Top to Bottom Review of MVF Operations
Don O’Neill
2011 Candidate, MVF BOD
BACKGROUND
On January 13, I requested the MVF EVP to initiate a Top to Bottom Review of MVF Operations designed to assess the operational effectiveness of resources, assets, and personnel against citizen-centric goals important to MV residents.
1. The citizen-centric goals to be used in the review are as follows:
a. Promote the quality of life for all MV residents.
b. Ensure the safety and security of the residents of MV and their property.
c. Promote an economic development environment for the community businesses that serve the residents of MV.
d. Position MV with the County Executive, County Council, and the Maryland delegation to ensure the recognition we deserve and the protection against government overreach and interference we need.
e. Encourage the pride of MV residents in maintaining the aesthetic appearance of the community needed to boost property values.
f. Encourage the role and responsibility of the MVF Board in fostering the democratic process, encouraging free expression, and combating apathy among its residents and staff.
2. Specifically, the methodology for the review is outlined as follows:
a. The review is to include an inventory of all brick and mortar assets and their assessed value; an assessment of personnel headcount by function; an identification of all MVF programs with person responsible, allocated budget, and assets needed; and current MVF budget annotated with program, headcount, and assets.
b. Using this database of current information, I have requested that these programs be ranked according to the number of goals they impact and that the goals be ranked by the allocated budget devoted to their achievement.
c. The top three programs and the top three goals are to be identified.
3. Going forward it should be the responsibility of the MVF EVP to compose the leading indicators and analysis that best characterize goal effectiveness and to systematically and periodically record these measurements in order to guide performance measurement, analysis, and improvement.
4. It is expected that the MVF EVP shall periodically report to the MVF BOD and residents on the operational effectiveness of MVF operations with respect to goal achievement.
STRATEGIC PLANNING
What is the focus of MVF strategic planning? We need to forge a shared vision on the basic strategic management process. The following is the straightforward paradigm I suggest:
1. Know what your customer needs most.
2. Align your best capability to provide that.
3. Measure the critical aspects.
4. Plan for lasting improvement.
5. Stay the course.
How does the strategic management process apply to the MVF operation?
1. The citizen-centric goals represent what residents need most. The citizen-centric goals to be used in the review are as follows:
a. Promote the quality of life for all MV residents.
b. Ensure the safety and security of the residents of MV and their property.
c. Promote an economic development environment for the community businesses that serve the residents of MV.
d. Position MV with the County Executive, County Council, and the Maryland delegation to ensure the recognition we deserve and the protection against government overreach and interference we need.
e. Encourage the pride of MV residents in maintaining the aesthetic appearance of the community needed to boost property values.
f. Encourage the role and responsibility of the MVF Board in fostering the democratic process, encouraging free expression, and combating apathy among its residents and staff.
2. The Top to Bottom Review of MVF Operations assesses the alignment of the MVF capability in providing that based on the MVF Strategic Plan and MVF department/committee structure. The report reveals that renovation and realignment are needed. Perhaps the Board review of strategic goals in the spring 2011 is the time to do that so now is the time to complete the staff work needed to drive that process.
3. In measuring the critical aspects, it is necessary to identify the leading indicators and analytics associated with each citizen-centric goal. That is a task for the MVF EVP and should be part of the completed staff work leading up to the Board review of strategic goals in the spring 2011.
4. Planning for lasting improvement would be accomplished by producing a renovated and realigned Strategic Plan to which the MVF Board and the MVF EVP and staff make an explicit public commitment.
5. Staying the course includes performance, management, and oversight of the MVF operation in accordance with the citizen-centric goals. Performance and management are the responsibilities of the MVF EVP, its staff departments and contractors, and its committees. Oversight is an important responsibility of the MVF BOD that needs to be strengthened.
Specifically, the methodology for a Top to Bottom Review of MVF Operations is outlined as follows:
1. The review is to include an inventory of all brick and mortar assets and their assessed value; an assessment of personnel headcount by function; an identification of all MVF programs with person responsible, allocated budget, and assets needed; and current MVF budget annotated with program, headcount, and assets.
2. Using this database of current information, these programs are to be ranked according to the number of goals they impact and the goals are to be ranked by the allocated budget devoted to their achievement.
3. Finally the top three programs and the top three goals are identified.
4. Going forward it should be the responsibility of the MVF EVP to compose the leading indicators and analytics that best characterize goal effectiveness and to systematically and periodically record these measurements in order to guide performance measurement, analysis, and improvement.
5. It is expected that the MVF EVP shall periodically report to the MVF BOD and residents on the operational effectiveness of MVF operations with respect to goal achievement.
