Innovative Value Creation in Public TransportLearning to Structure for Capability

Sara Davoudi

Sara Davoudi | Innovative Value C

reation in Public Transport | 2016:6

Innovative Value Creation in Public TransportPublic transport is one of the few public services with a mandate toattract users, and therefore, this thesis suggests that Swedish publictransport organizations must understand how various services inmultiple dimensions affect users’ preferences for public transport.With this understanding, public transport organizations caneffectively and efficiently allocate resources and increase the appealof future public transport. Such an approach requires not only a deeporganizational knowledge of customer needs, but also a detailedknowledge of how the achievement of the various demands affectsusers and their value creation. This thesis further shows thatorganizational structures are based on political comprises ratherthen the needs to solve coordination challenges and facilitatecustomers’ value creation. It is here argued that the organizationalstructures and personal or impersonal information processingmechanisms in Swedish public transport influence the search forinformation and subsequent organizational learning influencing theRPTAs’ capabilities to include and understand public transportusers’ needs. This thesis offers insight into how public organizations,such as Swedish public transport authorities, can make decisions instructural design to learn from customer perceptions and adaptorganizational policy accordingly.

LICENTIATE THESIS | Karlstad University Studies | 2016:6 LICENTIATE THESIS | Karlstad University Studies | 2016:6

ISSN 1403-8099

Faculty of Arts and Social SciencesISBN 978-91-7063-684-4

Business Administration

LICENTIATE THESIS | Karlstad University Studies | 2016:6

Innovative Value Creation in Public TransportLearning to Structure for Capability

Sara Davoudi

Print: Universitetstryckeriet, Karlstad 2016

Distribution:Karlstad University Faculty of Arts and Social SciencesKarlstad Business SchoolSE-651 88 Karlstad, Sweden+46 54 700 10 00

© The author

ISBN 978-91-7063-684-4

ISSN 1403-8099

urn:nbn:se:kau:diva-39091

Karlstad University Studies | 2016:6

LICENTIATE THESIS

Sara Davoudi

Innovative Value Creation in Public Transport - Learning to Structure for Capability

WWW.KAU.SE

1

Some Hindus have an elephant to show. No one here has ever seen an elephant. They bring it at night to a dark room.

One by one, we go in the dark and come out saying how we experience the animal. One of us happens to touch the trunk.

“A water-pipe kind of creature.” Another, the ear.

“A very strong, always moving back and forth, fan-animal.” Another, the leg.

“I find it still, like a column on a temple.” Another touches the curved back.

“A leathery throne.” Another, the cleverest, feels the tusk.

“A rounded sword made of porcelain.” He’s proud of his description.

Each of us touches one place and understands the whole in that way. The palm and the fingers feeling in the dark are how the senses explore the reality of the

elephant. If each of us held a candle there, and if we went in together, we could see it.

(The essential Rumi, by Barks, 1995)

2

3

Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this thesis is to explore the capability of Swedish regional public transport authorities (RPTAs) to organize public transport so that it stimulates the intended value creation process needed to increase users’ positive experience.

Design/methodology/approach – This thesis utilizes an interpretative research approach. Two empirical studies have been used, resulting in two papers presented in this thesis.

Findings – Public transport is one of the few public services with a mandate to attract users, and therefore, this thesis suggests that Swedish public transport organizations must understand how various services in multiple dimensions affect users’ preferences for public transport. With this understanding, public transport organizations can effectively and efficiently allocate resources and increase the appeal of future public transport. Such a focus demands a deep organizational knowledge and understanding of user needs and detailed awareness of how the achievement of various requirements affects users. It is further argued that the organizational structures and personal or impersonal information processing mechanisms in Swedish public transport influence the search for information and subsequent organizational learning influencing the RPTAs’ capabilities to include and understand public transport users’ needs. This thesis offers insight into how public organizations, such as Swedish public transport authorities, can make decisions in structural design to learn from user perceptions and adapt organizational policy accordingly. In addition, I argue that RPTAs must employ both exploitative and exploratory learning to improve their capabilities and increase their efficiency and effectiveness. This thesis also provides a model to describe these relationships.

Originality/value – Unlike previous studies, this thesis shows how organizational structures are decided based on political compromises rather than the need for coordination.

4

5

Acknowledgments

The research for this licentiate thesis was financed by the Public Transport Authority in Värmland and Region Värmland. Region Värmland gave me the opportunity, as an industrial PhD student, to be placed with their public transport authority for two and a half years. This placement gave me a broad insight into public transport and opened up many opportunities to conduct this research. I would like to thank Region Värmland, and especially my manager, Peter Wretman, for his support and patience. Thank you for giving me the freedom to find my way and for providing the network that made this thesis possible. Special thanks goes to my closest coworker, Mattias Landin: Thanks for all the discussions and for your support, thank you for providing me with sweets and food when I was low, and thank you for being my friend. I am also grateful to everyone I have worked with at Region Värmland. Thank you Rebecka and Anna (I miss you two), Camilla, Ingela, Marcus (dear principal), Sara, Eva, Gunilla, Catrin, Bosse, Jens, and Jenny (just to mention a few of you), for all the fun during these years. I am going to miss you all. Bo Enquist has been my main supervisor during this licentiate thesis. Thank you Bo, for your support and for sharing your knowledge through this process. My bachelor’s, master’s, and this licentiate thesis would not have been possible if not for Mikael Johnson. Mikael was not only my supervisor during all my academic steps, but also my mentor and coach. Thank you for pushing me to do my best, and thank you for putting me back together when I was broken. I am grateful for everything you have done for me. I also want to thank Henrietta Huzell and Margareta Friman for letting me be a part of CFT and SAMOT. Thanks to all my coworkers at CTF I look forward to continue this journey with you, special thanks to Katrin Lättman for the final proofreading. I also want to thank Värmlandstrafik, Trafikverket and all the regional public transport authorities that contributed to this study.

6

To my family, thank you Bo and Elisabeth for supporting me during this process. A special thanks to my parents and my brother Behzad for always supporting me, you give me courage to go my own way. I love you dearly. Finally, I want to thank my beloved Claes for being a part my life, and for always putting a smile on my face. Karlstad, January 2016 Sara Davoudi

7

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 10  1.1 Aim  ..................................................................................................................  12  1.2 Summary and findings of the appended papers  ......................................  13  

1.2.1 Paper I  .............................................................................................................  13  1.2.2 Paper II  ............................................................................................................  15  

1.3 Structure of the thesis  ..................................................................................  16  

2 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN ....................................... 18  2.1 The research approach  ................................................................................  18  2.2 The research design: a case study approach  ..........................................  19  2.3 Quantitative and qualitative methods  ........................................................  21  

2.3.1 Quantitative research  ....................................................................................  22  2.3.2 Qualitative research  ......................................................................................  22  2.3.3 Combining quantitative and qualitative methods  ......................................  24  

2.4 My choice of research method  ....................................................................  24  2.5 The Questionnaire Study, Paper I  ...............................................................  27  2.6 The Interview Study, Paper II  ......................................................................  29  2.7 Trustworthiness — a reflection on the research process  ......................  31  

3 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ............................................................. 34  3.1 Understanding the requirements and dimensions of Public transport  34  

3.1.1 Theory of attractive quality  ...........................................................................  35  3.2 Organizational learning  ................................................................................  38  

3.2.1 Forms of organizational Learning  ................................................................  38  3.3 Internal structures and information processes  ........................................  40  

3.3.1 Organizational structure  ...............................................................................  40  3.3.2 Information processing  .................................................................................  43  

4 GENERAL DISCUSSION AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH ............................................................................................... 46  

4.1 General discussion  .......................................................................................  46  4.2 Conclusions  ...................................................................................................  50  4.3 Final words and future research  .................................................................  51  

References ................................................................................................ 55  

8

Figures

Figure 1: DNA string illustrating the dialectical relationship of explanation and

understanding ................................................................................................... 19  Figure 2: Example of Kano pair questions .............................................................. 28  Figure 3: Kano classification table .......................................................................... 29  Figure 4: The theory of attractive quality (adopted from Gustafsson 1996) ........... 35  Figure 5: Relationship between organizational structure and information processing

mechanisms ...................................................................................................... 47  Figure 6: Stakeholder dialogue in public transport, (adopted from Enquist and

Johnson 2013) .................................................................................................. 53  

Tables Table 1. An overview of the contributions in the appended papers ........................ 13  Table 2: Emphases of quantitative, mixed, and qualitative research ....................... 21  Table 3: An overview of the research issue and data gathering in the appended

papers ............................................................................................................... 26  Table 4 An overview of the findings of this thesis .................................................. 48  

9

APPENDED PAPERS Study I: Högström, C., Davoudi, S., Löfgren, M., and Johnson, M. (2016). Relevant and preferred public service: A study of user experiences and value creation in public transport. Public Management Review, 18 (1) 65–90. Study II: Davoudi, S., and Johnson, M. Organizational structure and learning: The case of Swedish public transport authorities An earlier version of the paper was presented at the Third National Conference in Transport Research, Norrköping, Sweden, 2014.

10

1 INTRODUCTION

In the history of public service delivery, success or funding have not traditionally depended on attracting users, such as in the case of firefighting, law enforcement, or healthcare. While such public services are likely to benefit from regulations and charters that determine and govern service delivery (Osborne and Gaebler 1992), public transport success depends not only on reaching societal and environmental goals, but also on attracting users and providing experiences users are willing to pay for (Wallin Andreassen 1995). Enquist et al (2011) argue that in these circumstances, governmental charters as well as existing and potential public service users, that is citizens, highlight various quality requirements that affect the attractiveness of public services and demand managerial attention. As public transport provides a service that ultimately exists to meet user needs, these needs must be explicitly considered (Mokonyama and Venter 2013) and disseminated across the organizations (Kohli and Jaworski 1990). There exists a considerable amount of research in the context of Swedish public transport stressing its complexity with multiple dependent and independent actors within a system based on both public and private organizations (Gottfridsson 2009, Camén 2011, Gottfridsson 2012, Enquist and Johnson 2013). The focus has been on both the governance and management of public transport. The research into governance has focused on exploring organizational structures and roles within the Swedish public transport authorities (PTA) (cf. Enquist 1999, Enquist 2003, Enquist et al 2005, Camén 2010, Enquist et al 2010, Camén 2011, Enquist et al 2011, Enquist and Johnson 2013) while the research into management has mainly focused on contracts between the Public transport authorities and operators as well as the interaction with users and user’s needs (cf. Friman et al 2001, Friman and Gärling 2001, Johnson 2007, Gebauer et al 2010, Rönnbäck and Witell 2009, Gärling and Fujii 2009, Friman and Fellesson 2009, Camén 2011, Camén et al 2012, Pedersen et al 2011, Pedersen et al 2011a, Camén et al 2011, Bamberg et al 2011, Olsson et al 2012, Fellesson et al 2013, Gebauer et al 2012,

11

Enquist et al 2015). However, the condition as well as the complexity of Swedish public transport has changed due to the execution of a public transport regulation in 2012 (SFS 2010:1065). A main objective of the regulation (SFS 2010:1065) is to through de-regulation of the market, make public transport more attractive among travelers. This objective demands innovations that enhance users’ preference experiences of public transport and make public transport a part of societal development and daily life. The expectation is that the regulation leads to an increase in the supply of public transport and that more and new user-friendly travel options will increase public travelling. Further, the regulation requires that each region establish a regional public transport authority (RPTA), which has the formal responsibility for developing and organizing public transport in the region. In more practical terms, the authorities are responsible for creating regional public transport provision programs. The purpose of these programs is to decompose the overarching objectives of the regulation into a plan for strategic development of the regions’ public transport (see Enquist and Johnson 2013 for a more comprehensive review). Accordingly, the RPTAs’ need to organize public transport in ways that facilitate users’ value creation. Such facilitation demands structures that stimulate innovations aimed at sustaining or enhancing the users’ valuation of the benefits of public transport (cf. Priem 2007). Consequently, the RPTAs need to include the wants and needs of the user into their governance of public transport. However, as user needs are likely to change over time (Högström et al. 2010; Löfgren et al. 2011), organizational learning is needed in order for the RPTAs to be capable to adapt their programs to change, make acceptable decisions, and achieve current and future objectives (Galbraith 1973). In order to achieve the main objectives of the regulation the RPTAs need to create structures that facilitate information processing that integrates the understanding of use value— that is the users’

12

interactive and relativistic preference experience (Holbrook 2006)—into their policies and procedures. This thesis integrates the theory of attractive quality with theories of organizational structure, information processing, and learning in organizational science to address the complexity of public transport organizations.

