Based on 400 interviews in areas surrounding Vienna city

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
BEST 2014 BEST special topic 2013 Use of PT information channels Kjetil Vrenne, BEST Project Manager 2014.
Advertisements

BEST Survey 2010 City report: Copenhagen Benchmarking in European Service of public Transport.
BEST 2014 BEST 2011 BEST 2014 BEST Survey results 2013.
By: Chisom Alozie. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES:  To develop a budget for Shreve Island summer day camp.  To hire a responsible, educated, and trained staff.
BEST 2014 BEST 2011 BEST 2014 BEST Survey results 2014.
BEST Survey 2009 City report: Helsinki Benchmarking in European Service of public Transport.
THE 2011 VCC STUDENT CENSUS SURVEY Selected Findings for Overall Census Responses April 2012.
1 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Customer Satisfaction Measurement FY 2006 Q3 Comparison April 28, 2006.
BEST Survey 2010 City report: Helsinki Benchmarking in European Service of public Transport.
Big Listening 2010 A summary of surveys 13, 14 and 15.
Materials developed by K. Watkins, J. LaMondia and C. Brakewood Data Collection With Surveys Unit 2: Describing Transit Systems with Data.
The Cost Savings and Enhancements of a District’s Wellness Program A Case Study from Broward Presented by: Kay Blake, Training Supervisor Tina Severance-Fonte,
BEST Survey 2011 City report: Stockholm Benchmarking in European Service of public Transport.
Prepared by: DECEMBER 2008 Metro Transit Light- Rail and Bus Rider Survey FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS PERISCOPE.
Benchmarking in European Service of public Transport (BEST) Main results of the BEST 2010 Survey.
Benchmarking in European Service of public Transport (BEST) Main results of the BEST 2009 Survey.
Current trends and problems in Tbilisi public transport system.
FEST Finans Energi Samferdsel Telekom BEST Survey 2008 City report: Helsinki Benchmarking in European Service of public Transport.
Per Gellert /Barcelona Quality for Passengers.
Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics Richard Curtin University of Michigan.
TRANSED of September 2012 in New Delhi, India How accessible was the Swedish public transport system in 2010? Helena Svensson, Ph D in public transport.
Designing Survey Instruments. Creating a Survey Instrument  Survey instruments should help researchers collect the most accurate data and reach the most.
1 BEST results 2007 for Oslo Svein L. Alfheim Manager for Planning and Development SL (Greater Oslo Public Transport)
BEST Survey 2010 City report: Oslo Benchmarking in European Service of public Transport.
BEST SURVEY 2007 Extra report 2007 Based on 400 interviews in areas surrounding Vienna city.
BEST 2014 BEST 2011 BEST 2014 Special survey & key figure topic 2014 Tickets and ticket inspections Kjetil Vrenne, BEST Project manager.
BEST SURVEY 2007 Extra report 2007 Based on 600 interviews in Vienna city.
BEST SURVEY 2007 Report Copenhagen BEST 2007 BEST Survey Contents About the survey Participants Sample Method How to read the graphs Overall.
The monitoring of Customer Satisfaction Customer satisfaction survey of HCT BEST-survey Customer complaints.
BEST 2010 BEST 2010 Results of the survey Kjetil Vrenne BEST Project Manager May 27 th, 2010 BEST Survey 2010 Results & Analyses Page 1.
Benchmarking in European Service of public Transport (BEST) Main results of the BEST 2008 Survey.
Benchmarking in European Service of public Transport Results of the 2007 survey.
Quality indicators impact on overall citizen satisfaction BEST Survey 2014.
Impacts of Free Public Transport – An Evaluation Framework Oded Cats Yusak Susilo Jonas Eliasson.
Introduction to BEST Survey results 2015 Oslo, 8 th of February 2016.
EUROPEAN FORUM FOR GEOGRAPHY AND STATISTICS KRAKOW CONFERENCE October, Krakow, Poland Travel Behaviour in Pristina City Author 1: Naim Kelmendi.
Public transport quality elements – What really matters for users? By Dimitrios Papaioannou and Luis Miguel Martinez Presentation for the 20 th ECOMM in.
/ København Dok.nr. Nordic Cooperation in Public Transport Per Gellert.
Richard Darbéra CNRS, Latts Scientific director of IVM's Taxi Project
Community Survey Report
Findings of the Petaluma Transit 2014 Onboard Survey
Law Society of Scotland Survey of members 2016
Die Berliner Verkehrsbetriebe (BVG) - Anstalt des öffentlichen Rechts
Peter Linde, Interviewservice Statistics Denmark
2016 School Climate Survey: Northgate Crossing Elementary School
Survey of Potential Overnight Service Passengers
Data Analysis & Report Writing
MAKING SENSE OF THE ECONOMIC VALUATION OF TRANSPORT POLICIES
Evaluating performance management
Bus Passenger Survey - spring 2017 results West Midlands area
Law Society of Scotland Survey of members 2016
BEST Special topic 2015 What could make PT more interesting for car users? Stockholm, 15th of March 2016.
Benchmarking in European Service of public Transport (BEST)
Lecture 6 Structured Interviews and Instrument Design Part II:
Student Satisfaction Spring 2009 Short Version
Corinne Hermant-de Callataÿ
Law Society of Scotland Survey of members 2016
Survey Design Steps in Conducting a survey
The European Statistical Training Programme (ESTP)
Flash Eurobarometer 366   PERCEPTION of the Quality of life in European cities Survey conducted for Directorate-General for Regional Policy and coordinated.
Islington Residents’ Survey 2018 March 2018
Marketing Surveys Lecture: min 29.2.
Open Forum: Campus Parking
Geocoding of 2007 WMATA Rail Survey
Who is your Target Market?
Measurements in support of policy decisions
2019 Planning & Progress Study
Chapter 5: The analysis of nonresponse
Smart meters and energy usage: a survey of energy behaviour among those who have had a smart meter, and those who have yet to get one April 2019.
STEPS Site Report.
Presentation transcript:

Based on 400 interviews in areas surrounding Vienna city BEST SURVEY 2007 Extra report 2007 Based on 400 interviews in areas surrounding Vienna city

Contents About the survey Overall results Appendix Participants Sample Method How to read the graphs Overall results Quality dimension indexes, individual questions Satisfaction and impact Appendix Quality dimensions and indexes for subgroups Background information 2

About the survey Response rate Stockholm 64 % Oslo 28 % Helsinki 32 % Copenhagen 40 % Vienna 54 % Berlin 33 % Prague 31 % The following cities participated in the BEST 2007 survey: Stockholm (Extended questionnaire) Oslo (Extended questionnaire) Helsinki (Extended questionnaire, with additional questions) Copenhagen (Extended questionnaire, with additional questions) Vienna (Extended questionnaire) Berlin (Extended questionnaire) Prague (Extended questionnaire) For all cities 1000 residents in defined areas have been interviewed. The exception is Helsinki where 150 additional interviews where performed in the Espoo area. All interviews have been done by telephone. The response rate for each city is given in the table to the right. Results from the survey have been weighted with respect to sex and age to match the profile in each area. The Helsinki results are weighted with respect to geography as well, to correct for the uneven distribution of interviews resulting from the extra interviews in Espoo. All 1150 interviews in Helsinki are included in the analysis. The questionnaire used in the survey is an updated version of the 2006 questionnaire. Since 2006 one new statement (‘The information is good in stops and terminals’) and two new background questions (‘region/geography’ and ‘usage of different modes of public transport’) have been added. In Copenhagen the question on ‘usage of PT modes’ have been formulated differently. In Copenhagen respondents were asked how often they used each transport mode. For reporting and comparison purposes these questions have been recoded as follows: If a respondent states that he/she travels with PT on a daily basis, all transport modes which this respondent use on a daily basis is coded as ‘generally uses’. Transport modes who are not used on a daily basis have for this respondent been coded as ‘not used generally’. 3

How to read the graphs The graphs show the proportion of respondents who agrees (partially agrees or fully agrees) to the different statements in blue columns. The red columns shows the proportion who disagrees (hardly agrees or not agree at all) to the statements. Respondents with a neutral position are not displayed in the graphs. The topmost column show the distribution for the compound index, while the columns underneath show the distributions for the individual questions that make up the index. The graph show proportion of respondents that agree/disagree to the statement (as described in more detail above). The topmost column show the distribution for the total city sample, while the columns underneath show the distribution for certain relevant subgroups of the total population – the subgroups included are sex, age, travel frequency, place of residence (city region) and mode(s) of public transport used most often by the respondent. 4

