October 8, 2024 • 48 mins
What's the secret to engaging volunteers and fostering a supportive, inclusive committee environment? Find out as we welcome Matt Linneman, Chief Engineer for North Dakota DOT and Chair of the Committee on Materials and Pavements (COMP), along with AASHTO liaison Casey Soneira. We discuss effective volunteer engagement, from creating psychological safety to micro-engagements that encourage wider participation. They share thoughts on succession planning, the balance between industry and academic leadership roles, and future committee initiatives, including shifts in meeting formats to boost peer exchanges and best practice sharing. This conversation underscores the importance of stakeholder involvement and the challenges of managing a 6,000-page annual publication filled with detailed materials standards. Whether you're a state volunteer, industry member, or academic, this episode offers a treasure trove of insights into the workings of COMP, now and for years to come.
Read this episode's companion article or watch the video on YouTube.
Have questions, comments, or want to be a guest on an upcoming episode? Email podcast@aashtoresource.org.
Related information on this and other episodes can be found at aashtoresource.org.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Kim Swanson (00:03):
Welcome to AASHTO Resource Q&A.
We're taking time to discussconstruction materials, testing
and inspection with people inthe know.
From exploring testing problemsand solutions to laboratory
best practices and qualitymanagement, we're covering
topics important to you.
Brian Johnson (00:18):
Welcome to AASHTO Resource Q&A.
I'm Brian Johnson.
Kim Swanson (00:22):
And I'm Kim Swanson , and we have two guests with us
today, brian.
Who are they?
Brian Johnson (00:27):
That's right.
Today we've got Matt Lineman,chief Engineer for North Dakota
DOT and COMP Chair, that is, theCommittee on Materials and
Pavements Chair.
Welcome Matt.
Matt Linneman (00:40):
Yeah, thanks Brian, Thanks Kim, Thanks for
having me here today.
Brian Johnson (00:44):
And we've got Casey Soneira, liaison to COMP
and many other committees withinAASHTO and wearers of many hats
and masks and other things.
Welcome Casey.
Casey Soneira (00:59):
Thanks, thanks for having me back.
Kim Swanson (01:01):
I don't want to get too far into the discussion
because we've been throwingaround the term comp and you
briefly said what it was and Iknow we have another podcast
episode about it from probablyseason one or season two.
But very, very briefly, casey,can you give us like a one or
two sentence synopsis of whatcomp is and what they do?
Casey Soneira (01:22):
The Committee on Materials and Pavements is one
of many committees here atAASHTO.
This group specifically is madeup of the state materials
engineers they're all kind ofcalled different things across
their state but also the subjectmatter experts for their fields
within their testing units.
(01:43):
This group is charged withdevelopment and maintenance of
the Highway Materials StandardsBook.
It's a compendium of roughly575 individual materials, test
methods, specifications andpractices.
So this is the group thatwrites them, maintains them,
(02:03):
updates them and sometimes saysyou know what, I don't think
this is necessary anymore andsunsets them.
So this is that group.
We also do peer exchange andtalk about you know, best
practices and needs forpractices within our realm.
Kim Swanson (02:21):
Well, thank you for that, Casey.
I'm glad we had a whole episodeabout that a couple years ago
when you could do it sosuccinctly with that.
But anyway, back to you, Brian.
I just wanted to get that outof the way before we went too
far into this.
Brian Johnson (02:34):
Well, I'm glad you stopped us, because I was
also thinking about this.
We are going to go deep intocommittee activities, so some of
you may be a little lost.
But we'll try to keep it inlayman's terms as much as
possible and try to avoid someof the acronyms that we use all
the time.
But it's going to be verydifficult because you've got a
couple of us here who are usedto talking shop at these
(02:56):
meetings and, Kim, we arerelying on you to interject and
say I have no idea what you'retalking about, so we can correct
that.
So Matt is here today because Iwas talking to him at the last
Committee on Materials andPavements meeting, where he is
the chair, and he was talkingabout strategic planning and he
(03:18):
had some ideas about what hewanted to do with comp and his
leadership role and I thoughtwhat a great opportunity to talk
to Matt and find out what kindof things he's thinking about.
You don't have to have yourstrategic plan to unveil right
now, Matt, but just kind of whatkind of things that you want to
do as the comp chair.
So we are going to talk aboutthat and some other things today
(03:40):
.
But before we get into it, myfirst question for you today,
Matt, is with all of the thingsgoing on right now, all of the
things that you have to do inyour normal job that is newish
to you why did you take on therole of the comp chair amidst
all of the other things thatyou're doing?
Matt Linneman (04:00):
I got a couple of different answers for that,
probably, but the serious answeris that you know, as formerly a
state materials and researchengineer for North Dakota, I had
been a member of comp in thepast and it was a very rewarding
experience for me beinginvolved with AASHTO friendships
(04:26):
and relationships and as I hadmoved on and got the opportunity
to become the chief engineerand was getting involved in
AASHTO again because I knew thatwas going to be important to me
but I didn't really know whatthat path looked like and
getting involved with thecouncil on highways and streets,
about that time our greatleader from before, mo Jamshidi,
was looking at retirement andstarted getting in got.
I got in the middle of a coupleconversations of being in the
(04:47):
wrong place at the wrong time, Iguess, if you want to call it
that and uh, this opportunitypopped up and I thought it was a
great chance to get back to uh,like I always say, a great
group of friends that I've madeand even, like I said, even
moving on since, uh, my time andand with the committee, I'd
stayed in contact with severalof them.
So I feel like it was cominghome a little bit.
(05:08):
It was a chance to take on anew role and still be involved
in something that I really enjoy, which is materials and
research both sides of thatworld.
So I get to do a little bitmore of that kind of on the side
, on top of all the other dutiesthat I get to enjoy to do now
that kind of on the side on topof all the other duties that I
get to enjoy to do now.
Brian Johnson (05:32):
Matt's position now as chief engineer.
He oversees quite a bit of theactivities at North Dakota.
Dot Materials would be one ofthe many areas, or realms as
Casey referred to them, that hehas to be concerned with Matt.
Matt Linneman (05:47):
what other things are you involved with at North
Dakota DOT?
The way, like I said, everystate's set up a little bit
different and a lot of stateshave different names for chief
engineers or that role.
But here in North Dakota I getto work.
Well, I always say the bestpart about my job now is I get
to work with everybody.
So I get to work with our right.
So I get to work with ourengineers that do our engineers,
(06:08):
surveyors, field technicians,lab technicians that help do
project development, so like thedesign of projects.
So we have a group that doesthat.
I get to work with ourconstruction teams, both our
central construction office andour out in our districts and in
the field administeringconstruction you know, highway
infrastructure constructionprojects doing the oversight,
(06:29):
doing the testing, doing theinspection, surveying, contract
administration.
And then I also get to workwith our maintenance teams then
that do the snow and ice control, pavement maintenance, roadside
maintenance, all that sort ofthing.
And then I also get a coupleunique groups with our civil
rights division and our employeesafety division and we have a
(06:53):
separate deputy for planning.
They kind of handle all thefunding and planning and
deciding where projects start.
So they get projects startedand then we basically deliver
them and maintain them andoperate them.
Brian Johnson (07:03):
I think a lot of times people who don't work with
DOTs don't realize the scope ofwork that goes on at a DOT and
how that can vary from state tostate.
So I know for some of thestates, like Virginia, where I
live, they are in charge ofmaintenance of all the local
roads, which seems insanebecause there are so many of
them.
(07:23):
I don't know about North Dakota, though.
I mean, how far do you go?
Are you mainly concerned withthe interstates and state roads,
or do you cover everything?
Matt Linneman (07:32):
Yeah, in North Dakota the state highway system
is what we have responsibilityfor, which includes the
interstate, the state highwaysand the US numbered highways,
and then, which is similar tomany western states, we have a
county network, so counties andcities and townships actually
that maintain the local roadwaynetwork.
(07:52):
But we also try to partnerclosely with them.
You know there is federal aidthat funnels to them.
We have some new state fundsavailable now that we help
administer.
We help them with some of theirtechnical expertise as well,
and also through our localtechnical assistance program
that we have a partnership withour university here to deliver
(08:13):
support to those local agencies.
But we are solely responsiblefor the state highway system.
Brian Johnson (08:18):
Yeah.
So why am I asking a questionthat's in the weeds?
I know that's what you'rethinking, Kim.
I'm trying to get people tounderstand how much effort and
time goes into these volunteeractivities.
So, basically, the activitythat we're talking about today,
with Matt as the comp chair,that is a high-level leadership
(08:40):
position in a voluntary capacitythat Matt has taken on in
addition to his normal dutiesthat are extensive with the DOT.
So we really appreciate theeffort you put into that, Matt,
and we're excited about havingyou in the leadership position.
So I want to talk about thatleadership position now, though,
(09:01):
now that we've kind of set thestage.
So let's talk about thebeginning of your tenure here as
the comp chair.
So you came in and you had anidea of some things that you
wanted to see happen.
We could call it a strategicplan or we could call it just
some things that you wanted toaccomplish in the beginning.
But do you want to tell usabout some of those things that
(09:23):
you were thinking about?
Matt Linneman (09:24):
For me coming into this role and actually
coming into my role as the chiefengineer at the DOT and kind of
relating this.
I think that's the one thingthat ASTHO provides.
That's one of the reasons I'minterested in doing this too is
that this is just another forumto help work on leadership
skills, right and perspectives,and it's a fulfilling role.
(09:46):
And I think some of there's alot of good parallels there.
So my thought was where.
You know the first question Iasked I know what the Committee
on Materials and Pavements hasdone and has always done right,
like we talked, like Casey gavethe overview of, you know,
publishing the standards,publishing the material
standards and some guides, butwhat else are we right and what
(10:09):
else are we doing and what elseshould we be doing?
And those were sort ofquestions I was asking.
And so then, as we starteddiscussing, we said, well, maybe
we should look at what is ourstrategic roadmap, is the term
we're using right?
We're falling in line with theAASHTO strategic plan overall
across all the committees andcouncils, and we want to make
sure we're aligned with that.
(10:29):
What is AASHTO asking us to do?
What are the states?
What are all 52 state DOTsasking out of AASHTO.