1.1 Aim This research focuses on the Swedish RPTAs and seeks to contribute to the theoretical discussions on the challenges and changes in the public sphere. The aim of this thesis is to explore the RPTAs’ capability to organize public transport so that it stimulates the intended value creation process needed to enhance user preference experiences. I define capability as coordinating internal structures and information processing, while at the same time increasing and including knowledge about users’ changing needs. This definition is consistent with previous research such as Ulrich and Lake (1991) and Grant (1996, 96a). However, even though capability is a complex multifaceted concept, I will not develop the concept per se but rather focus on answering the following questions in order to reach the aim.

• How does meeting various service requirements affect public transport’s relevance to users and their preferences for public transport services?

• How do organizational structure and information processing, in

public organizations in general and public transport in particular, frame an organization’s capability to reach its objectives?

13

1.2 Summary and findings of the appended papers

This section summarizes the two appended papers. I have chosen to present this section in the introduction to provide an understanding of my chosen methods and the theoretical framework presented in chapters 2 and 3. Table 1. An overview of the contributions in the appended papers  Paper    

 Title  

 Contribution  

 Contributions  of  the  author  

1   Relevant  and  Preferred  Public  Service:  A  study  of  user  experiences  and  value  creation  in  public  transit      

Provides  empirical  evidence  for  the  multi-­‐dimensionality  of  PT  and  how  organizational  efforts  affect  the  relevance  and  preference  of  PT.  This  paper  suggests  that  both  exploitative  and  explorative  approaches  have  an  effect  on  the  relevance  and  user  preference  of  PT  and  that  both  these  approaches  are  important  for  current  and  future  success.    

This  paper  was  co-­‐authored  with  Dr.  Högström,  Dr.  Löfgren  and  Dr.  Johnson.  Dr.  Högström  and  I  contributed  equally  to  the  writing  and  to  all  parts  of  the  paper.    

2   Organizational  structure  and  learning:  The  case  of  Swedish  public  transport  authorities    

Provides  empirical  evidence  of  how  personal  and  impersonal  information  mechanisms  and  organizational  structure  affect  the  perception  of  uncertainty  and  equivocality,  and  in  turn,  the  need  for  information  processing.    

This  paper  was  co-­‐authored  with  Dr.  Mikael  Johnson.  I  did  the  main  part  of  the  data  collection  and  writing  plus  contributed  to  all  parts  of  the  paper.  

1.2.1 Paper I

This paper utilizes the Theory of Attractive Quality (Kano 1984), described in chapter 2.5 and 3.1.1, to show how achievement of service requirements can affect organizations’ relevance and preference among users. The paper, focuses on how managers can, apart from lowering prices, implement value-creation strategies based on relevance or preference (cf. Lepak et al. 2007; Priem 2007). With this approach, the paper provides a general and reflective understanding of strategies for facilitating users’ value creation. The findings suggest managerial

14

decisions and analyses must focus on several requirements across different dimensions rather than only a few. To enhance service delivery governance and management, managers and scholars should adopt a holistic view of how organizational efforts affect users’ experienced value. This theoretical understanding can help managers allocate and coordinate resources to make transport more relevant to users and to reflect their preferences. Findings suggest, for a service offering to be considered legitimate and relevant to the user, it must fulfill certain minimum or must-be attributes. When an organization achieves unique, requested must-be service requirements or standards, it can potentially define a service category of its own and make competing alternatives irrelevant. An organization’s achievement of attractive, one-dimensional requirements, when accepted as a legitimate constituent of an offering category, can enhance both user preference and the organization’s reputation for its offerings within that category (King and Whetten 2008). Further, an organization’s achievement of reverse attributes is counterproductive when success is dependent upon attracting users because the presence of reverse attributes has a negative effect on the relevance of the organization’s offerings and their preference among users. Both the achievement of attractive and one-dimensional requirements and the elimination of reverse requirements can enhance user preference. Findings also show social aspects that disturb users, on-board staff behavior that negatively affects on-board safety, and a system design that increases the need to switch lines to reach a destination all have strong reverse (negative) effects on user preference and public transport relevance. To attract users, this study shows that public transport organizations (PTOs) should focus their efforts and resources on eliminating reverse service requirements before investing in preference-increasing requirements.

15

Findings of this empirical study show that to increase public transport’s relevance, managers first need to adopt an exploitative strategy (cf. Benner and Tushman 2003), focused on incremental improvements to eliminate reverse service attributes. Once such efforts have been successfully implemented, managers can continue to follow the exploitative approach to focus on one-dimensional attributes that increase consumer preference and attract users. However, public transport managers also have the strategic option of using some or all their resources in an explorative approach to develop radical innovations that will become must-have attributes. If successful, such an explorative, value-creation strategy (cf. Benner and Tushman 2003) could potentially make alternative modes of transportation without these novel, must-have attributes, irrelevant. This paper was co-authored with Dr. Claes Högström (Ph.D. candidate at the time), Dr. Martin Löfgren, and Dr. Mikael Johnson. I conducted the data collection for both the pre-study and the empirical study. The literature review, the data analysis, and the actual writing of the paper were a joint effort with Dr. Högström, with whom I share the main authorship of this paper. Dr. Löfgren and Dr. Johnson contributed by commenting on and suggesting changes to the paper.

1.2.2 Paper II

This paper explores how organizational structure and information processing in Swedish public transport frame organizations’ abilities to reach their objectives. Within public organizations that are a mix of public organizations and private business, the findings demonstrate that organizational structure is based on a political compromise rather than a strategic choice designed to match the organizations’ information processing and performance requirements (Tushman and Nadler 1978). Findings in this paper illustrate how the combination of different organizational structures—mechanistic and organic—with personal or impersonal information mechanisms can affect perceived equivocality

16

and uncertainty in the organization, and thus, affect the need for information processing and in turn organizational learning. Findings identify four distinct levels of organizational design based on organizational structure and structural characteristics. The mechanistic impersonal structure represents a conventional formal, centralized organization, with a short-term focus on control and efficiency. The mechanistic personal structure adds personal mechanisms to allow open discussion in ambiguous situations. This paper suggests that adding personal characteristics to the mechanistic structure can, through exploitative reasoning, lead to different interpretations of questions and answers, and (intentionally or unintentionally) lead to learning. Similarly, organic personal structures represent a conventional emphasis on coordination and effectiveness. This structure can, through extensive vertical and horizontal information processing, lead to both exploitative and exploratory learning and result in present and future viability. Organizations with organic impersonal structures have formalized vertical connections executed through bureaucratic processes; however, their impersonal structure prevents open discussions and ambiguous situations. This paper was designed and co-authored with Dr. Mikael Johnson. I conducted the main empirical work, the literature review, and the writing. The data analysis was a joint effort with Dr. Johnson.

1.3 Structure of the thesis The thesis consists of the following four chapters. Chapter 1 introduces the research field and the aim of the research. The introduction is followed by a summary of the findings in the appended papers. Chapter 2 describes the research approach and design, including the methods used in each of the appended papers.

17

Chapter 3 presents a review of relevant literature to provide the background and theoretical framework for the thesis. The chapter begins with a review of the multidimensionality of public transport offerings and theory of attractive quality, followed by a review of theory related to internal structures, information processes, organizational learning, and organizational capability. Finally, Chapter 4 concludes with a discussion that coordinates the findings in the appended papers and presents the main contributions and opportunities for future research.

18

2 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN

In this chapter, I present the research approach, research design and methods used in my research.

2.1 The research approach With the aim of this thesis being to explore RPTAs’ capability to organize public transport so that it stimulates the intended value creation process needed to increase users’ positive experience, I have been interested in unfolding this phenomenon. Due to this, I have been inspired by Hermeneutics and the interpretative research approach. The Hermeneutics approach can be explained as an ever-ongoing struggle between explanation and understanding as well as pre-understanding and understanding. It stresses the significance of how past knowledge and experience affects the understanding of the phenomena being studied (Alvesson and Sköldberg 2009). Thus, hermeneutics is about revelation of the hidden, alternating between pre-understanding and understanding, rather than the correspondence between subjective thinking and objective reality (Alvesson and Sköldberg 2009). With other words, when exploring something and striving for understanding, we try to explain a phenomenon in comparison with what we already know—our pre-understanding. By continuing to explore, discuss, and think, we find new explanations and our understanding is no longer the same; it is set at a new level of pre-understanding. Interpretation, then, is this process, this dialectical relationship where the moment of explanation and understanding is no longer separated, but mutually related in one process (Kristensson Uggla 2010). My interest is in this dialectical relationship. It is important to note that dialectic does not mean a simple diversity of things put together, but rather is the conflict, or in my opinion, a “game” that in a “love struggle” (Kristensson Uggla 2010) for truth holds the joint venture of explanation and understanding in place, guarding the open

19

atmosphere and protecting it from all false recognitions (Kristensson Uggla 2010). Metaphorically, I see the development of this research as a dyadic spiral, like a DNA string (Figure 1), held in place by the ongoing dialectical relationship between explanation and understanding. I see this as the dialectical spiral of interpretation that sets the DNA—the identity of this thesis—where explanation and understanding are “playing” and evolving together and where explanation is constantly correcting understanding.

Figure 1: DNA string illustrating the dialectical relationship of explanation and understanding

2.2 The research design: a case study approach Before method selection, data collection, and analysis can take place, research needs a design (Yin 2003). A design is a logical plan for “getting from here to there,” or from the initial research idea to the research conclusions, and specifies what evidence is needed (De Vaus 2001). The research design defines the research question, at least in broad terms (Eisenhardt 1989), and ensures the evidence will answer the research question as clearly as possible. The case study approach, which focuses on understanding the existing dynamics within single settings (Eisenhardt 1989) is often used to develop knowledge of individuals, groups and organizations, and to explore social, political, and related phenomena. Case studies are appropriate for exploratory,

20

descriptive, and explanatory applications (Yin 2003). The exploratory nature of my research question makes the case study approach the preferred design. As a research design, the case study approach is sometimes considered less desirable or less rigorous than other approaches because it can lead to various biases (Yin 2003). However, case studies can also reduce biases by allowing researchers to obtain deep insight about situations and people’s interpretation of them. The focus is on processes and interactions rather than results, and the purpose is to see entities rather than expose individual phenomena. Another common concern regarding the case study approach is generalizability—how one or a few cases can induce generalized conclusions (Yin 2003). However, the goal of case studies is not to find the truth, but rather a rational or interesting perception of it (Norén 1995). The focus is on analytical generalization, and expanding and generalizing theories, rather than on enumerating frequencies (Yin 2003). In addition, case studies have been criticized for being too time consuming and resulting in massive documents (Yin 2003). Traditionally, case studies have been identified with qualitative methods, with the common misunderstanding that they require a particular form of data collection (Yin 1981, 2003). But similar to other types of research design, such as experimental, longitudinal, and cross-sectional approaches, case studies do not imply any particular form of data collection (De Vaus 2001); scholars typically combine methods such as documents, interviews, surveys, and observations (Eisenhardt 1989; Yin 2003). In the following sections, I discuss qualitative and quantitative methods as both separate and combined research strategies and outline the specific research strategy of my thesis.

