Collaborative Leadership: Success Stories in Transportation Mega Projects

Collaborative Lessons Learned

As can be seen from the project material above, there are many positive lessons learned that can be used in future transportation mega projects. At first glance, these examples seem to address typical project management issues that arise consistently across projects, but their magnitude increases with the additional complexities of mega projects:

• Support and involvement from leadership at the highest level
  • The Hyperfix project needed support to completely close the highway for construction which resulted in reduced construction time
• Extensive planning
  • Preparing and enforcing the use of a standard superstructure design in the Big I project took time to prepare but resulted in rapid completion and consistent implementation
• Flexibility in solution
  • Willingness to try a non-standard design-build approach in the I-15 project simplified implementation and brought the project in early, under budget, and with minimal traffic disruption
• Partnerships
  • The One DOT approach brought cohesion and a sense of identity to the participants in the Olympics project
  • Figuring out a way for local communities to participate in construction contracts benefited the Alameda, Olympics and I-15 projects
• Keep the customer informed
  • Creative use of technology in managing accident response during the Big I project and giving the public up-to-date information on traffic status for the Hyperfix and Olympics projects reduced public frustration and increased willingness to tolerate inevitable inconveniences

Clearly the above projects were well designed, managed, and implemented. Additional scrutiny will quickly bring your attention to the type of leadership that was used. In this context, Chrislip (2002) provides some additional guidance. According to Chrislip, there are four keys areas that must come together for success in collaboration.

The first is a constituency for change. The concept of constituency is of a broad-based stakeholder group that brings together many different perspectives. If this group is well formed, then it will have credibility and influence to have its recommendations followed. In the context of a transportation mega project, another aspect that must be considered is the complex public-private partnership that must be established and nurtured throughout the implementation of a mega project. Often public mistrust based on previous experiences must be overcome. The public can be seriously affected during the course of the project so their buy-in is critical. If the public's needs and concerns are recognized and addressed, their support will be greater. The openness and credibility of the process is very important. There have to be real reasons for engaging in a project in the first place. Bad timing, for example during a period of economic downturn, can create tremendous obstacles for gaining public support for the project.

The second key area is process expertise. This concept recognizes that broad-based stakeholder groups will have varying levels of process or management expertise. Bringing in outside facilitators who can help train the group and guide discussions from a neutral position can be beneficial. It is also a good idea to consider including junior people in the various project teams. Training the next generation of project leadership takes time and experience.

The third area is content expertise. In a collaborative methodology, instead of having content experts prepare and present completed recommendations, content experts are brought in to present information to the stakeholder group. This gives the stakeholders continued control over the evolution of the project. In addition, this approach can result in innovative ideas and solutions. People often design solutions based on their area of expertise and comfort. Many organizations, including those who would participate in mega projects, have developed standard processes for developing and implementing projects. These processes are often bureaucratic and slow in implementation. Opening up the processes to innovation can lead to some creative and effective solutions that can result in faster completion of mega projects.

The final area is strong facilitative leadership. Leadership within the stakeholder group is critical. There must be several key players who are able to keep the group focused on the task especially during difficult phases. Choosing the right people to participate from the public agency side is very important. In addition, transportation mega projects can span many jurisdictions. As a result, there are many leaders at different levels who can stymie or facilitate a mega project. Getting commitment and support of the various key leaders affected by a mega project is critical.

(Please see Appendix A for Chrislip's four-phase guide to implementing collaborative leadership for mega projects. Another very useful tool is the Maryland State Highway Administration's Field Guide to Partnering on MSHA Projects. It is available online at http://www.mdqi.org/documents/SHA%20FieldGuide%20Partnering.pdf (PDF, 1 mb). With the permission of the Maryland State Highway Administration, the concepts in this document could be borrowed by the FHWA to provide a step-by-step guide to monitoring mega projects.)

The above projects reflect many different successful uses of a collaborative leadership approach. In an attempt to focus on the key elements that would be most beneficial for a transportation mega project, this graduate study group conducted several interviews with various former members of the above mega projects via e-mail, telephone, and in person during November 2004.

