not yet part of the 

TIP Project Prioritization process.

Jason 

Oldham

Tennessee 

DOT

There is a large focus at Tennessee DOT on incident management and 

trying to increase buy-in for TSMO related efforts. Tennessee DOT has 

successfully standardized TMC operations across the State, created a 

TSMO Program Plan, and incorporated TSMO into the long range 

planning process. Current challenges include the increased growth and 

congestion rates in urban areas, and the lack of funding for TSMO data, 

staff training, and technology infrastructure.

Kelli Raboy District DOT In Washington, D.C.’s 61 square miles, there are only 15 miles of 

freeways, with limited potential for expansion or new infrastructure, 

thus necessitating a focus on increasing effective capacity from existing 

assets. The District DOT (DDOT) is currently focused on building its 

staff that deal with TSMO and cultivating champions across the agency. 

DDOT has succeeded in updating its asset inventory with GIS and other 

agency-wide tools, and has been taking steps to create a formal TSMO 

strategy. Current challenges include getting on-the-ground staff on the 

same page as in-the-office staff regarding the agency’s TSMO efforts.

Faisal 

Saleem

Maricopa 

County DOT

The AZTech partnership is a regional traffic management partnership in 

the Phoenix metropolitan area, including Arizona DOT, Maricopa 

County, the Maricopa Association of Governments, local governments,

and other partners. One of AZTech’s current initiatives is to provide 

partner agencies with standardized job descriptions so specialized staff 

can be recruited for TSMO functions. Current challenges include: 

shifting from a local to a regional focus and getting executive level 

decision makers (specifically within smaller jurisdictions) to fully 

embrace TSMO. Currently, AZTech Performance Indicator Books are 

developed to promote TSMO to the operational decision makers.

Willy 

Sorenson

Iowa DOT Iowa DOT is focused on shifting its agency culture to be more 

conducive to TSMO. Every month, a list of accomplishments related to 

TSMO is released to DOT employees, which helps keep TSMO at the 

forefront of employees’ attention. Currently, Iowa DOT is shifting the 

responsibilities of the State TIM Committee to a non-profit and is 

working on developing a TIM Training Center. A current challenge

faced by the agency includes limited ability to devote staff time towards 

increasing TSMO awareness.

Patrick 

Zelinski

AASHTO AASHTO has developed the Committee on Transportation System 

Operations to help its partner agencies focus on operations, wireless 

communications, and highway transport. The goal of this committee is 

to help transform the national transportation community to a TSMO 

culture.
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

9

Communicating the Value of TSMO / Making the Business Case

During this session, participants were engaged in 

an exercise to think about communicating the 

value of TSMO. Participants were challenged to 

quickly identify a soundbite or hashtag that 

described why TSMO is an important effort to be 

pursued by the agency, resulting in a wide array of 

ideas (see text box). Some of the responses 

generated significant discussion. For example, 

“Zero delay” was suggested as similar to the “Zero 

fatality” goal from the Safety area. This received 

some rebuttal from other participants, who 

suggested “100% Reliability” might be a better 

alternative for the idea expressed. Another 

borrowed phrase was “you can’t build your way 

out of” the problem – typically applied to 

congestion. 

One analogy that came from the soundbite activity 

was the comparison of TSMO to mold. Two initial 

points framed the mold analogy. First, much like 

mold, the concept of TSMO involves a lot of 

different things that are hard to explain; however, 

everyone can recognize it when they see it. 

Second, as with penicillin that is created from mold, there will be creative applications for 

TSMO that are not currently being used today and will provide great value in the future. 

Participants felt it is the job of TSMO professionals to look for the opportunities and encourage 

the growth of a TSMO culture; just as a researcher would encourage the growth of a mold 

culture. This analogy was developed and referenced throughout the peer exchange.

Iowa DOT Peer Presentation

Willy Sorenson of Iowa DOT gave a presentation on how Iowa DOT has made the business case 

for TSMO. Within Iowa, an average of 3,000 crashes occur every month, contributing to 400 

fatalities a year. Recently, a snowstorm caused a 70 car pile-up, which resulted in one fatality. 

The dramatic video footage of cars crashing as a result of this storm makes a clear case for the 

importance of road weather management and incident management. Moreover, the economic 

cost of delay from these crashes as well as the value of individual life clearly demonstrate the 

critical role of managing the transportation system. Additionally, $400 billion dollars’ worth of 

goods move through Iowa every year – delaying these goods results in increased costs to 

Communicating the Value of 

TSMO

Participant ideas for a quick 

communication message included:

• Get more out of what you already 

have

• Efficiency: Squeezing more capacity 

out of existing infrastructure

• Reliability

• Economical: Cheaper than adding a 

lane, good return on investment, do a 

lot for a little

• You can’t build your way out

• Faster: Quicker to implement

• Faster travel, less delay, on-time 

travel, zero unexpected delay (or 

100% reliable)

• Guaranteed on time

• Embracing technology

• Capacity is an asset

• Plan ahead: Know before you go, the 

travel source

• The door to door travel experience

• Mobility as a service
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

10

consumers and in shipping 

goods to markets around the 

world. Therefore, Iowa DOT 

has successfully made the 

business case that reliable 

roads contribute to healthy 

economic development, 

including jobs growth.

