Work Group Recommendation and Decision Package/media/depts/transportation/metro/employees/metro-department/d...21. Ensure all employees have equitable access to inclusive, culturally

Work Group

Recommendation and Decision

Package

Published March 2, 2018

d2D Decision Log* Recommendation# and Title

Work Group Pg. #

Delegate Decision Outcome Amendments

Discussed at retreat: Seek consensus – If no consensus, GM will make decision (Recommendations #2, 7, 8, 33, 37)

2. Improve Capital Planning

Capital Investment Rolling Stock

3 Rob Gannon

Leadership agrees with the need for a clear capital planning function These recommendations will be considered together and require follow up with SMEs, work groups, and leadership team Goal is to have decisions by mid-March

Follow-up work requires attention to:

how to integrate service delivery, capital planning, and operations to speed up our delivery.

where these functions best sit in the organization.

clarifying roles and responsibilities around this work.

understanding the relationships between these planning functions by mapping out long and mid-range planning processes.

7. Consolidate Capital Delivery Functions

Capital Investment Infrastructure

14

8. Create a Capital Planning Section


16

33. Consolidate Services Planning for all modes, programs, and time frames (short, medium, long) into the Mobility Division

Mobility Planning and Services

69

37. Midrange Transit Implementation Plan


76

Discussed at retreat: Seek consensus – If no consensus, GM delegated decision (Recommendations #1, 4, 9, 21, 23, 25, 26, 36, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, 48, 49, 50, 51)

1. Implement a more robust asset management system, to improve data analysis, planning, predictability, and maximize value from Metro’s available resources

Capital Investment (Rolling Stock & Infrastructure)

1 Diane Carlson and John Resha

Approved, with amendments

Within Metro, this work could sit in Safety & Security or Capital Planning.

FTA and Washington State require that infrastructure, rolling stock, and IT be tracked in a centralized system. This recommendation requires more work to determine how Metro rolling stock and IT are incorporated.

We can make the decision on where this function resides at a later time.

4. Manage Fleet Complexity


7 Terry White


Collaborate with work group and leadership for more clarity about the recommendation and what will be required to implement it.

Confirm who will own the service level agreement (SLA) as identified in the recommendation? Will it reside in Vehicle Maintenance? Or in asset management?

This recommendation should apply to Metro’s bus fleet only.

This recommendation requires a process change, not a structural change in organization.

9. Utilization of Formalized Resource Planning Methodology


19 Diane Carlson & Tina Rogers

Approved in concept

Follow-up will require understanding and confirmation of clear job descriptions and duties in capital program delivery.

21. Ensure all employees have equitable access to inclusive, culturally responsive, personalized ongoing development.

Workforce Development and Training

46 Kathy Crego

Approved in concept

Follow-up will include a deeper understanding of the operational and service-related needs of the organization for ongoing development.

d2D Work Group Recommendation and Decision Package - ii

Recommendation# and Title

Work Group Pg. #


23. Centralized Workforce Development (WFD) Team


62 Kathy Crego


WFD training oversight includes: ensure training standards, coordinate delivery, and monitor outcomes to ensure appropriate consistency.

Make sure leaders don’t lose their voice/ability to make decisions about training and changes that the organization needs to make.

Training staff may remain embedded in the various work groups.

Should expand on technical training to include professional development and soft skills training.

Add additional details on how to implement the recommendation.

25. Create a Partnership Steering Committee to establish policies and objectives for guidance throughout the department for prioritizing and approaching partnerships that will support achieving Metro’s strategic goals.

Partnership 54 Diane Carlson & Michelle Allison

Approved, with amendments Move forward with Steering Committee portion of the recommendation Recommendations considered together

Propose additional 1 FTE recognizing that there is more work that needs to be done to support the FTE throughout Metro.

Leadership sets partnership strategy, FTE coordinates it.

Report to the Chief of Staff.

26. Create a Partnership Hub & Resource office within the Department with its primary responsibility being to support staff by acting as a central point for the collection, management and communication of key information related to Metro partnerships.

Partnership 56

36. Create a dedicated Partnership /Relationship Management Group to coordinate Metro efforts to partner with citizens, groups, other agencies, and businesses in King County.


74

d2D Work Group Recommendation and Decision Package - iii


Work Group Pg. #


29. Enhance Marketing Capability


61 Rob Gannon (Structure); Chris O’Claire

Hold on recommendation. This resource request can be included for consideration in the 2019-2020 budget process

30. Integrated Innovation Team


62 Rob Gannon

Rob to make the final decision about how to foster innovation without centralizing it Rob and Chris to discuss next steps with support from the work group Goal is to have a plan by mid-March

Recommendation will be narrowed to be more focused on market- and customer research-driven product development.

It is important not to quell innovation by centralizing it.

31. Customer Experience/Market Research Program/Group


64 See Recommendation #51 above. Decision to be included as part of recommendation #51.

32. Provide Centralized Contract Support Services


67 John Resha with support from work group

Refine and submit proposal to Rob Gannon

Proposal should address:

How to structure the administration support of contracts

Mobility division needs

Marine division needs

Other needs as necessary

Where the centralized contract support function will sit in the organization

Inter-local agreements (ILAs) 34. Employer

Relationships Mobility Planning and Services

71 Chris O’Claire

Support employer products sales being “together”

Decisions about data that have organization-wide implications will be discussed at a later time.

48. Government Relations (GR) - 5-Part Recommendation

Strategic Communications & Ext. Dept. Functions

89 Michelle Allison, Diane Carlson, Chris O’Claire with support from work groups

Approved, with amendments External Relationship Management: Partnerships, Government Relations, and Community Relations will sit in the GM’s office, under the leadership of the Chief of Staff.

Create a community relations, government relations, and partnership function called “External Relations” that reports to the Chief of Staff.

Have a lead/director of external relations.

The structure to align this work by geography vs programmatically/project will be determined by Diane, Michelle, and Chris with the work group.

49. Community Relations and Public Engagement: Building short and long-term trust and shared ownership of our regional mobility network with the public


93

d2D Work Group Recommendation and Decision Package - iv


Work Group Pg. #


50. Grants Management


98 John Resha Approved, with amendments

Grants management functions can be housed within the Financial & Administrative part of the organization.

Include Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) function and other work.

Should include a grants proposal writing team.

51. Strategic Communications – Position Metro to effectively communicate its efforts as the region’s mobility provider


101

Rob Gannon for structural decision

More discussion needed between Rob, Michelle, and Chris

Move forward with the communications portion of the recommendation.

Hold off on making the decision re: marketing until further discussion.

Decisions made: GM decided unilaterally (Recommendations #28, 38, 24, 42, 43, 44, 45)

28. Keep Scheduling in Mobility Division


60 Rob Gannon

Scheduling to remain in Mobility Division

Linkages to capital functions will be developed and improved.

38. One Maintenance Division

Mobility – Ops, VM, P&F, Rail

78 Rob Gannon

Establish a VM Division, with adjustments Establish Facilities Maintenance Division with adjustments

24. Establish a Career Center


52 Kathy Crego

For future consideration, as amended

Immediate priority is the development and successful implementation of an Employee Wellness Center.

42. Create a “Business Enterprise Systems” Section


82 Rob Gannon

For future consideration

43. Establish a Bus Operations Division with 3 Sections


84 Rob Gannon


44. Create a “Systems Impacts” work unit within the Operations Division


85 Rob Gannon


45. Establish a 3rd Section in the Bus Operations Division for Management of Contracted Service


86 Rob Gannon

Contract Service management will remain outside the Operations Division

Decisions made: Move forward to explore implementation (Recommendations #3, 6, 10, 13, 15, 16, 17, 20, 22)

3. Improve rolling stock procurement efficiency


5 Diane Carlson

Approved

6. Fully Implement Portfolio Management


11 Diane Carlson

Approved

d2D Work Group Recommendation and Decision Package - v


Work Group Pg. #


10. Formalize Process to Effectively Integrate METRO’s Strategic Priorities including ESJ and Sustainability, as well as end user and customer needs into Capital Project Planning and Delivery


21 Diane Carlson

Approved

13. Become a smarter client by improving project life cycle management practices at Metro IT/ SDO

Capital Investment Technology

28 Rob Gannon and John Resha

Approved

15. Hiring and Recruitment

HR Services 34 Kathy Crego

Approved

16. HR Information Access and Delivery

HR Services 37 Kathy Crego

Approved, as amended

Consider budget needs and technical issues in implementation

17. Labor Relations HR Services 39 Kathy Crego

20. Establish a business plan and measurable strategic goals that prioritizes employee growth and development while serving and meeting the mobility desires and needs of the community.


44 Kathy Crego and Terry White


Business planning effort should be done in consideration of decision to establish a centralized workforce development team.

22. Develop a strategic and standardized plan to establish and maintain collaborative relationships with internal and external partners that build and support a diverse workforce at all levels.


48 Kathy Crego


Follow-up to consider resource needs in implementation.

Decisions made: Move forward to explore; requires discussion (Recommendations #18, 19, 35)

18. Succession Planning for Metro’s Workforce

HR Services 41 Kathy Crego, with additional input from division leaders

Approved in concept, with amendment

Further develop recommendation for implementation.

19. Ensure equitable access to effective, reliable & user-friendly WFD technology systems that remain nimble.


42 Kathy Crego

Approved

35. Expand CITRS Span of Service


73 Chris O’Claire


Move forward as budget proposal, subject to availability of funds.

d2D Work Group Recommendation and Decision Package - vi


Work Group Pg. #


Consider at a later date (Recommendations #12, 14)

12. Establish a structure between KCM and KCIT based on KCM ownership of Intelligent Transportation Systems




14. Recommendation 3a and 3b: Bringing Ourselves Current and Preparing for Future Technology




No action required (Recommendations #39, 40, 41, 46, 27, 47, 5, 11)

39. Endorsement of Workforce Development Recommendations


79 See recommendations #19-23 above.

40. Endorsement of Capital Rolling Stock Recommendations for Fleet Procurement Group in Capital Division


80 See recommendations # 8, 33, 37, 3, 7 above.

41. Endorsement of Capital Infrastructure Recommendations for P&F Capital Planning group in “Capital Planning” part of Capital Division


81 See recommendations # 8, 33, 37, 3, 7 above.

46. Build and integrate a department specific IT support organization


87 See recommendations 12, 13, 14 above.

27. Partnership Types (Infographic)

Partnership 59 No action needed

47. Metro Mobility Operations Proposal (Org Chart)


88 No action needed

5. Cover Sheet (Road Map) for Infrastructure Recommendations


9 No action needed

11. [Duplicate recommendation to #1] Implement a more robust asset management system, to improve data analysis, planning, predictability, and maximize value from Metro’s available resources.


23 See recommendation #1 above.

d2D Work Group Recommendation and Decision Package - vii

Background on Decision-Making for BIG PICTURE Recommendations1

From Work Group “Big Picture” Recommendations to Decision Outcomes – key activities Feb. 14 – Work Group “Big Picture” recommendations delivered to design team

Feb. 16 – d2D Design Team packaged recommendations for consideration by the General Manager (GM)

Feb. 20 – GM delivered categorized decisions according to decision types (listed below) for d2D Design Team

Feb. 22 – Extended Management Team (EMG) previewed recommendations and how they would be decided

with the leadership team

Feb. 23 – Leadership team participated in an all-day session to make decisions on 12 key items identified by

the GM for consideration

Week of Feb. 26 – Continue conversation among identified delegates to further decision making on items left

undecided at all-day session

Feb. 28 – GM shared decision outcomes with EMG; d2D Design Team shared decision outcomes with Work

Group leads and facilitators

Mar. 2 – Agency-wide announcement and sharing of decision outcomes and full suite of recommendations

How the GM categorized recommendations during review During review of the recommendations, the GM used a framework based on his own decision making model and

organizational development best practices to help determine whether a recommendation needed to be

collaborated on because it would require high levels of decision support within the organization to be successfully

owned and implemented.

GM Collaboration more necessary in decision-making when recommendation:

GM Collaboration less necessary in decision-making when recommendation:

Carries potential high risk Is relatively low risk

Requires a big shift in resources Requires little/no shift in resources

Carries potential political or reputational consequences

Is largely off the “political” radar

Alters our established strategies/ priorities Is tactical in nature & supportive of existing strategies/ priorities

Is critical to successful achievement of our strategies/ priorities

Is supportive of, but not critical to, achievement of our strategies/ priorities

Will be difficult to implement:

organizational structure

change is not easily reversible

work design/classifications

labor impacts

changes necessary across Metro

heavy impact on our people

take a long time to implement

we lack the know-how to implement

Is relatively easy to implement

*Note: Leadership support for all decisions is necessary. Enthusiastic support from every leader is necessary for decisions requiring elevation to GM/high level of collaboration. Lukewarm support from some leaders may suffice for decisions on the other end of the spectrum.

1 As Big Picture rec’s become 2019-2020 budget proposals, the decision-making process may look different.

d2D Work Group Recommendation and Decision Package - viii

Based on his assessment of each recommendation using those spectrums, the GM categorized each

recommendation into the following decision types:

GM decides unilaterally

Seek consensus among leadership, if no consensus:

o Goes back to GM for final decision

o Delegated to an individual or small group of individuals

Move forward to explore implementation

o Move forward with discussion and input from others

o Move forward with delegate

Consider at a later date

No action needed (e.g. endorsements of one work group’s recommendation from another)

Those decisions categorized as seeking consensus were prioritized for discussion at the Feb. 23 session with the

leadership team. Recommendations are organized in the “d2D Decision Log” by these decision types with the

recommendations discussed at the all-day session at the top.

d2D Work Group Recommendation and Decision Package - ix

Contents Capital Investment Rolling Stock:

Recommendation #1: Implement a more robust asset management system, to improve data

analysis, planning, predictability, and maximize value from Metro’s available resources. .................. 1

Recommendation #2: Improve Capital Planning ................................................................................... 3

Recommendation #3: Improve rolling stock procurement efficiency .................................................. 5

Recommendation #4: Manage Fleet Complexity .................................................................................. 7

Capital Investment Infrastructure:

Recommendation #5: Cover Sheet (Road Map) for Infrastructure Recommendations........................ 9

Recommendation #6: Fully Implement Portfolio Management .........................................................11

Recommendation #7: Consolidate Capital Delivery Functions ...........................................................14

Recommendation #8: Create a Capital Planning Section ....................................................................16

Recommendation #9: Utilization Of Formalized Resource Planning Methodology ............................19

Recommendation #10: Formalize Process to Effectively Integrate METRO’s Strategic Priorities

including ESJ and Sustainability, as well as end user and customer needs into Capital Project

Planning and Delivery ……………………………………………………………………………....………………………………….21

Recommendation #11: Implement a more robust asset management system, to improve data

analysis, planning, predictability, and maximize value from Metro’s available resources. ................23

Capital Investment Technology:

Recommendation #12: Establish a structure between KCM and KCIT based on KCM ownership of

Intelligent Transportation Systems .....................................................................................................25

Recommendation #13: Become a smarter client by improving project life cycle management

practices at Metro IT/ SDO…………………………………………………...……………………………………………………….28

Recommendation #14: Bringing Ourselves Current and Preparing for Future Technology ..............31

HR Services:

Recommendation #15: Improve Hiring and Recruitment Process ......................................................34

Recommendation #16: HR Information Access and Delivery .............................................................37

Recommendation #17: Labor Relations ..............................................................................................39

Recommendation #18: Succession Planning for Metro’s Workforce .................................................41

Workforce Development and Training:

Recommendation #19: Ensure equitable access to effective, reliable & user-friendly WFD

technology systems that remain nimble. ............................................................................................42

d2D Work Group Recommendation and Decision Package - x

Recommendation #20: ....... Establish a business plan and measurable strategic goals that prioritizes

employee growth and development while serving and meeting the mobility desires and needs of

the community……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………….44

Recommendation #21: Ensure all employees have equitable access to inclusive, culturally

responsive, personalized ongoing development. ...............................................................................46

Recommendation #22: Develop a strategic and standardized plan to establish and maintain

collaborative relationships with internal and external partners that build and support a diverse

workforce at all levels……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…….48

Recommendation #23:….Establish an accountable, centralized workforce development team and

budget that is adequately resourced, staffed by diverse and highly skilled employees, and

integrated within each section/division. .............................................................................................50

Recommendation #24: Establish a Career Center ...............................................................................52

Partnership:

Recommendation #25: Create a Partnership Steering Committee to establish policies and

objectives for guidance throughout the department for prioritizing and approaching partnerships

that will support achieving Metro’s strategic goals. ...........................................................................54

Recommendation #26: . Create a Partnership Hub & Resource office within the Department with its

primary responsibility being to support staff by acting as a central point for the collection,

management and communication of key information related to Metro partnerships. .....................56

Recommendation #27: Partnerships Types Infographic .....................................................................59

Recommendation #28: Keep Scheduling in Mobility Division .............................................................60

Mobility Planning and Services:

Recommendation #29: Enhance Marketing Capability .......................................................................61

Recommendation #30: Integrated Innovation Team ..........................................................................62

Recommendation #31: Customer Experience/Market Research Program/Group ............................64

Recommendation #32: Provide Centralized Contract Support Services ............................................67

Recommendation #33: Consolidate Services Planning for all modes, programs, and time frames

(short, medium, long) into the Mobility Division ................................................................................69

Recommendation #34: Employer Relationships .................................................................................71

Recommendation #35: Expand CITRS Span of Service ........................................................................73

Recommendation #36: Create a dedicated Partnership /Relationship Management Group to

coordinate Metro efforts to partner with citizens, groups, other agencies, and businesses in King

County…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………74

Recommendation #37: Midrange Transit Implementation Plan ........................................................76

d2D Work Group Recommendation and Decision Package - xi

Mobility - Ops, VM, P&F, Rail:

Recommendation #38: One Maintenance Division.............................................................................78

Recommendation #39: Endorsement of Workforce Development Recommendations .....................79

Recommendation #40: Endorsement of Capital Rolling Stock Recommendations for Fleet

Procurement Group in Capital Division ..............................................................................................80

Recommendation #41: Endorsement of Capital Infrastructure Recommendations for P&F Capital

Planning group in “Capital Planning” part of Capital Division .............................................................81

Recommendation #42: Create a “Business Enterprise Systems” Section ..........................................82

Recommendation #43: Establish a Bus Operations Division with 3 Sections .....................................84

Recommendation #44: Create a “Systems Impacts” work unit within the Operations Division ........85

Recommendation #45: Establish a 3rd Section in the Bus Operations Division for Management of

Contracted Service…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………86

Recommendation #46: Build and integrate a department specific IT support organization ..............87

Recommendation #47: Metro Mobility Operations Proposal (Organizational Chart) ........................88

Strategic Communications & External Department Functions:

Recommendation #48: Government Relations (GR) - 5-Part Recommendation ................................89

Recommendation #49: Community Relations and Public Engagement: Building short and long-term

trust and shared ownership of our regional mobility network with the public ..................................93

Recommendation #50: Grants Management ......................................................................................98

Recommendation #51: Strategic Communications – Position Metro to effectively communicate its

efforts as the region’s mobility provider ...........................................................................................101

d2D Work Group Recommendation #1

Work Group Name: Capital Investment (Rolling Stock & Infrastructure) Work Group Leads: Pete

Melin and Tina Rogers

Recommendation: Implement a more robust asset management system, to improve data analysis,

planning, predictability, and maximize value from Metro’s available resources.

1. Background. What is the problem we are trying to solve (e.g., What is the issue? What is happening?)? Or, what

is the business opportunity?

Metro has several existing asset management tools in place, primarily for inventory control and asset

management. These tools are deeply entrenched in the day-to-day operation of Metro, but are not

interoperable for an overall asset management program.

Multiple sections within Metro function as asset management groups for different types of assets, with

various levels of maturity of their lifecycle planning and asset management policies. This disparity in Metro’s

overall asset management capabilities leads to decreased reliability, increased cost, and inaccurate asset

replacement cost projections.

2. Why should the Agency care about this? What is the impact?

Although Metro has several existing Asset Management tools the accuracy of the data and the

different data streams all residing independently of each other have resulted in Metro making

fragmented decisions in isolation of the state of its current assets.

Additionally with different tracking systems and minimal opportunities for process improvement,

Metro as a whole, has not consistently identified baselines for ideal asset management lifecycles,

which has led to costly corrective maintenance and reactive business practices to meet fleet and

service demands.

Although, Metro is on track to meet Federal Transit Authority’s Transit Asset Management Rule (per

49 CFR Parts 625 and 630) it still needs to take it to the next level i.e., a more robust independent,

auditable Transit Asset Management Program which captures all of Metro’s assets including

Technology with one clear goal “maximize its return on the Investments”.

The tangible results of joined, risk-based, whole life cycle asset management will be:

o Alignment of processes, resources and functional contributions instead of competing

divisional silos and short term priorities

o Creation of a transparent audit trail

o Better data and information understanding and use which provide the basis for informed

and consistent decisions

o Improved planning and allocation of capital funds

o Consistent, prioritized and auditable risk management

Alignment and coordination of existing initiatives including competency

Greater engagement of Metro employees, including leadership

d2D Work Group Recommendation and Decision Package - 2

3. Recommendation. What is your solution to the problem? Or, what is your big picture idea to take advantage of

the business opportunity? [If there are multiple solutions, please provide high level pros and cons for each

solution or recommendation].

Create a centralized Asset Management Section responsible for overseeing the asset management functions

of Metro’s organizations – fleet, facilities (fixed assets), technology. This group works in partnership with the

other sections to ensure data maturity, compliance with FTA rules and established process and policy, and

support of assessments and reporting.

Adopt and implement a more robust asset management plan to inform data driven decisions across the

organization to maintain rolling stock and all assets in a state of good repair according to adopted levels of

service consistent with METRO’s vision and financial resources. This plan will be inclusive with defined and

documented processes, and data integration and reporting consolidation across Metro’s systems including

but not limited to asset condition assessments, useful life benchmarks and performance measures.

Pros: leads to more predictive maintenance cycles, improved asset’s useful life, reduced inventory costs,

reduced asset base, improved reliability and safety and maximizing return on investment.

Cons: Business as usual wherein these systems are used only for data gathering and maintenance activities

and replacements are reactive rather than planned.

An additional objective to consider is achieving the ISO 55001 certification for Asset Management Systems.

The FTA mandate is based on the ISO 55001 standard but does not call upon Metro to be certified. Other

Transit Agencies who have done ISO certification have found it much easier to implement the FTA mandate

since with ISO certification, the culture of “Plan, Do, Check, Act” is ingrained in the organization.

Pros: well documented procedures, accountability.

4. What are the anticipated barriers or challenges to implementing this recommendation?

Readily available resources to provide continuity and oversight of the plans

Sustainable funding to support an asset management team

Resources to maintain and replace assets when planned continue to be a constraint, impeding our

ability to implement the asset management programmed work.

5. Outline high level requirements to implement the solution or idea, if known:

Identify a Data Integration Tool such as TREX and consolidated reporting strategy

Create Asset Management “Team” to:

o Vet and document procedures

o Work with all Divisions and Sections to set level of service and performance targets

o Routinely conduct internal audits, identify opportunities, and modify plans to adjust to

Metro’s needs

o Be accountable for managing and ensuring follow through

Identify existing or new staff resources to adequately staff the team

Identify optimal location in METRO organization structure, perhaps consider Safety & Security or

Capital Planning



Work Group Name: Capital Investment Rolling Stock Work Group Lead: Pete Melin

Recommendation: Improve Capital Planning



Capital planning for rolling stock is part of a larger process that turns visionary ideas about the future of Metro service into a tangible, operational reality. Rolling stock includes more than 4,500 current assets – such as buses, vanpool, water taxis, paratransit, and non-revenue vehicles.

The purpose of this proposal is to suggest alternative ways of planning that would be more likely to result in synchronized delivery of rolling stock along with other transit system elements necessary to support service – sufficiently trained staff to safely operate and maintain vehicles, appropriate parts and tools, space for training and storage, the infrastructure to maintain and support service, and the people and tools for maintaining the infrastructure. Current planning and monitoring efforts do not result in synchronized delivery, and there is greater risk in the future of being out of synch due to system growth and new technologies.


The lack of rigorous systemic planning currently affects our ability to safely provide effective and efficient

service, maintenance to a state of good repair, and engagement of our employees. The misalignment of

capital delivery timelines impacts Metro’s ability to deliver service, as rolling stock requires trained staff,

infrastructure and resources to be in place to support service expansion.

