The Right MAP Will Get You There
Benchmark assessment offers utilities comparative data to better direct future performance
Utility performance has been the subject
of many benchmarking tools
over the last decade. Professional
water and wastewater associations
have offered programs to their
members to fill this need, focusing on various
indicators. Typically, the measures are broad and
all-encompassing at higher levels of management
and more specific and narrow at the lower
levels of an organization.
A number of tools provide assistance in
strategic planning for the areas of human
resources, technology, regulatory compliance,
customer satisfaction, and organizational knowledge
capture and retention.
Perhaps the best-known program, Qualserve,
is a series of organizational improvement tools
jointly developed by the American Water Works
Association and the Water Environment Federation
to improve public health protection and
operational performance and increase public
confidence and support.
The Qualserve Benchmarking Clearinghouse
offers an annual national survey for utilities
to compare their results with more than
100 high-performing utilities from across the
country. These standardized measures address
the areas of organizational development, business
management, customer relations, water
operations, and wastewater operations. The survey
results are available to nonparticipants at a
cost of several hundred dollars but are free to
survey participants. The benchmarking survey
has greatly improved the depth and breadth of
comparative data available, and the cost has
dropped dramatically.
An Environmental Management System, or
EMS, is a set of management processes and procedures
that allow an organization to analyze,
control, and reduce the environmental impact
of its activities, products, and services and operate
with greater efficiency and control. Based on
private-sector improvement approaches to environmental
performance, an EMS uses a continuous
cycle review of a “Plan, Do, Check, Act”
system methodology rather than the traditional
command-and-control approaches. The elements
of an EMS can be found at EPA’s Web
site. The University of Florida TREEO Center
also is a direct source of EMS assistance
and information on a third tool, the National
Biosolids Partnership program.
All of the instruments mentioned provide
utilities roadmaps to higher performance. It is
most important to note that measuring current
performance against the industry is the first step
in overall improvement.
Another tool, the Management Assessment
Profile (MAP), provides a way for progressive
facility managers to measure how they are performing
relative to others and how they are
improving over time. People value comparative
analysis. “How are others in our profession
addressing this issue?” or, “Is our group a top performer?”
A common template of measuring quality
performance ensures direction, systems control,
teamwork, and a sense of accomplishment.
MAP was developed in 2003 by Woodard
& Curran of Portland, Maine. It measures the
following elements of quality performance:
• customer service,
• leadership,
• technical management,
• community, and
• vision.
Each of the five elements is further defined
by five standards, creating a matrix of 25
achievement goals. Standards are divided into
requirements, and specific measurements are
assigned to each.
A group of water and wastewater facility
managers that perform contract operations
refined MAP over a six-month period. They
defined the five core elements of performance
and five standards for each element. During a
series of three meetings, groups of 15 to 30 project
managers discussed each element and standard
and more carefully crafted them. A consensus
process finalized the standards and
performance measure for each element. After
the matrix was formed, the consulting firm
developed a wall chart using icons and text to
easily and routinely remind facility managers
and staff of their expectations and goals.
How to use a MAP
MAP audits can be used as the primary management
tool to ensure that facilities operate
in compliance and in a consistent, professional
manner.
Each audit can result in the formation of a
list of recommended and required action items.
The audits are conducted using a consistent
template. A score is assigned by the auditor. Each
item is scored with zero, one, or two points. A
two-point assignment suggests that the manager
and staff have achieved the spirit, intent,
and details of the standard. A one-point assignment
suggests that the work is in significant
progress but not yet completed. A zero-point
assignment suggests that the facility has neglected
the item.
Within the Woodard & Curran contract
operations system, which comprises about 32
facilities, scores must achieve or exceed an 86
percent level. A zero-point assignment in any
one category results in a failed audit and a
rescheduled visit. In more specific detail:
• The facility environmental safety and
health contact, manager, or designee accompanies
the auditor(s) onsite visits and generally
must be available to answer questions.
• The auditor has unrestricted access to all
operations, records, and personnel.
• At any time, an auditor may advise the
facility contact or manager of conditions and
deficiencies as discovered. The facility contact
or manager is responsible for undertaking any
and all measures immediately to cure such conditions
and deficiencies.
• At the conclusion of activities, the auditor
provides the facility manager with an
overview of conditions and deficiencies noted
during the assessment to assist in the development
of appropriate corrective measures, including
action items.
• Generally, the action agenda should
include a timeline for when the necessary actions
or improvements can be completed.
Facility management and staff at contract
operation sites who pass the audit are entitled
to financial bonuses and may attain further
recognition for individual achievements in the
areas of compliance, safety, facility maintenance,
and customer service. The zero, one-, and twopoint
system was deliberately used to address
any subjectivity associated with matrix standard
measurement. Those being audited have
described the rating system as consistent, fair,
and reasonable.
A MAP of your own
Essentially, the MAP program may be used by
any water or wastewater facility manager to perform
a self-audit against a set of 25 criteria-based
professional standards. Consider the following:
• Public works directors or city administrators
can use the MAP audit to see the big picture
of how an objective assessment characterizes
utility plant operations. Recommendations
can be prioritized to fulfill all standards that
impact public health, health and safety, and
compliance with operating permits.
• Utility directors can be given a report card
that identifies deficiencies or areas needing
improvement. Specific observations and recommendations
regarding staff structure, operational
procedures, maintenance practices,
equipment practices, or administrative bottlenecks
can be identified.
• City engineers or engineering consultants
can review MAP results before designing, planning
improvements, or recommending capital
expenditures.
• Plant managers can be given specific action
activities designed to establish their facility operation
and team management in the “best-inclass”
group.
The MAP program and other benchmarking
instruments offer detailed and valuable
insight into the management performance of
a utility system.
This article originally appeared in the 07/01/2007 issue of Environmental Protection.
About the Author
Michael Cherniak is a senior vice president at Woodard & Curran, Inc., in Tampa, Fla. Cherniak has 28 years of experience in water, wastewater, and industrial waste treatment. A nationally recognized environmental trainer, he has delivered more than 11,000 hours of training across the nation. He is a past president of the National Environmental Training Association and recipient of NETA’s Environmental Education Award for lasting and significant contributions to the environmental profession. He can be reached at (813) 926-9926.