By Chris  Joyce 
            
              
                  
                  Phil Barnes,  assistant director for Policy Analysis, Research & Innovation, leads a discussion about risk management. Photo by Nick Carpenter  | 
               
             
            When considering whether Mn/DOT should, for example, turn a state  highway back to a local government, replace an aging mainframe information system  or find alternative bypass routes around a city, many department managers these  days have turned to a process known as risk management to help them weigh the  alternatives in tough decisions. 
            “Risk management is a systematic way to look at  possible consequences of actions—or lack of action,” said Phil Barnes,  assistant director for Policy Analysis, Research & Innovation. “It’s about  getting ahead of things so we can make better  decisions for the department, our partners and the public.” 
            Barnes, who has facilitated risk  management sessions for 13 different Mn/DOT projects during the past  year, noted that the process can be used for most decisions  that affect an organization.   
            “When people get to feeling uneasy about making a decision,  then maybe it’s a good idea to bring them together,” he said.   
            Hwy  197/Paul Bunyan Drive turnback in Bemidji 
            Such was the case recently for Bemidji/District 2, which was wrestling  with the decision of whether or not to turn back Hwy 197/Paul Bunyan Drive to  the city of Bemidji. Barnes brought together staff from District 2, the city of  Bemidji and the Office of Land Management to identify and weigh the risks  associated with the two alternatives before them: (1) Mn/DOT continues to own  and operate Hwy 197, or (2) Bemidji assumes ownership and operation of the road. 
            Barnes said the group concluded that although there were  risks associated with both alternatives, there was a perception that there  would be less risk during the next five years if Mn/DOT maintained ownership of  the highway.  
            In addition, to address the city’s concern that it would  lose “control over its destiny,” the group came to an understanding that a cooperative  agreement about when and what kinds of changes could be made on the road would  be productive.  
            “For D2, the  process enabled Mn/DOT and the city of Bemidji a forum for openly and honestly  discussing this matter,” said Lynn Eaton, District 2 engineer, who shared his  district’s experiences at the Managers’ Conference in mid-December.  
            “We each had  to make our case and identify how a potential turnback would affect each party.  Each got an opportunity to comment on the other’s potential risk. It  exposed where each other’s greatest threats were and gave the opportunity for  both parties to walk away from the table with a better understanding of the  issue,” he said. 
            “Even though  Mn/DOT was not able to use the opportunity to turn MN-197 back to the city, D2  learned what was important and is using that knowledge to take the turn back  idea to another level.” 
            Transportation Information System  replacement 
            Jonette Kreideweis, Transportation Data & Analysis  director, also shared her office’s experiences at the Managers’ Conference. 
            “The risk management process provided a structure for  reviewing alternatives and assessing risks to move forward for replacing TIS,”  she said, referring to the department’s 30-year-old, mainframe-based,  transportation data information system. 
            “We were a group with strong opinions and were risk-averse  after the failure of the last replacement attempt,” she said. 
            Barnes facilitated 10-12 hours of discussion for a group of  TIS stakeholders, which included TDA staff as well as representatives from  Bridges; Information & Technology Services; Land Management; Materials and  Road Research; Metro District; and Traffic, Safety and Operations.  
            “The process gave a structured way to weight options, assess  risks and identify best options for moving forward that everyone could live  with and hope will meet our needs,” Kreideweis said. 
            In the end, the group decided to go with an off-the-shelf  product, instead of selecting the typical solution of developing and building  in-house, she said. 
            Although these two examples show how successful the risk  management process can be on certain types of decision-making, Barnes said it  may not work with unilateral decisions or low-risk projects. 
            “As a neutral party, it’s very humbling to be a part in these  discussions,” Barnes said. “These projects have big impacts on Minnesota—it  feels good to be part of the decision.” 
            What’s  ahead 
            Barnes and staff have already scheduled time in 2010 for  several more projects, including evaluating the RouteBuilder system (the  program used to route oversized vehicles through the state), jumpstarting  project management plans for Chapter 152 bridge projects, delivering the new  stimulus program and assessing the ideas collected during Emagination-JAM to see  which should go forward.  
For more information, see the risk management Web page, or contact Barnes at philip.barnes@state.mn.us or 651-366-3171. |