Our current planning efforts do not give confidence that Metro will have all other system components in place for safe and effective service into the future:

Operators – current processes have not resulted in a sufficient number of trained operators upon service change

Facilities and vehicle maintenance technicians – already pressed for training, we will need to have enough people with training in the new technology as service increases. How do we get there? Should training be a stand-alone function?

Infrastructure – will charging infrastructure be in place, sufficient for service to be operated with electric buses? We must have enough base capacity in time to support a fleet that meets the planned level of service, and phase in electric bus capability across our base network in a predictable, efficient manner.

Asset management plans must be reviewed to understand if they are adequate, not yet in place, or if in place robust and automated enough to maintain a state of good repair for fixed and rolling assets. What is the plan to ensure we have tools and parts available in time to fix and maintain our assets, and to know when to retire and replace assets?

The problem will only intensify as service grows and technology changes. For example, Metro’s fleet plan

(still in development to include more buses to accommodate expansion) anticipates purchasing the 1236 new

and replacement buses by Fall of 2030, which represents the next 12 years.





Manage a cohesive strategic planning process with a consolidated vision in mind, fully integrated and coordinated across Metro functional areas –Service delivery plans and timelines need to align with fleet planning, rolling stock acquisition and delivery of necessary support infrastructure with clear feedback across all these aspects.

Apply industry-leading asset management practices and data driven decisions to inform planning – including ideal proactive vs reactive maintenance, other planned requirements to maintain rolling assets to a state of good repair, and when assets should be retired.

Institutionalize a learning organization with effective feedback loops with transparent status to keep all work groups aligned to shared objectives.

Improvement of communications across sections to align decision making about service needs that drive capital and resource needs to ensure that rolling stock and the fixed assets needed to support them can be delivered in time to support planned changes in Metro service.


Cohesive and integrated planning: Someone needs to own coordination of this function across the organization (all silos). Who manages it? How do we build the capabilities needed to perform this exceptionally well? How do we ensure timely handoffs of complete and accurate information, etc.? I.e. from fleet planning/resource planning (Mobility?) to capital planning (procurement, facilities planning, workforce planning, etc.).

Robust asset management: This will take time, discipline, and strong leadership. How will we overcome strong resistance to change? How will we make the time needed for this effort? How do we overcome current lack of data integration and increase data analysis? What is the right balance between sticking to the plan and being responsive to emergent changes to in service or fleet needs?

Ongoing performance and feedback loops: This will take management and data integration. Someone needs to own or coordinate this. Who manages it? How are constraints communicated across sections to set achievable delivery timelines for all components?

Fleet complexity: Fleet complexity must be managed and in the past has had a negative ripple effect on our ability to maintain rolling assets due to numerous and varied expertise, parts, tools, and infrastructure required. What is the true cost of fleet complexity, and how do we balance with the need for a diverse fleet and innovation? By some counts, KCM has 50 different fleet types in buses alone.


Locate the cohesive and integrated planning function outside of capital and operations. Clarify roles, responsibilities and accountability processes. Staff with expertise including collaboration, etc. Clearly define a hand-off process between steps in the process. Develop change management plans and communication plans. Staff appropriately. (Near term org chart and budget implication TBD).

Spearhead a robust asset management plan across vehicle maintenance with an ambitious timeline. Staff up appropriately (long term and near term budget implications TBD)

Develop performance management system to understand status at a glance, and mechanisms for incorporating feedback into the process including adaptation. This is partly about people, and partly about data systems, to use data to learn and improve across the organization. (org chart and budget implication TBD)




Recommendation: Improve rolling stock procurement efficiency



Rolling stock represents critical capital assets for King County Metro’s mission of safely and predictably

providing public transportation mobility options to the transit riding public. There are 4500 current assets,

including buses, vanpool vans, paratransit vehicles, non-revenue vehicles (NRVs), and three water taxis.

We are looking to improve the rolling stock procurement process. Ideally that would include a faster, less

resource intensive process that continuously cycles from planning and requirements generation through

procurement, rolling stock receipt, operation in revenue or non-revenue, to decommissioning and surplus of

the old rolling stock. This recommendation focuses on the specification development and procurement part

of the process.

The ideal state would reduce resources and time required to execute the procurement process and make it

easier for KCM staff to do their work, while ensuring KCM gets the quality rolling stock it needs. This may

necessarily look different depending on what type of rolling stock is being procured. Bus procurement is

likely to be the most complex, while buying off a state contract, such as what happens, with NRVs may be the

easiest.


Subject matter expert (SME) inputs take longer than they should, often due to competing priorities. The

inputs that result in a final specification are also sometimes second guessed, and as a result the process is

slowed, costing KCM time and money. There must be an agreed upon process that will be supported and

respected by all stakeholders which means stakeholders commit to doing their work well, on-time, and

sticking by their final inputs, with clearly documented and easily obtainable decision documents.

Improvement of the current requirements generation process to ensuring stakeholder/SME input is well

documented, repeatable, and timely, and the team sized appropriately to increase efficiency, and reduce the

time it takes to specify and order rolling stock. This would be comprised of working all relevant requirements

into and doing a thorough review of KCM’s rolling stock contract specifications quickly. Final contract

specifications decisions would be recorded and documented and endorsed by leadership so that no last

minute changes, except for safety and security misses would be allowed to slow the process. It is also

important to receive rolling stock in a steady stream to minimize peaks and valleys of revenue service prep

work.




Deploy the Metro lean team to study the entire process working with the current Bus Procurement Team to

formalize, where necessary, the documentation, right size the subject matter expert teams, develop hard and

fast deadlines for working on and submitting input, and ensuring that the process stays on schedule. Also


study the process for other rolling stock buys (NRVs, accessible services vehicles, vanpool vans, water taxis,

etc.

Note: this may require dedicated staff and $ resources if this is to be completed as a priority in a timely

manner.


A long standing process and culture of SMEs to the bus procurement team is not responding in a timely

manner and sometimes second guessing decisions made on either the grounds that they didn’t get the

opportunity to contribute, didn’t contribute on time, or other reasoning which has in the past delayed or

overridden the original decision.

There appears to be a lack of authority for the person or organization to require timely, quality participation

by SMEs for rolling stock requirements development.

BPT members have other responsibilities and their participation as Bus Procurement Team (BPT) SMEs may

get pre-empted by other tasks. This must not be allowed to continue

Rolling stock procurement must get the attention and priority it deserves from all stakeholders and

participants.

A single point of contact within the KCM organization must have the responsibility and authority to

coordinate and enforce schedule and insist upon quality, timely input.


Adequate time and resources, both money and staff are required. Staff is required to execute this work in

vehicle maintenance (or wherever this function lands in the new department), the lean team, and all parts of

KCM that participate in rolling stock (bus procurement or other rolling stock) requirements generation.

A change management process may be required to help those impacted by these changes participate in and

understand the logic behind the adjustments.




Recommendation: Manage Fleet Complexity



The higher the fleet variation, the more complex it is for VM to carry out vehicle maintenance, specifically

service vehicles and buses. Vehicle maintenance prefers that buses are bought in large batches to reduce

fleet and training variation needs as well as managing inventory costs. However there are also limitations and

downside to buying buses in large batches. Diversification, i.e. similar buses from different manufacturers,

provides Metro with redundancy should performance or other problems arise. Metro needs to find the right

balance between batch size and maintenance complexity.


VM plays a critical role of ensuring that buses are service ready for the scheduled operations every day. VM is

also an 800 person organization and makes up a significant portion of our operating expenses. Improving VM

performance can thus have significant impact on both service quality and service costs, inventory expense,

and VM employee morale. Fleet complexity creates significant impact which should be measured and

quantified.




Acquisition quantity is fundamentally determined by the number of buses retiring each year and number of

buses required for expansion. There are several determining factors that lead to variation in bus quantity.

1) Fundamental changes in fleet technology such as diesel to diesel-hybrid electric to battery electric buses.

The fundamental changes are determined by the strategic decisions made at the county level (example-

Executives directive to go all electric by 2034-2040).

2) Desire for Metro to not put all its eggs in one basket’ by acquiring all its buses from a single manufacturer

and maintain leverage in price/feature negotiations, while recognizing there are just three 60’

manufacturers, and a limited number of bus manufacturers in general.

3) Incremental updates made by coach manufacturers to update their coaches with latest vehicle technology

on a periodic basis.

4) Service needs that do not always align with fleet procurements leads to multiple requests for buses within

a short period of time as opposed to a fleet plan that can both accommodate incremental change, but also

increase the batch size and lower variation, by better incorporating known service needs/projections and a

fleet asset management strategy.

The first three drivers cannot and need not be avoided to ensure that we are delivering on the strategic

decisions (such as all electric fleet), maintain our leverage with manufacturers and benefit from the upgraded

fleet coming from the manufacturers. To manage this ‘desirable’ variation and complexity, we should rely on

smart and robust VM training programs with at least two categories. One that focuses on comprehensive

training for fundamental shifts such as battery electric buses and another one that is modular with modules

focusing only on the incremental updates. One key to improving training is to tie it closely to the


procurement process and ensure it is scheduled and occurs on time. Each batch of newly procured buses

must also include timely associated training.

The fourth driver of bus variance, however, is largely avoidable. Over the past several years, Service

Development has made requested changes to the fleet plan to reflect major capital and service projects, such

as supporting RapidRide expansion, growth in demand for service, and incorporation of new technologies

(i.e. battery bus). This has resulted in small batches of buses with initially minor differences that over time

lead to small, but noticeable bus type maintenance complexities. The fleet planning function from Service

Development should be simplified to consider a few basic traits, such as vehicle length, branding, propulsion,

and quantity before handing off the request to a capital acquisition and asset management group that

includes other stakeholders so that bus orders minimize negative VM consequences.

Service Level Agreements (SLAs) between KCM sections should be developed and include legitimate change

reasons, and a reasonable requirements delivery frequency, and clear articulation by impacted sections as to

the real cost (time, money) of late changes and fleet complexity.


Additional data needs to be collected to identify costs and benefits associated with diversification. This data

could lead to a desired level of diversification. Getting buy-in to an improved way of fleet planning that

improves outcomes.

The County must follow all mandated FTA guidelines and requirements for a fair and equitable competition

when we purchase our vehicles in order to receive/maintain Federal funding status.

Partnerships with Sound Transit, Rapid Ride branding requirements, City of Seattle may generate outlier

requirements that add to fleet complexity.


* Service Development meetings must incorporate impacts and effects to all bus maintenance and

operations stakeholders, and minimize “micro-fleets”.

Replace current Fleet Planning Steering Committee function with a fleet planning function that is split

between fleet/resource planning in Mobility Division and acquisition and fleet asset management function in

Capital Division.


d2D Work Group Recommendation #N/A

Work Group Name: Capital Investment Infrastructure Work Group Lead: Tina Rogers

Recommendation: Cover Sheet (Road Map) for Infrastructure Recommendations



Capital planning and capital project delivery are dispersed and uncoordinated resulting in

inefficiencies and suboptimal use of limited resources.


Overall, METRO’s capital planning and project implementation processes and resources are not

adequate to deliver the envisioned larger capital program needed to meet the goals of METRO

Connects.

If we cannot clearly define and efficiently implement projects for our highest priority capital

programs (base capacity expansion, new rapid ride lines, fleet acquisition, maintaining our assets in

a state of good repair) we also put near term expectations to add transit service in jeopardy.




We make 6 recommendations, four of them very interrelated. Achieving the benefits of our

recommendations are dependent on adopting the suite of recommendations in these cases. Our

recommendations include:

i) Fully implement capital portfolio management, creating the overall framework for roles

and responsibilities in the new METRO organization and to successfully delivery Fixed

Asset, Fleet and Technology Portfolios of capital projects and programs. This best practice

organizational strategy will equip us to take on the larger and more complex work planned

for capital project needs through 2040.

ii) Consolidate capital delivery functions, organizing together all employees who work to

deliver capital projects into the new Capital Division. This provides benefits such as

streamlined delivery, more effective use of resources, and improved accountability.

iii) Create a capital planning section (with two possible options for locating this new function)

to make sure we are doing the right projects to best advance our strategic goals.

iv) Formalize resource planning methodology to ensure staff and consultant resources are

available and strategically deployed to complete priority capital projects and programs.


v) Formalize processes to effectively integrate and advance METRO’s strategic priorities for

ESJ and sustainability goals, as well as meet the needs of agency end-users and customers.

Formalizing these processes and governance ensures that Metro efficiency integrate this

work into capital delivery processes having them be an afterthought.

vi) In coordination with the Capital- Rolling Stock work group, we propose implementing a

more robust asset management system, to improve data analysis, planning, predictability,

and maximize value from Metro’s available resources.


Because the targets for Capital Investments represent such a significant expansion over our current

production rate and that the organizational processes, experience, and staffing have been eroded over

time and since the 2009 recession and focus away from capital investment to focus on maintaining and

now growing service, the need for changes in this area are great.

Much of our current organization in capital planning and delivery is insufficient to meet our capital

delivery goals, such that more radical change is warranted in this part of the organization than in parts.

This represents a large amount of change for an organization that will need to be effectively managed.


Outlined in the individual recommendations




Recommendation: Fully Implement Portfolio Management



METRO’s structure to deliver the capital program is not well aligned to effectively plan, authorize,

manage and monitor the work. Projects are initiated from multiple sources, using different

methodologies, with unclear expectations for benefits tied to strategic business goals.

Projects enter into the project delivery workflow from numerous places within the METRO

organization and at different stages of project formulation and differing levels of rigor in justifying

the projects. This results in inability to set priorities, effectively manage resources, meet project

delivery goals and internal end-user needs. Unclear roles for oversight and decision making lead to

lax accountability, unpredictable results, and inadequate coordination.


METRO’s capital improvement program is growing in size and complexity, and ability to speed up

capital project delivery is critical to supporting planned service increases. Relatively small capital

programs in recent years and loss of talent over time and in response to the 2009 recession has left

METRO with staff resources and processes that have not kept pace with these new demands. In

short, METRO’s capital program is in the rebuilding phase and can benefit from a proven structure

to guide our growing organization and increase the maturity of our capital planning and delivery

practices.

Portfolio management provides a framework for processes that will help METRO deliver

measurable success toward our priority capital portfolio outcomes.




Metro should finish implementing Portfolio Management, a process, begun in mid-2017. This will

facilitate improved coordination and delivery of near and mid-term capital project investments

across all component components of our three portfolios – Fixed Assets, Fleet and Technology

(shown on page 3).

Portfolio Management is defined as “the centralized management of … portfolios, which includes

identifying, prioritizing, authorizing, managing and controlling projects, programs and other related

work to achieve specific strategic business objects.2”

2 The Standard for Portfolio Management, Project Management Institute, 2008, page 138.


A best practice developed by the Project Management Institute, Portfolio Management is

recognized as having the following benefits3:

Selecting the right mix of projects to maximize overall returns defined by organization

criteria

Balancing the risks within a portfolio of capital investments and adapting to change

Optimally allocating resources across projects in the portfolios

Identifying and correcting performance problems and struggling initiatives early

Aligning projects with strategic goals throughout execution, avoiding projects of low value

The Capital Division, and any separate components (such as Marine capital) will use the Portfolio

Management structure to clearly define roles and responsibilities and to translate Strategic Plans

into executable projects and deliver those projects within resource constraints. This process

enables strategy direction to flow horizontally across the organization through program managers

and capital planners focused on interdependencies with other projects and the benefits intended

from projects in those programs. Implementation Supervisors of specific disciplines, such as

electrical engineering, focus on the processes and resources required to execute the project work.


Portfolio management will require a more rigorous approach to project formulation, planning, and

prioritization. Current practices must be modified to reflect portfolio management best practices.

Another challenge will be changing the roles and responsibilities of Implementation Supervisors to

focus on resource management, workforce planning, and mentoring/coaching direct reports.

It may be challenging to reach consensus on the roles, responsibilities and expectations for

sponsors, supervisors, program managers, sub-portfolio managers and portfolio managers.


Review existing models and processes for Portfolio Management already in place at METRO

and in peer agencies

Align the new Capital Division organizational structure with Portfolio Management roles

Develop and execute comprehensive implementation and communication plans to roll out the

Portfolio Management structure and processes

Establish governance entities including the Delivery Board and project controls to provide

support and ensure compliance in capital delivery processes.

Create or modify positions as needed to reflect the roles, responsibilities and expectations to

effectively execute the portfolio management framework.

Continue to provide training/education, tools and resources at all levels to effectively

implement the portfolio management framework.

Recommended Portfolio Structure:

3 From International Institute for Learning, Inc. Participant’s Workbook from 9/11/2017 Portfolio Management Executive Briefing attended by 12 of 27 invited METRO managers.





Recommendation: Consolidate Capital Delivery Functions



Capital project delivery is dispersed in numerous places in METRO often straddling operations and capital

responsibilities4. This decentralized delivery approach leads to uncoordinated efforts and produces

significant challenges in creating and enforcing standards. Without a consistent process to deliver projects it

is extremely difficult to monitor and improve performance. There is limited transparency and accountability

about what is getting done. There is limited coordination of efforts across end user groups and

interdependent projects.


We are undertaking a larger and more complex capital program to support expectations for significant

increases in transit service and deferred maintenance of our assets. Implementing METRO CONNECTS will

require producing a capital program that is more than twice as large as any METRO has accomplished in

recent years.

Opportunity exists to get more projects done faster. Gaining efficiencies through shared services and tools

for support of capital project delivery avoids duplicating functions and processes in multiple areas of our

organization. Structure enables deployment of industry best practices across the board, training,

establishment of clear expectations, and monitoring and reporting progress to better coordinate across

project interdependencies. These are key strategies to streamline and improve outcomes of capital project

delivery, using existing staff resources and leveraging production as new resources are added.

Siloed workgroups that exist today can limit flexibility in deploying staff to work on a variety of projects,

resulting in over resourcing of some programs and under resourcing of others. Additionally, silos can stand in

the way of providing a variety of experience and opportunities for growth for capital delivery employees as

well as deepened expertise and understanding of capital delivery best practices and methodologies




Bring all capital delivery functions together into the Capital Division. Broadly speaking these functions include

planning and delivery of capital assets supporting Fleet, Fixed Asset and Technology portfolios and include

employees currently housed in six different sections, some with multiple workgroups involved.

Implement a Project Controls Office to put in place standard processes and monitor and report on capital

delivery performance. Develop and train common information tools (CMRS).

4 Currently in the General Manager’s Office (Zero Emission Fleet), Finance (TOD), Vehicle Maintenance (Fleet Procurement), Planning and Customer Services (Service Development, Market Development, Speed and Reliability, Transit Route Facilities), Systems Development and Operations (Development), Power and Facilities (Capital), and Design and Construction.


Implement gate checks through implementation of a Delivery Board to ensure that project implementation is

meeting targets and expectations.

We recommend that employees brought together in a centralized Capital Division be structured described in

the Portfolio Management recommendation.


Combining the staff and supervisors from different unions will be a challenge for METRO to resolve with

labor.

Staff resistance to leave the current functional unit to join a new consolidated organization and adapt to new

work practices.

Staff willingness to adapting to more rigorous project management practices.

Keeping strong linkages to “home” sections and maintaining feedback loop to service, operations, and end-

user needs.

Retaining special institutional technical expertise.

For the solution to be successful the capital functions must receive clear direction and be adequately staffed.


Identify all current capital functions for potential consolidation.

Identify specific employees to move to Capital Division- focusing on those currently performing capital

planning and implementation.

Create section level organization chart

Implement formal practices to maintain linkages to operational needs.

Hire to file gaps.




Recommendation: Create a Capital Planning Section



Capital Planning within METRO is not coordinated; projects are initiated from multiple sources. As a

result, our vision and strategies are not efficiently translated into tangible projects, and the

planning process does not include feedback on how capital projects are effectively realizing the

vision.


Uncoordinated capital planning has multiple impacts upon project delivery, including the following:

It is difficult to connect projects and programs to specific strategies and objectives, and this

limits the ability to clearly communicate priorities.

We do not have the ability to effectively plan and allocate resources.

We do not have the ability to ensure the right resources are assigned to projects.

No one is clearly the owner of the process.

We do not have a prioritized list of scheduled projects.

There are vague scopes of work for projects, without well-defined project objectives.

Vague project formulation leads to potential scope creep, schedule delays and cost overruns

Notable interdependent projects to be missed (Hybrid Buses in operation without a means to

replace battery packs) and efficiency project to be neglected (replacing a roof at the same time

as an HVAC to save repetitive works).

There is an opportunity to conduct capital planning more efficiently, improve communications and

feedback, and better connect the capital program to our vision and strategies so capital projects

can effectively support operations.




Create a consolidated capital planning section to act as the single source for capital projects. This

capital planning section partners with all other sections to evolve their needs into packaged,

coordinated, and planned projects that can be handed off to the capital delivery team for

execution.

Role: The capital planning effort will serve as a key organizational communication role in explaining

how the capital investments are intended to improve service (i.e., reliability, safety, customer

experience, etc.) and provide a constant feedback loop between Capital Planning, Service Planning,

and Strategy. The makeup of the group and granularity of their operation is critical – capital

planning does not make visions nor do they actually execute project, but serve only as the bridge,

creating a transparent roadmap that strategy, management, and service planning can leverage to

understand progress and resource needs.


Capital planning will focus executive, managerial, supervisory, and staff level employees on using

the capital program as an investment tool to improve the organization’s ability to:

Deliver service

Leverage our resources, proactively

Approach our partners with a feasible group of projects

Utilize proactive real estate and environmental approaches that avoids delays

Coordinate capital works across the agency to maximize efficiencies and ensure

interdependencies are captured and maintained

Provide consistent rigor to project formulation

Incorporate ESJ, Sustainability, Safety, Security, and other Agency requirements at project

formulation making these integral project requirements vs “add-ons” during project

execution

Org structure: This proposal suggests two options for where this planning function sits within

METRO:

1. As a Capital Planning Section (working title Portfolio & Program Management) within the Capital

Division that includes all three capital portfolios – Fleet, Fixed Asset and Technology – to produce

10-year Plans, 6-year Plans and 2-year budget proposals. Programs and projects would more likely

be resourced appropriately if located within the same division as resource planning (see chart

above). However, this structure could require additional effort for adequate coordination with

strategic planning, service planning and other planning functions in METRO.

2. As a unified planning group elsewhere in the organization – integrating capital planning with

personnel conducting other planning functions into comprehensive mid-term and near-term

plans incorporating capital, service and operational components. Placement within this type of

organization should be strategic to avoid bias or division influence in the planning of Capital


Projects. However, this structure requires additional effort for adequate coordination with

project implementation supervisors to ensure feasibility of capital plans, adequate

implementation resources and adjustment to plans when changes arise.


Due to existing labor contracts, there is potential barrier to creating new Job Classifications to

define the roles, responsibilities and expectations for portfolio, sub-portfolio and program

managers.

Some capital planning functions currently in Service Development may be concerned about

losing the connection to service.

Ensuring strong relational ties upstream with strategic and service planning and downstream

with project implementation.

General inconsistency in the understood function and output of the term “Capital Planning”

Outside of budget, all service change packages have driven capital projects that may be

challenging to get a supplemental capital appropriation approved by council outside of biennial

budget. Timeline may be inconsistent with optimal time to start a capital project. Committing

to capital projects out of synch with service change approvals.


Designate a Capital Planning Section on the new org chart or integrate a Capital Planning Section

(Program & Portfolio Management) within the Capital Division

Select a section manager to further develop the processes and details of the Capital Planning

Section

Specify purpose and primary products and services carries out by the section.

Create section level org chart

Hire to file gaps; much of this capital planning work is not presently being done.




Recommendation: Utilization of Formalized Resource Planning Methodology



Decentralized resource planning has created an environment where individual capital project &

total portfolio staff resource needs are not clearly understood. This affects Metro’s ability to

complete projects in a timely manner. Resources may be committed to lower priority projects,

especially when dedicated resources for capital project planning and delivery exist outside of

design and construction group. Coupled with limitations of biennial staff increases and long lead

time to fill vacant positions with qualified employees, staff resource planning is critical to success in

capital project planning and delivery.


Effective resource planning is a key feature in accelerating the delivery of capital projects, while

also addressing the following issues:

Inability to complete projects in an efficient and timely manner

Progress on non-priority project exceeding those of high priority projects

Cannot, with confidence, forecast future staffing needs or ability to complete future

projects

Inability to deliver larger and more complex portfolio of projects required to support future

needs

Sub-optimal assignment of key Metro staff

Lack of efficient vendor resource utilization

No reserve capacity or understanding of staffing limitations to respond to partnership

projects

Poor project quality and other issues can result from suboptimal resourcing such as

changes in project teams, use of under qualified staff, or under resourcing teams




Centralize resource planning for the entire capital program within the Project Controls Office (PCO),

currently located in Design & Construction.

