ADTI - Administración para las contrataciones de TIC

Table A-4: Application of quality management in superordinate modules

Basic Module Level of Application Remark

QM public transport

• DIN 13816

• Qualitätssicherung ÖPNV (Quality Assurance in Public Transport (FGSV, 2006a)

• Public Transport plans (e.g Public Transport Plans in Darmstadt and Darmstadt-Dieburg, 2007)

• Measurement of public transport service quality (VDV, 2002)

QM mobility

• Qualitätsbarometer Mobilität (Quality

Barometer in Mobility) (Reusswig & Sturm,

2007, Blees & Reusswig, 2009)

• Quality barometer was designed in a metropolitan area, not a city

QM safety

• ESN (FGSV, 2003c),

• Leitfaden Soziale Sicherheit (Guidelines for Social Security) (GDV, 2006)

QM

environment

QM efficiency • EWS/comment EWS (FGSV 1997 a/b) _{• Standardized Assessment (Intraplan, 2006)}

• Both approaches are used in efficient evaluation of individual projects. QM road QM organizational structure

• QM VM ASFINAG (Boltze et al., 2006) • QM VM ASFINAG refers to highways

QM urban transport QM Meta-QM

Appendix B

Appendix B. Customer Satisfaction Survey B.1. General Introduction

B.1.1. Context and Objectives of the Customer Satisfaction Survey

As a part of the data collection for the dissertation “Quality Management for Public Transport in the Motorcycle Dependent City (MDC)”, a customer satisfaction survey was conducted in Hanoi in order to define a clear image of service quality from customers’ perception in a typical motorcycle dependent city.

Covering an area of more than 3.300km2 and with a population of nearly seven million, Hanoi is one of the most populated cities in Asia after Jakarta (Indonesia) and HCMC (Vietnam) and is facing a large number of travel demands. Road users are composed of 80-90% motorcycles and 6-10% cars. Approximately 95% of road vehicles are private vehicles and only 2% are public bus transport (TRAHUD, 2009).

The number of private motorized vehicles has rapidly increased over ten years, from 2 million in 2000 to 4.4 million in 2010. In this period, the annual average growth rate of private motorized vehicle was 8.3% for motorcycles and 11.6% for automobile. Currently, Hanoi is dealing with high traffic congestion and other negative effects related to high private vehicle use.

Table B-1: Number of vehicles in Hanoi

Source: Hanoi Traffic Police Bureau

It is often assumed that the extremely high rate of population and the relatively lower level of economic development make public transport the most suitable mode. However, the case of Hanoi shows that the relationship between income levels (indicated by Gross Domestic Product per Capita) and use of public transport is not as simple as might have been expected. Hanoi had lower level of public transport use than might be expected given their incomes (Figure B-2). Meanwhile, other low-income cities such as Bangkok and Shanghai had public transport usage levels that were surprisingly high.

Nowadays, the public transport system consists of only a bus system with 71 routes and 1.200 - 500.000,0000 1.000.000,0000 1.500.000,0000 2.000.000,0000 2.500.000,0000 3.000.000,0000 3.500.000,0000 4.000.000,0000 4.500.000,0000 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 4-wheel vehicle Motorcycles

Appendix B

bus vehicle, which serves more than one million trips every day (TRANCONCEN, 2011). This public bus system seems to be over capacity. Over the past ten years, the city government has invested a large amount of money in the vehicle fleet and to improve service quality, with the aim to attract new users. Unfortunately, the market share of public transport system has not been changed in recent years when it has satisfied only 10% of travel demand.

Table B-2: Public transport modal split versus GDP per capita

It is evident that low public transport use in Hanoi seems usually to go together with a high popularity for motorcycles. The high motorcycle ownership subsequently creates further problems for public transport by competing for the same low-income and middle-income passengers.

Table B-3: Share of different mode in Hanoi and other Asian cities

Public transport is one of great importance tool in achieving the sustainable urban transport system in Motorcycle Dependent Cities (MDCs). The provision of high quality, accessible and affordable services meeting the needs of customers is essential for not only developing

Appendix B

cities, where MDCs are located, but also develop cities. Therefore, understanding perception of customers and the problems they have experience with public transport service through studies and opinion surveys is one of the priorities of the municipalities.

The outcomes of survey are expected as a tool to support city authorities in public transport service. The satisfaction attributes are developed to:

Understand how customers perceive public transport service, what their main requirements are and how key service areas meet their expectations;

Identify priorities for improvement;

Set goals for improvement and monitor progress.

The quality attributes resulting from the survey are expected as a reference tool for transport authorities in MDCs. They could gauge both overall customer satisfaction levels and measure the specific elements that determine satisfaction levels. The satisfaction indicators proposed should be able to help transport authorities define and review public transport policy. The quality attributes provide signals for functioning public transport service and correcting regulatory or considering enforcement measures.

