BEST. Benchmarking in European Service of public Transport. Results of the 2006 survey

Transcription

1 BEST Benchmarking in European Service of public Transport BEST Benchmarking in European Service of public Transport Results of the 2006 survey Barcelona Berlin Copenhagen Geneva Helsinki Manchester Oslo Stockholm Vienna

2 Index Index... 1 Foreword... 2 About the survey and the results... 3 About the survey and the results... 3 BEST Scores Citizen s Satisfaction... 6 Traffic Supply... 7 Reliability... 9 Information Staff Behaviour Personal Security and Safety Comfort Social Image Value for Money Citizen s Satisfaction Travel Frequency Background information Synovate Temo Summary - About the survey TEMO Summary - General comments on the results How to read the graphs

3 Foreword In this report the results from the 2006 Survey are presented in the way that now has become traditional. The shares of satisfied citizens within the 10 dimensions of quality are presented in diagrams. The main object of the report is to offer a common frame work for the discussion on new role models and themes to be subject to benchmarking. In depth analyses of the results are also conducted this year and presented in another report. This report reveals the importance of the different quality questions together with the scores. A working group within BEST has discussed how to develop the questionnaire and the presentation of the results and make the survey even more useful The proposal from the group will be discussed at the annual seminar in Helsinki November. This year is the last year that BEST is administrated from SL and Stockholm. Tore Kåss from Oslo Sporveier will become new chairman of the organising committee and a secretariat will be established in Oslo. The initiative to start this benchmarking process was taken in Stockholm We have with great satisfaction shared many positive experiences of BEST with European colleagues. It has been stimulating, learning and fun thank you all! To develop public transport still is one of the more valuable and rewarding challenges one can meet! Stockholm October 2006 Bo Tengblad BEST Organising Committee Chairman Björn Dalborg Project Manager Participating companies/authorities Transports de Barcelona, TMB, Barcelona, Spain Berliner Verkehrsbetriebe, BVG, Berlin, Germany Greater Copenhagen Authority, HUR, Copenhagen, Denmark DSB S-train A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark DSB, Copenhagen, Denmark Copenhagen Metro, ØSS, Copenhagen, Denmark Helsinki City Transport, HKL, Helsinki, Finland GMPTE, Manchester, England Oslo Public Transport Inc., OS, Oslo, Norway Greater Oslo Public Transport, Oslo, Norway AB Storstockholms Lokaltrafik, SL, Stockholm, Sweden Wiener Linien and Verkehrsverbund Ostregion (VOR), Vienna, Austria Office des Transports et de la Circulation, OTC, Geneva, Switzerland 2

4 About the survey and the results The response rate of this survey is slightly lower than last year s and not completely satisfying. The respond rates are: Barcelona 23% 36 % 38 % 38 % 37% 37% Berlin 31 % Copenhagen 38 % 54 % 55 % 56 % 53 % 39% Geneva 50 % 47 % 50 % 49% 47% Helsinki 41 % 49 % 45 % 47 % 40 % 37% London 35 % 34 % Manchester 34 % 29 % 18% Oslo 37 % 44 % 48 % 45 % 40 % 39% Prague 52 % Stockholm 50 % 64 % 56 % 60 % 56 % 50% Vienna 39 % 57 % 58 % 61 % 58 % 58% All participants have been asked to comment on their survey results. All participants except one have used this opportunity. For technical comments from TEMO see page 30. 3