Enable the Project Control Office with the ability to add additional staffing and resources in

order to fulfill this need.

Establish clear roles and responsibilities for resource management within the capital

division.

Develop and implement a formal resource management process -


o Resource Planning component involved in planning, identifying resource

constraints in developing Capital Improvement Program (CIP)

o Matrix Resource Management Approach For Project Delivery. As part of capital

planning, Project Controls (PC) captures all resource requirements for projects w/in

the CIP, by discipline/FTE, & transfers the requirements to discipline supervisors

o Discipline Supervisors are responsible for assigning and maintaining appropriate

skilled employees and contract capacity for each project as planned within the CIP

Build in a consistent feedback loop between resource management, planning, and delivery

of both capital and operations

Provide ongoing analysis to map resources against commitments by project controls

Use data to plan adequate resource to staff external partnership efforts and consideration

of resource availability in engagement of external project

Develop planning for expansion of resource pool utilizing internal employees and

consultants, remaining mindful of the need to adequately supervise consultant resources

Maintain a long term goal of establishing sustainable staffing level to meet capital needs

with the ability to supplement resources in peak times and maintain employee staffing

level during lean time.

Model impacts of likely retirements and monitor turnover trends to develop a succession

plan to mitigate impacts of turnover, in coordination with Human Resources.


Elevation of project controls capabilities and capacity

o Adequate authority for project controls group (directly reporting to Capital Division

Director)

Lack of data and estimating skills to adequately forecast resource needs

Limitations on flexibility of resources due to work rules and training

Limited control over incoming workload associated with external partnership projects


Onboarding of additional project controls resources

Development of formalized procedures

Identification and procurement of tools, resources, and/or training to efficiently utilize

resource planning


d2D Work Group Recommendation #10 Work Group Name: Capital Investments Infrastructure Work Group Lead: Tina Rogers

Recommendation: Formalize Process to Effectively Integrate METRO’s Strategic Priorities including

ESJ and Sustainability, as well as end user and customer needs into Capital Project Planning and

Delivery



Climate change and ESJ are key priorities for the Executive and METRO. As well, capital

infrastructure must meet the needs of agency end-users and our customers. Ideally, these priorities

would be imbedded into METRO’s lines of business so they become how we deliver capital

projects. However, to date formalized systems are not in place to integrate these priorities in the

vision, planning, and delivery of capital infrastructure.


Without systems to integrate strategic priorities and the needs of end users into capital planning,

opportunities for cost savings, energy savings, operational and maintenance efficiencies, customer

satisfaction, and advancing a pro-equity approach are missed. In addition, these priorities and

needs may be considered too late in the capital process, reducing the impact on achieving these

priorities and disrupting smooth flow of capital project delivery. Without a clear accountability

structure in place, key internal end-user needs are not considered and projects are not meeting

performance metrics.




Formalize a process to identify and integrate these priorities at each phase of capital infrastructure

development from formulation stages to project delivery phases.

METRO’s capital infrastructure must be aligned with the agency’s priorities and strategic vision, and

it must meet the needs of our agency end-users and customers. Formalizing the integration of

these priorities into each step of the capital formulation, planning and delivery process is the only

way to ensure these priorities are considered early enough to create advance priorities.

Transparency and accountability are critical to ensure standards are uniformly adopted and

opportunities to advance priorities are maximized.


Overall, we expect including these priorities early in the project formulation will ease the burden

on project managers. These priorities will be articulated in the project scope they receive vs. being

required as an add-on after the project has been budgeted. By doing so, there will be improved

clarity over the alignment between the scope and priorities.

Adopting these recommendations will represent a significant shift for PM and PE staff. There may

be a barrier to adopting new practices. Training and support for METRO PM and PE staff will be

critical, as well as improving access to external consultants with green building and ESJ expertise.



Formalize systems to ensure key priorities of ESJ, sustainability, and end user needs of the capital program are considered at all stages from project formulation to project delivery. This includes the need for:

Identify ESJ and sustainability champions on METRO’s capital definition board and capital

delivery board to ensure alignment of capital portfolios and agency priorities.

Leadership champions for sustainability and ESJ.

Formalize connections between capital planning group and subject matter experts to ensure

that 6- and 10-year portfolio plans are in alignment with ESJ, sustainability, and end user

priorities.

Integrate sustainability priorities including energy savings and green building into our Transit

Asset Management Plan and State of Good Repair program to ensure these become standard

in how we do business.

Include specific ESJ and sustainability evaluation criteria in the capital prioritization process for

developing the Transit CIP and budget priorities.

Explicitly refer to ESJ, sustainability, and end-user needs in project scope once budgeted to

ensure that life-cycle cost analysis of alternatives maximizes the opportunity to advance

priorities.

Put accountability systems in place to ensure ESJ, sustainability, and end-user project elements

are reviewed and required at project delivery gate-checks (incl. contract specifications and

construction manager oversight).

Require validation of project performance post-construction compared to baseline to ensure

projects meeting priorities and needs.

Staffing and resource capacity for capital division to ensure that capital planning, project

managers, project engineers have access to staff with sustainability and ESJ subject matter

expertise, on-call external consulting support, and training.

Consider and explore the option of budgeting a management contingency fund, or something

of the kind to support capital projects with high sustainability – green building design or ESJ

where there is an opportunity for a high impact project.

Close connections between capital planning group and strategic planning for ESJ and

sustainability programs, as well as end-users and customers.

Accountability and transparency in project delivery phases to ensure performance of projects

delivered meets ESJ and sustainability priorities and the needs of end-users and partners.


d2D Work Group Recommendation #11 (Same as #1)

Work Group Name: Capital Investment (Rolling Stock & Infrastructure) Work Group Leads: Pete

Melin and Tina Rogers

Recommendation: Implement a more robust asset management system, to improve data analysis,

planning, predictability, and maximize value from Metro’s available resources.



Metro has several existing asset management tools in place, primarily for inventory control and asset

management. These tools are deeply entrenched in the day-to-day operation of Metro, but are not

interoperable for an overall asset management program.

Multiple sections within Metro function as asset management groups for different types of assets, with

various levels of maturity of their lifecycle planning and asset management policies. This disparity in Metro’s

overall asset management capabilities leads to decreased reliability, increased cost, and inaccurate asset

replacement cost projections.


Although Metro has several existing Asset Management tools the accuracy of the data and the

different data streams all residing independently of each other have resulted in Metro making

fragmented decisions in isolation of the state of its current assets.

Additionally with different tracking systems and minimal opportunities for process improvement,

Metro as a whole, has not consistently identified baselines for ideal asset management lifecycles,

which has led to costly corrective maintenance and reactive business practices to meet fleet and

service demands.

Although, Metro is on track to meet Federal Transit Authority’s Transit Asset Management Rule (per

49 CFR Parts 625 and 630) it still needs to take it to the next level i.e., a more robust independent,

auditable Transit Asset Management Program which captures all of Metro’s assets including

Technology with one clear goal “maximize its return on the Investments”.

The tangible results of joined, risk-based, whole life cycle asset management will be:

o Alignment of processes, resources and functional contributions instead of competing

divisional silos and short term priorities

o Creation of a transparent audit trail

o Better data and information understanding and use which provide the basis for informed

and consistent decisions

o Improved planning and allocation of capital funds

o Consistent, prioritized and auditable risk management

Alignment and coordination of existing initiatives including competency

Greater engagement of Metro employees, including leadership





Create a centralized Asset Management Section responsible for overseeing the asset management functions

of Metro’s organizations – fleet, facilities (fixed assets), technology. This group works in partnership with the

other sections to ensure data maturity, compliance with FTA rules and established process and policy, and

support of assessments and reporting.

Adopt and implement a more robust asset management plan to inform data driven decisions across the

organization to maintain rolling stock and all assets in a state of good repair according to adopted levels of

service consistent with METRO’s vision and financial resources. This plan will be inclusive with defined and

documented processes, and data integration and reporting consolidation across Metro’s systems including

but not limited to asset condition assessments, useful life benchmarks and performance measures.

Pros: leads to more predictive maintenance cycles, improved asset’s useful life, reduced inventory costs,

reduced asset base, improved reliability and safety and maximizing return on investment.

Cons: Business as usual wherein these systems are used only for data gathering and maintenance activities

and replacements are reactive rather than planned.

An additional objective to consider is achieving the ISO 55001 certification for Asset Management Systems.

The FTA mandate is based on the ISO 55001 standard but does not call upon Metro to be certified. Other

Transit Agencies who have done ISO certification have found it much easier to implement the FTA mandate

since with ISO certification, the culture of “Plan, Do, Check, Act” is ingrained in the organization.

Pros: well documented procedures, accountability.


Readily available resources to provide continuity and oversight of the plans

Sustainable funding to support an asset management team

Resources to maintain and replace assets when planned continue to be a constraint, impeding our

ability to implement the asset management programmed work.


Identify a Data Integration Tool such as TREX and consolidated reporting strategy

Create Asset Management “Team” to:

o Vet and document procedures

o Work with all Divisions and Sections to set level of service and performance targets

o Routinely conduct internal audits, identify opportunities, and modify plans to adjust to

Metro’s needs

o Be accountable for managing and ensuring follow through

Identify existing or new staff resources to adequately staff the team

Identify optimal location in METRO organization structure, perhaps consider Safety & Security or

Capital Planning


d2D Work Group Recommendation #12 Work Group Name: Capital Investment Technology Work Group Leads: Dan Root

Recommendation: Establish a structure between KCM and KCIT based on KCM ownership of

Intelligent Transportation Systems

1. Background. What is the problem we are trying to solve (e.g., What is the issue? What is

happening?)? Or, what is the business opportunity? Ideal State

Metro is able to keep pace with internal and external customer needs and create rapid, responsive partnerships for delivery, successful implementation, and adoption of Intelligent Transportation Systems and projects by end-users.

How we get there

Establish priorities and management of enterprise level IT (KCIT) services and build out Metro’s technology infrastructure.


Current State

Technology (to include Incidents and Service Requests) is not defined to best fit the needs of Metro. Metro’s ITS needs are unique among county departments

Technology Policy and Governance is defined at the County and does not always meet the needs of Metro

Metro's Technology workforce can be limited by current IT not allowing recruitment of "IT" jobs for Transit Technology positions


Metrics for IT performance are not meaningful to Metro

Since there is no Service Level Agreement (SLA) or OLA (?), there is no way to hold Metro’s Technology Capital, Service and Support provider accountable

Metro is not in control o KCIT will take over any “technology” project o TRC process is too slow and often causes undue delays in decision making

Confab feedback confirms the Workgroups proposed Ideal state is preferred

Despite wonderful and dedicated people in KCIT, they are stretched thin to the point support fails too often

There is no logic or transparency to Technology Project or Service and Support cost from KCIT

Recruiting and training focused on the needs of Metro aligns with Metro Connects o JD’s will match Metro needs for recruitment o TMS will help develop Knowledge, Skills and Abilities


3. Recommendation. What is your solution to the problem? Or, what is your big picture idea to

take advantage of the business opportunity? [If there multiple solutions, please provide high

level pros and cons for each solution or recommendation].

Instead of improving relationship with KCIT, separate it into two distinct parts (change it

significantly)

o Separate ITS (Transit Tech) and KCIT (Business IT)


KCIT might come back and say "We can change to accommodate" when they have not in the past

KCIT will see this as complaints and possibly threats which could further damage the relationship

Need to maintain a relationship and partnership with KCIT

Staying on top of communication thru silos o Must be plain English for all to understand

Creating bandwidth to implement Proposal

No Hand Off from KCIT (Knowledge sharing)

KCIT Empire Building (Smart Toilets – KCIT would own this project in Current State)


Change internal policy

Executive policy needs to be changed

Legislative ordinance will require updating

Inter-agency relations & communications plan

Organizational structure will need to change

Ramp up Plan & Hand Off to KCIT

Leadership needs to go to bat for Metro o Rob o Dow

Define SLAs, etc.?

Update Transit Tech Roadmap

Identify needs of business owners to effectively manage system lifecycle process



Recommendation: Become a smarter client by improving project life cycle management practices

at Metro IT/ SDO


happening?)? Or, what is the business opportunity? Current State

KCIT’s shortcomings is only one side of the coin of Metro’s underperformance in delivering critical transit technology projects. The other side of this coin is that Metro IT/SDO does not have the right practices in place necessary to become a smart and informed client that knows how to hold its technology vendors accountable (KCIT or private sector), have them deliver under budget and on time and manage the technology projects through their lifecycle. Following is a partial list of challenges that Metro IT/SDO’s needs to address:

SDO needs to have a clear definition on what constitutes a project vs. a service request

SDO does not have the most basic project management practices in place o No budget baselining of projects o No documenting of project start or end dates or effort estimation o No tracking of milestones o No tracking of scope, budget, delivery time changes o Without this information, it is difficult to ascertain the real extent of the delays and

overages or to credibly point out what’s causing them and who to hold responsible o We (Metro) are not good at estimating projects. We don’t have an estimator on staff or

a consultant on hand to do project estimation. As a result, we often go in with made up number of $s, that number goes to council and then gets locked.

SDO does not have a portfolio or asset management system o No system to intake, evaluate (cost/benefit), estimate and prioritize technology project

requests and corresponding investments o Capital Management & Reporting System (CMRS) due to launch in Dec 2017 is

expected to solve for this, but it remains to be seen if it actually delivers demonstrable improvements portfolio management

o We (Metro) has no annual process in place for reviewing our IT asset portfolio.

Example: No one asks on an annual basis as to why we should still be funding the Trip

Planner when the market has completely outpaced us on that technology solution.

Metro's business units likewise are ill-prepared to manage the ITS solutions they use and care for. When projects close out and become regular systems in operation, workgroups need to be educated about proper lifecycle management and equipped to carry out that responsibility.

Ideal State

Metro IT/SDO develops practices that enable us to become smart client and consumer of transit technology solution. We adopt tools and develop capabilities to significantly improve project scoping, technology solution evaluation, strong project management practices that establish realistic delivery schedule, a realistic budget, sets clear milestones, holds the vendors accountable to meet schedules within the set budget. In case of scope changes, the same processes allows us to


track changes in scope, budget and schedule. In the ideal state, Metro should also have tools and capabilities to manage the deployed projects through their life cycle.

How we get there

First and foremost, we need to reflect and realize that not all our technology related challenges are NOT due to KCIT and that we own a good amount of responsibility

We need to be able to keep track of the delivery of projects.

We need to adopt tools and develop capabilities to significantly improve project scoping, technology solution evaluation, strong project management practices that establish realistic delivery schedule, a realistic budget, sets clear milestones, holds the vendors accountable to meet schedules within the set budget. In case of scope changes, the same processes allows us to track changes in scope, budget and schedule.

Metro needs to develop a comprehensive plan for improving its own technology capital delivery performance. The plan should include development of the necessary project management and life cycle management practices, a new team composition, metrics against which this plan will/should be measured (what success looks like/ desired end state/outputs), and actions and timeline with milestones to get us there

Metro needs to hire/develop talent/expertise in project estimation so that our budget asks to council are rooted in analysis and reason and we don’t end up getting locked into an amount that is grossly under or over

Metro needs to develop an annual process for reviewing our IT asset portfolio to ask ourselves on a regular basis as to which projects we should continue, terminate, expand etc.

Metro should look to two documents to guide how to get there: the Strategic Technology Roadmap for Transit and the recent Audit of Metro's technology program. The Roadmap needs to be revisited and revised to be more actionable and to be in line with current d2D and SDO thinking. Metro also needs to act upon audit findings and engage the auditor and users of ITS solutions to identify more areas for improvement.

Hire outside talent with significant experience and diversity managing large scale projects.

2. Why should the Agency care about this? What is the impact? Transit is being revolutionized by technology, as we speak. Metro will face steep criticism, loss of user base, and declining support from citizens in general. Our inability to compete with smaller more agile and technologically superior competitors will only widen our perceived shortfalls. The social and political ramifications are enormous. As we lose relevance we will lose funding. Loss of funding and the inevitable loss of service and support that accompanies it will adversely impact those that need it the most and create unsafe working an environment for our employees and customers. For this reason, our inability to manage the delivery of technology projects is one of the key challenges we face.



level pros and cons for each solution or recommendation]. See above


Conflicting guidance about project goals and project ownership.

http://aqua.kingcounty.gov/council/clerk/OldOrdsMotions/Motion%2014769.pdf

http://aqua.kingcounty.gov/council/clerk/OldOrdsMotions/Motion%2014769.pdf

https://www.kingcounty.gov/depts/auditor/auditor-reports/all-landing-pgs/2017/transit-it-2017.aspx


Leadership needs to be capable of bringing about a shake up and a turnaround by , and clearly communicating goals, standards, and expectations to our internal customers as well as to our service partners.

Technology is so ubiquitous that most people feel comfortable with it and don’t think it takes much to implement it. This can result in procrastination and kicking the can down the road.


Rob making this a top priority and holding internal folks accountable for failure in turning things around.

Educate employees in the Development and Operations parts of SDO about lifecycle management and create clear expectations. Educate operating business units about expectations of being solid Business Owners.



Recommendation: Recommendation 3a and 3b: Bringing Ourselves Current and Preparing for Future Technology 1. Background. What is the problem we are trying to solve (e.g., What is the issue? What is happening?)? Or, what


Issue: Currently, Metro cannot adapt to new technology with reasonable timeliness.  There is also a need to balance this with having a stable current state and not jumping on every new technology that seems interesting. 

Instead of using strong strategic planning from the beginning, we have a tendency to develop projects and solutions outside of good planning practices and operate in a silo without considering the benefits and impacts to other groups.

There is not currently a team in place that is maintaining knowledge of the industry trends and standards in technology so that we can strategically plan for it, instead we wait for the results of RFP to come in to tell us what we can do.

There are many people at all levels of the agency who are aware that there may be simple technology solutions available to make Metro run more efficiently. These solutions aren't investigated/initiated because of cultural norms that dictate that people on the front line have a fear of technology, or that it is different than how things have always been done. Likewise, there are concerns that by the time the technology has been realized, it will be woefully out of date and unusable. Both sides of this issue need to be addressed.

To clarify this issue – when appropriate - this recommendation will be outlined in 2 parts. Recommendation 3a will involve bringing us up to a current state of using reasonable technology. Recommendation 3b will involve strategic planning for the future so that Metro Transit can stay current on changing and evolving technologies.

Examples of 3a: Bringing Metro up to a Current Technological State There are many processes which are woefully out of date. Bringing them forward to current technology is important in order to run Metro in the best ways possible. Examples of these include:

Paper based timecards, Employee Time Tracking System (ETTS), Veederoot system, etc. I think it’s worth noting here as well that a lot of systems don’t communicate with each other very well which is why there are so many stand alone, one off, or customized solutions running around. For example, there are at least 5 different job (or ticket) tracking systems in use and none of them talk to each other. The two I'm most familiar with (M5 and EAM) can "sort of" talk to each other but not well enough to say it’s an effective composite system.

Accident/Incident Reporting: This is done on paper and then routed to the safety office. Switching from paper to an online reporting system (on a computer or a tablet) would allow there to be logic built into the forms allowing clarity for the operators to only answer the questions that make sense. This could reduce the amount of errors that may occur, would allow a reduction in the time between incident and data analysis to increase the opportunities for data driven decisions or to response more quickly to making necessary changes after major incidents. Dispatch: Currently, dispatch uses paper Word documents to track what pieces of work need to be filled. This leads to inefficiencies in the process, only allowing one person to have access to that information at a time. It also leads to issues where there isn’t conformity in data tracking making it difficult to assess for trends and make decisions on this information.


Salesforce: We have a platform that is able to do any data collection and analysis task imaginable and yet we have taken 18 months to give ourselves permission to use it beyond its current application in C3: managing customer comments. This approach is entirely in line with the STRT: get a SAAS platform and build applications to support agency needs...

Examples of 3b: Readiness for the Future with Rapidly Evolving Technology Technology is rapidly evolving. Metro needs to make sure that it has systems and strategies in place that are tracking upcoming technologies in order to adopt the right technologies at the right time. Examples of these technologies may include:

The change of cellular systems to 4g drove the drop of 2g networks. The "smart" trash cans (Big Bellies) used at RR stops use 2g cards to communicate their relative status. If someone was on top of tracking technologies, the market deciding to drop support for 2g wouldn't have caught anyone by surprise and could have saved quite a bit of money in upgrades and labor. The Metro radio system is another example. It does voice and "low speed" data very well. Metro bucked the market trend and used a vendor that said they could work with low speed data. However, we are the only ones in the world using a system like this so there is a lot of pressure to migrate to a different high speed data technology.

Cloud based computing systems

Autonomous Vehicles

Who Knows?


From gathering information to making payments, our employees and customer base are becoming accustomed to utilizing technology in their day-to-day lives. 

Metro prides itself on being an industry leader. To continue doing so, Metro must utilize the technology that customers have come to expect (real time information, mobile payments, ease of contacting customer service, and more). In addition, Metro is continuing into an era of being more data driven. At this moment in time, no one can tell you how many accidents occurred in a given day without a several day delay. This makes it difficult to be nimble and make changes that could improve service for our customers.     Example: Rapid Ride Expansion Program – Deciding what features and systems they want, they make promises to customers and partners.  Then they ask about the technology – which can’t meet the timing at the current budget.  If they had asked in advance, they could have saved millions of dollars and met their promises.  Another example of the benefits of integrated data: It is possible that you buy a bus ticket with your phone, your phone alerts you when you are approaching your stop, where to walk to catch the transfer and how long you have to wait before the other bus arrives. This is a process that our customers have asked for (in a general way) and eliminate the largest point of conflict between drivers and citizens, fares and transfers. Yet we cannot accomplish this vision without replacing multiple, heavily customized stove-pipe systems currently in use.

1





Create a centralized strategic technology group.  This group would be the ones monitoring the industry for changes and trends.  There would be a network of distributed/matrixed SMEs within the agency who would be involved in understanding how different projects could fit together so that things can move more quickly and collaboratively. 

Create a clear and transparent method for people to suggest or initiate technology solutions.  Make sure others have access to what has been requested previously to encourage collaboration.   

Create a faster path for technology projects that doesn't get bogged down with the budget cycle.  Ensure that there is transparency to which projects get selected and why. 

Evaluate all projects using cost/benefit analysis including opportunity benefits and the costs of missed opportunities. 


Current Job Descriptions don’t exist to support a strategic technology group

Current budgeting is on a bi-annual basis – which requires budgeting packages that can quickly become out of date with technology.

Current culture is pessimistic towards effective strategic technology solutions (“It will never work”, “The people on the front lines will refuse to change”)

If a budget is created for ad hoc technology projects, there is a risk if the money doesn’t get spent or gets over spent

Grants often require that we buy a specific technology tool – how do we do things like SaaS solutions that don’t fit our current granting/funding model.


Creation of a centralized Strategic Group to carryout recommendations in line with the Strategic Technology Roadmap for Transit. This likely needs to include capital project managers as well as transit technology experts. Once this group is identified, then the SMEs within the agency need to be identified.