The Iowa DOT’s TSMO 

Process was developed in three 

stages: strategic, programmatic, 

and tactical. The first stage 

began with the DOT Director 

and Division-level Leadership 

coming together to create a 10-

page, high-level document 

which outlined a strategic direction for the entire DOT to take regarding TSMO. The second, 

programmatic stage, was comprised of middle management who created a 100-page plan 

targeted towards agency leadership. The final stage is the development of a series of service 

layer plans addressing specific services, such as traffic management centers, traffic incident 

management, and traveler information. This top-down approach, starting with executive 

leadership and progressing to specific details, has helped to leverage existing planning processes 

and further a TSMO culture at the agency.

Discussion

Following the Iowa DOT presentation, the discussion of communicating TSMO continued. 

Participants were asked to identify audiences for the business case message. For example, who 

did they want to convince? What groups may benefit from the message? Answers included:

• Political/Government administrations

• Internal partners within a State DOT, like divisions or districts, including front-line 

supervisors, resident engineers, and maintenances crews

• Metropolitan Planning Organizations

• External agency partners, such as State and local peers

• State legislatures and elected officials

• Law enforcement and emergency management partners

• Road builders

• Business communities such as Chambers of Commerce

At the end of this activity, the participants were asked to consider the relationship between the 

“soundbites” or messages and the audiences for the “value of TSMO” business case. Participants 

Figure 5. Iowa DOT makes the connection between system reliability 

and economic activity, highlighting the importance to export markets
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

11

noted that it is important to match the message with the right audience based on unique interests 

and responsibilities. 

Changing Agency Culture

The group discussion on Making the Business Case 

transitioned into a discussion on agency culture, and methods 

to foster a favorable agency culture for TSMO. Participants 

agreed that a TSMO culture means there is a focus on TSMO 

across the organization. In other words, TSMO is not 

something that can be neglected because it is “somebody 

else’s job,” because TSMO is a part of everyone’s job. 

Participants found value in having executive support for TSMO activities and integration. Topdown support ensures the prevalence of an across-the-board focus, which is necessary for a 

successful TSMO culture. Several States, including Florida, Tennessee, Arizona, and Iowa,

noted that their TSMO efforts stemmed from agency leadership. For instance, Arizona DOT 

chose to institutionalize TSMO by reorganizing its divisions to better embrace TSMO without 

adding any additional staff. This effort has gone a long way in developing a culture for 

operations by creating a greater focus within the organization on the value and importance of 

TSMO. 

Other States, such as Nevada, North Carolina, and 

Kansas, noted significant initiatives from the staff 

level and more of a “bottom up” approach, and 

many other participants indicated that their 

agencies fell somewhere in the middle. Some 

agencies expressed concern that institutionalizing 

TSMO into an individual division or position 

would cause other divisions and employees to not 

fully integrate TSMO in their daily responsibilities

since it would be viewed as a different part of the 

organization. For instance, Maryland DOT decided 

to bring TSMO efforts into existing parts of the 

organization rather than create a new branch or 

division. This method was viewed to be successful 

by the Maryland DOT participants. In both cases of 

Arizona and Maryland, executive leadership helped 

the agency towards establishing a TSMO culture.

Agencies that had seen top-down integration of 

TSMO usually were often able to trace the 

beginning of TSMO integration to a single incident 

TSMO is not 

“somebody else’s 

job,” because TSMO 

is a part of 

everyone’s job.

What enables TSMO?

Peer exchange participants identified a 

broad range of TSMO enablers.

• A top-down approach creating a 

TSMO-focused division within the 

agency (Arizona)

• Budget cuts limiting funding for new 

major projects while needing to 

increase capacity in an urban area. 

(Kansas).

• Developing a project scoping form and 

requiring its use (Florida)

• Safety – the economic cost of delay 

plus the value of individual lives 

(Iowa)

• Focus at the Secretary’s level on the 

customer experience and outcomes 

(Maryland)

• Creating a new Traffic Incident 

Management training facility, to 

address real world experiences under 

real world conditions (Tennessee)
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

12

highlighting the need for TSMO. In Iowa, a snowstorm during Black Friday (day after 

Thanksgiving) in 2012 caused significant lane closures. In Florida, a major bridge between Palm 

Beach and West Palm Beach was closed, creating major issues on arterials in the region. The 

coordination between agencies and partners that resulted from that closure evolved into what is 

the current Florida DOT arterial management program. In both cases, a “common enemy” united 

efforts within agencies and across partners. These united efforts developed into a focused TSMO 

culture.

Business Processes: Integrating TSMO into Planning and Project 

Development 

Participants from Maryland DOT, Florida DOT, and Washington State DOT all presented on 

how their agencies have built business processes around TSMO. The presentations highlighted 

that no two agencies are alike when it comes to integrating TSMO into planning and project 

development. 

Maryland DOT Peer Presentation

Joey Sagal and Subrat Mahapatra of Maryland DOT gave a presentation on how Maryland has 

begun to integrate TSMO into planning and project development. The current transportation 

system is operating at or over capacity in the Baltimore and Washington, DC regions. At the 

same time, consumer needs are changing as new technologies enter the transportation 

marketplace. Maryland DOT had strong TSMO foundations with dynamic message signs and a 

good signal system. From this basis, Maryland DOT created its TSMO Strategic Plan, which 

included four goals:

1. Develop and implement a sustainable TSMO program.

2. Improve travel time reliability for both people and freight by looking into smart signal 

corridors, telecommunications, and other advanced systems and technologies.

3. Identify and analyze common data sets and performance measures within multiple 

systems.

4. Determine outcomes by looking at bottom line change 

(how has the user’s experience changed?).

