Bus Company Case Study

Bus Company Case Study

There are always ups and downs in business. And the new bus company case is not an exception
to this. Difficult times do really exist, as they say but it doesn’t mean failure at all. Based on the
survey done by two of the students, there are several serious customer concerns that need to be
given appropriate action on time. Ensuring customer satisfaction should be the focus at all times,
giving them every possible means to make the trip worth the money and time.

The biggest opportunities for continued growth for the company are not in taking passengers
away from airlines or Amtrak but in getting people to choose a bus rather than drive their cars
between the strategic city pairs. Again, the biggest challenge for the company is overcoming the
negative stereotype, making it to the headway. Many of the serious concerns have been about the
speed and the lack of seats, so I suggest that they should address to this and assure the passengers
that the current challenges will be resolved. They should make their customers to tell their
friends they had a positive travel experience with them. This is how they should grow in a
mature industry. Customers want clean buses (that’s no doubt), courteous and professional
drivers, on-time service, and good value for their money. So that’s what they should concentrate
on. It’s not gonna be easy but it’s what they should strive to deliver to keep the business gaining
and not losing.

Monitoring Performance, what do they need?

Bus priority is central to improving the speed and reliability of services. Different techniques
have been used across the country. We have to evaluate them to see how they: benefit bus
operators and passengers; affect other road users; operate effectively; may need improving; and
give value for money.

It is important to test whether bus priority schemes have met their stated objectives, firstly to
ensure local accountability, and secondly to see whether the same type of scheme would work in
similar circumstances elsewhere. This is particularly important where innovative bus priority
measures are being tried for the first time.

Performance indicators assess important aspects of a new scheme. They allow us to judge
whether it has benefited bus users or whether the scheme needs to be modified. Performance
indicators from different schemes can also provide stakeholders with evidence of what works.
This will help with the continued development of bus priority.

Monitoring statistics should be straightforward and easy to collect, and should form the basis of
useful performance indicators. Monitoring resources should be proportionate to the overall cost
of the scheme. They should also be built into the scheme costs early in the planning and appraisal
stage. ‘Before’ and ‘after’ monitoring may necessarily be limited for smaller schemes. More
complex schemes may need a wider programme of monitoring.
Bus service improvements

Buses can be timed along a section of a route both before and after schemes are implemented.
Bus journey times are likely to reduce as a result of bus priority measures. Sample sizes will
depend on the variability of the bus journey time and the expected benefit.

Reliability

One of the main factors in passenger perception of bus services is reliability. This performance
indicator records the difference between timetabled and actual arrival times at one or more points
in the scheme on low frequency routes. This shows any improvements in reliability. On higher
frequency routes, the variation in headways (the interval between consecutive buses traveling on
a route) can be used.

Improvements for passengers

Bus use trends

Better bus services can attract people from other forms of transport or encourage people to use
the bus for trips they might otherwise not have taken. This increases bus patronage. Any changes
need to be seen in context with the underlying trends in the area. The most appropriate way to
assess the effect of bus priority schemes on patronage is by carrying out ‘before’ and ‘after’
surveys. For smaller schemes, it may be enough to simply compare ticket sales on a route that
has benefited from bus priority measures with sales on one that hasn’t.

Bus stop waiting times

The time it takes to pick up and drop off passengers is a significant proportion of the total
journey time. Clearly this will relate to the number of passengers getting on and off. So if bus
passenger numbers increase, buses are likely to spend longer at bus stops. As a result, some
journey time saving from bus priority measures may not be fully realized.

Effects on other traffic

Car journey times can be measured to see whether bus priority has caused any significant delays.
The main technique for this is matching the number plates of vehicles traveling in a corridor
between two or more fixed points.

An example approach: Bus priority strategy

1. Improve bus service reliability.

2. Improve bus speeds.
3. Increase patronage.
4. Reduce car dependency.
5. Improve bus services.
6. Provide value for money.
Targets (5 Years)

1. Improve reliability 15 per cent.

2. Faster bus speeds 10 per cent.
3. Increase patronage 20 per cent.
4. Reduce congestion 20 per cent.
5. Implement three quality corridors.