5 BEST Scores 2006 Below the BEST scores are presented for each of the parameters used in the survey. Parameters Best Scores Citizen Satisfaction Helsinki Traffic Supply Berlin Reliability Geneva Information Geneva Staff Behaviour Geneva Personal Security Vienna Comfort Geneva Social Image Geneva Value for Money Helsinki Loyalty Helsinki/Vienna % Top box - Partially/Fully agree Bottom box - Hardly/Not at all agree Obs! If two regions or more have the same top box value, the best score goes to the region with the lowest bottom box value. General comments: Geneva has the best score in five dimensions, two dimensions better than last year. Also Helsinki has scored very well this year, the region has three top box value this year to compare with 2005 when Helsinki did not have any. General comments from Barcelona: The study of the results of BEST 2006 demonstrates that global evaluation is coherent with the results of each of the service items taken into account. This was not the case during the foregoing years and therefore justification of the results was difficult. This change is due to an adjustment in the methodology used to formulate the question dealing with global evaluation. The same methodology is currently being used by other cities involved in the survey. Therefore, during the next years an accurate evaluation of the global index evolution will be possible since the new methodology has been adopted. General comments from Berlin: There are positive developments for BVG. On the one hand the BVG gets a positive feedback for better performance and better communication with the passengers in On the other hand it gives a displacement among the respondents (more daily users than less often travellers). The activities for good customer satisfaction have to be proceeded in General comments from Copenhagen: Generally, the results from the 2006 survey are rather similar to the results from the BEST 2005 survey. Copenhagen is still estimated rather low with only 56% generally satisfied citizens. This is a 4

6 lowering of 2 percentage points compared to Especially within the categories Reliability, Information and Comfort the figures have gone down, though not significantly. Lately, public transport in Copenhagen has gone through some quite tough years despite the opening of the metro in Cut-backs in operations, fare increases and break-down of train operations due to worn-out tracks have been some of things public transport has experienced. As from January 2007, a new public transport authority will take over the duties of the Greater Copenhagen Authority, HUR, when a new authority is created covering the totality of Eastern Denmark. At the same time public funding for bus transport will be transferred from the counties - that stop existing - to the municipalities and the new regions. Costs will be calculated according to the actual operation/number of customers within the municipality/region. General comments from Oslo: Greater Oslo consists of two different regions: - The municipality of Oslo, which is served by Oslo Public Transport Inc (Sporveien), - The county of Akershus, which is served by Greater Oslo Passenger Transport Ltd (SL) General comments from Stockholm: The results for Stockholm are generally stable of slightly negative, which is disappointing regarding the strong efforts that are made to improve quality in several important dimensions. General comments from Vienna: The figures for the urban area have remained steady, compared to the same period last year. The figures of the entire area which was covered (the city of Vienna and its environs) are above the average of all cities as regards most parameters. 5

7 Citizen s Satisfaction A measurement that describes the satisfaction with public transport in general General comments: This dimension contains the answer to one question. This year Helsinki has the most pleased citizens. Most regions show small changes except for Berlin that scored a lot higher than last year. Berlin: The results are better than The findings of BEST are consistent with BVG-owned surveys. It shows that the BVG is on the right track for better citizen s satisfaction. One cause is the optimised traffic supply but the development in the future will be interesting. We hope that we can keep and further improve the BEST results. Helsinki: The citizen satisfaction with public transport in the Helsinki Region improved outstandingly. The satisfaction increased most in the west part of the area which indicates that the new public transport terminal in Kamppi has improved standard of public transport services in many ways especially in the city centre and west. Vienna: The level of overall satisfaction with public transport in Vienna in 2006 has remained unchanged compared to The figures of the environs (difference -7 points) are above average except for those regarding traffic supply. Those figures regarding information, social image and citizen satisfaction are slightly below average, yet within a tolerable range. 6

8 Traffic Supply Good for work/school trips and other trips e.g. shopping, leisure (2 questions) Good for trips in and outside the city centre (2 questions) Nearest stop close to home Travel time Waiting time at transfers Frequency of departures General comments: This dimension contains the answers Berlin is the region that improved most in this dimension. to eight questions. Barcelona: Almost the same score as the previous year (61 to 60). The improvement in metro and bus frequency has not already been perceived by the user. Berlin: The results developed positive from 2005 to 2006 which is reasoned by our new structured traffic supply at the end of The new released Metro Lines become more positive recognition from the passengers. This influenced also the rest of the other lines. The positive development shows the number of departures which is a big improvement of the new structured traffic supply. Copenhagen: 5 % points increase on the question about PT and commuter transport and 4% points increase on PT and leisure. No direct explanations can be identified as reasons for these increases. Public transport outside the city centre still has room for improvement since only 41% is satisfied. HUR plans to develop more demand-managed public transport when the new transport authority comes into power. One of the merging companies holds a programme on how to integrate disabled transport services, elderly services, tele bus services and the ordinary bus service into one. More can be said about this in

