Communication/Engagement Preferences Study Jan Kihm | Market Research Coordinator Renee Raduenz | Market Research Manager October 4, 2018 (PE Call) Preliminary Presentation

Purpose This study is a follow-up to U of MN study: “Effective Social Media Engagement Options for MN’s Diversifying Population” To understand level of interest in receiving and giving for specific content: Planning/improvement efforts (e.g. long range and bicycle/ped) Construction Projects (current, 1 year out, completed) General Communication (e.g., questions, communication, jobs) To determine preferred methods to give/receive for specific content

Background Pilot survey conducted in 2017, using non- targeted Facebook and Twitter posts: Generated responses from about n=200 respondents Respondents were mostly white, Metro residents Preliminary insights presented at PE Workshop Goal set to increase the sample diversity in full study by: Translating the survey Using targeted ads Broadening the geographic reach

Approach & Caveats Approximately n=2,000 respondents participated: Most from Facebook (and handful from Twitter and Instagram) Some from other sources (MnDOT email, website, etc.) Because of the sampling and data collection process: Likely an inflated interest in certain methods/tools (electronic, online and social media formats) With majority of population using social media and email, content preferences may not be markedly different from other sources Regardless, opportunity to investigate and expand on with other data collection and targeting methods

How well did it work?

Range of Respondents Overall response was reasonable Not much luck increasing racial/ethnic diversity Able to represent Metro and Greater MN Fairly diverse in terms of other demographics

Reasonable initial response overall (at n=2000+) but difficult to get traction outside of English and Spanish speaking segments Some response decline for each language Fairly minor for English Moderate for Spanish Extreme for the Hmong and Somali (and very few started) starting sample

English and Spanish language segments only groups large enough to analyze Difficult to reach others and even more difficult to keep them Hmong and Somali drop well below usable samples (n < 30) NOTE: 43 Native American / Alaska Natives (self-classified at end of survey) Survey Language Started Survey Answered District Question Answer Content Grid Question* Answered Survey Method Question Completed Last Question English 2186 1926 1714 1469 1463 Spanish 191 153 120 87 86 Hmong 27 10 5 4 Somali 54 29 14 Total 2458 2118 1853 1570 1563 Red cells are too small to analyze separately/generalize *This question asked if they had any other topic area of interest (after the specific content types) NOTE: Those who specified race classified as: white (1365), Hispanic, Latino or Spanish (92), American Indian or Alaska Native (43), Black or African-American(28), Asian (11), Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (4) And Other (35)

Sample is diverse in many other ways (n shown is # who completed preference content grid) Female (1126) Male (426) Other* (3) 26% 72% D1 (134) D2 (115) D3 (110) D4 (121) Metro (815) D6 (176) D7 (244) D8 (128) Greater MN NET (1028) Non-MN (10) 0.2% (n shown is number who completed initial content preference grid) *includes those who identify as neutral, non-conforming, non-binary, etc.)

RESULTS Today . . . Review overall interest in giving and receiving specific content And, some key differences Cover a summary of preferred methods for receiving information and giving input across content And, one example of detailed preferences by content (if time permits) End of the Month . . . A detailed report will summarize findings for each area

Preferences for Types of Content

Content Categories Evaluated Receive Information Give Input Not Interested Planning & Improvements Minnesota's long-range transportation planning (5+ years in the future) 1 2 3 Bicycle and pedestrian plans / improvements Construction Projects Construction that currently impacts your travel/commute Construction happening in your community within a year from today Completed construction/projects General Topics Expressing specific concerns (e.g., potholes, signage, broken signals, safety) Asking general questions MnDOT job opportunities

CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS Lots of interest in receiving information and reasonable appetite for giving input (especially to ask questions and express concerns) RECEIVE INFORMATION GIVE INPUT PLANNING / IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS Base: set to stable level based upon those who responded to last item (to make comparisons possible). GENERAL TOPICS

Key Differences by Survey Language/Ethnicity (for English and Spanish Language and Native Americans (where n>30)) Spanish language survey respondents: Most interested in receiving information on Bicycle/Pedestrian Plans Jobs Native American respondents: Most interested in receiving information on near term construction (similar to English language survey segment, overall) English language survey respondents: Most interested in: Giving input on near term construction Expressing concerns (similar to Spanish language)

Differences by Survey Language and Race/Ethnicity Give Input *Differences significant at the 90% confidence level AND at least 15-percentage points difference

Differences by District Interest in Receiving Information: Metro District is hungriest for information on plans/improvements Most interest in long range planning (similar to D1, D2 and D3 (and especially compared to D4)) Most interest in bicycle/pedestrian plans (significantly higher than D6 and D8) District 3-4 are the most interested in information on jobs Especially compared to D8 Interest in Giving input: District-3 is most keen on giving input Long range planning Bicycle/pedestrian plans (but only significantly higher than D4) Metro District and District 2 have most interest in expressing concerns