Aashto has worked out a greatstrategic plan for all of its
groups.
So then how are each committeefitting into that and then also
serving the needs of the users?
So I think you start with thatand then start laying out, you
know, your fundamental buildingblocks of a roadmap, a strategy
(10:52):
plan.
Right is, what is our coremission?
You boil that down into onesentence.
Like you said, ryan, we haven'tgot there yet.
You know we've been havingthese discussions with and we
want a lot of input, you know,both from the comp membership
and specifically from the, thesteering committee and we can
talk a little bit about theactual steering committee here
(11:12):
in a minute.
But like setting those so wecan say in one sentence this is
our mission, here's our visionof where we want to go.
How do we value what we do here?
How do we value all the members?
What are our culturalaspirations as a group?
How do we make everybody feellike they belong and can get
involved right away?
What are the initiatives thatwe have to tackle?
And, just like you said me,balancing my workload.
(11:35):
How do we balance everybody'svolunteerism and workload to
accomplish some of these thingswhen we know we have a core base
of things we need to do indelivering the standards and
keeping them up to date, butalso maybe you know that we need
to be looking at ourselves asthe leaders when it comes to
transportation materialstransportation and pavements.
And how do we tackle some ofthose emerging issues and make
(11:58):
sure that we can provide theinput and the guidance that
states are looking for?
Brian Johnson (12:02):
Yeah now, casey, given that it sounds like a lot
of effort and coordination isgoing to be needed to get that
accomplished.
So what have you been thinkingabout as the compliaison to kind
of assist Matt along the way ingetting some of these things
done?
Casey Soneira (12:21):
I think one of the things that Matt really
brought up that's reallyimportant is just including the
stakeholders.
You know, I know you, brian, me, kim we all work for AASHTO but
we're not actually AASHTO, likewe're employees, but the
members are AASHTO.
And so understanding what ourmembers really want and getting
(12:42):
them into a focus group,understanding, you know what
they want and what we can dowithin the limitations of, you
know, staff capacity, you knowthe rules and regulations that
we have because we do actuallyhave some of those and kind of
the time limits, andunderstanding that there is a
certain capacity for change thatwe need to take hold of.
(13:03):
We do still have standards.
You know maintaining, updatingand maintaining the standards is
still kind of our core.
But I agree with Matt, it can'tbe the only thing that we do.
Sorry, I kind of veered alittle bit, but making sure that
we have stakeholder buy-in andinput from the steering
committee especially thesteering committee is just to
(13:26):
describe what they are.
They're made up of four regionalrepresentatives from our all 52
states.
So we have a Northeast, aSoutheast, a Western
representative and then a MiddleAmerica representative, which
is kind of the Midwest.
It's made up of our chair andvice chair.
We have an ex officio memberwith Federal Highway and then
(13:49):
our ATG, our administrative taskgroup chair, which is the
AASHTA resource oversight group.
Chair is another ex officiomember, of course.
Chair is another ex officiomember, of course, myself as
just kind of the facilitator ofthat group and the pavements
chair.
And the pavements chair.
Thank you, I forgot about thepavements chair.
Actually, that brings up a goodpoint that I need to circle
(14:11):
back to when I'm done with this.
But the steering committee isreally a good cross-section of
representation across ourregions and across the materials
.
They're all either chairs orvice chairs of technical
subcommittees, so they have heldleadership positions.
They're all voting members fromtheir state, so they're the
state voting member that wasappointed by their CEO.
(14:33):
They've got great exposure.
They have great understandingof the materials, what this
group does, but also just labwork in general and the
framework of what's going on intheir states and their regions.
So they're a great place tostart and we've really got a
great network of members who arevery willing to tell us what
(14:54):
they think.
I mean, that's a great place tostart is just understanding
what they want.
What does success look like?
What does success in 5, 10, 15years look like?
And then, what steps can wemake now and systems can we put
in place to eventually get there?
Brian Johnson (15:06):
Yeah, I think that's going to be a challenge
as far as the amount of ballotsthat go out normally Just for
normal activities that peopleare used to, and the sequence of
events that people are used toand all of a sudden interjecting
hey, let's sit down andactually like take a step back
and look at what we're doing andwhat we want to accomplish.
Uh, so, so matt, I guess.
(15:27):
When do you think we we mightget to a point, uh, where we can
actually sit down with thesteering committee and talk
about some of these things?
Matt Linneman (15:37):
that's the conversation we're starting.
Obviously, the the flow ofthings.
As I'm starting, I'm learningtoo right, as we we meet monthly
as a steering committee.
We we spend a full day twice ayear, uh, in person to talk
about these things, and so wehad.
We had kind of been teasingthis idea and throwing those
around, but at the at the annualmeeting at the steering
(15:58):
committee, there we spent a lotof time talking about this and
talking about some of these samesort of ideas when do we want
to go, what are the things weneed to focus on, what's the
time allocation look like forthat and how we get the business
done that we have to do.
And so from that I've beentrying to synthesize that a
little bit.
That's because what I owe backto the steering committee is
(16:20):
give them something to chew onin writing based on that and a
lot of the stuff you know as faras putting words on paper for
our strategic roadmap, a lot ofthe stuff exists in
documentation that's already outthere between the AASHTO
website or guidance documents orthe operating procedures.
So I've been reading throughthat stuff quite a bit, trying
(16:41):
to glean the words out there butalso maybe take a twist on what
I heard out of theconversations.
And then once obviously it'salways easier to react to
something that's in writing,right Once, say we're going to
put this on paper and say thisis what we're about.
But I think we're going to want, like Casey said, we want a lot
of input into that and I justknow going through this process
(17:04):
before it takes some time, right, because we want that input and
it always comes out better whenwe take the time to get the
input and polish it.
But I think we don't want to.
We don't want a mile longroadmap.
We want something that's fairlystraightforward, it's fairly
succinct, it's fairly.
You know, casey encapsulatedpart of that already today when
she gave the brief overview.
It's like we should be able tosay this is the committee on
materials story, materials andpayment story, right, that this
(17:27):
is what we do.
Here's our focus areas forright now.
These are the things that we'respending time on and that will
change.
The focus areas will probablychange as those technologies or
policies or situations evolve.
Um, we'll have to evolve withit and maybe we've adapted and
we we build it into somethingthat we just do as a normal sort
(17:47):
of I always call it like ourbase load of work, which is the,
the update of the standards,some of that stuff.
We'll just roll into that andthen we can look at the next
thing.
Brian Johnson (17:56):
Try not to overwhelm everyone with doing
too much yeah, and that, thatplenty, just so people have an
idea.
There are, casey, you saidthere are how many standards
that are being managed.
I'm sorry if that went awayfrom your screen or if it's up
here, it changes from year toyear.
Casey Soneira (18:15):
So we're typically between 550 and 600
standards Changes from year toyear, so we're typically between
550 and 600 standards, whichresults in a roughly 6,000 page
annual publication every yearannually.
So those are the materialstandards.
But one thing that I didneglect to mention was that,
because we are the materials andpavements group, we also have a
(18:35):
bunch of several otherpavement-related documentation
or pavement-related documents.
So we have the Guide forPavement Structures, guide for
Pavement Friction, localCalibration, pavement Guide,
manual on SubsurfaceInvestigation, the MEPDG, which
is the Mechanistic EmpiricalPavement Design Guide, which is
what basically AASHTOWARE isbased off of.
(18:59):
I'm glad, kim, you didn't askme what MEPDG meant without me
being able to read it, because Ijust refer to it as that and I
forget what it's actually called.
We have the Pavement ManagementGuide, the Pavement Smoothness
Guide and then the SupplementalGuide on Pavement Design
Structures.
So all of those in addition toan annual 6,000 page document.
(19:22):
Plus, we all want to doprofessional development, talk
about workforce, talk about, youknow, quality lab practices.
So how do we make sure we getall of that and do the things
that?
You know?
People around the world areusing these standards and guides
, the things that you know.
People around the world areusing these standards and guides
, so we really do have quite abit of responsibility to make
(19:44):
sure that those are maintained.
It's stressful just hearing allof the items that are of concern
to this committee, managed byvolunteers.
Brian Johnson (19:57):
It stressed me out, saying them yeah.
I was like is she done yet,explaining what these are?
No, there's so many of them.
So here's a question for you,matt, thinking about how to
handle all this and what, as theleader of this group, you can
do to make sure that we've gotthe volunteers that are willing
to work on this stuff.
(20:17):
Have you had any thoughts aboutways to stimulate people, to
get them to sign up for more, toraise their hand in these
meetings?
You know all these already busypeople who show up for these.
Is there something you've beenthinking about and it doesn't
have to be on paper yet, ofcourse, but just anything that
(20:40):
might come to mind about how toget more volunteers?
Matt Linneman (20:44):
the one thing we try to talk a lot about at the
annual meeting is justinvolvement and building our
sense of community, right, we wehave?
We have a great core group ofpeople that have been in their
roles a long time and have beenlong time contributors to the
community into the standardsright, and we have lots of new
people that are coming in everyyear and, just as we're getting,
(21:07):
it gets fairly complicated whenyou're the first time coming
into one of these meetings andunderstanding how this all works
and the flows of of uh, youknow, revising standards and
running balance, running ballotsand confusing old terminology
with new terminology.
But the point is we want peopleinvolved right away.
(21:29):
We want them to feel welcome,to say we want you to join our
materials and payments communityand say we need your help,
whether that's as a researchliaison, as a steward of a
standard right that can reallydig in and be a subject matter
expert and contribute to theupdate of those standards, being
(21:50):
liaisons to other committees,right, and helping with that.
So I think that's the firstpart is, you know, when I first
started, you know, and firstcame my first meeting, it was
like I have no idea what thatwas about right, like I took
away some technical things, butthe whole process I was like
I'll get it later, right, andthen I probably would have been
in that boat for a while, but Igot a chance to be step in and
(22:12):
be a vice chair pretty early andthen it all made more sense.
So, getting involved I alwaysencourage people to get involved
because then it all makes moresense and we don't have the
opportunity anymore.
Right, we have a retiring agingworkforce, we get a lot of
turnover, right.
Everyone's seeing that theirplaces of work are their state
DOTs I know that they are.
(22:33):
The same is happening then,obviously, in AASHTO committees.
