1 / 44

Benchmarking in European Service of public Transport

Benchmarking in European Service of public Transport. Results of the 2007 survey. Content. About the survey Participants Sample Method Questionnaire Results (graphs) How to read the graphs? Each quality dimension Background information. About the survey.

lucius-farmer
Download Presentation

Benchmarking in European Service of public Transport

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Benchmarking in European Service of public Transport Results of the 2007 survey

  2. Content • About the survey • Participants • Sample • Method • Questionnaire • Results (graphs) • How to read the graphs? • Each quality dimension • Background information 2

  3. About the survey • The following cities participated in the BEST 2007 survey: • Stockholm (Extended questionnaire) • Oslo (Extended questionnaire) • Helsinki (Extended questionnaire, with additional questions) • Copenhagen (Extended questionnaire, with additional questions) • Vienna (Extended questionnaire) • Berlin (Extended questionnaire) • Prague (Extended questionnaire) • Geneva (Extended questionnaire) – Fieldwork in august/september 2007 • For all cities 1000 residents in defined areas have been interviewed. The exception is Helsinki where 150 additional interviews where performed in the Espoo area. All interviews have been done by telephone. • The fieldwork for BEST Survey 2007 was conducted between March 5th and March 18th 2007. • Results from the survey have been weighted with respect to sex and age to match the profile in each area. The Helsinki results are weighted with respect to geography as well, to correct for the uneven distribution of interviews resulting from the extra interviews in Espoo. All 1150 interviews in Helsinki are included in the analysis. • The questionnaire used in the survey is an updated version of the 2006 questionnaire. Since 2006 one new statement (‘The information is good in stops and terminals’) and two new background questions (‘region/geography’ and ‘usage of different modes of public transport’) have been added. • In Copenhagen the question on ‘usage of PT modes’ have been formulated differently. In Copenhagen respondents were asked how often they used each transport mode. For reporting and comparison purposes these questions have been recoded as follows: If a respondent states that he/she travels with PT on a daily basis, all transport modes which this respondent use on a daily basis is coded as ‘generally uses’. Transport modes who are not used on a daily basis have for this respondent been coded as ‘not used generally’. 3

  4. How to read the graphs The graphs show the proportion of the respondents who agrees (partially agrees or fully agrees) to the different statements in blue columns. The red columns shows the proportion who disagrees (hardly agrees or not agree at all) to the statements. Respondents with a neutral position are not displayed in the graphs. The graphs also include results from previous surveys, shown in the table to the right as the proportion of the respondents who agrees to the statement in question. Development per index in the different cities are also shown as time lines. All graphs are standard PowerPoint-graphs where different categories can be hidden and value labels displayed at ones own preference. 4

  5. Overall report – BEST Survey Results 2007

  6. BEST Survey 2007Best performing city per index TOTAL BASE: Replied grade 6

  7. BEST Survey 2006Best performing city per index TOTAL BASE: Replied grade 7

  8. BEST Survey 2005Best performing city per index TOTAL BASE: Replied grade 8

  9. BEST Survey 2007 Citizen satisfaction

  10. BEST Survey 2007Citizen satisfaction TOTAL BASE: Replied grade 10

  11. Citizen satisfaction % satisfied citizens TOTAL BASE: Replied grade 11

  12. BEST Survey 2007 Traffic supply

  13. BEST Survey 2007Traffic supply TOTAL BASE: Replied grade 13

  14. All citiesTraffic supply % satisfied citizens TOTAL BASE: Replied grade 14

  15. BEST Survey 2007 Reliability

  16. BEST Survey 2007Reliability TOTAL BASE: Replied grade 16

  17. All citiesReliability % satisfied citizens TOTAL BASE: Replied grade 17

  18. BEST Survey 2007 Information

  19. BEST Survey 2007Information TOTAL BASE: Replied grade 19

  20. All citiesInformation % satisfied citizens TOTAL BASE: Replied grade 20

  21. BEST Survey 2007 Staff behaviour

  22. BEST Survey 2007Staff behaviour TOTAL BASE: Replied grade 22

  23. All citiesStaff behaviour % satisfied citizens TOTAL BASE: Replied grade 23

  24. BEST Survey 2007 Security and safety

  25. BEST Survey 2007Security and safety TOTAL BASE: Replied grade 25

  26. All citiesSecurity and safety % satisfied citizens TOTAL BASE: Replied grade 26

  27. BEST Survey 2007 Comfort

  28. BEST Survey 2007Comfort TOTAL BASE: Replied grade 28

  29. All citiesComfort % satisfied citizens TOTAL BASE: Replied grade 29

  30. BEST Survey 2007 Social image

  31. BEST Survey 2007Social image TOTAL BASE: Replied grade 31

  32. All citiesSocial image % satisfied citizens TOTAL BASE: Replied grade 32

  33. BEST Survey 2007 Value for money

  34. BEST Survey 2007Value for money TOTAL BASE: Replied grade 34

  35. All citiesValue for money % satisfied citizens TOTAL BASE: Replied grade 35

  36. BEST Survey 2007 Loyalty

  37. BEST Survey 2007Loyalty TOTAL BASE: Replied grade 37

  38. All citiesLoyalty % satisfied citizens TOTAL BASE: Replied grade 38

  39. BEST Survey 2007 Background information

  40. Gender – All cities 2007 40

  41. Age – All cities 2007 41

  42. Life situation – All cities 2007 42

  43. PT travel frequency – All cities 2007 43

  44. Further information and other available reports at best2005.net

More Related