TRAMITACIÓN DEL DOCUMENTO DE MODIFICACIÓN Y CONTESTACIÓN DE INFORMES SECTORIALES

Section 9.3 provides a new perspective on understanding the passenger experience and on how airports can improve this experience. Throughout the discussion of the TOPA, interactions were discussed: processing and preparatory

Chapter 9 A new perspective on passenger experience 151

groups interacted, thus allowing more efficient processing; consumptive and social groups interacted, thus demonstrating how passengers choose items to buy; and moving, processing, consumptive and queuing groups interacted, thus providing an explanation for the trajectory of passengers through the airport terminal. The interactions are now compiled and illustrated in this section.

Interactions during processing periods

Interactions were observed to occur between the TOPA groups while passengers were in processing periods. These interactions between the various groups were observed to have both positive and negative effects on the processing periods. Figure 9.11 and Figure 9.12 present the observed positive and negative interactions respectively.

The majority of the interactions can have both the positive and negative affects on the experience. Whether the interaction is positive or negative depends on the contextit occurs. Preparatory interacts with processing and this can have a positive effect on the passenger experience and the processing efficiency (Figure 9.2). By preparing what items to get ready passengers are processed more quickly at every domain. This also results in straightforward processing, which improves the passenger’s experience. The lack of preparation mirrors this result; increasing the time it takes to process passengers and increasing the uncertainty at the domains (Figure 9.3). This results in the passenger having a negative experience. By acknowledging the importance of preparatory activities airports could greatly improve processing efficiency and passenger experience.

The second interaction which is both positive and negative is between queuing and processing. Queuing can negatively affect processing if the queue time takes over 30 minutes, and can positively affect processing if the passenger does not have to queue (Table 9.1). However this interaction is over estimated in much of the airport literature. There is an assumption that reducing queue times will improve the

152 Chapter 9 A new perspective on passenger experience

Figure 9.11 Positive interactions between TOPA groups during processing periods

Chapter 9 A new perspective on passenger experience 153

Figure 9.12 Negative interactions between TOPA groups during processing periods

154 Chapter 9 A new perspective on passenger experience

experience. However this interaction between queuing and processing is not as influential on improving the experience.

The third interaction which has both positive and negative interactions on the passenger experience is how processing effects passenger trajectory through the airport terminal. Whether the interaction is positive or negative is more related to the views of the airport stakeholders, than that passengers themselves. Airports can use this interaction in the design of airport domains to ensure their terminal footprint is used optimally, reducing the amount of unused space allocated for passenger use.

The social activity group interacts both positively and negatively with other activity groups. Social activities can have a positive interaction with preparation, as travelling companions can provide information to passengers on what to prepare. This can result in those passengers who were not informed by staff of what to prepare can, instead, be informed by their companions. Although this interaction is beneficial to the airport, they have limited control over this interaction, as it is hard for airports to know who is accompanying the passenger, and what knowledge those accompanying the passenger possess.

Social activities also have interactions that have both positive and negative implications to processing. When passengers are involved in social interactions this can distract them from what is going on around them, which can result in passengers not paying attention to what is happening in the queue, or what is happening during the processing interaction with members of staff (Figure 9.10). However if staff members interact and have a social interaction with the passenger during the processing interaction, passengers remember this as a positive experience (Figure 9.4)

The final interaction shown in Figure 9.12 occurs between the entertainment and processing activity groups. Passengers use the personal electronic technology in processing areas, such as security and customs (Figure 9.9). These areas currently have restrictions on the use of such technology, such as mobile phones and cameras.

This interaction is one that requires further investigation by airports, as much of the innovation within airports is coming from the use of such personal technology.

Chapter 9 A new perspective on passenger experience 155

Interactions during discretionary periods

Interactions were observed to occur between the TOPA groups while passengers were in discretionary periods. These interactions between the various groups were observed to have both positive and negative effects on the discretionary periods. Figure 9.13 and Figure 9.14 present the observed positive and negative interactions respectively.

Two interactions between the activity groups can be positive and negative, depending on the context of the interaction. Preparatory activities can occur during discretionary periods and this has a positive effect on the processing activity group.

By preparing what items to get ready during the discretionary periods means passengers will be processed more quickly when they re-enter the processing period.

This benefits the airport as passengers are choosing to do this in their own time.

What happens when passengers are not prepared has been discussed in the last section, and results in reducing processing efficiency and increasing uncertainty at the domains, and therefore passengers have a negative experience.

The other interaction which can have both positive and negative interactions is between social and consumptive (Figure 9.6). Social interactions can have a positive interaction on consumptive activities as passenger spending is related to who accompanies them (Livingstone et al., 2012). Passengers spend more money on the landside if they are accompanied by group members who are seeing them off on their trip (Figure 9.8). It is suggested by Livingstone et al that by providing areas on the landside of the airport that focus on promoting social activities could improve passenger experience.

Social activities can have a negative interaction with consumptive activities when they occur in retail areas and these social interactions block displays and access to products. However it is not clear how these interactions could be prevented, and if this would benefit the passenger experience. However it is important to recognise that such interactions occur. A similar interaction occurs with social and queuing, and passengers can be distracted while they queue and not notice what is going on around them. This was also observed during processing periods.

156 Chapter 9 A new perspective on passenger experience

Figure 9.13 Positive interactions between TOPA groups during discretionary periods

Chapter 9 A new perspective on passenger experience 157

Figure 9.14 Negative interactions between TOPA groups during discretionary periods

158 Chapter 9 A new perspective on passenger experience

Consumptive activities can also be affected by the moving and processing groups. As discussed above the location of the processing domains on the landside affects the trajectory of the passengers (Figure 9.7). This interaction does not appear in previous published literature, making it unclear if relationship between processing domains and retail locations has been used in planning the layout of these areas. The interaction between processing and consumptive activities is considered negative as this interaction has not been used. This means retail areas are missed by passengers as they are not designed to be on the passenger trajectory. However this interaction could be used to positively influence the experience in future design if it is incorporated in planning domain locations. Processing can also negatively influence consumptive activities when processing periods take a long time. This results in shorter discretionary time available for passenger to spend undertaking consumptive activities.

When passengers prepare during the discretionary periods, interactions can also occur with consumptive activities. For example passengers can purchase food or drink to consume while they complete their outgoing passenger card. This allows the passenger to undertake preparatory activities while relaxing with a coffee. This benefits the airport in two ways: (i) passengers are preparing of an upcoming domain and so should be processed faster, and (ii) passengers are spending money while preparing. Preparation is also seen in how passengers plan their consumptive activities. This research and research by Livingstone (Livingstone, Unpublished) shows that the majority of purchases during the airport experience are pre-planned and this interaction could be incorporated to improve how airports communicate what is available for passengers to buy.

Figure 9.11, Figure 9.12, Figure 9.13 and Figure 9.14 provide one way to illustrate the interactions that exists between the TOPA groups. However a matrix of the interactions provides an alternative way to consider all the interactions and this will now be discussed.