The prototype Top to Bottom Review of MVF Operations included in this paper was based on the following:
1. MVF strategic intent is determined by viewing The Strategic Plan [1]; closely examining the Mission, Vision, Organizational Values, and 2010-11 Strategic Goals Overview sections [Appendix B-E]; and listing the focus areas for each. The result is a set of 33 focus areas that define the strategic intent of MVF.
2. The correspondence between MVF strategic intent and actual MVF administration and operation is determined by reviewing the MVF Organization Chart [3], [Appendix F, G] and closely examining the departments and committees. The result is a set of 21 entities comprising the actual MVF operation.
3. In addition the correspondence among MVF strategic planning, MVF administration and operation, and the MVF allocated budget would provide additional insights useful in a Top to Bottom Review of MVF Operations. This segment has not yet been conducted.
CITIZEN-CENTRIC GOALS
In the construction of a strategic plan, it is useful to distinguish the elements of strategic intent, means to achieve, and preferred outcomes. The focus areas comprising MVF strategic planning are primarily task objectives, that is, the means to achieve.
Consequently, The Strategic Plan needs to be renovated to move beyond the inward looking perspective of MVF administrative and operational task objectives to a more citizen-centric context. The renovation needs to focus on strategic intent and preferred outcomes as well as the means to achieve. Accordingly, it is suggested that the renovation revolve around a set of citizen-centric goals [2], [Appendix A], such as, the following:
1. Promote the quality of life for all MV residents.
2. Ensure the safety and security of the residents of MV and their property.
3. Promote an economic development environment for the community businesses that serve the residents of MV.
4. Position MV with the County Executive, County Council, and the Maryland delegation to ensure the recognition we deserve and the protection against government overreach and interference we need.
5. Encourage the pride of MV residents in maintaining the aesthetic appearance of the community needed to boost property values.
6. Encourage the role and responsibility of the MVF Board in fostering the democratic process, encouraging free expression, and combating apathy among its residents and staff.
Goals are important. On the one hand they can be placeholders for things to come, on the other hand they serve to lock in the gains already made... as is the case of the healthy and robust MVF Public Safety Committee led by Sharon Cranford of Whetstone and supported by Officer Tillery. Either way, goals serve as a means to express the commitment of an organization to those they serve going forward.
FOCUS AREAS AND STRATEGIC GOALS
To what extent do the 33 focus areas address the citizen-centric goals? The strategic focus tilts substantially towards means to achieve with 14 out of 33 focus areas directed at task objectives associated with MVF administration and operations and not connecting with citizen-centric goals.
Strengths
1. The Quality of Life goal connects with six out of 33 focus areas.
2. The Community Pride goal connects with six out of 33 focus areas.
Weaknesses
1. Today the Village faces significant issues as the County and State pull back and renege on their commitments and encroach on our quality of life. For example, cutbacks in school funding, road maintenance burden sharing, and Town Sector density changes.
a. With just two focus areas devoted to County and State, the current level of attention to this County and State is insufficient going forward.
2. If MV is to earn the attention of the County and State on issues important to our quality of life, safety and security, and economic development, the Village must reverse its record of low turnout at elections, overcome apathy and lack of engagement, and demonstrate an ability to speak out on the issues and deliver the votes on election day.
b. With just three focus areas devoted to the Democratic Process, there is room for improvement in citizen engagement going forward.
3. With a Montgomery Village Center filled with vacancies and a portfolio of stores that would not be the first choice of Village residents, the need for a strong focus on Economic Development has been demonstrated.
c. With just one focus area devoted to Economic Development, there is significant room for improvement in citizen engagement going forward.
4. Montgomery Village has many school and many children wending their way to and from school every day. In addition the County encroachment continues to threaten Montgomery Village with road projects that promise increased traffic for the residents and their children.
d. With just one focus area devoted to Safety and Security, there is significant room for improvement in citizen engagement going forward.
DEPARTMENTS/COMMITTEES AND STRATEGIC GOALS
The strategic focus is well balanced with respect to means to achieve with five out of 21 departments/committees directed at task objectives associated with MVF administration and operations and not connecting with citizen-centric goals.
Strength
1. The Quality of Life goal connects with seven out of 21 departments/committees.
Other Findings
1. The Democratic Process goal connects with three out of 21 departments/committees.
2. The Safety and Security goal connects with two out of 21 departments/committees.
3. The economic development goal connects with two out of 21 departments/committees.
Weaknesses
1. The Community Pride goal connects with one out of 21 departments/committees.
2. The County and State goal connects with one out of 21 departments/committees.
FINDFINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The ranking of Citizen-Centric Goals based on focus areas and departments/committees is as follows:
1. Quality of Life
2. Community Pride
3. Democratic Process
4. County and State Positioning
5. Safety and Security
6. Economic Development
While the review identified important positive outcomes in MVF operations principally quality of life, community pride, and safety and security, the focus in the MVF Strategic Plan is diffuse and spread across mission, vision, organizational values, and strategic goals overview which are more accurately annual task objectives. I have asked the MVF Board to include the adoption of the Citizen-Centric goals on the agenda for the spring 2011 review and update of the MVF Strategic Plan.
