City gummint snark o' the day: No wonder Public Works staff scratch their heads on street cut repair

Look, we're all human, and I'm glad nobody is out there blogging about me every time I screw up in my work life.

But, hey, we can't resist a gaffe like this one -- especially when it involves potholes, which rank somewhere up on the list of the biggest gripes you'll hear among Bull Citizens.

The Herald-Sun's Ray Gronberg noted a couple of weeks ago the unease that City Councilfolk had over an audit report that found only 44% of pothole repairs were performed in the 3 days operational target set by the department, with street cuts (due to utility work, etc.) meeting the 7 day target only 69% of the time.

As the paper noted, communication of these expectations between management and staff didn't seem fully realized:

In interviewing various crew members and supervisors, it was noted that the department’s performance service standards were not communicated properly through the organization. Audit staff was provided with different information from different personnel regarding the number of days service is suppose to be completed in.

OK, fair enough. But do you know how you know when you really have problems? When management itself doesn't even list the right target. From the management response to the audit (emphasis added):

Service response standards like the goal of filling potholes within 3 days or completing street cut repairs within 10 days are not being communicated to all crew personnel. With turnover and transfers from one work group to another these standards should be reiterated regularly.

So, is the target seven days -- or ten days?

The rest of the audit report is actually worth reading. 

Audit's key suggestion for improving process performance lies in getting Public Works to document each and every issue that needs resolution into a Service Request through the City's issue tracking system. (Which is, we presume, the same system used when you call Durham One Call with a problem.)

The audit notes that even the time-tracking analyzed for the report only involved service requests, not all departmental work, since the current departmental database used for other kinds of work orders only captures completion dates, not dates when other kinds of issues are noticed.

But Public Works management express concern in their audit response about getting field staff to document issues that crop up in the field or from other sources:

All relevant Public Works management agree that Public Works does not have enough “hands” to do this as it would create a tremendous amount of data entry. Therefore we will not implement this recommendation – at least not in this way....

This would create unnecessary paper work on the field employees. If a problem is seen during the daily work it must be repaired at that time to conserve fuel.

The only way to do this effectively with City Works is using a Service Request. If the crews had a computer with them in the field, they could create one. If they could radio in the problem and location, someone in the office could create one. They could radio Alyce and/or Starmye and they could create a service request. However, it is too much to ask tradesmen focused on daily production to be data entry personnel. Such a task would adversely affect field production.

Comments

[Stockard Channing]

Maybe I'm atypical, but I feel like I rarely encounter a pothole in Durham.

[Oops]

A pothole and a street cut repair are two different types of repairs, with two different time lines for making those repairs. Perhaps BCR is a tad bit critical?

[Bull City Rising]

Oh, the irony. Thanks, Oops -- the title is fixed.

[Pete]

Forget requesting pothole repairs. I would rather request potholes... since obviously speed humps are unavailable.

[Meh]

"However, it is too much to ask tradesmen focused on daily production to be data entry personnel."

I love to see that American "Can-Do!" attitude.

[Frank Hyman's Hated Alias]

I finally manage to get the giant hole in my street left by a busted water main repaired. It only took four months and many messages to One Call!

[D]

I drive a lot, in fact I have been a "professional" driver in many cities. Now I drive the streets of Durham and I have never seen a city with so many steel plates covering unfinished road work. Sometimes weeks at a time!

[Seth Vidal]

Kevin,
There are plenty of us survivors of duke oit, I'm sure if you'd like we could set up a blog commenting on any time systems falls over. Heck, probably 24 hour coverage, if you'd like.

Michael Bacon, you wanna help? :)

-sv

[The Future is NOW]

If there's a Service Request system, then we need an iPhone app to tie to it. We can even make it verbal to conform to our new Nanny State laws! It'll be like OnStar, but useful.

GPS tied to the accelerometer, so you hit a bump and it asks, "Whoa, damn, did you hit something?" and you say, "yeah, a fuckin' pothole!" "OK, noting your location. Dispatching service request."

[Ray Gronberg]

And The Future is NOW wins the thread ...

[James]

D -
There have been steel plates in my neighborhood for months. It is as if they repair something under the road and just forget about repairing the asphalt.

Future is now -
Nice satire? There is a service request system. You just have to stay on the city to make sure that the work gets done. Squeaky wheel...

[Steve Nicewarner]

"And The Future is NOW wins the thread ..."

Absolutely agreed. :)

The irony, though, is that, without the profanity, it wouldn't be a bad idea on City vehicles . . .

[Ray Gronberg]

Actually, from what little I know of iPhone programming, it may almost be doable. Only problem is you'd have to leave the app running.