21

2.3 Quantitative and qualitative methods Quantitative research is associated with hard and reliable data collected through structured surveys and experiments. Qualitative data is linked to rich data collected through true observation and in-depth personal interviews. Quantitative research is often based on the deductive orientation and has the goal of testing and confirming theory (Bryman 1997). In quantitative research, preparation is critical; the study must be clearly defined before the data is gathered, and the researcher must remain independent and separate from the subject of the study. Qualitative research is often based on an inductive approach, in which theory emerges as the study progresses. In contrast to the quantitative method, the qualitative approach keeps researchers at a minimal distance from the subject, because by getting closer to the subject the researcher can see reality from the perspective of the actors being studied. Table 2: Emphases of quantitative, mixed, and qualitative research    

Quantitative  Research    

 Mixed  Research  

 Qualitative  Research  

Scientific  method   Confirmatory   Confirmatory  and  exploratory  

Exploratory  

Ontology   Objective   Pluralism;  appreciation  of  objective  and  subjective  

Subjective  

Epistemology   Scientific  realism;  search  for  truth  

Dialectical  pragmatism   Individual  and  group  justification;  varying  standards  

View  of  human  behavior  

Regular  and  predictable  

Dynamic,   complex,   and  partially  predictable  

Situational  and  unpredictable  

The characteristics of quantitative and qualitative methods are presented in table 2 and discussed in more detail in the following sections.

22

2.3.1 Quantitative research The quantitative method focuses on the confirmatory scientific method; it aims to test hypotheses and theories with data (Johnson and Christensen 2010). Quantitative research adopts a structured research strategy where all preparations (sampling and questionnaire construction) are conducted before data collection (Bryman 1988). The emphasis is on the importance of stating a hypothesis and testing its support with empirical data. The comparability of the sample and the study population is highly important because the sample is assumed to represent the population (Morse 1999). In quantitative research, human thoughts and behavior are assumed to be highly regular and predictable. A study focuses on only one or a few factors at the same time (Johnson and Christensen 2010); factors not being studied are held constant, often under laboratory conditions, while the factor in focus is manipulated. This method operates under the assumption of objectivity. The ontological understanding of quantitative researchers is objectivistic: Researchers assume there is one truth or reality to be observed, and by remaining neutral and keeping distant from the study subject, they can define the phenomenon. In this way, researchers can study a factor from a distance and avoid human bias (Bryman 1984). The quantitative method is an approach that applies natural science, particularly a positivistic approach, to social phenomena (Bryman 1984). One of the main characteristics of quantitative research is that it involves valid and reliable data collection (Tashakkori and Teddlie 1998). By choosing random, representative samples, the researcher produces objective viewpoints and generalizable findings that can be inferred to other research areas (Bryman 1997; Johnson and Christensen 2010).

2.3.2 Qualitative research In much of the quantitative research literature, qualitative methods are regarded as tools that are used in the exploratory or early stages of a study, before the “real” study and the counting begin (Silverman 2000). According to qualitative researchers, however, quantitative methods are not the only way to establish the validity of findings;

23

qualitative research can determine validity from field research that includes observation of behavior in everyday situations (Silverman 2000). Although both quantitative and qualitative research aims to transfer knowledge gained from data collected during fieldwork to modify or create theory, their means are different (Morse 1999). The qualitative research method is used when researchers know little about a phenomenon, but want to learn more. Studies usually include participant observations and unstructured interviews (Bryman 1997). The data derived from qualitative research is often described as deep and rich, indicating the desire to understand multiple dimensions and layers of the subject (Johnson and Christensen 2010). The primary focus is to express episodes, actions, norms, and values from the perspective of the investigated subjects (Alvesson and Sköldberg 1994; Bryman 1997). Qualitative research focuses on the exploratory scientific method, which is used to describe the case studied. The method generates new hypotheses and theories; and specification of theories prior to the study is often (but not always) rejected to avoid preconceptions (Bryman 1997). Qualitative researchers view human thoughts and behavior as personal and unpredictable, changing from time to time. Within this research method, reality and truth are subjective, personal, and constructed within different groups; because “right or wrong” are defined within these social constructions, the researcher’s main interest is usually simply to generalize within the particular groups studied. In qualitative research, each participant is carefully selected to contribute to the study in the best way (Morse 1999). Qualitative researchers study human behavior in its natural environment. They do not interfere in the natural flow, but hope to be insiders—part of a group—to understand how multiple dimensions and layers of reality interact and define the group. Within the qualitative research method, the main aim of the observation is to attempt a deeper understanding of the subject or people studied. The qualitative researcher constantly tries to maintain a view that is true to the subjects’ viewpoints and to understand their perspective (Johnson and Christensen 2010). The theory gained from the study is applicable beyond the study subject and is valid to all similar situations, questions, and problems (Morse 1999).

24

2.3.3 Combining quantitative and qualitative methods Due to the fundamental differences between qualitative and quantitative methods, some researchers have argued that the two cannot and should not be combined. Others have stated that the choice of method should not be affected by methodological or philosophical commitment, but be determined by the purposes and circumstances of the study (Hammersley 1992). Nevertheless, the limitation of using only one method has led to a greater interest in and acceptance of the combination of methods to understand difficult research questions; use of only one approach is even considered to be incomplete in some aspects (Johnson and Christensen 2010). Tashakkori and Teddlie (1998) argue that there are different scenarios for combining qualitative and quantitative methods. For example, the qualitative method could be used to develop and explain quantitative measures. Depending on the stage of the study, another approach could be to use the two methods in parallel, to better understand the subject (Tashakkori and Teddlie 1998). Researchers who use both methods argue it is important to include both confirmatory and exploratory methods in their studies (Johnson and Onwuegbuzie 2004) and to adapt their methods to particular subjects and situations. They move back and forth between a confirmatory perspective and deep examination of phenomena (Bryman 1997).

2.4 My choice of research method My research design is based on how well the characteristics of different methods—qualitative or quantitative—answer my research question. The choice of method should consider not just the research as a whole but also the different parts and levels of research needed to reach the best understanding. I sought to explore by putting the research question in the spotlight and stepping away from paradigmatic commitments. I aim to take a pluralistic (see Table 2) stance toward the nature of reality and accepted both methods to explore the RPTAs’ capability to organize a public transport service that stimulates the intended value creation process. Rather than

25

neglecting the characteristics of these methods (their ontological and epistemological beliefs), my approach embraced the differences and used them in my interpretation. My use of both qualitative and quantitative methods required awareness of their strengths and weaknesses and knowledge of different paradigms, to fit the most suitable technique to the research elements. Both appended articles have a holistic design, focusing on the global nature (Yin 2003) of each case. The survey used in Paper 1 produced a large data set that provides broad insight into the requirements of Swedish public transport and the possibility of connecting these requirements to industry goals and measures. The quantitative survey created a first level of understanding and triggered the hermeneutic spiral to “spin,” as I sought explanations and more detailed information. This process identified the need for deeper, more detailed interviews—the basis for Paper 2, which addressed RPTA organizational structure and learning. This process, along with the hermeneutics approach, is at the methodological heart of this thesis; that is, the choice of method should consider not just the research as a whole but also which various parts and levels of the research procedure are needed to reach the best understanding. I regard the methods used in this thesis as equally necessary and parallel to produce these results. Table 3 provides an overview of the research issue and data gathering in the two appended papers. The following two sections describe the research procedures in greater detail.

26

Tab

le 3

: An

over

view

of t

he r

esea

rch

issu

e an

d da

ta g

athe

ring

in th

e ap

pend

ed p

aper

s

 Stud

y    

Type

 of  

pape

r  

 Aim  

 Metho

d(s)  

 

 Em

piric

al  basis  

 Da

ta  gathe

red  

by  

 Da

ta  ana

lyzed  

by  

 Re

sulting  

pape

r    

1  Em

pirical  

Und

erstanding  how

 achievem

ent  o

f  service  

requ

iremen

ts  affe

cts  

organizatio

ns’  relevance  

and  preferen

ce  amon

g  users.    

 

Interviews  (pre-­‐

stud

y)  

  Que

stionn

aires  

30  interviews  

    930  qu

estio

nnaire  

respon

dents  

Sara  Davou

di  

Claes  H

ögström  

Sara  Davou

di  

 

I  

2  Em

pirical  

Exploring  ho

w  

organizatio

nal  structure  

and  inform

ation  processes  

fram

e  organizatio

ns’  

abilitie

s  to  reach  their  

objectives.  

Interviews  

11  se

mi-­‐structured  

interviews  

Sara  Davou

di  

Sara  Davou

di  

Mikael  Joh

nson

 II  

27

2.5 The Questionnaire Study, Paper I To study the link between service requirement performance and user preference and relevance in public transport, we adopted the methodology of Kano et al. (1984), based on the theory of attractive quality. This methodology can be used to evaluate and divide specific quality attributes in relation to the subjective attribute satisfaction of users. Kano methodology links the degree of attribute achievement to user’s corresponding subjective experience evaluation (e.g., Berger et al. 1993). The attributes can be divided into five quality categories based on an attribute’s impact on user satisfaction and dissatisfaction in relation to the degree of attribute achievement (Löfgren and Witell 2005). These categories are “must-be” (M), “one-dimensional” (O), “attractive” (A), “indifferent” (I), and “reverse” (R). To create a relevant questionnaire and follow the approach of previous Kano studies (e.g. Högström et al. 2010; Matzler et al. 1996), we conducted a preliminary study to identify specific requirements in public transport. According to Griffin and Hauser (1993), 20 to 30 user interviews are sufficient to determine approximately 90 percent or more of all user requirements in a homogeneous user segment. Therefore, given public transport’s standardized nature and relatively low complexity, we deemed 30 user interviews to be appropriate. In this study no new requirements were found after 11 interviews. Nevertheless, following Griffin and Hauser (1993), 19 additional interviews were conducted to confirm and validate the 25 requirements found to assure theoretical saturation and internal consistency of the results (Gasson 2003). To ensure a representative sample, the questionnaire was distributed by mail to a random sample of 2,500 public transport users located in the county of Värmland. The sample was drawn from a database of potential and existing local public transport users. A total of 930 complete responses were received, representing a response rate of 37 percent, of which 64 percent were women. Notably, 70 percent of the respondents reported using public transport monthly, while 95 percent had used it at least at some point. In return for returning the

28

questionnaire by the due date, respondents received a 50-SEK travel voucher for local public transport. The first section of the survey aimed at gathering information regarding the respondents’ gender, age, and travel habits. These background questions were followed by the Kano pair questions, based on the attributes that emerged from the preliminary study: a pair of Kano questions for each attribute, formulated with five alternative responses, as shown in Figure 2 (see also Kano et al 1984). The first question (A) relates to the user’s reaction if the product fulfills a specific requirement (the functional part of the question). The second question (B) relates to user’s reaction if the product does not fulfill the requirement (the dysfunctional part). In the last section, the respondents were asked to rate the importance of the quality attributes on a scale of 1–10. A) How do you feel if the service is

environmentally friendly?

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel if the service is NOT environmentally friendly?

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Figure 2: Example of Kano pair questions Before the questionnaire was sent out, a test was conducted where we asked 10 people to identify unclear wording, typographical errors, and confusing instructions, based on the feedback minor corrections were made. In the first part of the analysis, we conducted a principal component analysis (PCA) with varimax rotation to divide the survey’s 25 attributes into context-specific public transport quality dimensions (cf. Fellesson and Friman 2008). In the initial analysis, we excluded two attributes with low convergent and discriminant validity between factors, cross-loadings over 0.4, and communalities below 0.4 on

29

several factors (Hair et al. 2010; Stevens 2002;), leaving 23 requirements for the final analysis. In the second part of the analysis, the requirements were classified according to the theory of attractive quality. We used the evaluation rules displayed in Figure 3 to classify respondents’ answers to the Kano pair questions into quality categories in the theory of attractive quality (Kano et al. 1984; Löfgren and Witell 2005).