A transparent and well documented process on how to initiate technology projects needs to be established. This process may be different for the shorter term projects identified under category 3a (Bringing Metro up to a Current Technological State) and category 3b (Readiness for the Future with Rapidly Changing Technology).


d2D Work Group Recommendation #15 Work Group Name: HR Services Work Group Lead: Cheryl Binetti

Recommendation: Improve Hiring and Recruitment Process


happening?)? Or, what is the business opportunity? Metro faces several challenges that this recommendation addresses:

Despite improvements in the hiring process, it is still an intensive and time-consuming process that

is complicated by myriad County process, HR practices and CBA requirements

Inconsistent practices and assumptions regarding the roles, commitment, and accountability of

managers/hiring authorities, (HA) and Human Resources (HR) in the hiring process

Myriad resources that are not readily available and potentially confusing to managers/hiring

authorities, which results in reliance on HR staff

Build a workforce of high qualified, engaged and diverse employees

Ability to recruit talented individuals hindered because our process is lengthy and they find other

jobs

Ability to dedicate the focused resources on attracting applicants in a highly competitive job market

Employee Churn Data January 2016 – December 2017

930 hires (635 operators)

1011 leavers (704 operators)

1033 movers (623 operators)

2. Why should the Agency care about this? What is the impact? Demand for transit is rising throughout King County with a near-term strategy to provide 235 million rides in King County across all Metro-operated or partnered service. To meet this target, Metro has committed to enabling our employees- present and future- to do top quality work by:

hiring skilled, motivated and diverse employees;

offering training and development opportunities;

promoting health and well-being;

rewarding high performance; Given the volume of anticipated churn, growing service demands, changing fleet technology and service options, as well as changes in the job market, we have an opportunity to ensure that Metro is an employer of choice by improving our hiring process and recruiting and hiring a well-qualified and diverse workforce that reflects the broader community. This recommendation focuses on improving the existing hiring process and developing an effective recruitment strategy for Metro. If we are unable to efficiently and sustainably staff key functions (including mechanics, leaders, engineers, etc.), we will threaten our ability to achieve our service targets as above.




level pros and cons for each solution or recommendation]. This recommendation is composed of two proposals, as below:

Improve the hiring process by implementing the following strategies:

1. Embed HR support functions in administrative staff role in sections and divisions to:

Improve our ability to anticipate hiring needs

Encourage and support hiring authorities to do front-end work in advance of formal hiring

process’s first meeting between HR and hiring authority, therefore reducing cycle time

Proactively initiate hiring processes, in partnership with hiring authorities

Coordinate and assist with hiring, onboarding and exiting employees

Align administrative skill sets with job function and line of business expertise as well as

ability to leverage appropriate resources

Support standardization of current HA and HR processes/practices/CBA, etc.

2. Refine Hiring Process while still aligning with County/labor requirements (current process

improvement efforts; not SLT direction)

Implement tiered service delivery or different processes for routine vs. unique recruitments

(due to differing criteria for selection process flow; different cycle time, or if combining

efforts across various groups).

Provide hiring information pro-actively to hiring authorities in advance of initial meeting

between HA and HR (as soon as quarter priorities are established)

Refine announcements and marketing materials

Review and refine hiring events; evaluate onsite interviewing and testing (including pre-

employment drug testing) opportunities

Provide more effective resources and training to hiring to managers/HA to include:

o Access and classification information and previous postings in advance of the first

meeting between HA and HR in the formal hiring process

o Role clarity in the hiring process: HR Services vs. manager/hiring authority

o HR policies

o CBA requirements

o Process flow charts and checklists

To develop and implement an effective recruiting strategy that positions and showcases Metro as an

employer of choice in the region:

1. Evaluate current state, develop and implement a Metro Recruitment Plan that identifies key

strategies, required resources, and process map. The evaluation and plan should include:

o Marketing/branding

o Staffing and workflow

o Outreach plan/process

o Partnerships

o Tools

o Communications function support (social media, editor, etc.)

o Talent pool identification and build long term partnerships (consider ESJ)

2. Evaluate the creation of a sourcing/recruiter role - establish sourcing partnerships and identify

positions that require direct sourcing and align our recruiting and selection processes with current

market strategies as well as ESJ principles. Identify process to implement and adjust HR Analyst

role to HR Business Partner.


3. Identify ongoing communications/marketing resource requirements (Coordinate with d2D

Communications Work Group)

4. What are the anticipated barriers or challenges to implementing this recommendation? Potential barriers to improve the hiring process: Where past interpersonal relationships between hiring

authorities and HR staff have suffered, there may be challenges in developing true partnerships and shared

accountability in the hiring process. Already-overextended managers may find it burdensome to prioritize the

hiring process and commit the necessary administrative resources to support this change.

Potential barriers to improving the recruitment process: Dedicating resources to develop the recruitment

plan and associated strategies as well as refining the recruiter/sourcer function. The recruitment/sourcing

changes will require ongoing support from Metro’s communications and marketing team as well as a

dedicated budget to utilize various strategies (social media, events, onsite testing, etc.) and stay aligned with

the job market trends.

5. Outline high level requirements to implement the solution or idea, if known: Several requirements will need to be met to implement this recommendation.

Improve the hiring process: Clarify, document and communicate roles and expectations of managers/ hiring

authorities and HR staff in the hiring process; validate and refine resources and training content; provide

more resources and tools to managers; identify resources to embed HR administrative staff in

sections/divisions; dedicate staff to support the “resource line.” Evaluate the opportunity to provide onsite

testing (including drug testing) to reduce hiring process timeline and costs.

Improve the recruitment process: Evaluate current state, develop and implement a Metro Recruitment

Plan that identifies key strategies; required resources and process map. The evaluation and plan should

include: marketing/branding, staffing and workflow, outreach plan/process, partnerships, tools, metrics, and

communications function support (social media, editor, etc.). Additional high level requirements also include

evaluating the creation of a sourcing/recruiter role - establish sourcing partnerships and identify positions

that require direct sourcing and align with current market strategies. In order to implement required

changes, these strategies will need to clearly identify required resources and elevate in the budget process.



Work Group Name: HR Services Work Group Lead: Cheryl Binetti

Recommendation #1: HR Information Access and Delivery

1. Background. What is the problem we are trying to solve (e.g., What is the issue? What is happening?) Or, what is

the business opportunity?

Most Metro employees do not have access to computers and email, work varying shifts at various locations –

and have very limited access to important information. These employees find it difficult to stay informed on

basic employee information related to benefits, retirement plan changes as well as take advantage of

employee development and promotional opportunities. It is difficult for Supervisors to disseminate

information to their work group in a timely fashion when they do not have a County email account; often,

they have to contact staff on an individual basis. The Human Resource Services work group would like to

identify the best way to provide HR/Benefits/Employee Relations information to all employees and improve

their employee experience and empower them to provide first rate service. In order to make sure we are

building a KC Metro culture that is consistent across divisions, we should design a targeted integrated and

inclusive communication plan for HR such that all employees across the divisions equitably access HR

information.


Better communication improves operations and morale, eliminates confusion, and reduces errors made

because of poor communication. Metro should support and align its practices with PACE and ESJ

commitments, better support Investing In You, improve organizational performance, achieve Metro’s

strategies and targets, increase employee engagement and ensure that information is distributed in a fair

and equitable way. If we don’t address this critical gap, employees could miss important information

regarding:

Benefit and retirement plan information

Training and development resources

Employee health, well-being and conflict management resources

Promotional opportunities

Compliance, policy and procedure information

Safety information

Conflict management information or employee resources

Time sensitive information related to work duties




Improve communication, tools and partnerships to deliver information equitably throughout the

organization. Consider improving access to HR at bases through a “business partner” model, increased

presence, relationship-building, and increased access to employee information. Identify the best way to

deliver information to frontline employees. Include end-users in design of information delivery system and

fully utilize existing methods.



Technology-limited at work locations, lack of email access and training on how to use technology across

work. If dissemination of information is limited or primarily through staff meetings, it is important to note

that meetings are not an option for all employees, such as rail operators and supervisors, bus operations and

field maintenance and power crews. It is also important to address any associated labor issues. Employee

information is not current and readily available as well as limited access to HR staff and information. A

dedicated resource is needed to create and maintain multiple methods of information delivery as well as

possibly siting a dedicated resource at various facilities to serve as a resource.


Improve and standardize access and delivery of information to employees through technology/staff/training

etc. Adopt an HR business partner model to compliment other information delivery methods. Training on how

to access and navigate the site for managers/supervisors and administrative staff.




Recommendation #1: Labor Relations

1. Background. What is the problem we are trying to solve (e.g., What is the issue? What is happening?) Or, what is


The work is to create a robust system to enforce labor contracts, policies and procedures to support and

guide the success of managers—to create “One KC Metro.” Through training and service delivery, managers

would be empowered to be consistent, even-handed, and to hold and be held accountable for performance

and behavior. A shared understanding must be developed through partnership with chiefs, superintendents,

other managers unions, and employees. Regular uniform training with regard to employee accountability,

grievance handling, investigation, policy and procedure enforcement, conflict resolution provides an

opportunity to improve employee relations by reducing conflict. Role clarity achieved by setting clear

expectations among TELR, HR and Transit supervisory personnel will lead to more consistent and defensible

practices.


Managers, HR and TELR could benefit from stronger partnerships in order to effectively handle HR issues,

acting in concert for the benefit of employees, and Metro more generally. Currently, there is lack of

consistency in the understanding and application of policies, procedures and practices. There also exists a

lack of role clarity, and inefficiencies in policies and procedures. There are numerous disparate data bases

collecting various documentation which does not support efficient use of resources.




One KC Metro Team – unified goals for TELR, HR and transit supervisory personnel through regular training.

Setting clear expectations, and maintaining data to assure consistency, accountability, and strategy. Data

management system should be created for tracking grievances, investigations, disciplines, litigation,

memoranda of understanding, unfair labor practices, bargaining, policy revisions, paid administrative leave,

et cetera. Data to be actively maintained by trained, experienced staff. Uniformity through training and

accountability in data collection and storage by admins and others outside of TELR who maintain data

relevant to the work, including but not limited to Laserfiche, grievance handling, investigations and discipline.

Creation, use, and maintenance of single source forms for labor relations by TELR-e.g., no one-off,

duplicative, or unit specific forms. Design and maintenance of handbook or guidelines for handling TELR

matters -- which should include all county mandated expectations--for how TELR and managers are to carry

out the work. Examples: PAL notice, Loudermill Letter, Investigatory report, disciplinary letters, paper to

digital. Partner with Unions where applicable to work through changes to the way we practice/execute labor

relations.


Existing norms and expectations will likely be hard to change without a thoughtful and well executed plan.

Concerns about a changing role—where accountability and consistency haven’t been coherently promoted,

will likely lead to some resistance. Some chiefs may claim the need to bargain over changing or more defined

duties and expectations. Legal restrictions around labor practices via CBAs, frontloading time and resources

to develop stronger partnerships and streamline practices, and lack of dedicated resources to maintain and


track data will serve as challenges. The need to bargain the impact of policy changes may also be a challenge.

Dedicated time to provide training will be hard to acquire without effort and cost; the varying skill sets of

managers will require calibrated training, which will take additional resources and planning.


Uniform expectations, training, and data management and time to create a robust plan are required if this

plan is to work. KC Metro One Team- One unified/uniform goal or set of goals for TELR, Supervisory personnel,

and employees; a department built for the 22nd century to create a robust system to enforce labor contracts

and policies and procedures that is trusted by employees, unions, and management; and implement and

enforce standard LER practices across KC Metro. Consistent and improved communications on TELR matters

and changes, to generate feedback and buy-in. Will need dedicated resources initially to build standards for

agency. Will need IT technology support to develop database.




Recommendation #1: Succession Planning for Metro’s Workforce

1. Background. What is the problem we are trying to solve (e.g., What is the issue? What is happening?)? Or,

what is the business opportunity?

Metro has lost and will continue to lose key leaders due to the aging workforce/retirement, or natural

attrition. Currently, Metro does not have a succession plan for key positions. As a result, we lose critical

expertise and institutional knowledge when employees leave and remaining team members are put in the

challenging position of trying to fill in knowledge gaps. We also seek to establish fair and open recruitment

for employment positions to further equity and social justice.


Ineffective or lack of succession planning affects our ability to support appropriate knowledge transfer that is

essential to our ability to efficiently carry out our day to day business. The new leader and existing colleagues

will reap the benefits of effective succession planning as it will reduce the amount of transition time. There is

a loss of institutional knowledge in the absence of a comprehensive succession plan, so training time will be

significantly reduced. Also, positions that have a hard time being filled will have an easier time with

recruitment. New employee mistakes will be reduced. Safety is improved. A fair and open recruitment

process furthers our ESJ goals.




Institute a policy that requires an overlap between key position transitions for adequate knowledge transfer.

Design and share a process for transition management that is available for all employees. This process may be

utilized for internal transitions, as appropriate. Some best practices include: double-filling positions/making

this standardized practice, retirement succession plan, apprenticeships, “trainer” pay, cross-training,

standardize cross-training practices, mentorship as a policy for managers, work with unions to come to

solutions that benefit employees, the agency as a whole, and promote fair and open recruitment.

Standardized work documentation. Encourage exit interviews for employees and TLTs.


Adherence to the policy could be a challenge. Need to determine how to hold an exiting employee and

manager accountable if they do not adhere to the policy. Employees close enough to retirement age may feel

pushed out. Special duty assignments currently are extended and offered to the same person, without a plan

to hire. There are current cultural barriers to succession planning, which has ESJ implications, as those newer

to the industry have less access to available positions. Another barrier is that employees are only required to

give two week notice. County policy and CBAs may need to be modified in order to create a new way of

addressing succession planning.


Need to write a succession planning policy; Share the policy and any related resources (e.g., process map

outlining key steps to ensure transfer of knowledge; Transition/change management template that captures

key issues and recommendations for incoming employees; etc.); Apply the practice and include this

succession planning as part of the employee’s exit process. Ask Managers to identify key positions in their

work groups, engage in succession planning efforts and reflect in the budget process.


d2D Work Group Recommendation #19 Work Group Name: Workforce Development & Training Work Group Lead: Amanda Nightingale

Recommendation: Ensure equitable access to effective, reliable & user-friendly WFD technology systems

that remain nimble.



As a leader in mobility, Metro needs to continue to evolve with technology. Currently, Metro does not have an

enterprise wide/systematic way to derive insights on workforce development needs such as: quality of trainings,

training completion rate, and training effectiveness. Limited access to training information and data inhibits our

ability to have valuable insight to identify issue areas and implement training needs that are essential to the

development of our workforce and maintaining our service commitments. Without appropriate training, our

workforce will have limited access to learning and limits their ability to master their current jobs, advance within

the agency, and maintain the required knowledge as employees attrite. Metro also does not have an eLearning

platform that allows us to provide trainings to our large workforce in a cost effective and time efficient way. We

also do not have a systematic platform to track external training information.


Technology advances and our rapidly changing work environment are impacting our line of business. Metro needs to continue to invest in our human capital to meet the demands of the evolving workplace. Metro lost roughly 10% of our workforce to retirements and natural attrition in 2017. To make sure that our workforce is equipped to safely and effectively execute their jobs, we need to prioritize workforce development and training by implementing technology systems that are effective, reliable, and user-friendly. These systems will also help ensure cost-effective and scalable training in a timely manner, support standardized performance management, and foster a culture of transparent and equitable access and shared accountability to training resources. Additionally, these systems will allow Metro to proactively identify training needs, gaps, and improve regulatory compliance.

Inadequate training can pose hazard/safety risks for our workforce and the public that is beyond an

acceptable risk threshold (e.g., operators need to be adequately trained to drive buses; our maintenance teams

need to stay current on how to maintain new rolling stock, etc.). If we continue to neglect relevant training,

especially technical training, that can be made available via technology for all employees we put the organization

at risk of decreased safety, inability to meet service commitments, and a less engaged and productive workforce.




Metro needs an enterprise Learning Management System (LMS) that supports all aspects of workforce

development. A robust LMS provides a platform for training design, development, evaluation and delivery (e-

learning); compiles training record for each employee; and includes tools for planning workforce development

that supports the needs of each employee’s professional development goals and the organizations current and

future needs. An LMS provides access to training for employees 24/7, which supports Metro’s interests and

allows the agency to delivery training agency wide, that is timely and consistent. Finally, a healthy LMS provides

easily accessible information to all levels of the organization and resources which supports the planning,

development and strategies necessary to ensure that Metro is the mobility leader in the region.

This recommendation supports Metro’s Strategy for Delivering More and Better Mobility Solutions

(“Building a highly motivated and high-performing workforce”) as well as King County’s Investing in You initiative.


Metro Transit Tech is limited and does not currently have the autonomy to support the desired technology. It will

require time and effort to introduce a new system and integrate it. We will need a flexible change management


plan (taking in to account that each employee requires varying space and time to learn the system), to help

employees see the benefits, adopt the new system, and processes and procedures. Metro does not have

sufficient equipment. Employee access to technology is a barrier (for example: transit operators not having email

and access to equipment). Determining a plan to provide coverage and backfill so that employees can attend

required and desired trainings will be a challenge.


In order to implement a new technology platform that is inclusive and accessible to all, Metro will have

to invest in an enterprise-wide LMS (as described in #3)

conduct an assessment to identify requirements and resources needed to successfully implement an

LMS

Create a space for employees to have access to technology

Create training so that this resource can be adopted by all.


d2D Work Group Recommendation #20 Work Group Name: Workforce Development & Training Work Group Lead: Amanda

Nightingale

Recommendation: Establish a business plan and measurable strategic goals that prioritizes employee

growth and development while serving and meeting the mobility desires and needs of the community.


what is the business opportunity

Metro lacks a systematic approach to proactively assess: the talent of our workforce; assess the gap between

organizational current and future staffing needs; and provide a standardized approach to performance and

development planning and budgeting for all employees. Without a centralized training and WFD group, we

lack oversight on workforce development and training, implementation of our ESJ plan, supporting training

for underrepresented and underserved groups. This results in a misalignment with metro’s business plans

(for example, Equity and Social Justice Strategic Plan, Metro Connects) and progress toward meeting current

and future regional mobility needs.


To maintain our position as an industry leader and ensure we remain an effective mobility solution for the

region, we must make a lasting commitment to invest in our employees. A centralized WFDT business plan

and measurable strategic goals will support creating, maintaining, and resourcing a multi-year strategy. Our

business plan will allow Metro to focus on: 1. Assessing the gaps between our current and projected

staffing/development needs; 2. Build a highly skilled workforce to meet those needs in a timely and effective

manner; 3. Take a more holistic approach to WFDT for all employees; 4. Implement measurable outcomes to

increase accountability of both leaderships and employees. These measureable goals will allow us to track

our progress to support and standardize our commitment to Safety, ESJ, Continuous Improvement, and

Workforce Development.




We need a centralized workforce development and training business plan that builds and measures our

ability to meet the development goals of each employees and the workforce needs of the agency for both the

near term and long range. The plan should identify the necessary resources to achieve the required results,

develop strategies to retain institutional knowledge, align with King County and Metro initiatives (such as

Metro Connects), and be scalable over time. The plan must also craft strategies to ensure that access to

development opportunities are inclusive, responsive and nimble to the changing needs of the work force and

agency and provide for growth opportunities that are supported by a career development center.

This recommendation supports Metro's Strategy for Delivering More and Better Mobility Solutions (“Build a

highly motivated and high-performing workforce”) and King County’s Investing in You Initiative.


Barriers to include: no centralized workforce and development team to oversee this effort; organizational

resistance; insufficient budget and staffing plans (backfill); unidentified needs and gaps and associated

timelines; and uncertainty about how to partner throughout and outside of Metro to reach these goals. As

part of a centralized WFD and training plan, we must systematically address the barriers that diminish our

ability to provide opportunities by identifying scalable resources (such as budgets and staffing plans) to


support agency goals and community mobility needs. A plan must educate leadership of their role to support

their employees’ personal development and provide equitable access to all employees.


The business plan overseen by a centralized workforce development and training team must identify

measurable goals from each division that are integrated into a cohesive and consistent approach to support

the individual development goals and organizational needs. For a plan to be successful, the WFD and training

team must socialize the plan for feedback to create support and buy in from all levels of the agency. The plan

must identify resources and goals that are scalable and project outcomes (both near term and long term

goals), identify gaps between current talent and projected work force models and ultimately support the

mobility needs of the communities we serve.



Nightingale

Recommendation: Ensure all employees have equitable access to inclusive, culturally responsive,

personalized ongoing development.



Metro does not have a professional development strategy to effectively develop our workforce in a

manner that is inclusive, culturally responsive, personalized and ongoing. Currently, employees lack

clearly defined career growth pathways, professional development plans that support employees’

interests in ongoing development, and our business needs in having a highly effective and engaged

workforce. Workforce development and training opportunities that do exist are not perceived as

equitably accessible to all employees and there is insufficient structure in place to measure how we are

implementing the Equity and Social Justice (ESJ) strategic plan to support equitable access. Current

training efforts are largely focused on new hire training or training that is specific to required tasks. It is

often approached as “one size fits all” rather than customized for the specific needs of the employees

participating in the training and application of the learning on the job is not evaluated. Trainings are

often conducted “just in time” to meet the needs/requirements of the job rather than timed to be in

alignment with succession planning, business activities (such as growth of service, implementation of

new technology). Metro is lacking a focus continuous learning/soft skills development approach that is

more holistic. Leaders are also not provided with appropriate tools and coaching to support employees

who are entering Metro employment and/or want to develop their careers, which contributes to a

variety of issues that affect morale in the workplace (e.g., employees feeling unsupported by managers,

lack of guidance on appropriate training and utilization of training, limited career mobility within

Metro, etc.).


Metro needs to be a competitive employer that retains and grows our workforce. In 2017, we lost 525 of

employees (143 due to retirement) and hired 499 new employees. Replacement costs for each position ranges

between 30% to 150% of an employee’s annual salary and average fill time is between 12 and 16 weeks. We need

a way to retain and promote existing staff and attract new employees into positions as soon as they are open.

Promoting professional development is one way of doing this while ensuring high levels of employee morale and

effective utilization of employee skill sets.

A successful professional development program can also improve employee effectiveness and safety in the

workplace while maintaining our commitments to fiscal responsibility and service levels to the region. Ensuring all

employees have equitable access to inclusive, culturally responsive, personalized ongoing development signifies

that Metro is interested in fostering an organizational culture, and generation of managers who are better

prepared to be people leaders, to increase employee engagement.


(“Build a highly motivated and high-performing workforce”) and King County’s Investing in You

Initiative.





Metro should require all employees to adopt, and have sufficient support (i.e. time, budget) to pursue,

comprehensive individual training plans (including onboarding trainings at the department level) regardless

of their role within Metro. Sufficient staffing plans and budget should be allocated to support development

and training programs that address our diverse workforce (e.g., deliver training in multiple languages;

trainings should be responsive and culturally sensitive to various learning styles; trainings need to

accommodate for those that work outside of traditional business hours) and content should include both

technical skills and soft skills (such as ESJ, communications, problem solving). Metro should consider a tuition

reimbursement program that would provide a win-win scenario (for employees to grow professionally and

improve their level of competency; for employers to have an engaged workforce and to easily identify

leaders at an early stage) for both the employer and employee. Managers should be held accountable and

evaluated on their level support for developing their employees.


Implementing a robust professional development and training program for all employees will require major

budget resources to be allocated. Even if resources are available, Metro’s culture is adverse to change and

requires buy in and support. It will take time and resources to design a transparent, equitable, and

comprehensive program that is accessible to all employees. It is hard to agree on performance metrics

without investing in other required resources (e.g., a Workforce Development and Training (WFDT) team to

develop a strategy based on their identification of employee/business needs and gaps, a Learning

Management System that would provide appropriate insight/data to show results/outcomes).


Conduct focus groups to design a comprehensive program to meet the needs of Metro’s diverse

workforce

Conduct research and benchmarking against peer agencies

Capture requirements and standard processes/procedures to implement the recommendation

Develop performance based metrics to evaluate program success

Create tools and guidance to management and employees to outline high level milestones based on

individual job classifications

Introduce a policy that will help Metro enforce adoption of this recommendation

Pilot the recommendation

Audit and review training/development to see if employees who may not have had access previously are

getting access

Establish accountability metrics for managers in support of their employee’s development



Nightingale

Recommendation: Develop a strategic and standardized plan to establish and maintain

collaborative relationships with internal and external partners that build and support a diverse

workforce at all levels.



To expand career and development opportunities for current Metro employees and prospective employees, Metro needs to cultivate and strengthen partnerships with stakeholders. The lack of internal processes for collaboration and communication with employees, between workgroups, and with labor unions hamper our employees’ ability to receive information on career building and training opportunities especially for those interested in a non-traditional career path. There is also a lack of opportunities for Metro employees to pursue development and training.

As an organization, Metro needs to foster a culture of building partnerships. With our external partners, we need to develop a strategic and standardized approach and plan to empower our employees to leverage existing partnerships to pursue skills training and career advancement. For example, Metro would benefit from utilizing opportunities to partner with public agencies, community organizations, educational institutions, and industry peers to better support our employee’s development and training.

By finding strategic alliance to develop Metro’s employees, the organization can be better positioned as a growth-oriented and community-focused employer and attract high-quality candidates that share these values.


Metro relies on partnerships to deliver better and more comprehensive training as we have limited

capacity. Through partnerships, we are also able to increase our visibility within the community and

attract a more diverse workforce that is reflective of the community we serve. The more of a role we

play regionally in workforce development and training, the higher quality and/competitive our

workforce is internally and in the market we pull from.

