GIS-101-article by IntentPR

Ms. Vander Werff has reported on business, economic, and technology issues for Nation’s Business, Entrepreneur, and a variety of trade journals.

It’s elementary, but oh, so necessary. In fact, planning for your GIS can mean the difference between organization-wide success and certain failure. Here’s how to properly plan so your GIS makes the grade.

n the early 1980s, when geographic information system (GIS) technology was just beginning to blossom, a large city with a large technology budget plunked down major dollars for the hardware, software, and data needed to launch a GIS. Expectations were high, and the countdown was on. But all systems weren’t go. In fact, the much-anticipated GIS launch fizzled into a disappointing state of limbo. The hardware and software literally sat in boxes, collecting dust and eventually becoming outdated. Meanwhile, people continued to do their jobs the time-intensive, oldfashioned way: by relying on paper maps and records stored in a multitude of locations throughout the city. What went wrong? Dazzled by technology, the city started at the end instead of the beginning. Planning — which should have been the first priority — never took place. A true story, this could be any city or utility. Indeed, other organizations have had the same experience in which a GIS has failed because of a lack of planning. Meanwhile, some cities and utilities — trying to skimp on planning — have emulated others’ GIS technology, only to find that what works for one may not work for another. And at the other end of the spectrum are the cities and utilities that have planned so much that they’ve become mired in their own paperwork. Of course, people want a GIS for its ability to help solve problems, save money, reduce redundancies, and increase efficiencies. Ultimately, people want a GIS to better serve the customer. Yet when a GIS fails, the technology and data — the most expensive components in creating a GIS — are the first to be blamed. “The computer programs had bugs.” “The data wasn’t as accurate as we really needed it.” In reality, failure is usually caused by human factors, including a misunderstanding of the GIS’s capabilities and a lack of confidence in the data’s integrity or usefulness. “A GIS is destined to fail no matter how flashy the bells and whistles, no matter how much it resembles another’s successful GIS, no matter how thick the planning document — unless people take the steps to plan properly and understand the goals of their GIS,” said Paul Klimas, environmental/utilities group leader for Woolpert LLP, a Dayton, Ohio-based civil engineering and GIS consulting firm. Indeed, people must plan first and purchase last. In fact, planning will define and drive the entire GIS process, including the eventual hardware, software, and data decisions. Whether you’re just beginning or already have a GIS underway, here’s how to take a step back and properly plan for your GIS. continued on page 2

Planning/GIS

by M. K. Vander Werff

continued from page 1

the resource can guide you through the planning process and even create the GIS, it cannot champion the effort internally. That drive must come from within your organization.

The Operational Review

The GIS Leader You’re pretty sure you want to go ahead with the GIS. You’ve talked with various department heads and officials. There seems to be some support and a basic knowledge of what a GIS is. Planning begins by appointing someone who will truly champion the effort — that may be you or another person within your organization. The individual should have at least a fundamental knowledge of what a GIS is and can do, as well as the interpersonal and leadership skills to bring differing personalities to the meeting table. But even more important, the leader must be someone who can and will take ownership of the process and its results. The leader must be someone who understands the needs and demands of the GIS effort and is willing to go to bat for that effort. The help of an outside resource — whether an individual or a team of experienced GIS analysts — may be enlisted at this point to help with the GIS process. These specialists have helped organizations similar to yours with GIS development; by guiding you through the process and away from the pitfalls of creating a GIS, their cumulative experience ultimately can save you time and money. Meanwhile, it’s important to understand that this outside resource cannot be the impetus pushing the GIS through. While

Water/Sewer/Storm

The leader, either alone or in collaboration with the consultant, should begin by spearheading an Operational Review, a study that takes an objective look at the organization. To assist in the review, select key individuals — ideally those with decision-making authority as well as those who have the most to gain from technology integration — from your organization’s operations, maintenance, mapping, engineering, and finance departments. “Here begins an opportunity not only to construct a GIS, but also to build bridges among departments. In forming a team, you elicit more than GIS needs: You get people talking, cooperating, sharing. And that can be the beginning of very positive organizational changes,” said Dawn Johnson, a documentation specialist for Woolpert. The team, in performing the Operational Review, examines the core components of an organization’s information environment: • Values and beliefs about information (culture) • How people actually use information (behavior and work processes) • Pitfalls that can interfere with information sharing (politics) • What information systems already exist (technology)

Culture. A culture can be fast- or slow-paced. Relaxed or conservative. Technology-oriented or clinging to old-

fashioned methods. A fast-paced, relaxed, technology-oriented culture mostly likely will embrace the exchange of information initiated by a GIS. The opposite kind of culture — historically more protective of information — may counter the kind of informationsharing activities needed for a successful GIS. Culture is also about personalities and how people make decisions. Some individuals are good at making decisions because of an inherent sense of vision. Others are not so confident; they may need guidance, assurance. Consider your organization’s culture: Is it “GIS-ready,” or will a serious sales pitch be required? How are decisions made?