B.1.2. Methodology

This study conducts an opinion survey to investigate factors affecting customer satisfaction in public transport service in Hanoi. Data are collected through face-to-face, on-board, with interviews lasting an average of 20 minutes.

The questionnaire collects “observed” dimensions among customers, including common items as follows:

Overall satisfaction with the service: extent to which the requirements of customers are met;

Quality attributes:

o _{Network coverage: customer perception of the area served by a stop or bus} route,

o _{Frequency : customer perception of the number of bus vehicle per hour,}

o _{Span of service: customer perception of the length of the service provided} during a day,

o _{Punctuality: customer perception of the vehicle which depart or arrive at a} location follows schedule,

o _{Travel time: customer perception of the average duration of a passenger trip} from origin to destination,

o _{Bus comfort: customer perception of the crowded conditions and passenger} environment,

o _{Stop comfort: customer perception of the waiting time and passenger} environment at stops,

o _{Safety: customer perception of the safety,}

o _{Security: customer perception of the security of the public transport system,} o _{Walking distance and walking environment: customer perception of the ease}

Appendix B

o _{Accessibility to disabled persons: customer perception of the ease and} convenience that a disabled person can access a stop

o _{Cleanliness: customer perception of the cleanliness}

o _{Passenger information: customer perception of the information availability and} the ease to access information

The first level of analysis aims to describe customers’ feelings about public transport service and the problems encountered when using this service.

For each quality attribute measured in the questionnaire, people were asked to evaluate, on a scale from 1 (not satisfied at all) to 5 (fully satisfied), the extent to which they are satisfied with public transport service. On the basis of individual scores, average scores are calculated. Levels of satisfaction and dissatisfaction: the research experts’ community widely admits that the average satisfaction score is necessary to rank the position of public transport service. In this study, rate of 1, 2 are considered as dissatisfied, point of 4, 5 is considered as satisfied. Based on this rule, the percentage of satisfied and dissatisfied customers is easily measure. The second level of analysis intends to make use of more advanced statistical methods in order to determine the interaction of these quality attributes so as to explain customers’ overall satisfaction. The outcomes of this analysis are expected to provide useful information to transport authorities in MDCs, who are desired to determine the areas of priority and the appropriate actions to be taken in order to improve satisfaction in public transport. It will also be a useful tool for monitoring customer satisfaction by a specific MDC over time and for evaluating the impact of a policy on customer satisfaction.

There are two statistical tools using in this study: the satisfaction model and the two- dimensional analysis.

Satisfaction model: This model offers a range of possible added-value analysis and allows explaining the contribution of observed variables to overall satisfaction; it also determines the levels of customers’ expectations. The satisfaction model uses two types of variables: a dependent variable Y (overall satisfaction) and a number of independent variable Xn (quality attributes). The model helps explain the level of

overall satisfaction observed with the help of the independent variables. In other words, the model indicates the level of contribution made by each quality attribute to overall satisfaction. This contribution is calculated through a regression analysis, which determines the weight of each variable. These weightings can take a value ranging from 0 to 1. The more a weighting is close to 1, the more the variable is contributing to overall satisfaction, or, in other words, the higher customers’ expectations are.

SPSS software was used for data input and analysis. Data Analysis was conducted in three steps; first correlation analysis was undertaken to measure linear correlation between variables. Then factor analysis was performed with the aim to identify group or cluster of variables. Third, a regression analysis was performed to evaluate the contribution of each factor on overall satisfaction.

Two-dimensional analysis: This approach aims to identify the opportunities for action (areas where public transport system does not provide good enough and need action to

Appendix B

improve customer satisfaction) and no action (area where public transport system provide well), on a simple mapping system. Four corners are developed:

The upper left corner corresponds to a priority action, a situation where the item’s

satisfaction scores are below average whereas customers expectations for these items are quite high. Customers are not very satisfied with the items falling into this corner whereas these are important items for them. This corner defines the policy areas where action will have the greatest effect on overall customer satisfaction.

The upper right corner corresponds to an ideal situation, an area where no action is

needed. This is a situation where the item’s satisfaction scores are above average and customer expectations are quite high for these items. Customers are very satisfied with the items falling into this corner. In addition, these contribute most to customer satisfaction. This corner defines the policy areas where action will have the least effect on overall customer satisfaction.

The lower left cornercorresponds to a low importance area, a situation where the

item’s satisfaction scores are below average and expectations are quite low for these items. Attention should not be focused on these items as they are secondary factors. This is not a priority for the moment. This corner defines the policy areas where action will have a small effect on overall customer satisfaction.

The lower right cornercorresponds to a long-term action, a situation where the

item’s satisfaction scores are above average whereas expectations are quite low for these items. Customers are quite satisfied with the items falling into this corner but these items do not contribute much to the overall satisfaction. Although these are not priority areas, there may be an opportunity for raising customer’s awareness about the importance of these items. This corner defines the policy areas where action could have a longer term effect on overall customer satisfaction.

B.2. Descriptive Analysis of the Survey Results