Key Performance Indicators for Intermodal Transportation

Martin Posset (1) , Hans Häuslmayer (1) , Prof. Dr. Manfred Gronalt (2)

(1) h2 projekt.beratung KG, Obere Viaduktgasse 10/7, A-1030 Vienna, Austria.

(2) University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Feistmantelstraße 4, A-1080 Vienna, Austria.

• consortium | WHO did it

• content & aim | WHY did we do it

• approach | HOW did we do it

• result | WHAT did we do

cont

act|

resu

lt| a

ppro

ach

| con

tent

& a

im| c

onso

rtiu

m

agenda

• PARTNERS– University of natural resources and life sciences, Vienna– h2 projekt.beratung KG (consulting company)– vienna international airport (air)– OEBB Austrian railway company (rail)– Schachinger Logistik Holding GmbH (road)– Viadoanu Österreichische Wasserstraßen-Gesellschaft mbH

(inland waterways)

cont

act|

resu

lt| a

ppro

ach

| con

tent

& a

im| c

onso

rtiu

mco

nsor

tium

COCKPIIT: Clear, Operable and Comparable Key Performance Indicators for Intermodal Transportation

• INTERMODAL TRANSPORT– Multimodal Transport: “Carriage of goods by two or more modes of transport.” (UN/ECE 2001)

– Intermodal Transport: “The movement of goods in one and the same loading unit or road vehicle, which uses successively two or more modes of transport without handling the goods themselves in changing modes.” (UN/ECE 2001)

– Combined Transport: “Intermodal transport where the major part of the European journey is by rail, inland waterways or sea and any initial and/or final legs carried out by road are as short as possible.” (UN/ECE 2001)

• INLAND TERMINALS– Inland container terminals ensure efficient turnover (exchange between transport modes: rail |

road and inland navigation) of loading units (containers, swap bodies and semi trailers) in intermodal logistic networks.

• PERFORMANCE INDICATORS– quantifiable metrics that provide a method for measuring the quality of operation– facilitate the understanding of strengths and support continuous improvement– help in monitoring progress and assist active counteraction against undesirable developments– method for working out the causes and effects that directly and indirectly influence the

achievement of goals and corresponding results.

cont

act|

resu

lt| a

ppro

ach

| con

tent

& a

im| c

onso

rtiu

mco

nten

t& a

imDOMAIN

1

2

A

B

Begleiteter Kombinierter Verkehr

1

2

A

B

Unbegleiteter Kombinierter Verkehrunaccompanied

accompanied

“Things you cannot measure, you cannot control.“Tom DeMarco

• INTERMODAL TRANSPORT– increasing overload of capacity at intermodal transhipment nodes and the concentration of

freight transport on fewer main hubs show the need to understand the cooperation requirements between all transportation modes

– intermodal services and the quality of existing intermodal transhipment nodes will not keep up with capacity needs

– integration of more environmental friendly transport modes and the efficient combination of transport modes

– the number of involved actors, the existing diversity and thus resulting complexity.

• INLAND TERMINALS– terminals have to be evaluated as part of the whole transport system because the effectiveness

and efficiency of these intermodal hubs contributes to the overall competitiveness and attractiveness of intermodal transports

• PERFORMANCE INDICATORS– performance indicators of hinterland | inland terminals are often defined on company or group level

which leads to different taxonomies and poor comparability between different locations and companies

– until today, no inter-sectorally (between rail, road, inland waterway and air transport) accepted concept for measuring and evaluating the performance of the different transport modes is available

cont

act|

resu

lt| a

ppro

ach

| con

tent

& a

im| c

onso

rtiu

mco

nten

t& a

imPROBLEM DESCRIPTION

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS FOR INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION

– outline the main components of the intermodal freight system

– highlight the factors that determine intermodal transport as a complex system

– provide a guideline for the definition of comparable performance indicators for intermodal transport

– allow decision makers and interested parties in intermodal transport to analyze and evaluate (understand) the strengths and weaknesses of the different modes of transport

– make the specific strengths and weaknesses of different transport modes comparable by providing a standardized and comprehensive integrated concept

cont

act|

resu

lt| a

ppro

ach

| con

tent

& a

im| c

onso

rtiu

mco

nten

t& a

imAIM

• STANDARD PROCESSES of the intermodal transport chain and its actors

• INDICATOR FRAMEWORK which enables us to apply this set to any of the selected sectors of the particular intermodal chain and finally aggregate them for the whole chain

• PERFORMANCE TABLES are structured in such a way that a user may easily extend it and can further refine the intended indicator set

cont

act|

resu

lt| a

ppro

ach

| con

tent

& a

im| c

onso

rtiu

map

proa

chcockpiit approach

(A) s

yste

m d

imen

sion

road

rail

inla

nd

navi

gatio

n

(C) t

rans

port

mod

e vi

ew

container yard/carrier

placing the load unit

consignor

terminal

consignee

vessel/open sea

stripping

M2

truck / road

train / rail

light grey objects are not considered in detail

truck/roadtrain/railinland ship/inland waterway

aircraft/air network

M3

M4

P1P2

1

E1

E2

P1P2

E1E2M2

M3

M4

prehaulage truck/road endhaulage truck/roaprehaulage train/rail mainhaulage train/rail endhaulage train/rail

mainhaulage inland ship/inland waterway

mainhaulage inland aircraft/air network

port, airport

vessel/open sea

23

4

aircraft/airway

P3

shunting

terminal

shunting

Stuffing P: prehaulage M: mainhaulage E: endhaulageT: transhipment T: transhipment

