Suggestions for Improvement
Transcript of Suggestions for Improvement
Page 31 Confidential & ProprietaryCopyright © 2009 The Nielsen Company
Suggestions for Improvement
Department of Transport and Main Roads, Queensland Public Transport Customer Satisfaction Research Program — Total Queensland Report (Quarter 4), August 2009
Page 32 Confidential & ProprietaryCopyright © 2009 The Nielsen Company
12%
7%
7%
5%
4%
4%
16%
21%
9%
2%
2%
1%
6%
1%
22%
3%
6%
5%
More frequent services
Should run on time
Cheaper fares/tickets
Better security/safety
Increased bus routes
Better service/user friendly
Facilities at stops need
improving
Deal with overcrowding
Nothing/no improvements
QLD Overall (Q43) Bus
Suggestions for ImprovementSuggestions for Improvement
Q43. Thinking now about public transport as a whole, do you have any suggestions on how TransLink/qconnect can improve the public transport services it provides to you? Base: Total Interviews (online only) n=3547. Note: Not all responses shown.Q44. Now thinking more specifically, do you have any suggestions on how <INSERT MODE > services can be improved for you? (online and F2F)Base: Total Bus Interviews n=2581; Note: Responses less than 3% not shown
Department of Transport and Main Roads, Queensland Public Transport Customer Satisfaction Research Program — Total Queensland Report (Quarter 4), August 2009
Page 33 Confidential & ProprietaryCopyright © 2009 The Nielsen Company
12%
7%
7%
5%
4%
4%
16%
9%
1%
4%
7%
0%
4%
5%
9%
13%
3%
6%
More frequent services
Should run on time
Cheaper fares/tickets
Better security/safety
Increased bus routes
Better service/user friendly
Facilities at stops need
improving
Deal with overcrowding
Nothing/no improvements
QLD Overall (Q43) Train
Suggestions for ImprovementSuggestions for Improvement
Q43. Thinking now about public transport as a whole, do you have any suggestions on how TransLink/qconnect can improve the public transport services it provides to you? Base: Total Interviews (online only) n=3547. Note: Not all responses shown.Q44. Now thinking more specifically, do you have any suggestions on how <INSERT MODE > services can be improved for you? (online only)Base: Total Train Interviews n=376; Note: Responses less than 3% not shown
Department of Transport and Main Roads, Queensland Public Transport Customer Satisfaction Research Program — Total Queensland Report (Quarter 4), August 2009
Page 34 Confidential & ProprietaryCopyright © 2009 The Nielsen Company
12%
7%
7%
5%
4%
4%
16%
18%
2%
4%
0%
4%
4%
1%
0%
21%
3%
6%
More frequent services
Should run on time
Cheaper fares/tickets
Better security/safety
Increased bus routes
Better service/user friendly
Facilities at stops need
improving
Deal with overcrowding
Nothing/no improvements
QLD Overall (Q43)
CityFerry/CityCat
Suggestions for ImprovementSuggestions for Improvement
Q43. Thinking now about public transport as a whole, do you have any suggestions on how TransLink/qconnect can improve the public transport services it provides to you? Base: Total Interviews (online only) n=3547. Note: Not all responses shown.Q44. Now thinking more specifically, do you have any suggestions on how <INSERT MODE > services can be improved for you? (online only)Base: Total Ferry Interviews n=154; Note: Responses less than 3% not shown
Department of Transport and Main Roads, Queensland Public Transport Customer Satisfaction Research Program — Total Queensland Report (Quarter 4), August 2009
Page 35 Confidential & ProprietaryCopyright © 2009 The Nielsen Company
12%
7%
7%
5%
4%
4%
16%
4%
4%
13%
2%
2%
3%
0%
0%
18%
3%
6%
More frequent services
Should run on time
Cheaper fares/tickets
Better security/safety
Increased bus routes
Better service/user friendly
Facilities at stops need
improving
Deal with overcrowding
Nothing/no improvements
QLD Overall (Q43) Taxi
Suggestions for ImprovementSuggestions for Improvement
Q43. Thinking now about public transport as a whole, do you have any suggestions on how TransLink/qconnect can improve the public transport services it provides to you? Base: Total Interviews (online only) n=3547. Note: Not all responses shown.Q44. Now thinking more specifically, do you have any suggestions on how <INSERT MODE > services can be improved for you? (online only)Base: Total Taxi Interviews n=286; Note: Note: Responses less than 3% not shown
Department of Transport and Main Roads, Queensland Public Transport Customer Satisfaction Research Program — Total Queensland Report (Quarter 4), August 2009
Page 36 Confidential & ProprietaryCopyright © 2009 The Nielsen Company
Predisposition towards PT
Department of Transport and Main Roads, Queensland Public Transport Customer Satisfaction Research Program — Total Queensland Report (Quarter 4), August 2009