Encouraging a culture of partnering internally will help break down silos and align resources for training

efforts. These internal partnerships will help ensure that we are able to meet service commitments and

maintain maximum system safety in providing these services.




In order to build a culture that fosters collaboration and partnership with our employees, internal

stakeholders, and external partners there must be a plan and a team that is strategically focused on

building and maintaining these relationships as they specifically relate to workforce development and

training. To better leverage existing development opportunities offered by partnering organizations,

Metro needs to refine our communication strategies and create information sharing platforms that

allows easy access of development opportunities with partnering organizations. When addressing


internal development resource constraints, Metro needs to look outside the agency, partner with

community/public agencies, education entities and industry organizations to look for fresh ideas and

share resources to expand personal growth and skill building opportunities.


(“Build a highly motivated and high-performing workforce”), Equity and Social Justice, and King

County’s Investing in You Initiative.


To fully leverage existing partnerships for employee development and training, senior leadership, team

leaders, and labor organizations need to embrace its importance and provide resource and material

support to allow employees to pursue these opportunities. A cultural shift could pose considerable

challenges (for example, current siloed workplace and existing restrictive policies). Secondly, budgetary

constraints pose as a barrier to free up our employees from their workload to pursue skill building

trainings. Furthermore, building new partnerships requires vision, creativity, and resources. Without a

dedicated workforce development team that can identify and prioritize these relationships based on a

strategic WFDT plan, and serve as a point of contact to manage these internal and external

relationships, our agency is limited in our ability to leverage these relationships to support system

safety, service, and remain an industry leader.


Conduct need assessments across the department to understand how internal and external

development opportunities and partnerships are identified, prioritized, communicated and

maintained.

Senior leadership and team leaders are committed and held accountable for the employees’

performance and development goals.

A dedicated workforce development team that explores and fosters partnerships with internal

stakeholders and external entities.

Develop creative communication strategies and platforms to allow easy access of development

opportunities that are offered via a partner organization.



Recommendation: Establish an accountable, centralized workforce development team and budget that is

adequately resourced, staffed by diverse and highly skilled employees, and integrated within each

section/division.



Metro’s training program is not centralized, contributing to: 1. Inconsistent administration, planning, and

development of workforce development strategies and programs; 2. Lack of governance and oversight on

development program; 3. Inequity among work group’s access to budget and training. The decentralized training

management inhibit our ability to effectively plan and develop trainings (e.g., training is often reactive, we do not

have common standards and processes, and training quality is inconsistent, employees do not know how to

request and attend training and development opportunities). This then impacts our ability to support an engaged

and diverse workforce that is prepared to safely and effectively complete their work, and help Metro maintain its

position as an industry leader.


Metro needs to be a competitive employer that retains and grows our workforce to maintain system safety and

service level commitments. Workforce development and investment in our workforce can be a powerful tool to

attract and retain diverse talent, and maintain high employee morale. There is a growing need for Metro to

evaluate and improve our training program.

Employees have the perception that there is inequitable access to training information and varied ability to

participate in trainings (e.g., the “favorites” are provided with training opportunities, those who don’t get along

with managers are marginalized and thus have barriers for professional development). Transparent training plans,

processes, and resources that would be developed and overseen by a centralized workforce development team

would help mitigate real and/or perceived inequities. In addition, this team would increase our employees’

accountability in complete their trainings—anecdotally, many employees do not complete courses despite

Metro’s investment. Furthermore, Metro needs to comply with regulatory requirements for mandatory trainings.

A centralized training program and team plans and ensures that Metro can meet and satisfy any required training

requirements for our employees Lastly, to continuously improve our workforce development and training

programs, Metro currently has limited insight on the quality of trainings A centralized training team with the

ability to develop metrics, track workforce development trends, and provide strategies and recommendations will

enable Metro to make effective decisions to build a strong and engaged workforce.




We propose having a centralized workforce development team that has both budget oversight and management

of Metro’s workforce development program. The centralized team will determine strategy and roadmap, set

standards, develops policies and guidelines, support both internal and external partnerships, and foster a culture

of transparency, accountability, and inclusiveness to support Metro’s workforce development program. The team

will have oversight over workforce development and training efforts embedded within Metro divisions and

sections.

This recommendation supports Metro’s Strategy for Delivering More and Better Mobility Solutions (“Build a

highly motivated and high-performing workforce”) and King County’s Investing in You initiative.



Designing an organization that balances the need for minimum standards while also allowing space for individual

teams to have ownership and authority to deliver quality work will take time and agility. Getting organizational

support/buy in from everyone will be a challenge (particularly managers and supervisors as they do not want to

relinquish control; and, current employees who may feel uncertain about their job security). Communication and

change management will take effort upfront.


Change in organizational structure to accommodate team.

Conduct an assessment of current state (budget, current trainings, processes, policies) and determine

gaps through various stakeholder engagement within Metro.

Create a plan to address the gaps.

Determine a budget.

Draft communication strategy, guidelines, and FAQs so employees know how to access WFD resources.

Staff the centralized team and implement plan.



Recommendation: Establish a Career Center



Metro lacks a central and neutral location to access information, resources, and technology that provide Metro

employees with equitable access to training, development, and employment information and opportunities.

Development opportunities are especially limited and do not accommodate those that work outside traditional

business hours, do not have access to technology, do not work in an office environment, and/or lack other

resource support in the workplace. Metro’s current professional development programs are more focused on

employees who have access to technology and work in an office environment, and often promote traditional

career paths rather than supporting employees who want to seek new opportunities that don’t follow the

standard path. This barrier contributes to low staff morale due to the perception that there is lack of

opportunities.

There is also a great need to attract and hire a highly skilled and diverse workforce to support Metro’s

growth. This career center would be a way to introduce and support prospective employees with researching,

preparing for, and/or applying for positions within Metro.

This is a business opportunity to break down career path siloes, introduce prospective employees to job

opportunities at Metro, and provide inclusive and personalized support that is representative of Metro’s people-

focused approach to its employees.


Metro needs to be a competitive employer that retains and grows our workforce. In 2017, we lost 525 of

employees (143 due to retirement) and hired 499 new employees. Replacement costs for each position ranges

between 30% to 150% of an employee’s annual salary and average fill time is between 12 and 16 weeks. We need

a way retain existing staff and attract new employees. A career center is part of a comprehensive training and

workforce development program that enables employees to safely and effectively complete their day-to-day job

and signals Metro’s commitment to develop our workforce. Inclusive and equitable access to training empowers

employees to develop professionally and advance their careers at Metro and will contribute to a more engaged

and invested workforce. Establishing a career center is an opportunity to share training resources and scale our

service across the organization. It also offers an opportunity to attract and support a diverse group of prospective

employees in their understanding and exploration of career options within Metro.

This recommendation is in response to employee’s need to access training and professional

development opportunity in an inclusive and neutral place whether exploring, preparing for, or applying for job

opportunities. Having a dedicated space better positions Metro to partner with employees to curate customized

learning agendas based on employee interests and skills. It would also facilitate deploying computer skills

training, initiatives such as instituting a succession planning process and policy, a place to provide feedback and

share ideas for training, and centralized job board that highlights Metro’s career options and upcoming

employment needs.

This recommendation supports Metro’s Strategy for Delivering More and Better Mobility Solutions (“Build a

highly motivated and high-performing workforce”) and King County’s Investing in You Initiative.





Metro should establish a dedicated career center that provides current employees and prospective employees

with strategies and recommendations to explore careers within Metro. This career center would also help

current employees better navigate their career development and tap into Metro resources.


It will take time to get buy-in from both leaders and frontline managers because the work will require an

investment in resources; Identifying a location/space that is easily accessible for all employees; Budget to

adequately staff and support career center operations; Determining how best to accommodate employees that

work outside traditional business hours.


Conduct assessment to identify requirements and resources needed for effective deployment of a career

center

Identify adequate and easy to access space for the career center

Obtain buy-in from all leaders to support this initiative; Introduce a policy to introduce training and

development as a core function of Metro’s business

Identify areas where there is a need for labor agreement and support, as appropriate

Capture Metro HR’s existing training and development process

Develop standards and procedures around individual development plan

Allocate budget, staff, technology (computers, e-learning, assessments), and business hours

Determine a communication strategy to encourage prospective employees to utilize the career center,

and develop processes to support these individuals when they access the career center


d2D Work Group Recommendation #25 Work Group Name: Partnership Work Group Lead: Mike Beck

Recommendation: Create a Partnership Steering Committee to establish policies and objectives

for guidance throughout the department for prioritizing and approaching partnerships that will support

achieving Metro’s strategic goals.


what is the business opportunity?

Metro’s current development and prioritization of partnerships does not always reflect a consistent, long-

term approach for establishing partnerships that achieve the department’s goals and objectives as defined by

Metro’s strategic plan (METRO CONNECTS) and Metro leadership. The agency does not have established

goals and priorities for partnerships that can be easily communicated as guidance for staff working with all

types of partnerships, including both external and internal.


Metro’s current approach to reaching out and creating partnerships is decentralized and inconsistent. There

is a lack of clarity around priorities for the type of partnerships that will actually move Metro towards its long

range vision. Without guidance from documented objectives for approaching partnerships as established by

Metro leadership and our strategic plan, staff tends to determine their own partnership priorities based on

their programs/projects needs. This results in confusion and mixed messages with our partners and the

investment of resources in partnerships that may not be achieving our agency’s overall goals and objectives.




Establish a Partnership Steering Committee, comprised of representatives from Metro’s senior

management team, and impacted divisions, with the responsibility of developing a policy for specifying and

prioritizing partnership goals over the next 6-10 years that are based on METRO CONNECTS, Metro capital

project prioritization, and management input. This board would be led by a single point of contact (TBD) who

would convene the board to:

1. identify and document the specific goals and objectives Metro desires to pursue through partnerships

over the next 6-10 years using the strategic plan, METRO CONNECTS Development Program, Metro

project prioritization, grants, and other near-term priorities as a basis.

2. develop a policy and guidelines with key criteria to inform staff on current status of Metro relationship

with external and internal partners, help to identify, prioritize and approach potential partners in early

phases. The policy would include a clear definition of valued types of partnerships, expectations and the

resources that may leverage. This would build on work being done for the RapidRide program and the

Regional Transit Committee through the METRO CONNECTS Development Program.

3. in addition to jurisdiction and service partnerships, address policies for employer and community

partnerships, including partnerships for recruiting and developing Metro’s work force.

4. review the policy & guidelines on at least an annual basis to take in account any necessary adjustments

to strategic goals and/or changes to partnership priorities.

5. assign knowledgeable staff to participate in building a relationship with a proposed partnership resource

office in early phase of the project and identify appropriate point of contact to elevate communications

internally and externally.

6. review and update current approaches for building partnerships and achieving strategies.


7. provide guidance and decision-making on a strategic policy level for use by a centralized partnership

resource office to support staff within the department working on partnerships.

8. consider equitable distribution of partnerships and ensure that smaller cities and cities with fewer

resources are able to participate in meaningful ways.

9. Schedule: It is recommended that this Partnership Steering Committee be immediately implemented to

start to lay the groundwork for this work and support the submittal of Metro’s department budget to the

Executive’s office this June. It is considered urgent that Metro start as soon as possible to begin

developing and communicating to staff the partnerships to be prioritized and pursued going forward,

both new and existing, and that we do so in a manner that is consistent and compatible with our

established strategic goals and METRO CONNECTS. It is anticipated that the Board would be led by a

single point of contact (TBD) and made up of representatives from Metro’s Senior management team,

impacted divisions, Strategic Planning, program/project staff, and various support sections including,

budget, legal, ESJ, etc.

10. Expected Benefits: By clearly identifying the goals and expectations of Metro’s partnerships and

communicating this information to Metro staff, it is expected that staff will be in a better position to

evaluate and prioritize potential partnerships that will enhance the department’s ability to achieve our

long-term, strategic objectives in METRO CONNECTS. With established policy and guidelines, Metro

should have a more consistent message carried forward to all our partners and reduce issues of

confused, mixed messages and negotiation disadvantages.


A major challenge of this recommendation is dedicating the time and resources required to create, support

and manage a Partnership Steering Committee consisting of Metro leadership and divisional staff

representatives to perform the extensive work of becoming knowledgeable on partnerships, to resolve

conflicting priorities, and evaluating information and data from a wide variety of sources to develop policy

and guidelines for establishing the agency’s goals and objectives related to partnerships.


Obtaining a commitment from department leadership that establishes agency-wide objectives and

priorities for partnerships is essential for directing staff and achieving our strategic plan and METRO

CONNECTS goals.

These established goals and objectives would include all types of partnerships with jurisdictions,

employers, operators, human services agencies, transportation agencies, educational institutions and

internal work groups.

The goals and objectives established by the Steering Committee will address both service and capital needs

and guidance for leveraging resources with all sizes of potential partners.

A commitment from the entire department that the partnership goals and objectives established by the

Steering Committee will be used for reference and guidance on how to prioritize and create partnerships

that support achieving METRO CONNECTS.


d2D Work Group Recommendation #26 Work Group Name: Partnership Work Group Lead: Mike Beck

Recommendation: Create a Partnership Hub & Resource office within the Department with its primary

responsibility being to support staff by acting as a central point for the collection, management and

communication of key information related to Metro partnerships.



Due to the decentralized nature of how Metro approaches partnerships, staff has limited access to

information and data concerning individual organizations. This lack of knowledge creates confusion and

disadvantages when staff attempts to negotiate and develop partnerships that are advantageous to Metro

and its objectives. Instituting a centralized hub and resource office will also allow Metro to be more strategic

in how the organization approaches and selects partnerships. The idea of this recommendation is to establish

a more centralized, consistent organizational arrangement for creating and managing partnerships that

moves Metro forward towards achieving our strategic goals and METRO CONNECTS, but without

undermining the ability of expert, knowledgeable staff to directly interact, plan and negotiate with both

potential and established partners.


What is a partnership?: For the purpose of this recommendation, the Partnership Work Group considered

partnerships to be interactive relationships with both external and internal organizations that would commit

resources (money, staff, in kind, etc.) from all parties in order to build transit capital projects, improve

accessibility to transit, increase Metro’s system capacity, address workforce needs and address the mobility

needs of all partners, including jurisdictions, employers, community-based organizations and other

government agencies. The ultimate goal of all partnerships formed by Metro should be to assist the

department with achieving the goals in METRO CONNECTS and other objectives as determined by Metro’s

management team.

Currently, it is difficult for staff working on Metro programs & projects with other organizations, whether for

capital or services requirements, to understand Metro priorities for partnerships and how to most effectively

approach and leverage resources from those partnerships without appropriate information and knowledge.

This may be related to internal staff interactions that are already occurring with a potential partner as well as

an external understanding of the organization’s motivations and challenges. Without this type of

information being readily and conveniently available to staff, they are not in the best position to develop

partnerships that efficiently leverage the limited resources in the region that are necessary for achieve

Metro’s strategic priorities and goals. It is very clear that Metro will need all forms of effective partnerships if

we are to successfully meet the future transportation demands within King County.




Establish an organizational arrangement within the department that would create a centralized resource

point for information and guidance to support staff looking to approach potential partners and manage

existing partnerships. This resource would require clear definitions of roles and responsibilities and would not

replace direct interaction of expert staff with potential and established partners as those relationships are

critical to our success.


Option 1: This would be a Partnership Hub & Resource office with its primary responsibility to act as a

central point for the collection, management and communication of key information related to specific

jurisdictions, employers and other organizations who partner with Metro. The office would consist of six-

seven (6-7) FTE positions; one (1) lead, 4 -5 strategic advisors, and one (1) administrative support. The

strategic advisors would be assigned to support either geographical districts or by partnership category

(jurisdictions, employers, service/retail, etc.). Under this option, the office would not reside within one of

Metro’s divisions, so it is viewed as a common resource available to all staff no matter which division they

work under.

Option 1 is the preferred option being recommended by the Partnership Work Group based on the

extremely important role partnerships will play in Metro’s ability to achieve its policy objectives and

strategic goals. It’s believed that funding a dedicated staff and resources for this office is the best way to

ensure support and guidance for staff working on partnerships. Without this financial commitment by

the Department, Option 2 is proposed as a possible means of addressing some of the issues with existing

resources. However, this option may also result in overtaxing existing staff’s ability to perform their other

responsibilities.

Option 2: Create one FTE to lead the work of a coordinated group of existing partnership resources. Identify

staff positions that work primarily with a specific partnership category and assign them as central partnership

resources. These positions based on the knowledge and experience they already hold would become lead

resources for information and guidance related to that partnership category. This option allows primarily the

use of existing resources to address the need for central points of contact which staff could access for

information about specific organizations in each partnership category. In addition, these staff positions

would provide direction and assistance with how to approach partnerships that would comply with the

department’s policy priorities and strategic goals.

Note that as Metro CONNECTS program is being implemented, partnership-related work is anticipated to

increase, additional dedicated resources in one form or another will be needed to perform the work to

maintain and organize Metro’s partnership.

Some of the responsibilities of either a Partnership Hub & Resource office (Option 1) or lead partnership staff

(Option 2) would be to:

1. Provide guidance and information related to the Partnership Board’s policies for prioritizing, establishing

and managing partnerships.

2. Collect information and data on staff interactions with specific partners. Use an electronic database to

store existing agreements and contract document, in addition to providing information on organization

contacts and recent staff interactions.

3. Manage and communicate such information to staff as-needed for their interactions and negotiations

with potential and established partners.

4. Act as an electronic file center for executed partnership documents, including agreements, MOUs and

amendments.

5. Establish communication channels and relationships with partner organizations. When requested, assist

staff with partner communications and identifying appropriate contacts within an organization.

6. Consider how equity factors into the formation of partnerships in smaller cities and those with fewer

resources.

7. Include government relations and community relations responsibilities to develop on-going relationships

with partners, understanding their issues, priorities and political situations. Be able to communicate and

inform staff of this information in order to enhance consistent messages and approaches to individual

partners and support two-way communications with the public and stakeholders. It is also

recommended an employer-relations function be included in this office.


Schedule: This organizational arrangement with either a Partnership Hub & Resource office or assigning lead

staff by partnership category would be proposed in the Department’s biennial budget submitted to the

County Executive in June. Ideally, this centralized partnership arrangement would be formed as the

Partnership Steering Committee is being established so that a close working relationship can be developed

early on.

Expected Benefits: The benefits of establishing a centralized partnership resource arrangement is that it

keeps in place the staff in various divisions with the expertise and knowledge necessary to interact and

negotiate with partners but would provide such staff with the information and resources needed to perform

their work in an informed and consistent manner. By either the Partnership Hub & Resource office or the

lead partnership staff arrangement working closely with the Partnership Steering Committee, the

department can be ensured staff is aware of the type of partnerships Metro is prioritizing and the most

effective way to approach them to successfully achieve Metro’s strategic goals.


A major challenge of this recommendation is finding the funding and/or determining how to dedicate existing

staff and resources to form this office so it may act as a central point of partner information and to provide

guidance to staff working on a variety of partnerships across the department.

The objective of this office would be to act as an available as-needed resource to staff working with various

organizations on partnerships, not as another organization structure they would have to report though and

require approvals from. However, to make this office effective there would need to be a minimum reporting

requirement of all staff working on partnerships in order for that information to be available to all

partnership staff throughout the department. The challenge would be obtaining that information on a

regular basis so that the office is viewed as a credible resource. It may be reasonable to accomplish this

through an electronic system.


Obtain a commitment from department leadership for funding and dedicating staff and resources to create

an office to establish a more centralized, consistent organizational arrangement for informing and

supporting staff on partnerships, but without undermining the ability of expert, knowledgeable staff to

directly interact, plan and negotiate with both potential and established partners.

Determine where this office would reside in the department, within a division or outside of all divisions

with a more directing reporting relationship to the GM’s office.

Consider if staffing for this office would be new positions or the transferring of existing staff from other

work groups.

In consideration of a recommendation from Strategic Communications & External Department Functions

work group, determine if this office arrangement should include responsibilities for government relations.

This recommendation is consistent in concept with a similar recommendation coming from the Mobility

Service Planning Work Group. It is anticipated further discussion will be required with both this work

group and the Strategic Communications & External Department Functions Work Group to reach an overall

recommendation for this organizational arrangement to support partnerships.

d2D Work Group Recommendation #27: Partnerships Types Infographic

d2D Work Group Recommendation #28 Work Group Name: Mobility Planning and Services Work Group Lead: Carol Cooper

Recommendation: Keep Scheduling in Mobility Division

1. Background. What is the problem we are trying to solve (e.g., What is the issue? What is happening?)? Or, what is


Metro’s Scheduling group is responsible for scheduling all bus, rail, DART, community shuttle, and special

services. The group is currently part of Service Development and has strong linkages in particular with Service

Planning and Transit Route Facilities. The location of Scheduling within the organization has been up for

discussion with some d2D teams suggesting it should no longer be in the same Division as Service Planning.


The success of Scheduling is vital to creating and delivering high-quality, reliable services for riders.

Scheduling, Service Planning, and Transit Route Facilities need to be closely connected both in physical

proximity and in organizational structure. Moves that would separate these three functions would hurt our

ability to develop high-quality transit service. Service Planning relies on scheduling to vet ideas, conduct cost

analysis, provide feedback, develop draft schedules, and more. Route Facilities relies on scheduling to analyze

and review layover and facilities impacts of schedule development. These functions and processes are not

linear, and require ongoing and continuous coordination and feedback. Scheduling also offers a bridge

between Operations and Planning staff. Senior Schedule Planners are all former bus operators and ATU 587

members, bringing a valuable and diverse set of experiences to their work. Service Planners typically do not

have this background, so therefore benefit from close coordination and rely on Scheduling for their expertise,

familiarity with Operations, and relationships as well.




Locate Scheduling within the newly-formed Mobility Division, along with Services Planning and Route Facilities

groups. Reinstate geographic “squads” that take further advantage of the ability to closely link Schedulers and

Planners in teams that can develop deep knowledge about the services, needs, and potential ideas to improve

service in each area of the transit system.


A barrier to this could be the perception that there is some operational efficiency by consolidating Scheduling

with other groups that use HASTUS. However, with expansion of HASTUS into Service Planning in the near

future this justification will have a limited life span.


Senior leadership in Mobility should advocate for Scheduling to be within the Mobility Division along with

Scheduling and Route Facilities.


d2D Work Group Recommendation #29 Work Group Name: Mobility – Planning and Services Work Group Lead: Carol Cooper

Recommendation: Enhance Marketing Capability



Communications activities occur in many different work groups and include a variety of audiences. While

communications functions do not need to be centralized they do need to be coordinated, consistent and

adequately resourced. Currently, there are numerous demands placed on an under-resourced marketing

staff, and there are not clear protocols for ensuring all levels of communicators are included in a given

program or project as needed. Marketing, as referred to in this recommendation, is considered to be different

from strategic communications.


Our ability to communicate in a timely, accurate and persuasive fashion in critical to achieving our mobility

goals. Awareness marketing is paired with providing useable information that drives ridership.

Marketing is key to customer care and feeding, and to new customer recruitment. Marketing is how we build

loyalty, sell our services, demonstrate our expanding potential to provide improved mobility for customers,

and make our service easy to use and relevant in customer’s lives. Customers are being marketed to

constantly in their daily lives. For Metro to break through and be relevant, we need to have a visible presence

and frequent opportunities to reach customers.




Marketing is responsible for providing overall direction in messaging and brand, providing creative support for

materials design, maintaining an easy to use web presence, and using social media to support programs and

brand awareness. Marketing should be adequately resourced to support customer communications for all

necessary programs and initiatives. These include general Metro awareness campaigns, and specific programs,

services and ridership initiatives. Additional staff are required for web, creative and project management.

Marketing should also include a communications specialist that can liaison with government relations. Failure

to adequately resource the marketing function results in delay in services and program delivery, and

negatively impacts the Metro brand. Providing additional support allows Metro to provide excellent customer

service, increases our relevance, and allows timely program delivery to achieve our mobility targets.