Findings and Recommendations
1. The Focus on Quality of Life is already very strong and should be sustained. Specifically, the MVF BOD should increase its focus on events surrounding Goshen Road widening; the Webb Tract, Residue Webb Tract and the Nike Site; and the Town Sector Zoning and the prospect for increased population densities.
2. The focus on Community Pride is strong and should be sustained including staying the course with the architectural control board and managing push back from residents some of whom would like to permit truck parking overnight.
3. The focus on Democratic Process should be strengthened to meet the challenges ahead by enhancing MVF political clout with the County and State. Specifically, the MVF BOD should launch a program to combat apathy among MVF staff and committees and Village residents, one designed to turn out the vote so that MV does appear as a toothless tiger to the County and State. In addition the MVF BOD should revise the MVF rule set to permit political advertising in MV News letters to the editor.
4. The focus on County and State needs improvement in order to better face future challenges. Specifically, the MVF BOD should establish a Linkedin social networking connection among members and establish Linkedin groups to connect with the MD Delegation, MC County Executive Office, and MC County Council.
5. The focus on Safety and Security should be strengthened especially with respect to the prospect for increased traffic and the proximity to numerous schools, neighborhood crime, and the threat of gangs.
a. Montgomery Village has many school and many children wending their way to and from school every day. In addition the County encroachment continues to threaten Montgomery Village with road projects that promise increased traffic for the residents and their children. For example, the widening of Watkins Mill Road will greatly impact safety of numerous schools along its route. MVF must be on top of the County ad State plans at every step to ensure the walking safety of these children.
b. Crime statistics in the Village surge up and down, but crime remains a persistent threat and impacts the quality of life and feeling of well being of all of us. Every HOA in Montgomery Village would benefit by adopting a Whetstone Neighborhood Watch style alert system. A lesson that Officer Tillery has taught us all is to report incidents immediately so that the police can get on the case. Here apathy of residents and reluctance to file a report need to be countered using the MVF News and an official report at the monthly board meetings of incidents and locations.
c. The threat of gangs and the rumor that there are dozens of gangs operating in Montgomery Village make it necessary to hold a Public Safety Committee meeting on April 26 at NCCC that promises to be well attended. MVF BOD candidate Dennis Cox from North Gate has had direct experience with gangs and should be asked to speak at the meeting to share his experience.
6. The focus on Economic Development is weak and is reflected in the vacancy rate and store quality in the Montgomery Village Shopping Center. A more aggressive posture is required, and the adequacy of the 2030 Vision Committee in meeting this need should be critically assessed. In addition the 2030 Vision Committee should include the Webb Tract and its adjacent Nike Site in its list of projects as well as the road projects the County is planning including Goshen Road and Watkins Mill Road widening.
THE WAY FORWARD
Beyond the findings and recommendations reported in the Top to Bottom Review of MVF Operations study, the MVF community is in need of a culture change. The MVF community includes the MVF BOD and its committees, the MVF staff operations and its departments, and HOA’s and Village residents.
Today’s top down, authoritative culture serves as an enabler for overreach and underperformance. Beginning with the role confusion between the MVF President and MVF EVP, the MVF BOD is dominated by a President with tendencies toward over control and micromanagement and has acquiesced by adopting a passive posture. This has resulted in a delinquent performance of its oversight role.
Furthermore, committee operations are fragmented and stove piped with insufficient interaction or coordination among committees. The result is incomplete committee staff work whenever crosscutting issues arise. For example, the environment and transportation issues crosscut those of recreation, public safety, and 2030 Vision committees. The completed staff work necessary for high quality MVF BOD recommendations demands that committees be informed by necessary input from subject matter experts in other committees in a systematic and dependable way. MVF committee operations need to be coordinated and integrated with respect to information flow.
Finally the governance of MVF needs to transition from the current dysfunctional top down culture to a civil and democratic bottom up paradigm featuring purposeful and transparent networking among MVF BOD, MVF staff departments, committees, HOA’s, MV business community, and Village residents. In this arrangement, the Village resident is accorded respect, is listened to carefully, and is dealt with in a civil manner. Village residents who comment at MVF BOD Residents Time should be rewarded with a letter from the MVF EVP acknowledging the testimony, informing the resident of any actions taken, and promising appropriate actions as necessary.