When we asked, "what is the single most important key to successful collaboration on mega projects and why", the answers from the experts pointed to the following areas:

• Communication - Be prepared for public scrutiny. The projects are huge and will naturally attract attention. Prepare to be audited. Manage expectations about impact - physical and financial. Good scope, cost, and schedule estimates help to maintain credibility.
• Relationships/Collaboration - Good interpersonal skills are needed. Co-location of teams from various agencies can facilitate communication and problem solving. Working relationships developed from daily interaction can result in open and honest discussions. This is the basis for solving the problems that a mega project inevitably encounters. Humility and willingness to hear and recognize solutions from others is necessary.
• Recognition of complexity - Mega projects are inherently complicated and resource intensive. Reusing past lessons can help save time and effort. Extensive upfront planning is needed. Recognition that a mega project is not just a big construction project is needed. The complexity lies also in the funding area. Flexibility and willingness to look at creative solutions is important.
  • (P. Barnes, personal communication, November 22, 2004;
  • J. Basso, personal communication, November 15, 2004;
  • J. Broadhurst, personal communication, November 23, 2004;
  • W. Dooley, personal communication, November 22, 2004;
  • M. Huerta, personal communication, November 22, 2004;
  • J. Kolb, personal communication, November 22, 2004;
  • M. Morrow, personal communication, November 29, 2004;
  • D. Platz, personal communication, November 22, 2004;
  • J. Sinnette, personal communication, November 22, 2004;
  • D. Wood, personal communication, November 23, 2004)

Conclusion

By definition, mega projects create a great amount of national interest with their scope or their $1 billion (plus) price tag. The interest of national leaders, the media, and the taxpayers in mega projects is heightened in this age of fiscal responsibility. Those individuals selected to be project managers for mega transportation projects must pay a lot of attention to the public opinion. The public's trust in the FHWA and mega projects is a delicate matter and must be cared for openly and honestly.

The project manager for the FHWA's future mega projects must remember Chrislip's four keys areas that come together for success in collaborative leadership; constituency for change, process expertise, content expertise, and strong facilitative leadership. Combined with his four phases for implementing collaborative leadership, the mega project manager should be well on their way to completing the project on time, under budget, and with the public trust still in tact. The quotes from some of the personnel involved in recent successful mega projects clearly indicate that extensive planning, a broad range of partnerships, and open and honest communication are vital to meeting the needs of the public and their transportation needs.

Appendix A

Keys to Implementing Collaborative Leadership for Future Mega Projects

Chrislip, in his book The Collaborative Leadership Fieldbook: A Guide For Citizens And Civic Leaders (2002), presents an outline of practical steps that can be used to move from the theoretical to the practical implementation of the planning needed to implement a project based on a collaborative leadership approach. The outline is divided into four phases with the first three dealing with planning and only the last phase being actual implementation.

Phase 1 - Getting started

• Analyzing the context for collaboration
  • Understanding the political dynamics
  • Understanding how citizens think about public issues
• Deciding on a collaborative strategy
  • Determining the feasibility of collaboration
  • Defining the purpose, focus, and scope

Phase 2 - Setting up for success

• Identifying and convening stakeholders
  • Understanding the principle and practice of inclusion
  • Finding the credibility to convene
  • Identifying stakeholders
  • Inviting, recruiting, and convening stakeholders
• Designing a constructive process
  • Defining the decision-making method
  • Establishing ground rules
  • Designing a constructive process
• Defining information needs
  • Defining information and education needs
• Defining critical roles
  • Selecting process experts
  • Selecting content experts
  • Identifying strong, facilitative leaders
• Managing the process
  • Establishing a steering committee
  • Staffing the effort
  • Documenting the process
• Finding the resources
  • Developing the budget
  • Funding a collaborative process