9 Concerning the trains, the S-train ring around Copenhagen city will be completed in 2008 when the terminal station, Ny Ellebjerg, is opened. This will make it possible for travellers to avoid being travelled through the city centre itself. Autumn 2008, stage 3 of the Metro will opened to the Eastern part of the island of Amager and thereby to the Copenhagen Airport. Helsinki: Satisfaction with supply has increased. This has been affected significantly by increased traffic supply in the regional transport. This is also shown by amount of passengers. Another possible reason is that big construction sites which interfered with the transport in the city centre have been finished. Stockholm: The general decrease is explained by corresponding decreases in almost all the 8 questions that creates the base for the traffic supply index. As a part of the test with congestion charges the public transport supply was heavily expanded (+200 new buses operated important relations and was a success!), but the demand increased even more which maybe is a part of on explanation. Vienna: Overall satisfaction regarding the range of transport services could be maintained at the same level. Due to the dense urban transport network, evaluations concerning the routes to the city centre have been particularly positive. With regard to traffic supply, satisfaction with the number of connections and the suitability of public transport for spare time activities and shopping trips was rated significantly low on the scale. However, people gave considerable feedback about the fact that the distance to one s next stop is not very big and that connections to the city of Vienna are rather excellent. 8

10 Reliability Capability to run on schedule General comments: One question was asked. Berlin is the only region that has improved this year. Geneva has the most pleased citizens as they have had for the last four years. Barcelona: Again, same score as previous year. As we mentioned last year, traffic restrictions due to works of the new metro line, the tramway and the railway network caused several problems which would not have happened in a normal situation. It is expected that this situation will improve when most of the surface works will be completed. In the case of Metro, the incorporation of new trains could have affected the level of reliability due to the inevitable trial period. The ISC of bus here has increased 1,5 points (ISC Feb. 05 = 57,4; ISC Feb. 06 = 58,9) Berlin: The increased perception of punctuality is a result of the new frequency (see traffic supply). These figures will be interesting next year when the new frequency is normal for the passengers. Copenhagen: Decreasing rate from 45% to 38%. This is the lowest figure Copenhagen has experienced ever. Especially the train services have gone through some severe delays beginning in August Track works have also deteriorated the situation. Helsinki: Satisfaction with reliability and following timetables decreased. Especially bus transport has suffered from lack of drivers which have led to a situation where all departures are not performed. Oslo: Measured reliability (the portion of the departures leaving on time) of the bus, metro, and tram lines operated by Oslo Public Transport has decreased somewhat from the first six months in 2005 (90%) to the first six months of 2006 (89%). The figures have improved for the tram lines, whereas reliability concerning bus lines and metro has decreased. People in the greater Oslo Region have during the last years experienced an increase in number of vehicles commuting to and from Oslo City. An extensive bus-line operation travelling the same roads facing heavy traffic, results in longer travel time using public transport. This may be one of the reasons 9

11 why satisfaction regarding reliability has seen a significant decrease compared to last year. Oslo Public Transport s metro trains are mainly from the 1960 s. Plans to replace the old trains with new ones have left maintenance budgets at a minimum, and this may explain some of the worsening of the perceived reliability measured by the BEST survey. Stockholm: The positive trend since 2003 is broken. The reason is most probably severe operational problems with the commuter trains, mainly because of poor performance by the state authority responsible for the infrastructure. These problems have gained a very understandable attention in the mass media. Vienna: Time schedules in the VOR region were assessed as outstandingly reliable, and much better than those of the city of Vienna. However, the options for planning a journey and the public information procedures in cases of disruptions were evaluated as rather poor. People feel that the services for Vienna are operated largely according to schedule and are reliable. 10

