Benefits of Benchmarking

1
Benefits of Benchmarking

• Malcolm McKenzie
• Monash City Council
• John McCarthy
• Stonnington City Council
• Dallas Bibby
• Northern Grampians Shire Council
• Assisted by
• ACIG

2
The LGPro Benchmarking Project

• Origins of the project
• No clear understanding of what benchmarking was
• LGPro and Federal Govt Support
• Industry Panel
• Facilitator Appointed
• Was it worth it?

3
Objectives

• Carry out a benchmarking project in metropolitan
  rural regions of Victoria accessible to all
  Councils.
• Deliver benchmarking training to
• prepare participants to carry out benchmarking
  exercises
• Create a consistent understanding on how to
  conduct benchmarking.
• Show participants how benchmarking can help in
  supporting Best Value.
• Identify improvement opportunities.

4
Outline

• Initial training and project kick-off Nov/Dec
  2001.
• Services
• Road Maintenance (urban group)
• Design Engineering
• Statutory Planning
• Traffic and Local Laws
• Rural Road Maintenance
• Rural Parks Gardens
• Fleet Maintenance
• Environmental Health
• Training based on Benchmarking for Local
  Government - A Practical Guide - 2 days, 4
  locations.
• Five more half-day sessions, 6 weeks apart.

5
Learning through Benchmarking
Comparisons
Gap Analysis 1
Improvement Plan
Implemented improvements!
Gap Analysis 2
6
Learning through Benchmarking
7
Learning through Benchmarking
8
Results

• Benchmarking skills acquired
• High confidence in ability to carry out
  benchmarking.
• Networks formed
• 31 councils participated
• Largest group 14, smallest 6
• Interest in continuing SIGs and/or annual
  re-benchmarking.

9
Results

• Eight services benchmarked
• All services completed on schedule
• Some councils commenced subjects but failed to
  complete data inputs or missed sessions.
• Improvements to services identified
• Participants have done a gap analysis, identified
  potential improvements and created an action
  plan
• Capacity and motivation to implement improvement
  plans will vary
• Follow-up by Council managers needed to ensure
  implementation of action plans.

10
Feedback

• Belief in capacity to do benchmarking in future
• Strong support for future LGPro benchmarking
• Preference to spread formal training throughout
  project
• Would like some more time on comparisons.

11
Experience OutcomesStonnington

• CITY OF STONNINGTON
• INNER SOUTH EASTERN COUNCIL COMPRISING
• PRAHRAN
• TOORAK
• MALVERN
• EAST MALVERN
• WINDSOR
• CHADSTONE
• SOUTH YARRA
• ARMADALE
• KOOYONG, GLEN IRIS

12
Urban road maintenance group

• BRIMBANK
• HUME
• MONASH
• MANNINGHAM
• STONNINGTON

13
Experience OutcomesStonnington

• ACTIVITIES CONSIDERED
• ROAD MAINTENANCE
• DRAINAGE MAINTENANCE
• SIGN MAINTENANCE
• FOOTPATH MAINTENANCE

14
My Experience

• INITIAL TRAINING SESSION COULD BE REDUCED
• BENCHMARKING IS ONLY THE BEGINNING
• CONSIDERABLE TIME AND RESOURCES REQUIRED
• PROCESS REQUIRES COMMITMENT
• DIFFICULT TO GATHER ALL THE REQUIRED INFORMATION
• DIFFICULT TO DRAW COMPARISONS AT THE MICRO OR
  MEDIUM LEVELS

15
KPIs
16
KPIs
17
KPIs
18
Most Important Practices

• PRACTICES IDENTIFIED BY THE GROUP
• AS BEING IMPORTANT
• Quality assured procedures
• Reinstatement works
• Regular inspections of footpaths, drains and
  pits conducted, linked to risk assessment.
• Resourcing issues
• Use of appropriate technology, specialized
  vehicles and equipment
• Customer service officers trained in works issues
  informed about where to refer work.

19
(No Transcript)
20
Best Practice
21
Best Practice
22
Main Gaps to Best Practice

• Reinstatement works          
• Use of standard pit cover types
• Data acquisition using latest technology.
• Computerized works management systems for
  monitoring performance and reporting.

23
Implementation
24
Implementation
25
Implementation
26
Implementation
27
CONCLUSION

• PROCESS PRESENTED A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE
  IDEAS AND EXPERIENCES WITH COLLEAGUES.
• MORE THAN BENCHMARKING.
• VALIABLE EXPERIENCE.

28
Northern Grampians Shire

• LGPro BENCHMARKING 2002
• Rural Road Maintenance
• An Overview
• Presenter Dallas Bibby

29
Northern Grampians Shire

• Why Benchmark?
• Best Practice
• Continuous Improvement
• Compare with other Councils
• Networking with other participants
• Reporting to the Community

30
Northern Grampians Shire

• Basics required for Benchmarking
• Recording of Inputs and Outputs and Outcomes
• Comparison of Intervention Levels
• Analyse and compare data
• Inclusion of Overhead Costs
• Customer satisfaction survey data

31
Northern Grampians Shire

• Why do grading costs vary?
• Light or heavy cut
• Ripped and watered
• Compaction method
• Drains cut
• Canopy clearance
• Light re-sheet
• Cost of Plant and Labour

32
Northern Grampians Shire

• Why do digout costs vary?
• Remoteness to Depots
• Depth of digout
• Availability of materials
• Stabilised or replacement
• Area of digout

33
Northern Grampians Shire

• Why do maintenance costs vary?
• Intervention levels / Budget
• Community expectation
• Rural residential / Population distribution
• Remoteness to Depots
• Heavy haulage
• Climatic conditions terrain
• Availability and cost of Labour, Plant and
  Materials
• Sealed to unsealed roads ratio

34
Most Important Practices

• A 5 year capital works program is tied to the
  annual budget and is reviewed annually by
  Council, with only minor variations allowed
  unless there are exceptional unforeseen
  circumstances.
• Staff are appropriately trained through skills
  needs analyses and delivery of appropriate and
  consistent training.
• Use of a structured maintenance grading program
  that reduces the amount of deviation from optimum
  routing of work crews.

35
Main Gaps to Best Practice

• 5 year capital works program tied to the annual
  budget.
• Funding assured for the entire road asset
  inventory, based on the needs analysis.
• Corporate planning processes.
• Use of road hierarchy and inspection program
  linked to condition assessment standards.
• Utilisation of weather conditions
• Five year condition rating for all roads.

36
Northern Grampians Shire