Behavior and work processes. Ideally, information flows from Point A to Point B to Point C. And each point uses information in specific ways. Assuming you have a GIS, Point A could be an in-the-field technician using a laptop computer to record into the GIS the exact location of a main break; Point B could be a customer service representative using the GIS to let affected water customers know where the main has broken and when it should be fixed; and Point C could be a water department supervisor who uses the GIS data to later prepare a report about how the water main break affected customers in that service area. In a perfect world, A, B, and C are computer-savvy individuals who are able to access and share the same data. In the real world, the field technician may be using the GIS — even the laptop computer — for the first time in his life. The customer service representative may bypass the time-saving and more accurate GIS in preference of paper maps, simply because she’s more comfortable with “the old way.” And the water department supervisor may not have computer access to any of the information input by the maintenance or customer service departments. Consider your organization’s behavior and work processes: Does information flow smoothly from department to department, or not at all? Are bottlenecks caused by people, processes, lack of technology, or all of the above? Even if employees are computer literate, will they use the GIS technology to do their jobs? What kinds of behav-

ior modifications and training programs will be needed to transform staff? How will information technology and the GIS strategically impact behavior and work processes?

Politics. An organization is of course affected by external politics (the priorities set by elected officials and, by extension, their constituents) and by internal politics (the priorities of various departments). Externally, elected officials with progressive platforms generally are more supportive of technology efforts such as GIS. Organizations with officials who see no need for a GIS, or who don’t understand its uses and benefits, may be denied the monetary and even information-sharing support that would be needed to launch a GIS. Meanwhile, internally, departments may battle with each other for a slice of an already-slim budget, edging out a GIS’s chances for funding. Things may even “get personal” — for example, one department may distrust another department because of an incident that occurred long ago — which could impede information sharing. Consider your organization’s politics: Will the environment allow people to collaborate on a GIS, or will the environment quash it before it even starts?

Technology. Naturally, a review of existing hardware, software, and data is necessary. This element of the Operational Review gives you a grasp of gaps in your information infrastructure and helps you budget accordingly. As you examine your existing technology, keep in mind that the key is not only the technology itself, but also how to accommodate changes in technology. Hardware and software quickly grow obsolete. Your GIS plan must accommodate a GIS industry that is dynamic. Consider: What kinds of hardware, software, and data do you already have on hand? Can it still be used, or is it outdated? How can it be “merged” with new technology and data? (Note: A more in-depth review of technology and data needs occurs during subsequent phases in the planning process and is discussed later in this article.) Once you’ve completed the Operational Review, answer the following questions: • Will your organization’s culture, behavior, work processes, politics, and technology allow for a GIS?

• Or do you want a GIS to change your organization’s culture, behavior, work processes, politics, and technology? Indeed, some organizations use a GIS as a rationale to change their entire structure. In this case, the GIS is not merely a technology “end-product” but the driving force behind a new way of conducting business.

The Spiral Model of GIS Planning Lau

nch

Those who do take the time to plan for a GIS usually start here — with a Needs Assessment — a look at what kind of a GIS an organization needs. By definition, a Needs Assessment is a document that tells “what” is needed rather than specifically “how” to get there. (The “how” is part of an Implementation Plan, which is essentially a GIS’s “assembly instructions.” These instructions depend on what has been determined by the Needs Assessment.) Although the Needs Assessment is a crucial step in the planning process, it cannot be emphasized enough that the Operational Review must precede it. That said, the Needs Assessment helps identify key goals at the outset, thereby keeping the GIS on track. But don’t think of that track as linear. Indeed, picture it as a spiral that starts small, then swirls, spreads out, strengthens as new issues are identified and incorporated into the GIS plan. “The ‘spiral model’ of GIS development allows you to remain flexible, open to new ideas,” noted Klimas. “It lets you get started on a GIS — or for that matter, any information system — before every little question is answered in detail and carved in stone.” Indeed, the spiral model discourages an overplanned, static GIS in favor of one that is fluid, dynamic. First task for you, your team, and your consultant: Conduct workshops to interview the department heads and staff most likely to use a GIS about the issues they face. Engineering issues can include water loss/quality, sanitary sewer overflows, and flooding. Operational issues can include aging infrastructure, ongoing maintenance, capacity overloads,

GIS

Costs and Perceived Benefits

If you answered “yes” to either of these questions, you’re ready to move onto the next step of planning: the Needs Assessment.