12 Information Access to information needed when planning a trip Information during traffic interruptions General comments: Geneva citizens are still the most pleased with information. Helsinki has improved the most since last year. Other changes are quite small. Barcelona: Comparing the previous year there are no significant changes in the way information has arrived to the customers before and during the trip. Nevertheless, some improvements have been carried out, which together with other significant elements may be a real step forward which as we expect could lead to better the evaluation scores. Among these improvements: The increase and better signalling of INP s (displays of waiting time at Metro). A new information service on demand (SMS) which enables the user to know the real passing time of next buses. The ISC of Bus as regards to information on service interruptions has increased 4,0 points from Feb. 05 to Feb. 06 (55,5 to 59,5). In the case of Metro the, the increase reached1,3 points (61,8 to 63,1). Berlin: The results are similarly to The findings of BEST are consistent with BVG-owned surveys. From our point of view the high gap to the European leading company may be due to differences in mentality and regional characteristics in the cities. Copenhagen: Information at traffic disruptions is still low. Only 27% find it satisfactory. The transport companies have a number of plans e.g. short message services to the train passengers. A new task force with an information desk at the Copenhagen central station has been created. This has become very popular. Helsinki: Satisfaction with information has improved considerably. Disturbance information has been expanded. More stops in the city centre were fitted with realtime timetable displays and mobile schedule services have been offered to the passengers. Stockholm: Quite stable results, even a slight increase to be noticed! The level of satisfaction is still very low when we look at information at traffic disruptions. The 11

13 break-through hopefully comes within a couple of years when the new real time information system is working. Vienna: The question of detail access to information was assessed well below the international average, with the figures for the VOR region being even lower than those for the city of Vienna. However, the evaluations for the handling of disruptions are again higher than the international average. In general the figure corresponds to the average score. For the urban area of Vienna, the level of the year 2005 could be maintained. 12

14 Staff Behaviour Ability to answer questions General behaviour of staff General comments: As the last years Geneva is still the region with the most pleased citizens concerning staff behaviour and did even improve this year. Most regions show small changes. Barcelona: Comparing with previous year there is a small improvement in the way staff deals with customers. We believe that this positive development is caused by the implementation of the NMO (New Operative Model) at the Metro. Main aim of this project is to free the staff of pure passive activities, like ticket selling, and instead turn their full attention to the customers at the metro stations. This deployment took place at two Metro lines and it could be fully operative on the whole of network in approximately two years. The ISC of Metro increased 0,1 points, from 63,9 on Feb. 05 to 64,0 on Feb. 06 and the ISC of Bus increased 4,5 points, from 67,7 to 72,2. Berlin: The results are similar to Improvement of staff behaviour with seminars and discussions is our daily business. It is the same situation as for Information with differences in mentality and regional characteristics in the cities. The result is linked to general satisfaction. Copenhagen: No significant changes. Helsinki: Satisfaction with staff behaviour and capability to inform passengers has increased. In the joint meetings with the operators, Helsinki City Transport has emphasized that the operators have an important role in the customer service. Continuous follow-up studies measure the level of customer service on different lines. The best operators get financial bonus. Oslo: High staff turnover could explain some of the decline in the respondents satisfaction with regards to information. Introducing new operators and new staff through tendering contracts also creates a challenge of training staff in order to maintain a high level of competence. 13

15 Stockholm: A slight decrease, in spite of the fact a great awareness and concern is focused on conditions of front staff and their performance. Vienna: Staff has been evaluated as generally competent and friendly. In the urban area, there were no deviations from the evaluations of the year

