Identifying Methods and Metrics for Evaluating Interagency Coordination in Traffic Incident Management

One role of state-level Departments of Transportation (DOT) is traffic incident management (TIM): managing incidents that impact traffic flow on interstate highways and involving multiple agencies (e.g., police, fire). This study found DOTs collect basic TIM performance measures (e.g., lane clearance times), but many do not record additional measures, consistently review the collected data or analyze it unless needed to answer specific questions. Since performance evaluation of interagency coordination is one area of TIM in which little success has been attained (FHWA, 2003), process improvement methods from operations management may prove useful. To illustrate, interagency incident response for a disabled vehicle (no injuries or property damage) is modeled as a process in which appropriate resources (e.g., state police, tow) must coordinate to safely remove the vehicle and restore normal traffic flow. Completing these events requires the resources to perform specific functions, each taking more or less time depending on various factors (e.g., weather, time of day). Response time data can highlight geographic areas or process segments with highly variable event times, leading to investigation and recommendations to reduce variability and, ultimately, traffic delays. Based on this approach, recommendations are made for data collection and analysis of appropriate TIM performance measures.

[1]  C. Caldas,et al.  Benchmarking Initiatives in the Construction Industry: Lessons Learned and Improvement Opportunities , 2006 .

[2]  Kimberly C Vásconez,et al.  Unifying Incident Response , 2007 .

[3]  D. White.  Thank You-1 , 2010 .

[4]  Phil Charles,et al.  Review of current traffic incident management practices , 2007 .

[5]  Ying Liu,et al.  Emergency incident management, benefits and operational issues performance and benefits evaluation of CHART , 2004, IEEE International Conference on Networking, Sensing and Control, 2004.

[6]  Charles Karl.  Improving traffic incident management: literature review , 2007 .

[7]  Brian Lee Smith,et al.  Investigation of System Operations Performance Measures for the Virginia Department of Transportation , 2007 .

[8]  April Armstrong,et al.  Traffic Incident Management Handbook , 2010 .

[9]  D. Garvin.  Building a learning organization. , 1993, Harvard business review.

[10]  Claire Creaser,et al.  VAMP – laying the foundations , 2007 .

[11]  K. Webb,et al.  Obtaining Citizen Feedback: The Application of Citizen Surveys to Local Governments. , 1973 .

[12]  P. Schroeder.  The Goal: A Process of Ongoing Improvement , 1994 .

[13]  W M Dunn,et al.  SAFE AND QUICK CLEARANCE OF TRAFFIC INCIDENTS , 2003 .

[14]  D. Commerce.  Statistical abstract of the United States , 1978 .

[15]  John Housley,et al.  Benchmarking - is it worth it? , 1999 .

[16]  David Helman,et al.  TRAFFIC INCIDENT MANAGEMENT , 2004 .

[17]  K Dopart,et al.  SHARING INFORMATION BETWEEN PUBLIC SAFETY AND TRANSPORTATION AGENCIES FOR TRAFFIC INCIDENT MANAGEMENT , 2004 .

[18]  Phil Charles.  Traffic incident management: best practice , 2007 .

[19]  Terry Wireman,et al.  Benchmarking Best Practices in Maintenance Management , 2003 .

[20]  Jon Martin Denstadli,et al.  Analyzing Air Travel: A Comparison of Different Survey Methods and Data Collection Procedures , 2000 .

[21]  Harry P. Hatry,et al.  Performance Measurement: Getting Results , 2007 .

[22]  N. Fenton.  The Personal Interview , 1934 .

[23]  L. Berrah,et al.  Information aggregation in industrial performance measurement: rationales, issues and definitions , 2004 .