Resourcing additional staff required to full staff this function


At least 1 additional webmaster, and 2 additional marketing specialists

Management support for improved communications and clarity of roles regarding strategic

communications



Recommendation: Integrated Innovation Team



Innovation is occurring at an ever increasing pace, and in numerous areas that directly impact the way Metro

does business. This includes the direct provision of private transportation services, the move toward

automated and electric vehicles, development of advanced information systems, and integrated payment

systems. Metro currently is not well positioned to capitalize on and exploit these innovations. A centralized

“intake” group could actively track new developments, help assess their potential utility, assist in identifying

priorities, work with SME’s to develop pilots and streamline processes for implementation and ensure

evaluation. Note, this innovation group does not replace the need for continuous process improvement or for

innovation to be embraced and pursued throughout the organization. It would be provide a resource to

pursue specific initiatives identified and prioritized in response to ongoing market research and analysis.


As a 21st century mobility agency, Metro must take advantage of the opportunities presented through

technological advances or we could lose market share and weaken our financial stability. Creating a group

focused on facilitating innovation will help Metro retain a leadership role in defining the transportation future,

and allow us to influence change to meet our mobility targets and achieve our accessibility, ESJ and workforce

objectives. Strengthening this function will allow Metro to be more proactive in setting an agency agenda for

innovation. It will also allow implementation of other agency priorities to continue without interruption, by

creating the space and resources for Research and Development to exist.




Create an innovation group within the Mobility Division, which could build from the Innovative Mobility group

within Market Development. This group would be focused on tracking advances in transportation services and

technology, and working with SME’s to assess potential utility, help identify priorities, implement prioritized

test projects, and function as an in-house consultant for innovation initiatives. This group should work closely

with market research and strategic direction functions. This group serves as a resource to help develop new

services to respond to market needs and opportunities. The model used by the Zero-Emission bus process

could serve as implementation model, once a priority has been established. The innovation group would

resource a lead and pull a cross-section of the agency together.


The ability to prioritize efforts and stay focused on set priorities will be a challenge as new opportunities

become available. Current procurement and contracting processes slow our ability to test quickly. Policy and

regulatory requirements may provide barriers to innovation. The willingness of management to take risk,

make decisions quickly, seek Council authority to relax certain requirements and engage labor on difficult

issues may not be present. Adequately resourcing the core innovation team may require additional staff

positions. It may be difficult to identify SME’s that can create space to engage on innovative pilots.


Dedicated resources for market analysis and expanded customer research; high level commitment and staff

time allocation to pursue strategic innovations; contracting and legal support; support to engage with labor;


ability to move decisions quickly, including those that intersect with technology; internal and external

communications support; technology support



Recommendation: Customer Experience/Market Research Program/Group



Metro receives customer input through many channels – some solicited via surveys and some

unsolicited via customer comments, Twitter, Facebook, blogs, etc. Currently, there is no cohesive

customer experience perspective that uses these inputs to provide customer-focused advocacy across

the agency (break down silos), and drive priorities.

Metro also lacks robust information on changing market conditions. We don’t have the processes or

infrastructure necessary to coordinate analysis of externally and internally available data sources, and

have those analyses adequately inform our decision making.

In addition, we lack adequate baseline system-wide information on our customer needs for mobility

patterns, modal needs, span, etc.

And finally, our customers do not know how their input, needs, and wants are affecting Metro work and

outcomes – we don’t have a good feedback loop.


King County is a rapidly growing and changing place. Change includes land use types and densities,

population demographics, access to technology and available transportation resources. In order to

deliver mobility services that meet the demands of the market – both in terms of service type and

capacity, the way we provide information and the way people pay for the service, we need to anticipate

the changing needs of our customers.

To reach our ridership targets, ensure equitable provision of mobility services (including information and

fare payment), and provide a great customer experience, Metro needs to be looking through the eyes of

the customer in our planning and decision making. If we don’t, we are at-risk of falling behind our

competitors that are more effectively prioritizing and delivering investment in the items that are most

important to our customers. Due to the pace of change in mobility, this risk for poor or inefficient

decision-making is escalating simply due to lack of information, an actionable vision for the customer

experience, and high volume of work.




Create a group with dedicated staff to better understand the customer experience, needs, priorities,

mobility patterns, and market analysis including land use development and demographic trends;

support customer-focused solution development for services and system improvements; and lead

development and reporting of customer-focused system improvement agenda. This group can build

from our current research staff, but may need additional staff or staff expertise to be able to accomplish

the level of customer and market research, analysis, and communication needed to ensure the resulting

information is actionable throughout the agency.


The group would have the following functions:

- Customer and market research – Expand on existing rider/non-rider survey to provide ongoing

information on a variety of customer-focused topics, provide information on mobility patterns,

demographic and market analysis, trends, and emergent opportunities. Provide pathway for

internal customers to identify information needs for additional research. Provide ability to use

data to model future demand.

- Data coordination & internal communication – Support developing a framework and channels

for 1) coordinating Metro’s existing and future customer-focused data sources, and 2)

communicating customer information internally.

Establish customer-focused solution making – Identify agenda of customer priorities that is

communicated and used as a lens for decision making across the agency. Engage SME’s on

customer-focused problems/opportunities throughout the agency, and bring visibility to

customer-oriented (rather than project/program-oriented) solutions.

- Customer-facing communication – Establish customer-facing information program to establish

customer agenda, solicit information, and report on progress to create an ongoing conversation

with Metro.

This group could be housed in one of two areas: Financial and Administrative Services, or the Mobility

Division. Because of its close ties to services planning, innovation and customer communications and

services, the Mobility Division may be the preferred location.


Coordinating with existing work and policy - Some groups are already doing some smaller pieces of this

work, and we would need to potentially reallocate some resources, develop new processes and

practices to coordinate these efforts.

Resourcing - Additional or reallocation of resources will likely be needed to support additional customer

and market research

Navigating new, potentially difficult conversations - Customer-focused solution development may

challenge the agency with new trade-off conversations (e.g. investment in off-board fare payment vs.

corridor speed and reliability improvements to speed up operations)

Potential technology barriers - There are likely unforeseen technical barriers to coordinating and

communicating Metro data sources


- Establish clear program purpose and role assignment, and identify relationships with existing

work

- Assign group ownership and staff resources for customer and market research

- Assign outreach resources for customer agenda development

- Develop two-way communications protocols for identifying internal needs for customer research

and communicating inputs to appropriate SME’s for inclusion in program design and decision

making

- Assign marketing resources for potential customer-facing campaign (“we heard you want this,

and this is what we are doing to get there”)


- Technology support for data coordination, modeling and development of potential customer-

facing data/info portal(s)



Recommendation: Provide Centralized Contract Support Services



Currently we have SME’s responsible for procuring, contracting and administering contracts for a

variety of services including Access, CAT, DART, private and public sector service buys, and

innovative services. Procurement, contract writing and management are specialized skills. Project

managers are not experts in these process and often spend considerable time learning, revising and

administering these tasks instead of developing and implementing projects and services. There is a

continuous learning process, as staff engage in these processes sporadically and processes change

over time. Often this necessitates “starting from scratch” in deciphering the processes needed.


Current practice drains resources away from SME’s managing the contracts which adversely impacts

the agency’s customers and slows down project delivery. It also exposes the agency to unnecessary

risk, as some contracts may not be written to the latest specification, important grant requirements

may not be included, and inconsistent approaches to contracting with a single agency may be

employed. This puts additional strain on the procurement, PAO, risk and grants groups which

support staff, taxing their abilities to provide adequate and responsive support. Our ability as an

agency to deliver more quickly, test new services and technologies, and continue to deliver on

ongoing contracted services, is compromised by the current approach.




This body of work, which might be better termed contract administration, should reside in the same

division with Access, CAT, DART, and other contracted services. This group would also support

vendor procurement and inter-agency agreements for a variety of mobility-related projects. The

actual service management will be performed by fully engaged SME’s whose primary responsibility

shall be to manage the direct delivery of service. Contract Specialist would be responsible for

overseeing contract development, coordination with Risk and other reviewers, administration and

monitoring and preparing amendments.


Resource allocation for the requisite FTE’s to perform this body of work. Defining this work and its

relationship to procurement and level of engagement with the PAO.


High level understanding of the burden faced by service management SME’s when forced to

administer aspects of contracting which they are unfamiliar.


High level understanding of the inefficiencies, elevated risks, and adverse service impact due to

lack of contract administration expertise from the procurement process through to the life of

service contracts.

Identifying staff resources to support contracting for the entire Mobility Division

Developing standard processes for that govern staff interactions with the support services



Recommendation: Consolidate Services Planning for all modes, programs, and time frames (short,

medium, long) into the Mobility Division



Metro offers a variety of services but planning is divided between sections and groups today – occurring in

multiple groups in Service Development, Paratransit/Rideshare Operations, and Strategy and Performance.

Communication is not always clear between groups, or communication occurs at points in project

development that are too late to make meaningful impact. For example, fixed-route service restructuring

projects do not include Community Connections, Rideshare, or Access planners on a routine basis.


Serving as a mobility agency means planning for all types of services together. A consolidated, coordinate

planning process is needed to position Metro to achieve our aggressive goals of increased ridership and

enhanced mobility for all customers. Piecemeal and duplicative discussions currently occur with stakeholders

and riders, resulting in mixed messages, wasted time and confusion. Different Metro planners end up

overlapping in functions and duplicate work, creating waste and frustration. It is difficult for jurisdictions and

riders to get the full picture of what Metro is planning and how we can meet their needs. A fragmented

approach also results in demand for and provision of high-cost fixed-route service in areas where other

services may be a better match. There can be too many “surprises” for groups, such as Access planners being

unaware of and unable to accurately budget for service expansion related to fixed-route expansion. Finally,

planning for mid- and long-range service (e.g. 2025, 2040) in one section and short-range in other sections has

created confusion about roles and unclear ownership over services planning as a whole.




We recommend consolidation of all services planning functions into the Mobility Division; and development of

clear roles and responsibilities among staff working on short-, mid-, and long-range planning. We define

services planning to include functions that currently reside within: Service Planning; Market

Development/Community Connections; Strategic Planning; and Paratransit/Rideshare Planning.

The big picture is to have all planning occurring in one division and improve communication among staff

working on all types of services planning, to allow Metro to more quickly and clearly respond to mobility needs

both newly emergent and long-standing; and to set up clearer pathways for decision-making at staff as well as

management levels.

This recommended approach will:

Create clear decision-making authority for all staff involved in services planning;

Create opportunities to redistribute or regroup planning functions while also building better linkages

between planning functions to reduce duplicative work and improve communication

Reintegrate short-, mid-, and long-term planning functions into a single division.

One way to achieve this is to have all the groups and functions above completely housed within the Mobility

division. Another approach would be to break out the Strategic Planning group functions most closely related

to mobility planning and implementation (e.g. long-range service planning, base & fleet planning, fare policy)


and move only those functions into Mobility Division, while moving other functions into other divisions (e.g.

sustainability). In either approach, the goal is to have all services planning occurring within one division.

Finally, in any approach it will be vital to create clear paths of communication and clear roles and

responsibilities for staff.


All groups doing planning currently report problems with being overcommitted and under-resourced relative

to the high expectations being laid out by Metro Connects and being set by Metro riders and stakeholders.

Implementing a revised planning process and structure will require changes to current practices, and may be

perceived as additional work and/or loss of autonomy. Differentiation between agency-wide strategic

planning and the long-term planning related to services development and implementation could prove

challenging. Integration with capital planning functions and the Capital Division requires special attention.


Higher level of government/community relations support to help Services Planning staff identify community

needs; outreach processes that are inclusive and accessible to all; more ongoing dialogue with riders, cities,

elected officials, community organizations, and other stakeholders (proactive rather than reactive

conversations). More staff or clearer identification of roles for Services Planning- specifically, to make time

and space for more intense work on mid-range plan development and coordination with stakeholders. Clarity

from management on processes and clearer decision making authority.



Recommendation: Employer Relationships



Employer commute programs account for over 60% of our fare revenue. However, our ability to provide a high

level of engagement with our employer base is extremely limited, and varies widely between companies.

Some companies are expressing dissatisfaction with the level of customer service they receive, we don’t have

a proactive employer recruitment strategy in much of King County, and we risk losing customers to private

transportation services if they feel Metro is not engaged in helping them solve their mobility challenges. We

have access to employer commute data that is not well utilized to inform new products or employer

strategies. We have numerous staff engaging with employers, creating inefficiencies and confusion.


Many employers actively engage in helping their employees get to work. They offer programs and incentives

to employees for a variety of reasons, including regulatory requirements under the CTR law, attracting and

retaining employees, and sustainability. Transportation benefits are not spread equally among employers,

with smaller and low-wage employers participating at a lower rate than large businesses. Creating on-going

and meaningful engagement and partnerships with employers will help achieve our mobility goals by

increasing our awareness of, and responsiveness to, employment growth; creating a broad base of advocacy

for Metro and our services in the community; and developing more inclusive products and programs.




Employer relationship management should be consolidated into one group, building from staff currently in

Business Transportation Solutions and Market Development. This new group should include several “account

executives” that establish and foster personal relationships with their employer accounts, and are able to

engage in a broad level of support, helping them structure and manage their employee commute programs.

This would include management of any product agreements, providing data on program performance, and

regular proactive contact to problem solve and explore opportunities. This group should also fulfill CTR

contractual requirements with cities, enabling a much more robust engagement with employers linking

regulatory and other decision factors together. The group would be supported by data analysts, which could

be integrated with the overall Customer Experience/Research group if this group includes CTR and ORCA data

analysis. This group would not do direct ORCA customer service support. A separate ORCA business account

support would be integrated with the pass sales office and be dedicated to helping both Passport and Choice

Customers with troubleshooting day to day issues. Clear definition of roles and responsibilities will enable

superior customer service to a broader range of customers. This group would coordinate with other employer

support programs, notably Rideshare Operations.


Existing staff positions would need to be repurposed to encompass the desired range of activity. Current staff

may not have the skill or desire to fill the requirements of the revised positions. Ensuring sufficient support

for data analysis and administrative aspects will be crucial. Other process changes may be required to provide

the proper level of support for some functions. Delays in implementing technology improvements, such as

Salesforce and DocuSign, could undermine the success of the program. The potential for labor issues will need

to be assessed.



Reorganization and repurposing of existing staff positions will be required. Some staff may require training or

desire to be relocated, and new staff hired. Implementation of Salesforce, DocuSign and communication tools

must continue on schedule. Some additional processes, such as invoicing and payment, may need to be

revised in order to provide proper support for the full range of functions involved in employer programs.

Clear definition of roles and responsibilities with other groups will be needed, notably Rideshare Operations

and ORCA business call center support.



Recommendation: Expand CITRS Span of Service



Currently, real-time service advisories are only provided during a limited span of service (weekdays 5 am-8

pm) while Metro is continuing to expand the span of our mobility services. Customers riding at night or

weekends are not provided real-time updates to help them use our system most effectively.


The lack of current, in the moment customer information, on platforms we continue to promote such as Trip

Planner, SMS and email Transit Alert subscriptions and Twitter, creates aggravation and leads customers to

other modes of travel during our “non-core” hours. This directly undermines our goal of being a highly

customer focused full-service mobility agency. This reinforces consideration of Metro as a work solution, but

not as a mobility solution. As the industry moves to the “Mobility as a Service” concept, this level of service

will be increasingly unacceptable.




Provide 3 additional FTEs to provide real-time customer updates on travel conditions and Metro service, to

match the span of service of our fixed-route network. These staff, Functional Analyst III positions, will sit in

the TCC, creating and distributing customer information across multiple platforms to provide up to date

information on service conditions.


Providing the 3 additional positions required. Changing this group's working hours to include overnight,

weekend and holiday shifts may require bargaining. Depending on abilities upon hiring, it currently takes 6-12

months for a new CITRS FA III to be able to staff the TCC solo.


Three new FA III positions.

Note: CITRS stands for Customer Information Technological Resources & Solutions


d2D Work Group Recommendation #36 Work Group Name: Mobility Services Planning Work Group Lead: Carol Cooper

Recommendation: Create a dedicated Partnership /Relationship Management Group to coordinate

Metro efforts to partner with citizens, groups, other agencies, and businesses in King County.



Numerous individuals located in various divisions, sections and work groups, engage with cities,

non-profits groups and businesses in a variety of activities. Currently, staff are often in the dark

regarding other efforts being pursued by their colleagues, and local city staff are often confused

about who is doing what at Metro, and what Metro’s priorities and positions are on a given topic.


As we implement Metro CONNECTS, we will be looking to our partners to help achieve our

ambitious agenda. By coordinating our approach and prioritizing our activities with our local

partners, we will be able to move forward in an efficient and effective manner. We will be able

advance our priorities, leverage our investments and deliver on mobility more quickly. This not only

enhances Metro’s ability to deliver service and capital projects, but provides external partners with

clarity about how to approach Metro. This support works to break down internal silos, helping staff

meet specific project objectives and milestones.




Establish a Partnership Program with dedicated staff that serve as a central

clearinghouse/coordination. These individuals would be the first point of contact and would be

clearly identified as such for our external partners. They would have a good understanding of our

internal structure, and will know who to turn to for any given issue or project raised by an external

or internal contact. They would provide a “one-stop shop” for information to internal staff about

who else is engaged with a given partner, and a read on the political landscape. They would also be

assigned, as-needed, to lead early partnership discussions and government relations functions for

major system redesigns associated with METRO CONNECTS. This team could be located within the

GM central staff and we suggest, be organized by geographic area. This team would not be

expected to be experts in negotiating partnerships for specific projects, but would serve to bridge

the many activities with which Metro is engaged in for a particular community, lead high-level early

partnership discussions for major agency initiatives, and support ongoing staff-level coordination

between Metro and jurisdictions. They would also provide internal support for internal decision-

making to ensure responsiveness for agency partners. Clear definition of roles and responsibilities

for these staff will be important to ensure maximum integration with project and program staff

throughout the agency.



Recognizing the diverse needs, types of communications, and abilities of the groups that we

partner with.

Ability to establish single initial POC for external and internal staff.

Unclear responsibilities and path for decision-making on partnerships

Developing protocols to keep designated partnership staff current on various activities

Establishing the right level of detail for partnership staff around activities

Not a priority for new department.

No dedicated staff assigned (other duties as assigned).


Commitment from department leadership that this is an important process for the success

for the department.

Establish clear program charter, vision statement, mission statement, and staffing plan.

Identify existing partnerships.

Develop plan/process for establishing and implementing a partnership, including outreach

and hand-off’s.

Implement an easy-to-use tracking system and train all staff to use it.

Set roles, responsibilities, and authority to develop relationships.

Partner with other King County agencies in outreach programs and partnering opportunities.


d2D Work Group Recommendation #37 Work Group Name: Mobility Planning & Services Work Group Lead: Carol Cooper

Recommendation: Midrange Transit Implementation Plan



There is a lack of coordinated mid-range programming/planning that identifies planned services,

program initiatives, and needed capital investments to support agency priorities beyond the 2-year

budget cycle (e.g. a 6 or 10 year TIP). Since capital planning requires longer lead times to implement,

this has resulted in a disconnect between planned service changes and the capital planning needed

to support them. There is also no comprehensive process delivering a strategy to identify, prioritize,

fund, resource, and construct/implement projects/programs that meet the agency’s goals and

objectives consistent with Metro Connects and the 10-year Strategic Plan.


The vision of Metro as a Mobility Agency depends on our ability to clearly articulate priorities and

plans for the future, both the immediate budget cycle as well as six-year cycle that many partner

cities and agencies work on. The last TDP (2002-2007) that outlined capital investment and

implementation was prepared in 2001 (Metro’s current “Transit Development Plan” for 2015-2020

is designed to comply with the six-year planning requirements of WSDOT and does not include a

prioritized capital program). This lack of a programmatic effort for the last decade+ has led to

planning and capital silos within Metro and a lack of a coordinated effort to achieve the long range

vision adopted in Metro Connects. Without a coordinated, integrated mid-range program that sets

priorities for service, capital and other initiatives, the agency is unable to build longer range funding

plans to deliver on large projects, and to prioritize resources to sustain efforts on delivering multi-

year initiatives. As a result, we are unable to effectively work with partners to deliver projects on

shared roadways, resources are often redirected to competing projects without understanding the

impact on overall priorities, and we are unable to effectively assess our capital needs for capital

planning. Our ability to deliver capital more quickly, structure meaningful partnerships and

ultimately meet our mobility targets are all impacted.




Develop a mid-range plan for service, capital and other initiatives where projects are identified,

evaluated, prioritized, funded and resourced to translate Metro’s Long range vision and needs

(LRTP) into a mid-range service and capital program. The plan would provide an integrated,

comprehensive framework for agency projects and provide a vehicle for mid-range decision-making

and prioritization. The plan would support capital delivery and planning by identifying concept-level

(≤10% design) capital needs to support Metro service changes and mobility initiatives. This plan

would not capture the total agency capital program (e.g. SGR, etc.), but would be intended to

identify, prioritize and initiate mobility-related service and capital needs for integration into the

agency CIP.


This mid-range planning should be led out of the Mobility section while understanding a need to

closely coordinate with Capital Planning efforts (e.g. base, fleet) that would more likely be led by

other sections. The reason for Mobility to be the “owner” of the six-year plan is to keep customers

and service as the key drivers for decision-making and prioritization.


Coordination with Capital Planning to integrate with CIP

Obtaining policy support early on from Management

Buy-in to organizational roles and responsibilities

Ownership of the process

Defining clear project scope that is synchronized with CIP work

Ability to embrace prioritization throughout agency

Decision making authority – where does it reside

Identification of new resources, or significant prioritization of existing resources


Clear identification of roles for staff within Mobility and Capital divisions in relation to the

mid-range Transit Implementation Plan, CIP and capital planning

Integration of planning functions is preferred. At a minimum, clear protocols are needed to

ensure ongoing cooperation, collaboration, and feedback loop between the Capital and

Mobility planning functional teams

Establishing protocols for integrating with capital planning, portfolio management, and

addressing emerging priorities Identify additional resources to support planning and analysis

to support Mid-Range Plan development

Buy-in from senior leadership as a necessary component to delivering Metro’s long-range

vision


d2D Work Group Recommendation #38 Work Group Name: MOBILITY – Ops, VM, P&F, Rail Work Group Lead: Jon Bez

Recommendation: One Maintenance Division



The Maintenance functions of Metro are currently divided across two sections in Metro resulting in occasional

disputes over responsibility or appropriateness of organizational structure within that context.


A chance to bring quicker resolution to future questions around issue responsibility within the larger Metro

maintenance context was appealing to the work group. Creating one individual at the division director level

can help bring clarity, accountability, and resolution to these types of issues quickly. At the same time, section

level managing directors can bring more specific focus to specific lines of the maintenance business, so

appropriate attention is brought to all facets of the maintenance organization.




The work group considered the current paradigm of two nominal leaders of two separate divisions vs. one

nominal leader with 3 more targeted section leaders and preferred the latter for purposes of helping nurture

conflict resolution and bring more targeted attention to 3 separate lines of maintenance work:

1. Revenue Fleet Maintenance – A focus on bus maintenance and daily dispatch

2. Power/Electrical/Communications Maintenance – Enabling an increasing attention on a growing battery

bus/electrical charging infrastructure, including maintenance of Trolley and Streetcar overhead infrastructure.

3. System Support Maintenance – with a focus on all current “Facilities Maintenance” as well as signage,

stores, and NRV.

This addresses two key strategic areas, “Mobility” and “Workforce Development”. Added focus and issue

resolution capacity will help Metro’s maintenance division deliver top quality service to Metro’s customers.

Better clarity of roles, will benefit all Maintenance division staff and create new opportunities.

Bringing new focus to Metro’s Electrical Infrastructure with a section focused on this area, also helps

demonstrate Metro’s commitment to our Sustainability goals and target of becoming an all Zero Emissions

fleet by or before 2040.


Concerns will likely revolve around general resistance to change, but framed in the context of not being able

to do something as well as we do it today. The work group fully expects to iron out details of this proposal

with the Maintenance Division director, if this recommendation is adopted. The group was flexible in its

thinking about where to draw the lines between each of the three sections, but was more focused on trying to

bring balance to the scope of each.


All of the pieces of this organization exist today, so it’s more about addressing the details (i.e. potential loose

ends of this proposal), communicating the change to employees, and populating the new leadership positions.


d2D Work Group Recommendation # 39 Work Group Name: MOBILITY – Ops, VM, P&F, Rail Work Group Lead: Jon Bez

Recommendation: Endorsement of Workforce Development Recommendations




This workgroup generally supports the proposed recommendations of the Workforce Development group as

they envision realignment/centralization of Metro’s Training organization/staff and associated

implementation of a “Learning Management System” that tracks and supports every Metro employee. The

workgroup supports the notion that while centralized organizationally, training staff would remain engaged in

the operational work units, familiar with their subject matter, maintaining expertise and the relationships

needed to be effective supporters of their training customers (i.e. all Metro staff).