Phase 3 - Working together

• Building capacity
  • Building relationships and skills
• Ways of engaging
  • Engaging through dialogue
  • Working with written information
• Informing the stakeholders
  • Understanding the content
  • Understanding the context
    • Analyzing strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats
    • Developing scenarios
• Deciding what needs to be done
  • Collaborative problem solving
  • Visioning
  • Strategic planning

Phase 4 - Moving to action

• Reaching out
  • Building a broader constituency
  • Engaging with decision makers and implementing organizations
• Managing action
  • Developing action plans
  • Organizing and managing implementation

References

• "2004 Annual Report". Retrieved October 31, 2004, from http://www.in.gov/dot/div/communications/2004annualreport/Mobility.pdf.
• Agarwal, Ajay, Giuliano, Genevieve, & Redfearn, Cjrostoam. (2004, June). The Alameda Corridor, A White Paper. Prepared for the presentation at the Davidson Conference Center, University of Southern California: Alameda Corridor: A blueprint for the future? Retrieved November 8, 2004, from http://www.metrans.org/pdfs/AlamedaCorridorWhitePaper.pdf.
• Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority (ACTA). (2004). Fact Sheet. Retrieved November 8, 2004, from http://www.acta.org/projects_completed_alameda_factsheet.htm.
• Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority (ACTA). (2004). Photo Gallery. Retrieved December 2, 2004, from http://www.acta.org/newsroom_photo.htm.
• American Society of Engineers (2004, June). Retrieved November 1, 2004, from http://sections.asce.org/indiana/Jun_04_ICE.pdf
• ASBI. (2000). "Big I" Project, Albuquerque, New Mexico. American Segmental Bridge Institute. Retrieved December 7, 2004, from http://www.asbi-assoc.org/news/project/index.cfm?aid=150
• ASBI. (2002). I-25/I-40 Interchange - The Big I Project, Albuquerque, New Mexico. American Segmental Bridge Institute. Retrieved November 17, 2004, from http://www.asbi-assoc.org/news/project/index.cfm?aid=164
• Avery, C. (1999). All power to you: Collaborative leadership works. The Journal for Quality and Participation, March/April 1999. 22(2), 36-40. Retrieved November 10, 2004, from ABI: Inform database.
• Baxter, John R. Utah's I-15 Design-Build Project: Meeting the Challenge through Innovation. Region 4 Quality Management Workshop. Retrieved September 23, 2004, from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/utdiv/projects/i15inovt.htm
• Baxter, John & Daves, James. Utah's I-15 Design Build Project: Evaluation and Selection Process. Retrieved September 23, 2004, from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/utdiv/projects/i15selxn.htm
• Bergeron, Kathleen A. (2004). Public Roads Magazine - The Future Is Now. May/June 2004. 67(6). Retrieved November 22, 2004, from http://www.tfhrc.gov/pubrds/04may/06.htm
• Camp, Jimmy D. (2001). Concrete Segmental Bridges for the Albuquerque 'Big I' New Mexico Department of Transportation. Retrieved November 22, 2004, from http://www.nmshtd.state.nm.us/general/depts/commrelat/Tech/dec.pdf
• Capka, R. (2004). A well-conceived plan will pull it all together. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. July/August 2004. 68(1). Retrieved November 16, 2004, from http://www.tfhrc.gov/pubrds/04jul/10.htm
• Capka, R. (2004). Mega projects - They Are a Different Breed. Public Roads U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. July/August 2004. 68(1). Retrieved November 10, 2004, from http://www.tfhrc.gov/.
• Capka, R. (2004, April 27). Remarks to the Project Management - National Study Results Conference. Retrieved November 3, 2004, from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pressroom/re040427.htm
• Chrislip, D. (2002). The Collaborative Leadership Fieldbook: a guide for citizens and civic leaders. Jossey-Bass. San Francisco, CA.
• Dentico, J. (1999). Games leaders play: using process simulations to develop collaborative leadership practices for a knowledge-based society. Career Development International Bradford: 1999. 4(3), 175. Retrieved October 4, 2004, from ABI: Inform database.
