DAB DA EVENT
POST EVENT REVIEW
DAB Communications sub-group
6th June 2011
1
Attribution Queries
I or X codes when
animals access the
track by jumping
the fence
Lack of
access
to crew
diagram
Fatality due to trespass
s
at a station. – How can
attribution determine
whether it is a V or X
code if there is no CCTV
or other investigation?
VSTP delays
attribution to TOC –
Plan should have
been verified
What is the
definition of
Day 1?
Is waiting train crew
report a valid
reason to dispute?
2
Challenges to Day to Day Attribution
Attribution
process is too
slow to follow
3
Challenges to Day to Day Attribution
Cross Route
Delays
Inconsistent
approach from one
area to another
Resolving sub-threshold
delay causing threshold
delay can be very time
consuming. Taking longer
than larger incidents
Limits of TRUST
reporting 4 reporting
points in 2 miles then 6
miles with no
intermediate points at
all.
4
Challenges to Day to Day Attribution
Influence on attribution
process of financial
considerations
(Commercial take back)
Delay Attribution as a
performance tool (per
original intention)
Vice as a financial
instrument
Same issues with
attribution since 2007
5
Challenges to Day to Day Attribution
Dispute
resolution too
slow at level 2
&3
Dispute Resolution at level 1. Who are we
supposed to speak to at Network Rail to
get dispute resolved on Day 1? We dispute
the incidents in TRUST but often no more
is heard until Level 2 sort out the
problem.
6
Challenges to Day to Day Attribution
Although much improved, the DAG still
has gaps in event processing charts
EG. Third Rail
Better communications required to
gain accurate information to define
prime root cause
Deficiencies within the DAG. i.e.
timetable clashes – all NR responsibility,
Doesn’t really fulfil learning objectives
Network Knowledge required to cover
remotely
7
Challenges to Day to Day Attribution
Over reliant on
‘principles’
rather than DAG
references
Prime cause
Vs Root Cause
Rulings/Guide
not issued in
‘DAG’ format
DAG is becoming too prescriptive which
avoids disputing/ambiguity but can
destroy the performance/learning
objectives & purpose of DA
8
Challenges to Day to Day Attribution
Lack of
ownership and
pride in ensuring
that the data is
correct
Level 2
attribution
during times of
major disruption
is a struggle
Level 1
‘template’ is
over-used
Network Rail
attribution
cover on
event days
Access to incident headers
for TOC staff would reduce
the number of phone calls
or incidents disputed – just
to get the title changed.
9
Challenges to Day to Day Attribution
A driver’s report no
longer appears to be
sufficient
Interpretation of
passenger connections and
or diversions are in the
TOCs favour.
A lack of responsibility to
investigate or follow up
Off network delays – ECS
class 5s in particular
10
TOP 5 DELAY ATTRIBUTION
BARRIERS
•GETTING IT RIGHT FIRST TIME
•INDUSTRY CULTURE
•LACK OF CONSISTENCY IN APPLYING THE DAG
•TRAINING AND INDUSTRY KNOWLEDGE
•TIME TAKEN TO RESOLVE DISPUTES
11
RESOLVING DA ISSUES
GETTING IT RIGHT FIRST TIME
• Provide the correct process at level1
• Improve level 2 & 3 efficiency
• Provide expert training
• Impart knowledge
• Share resources
• Remove or mitigate against the effect of target setting and money on
the attribution process
12
RESOLVING DA ISSUES
INDUSTRY CULTURE
•What: Understanding why we have the performance regime and
how this is used
Advise on root causes when appropriate
Feel that you are able to challenge appropriately and can
execute a difficult discussion
Uncouple objectives from performance targets
•How: Open and honest joined up briefings
Joint up training involving both Network Rail and Operators to
be given – Training on Performance should be incorporated into
the Induction training
Bi lateral sessions between operational grades
13
RESOLVING DA ISSUES
INDUSTRY CULTURE
• Who: Assign a champion – project • Share the knowledge with:
leader
• Drivers
• Put together joint performance
• Signallers
teams
• Stations/customer services
• IMM staff
• Train planners
• Fleet technicians
• TDA level 1 staff
How: Workshops on conflict resolution – professional body.
When: As soon as there is a plan in place, champion targets are set
and agreed
14
RESOLVING DA ISSUES
INDUSTRY CULTURE
•What: Financial targets – delegated authorities
•What: Perverse incentivisation
‐KPI ‘pots’
‐Responsible Managers
‐Budgets
•How: Promote a culture where the Responsible Managers form part of
the target setting process
•Who should get involved: Responsible Managers
15
RESOLVING DA ISSUES
INDUSTRY CULTURE
• What: Approach to budget
management –
– Used as a performance
management tool
– Personalities – intimidation
• How: Education – Reasons for DA
• Re-instate previous DA staffing
levels
• Joint up training
– Lack of understanding of
the DAG
• DA boundaries – input from
managers who are not directly
involved in the process
– Protecting the company
interest – not impartial
• Improvement of the internal
attribution process
– Perceptions may not be
aligned – was the correct
process followed?
• Group meetings/sessions – DAB,
TOCs, FOCs, Network Rail,
Operational staff
16
RESOLVING DA ISSUES
INDUSTRY CULTURE
• Who:
• Operator’s Performance Managers
• Network Rail Route Performance
Measurement Managers
• Delay Attribution Board
• Route Performance Managers
• Local Operations Managers
• Directors
• Network Rail Development
Specialist
• Delay Attribution Managers Group
• Operator’s Strategy Managers
17
RESOLVING DA ISSUES
INDUSTRY CULTURE
•What: Culture bred by targets
•Knowledge of the purpose of attribution
•How: Through education, training, cross Industry collaboration
•Who: Everyone
‐DAB
‐DMAG
‐RPMMG
‐Local line managers
‐Senior managers
•When: Start now – DAB to coordinate
18
RESOLVING DA ISSUES
LACK OF CONSISTENCY IN APPLYING THE DAG
DAG is more
passenger focused
than freight
focused!