Quality attribute → Dysfunctional ↓ 1. like 2. must be 3. neutral 4. live with 5. dislike

1. like Q A A A O

2. must be R I I I M

Functional 3. neutral R I I I M

4. live with R I I I M

5. dislike R R R R Q Figure 3: Kano classification table M = must-be O = one-dimensional A = attractive I = indifferent R = reverse Q = questionable

2.6 The Interview Study, Paper II We used multiple case studies to create a holistic understanding of how organizational structure and information processing frame the ability of the organization to reach its objectives (Bonoma 1985; Eisenhardt 1989; Orton 1997; Stake 1978; Yin 2003). The iterative process involved two steps, with the first alternating between existing theory and (empirical) data analysis, and the second alternating between data analysis and data collection (Burawoy 1991). The first step represented the first iteration, in which the interplay of existing theory and data analysis occurs. This exchange guided the literature review, which provided a framework for data interpretation. In this step, I identified organizational structure and information processing as the core theoretical concepts of this study. In addition, we developed a tentative link between the theoretical core concepts and the data analysis and established the basis for a tentative theory

30

that guided the second exchange (Yin 2009). We coded the collected data and wrote memos (Silverman 1970) that motivated and guided further theoretical review. This iterative process, alternating between deductive and inductive theorizing, continued to a point of theoretical saturation (Glaser and Strauss 1967), allowing the construction of the study’s formal typology. Among the 21 RPTAs in Sweden, this study included 11 respondents representing 11 different RPTAs. The criteria applied for participation were that the interviewees had been involved throughout the process with the creation of the RPTA and their strategic documents, as well as been active in the daily processes of the RPTA. The interviews were conducted by phone. Although the interviews were open and the aim was to have deep conversations, an interview guide was used to guide the way. Such semi-structured interviews provide an opportunity for exploration of in-depth views that exist in the various organizations, and quantitative techniques could not have been used to answer this particular study’s research question. The empirical study began with a pre-study to check the appropriateness of the research context and the informants. The pre-study included four semi-structured phone interviews and confirmed that the context of the included cases represented various organizational structures affecting information processing. The pre-study also showed that the organizations differed mainly in their placement of the RPTA, the operational activities and in their funding. This information provided guidelines for selecting the main study’s sample. These three differences in the organizations were used in the sampling procedure, and seven more RPTAs were included in the study based on their potential to contribute to developing a theory (Eisenhardt 1989; Maxwell 1998; Patton 1990). The cases included various compositions of the three main organizational differences. The case selection resulted in a total of 11 semi-structured, in-depth phone interviews with managers (or equivalents) of the public transport authorities. The interviews focused on the organizations’ governance, policy documents, roles and responsibilities, and intra- and inter-organizational relationships. Each interview (2.5–3 hours) was audio recorded and transcribed word by word. Next, all

31

documents referenced by the respondents during the interviews were studied. These additional data sources provided an external check that assisted coding and interpretation during data analysis. Following data coding, we used memos to develop the study’s model and typology, and extending existing theory (Bryman and Bell 2011; Glaser and Strauss 1967; Miles and Huberman 1994; Strauss 1987; Strauss and Corbin 1990). Through these memos, we crystallized various ideas and structured thoughts along categories and themes (Bryman and Bell 2011; Strauss 1987; Strauss and Corbin 1990). Case descriptions were created during the first step of the data analysis. Cases in the pre-study to start with and later all the 11 cases, underwent member checks to test their credibility. Case descriptions were continuously organized, matched, and compared within the iterative process and typologies emerged.

2.7 Trustworthiness — a reflection on the research process This thesis has an exploratory aim—to investigate the capability of RPTAs to organize public transport so that it stimulates the intended value creation process needed to increase users’ positive experience —and therefore, makes no claim regarding objectivistic truth. I am generally convinced that I have presented a trustworthy study. A description of my efforts in the gathering and processing of empirical data and in constructing the formal typology of this research is included in this thesis and in both papers. Trustworthiness has been described as a matter of balancing confessions and self-consciousness (Seale 1999), with “confessions” describing fieldwork experiences and “self-consciousness” being the awareness of personal biases. Seale (1999) discussed how self-consciousness alone can make research impossible. I have tried to avoid this effect by not generalizing beyond the context of my thesis, while at the same time accepting my role in constructing my own reality, which probably contains biases from someone else’s point of view.

32

In the same spirit as the balance of confession and self-consciousness, the challenge of an interpretative approach is the significance of alternating between nearness and distance (Kristensson Uggla 2010). Nearness refers to the time and effort required for the researcher to get close to the subject and understand its complexity. Distance on the contrary, which is important in the interpretation phase, refers to the researcher’s need to take a step back and see the whole (Kristensson Uggla 2010). During my research, I was a part of the context, an insider, which made it “easier” to get close to the research subject and truly understand its complexity. However, I struggled with the distance and at times, both mentally and physically, forced myself out of the process, until I learned to master this challenge. Another argument for nearness is known as “response.” The actors in the narratives confirm the credibility of the texts (Norén 1995). During the pre-study, interviewees had the opportunity to express their views on their parts of the narrative case descriptions; all agreed with the written document. In addition, the findings of the qualitative study as a whole were presented at a seminar, where representatives of the 21 Swedish RPTAs (including the 11 cases studied) and other national actors within Swedish public transport were present. Informants agreed with the findings and the logic of the study and provided feedback that confirmed the analysis. Referring to “reflexivity,” Alvesson and Sköldberg (2009) argued for an open attitude regarding the vital importance of the interpretative dimension and acknowledged that social, political, and ideological elements are woven together while constructing, interpreting, and writing empirical material. In other words, all independent empirical material, whether interview statements, questionnaire responses, or observations, is constructed to a certain extent by the researcher, and therefore, is an interpretation. I affirm that my interpretations have influenced all the steps of this research—when I decided what was interesting to study and what aim would lead to interesting results, and when I chose methods and informants, observed informants, and interpreted the empirical material. I embrace my interpretations and reflexivity as these

33

processes helped me to “spin” and develop through the hermeneutic spiral that created the identity—the DNA—of this thesis.

34

3 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK This section presents the theoretical constructs used in this thesis.

3.1 Understanding the requirements and dimensions of Public transport A number of public transport studies have shown that public transport service can differ across various contexts, which underlines the service- and contextual-specific nature of quality dimensions (Eboli and Mazzulla 2007, 2012; Fellesson and Friman 2008; Stradling et al. 2007). If we can understand the various requirements and dimensions of a context, we can better understand how users evaluate their experiences and in turn better help RPTAs to be more efficient and effective (Cronin and Taylor 1992; Johnson et al. 2001; Wallin Andreassen 1995). Previous studies on consumers in various contexts have shown that symmetrical and linear models of the performance-satisfaction relationship may result in inefficient prioritizations between efforts to maintain and improve user satisfaction (Anderson and Mittal 2000). Thus, the relationship between service requirements and users’ evaluation of their experience is important for understanding what drives user relevance and preferences among competing alternatives (Högström et al. 2010). Yet, few if any public management studies, including public transport research, have adopted a two-factor theory of user evaluations to provide insight into how specific public transport service quality dimensions facilitate value creation. This research uses the two-factor theory of attractive quality, with associated methodology (see 2.5 Kano methodology used in paper I) to provide insight into how user preferences are created through interaction with various public transport service dimensions.

35

3.1.1 Theory of attractive quality Inspired by Herzberg’s M-H theory, Kano and his colleagues developed the theory of attractive quality (Löfgren and Witell 2005). To avoid confusion with the M-H theory, Kano et al. (1984) named the theory “attractive quality and must-be quality.” Figure 4 illustrates how the theory links the degree to which a certain requirement is achieved to a user’s corresponding subjective experience evaluation, forming the basis for the theory’s “must-be” (M), “one-dimensional” (O), “attractive” (A), “indifferent” (I), and “reverse” (R) quality categories (Berger et al. 1993; Högström 2011; Löfgren and Witell 2005).

Figure 4: The theory of attractive quality (adopted from Gustafsson 1996) In Figure 4 the horizontal axis represents the degree to which a certain requirement is achieved, and the vertical axis corresponds to the user’s experience evaluation. The graphs illustrate the nature of the theory’s quality categories and, thus, how requirement

36

achievements can have an asymmetrical or symmetrical relationship with users’ experience evaluations. Must-be quality The must-be requirements are the basic criteria of a service. That is, basic performance standards a service must meet to be identified with a certain offering category and be able to compete with other alternatives within the specific category (Högström 2011; King and Whetten 2008). Consequently, users are likely to take these requirements for granted and therefore may not clearly demand them (Löfgren and Witell 2005). Achievement of must-be requirements is assumed to only lead to a state of user ‘non-dissatisfaction’ with the service and will not contribute to user satisfaction (Kano et al. 1984). Conversely, users will perceive the service irrelevant and exclude it from their consideration set if must-be requirements are not met (Högström et al. 2010). One-dimensional quality One-dimensional quality requirements have a linear, symmetrical and proportional relationship between requirement achievement and user (dis-)satisfaction. The higher the degree of achievement are met, the greater the user satisfaction with and preference for the service and vice versa. One-dimensional requirements, are usually known to, and explicitly demanded by, the user (Gustafsson 1998; Sauerwein et al. 1996). As the achievement these one dimentional requirements follow a the more – the better mantra, they are of key importance for the organization to increase and compete on user preference for the service (Matzler et al. 1996). Attractive quality Attractive quality attributes are, unlike the one-dimensional requirements, normally not expected by the costumer and can be described as surprise or delight attributes. As Figure 4 illustrates, attractive quality requirements have the ability to satisfy or delight users when achieved, but do not cause any dissatisfaction if they are not performed (Kano et al. 1984). Normally, attractive requirements delight users because users are unaware of the requirements’ existence or do not expect suppliers to perform them. Identification

37

and achievement of these requirements is likely to improve the reputation of the service and increase user preference, which in turn leads to a competitive advantage (Sauerwein 1999). Indifferent quality Indifferent quality requirements refer to aspects that users do not care about. As depicted in Figure 4, indiffrent quality requirements do not result in either satisfaction or dissatisfaction (Löfgren and Witell 2005). Nevertheless, these attributes may be necessary aspects of an offering that may be needed to facilitate value creation and to complete the service. Another explanation of the indifferent state of these attributes may also be that the attribute has become obsolete and is no longer requested or that they are in the beginning of their lifecycle and not yet discovered as relevant by the users. Reverse quality Reverse requirements represent negative relationships between the achievement of certain aspects and user experience evaluations, they are the things users do not want performed. Thus, the achievement of reverse requirements will result in dissatisfaction while the absence of the attribute will result in satisfaction (Löfgren and Witell 2005). Therefore, in order to be relevant organizations should seek to eliminate or achieve these attributes to the lowest possible degree. Matzler et al. (1996) provide an evaluation rule, known as “M > O > A > I,” used to prioritize categorized attributes. This evaluation rule indicates the hierarchical importance of categories suggesting a prioritization order of the requirements based on the assigned category. However, if two or more categories are tied, or close to tied, for a certain attribute, then more information is needed as there may be two market segments, or an attribute life cycle change, meaning that changes in user needs, may have occurred (Berger et al. 1993; Högström et al. 2010; Löfgren et al. 2011). Accordingly, as user needs are likely to change over time (Högström et al. 2010; Löfgren et al. 2011), organizational learning is needed in order for the RPTAs to be capable to adapt their programs to change, make acceptable decisions, and achieve current and future objectives (Galbraith 1973).

38

3.2 Organizational learning Organizational learning is often regarded as an intentional or unintentional process to improve an organizations’ effectiveness (Argyris and Schön 1978, Fiol and Lyles 1985, Huber 1991). Conceptualizations of organizational learning focus on how information processing changes the repertoire of organizational behaviors. For example, Huber (1991) argued that an organizational entity learns when information processing intentionally or unintentionally changes its range of potential behaviors. Accordingly, organizational learning may occur even though information processing does not contribute to formal organizational goals of improved organizational know-how and effectiveness. Instead, at the most basic level, the organization is assumed to learn when any of its units acquires knowledge that its constituent agents recognize as potentially useful (information acquiring). The level of organizational learning increases when the number of organizational units that obtain certain knowledge (and recognizes it as potentially useful) increases (information distributing). The amount of learning is further increased when the units develop various interpretations (information interpretation) (Huber 1991) of acquired and distributed knowledge. During this process, member agents develop uniform understandings across the units of possibly different interpretations (Huber 1991) and their advantages to the organization. Accordingly, a high level of learning can be reached if the organization allows for equivocality and tries to create uniform understanding through personal interaction (cf. Weick 1979).