Out of this plan emerged two tracks: the operations track, which 

is consumer-focused and seeks to take advantage of emerging 

technologies; and the planning/performance track, by which 

Maryland DOT developed a list of projects and corridors where 

TSMO could be implemented. By comparing this list of 

intended TSMO projects to a map of planned projects, 

conversations occurred between parties that would not ordinarily 

communicate, and the TSMO projects began moving forward.

The focus on the customer experience and outcomes driven at the 

Secretary’s level has been a shift that has aided TSMO efforts. By 

Figure 6. Maryland DOT’s 

TSMO Strategic 

Implementation Plan
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

13

asking questions such as “how much will users save under these identified strategies?” and “what 

is the cost to the consumer?”, Maryland has been able to encourage a TSMO focused culture, 

which has helped to integrate TSMO into planning and project development.

Florida DOT District 4 Peer Presentation

Melissa Ackert of Florida DOT’s District 4 gave a presentation on integrating TSMO into 

planning and project development from a district perspective. District 4 conducted a Value 

Engineering Workshop in which engineers met with planners, designers, and construction and 

maintenance staff to talk about “how projects are born, and how TSMO can be incorporated into 

that process.” The result of this workshop was more than 40 recommendations for changing 

agency culture and processes to incorporate TSMO, including development of a District 4 TSMO 

Master Plan.

One of the significant recommendations highlighted was the development of a Florida DOT 

Scoping Form, and a requirement to make this form necessary for any project looking to move 

forward. At the beginning of a project, the project manager must fill out the form about TSMO 

and meet with someone in the TSMO office, who will provide feedback on how to incorporate 

TSMO ideas from the Master Plan. This ensures that Florida DOT does not miss opportunities to 

integrate TSMO into projects under development.

A complexity in the nature of MPOs in Florida opened an opportunity for TSMO integration. 

While most MPOs are regional in nature, Florida MPOs are county based and work collectively 

for regional planning. A TSMO subcommittee was developed at this regional level, which 

incorporated employees across multiple MPOs. This subcommittee is able to review successful 

TSMO projects (and reasons why TSMO was not incorporated into other projects) to determine 

potential funding sources and best practices for future projects. Paths to success identified 

included: safety funding being available, looking at capital funding available, Memoranda of 

Agreement (MOA) between Florida DOT and the local agency for maintenance of devices, intercounty agreements (for projects at county boundaries), and desirable benefit-cost ratios. As 

MPOs are updating their long-range transportation plans, a focus is now on integrating TSMO 

into those plans.
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

14

Figure 7. Portion of TSMO Checklist from the FDOT Scoping Form

Washington State DOT Peer Presentation

Monica Harwood of Washington State DOT gave the final presentation on integrating TSMO 

into planning and project development. The agency did not reorganize for TSMO, but had 

reorganized 20 years earlier to better integrate traffic operations into the department. When 

considering how best to integrate TSMO into agency culture and processes, Washington State 

DOT found that its current organizational chart was conducive to promoting TSMO, and decided 

to make no changes to it but to focus on processes.

Washington State DOT created a program called the Corridor Sketch Initiative, which seeks to 

incorporate practical solutions on the planning side as well as practical solutions with operations 

applications. The agency wanted a systems approach, and looked to integrate modes, 

governments, and agencies along individual corridors in an attempt to be proactive in planning 

for user needs instead of reactive. This meant projects need to be flexible and performancebased. In other words, in order for projects to produce performance-based results they need to be 

planned in a performance-targeted manner, and those targets need to be able to change as user 

needs change.
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

15

Every State highway in Washington is currently covered in a corridor sketch. Within the 304 

identified corridors, Washington State DOT engaged partners and helped create high level 

strategies based on what has been working well in the corridor, what needs to be improved in the 

corridor, and what strategies could be used to both close the gap on those identified 

improvements and preserve the efforts of what is working well. When engaging these partners, 

TSMO was broken out into four categories (which are now the agency’s definition of TSMO): 

Corridor Management, Demand Management, Minor Operational Improvements, and Planning. 

Coming out of these corridor sketches, Washington State DOT and partner agencies have a set of 

strategies, not a list of specific projects. The idea within the agency is that in doing planning,

staff are now searching for the best projects; agencies should find the correct project and match 

up funding later, rather than the typical practice which was “we have this bucket of money so we 

can pursue these types of projects.”

Emerging Transportation Technologies and TSMO

During this session, participants discussed the implications of TSMO in the future of Big Data, 

machine learning, and connected and automated vehicles (CV/AVs). These are important topics 

in long-range transportation planning, and participants were asked how these advanced 

technologies are being considered in the context of TSMO. Current involvement of agencies 

related to CV/AVs and advanced technologies was also discussed, and most participants noted 

that their States or regions are involved in activities (pilots, planning, etc.), and in most cases, 

TSMO staff play an important role. 

Participants agreed that there is a lot of uncertainty about what technologies will emerge and 

what type of infrastructure they will need. For example, it is currently too early to tell which 

communications platform will emerge as the dominant one. No one within the transportation 

agencies wants to install costly infrastructure that ultimately will not be used; however, there is a 

need to start installing infrastructure now so that it exists when CV/AVs substantially enter the 

transportation fleet. The interest in emerging technologies among elected officials and the public 

offers an opportunity for agencies to better sell TSMO to decision makers. Multiple participants 

cited SmartCities and CV/AVs as strategies to further TSMO.

