JamiQ Research Report Issue 1 Volume 2012

JamiQ Private Limited 67 South Bridge Road Level 3 Singapore 058697 ACRA: 200817573N

JamiQ Research Report Series Issue 1, Volume 2012 Analysis on Singapore Public Transit Trains Breakdown Crisis 1st December 2011 – 15th March 2012


Background

The premise of this report is to examine a correlation with a failure in the transport system to an exponential increase of conversations in the Twittersphere. This report covers the insights we uncovered from monitoring Singapore’s Mass Rapid Transport (MRT) from 1st December 2011, the month when the first major breakdowns and delays occurred till 15th March 2012. This report will cover:

1. The difference in the volume of tweets before, during and after the breakdowns

2. The shift of attention from the situation to the management of the company operating the trains

3. The time it takes for interest in any particular issue to subside

Significance of the MRT The MRT forms a key component of transport in Singapore. It is a railway system that spans the mass of the country and is comprised of four lines, three of which are operated by SMRT Corporation and one by SBS transit. The railway system itself is owned by the Land Transport Authority. The MRT served over 2.4 million commuters to and fro their destinations in 2011. Up until December 2011, no major breakdowns or delays had occurred since the start of operations on 7 November 1987. This situation allowed us to examine how the general public reacts to a failing on an agency’s part, from which we can draw upon how to handle similar crisis’ in future.

Lament of the Singaporean Singaporeans take to cyberspace to spread word of a crisis

The last year had demonstrated during the Arab Spring uprisings that social media was the fastest medium by which news travelled. We wanted to put that theory to the test on the home front, how would Singaporeans react on Twitter, Facebook and the like in face of the ever dodgy performance of the MRT in Singapore. Our hypothesis was that the microblog Twitter would be abuzz with chatter during a breakdown and quickly disseminate this information faster than any news network could. We were absolutely right on this.


Number of conversations from 1 December – 15th

March Our data revealed that conversations revolving around the MRT were non-existent before 13th December 2011. After the 13th however, we see a spike as demonstrated in table 1.1, from an average of 70 conversations a day, SMRT had over 1000 conversations regarding their services. This was of course an estimated 2500% increase in chatter. Of course, chatter is merely noise without listening. We proceeded to analyse the great sea of complaints and drew several insights. Utilizing JamiQ buzz we wanted to find the average sentiment of the thousands of conversations in the Twittersphere and what was the oculus of the average Singaporean fixating on.

Throwing saw under the train How long does it take for Singaporeans to start pondering whose fault it is?

Table depicting sentiment from 1

st December 2011 – 15 March 2012

We found that negative sentiment, though consistently high during mid-December 2011 until late December 2011, was due to a myriad of different


factors. In December 2012 the ire of people was largely focused around the breakdown of trains. However as January crept in, the negativity started to gravitate around the ex-CEO of SMRT Saw Phaik Hwa. An interesting phenomenon here was the average number of days it took for Singaporeans to collectively figure out who was in charge to “throw her under the train”. It took Singaporeans over a week to commence the witch hunt. What was more interesting was that after being repeatedly run over by the angry train and when Saw finally quit, the negative sentiment online dampened by a large margin , it was as if the Twittersphere felt that Justice had been served.

Celebrating its 3 month breakdown anniversary Only 20-30% of Singaporeans “revel” in the March breakdown Nearly 3 months after its first breakdown, the MRT celebrated its 3 month anniversary with another breakdown on the north east line operated by SBS. This allowed us to contrast the reactions of Singaporeans in March against their reactions in December 2011. We found that the number of conversations online regarding trains ranged from only 20-30% of the numbers that we observed in December 2011. This can be attributed to an adjusted Singaporean mentality accepting that train breakdowns are becoming commonplace. We observe that it takes slightly over a month from the beginning of a crisis like MRT breakdowns for the general public to become generally disdainful again with regards to the situation. However, what we conclude is that once the attention of the general public is drawn toward an issue, it will take far more than three months for them to completely forget about it. Our data indicates that during January, the nadir of breakdowns in this three month period, there was still a great deal of negative chatter about the MRT.


Grand Takeaways Company’s avatar must be prepared, monitoring vital in identifying salient issues When it comes down to monitoring social media feeds after a company error, the margin change in the number of conversation entries can determine the magnitude of the situation before it appears on the television or tomorrow’s papers. The sentiment on the other hand will determine the tone of the response that needs to be prepared, be it apologetic or defensive. Whilst any public relations or communications executive could tell you that people talk online and they will definitely talk about your blunders on twitter, we conclude that it’s next to impossible to identify the key issues that people are unhappy about with actually looking at every single conversation. SMRT eventually managed to lower the negative sentiment that was generated toward their company only after two months. Apart from a general lack of engagement on social media networks, the major drawback in their crisis approach was an inability to identify the key factors that generated negativity towards their brand. An example their inability to address issues that Singaporeans had tolerated before breakdowns that were brought up by unhappy netizens. This included congestion and punctuality issues, though unrelated to what actually caused the breakdown, when combined it had an effect of compounding the gravity of the fiasco.

It is imperative that the figure representing the company is ready to deal with the flak the public will inevitably arrive. Traditionally companies have been able to weather PR storms by staying silent; this situation has clearly demonstrated that strategy is no longer infallible.


Timeline of events Date Event

13th December 2011 First major breakdown of MRT

15th December 2011 Second disruption occurs on both directions of the north south line

Public Outrage over “Income opportunity” message leaked to public

17th December 2011 Disruptions at Ang Mo Kio and Marina Bay Stations

18th December 2011 Prime Minister Lee announces public inquiry to investigate the cause of breakdowns

19th December 2011 Minister for transport Lui Tuck Yew holds a press conference to address the breakdowns and announce response

CEO of SMRT Saw pledges to stay put in the company to “get the problem fixed”

22th December 2011 Ong Ye Kun appointed to head SMRT probe.

29th December 2011 Committee of Inquiry appointed to investigate the breakdowns

6th January 2012 Saw Phaik Hwa resigns

9th January 2012 Minister Lui Tuck Yew delivers ministerial statement that announces gaps in the way emergencies are handled

10th January 2012 Minor Disruption: Trains delayed along North South line

21st February 2012 Free bus bridging services announced in event of train breakdown

8th March 2012 Minor Disruption: Trains delayed twice at Pasir Ris Station

15th March 2012 Breakdown of the North East Line

Technology

JamiQ Research Report Issue 1 Volume 2012