2 results found
Morse L, Trompet M, Barron A, et al., 2020, A benchmarking framework for understanding bus performance in the U.S., Benchmarking: an international journal, Vol: 27, Pages: 1533-1550, ISSN: 1463-5771
Purpose This paper describes a benchmarking framework applied to medium-sized urban public bus agencies in the United States which has overcome the challenges of data quality, comparability and understanding.Design/methodology/approach The benchmarking methodology described in this paper is based on lessons learned through seven years of development of a fixed route key performance indicator (KPI) system for the American Bus Benchmarking Group (ABBG). Founded in 2011, the ABBG is a group of public medium-sized urban bus agencies that compare performance and share best practices with peers throughout the United States. The methodology is adapted from the process used within international benchmarking groups facilitated by Imperial College and consists of four main elements: peer selection, KPI system development, processes to achieve high-quality data, and processes to understand relative performance and change.Findings The four main elements of the ABBG benchmarking methodology consist of eighteen sub-elements, which when applied overcome three main benchmarking challenges; comparability, data quality, and understanding. While serving as examples for the methodology elements, the paper provides specific insights into service characteristics and performance among ABBG agencies.Research limitations/implications The benchmarking approach described in this paper requires time and commitment and thus is most suitably applied to a concise group of agencies. Practical implications This methodology provides transit agencies, authorities and benchmarking practitioners a framework for effective benchmarking. It will lead to high-quality comparable data and a strong understanding of the performance context to serve as a basis for organizational changes, whether for policy, planning, operations, stakeholder communication, or program development. Originality/value The methodology, while consistent with recommendations from literature, is unique in its scale, in-depth validation
Morse L, Trompet M, Barron A, et al., 2017, Development of a key performance indicator system to benchmark relative paratransit performance, Transportation Research Record-Series, Vol: 2650, Pages: 1-8, ISSN: 0361-1981
The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities. US transit agencies are therefore required to offer services to eligible customers that complement the mobility opportunities provided to the general public on fixed-route public transit. While these paratransit services are necessary and just, they represent a proportionally large cost to agencies: approximately eight times the cost per boarding compared to fixed-route bus service. To be able to identify opportunities for (cost) efficiencies, and to further improve the quality of paratransit services offered, the twenty agencies of the American Bus Benchmarking Group (ABBG) decided to benchmark their relative performance in paratransit management and operations. To ensure comparability of agencies’ performance and hence ensure the usefulness of the benchmarking program, a key performance indicator system was developed and associated data items were defined in detail. The scope of this system went beyond the data already provided to the National Transit Database, both in amount and granularity of data collected, as well as the detail of definitions. This paper describes the challenges, respective solutions, and other lessons identified during four years of paratransit benchmarking development led by Imperial College London, the ABBG facilitators. The paper provides transit agencies and authorities as well as benchmarking practitioners and academics an opportunity to apply these lessons for the further benefit of paratransit services and their customers around the U.S.
This data is extracted from the Web of Science and reproduced under a licence from Thomson Reuters. You may not copy or re-distribute this data in whole or in part without the written consent of the Science business of Thomson Reuters.