Attribution process
is abandoned
during periods of
extreme
perturbation
Commercial deals
defeat the purpose
of identifying root
cause don’t they?
DAB perceived
to be too
formal
19
RESOLVING DA ISSUES
LACK OF CONSISTENCY IN APPLYING THE DAG
• What: Interpretation of the DAG – Requests for guidance
• Lack of process knowledge
» Forms
» Jargon
• Requesting for guidance is seen as last resort – ‘washing
dirty linen
• How: Regional sessions, informal road shows
• Better sharing of best practice
• More accountability
• New delay code for pending report
20
RESOLVING DA ISSUES
LACK OF CONSISTENCY IN APPLYING THE DAG
• What: Standard of incident creation
• Same quality and depth of incident creation across Routes.
• How: Use EESIC [Essential Elements of Standard Incident Creation] to
create incidents
– EESIC to be updated and re-issued in June. RPMM’s to make sure
that the EESIC is followed.
– Compliance with the EESIC to be assured through an Audit process
– Support to be given to the DA process by both Network Rail and
the Operators. Transparency of the process and why TDA is
important drives performance improvement.
21
RESOLVING DA ISSUES
TRAINING AND INDUSTRY KNOWLEDGE
Best Practice
Multiple Choice
Questions
FAQ question
bank
Case Studies
22
RESOLVING DA ISSUES
TRAINING AND INDUSTRY KNOWLEDGE
• What: Practical hands on interactive training
• Who:
New starters
• Why:
Create a centralised base for all industry partners
involved in the DA process
• How:
On-line course on the DAB website using real-time DA
attribution examples/scenarios that require the person
participating to use the DAG.
• When: Pass out competent before becoming an attributor and
also undertake an annual review
23
RESOLVING DA ISSUES
TRAINING AND INDUSTRY KNOWLEDGE
• What: Job specific training before starting the job
• Why: Need a clear and practical understanding
• Who: Who is responsible for taking ownership of training on this
topic in the industry. – TOCs, FOCs, NR, DAB – We need ownership
• When: Before initiating the role
24
RESOLVING DA ISSUES
TRAINING AND INDUSTRY KNOWLEDGE
• What: Accredited Training Courses
• Why: This would raise the profile of the role and function of Delay
Attribution and DAB
• How: Roster training and or briefing days for Delay Attribution and
Control staff
• Who: All relevant staff
•
Efficient and effective use of the Workforce Development
Specialist (Ian Heath)
25
RESOLVING DA ISSUES
TRAINING AND INDUSTRY KNOWLEDGE
• What: General Industry Training to Understand the Railway Better
• Why: There is a need for more accurate real-time information
• How: More DAB events
• Database of industry contacts
• Lead TDA to prepare brief for others to hear
• Undertake cab rides, digital route learning information
• Maps, box diagrams & photographs
• Area visits and maintenance depot visits
• When: On going
26
RESOLVING DA ISSUES
TRAINING AND INDUSTRY KNOWLEDGE
• What: Systems – Where to find information
• Why: There is a need for more accurate real-time information
• How: Learning from colleagues
• User guides
• Systems champions on an on-going basis
• When: On going
• Note: Issues preventing this- Scarce resources – availability of
attributors to be released – budget limitations on RDW identification
of who needs additional training and who can help
27
RESOLVING DA ISSUES
TRAINING AND INDUSTRY KNOWLEDGE
• What: Generic briefings
• Why: There is a need for more joint up working
• How: Joint briefings between Network Rail and Operators
• When: During the DAG change briefing period
28
RESOLVING DA ISSUES
TRAINING AND INDUSTRY KNOWLEDGE
• What: Technical Understanding and Terminology
• Why: Fundamental to right first time attribution
• How: Mutual improvement led by an expert
• Visits to maintenance training facilities
• Depot visit to understand fleet references
• Refresher training at specific times e.g. leaf-fall season to
renew knowledge of TGAs, one shot sanders etc
29
RESOLVING DA ISSUES
TRAINING AND INDUSTRY KNOWLEDGE
• What: Standardisation of the text/freeform box use to be
implemented
• Why: Currently the information can be confusing and inconsistent to
people that may not have the same level of knowledge and
experience as the person who create the incident
• How: DAG to have suggestions, definitions a guide for freeform terms
to use
• Provide a link to a jargon buster on the DAB website or to other
websites
30
RESOLVING DA ISSUES
TIME TAKEN TO RESOLVE DISPUTES
• What: Cross route re-attribution
• How: Owning the route, lead zone to have other # sign on and
responsibility
• How: Network Rail Route to communicate and trust each other
• What: Needless escalation to level 3
• How: Level 2 Network Rail to be given authority and trust and
responsibility to deal with the incidents
31
RESOLVING DA ISSUES
TIME TAKEN TO RESOLVE DISPUTES
• What: It’s not mine, I don’t want it, it will bust my target
• How: Honest responsible managers wanting to understand issues and
engagement in budget setting
• What: The commercial deal
• Issues: Not visible, ‘Grandfather rights’, deals are rarely reviewed
• How: Fully visible commercial deals – with review and break clauses
• What: Attribution at times of disruption at times of severe
perturbation – reduced staff resource
• How: Identify staff with relevant experience
– Consider training L2 staff to undertake the task
• When: During a major incident, Leaf Fall, Severe Weather
32
Event Feedback Results
33