A New Passenger-Oriented Performance Measurement Framework for Public Rail Transportation Systems
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
A. S. Kesten, K. S. Öğüt: A New Passenger-Oriented Performance Measurement Framework for Public Rail Transportation Systems ALI SERCAN KESTEN, Ph.D. Human-Traffic Interaction E-mail: [email protected] Preliminary Communication KEMAL SELÇUK ÖĞÜT, Ph.D. Submitted: May 31, 2014 E-mail: [email protected] Approved: July 8, 2014 Istanbul Technical University, Department of Civil Engineering I.T.Ü. Ayazaga Kampüsü, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü 34469 Maslak/Istanbul, Turkey A NEW PASSENGER-ORIENTED PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT FRAMEWORK FOR PUBLIC RAIL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS ABSTRACT and therefore, this perception should be one of the prominent factors in systems management. The ser- Customer perception of the quality of service provided by vice quality has a positive and significant effect on cus- the operator and the level of satisfaction are one of the key tomer satisfaction [1]. Satisfaction is a consumer’s re- parameters to monitor the performance. This paper presents sponse to the evaluation of the perceived quality with a practical approach for monitoring public transportation system performance by focusing on the passengers’ evalua- pre-purchased expectations (or some norm of perfor- tions. The paper first outlines the development of a system- mance) and the actual performance of the product as atic framework for an objective and participatory monitoring perceived after its consumption [2]. of transportation systems performance. A Passenger-Orient- Satisfaction can also be defined as a function of ed Performance IndeX (POPIX) has been developed by us- perceived performance, expectations and prior satis- ing 22 indicators with 6 different measures defined as time, faction [3]. Passenger satisfaction is directly related cost, accessibility and transfer, comfort, safety – security to the expectations of service quality and the actual and quality of service. The proposed framework allows the investigation of the performance changes of a particular level of service. Therefore, measuring the satisfaction transportation system and enables the performance com- and the importance of measures and combining them parison of different systems directly from the customer point is essential for monitoring the performance of trans- of view. The POPIX methodology has been presented and an portation systems [4]. Furthermore, it is expected that example application of the suggested method is provided for customers who are satisfied with the performance of the selected Railway Systems. The shifted POPIX concept a particular service would prefer to purchase that ser- has also been developed for more reliable trend analyses. vice again when it is desired. Certainly, this is similar The case study highlights that the measures of cost, acces- for the service provided by public transportation op- sibility and transfer and comfort have lower performance erators. scores and the Metro System performs better than the Tram and Light Rail Systems. A performance measurement system is required to monitor the efficiency and effectiveness of the system KEY WORDS and evaluate the impacts of the service provided. A comprehensive performance measurement program public transport performance; passenger satisfaction; rail- should set guidelines, measures, detect problems, way systems performance measurement monitor process for improvement, and document the accomplishments [6]. Furthermore, such programs 1. INTRODUCTION are practical for operators in assisting them to better understand the passenger demands and to modify the The performance of transportation systems af- transportation service accordingly [7]. fects not only the traveller’s preferences on mode of In European Standard EN 13816, the quality loop transportation, but also the choice of route or depar- approach has been accepted as the standardized ture time of the trip. The quality of service reflects the measurement procedure for public transportation passenger’s perception of the system performance quality [8]. The concept of the service quality loop dis- Promet – Traffic&Transportation, Vol. 26, 2014, No. 4, 299-311 299 A. S. Kesten, K. S. Öğüt: A New Passenger-Oriented Performance Measurement Framework for Public Rail Transportation Systems tinguishes between passenger view and operator view formance and quality monitoring standard for public where the passenger side includes perceived and ex- transportation. CER sets the measures to be monitored pected quality while the operator side focuses on the including the actual and perceived quality, punctual- targeted and delivered quality. There have been some ity and reliability, safety and security, travel comfort, studies focusing on public transportation and rail sys- train cleanliness, on-board staff, customer informa- tem service quality monitoring such as multi-criteria tion during the journey, as well as cleanliness, staff approach applied to estimate the overall performance and customer information in stations, with the main index for the quality of services for passengers in the emphasis given to journey speed, reliability and infor- Hellenic Railways and a customer satisfaction index mation, which have become the parameters of high- has been developed to evaluate the bus transport ser- est importance for the assessment of passengers ex- vice quality in Cosenza, Italy [9, 10]. pectations [17]. In the European Standard EN 13816, eight measures, which are availability, accessibility, information, time, customer care, comfort, security, 1.1 Performance measurement and and environmental impact, are defined for benchmark- classification ing purposes such that an organization is required to identify service quality targets from a range of criteria There have been numerous studies developed of listed in the standard [8]. Thus the term targets and the studies on performance measurement and clas- objectives vary among organizations. sification of measures. Concurrently, performance Since 1970s extensive consideration has been measures should be identified accordingly to goals given to performance measurement studies which are and objectives of the operators. Through the selec- mostly carried out by either operators or transport au- tion of appropriate measures in a context of distinctly thorities. In each study, the measures are specified ac- determined structure, the system performance moni- cording to the course of the study addressing different toring process will in fact lead to success. Otherwise, objectives. Some of the performance measurement operators will spend their resources on investigating programs aim for different target groups for different ambiguous measures which may have a limited effect purposes for their specific performance measurement on overall performance. programs. For instance, passenger satisfaction is fo- Many transportation agencies measured their sys- cused on the performance measurement program car- tem performance in the USA, and later reported that ried out in Michigan, USA where the service attributes some (or most) of the measured data do not reflect of the transportation system mostly related to the the achievement of objectives [5]. However, there is no comfort and convenience of the system are examined. consensus in theory and practice on not only the se- In another operator-oriented study in Sydney, Austra- lection of appropriate measures but also on the classi- lia, the efficiency measures are taken into consider- fication of measures for specific objective. Various as- ation while the impacts of transportation system on pects exist on classification of performance measures. society are investigated through mobility, accessibility, A group of studies stated different approaches for clas- reliability, equity, livability and sustainability measures sification of performance measures corresponding to in San Diego, USA [16]. different system attributes and priorities [8, 11 – 16] Transportation system attributes are mainly classified 1.2 Passenger-oriented performance under main measures and components and the main monitoring in public transportation systems service aspects are characterized as efficiency, effec- tiveness and impacts [11, 12]. A different classifica- Numerous notable customer satisfaction surveys tion proposed system performance, level of service, and satisfaction benchmarking studies have been descriptors of systems, impacts, costs and income, conducted in several European countries during the trip-making behaviour and cost effectiveness and ef- last two decades [18 – 20]. Since 2005 Passenger ficiency as main measures of a system [15]. A compre- Focus has been conducting National Passenger Sur- hensive guidebook, TCRP Report 88, was published veys (NPS) in order to monitor the performance of the by TRB in 2003 on developing performance measure- Train Operating Companies (TOC). System attributes ment system approaching a distinctive classification are regularly monitored and stored in an overall pas- direction. In this report the system attributes are sort- senger carrier database. In the NPS, the criteria, indi- ed as primary and secondary measures [16]. cators, and threshold values for TOCs are established Performance measurement methods and mea- by regulators. If the overall performance of the operat- sures are defined by various institutions. CER (Com- ing company declines in comparison to previous years, munity of European Railway and Infrastructure Com- the relevant TOC is requested to decrease its fares, as panies), UIC (International Union of Railways), CIT compensation to the passengers [18]. (International