Page 37 Confidential & ProprietaryCopyright © 2009 The Nielsen Company
Likelihood to Recommend to OthersLikelihood to Recommend to Others
24%
54%
17%
2%
7%
48%
26%
16%
2%
2%
I would voluntarily speak
positively and strongly
recommend public transport
I would recommend public
transport when asked
I would give a fair opinion, but
would not recommend public
transport
I would not give any opinion or
recommend
I would warn people not to
travel on public transport
PT Users
Non-Users
Q45. Using the scale below, how likely are you to recommend public transport to a visitor to Queensland? [SA]Base: Total PT User Interviews n=3111; Total Non-User Interviews n=948;
Department of Transport and Main Roads, Queensland Public Transport Customer Satisfaction Research Program — Total Queensland Report (Quarter 4), August 2009
Page 38 Confidential & ProprietaryCopyright © 2009 The Nielsen Company
Likelihood to Use PT AgainLikelihood to Use PT Again
50%
30%
18%
0%
7%
55%
14%
14%
10%
1%
I will definitely continue to use public
transport
I will continue to use public transport if
it is convenient
I will continue, but only because I
have no choice
I am unlikely to continue - it’s just a
matter of time
I will definitely not continue to use
public transport
PT Users
Non-Users
Q46. Using the scale below, how likely are you to use public transport again? [SA]Base: Total PT User Interviews n=3111; Total Non-User Interviews n=948;
Department of Transport and Main Roads, Queensland Public Transport Customer Satisfaction Research Program — Total Queensland Report (Quarter 4), August 2009
Page 39 Confidential & ProprietaryCopyright © 2009 The Nielsen Company
Mode Share
Department of Transport and Main Roads, Queensland Public Transport Customer Satisfaction Research Program — Total Queensland Report (Quarter 4), August 2009
Page 40 Confidential & ProprietaryCopyright © 2009 The Nielsen Company
Proportion of Mode ShareProportion of Mode Share
Public
Transport, 8
Car/ Private
vehicle, 77
Taxi, 6Cycling,
1
Walking, 8
Q49. Thinking about the various ways you travel over a typical month, what proportion of each mode would you say make up the total time you spend travelling? Base: Total Interviews Qtr 4 ’09 (Apr) n=3547
Department of Transport and Main Roads, Queensland Public Transport Customer Satisfaction Research Program — Total Queensland Report (Quarter 4), August 2009
Page 41 Confidential & ProprietaryCopyright © 2009 The Nielsen Company
Demographic Profile
Department of Transport and Main Roads, Queensland Public Transport Customer Satisfaction Research Program — Total Queensland Report (Quarter 4), August 2009
Page 42 Confidential & ProprietaryCopyright © 2009 The Nielsen Company
Summary of Demographic ProfileSummary of Demographic Profile -- PT UsersPT Users
Student10%
Unemployed5%
Other4%
Retired9%
Home duties7%
Working65%
Empty Nesters8%
Family41%
Couple w/o kids17%
Group household16%
Single person15%
Female52%
Male48%
55+ yrs23%
35-54 yrs37%
18-34 yrs35%
16-17 yrs5%
Live within 400m of bus stop, train station or ferry terminal72%
Avg. no. of private vehicles2.01
Rest of Queensland15%
South East Queensland85%
Avg. household size3.16
*Results are weighted
Department of Transport and Main Roads, Queensland Public Transport Customer Satisfaction Research Program — Total Queensland Report (Quarter 4), August 2009
Page 43 Confidential & ProprietaryCopyright © 2009 The Nielsen Company
Summary of Demographic ProfileSummary of Demographic Profile –– PT NonPT Non--UsersUsers
Student4%
Unemployed3%
Other3%
Retired12%
Home duties16%
Working62%
Empty Nesters8%
Family55%
Couple w/o kids18%
Group household8%
Single person8%
Female51%
Male49%
55+ yrs21%
35-54 yrs47%
18-34 yrs31%
16-17 yrs1%
*Results are weighted
Live within 400m of bus stop, train station or ferry terminal
55%
Avg. no. of private vehicles2.09
Rest of Queensland35%
South East Queensland65%
Avg. household size3.19
Department of Transport and Main Roads, Queensland Public Transport Customer Satisfaction Research Program — Total Queensland Report (Quarter 4), August 2009
Page 44 Confidential & ProprietaryCopyright © 2009 The Nielsen Company
Appendix I
Department of Transport and Main Roads, Queensland Public Transport Customer Satisfaction Research Program — Total Queensland Report (Quarter 4), August 2009
Page 45 Confidential & ProprietaryCopyright © 2009 The Nielsen Company
Overall Indicators of PerformanceOverall Indicators of Performance(eQ Scores)(eQ Scores)� In order to gain a more strategic understanding of overall performance of the public transport
system in Queensland, based on all performance attributes measured, each attribute was allocated to one of the ten KPI’s (see diagram overleaf).