Action plan

1. Introduce on-street bus priority (with-flow bus lanes).

2. Innovative methods (contra-flow bus lanes).
3. Innovative methods (traffic signal priority).
4. New wheelchair accessible buses.
5. High quality bus stop facilities.
6. Enhanced pedestrian facilities to access bus stops.

Monitoring

1. Bus/car journey times.

2. Car journey times on parallel routes.
3. Queue length surveys.
4. Bus reliability surveys.
5. Traffic counts for area.
6. Number of bus passengers.
7. Bus stop dwell times.

Results

1. Two corridors implemented, third delayed by longer than anticipated consultation process.
2. Reliability, journey time and patronage targets on the two implemented corridors met or
exceeded.
3. Congestion targets not met: revisions made to signal timings on parallel routes

Telephone Polling

Are phone polls accurate?

They are accurate for those that respond, but the crucial question is how many actually
responded. Today, telephone polls have become a standard part of news reporting. Every
scandal, major news event, or change in direction is heralded by an instant analysis of who is up,
who is down and What America thinks. Often, the findings from these polls take on a life of their
own, framing what people think about an event and shaping their response to it. Yet by social
scientific standards these findings are often of poor quality, or worse, are misleading,
representing what an outspoken minority feels rather than mainstream America.
Why misinformation is popular

Information from these polls is popular because it is relatively quick and inexpensive way to put
the survey sponsors in the position of being knowledge brokers. In effect they have created news.
It is in their best interests to present the information in a way that shapes headlines. The results
are typically reported in a pseudo-scientific fashion, stating that the poll was based on 1000+
adult respondents in a national sample with a margin of error of plus or minus 3%.

What they don’t tell you

The American public has been trained to assume that a national poll of thousands with a small
margin of error accurately represents the opinions of the whole society, but is that true? In fact,
the sample size and margin of error give no indication as to the more important information
about whether the results accurately reflect the population it has surveyed. The margin of error
simply reflects how well the responses cluster around an average score.

To determine how well the study results describe the target population, one needs to look at the
response rate. The response rate refers to the total number of persons contacted to obtain the
reported number of valid results. A high response rate in a random sample offers higher
confidence in the results because the answers are more likely to be representative of the
population. In the social sciences an 85-90% response rate is considered desirable. Confidence in
the results declines proportionally as the response rate gets lower. Below 50% and the survey is
considered very dubious since it means that 50% of the people contacted refused to participate in
the survey.

A poll published by LeMoyne College and Zogby International, a reputable polling firm stated
that “One in five Catholics say a priest in their local diocese has been accused of committing
child sexual abuse. The communications director reported that to get the 1,508 completed
responses in the study they called 41,033 people. In other words, the response rate was roughly
1/3 of one percent. Even assuming that only 25% of the people called were Catholic, and
therefore able to provide valid responses, in the social sciences this outcome would be
considered garbage. The respondents to these polls hardly represent the average American, rather
they represent the tiny minority of people who do not hang up on those annoying telemarketers
who call you during dinner.

It makes you wonder, whose opinions do these polls really reflect? While not all telephone polls
are equally unreliable one rule of thumb is that those who do not report a response rate should be
treated with a high degree of skepticism. Yet until the public stops believing in them, telephone
polls will be tempting to those who, for a few thousand dollars, wish to see themselves as
knowledge brokers.

Conducting Face to Face Personal Interview

Face-to-face interviews are most effective, especially if there is prior notification for participants.
People are likely to say more than they will write. Participants are motivated by an effective,
personable interviewer. This increased rapport means that more interview questions are likely to
be answered and the interview is more likely to be completed. Oral interaction provides
immediate opportunities for probing, clarifying answers, and providing feedback.

The need for a skilled interviewer

Project management skills are needed to manage the process of interviewing several people at
different times and, perhaps, places. Strategies will need to be developed to insure a good
response rate. Each interview must be conducted and managed to insure good results.

