Benchmarking in european service of public transport
Download
1 / 74

Benchmarking in European Service of public Transport - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 107 Views
  • Uploaded on

Benchmarking in European Service of public Transport. BEST Survey 2010 City report: Oslo. About the survey How to read the graphs Results Results per index in 2010, 2009, 2008 and 2007 Satisfaction per city/region 2005 – 2010 with: Traffic supply Reliability Information

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Benchmarking in European Service of public Transport' - tynice


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Benchmarking in european service of public transport

Benchmarking in European Service of public Transport

BEST Survey 2010

City report: Oslo


Content

About the survey

How to read the graphs

Results

Results per index in 2010, 2009, 2008 and 2007

Satisfaction per city/region 2005 – 2010 with:

Traffic supply

Reliability

Information

Staff behaviour

Security and safety

Comfort

Perception of social image 2005 - 2010

Perception of value for money 2005 - 2010

Citizens stated loyalty to public transport 2005 - 2010

Quality indicators impact on overall citizen satisfaction 2010

Results per subgroup

Background information

Gender

Age

Life situation

PT travel frequency

Content

2


About the survey
About the survey

  • The following cities participated in the BEST 2010 survey:

    • Stockholm

    • Oslo

    • Helsinki (with additional questions)

    • Copenhagen

    • Vienna

    • Geneva (with additional questions)

  • For all cities 1.000 residents in defined areas have been interviewed. An additional 600 interviews where conducted in Helsinki in 2010. All interviews have been done by telephone.

  • The fieldwork was conducted between March 1st and March 14th 2010.

  • Results from the survey have been weighted with respect to sex and age to match the profile in each area.

  • In 2010 the special topic was transfers. Five questions related to this topic was added to the questionnaire. The results is to be found in a separate report.

BEST City report 2010

3


Eight dimensions believed to affect satisfaction included in the survey

Background variables:

Travel frequency by public transport

PT modes most often used

Main occupation

Sex

Age

Post code (geography)

Eight dimensions believed to affect satisfaction included in the survey

7. Social image

  • Traffic Supply

  • Reliability

  • Information

  • Staff behaviour

  • Personal security/safety

  • Comfort

Satisfaction

Loyalty

Ridership

8. Value for money

4


Response rates
Response rates

Response rates are calculated as follows:

5


Sampling
Sampling

  • Sampling procedures varies from country to country.

  • In Norway, Denmark and Finland samples are drawn from databases covering both mobile and fixed line telephones.

  • In Sweden and Switzerland samples are drawn from fixed line telephones.

  • In all instances it is estimated that approximately 85-95% of the adult population in all included countries can be reached by telephone.

  • The primary sampling unit varies across countries (see table on right hand side).

  • The secondary sampling unit for fixed line phone numbers are the person in the household who last had a birthday. For mobile telephone numbers the secondary sampling unit are the individuals uses the particular mobile phone.

  • There are no single, clear answer to what the best sampling method and procedure is. In case of the BEST survey there is little reason to believe that there should be a strong correlation between attitudes towards the public transport system and telephone usage, fixed line or mobile.

  • From Norway and other countries we know that there is a relatively strong correlation between age and mobile subscription. The younger people are the more likely they are to be using mobile telephones. In the BEST survey the completed data are weighted with respect to age, and hence adjusted for this possible skewness.

6


Mobile interviews
Mobile interviews*

7


How to read the graphs
How to read the graphs

The graphs show the proportion of the respondents who agrees (partially agrees or fully agrees) to the different statements in blue columns. The red columns shows the proportion who disagrees (hardly agrees or not agree at all) to the statements.

Respondents with a neutral position are not displayed in the graphs.

The graphs also include results from previous surveys, shown in the table to the right as the proportion of the respondents who agrees to the statement in question.

Development per index in the different cities are also shown as time lines.

All graphs are standard PowerPoint-graphs where different categories can be hidden and value labels displayed at ones own preference.

8


Results 2010 oslo

Results 2010

Oslo


Oslo indices 2010
Oslo Indices 2010

10


Oslo 2010

Oslo 2010

Quality dimensions


Oslo traffic supply
Oslo Traffic supply

12


Oslo reliability
Oslo Reliability

13


Oslo information
Oslo Information

14


Oslo staff behaviour
Oslo Staff behaviour

15


Oslo security and safety
Oslo Security and safety

16


Oslo comfort
Oslo Comfort

17


Oslo social image
Oslo Social Image

18


Oslo value for money
Oslo Value for money

19


Oslo loyalty
Oslo Loyalty

20


Impact on satisfaction

Impact on satisfaction

Indicators impact on

citizen satisfaction


How is the most important areas for improvements determined

Traffic supply

Nearest stop is close to where I live

Waiting time is short at transfers

I am satisfied with the number of departures

Reliability

Capability to run on schedule

Information

It is easy to get the information needed when planning a trip

Information is good when traffic problems occur

Staff behaviour

Staff answers my questions correctly

Staff behaves nicely and correctly

Security and safety

I feel secure at stations and bus stops

I feel secure on board busses and trains

I am not afraid of traffic accidents when using PT

Comfort

Transfers are easy

Busses and trains are modern

Busses and trains are clean

I normally get a seat when travel with PT

How is the most important areas for improvements determined?

  • Description of the analysis:

  • The indicators shown to the left have been used to determine the impact they have on citizens over all satisfaction.