• FHWA. (2001). Supporting Transportation System Improvements. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. Retrieved November 17, 2004, from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/reports/2001report/role1.htm
• FHWA. (2002, October). VII. Lessons Learned. Retrieved November 8, 2004, from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/programadmin/mega/lessons.cfm
• FHWA. (2002, October 13). FHWA Cites Top Web Sites That Provide Vital Safety, Congestion Information to Travelers. Retrieved November 5, 2004, from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pressroom/fhwa0244.htm
• FHWA. (2003, December 1). About FHWA - Who we are and What we do. Retrieved December 1, 2004, from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/whoweare/whoweare.htm
• FHWA. (2004). FHWA Major (Mega) Projects: Lessons Learned. Retrieved November 2, 2004, from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/programadmin/mega/lessons.cfm
• FHWA. (2004, November 1) FHWA Mega Project - Active and Future Major Projects. Retrieved December 1, 2004, from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/programadmin/mega/majormap.htm
• Harris, N. (1996, March 5). Minutes from the 2002 Winter Olympics Transportation Meeting held in Salt Lake City, Utah on March 5, 1996. Retrieved November 24, 2004, from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/utdiv/programs/olympnot.htm
• Hyperfix 65/70 Official Web Site. Retrieved October 29, 2004, from http://www.in.gov/dot/div/specialprojects/hyperfix/
• Hyperfix 65/70 Facts at-a-Glance. Retrieved on October 29, 2004, from http://www.in.gov/dot/div/specialprojects/hyperfix/about/about.htm
• Hyperfix Fact Sheet. Retrieved October 29, 2004, from http://www.in.gov/dot/div/specialprojects/hyperfix/news/news.htm
• Hyperfix PowerPoint Presentation. Retrieved November 3, 2004, from http://www.otecohio.org/presentations/OTECpresentations/Se13/Mroczka_Hyperfix.pdf (.pdf, 1 mb)
• I-15 Statistics. (2003, July 13). Deseret Morning News. Retrieved November 25, 2004, from http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,510039609,00.html.
• Illia, T. (2002, June 6). Highways: New Mexico's Open "I" Surgery Features Innovation, Incentives. The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Retrieved December 4, 2004, from http://enr.construction.com/features/transportation/archives/020606.asp
• Interstate 15 Design-Build Briefing. Retrieved September 23, 2004, from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/utdiv/projects/i15brief.htm
• Leyendecker, Kathie (2001, May). Making Highway Projects Successful with Community Involvement. NMSHTD. Retrieved December 4, 2004, from http://www.nmshtd.state.nm.us/general/depts/commrelat/Tech/TL%20MAY%2001.pdf
• Knopp, M. (2002). Using Collaboration and Technology in Transportation to Save Lives, Time and Money. November/December 2002. Retrieved November 10, 2004, from http://www.govwest.com/trantec_tec.asp
• Knopp, M. (2002, November/December). Using Collaboration and Technology in Transportation to Save Lives, Time and Money. Government West. November/December 2002. Retrieved November 4, 2004, from http://www.govwest.com/trantec_tec.asp
• Office of the Mayor (2003, May 22). Mayor's Action Center to offer extended hours during state Hyperfix Project. Retrieved October 18, 2004, from http://www.in.gov/dot/div/specialprojects/hyperfix/
• Maryland State Highway Administration. (2004, November). Field Guide to Partnering on MSHA Projects. Maryland Quality Initiative Partnering Subcommittee. Retrieved October 1, 2004, from (.pdf, 1 mb)http://www.mdqi.org/documents/SHA%20FieldGuide%20Partnering.pdf
• Metro New Mexico Development Alliance. (2004, November). Road. Retrieved November 24, 2004, from http://www.nmsite search.com/ee/ee_4_1_1.htm
• Mroczka, Straumins & Pinkerlman, Jim. (2004, March/April). Hyperfix 65/70. Public Roads. Retrieved October 27, 2004, from http://www.tfhrc.gov/pubrds/04mar/01.htm
