Performance Measurement Services and Organizational Assessment
WSSC hired PEER Consultants as subcontractors to assist with the implementation of a performance oversight and monitoring program within the Office of the General Manager to identify opportunities for process and operational improvements within critical functional areas. The program was set up to assess and analyze key performance indicators in specific organizational and operational areas within the utility and engage Commission staff and managers in a continuous effort to improve service delivery and operational effectiveness.
Over the period of the two-year project, the project team provided direct assistance to the Office of the General Manager and the Commission’s executive staff in support of the implementation of WSSC’s Stat Office.
As a subcontractor, PEER was involved with Task 1, Stat Program Development. The team evaluated WSSC’s Stat program and provided continuous feedback to the Stat Office Director on the program approach and effectiveness. The program evaluation focused on analytical capabilities, identifying appropriate performance metrics, report organization, data utilization, and staffing needs. The team provided training to staff and management on the overall Stat process. The team provided assistance to the State Office in identifying and developing performance indicators associated with the Commission’s strategic goals. Under Task 2, PEER assisted with data collection, data organization, and information management activities, and also was involved with data analysis, GIS analysis, preparation of briefing materials, preparation of meeting materials, meeting coordination, field investigation, and post-briefing follow-up activities. The PEER data analyst assigned to the project assessed WSSC’s performance and customer satisfaction for road repairs performed by WSSC.
The main challenge faced when performing work on this contract involved WSSC’s organizational structure. WSSC has a very hierarchical structure that can best be described as silos – there was little communication between silos, except the top (i.e., Director level managers who reported to the Deputy GM or GM directly). Very often the responsibility for one function (e.g., pavement repair) was split between silos so that internal communication was poor. Other functions (e.g., claims processing) were all handled within one silo, but there were no established productivity standards, and output varied wildly from one claims processor to another. In other cases (MWBE Office), there was a significant backlog of cases because the director of the group (who was very bright and worked very hard) required that all applications had to move through her, and her health problems caused extended absences. Senior-level management was very helpful in removing these impediments to efficiency, and some organizational and operating procedures were modified.