benchmarking in european service of public transport n.
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Benchmarking in European Service of public Transport

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 74

Benchmarking in European Service of public Transport - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • 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

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

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

Download Now 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
About the survey

How to read the graphs


Results per index in 2010, 2009, 2008 and 2007

Satisfaction per city/region 2005 – 2010 with:

Traffic supply



Staff behaviour

Security and safety


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



Life situation

PT travel frequency



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


eight dimensions believed to affect satisfaction included in the survey
Background variables:

Travel frequency by public transport

PT modes most often used

Main occupation



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




8. Value for money


response rates
Response rates

Response rates are calculated as follows:


  • 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.


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.


oslo 2010

Oslo 2010

Quality dimensions

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


Capability to run on schedule


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


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


impact on satisfaction oslo
Impact on satisfaction - Oslo




  • 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.


oslo 20101

Oslo 2010


oslo 20102

Oslo 2010

Citizen satisfaction in subgroups

oslo 20103

Oslo 2010

Traffic supply in subgroups

oslo 20104

Oslo 2010

Reliability in subgroups

oslo 20105

Oslo 2010

Information in subgroups

oslo 20106

Oslo 2010

Staff behaviour in subgroups

oslo 20107

Oslo 2010

Security and safety in subgroups

oslo 20108

Oslo 2010

Comfort in subgroups

oslo 20109

Oslo 2010

Social image in subgroups

oslo 201010

Oslo 2010

Value for money in subgroups

oslo 201011

Oslo 2010

Loyalty in subgroups

oslo 201012

Oslo 2010

Background information

For more information and other reports see our web site or