Working Group 3

Minutes from the meeting on 4th of October 2001 at LTSA

Chair: Mark Booth (Health)

Participants:

Martin Small, Jagadish Guria (LTSA), Sonia Wonsbrough (Conservation), Mark Booth (Health), Greg Edwards (Labour), Valmai Copeland, Pru Oxley (IRD), Leon Bakker (Corrections), Rose Ryan (CYF), Margaret Niven (Customs), Greg Claridge (SSC), Roger Waite (Treasury)

Introduction (Chair)

Ø  Working Group Meeting 4, 1 November to be hosted by CYF

Ø  Work Shop 3, 15 November to be hosted by NZ Customs

Ø  Customs presentation at WS2 delayed to WS3. In its place, the WG will trial a ‘question and answer’ round table to share knowledge related to current issues and development challenges facing Pathfinder agencies.

SG2 Feedback (Roger Waite)

Roger summarised SG2:

Ø  A very positive meeting

Ø  Sponsors’ Group was well focussed on the ‘path forward’

Ø  To date, achievements are mainly process – must translate into results

Ø  Decisions for Working Group action:

o  STW document to be developed for communication to interested parties (needs succinct introduction; agency STWs to be retained / developed)

o  Terms of Reference gained support. SG wants a ‘two page’ version with all the key points included plus reference to agencies need to consult with Ministers on outcomes, and the new cross-agency STW (STW #9)

o  Position ourselves for next SG meeting in February 2002 by producing first products for presentation to SG – to test suitability / acceptance

Ø  SG noted expansion of WG for a (Working Group; Workshops; e-mail; web site). Chair supported use of Workshops (suggesting more would be useful)

Ø  Interest from non-participating agencies. SG could admit new entrants if pressing reason exists e.g. crucial agency, or cross-agency outcomes, and agreed to using low cost options for promoting outcome-driven management (website, conferences, presentations).

Ø  SG want report back on high cost options (e.g. special seminars, etc)

Agency comments from WG:

Ø  Do not want 3 meetings per month

Ø  Prefer 2 meetings with extension to WG to allow ½ hour admin and then WS mode, OR

Ø  Current arrangement with shorter presentations and more discussion

Ø  Carry this item to next agenda item

Agency Feedback from SG

Ø  LTSA – useful discussion:

o  Raises questions of “size” of deliverable

o  Need to discuss at next WG

o  Affects all agencies

Making WG Presentations Work (Greg Claridge)

The issue of maximising the learning from presentations was raised. The WG agreed the next Workshop should be adjusted to include 1 presentations and 1 question and answer session. Questions should be sent to secretariat for collation and wider circulation to WG. Overall, WG for a should promote the identification of key issues, and the collection and collation of learning points into useful guidance for managers who are implementing outcome orientated management systems.

LTSA Presentation (Martin Small and Jagadish Guria)

Martin and Jagadish presented LTSA’s description of LTSA’s outcome model. The slides will shortly be available on the Pathfinder website.

Learning points are captured in the Learning Points documentation on website.

The key building blocks of LTSA’s outcome management process:

  1. Comprehensive data gathering on accidents, supported by information system
  2. “Safety at reasonable cost” legislation
  3. Focus on the social costs of road death and injury to contrast safety outcomes
  4. Value of ‘statistical life’ is a key building block (enables cost-benefit analysis)
  5. Identification of resources and means necessary to achieve outcome goals
  6. Emphasis on effective use of existing resources, as well as new funding
  7. Ongoing cycle of performance review and improvement
  8. Range of correlated outcome indicators used for different purposes
  9. Target setting – use of Statistical Process Control to monitor progress vs. target
  10. Understanding the key ‘drivers’ of accidents, and relationships with accidents –enables effective use of resources to reduce death and injury on the roads
  11. Mapping sources of accidents from outcomes, to intervention options (as tree)
  12. Evidence-based model predicting impact of intervention options on outcomes
  13. Emphasis on expert / international peer review, and international comparisons
  14. Building good working relationships with agencies contributing to transport safety outcomes, to get support for actions reducing death / injury
  15. Outcome target hierarchy – ‘truckload’ of indicators informing specific decisions
  16. Ability to disaggregate death and injury data by area, cause, demographics, etc
  17. LTSA’s analytical capabilities are pivotal to success (statistics; economics cited) – agencies should ensure capabilities are available at from the start

In response to a question, Martin identified three elements underpinning their effort:

§  The value of targets in providing focus and impetus to LTSA’s work;

§  Partnerships were essential to their success in improving road safety; and

§  The need for rigorous analysis, supported by robust information.

3