District Preferences

Differences by Demos Interest in Receiving Information: Those >35 years of age more interested in long range plans Those advanced degrees/coursework most interested in bicycle/pedestrian plans and improvements (and it declines as education levels drop) Those 35-44 years of age and/or without a college degree most interested in jobs Interest in Giving input: Interest in giving input decreases with age (across content) But, those 35-54 years of age most interested in being able to ask questions Interest in giving input, in general, is higher among the college educated (especially compared to those with no post-secondary education)

Age Group Preferences by Topic

Education Group Preferences by Topic

Preferences for Methods for Receiving Information & Giving Input

Methods for Receiving Information (options listed in survey) Website Media Social Media/ Technology Direct 1:1 Contact Traditional Community Based Local newspaper Twin Cities newspaper Radio Television Twitter Facebook Mobile app Text 511 (current only) LinkedIn (Job info only) Contact MnDOT person Hotline Live chat Email MnDOT Open House Community Meeting/Event US Mail Career Fair (job info only) Community Leader/Org Poster in Neighborhood

Preferred Methods for Receiving Information Mobile App 511 Texts TV Email Website Facebook Core set for all content LR Planning Bicycle/Ped Plans Construction in next year Job Opportunities Current Construction impacting travel Completed projects The additional sources are generalized across (and some other methods have similar levels of appeal for particular content areas)

Methods/Tools for Giving Input (options listed in survey) METHODS FOR GIVING INPUT Structured Survey (quant) Written Contact Social Media/ Technology Live Contact Qualitative Discussions (in-depth) Other Online survey Phone survey Paper Survey Twitter Facebook Live Chat on Website Specific MnDOT person Information Desk or Hotline MnDOT Open House Focus Groups Community Meetings Online Focus Group Community Leader/Org Mobile App Mail Email Contact Form on Website

Preferred Methods for Giving Input Mobile App Open House Online survey* Email Web contact form Facebook Core set for all content Bicycle/Ped Plans Construction in next year Current Construction Completed Projects Expressing Concerns Asking Questions Long Range Planning *This survey was done online, so it makes sense that this format would be one of the preferred methods

Construction that Currently Impacts Travel/Commute One example: Detailed preferences for receiving information

Preferences for Methods of Receiving Information on Construction that Impacts Current Travel/Commute Ranked by Total Sample Core set tops the list for all levels of interest Email is ranked higher for “most preferred” (and some others shift order)

Choosing Combinations: Most Common vs. Broadest Reach TURF Analysis = Total Unduplicated Reach & Frequency Hypothetical Example 1st 3rd 2nd Most Commonly Preferred 1st 3rd 4th TURF: Broadest Reach Another way to consider

What other combinations/methods should be considered? Preferred Methods to Receive Information on Construction that Impacts Current Travel/Commute The core set of methods reaches majority of those interested in receiving this type of information + = 86% reach What other combinations/methods should be considered?

Secondary Set of Preferred Methods to Receive Information on Construction that Impacts Current Travel/Commute Best secondary set to overlay on top of the core 511 + Texts + TV + Local Paper + Mobile App [- TV (dropped)) + TV (added back) + US Mail Based upon “all methods” preference data

Key Differences in Preferred Methods to Receive Information about Construction that Impacts Current Travel by Survey Language Email, Facebook and the MnDOT website top the list for both groups English survey takers are more likely to prefer MnDOT website, Facebook, 511 and Texts Spanish survey takers are more likely to prefer US mail and Posters in the neighborhood

Key Differences in Preferred Methods to Receive Information about Construction that Impacts Current Travel by District MnDOT website, Facebook, 511 and email in top-5 for all districts Methods below are significantly higher for those with % shown than 3+ districts: D1 > local paper, TV and info phone D2 & D4 > local paper D3 > email Metro > email, mobile app, TV and TC paper D6 > Facebook and TV D7 not higher on any D8 > mobile app and trusted community leader

Key Differences in Preferred Methods to Receive Information about Construction that Impacts Current Travel by Age Core set of methods overall are in the top set for all age groups Many sources decrease in appeal with age: 511, Facebook, neighborhood posters, radio and US mail But not all - local newspaper and email are more attractive to the extremes than the middle age The options shown had significant differences across 3 or more age groups

Key Differences in Preferred Methods to Receive Information about Construction that Impacts Current Travel by Education Core set of methods are in the top set for all education groups Appeal of some sources increases as level of education increases: MnDOT website and Twin Cities newspapers Appeal of US mail decreases as level of education increases (with the significant drop right after “high school or less”) The options shown had significant differences across 3 or more education groups

Today’s Wrap Up There is no one-size fits all process for communication and engagement: Not everyone wants to know or do the same thing Some methods work better for some segments than others There is some consistency in preferences - some foundational methods (“givens”) But only looking at the top set may result in missed opportunities There are opportunities to do more: Target content somewhat by segment Increase the reach by adding customized methods into the mix Expand on this work (to reach and understand others and test more specific executions)

Thank you!