Staffing and Workforce Development

Many agencies are facing staffing and workforce development issues in relation to TSMO. Two 

major themes arose during the discussion: training and staff turnover. Many agencies have seen a 

shift from classroom-formatted trainings to online trainings. This sometimes limits the ability for 

different learners to get all the information they need in order to properly do their job. 

Additionally, agencies are seeing a large number of older professionals “walk out the door.” 

While this loss in institutional knowledge can be detrimental, some agencies have seen this as an 

opportunity to further their TSMO efforts, bringing in new staff and new ideas to help execute 

new policies. One suggestion from the discussion was for agencies to look into mentorship 
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

16

programs, so that there is a succession plan for staff when the institutional knowledge is lost 

through retirement or attrition.

North Carolina DOT Peer Presentation

Meredith McDiarmid of North Carolina DOT presented on TSMO Staffing and Workforce 

Challenges and Successes. A major challenge within North Carolina DOT is that Human 

Resources classifications for employees and contracted workers often do not align with TSMO 

work. As a result, the positions for which the agency is hiring and contracting out work do not 

have a TSMO focus, and the educational background being recruited does not line up with 

TSMO efforts. While there are some firms who are good at TSMO planning and design or at 

TSMO operations, there are very few who are able to make the connection between operations 

and planning and design. The combination of these issues hinders progress in creating more of a 

TSMO culture within North Carolina DOT’s workforce.

However, North Carolina DOT has found unique methods for success in promoting TSMO. The 

agency has moved from an Interactive Voice Response (IVR) phone system for their 511 

program to a more cost-effective solution. Inmates at a State female prison, who were previously 

the “back up” option for overflow calls, now handle most travel and tourism information. During 

large travel events or severe storms, pop up centers are set up to handle the anticipated overflow 

of incoming calls. This change was able to save North Carolina DOT hundreds of thousands of 

dollars, and create a traveler information system which could better respond to user needs.

Tennessee DOT Peer Presentation

Jason Oldham of Tennessee DOT 

presented on his agency’s Traffic 

Incident Management (TIM) program. 

TIM has been a major focus for the 

agency, and Tennessee DOT has been 

working with local agencies and first 

responders to help all parties involved in 

response be of one, unified mind and 

work together effectively. In these 

efforts, Tennessee DOT created a new 

TIM training facility, which addresses 

real world experiences under real world 

conditions. All responders are able to use 

this facility to train in various conditions 

like day-time, night-time, and adverse weather. Responders are then able to practice TIM 

techniques like parking and blocking, quick clearance, establishing the area, and command 

responsibilities. Additionally, Tennessee DOT has developed and taught an Advanced TIM 

training course to meet the specific needs of Tennessee’s emergency responders.

Source: Tennessee DOT

Figure 8. Aerial view of Tennessee DOT's TIM training facility.
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

17

Discussion

Following the two presentations, participants discussed staffing and workforce development 

issues. While training was identified in the presentations as a viable solution to some workforce 

issues, creating positions with competitive pay rates was also seen as an important step for 

agencies to take to recruit and retain TSMO-specific talent. Additionally, agencies should look 

for partnerships and opportunities to leverage when conducting staff training. In Nevada, where 

the State DOT does not have the ability to create a Traffic Incident Management (TIM) training 

facility like the one in Tennessee, a multi-agency TIM training was conducted on a newly 

constructed highway prior to the ribbon cutting ceremony. Participants saw enormous value in 

combining events such as these, which also raises TSMO awareness during events that have high 

public and leadership attention.

Financial Planning and Funding TSMO

The initial question posed to participants in the Financial Planning and Funding TSMO session

was “what funding sources has your agency successfully used for TSMO?” Participants 

identified a variety of sources, including using safety funds for TIM, funds generated by 

advertisements on traveler information websites, Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) 

funding, regional taxes, and State Planning and Research (SPR) funding. FHWA also identified 

using Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds, and construction and maintenance 

funds associated with projects to help support TSMO activities associated with those projects. 

Some agencies identified unique practices for finding funding. In Nevada, it was legislatively 

mandated that funds from blue interstate signs be used for traveler information services, 

providing a continuing source of revenue to that program. Washington State DOT incorporated 

planning efforts into their definition of TSMO, which opened access to planning funds for 

TSMO projects.

Participants then considered the question “does your agency have a line item or a budget for 

TSMO?” The general consensus was that TSMO is usually not funded from a separate budget, 

but that TSMO is included in projects when the business case for TSMO can be made. For 

example, in Florida, the DOT had data on incident clearance time prior to a budget cut. 

Following the budget cut, the incident clearing time increased, and the DOT was able to 

demonstrate the impact of the budget reduction on system performance and reliability and make 

the case for restoring the funding. Similarly, Maryland DOT and Arizona DOT have been able to 

use performance measures to justify TSMO.

Performance Management

Many agencies are already looking into new tools that take national performance measures and 

“dive deeper” into local level data. An interest was expressed by participants in helping MPOs 

and other local organizations access and analyze data in a way that would lead to the pursuit of 

more TSMO initiatives. 
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

18

As participants discussed performance management, they identified a gap in the national 

performance measures for reliability, since the aggregation of data at the State and regional 

levels “waters down” the true characteristics of system reliability. As a system-wide measure, the 

national performance measures do not adequately capture the customer experience on different 

components of the system nor help to pin-point reliability problems for developing solutions. 

Faisal Saleem (Maricopa County DOT) presented a local level solution that had succeeded in 

Utah, where high fidelity data from the traffic signal controller is utilized to develop Automated 

Traffic Signal Performance Measures (ATSPM) using a tool developed by Purdue University. 