The same is happening then,obviously, in AASHTO committees.
So we really need people to getinvolved right away and we know
that they can contribute.
Right, and so that's what we'retrying to encourage, and we're
trying to encourage that senseof community that we're all here
.
We're all a great big family.
Brian Johnson (22:54):
We want to be here to help each other and
share with each other and findways that we can help each other
out.
Yeah, I think you did a greatjob at the comp meeting going
over that part, trying to thatyou care about the community,
you know that's why you gotinvolved, like you mentioned
earlier, and that is somethingyou want people to understand as
they get involved and we'veseen some of the you know some
of the fruits of that type ofdiscussion already with some of
(23:14):
the newer members that we sawthe previous year who are now in
leadership positions.
I'm thinking about Sue fromFlorida, for example.
You know she came in, she wastrying to figure it out and,
boom, now she's a chair, gettinginvolved in all sorts of
ballots, engaged in discussionsin the meeting.
You know, as far as I'mconcerned, great success story
(23:34):
with her involvement and how dowe get more of it?
So I think that the way youhave been talking to people,
both at the plenary and theintroduction of the meeting and
sort of the wrap up at the end,was a good way to do it and
hopefully this conversation willbe heard by some and it will
spur on some motivated people tosign up for things.
Matt Linneman (23:56):
I think the other thing too and Casey has brought
this up, I think, in previousmeetings is that we do have some
opportunities and capacity tohelp help right.
We have two contractors thathelp us with the work that we do
already Mark Feeleg obviously,obviously also serving as our
secretary for the steeringcommittee and the overall
committee, and Georgine Garyhelping with that very technical
(24:19):
writing.
So we have that opportunitythat's very critical for us
delivering this.
Casey's also brought up thepoint.
You know that there's there'sNCHRP help out there if there's
there's several different potsof of funds.
You know there's the full NCHRPresearch program, but there's
also other.
There's an also a pot of moneyjust for help and support for
(24:40):
AASHTO committees that we cantap into if we need technical
help on things that are maybe alittle bit bigger issues to deal
with.
So I think there's someresources out there and
obviously partnering andcollaborating with others in the
industry that will alsoobviously make things easier for
us too.
Brian Johnson (24:59):
Yeah, I did want to talk for a minute about those
other interested parties.
So when you're developing thestrategic roadmap you kind of
alluded to getting otherinterested parties involved,
getting input from people whatother kind of people or industry
folks should we get involved inthe development of some of
(25:19):
these standards and some of thework that COMP is doing?
Matt Linneman (25:23):
I think we've always known that industry input
is valuable, even though thisis a committee of the states,
for the states, by the states,if you want to call it that way.
But we need industry input too.
Right, because we need to knowwhat they're capable of.
We invite them to be at themeeting they're critical for
(25:43):
being sponsors, for making thein-person meeting happen.
But we need their technicalinput right.
We need their feedback on whattheir industry can and can't do,
what's realistic, what isn't.
We want them involved intechnical, sub-technical working
groups, task forces, thingslike that, that are working on
specifics, because without thatwe might not know the whole
(26:07):
story of where the industry's at.
So we definitely need thatinput as well.
Brian Johnson (26:10):
Casey.
Is there anything we're missing?
Have you thought about anyother parties that should be
involved, or are there ways thatwe could get people more
involved that you've beenthinking about?
Casey Soneira (26:20):
I think about involvement in all of the
committees all the time, whetherit's volunteer involvement or,
well, I guess, state volunteerinvolvement, or industry,
academic, student involvement,other associations, other
non-government associations, buteven local agencies like local
(26:44):
governments.
That would be great to get theminvolved as well.
Understand, you know whatthey're doing, whether or not
they have certain things thatthey're working on,
relationships that they havewithin their state, or you know
local communities.
Ultimately, you know, we canall learn from each other.
It's not just 52 states who areusing these standards.
(27:09):
It's, as you know, Brian beingthe accreditation director, many
, many more, like thousands ofaccredited laboratories, many
more thousands of non-accreditedlabs and then individuals
within those laboratories usingthese methods.
So we have a responsibility toreally make sure that they're
the most useful that they can be, and bringing people to the
(27:30):
table to contribute to that isreally an important part of that
.
And we listen.
You know we can't take everysingle person's comment and say,
yes, absolutely, we're going todo that and that and that, then
that.
But there is a conversation andif we don't hear the
conversation, especially fromsomeone you know who has a
(27:51):
unique perspective, maybesomeone it's a kind of a niche
material or, you know, anemerging technology.
We really need to be includingthose people in the conversation
in order to make thesestandards the most useful and to
make sure that people, even ifthey are useful, that people
know about them and that they'reusing them.
And, ultimately, the volunteermodel I've spent a lot of time
(28:13):
thinking about this too.
I think it's a numbers game,you know, when it comes to
succession planning, you canhave, you know, the best people,
but if not every single one ofthose people will have the
personality, the desire, themotivation or the ability to
step into a leadership role.
(28:34):
So what we need to maintain,kind of the volunteer model
which, you know, a lot ofassociations, a lot of volunteer
groups are struggling with this, is to make sure that there are
people showing up and beingthere and having being part of
(28:54):
the conversation.
Now, industry members,academics they can't really hold
leadership groups within orleadership positions within this
group, so that's kind of anunfortunate circumstance that we
find ourselves in.
But if we have people fromindustry and academia and other
you know groups, they can reallyhelp with some of the task
forces and some of the reallykind of technical, really nitty
gritty, technical pieces.
(29:15):
That clears the way for ourvolunteer leaders within the
states to have that extracapacity to lead and facilitate
these discussions, keep track ofthings and take part in that.
You know, leadership discussionand when it comes to you know I
agree with everything Matt saidin terms of trying to get these
(29:35):
volunteers engaged andparticipating.
A big part of my job is makingsure that we have the structure
I think of probably all of ourcommittees this committee comp
and maybe like design and maybebridges and structures, because
there are two other bigpublications, heavy committees.
We are very, very processoriented.
(29:57):
Which tracks?
Because it's a bunch ofengineers.
We're very process oriented.
And so making people, trying totake away some of the ambiguity,
trying to make peopleunderstand there is a process,
it is a thoughtful process,you'll be safe, participating,
you know, creating that space ofpsychological safety for them
(30:18):
to, you know, be nervous but besupported, helping them not only
understand that we have athoughtful process but
communicating it and includingthem in any changes or
improvements we make withinthose processes and then just
helping people feel valued.
You know there's a realdifference between being needed
(30:40):
and feeling valued and we allknow we need volunteers, but
when people step into thoseroles, I think I take it as a
personal task of mine and a jobresponsibility to make sure that
they're comfortable and have anenjoyable experience.
I mean, they're doing extrawork.
(31:00):
It kind of ultimately maybebenefits the DOTs and benefits
the stakeholders, but they'renot getting paid to do this.
Benefits the DOTs and benefitsthe stakeholders, but they're
not getting paid to do this.
So I want to make sure thatit's a pleasant experience that
it's.
You know, the gratitude isindividualized.
I try to make jokes.
We try to, you know, meetpeople where they are and
support them in the ways that wecan, even if that is a specific
(31:24):
tailored joke.
Brian Johnson (31:26):
Yeah, yeah, I think there's really so much fun
you can have with Robert'sRules of Order, but I feel like
comp is pretty laid back as faras a structured committee
environment is.
You know the actual meeting.
You know people are free todiscuss things and it's not.
You know Mr Chairman or youknow are free to discuss things
(31:47):
and it's not.
You know you know mr, mrchairman or you know chairperson
, whatever you know, am I ableto speak now?
Casey Soneira (31:55):
it's not that structured I think ultimately
what it will boil down to acrossall of our committees is the
more people we can get toparticipate, and that doesn't
necessarily even mean coming tothe in-person meeting.
So I know, like I know, travelcan be a huge barrier for some
people, whether it's throughtheir state or just personal
preferences or personalcircumstances.
Just have a micro engagement.
(32:29):
So you know, you don't have tobe the voting member, you don't
even have to really be on thecommittee to have your
supervisor say hey, I'm incharge of reviewing the standard
this year.
And you take the supervisor,takes the standard and plops it
in front of the technician andsays can you like mark this up
and see you know what needs tobe updated.
Is there anything out of date?
Are there any typos?
You know, what do you thinkabout this?
(32:50):
And in that way they're gettinga sense of, oh, this is what
comp is, this is what thestandard is.
I didn't know I could do this.
I just thought I was stuck withthis standard forever, you know
, but that's like one steptowards a micro engagement that
can continue to build and buildand build and then when that
person hopefully they stay withthe DOT and get promoted and you
(33:14):
know, become engaged with acommittee even more.
It's not this massive, you knowroom of people who know all the
rules and all of these thingsthat are happening in these
terms that nobody knows.
You're slightly more familiar.
Maybe you've had some exposureto some of the technical
(33:34):
subcommittee virtual meetingsbecause you've been invited to
come and talk about the changesthat you're proposing.
It's those opportunities formicro-engagement that I see as
being kind of a lifeline tosuccession, with getting DOT
staff continuing to be engagedin this group as we get younger
and younger and fewer and fewerworkforce people available.
(33:54):
Just making sure that it's not,you know, understanding is not
a barrier to entry, I think is areally important thing for us
to kind of try and be veryintentional about.
Kim Swanson (34:05):
I had a question for Matt that what are some of
the personal benefits of being avolunteer that maybe you've
noticed in other people or thatyou've experienced yourself as
volunteering with comp?
What are some of like not onlythe professional benefits of it,
but the personal benefits thatyou've gotten from being a
volunteer?
Matt Linneman (34:26):
That's a good question.
I think some of it for me hasbeen, like I alluded to a little
bit before, just the ability to, especially in this role now,
to work on leadership skills.
Right, it's one thing to leadyour team that you supervise,
let's say, at your normal job,but it's different when you're
working with a group ofvolunteers, right?
So you approach thingsdifferently.
(34:48):
It gives you new perspectives.
You get to hear a lot ofdifferent perspectives from
around the country, from all thedifferent states.
That's one thing I always enjoybeing able to just, you know,
especially at an in-personmeeting, you know pick someone's
brain on some issue that youhave going on or you've created
that contact network.
