AORAKI ROADS – A WORKING COLLABORATION

Suzy Ratahi, District Council, Roading Network Team Leader, Council

Abstract

Collaboration, the “buzz” word or more meaningful? The Oxford dictionary defines collaboration as “The action of working with someone to produce something”, a very flexible description!

What started slowly in 2013 as an initiative to work closer together in the roading space, gathered momentum in 2014 when Ashburton, Mackenzie, Timaru and Councils signed a Memorandum of Understanding. This was a significant step to achieving more than initially thought possible.

Learnings;

1. Clear goals, defined projects with deadlines are required to engage action, start with low hanging fruit! 2. Collaboration requires commitment and time at all levels and needs to be resourced appropriately; it is very easy to lose sight of the bigger picture. 3. The process of producing generic maintenance contracts developed an understanding of each Councils needs and issues. The individual strengths of staff are fostered enabling them to become more technically competent. This is helping to attract and retain staff in the sub-region. There is a great deal of knowledge sharing and robust discussion. Not only does this debate produce better documentation, it also enhances asset and data management practices, preparing us well for the challenges ahead.

Our combined strength is greater than the sum of our individual parts.

Key Words

Mid- Collaboration, Road Maintenance, Working Together, Efficiency, Ashburton Mackenzie Waimate and Timaru District Council, Shared Resources

Introduction

“Bigger is better, clustering, collaboration, where do you fit onto this scale, you should be here….”

