Establecimiento de relaciones y orden entre eventos

Much like the Seattle Smart Traveler demonstration, “M21” began with a large institution because of the obvious critical mass of potential participants. The trial aimed into integrate various types of information including roadway congestion, transit service schedules, commuter bus availability, and the ability to reserve a vehicle through an institution-specific carsharing service (Holzwarth et al., 2001).

The “M21” mobility trial was originally designed as a package of six interconnected services; a pre-planned carpool service, a real-time carpool service (referred to as a ‘tele-shuttle), an employer-specific carshare system (referred to as a ‘mobility pool’), an evaluation of providing commuter bus services, the provision of real-time traffic information and a tele-shopping service that delivered small grocery orders to the

employer’s office. The trial was a true public-private partnership, with Daimler-Chrysler, the State of Baden-Wurttenberg and the private-sector service provider each contributing 1/3 of the €10M. budget (Holzwarth et al., 2001). The focus of the description below will be on the pre-planned and real-time carpool services, and the carshare service, as they proved to be the most innovative in their design.

The pre-planned carpool service was designed to operate within a single-employer environment.

Employees were reminded daily of carpool opportunities and were encouraged to log their availability to share a ride, or their need for a ride later that evening and for the following morning. Employees could log their offers/requests via the firms internal computer system or by calling a telephone number. At 2pm every day, the central computer system would match those that had expressed interest in sharing a ride for the afternoon commute and the following morning’s commute and would notify all participants shortly thereafter via e-mail or text message. Information sent included the names and contact information of the participants, the departure time and a recommended fare. The central computer would assume that no driver was willing to incur more than a 10% travel time deviation, or 5 minutes, whichever was less. Employees that preferred traditional, longer-term carpool arrangement could still log their desire to share a ride if their traditional partners were unable to share a ride on that particular day, or if they were willing to share the ride with an additional individual. For registered participants that lived in sparsely populated areas where few shared ride opportunities were available, the system would ask whether they would be willing to meet at more heavily trafficked locations such as “Park-and-Ride” parking lots along major highways. A ‘Mobility

Guarantee’ was provided to all participants and proved to be a major factor in the acceptance of the trial. If a passenger could not be matched on a given day and lived in an area that was deemed transit accessible, transit information would be provided along with a voucher redeemable for free travel on that day. For those passengers that did not live in a transit accessible area, access to a vehicle from the employer-specific carshare pool was provided free of charge (Holzwarth et al., 2001).

The design of the pre-planned carpool portion of this trial was innovative from a number of perspectives and addresses a number of traditional concerns associated with ridesharing. First, by sending daily reminders to all potential participants, rideshare options remained salient in the mind of employees.

Second, the fixed 2pm matching time balanced the flexibility of occasional carpool opportunities sought by employees with the reliability of knowing ahead of time whether or not a ride home was going to be

alternate arrangements. Third, the system assumed that traditional, long-term rideshare participants were not likely to use this type of service, but allowed them to log shared ride opportunities nonetheless, thereby linking two types of ridesharing that are often viewed as separate. Fourth, the attempt to suggest higher trafficked common meeting locations likely increased match rates. Finally, the ‘Mobility Guarantee’ with its multiple travel options likely reduced some of the fear of being stuck at the office.

The “M21” trial provided a small vehicle fleet for carsharing. Interestingly, the fleet was largely established to support the ‘Mobility Guarantee’ service provided as part of the carpooling initiative. The fleet of vehicles would be provided to employees when a carpool match could not be established. The employee in question would be able to use the vehicle for the evening and for the return trip the next morning. If the vehicles were provided to employees for the evening, they became “tele-shuttles” (described further in the next paragraph) meaning that employees were required to transport other employees if last minute rideshare requests were received (Holzwarth et al., 2001). It is not clear whether employees were responsible for fuel expenses. While the trial planned to offer the vehicles for short-term rental during the daytime hours to improve utilization, this idea was not tested during the trial (Holzwarth et al., 2001).

The real-time, “tele-shuttle” portion of the “M21” trial was essentially a combination of the carpool and carshare services. The carshare vehicles were outfitted with a wireless telephone and navigation system. If an employee requested a ride on short notice (within an hour of travel), the central computer system would attempt to locate a “tele-shuttle” whose route passed by the employee’s location. If a shuttle was identified, the requestor would be notified and the driver of the “tele-shuttle” would receive a phone call notifying them of the intermediate stop. The navigation system was used to determine an optimal route to the intermediate point (Holzwarth et al., 2001). The driver of the “tele-shuttle” was either an employee that could not be matched in the pre-planned carpool service, or was a volunteer that chose to drive the “tele-shuttle” on a daily basis in exchange for use of the vehicle during non-work periods. “Tele shuttle” drivers were expected to honor all passenger requests assigned to them in exchange for the rather substantial benefit of being provided with a private vehicle free of charge (Holzwarth et al., 2001). While sources did not describe how volunteer drivers were selected, one would hope that preference would be given to those whose travel route passed by a large number of employee home locations, in order to improve match rates.

The trial was initiated in 1999 at the 6,000-employee Daimler-Chrysler research facility. Within 9 months, 320 employees (~5%) had registered for the “M21” pre-planned carpool service. Registration would grow to approximately 500 employees (~8%) by the end of the second year. No information was provided on the number of matches or successful number of shared rides.

The findings from the trial were revealing. Marketing and advertising were seen as particularly important (Holzwarth et al., 2001). The personalized service provided by telephone customer service representatives was particularly important during the initial weeks of the trial, as participants were growing accustomed to the service. Not surprisingly, the service was most popular among suburban commuters with few

alternative transport options. In many cases, participants were unwilling to accept even a 5% travel time deviation, particularly those commuters that were traveling on limited-access freeway systems. Passengers stated that they preferred being picked up at their home location because it allowed other family members to use their vehicle during the day. A survey of 132 employees after the first year of the trial found that the major motivations for registering included the added flexibility of occasional arrangements and the cost savings of leaving a vehicle at home. Features of the service that were viewed positively included convenient bookings, fair cost sharing and the ‘Mobility Guarantee’ feature (Holzwarth et al., 2001).