This allowed the operator to immediately locate a problem when it was reported by a citizen by 

going back into the ATSPM charts. When Maricopa County, Arizona applied this model, it was 

able to locate around 40 signals that needed to be updated in order to mitigate gaps in detection 

of system performance. 

Because different performance measures have varying levels of importance to different interest 

groups, how performance measures are communicated to different audiences matters. 

Specifically, for ITS, agencies were curious where successes occurred in communicating the 

value of ITS infrastructure to less willing partners and organizations. Joe Gregory (FHWA) 

mentioned that some States are including ITS in their transportation asset management plans 

(TAMPs), highlighting an opportunity for agencies.

Breakout Group Discussions

Breakout group discussions were held over the course of the Peer 

Exchange. Participants suggested different topics for discussion 

related to a key theme and then voted on the topics to discuss. 

The top three topics for each key theme were picked as breakout 

groups. 

The first key theme was Business Processes, and the group 

selected Integrating TSMO into Project Development, Funding 

and Budgeting, and Promoting TSMO in Rural Areas as the three 

breakout groups. The second key theme was Leveraging 

Opportunities to Advance TSMO, and the group selected What is 

TSMO?, Motivating Agency Staff, and Emerging Partnerships, 

Opportunities, and Coordination as the three breakout groups.

Business Processes

Integrating TSMO into Project Development

In order to integrate TSMO into project development, partners and stakeholders need to 

recognize how TSMO will help meet project objectives. Thus, the breakout group focusing on 

Integrating TSMO in Project Development identified a need for TSMO staff, as well as other 

functional groups, to provide input before the final scope of a project is determined. In particular, 

Source: ICF

Figure 9. Presenting on individual 

group discussions
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

19

it is important to obtain input early in the project development process before design decisions 

are made. By making all interested stakeholders, such as those related to TSMO, safety, 

bicycle/pedestrian issues, and other topics a part of the conversation, project decisions can better 

integrate these solutions. Bringing these parties into the early side of the planning process would 

also help avoid future conflicts, since revisions to the project based on specific inputs could be 

made before the project turns into a construction site.

A second recommendation from the breakout group was that agencies develop a Maintenance 

and Operations plan on all integrated corridor management (ICM) projects. Doing so would help 

agencies and partners to understand up front who owns specific infrastructure and who is 

responsible for maintenance and operations activities. Another idea was for traffic maintenance 

plans to include TSMO strategies within work zones (e.g., smart work zones), for which 

components could be integrated into the resulting project. 

Finally, the breakout group suggested agencies create a template for implementation of certain 

geometries (such as a 12’ shoulder), and make that template available to partners whenever they 

are “touching a freeway segment.” This would allow TSMO to be better implemented during 

future improvements to corridors, as well as be better considered in current projects. An example 

given was the construction of a new bridge – an agency may be tempted to decrease the shoulder 

size in order to reduce the overall cost of the project, but building a larger shoulder on the bridge 

would allow for future TSMO applications (and multi-modal enhancements), such as the 

inclusion of potential bus on shoulder use. 

Funding and Budgeting

The breakout group focusing on Funding and Budgeting found that a common challenge faced 

by participants was competing priorities within their agencies. They noted that an agency that 

decides to make TSMO an agency-wide priority will ultimately have more success in funding 

TSMO projects. Two types of funding mechanisms were identified: large funding programs 

where projects deemed to have the most merit are funded, and smaller programs which have 

money earmarked for certain regions or types of projects. In both cases, the breakout group 

determined that agencies should streamline policies for identifying lower cost TSMO projects 

($3 million to $15 million) and then finding the appropriate funding mechanism (rather than 

letting the funding mechanism dictate the type of projects pursued).

A second common challenge faced by participants was the lack of a maintenance budget for ITS 

equipment. Since this equipment has a cost after being installed, it is important for agencies to 

identify roles and responsibilities for equipment maintenance.

Overall, the breakout group came back with seven recommendations for funding and budgeting 

strategies that could be pursued by agencies in the immediate future:

• Build the business case to show why TSMO projects need to be funded

• Develop a 5-year capital plan for Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) equipment and 

ATMS
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

20

• Develop an Information Technology (IT) Strategic Plan

• Develop a life cycle approach for TSMO infrastructure (capital and M&O)

• Look for FHWA Statewide Planning and Research (SPR) and Metropolitan Planning 

(PL) funding for TSMO planning work

• Identify funding for TSMO projects in district program budgets

• Look at safety dollars for TSMO projects (example, for secondary incidents).

Promoting TSMO in Rural Areas

The breakout group on Promoting TSMO in Rural Areas recognized that not all aspects of 

TSMO, such as recurring congestion mitigation, are necessarily applicable to rural areas but 

noted that rural areas have some key concerns and opportunities for TSMO, such as festivals 

which attract large audiences. These situations present opportunities to both apply TSMO 

solutions and demonstrate the value of TSMO to rural partners. It is important to determine what 

the public and policy makers in rural areas need, and find TSMO strategies to address those 

needs. For example, safety can be a major concern for rural communities. The breakout group 

encouraged agencies to undertake safety campaigns along specific rural corridors and explain the 

benefits of TSMO to support the safety campaign. These safety campaigns could include TIM 

trainings for first responders, which are often volunteers in rural areas.

Identifying dedicated funding sources is also important when advancing TSMO in rural areas. 

Rural policy makers want to see spending outside of urban areas, so having funding available for 

TSMO efforts in rural areas could help to make the case to policy makers for TSMO. 