� Within each KPI, a statistical analysis was undertaken to ascertain the importance of each attribute relative to others grouped within that KPI - that is, the relative impact they have on the performance of that particular KPI.
� A weighted average was then calculated based on the mean performance scores (out of 10), and rescaled to an index out of 100.
� These KPI scores are then similarly indexed to an overall performance (or eQ) score, based on their relative importance or impact on overall performance.
Department of Transport and Main Roads, Queensland Public Transport Customer Satisfaction Research Program — Total Queensland Report (Quarter 4), August 2009
Page 46 Confidential & ProprietaryCopyright © 2009 The Nielsen Company
eQ Flow CharteQ Flow ChartOverall eQ Index = 60Overall eQ Index = 60
Safety & Safety & SecuritySecurity
= 63= 63
Reliability & Reliability & FrequencyFrequency
= 52= 52
Comfort Comfort of rideof ride= 60= 60
Ease of Ease of UseUse= 60= 60
ProximityProximity= 60= 60
EfficiencyEfficiency= 62= 62
Info.Info.= 58= 58
AccessibilityAccessibility= 69= 69
StaffStaff= 65= 65
AffordabilityAffordability= 55= 55
•Safety of
vehicle at
stops/
stations
•Safety at
stops &
stations
•Safety
on board
• Running of
trains
outside
peak
• Running of
trains
inside peak
• Advise if
train late/
cancelled
• Frequency
of ferry,
train, bus
• Departure
times
• Number of
taxis off
peak and
peak
• Crowding
during peak
times
• Facilities at
stops &
stations
• Avail. of seats
• Comfort of
ride
• Cleanliness
of station, on
board
• Rubbish &
graffiti
around tracks
• Maintenance
of station,
train
• Temperature
on board
• Mechanical
reliability of
taxis
• Ability to
transfer
tickets betw.
modes/opera
tors
• Ease of
using &
understandi
ng tickets
• Connections
with other
modes
• Ease of
using touch
screens
• Ease of
booking taxi
• Distance
to end
destinatio
n from
leaving
the ferry,
train, bus
• Convenien
ce of
routes and
stops
• Distance
to stop or
station
• Convenien
ce of taxi
rank
locations
• Travel
time
door-
to-door
• Not
paying
for
parking
• Dealing
with
traffic
• Waiting
time
for
immedi
ate hire
and pre
booked
trips
• Availability of
info. about
catching PT
• Accuracy of
info.
• Signage of
directions
• Info. onboard
about routes
& stops
• Info. at stops
& stations
• Ease of
understandin
g timetables
• Public
announceme
nts
• Method of
handling
complaints
• Consideration of
passengers when
stopping/ driving off
• Drivers ability to
handle PT
• Drivers knowledge of
routes/ stops
• Conduct of ferry staff
• Helpfulness of staff
• Drivers conduct
• Drivers leaving
passengers waiting
• Drivers smoking or
using mobiles
• Drivers set down of
passengers
• Drivers provide
correct change, ticket
• Driver’s willingness to
help
• Presentation of
drivers
• Ability
to buy
multi-
trip
tickets
• Range
of
tickets
avail.