The interviewer must be successful in communicating and motivating. Motivating includes

effective communication skills so the two attributes are intertwined. Communication skills
include personality and manner so that the interviewer is clearly seen as welcoming and non-
threatening. She or he must be a person that the participant would like to spend time with.
Creating a comfortable environment is crucial. Although part of good communication, well
developed listening skills are important enough to receive separate attention. Thoughtful,
focused listening is essential. Without it, the interviewer will likely miss important messages or
misunderstand them. When possible, the interviewer should be similar in race, ethnic, economic,
and social background as those interviewed. For an example, an African-American interviewer is
more productive with African-American participants than a Hispanic one. The interviewer must
be able to control the interview and keep it on track. With challenging questions and human
nature, this can be quite a challenge, especially if the interview schedule is not as well developed
as it might be. Given the importance of skill and manner, the supervision, training, and
management of interviewers is a crucial aspect of success in data collection.

Differences with face-to-face interviewing

The opening or introduction is much more important since it is so easy for participants to hang
up. Do not use the word “survey” since it has so many negative connotations with marketing.
Use simple words and phrases. Be as brief as possible. If rating scales are used, they must have
few values. Select a sample size that is about three times larger than what you need. Interviewers
must have a good telephone voice. Be prepared for some rude behavior. Advance letters and the
use of appointments will increase the response rate.

Planning

Six broad aspects of the interview should be considered:

1. Purpose, especially the research problem and related questions.

2. Particular topic areas where information is needed.
3. Construction, testing, and refinement of questions.
4. Structuring the interview.
5. Selecting the place and particulars for the interview.
6. Anticipating problems and appropriate solutions.

For the interview to be successful, the purpose must be clearly and directly specified so that the
researcher knows exactly the information that is needed. Objectives need to be limited and
specific. Following this stage, it should be possible to create an agenda for the interview, a list of
the kinds of evidence to be gathered, and the priority or sequence of the topics.

Interview structure

The first few minutes are crucial, especially the introduction. Begin with an honest, welcoming
greeting that builds rapport. This includes a self-introduction and positive body language. While
conscious of time enough time should be allowed for the participant to become comfortable. This
may involve informal, banal exchange about the weather, traffic, or sports. Appropriate humor
and personal inquiry often work well. Still, move quickly to the point. It is important to motivate
the participant. These are useful strategies: ask for help, make the participant feel important by
explaining the selection process, stress the importance of the problem and Mention endorsements
by leaders or colleagues

Provide an orientation to the interview with some emphasis on these aspects: the purpose of the
study, the role of the interviewer, the role of the participant, how the information will be used,
Confidentiality, and how to learn about study findings and conclusions

The body of the interview is the heart of the matter. With structured questions, the interview
schedule [a script for the interview] is followed word by word. With the open-ended or “non-
directive approach,” there are fewer questions, but the interviewer must be much more skilled.

Reference

Astrop, A.J., Balcombe, R.J. & Daugherty, G.G. (1997 not published) The performance of Bus
Priority Measures in Brighton. PR/TT/024/97. Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne

Balcombe, R. and York, I. (1999) Bus Priority: Monitoring and Evaluation. TRL Annual
Research Review 1998 pp. 18 - 23. Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.

Bell South, Digital Storyteller (2002) The Art of Conducting an Interview

Daugherty, G.G. and Balcombe, R.J. (1999) Leeds Guided Busway Study. TRL410. Transport
Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.

DETR (March 2003) Traffic Advisory Leaflet 5/03. Public Transport Priority. Traffic Advisory
Unit.

DETR (1999) From Workhorse to Thoroughbred. A Better Role for Bus Travel. 208.

Hounsell, N.B. and McDonald, M. (1985 – 93) Evaluation of Bus Lanes. CR87. Transport
Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.

JMP Consultants Ltd. (1999) London Bus Priority Network. South West Sector, Bus Priority
Study. Route 65 Monitoring Study. London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames.
LeMoyne College (2002) Spring 2002 LeMoyne College/Zogby International Contemporary
Catholic Trends Poll Report.

McNamara, C. (1999) General Guidelines for Conducting Interviews.