16 Personal Security and Safety Safety at stations and bus stops Safety on board buses and trains Safe traffic General comments: Most regions show small changes. Vienna still has the most pleased citizens. Barcelona did improve back to the level of Barcelona: This item has also suffered a positive development in comparison with the previous year. Presence of security personnel and customer attention staff has increased considerably at the metro network as a consequence of the implementation of the NMO and the installation of more video cameras. Moreover, the Government of Catalonia has decided on the presence of policemen in the metro network. There has been an intensive information campaign on all that which has positively influenced customers perception of security and safety. The ISC of personal security increased on Bus 1,8 points, from 70,8 to 72,6; in Metro the increase was even more (5,9 points), from 56,0 to 61,9. Berlin: The findings of BEST are consistent with BVG-owned surveys. The feeling of safety falls, especially by night. This is partially a reason for discussions in media and policy. The BVG analyses possibilities for better personnel placement and more installation of video recording. Higher staff presence takes centre stage. Copenhagen: No significant changes. No terrorist fears are reflected in the survey. Helsinki: Passengers have given feedback that they feel insecure especially in the metro and tram traffic. The cure for this was a large security campaign with the police and security companies. The campaign started in the spring and summer and passengers have given positive feedback but it will not show until in the next survey. 15

17 Oslo: Greater Oslo s numbers regarding personal security and safety suggest that public transport is considered very safe in the Greater Oslo area. Despite some incidents, Oslo is considered a safe city, with relatively low crime rate and somewhat remote from the international terror scene. Stockholm: A high priority question for SL has for several years been personal security of customers. A comprehensive cooperation with the police, communities and organisations together with large investments in technical support and more visible staff in the system still waits for results. Vienna: Despite challenging conditions, passengers still describe their feeling of safety as very good. On a personal level passengers continue to feel safe. Various activities and measures have started to bear fruit. 16

18 Comfort Comfortable to travel with public transport Easy to change routes Modern busses and trains Clean busses and trains Access to a seat when travelling General comments: Geneva and Vienna are still the regions where the citizens are most satisfied. Small changes in other regions. Barcelona: The score remains the same as previous year. Despite the fact that the fleet of buses and trains has increased, the score has not improved due to the rise in the number of passengers in trains and buses, mostly at peak hours. Hopefully, the important investment in new trains and buses together with increasing frequencies could modify the tendency. Berlin: The results are constantly at a reasonable level. The improvement of modern vehicles is due to the operation of a new vehicle generation, especially new double-deckers. Copenhagen: On the regional lines a number of old refurbished trains have been introduced because of a delay in the delivery of new IC4 trains. This may explain the decrease in the figure busses and trains are modern from 68% to 59% from 2005 to On the bus side, a number of disputes in the press have been going on in connection with old busses on lines where newer busses were stipulated in the contract. Clean busses and trains have also decreased this may be a result of the increasing number of free newspapers that are handed out on the stations and in the busse s. Helsinki: Satisfaction with the travelling comfort has decreased a little. According to the customer satisfaction researches the tidiness of vehicles has become worse in all transport modes. Also transfers from one line to another have become more difficult because all departures aren t run due to the shortage of drivers. Oslo: Satisfaction with some comfort indicators has decreased from 2005 to 2006, despite the introduction of new busses. The main reason explaining the lower 17

19 satisfaction is probably Oslo s very old metro trains (from the 1960 s). New tendering contracts in both Akershus County and Oslo starting in July 2006 may influence next year s results in a positive direction. Stockholm: Stable results, but for the question on modern buses and trains where the decrease continues parallel to the introduction of more and more new vehicles.maybe the contrast to the older part of the fleet gets more provocative? Vienna: In this part of the survey the individual questions concerning comfort, ease of use and level of technology of the vehicles, are above the international average except for the issue of vehicle cleanliness. The activities around the issue of cleanliness were continued in a consistent way and strongly contribute to the fact that the respective evaluations are rather good. 18

