The Difference in Transportation Quality by Transportation Mode. Masafumi Nakamura. JR Freight Research Center, Ltd, Tokyo, Japan

Transcription

1 The Difference in Transportation Quality by Transportation Mode Masafumi Nakamura JR Freight Research Center, Ltd, Tokyo, Japan Abstract In this study I try to develop the specific item of the transportation quality and classify transportation quality. This survey, conducted in the form of a questionnaire, asked respondents to assign priority levels to nine items considered to be important in maintaining the quality of transportation services. The items respondents viewed as important in determining transportation quality were Prevention of damage to cargo from falling, Safety of dangerous goods, Prevention of water leakage damage to cargo, Anti-theft and anti-pilferage measures. Next, I checked the same items as above and asked respondents to evaluate the levels of transportation quality in each item by the truck, railway and inland vessel modes of transportation. When I compare the differences in transportation modes by how respondents evaluate the quality level, the respondents evaluations for railways and inland vessels showed similar results, with higher ratings given to the items of anti-theft and anti-pilferage measures and safety of dangerous goods. Meanwhile, in the truck transportation mode, higher quality ratings were given to maintenance of temperature and freshness and prevention of unpleasant smells. To classify transportation quality, I conducted a factor analysis based on the results of the questionnaire survey and examined whether there were any differences between the extracted factors that provide evaluation criteria for transportation quality. According to the analysis, it can be stated that respondents have discriminated software management (such as the controlling of container temperature) from hardware management (such as protection of containers) as different factors and evaluated the respective indexes of transportation quality separately. 1. Introduction Shippers select logistic companies based on their cost, speed, and transportation quality. They can easily compare the companies cost and speed, but they cannot compare the transportation quality because of the difficulty of collecting relevant data. For this reason, comparisons of railway and truck transportation services in terms of quality sometimes present a challenge for shippers. Since railway services carry cargo on tracks, continuous micro-vibrations are inevitable. It is also necessary to transfer cargoes from trains to trucks in the loading yards using forklifts, etc. This transfer work sometimes causes cargo to fall or frictional damage to be inflicted on cargo inside the containers. Therefore, efforts to avoid falling cargo or frictional damage are important for improving transportation quality in the railway services. Also in recent years, retailers criteria for cargo acceptance have grown stricter than before. Cases in which printed letters on the package surface became illegible due to friction may be regarded as unacceptable. What exactly is transportation quality? Logistics companies use transportation quality as a public relations term when asserting their superiority. Transportation quality is a valuable concept for shippers and logistics companies, but an exact definition does not exist. For example, when I searched the websites of Japanese logistics companies using the keywords transportation quality, I found that logistics companies use various different words to refer to transportation quality. The objective of this study is thus to research the item of transportation quality and the differences in transportation quality among different transportation modes. As the first step of the study, I carried out a survey by issuing questionnaires to shippers and logistics company experts to find out what items are considered important in terms of transportation quality and how important they are considered to be. Based on the results of that survey, I carried out a factor analysis and attempted to classify the nature and characteristics of the matters required of transportation services. Then I compared those transportation qualities to find the differences that might exist among railways, trucks and inland vessel transportation services. 1