This is what the South Canterbury Councils technical staff thought they heard in 2013 when initial collaboration discussions began. These workshops were facilitated by a consultant in conjunction with the Road Efficiency Group (REG). To say it all became too hard would be an understatement. We lacked the leadership and clear direction to The group at the table at the time was very drive forward into unchartered territory. much focused on “why we are being made to do this. We are already efficient and effective in our road asset management, maintenance and delivery activities to meet our Customers expectations.” There was a shared understanding that the MoU committed the three South Canterbury REG were attempting to drive change Councils, Mackenzie, Timaru and Waimate following Road Maintenance Task Force District Councils to deliver on a series of (RMTF) recommendations. Whether it was objectives. arrogance or fear, or a combination of both “The parties will improve management and factors was unclear, but the result was, a operation of their road networks by working retreat to the borders and entrenched together. In doing this they want to: positions and status quo remained. There a) Improve asset management processes, was no driver to change and no political push outcomes and consistency in respect of their from all Councils to work together more respective road networks. formally as some elected members believed b) Improve investment decision-making, “localism is best”. This all changed in 2014, while recognising and accepting appropriate following local government elections, when risk. the three South Canterbury Councils c) Attract, develop, and retain good internal (Mackenzie, Waimate and Timaru Districts) human resources. received direction from their respective d) Enhance governance through shared Mayors. The direction was work together, policy and strategy. partly out of response to, work together on e) Provide a sustainable market for amicable grounds before collaboration is affordable specialist resources. “directed by others” and thus “South f) Become “smarter buyers”. Canterbury Roading Collaboration Group” g) Enhance customer satisfaction. was born. h) To further embed safety in the cultures of the respective organisations”. Evolution not revolution - Defining the Project The above principles were a start and could Every Territorial Local Authority (TLA) faces have easily ended with a focus on Asset the hard task of how to manage the Management and a lot of “talk”. However, the investment and maintenance of its roading MoU went further and set specific projects or network cost-effectively without tasks to force collaboration. One key task compromising on service to stakeholders. identified was; “2. Investigate opportunities for the joint procurement of At this time, Timaru District Council and physical works contracts, e.g. sharing Council already had a procurement of re-seals contracts and road shared services agreement and procured a maintenance contracts.” single contract for the joint road resurfacing programme. Picking the low hanging fruit. At the time of signing the MoU, all road Following the direction from Council, the maintenance contracts were coming close to Chief Executives met to discuss the best their respective terms, so the decision to align method of implementation to working the timing of retendering was made. This together; this was the formation of the involved negotiation with contractors and Leadership Group. An independent project discussions with the Transport manager was appointed to drive progress. A Agency (NZTA) to extend some of the draft Memorandum of Understanding was existing contract arrangements. circulated to technical staff members. This resulted in all Roading Managers getting Work began with the three South Canterbury together to understand and personalise the Councils and a Consultant to deliver on a document. The result was a formation of a shared specification to be used on all three technical delivery team, with at least one networks. As the three Councils were representative from each Council. running on very similar measure and value type contracts this started well, though there The ultimate signing by all three South was much focus on pothole number, size, Canterbury Councils’ of the Memorandum of repair type and recording of locational details! Understanding (MoU) in June 2014 had a far The later arrival of Council broader scope than originally envisaged. The to the MoU “party” tended to slow progress, with the three South Canterbury Councils The end result was two unconditional having to provide background on to where the contracts for Timaru and Ashburton Networks team had got, and why. At the same time as with Fulton Hogan being awarded both discussing some significant changes to what contracts, and a conditional contract being had been historically delivered by contractors awarded to Whitestone Contracting, for the on the third largest roading network in the Waimate and Mackenzie Roading networks. country. The joining of Ashburton meant a The conditional tenders resulted in a transfer name change was required; Mid-South payment being made to Waimate District Canterbury Roading Collaboration was born. Council. Generally there were savings on Through many iterations of the written original estimates. document and much and varied debate a general group ease and understanding of Without task and associated deadline of each Council key issues and drivers was delivering on a common maintenance established. The final agreed common contract, the newly branded, Aoraki Roads contract was a Measure and Value NZS3917 Collaboration, would not have gained traction based document with allowances for minor in any other areas of collaboration, or it would Council differences within each separate have been much slower to materialise. The contract, covered by way of common format robust, occasionally confrontational, debate appendices. sparked a deeper association between the team members, testing practices, principles The contracts were put to the market-place; and management. This trust has driven real with the instruction from the Leadership change for the management of all four Group that the market-place could nominate networks for the better. on how cost effectively to deliver the contract(s). There was a comprehensive Why are we collaborating? – Are we briefing on day seven of the tendering committed (or should we be!) process, and contractor wishing to place a The direction to begin a more formal tender were required to attend. This was collaboration was driven by governance not specified in the tender documents. The technical staff, as it provided the impetus to packaging approach was taken so the deliver. However direction on the “why” was tenderers could submit conditional tenders, somewhat flawed. What started as a case of packaging from 2-4 contracts or solely bid on “Collaborate ourselves before we are forced individual contracts. This was not well to through external parties” soon became a understood by some contractors and the case of true willingness to share resources window for tendering (four weeks) was and understandings to answer a number of somewhat tight for what was a combined big questions faced by the sector. The value of $61M over a five year contract biggest external drivers being increased data period. However, even with the capture and interrogation, ensuring systems misunderstandings