3.2.1 Forms of organizational Learning

Organizational learning can take various forms (March 1991; Kang et al. 2007). March (1991) suggested two forms of organizational learning: exploratory and exploitative. Exploratory learning involves the search for knowledge that does not exist within the organization; exploitative learning involves deepening and refining existing knowledge. These two archetypes of organizational learning, based on

39

different knowledge and information flows within the organization, both have advantages and disadvantages. Exploitative learning organizations increase their knowledge base (learning) by refining (Kang et al. 2007) existing knowledge and improving how it is used. In such cases, learning results as the organization seeks to find well-defined solutions to well-defined questions within the organization’s existing knowledge base. Dewar and Dutton (1986) argued that exploitative learning is more incremental, more routine, and more relevant to the organization’s current operation than other forms. Exploitative learning is more certain in process and outcomes and less diverse than exploratory learning, which involves completely new knowledge (Schulz 2001). Benefits of exploitative organizational learning include predictable costs, contributions to incremental innovations, and improvements to productivity and efficiency (Argyris and Schön 1978; Benner and Tushman 2003; Danneels 2002; Eisenhardt and Martin 2000; Katila and Ahuja 2002; March 1991; McGrath 2001; Starbuck 1992). According to Coleman (1988) and Baker and Obstfeld (1999), close social connections and low differentiation among departments make exploitative learning more efficient and create understanding of the other parties’ idiosyncratic knowledge. However, Gargiulo and Benassi (2000) argued that close social connections also could lock employees into small social circles and limit their opportunities to explore other knowledge domains, thereby limiting organizational learning. A further concern is that organizations that focus only on exploitative learning may experience detrimental effects if their knowledge bases ultimately decay and become obsolete (Levinthal and March 1993). In contrast, exploratory learning is based on the search for broad and general information and radically new ideas and innovations that can dramatically improve the organization’s performance and help it adapt dynamically to unpredictable, complex changing environments (Danneels 2002; Eisenhardt and Martin 2000; McGrath 2001; Teece et al. 1997). Granovetter (1973) and Burt (1992) suggested that weak social relations and high differentiation (Daft and Lengel 1986) among departments, enable employees to reach new and diverse knowledge through connections across the usual boundaries. Accordingly, weak social connections are likely to provide employees

40

with opportunities to identify and use new knowledge from a variety of sources that differ from their own, thus encouraging exploratory learning. Despite the substantial potential of exploratory learning, Levinthal and March (1993) noted that focusing only on this approach could prevent an organization from gaining the full returns of its knowledge. Constant exploratory learning may cause less efficiency if the organization is continuously renewing its stocks without fully utilizing them. Thus, organizations should not neglect neither exploitative nor exploratory learning (Kang et al. 2007), as both are important to ensure current and future viability (Bierly and Chakrabarti 1996; Katila and Ahuja 2002; Tushman and O’Reilly 1996). Consequently, exploitative and exploratory learning is necessary to improve organizational capability, that is coordinating internal structures and information processing, while at the same time increasing and including knowledge about users’ changing needs, and fit services to user needs. Therefore, public transport organizations must create internal structures and processes to allow information processing that integrates understanding of user value into organizational policy. Two types of organizational structures, and their influences on information processing, are discussed below.

3.3 Internal structures and information processes

3.3.1 Organizational structure Organizational structure refers to the type of framework a company uses to distinguish roles and responsibilities, power and authority, and the ways in which information flows through the organization (James and Jones 1976). Previous studies have shown that organizational structure is not an independent concept, but is shaped and formed according to the organization’s internal and external needs (Burns and Stalker 1961; Macintosh 1994; Skaggs and Galli-Debicella 2012; Tushman and Nadler 1978). An organization must choose a structure appropriate to its individual needs that allows it to respond to internal and external changes and uncertainties (Burns and Stalker 1961; Thompson 1967). Thus, understanding how the

41

components of a system relate to each other (architectural knowledge) and how to coordinate efforts to match the organizational structure with its environment are important (Puranam et al. 2012). Accordingly, a proper fit between organizational structure and the environment allows an organization to implement procedures and decision-making processes that integrate departments and help the organization to reach its goals (Lawrence and Lorsch 1967; Skaggs and Galli-Debicella 2012). Scholars have conceptualized two broad forms of organizational structure: mechanistic and organic (e.g., Burns and Stalker 1961; Child and McGrath 2001). These two types represent a polarity (Burns and Stalker 1961), and organizational structures may have “degrees of flexibility” ranging from completely mechanistic to completely organic (Skaggs and Galli-Debicella 2012). However, from here on I will, for practical purposes, refer to organizations that are more organic than mechanistic as “organic” and vise versa. A mechanistic structure, also known as a bureaucratic structure, has two fundamental characteristics (Burns and Stalker 1961; Macintosh 1994; Tushman and Nadler 1978): First, the structure is divided into clear, ordered management levels, with the lower levels subordinate (answerable) to the higher (centralization). This hierarchy reflects a well-defined allocation of formal authority (the right to decide) (Aghion and Tirole 1997), in which top-level managers make the majority of decisions. The mechanistic organization structure is highly differentiated into departments based on functions, so that costs and production can be controlled. As a result, integration among departments tends to be low; that is, the quality of collaboration (Lawrence and Lorsch 1967) among functional areas or departments is poor. Decision-making also tends to be bottlenecked because few general managers understand the entire scope of all functions (Skagg and Galli-Debicella 2012). Communication, like decision-making, flows through hierarchical routes, and interaction between members tends to be vertical. With this structure, divisions are not dependent on each other for the most part, but carry out their own specific responsibilities.

42

Second, a mechanistic organization stresses formal rules and procedures (formalization), and is governed by objective laws, rules, and procedures that form its basis of authority and direction. The mechanistic structure can achieve great efficiencies, is easy to maintain, and rarely requires change. However, this structure is most appropriate for stable conditions because organizational distance, decision-making bottlenecks, and slow reaction times can limit such an organization’s ability to react and adapt quickly in changing environments (Burns and Stalker 1961; Head 2005). In contrast, an organic structure, also called a relational structure, is appropriate for organizations in unstable and changing environments that call for quick adaptation (Burns and Stalker 1961; Macintosh 1994; Tushman and Nadler 1978). Within this structure, fresh problems and unexpected requirements are not automatically distributed to functional divisions with defined roles (Skaggs and Galli-Debicella 2012). When the environment changes, an organization must be able to quickly gather, process, and communicate information, and rapid and lateral communication is crucial to such an organization’s competitive advantage. In organic organizations information flows along lateral rather than hierarchical routes, and task design and allocation are flexible rather than standardized (Head 2005). With members in charge of multiple tasks, organic organizations can adapt easily to uncertainty (cf. Burns and Stalker 1961; Child and McGrath 2001). Rapid distribution of knowledge results in an increased ability to respond to changes in internal and external environments. Organic organizations often form teams to coordinate tasks, with employees working together on larger projects. In the face of uncertainty, organic organizations can take actions across horizontal boundaries without being confined by strict hierarchical structures and rules. Their decision-making processes are decentralized and complex, involving multiple parties from different levels. By moving toward an organic structure, organizations are able to maintain their effectiveness in uncertain environments (Head 2005). Organizational structure affects both the volume and richness of information that flows through the organization. An extensive body of literature treats the structure of organizations as a means to meet

43

information processing requirements (Galbraith 1973, Tushman and Nadler 1978). Having discussed the effect of organizational structure on information processing in mechanical and organic organizations, I now turn to discuss why organizations need to process information.

3.3.2 Information processing

According to previous research, organizations process information to reduce uncertainty (e.g. Argote 1982; Galbraith 1973; Larsson and Bowen 1989). Galbraith (1973) states that organizational structure varies based on the amount of information needed to reduce uncertainty, make good decisions, and achieve acceptable performance. In organization theory, uncertainty has come to mean the absence of information (Downey and Slocum 1975; Galbraith 1977; Tushman and Nadler 1978), that is, the absence of answers to explicit questions. “Uncertainty is defined as the difference between the amount of information required to perform the task and the amount of information already possessed by the organization (Galbraith 1973, p. 5). Uncertainty is best reduced through impersonal media such as formal information systems that rapidly provide the system with a large amount of objective data (Daft and Lengel 1986). Adding a twist to the discussion, Weick (1979) argued that equivocality reduction is the reason to process information. Equivocality means ambiguity, the existence of various and contradictory interpretations of the organizational situation (Weick 1979). Daft and Lengel (1986, p. 557) noted that equivocality “… originates from ambiguity and confusion, as often seen in the messy, paradoxical world of organizational decision making”. According to this definition, high equivocality means confusion and lack of understanding. Participants are not certain about what questions to ask, and clear answers to the questions that are asked are not possible (March and Olson 1976). Interdepartmental differentiation influences equivocality (Daft and Lengel 1984) because with high differentiation, organizational departments approach problems with different understandings, goals, values, and priorities (Lawrence and Lorsch

44

1967; Shrivastava and Mitroff 1984). Even if information processing is working properly throughout the organization, departments will likely reach different interpretations of the information (Huber 1991). With high equivocality, new data may not resolve anything, but might be confusing and in some cases even increase uncertainty. Instead, equivocality is best reduced through personal (interactive) media, with participants talking things over, and ultimately reaching a solution (Daft and Lengel 1986; Gittell 2002). Participants can use their experience when interpreting data to reduce equivocality, rather than by learning the meaning of it (Weick 1979, Daft and Macintosh 1981). When equivocality is high, organizations tend to allow for more rapid information processes and prescribe fewer rules for interpretation (Weick 1979; Daft and Weick 1984; Daft and Lengel 1986). Therefore, rules and programs play almost no part in equivocality reduction. To extend the discussion on why organizations process information, Daft and Lengel (1986) combined the two causes of information processing into a single framework; they proposed that uncertainty and equivocality are complementary forces that influence information processing. They suggested that these forces are similar in some respects because they both have implications for selecting an organizational structure that meets information processing requirements and attains acceptable performance (Lewin and Minton 1986). Research in organizational theory suggest that organizational design enables additional data processing to reduce uncertainty (Galbraith 1973, 1977; Tushman 1978; Tushman and Nadler 1978), and also that organizations should be designed to reduce equivocality through other means than obtaining more data (Weick 1979). Finally, structural choices are means to meet the organization’s information processing requirements. From an information processing perspective, the chosen organizational structure reflects the architectural knowledge of an organization’s designer. In cases when the organizational structure reflects poor architectural knowledge, information processing mechanisms can be used to compensate for any structural shortcomings, while maintaining departmental integration. Therefore, organization design may be seen

45

as the interplay between the designer's knowledge of how the components of a system relate to each other (architectural knowledge), and the organizations own knowledge of how to coordinate information processing mechanisms in order to meet the organization’s information processing requirements (cf. Puranam et al. 2012)

46

4 GENERAL DISCUSSION AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

4.1 General discussion If public transport is a relevant means of transportation and people tend to prefer it to other transportation modes, then public transport usage is likely to increase, and the ultimate goal of Swedish public transport regulation will be met. Swedish public transport organizations need a comprehensive view of how various service requirements across service dimensions may affect the relevance of public transport for users and their preference for it. The effect of these various requirements on user experiences can guide public transport organizations to allocate resources and efforts effectively and efficiently. This thesis shows that understanding current, future, and potential lifecycle changes in service requirements can help public transport adjust resources to deliver a relevant and preferred service. However, the interview study provides empirical evidence that the concept of attracting paying users is new and unfamiliar to many of these public organizations. Thus, to reach strategic success and achieve the aims of the Swedish public transport regulation, RPTAs must understand what the user requirements are and how they are changing as well as distribute the information across the organization. This focus on user needs, and how fulfilling various requirements affect user experiences, places high demands on organizational learning and on the organizations’ abilities to process information. Building on notions of information processing capabilities (e.g. Galbraith 1973), this thesis shows that RPTAs need to consider both internal resources and external marketplace requirements. Internal structures and information processing mechanisms must facilitate both flow and integration of user knowledge to enable the organization to adapt to user requirements. Researchers (e.g. Daft and Lengel 1986; Gittell 2002; Tushman and Nadler 1978) have argued that information processing requirements— equivocality

47

and/or uncertainty—influence the choice of organizational structures and the use of information processing mechanisms. In contrast, this study illustrates how organizational structure and information processing mechanisms influence organizations’ perceptions concerning the type and degree of information processing required (see Figure 5). The RPTAs’ organizational structures are based on political compromises rather than architectural knowledge, which make the use of information processing mechanisms crucial. Use of impersonal or personal information processing mechanisms can be the determinant of the extent to when organizations are able to compensate for potential shortages in their politically conceived organizational structures. The majority of the RPTAs in the study utilize a mechanistic, impersonal design (Figure 5). Mechanistic impersonal organizations focus mainly on internal systems and policies involving the efficiency of policy-making and the system per se rather than on its effectiveness and outcomes. Accordingly, these types of organizations function more as bureaucratic public administrations and do not perceive any uncertainty or pressure to understand user needs. Based on this, the findings suggest these mechanistic impersonal organizations are not likely to engage in either intentional or unintentional learning and, thus, are unlikely to change their behavior (see Figure 5).