It actually was surprising tome going from the state
(35:10):
materials engineer and beinginvolved in the committee of
materials to now to thecommittee on highways and
streets and a different peergroup.
But having a lot of thoseAASHTO relationships, like with
Casey and Brian, made thattransition pretty easy for me
because there's a lot offamiliar faces around, right.
So and so I really enjoyed thatand, like I said, it's built a
(35:33):
lot of friendships over the timetoo.
That I've maintained and that'sbeen a personal value to me as
well.
Brian Johnson (35:40):
Yeah, it's a great community and I love that
you keep talking about thecommunity and the relationships
that are built.
Keep talking about thecommunity and the relationships
that are built.
It's been, you know, even froma staff perspective.
I think that's been a realbenefit for us.
Casey, I think you would agreewith that as well, because I
(36:01):
know that we've talked aboutthis before with certain people
that we know and really like tospend time with at these
meetings, like somebody likeMatt, for example.
It's nice to be able to go toanother meeting and then you see
that person again, like TRB orsome of the other meetings,
regional meetings, so I thinkthat's really great.
I wanted to ask you, matt, backto the roadmap concept are
(36:23):
there any changes that you havethought about that you would
like to see?
This is a tough questionbecause we haven't gotten too
into it yet, but has there beenanything on your mind.
Matt Linneman (36:36):
I might have a lot of ideas, but I really want
to hear everybody else's ideas,right, and I want the input on
it.
So I think that's what's key.
We already kind of talked aboutthat, especially the steering
committee.
That's what their role is.
Casey went over the membershipof it, but that's really what
we're asking them to do is helpshape all of this as it goes.
Right, I'm viewing that that'smy role, and Casey kind of keeps
(36:58):
me in the guardrails of wherecan we go and what can we do,
and hear everybody else's ideasand say, okay, we all need
ownership in this, right.
You know, one specific thingthat will definitely build into
the roadmap but is alreadytaking shape and was an idea
long before I came along, washow to deal with research.
(37:19):
Right, we've always been.
How does research inform theactivities and the standards
development and the manualsdevelopment?
How do we seek it out?
How do we get input into it?
How do we turn that those ideas, into actual, usable research?
Right, and so that's somethingthat each technical subcommittee
(37:42):
used to deal with we used totalk about at the annual meeting
.
You know, in the brief timethat I was gone from the
committee, there was new ideasand a research summit was put in
place separately to have thosediscussions.
Now we're standing up androlling out a new dedicated
technical subcommittee just forresearch to kind of handle all
of that right.
So we know that research needsto be something that we grab
(38:05):
onto more, get more value out of, and now we're putting a focus
on that right.
So that was a discussion at thelast steering committee meeting
.
We got everybody on board withthat idea and so we have a map.
Now we just got to get them upand running and so they
understand what the roles andresponsibilities are.
In case.
He's working on documentingsome of that and we'll have to
(38:29):
learn that a little bit, right.
Well, we'll learn what worksand what doesn't, but there's
some good foundation that'salready been laid for that and
we're taking action towards it.
Right, and I'll probablyreflect that as we as we write
our roadmap.
But there's some of thosethings we're already working
towards that are outside of thatcore of standards development,
and I think there'll be morethings like that.
(38:50):
We know there's lots ofemerging issues out there, right
, like workforce development.
Casey mentioned that.
We talk about that at everyconference we go to.
Probably Low carbon materialsis a big one for us Buy America,
policy changes and things likethat.
Like there's all sorts of thosesort, those emerging things
that I think we need to beweighing in on as a committee,
(39:12):
because we're the leaders inthose areas.
But we need to strike a balance.
Brian Johnson (39:17):
Yeah, there are a lot of things you're thinking
about right now.
So the typical comp meeting isabout a week and it is a full
week.
But now you've got all thesestandards to manage, guides,
manuals, and now you've got toalso discuss hey, what are best
(39:38):
practices around low-carbonmaterials and all the other
things you just mentioned, theother things you just mentioned.
Do you foresee a time where weshift from the formulaic nature
of the meetings, where we gothrough the agenda and the votes
(39:58):
and the affirmatives andnegatives, to having more time
towards the best practicesharing, or what AASHTO calls
peer exchanges in a lot of cases?
Do you think that might becoming at some point?
Matt Linneman (40:15):
I think we've had some discussions on what is
that distribution of time splitright, because you can't go away
from the core of what makes theCommittee of Materials makes it
right, like that formula hasworked for many, many years for
many, many versions of thestandards right, so we can't
(40:36):
take away.
That's the identity, that's thecore.
We got to be careful that wedon't lose our identity, but we
also have to make time, and sothat's something that we ask the
steering committee tocontemplate right?
That's one of the things weleft with, I would say, from our
in-person meeting is what isthat balance of how much time we
spend on what we do, and whereare there places that we can
(40:59):
provide some capacity?
You know we're not going toturn it into a two week meeting
you know as much as people mightenjoy that.
You know it's already, like yousaid, a pack full agenda for a
week or so.
So we got to, you know, pickour spots and find where we get
value.
And you know we've already donesome of that.
Casey and the steeringcommittee has already been
(41:19):
shaping that the last few yearswhen it comes to the some of the
roundtable discussions, gettinggood value out of those,
getting good value out of theresearch discussions and maybe
shifting that around a littlebit.
Now we got a different groupthat can focus on that.
So maybe there's a little bitmore of that structuring we can
do using some of the outsidesupport opportunities that there
are to gain some capacity.
(41:41):
But I think that's where wereally need to figure out what
do we want to do?
And then we'll have to figureout how are we going to build
the capacity to do that.
Casey Soneira (41:51):
So one of the things that sort of you know my
job is making sure that we don'twaste the members' time, that
we make the best use of theirtime as much as we can.
Try to streamline things, tryto remove barriers.
To Matt's point, one of thethings that he mentioned was the
research summit, and theresearch summit came about
(42:14):
because we used to talk aboutresearch the last four hours of
an in-person meeting and peoplehad to leave for flights.
A lot of people were tired.
Not everyone had had a chanceto review the research that had
come in.
So we would talk about it andsay you know, what do you think
about this?
And for some people it's thefirst time they're hearing it.
They don't know what's going onwith that particular thing in
(42:36):
their state off the top of theirhead.
Because why would they?
And we were just likeeveryone's so exhausted Are we
getting what we need out of this?
And the answer was veryobviously no.
You could see people justtwitching and looking at their
watches, like I got to catch myflight.
We weren't getting a lot ofdiscussion and so we just picked
it up and said can we just dothis virtually a couple of weeks
(42:58):
later, send these all out, sendall these statements out, give
people an opportunity to reviewthem and talk, you know, confer
with their states and with theirsub committees.
So not only did we then make theresearch discussion more
valuable, that opened up timewithin the meeting to talk about
other things, to give us alittle bit of padding for, you
(43:20):
know, those peer exchange-y typediscussions it made us, gave us
some flexibility in not havingso many concurrent sessions, so
some sessions that you just haveone session instead of two or
three.
But those small kind ofincremental changes where we
look at and we say is thispractice, is this system really
(43:41):
doing what it's intended or isit having unintended
consequences?
Because the research at the endof the research meeting, at the
end of trying new things andstill doing getting the
(44:05):
deliverable, but maybe in adifferent way.
Yeah, I'm really grateful thatthis committee has been so
flexible and willing to try newthings.
Brian Johnson (44:14):
All right, Matt, I have one last question for you
.
What does success look like foryou at the end of your term as
comp chair?
Is there anything you'll feellike you really want to
accomplish this before you stepdown as comp chair?
Matt Linneman (44:31):
Let me stop you there A really long time from
now.
Casey Soneira (44:36):
I was going to say what's the length of term.
Matt Linneman (44:37):
Don't worry about it term, don't worry about it,
don't worry about it I reallythink that putting this roadmap
together will will lay that outfor us like so.
So first thing on my list islet's get this formulated and
say, okay, now we know whatwe're gonna do, right then we.
Then we can say, okay, nowthese are the focus areas that
(44:58):
we're gonna put our effort into.
So it helps us prioritize too,because we know we've talked a
couple times we need to havethat balance.
So what does that look like forall of us?
And that we want to getaccomplished.
So I don't know if I have thegreatest answer yet, because I
want some more input to say whatare those priorities from all
the members and from thesteering committee and say then
(45:19):
we can go to work in making ithappen.
And I think that will show thatwill be what I want to do is
that we've carried out thoseobjectives that we come out of
this strategic roadmap and, Ithink, continuing to build the
community that we have.
That everybody feels, which Ithink they do now, but we can
always do better, especially fornew members.
Right To say you're welcomehere.
(45:40):
This is a safe, inclusive placethat we want you to be involved
in, be involved in theconversations, even if it's your
first day in the door, even ifit's your first meeting that
you've ever been to.
And I think the other thing thatwe're another thing that we're
already doing is working on thecommunications out to the group.
Right, we, we we have a lotmore communications going out
(46:02):
that come from Casey.
She's been doing a great job ofprobably ramping that up.
We're now doing quarterlyleadership meetings as well to
inform all of the, the, thetechnical subcommittee,
leadership chairs and vicechairs of what some of the
things that are going on likethis.
Obviously, this is a greatforum for putting that
information out too, but we canalso have those one-on-ones and
(46:23):
give them a chance to askquestions outside of the kind of
once a year format.
So, building the community,building our roadmap and really
making sure we still continue todeliver the quality and the
expectation that the states havethat come out of this committee
for really setting theframework of what transportation
(46:49):
materials and payments qualityshould be.
That's the high standard thatwe've got to continue to carry
out too.
So those are the three, I guessoff the top, and we'll have
more specific ones as we go.
Brian Johnson (47:01):
Well, I want to thank you, matt, matt Linneman
from North Dakota DOT and CaseySinera, aashto colleague, and,
as always, kim Swanson, who'sgoing to have some fun editing
this one with the nonsense inthe beginning, so hopefully not
everybody hears that anyway.
But thanks again for your timeand input and looking forward to
(47:22):
your tenure as comp chair.
Matt Linneman (47:26):
Yeah, thanks for the opportunity.