  • The selected indicators have been chosen as they are independent of each other and describes different phenomenon. I.e. ‘Travel time’ is not included as this element is a function of and covered through ‘Nearest stop is close to where I live’, ‘Number of departures’ and Waiting time is short at transfers’.

  • As such the indicators included are thought to be the ones who are possible to influence and describes the most concrete properties of the public transport system.

  • Price has not been included in this analysis, as the perception of price most often is a function of the perception of other properties.

  • A stepwise regression method has been used in the analysis.

  • On the following slide the five indicators with strongest significant impact on satisfaction are listed in ranked order for all participating cities in 2010.

Overall satisfaction with PT

22


Impact on satisfaction oslo
Impact on satisfaction - Oslo

2008

2009

2010

  • When studying these results please keep in mind that the internal ranking of the different elements in each year is of prime interest.

  • Comparison of the estimated effects across years must be done cautiously and interpreted as indications of differences.

23


Oslo 20101

Oslo 2010

Appendix


Oslo 20102

Oslo 2010

Citizen satisfaction in subgroups


Oslo citizen satisfaction subgroups
Oslo Citizen satisfaction - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 994>

26


Oslo 20103

Oslo 2010

Traffic supply in subgroups


Oslo traffic supply subgroups
Oslo Traffic supply - Subgroups

28


Oslo good for work school trips subgroups
Oslo Good for work/school trips - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 877>

29


Oslo pt is good for leisure trips subgroups
Oslo PT is good for leisure trips - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 947>

30


Oslo pt is good for trips in the city centre subgroups
Oslo PT is good for trips in the city centre - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 931>

31


Oslo pt is good for trips outside the city centre subgroups
Oslo PT is good for trips outside the city centre - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 794>

32


Oslo nearest stop is close to where i live subgroups
Oslo Nearest stop is close to where I live - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 995>

33


Oslo travel time on pt is reasonable subgroups
Oslo Travel time on PT is reasonable - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 974>

34


Oslo i am satisfied with the number of departures subgroups
Oslo I am satisfied with the number of departures - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 962>

35


Oslo waiting time is short at transfers subgroups
Oslo Waiting time is short at transfers - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 873>

36


Oslo 20104

Oslo 2010

Reliability in subgroups


Oslo reliability subgroups
Oslo Reliability - Subgroups

38


Oslo 20105

Oslo 2010

Information in subgroups


Oslo information subgroups
Oslo Information - Subgroups

40


Oslo it is easy to get the information needed when planning a trip subgroups
Oslo It is easy to get the information needed when planning a trip - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 965>

41


Oslo information is good when traffic problems occure subgroups
Oslo Information is good when traffic problems occure- Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 912>

42


Oslo information is good in stops and terminals subgroups
Oslo Information is good in stops and terminals - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: NNN>

43


Oslo 20106

Oslo 2010

Staff behaviour in subgroups


Oslo staff behaviour subgroups
Oslo Staff behaviour - Subgroups

45


Oslo staff answers my questions correctly subgroups
Oslo Staff answers my questions correctly - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 813>

46


Oslo staff behaves nicely and correctly subgroups
Oslo Staff behaves nicely and correctly - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 932>

47


Oslo 20107

Oslo 2010

Security and safety in subgroups


Oslo security and safety subgroups
Oslo Security and safety - Subgroups

49


Oslo i feel secure at stations and bus stops subgroups
Oslo I feel secure at stations and bus stops - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 985>

50


Oslo i feel secure on board busses and trains subgroups
Oslo I feel secure on board busses and trains - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 987>

51


Oslo i am not afraid of traffic accidents when using pt subgroups
Oslo I am not afraid of traffic accidents when using PT - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 993>

52


Oslo 20108

Oslo 2010

Comfort in subgroups


Oslo comfort subgroups
Oslo Comfort - Subgroups

54


Oslo pt travel is comfortable subgroups
Oslo PT travel is comfortable - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 994>

55


Oslo transfers are easy subgroups
Oslo Transfers are easy - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 918>

56


Oslo busses and trains are modern subgroups
Oslo Busses and trains are modern - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 978>

57


Oslo busses and trains are clean subgroups
Oslo Busses and trains are clean - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 981>

58


Oslo i normally get a seat when travel with pt subgroups
Oslo I normally get a seat when travel with PT - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 989>

59


Oslo 20109

Oslo 2010

Social image in subgroups


Oslo social image subgroups
Oslo Social image - Subgroups

61


Oslo more people will travel with pt in the future subgroups
Oslo More people will travel with PT in the future - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 921>

62


Oslo pt is good for the environment subgroups
Oslo PT is good for the environment - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 995>

63


Oslo pt is beneficial to society subgroups
Oslo PT is beneficial to society - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 994>

64


Oslo 201010

Oslo 2010

Value for money in subgroups


Oslo value for money subgroups
Oslo Value for money - Subgroups

66


Oslo pt gives good value for money subgroups
Oslo PT gives good value for money - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 977>

67


Oslo pt fares are reasonable subgroups
Oslo PT fares are reasonable - Subgroups

<TOTAL BASE: 981>

68


Oslo 201011

Oslo 2010

Loyalty in subgroups


Oslo loyalty subgroups
Oslo Loyalty - Subgroups

70


Oslo 201012

Oslo 2010

Background information




For more information and other reports see our web site http://best2005.net or

https://report.scandinfo.se/best/


ad