← Back
Dave Rendall 1

Meet the ISG - Dave Rendall


Get to know the ISG. 

It’s time to meet one of our Lead Contractor representatives – Dave Rendall.

Keep an eye out for your representative, as we continue to introduce you to our members.  

Tell me a little bit about yourself and your background in TTM 

I am currently the National Strategic Traffic Management Lead for Fulton Hogan. Some would call me a career roadie having spent nearly all my working life around roads and related infrastructure.

My more recent experience, since 2008, includes Traffic Operations Manager and Alliance Director of the Auckland Motorway Alliance, then onto the ASM Alliance.  It was great to then spend a year in Wellington as Alliance Manager of the Wellington Transport Alliance during its establishment and early operation (2022/3). I previously spent time with Transit New Zealand on the state highway network, and during that period oversaw implementation of the High-Capacity Highways Manual on the Wellington network in the late 1990s.  

My TTM background includes:

  • CoPTTM Governance Group 2015-19.
  • Member of, then leading, the Fulton Hogans Traffic Critical Risk Group for seven years until 2019
  • Client, consultant and contractor roles in the development of design and implementation of projects, but with a passion for the operations, ITS and maintenance part of the business.

The most rewarding part of my current role is making risk-based TTM real for our people –improving the safety of our staff and road users, and the engagement of our wider business when we work in the road environment.

Give us a quick helicopter-view of where the industry is on this journey at the moment and what needs to change to get to where we want to be? 

The industry is at different stages, which is what we would expect as everyone (and every business) reacts to an imposed change in different ways.  Some are welcoming it and seeking to make the most of the opportunity, while at the other end of the continuum some are still in the denial phase.

There are widely different levels of understanding and experience across the sector.  No one business I know of has all the capacity and capability they would like to make the change – some have close to none.

Many clients have clearly signaled firm dates for their transition to full adoption of NZGTTM.  I believe each business or organisation needs their own transition plan – one that is written down.  I would suggest that if the plan only exists in someone’s head, then they have not yet understood everything that needs to done, and it will always be ‘something to do tomorrow’.

There is no standard transition plan as each business is different – client mix, work types and corporate approach to risk and capability. These plans need to recognise that leadership and engagement are required.  The change needs to break through and undo some things ‘we have always done’.   Done well, the transition will change the delivery culture of an organisation, with TTM becoming a valued enabler, as opposed to a ‘reluctant purchase’.

Where do you see the ISG adding the most value over the next 12-18 months? 

I believe this is succinctly summed up in the ISG mission: Connect, collaborate, advocate and share.   Most value will happen when we apply ourselves to the issues that our members tell us are most important.

I also chair the Good Practice Group of the ISG.  What we are hearing is that the industry wants examples of Good Practice, which they can use or at least reference.  Specifically:

  • documentation that helps guide people through the design and implementation of risk-based TTM plan
  • examples of risk-based solutions that can be used by others.

While, in time, we may have a common approach across the industry, this will remain a challenge in the short/medium term due to the wide variety of activities, environments, and clients we operate with. However, examples of both are now appearing in the wider industry.  I also know of other material, which is being tightly held by the originators, either to protect their own Intellectual Property and/or future commercial opportunities.

For the ISG to actively promote ‘Good Practice’ examples we do need to ensure they are aligned with the regulatory requirements, have a degree of robustness, and the originators are happy to share.

What do you think is the biggest challenge in shifting to a more risk-based approach? 

Different roles and responsibilities, and the challenges of change. Risk-based TTM represents an uncertain and new way of doing things – a change from the relative stability over the last 20 years.   For example, CoPTTM provided a documented ‘safe place’ with defined boundaries for the discussions between the TTM provider and RCA to resolve the controls required to manage the risk of traffic. Risk-based TTM removes many of the boundaries from that discussion.  The RCA will more frequently be challenged on what their minimum requirements are, and why.  Some of those challenges will be well-founded, some will not.

The public and media interest in ‘right-sized TTM’ is causing distraction and consuming good resources away from the work required to make the transition. Arguably it does cause greater focus on progressing the transition.

If you could clear up one misconception or let people know one thing that you don’t think is widely understood about the shift to a more risk-based approach, what would it be?  

There will not be another document (like CoPTTM) that provides the answers for everyone.

  • I believe minimum requirements will evolve and be adopted by many to protect against risk-taking behaviours and maintain a degree of uniformity for road users.
  • Organisations will develop their own way of doing risk-based TTM which will have line of sight to H&S legislation and their own business ‘rules’, processes and culture.  In practice, risk-based TTM processes will be similar between a number of peer organisations.
  • On the road, many aspects of our TTM layouts may not change (e.g. Temporary Speed Limit signage still has to follow Regulations to be enforceable, and the laws of physics which we use to calculate things like Clear Sight Distances will continue).  However, the choice of layout or TTM operation for a given activity and environment will.