2 2. Important item in transport quality 2.1 General In order to collect the opinions of industry insiders on what is important in transportation quality, I conducted a questionnaire-based survey via the Internet in February There were 200 respondents to the survey, of whom 33% were employees or customers of shipping companies and 67% were employees of logistics companies. 2.2 Ranking of Factors Determining Transportation Quality This survey, conducted in the form of a questionnaire, asked respondents to assign priority levels to nine items considered to be important in maintaining the quality of transportation services. The items included prevention of damage from unnecessary frictional, prevention of damage to cargo from falling, maintenance of temperature and freshness, prevention of unpleasant smells, sterilization and maintenance of sanitation, prevention of rusting and dewing, prevention of water leakage damage to cargo, safety of dangerous goods and anti-theft and anti-pilferage measures. Each question featured a statement followed by varying degrees of importance ranging from Not important to Slightly important, Important and Very important. Upon checking the responses for items considered very important, the item prevention of damage to cargo from falling was found to top other items at 63.5%, followed by safety of dangerous goods at 53.0%. Prevention of water leakage damage to cargo and anti-theft and anti-pilferage measures shared third place at 46.0% each (Table 1). Others included maintenance of temperature and freshness at 38.0%, prevention of unpleasant smells at 34.5%, sterilization and maintenance of sanitation at 32.5%, prevention of damage from unnecessary frictional at 29.5% and prevention of rusting and dewing at 28.5%. Thus the top three items respondents viewed as important in determining transportation quality were: 1) Prevention of damage to cargo from falling 2) Safety of dangerous goods 3) Prevention of water leakage damage to cargo Anti-theft and anti-pilferage measures Items NI SI I VI Prevention of damage from unnecessary frictional Prevention of damage to cargo from falling Maintenance of temperature and freshness Prevention of unpleasant smells Sterilization and maintenance of sanitation Prevention of rusting and dewing Prevention of water leakage damage to cargo Safety of dangerous goods Anti-theft and anti-pilferage measures NI: not important, SI: slightly important, I: important, VI: very important. Table 1 Degree of Importance in Determining Transportation Quality (unit %) 3. Ratings of Transportation Quality by Transportation Mode Next, I asked questions about the ratings of transportation quality for various transportation modes. Here, I checked the same items as above and asked respondents to evaluate the levels of transportation quality in each item by the truck, railway and inland vessel modes of transportation. Each question was a statement followed by a four-point scale ranging from bad level, normal level and good level to fair level. I compared the consolidated responses of good level and fair level for each item according to the transportation mode. I asked the respondents whether the quality levels presently provided by truck, railway and inland 2

3 vessels were satisfactory in the nine categories of transportation quality listed above. Then I analyzed the responses to see whether there were noticeable differences in quality levels among the transportation modes. Items Truck Railway Inland vessel Prevention of damage from unnecessary frictional Prevention of damage to cargo from falling Maintenance of temperature and freshness Prevention of unpleasant smells Sterilization and maintenance of sanitation Prevention of rusting and dewing Prevention of water leakage damage to cargo Safety of dangerous goods Anti-theft and anti-pilferage measures Table 2.Ratings of Transportation Quality by Transportation Mode (Consolidated responses of good level and fair level ) 3.1 Levels of Transportation Quality in the Truck Transportation Mode For trucks, maintenance of temperature and freshness was rated most highly with 56.8%, followed by safety of dangerous goods at 53.8% (Table 2). Prevention of unpleasant smells received 48.6%, with prevention of damage to cargo from falling at 47.7%. Prevention of water leakage damage to cargo followed with 47.1%, then anti-theft and anti-pilferage measures at 46.3%, sterilization and maintenance of sanitation at 42.3% and prevention of rusting and dewing at 40.0%. The survey in the field of truck transportation thus indicated that the respondents rank the quality level of this particular service highest in the areas of: 1) Maintenance of temperature and freshness 2) Safety of dangerous goods 3) Prevention of unpleasant smells 3.2 Levels of Transportation Quality in the Railway Transportation Mode For railway services, anti-theft and anti-pilferage measures topped all others with 61.5%, followed by safety of dangerous goods at 58.1% (Table 2). Prevention of damage to cargo from falling received 50.6%, with prevention of water leakage damage to cargo at 47.1%. Prevention of damage from unnecessary frictional followed with 46.0%, then sterilization and maintenance of sanitation and prevention of unpleasant smells at 44.7% each, maintenance of temperature and freshness at 44.1% and prevention of rusting and dewing at 44.0%. The survey in the mode of railway transportation thus indicated that the respondents rank the quality level of this particular service highest in the areas of: 1) Anti-theft and anti-pilferage measures 2) Safety of dangerous goods 3) Prevention of damage to cargo from falling 3.3 Levels of Transportation Quality in the Inland Vessel Transportation Mode For inland vessels, anti-theft and anti-pilferage measures topped all the others with 58.9%, followed by safety of dangerous goods at 48.6% (Table 2). Prevention of damage from unnecessary frictional was next with 46.9%, and then prevention of damage to cargo from falling at 46.3%. Maintenance of temperature and freshness followed with 40.6%, then prevention of unpleasant smells and sterilization and maintenance of sanitation with 37.3% each, followed by prevention of water leakage damage to cargo at 37.2 % and prevention of rusting and dewing with 35.4%. The survey in the mode of inland vessel transportation thus indicated that the respondents rank the quality level of this particular service highest in the areas of: 3

