BEST SURVEY 2007

1. BEST SURVEY 2007 Report Vienna 2007

2. Contents • About the survey • 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

3. About the survey • 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

4. 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

5. Results 2007

6. Vienna Indices 2007 6

7. Vienna 2007 Quality dimensions

8. Vienna Traffic supply 8

9. Vienna Information 9

10. Vienna Staff behaviour 10

11. Vienna Security and safety 11

12. Vienna Comfort 12

13. Vienna Social Image 13

14. Vienna Value for money 14

15. Vienna 2007 Satisfaction and impact

16. Satisfaction and impact • This graph shows the relationship between the scores for each quality dimension and its relative impact on citizen’s satisfaction. • The scores for each quality dimension are shown on the x-axis. The y-axis shows the relative impact of each quality dimension on the overall satisfaction. Impact scores are based on a regression analysis, in which the effects of each dimension on overall satisfaction are calculated while controlling for the effect of all other, and possibly confounding, dimensions. This analysis returns the individual effect of each dimension i.e. the effect that cannot be accounted for by the other dimensions. • The horizontal grey line indicates the average impact of each dimension, across all cities participating in the 2007 survey. The vertical grey line indicates the average proportion of citizens in agreement with each dimension, across all participating cities. • Based on the averages, there are 4 regions in this plot. In the lower left quadrant we find dimensions that has low scores, but that also have low impact on overall satisfaction – these dimensions should receive less attention. In the lower right quadrant we find dimensions that has high scores, but low impact on satisfaction – the main focus here should be to maintain satisfied customers. The focus with regard to dimensions positioned in the upper left quadrant should be to improve satisfaction, since these dimensions have high impact on overall satisfaction, but are currently given low scores by the citizens. The PT service already succeed with the dimensions positioned in the upper right quadrant, which are rated high and has high impact on overall satisfaction. The focus here should be to maintain the level of service and improve satisfaction if possible. • The graph show the relative “movement” of each dimension by plotting both this year’s position and its position in the last survey. The filled circles indicate this year, the open circles the scores for last survey. 16

17. Satisfaction and impact – Vienna High effect but low scores High effect and high scores * Filled circles 2007 Open circles 2006 Low effect and low scores Low effect but high scores 17

18. Vienna 2007 Appendix

19. Vienna 2007 Citizen satisfaction

20. Vienna CITIZEN SATISFACTION - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used <TOTAL BASE: 993> 20

21. Vienna 2007 Traffic supply in subgroups

22. Vienna Traffic supply - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used 22

23. Vienna Good for work/school trips - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used <TOTAL BASE: 936> 23

24. Vienna PT is good for leisure trips - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used <TOTAL BASE: 989> 24

25. Vienna PT is good for trips in the city centre - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used <TOTAL BASE: 981> 25

26. Vienna PT is good for trips outside the city centre - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used <TOTAL BASE: 962> 26

27. Vienna Nearest stop is close to where I live - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used <TOTAL BASE: 999> 27

28. Vienna Travel time on PT is reasonable - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used <TOTAL BASE: 987> 28

29. Vienna I am satisfied with the number of departures - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used <TOTAL BASE: 982> 29

30. Vienna Waiting time is short at transfers - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used <TOTAL BASE: 968> 30

31. Vienna 2007 Reliability in subgroups

32. Vienna Reliability - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used 32

33. Vienna 2007 Information in subgroups

34. Vienna Information - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used 34

35. Vienna It is easy to get the information needed when planning a trip - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used <TOTAL BASE: 929> 35

36. Vienna Information is good when traffic problems occur - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used <TOTAL BASE: 947> 36

37. Vienna Information is good in stops and terminals - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used <TOTAL BASE: NNN> 37

38. Vienna 2007 Staff behaviour in subgroups

39. Vienna Staff behaviour - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used 39

40. Vienna Staff answers my questions correctly - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used <TOTAL BASE: 868> 40

41. Vienna Staff behaves nicely and correctly - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used <TOTAL BASE: 933> 41

42. Vienna 2007 Security and safety in subgroups

43. Vienna Security and safety - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used 43

44. Vienna I feel secure at stations and bus stops - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used <TOTAL BASE: 989> 44

45. Vienna I feel secure on board busses and trains - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used <TOTAL BASE: 994> 45

46. Vienna I am not afraid of traffic accidents when using PT - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used <TOTAL BASE: 987> 46

47. Vienna 2007 Comfort in subgroups

48. Vienna Comfort - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used 48

49. Vienna PT travel is comfortable - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used <TOTAL BASE: 996> 49

50. Vienna Transfers are easy - Subgroups Gender Age PT travel frequency Geography PT modes used <TOTAL BASE: 979> 50