Monitoring Key performance indicators
Ruud van der Ploeg EMTA GM 11-12 november 2010
Quality in Amsterdam public transport contracts
2
Stadsregio Amsterdam in Randstad area
3
Running contracts in Amsterdam region
Zaanstreek€9 mio subsidy€5 mio revenue
Cost coverage 36%
Waterland€11 mio subsidy€22 mio revenue
Cost coverage 67%
Amsterdam€221 mio subsidy€129 mio revenue
Cost coverage 37%
Amstelland-Meerlanden
€30 mio subsidy€21 mio revenue
Cost coverage 41%
2004
2005
2007
2011
2004
2005
2007
2012
responsabilities and risk sharingRisks linked with the production hold by
The Authority The Operator
Rev
enue
s ris
ks h
old
by
Management contract (M)
Gross cost contract (GC)
Net cost contract (NC)
M with productivity bonus
M with productivity and revenue bonus
M with revenue bonus
GC with shared production risk
GC with revenue bonus
NC with revenue bonus and shared production
risks
NC with shared revenue risk
NC with shared production risks
GC with shared production risk
and revenue bonus
Source: MARETOPE
5
Need to haveNeed to have
Want to haveWant to have
Wish to haveWish to have
Basic QualityBasic Quality
ExperiencExperiencee
SatisfiersSatisfiers
DissatisfiersDissatisfiers
QualityQuality of a tripof a trip
Minimum QualityMinimum Quality
6
Trust:Safe and secure journeyGet what you expect
Mental Mental effort:effort:No hassle, no stressNo hassle, no stress
Travel time door to door:Travel time door to door:The faster, the betterThe faster, the better
Physical effort:Personal convenience
EmotionsTime is money
Reliability Reliability
EaseEase
SpeedSpeed
Comfort
Experience
Safety
‘‘must’: must’: travel travel fastfast
‘‘lust’: lust’: travel relaxedtravel relaxed
Pyramid of Customer NeedsPyramid of Customer Needs
7
Minimum Quality
Basic Quality
Experience
EmotionsEmotions(Lust)(Lust)
FunctionalitiesFunctionalities(Must)(Must)
Emotions..Emotions.. ..and Functionalities..and Functionalities
8
Amsterdam concessionPerformance indicators
Punctuality (departures times)
Trips cancelled
Accessibility
Vehicle capacity
Incidental under capacity
Key performance indicators
bonus and fines
Customer judgment (KKM*)
Only fines
bonus and fines
9
Looking back from figures 2006-2010
Development of Bonus/fines
Development of main KPI’s
• Punctuality
• Trips cancelled
• KKM (Passenger Satisfaction)
Methods of monitoring (1)
• Concession Amsterdam City
– In Amsterdam: making use of quarterly data base performance information; (a minimum of 95% of trips is checked)
– Operator management reports send to the transport authority
– Outcomes of the reports are randomly checked
– Apart from these reports, mystery guests are brought into play
– Operator earns a bonus for the % of performance within the standard and is fined for the % of performance above the standard.
Methods of monitoringConcessions (3) outside Amsterdam
– Carrying out quarterly surveys (observations i.e. with cameras and mystery guests)
– Representative random check (every day of the week; in and outside rush hours) in respect to the total network
– Random checks faults assessed fines imposed
– Independent consultant carries out the surveys (outsourced)
Administrative fines imposed for a range of quality insufficiencies
12
Contract incentives regional buses
1. Revenue based contract
2. Bonus/Fine arrangement onPassenger satisfaction
–Yearly report by independent institution–Rise of figure results in Bonus–Decrease of figure results in Fine
3. Fine policy on Key Performance Indicators
13
• 2006-± mid 2008: – animosity and tiresome discussions on contract clauses
imposing fines (“malus”) for insufficient reporting on performances and poor level of operations;
• Mid 2008 – 2009: – Improvement of relation and mutual understanding
(mediation); GVB meets standards of reporting and succeeds better in meeting (key) performance indicators less fines
• 2009 – now: – growing towards a joint effort of GVB and PTA
(Stadsregio), aiming to improve customer services (transition to customer oriëntation)
Looking back on GVB-concession 2006-2011
14
Results
Suburban transport contracts (bus): - Considerable growth of both productivity and
ridership (from 15-60% more driving hours);- National barometer customer satisfaction:
stable (on average 7,5).
Urban transport (GVB):- Step by step a better performance on the
main kpi’s for quality: less fines and more bonuses.
15
GVB delivers more driving hours (dru) for less subsidy
16
RecommendationsTo the PTA’s
• Generate a level of trust between commissioning authority and operator • Define a starting level of reliability of service in your tender documents (indicating that the level of performance has to move up each year)
• Think of fines/bonuses as a means to an end: just a trigger to get better quality
• Create a reliable and trustworthy monitoring system
• Be transparent, consistent and straightforward
• Quality is reflected in customer surveys appreciation!
To the operators
- mind the comfort and style of driving (bus)
- grant friendliness to passengers
- don’t take the passenger for granted!
17
bonus/fines
-6.000.000
-5.000.000
-4.000.000
-3.000.000
-2.000.000
-1.000.000
0
1.000.000
2.000.000
3.000.000
4.000.000
2006 2007 2008 2009 1/2 2010
years
be
dra
g bonus
fine
sum
18
punctuality
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 -2017
years
pe
rce
nta
dg
e
punct metro
norm metro
punct tram
norm tram
punct bus
norm bus
19
trips cancelled
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 -2017
years
pe
rce
nt
trips canceled metro
norm metro
trips canceled tram
norm tram
trips canceled bus
norm bus
20
KKM
60
65
70
75
80
85
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
years
cu
sto
me
r ju
dg
me
nt
metr W
metro S
tram W
tram S
bus W
bus S
21
Customer appreciation yardstick