• Cost of
ticket
• Ease of
use for
people
with
mobility
difficulti
es
• Ease of
getting
on / off
platfor
m and
vehicle
Department of Transport and Main Roads, Queensland Public Transport Customer Satisfaction Research Program — Total Queensland Report (Quarter 4), August 2009
Page 47 Confidential & ProprietaryCopyright © 2009 The Nielsen Company
WeightingWeighting
� In order to ensure that data collected represents the population of Queensland according to both demographics and usage of public transport, a complex system of weighting is undertaken.
� In the first instance, data is weighted within each of the fifteen geographic regions (seven in SEQ and eight in rest of Qld) to reflect age, gender and PT user/non-user profile within that region. Age and gender population estimates are based on the most current forecasts available from the Australian Bureau of Statistics, and PT user/non-user estimates are based on the comprehensive profiling research undertaken in late 2006 on behalf of TransLink, and the 2007 KPI research undertaken on behalf of Queensland Transport. Regions are then weighted relative to each other to reflect relativities in population size of each region.
� The second stage of weighting ensures that modal usage (bus, train, ferry, and taxi and all combinations of multi modal users) are accurately reflected. These usage statistics are based on the 2006 profiling research and 2007 KPI research.
� The final stage accounts for the over-sampling of particular bus operators undertaken in some SEQ regions (multi-operator regions). This ensures that users of a particular operator are not under or over emphasised based on the sample design.
Department of Transport and Main Roads, Queensland Public Transport Customer Satisfaction Research Program — Total Queensland Report (Quarter 4), August 2009
Page 48 Confidential & ProprietaryCopyright © 2009 The Nielsen Company
CATI (Phone)
AdvantagesAdvantages99
DrawbacksDrawbacks889Can sample non-users
9Good geographic coverage
8 Costly to find users
8 No visual stimulus
8 Quality of sample (cost)
Online
9Convenient for respondents
9Able to ask more detailed survey
9Sample users & non-users
9Visual stimuli
8 More effort required to find
users / maintain panel
8 May not be representative of
some segments of pop.
• Over the past 11 years the KPI research has been undertaken via telephone interviewing. This method of interviewing is rapidly being superseded by online surveys based on the advantages and drawbacks detailed below. While neither method is perfect, and at this point in time either would fulfil the needs of the research, the balance will continue to tip towards online interviewing over the coming years. Therefore in a situation such as this, where change is being made, it is beneficial to set the survey up to be more robust over time.
Methodology ChangeMethodology Change
Department of Transport and Main Roads, Queensland Public Transport Customer Satisfaction Research Program — Total Queensland Report (Quarter 4), August 2009
Page 49 Confidential & ProprietaryCopyright © 2009 The Nielsen Company
Comparability to Previous KPI ResearchComparability to Previous KPI Research
• This survey is a major shift in both the questions asked and the method of interviewing. As such, it is not possible to make direct comparisons of current results against the previous KPI results.
• However, we can draw some conclusions by comparing key information captured in the TransLink survey undertaken in SEQ in the last quarter of 2007, at the same time as the KPI research. Detailed below are results for similar questions. KPI results have been converted from a scale of 1 (very dissatisfied) to 5 (very satisfied) to a scale of 0 to 10, to allow comparison with the scale used in the TransLink research.
Ease of use - to get to where you want to go when you want to go
5.45.4Meets transport needs
Reliable, that is, turning up when it’s meant to 5.26.0Well run and reliable
Efficient, that is including travel time door to door, connections and frequency of services
5.05.6Well co-ordinated
Overall4.84.7Overall
TransLink research: SEQ results Oct-Dec 2007KPI research: SEQ results November 2007
• This suggests that results for overall satisfaction can be directly compared over time, as can results for meeting transport needs (utilising the new “ease of use” KPI). However, historical results for being well co-ordinated and being well run and reliable need to be adjusted downwards prior to any comparison over time.
Department of Transport and Main Roads, Queensland Public Transport Customer Satisfaction Research Program — Total Queensland Report (Quarter 4), August 2009
Page 50 Confidential & ProprietaryCopyright © 2009 The Nielsen CompanyConfidential & Proprietary • Copyright © 2007 The Nielsen Company
Department of Transport and Main Roads, Queensland Public Transport Customer Satisfaction Research Program — Total Queensland Report (Quarter 4), August 2009