It was a great discussion so Ido appreciate all this
opportunity and I appreciate theopportunity to provide the
leadership for the committee onmaterials, so I'm excited about
the role.
Casey Soneira (47:39):
Brian, thanks Kim and thanks Matt.
Kim Swanson (47:45):
I'm excited to work with all of you.
Thanks for listening to AASHTOResource Q&A.
If you'd like to be a guest orjust submit a question, send us
an email at podcast ataashtoresourceorg, or call Brian
at 240-436-4820.
For other news and relatedcontent, check out AASHTO
Resources' social media accountsor go to aashtoresourceorg.
Welcome to AASHTO Resource Q&A.
We're taking time to discussconstruction materials, testing
and inspection with people inthe know.
From exploring testing problemsand solutions to laboratory
best practices and qualitymanagement, we're covering
topics important to you.
Brian Johnson (00:18):
Welcome to AASHTO Resource Q&A.
I'm Brian Johnson.
Kim Swanson (00:22):
And I'm Kim Swanson , and we have two guests with us
today, brian.
Who are they?
Brian Johnson (00:27):
That's right.
Today we've got Matt Lineman,chief Engineer for North Dakota
DOT and COMP Chair, that is, theCommittee on Materials and
Pavements Chair.
Welcome Matt.
Matt Linneman (00:40):
Yeah, thanks Brian, Thanks Kim, Thanks for
having me here today.
Brian Johnson (00:44):
And we've got Casey Soneira, liaison to COMP
and many other committees withinAASHTO and wearers of many hats
and masks and other things.
Welcome Casey.
Casey Soneira (00:59):
Thanks, thanks for having me back.
Kim Swanson (01:01):
I don't want to get too far into the discussion
because we've been throwingaround the term comp and you
briefly said what it was and Iknow we have another podcast
episode about it from probablyseason one or season two.
But very, very briefly, casey,can you give us like a one or
two sentence synopsis of whatcomp is and what they do?
Casey Soneira (01:22):
The Committee on Materials and Pavements is one
of many committees here atAASHTO.
This group specifically is madeup of the state materials
engineers they're all kind ofcalled different things across
their state but also the subjectmatter experts for their fields
within their testing units.
(01:43):
This group is charged withdevelopment and maintenance of
the Highway Materials StandardsBook.
It's a compendium of roughly575 individual materials, test
methods, specifications andpractices.
So this is the group thatwrites them, maintains them,
(02:03):
updates them and sometimes saysyou know what, I don't think
this is necessary anymore andsunsets them.
So this is that group.
We also do peer exchange andtalk about you know, best
practices and needs forpractices within our realm.
Kim Swanson (02:21):
Well, thank you for that, Casey.
I'm glad we had a whole episodeabout that a couple years ago
when you could do it sosuccinctly with that.
But anyway, back to you, Brian.
I just wanted to get that outof the way before we went too
far into this.
Brian Johnson (02:34):
Well, I'm glad you stopped us, because I was
also thinking about this.
We are going to go deep intocommittee activities, so some of
you may be a little lost.
But we'll try to keep it inlayman's terms as much as
possible and try to avoid someof the acronyms that we use all
the time.
But it's going to be verydifficult because you've got a
couple of us here who are usedto talking shop at these
(02:56):
meetings and, Kim, we arerelying on you to interject and
say I have no idea what you'retalking about, so we can correct
that.
So Matt is here today because Iwas talking to him at the last
Committee on Materials andPavements meeting, where he is
the chair, and he was talkingabout strategic planning and he
(03:18):
had some ideas about what hewanted to do with comp and his
leadership role and I thoughtwhat a great opportunity to talk
to Matt and find out what kindof things he's thinking about.
You don't have to have yourstrategic plan to unveil right
now, Matt, but just kind of whatkind of things that you want to
do as the comp chair.
So we are going to talk aboutthat and some other things today
(03:40):
.
But before we get into it, myfirst question for you today,
Matt, is with all of the thingsgoing on right now, all of the
things that you have to do inyour normal job that is newish
to you why did you take on therole of the comp chair amidst
all of the other things thatyou're doing?
Matt Linneman (04:00):
I got a couple of different answers for that,
probably, but the serious answeris that you know, as formerly a
state materials and researchengineer for North Dakota, I had
been a member of comp in thepast and it was a very rewarding
experience for me beinginvolved with AASHTO friendships
(04:26):
and relationships and as I hadmoved on and got the opportunity
to become the chief engineerand was getting involved in
AASHTO again because I knew thatwas going to be important to me
but I didn't really know whatthat path looked like and
getting involved with thecouncil on highways and streets,
about that time our greatleader from before, mo Jamshidi,
was looking at retirement andstarted getting in got.
I got in the middle of a coupleconversations of being in the
(04:47):
wrong place at the wrong time, Iguess, if you want to call it
that and uh, this opportunitypopped up and I thought it was a
great chance to get back to uh,like I always say, a great
group of friends that I've madeand even, like I said, even
moving on since, uh, my time andand with the committee, I'd
stayed in contact with severalof them.
So I feel like it was cominghome a little bit.
(05:08):
It was a chance to take on anew role and still be involved
in something that I really enjoy, which is materials and
research both sides of thatworld.
So I get to do a little bitmore of that kind of on the side
, on top of all the other dutiesthat I get to enjoy to do now
that kind of on the side on topof all the other duties that I
get to enjoy to do now.
Brian Johnson (05:32):
Matt's position now as chief engineer.
He oversees quite a bit of theactivities at North Dakota.
Dot Materials would be one ofthe many areas, or realms as
Casey referred to them, that hehas to be concerned with Matt.
Matt Linneman (05:47):
what other things are you involved with at North
Dakota DOT?
The way, like I said, everystate's set up a little bit
different and a lot of stateshave different names for chief
engineers or that role.
But here in North Dakota I getto work.
Well, I always say the bestpart about my job now is I get
to work with everybody.
So I get to work with our right.
So I get to work with ourengineers that do our engineers,
(06:08):
surveyors, field technicians,lab technicians that help do
project development, so like thedesign of projects.
So we have a group that doesthat.
I get to work with ourconstruction teams, both our
central construction office andour out in our districts and in
the field administeringconstruction you know, highway
infrastructure constructionprojects doing the oversight,
(06:29):
doing the testing, doing theinspection, surveying, contract
administration.
And then I also get to workwith our maintenance teams then
that do the snow and ice control, pavement maintenance, roadside
maintenance, all that sort ofthing.
And then I also get a coupleunique groups with our civil
rights division and our employeesafety division and we have a
(06:53):
separate deputy for planning.
They kind of handle all thefunding and planning and
deciding where projects start.
So they get projects startedand then we basically deliver
them and maintain them andoperate them.
Brian Johnson (07:03):
I think a lot of times people who don't work with
DOTs don't realize the scope ofwork that goes on at a DOT and
how that can vary from state tostate.
So I know for some of thestates, like Virginia, where I
live, they are in charge ofmaintenance of all the local
roads, which seems insanebecause there are so many of
them.
(07:23):
I don't know about North Dakota, though.
I mean, how far do you go?
Are you mainly concerned withthe interstates and state roads,
or do you cover everything?
Matt Linneman (07:32):
Yeah, in North Dakota the state highway system
is what we have responsibilityfor, which includes the
interstate, the state highwaysand the US numbered highways,
and then, which is similar tomany western states, we have a
county network, so counties andcities and townships actually
that maintain the local roadwaynetwork.
(07:52):
But we also try to partnerclosely with them.
You know there is federal aidthat funnels to them.
We have some new state fundsavailable now that we help
administer.
We help them with some of theirtechnical expertise as well,
and also through our localtechnical assistance program
that we have a partnership withour university here to deliver
(08:13):
support to those local agencies.
But we are solely responsiblefor the state highway system.
Brian Johnson (08:18):
Yeah.
So why am I asking a questionthat's in the weeds?
I know that's what you'rethinking, Kim.
I'm trying to get people tounderstand how much effort and
time goes into these volunteeractivities.
So, basically, the activitythat we're talking about today,
with Matt as the comp chair,that is a high-level leadership
(08:40):
position in a voluntary capacitythat Matt has taken on in
addition to his normal dutiesthat are extensive with the DOT.
So we really appreciate theeffort you put into that, Matt,
and we're excited about havingyou in the leadership position.
So I want to talk about thatleadership position now, though,
(09:01):
now that we've kind of set thestage.
So let's talk about thebeginning of your tenure here as
the comp chair.
So you came in and you had anidea of some things that you
wanted to see happen.
We could call it a strategicplan or we could call it just
some things that you wanted toaccomplish in the beginning.
But do you want to tell usabout some of those things that
(09:23):
you were thinking about?
Matt Linneman (09:24):
For me coming into this role and actually
coming into my role as the chiefengineer at the DOT and kind of
relating this.
I think that's the one thingthat ASTHO provides.
That's one of the reasons I'minterested in doing this too is
that this is just another forumto help work on leadership
skills, right and perspectives,and it's a fulfilling role.
(09:46):
And I think some of there's alot of good parallels there.
So my thought was where.
You know the first question Iasked I know what the Committee
on Materials and Pavements hasdone and has always done right,
like we talked, like Casey gavethe overview of, you know,
publishing the standards,publishing the material
standards and some guides, butwhat else are we right and what
(10:09):
else are we doing and what elseshould we be doing?
And those were sort ofquestions I was asking.
And so then, as we starteddiscussing, we said, well, maybe
we should look at what is ourstrategic roadmap, is the term
we're using right?
We're falling in line with theAASHTO strategic plan overall
across all the committees andcouncils, and we want to make
sure we're aligned with that.
(10:29):
What is AASHTO asking us to do?
What are the states?
What are all 52 state DOTsasking out of AASHTO.
Aashto has worked out a greatstrategic plan for all of its
groups.
So then how are each committeefitting into that and then also
serving the needs of the users?
So I think you start with thatand then start laying out, you
know, your fundamental buildingblocks of a roadmap, a strategy
(10:52):
plan.
Right is, what is our coremission?
You boil that down into onesentence.
Like you said, ryan, we haven'tgot there yet.
You know we've been havingthese discussions with and we
want a lot of input, you know,both from the comp membership
and specifically from the, thesteering committee and we can
talk a little bit about theactual steering committee here
(11:12):
in a minute.