20 Social Image Positive development of public transport Good for the environment Beneficial to society General comments: Geneva and Berlin have improved most. Geneva and Helsinki are the regions where the citizens give the highest score on social image. This quality dimension contains three questions. Barcelona: The population is highly aware of the benefits of investing in a strong public transport network. Therefore public transport image is very positive and steady in comparison to previous years. Since long ago regional and local governments have noticed the populations positive feeling towards public transport which together with the efforts carried out to achieve optimum levels of energy saving and environmental protection have encouraged them to invest in a public transport network. Berlin: In principle there are no changes. The increased value for the future of public transport in Berlin could be a result of better customer loyalty. These findings are consistent with BVG-owned surveys. Copenhagen: No significant changes. Helsinki: The number of environment-friendly equipment has been raised. The citizens faith in the future of public transport has improved because there has been a lot of discussion about future, big transport projects (like the West metro) in the media. Oslo: Oslo s score regarding More people will travel with public transport in the future has improved over the last years. This is probably related to the strong growth rates experienced in the number of journeys by Oslo s Public Transport Inc and Greater Oslo Passenger Transport Ltd during the last couple of years. Current growth probably spurs people s expectations of future growth. 19

21 Stockholm: Surprisingly enough, having the rest of the results in mind, the image is getting more positive! Maybe have the test with congestion charging has contributed to strengthen the opinion that more people will travel with public transport in the future. 61% last year and 70% 2006 agree on that. Vienna: Respondents rank the positive impact of public transport for the environment and society as very high. However, the number of those who would increasingly resort to public transportation in the future, is below average. The figures have remained steady, which indicates that the services have been received favourably. 20

22 Value for Money Public transport gives value for money Public transport fares are reasonable General comments: Helsinki is the region where the citizens give the highest score on value for money. Stockholm improved most. Overall the levels are low! Barcelona: Fares of public transport increased in 2005 more than the cost-ofliving index. As commented before, the increase in the number of passengers in great parts of the public transport system is the origin of the important decrease in the quality/price relationship and consequently has caused a decrease in the satisfaction level of the Barcelona public transport user. Berlin: This figure has a wide influence on the customer satisfaction. It is visible that there is a movement to the middle (Grade 3). The results are similar to 2005 because of no fare increase in Furthermore good communication with the passengers is necessary. Copenhagen: No significant changes. Helsinki: Satisfaction with the ticket prices has increased. The general price rise in 2006 was very moderate and the ticket prices for a big customer group, students, fell significantly. Oslo: The numbers of positive respondents regarding the question Value for money have been increasing, at least compared to 2004, in this area, albeit we have seen a small decrease from 2005 to The improvement compared to 2004 is probably due to the fact that fare increases have only been adjusted at the inflation level over the last years, while earlier years fare prices have increased more than the general inflation rate. It is positive, though, that the number of people being negative to the price level of public transport fares has dropped significantly since Still, a relatively large proportion of the inhabitants in the greater Oslo area do not find public transport fares reasonable. Compared to other European cities, and adjusted for purchasing power, greater Oslo has relatively expensive public transport fares. This may offer some explanation to the low score. 21

23 Stockholm: The memory seems short - a couple of years have now gone since the last raise of price - and we are almost back on the same level as before. The introduction of a flat fare even for single trips is evaporating SL s financial situation but is probably popular by those who forget that they pay taxes as well Vienna: Value for money has been evaluated as poor, particularly with regard to the ticket prices. Satisfaction levels concerning the price-performance ratio have been stable. 22

24 Loyalty Willingness to recommend others to use public transport General comments: The dimension contains one question. Vienna and Helsinki have the most loyal citizens. Berlin and Geneva are the only regions that improved this year. Barcelona: Difficult to explain. Berlin: The result has improved in It has a strong connection with the enhanced customer satisfaction. Nevertheless there is a gap to the best company in BEST The activities for better customer satisfaction must be proceeded in Copenhagen: No significant changes. Helsinki: The score decreased a little. The reason may be the bus strike just before the survey. Vienna: An above-average number of people recommend the use of public transport. Compared to 2005, the major part of the figures for the VOR region show a slight downward trend, while all changes are within a tolerable range except for those regarding reliability. The figures regarding personal security and social image are constant, while the parameter value for money has improved (4 points). The passengers in Vienna appreciate the advantages of public transport, also with regard to private motorised traffic. 23

