PCC Assessment

PCC Assessment

Performance Team - Profile, Capacity & Capability

What is the PCC Assessment?

• This tool was created in 2024 and as been designed using RM3P principles, particularly around outputs like scoring and radar graphs.

• It is designed to evaluate and enhance the effectiveness of performance teams within organisations.

• Key Features of the PCC tool:

1. Assessment Criteria:This tool includes a set of criteria that assesses various aspects of the performance team, such as team structure, meeting governance, internal & external interfaces, delay attribution, incident review, service recovery, risk management, performance reporting and continuous improvement.
2. Scoring System:The assessment uses a maturity model with five levels: Ad-Hoc, Managed, Standardised, Predictable, and Excellence. Each level represents the degree of process maturity and effectiveness.
3. Outputs:The assessment generates outputs such as radar graphs and key actions / notes, which help identify areas of strength and opportunities for improvement.
4. Integration with Whole System Performance Model:The tool has clear linkages to the Whole System Performance Model, ensuring that assessments align with broader organisational goals.

PT1 - Team Structure (Performance Team) - Things to Consider

• How often do you review the structure of the team to ensure it is delivering at the optimum levels?

• Who is responsible for performance? Is it the performance team, the functions or jointly through generation of initiatives embracing both internal and external engagement?

• Does the performance team engage in silo working or is the engagement carried out always considering external factors, either through internal collaboration or both internal and external collaboration?

• Does the front line understand the role of the performance team, is there a clear line of sight from those that deliver to those that measure?

• Is the performance team solely responsible for measuring or do they have a wider and more important role in the organisation? What is that role?

PT2 - Performance Meeting Governance (Internal) - Things to Consider

• How are your internal meetings organised, are there clear linkages?

• Can you provide examples of key issues which have been stress tested through your governance with a positive outcome?

• How do you go about avoiding duplication in meeting governance?

• What exposure do you have to the higher levels of your internal meeting governance and how do you ensure key messages are cascaded down to other parts of the organisation?

• How do you ensure you have the right people in the right meetings e.g. reviews of ToRs?

• Does the performance team engage in silo working or is the engagement carried out always considering external factors, either through internal collaboration or both internal and external collaboration?

PT3 - Performance Meeting Governance (Extermal) - Things to Consider

• How are your external meetings organised, are there clear linkages?

• Can you provide examples of key issues which have been stress tested through your governance with a positive outcome?

• How do you go about avoiding duplication in meeting governance?

• What exposure do you have to the higher levels of your external meeting governance and how do you ensure key messages are cascaded down to other parts of the organisation?

• How do you ensure you have the right people in the right meetings e.g. regular reviews of ToRs?

• How well developed is our engagement with external stakeholders, is it purely through performance meetings or does that partnership working run deeper than that? Do we work with other organisations external to rail to adopt good practice?

PT4 - Internal Interfaces and Delivery - Things to Consider

• Are your internal colleagues bought into performance improvement, not just for themselves but through challenging others involved in delivery?

• Are you engaging with internal colleagues to increase confidence levels in initiative outcomes e.g. development of a benefits realisation tool?

• Is your internal engagement driven through an ethos of proactivity?

PT5 - External Interfaces and Delivery - Things to Consider

• Are external colleagues bought into performance improvement jointly, challenging others involved in delivery?

• Is there engagement with external colleagues to increase confidence levels in initiative outcomes e.g. development of a benefits realisation tool?

• Is external engagement driven through an ethos of proactivity?

PT6 - Delay Attribution Process and Structure - Things to Consider

• How important is delay attribution to you and why?

• Can you identify performance improvement initiatives you have created through regularly attributed issues?

• Does your organisation put delay attribution at the forefront of performance improvement activity or is it simply a routine process?

• Do you have a process for looking at dwells and sectional running times and feeding this back through Train Planning and can you implement tools through delay attribution for addressing this?

• Is delay attribution an opportunity for internal and external partnership or is it a ‘conflict process’?

PT7 - JPS Process to include PIPs, Benefit Realisation & Forecasting - Things to Consider

• Refer back to the recent Joint Performance Strategy (JPS) review; were there any key actions in there that you felt you needed to improve upon, if so, have you addressed them?

• Does the JPS play an important part in driving performance improvement, or, is it simply a document that has to be produced.

• Is it a lived strategy or is it an obligatory document gathering dust?

PT8 - Incident Review Process

• Does the incident review process lend itself to being useful as opposed to a tick box exercise?

• What involvement does the performance team have in the process?

• What are the key tangible outputs from the incident learning process that can be highlighted?

PT9 - Service Recovery Process

• Is service recovery part of the whole Incident Learning Review process?

• What involvement does the performance team have in the service recovery process and the review of contingency plans?

• What does our data analysis tell us about reactionary versus primary delays as a trend? What actions have we taken as a consequence of this?

PT10 - Risk Management

• Is performance risk management a part of everybody’s thinking not just the performance team?

• Is there a dedicated role to the management of risk in the performance team?

• What is the period of horizon scanning that we undertake in the management of risk?

• Do we know what is going to impact our performance and are we clued into the work being undertaken in the functions to mitigate this and/or are there mitigations in place at all and is the risk actually being managed?

P11 - Performance Reporting

• Do we use a self-serve approach to performance reporting?

• Does our performance reporting consider an approach to benefits realisation e.g. if we forecast performance at a level is that level achieved according to our forecast?

• Do we use performance reports properly i.e. to drive performance improvement or are they simply routinely produced because they always have been

PT12 - Continuous Improvement Strategy

• Is performance improvement part of everybody’s thinking not just the performance team?

• What engagement plans do we have in place for wider engagement around performance?

• What evidence do we have of proactive data analysis to drive improvements and to substantiate initiatives as opposed to contractual report generation?

• Is the performance team introspective or is it engaging (outwardly facing) and driving network performance improvements?

Assessment completed

Thank you for your time! Your opinion is key to continue improving our processes.