But like setting those so wecan say in one sentence this is
our mission, here's our visionof where we want to go.
How do we value what we do here?
How do we value all the members?
What are our culturalaspirations as a group?
How do we make everybody feellike they belong and can get
involved right away?
What are the initiatives thatwe have to tackle?
And, just like you said me,balancing my workload.
(11:35):
How do we balance everybody'svolunteerism and workload to
accomplish some of these thingswhen we know we have a core base
of things we need to do indelivering the standards and
keeping them up to date, butalso maybe you know that we need
to be looking at ourselves asthe leaders when it comes to
transportation materialstransportation and pavements.
And how do we tackle some ofthose emerging issues and make
(11:58):
sure that we can provide theinput and the guidance that
states are looking for?
Brian Johnson (12:02):
Yeah now, casey, given that it sounds like a lot
of effort and coordination isgoing to be needed to get that
accomplished.
So what have you been thinkingabout as the compliaison to kind
of assist Matt along the way ingetting some of these things
done?
Casey Soneira (12:21):
I think one of the things that Matt really
brought up that's reallyimportant is just including the
stakeholders.
You know, I know you, brian, me, kim we all work for AASHTO but
we're not actually AASHTO, likewe're employees, but the
members are AASHTO.
And so understanding what ourmembers really want and getting
(12:42):
them into a focus group,understanding, you know what
they want and what we can dowithin the limitations of, you
know, staff capacity, you knowthe rules and regulations that
we have because we do actuallyhave some of those and kind of
the time limits, andunderstanding that there is a
certain capacity for change thatwe need to take hold of.
(13:03):
We do still have standards.
You know maintaining, updatingand maintaining the standards is
still kind of our core.
But I agree with Matt, it can'tbe the only thing that we do.
Sorry, I kind of veered alittle bit, but making sure that
we have stakeholder buy-in andinput from the steering
committee especially thesteering committee is just to
(13:26):
describe what they are.
They're made up of four regionalrepresentatives from our all 52
states.
So we have a Northeast, aSoutheast, a Western
representative and then a MiddleAmerica representative, which
is kind of the Midwest.
It's made up of our chair andvice chair.
We have an ex officio memberwith Federal Highway and then
(13:49):
our ATG, our administrative taskgroup chair, which is the
AASHTA resource oversight group.
Chair is another ex officiomember, of course.
Chair is another ex officiomember, of course, myself as
just kind of the facilitator ofthat group and the pavements
chair.
And the pavements chair.
Thank you, I forgot about thepavements chair.
Actually, that brings up a goodpoint that I need to circle
(14:11):
back to when I'm done with this.
But the steering committee isreally a good cross-section of
representation across ourregions and across the materials
.
They're all either chairs orvice chairs of technical
subcommittees, so they have heldleadership positions.
They're all voting members fromtheir state, so they're the
state voting member that wasappointed by their CEO.
(14:33):
They've got great exposure.
They have great understandingof the materials, what this
group does, but also just labwork in general and the
framework of what's going on intheir states and their regions.
So they're a great place tostart and we've really got a
great network of members who arevery willing to tell us what
(14:54):
they think.
I mean, that's a great place tostart is just understanding
what they want.
What does success look like?
What does success in 5, 10, 15years look like?
And then, what steps can wemake now and systems can we put
in place to eventually get there?
Brian Johnson (15:06):
Yeah, I think that's going to be a challenge
as far as the amount of ballotsthat go out normally Just for
normal activities that peopleare used to, and the sequence of
events that people are used toand all of a sudden interjecting
hey, let's sit down andactually like take a step back
and look at what we're doing andwhat we want to accomplish.
Uh, so, so matt, I guess.
(15:27):
When do you think we we mightget to a point, uh, where we can
actually sit down with thesteering committee and talk
about some of these things?
Matt Linneman (15:37):
that's the conversation we're starting.
Obviously, the the flow ofthings.
As I'm starting, I'm learningtoo right, as we we meet monthly
as a steering committee.
We we spend a full day twice ayear, uh, in person to talk
about these things, and so wehad.
We had kind of been teasingthis idea and throwing those
around, but at the at the annualmeeting at the steering
(15:58):
committee, there we spent a lotof time talking about this and
talking about some of these samesort of ideas when do we want
to go, what are the things weneed to focus on, what's the
time allocation look like forthat and how we get the business
done that we have to do.
And so from that I've beentrying to synthesize that a
little bit.
That's because what I owe backto the steering committee is
(16:20):
give them something to chew onin writing based on that and a
lot of the stuff you know as faras putting words on paper for
our strategic roadmap, a lot ofthe stuff exists in
documentation that's already outthere between the AASHTO
website or guidance documents orthe operating procedures.
So I've been reading throughthat stuff quite a bit, trying
(16:41):
to glean the words out there butalso maybe take a twist on what
I heard out of theconversations.
And then once obviously it'salways easier to react to
something that's in writing,right Once, say we're going to
put this on paper and say thisis what we're about.
But I think we're going to want, like Casey said, we want a lot
of input into that and I justknow going through this process
(17:04):
before it takes some time, right, because we want that input and
it always comes out better whenwe take the time to get the
input and polish it.
But I think we don't want to.
We don't want a mile longroadmap.
We want something that's fairlystraightforward, it's fairly
succinct, it's fairly.
You know, casey encapsulatedpart of that already today when
she gave the brief overview.
It's like we should be able tosay this is the committee on
materials story, materials andpayment story, right, that this
(17:27):
is what we do.
Here's our focus areas forright now.
These are the things that we'respending time on and that will
change.
The focus areas will probablychange as those technologies or
policies or situations evolve.
Um, we'll have to evolve withit and maybe we've adapted and
we we build it into somethingthat we just do as a normal sort
(17:47):
of I always call it like ourbase load of work, which is the,
the update of the standards,some of that stuff.
We'll just roll into that andthen we can look at the next
thing.
Brian Johnson (17:56):
Try not to overwhelm everyone with doing
too much yeah, and that, thatplenty, just so people have an
idea.
There are, casey, you saidthere are how many standards
that are being managed.
I'm sorry if that went awayfrom your screen or if it's up
here, it changes from year toyear.
Casey Soneira (18:15):
So we're typically between 550 and 600
standards Changes from year toyear, so we're typically between
550 and 600 standards, whichresults in a roughly 6,000 page
annual publication every yearannually.
So those are the materialstandards.
But one thing that I didneglect to mention was that,
because we are the materials andpavements group, we also have a
(18:35):
bunch of several otherpavement-related documentation
or pavement-related documents.
So we have the Guide forPavement Structures, guide for
Pavement Friction, localCalibration, pavement Guide,
manual on SubsurfaceInvestigation, the MEPDG, which
is the Mechanistic EmpiricalPavement Design Guide, which is
what basically AASHTOWARE isbased off of.
(18:59):
I'm glad, kim, you didn't askme what MEPDG meant without me
being able to read it, because Ijust refer to it as that and I
forget what it's actually called.
We have the Pavement ManagementGuide, the Pavement Smoothness
Guide and then the SupplementalGuide on Pavement Design
Structures.
So all of those in addition toan annual 6,000 page document.
(19:22):
Plus, we all want to doprofessional development, talk
about workforce, talk about, youknow, quality lab practices.
So how do we make sure we getall of that and do the things
that?
You know?
People around the world areusing these standards and guides
, the things that you know.
People around the world areusing these standards and guides
, so we really do have quite abit of responsibility to make
(19:44):
sure that those are maintained.
It's stressful just hearing allof the items that are of concern
to this committee, managed byvolunteers.
Brian Johnson (19:57):
It stressed me out, saying them yeah.
I was like is she done yet,explaining what these are?
No, there's so many of them.
So here's a question for you,matt, thinking about how to
handle all this and what, as theleader of this group, you can
do to make sure that we've gotthe volunteers that are willing
to work on this stuff.
(20:17):
Have you had any thoughts aboutways to stimulate people, to
get them to sign up for more, toraise their hand in these
meetings?
You know all these already busypeople who show up for these.
Is there something you've beenthinking about and it doesn't
have to be on paper yet, ofcourse, but just anything that
(20:40):
might come to mind about how toget more volunteers?
Matt Linneman (20:44):
the one thing we try to talk a lot about at the
annual meeting is justinvolvement and building our
sense of community, right, we wehave?
We have a great core group ofpeople that have been in their
roles a long time and have beenlong time contributors to the
community into the standardsright, and we have lots of new
people that are coming in everyyear and, just as we're getting,
(21:07):
it gets fairly complicated whenyou're the first time coming
into one of these meetings andunderstanding how this all works
and the flows of of uh, youknow, revising standards and
running balance, running ballotsand confusing old terminology
with new terminology.
But the point is we want peopleinvolved right away.
(21:29):
We want them to feel welcome,to say we want you to join our
materials and payments communityand say we need your help,
whether that's as a researchliaison, as a steward of a
standard right that can reallydig in and be a subject matter
expert and contribute to theupdate of those standards, being
(21:50):
liaisons to other committees,right, and helping with that.
So I think that's the firstpart is, you know, when I first
started, you know, and firstcame my first meeting, it was
like I have no idea what thatwas about right, like I took
away some technical things, butthe whole process I was like
I'll get it later, right, andthen I probably would have been
in that boat for a while, but Igot a chance to be step in and
(22:12):
be a vice chair pretty early andthen it all made more sense.
So, getting involved I alwaysencourage people to get involved
because then it all makes moresense and we don't have the
opportunity anymore.
Right, we have a retiring agingworkforce, we get a lot of
turnover, right.
Everyone's seeing that theirplaces of work are their state
DOTs I know that they are.
(22:33):
The same is happening then,obviously, in AASHTO committees.
The same is happening then,obviously, in AASHTO committees.
So we really need people to getinvolved right away and we know
that they can contribute.
Right, and so that's what we'retrying to encourage, and we're
trying to encourage that senseof community that we're all here
.
We're all a great big family.
Brian Johnson (22:54):
We want to be here to help each other and
share with each other and findways that we can help each other
out.