M1 mainhaulage rolling road

shunting shunting

M1

M3 mainhaulage floating road

M3

TN TN

loading unit

cont

act|

resu

lt| a

ppro

ach

| con

tent

& a

im| c

onso

rtiu

map

proa

chstandard process

stages

flows DOOR-TO-DOOR TRANSPORT

cont

act|

resu

lt| a

ppro

ach

| con

tent

& a

im| c

onso

rtiu

map

proa

chframework

loading unit documentsinformation

transhipment mainhaulage endhaulage

prehaulage

labourinfrastructure equipment

(1)chain

(3)process

(4)resource

(2)entity

financial performance

service quality performance

operational performance

environmental performance

orderdoor-to-door

(B) performance dimension

PERFORMANCE FRAMEWORK

cont

act|

resu

lt| a

ppro

ach

| con

tent

& a

im| c

onso

rtiu

map

proa

chperformance tables

Focus: the specific element the performance indicator focuses onsystem dimension performance dimension

ID

Indicator name

CATEGORY:

measurement unithourskilogramsliftings...

PARAMETER FOR CALCULATION detailed specification of parameters

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION | FURTHER CALCULATIONS

ADVICE | REFERENCE | SEE ALSO

operatorPARAMETER FOR CALCULATION

detailed specification of parameter

Description

Indicator category: The name of the performance indicator / indicator group

Influencing PI Influenced PIIN: Other performance indicators which influence this performance indicator

Specification Calculation

COCKPIIT Dimension

Recording

the collection regularity of the performance indicator

OUT: Performance indicators which are influenced by this performance indicator

entitiyprocessresource

chain operational performanceservice quality performance

financial performanceenvironmental performance

the detailed description of the performance indicator

1211109876543211 2 3 4

1 21

1 - 521 - 365

monthlyquarterly

six-monthlyyearly

weeklydaily

infrastructure equipment labourprehaulage transhipment mainhaulage endhaulage

information loading untis documentsorderdoor-to-door

/

+

-

:

*

divide

add

minus

compare

multiply

123

TIMEQUANTITYMONEY

PI

INDICATOR TABLES

cont

act|

resu

lt| a

ppro

ach

| con

tent

& a

im| c

onso

rtiu

map

proa

chperformance tablesexample: chain system dimension

Total order lead time | cycle time

On-time service

Order completeness

Transport lead time

Overall damages | losses | thefts

Delays (arrvials | departures)

Noise

Total transport greenhouse gas emissions (CO2)

Transport and economic development

Total transport cost

1.1.1

1.1.2

1.1.3

1.2.1

1.2.2

1.2.3

1.2.4

1.2.5

1.2.6

1.2.7

- Average order to invoice time- Order to invoice time development

- Percentage of transports on-time

- Percentage of consignments received as contracted- Percentage of loading units received as contracted- Physical accounting correspondence

- Percentage of delays- Percentage of critical delays

- Total origin-destination lead time- Average origin-destination lead time

- Percentage of transports with damages | losses | theft- Percentage of damaged loading units- Damages | losses | thefts per ton-kilometer- Development of damages | losses | thefts | over time

- Percentage of people exposed to noise class 1- Status | expansion of noise barriers- Percentage of vehicles equipped with noise reduction

- Average diesel consumption- Diesel Co2 per transport- Equipment electricity Co2 per transport- Infrastructure electricity Co2 per transport

- Ton-kilometers GDP ratio

- Total origin-destination transport cost | price | proceed- Development of transport cost | price | proceeds over

Performance Indicator

operational

service quality

financial

environmental

(B) performance dimension

financial

environmental

service quality

service quality

service quality

operational

loading unit documentsinformation

transhipment mainhaulage endhaulage

prehaulage

labourinfrastructure equipment

(1)chain

(3)process

(4)resource

(2)entity

financial performance

service quality performance

operational performance

environmental performance

orderdoor-to-door

(B) performance dimension

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

• 3 standard processes and 1 framework covering :

– 3 transport modes:• rail | road | inland waterways + rolling and floating/swimming road

– 4 system dimensions:• chain | entity | process | resource

– 4 performance dimensions:• operational | service quality | environmental | financal

– 36 Performance Tables including• 96 Performance Indicators

– 24 chain PIs– 13 entiy PIs– 14 process PIs– 45 resource PIsco

ntac

t| re

sult

| app

roac

h| c

onte

nt&

aim

| con

sort

ium

resu

ltcockpiit concept

consignor

terminal

consignee

vessel/open sea

stripping

M2

re not considered in detail

M3

M4

P1P2

E1

E2

port, airport aircraft/airway

P3

shunting

terminal

shunting

Stuffing P: prehaulage M: mainhaulage E: endhaulageT: transhipment T: transhipment

shunting shunting

M1

M3

TN TN

loading unit

(4.1

) inf

rast

ruct

ure

(4.2

) equ

ipm

ent

(4.3

) lab

our

(4) r

esou

rce

(A) s

yste

m

dim

ensi

on

focu

s

INDICATOR TABLES

DOOR-TO-DOOR TRANSPORTPERFORMANCE FRAMEWORK

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, ViennaDepartment of Economics and Social SciencesInstitute of Production and LogisticsFeistmantelstraße 4, 1180 Vienna

http://www.wiso.boku.ac.at/pwl.html

Univ. Prof. Manfred Gronalt | manfred.gronalt@boku.ac.at

h2 projekt.beratung KG Obere Viaduktgasse 10/7, 1030 Vienna

http://www.h2pro.at

Martin Posset | mcp@h2pro.atHans Häuslmayer | hh@h2pro.at

cont

act|

resu

lt| r

esul

tap

proa

ch| c

onte

nt&

aim

| con

sort

ium

cont

act