Specifically, benefit-cost ratios can be used to help gain political support and demonstrate to the 

public why TSMO applications should be supported in rural areas.

Other identified strategies included:

• Conducting ITS “test runs,” with different types of information display messages, which 

show what useful information can be relayed to rural communities, 

• Utilizing GIS to visually display existing and planned ITS infrastructure, and 

• Circling back with communities after conducting outreach so rural communities know

their feedback has been heard. 

Additionally, unique opportunities within rural areas, such as festivals which attract large 

audiences, present an opportunity to demonstrate the value of TSMO to rural partners.

Leveraging Opportunities to Advance TSMO

What is TSMO?

Throughout the course of the peer exchange, it became clear that not every agency defined 

TSMO in the same way. This breakout group was suggested and selected by participants who 

wanted a more concrete answer to the question “What is TSMO?” for them.
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

21

The What is TSMO? breakout group first considered what TSMO was not to help their efforts in 

determining a definition for TSMO that they could come to some consensus on. The breakout 

group decided that TSMO definitely was not two things: routine maintenance, such as bringing 

corridors up to standard condition, and adding pavement to existing roadways. A definition for 

TSMO emerged among the participants from that discussion, including multiple components:

• Engineering

• Corridor management

• Multimodal/demand management

• Planning and policy.

The group identified that as a road system ages, it comes with opportunities to pursue TSMO 

strategies. For example, as more users travel on a roadway system, TSMO strategies can be used 

to reduce congestion before an additional lane becomes necessary. TSMO is identifying those 

opportunities and implementing measures to “put off” the need to add a lane. It is ultimately 

about improving reliability and safety across all modes. 

The Caltrans TSMO Umbrella (Figure 10) from Nick Compin’s introductory presentation was 

highlighted as a good example of how an agency can define what TSMO is, since it highlighted 

the broad reach of TSMO into the agency’s institutional, technical, and operational capacities. 

Still, definitions of TSMO differ between agencies. For example, Washington State DOT 

(WSDOT) identified four categories of activities that make up its definition of TSMO: Corridor 

Management, Demand Management, Minor Operational Improvements, and Planning. A key 

takeaway from the breakout group was that are multiple ways of defining TSMO, which may 

differ between agencies. 
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

22

Figure 10. Caltrans' TSMO Umbrella

Motivating Agency Staff

The breakout group on Motivating Agency Staff referenced several anecdotes that had been 

shared over the course of the peer exchange regarding delay, such as the Black Friday road 

closures in Iowa. These “common enemy” events provide motivation and can spur TSMO efforts 

in agencies. Further, the economic benefits of a reliable transportation system should be used 

when making the business case to decision-makers and elected officials, who can use economic 

benefits to gain public support for TSMO efforts.
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

23

Within an agency, TSMO can be furthered with targeted training that creates champions for 

specific efforts, if those champions are also provided with resources to achieve TSMO goals. 

Existing opportunities to highlight TSMO, such as the TIM training session alongside a ribbon 

cutting event, should be pursued. Front-line employees who are doing great TSMO work should 

be recognized to help promote a positive TSMO culture.

Emerging Partnerships, Opportunities, and Coordination

The Emerging Partnerships, Opportunities, and Coordination breakout group suggested that 

agencies look first to known and existing partners for opportunities to further TSMO. These 

existing partnerships will likely provide lower cost and less time consuming results. Beyond that, 

the breakout group suggested that agencies make time available for pilot projects, which 

vendors, consultants, and universities are eager to pursue. Especially when these pilot projects 

can be combined with research projects, funding opportunities through grants can help the 

agency to offset the total cost of the project. With cost considerations, agencies should look to 

share the cost of projects between agencies, MPOs, and vendors whenever possible. A costsharing plan could help in obtaining executive leadership and higher management support.

The breakout group suggested that States take the lead on innovation, inviting MPOs and 

partners to scenario planning workshops to determine what the future of the State’s 

transportation system may be. Additionally, it would help local agencies and districts to have a 

unified data sharing system as they enter the age of Big Data and the Cloud. Unified data formats 

and access to the same data would help as agencies work together on TSMO efforts.

Implementation: Making it Happen

This session focused on how TSMO strategies are implemented by focusing on two regional 

consortiums – the Niagara International Transportation Technology Coalition (NITTEC) from 

upstate New York and the AZTech Partnership from Arizona. Both presentations highlighted the 

importance of increased collaboration between agencies when implementing new TSMO 

strategies by showing how participation on content-specific committees informed the individual 

agencies of regional projects and resources related to TSMO and how those efforts could benefit 

their agencies. Following the presentations, there was a discussion centered on how to pursue 

these partnerships without a formalized organization like NITTEC or AZTech.
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

24

Niagara International Transportation Technology Coalition Peer 

Presentation

Athena Hutchins of NITTEC presented on 

TSMO implementation strategies for the 

United State-Canada border crossing area. 

NITTEC is an independent agency in the 

Niagara region of New York State and 

Canada which brings together 43 partner 

agencies on both sides of the border for 

regional collaboration on transportation. 

It has several committees that deal with 

specific subject matter such as border 

crossing, construction coordination, 

strategic planning, traffic operations, 

technology and systems, incident management, and regional transportation signals. These 

committees help to inform partner agencies on regional efforts, and contribute to regional 

projects dealing with TSMO, such as border wait time, border crossing traveler information 

systems, and integrated corridor management. This has allowed the consortium to pursue several 

grants for projects, such as Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) projects, and deploy new 

technologies and strategies in the region.