Yeah, I think you did a greatjob at the comp meeting going
over that part, trying to thatyou care about the community,
you know that's why you gotinvolved, like you mentioned
earlier, and that is somethingyou want people to understand as
they get involved and we'veseen some of the you know some
of the fruits of that type ofdiscussion already with some of
(23:14):
the newer members that we sawthe previous year who are now in
leadership positions.
I'm thinking about Sue fromFlorida, for example.
You know she came in, she wastrying to figure it out and,
boom, now she's a chair, gettinginvolved in all sorts of
ballots, engaged in discussionsin the meeting.
You know, as far as I'mconcerned, great success story
(23:34):
with her involvement and how dowe get more of it?
So I think that the way youhave been talking to people,
both at the plenary and theintroduction of the meeting and
sort of the wrap up at the end,was a good way to do it and
hopefully this conversation willbe heard by some and it will
spur on some motivated people tosign up for things.
Matt Linneman (23:56):
I think the other thing too and Casey has brought
this up, I think, in previousmeetings is that we do have some
opportunities and capacity tohelp help right.
We have two contractors thathelp us with the work that we do
already Mark Feeleg obviously,obviously also serving as our
secretary for the steeringcommittee and the overall
committee, and Georgine Garyhelping with that very technical
(24:19):
writing.
So we have that opportunitythat's very critical for us
delivering this.
Casey's also brought up thepoint.
You know that there's there'sNCHRP help out there if there's
there's several different potsof of funds.
You know there's the full NCHRPresearch program, but there's
also other.
There's an also a pot of moneyjust for help and support for
(24:40):
AASHTO committees that we cantap into if we need technical
help on things that are maybe alittle bit bigger issues to deal
with.
So I think there's someresources out there and
obviously partnering andcollaborating with others in the
industry that will alsoobviously make things easier for
us too.
Brian Johnson (24:59):
Yeah, I did want to talk for a minute about those
other interested parties.
So when you're developing thestrategic roadmap you kind of
alluded to getting otherinterested parties involved,
getting input from people whatother kind of people or industry
folks should we get involved inthe development of some of
(25:19):
these standards and some of thework that COMP is doing?
Matt Linneman (25:23):
I think we've always known that industry input
is valuable, even though thisis a committee of the states,
for the states, by the states,if you want to call it that way.
But we need industry input too.
Right, because we need to knowwhat they're capable of.
We invite them to be at themeeting they're critical for
(25:43):
being sponsors, for making thein-person meeting happen.
But we need their technicalinput right.
We need their feedback on whattheir industry can and can't do,
what's realistic, what isn't.
We want them involved intechnical, sub-technical working
groups, task forces, thingslike that, that are working on
specifics, because without thatwe might not know the whole
(26:07):
story of where the industry's at.
So we definitely need thatinput as well.
Brian Johnson (26:10):
Casey.
Is there anything we're missing?
Have you thought about anyother parties that should be
involved, or are there ways thatwe could get people more
involved that you've beenthinking about?
Casey Soneira (26:20):
I think about involvement in all of the
committees all the time, whetherit's volunteer involvement or,
well, I guess, state volunteerinvolvement, or industry,
academic, student involvement,other associations, other
non-government associations, buteven local agencies like local
(26:44):
governments.
That would be great to get theminvolved as well.
Understand, you know whatthey're doing, whether or not
they have certain things thatthey're working on,
relationships that they havewithin their state, or you know
local communities.
Ultimately, you know, we canall learn from each other.
It's not just 52 states who areusing these standards.
(27:09):
It's, as you know, Brian beingthe accreditation director, many
, many more, like thousands ofaccredited laboratories, many
more thousands of non-accreditedlabs and then individuals
within those laboratories usingthese methods.
So we have a responsibility toreally make sure that they're
the most useful that they can be, and bringing people to the
(27:30):
table to contribute to that isreally an important part of that
.
And we listen.
You know we can't take everysingle person's comment and say,
yes, absolutely, we're going todo that and that and that, then
that.
But there is a conversation andif we don't hear the
conversation, especially fromsomeone you know who has a
(27:51):
unique perspective, maybesomeone it's a kind of a niche
material or, you know, anemerging technology.
We really need to be includingthose people in the conversation
in order to make thesestandards the most useful and to
make sure that people, even ifthey are useful, that people
know about them and that they'reusing them.
And, ultimately, the volunteermodel I've spent a lot of time
(28:13):
thinking about this too.
I think it's a numbers game,you know, when it comes to
succession planning, you canhave, you know, the best people,
but if not every single one ofthose people will have the
personality, the desire, themotivation or the ability to
step into a leadership role.
(28:34):
So what we need to maintain,kind of the volunteer model
which, you know, a lot ofassociations, a lot of volunteer
groups are struggling with this, is to make sure that there are
people showing up and beingthere and having being part of
(28:54):
the conversation.
Now, industry members,academics they can't really hold
leadership groups within orleadership positions within this
group, so that's kind of anunfortunate circumstance that we
find ourselves in.
But if we have people fromindustry and academia and other
you know groups, they can reallyhelp with some of the task
forces and some of the reallykind of technical, really nitty
gritty, technical pieces.
(29:15):
That clears the way for ourvolunteer leaders within the
states to have that extracapacity to lead and facilitate
these discussions, keep track ofthings and take part in that.
You know, leadership discussionand when it comes to you know I
agree with everything Matt saidin terms of trying to get these
(29:35):
volunteers engaged andparticipating.
A big part of my job is makingsure that we have the structure
I think of probably all of ourcommittees this committee comp
and maybe like design and maybebridges and structures, because
there are two other bigpublications, heavy committees.
We are very, very processoriented.
(29:57):
Which tracks?
Because it's a bunch ofengineers.
We're very process oriented.
And so making people, trying totake away some of the ambiguity,
trying to make peopleunderstand there is a process,
it is a thoughtful process,you'll be safe, participating,
you know, creating that space ofpsychological safety for them
(30:18):
to, you know, be nervous but besupported, helping them not only
understand that we have athoughtful process but
communicating it and includingthem in any changes or
improvements we make withinthose processes and then just
helping people feel valued.
You know there's a realdifference between being needed
(30:40):
and feeling valued and we allknow we need volunteers, but
when people step into thoseroles, I think I take it as a
personal task of mine and a jobresponsibility to make sure that
they're comfortable and have anenjoyable experience.
I mean, they're doing extrawork.
(31:00):
It kind of ultimately maybebenefits the DOTs and benefits
the stakeholders, but they'renot getting paid to do this.
Benefits the DOTs and benefitsthe stakeholders, but they're
not getting paid to do this.
So I want to make sure thatit's a pleasant experience that
it's.
You know, the gratitude isindividualized.
I try to make jokes.
We try to, you know, meetpeople where they are and
support them in the ways that wecan, even if that is a specific
(31:24):
tailored joke.
Brian Johnson (31:26):
Yeah, yeah, I think there's really so much fun
you can have with Robert'sRules of Order, but I feel like
comp is pretty laid back as faras a structured committee
environment is.
You know the actual meeting.
You know people are free todiscuss things and it's not.
You know Mr Chairman or youknow are free to discuss things
(31:47):
and it's not.
You know you know mr, mrchairman or you know chairperson
, whatever you know, am I ableto speak now?
Casey Soneira (31:55):
it's not that structured I think ultimately
what it will boil down to acrossall of our committees is the
more people we can get toparticipate, and that doesn't
necessarily even mean coming tothe in-person meeting.
So I know, like I know, travelcan be a huge barrier for some
people, whether it's throughtheir state or just personal
preferences or personalcircumstances.
Just have a micro engagement.
(32:29):
So you know, you don't have tobe the voting member, you don't
even have to really be on thecommittee to have your
supervisor say hey, I'm incharge of reviewing the standard
this year.
And you take the supervisor,takes the standard and plops it
in front of the technician andsays can you like mark this up
and see you know what needs tobe updated.
Is there anything out of date?
Are there any typos?
You know, what do you thinkabout this?
(32:50):
And in that way they're gettinga sense of, oh, this is what
comp is, this is what thestandard is.
I didn't know I could do this.
I just thought I was stuck withthis standard forever, you know
, but that's like one steptowards a micro engagement that
can continue to build and buildand build and then when that
person hopefully they stay withthe DOT and get promoted and you
(33:14):
know, become engaged with acommittee even more.
It's not this massive, you knowroom of people who know all the
rules and all of these thingsthat are happening in these
terms that nobody knows.
You're slightly more familiar.
Maybe you've had some exposureto some of the technical
(33:34):
subcommittee virtual meetingsbecause you've been invited to
come and talk about the changesthat you're proposing.
It's those opportunities formicro-engagement that I see as
being kind of a lifeline tosuccession, with getting DOT
staff continuing to be engagedin this group as we get younger
and younger and fewer and fewerworkforce people available.
(33:54):
Just making sure that it's not,you know, understanding is not
a barrier to entry, I think is areally important thing for us
to kind of try and be veryintentional about.
Kim Swanson (34:05):
I had a question for Matt that what are some of
the personal benefits of being avolunteer that maybe you've
noticed in other people or thatyou've experienced yourself as
volunteering with comp?
What are some of like not onlythe professional benefits of it,
but the personal benefits thatyou've gotten from being a
volunteer?
Matt Linneman (34:26):
That's a good question.
I think some of it for me hasbeen, like I alluded to a little
bit before, just the ability to, especially in this role now,
to work on leadership skills.
Right, it's one thing to leadyour team that you supervise,
let's say, at your normal job,but it's different when you're
working with a group ofvolunteers, right?
So you approach thingsdifferently.
(34:48):
It gives you new perspectives.
You get to hear a lot ofdifferent perspectives from
around the country, from all thedifferent states.
That's one thing I always enjoybeing able to just, you know,
especially at an in-personmeeting, you know pick someone's
brain on some issue that youhave going on or you've created
that contact network.
It actually was surprising tome going from the state
(35:10):
materials engineer and beinginvolved in the committee of
materials to now to thecommittee on highways and
streets and a different peergroup.
But having a lot of thoseAASHTO relationships, like with
Casey and Brian, made thattransition pretty easy for me
because there's a lot offamiliar faces around, right.
So and so I really enjoyed thatand, like I said, it's built a
(35:33):
lot of friendships over the timetoo.
That I've maintained and that'sbeen a personal value to me as
well.
