iii
Document name
Working with each other to achieve shared goals
Collaboration
4
BACKGROUND
Our commitment to Collaboration
We are an active member of the Road Efficiency Group (REG), a collaborative initiative by the road controlling authorities of New Zealand. Its goals are to drive value for money and improve
performance in maintenance, operations and renewals throughout NZ. Since the formation of REG in 2012, considerable progress has been made on a number of projects aimed at sharing perspectives and knowledge to identify opportunities to improve performance and reduce costs.
The REG work encourages better collaboration and flexibility between road controlling authorities and has a number of practical aims: Reducing costs by saving money in the right areas
Prioritising investment on the roads that need it most
Encouraging best practice for the future from suppliers, industry and road controlling authorities
Providing a more integrated, collective way of maintaining and operating state highways and local roads in the regions.
There are a number of collaboration conversations happening between the NZ Transport Agency and local authorities. Each of the
conversations is different and what works for one group may not work for another. There is no ‘one size fits all’ model that can be applied.
THE NEED TO WORK DIFFERENTLY
Our Objective
The main objective of collaborating is achieving better value for money in maintenance and operations. We will always work with local
authorities to ensure that we are getting efficiency regardless of the collaboration model that is put in place. A secondary benefit is a seamless customer experience. The value for money and seamless connections is being reinforced by the one network road classification system and other tools that are being put in place.
The Transport Agency recognise that collaboration is a potential tool to address the current financial constraints that will continue into the foreseeable future
5
Our Principles
We want to take a principles-based approach to collaboration. One size doesn’t fit all. So we will revisit our plans to make sure all parties are getting the full benefits from each project. These principles are based around the following:
Allowing the parties involved to arrive at an outcome that is mutually beneficial without any preconceived models
Creating a seamless customer experience by working with the right people to obtain mutual goals for value for money
Ensuring value for money benefits are agreed by all collaborative parties
Each collaboration partnership is likely to be slightly different and have unique aspects. The following points may help to guide discussions and act as a suitable test to ensure that the proposed collaboration model is fit for purpose. It is likely that as we get more experience in facilitating and negotiation collaboration arrangements that the principles will be reviewed and changed to maintain relevancy: Do we have pre-conceived collaboration answer? If so why? Should
we “go back to go” in order to draw on the spirit of true
collaboration to find the most suitable model on balance for the partnership, and think about what we can sacrifice in order to achieve that.
Have we carefully drawn out and considered what each party’s objectives are in order to solve actual problems rather than perceived ones?
Have we got the right partners and parties involved? Is there a sensible cluster? What is the best fit for the local, regional, and national circumstances? Does the critical mass/cluster fit the State Highway strategic network, or does it undermine it? Is it better to pause until a critical mass/cluster is formed?
Is there value for money (efficiency and effectiveness) benefits for the parties involved? Are all parties comfortable with the benefits and consequences? If all the benefits are one-sided is there still value for the Transport Agency to be involved (acknowledging that we also pay for part of local government roading through the NLTP)? Are there wider NZ Inc. benefits (one network, customer experience etc) that can be considered and hence warrant the initiative?
Are there sensible shared outcomes to be achieved through collaboration? Is achieving the outcomes a long or short term proposition? If short term, what are the long term
outcomes/possibilities/risks? Does each party agree to the achievement of these?
Are we proposing to use a complex collaboration model when a more simplistic one would suffice? If so why?
Every collaboration relationship is different, the parties themselves bring different maturities, desires and aspects to the table – all of which need to be
discussed and worked through
Agreeing the non-negotiables is an important early step in the collaborative process
6
Is there suitable cultural alignment between parties to make the collaboration sustainable? How are we planning to develop a collaborative culture?
Have we got the right partners and parties involved?, have all collaboration options been considered?
Examples of Collaboration structures
There are three key areas which help build towards collaborative work
Network operations – This is the simplest of the collaboration models
where we co-operate to help ensure the efficient and effective
operation of our networks. The Traffic Operation Centres (TOCs) in the major urban areas are examples where it has made sense to work to together to manage and operate our collective assets more effectively and provide a better service to road users. We are establishing network operating plans for Local Authorities in the urban and rural areas. In terms of collaboration, this model is similar to two mates flatting together, where combining at times make sense, but independency is maintained.
Asset management – This is a collaboration in the strategic asset
management space where all parties involved draw on each other’s knowledge and experience to develop asset management plans. It does not matter whether the plans are strategic, investment or treatment related. The formality of this type of arrangement ranges depending on the parties involved. This type of collaboration is similar to an engagement. You are pretty certain that you can work together, but have not fully committed as either party can call off the
engagement if it does not work out without having to go through messy separation
Service delivery – This is a complete collaboration between the parties
involved whereby a Joint Venture (or similar) is used to jointly operate and manage the local and state highway roading network. The delivery is seamless, and all parties have shared outcomes that they are
working towards. While a service delivery model operates, the sovereignty of the State highway or local roading asset does not change. This type of collaboration is the equivalent of a marriage with a pre-nuptial agreement in place. Both parties have committed to the working relationship and it is in their best interests to work together to deliver an optimal service.
It’s all about getting the Right People, doing the Right Jobs with the Right Attitudes
Seek the right collaborative
structure to generate optimal benefits. Any collaborative structure needs to be considered in its own merit and within the context of the
relationship being considered.
7
Benefits and consequences of collaboration
Each party involved in a collaboration agreement will need to work through the benefits and consequences for their involvement. Some of the wider benefits that can be considered and included when
considering a business case:
Are there customer benefits generated from creating seamless connections between the state highway and local roading networks?
Are there one network benefits in applying similar maintenance and operation standards?
Are there likely to be benefits from having a similar look and feel to the roading network i.e. safety, resilience, etc?
Note that these are strong considerations for the Agency, but it is not to say they cannot be adjusted on a regional basis where service delivery is seen as the optimum solution.
The following table outlines the type of issues that may arise with Local Authorities when considering collaboration discussions:
Issues/Challenges Objectives/Opportunities
Maintaining a financially
sustainable, safe and reliable network
Maximise whole-of-life value of the assets, while enhancing safety and ensuring a sound resilient local and regional network.
Asset management abilities
Enable better decision making and investment optimisation by improving asset management data, analysis and expertise.
HR - retaining staff and skills
Improve the ability to attract, develop and retain staff with the desired mix of skills, experience and knowledge.
Levels of Service (classification & consistency)
Assist the development and implementation of consistent road classifications and related LOS considerations as part of a “one-network” approach.
Growth/Land use changes
Provide a basis for better understanding and responding to growth and land use changes.
Facilitating local economic growth
Support transport growth and efficiency as a driver of economic success.
Larger collaborative networks and/or contracts doesn’t necessary create larger or additional benefits Taking a holistic view can have considerable benefits for New Zealand as a whole through an
improved customer experience, and more significant benefits for the contributing parties
8
Issues/Challenges Objectives/Opportunities
Competitive physical works market
Support the retention of competitive market conditions.
Professional services / consultants
Support the retention of accessible, affordable and suitably skilled expertise in support of TLA’s to retaining “ownership” of decision making.
Retaining "local" governance/decisions
Enable and support good local decision making.
Procurement and value for money
Provide for benchmarking and information to support “smart buying”. Allow for local procurement if appropriate/cost effective. Provide a foundation for possible joint procurement.
