|
There
are always ups and downs in business. And the new bus company
case is not an exception to this. Difficult times do really
exist, as they say but it doesn’t mean failure at
all. Based on the survey done by two of the students, there
are several serious customer concerns that need to be given
appropriate action on time. Ensuring customer satisfaction
should be the focus at all times, giving them every possible
means to make the trip worth the money and time.
The
biggest opportunities for continued growth for the company
are not in taking passengers away from airlines or Amtrak
but in getting people to choose a bus rather than drive
their cars between the strategic city pairs. Again, the
biggest challenge for the company is overcoming the negative
stereotype, making it to the headway. Many of the serious
concerns have been about the speed and the lack of seats,
so I suggest that they should address to this and assure
the passengers that the current challenges will be resolved.
They should make their customers to tell their friends they
had a positive travel experience with them. This is how
they should grow in a mature industry. Customers want clean
buses (that’s no doubt), courteous and professional
drivers, on-time service, and good value for their money.
So that’s what they should concentrate on. It’s
not gonna be easy but it’s what they should strive
to deliver to keep the business gaining and not losing.
Monitoring Performance, what do
they need?
Bus
priority is central to improving the speed and reliability
of services. Different techniques have been used across
the country. We have to evaluate them to see how they: benefit
bus operators and passengers; affect other road users; operate
effectively; may need improving; and give value for money.
It
is important to test whether bus priority schemes have met
their stated objectives, firstly to ensure local accountability,
and secondly to see whether the same type of scheme would
work in similar circumstances elsewhere. This is particularly
important where innovative bus priority measures are being
tried for the first time.
Performance
indicators assess important aspects of a new scheme. They
allow us to judge whether it has benefited bus users or
whether the scheme needs to be modified. Performance indicators
from different schemes can also provide stakeholders with
evidence of what works. This will help with the continued
development of bus priority.
Monitoring
statistics should be straightforward and easy to collect,
and should form the basis of useful performance indicators.
Monitoring resources should be proportionate to the overall
cost of the scheme. They should also be built into the scheme
costs early in the planning and appraisal stage. ‘Before’
and ‘after’ monitoring may necessarily be limited
for smaller schemes. More complex schemes may need a wider
programme of monitoring.
Bus service improvements
Buses
can be timed along a section of a route both before and
after schemes are implemented. Bus journey times are likely
to reduce as a result of bus priority measures. Sample sizes
will depend on the variability of the bus journey time and
the expected benefit.
Reliability
One
of the main factors in passenger perception of bus services
is reliability. This performance indicator records the difference
between timetabled and actual arrival times at one or more
points in the scheme on low frequency routes. This shows
any improvements in reliability. On higher frequency routes,
the variation in headways (the interval between consecutive
buses traveling on a route) can be used.
Improvements for passengers
Bus use trends
Better
bus services can attract people from other forms of transport
or encourage people to use the bus for trips they might
otherwise not have taken. This increases bus patronage.
Any changes need to be seen in context with the underlying
trends in the area. The most appropriate way to assess the
effect of bus priority schemes on patronage is by carrying
out ‘before’ and ‘after’ surveys.
For smaller schemes, it may be enough to simply compare
ticket sales on a route that has benefited from bus priority
measures with sales on one that hasn’t.
Bus stop waiting times
The
time it takes to pick up and drop off passengers is a significant
proportion of the total journey time. Clearly this will
relate to the number of passengers getting on and off. So
if bus passenger numbers increase, buses are likely to spend
longer at bus stops. As a result, some journey time saving
from bus priority measures may not be fully realized.
Effects on other traffic
Car
journey times can be measured to see whether bus priority
has caused any significant delays. The main technique for
this is matching the number plates of vehicles traveling
in a corridor between two or more fixed points.