Recommendation: Endorsement of Capital Rolling Stock Recommendations for Fleet Procurement

Group in Capital Division




The fleet procurement group currently is organized as a part of the Vehicle Maintenance section today. This

workgroup supports and endorses the proposal of the Capital Rolling Stock work group that this group would

be reorganized in some part of the new Capital Division.



Recommendation: Endorsement of Capital Infrastructure Recommendations for P&F Capital

Planning group in “Capital Planning” part of Capital Division




There is currently a Capital Planning team in Power & Facilities that manages TAMP, Base Mods, Trolley Mods,

and Base Expansion. This workgroup supports and endorses the proposal of this team being reorganized into a

“Capital Planning” section existing within a new Capital Division, maintaining responsibility for managing these

programs. The workgroup supports the notion that once relocated, this staff will continue to bring an

emphasis on meeting the needs of their internal customers.



Recommendation: Create a “Business Enterprise Systems” Section



Metro has operational support groups that are located within each operational section today. These groups

don’t participate in actual service delivery, but they’re integral in supporting the operation to accomplish its

tasks. Each of these groups are also defined by being power users of one of Metro’s enterprise software

systems, making them key owner representatives of those business systems. Their isolation within each

section makes it harder for the agency to bring a common vision to the future of those enterprise software

systems. It is also harder for them to individually see the challenges that might be similarly confronting all of

them at the same time, like the potential design and implementation of a T-BIRD project or the support level

they need from County IT staff.


The agency’s primary interest in this area should stem from a desire to have a clearer direction on the

evolution of its enterprise systems and the organization of the workforce built around those systems who

support Metro’s operations. The impact of not having this is a lot of wasted effort due to a lack of focus or

competing efforts in this realm of managing Metro’s business systems and related staff.




Create a “Business Enterprise Systems & Logistics” Section populated with the following groups:

* VM Data Management

* Power & Facilities Workcenter

* The “Operations” group within Systems Development and Operations (SDO)

* Operations System Support (OSS Coordinators)

* Operations Communications Staff

* HASTUS Business Lead, currently organized in Service Development’s Scheduling group

This new section would report up through the General Manager’s office.

This addresses two key strategic areas, “Mobility” and “Workforce Development”. Bringing consistency,

common vision and common leadership for all staff who work with Business Enterprise software to support

operational groups. Having a clearer vision and direction will help deliver top quality service to Metro’s

customers. The creation of this new section will also to better establish a new “community” of power users of

enterprise software system in a way that better acknowledges this type of professional worker within Metro,

creating a new pathway to leadership for all staff in these roles.


Along with general resistance to change, a key barrier that these groups will confront is finding ways to make

sure that each of these group’s stakeholders still feel well supported and engaged by this new section. Each

workgroup in this new section will remain embedded within the culture, discussions, and priorities of the

stakeholders they support.



Once details of these organizational changes are worked out with each division director, the groups will also

have to resolve to what extent the scope of their work or the scope of what is covered by their respective

enterprise software systems.



Recommendation: Establish a Bus Operations Division with 3 Sections



Operations has been just one section historically, with at least 10 work units requiring a large amount of

bandwidth for just one section manager, potentially risking a lack of managerial attention in some areas of

that section.


Bus Operations is the biggest section, now division, in Metro. Without proper oversight, Bus Operations is

vulnerable to poor decision making, poor problem solving, and potential negligence. The group acknowledges

that Operations is filled with heroic efforts that have helped overcome some of these challenges, but the risks

remain.




The Bus Operations Division would be separated into 3 sections, each with its own Managing Director

1. Base Management, includes the 7 Operating Bases

2. Service Management, includes the Transit Control Center, Service Quality, and System Impacts (a new

group discussed in a later recommendation)

3. Daily Management of Contracted Service Operations (i.e. daily contractor oversight)

The creation of a 3rd section around contracted service management is discussed in another recommendation.

The delineation of Base and Service Management within Operations is consistent with a the “Mobility”

strategy that recognizes Metro’s need to bring a more robust menu of tactics to managing the quality of our

service, both in the field and from the Control Center. This proposal also speaks to Metro’s commitment to

better engage its workforce, especially its operators, by increasing managerial attention on the 7 transit bases

and having the bandwidth to properly engage in the many HR and employee related issues that surface there.


Regarding the delineation of Base and Service Management, the group did not anticipate large challenges

there. We covered the issues around a 3rd section involving daily management of Metro’s contracted service in

a separate recommendation.


Establish two new sections in the new Bus Operations Division, hire section managers and establish support

staff roles/assignments for each section.



Recommendation: Create a “Systems Impacts” work unit within the Operations Division



When Metro is planning for various impacts that will affect the transportation network and transit service,

Metro’s staff tasked with helping manage these impacts are spread across several parts of the organization. As

a result, definition of roles can sometimes be unclear, and leadership for developing the game plan for each

impact/event is distributed and not always clear.


Metro’s customers and external stakeholders often form their strongest opinions of the agency in the

moments of adversity based on how Metro handles these extraordinary circumstances.




The Service Quality unit should have a permanent Superintendent and remain within the Service Management

section, in the Bus Operations Division, as its own standalone work unit.

Metro should also create a separate “Systems Impacts” work unit with its own Superintendent, First Line

Staff, and consolidation of staff from Service Quality, Scheduling, and administrative support. This group

would be located within the Bus Operations Division and report up through the “Service Management”

Section.

This addresses two key strategic areas, “Mobility” and “Workforce Development”. By bringing clarity to roles

and providing new leadership around the area of system impacts, Metro will be better prepared and more

responsive to impacts and events that play a disproportionate role in forming customer’s opinions of the

service Metro provides. This added leadership and clarity of roles will also improve the employee experience

with these groups, including creating new opportunities for career advancement.


Along with general resistance to change, there will be a few issues to resolve around which exact staff to

reorganize into this new group, how to provide administrative support, whether/how much 1st line staff can

be built into this organization, and potentially where they all physically sit. There are also some L587/L17

representation issues to resolve for this new group.


Hire two new superintendents, one for Service Quality and one for a new System Impacts to help establish this

new work unit in Bus Operations. Revise policies to clarify role of Service Quality vs. System Impacts, especially

for first line supervisors.



Recommendation: Establish a 3rd Section in the Bus Operations Division for Management of

Contracted Service



The workgroup has concerns that Metro’s current approach to daily management of the contracted

transportation providers is not at a level appropriate consistent with best business practices. Metro knows

how to plan, procure and contract its contracted services, but there isn’t that corresponding investment in

actually managing the quality of the service in real time for this service type.

Metro’s contracted service is isolated in the organization to the point where we cannot be sure that any of the

quality of service standards that we’re applying to the operators of our fixed service are also being applied to

the operators of our contracted service in the same fashion.


This proposal speaks to Metro’s interest in bringing consistency in service delivery to all service branded as

Metro. If contracted service operations are isolated within the organization, that consistency and/or lack of

appropriate oversight is a risk.




All planning, RFPs for new contracts, and administration of those contracts would be organized in the Mobility

division. However, the day to day management and oversight of the contractors would be provided by a new

3rd section in the Bus Operations Division that focused solely on all contracted service.


Along with general resistance to change, there will be a few issues to resolve around which exact staff would

reside in the Mobility Division or in this new section of Bus Operations. Some new positions will need to be

created for this oversight role.


Establish a new section in the new Bus Operations Division, hire a section manager and create a set of support

roles to establish this section and its oversight function.



Recommendation: Build and integrate a department specific IT support organization

1. Recommendation. What is your solution to the problem? Or, what is your big picture idea to take

advantage of the business opportunity? [If there are multiple solutions, please provide high level pros and cons for

each solution or recommendation].

The group strongly recommends that department specific IT Division/group be established to expeditiously

support day to day business functions of all Metro and to facilitate the growth of emerging transit technologies

and Metro’s ever-growing ridership.

We are aware of some of the recommendations from the Capital Technology workgroup and some of their

recommendations may speak to the technology needs of Metro.

d2D Work Group Recommendation #47: Metro Mobility Operations Proposal (Organizational Chart)

d2D Work Group Recommendation #48 Work Group Name: Strategic Communications & Ext. Dept. Functions

Work Group Lead: DeAnna Martin

Recommendation: Government Relations (GR) - 5-Part Recommendation

1. Background. What is the problem we are trying to solve (e.g., What is the issue? What is happening?)?

Or, what is the business opportunity?

Decrease confusion:

o Internal:

Staff are confused about roles and responsibilities (ex: who should

negotiate partnerships –“partnerships” staff, division or section leaders, or

government relations staff?), which can result in key projects being

overlooked and/or GR staff getting left out of key conversations

Staff feel confused about what conversations have already been had with

key stakeholders (King County Council, cities, regional agencies, state

agencies, federal agencies and other elected officials) , which can cause

duplication of efforts

o External:

Stakeholders and partners often don’t know who to contact or how to work

with Metro

Partners want to know how Metro can better support them (especially

smaller/less well-resourced jurisdictions)

Increase coordination:

o Government relations needs to work across divisions – especially with community

relations, partnerships, grants team, and individual program managers advancing

programs or policies through Council and/or external stakeholders. But staff are not

always positioned to coordinate effectively

o Government relations needs to be brought in to the planning process early, so our

interactions with decision makers are strategic instead of reactive

Be more strategic and proactive:

o Metro often reacts to external stakeholders, instead of acting strategically

o Metro does not always know our goals and priorities, which contributes to our

reactiveness and prevents our agency from effectively setting expectations

o Metro often involves external stakeholders later in the planning process, which can

create frustration among stakeholders who want influence and result in programs

or policies being prescribed to Metro

Improve tracking:

o No central tracking of contacts at or conversations with other jurisdictions



Generally, Metro is limited in our ability to accomplish our goals if we cannot effectively

move legislation through the King County Council, advance our policies and positions with

regional, state and federal agencies and manage our relationship with elected officials

Confusion (internal and external):

o Metro will be less effective and could lose credibility with decision makers and

external stakeholders if they don’t know who to go to within Metro

o Similarly, Metro staff could appear unprepared if they interact with jurisdictions and

don’t know about other projects occurring with that partner.

o Metro could lose valuable staff time through duplication of efforts

o Crucial projects could get overlooked by staff who think someone else is in charge,

which could have disastrous implications

Need for better coordination

o Metro’s success with decision-makers will be harmed if government relations can’t

work with community relations, partnerships team, and program managers to

incorporate working with elected officials into the overarching strategy

o Better coordination between government relations and other staff could help the

agency act more proactively and better achieve its goals

Importance of being more strategic/proactive

o Metro staff sometimes waste time on requests that could be avoided if we were

more strategic and better communicated our own goals from the outset

o Constantly reacting to external stakeholders prevents Metro from strategically and

proactively advancing our own plans and programs

o Metro could improve relationships with key stakeholders by proactively

communicating our goals, offering early opportunities for stakeholder involvement,

and better setting expectations

Improved tracking

o Improved tracking will better prepare Metro staff to do their jobs


advantage of the business opportunity? [If there are multiple solutions, please provide high level

pros and cons for each solution or recommendation].

Clarify roles and responsibilities on the government relations team, and between others

engaging in government relations – type work, and determine an appropriate staffing

structure

o After clarifying roles and responsibilities, communicate that internally and externally

o Metro should have a structure that designates which individuals are in charge of

communication with key stakeholders such as the King County Council, King County

Executive, State and federal delegations, state and regional agencies, regional

groups (ex: PSRC, SCA), and third-party stakeholders (more “topical” leads).

o Metro could also consider having geographic “government relations leads” who

work with other jurisdictions as part of the partnerships resource center, to be

consistent with recommendations coming out of other work groups and the service


and capital planning processes. Metro should make sure these leads to not overlap

with the designated points of contact mentioned above.

Government relations should be under the Chief of Staff to ensure department-wide access

and have planned interactions (joint meetings, work teams) with community relations,

partnerships resource center, grants and other groups that have external contacts to ensure

clear and consistent communications.

Utilize CRM, an electronic database, to track contacts, conversations, agreements, etc. with

KCC, RTC, other jurisdictions, key stakeholders

o Develop protocols for reporting, keeping this up-to-date (ex: who should update it),

and deciding when an interaction crosses a certain threshold and needs to be

recorded in the system

Government relations should participate in the mid-range planning process

(recommendation from the mobility work group) to help Metro determine goals, priorities,

and targeted government relations strategies early

o Targeted strategies should include:

defining scope of work with stakeholders (ex: policy decisions with RTC)

communicating and setting expectations early and often

incorporating opportunities to involve decision-makers early and give them

influence

developing champions and advocates

working with stakeholders other than decision makers (jurisdiction staff,

advocacy organizations) to achieve our goals

Generally, government relations should develop clear protocols and communicate them

department-wide

o Examples: how to interact with Council staff, state and federal agencies, elected

officials from other agencies and state and federal delegations; who should update

and what type of information should go in the electronic tracking system; when

government relations should be brought in to the project planning process, etc.


Staff confusion/resistance

o Staff could feel hesitant or threatened if they perceive that they are being asked to

take on new work or give up work previously assigned to them

o It will take time for staff to adjust to new staffing structures and protocols

External confusion

o It will take time for our partners to understand who they should contact

Technical considerations and costs associated with using CRM

Staff resource needs for scheduling, geographic leads, database maintenance, partnership

hubs (depending on structure, could require more staff)

Having designated leads can create bottlenecks. Government relations should take care to

organize in a way that minimizes bottlenecks, and make clear which level of

communications needs to go through the designated leads, and at what point SMEs or PMs

can reach out to Council staff directly.



CRM (database)

Potentially more staff, depending on relationship with partnerships resource center




Recommendation: Community Relations and Public Engagement: Building short and long-term

trust and shared ownership of our regional mobility network with the public



The need to bring community relations/public engagement services in-house from the DOT

Director’s Office is an opportunity to embed and better align a talented community relations/public

engagement team around our strategic communications needs and priorities.

Current state, challenges

Currently when Metro seeks to engage the public in decision making about plans, policies, or capital

investments, they rely on two community relations planners in the DOT Director’s Office

Communications section. These planners also serve the other DOT divisions.

Metro’s public engagement processes are led by a community relations planner. Each planner is

assigned to a project and coordinates a team of communications professionals that includes

writer/editor, graphic design, multi-media, and PIO/social media who sit in the same section within

the DOT Director’s Office. They also staff the King County’s Transit Advisory Commission. During the

“engagement” phase(s) of a program or project, the community relations planners lead the

development of communications plans with business and program leaders throughout Metro. Once

engagement is complete (e.g. a Council decision has been made), lead communications

responsibilities pass to Marketing and Customer Information.

Metro’s public engagement requirements and standards are driven by federal, state, and county

policies – including requirements to conduct engagement on changes that affect certain levels of

service and require King County Council action; our strategic plan and service guidelines; our King

County Equity and Social Justice Strategic Plan; and Title VI – as well as public participation

professional best practices.

Our community relations planners are positioned as internal consultants with more requests for

their service than can be met with existing resources.

Until 2017, there was limited consultant support to augment their services – the result of which

meant Level IV CR planners are doing all aspects of a public engagement effort, including planning,

designing feedback methods, conducting feedback gathering (facilitating meetings and advisory

groups, staffing and coordinating others to staff outreach events, etc.), researching affected

populations and stakeholders to engage, developing relationships and engaging stakeholders,

determining appropriate ways to equitably reach out to and engage underrepresented populations,

managing public and stakeholder correspondence during an outreach effort, and theming and

summarizing public feedback for consumption by decision makers. They often work on 10-12

projects at a time.


There is more need than can be met, resulting in:

A lack of attention and resource to strategic engagement and relationship-building needed

for Metro to be successful at achieving its strategy and targets

Program or project staff doing their own engagement and outreach or contracting with

consultants who may or may not connect with DOT communications for guidance and

quality assurance. (Even when outsourced, there is little bandwidth to provide oversight

and direction to assure consultant work is consistent with our standards.)

Inconsistent practices, expectations, and definitions of what public engagement means. (It’s

common for staff to reach out to community relations planners for help with pre-

determined tactics or products in mind – e.g. “I need a community meeting” – which may or

may not be the right approach depending on what they are trying to achieve.)

Communications team members being involved by program or project staff at inopportune

times or the wrong time to conduct meaningful public outreach and engagement, leading to

ineffective use of resources, stressful employee experience, and poor outcomes for

customers and those who choose to participate in our engagement.

When staff want to reach out to the public, it’s unclear to many what resources are available to

support them and how to utilize those resources effectively – including clarity of roles and

responsibilities for government relations, community relations, marketing, customer information,

and customer research.

Communications and public engagement are core planning functions and have not been mapped to

service and capital planning milestones, nor are resources for communications and engagement

allocated by project. We end up with unrealistic expectations for engagement or no engagement at

all, a pattern of planners lacking clarity about how they intend to use public feedback to shape their

decision making, and a lack of resources to innovate and practice equitable outreach strategies,

such as partnering with community-based organizations.


Making mobility easy and accessible to all and getting things built to achieve and sustain our

region’s mobility network requires a strong partnership and relationship with the public. We need

meaningful engagement with those who might use, do use, and, in some cases, couldn’t get around

without our services to know how to design an easy, accessible, and responsive mobility network.

Public input into decision making and shared ownership of solutions where possible will help Metro

demonstrate our value, achieve new levels of service, and show how we reach our vision with

community input.

It is critical to our success as an agency that our public engagement is:

Sincere and meaningful – quantity without quality is a waste of resources

High quality in that we achieve measurable outcomes that demonstrate an increase in

public and stakeholder trust and participants can see how their involvement made a

difference in the decision

Consistent and transparent – so communities and stakeholders know what to expect when

we engage with them in decision making


Equitable – we advance equity by practicing equity in our engagement processes, directly

involving historically disadvantaged populations affected by change we are considering,

resulting in more equitable decisions

Innovative and customized

A two-way, facilitated conversation – where community relations planners facilitate SME’s,

stakeholders, and the public in identifying shared problems and solutions; not selling the

public on a pre-determined solution

Builds towards shared outcomes that withstand political pressures because there is broad

support and shared ownership of the solution from the public and stakeholders


advantage of the business opportunity? [If there are multiple solutions, please provide high level pros

and cons for each solution or recommendation].

Structure, location

Consistent with the Partnership Work Group recommendation to create a Partnership

Hub/Resource Center, create the “Partnership Resource Center” under the Chief of Staff in

Metro’s new department structure and assign community relations and government

relations staff to comprise part of the partnership team FTE’s. If relationship building is a

core function of this “center” then community relations and government relations are

essential components.

Alternatively, if the “Partnership Resource Center” is a team of people across sections or

located in a different division, community relations and government relations should reside

in the Office of the Chief of Staff, but should participate in the “center.”

Community relations needs to be at a high-enough level in the organization to:

o interact with all divisions,

o bridge silos,

o connect external feedback to the right places internally,

o facilitate SME’s across divisions to address emerging issues,

o reflect the voice of the public at all levels of decision making,

o prepare with appropriate review and implement communications products needed

for public responses

o work in close concert with government relations, and

o elevate public risks and opportunities for guidance to decision makers throughout

the life-cycle of the engagement.

Community relations needs to be co-located with government relations and creative

services for ease and efficiency of planning and executing engagement processes.

Resources

Resource enough FTE’s plus contracted services to meet service and capital planning needs

with depth.

Decide on and invest in growing Metro’s use of a Contact Relationship Management (CRM)

system for tracking contact with stakeholders across community relations, government

relations, partnerships, community outreach being conducted in market development,

customer communications and services, employee services, and employer relations.


Function, organization of work

Assign community relations and some government relations staff by geography to align with

capital, service and facilities planning organization (consistent with the Partnerships Work

Group recommendation). This will allow community relations and government relations to

continue breaking down silos in planning, maximize engagement opportunities, and

minimize community disruption in our outreach and engagement efforts.

The community relations team should be organized by geography with two exceptions:

o Maintain communications and community relations position dedicated to the

RapidRide Program.

o Add an FTE with a specialized focus on equity and social justice populations and

people with disabilities who would develop and manage relationships with

community-based organizations, facilitate our Transit Advisory Commission, staff

Accessible services engagement needs, and work closely with the Metro’s Office of

Diversity and Inclusion to assure our public engagement approach and practices are

consistent with our ESJ strategic plan commitments.

Create a stronger connection between customer research and community relations planners

by establishing clear roles and responsibilities and agency-accepted definitions of pubic

engagement and customer research – e.g. what’s the difference and when to do what.

Strategic engagement planning, mid-range and biennial capital and service planning

Be integrated with government relations in mid-range capital and service planning so

assessment of communications and public engagement resources is part of the prioritization

and stakeholder and the public have a voice in shaping our mid-range planning.

Work with government relations as a team to design a strategic engagement plan with GM

as sponsor.

Community outreach and engagement guidelines, protocols

Work with customer research, marketing, customer information, and government relations to

formalize protocols, processes, levels of service and authority in Metro-centric Community

Engagement Guide consistent with the Equity and Social Justice Strategic Plan commitments and

best practices for equitable engagement. This would include:

o how public engagement should be planned for and factored in to the life cycle of a

service or capital planning project (work is already underway)

o an intake process in partnership with customer research for planners and project

managers to utilize community relations and customer research functions in conducting

their planning

o “do-it-yourself” resources for informing and consulting with the public and centrally

tracking that activity so community relations resources can be prioritized and targeted

to 2-way engagement processes in the County’s spectrum of community engagement

o Clarity for project managers about what resources are available to them and for what

purpose, along with guidelines for engaging with communications specialists in a timely

manner to best utilize those resources


o Assure that community relations is a touchpoint before staff reach out to the public or

the community (consistent with the “Partnership Resource Center” recommendation).

Staff need to know of work already underway with the community, any issues, and

resources available to support them; and to assure their outreach is consistent with the

agency’s approach to community outreach and engagement

Conduct training and orientation for division leadership, section managers, and project

managers on (work already underway, consistent with ESJ Strategic Plan commitments)


Wide-ranging definitions of public engagement.

Planning can’t wait for communications and public engagement resources to become

available – there’s need right now that is not being met. Implementing these

recommendations in the long-term will help, but have to overcome short-cut patterns that

have been established in a resource-scarce recent organizational history.

Planners have expressed concerns that they don’t want what they choose to work on and

when to be driven by communications and engagement professionals. Building a more

strategic relationship between community relations planners in mid-range planning and

prioritization, in the partnership steering committee, and having a clearly defined role for

community relations to play throughout the life cycle of a planning project will help to

address this – though challenges will still come up.


Community relations and government relations needs to be closely integrated with mid-

range capital and service planning prioritization.

Analysis needs to be done to determine the level of FTE’s, consultant support, and resources

to conduct engagement consistent with our ESJ Strategic Plan commitments (e.g.

contracting with community based organizations) to support the service and capital

planning efforts underway that will require public engagement over the next 5 years. This is

hard to do as Metro does not use project based budgeting so it is difficult to look at past

efforts and make an assessment about future ones based on that data.

We’ll need to define and establish a relationship between community relations and the

“customer experience” function being articulated by the Mobility: Planning and Services

Work Group.




Recommendation: Grants Management



The basic need to bring grants management services in-house from the DOT Director’s Office is an opportunity to align a talented grants management team around Metro’s strategic needs and priorities. Staff throughout Metro rely on services provided by the grants office related to grant acquisition, management, and accounting. In addition, grant staff facilitate and maintain close working relationships with federal funding agencies and advise senior leadership on emerging grant or organizational relationship issues. The grants group currently serves or otherwise interacts with the Marine Division and many parts of Metro Transit, including: Chief of Staff, Planning & Customer Services, Strategy and Performance, Operations, Safety and Security, Design and Construction, Finance and Budget and Government Relations. The grant group interacts with project managers, budget analysts, section leads, the Chief of Staff, Deputy General Manager and General Manager. Due to the lack of an adopted long range plan or program to expand capital facilities over the last decade, Metro’s priorities for implementation of capital projects has not been clear. Development and management of a candidate projects list has been assigned to staff who often have many other competing demands on their time. The lack of clearly defined priorities and staffing has resulted in an ad hoc decision-making process to select projects to compete for grant funding.


Metro receives approximately $80-100 million each year through various grant programs and competitions, and grant staff manages approximately $500 million in active grants at any given time. Maintaining access to services provided by the grants team will help to ensure that Metro is able to successfully compete for grants and that associated projects are implemented successfully while maintaining compliance with applicable rules and regulations.

