Objective
The aim of the pre-concept stage is to ensure the project will be viable to pursue. This involves initial analysis and consultation to ensure the project aligns with the priorities of the lead organisation, as well as of key stakeholders who will be needed to collaborate on the project or support the project via funding pathways for trials and eventual adoption/implementation.
It is assumed that this phase could be triggered by an early concept for a general intervention (eg improving safety at passive crossings through lower-cost warning devices), or for a more specific technology (eg an in-vehicle warning device providing warning of approach trains adopting technology proven in other road contexts). Regardless of the extent of scoping at this phase, a key activity in this phase is ensuring strategic alignment.
Strategic alignment
Description
Before initiating project, the project team should identify how the proposed intervention or technology aligns with their own organisational strategy and with broader Australian transport safety and infrastructure strategies (eg the National Level Crossing Safety Strategy, State-based transport or road safety strategies, Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator regulatory priorities, and National Rail Action Plan).
This phase involves reviewing relevant strategic frameworks to identify where the project contributes to key priorities and holding discussions with key stakeholders to determine the level of support existing for the project to proceed and the forms of support that might be possible (eg strategic alliances/partnerships, co-investment, funding streams). It should also involve an assessment of regulatory requirements, incident data, risk modelling, and other relevant information (eg existing research and evidence for interventions/technologies, recommendations of coroners or investigation bodies following level crossing collisions).
At the conclusion of the phase, the project team should assess the level of alignment with policy priorities and regulatory requirements, as well as project enablers and constraints, and make a recommendation to the project sponsor/organisation regarding the likely viability of the project.
Key activities
- Review organisational, national and jurisdictional strategy documents.
- Engage with relevant stakeholders.
- Identify applicable research, data, and investment pipelines.
- Evaluate extent to which business-as-usual meets regulatory requirements (eg eliminate or mitigates risk so far as is reasonably practicable; SFAIRP).
- Document and communicate how the project supports strategic outcomes.
Human Factors contributions to strategic alignment
Human Factors expertise can be utilised when considering published research findings (see Literature Overview), incident data, risk modelling, outcomes from past level crossing safety investigations and when conducting SFAIRP assessments on the business-as-usual case. Tools such as the Australian Level Crossing Assessment Model (ALCAM) or Level Crossing Management (LXM) can also provide structured data to support early risk assessments, helping to identify high-priority sites and inform whether the proposed intervention addresses an identified gap or known risk factor.
Early involvement of Human Factors specialists could be particularly useful for assessing the viability of a specific technology through early consideration of the extent to which that technology could influence the types of road user behaviours that result in level crossing collisions (eg non-compliances). Note, unless there are significant concerns at this phase, it would be recommended to move into Concept & Planning to support a more detailed analysis and business case. Concerns could also be used to consider a widening of project scope and exploring additional options for level crossing safety improvement, rather than cessation of the project altogether.