Brian Johnson (35:40):
Yeah, it's a great community and I love that
you keep talking about thecommunity and the relationships
that are built.
Keep talking about thecommunity and the relationships
that are built.
It's been, you know, even froma staff perspective.
I think that's been a realbenefit for us.
Casey, I think you would agreewith that as well, because I
(36:01):
know that we've talked aboutthis before with certain people
that we know and really like tospend time with at these
meetings, like somebody likeMatt, for example.
It's nice to be able to go toanother meeting and then you see
that person again, like TRB orsome of the other meetings,
regional meetings, so I thinkthat's really great.
I wanted to ask you, matt, backto the roadmap concept are
(36:23):
there any changes that you havethought about that you would
like to see?
This is a tough questionbecause we haven't gotten too
into it yet, but has there beenanything on your mind.
Matt Linneman (36:36):
I might have a lot of ideas, but I really want
to hear everybody else's ideas,right, and I want the input on
it.
So I think that's what's key.
We already kind of talked aboutthat, especially the steering
committee.
That's what their role is.
Casey went over the membershipof it, but that's really what
we're asking them to do is helpshape all of this as it goes.
Right, I'm viewing that that'smy role, and Casey kind of keeps
(36:58):
me in the guardrails of wherecan we go and what can we do,
and hear everybody else's ideasand say, okay, we all need
ownership in this, right.
You know, one specific thingthat will definitely build into
the roadmap but is alreadytaking shape and was an idea
long before I came along, washow to deal with research.
(37:19):
Right, we've always been.
How does research inform theactivities and the standards
development and the manualsdevelopment?
How do we seek it out?
How do we get input into it?
How do we turn that those ideas, into actual, usable research?
Right, and so that's somethingthat each technical subcommittee
(37:42):
used to deal with we used totalk about at the annual meeting
.
You know, in the brief timethat I was gone from the
committee, there was new ideasand a research summit was put in
place separately to have thosediscussions.
Now we're standing up androlling out a new dedicated
technical subcommittee just forresearch to kind of handle all
of that right.
So we know that research needsto be something that we grab
(38:05):
onto more, get more value out of, and now we're putting a focus
on that right.
So that was a discussion at thelast steering committee meeting
.
We got everybody on board withthat idea and so we have a map.
Now we just got to get them upand running and so they
understand what the roles andresponsibilities are.
In case.
He's working on documentingsome of that and we'll have to
(38:29):
learn that a little bit, right.
Well, we'll learn what worksand what doesn't, but there's
some good foundation that'salready been laid for that and
we're taking action towards it.
Right, and I'll probablyreflect that as we as we write
our roadmap.
But there's some of thosethings we're already working
towards that are outside of thatcore of standards development,
and I think there'll be morethings like that.
(38:50):
We know there's lots ofemerging issues out there, right
, like workforce development.
Casey mentioned that.
We talk about that at everyconference we go to.
Probably Low carbon materialsis a big one for us Buy America,
policy changes and things likethat.
Like there's all sorts of thosesort, those emerging things
that I think we need to beweighing in on as a committee,
(39:12):
because we're the leaders inthose areas.
But we need to strike a balance.
Brian Johnson (39:17):
Yeah, there are a lot of things you're thinking
about right now.
So the typical comp meeting isabout a week and it is a full
week.
But now you've got all thesestandards to manage, guides,
manuals, and now you've got toalso discuss hey, what are best
(39:38):
practices around low-carbonmaterials and all the other
things you just mentioned, theother things you just mentioned.
Do you foresee a time where weshift from the formulaic nature
of the meetings, where we gothrough the agenda and the votes
(39:58):
and the affirmatives andnegatives, to having more time
towards the best practicesharing, or what AASHTO calls
peer exchanges in a lot of cases?
Do you think that might becoming at some point?
Matt Linneman (40:15):
I think we've had some discussions on what is
that distribution of time splitright, because you can't go away
from the core of what makes theCommittee of Materials makes it
right, like that formula hasworked for many, many years for
many, many versions of thestandards right, so we can't
(40:36):
take away.
That's the identity, that's thecore.
We got to be careful that wedon't lose our identity, but we
also have to make time, and sothat's something that we ask the
steering committee tocontemplate right?
That's one of the things weleft with, I would say, from our
in-person meeting is what isthat balance of how much time we
spend on what we do, and whereare there places that we can
(40:59):
provide some capacity?
You know we're not going toturn it into a two week meeting
you know as much as people mightenjoy that.
You know it's already, like yousaid, a pack full agenda for a
week or so.
So we got to, you know, pickour spots and find where we get
value.
And you know we've already donesome of that.
Casey and the steeringcommittee has already been
(41:19):
shaping that the last few yearswhen it comes to the some of the
roundtable discussions, gettinggood value out of those,
getting good value out of theresearch discussions and maybe
shifting that around a littlebit.
Now we got a different groupthat can focus on that.
So maybe there's a little bitmore of that structuring we can
do using some of the outsidesupport opportunities that there
are to gain some capacity.
(41:41):
But I think that's where wereally need to figure out what
do we want to do?
And then we'll have to figureout how are we going to build
the capacity to do that.
Casey Soneira (41:51):
So one of the things that sort of you know my
job is making sure that we don'twaste the members' time, that
we make the best use of theirtime as much as we can.
Try to streamline things, tryto remove barriers.
To Matt's point, one of thethings that he mentioned was the
research summit, and theresearch summit came about
(42:14):
because we used to talk aboutresearch the last four hours of
an in-person meeting and peoplehad to leave for flights.
A lot of people were tired.
Not everyone had had a chanceto review the research that had
come in.
So we would talk about it andsay you know, what do you think
about this?
And for some people it's thefirst time they're hearing it.
They don't know what's going onwith that particular thing in
(42:36):
their state off the top of theirhead.
Because why would they?
And we were just likeeveryone's so exhausted Are we
getting what we need out of this?
And the answer was veryobviously no.
You could see people justtwitching and looking at their
watches, like I got to catch myflight.
We weren't getting a lot ofdiscussion and so we just picked
it up and said can we just dothis virtually a couple of weeks
(42:58):
later, send these all out, sendall these statements out, give
people an opportunity to reviewthem and talk, you know, confer
with their states and with theirsub committees.
So not only did we then make theresearch discussion more
valuable, that opened up timewithin the meeting to talk about
other things, to give us alittle bit of padding for, you
(43:20):
know, those peer exchange-y typediscussions it made us, gave us
some flexibility in not havingso many concurrent sessions, so
some sessions that you just haveone session instead of two or
three.
But those small kind ofincremental changes where we
look at and we say is thispractice, is this system really
(43:41):
doing what it's intended or isit having unintended
consequences?
Because the research at the endof the research meeting, at the
end of trying new things andstill doing getting the
(44:05):
deliverable, but maybe in adifferent way.
Yeah, I'm really grateful thatthis committee has been so
flexible and willing to try newthings.
Brian Johnson (44:14):
All right, Matt, I have one last question for you
.
What does success look like foryou at the end of your term as
comp chair?
Is there anything you'll feellike you really want to
accomplish this before you stepdown as comp chair?
Matt Linneman (44:31):
Let me stop you there A really long time from
now.
Casey Soneira (44:36):
I was going to say what's the length of term.
Matt Linneman (44:37):
Don't worry about it term, don't worry about it,
don't worry about it I reallythink that putting this roadmap
together will will lay that outfor us like so.
So first thing on my list islet's get this formulated and
say, okay, now we know whatwe're gonna do, right then we.
Then we can say, okay, nowthese are the focus areas that
(44:58):
we're gonna put our effort into.
So it helps us prioritize too,because we know we've talked a
couple times we need to havethat balance.
So what does that look like forall of us?
And that we want to getaccomplished.
So I don't know if I have thegreatest answer yet, because I
want some more input to say whatare those priorities from all
the members and from thesteering committee and say then
(45:19):
we can go to work in making ithappen.
And I think that will show thatwill be what I want to do is
that we've carried out thoseobjectives that we come out of
this strategic roadmap and, Ithink, continuing to build the
community that we have.
That everybody feels, which Ithink they do now, but we can
always do better, especially fornew members.
Right To say you're welcomehere.
(45:40):
This is a safe, inclusive placethat we want you to be involved
in, be involved in theconversations, even if it's your
first day in the door, even ifit's your first meeting that
you've ever been to.
And I think the other thing thatwe're another thing that we're
already doing is working on thecommunications out to the group.
Right, we, we we have a lotmore communications going out
(46:02):
that come from Casey.
She's been doing a great job ofprobably ramping that up.
We're now doing quarterlyleadership meetings as well to
inform all of the, the, thetechnical subcommittee,
leadership chairs and vicechairs of what some of the
things that are going on likethis.
Obviously, this is a greatforum for putting that
information out too, but we canalso have those one-on-ones and
(46:23):
give them a chance to askquestions outside of the kind of
once a year format.
So, building the community,building our roadmap and really
making sure we still continue todeliver the quality and the
expectation that the states havethat come out of this committee
for really setting theframework of what transportation
(46:49):
materials and payments qualityshould be.
That's the high standard thatwe've got to continue to carry
out too.
So those are the three, I guessoff the top, and we'll have
more specific ones as we go.
Brian Johnson (47:01):
Well, I want to thank you, matt, matt Linneman
from North Dakota DOT and CaseySinera, aashto colleague, and,
as always, kim Swanson, who'sgoing to have some fun editing
this one with the nonsense inthe beginning, so hopefully not
everybody hears that anyway.
But thanks again for your timeand input and looking forward to
(47:22):
your tenure as comp chair.
Matt Linneman (47:26):
Yeah, thanks for the opportunity.
It was a great discussion so Ido appreciate all this
opportunity and I appreciate theopportunity to provide the
leadership for the committee onmaterials, so I'm excited about
the role.
Casey Soneira (47:39):
Brian, thanks Kim and thanks Matt.
Kim Swanson (47:45):
I'm excited to work with all of you.
Thanks for listening to AASHTOResource Q&A.
If you'd like to be a guest orjust submit a question, send us
an email at podcast ataashtoresourceorg, or call Brian
at 240-436-4820.
For other news and relatedcontent, check out AASHTO
Resources' social media accountsor go to aashtoresourceorg.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.