4 1) Anti-theft and anti-pilferage measures 2) Safety of dangerous goods 3) Prevention of damage from unnecessary frictional 3.4 Comparing the Differences in Transportation Modes by Respondents Ratings of Transportation Quality Level In the railway mode, it was found that the respondents gave higher ratings to anti-theft and antipilferage measures, safety of dangerous goods and prevention of damage to cargo from falling. In the inland vessel service mode, the respondents gave higher ratings to anti-theft and anti-pilferage measures, safety of dangerous goods and prevention of damage from unnecessary frictional. When I compare the differences in transportation modes by how respondents evaluate the quality level, the respondents evaluations for railways and inland vessels showed similar results, with higher ratings ( good level or fair level ) given to the items of anti-theft and anti-pilferage measures and safety of dangerous goods. Meanwhile, the respondents rated railway services quality more highly on prevention of damage to cargo from falling, whereas for inland vessels, prevention of damage from unnecessary frictional was rated more highly. In the meantime, more respondents rated truck transportation services as good or fair in maintenance of temperature and freshness as well as prevention of unpleasant smells, obviously because of the need for shorter transportation time. When I compare these survey results over the three transportation modes of truck, railway and inland vessel transportation, I can see that safety is the essential factor common to all these transportation modes. Railway and inland vessel transportation showed similarly high marks on the item anti-theft and anti-pilferage measures, probably because of strictly limited accessibility to freight stations and port facilities. Meanwhile, in the truck transportation mode, higher quality ratings were given to maintenance of temperature and freshness and prevention of unpleasant smells. This may reflect the need for expeditious handling of cargoes that consist mainly of foods and such. 4. Factor Analysis 4.1 Factor Analysis for All Transportation Modes Factor analysis is an analytical technique employed to explain relationships among multivariate data by means of a small number of potential factors. Factor 1 is most influential, Factor 2 is second most influential and Factor 3 is the third most influential. In general, three factors are said to account for the total variance. Here, I carried out such an analysis to identify specific common factors from among data related to transportation services. Specifically, an analysis was made based on the results of the questionnaire to extract and identify factor that may form the basic criteria of transportation quality for different transportation modes (trucks, railway and inland vessels). The purpose was to find and study whether there were differences between the extracted factors forming the criteria for evaluating transportation quality and those forming the criteria for evaluating transportation modes. At first I conducted a factor analysis for all transportation mode data. The results of the factor analysis indicated that the contribution ratio of Factor 1 was 28%, Factor 2 was 27% and Factor 3 was 12%. A total of 67% of the data was explainable by three factors. In Factor 1, prevention of unpleasant smells, sterilization and maintenance of sanitation, maintenance of temperature and freshness gained high scores in that order (Table 3). In Factor 2, prevention of damage to cargo from falling, anti-theft and anti-pilferage measures, safety of dangerous goods, prevention of damage from unnecessary frictional and prevention of water leakage damage to cargo scored high marks. The prevention of rusting and dewing topped Factor 3. Factor 1 can be said to represent measures and means for maintaining the quality of the cargo inside the container, which is considered an important factor in of the event of transporting foods. Factor 2 is seen as including measures for protecting the container from exterior forces or shocks inflicted from outside of the container. Factor 3 is also considered to indicate measures taken to maintain the quality of the goods in the container. 4

