Lesson

Ensure the long-term stability of an interagency incident management program by creating dependencies and by managing for leadership succession.

Major metropolitan areas' experiences with formalized incident management programs.


5/1/2001
Atlanta,Georgia,United States; Houston,Texas,United States; Seattle,Washington,United States; Milwaukee,Wisconsin,United States; Chicago,Illinois,United States; Los Angeles,California,United States; San Francisco,California,United States; Detroit,Michigan,United States; San Antonio,Texas,United States; Maryland,United States


Background (Show)

Lesson Learned

Formalizing the incident management effort existing in many cities into an incident management program can make incident management a core agency activity at senior executive levels and demonstrate a long-term commitment to incident management, with a clearly defined strategy. The program becomes a component in the budget process of each participating agency and of every major aspect of each agency, helping it last through tight budgets, personnel and political changes, and helping agencies to support each other.
  • Create dependencies to ensure program sustainability. Developing a clear 'dependency' on the program and its offerings is one way to ensure its visibility and stability for the long term. Public leaders and travelers come to expect the services and improved conditions that result from the program. Thus, it becomes part of the budget baseline, rather than an optional item.

    Atlanta’s highly popular HERO service patrol clearly illustrates the success of this approach: Sustaining interest and support (both financial and popular) is one of the toughest challenges any incident management program faces after its initial success. Atlanta has isolated its HEROs (Highway Emergency Response Operators) freeway service patrol from political and financial vulnerabilities by cultivating dependency on its services. The HEROs are a highly visible arm of the incident management program. GDOT is deluged with letters of appreciation for their service. "Our public and our partners could not imagine living without our HEROs", says Marion Waters of GDOT. "They are dependent on them on a daily basis." The positive responses and publicity that the Atlanta program receives puts the pressure on politicians and policymakers to sustain and grow the program. This provides the best protection from any threats to the entire incident management program, even the less visible operations that are most vulnerable to budget cuts.

  • Prepare for the possibility that a leader might leave. Successful leaders are difficult to retain in any organization, and particularly difficult to retain in the public sector. Often they are promoted internally or hired away by the private sector, leaving a leadership "vacuum" if no one has been designated as a successor. This lack of clearly-defined leadership following loss of a successful champion can cause incident management to lose momentum, sometimes causing the eventual breakdown of interagency relationships that had been established at a person-to-person level. Overcoming the loss of a champion requires the consideration of a leadership succession model. This model should consist of the identification and preparation of one or more additional persons participating in the incident management program who can be prepared to assume leadership responsibilities should the current champion leave. Such preparation will likely be informal and performed within the incident management program, rather than part of an individual’s career development program within his or her home agency. Ideally, each agency will see its incident management focal point as a key individual, and will take steps to ensure that a successor is identified and prepared in advance of such a departure. Critical to the success of this model is its early implementation. If there is no effort to begin preparing a qualified, capable, and recognized successor until the current leader gives notice, it is unlikely that the new leader will have the understanding necessary to succeed.

    Future leaders should be chosen not simply for their management experience, but because they exhibit qualities that would allow them to build and sustain an interagency team of incident management professionals.


Addressing institutional challenges is critical for the sustained success of any regional incident management program. Incident management programs that do not have a solid institutional foundation and which rely solely on the leadership of a single champion, or on temporary synergies created by interagency coordination for special events, may fall apart over the long term. The critical factor for the long term success and sustainability of an incident management program is its institutionalization and multilevel commitment across all agencies involved. Thus, the development and implementation of strategies to overcome the institutional challenges is of utmost importance when organizing incident management programs.


Lesson Comments

No comments posted to date

Comment on this Lesson

To comment on this lesson, fill in the information below and click on submit. An asterisk (*) indicates a required field. Your name and email address, if provided, will not be posted, but are to contact you, if needed to clarify your comments.



Source

Regional Traffic Incident Management Programs: Implementation Guide

Author: Vincent Pearce

Published By: U.S. Department of Transportation, FHWA ITS Joint Program Office, Federal Transit Administration

Source Date: 5/1/2001

EDL Number: 13149

Other Reference Number: FHWA-OP-01-002/FTA-TRI-11-00-03

URL: http://ntl.bts.gov/lib/jpodocs/repts_te/13149.pdf

Other Lessons From this Source

Lesson Contacts


Agency Contact(s):

David Helman
FHWA
202-366-8042
David.Helman@fhwa.dot.gov

Lesson Analyst:

Jane Lappin
Volpe National Transportation Systems Center
617-494-3692
jane.lappin@volpe.dot.gov


Rating

Average User Rating

0 ( ratings)

Rate this Lesson

(click stars to rate)


Application Areas

None defined

Countries

United States

Focus Areas

None defined

Goal Areas

None defined

Keywords

None defined

Lesson ID: 2006-00183