The Needs Assessment: The Interview Process

the

Data Accuracy

Mak

GIS, CMMS, CIS, FAS, LIMS, SCADA

ecis

ions

Organizational Issues Management Issues

Operational Issues

Engineering Issues Con d u Ass ct a ess men Needs t Technology

Politics Culture

Begin Planning

Con Ope duct a Rev ration n iew al App GIS oint a Lea der

Behavior and Work Processes

Personalities

customer service, and staffing. Management issues can include funding, privatization, and government mandates (see the sidebar for more information about several government mandates). An organization-wide issue may be “information redundancy” in which each department acts like an island, creating and maintaining duplicate data while not realizing it. These issues may be just the tip of the iceberg. Ask: How could a GIS assist in solving your issues? What kinds of technology and data are already in place to address the issues? Where are technology and data lacking? Second, consider touring organizations that already have a GIS in place. Take care, however, not to copy someone else’s GIS. “The danger at this point is seeing someone else’s successful GIS and emulating it. No two organizations

are alike; GISes shouldn’t be carbon copies either,” Klimas said. In other words, view GISes to learn from others’ experiences — not to have the same experience. Ask of the organizations you tour: How did you begin the GIS process? How does it continue today? What have been the pitfalls? What have been the successes? What are some of the issues you face, and how is the GIS solving these problems? •

The Needs Assessment: The Technology Process You’ve discovered from your interviews and tours that a GIS is really just the beginning of a comprehensive information infrastructure. And you’re getting a good idea of what your organization wants in such an infrastructure. But what does it need? Let’s look at all of the possibilities. As you’ve probably learned, “GIS” is a blanket term for an overall information technology solution in which multiple systems may be supported by individual databases or from one central repository, or data “warehouse.” The information from these data environments, in turn, may be accessed by many different users. These are the multiple systems feeding the data environments: • The GIS itself, which is a collection of spatial, digitized maps. These maps can be created through a variety of methods, including from original source documents, global positioning system (GPS) satellite surveying technology,

GIS Options GIS Geographic Information System

SCADA Supervisory/Control And Data Acquisition

CMMS Computerized Maintenance Management System

DATA WAREHOUSE

LIMS Lab Information Management System

FAS Facility Accounting System

CIS Customer Information System

•

and orthophotography. GIS functions include better map maintenance, relational database management system (RDBMS) administration, and engineering document management. The GIS component allows spatial analysis of graphic and nongraphic data contained within and connected to the maps. This ability allows the GIS to connect to other functions, including the following: The CMMS, or computerized maintenance management system, which is typically the next step after the GIS component. The CMMS allows for improved in-the-field maintenance and construction efforts. The CIS, or customer information system, which aids in customer service, billing, and dispatch. The FAS, or facility accounting system, which aids in inventory management and project tracking. The LIMS, or lab information management system, which aids in water sampling and reporting. The SCADA, or supervisory/control and data acquisition, which allows for real-time monitoring, water-loss and trend analysis, and non-peak pump savings.

Ask: Of the above technologies, which do you need to resolve organizational issues? Will they use common information? But a GIS is more than a technology wheel with a database at the center. It’s also a series of stages. The first stage, of course, is Planning, the topic of this article. The second stage is Computerized Inventory, in which data is collected and the GIS is built. The third stage is Spatial Data Dissemination, in which intranets and the Internet are used as fast, easy, cost-effective, and secure ways to share data with in-house staff and with the public. The fourth stage is Information Management, in which the GIS is linked to one or more of the “wheel” technologies. The fifth stage is Modeling and Data Analysis, in which GIS data is used in conjunction with modeling programs to depict and predict scenarios. The sixth stage is Strategic Planning, in which the GIS and modeling data are used in capital improvements planning. In most environments, complete evolution of the

