OPERATIONS

MANAGEMENT FORUM

Jim KrupnickChief Operating Officer

April 13, 2009

OPERATIONS

Slide 2

Topics

Strategic Plan/Initiatives

– Peer reviews

HSS status

Stimulus Issues

Ops Climate Survey

Questions/Discussion re Forum

OPERATIONS

Slide 3

OPERATIONS

Slide 4

Operations Leadership Retreat Dec 11 & 12

Deputy COO – Gursahani

EH&S – Hatayama

Facilities – Ridgeway

Human Resources – Potapenko

Business Manager - Twohey

IT – Alvarez

Office of the CFO - Fernandez

Public Affairs – Miller

Workforce Diversity – Reed

Research Integrity - Montgomery

What should be the Strategic Plan for Operations? Are we organized most efficiently? Is Operations communicating properly/effectively? How should we organize & carry out top-to-bottom reviews?

OPERATIONS

Slide 5

Updated strategic plan goals1. Partnering with Science

2. Achieving Operational Excellence

3. Building Trust and Credibility

OPERATIONS

Slide 6

Partnering with Science

Establish robust accelerator safety program

Women Scientists Initiative

LBNL/UCB online journals project

Media training for scientists

OPERATIONS

Slide 7

Achieving Operational Excellence

Supervisor training program

Improve OCFO system applications

HR process improvements

Develop crisis communication plans/protocols

OPERATIONS

Slide 8

Building Trust and Credibility

Create community advisory group(s)

Establish IT Scientific Systems Council

Build new internal communications network

COO’s communication initiatives

OPERATIONS

Slide 9

Improve communication within Operations

– Quarterly All-Hands meetings

– Bi-weekly informal ‘brown-bag’ lunches

– Open-door policy

– Annual workplace climate survey

OPERATIONS

Slide 10

Other important agreements

Leadership will model and push down through their organizations the expectation of collaborative behavior.

All Operations groups will be peer reviewed by June 2010.

OPERATIONS

Slide 11

External Peer Reviews of Operations

Top to bottom review of organizations to evaluate our effectiveness

– Scope

– Staffing

– Budget

– Strategies

– Customer satisfaction

– Opportunities for improvement

Scheduled from Jan 2009 through Jun 2010

OPERATIONS

Slide 12

Operations Organization Peer Review Scope Tentative Schedule Structure of Review Committee

Industrial Hygiene Group June, 2009

Radiation Protection August, 2009

Occupational Safety November, 2009

Security February, 2010Utilize EFCOG members to perform Review

Emergency Management TBD TBD

Waste Management TBD TBD

Environmental Protection TBD TBD

Facilities Entire Division January, 2010

Members from PG&E, UC, local county public works department, and ORO

HR HR Centers & Core November, 2009Professional HR practicioners + Margo Treazi DOE SC

EH&SExternal reviewers and SMEs plus one individual who participates on all of the reviews to enable identifying organizational overlaps, gaps, and efficiencies.

OPERATIONS

Slide 13

Operations Organization Peer Review Scope Tentative Schedule Structure of Review Committee

IT E-mail

Telecommunications - voice

Help Desk

Backup/Storage (tentative)

Inst. Bus. Systems - Financials

Mid-Range Computing

OCFO Controller's Office November, 2009

Budget and Field Operations January, 2010Procurement/Property and Sponsored Research March, 2010

Division Office, BSA, Training, & Policy June, 2010

Office of Conflict of Interest/Integrity Conflict of Interest January, 2010

Members from UCOP, UCB, and private industry

Concerns/Whistleblowers August, 2009 UCOP

Conduct of Research June, 2010Members from UCOP, UCB, and private industry

Public Affairs Entire Department January 2009 (Completed) External group

Members from DOE labs, UC, private industry, and accounting organizations plus one individual who participates on all of the reviews to enable identifying organizational overlaps, gaps, and efficiencies.