• Njord, J. (2002, January/February). An Olympic Event: Handling Transportation during the Olympics. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. 65(4) Retrieved November 5, 2004, from http://www.tfhrc.gov/pubrds/janfeb02/olympics.htm
• Nelson, Roy. Utah's I-15 Design Build Project: Preconstruction Phase. Retrieved September 23, 2004, from http://www.fhwa.dot/utdiv/projects/i15rept.htm
• Peters, M. (2004, June 9). Remarks as prepared for delivery National Fraud Awareness Conference on Surface transportation and construction fraud. Retrieved November 3, 2004, from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pressroom/re040609.htm
• Peters, M. (2004, September 24). Excerpts from remarks as prepared for delivery "Partnerships for transportation and real estate: A union station anniversary workshop". Retrieved November 6, 2004, from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pressroom/re030924.htm
• Rahn, Pete (2001, November 1). Reporting on the Transportation Equity Act for the Twenty First Century (TEA-21) for the State of New Mexico. Retrieved December 4, 2004, from http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/Trans/hpw107-54.000/hpw107-54_0.HTM
• Rebuild California (2000, May). Saving Time, Saving Money: The Economics of Unclogging America's Worst Bottlenecks. Retrieved December 4, 2004, from http://www.rebuildca.org/pdfs/timemoney.pdf (.pdf, 0.5 mb)
• Research and Technology Transporter. (2003, May). Retrieved November 1, 2004, from http://www.tfhrc.gov/trnsptr/may03/
• Riek, Jim. (2002, July 11). Komu News reporter. The Road to Recovery. (Komu News). Retrieved November 23, 2004, from http://128.206.143.120:8080/ramgen/komu/roadtorecovery110702.rm
• Safety an added benefit of I-15 reconstruction. (2003, July 13). Deseret Morning News. Retrieved November 25, 2004, from http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,510037099,00.html
• Sinnette, J. (2004, July/August). Accounting for Mega project Dollars. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. July/August 2004. 68(1). Retrieved November 11, 2004, from http://www.tfhrc.gov/pubrds/04jul/07.htm
• Sorel, T. (2004). Great Expectations. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. July/August 2004. 68(1). Retrieved November 16, 2004, from http://www.tfhrc.gov/pubrds/04jul/02.htm
• The Federal Highway Administration 2002 Winter Olympics Experience. A Lessons Learned Report developed by the Utah Division Office. Retrieved November 12, 2004, from Mike L. Morrow, Federal Highway Administration, Utah Division.
• United States Department of Transportation (DOT). (1999, October 22). Office of Inspector General Audit Report, Review of the Alameda Corridor Project. Federal Highway Administration, Federal Railroad Administration. Report Number TR-2000-004. Retrieved November 4, 2004, from http://www.oig.dot.gov/StreamFile?file=/data/pdfdocs/tr2000004.pdf.
• van Eyck, Zack. (2003, July 13). Road Warrior Redux: Was I-15 rebuild worth the pain? Deseret Morning News. Retrieved November 25, 2004, from http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,510037097,00.html
• Webb, Andrew (2004, April 12). Growth loses a bit of steam. Business Outlook; p.1 Albuquerque Journal (New Mexico). Retrieved on December 4, 2004, from http://www.haverstickconsulting.com/pages/-1391-/
• Yakowenko, G. (2004). Mega project Procurement: Breaking from Tradition. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. July/August 2004. 68(1) Retrieved November 16, 2004, from http://www.tfhrc.gov/pubrds/04jul/08.htm
• Yeakey, G. (2002). Situational Leadership. Military Review. Jan/Feb2002. 82(1), 72-83, Retrieved November 17, 2004, from Military and Government database.
• Zdravesky, Charlie (2002, January 17). Kunm News reporter. Cracks in Surface Concrete Cost New Mexican Taxpayers More in Big I Project. (Kunm News.) Retrieved November 23, 2004, from http://kunm.unm.edu/cgi-local/stream/streamit.pl?str=011702-bigi4.rm