Figure 5: Relationship between organizational structure and information processing mechanisms

Percep&on)of)Uncertainty)Low ) ) ) )High)

Organiza(on*Structure*Mechanis&c ) ))))))))))))))Organic)

Inform

a(on

*processing*

mecha

nism

s*Im

person

al))))))))))))Pe

rson

al)

Mechanis&c)personal)design)

Organic)personal)design)

)

Mechanis&c)impersonal)design)

Organic)impersonal)design)

Exploita&ve)

Low

))))))H

igh)

Percep

&on)of)Equ

ivocality

))

48

Table 4 An overview of the findings of this thesis The findings of this thesis suggest: Knowledge of service requirements across service dimensions can guide

organizations to allocate recourses more efficiently and effectively

Internal structures and information processing mechanisms must facilitate both flow and integration of user knowledge through the organization to enable them to adapt to user requirements.

Organizational structure and information processing mechanisms influence organizations‘ perception concerning the type and degree of information processing requirements needed

The empirical study shows that public organizations’ organizational structures, such as public transport, are based on political compromises rather than architectural knowledge – this makes the use of information processing mechanisms crucial.

Organizations with mechanistic organizational structure and impersonal information processing mechanisms do not perceive any uncertainty or pressure to understand user needs. This finding further points out that these organizations are likely to continue using the same reasoning in decision making without any efforts to develop the service. They are unlikely to change the range of their behavior. RPTAs with mechanistic impersonal design focus on creating policy document and provision programs as required by the law. However they do not have the ability to include user needs or process the information through the organizations in informal ways.

Mechanistic personal organizations can develop the service through incremental innovations on well-recognized service requirements such as Must be and one-dimensional. This finding shows that adding personal information processing mechanisms to mechanistic organizations opens up opportunities for internal discussions allowing for different interpretations, leading to new questions.

Organizations focusing on only incremental innovations and exploitative learning may due to lack of new knowledge of user needs and attribute life cycles decrease their relevance on the market and become obsolete.

Organizations with an organic organization structure perceive uncertainty which triggers search for new information and new answers

Organic impersonal organizations aim to find attributes that are attractive or not even yet identified. These organizations are not interested in developing the basic service but rather in radical innovations. Organic organizations with impersonal information processing mechanism search for and accept new information, triggering radical innovations and exploratory learning.

Organic personal organizations can, based on their characteristics, trough both exploitative and exploratory learning develop the service through both incremental and radical innovations on well-recognized as well as not yet identified service requirements such as Must be, one-dimensional, attractive and in some cases indifferent attributes.

Combining organic organization structure and personal information processing mechanisms, RPTAs can include both radical and incremental innovations, focusing on making public transport both relevant and preferred.

49

By adding personal information processing mechanisms to organizations with mechanistic structures, organizations can cause information to flow in less formal ways. Making personal information processing a requirement opens up opportunities for internal discussion and allows equivocal situations and different interpretations. By embracing and discussing different interpretations of information, organizations are trying to reach a common state of internal understanding; they are working together to define questions and answer them through subjective opinions. This finding suggests that these organizations can reach a state of exploitative learning and

incremental improvements based on interpreting internal and subjective opinions. Thus, organizations with a personal information processing mechanism can reach a high amount of learning (Huber 1991). Organizations with such focus can recognize and improve well-recognized, current service requirements, such as known must-be and one-dimensional attributes. Accordingly, focusing on these core attributes can increase the RPTAs’ efficiency (Kang et al. 2007). This research shows, by focusing on efficiency and value capture (Priem et al. 2012), these mechanistic personal organizations aim to develop an attractive pubic transport service based on internal information. However, because the multidimensionality of Swedish public transport affects user relevance and preference in different ways, users are indifferent to some attributes, and such attributes do not affect relevance or preference (cf. Berger et al. 1993; Högström 2011). Findings suggest that exploitative learning that excludes any attempt to understand user needs or market changes may decrease current efficiency, because organizations risk investing in indifferent or even reverse attributes. For example, Paper I showed public transport users in the county of Värmland were indifferent to onboard Internet access (Wi-Fi). During the period of this study, the county’s RPTA proudly invested and presented new buses for city traffic with Wi-Fi access, a new feature that was planned for several years and was assumed to be a success factor. Based on the “indifferent” classifications of the Wi-Fi attribute in Paper I regarding attribute lifecycles, investments in on-board Wi-Fi do not facilitate any additional value creation among public

50

transport users, and therefore, are unlikely to generate any return on investment. Accordingly, organizations with internal focus may fail to renew their resource base in order to catch up with changes and meet user needs. However, if the Wi-Fi attribute categorization as indifferent is based on a life cycle change toward or away from “attractive” on shorter routes (due to the increased usage of smartphones and well developed internet access) cannot be answered in this study. In addition, this research shows that organizations that apply an organic structure can recognize uncertainty, which triggers a search for more information and exploratory learning. Organic RPTAs focus some or all their resources (organic personal or impersonal design; see Figure 5) on developing radical innovations that alter performance standards and facilitate unique and attractive service experiences. Consequently, it is likely that if public transport manages to create and achieve desirable central and lasting must-have attributes for transportation that no competitor can achieve, these standards may be used to create an exclusive market for the organization and may make alternative modes of transportation irrelevant. However, such exploratory focus can have negative consequences on efficiency because the RPTA is not likely to gain full returns on their resources if it constantly renews its resource base. If an RPTA focuses on radical development of the service based on future preferences, it may fail to make the current service relevant.

4.2 Conclusions

I have here argued for the importance of personal information processing mechanisms and how these mechanisms, independent of the organizational structure allow for discussion over departmental boundaries. Personal information mechanisms allow for information that does not run in formal ways and through policies. Even in organizations that do not perceive uncertainty, personal information processing mechanisms can enable learning, exploitative learning, that can develop and improve the service through incremental innovations. Thus, personal information processing mechanisms tend to drive exploitative learning. Organizations with organic structure

51

perceive uncertainty and allow for new and external information in decision-making, such as knowledge about user needs. These organizations open up for radical innovations and enable exploratory learning. Organic organizations with impersonal information processing mechanisms may risk forgetting to maintain basic service requirements, such as must be or one dimensional, that make the service relevant. Instead they put their focus and effort on attractive service requirements and radical innovations that increase user preference. Finally, Organizational learning can be integrated through personal information mechanisms, changing the range of the organizational behavior and thereby improving capability. Combining organic organization structure and personal information processing mechanisms, RPTAs can include both radical and incremental innovations, focusing on making public transport both relevant and preferred. Accordingly, with the combination of exploratory and exploitative learning, as in the case of organic personal design, RPTAs can increase their capability to stimulate the Swedish public transport regulations intentions.

4.3 Final words and future research The research presented in this licentiate thesis represents an ongoing research process, a work in progress, and further investigations are required to produce a complete picture indicated by the case studies. Based on the information presented here and the remaining empirical material not yet processed, I suggest four research areas that may contribute to the discussion of public organizations in the 21st century. These suggestions are made considering the context of Sweden’s complex public transport system, in which multiple interdependent and independent actors and stakeholders act laterally and at different levels. These proposed research areas include: 1) efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery, 2) trust as an institutional and/or external

52

pressure affecting public policy implementations, 3) governance and management of the plural system in interdependent networks, and 4) governance and management of the plural system in independent networks. Research area one Measurement systems are the foundation of active management and are often used to transform business, drive change in a specific direction, and achieve the organization’s purpose. Functionalists assert that well-functioning measurement systems allow managers to deal with the right things and reach strategic targets. When approaching performance measurements from the standpoint of user value creation and interpretation, I believe that simply having a well-functioning measurement system does not guarantee efficiency because information about users’ ever-changing needs may be suppressed. I propose that public transport must develop, design, and deliver service with high user-perceived quality across multiple service dimensions and segments to achieve efficiency and effectiveness. Thus, I believe opportunities should be investigated to employ user-driven, key performance indicators (KPIs) that transcend static performance indicators. Research area two Research has suggested that the shift of public organizations from public administration to the new public management has brought market mechanisms into public service delivery (Hood 1995). Further, researchers have argued that network mechanisms are moving public services from hierarchy and market toward the concept of New public governance (Osborne 2010). More business-oriented research has long suggested additions (Zenger and Hesterly 1997, Ouchi 1980) to the traditional market and hierarchy mechanisms (Williamson 1975). Adler (2001) argues that different institutions combine hierarchy, market and trust in varying proportions. Whether trust/network is an additional third governance mechanism, an outcome, the basis for a third service delivery mechanism or simply a reminder of the importance of informal relationships is a debate without a clear resolution. I believe further research is needed to explore the significance and role of trust within public organizations.

53

Research area 3 Because public transport is managed as a business and governed by political structures, it has many stakeholders and complicated structures. In a discussion introduced by Enquist (1999), Enquist and Johnson (2013) framed the relationship between governance and management in public transport as a true dialogue between the parties involved, with governance represented as “political dialogue” and “business dialogue” representing management; both focus on service delivery and operations (Johnson 2007). This model was the basis for a series of studies of public transport (cf., Enquist 2003; Enquist et al. 2005; Enquist et al. 2011; Enquist and Johnson 2013) that focused on four dialogue subtypes (see Figure 6). Because Swedish public transport regulation requires a separate arena for strategic development, there is a visible but floating boundary between governance and management in the public transport system. Additional research is needed to investigate the connecting surface between governance and management within the mission of public transport as Figure 6 indicates.

Figure 6: Stakeholder dialogue in public transport, (adopted from Enquist and Johnson 2013) Research area 4 While collecting the empirical data for Paper II, I also gathered data (not presented here) regarding interorganizational collaboration of RPTAs with the Swedish Transport Administration (STA). STA is the government agency responsible for long-term planning of the transport system and is also in charge of the state road and national railway networks. The Swedish public transport regulation executed in 2012 specifically requires an independent collaboration between RPTAs and STA to create regional transport provision programs. However, I found that in the absence of hierarchical responsibilities

54

and without any further descriptions of this collaboration, few RPTAs have been able to fulfill this regulatory requirement. I believe further research is needed to investigate public service inter-organizational collaboration.

55

References

Adler, P. S. (2001). Market, hierarchy, and trust: The knowledge economy and the future of capitalism. Organization Science, 12 (2), 215–234. Aghion, P., and Tirole, J. (1997). Formal and real authority in organizations. Journal of political economy, 1-29. Alvesson, M., and Sköldberg, K. (1994). Tolkning och reflektion. Lund: Studentlitteratur (in Swedish). Alvesson, M., and Sköldberg, K. (2009). Reflexive methodology: New vistas for qualitative research. 2nd ed, London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Anderson, E. W., and Mittal, V. (2000). Strengthening the satisfaction-profit chain. Journal of Service Research, 3 (Nov), 107–120. Argote, L. (1982). Input uncertainty and organizational coordination in hospital emergency units. Administrative science quarterly, 420-434. Argyris, C, and Schön, D. A. (1978). Organizational Learning. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Baker, W. E., and Obstfeld, D. (1999). Social capital by design: Structures, strategies, and institutional context. In R. T. A. J. Leenders and S. M. Gabbay (eds.) Corporate Social Capital and Liability, Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 88–105. Bamberg, S., Fujii, S., Friman, M. and Gärling, T. (2011). Behaviour Theory and Soft Transport Policy Measures, Transport Policy, 18, 228-235.