5 Items Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Prevention of unpleasant smells Sterilization and maintenance of sanitation Maintenance of temperature and freshness Prevention of damage to cargo from falling Anti-theft and anti-pilferage measures Safety of dangerous goods Prevention of damage from unnecessary frictional Prevention of water leakage damage to cargo Prevention of rusting and dewing Table 3. Factor Analysis for All Transportation Modes 4.2 Factor Analysis for Truck Transportation For trucks, in the Factor 1 category, prevention of unpleasant smells, sterilization and maintenance of sanitation, prevention of rusting and dewing and maintenance of temperature and freshness scored high (Table 4). In Factor 2, prevention of damage to cargo from falling got the highest score, followed by prevention of damage from unnecessary frictional. As for Factor 3, safety of dangerous goods earned the highest score, followed by anti-theft and anti-pilferage measures and the prevention of flood damage to cargo. Items Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Prevention of unpleasant smells Sterilization and maintenance of sanitation Prevention of rusting and dewing Maintenance of temperature and freshness Prevention of damage to cargo from falling Prevention of damage from unnecessary frictional Safety of dangerous goods Anti-theft and anti-pilferage measures Prevention of water leakage damage to cargo Table 4. Factor Analysis for Trucks The results of the analysis of responses indicated that the contribution ratios could be identified as follows: Factor 1 was 34%, Factor 2 was 24% and Factor 3 was 18%, with the total explainable percentages by the three factors reaching 76%. Factor 1 represents methods of maintaining the quality of the cargo loaded in the container, which is considered important for food transportation. Factor 2 is considered to represent measures for protecting containers from shocks and damages inflicted by forces from outside. Factor 3 is seen as constituting measures for protecting the cargo against thefts and water leaks, etc. According to this analysis, the respondents consider roughly three major points when evaluating the quality of truck transportation. From the order of the contribution ratio, they give high priority to maintenance of the quality of the cargo loaded in the container. This item is followed by the ways and means of protecting the container itself from outside force. And this is followed by measures against theft and pilferage as well as the protection of cargo from getting drenched by water leakage. 4.3 Factor Analysis for Railway Transportation For railway services, in Factor 1, sterilization and maintenance of sanitation, prevention of unpleasant smells, prevention of rusting and dewing, maintenance of temperature and freshness and prevention of water leakage damage to cargo gained high scores in that order (Table 5). In Factor 2, prevention of damage to cargo from falling and prevention of damage from unnecessary frictional earned high scores. As for Factor 3, safety of dangerous goods, anti-theft and antipilferage measures got the highest score. 5

6 Items Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Sterilization and maintenance of sanitation Prevention of unpleasant smells Prevention of rusting and dewing Maintenance of temperature and freshness Prevention of water leakage damage to cargo Prevention of damage to cargo from falling Prevention of damage from unnecessary frictional Safety of dangerous goods Anti-theft and anti-pilferage measures Table 5. Factor Analysis for Railways The results of the factor analysis of the responses indicated that the contribution ratio of Factor 1 was 41%, Factor 2 was 24% and Factor 3 was 24%. A total of 89% of the data was explainable by three factors. Factor 1 represents methods of maintaining the quality of the cargo loaded in the container. Factor 2 is considered to represent measures to protect containers from shocks and damages inflicted by forces from outside. Factor 3 is seen as constituting measures for protecting the cargo against thefts. The major difference among factor items as compared to truck transportation was the contribution of the prevention of water leakage damage to cargo in determining transportation quality. In the railway transportation mode, the prevention of water leakage damage to cargo was regarded as a factor constituting Factor 1, whereas in the truck transportation mode, this item was the lowest ranked contributing factor. According to this analysis, the respondents consider roughly three major points as important in evaluating the quality of railway services as a means of logistics. Judging from the order of the contribution ratio, they give very high priority to maintenance of the quality of the cargo loaded in the container. This item is followed by ways and means of protecting the container itself from outside force. This is followed by measures against theft and pilferage as well as the preservation of safety when carrying dangerous goods. 4.4 Factor Analysis for Inland Vessel Transportation For inland vessels, in the Factor 1 category, the items that gained high scores include sterilization and maintenance of sanitation, prevention of unpleasant smells, maintenance of temperature and freshness, prevention of rusting and dewing and prevention of water leakage damage to cargo, in that order (Table 6). In Factor 2, the safety of dangerous goods came out on top, followed by anti-theft and anti-pilferage measures. Prevention of damage to cargo from falling and prevention of damage from unnecessary frictional scored high in Factor 3. Items Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Sterilization and maintenance of sanitation Prevention of unpleasant smells Maintenance of temperature and freshness Prevention of rusting and dewing Prevention of water leakage damage to cargo Safety of dangerous goods Anti-theft and anti-pilferage measures Prevention of damage to cargo from falling Prevention of damage from unnecessary frictional Table 6. Factor Analysis for Inland Vessels The results of the analysis on the data indicated that the contribution ratios could be identified as follows: Factor 1 was 38%, Factor 2, 27% and Factor 3, 25%, with a total percentage of 90% explainable by the three factors. Factor 1 represents methods of maintaining the quality of the cargo loaded in the container and the 6