Collect benchmarking data from BNL, ANL, FNAL and commercial IT divisions. Consolidate all quantitative data and provide to all participating organizations. On-site visits by participating organizations.

June, 2009 send out survey; December 2009 receive results; On-site

visits Spring 2010

OPERATIONS

Slide 14

Outcomes from Public Affairs’ External Peer Review

Creation of a beat system that covers the Lab in its entirety, including science developments as well as Operations activities

Development of a new story planning process, with an eye toward the Lab's larger strategic objectives

More focus on Science at the Theater as a marketing and branding outreach event in addition to community relations and education.

Greater involvement in the early stages of important scientific initiatives to foster communications, community and government relations strategies

Reorganize and redesign LBNL’s main web page and secondary pages and the addition of more video content (new pages to debut around 4/23/09)

OPERATIONS

Slide 15

Outcomes of Public Affairs Peer Review (cont’d)

In the near term, the Public Affairs team isconcentrating on:

Developing an emergency communications plan and crisis response protocols Summer 2009

Developing a branding strategy for the Lab and a strategic communications plan for Public Affairs Fall/Winter 2009

OPERATIONS

Slide 16

Post HSS: Overall Objectives Sustain and extend improvements in safety

culture and implementation of ISM

Incorporate Human Performance principles and a focus on work observation into actions

Fully integrate improvement efforts with HSS Corrective Action Plan (CAP) and ISM Improvement Project Plan

OPERATIONS

Slide 17

Key Elements Self-assessments

– Institutionalize regular safety observations – Pair-up Divisions to observe work– Bring in M-T to guide work observation activities– Incorporate results into annual Division self-

assessments

Communications– Produce a short video on HSS Review Lessons Learned– Continue to develop and refresh “Our Safety”– Initiate a monthly safety message from the Director– Promote Lessons Learned Database for posting “near

hits”– Transition bi-weekly “Brown Bags” to mandatory

monthly - Input on draft HSS CAP

Rewards– Establish Lab-wide annual “Near Hit” awards– Establish a monthly EHS Suggestion Box award– Establish an annual Lab Safety forum for organizations

to discuss their accomplishments

OPERATIONS

Slide 18

1. Divisions involved: ESD, GEN, EETD, MSD, AFRD, NSD, PHYS

2. Observation team observes work at 3 sites or groups: each observation should take 60-90 minutes• Observation team: Director, DSC, experienced counterpart,

and an EHS observer with HSS experience• HSS-like review

3. The team meets with Division Senior Staff (typically <10 people) - similar to HSS out-brief to a Division

4. Division discusses and identifies Division-wide concerns, develops corrective actions, and enters items into CATS

5. Division Director reports on major issues and improvements at DDM and incorporates results in Division Self-Assessments

6. Begin in April finish in June

Other science divisions: Learning from the HSS experience

OPERATIONS

Slide 19

HSS Cap Status

10 Findings Final Problem Statements developed for

each 5 Whys Causal Analysis near completion

– Majority of the Teams have completed Causal Analyses Corrective actions are being developed

McCallum-Turner to return week of April 27 ORO to return week of May 4

OPERATIONS

Slide 20

Observations

Teams are identifying requirements management as an institutional weakness

Recurring opportunities for improvement identified through causal analysis process– Clear guidance regarding requirements

management– Strong self assessment programs to identify

program and implementation deficiencies– Strong communication between process SMEs and

process users– Accountability

OPERATIONS

Slide 21

Milestone

February 24 Identification of Steering Team and Finding Teams

March 4 & 5 5 Whys causal analysis training for Team Members

April 10 Drafts of preliminary problem statements, 5 Whys analysis, and corrective actions

April 6 Steering Team begins review of drafts with LBNL stakeholders and BSO

April 13-May 29 Teams incorporate feedback and continue development

April 13-17 Receipt of Final HSS Report

May 12-14 Krupnick & Koonce review Draft CAP with George Malosh and HSS @ DOE Headquarters