25 Citizen s Satisfaction Travel Frequency The graphs below show the correlation between the citizen satisfaction and travel frequency. Our hypothesis that satisfied citizen s travel more with Public Transport seems to be correct. Those who travel most with public transport are less satisfied than those who are our customers a few times a week. The explanation is probably that the number of captive riders (customers with no alternatives) are higher among the daily customers. Citizen s Satisfaction Travel Frequency all regions Citizen s Satisfaction Travel Frequency - Barcelona Citizen s Satisfaction Travel Frequency Berlin 24

26 Citizen s Satisfaction Travel Frequency Copenhagen Citizen s Satisfaction Travel Frequency Geneva Citizen s Satisfaction Travel Frequency - Helsinki 25

27 Citizen s Satisfaction Travel Frequency - Manchester Citizen s Satisfaction Travel Frequency - Oslo Citizen s Satisfaction Travel Frequency Stockholm 26

28 Citizen s Satisfaction Travel Frequency Vienna 27

29 Background information The graphs below show travel frequency, life situation, age and sex distribution for each participating region in the survey. The figures are weighted according to sex and age. Travel Frequency Helsinki Stockholm Barcelona Berlin Geneva Vienna Oslo Manchester Copenhagen 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Daily A few times/week or more seldom Never Life Situation Oslo Stockholm Copenhagen Helsinki Manchester Geneva Vienna Barcelona Berlin 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Work fulltime Work part time Student Retired Other The Nordic regions have a larger amount of people working full or part time than the other participating regions. 28

30 Age Helsinki Barcelona Copenhagen Manchester Stockholm Geneva Oslo Vienna Berlin 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Sex Berlin Oslo Stockholm Copenhagen Vienna Geneva Helsinki Manchester Barcelona 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Men Women 29

31 Synovate Temo Summary - About the survey As responsible for managing the survey in all participating regions we have outlined the most important actions taken compared to the surveys. The survey 2006 has been carried out in the same manner as in , except for one change in Barcelona (see that heading). A more clarified selecting process (was done before the 2002 survey) This is a citizen survey and in order to make as many as possible of the non-travellers participate, we improved the selecting process in the questionnaire. In the introduction the interviewers more clearly have explained that this is a citizen survey and that the local authorities also are interested to find out what the non-travelling citizen think about public transport. In general this action has small but negative influence on the results, since there is a correlation between travel frequency and satisfaction. Actions taken in handling the sample (was introduced before the 2002 survey) In order to improve the response rate the local institutes have received target levels for the response rate and a more detailed plan how to work with the sample. The sample used by the local institutes has been called through, i.e. the ambition has been to eliminate all ongoing contacts when reaching 1000 interviews. All numbers has been called at least 7 times before being classified as unavailable. The highest response rate achieved for each region always becomes the target level for the present survey. The participating regions for 2006 did not fully succeed in this, as several cities had a lower response rate. The problem with levels of response rates is, however, a global problem. Weighting has been done regarding sex and age to match the region profile The conducted interviews shall correspond with the demographic profile in each region according to sex and age. In all regions the results have been weighted according to the demographic profile for the region. This was introduced before the 2002 where profiles didn t match and implemented ever since. No weight matrix was used Since some differences in Helsinki and Vienna were significant when comparing weighted and unweighted results, the results for 2001 were adjusted using the weighted results. Drop out analysis (was introduced before the 2002 survey) We have also asked those who did not want to participate in the survey how often they travel with public transport. The conclusion is that the many of the refusals, do not travel regularly (incl. never) with public transport. The questionnaire Since 2002, when some minor modifications were carried out, no changes have been done. The local institutes have been responsible for the translation of the English questionnaire into the local language. The questionnaire has also been back translated (i.e. verified by a translation agency) in Sweden by Synovate Temo. The local public transport authorities have been given the possibility to go through the questionnaire to confirm that the content of the questionnaire is suitable for the local public transport authorities of the region. The scale in the English questionnaire has been translated into the most similar and suitable used scale for this kind of surveys in each region. Fieldwork The fieldwork 2006 was conducted from March 6 to March 31. Most of the interviews (70-90%) have been conducted on weekdays (Monday through Friday) between and Margin of error Margin of error, due to different proportions in answers 5-95% 10-90% 15-85% 20-80% 25-75% 30-70% 35-65% 40-60% 45-55% 50-50% 1000 int ±1,4% ±1,9 ±2,3 ±2,5 ±2,7 ±2,9 ±3,0 ±3,1 ±3,1 ±3,2 When comparing two surveys you have two margins of errors. This means significant differences when the difference is approx 1,5 at the margin of error. For example, if you have 50% satisfied customers, you must reach almost 55% satisfied customer in the next survey to have a significant difference. 30