Recently NITTEC began the Advanced Transportation and Congestion Management 

Technologies Deployment (ATCMTD) Initiative – a $7.8-million-dollar project aimed to 

improve border crossing performance and travel time, as well as improve commercial vehicle 

operations and safety. Commercial freight trucks are both coming into and going out of the 

region at all times. When massive storms hit, infrastructure can be shut down, posing a problem 

to these commercial fleets. This project is attempting to better communicate to freight operators 

what roadways and border crossings are open, to maintain the flow of goods across the border. 

AZTech Partnership Peer Presentation

Faisal Saleem of Maricopa County DOT gave a presentation on AZTech, a voluntary 

organization of 26 partners, including Arizona DOT, Maricopa County DOT, the Maricopa 

Associations of Governments, cities, towns, and others with a regional focus on implementing 

TSMO. A benefit to this group of partners is that they are able to produce a central resource 

database, providing multiple sources of information to system users at one location. At the 

moment, the organization has a focus on creating standardized job descriptions within its partner 

agencies to ensure current staff are well-trained for their positions and to generate a pipeline of 

new, qualified talent. This will help the area in maintaining a workforce that is trained in 

implementing TSMO strategies by attracting new staff with increased TSMO capabilities.

AZTech is comprised of various committees, each of which focuses on specific training topics 

for its partner agencies. One of the more recent committees to be established was the Media and 

Sources: NITTEC

Figure 101. NITTEC has facilitated the FHWA and 

Transport Canada Border Wait Time Deployment Pilot 

Project
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

25

Communications Task Force, whose key objective is to organize a Media and Transportation 

Forum.

The organization also creates a performance indicators book every two years which covers 

freeways, arterials, transit, and TIM, among others, in order to promote TSMO to local agency 

decision-makers. AZTech also produces an Action Plan document, which includes the business 

case for TSMO. Within this plan, jurisdictions are given opportunities to become champions 

within specific planning areas as a method to motivate jurisdictions to incorporate TSMO.

Discussion

Participants discussed how agencies could implement TSMO with regional organizations, such 

as NITTEC or AZTech, as well as how to generate partnerships in the absence of a formal multistakeholder organization. Participants agreed that executive support would be needed for any 

large-scale implementation of TSMO. Additionally, data needs to be shared in proper ways, or it 

will become costly for agencies trying to implement TSMO – either because data are owned 

privately and sold to the agencies or because inconsistent data formats will force agencies into 

collecting and storing their own data. 

What’s Next? Priorities and Resource Needs

For the final session, participants were asked what information was the most useful for them 

during the peer exchange. The initial tagline exercise from Day 1 had some appeal, with 

Maryland DOT saying they were planning on taking the activity back to their communication 

division. Overall, the Making the Business Case session received a lot of positive comments, 

since agencies are looking to increase buy in. Participants were encouraged to look at the SHRP2 

Business Case Primer on the FHWA and National Operations Center of Excellence websites, 

which could help agencies in developing their business case for TSMO. Additionally, 

participants enjoyed hearing how other agencies have succeeded in finding funding for TSMO 

efforts.

Participants were then asked what resources or services 

could be provided by FHWA that would be the most 

beneficial to them. They noted the value of the SHRP2 

program and a desire to continue the momentum for TSMO. 

There was a general consensus that the six dimensions of the CMM were broadly applicable and 

did not need to be refined; however, agencies are interested in what a “perfect score” would look 

like within an agency. Since most agencies are currently scoring at 1s or 2s on the assessment

(out of levels 1 to 4), it would be helpful to see highlights of an agency that has scored a 4 within 

a specific dimension to help create a vision or a goal. 

Other specific resources that participants would like to see from FHWA included:

• Resources to address risk, including examples of exposure to risk and lessons learned. 

This may include an “exit plan” for when TSMO projects do not work as planned. For 

“We’ve accomplished a 

lot, but there is still a lot 

to do.” 
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

26

example, when new infrastructure is implemented it needs to be maintained. If the 

infrastructure is removed due to lack of funds available for its maintenance, then the 

agency may be liable for increased travel times. 

• A TSMO “menu of services,” to aid agencies in marketing TSMO to individuals or 

organizations who are not immersed in TSMO. Like a menu at a restaurant, this tool 

would help agencies show potential partners or champions what TSMO could offer them, 

including a description of what TSMO strategies are and how much it might cost.

• A flow chart on TSMO strategies, to give agencies the ability to quickly show partners or 

stakeholders what TSMO can offer them and how TSMO would be implemented.

• A continued national push for innovation in TSMO, recognizing that completion of the 

second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP2). In particular, the Every Day 

Counts (EDC) Program focuses on innovations, and in the past has included some TSMO 

innovations such as Weather-Savvy Roads. The EDC Program solicits ideas for 

innovations and this could be an opportunity for continued identification of and efforts to 

promote TSMO innovations. 

• A platform for State DOT chief executive officers (CEOs) to learn about TSMO, given 

the turnover in political leadership. AASHTO could be a venue for this leadership 

training on TSMO. 

• Development of some more specific CMMs for different elements of TSMO (recognizing 

that some of these have already been developed). 