7 prevention of water leakage. Factor 2 is seen as constituting measures for protecting cargo against thefts, and Factor 3 is considered to represent measures for protecting containers from shocks and damages inflicted by forces from outside an example of a physical, or hardware, factor. According to this analysis, the respondents consider roughly three major points as important when evaluating the quality of inland vessel transportation services as a means of logistics. Judging from the order of the contribution ratio, they give very high priority to maintenance of the quality of the cargo loaded in the container (sterilization and maintenance of sanitation, prevention of unpleasant smells, maintenance of temperature and freshness and prevention of water leakage damage to cargo). This item is followed by ways and means of protecting the container itself from thefts and pilferage. This is followed by measures against shocks and impacts inflicted by outside force. 4.5 Comparison of Evaluations Over Three Transportation Modes When I compare respondents evaluations over the three different transportation modes, maintenance of the quality of the cargo inside the container (sterilization and maintenance of sanitation, prevention of unpleasant smells, maintenance of temperature and freshness, etc.) obtained high scores in all three modes (Table 7). While hardware factors such as the need for protection from shocks are considered important in truck and railway transportation, this item falls under Factor 3 in inland vessel transportation. In inland vessel transportation, anti-theft measures as well as preserving the safety of dangerous goods earned the highest scores under Factor 2. This is assumed to be due to the nature of the loading/unloading operations carried out in port facilities, where public access is somewhat difficult and restricted. During transportation, so-called software controls such as prevention of unpleasant smells, preservation through sterilization and maintenance of constant temperature are considered primary requirements. Respondents also identified as important, although at a secondary level, the management of hardware aspects such as the prevention of damages, thefts and pilferage, unnecessary, measures to preserve safety when carrying dangerous goods and water leakages, which are mainly caused by influences from outside of the containers. Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Hardware factors such as protection from shocks Truck Maintenance of the quality of the cargo inside the container Railway Maintenance of the quality of the cargo Inland vessel inside the container Maintenance of the quality of the cargo inside the container Hardware factors such as protection from shocks Anti-theft measures as well as maintaining the safety of the containers Anti-theft measures as well as maintaining the safety of the containers Anti-theft measures as well as maintaining the safety of the containers Hardware factors such as protection from shocks Table 7: Levels of Logistical Quality Ratings from the Standpoint of the Contribution Ratio of Factors by Transportation Modes (Lower numeric value represents a higher ratings) 5. Conclusion The questionnaire-based survey proved that the following items are regarded as most important for transportation quality: prevention of damage to cargo from falling, safety of dangerous goods, antitheft and anti-pilferage measures and prevention of water leakage damage to cargo. I conducted a factor analysis based on the results of the questionnaire survey and examined whether there were any differences between the extracted factors that provide evaluation criteria for transportation quality in terms of transportation modes (trucks, railways and inland vessels). According to the analysis, it can be stated that respondents (employees and customers of shipping companies and logistics companies) have discriminated software management (such as the controlling of container temperature) from hardware management (such as protection of containers) as different factors and evaluated the respective indexes of transportation quality separately. When looking at these matters per logistical mode as well, software controls such as the prevention of unpleasant smells, sterilization and maintenance of constant temperature are rated highly in all 7

8 modes, with slightly lower ratings given to the quality of hardware controls. These lower ratings indicate that measures to deal with hardware problems still have room for improvement. References [1] Masafumi Nakamura, Masahiro Sakano. A Study on Transportation Quality, The Official Journal of the Japan Society of Logistics Systems, Volume 7, Nov, (2007). [2] JR Freight Research Center, Ltd. (2007). Survey on Transportation Quality via Questionnaire. 8