and time restrictions in place to effectively capture contractual seven tenderers put forward twenty five bids information as required, a first point of contact for evaluation. in showing suitable, and sustainable customer levels of service for all The tender evaluation team, consisting of one stakeholders. The “One Network” approach independent chair (the common Engineer to was adopted early, with all local Councils’ the four contracts), one team member from appreciating the inter-district routes were each Council and two technical advisors, travelled regularly by road users and rate went through an approved NZTA modified payers alike and as such TLA boundaries are process of evaluation, which was developed not relevant. The technical team struggled specifically for this procurement process. initially with contract specifications and lost This modification was to ensure that no one sight of the bigger gains that could be had, Council was disadvantaged, through the the real sharing of knowledge. Had the team agreement. A separate Council funding started with more time and resources prior to share model was also developed. starting the task of delivering a common maintenance contract specification we may not have floundered as long as we did and found our stride much earlier. However, with do so would create a void in which external a clear deadline, and a large objective to works will fill and would undermine the strong achieve, meant that each Council put all work already undertaken by the collaboration available resource into the project and team. compromises had to be accepted. After all, having the right contract document to partner Prior to advertising any roading based with the preferred contractor is what positions, the intention is for, the technical implements your asset management team to discuss any current gaps in principals on the ground; this is where the knowledge or resource from within the rubber hits the road! various Councils. This has resulted in a Multiparty Funding Agreement (MPF), being Making it land – Keeping the Momentum signed between Mackenzie District Council The technical team had great momentum and Timaru District Council; this is to support following the intensive period of working a smaller Council in delivering services within together to prepare a contract document and their roading programmes. The agreement is accept tenders. This momentum could not be set up in such a way that the smaller Council lost. The task of ensuring a co-ordinated and has access to any particular skill set/staff consistent management of all contracts was member the larger Council may have to required to ensure the integrity of the joint under take key tasks or project works and at procurement. An overarching “Contract cost. Consistency Coordinator” position was created; regular meetings and beginnings of The offshoot to working closer together is that contract bench marking have been when positions are advertised within roading implemented. The shared understanding of departments, a large number of potential each districts drivers and issues has resulted candidates are expressing interest in working in a very positive less formal sharing of in the collaboration, so this in turn is helping services and skills; this is where the biggest to attract and retain staff in a smaller, South wins have been made in getting “camera Island area. ready” for implementations on industry requirements. The ability to share progress, While progress has been made on the ideas and even staff tasks within four objectives agreed to under the MoU there is Councils has been a key enabler in the ability still a long way to go, so keeping the for staff to easily cross boundaries. As the momentum, with leadership influence is roading teams within each Council are small, essential. We are continuing to be joint the collaborative approach is enabling various project focussed and delivering these staff from various organisations to become collaboratively. more specialised and grow their knowledge in specific areas. While also knowing who to Conclusion contact to resolve any problems or gaps in knowledge that any staff member may have. Collaboration in this case has been a bit like a forced reverse marriage. What started off Asset maintenance staff have been able to with a niggling, nagging and disagreeable discuss, with knowledge, how a certain relationship has now transitioned into a aspect of the contract is, or isn’t working on comfortable zone, where we are working their network. This has provided an towards a common objective. We can only opportunity to undertake some inward hope we soon hit the “honeymoon phase” glancing at why certain practices, or delays, where we will be lucky in the fact that this may not be “best for asset”, “best for “phase” should remain in place for the long contractor” or “best for NZ inc”. term, as we have all worked together warts and all. Gaps in leadership or direction tend to create opportunities for letting old habits creep back Collaboration needs strong leadership and a in. Regular communication and project work real willingness to challenge existing ideas or is required from both the Leadership Group ideals. The desire to sit back and do your and the technical team members. Failure to “own thing” will hamper real progress, and is contrary to challenging prospective and Acknowledgments driving the vital change the industry has been confronted with. Collaboration needs a All key members of Mid-South Canterbury strong team, from the top to the bottom and Road Collaboration from; side to side. Common goals, clear project Ashburton District Council deliverables and deadlines keep our Mackenzie District Council collaboration moving and successful. Timaru District Council The collaboration team has categorically subscribed to the partnership approach, within the Councils, inter council and between Peter Hall, Project Manager, Opus Council and Contractors. Even the International Consultants Contractors are partnering! This approach helps with effective communication and can References only be better for the roading network and customer experience. “A Road Efficiency Group Case Study Mid- South Canterbury Roading Collaboration He aha te mea nui o te ao - What is the most Resurfacing contract, and road network important thing in the world? operations and maintenance contracts” To be published on NZTA website soon He tangata, he tangata, he tangata - It is the prepared by Peter Hall, Commissioned by people, it is the people, it is the people Road Efficiency Group.

Author Biography

Suzy has recently been appointed as the Roading Network Team Leader at Timaru District Council after five years as the Roading Manager for Mackenzie District Council. Suzy has also recently been appointed to Chair the One Network Road Classification Subgroup.

The ability to remain involved in the Mid-South Canterbury Collaboration group (Aoraki Roads), where she assisted in the delivery of common contract documentation, was a key factor to remaining in the sub-region. Being able to step into the role knowing not only the contract details, but also the support structure available from collaboration partners, meant she could hit the ground running. The broad background working for a smaller Council and seven years previously working within the contracting sector has provided Suzy with a unique and wide understanding of transportation strategic planning to network operations.