In order to achieve the ambitious vision set forth in METRO CONNECTS, Metro will need to be better prepared to take advantage of grant funding opportunities to maximize grant funding, accelerate project implementation, support partnership projects, fund key initiatives, and leverage its existing resources. Identification of agency priorities for grant funding in a systematic and strategic fashion will enable better outcomes such as less stress on employees, lower impact on workloads, more time to develop/solidify partnerships, more informed decision-making more competitive proposals and ultimately an increase in grant funding to Metro.



advantage of the business opportunity? [If there are multiple solutions, please provide high level pros

and cons for each solution or recommendation].

Develop a standardized schedule and protocols to identify candidate projects for grant

funding, and a decision-making process for authorizing which projects are selected to be

submitted.

o Creation of a management-approved list of candidate projects for grant funding.

This list should be maintained and updated with current information to ensure that

transit management has adequate time and information to review and make

decisions related to grant opportunities and grant candidates/project selection.

o Approval/commitment from the appropriate level of transit management (division

directors, General Manager, leadership team) should be required prior to

submitting a project for grant funding.

Utilize expertise of the grants team when determining which projects to focus on for grant

applications

Grants group needs to be located in a place in the organization that enables access to senior

leadership and maximizes accessibility to personnel throughout the department (i.e. not

nested too far down in the organizational chart).

o Establish clear lines of communication with between grants group and those

divisions with greatest need for grant-related services (e.g. Capital and Mobility

Divisions)

Grants staff should participate in the mid-range planning process (recommended by the

Mobility – Planning and Services group and/or the Capital – Infrastructure Work Group) to

help Metro determine goals, priorities, and grants strategies early. Priority projects or

initiatives for grant funding should be identified through this process.


Grantor agencies typically only provide 5 to 7 weeks from the time grant funding programs

are released to when final proposals are due. This has meant a quick turnaround on

identifying competitive projects and securing management approval which leaves little time

for Metro staff to develop quality proposals.

Managers and supervisors within the divisions may want to maintain greater control of

selection process

In some instances, a decision will need to be made that will require prioritization between

Division projects for the same funding. There needs to be a higher level of decision making

above the Divisions.

Division directors may be reluctant to formally approve project submittals, especially if

adequate time and information are not provided for the process.

Senior staff may not feel comfortable committing to project delivery for certain projects

without additional staff resources


Create formalized mechanisms to establish a prioritized project list and approval of specific

projects prior to applying for grant funding


As part of the project selection process, staff resources to implement the project(s) should

be identified in the implementing Section(s).

Provide adequate staffing for centralized coordination.

Potential establishment of a project selection committee




Recommendation: Strategic Communications – Position Metro to effectively communicate its

efforts as the region’s mobility provider

1. Background. What is the problem we’re trying to solve? Or, what is the business

opportunity? The basic perfunctory need to bring communications services in-house from the DOT Director’s Office is

an opportunity to embed and align a talented communications team around our strategic

communications needs and priorities.

Currently Metro relies on DOT Communications professionals for PIO/Media Relations.

Metro also relies on DOT Creative Service functions for media, public, and government relations;

public engagement; internal communications; and social media needs. Metro also relies on creative

services from Marketing & Service Information for internal communications, marketing, and service

information needs. Sometimes Metro works with creative services in DOT Communications when

Marketing & Service Information is too busy to take on additional assignments and vice versa.

Two Public Information Officers, recently transferred to Metro, are responsible for:

o Coordinated and strategic storytelling in day-to-day media relations, blog writing and social

media responses.

o Serving as designated spokespeople for media relations who coordinate media responses

and help determine the best format for responding publicly to inquiries, or proactively

shaping communications planning.

o Are cross-trained and largely interchangeable on operational incidents and crisis

communications, while working on assigned specialized projects and remaining closely

coordinated, which is consistent with best practice.

o Are authorized to coordinate directly on emerging and planned communications and public

affairs topics with staff in the County executive’s office, his cabinet, partner transportation

agencies, jurisdictions, and stakeholder groups.

The Director’s Office Communications staff includes two writer/editors, a graphic artist, a

photographer and a multimedia producer specializing in videos and motion graphics. They produce

print and digital materials for all media relations; community relations; public, elected, and

stakeholder engagement efforts; and employee relations. They maintain King County’s brand

standards and guidelines and assure a consistent agency voice in concert with the voice of King

County, while Metro Marketing maintains Metro brand standards

Transferring current PIO and creative services staff to the new department is an opportunity to

streamline and strengthen that storytelling by establishing their roles and responsibilities within a

new departmental structure.

DOT has a designated social media lead (consistent with County practice) within the

Communications section. Metro will need a social media lead. This represents an opportunity to

strengthen the future department’s coordination of social media platforms and support.

Challenges with how we’re working currently include:


Having PIO’s in the Director’s Office, apart from strategic communications discussions among Metro

leadership, has hampered the effectiveness of coordinated and strategic storytelling in day-to-day

media relations, blog writing and social media responses.

The work level for PIO staff exceeds the current staffing level and will need to be addressed as the

agency accelerates the expansion of service, incorporates Water Taxi service, coordinates

communications with our partners, and increases storytelling, media, public relations and media

relations efforts.

The Creative services/production team (writer/editors, graphic designer, photographer,

videographer) is often treated as an outside resource by internal “clients.” These creative

production resources are brought into the communications planning processes later than required

and often faces unrealistic deadlines for public-facing creative services. This hampers the

effectiveness of the product, unnecessarily stresses out clients and the creative team.

The Creative services/production team is perceived as a consultant to project managers and often

find themselves at odds with the “internal client” when it comes to articulating projects, services,

and technical concepts in public-friendly and accessible ways that will be easy to understand and

transcreate for the general public.

Metro’s current social media communication efforts are often reactionary, and aside from project

announcements, engagement, marketing and education campaigns, they could be more strategically

driven.

o There is not enough staff support to answer all customer questions in a timeframe that

would be considered timely for these platforms. Some social media platforms are

underutilized to share Metro’s messages and support the various efforts that happen in

smaller work groups like Access, Community Van, Rideshare.

While PIO’s keep up with and do an excellent job of responding to reactionary pressures and

planned activities, their ability to plan and implement proactive, strategic communications and

public relations efforts is limited by sheer person hours.

The cumulative effect of these challenges negatively affects our customer experience and our brand

awareness and perception. Without a robust, responsive, and strategically-aligned

communications team, our skills and competency in these areas are diffused – we will continue to

struggle to claim our space in the public realm as a regional mobility provider and a successful,

unequaled partner to our peers and community in meeting our customers’ and the region’s

mobility needs.

2. Why should the agency care about this? What is the impact? King County Metro is a national leader in innovation, growing ridership and ambitious organizational

growth.

In coordination with writers, editors and public affairs/PIO staff, the DOT Communications section

synthesizes and distills Metro’s storytelling to reach riders, opinion leaders and the greater transit

industry.

Communications staffing is essential for creating the necessary and professional online and print

content to reach customers, stakeholders and advocates. Sophisticated visual storytelling is the

preferred method for public communications, using photos, video, graphics and social media.


Doing these activities well is essential for Metro to achieve its vision identified in METRO CONNECTS and

its Strategy and Targets. Positive public sentiment, trust, and accountability to the region’s leaders and

our riders are only attained when the public knows about who we are, what we’re doing, and how we’re

meeting their needs. As a public agency, our financial sustainability and our brand image is tied to this

broad public support from taxpayers whether they use our services or not.

3. Recommendation. What is your solution to the problem? We have a six-part recommendation to structure and improve strategic communications in Metro as a

department. This recommendation is rooted in a communications framework organized around three

purposes for communications: relationship building, changing behavior, and customer care (see

attached visual).

TWO STRUCTURAL OPTIONS

(Our work group has not arrived at a consensus about which option is preferred. Work group members

expressed interest in Option 2, however they also wanted to understand and reflect the feedback of

people at Metro engaged in customer communications and marketing. We facilitated two meetings with

subject matter owners within Metro. It is clear from these two meetings that there is preference among

the Manager of Customer Communications and Services and staff from Marketing and Service

Information for Option 1 and strong concern about Option 2 as detailed in the pros/cons of each option

below.)

Option 1. Establish a Communications section within the GM’s Office dedicated to strategic

communications and media and public relations. Keep Marketing & Service Information as is –

strengthen relationships, clarify roles and responsibilities.

In this option, the new Communications section would include a Communications Director, PIO/Media

Relations specialists, creative services functions currently housed in the DOT Director’s Office

Communications group, and internal communications management.

Brand strategy and management would remain in the purview of Marketing & Service Information as it

is currently scoped to be a key aspect of the soon-to-be hired Supervisor of Marketing and Service

Information’s position. Employee communications is an important aspect of Metro's brand; the GM

Communications team would be responsible for employee communications.

Communications and Marketing will need to be working closely in sync to develop and implement a

proactive brand and PR strategy, as well as guidelines. As we are doing now, brand strategy would be

developed in close concert with the GM and senior leaders (to include the new Communications

Director in future). We would test how we create a strategic communications "seat at the marketing

table" for the GM's office, Metro, and Water Taxi within this model for 1 year checking in at milestones

to see how it's working.

Pros:

Maintains the current Customer Communications and Services synergy

Allows the marketing role to be more distinct and not just a "service provider" in Metro

Cons:

We have been working in this matrixed way and, while we all think it's important, strategic communications needs continue to come second in deference to time, interest, and resources being dedicated


Separates politics from marketing needs to the core functions/mission of the marketing and customer information as they are structured today

Keeps marketing several layers removed from the strategic direction and priorities of the agency

Option 2. Establish a Communications and Marketing section within Metro, with direct relationship to

the GM. Merge Marketing and possibly Service Information into this new section.

In this option, the new Communications section would be led by a Communications Director who would

oversee the PIO/Media Relations team, Marketing, and possibly Customer Information. Creative

Services from DOT Communications and Customer Information could be combined into a one-stop shop

for media and public relations, community relations/public engagement, government relations, internal,

marketing, and customer information production needs.

This option would provide for a centralized brand strategy and management function within a strategic

communications section can establish consistency across communications efforts and sections.

Pros:

Strengthens production by integrating

DOT Communications and Service

Information production teams into a

creative services team

Brand consistency and strategy could be

improved and more easily deployed in all

communications and marketing materials

Raises marketing closer to organization

leadership where it can serve all divisions

more readily

Creates better positioning for Metro in

discussion with partners (e.g.

"protecting" our brand as we co-brand

more and more frequently with partners)

Cons:

Service information doesn't fit in the GM's office or that level, its production.

Could make these functions easy targets for reduction with greater visibility. There is a lived, past experience with this.

Concern that this model would mean marketing and creative services would have a charge-back feature – which lessens the value of the service. If implemented, funding for this section needs to be part of overhead.

Mixing politics and spin – marketing needs to focus on factual information.

Both options depend on enough resources, including creative services and web support to meet

strategic communications needs.

ROLES AND FUNCTIONS

In either option, the following roles and functions are critical to achieve Metro’s Strategy and Targets,

meet the needs of our customers, and grow ridership:

Brand strategy, management


Regardless of where this function sits, Metro’s brand strategy, visual consistency and spirit needs to

permeate all our communications, including all the communications currently coming out of the

Customer Information Office, Marketing, Employee Communications and Strategic Public/Media

Communications.

Communications Director

The Communications Director should be intentionally integrated into Metro’s strategic leadership team

so that PIO’s and lead communications specialists for strategic projects can be engaged in

communications conversations to discuss and help shape public affairs approaches and receive

unfiltered direction for implementing short-term, long-term, and crisis communications efforts. Access

to the GM and organization leaders is critical for strategic alignment in external and internal

communications.

Media relations/PIO’s

PIOs should report directly to the Communications Director to effectively operate in a public

affairs, media relations and social media relations capacity that immediately and strategically

protects and enhances Metro’s image in the public.

PIO’s should continue as they do today and be:

o authorized to coordinate directly on emerging and planned communications and public

affairs topics with County Executive communications staff and other cabinet staff, with

peers at partner transportation agencies and jurisdictions and stakeholder groups

o designated spokespeople for media relations who coordinate media responses and help

determine the best format for responding publicly to inquiries, or proactively shaping

communications planning

o expected to proactively establish strong ties across divisions and work sections for proactive

or reactive communications efforts

o responsible to act as prime Metro storytellers and have the expertise to create and

disseminate promotional and educational communications products via relationships with

news reporters and media outlets, the Metro Matters blog and social media channels

o on the front-line in rapid response to emerging communications issues regarding Transit,

Streetcar, Access and Rideshare operations, and in some cases customer relations

o communications consultants to business and program leaders throughout the Department,

in order to develop and oversee execution of communication plans

o be in direct contact to coordinate with staff at all levels of the organization to address

emerging issues, prepare communications products needed for public and media responses,

and implement them with appropriate review or with organizational trust to move without

review when absolutely necessary

A third PIO position, at an undetermined Communications Specialist level, is recommended to

improve the staffing levels of the current rotational on-call responsibilities, soon to include Water

Taxi, and address other current and planned communications efforts. A third PIO is essential given

the scope of METRO CONNECTS; aggressive development and communications regarding Seattle

transportation investments and transit capital investments; the increased need to partner with

external agencies and entities in our media and social media relations workload; plus the addition of

Water Taxi responsibilities. This role could serve on the virtual marketing team to help coordinate


and provide strategic guidance to a proposed Social Media Marketing Specialist (recommended in

the “Marketing” section of this recommendation) to help serve the growing needs in social media

and proactive PR that are identified in other marketing and social media recommendations.

Creative services (in support of communications for the purpose of “Relationship”)

Under the direction of communications leadership within King County Metro, a creative

services/production communications team would more effectively operate in a coordinated

capacity in line with broad strategic goals and as a clearing house for quality assurance and quality

control for public facing materials. They would work alongside and in support of public affairs, media

relations and social media relations efforts, and in support of the “building relationship” aspects of

communications.

As strategic communications structures are created, the writing, editing and visual creative team

should be intentionally integrated into Metro leadership’s strategic communications efforts to

prioritize this valuable and limited resource.

Writers, editors and multimedia staff should be authorized as the quality assurance and quality

control for external facing public communications pieces on behalf of King County Metro. It is

assumed final products achieve that through close collaboration, coordination, and review with

SME’s and project managers who are the content owners. (See recommendation on

“Communication Protocols” in which we recommend doing work to provide guidance and specify

types of materials and associated review processes.)

When and where possible, the creative services team should be collocated to quickly share new

creative approaches and to streamline editing and revision cycles.

Sections and divisions that communicate publicly on behalf of Metro should proactively include

writers, editors, multimedia and graphics staff in efforts where public communications is planned.

The production of any communications product works best with a communications specialist

assigned as a project manager (PM) for the production. This communications PM should work as a

single point of contact with the PM in the section (often the subject matter expert) who is primarily

responsible for the effort being communicated about. PIO’s, Writer/Editors, Community Relations

Planners, and internal communications specialists would serve in this capacity and be the interface

between section staff and graphic design and multimedia staff.

Writers, editors, graphic artists, photographers and multimedia specialists (regardless of where they

are located in the organization) are empowered to hold Metro and King County to style guidelines

established by King County for written and visual communications, and revise and improve them

when needed to meet evolving expectations in public communications. In either structural option,

Metro style guidelines would be maintained and updated by the Marketing group.

Internal communications

Throughout the course of our Work Group effort, we heard about challenges with how we share

information internally – both up and down and sideways within the organization. People often don’t

know who’s working on what, what the agency’s priorities are or why we’re doing what we’re doing,

and what our expectations are for employees who are our most frequent ambassadors of Metro to the

public. Processes that keep us informed and engaged as employees need to be formally established and

articulated to address this challenge:


Maintain a lead or manager role for internal communications in the new department structure.

This role would report to the Director of Communications and liaise with centrally-led and organized

employee communications and engagement; work closely with the GM on strategic communications

with employees and facilitate two-way employee engagement to inform agency and leadership

decision making; and support each division in establishing and maintaining their own

communications framework: values, goals, channels, and content that helps them tell their own

story in the context of the agency’s overall strategic communications goals and priorities.

Internal communications needs close proximity and access to the creative services team in the

GM’s office for production support and to provide communications project management for the

graphics and multi-media producers.

Establish an internal communications team with representation from each division and service

section. Each division and service section would identify an internal communications lead – could be

already a part of someone’s job now and this would make it explicit or could be a newly assigned

responsibility. Division representatives would be responsible for maintaining and making available

to the lead of internal communications an inventory of communications channels at work within

their division, working with the internal communications lead to disseminate information or

facilitate engagement as needed, and coordinating the generation of content for employee

communications.

The internal communications team would meet as needed and at least once annually to conduct an

audit of internal communications channels and products – what’s working well, what could be

improved – and creatively plan and problem solve around internal communications needs and

issues.

Social media relations

Create or assign a position as department Social Media Lead (in the Communications section of the

GM’s Office) to support the management of existing social media channels, consider the expansion

or contraction of channels, serve as a liaison for social media communication involving other

government or elected official’s accounts, and ensure the strategic direction of Metro’s social media

channels. (Requires part-time attention)

Create a Social Media Marketing position to support promotion of information from all parts of

Metro that needs to be shared with the public for the purpose of changing behavior – e.g. new

and changing service, safety messages, and marketing campaigns; this role could be posted as a

social Community Manager, a la "Metro Sarah" for representing the agency with community

members; and to work with channel leads within the department where the work is being done who

maintain ownership of social media channels (Examples being the In Motion Facebook page, or

Rideshare Facebook and Twitter channels.)

Increase staffing in the Customer Information Office to support the growing work load and

potentially longer hours and/or weekend support. As the group grows, we should consider the

requirement of Spanish language proficiency. (See related Mobility: Planning and Services Work

Group recommendations around Customer Experience.)


Marketing & Information Services

Increase the number and depth of Marketing and Information Services staff Specialist staff to

more fully support the new, growing Department. Currently demand for marketing services

repeatedly exceeds the supply capacity of the existing small team. Additional marketing specialist

support (and marketing funding) is needed for Accessible Services, Community Connections and

Connecting to Transit (need to change TLT to FTE), Human Resources/Recruiting, and more.

o Graphic Designer, in the past there was a full-time graphic designer in the marketing team.

This provided great efficiency and effectiveness both in terms of time and cost. This position

would handle one-off graphic design requests (such as posters for an event), updates to

collateral/brochures, graphics for use in social media or video, and they can extend a

campaign creative concept we purchase from a full-service agency (i.e. apply a strategic

creative concept from a larger marketing campaign to additional media as needed).

Currently, the marketing communication specialists have to hand off all graphic design work

to a designer in another work unit who isn’t familiar with the project, or to an off-site

vendor (freelance graphic design or marketing agency).

o Add depth to the Marketing Specialist team – Currently Marketing & Sales Specialist II and III are spending valuable time doing work that a MSS I could /should do. Having this role would allow MSS II and III to provide more marketing communications consultation, planning and strategy guidance to internal clients and Metro marketing needs. Under direction of more senior members of the team, the MSS I would, among other things: 1. Administer marketing projects which are vital to the agency’s mission. The work may involve large amounts of materials but requires limited discretionary judgment. 2. Coordinate updates of marketing and/or sales materials to reflect periodic changes; compose basic elements of communications or marketing materials. Coordinates this work w/ graphic designer and print shop.

o Make the TLT Sr. Marketing Communications Specialist an FTE. The volume of projects that

require outbound marketing communications planning and execution is tremendous from

Community Connections and Connecting to Transit. As the current projects are launched,

there will be more to come. If CC and CtT quiet down, there will be new emerging tools or

programs from Market Development that require this level of marketing consultation and

support.

Increase resources for Metro’s website – whether through hiring another FTE to help maintain and

update the site or through reallocation of internal resources, strengthen a core group of

communications specialists who comprise the web team – a fully up-to-date website designed for

optimal customer experience is essential for Metro to succeed at achieving our strategy and targets.

We currently have one and only one webmaster. We are falling far short on web resources to

support Metro. This is a risk and big gap relative to all that Metro is doing and needing to

communicate about through our website. Some program leads are finding a work-around and

creating web sites that do not live within the kingcounty.gov/Metro domain.

COMMUNICATIONS PROTOCOLS AND GUIDELINES

We recommend establishing communications protocols and guidelines for internal and external

communications:


Create clear expectations for internal staff interested in communicating externally or internally

about when and how to do so. These guidelines should be easily accessible to all employees and

included in new hire orientations.

Guidelines should classify various types of communications and clarify corresponding review

processes, how and with whom to engage with for communications support depending on the

purpose of the communication, resources available, and guidance on appropriate times and ways to

engage with communications professionals in the planning and implementation of work.

Guidelines should create and strengthen clear lines of communications, coordination and

processes between communications creative services and brand, graphics and visual storytelling

efforts underway in marketing.

Style guides and standards should be established and centrally available for Metro staff.

COMMUNITY OUTREACH

Create stronger connection and ongoing practices that bring together staff engaged in community

outreach. Outreach is conducted by many throughout the agency – there’s no centralized way to know

where we are in the community and what we are doing; sometimes staff end up at the same events or

organizations in the same timeframes for different purposes unbeknownst to each other and creating

confusion in the community.

Everyone who interacts with the public is an ambassador of Metro’s brand, our priorities, plans, and

services. This includes fare media sales specialists, customer service representatives, operators,

marketing specialists, program and service staff in Accessible services, Rideshare, Market Development,

community relations planners, employee services, and other sections who regularly reach out to or

attend community events.

We should consider having the ORCA To Go team in Pass Sales report to Marketing. This would

leverage this important resource in the community and provide an opportunity to broaden the

scope of the fare media specialists to include customer care and feeding, as well as education and

awareness building about Metro’s services, mobility options, and engagement opportunities.

We should conduct ongoing orientations and training for staff on current community outreach best

practices consistent with our equity and social justice commitments, all of Metro’s products and

services, current planning and engagement work underway, and current messaging.

Staff who regularly conduct community outreach should be added to an email list. Informing this

email list any time a new service, campaign, or public engagement effort is underway or there is

sensitive information we are publicizing can be added to the communications protocols/guidelines

recommendation above.

A recurring meeting should be established to bring together staff who do community outreach to

share their work, coordinate as necessary, and for the purpose of shared learning opportunities.

Staff engaged in outreach should use a CRM tool to calendar and track their presence in the

community in a way that is open-source and accessible to all staff.

o A CRM tool that makes our presence in the community accessible to all staff would

allow outreach and engagement staff to better leverage our touchpoints in the

community for strategic communications messaging, to raise awareness about products

and services or employment opportunities, or to engage the public in decision making.


OTHER ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER

Move the Revenue Processing Center (RPC) from Customer Services to another division – Operations

or Financial and Administrative Services. The RPC is not core to the mission of the Customer Services

which is primarily about caring for our customers.


Additional staff requires additional budget, FTE allocations and workspace.

Teams that have not had oversight of their communications work or content may be hesitant if

they see having additional layers or steps that slows down their process.

DOT Director’s Office creative services team members currently serve other DOT divisions and

other county departments.

DOT Communications being “external” to Metro makes its services a nice-to-have, not a

required checkpoint for communicating with the public. How do we establish this function

within Metro so it provides an effective checkpoint for communication with the public so it is

value-added for staff and the organization? Note: adding a checkpoint will require more labor

time from the Communications team members who will now serve also as reviewers.

The drive to be more active and responsive on some of Metro's social media channels needs to

reflect the different priorities of each section (some may be more/less active than others, and

that’s OK).

Limited funding puts pressure on focusing available resources elsewhere.

Some "transfers" of DOT communications staff may need to be phased into Metro prior to

Metro becoming a department. The iterative nature of this transition can be challenging to

navigate from a change management perspective.

There may be resistance to some of the recommendations proposed should they be

implemented that will require care and attention to make a smooth and respectful transition.

5. Outline high-level requirements to implementing this recommendation if known.

Additional staff and budget authority, workspace and equipment

Transferring staff could require transferring needed equipment or software, subscriptions

CRM system project management, adoption, and coordination

Internal and external communication resourcing and coordination with Employee Services to

achieve goals for Workforce Development and Training and recruitment needs

Staffing levels may need to be adjusted or reassessed as we determine how Metro

communications, marketing, and customer information services will support the Marine division

Documents

Work Group Recommendation and Decision Package/media/depts/transportation/metro/employees/metro-department/d...21. Ensure all employees have equitable access to inclusive, culturally