Government Mandates and GIS Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) – This multi-agency committee, organized in 1990 and chaired by the U.S. Department of Interior, has set certain criteria and standards for quality, content, and transfer of spatial data to enable the coordinated use, sharing, and dissemination of this data between producers and users. Local governments and their utilities must comply with these data collection and maintenance standards when surveying, mapping, and creating geographic information systems. Governmental Accountancy Standards Board (GASB) – This federal committee established the standards and requirements for accountancy practices of all state and local governments. Because of such standards, governments and their utilities may need a GIS to help them manage asset inventories, perform condition assessments, and depreciate assets. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Act of 1987 – Communities with populations of 100,000-plus have established storm water utilities and have been required to obtain Environmental Protection Agency permits under NPDES. The federal government has mandated that these communities lay out a “game plan” of how they propose to control pollutants flowing into streams and rivers. Although NPDES requirements vary on a case-by-case basis, many cities with the permits are charged with mapping and inventorying storm water structures, including collecting enough attribute information about each structure to perform hydraulic and hydrologic modeling. Failure to comply can result in heavy fines. New regulations will soon extend to communities over 10,000.

continued on page 5

Water/Sewer/Storm

continued from page 4

Strategic Planning

GIS Stages

Modeling and Data Analysis Information Management Spatial Data Dissemination

Computerized Inventory Planning GIS is the ideal situation. However, every organization is different, and each must consider its own needs in deciding how far to take the GIS. Ask: Does your GIS need to encompass all six stages to resolve organizational issues? In terms of data, your technology needs and the stage to which you propose to bring the GIS, as well as design constraints (such as a high groundwater table or hilly terrain) affect the types and accuracy of the data you will need. Also, it’s important to keep in mind that it’s useful to collect only the kind of data you are willing and able to maintain. Ask: What are the intended current and future uses of the data? What are the driving forces behind the accuracy of the data? Naturally, the amount of funding available for a GIS forces a prioritization of technologies and data. A Cost Analysis can help in this process. (It’s very difficult to estimate the direct, quantitative benefits attributed to information technologies. For this reason, a Cost/ Benefit Analysis may be impractical to perform prior to launching a GIS; however, a Cost Analysis is highly recommended before hardware, software, and data are purchased.) The following is a simplification of what is truly an indepth process: 1. Obtain cost estimates from hardware, software, and data suppliers, as well as from GIS consultants.

Water/Sewer/Storm

2. Evaluate each technology on the GIS “wheel” for its costs and perceived benefits to your organization. 3. Evaluate each GIS stage, from Computerized Inventory to Strategic Planning, for its costs and perceived benefits.

4. Evaluate the costs and future data uses of highly accurate versus moderately accurate data. Ask: How do funding limitations impede the development and deployment of the GIS? How might the GIS implementation and related information management systems integration be restructured to achieve the most value for the dollar in short- and long-term scenarios?

Planning for Very Different GIS Needs: Three Case Studies Johnson County, Kansas – On the edge of the Kansas and Missouri rivers, Johnson County is hilly and prone to flooding. Johnson County Public Works, which handles storm water management for the area, wanted a website that could serve up GIS data — including information about flood zones and projects — for use by internal staff, the public, and a consortium of communities that makes storm water management recommendations for the region. As part of the planning process, Public Works devised a “laundry list” of items they wanted on the website. Then, the department enlisted the aid of Woolpert to interview its engineers, GIS analysts, web page administrator, and Internet map server technician to further discern best GIS uses on the proposed site. To gain additional ideas as well as knowledge of how the site ultimately would work, the team viewed another utility’s website that had been created for similar purposes. Woolpert next helped Public Works devise the most practical list of items to include from a cost/implementation standpoint. Woolpert then developed a prototype of the website. This “proof of concept” version was built to demonstrate the benefits that a website would provide. The initial approach was to keep it

