Rail Process Improvement

Our client, a state government agency had designed a new draft operating model for major rail timetable changes and major rail infrastructure projects. This was in response to recommendations that had been developed through an independent commissioned inquiry into the operations of the rail network. We were engaged to help with the detailed future state process design to support the proposed operating model. This included cross agency engagement of key stakeholders to understand key interdependencies and to design integrated process maps outlining roles and responsibilities. These detailed process designs would then further inform the governance structures required and business impacts of the proposed changes.​ The future state operating model needed to be reviewed and endorsed by key executives from across both agencies.

There were several key issues identified by the Rail Commission in relation to the delivery of major capital rail projects and timetable delivery.  These needed to be addressed as part of the revised operating model and process design activities.​

Integrated Program – Major projects were not managed as an integrated program and hence did not have overarching program governance or full visibility of interdependencies.​​

Governance Bodies – Governance bodies in some cases lacked clearly defined roles and responsibilities and decision making focus.​

Steering Committee – Senior Rail Executive were delegating their steering committee accountabilities.  This reduced their direct involvement in the rail networks operational readiness.​

Operational Readiness – The operational readiness for delivering a major timetable change by the rail network was not adequately challenged or assured.   This contributed to a major risk not being identified around train crew capacity and resourcing. ​

The initial discovery phase of this work required our team to review and analyse existing practices and processes. We reviewed and analysed key artefacts, engaged with key subject matter experts across both agencies, reviewed online knowledge portals and other publicly available information. This allowed us to gain an understanding of the current process issues and variations. This discovery process enabled us to plan an approach for the delivery of ‘TO-BE’ process design workshops. It was also becoming evident that all stakeholders were not familiar with how future state processes are developed so we felt we needed to adopt a more directive approach in the workshop design process.

We commenced the design phase of the project with a ‘kick off’ for the subject matter experts identified from each agency. This kick off focused on the objectives of the design phase, their role as a subject matter expert on the project and the key outcomes we needed to achieve. The process design workshops were initially conducted face to face with the identified subject matter experts from each agency. We utilised our process design whiteboard workshop approach where we lead the development of the new process in a face to face group setting. We then transitioned the workshop outputs into Lucid Chart which is a cloud-based process mapping product.  During the design phase the COVID-19 pandemic hit so we had to adapt to a virtual workshop approach using Lucid Chart. You can read more about this in our blog on virtual process improvement.

Lucid Chart enabled us to seamlessly distribute the process maps via a secure URL to workshop participants so they could review and provide feedback directly on the designs. As these process designs were being developed we also undertook a detailed gap analysis to identify what additional processes and artefacts would be required to operationalise the new processes. This gap analysis was a key tool that helped us to develop a picture of the magnitude of the business change.

The key artefacts developed to meet the rail commission’s recommendations included:

• A detailed process architecture that outlined process owners and process managers and identified the key inputs and outputs required from each process.
• A proposed design for the establishment of an ongoing process governance framework across both agencies.
• A detailed gap analysis that identified other additional processes and artefacts required to operationalise the new processes.
• A business impact assessment based on the detailed process designs identifying the key roles impacted by the changes and the identification of any capability gaps required to deliver the new processes​.
• A detailed transition plan to support the effective implementation of the future state business processes and governance structures that had been developed and agreed.

The engagement provided the foundations to close out key recommendations from the rail inquiry.  The key elements being measured by the rail inquiry were:

Joint – Both agencies need to come to a joint/aligned position on the new operating model through a collaborative process.

Granular/executable – The operating designs needed to be sufficiently granular to ensure that the processes could be executed efficiently.

Consistent – The format of the process designs needed to be consistent to be assessable and comparable with other jurisdictions.

Comprehensive – The future state process designs needed to sufficiently consider all elements of the new operating model design.

The key outcomes were endorsed/approved by the relevant program steering committees and senior executives. The joint and collaborative approach adopted for the development of the key planning documents positioned the changes positively across both organisations. Key stakeholders felt they had a deep connection with the development of the future state and conveyed positive messages across their organisations regarding the changes.  The future state processes were therefore rolled out and tested on current in-flight projects.

Based on the assessment of the rail commission the new operating model met the intent of the inquiries recommendations.  Both agencies were extremely satisfied with the outcomes of the engagement and their mindset has now shifted towards continuous process improvement.