56

Benner, M. J., and Tushman, M. L. (2003). Exploitation, exploration, and process management: the productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of Management Review, 28 (2), 238–256. Berger, C., Blauth, R., Boger, D., Bolster, C., Burchill, G., DuMouchel, W., Pouliot, F., Richter, R., Rubinoff, A., Shen, D., Tinko, M., and Walden, D. (1993). Kano´s methods for understanding customer-defined quality. The Center of Quality Management Journal, 2 (4), 3–36. Bierly, P., and Chakrabarti, A. (1996). Generic knowledge strategies in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. Strategic Management Journal, 17 (Winter Special Issue), 123–135. Bonoma, T. V. (1985). Case research in marketing: 0pportunities, problems, and a process. Journal of Marketing Research, 22 (2), 199–208. Bryman, A. (1984). The debate about quantitative and qualitative research: a question of method or epistemology? British Journal of Sociology, 35 (1), 75–92. Bryman, A. (1988). Quality and quantity in social research. London: Routledge Bryman, A. (1997). Kvantitet och kvalitet i samhällsvetenskaplig forskning. Lund: Studentlitteratur (in Swedish). Bryman, A., and Bell, E. (2011). Business research methods 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Burawoy, M. (1991). Ethnography Unbound. Berkeley: University of California Press. Burns, T., and Stalker, G. (1961). The Management of Innovation. London: Tavistock Publications.

57

Burt, R. S. (1992) Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Camén, C. (2011). Using contracts to manage services: a study of contracts in public transport. Dissertation, 2011:20, Karlstad University Studies, Karlstad Camén, C., Gottfridsson, P., & Rundh, B. (2012). Contracts as cornerstones in relationship building. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 4(3), 208-223. Camén, C., Gottfridsson, P., & Rundh, B. (2011). To trust or not trust? Formal contracts and the building of long-term relationships. Management Decision, 49 (3), 365-383. Camén, C. (2010) Service quality on three management levels: A study of service quality in public tendering contracts. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 2(3) 317-334. Child, J., and McGrath, R.G. (2001). Organizations unfettered: organizational form in an information intensive economy. Academy of Management Journal, 44 (6), 1135–1148 Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 95–120. Cronin Jr., J., and Taylor, S.A. (1992). Measuring service quality: a reexamination and extension. Journal of Marketing, 56 (3), 53–66. Daft, R. L., and Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32 (5), 554–571. Daft, R.L., and Macintosh, N.B. (1981). A tentative exploration into the amount and equivocality of information processing in organizational work units. Administrative Science Quarterly, 207–224.

58

Daft, R. L., & Weick, K. E. (1984). Toward a model of organizations as interpretation systems. Academy of management review, 9(2), 284-295. Danneels, E. (2002). The dynamics of product innovation and firm competencies. Strategic Management Journal, 23 (12), 1095–1121. De Vaus, D. A. (2001). Research Design in Social Research. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Dewar, R. D., and Dutton, J. E. (1986). The adoption of radical and incremental innovations: an empirical analysis. Management Science, 32 (11), 1422–1433. Downey, H. K. and Slocum, J.W. (1975). Uncertainty: measures, research, and sources of variation. Academy of Management, 18(3), 562–511. Eboli, L., and Mazzulla, G. (2007). Service quality attributes affecting customer satisfaction for bus transit. Journal of Public Transportation, 10 (3), 21–34. Eboli, L., and Mazzulla, G. (2012). Structural equation modelling for analysing passengers’ perceptions about railway services. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 10 (54), 96–106. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14 (4), 532–550. Eisenhardt, K. M., and Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: what are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21 (10/11), 1105–1121. Enquist, B. (1999). Från produktionsparadigm till serviceparadigm? Karlstad University Studies 1999:3, Karlstad University, Sweden (in Swedish) Enquist, B. (2003) Intressentdialoger inom kollektivtrafiken – En probleminventering och diskussion kring behovet av ett stödjande

59

forsknings- och utvecklingsprogram för kollektivtrafikområdet, Karlstad University Studies 2003:4, Karlstad. (in Swedish) Enquist, B., and Johnson, M. (2013). Styrning och navigering i regionala kollektivtrafiknätverk. Karlstad University Studies 2013:14, Karlstad. (in Swedish) Enquist, B., Camén, C. and Johnson, M. (2011) Contractual Governance for Public Service Value Networks. Journal of Service Management, 22(2), 217-240 Enquist, B., Johnson, M., and Camén, C. (2005). Contractual governance for sustainable service. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 2 (1), 29–53. Enquist, B., Petros Sebhatu, S., & Johnson, M. (2015). Transcendence for business logics in value networks for sustainable service business. Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 25(2), 181-197. Enquist, B., Johnson, M., and Camén, C. (2005) Contractual governance for sustainable service. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 2 (1), 29-53. Fellesson, M., and Friman, M. (2008) Perceived satisfaction with public transport service in nine European cities. Journal of the Transportation Research Forum, 47, (3), 93–103. Fellesson, M., Salomonson, N., and Åberg, A. (2013). Troublesome Travellers – The Service System as a Trigger of Customer Misbehavior. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 5(3), 256-274. Fiol, C. M., & Lyles, M. A. (1985). Organizational learning. Academy of management review, 10(4), 803-813.

60

Friman, M. & Fellesson, M. (2009). Service Supply and Customer Satisfaction in Public Transportation: The Quality Paradox. Journal of Public Transportation, 12 (4), 57-69 Friman, Margareta, Bo Edvardsson, and Tommy Gärling. (2001) Frequency of negative critical incidents and satisfaction with public transport services. I. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 8(2), 95-104. Friman, Margareta, and Tommy Gärling. (2001) Frequency of negative critical incidents and satisfaction with public transport services. II. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 8(2), 105-114. Galbraith, J. R. (1973). Designing Complex Organizations. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Galbraith, J. R. (1977). Organization Design. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Gargiulo, M., and Benassi, M. (2000). Trapped in your own net? Network cohesion, structural holes, and the adaptation of social capital. Organization Science, 11 (2), 183–196. Gärling, T. and Fujii, S. (2009). Travel behavior modification: Theories, methods, and programs. In R. Kitamura, T. Yoshii & T. Yamamoto (eds.), The Expanding Sphere of Travel Behaviour Research. Bingley, UK: Emerald, 97-128. Gasson, S. (2003). Rigor in grounded theory research – an interpretive perspective on generating theory from qualitative field studies. In M. Whitman and A. Woszczynski (eds.) Handbook for Information Systems Research, Hershey, PA: Idea Group,15–45. Gebauer, H., Johnson, M., & Enquist, B. (2010). Value co-creation as a determinant of success in public transport services: A study of the Swiss Federal Railway operator (SBB). Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, 20(6), 511-530.

61

Gebauer, H., Johnson, M., & Enquist, B. (2012). The role of organisational capabilities in the formation of value networks in public transport services. Management Research Review, 35(7), 556-576. Gittell, J.H. (2002). Coordinating mechanisms in care provider groups: Relational coordination as a mediator and input uncertainty as a moderator of performance effects. Management Science, 48(11), 1408-1426. Glaser, B. G., and Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company. Gottfridsson, P. (2009). Actor Roles in Service Development Process. Journal of Public Transportation, 12 (1), 1-18 Gottfridsson, P. (2012). Joint service development - the creations of the prerequisite for the service development. Managing Service Quality, 22(1), 21-37. Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78 (6), 1360–1380. Grant, R. M. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17 (S2), 109–122. Grant, R. M. (1996a). Prospering in dynamically-competitive environments: organizational capability as knowledge integration. Organization Science, 7 (4), 375–387. Griffin, A., and Hauser, J.R. (1993). The voice of the customer. Marketing Science, 12, (1), 1–27. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J. and Anderson. R. E. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.

62

Hammersley, M. (1992). What's Wrong with Ethnography? Methodological Explorations. Psychology Press. Head, T. (2005). Structural changes in turbulent environments: a study of small and mid-size Chinese organizations. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 12 (2), 82–94. Högström, C. (2011). The theory of attractive quality and experience offerings. The TQM Journal, 23 (2), 111–127. Högström, C., Rosner, M., and Gustafsson, A., (2010). How to create attractive and unique costumer experiences: an application of Kano´s theory of attractive quality to recreational tourism. Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 28, (4), 385–402. Holbrook, M. B. (2006). Consumption experience, customer value, and subjective personal introspection: an illustrative photographic essay. Journal of Business Research, 59 (6), 714–725. Hood, C. (1995). The “New Public Management” in the 1980s: variations on a theme. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 20 (2), 93–109. Huber, G. P. (1991). Organizational learning: the contributing processes and the literatures. Organization Science, 2 (1), 88–115. James, L. R., and Jones, A. P. (1976). Organizational structure: A review of structural dimensions and their conceptual relationships with individual attitudes and behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16 (1), 74–113. Johnson, M. (2007). Stakeholder dialogue for sustainable service. Diss. 2007:51, Karlstad University Studies, Karlstad Johnson, M. D., Gustafsson, A., Wallin Andreassen, T., Lervik, L., and Cha, J. (2001). The evolution and future of national customer

63

satisfaction index models. Journal of Economic Psychology, 22 (2), 217–245. Johnson, R. B., and Christensen, L. B. (2010). Educational Research: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Approaches. SAGE Publications Johnson, R. B., and Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: a research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33 (7), 14-26. Kang, S. C., Morris, S. S., and Snell, S. A. (2007). Relational archetypes, organizational learning, and value creation: extending the human resource architecture. Academy of Management Review, 32 (1), 236–256 Kano, N., Seraku, N., Takahashi, F., and Tsuji, S. (1984). Attractive quality and must-be quality. Journal of the Japanese Society for Quality Control, 14(2), 147-156 Katila, R., and Ahuja, G. (2002). Something old, something new: a longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction. Academy of Management Journal, 45 (6), 1183–1194. King, B. G., and D. A. Whetten (2008). Rethinking the relationship between reputation and legitimacy: a social actor conceptualization. Corporate Reputation Review, 11 (3), 192–207. Kristensson Uggla, B. (2010). Ricoeur, hermeneutics, and globalization. Bloomsbury Publishing. Larsson, R., and Bowen, D. E. (1989). Organization and customer: managing design and coordination of services. Academy of Management Review, 14(2), 213-233. Lawrence, P. R. and J. W. Lorsch (1967). New managerial job: the integrator. Harvard Business Review, Nov.–Dec., 142–151.

64

Lepak, D. P., Smith, K.G., and Taylor, S. M. (2007). Value creation and value capture: a multilevel perspective. Academy of Management Review, 32 (1), 180–194. Lewin, A. Y., & Minton, J. W. (1986). Determining organizational effectiveness: Another look, and an agenda for research. Management science, 32(5), 514-538. Levinthal, B., and March, J. G. (1993). The myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 95–112. Löfgren, M., and. Witell, L. (2005). Kano’s theory of attractive quality and packaging. Quality Management Journal, 12 (3), 7–20. Löfgren, M., Witell, L., and Gustafsson, A. (2011). Theory of attractive quality and life cycles of quality attributes. The TQM Journal, 23 (2), 235–246. Macintosh, N.B. (1994). Management Accounting and Control System –An Organizational and Behavioral Approach. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2 (1), 71–87. March, J. G. and J. P. Olsen (1976). Ambiguity and Choice in Organization. Bergen, Norway: Universitetsforlaget. Matzler, K., Hinterhuber, H.H., Bailom, F., and Sauerwein, E. (1996). How to delight your customers. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 5 (2), 6–18. Maxwell, J. A. (1998). Designing a qualitative study. In Handbook of Applied Social Research Methods, L. Bickman, and D. J. Rog (eds.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 69–100.