June 1-5 Final review and approvals

June 5 Transmit CAP to George Malosh for final review and approval

June 8-17 George Malosh review and approval

Completion Date

OPERATIONS

Slide 22

Stimulus Projects Infrastructure and research

Upwards of $200M 18 mos to obligate, 5 yrs to cost

Range in size from $2M to $70

Rigorous oversight and reporting required

Executive Oversight Committee

Ops, science, BSO

FY09 Omnibus Bill: Increases in many programs

OPERATIONS

Slide 23

Workplace Climate Survey

– 85% response rate

– Results received last Wednesday

– Path Forward

Distributed to Leadership team; then discussion

Division and department data will be shared internally

Summary and division data will be shared w/all staff

Comments will be handled differently

– Will need to develop responses and action items

OPERATIONS

Slide 24

Q3a. I work in a group that recognizes safety as Mean CountAgree an important core value and priority 5.64 677 99%

Q1c. My work is important and contributes to the achievement of Berkeley Lab's mission. 5.55 684 99%

Q3c. I know and understand what my worker rights and responsibilities are as related to safety and health. 5.52 676 99%

Q25a. I am glad to be working at Berkeley Lab. 5.48 674 98%

Q5c. My supervisor holds me accountable for deliverables. 5.47 665 98%

Q1b. My Department/group is committed to excellence that contributes to the achievement of Berkeley Lab's mission. 5.41 678 97%

Q5a. I work in an environment where ethical conduct is required. 5.39 675 96%

Q3b. The Laboratory's safety guidelines and practices help me conduct my work safely. 5.36 672 97%

OPERATIONS

Slide 25

Q1a. My Division is committed to excellence that contributes Mean CountAgree to the achievement of Berkeley Lab's mission. 5.31 676 96%

Q13a. I know what is expected of me in my work. 5.30 682 97%

Q15c. I am given an appropriate amount of independence. 5.25 679 94%

Q5b. My supervisor is concerned about improving the performance of my work group 5.23 666 94%

Q17b. I am treated fairly and with respect by my colleagues. 5.21 683 95%

Q23b. I am satisfied with my benefits. 5.19 679 96%

Q17a. I am treated fairly and with respect by my supervisor. 5.16 682 91%

Q1d. I work in an environment where collaboration with other work groups is encouraged. 5.02 679 91%

Q9c. I know where to go for help in resolving disputes with colleagues and / or supervisors. 5.01 674 90%

OPERATIONS

Slide 26

Q9a. I receive the training needed to do my work. 4.97 676 90%

Q13d. I am comfortable bringing issues and problems to the attention of my supervisor. 4.95 681 87%

Q13c. My supervisor stresses an appropriate sense of urgency. 4.91 662 90%

Q13b. I receive clear direction from my supervisor. 4.86 672 89%

Q15a. I work in an environment where my opinions and ideas are valued. 4.80 676 87%

Q15b. My ideas on work process and procedure improvements are valued 4.79 673 87%

Q11a. I work in a group that operates efficiently. 4.77 676 89%

Q9b. I have the resources needed to do my work. 4.76 679 86%

Mean Count Agree

OPERATIONS

Slide 27

Q11b. New hires are effectively integrated into my Department/group's work priorities. 4.73 595 88%

Q7c. I receive constructive and timely feedback on my performance from my supervisor. 4.66 670 84%

Q7b. I have a development plan in my annual performance review. 4.58 634 83%

Q19a. Morale in my work unit is generally good. 4.47 677 81%

Q7a. My supervisor and I discuss my career opportunities. 4.33 660 77%

Q23a. I am satisfied with my compensation. 4.29 677 77%

Q21a. I work in an environment where there is a reasonable workload. 4.28 685 74%

Q21b. We have enough staff to get the work done in a quality manner. 3.83 676 63%

Mean Count Agree

OPERATIONS

Slide 28

It’s not important how well each part of the

organization works, but how well we work

together, over time.