32 TEMO Summary - General comments on the results Barcelona: The overall result is lower this year compared to The main reason for this is a change in the questionnaire on this specific question. This year all alternatives have been clearly stated (incl. grade 3). This has solved the question from earlier years where the overall result has been higher than all the indexes. All the other indexes are at the same level as last year (no difference larger than 3%). Berlin: It is the second time for Berlin as a participant. The result for Berlin is better than last year. The overall satisfaction has increased with 10 percentage units and the areas that have increased most are; Traffic Supply and Reliability. Those improvements have also lead to an increased loyalty. Berlin attained the highest score for all regions in 1 area (Traffic Supply). Copenhagen: The overall result is at the same level as in However Reliability has decreased a little (-7 percentage units). Also Information has decreased (-5 percentage units). All the other indexes are (almost) at the same level as last year. Geneva: The overall result is somewhat better (+5 percentage units). This also indicates a break in the trend of decreasing satisfaction. Opposite to last year the overall result is probably affected positively by the increase for Value for money (+6 percentage units). Last year that area decreased with 8 percentage units. Geneva reaches the highest score in 5 out of 10 index questions, compared to 3 out of 10 in Helsinki: The overall result is somewhat better compared to 2005 (+5 percentage units). All the other indexes are (almost) at the same level as last year, but note that Information has increased with 5 percentage units. Helsinki reaches the highest score in 3 out of 10 index questions. Manchester: It is the second time Manchester is participating (first time 2003). The results for Manchester is better than The overall satisfaction has increased with 9 percentage units and the areas that have increased most are; Traffic Supply, Reliability, Information and Comfort. Those improvements have also lead to an increased loyalty. Oslo: The overall result is at the same level as in Compared to 2005 Reliability has decreased with 9 percentage units, and is now back on the same level as for Stockholm: The overall result is at the same level as in Stockholm has two diverging developments, one showing that Traffic supply and Reliability is worse than 2005, another showing an increasing value for Value for Money. Vienna: The overall results are stable compared to Only Reliability has decreased a little (-5 percentage units). Vienna attained the highest score for all regions in 2 areas (personal security and loyalty). 31

33 How to read the graphs Name of each region In this base the respondents that have answered don t know are excluded Grade 3 is left out in all the graphs, in this graph s first statement 18% of the respondents gave grade 3 Blue, Top-box = Grade 4 and 5-73% agree to the statement Red, Bottom-box = grade 1 and 2, e.g 9% don t agree to the statement in BEST 2004 for this region Dark Grey /Light Grey, Bottom -box = Grade 1 and 2 from 2003/2002 for this region Dark Grey /Light Grey, Top-box = Grade 4 and 5 for earlier for this region. The region (among all 7) who had the highest score had 74% respondents who gave grade 4 or 5 for this statement 32