An example approach: Bus priority
strategy
1. Improve bus service reliability.
2. Improve bus speeds.
3. Increase patronage.
4. Reduce car dependency.
5. Improve bus services.
6. Provide value for money.
Targets (5 Years)
1. Improve reliability 15 per cent.
2. Faster bus speeds 10 per cent.
3. Increase patronage 20 per cent.
4. Reduce congestion 20 per cent.
5. Implement three quality corridors.
Action plan
1. Introduce on-street bus priority (with-flow bus lanes).
2. Innovative methods (contra-flow bus lanes).
3. Innovative methods (traffic signal priority).
4. New wheelchair accessible buses.
5. High quality bus stop facilities.
6. Enhanced pedestrian facilities to access bus stops.
Monitoring
1. Bus/car journey times.
2. Car journey times on parallel routes.
3. Queue length surveys.
4. Bus reliability surveys.
5. Traffic counts for area.
6. Number of bus passengers.
7. Bus stop dwell times.
Results
1. Two corridors implemented, third delayed by longer than
anticipated consultation process.
2. Reliability, journey time and patronage targets on the
two implemented corridors met or exceeded.
3. Congestion targets not met: revisions made to signal
timings on parallel routes
Telephone Polling
Are phone polls accurate?
They
are accurate for those that respond, but the crucial question
is how many actually responded. Today, telephone polls have
become a standard part of news reporting. Every scandal,
major news event, or change in direction is heralded by
an instant analysis of who is up, who is down and What America
thinks. Often, the findings from these polls take on a life
of their own, framing what people think about an event and
shaping their response to it. Yet by social scientific standards
these findings are often of poor quality, or worse, are
misleading, representing what an outspoken minority feels
rather than mainstream America.
Why misinformation is popular
Information
from these polls is popular because it is relatively quick
and inexpensive way to put the survey sponsors in the position
of being knowledge brokers. In effect they have created
news. It is in their best interests to present the information
in a way that shapes headlines. The results are typically
reported in a pseudo-scientific fashion, stating that the
poll was based on 1000+ adult respondents in a national
sample with a margin of error of plus or minus 3%.
What they don't tell you
The
American public has been trained to assume that a national
poll of thousands with a small margin of error accurately
represents the opinions of the whole society, but is that
true? In fact, the sample size and margin of error give
no indication as to the more important information about
whether the results accurately reflect the population it
has surveyed. The margin of error simply reflects how well
the responses cluster around an average score.
To
determine how well the study results describe the target
population, one needs to look at the response rate. The
response rate refers to the total number of persons contacted
to obtain the reported number of valid results. A high response
rate in a random sample offers higher confidence in the
results because the answers are more likely to be representative
of the population. In the social sciences an 85-90% response
rate is considered desirable. Confidence in the results
declines proportionally as the response rate gets lower.
Below 50% and the survey is considered very dubious since
it means that 50% of the people contacted refused to participate
in the survey.
A
poll published by LeMoyne College and Zogby International,
a reputable polling firm stated that “One in five
Catholics say a priest in their local diocese has been accused
of committing child sexual abuse. The communications director
reported that to get the 1,508 completed responses in the
study they called 41,033 people. In other words, the response
rate was roughly 1/3 of one percent. Even assuming that
only 25% of the people called were Catholic, and therefore
able to provide valid responses, in the social sciences
this outcome would be considered garbage. The respondents
to these polls hardly represent the average American, rather
they represent the tiny minority of people who do not hang
up on those annoying telemarketers who call you during dinner.
It
makes you wonder, whose opinions do these polls really reflect?
While not all telephone polls are equally unreliable one
rule of thumb is that those who do not report a response
rate should be treated with a high degree of skepticism.
Yet until the public stops believing in them, telephone
polls will be tempting to those who, for a few thousand
dollars, wish to see themselves as knowledge brokers.
Conducting Face to Face Personal Interview
Face-to-face
interviews are most effective, especially if there is prior
notification for participants. People are likely to say
more than they will write. Participants are motivated by
an effective, personable interviewer. This increased rapport
means that more interview questions are likely to be answered
and the interview is more likely to be completed. Oral interaction
provides immediate opportunities for probing, clarifying
answers, and providing feedback.
The need for a skilled interviewer
Project
management skills are needed to manage the process of interviewing
several people at different times and, perhaps, places.
Strategies will need to be developed to insure a good response
rate. Each interview must be conducted and managed to insure
good results.
The
interviewer must be successful in communicating and motivating.