Results 2007

Vienna – surrounding areas Indices 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 69 65 64 66 67 63 55 58 60 70 73 74 37 47 50 48 68 83 80 79 86 62 77 76 39 41 35 27 72 6

Vienna – surrounding areas 2007 Quality dimensions

Vienna – surrounding areas Traffic supply 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 63 55 58 60 62 59 57 48 40 36 38 44 88 89 90 83 56 49 51 69 65 68 64 67 61 52 42 53 8

Vienna – surrounding areas Information 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 37 47 50 48 56 49 53 52 39 45 43 16 - 9

Vienna – surrounding areas Staff behaviour 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 68 64 67 70 65 66 10

Vienna – surrounding areas Security and safety 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 83 80 79 86 78 72 75 70 81 85 90 91 87 93 11

Vienna – surrounding areas Comfort 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 69 62 66 65 73 67 70 71 64 63 68 60 52 61 57 59 12

Vienna – surrounding areas Social Image 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 77 76 59 56 51 52 82 86 84 88 87 90 92 13

Vienna – surrounding areas Value for money 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 39 41 37 35 27 44 38 28 31 26 14

Vienna – surrounding areas 2007 Appendix

Vienna – surrounding areas 2007 Citizen satisfaction in subgroups

Vienna – surrounding areas CITIZEN SATISFACTION - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 17

Vienna – surrounding areas 2007 Traffic supply in subgroups

Vienna – surrounding areas Traffic supply - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 19

Vienna – surrounding areas Good for work/school trips - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 20

Vienna – surrounding areas PT is good for leisure trips - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 21

Vienna – surrounding areas PT is good for trips in the city centre - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 22

Vienna – surrounding areas PT is good for trips outside the city centre - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 23

Vienna – surrounding areas Nearest stop is close to where I live - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 24

Vienna – surrounding areas Travel time on PT is reasonable - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 25

Vienna – surrounding areas I am satisfied with the number of departures - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 26

Vienna – surrounding areas Waiting time is short at transfers - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 27

Vienna – surrounding areas 2007 Reliability in subgroups

Vienna – surrounding areas Reliability - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 29

Vienna – surrounding areas 2007 Information in subgroups

Vienna – surrounding areas Information - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 31

Vienna – surrounding areas It is easy to get the information needed when planning a trip - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 32

Vienna – surrounding areas Information is good when traffic problems occure - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 33

Vienna – surrounding areas Information is good in stops and terminals - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 34

Vienna – surrounding areas 2007 Staff behavior in subgroups

Vienna – surrounding areas Staff behaviour - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 36

Vienna – surrounding areas Staff answers my questions correctly - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 37

Vienna – surrounding areas Staff behaves nicely and correctly - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 38

Vienna – surrounding areas 2007 Security and safety in subgroups

Vienna – surrounding areas Security and safety - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 40

Vienna – surrounding areas I feel secure at stations and bus stops - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 41

Vienna – surrounding areas I feel secure on board busses and trains - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 42

Vienna – surrounding areas I am not afraid of traffic accidents when using PT - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 43

Vienna – surrounding areas 2007 Comfort in subgroups

Vienna – surrounding areas Comfort - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 45

Vienna – surrounding areas PT travel is comfortable - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 46

Vienna – surrounding areas Transfers are easy - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 47

Vienna – surrounding areas Busses and trains are modern - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 48

Vienna – surrounding areas Busses and trains are clean - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 49

Vienna – surrounding areas I normally get a seat when travel with PT - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 50

Vienna – surrounding areas 2007 Social image in subgroups

Vienna – surrounding areas Social image - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 52

Vienna – surrounding areas More people will travel with PT in the future - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 53

Vienna – surrounding areas PT is good for the environment - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 54

Vienna – surrounding areas PT is beneficial to society - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 55

Vienna – surrounding areas 2007 Value for money in subgroups

Vienna – surrounding areas Value for money - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 57

Vienna – surrounding areas PT gives good value for money - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 58

Vienna – surrounding areas PT fares are reasonable - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 59

Vienna – surrounding areas 2007 Loyalty in subgroups

Vienna – surrounding areas Loyalty - subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency 61

Vienna – surrounding areas 2007 Background information

Public transport travel frequency – Vienna – surrounding areas 2007 63

Life situation – Vienna – surrounding areas 2007 64

Results 2007 – other available reports at best2005.net