VAA Virginia Asphalt Fall/Winter 2020

VAASPHALT.ORG 19 Psychologists have studied ways to motivate people for years. What methods work and do not work? The value of using reward versus punishment to change behaviors is one of those methods. These approaches are continually being used in homes, schools, workplaces, etc. to have people conform, improve, or prevent actions. For construction projects, the traditional approach was to conform (i.e., meet the specifications and requirements) or be punished (i.e., monetary reductions). Reward- ing work above and beyond the minimum requirements was foreign to project owners. The common phrase was, “Why should I pay more to get what I asked for?” While valid on the surface, the owner’s mindset resulted in contractors striving no further than to meet the minimum requirements or specifications to get full payment. Seldom did contractors go beyond the minimum to potentially provide a better product or project. Absent alternatives to pay reductions or rejection, the quality outcome in a competitive context is a “race to the bottom.” Initial Widespread Use of Incentives Since the 1990s, the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) has employed incentives based on a project’s final ride quality. Using a California-style Profilograph, VDOT technicians would push the device across a new pavement surface and assess the resulting ride against a specification. Meet the ride target, and the contractor gets full payment for that item; do better than what was expected, and receive a small bonus; but do worse, and expect a pay reduction. While a step in the right direction, the profilograph had many down- sides such as practical applicability to more than new construction projects, maintenance requirements of the equipment, and the often poor correlation between the profile index and actual seat-of-the-pants ride quality. Realizing the challenges with the profilograph, the Virginia Transportation Research Council (VTRC) initiated a project in the mid-1990s, looking at the Inertial Road Profiler (Profiler) to replace the profilograph. The Profiler could be operated at highway speeds, construction and maintenance projects, and the output— IRI—better related to the roadway user’s ride. In 1998, VDOT began employing the Profiler- and IRI-based ride specifications on projects. As with the profilograph, the specification included an incentive along with a disincen- tive. However, the available incentive for providing a smooth ride remained relatively small. In the early 2000s, VDOT and VTRC embarked on an effort to revise the IRI ride specification. By analyzing data and input by the paving industries, the bonus and penalty thresholds were adjusted based on project type (construction vs. maintenance) and roadway classification (interstate vs. non- interstate). VDOT’s districts were highly encouraged to use these specifications. While there was reluctance by some VDOT person- nel due to the potential “costs” of paying bonuses, VDOT Senior Leadership knew the improved ride would have long-term rewards. As shown in Figure 1 from the 2007 VDOT Ride Spec Report, ride quality was improving on paving projects in just a few short years. To validate or refute the hypothesis that improved ride results in longer life and actual savings to the taxpayer, VTRC conducted a project and issued a report titled “Impact of a Smoothness Incentive-Disincentive on Hot-Mix Asphalt Maintenance Resurfacing Costs” in 2006. This report looked at the costs paid by VDOT in terms of bonus payments to contractors and the resulting ride quality. The researchers studied sites that were paved with and without the ride specification included. The report suggests that pavement life could be extended up to seven years and result in more than $1.3 million per year in direct savings. When particulars such as reduced fuel and vehicle repair costs, along with VDOT administration costs, are considered, the savings were much higher. Since this initial effort, which included both incentive and disincentive provisions, the specification has evolved to include an incentive-only option. This option becomes relevant when project characteristics fail to meet the expected minimum criteria for the full ride spec requirements. However, if the contractor chooses to adjust their paving operations to exceed expectations, then the incentive-only option provides a mechanism to reward that extra effort. The incentive-only language was the first “carrot-only” approach to improve quality beyond the minimum acceptance limit. continues on page 20 △ THE POWER OF THE CARROT