Motivating includes effective communication skills so the
two attributes are intertwined. Communication skills include
personality and manner so that the interviewer is clearly
seen as welcoming and non-threatening. She or he must be
a person that the participant would like to spend time with.
Creating a comfortable environment is crucial. Although
part of good communication, well developed listening skills
are important enough to receive separate attention. Thoughtful,
focused listening is essential. Without it, the interviewer
will likely miss important messages or misunderstand them.
When possible, the interviewer should be similar in race,
ethnic, economic, and social background as those interviewed.
For an example, an African-American interviewer is more
productive with African-American participants than a Hispanic
one. The interviewer must be able to control the interview
and keep it on track. With challenging questions and human
nature, this can be quite a challenge, especially if the
interview schedule is not as well developed as it might
be. Given the importance of skill and manner, the supervision,
training, and management of interviewers is a crucial aspect
of success in data collection.
Differences with face-to-face interviewing
The
opening or introduction is much more important since it
is so easy for participants to hang up. Do not use the word
"survey" since it has so many negative connotations
with marketing. Use simple words and phrases. Be as brief
as possible. If rating scales are used, they must have few
values. Select a sample size that is about three times larger
than what you need. Interviewers must have a good telephone
voice. Be prepared for some rude behavior. Advance letters
and the use of appointments will increase the response rate.
Planning
Six broad aspects of the interview should be considered:
1. Purpose, especially the research problem and related
questions.
2. Particular topic areas where information is needed.
3. Construction, testing, and refinement of questions.
4. Structuring the interview.
5. Selecting the place and particulars for the interview.
6. Anticipating problems and appropriate solutions.
For
the interview to be successful, the purpose must be clearly
and directly specified so that the researcher knows exactly
the information that is needed. Objectives need to be limited
and specific. Following this stage, it should be possible
to create an agenda for the interview, a list of the kinds
of evidence to be gathered, and the priority or sequence
of the topics.
Interview structure
The
first few minutes are crucial, especially the introduction.
Begin with an honest, welcoming greeting that builds rapport.
This includes a self-introduction and positive body language.
While conscious of time enough time should be allowed for
the participant to become comfortable. This may involve
informal, banal exchange about the weather, traffic, or
sports. Appropriate humor and personal inquiry often work
well. Still, move quickly to the point. It is important
to motivate the participant. These are useful strategies:
ask for help, make the participant feel important by explaining
the selection process, stress the importance of the problem
and Mention endorsements by leaders or colleagues
Provide
an orientation to the interview with some emphasis on these
aspects: the purpose of the study, the role of the interviewer,
the role of the participant, how the information will be
used, Confidentiality, and how to learn about study findings
and conclusions
The
body of the interview is the heart of the matter. With structured
questions, the interview schedule [a script for the interview]
is followed word by word. With the open-ended or "non-directive
approach," there are fewer questions, but the interviewer
must be much more skilled.
Reference
Astrop, A.J., Balcombe, R.J. & Daugherty, G.G. (1997
not published) The performance of Bus Priority Measures
in Brighton. PR/TT/024/97. Transport Research Laboratory,
Crowthorne
Balcombe, R. and York, I. (1999) Bus Priority:
Monitoring and Evaluation. TRL Annual Research Review 1998
pp. 18 - 23. Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.
Bell South, Digital Storyteller (2002)
The Art of Conducting an Interview
Daugherty, G.G. and Balcombe, R.J. (1999)
Leeds Guided Busway Study. TRL410. Transport Research Laboratory,
Crowthorne.
DETR (March 2003) Traffic Advisory Leaflet
5/03. Public Transport Priority. Traffic Advisory Unit.
DETR (1999) From Workhorse to Thoroughbred.
A Better Role for Bus Travel. 208.
Hounsell, N.B. and McDonald, M. (1985 –
93) Evaluation of Bus Lanes. CR87. Transport Research Laboratory,
Crowthorne.
JMP Consultants Ltd. (1999) London Bus
Priority Network. South West Sector, Bus Priority Study.
Route
65 Monitoring Study. London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames.
LeMoyne College (2002) Spring 2002 LeMoyne
College/Zogby International Contemporary Catholic Trends
Poll Report.
McNamara, C. (1999) General Guidelines
for Conducting Interviews.
|