Finally, participants identified potential opportunities to engage more MPOs in TSMO, and to 

spread the message about TSMO through organizations such as the Association of Metropolitan 

Planning Organizations (AMPO) and the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) as 

promising areas for future focus.
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

27

Appendix A – Peer Exchange Agenda

Organizing for Reliability Peer Exchange

Agenda

Dates and Times: 

February 7, 2018, 8:30 AM to 4:30 PM 

February 8, 2018, 8:30 AM to 4:00 PM

Location: 

National Highway Institute, 1310 North Courthouse Road Suite 300, Arlington, VA 22201

Day 1: February 7, 2018

8:30 AM Welcome and Introductions

9:00 AM Context: Status of Organizing for Reliability Initiative

• Joe Gregory, Federal Highway Administration 

9:15 AM Round-robin: Quick Highlights of Participant Activities

Approximately 8-10 participants will each provide no more than 3-minute 

quick summaries of current experience

10:00 AM Break

10:15 AM Communicating the Value of TSMO (Making the Business Case)

• Facilitated Discussion

• Presentation: Iowa DOT (Willy Sorenson) 

11:15 AM Changing Agency Culture

11:45 PM Lunch Break

12:45 PM Business Processes: Integrating TSMO into Planning and Project 

Development 

• Presentations:

o Maryland DOT (Subrat Mahapatra)

o Florida DOT District 4 (Melissa Ackert)

o Washington State DOT (Monica Harwood)

• Facilitated Discussion

1:45 PM Break

2:00 PM Business Processes: Breakout Group Discussions
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

28

2:45 PM Report-backs from groups

3:15 PM Large Group discussion: Emerging Transportation Technologies

4:15 PM Conclusion

4:30 PM Adjourn

Day 2: February 8, 2018

8:30 AM Recap from Day 1

8:45 AM Round-robin Quick Highlights of Participant Activities

Approximately 8-10 participants will each provide no more than 3-minute quick 

summaries of current experience

9:30 AM Break

9:45 AM Staffing and Workforce Development

• Presentations: 

o Tennessee DOT (Jason Oldham) 

o North Carolina DOT (Meredith McDiarmid)

• Facilitated Discussion

10:45 AM Financial Planning and Funding TSMO

11:15 AM Performance Measurement: Group Discussion

11:45 AM Lunch Break

12:45 PM Breakout Groups based on Morning Topics

1:15 PM Report-backs from groups

1:45 PM Break

2:00 PM Implementation: Making it Happen 

• Presentations 

o Niagara International Transportation Technology Coalition 

(Athena Hutchins)

o Maricopa County DOT (Faisal Saleem)

• Group discussion: How are we going to advance / further implement TSMO

3:00 PM What’s Next? Priorities and Resource Needs

3:45 PM Conclusion and Wrap Up

4:00 PM Adjourn
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

29

Appendix B – Peer Exchange Participants

Participant 

Name

Title Organization

Melissa 

Ackert

Transportation System Management and 

Operation Program Manager

Florida Department of 

Transportation, District 4 

(FDOT)

Brent Cain Transportation Systems Management and 

Operations, Director

Arizona Department of 

Transportation (AZDOT)

Solomon 

Caviness

Special Projects Manager, 

Planning/Operations

North Jersey Transportation 

Planning Authority (NJTPA)

Nick Compin Chief, Office of Strategic Development; 

Statewide Connected Corridors Project 

Manager

Caltrans

Hugh 

Conroy

Director of Planning Whatcom Council of 

Governments

Monica 

Harwood

Workforce Development & Traffic 

Operations Engineer

Washington State Department 

of Transportation (WSDOT)

Tom Hein Public Affairs Manager Kansas Department of 

Transportation (KSDOT)

Athena 

Hutchins

Executive Director Niagara International

Transportation Technology 

Coalition (NITTEC)

Denise Inda Chief Traffic Operations Engineer Nevada Department of 

Transportation (NVDOT)

Tyler Laing Systems Program Manager Utah Department of 

Transportation (UDOT)

Subrat 

Mahapatra

Chief, Innovative Performance Planning 

Division

Maryland Department of 

Transportation (MDOT) State 

Highway Administration –

Planning

Meredith 

McDiarmid

State ITS and Signals Engineer North Carolina Department of 

Transportation (NCDOT)

Jason 

Oldham

State Traffic Engineer Tennessee Department of 

Transportation (TDOT)
Advancing Organizational Capabilities for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations – February 2018 Peer Exchange 

30

Kelli Raboy Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) 

Program Manager

District of Columbia 

Department of Transportation 

(DDOT)

Joey Sagal Director, Maryland Department of 

Transportation - State Highway 

Administration, Office of CHART & ITS 

Development

Maryland Department of 

Transportation (MDOT) State 

Highway Administration (SHA) 

- Operations

Faisal 

Saleem

ITS Branch Manager & MCDOT 

SMARTDrive Program Manager

Maricopa County Department 

of Transportation

Willy 

Sorenson

Traffic and Safety Engineer Iowa Department of 

Transportation (IADOT)

Patrick 

Zelinski

Associate Program Manager American Association of State 

Highway and Transportation 

Officials (AASHTO)

Daniel Grate SHRP2 / ITS Specialist Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA)

Joe Gregory Program Manager - Strategic Highway 

Research Program (SHRP2)

Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA)

Tracy Scriba Team Leader FHWA Office of Operations Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA)

Ralph Volpe Freight Technology/Operations Specialist Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA)

Beverly 

Bowen

Senior Technical Specialist ICF

Taylor 

Gestwick

Research Assistant ICF

Michael 

Grant

Vice President ICF

U.S. Department of Transportation

Federal Highway Administration

Office of Operations

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20590

Office of Operations Web Site

https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov

November 2018

FHWA-HOP-19-009