simple but to plan for and build new functionality into the site as required by the user base. Klimas explained: “We created a model that had the look and feel of the actual site. The Public Works team viewed the model, determined what they liked about it and what they didn’t like, and authorized Woolpert to make design changes without incurring significant additional costs.” Once design issues were hammered out and the Public Works team had a clear direction of goals, Woolpert began full programming of the site. “We entered the programming phase knowing where we were going with the site,” explained Joel Riggs, PE, stormwater engineer, Johnson County Public Works. “This way, when it came time to launch the site, we were talking only minor tweaking. And because we had planned to maintain the site ourselves, the website’s built-in flexibility allowed us to make modifications in-house.” Waterford Township, Michigan – Waterford Township might be called a second “land o’ lakes.” With 34 natural lakes in its jurisdiction, water is a resource in abundance. But managing water (and sewer) use can be a challenge. The township turned to a GIS as its solution. From the very beginning, Waterford conceived its GIS as a comprehensive project — one that would involve nearly all of the major township departments — with the township’s Public Works Department playing a leading role. “When we began the GIS planning process in 1996, we had a number of issues to confront,” explained Terry Biederman, Director of Public Works. “These issues included departments that functioned independently, mainframe and PC systems that didn’t link together, distributed locations, no central Information Technology Department, and no network to share data.”

continued from page 5

Waterford solicited consultants in a Request-for-Qualifications process and selected Woolpert to develop a comprehensive Implementation Plan, which has been used to develop the GIS. Components of the plan include: 1. Creation of an IT department to manage core IT functions. 2. Creation of a multi-department GIS that makes use of planimetric, parcel, utility, centerline, and orthophoto data sets. 3. Development of hundreds of different mapping products. 4. Connection of all major township facilities via local- and wide-area networks. 5. Development of a township website, which includes basic GIS data for access by residents. 6. Development of a data warehouse to integrate information from multiple sources into a single repository that is connected to the GIS. 7. The purchase and implementation of off-the-shelf document management, CMMS, and utility asset management systems — and integration of these products with the GIS. “Our focus is to deliver information to the people who will benefit most from it,” Biederman said. “In doing so, we will maximize the value of the entire GIS.” Louisville, Kentucky – Louisville, located on the Ohio River, derives its drinking water from the river’s depths. The Louisville Water Company (LWC), the water supplier for the area, began “testing the waters” of GIS technology in 1993 when it developed a pipe-evaluation model as a decision-support tool for its main rehabilitation and replacement program. In 1997, LWC began true planning for a comprehensive GIS when it formed a steering committee charged with creating a GIS strategic plan. Explained LWC GIS Coordinator James Bates: “What we did as a commit-

Keys to Success = GOOD PLANNING • Leadership • People • Phased process (quantifiable, measurable goals) • Needs-driven process • Education/communication • Technology infrastructure • Support strategies • Reengineered processes • Managed change

tee was to identify all LWC business systems and processes that, due to the nature of their work, demonstrated the potential to be positively impacted by the utilization of GIS technology. We grouped these 29 GIS ‘stakeholders’ according to their potential involvement with the technology.” In all, the committee conducted 25 interviews with the stakeholders who would directly benefit from the technology. Matrices were developed showing how each stakeholder used and created spatial data. One of the key items identified by LWC’s internal assessment was the need for a comprehensive automated mapping/facilities management (AM/FM) system. LWC and its steering committee then brought Woolpert on board to assess LWC’s current GIS-related conditions, design the database and conversion methods, and establish recommendations for implementation of the AM/FM/GIS. Woolpert performed a Needs Assessment to accomplish these tasks, building upon the previous analyses conducted by LWC staff. Woolpert’s Needs Assessment process included:

1. Assessing overall LWC business strategies, organizational structure, and management focus. 2. Verifying and validating LWC’s and the steering committee’s previous work with GIS stakeholder interviews to fill in information gaps and provide a more current foundation. 3. Clarifying expectations and interdependencies among and between GIS stakeholders. 4. Formally identifying and solidifying the relationship of AM/FM/GIS with other LWC technology initiatives to coordinate timelines and resources. 5. Identifying expectations regarding future applications and functionality. 6. Reviewing and assessing current computer systems, data, and facility records. “One of the conclusions of the Needs Assessment was that, in LWC’s case, the GIS should not be a stand-alone goal or a strategy unto itself,” noted Woolpert Project Manager Rick Hammond. “However, our Needs Assessment found that the AM/FM/GIS would serve as a strategic ‘enabler’ for LWC’s three main goals of improving water quality, competitiveness, and water sales.” For example, the technology eventually could support water-quality modeling and reporting, hydrant flushing, and main replacement and rehabilitation programs, thus reducing the risk of contamination in the water distribution system. It could make LWC more competitive by enhancing functions such as customer notification, facility records management, and project tracking. And finally, the technology could help increase water sales by assisting in area consumption and demand analyses.