65

McGrath, R. G. (2001). Exploratory learning, innovative capacity, and managerial oversight. Academy of Management Journal, 44 (1), 118–132. Miles, M. B., and Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc. Mokonyama, M., & Venter, C. (2013). Incorporation of customer satisfaction in public transport contracts–A preliminary analysis. Research in Transportation Economics, 39(1), 58-66. Morse, J. M. (1999). Qualitative generalizability. Qualitative Health Research, 9 (1), 5–6 Norén, L. (1995). Tolkande företagsekonomisk forskning – socialkonstruktionsim, metaforsynsätt, aktörssynsätt. Lund: Studentlitteratur. Olsson, L.E., Friman, M., Pareigis, J., and B. Edvardsson (2012) Measuring service expereince: Applying the satisfaction with travel scale in public transport. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Service, 2012. Orton, J. D. (1997). From inductive to iterative grounded theory: zipping the gap between process theory and process data. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 13 (4), 419–438. Osborne, D., and Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector. New York: Penguin Books. Osborne, S. P. (ed.) (2010). The New Public Governance?: Emerging Perspectives on the Theory and Practice of Public Governance. London: Routledge. Ouchi, W. G. (1980). Markets, bureaucracies, and clans. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25 (1), 129–141.

66

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods (2nd ed.). Newberry Park, CA: SAGE Publications. Pedersen, T., Friman, M. & Kristensson, P. (2011). Affective forecasting: predicting and experiencing satisfaction with public transport. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41, 1926–1946. Pedersen, T., Friman, M. & Kristensson, P. (2011). The Role of Predicted, On-Line Experienced and Remembered Satisfaction in Current Choice to Use Public Transport Services. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 18, 471-475. Priem, R. L. 2007. A consumer perspective on value creation. Academy of Management Review 32 (1), 219–235. Puranam, P., Raveendran, M., and Knudsen, T. (2012). Organization design: the epistemic interdependence perspective. Academy of Management Review, 37 (3), 419–440 Rönnbäck, Å. & Witell, L. (2009). Value creation in outsourced service provision in Public transportation. TQM Journal, Vol 21 No. 5. Roos I., Gustafsson A., Edvardsson B. & Landmark P. (2010). Should we differentiate between business and private customers? Management research and practice, 2, 1-13. Sauerwein, E., Bailom, F., Matzler, K., and Hinterhuber, H.H. (1996). The Kano model: how to delight your customers. International Working Seminar on Production Economics. Innsbruck/Igls/ Austria, February 19–23, IX (I), 313–327. Schulz, M. (2001). The uncertain relevance of newness: organizational learning and knowledge flows. Academy of Management Journal, 44 (4), 661–681. Seale, C. (1999). The Quality of Qualitative Research. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

67

Shrivastava, P. and I. I. Mitroff (1984). Enhancing organizational research utilization: the role of decision maker's assumptions. Academy Management Review, 9 (1), 18–26. Silverman, D. (1970). The Theory of Organisations. New York: Basic Books. Silverman, D. (2000). Doing Qualitative Research. London: SAGE Publications Inc. Skaggs, B. C., and Galli-Debicella, A. (2012). The effects of customer contact on organizational structure and performance in service firms. The Service Industries Journal, 32 (3), 337–352 Stake, R. E. (1978). The case study method in social inquiry. Educational Researcher, 7 (2), 5–8. Starbuck, W. H. (1992). Learning by knowledge-intensive firms. Journal of Management Studies, 29 (6), 713–739. Stevens, J. P. (2002). Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences (4th Ed.). New Jersey: Erlbaum. Stradling, S., Carreno, M., Rye, T., and Noble, A. (2007). Passenger perceptions and the ideal urban bus journey experience. Transport Policy, 14 (4), 283–292. Strauss, A. L. (1987). Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists. New York: Cambridge University Press. Strauss, A. L., and Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc. Tashakkori, A., and Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed Methodology: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc.

Appendix I

Appendix 1 Kano Questionnaire

This is a study of Värmlandstrafik based on understanding the travelers’ expectations so that they can be better satisfied. The questionnaire consists of three parts. After returning a fully completed questionnaire, you will receive SEK 50 in travel vouchers.

Part 1 This first part contains background information about you and your travel habits. Please follow the instructions in italic text in every question.

Gender (Mark ONE response option)

o Female o Male

Age (Mark ONE response option)

o Under 18 years o 19–25 years o 26–30 years o 31–40 years o 41–50 years o 51–60 years o 61–70 years o Over 70 years

Have you ever traveled on Värmlandstrafik trains? (Mark ONE response option)

o Yes o No

Have you ever traveled on Värmlandstrafik buses? (Mark ONE response option)

o Yes o No

During a normal day and independent of transport, how many trips do you make, back and forth from home (e.g., to job, school, gym or store)? (Mark ONE response option)

o 1 o 2 o 3 o 4 o More than 4

During a normal day, how much time do you spend traveling (e.g., to job, school, gym or store)? (Mark ONE response option)

o 0–15 minutes o 16–30 minutes o 30–45 minutes o 46–60 minutes o 1–1.5 hours o 1.5–2 hours o More than 2

hours

How often do you go to each of the following destinations during a typical week? (Mark the option that suits you best for every destination.)

1.

Dai

ly

2.

4–6

times

pe

r wee

k

3.

2–3

times

pe

r wee

k

4.

1 tim

es p

er

wee

k

5.

Rar

ely/

N

ever

Job

School/university

Store/supermarket/mall

Fitness center

Day care

Hospital

Visit family/friends

Outdoor area

Restaurant/bar/nightclub

Other

How often do you travel by the following forms of transportation during the winter months? (Mark the option that suits you best for every form of transportation.)

1.

Dai

ly

2.

Som

etim

e/so

met

im

es e

very

wee

k

3.

Som

etim

e/so

met

im

es e

very

mon

th

4.

Mor

e ra

rely

5.

Nev

er

Regional bus (Värmlandstrafik)

City bus (Karlstadbuss)

Interregional bus (e.g., Swebus, Go By Bus)

Regional train (Värmlandstrafik)

Interregional train (e.g., SJ)

Car

Moped/MC

Bike

Walking

Taxi

School vehicle

Transportation service

Other

How often do you travel by the following forms of transportation during the summer months? (Mark the option that suits you best for every form of transportation.)

1.

Dai

ly

2.

Som

etim

e/

som

etim

es e

very

w

eek

3.

Som

etim

e/so

met

im

es e

very

mon

th

4.

Mor

e ra

rely

5.

Nev

er

Regional bus (Värmlandstrafik)

City bus (Karlstadbuss)

Interregional bus (e.g., Swebus, Go by bus)

Regional Train (Värmlandstrafik)

Interregional train (e.g., SJ)

Car

Moped/MC

Bike

Walking

Taxi

School vehicles

Transportation service

Other

How important is the fare for public transport with Värmlandstrafik? (Mark ONE response option.)

1= Not important 10 = Very important 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

What do you think is a reasonable fare for a journey by public transport with Värmlandstrafik? (Mark ONE response option.)

o 0–20 SEK o 21–40 SEK o 41–60 SEK o 61–80 SEK o 81–100 SEK o More than 100 SEK

Do you think Värmlandstrafik’s fares are set at a reasonable level today? (Mark ONE response option.)

o Yes o No

Part 2 Below are 25 questions on Värmlandstrafik’s activities. Each question consists of two parts, “A” and “B,” with five response options for each subquestion. For each question, subquestion A is positively biased for a particular phenomenon, and subquestion B is a negative perspective on the same phenomenon. Answer the questions by marking ONE of the answer choices for the subquestion A AND B (see example below.). Questioning example

A) How do you feel if you get the morning paper on the bus? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel if you do NOT get the morning paper on the bus? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Access Question 1

A) How do you feel about a schedule that suits your needs? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel about a schedule that does not suit your needs? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Question 2

A) How do you feel about making changing buses several times to reach your destination? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel if you do not have to change buses several times before reaching your destination? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Question 3

A) How do you feel if the bus stop is close to where you live? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel if the bus stop is far from where you live? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Question 4

A) How do you feel if the bus keeps to its scheduled departure time? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel if the bus does not keep to its scheduled departure time? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Question 5

A) How do you feel if it saves you time riding the bus instead of using other public transportation? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel if riding the bus takes you a longer time than other public transportations? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Question 6

A) How do you feel if riding the bus saves you money compared with other public transportation? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel if you lose money by taking the bus instead of other public transportation? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Safety/Environment Question 7

A) How do you feel about the bus/train being driven in a comfortable/smooth way? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel about the bus/train not being driven in a comfortable/smooth way? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Question 8

A) How do you feel about the driver doing other things while he/she is driving (for example: talking on the phone, texting or eating.)? (Mark ONE response option)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel about the driver not doing other things while he/she is driving (for example: talking on the phone, texting or eating)? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Question 9

A) How do you feel about the service being environmentally friendly? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel about the service not being environmentally friendly? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Comfort Question 10

A) How do you feel about convenient travel? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel about inconvenient travel? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Question 11

A) How do you feel about sharing seats with other passengers? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel about not sharing seats with other passengers? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Question 12

A) How do you feel about having the opportunity to use your traveling time to do other things (e.g., work assignment or schoolwork)? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel about not having the opportunity to use your traveling time to do other things (e.g., work assignment or schoolwork)? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Question 13

A) How do you feel about the opportunity to use wireless internet access while traveling? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel about not having the opportunity to use wireless internet access while traveling? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Question 14

A) How do you feel if the temperature inside the train/bus is comfortable? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel if the temperature inside the train/bus is not comfortable? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Question 15

A) How do you feel if it is clean and fresh inside the train/bus? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel if it is not clean and fresh inside the train/bus? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Question 16

A) How do you feel about getting a friendly reception from the bus driver and other staff? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel about not getting a friendly reception from the bus driver and other staff? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Question 17

A) How do you feel about hearing chatter or other noise from other travelers? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel about not hearing chatter or other noise from other travelers? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Stops Question 18

A) How do you feel if there are shelters against wind or rain by the bus stops? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel if there are no shelters against wind or rain by the bus stops? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Question 19

A) How do you feel if bus stops have lighting? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel if bus stops do not have lighting? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Question 20

A) How do you feel if bus stops have seating? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel if it bus stops do not have seating? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Payment systems and information Question 21

A) How do you feel if there is an option to pay cash for your fare on your vehicle? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel if there is no option to pay cash for your fare on your vehicle? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Question 22

A) How do you feel if you can pay for your travel electronically (e.g., by credit card or texting)? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel if rou cannot par your travel electronically (e.g., by credit card or texting)? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Question 23

A) How do you feel if you can access travel information electronically regardless of location (on mobile devices)? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel if you cannot access travel information electronically regardless of location (on mobile devices)?

(Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Question 24

A) How do you feel about receiving reliable information regarding your travel (e.g., departure times, payment methods and prices)? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel about not receiving reliable information regarding your travel (e.g., departure times, payment methods and prices)? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Question 25

A) How do you feel about receiving live updates regarding your travels (e.g., delays)? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. It must be that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

B) How do you feel about not receiving live updates regarding your travels (e.g., delays)? (Mark ONE response option.)

1. I like it that way. 2. I like it that way. 3. I am neutral. 4. I can live with it that way. 5. I dislike it that way.

Part 3 This part consists of questions to be answered on a scale of 1–10. We would like to know how important the following factors are for you (1 is not important and 10 is very important). Tick the option that matches your opinion.

1 = Not Important

10 = Very Important

How important are these factors?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

A. Having a timetable that suits your needs.

o o o o o o o o o o

B. Not needing to make one or more changes to reach your destination.

o o o o o o o o o o

C. Being close to the bus stop. o o o o o o o o o o

D. The bus leaving at the scheduled departure time.

o o o o o o o o o o

E. Saving time on the bus compared with other transportation.

o o o o o o o o o o

F. Saving money on the bus compared with other transportation.

o o o o o o o o o o

G. The bus being driven in a comfortable/smooth way.

o o o o o o o o o o

H. Drivers not doing other things while driving.

o o o o o o o o o o

I. An environmentally friendly service.

o o o o o o o o o o

J. Comfortable seating on the trip. o o o o o o o o o o

K. Not having to share seats with other passengers.

o o o o o o o o o o

L. Having the opportunity to use travel time to do other things (e.g., work assignment or schoolwork).

o o o o o o o o o o

M. Wireless internet options while traveling.

o o o o o o o o o o

N. Comfortable temperature in the train/bus.

o o o o o o o o o o

O. The bus/train being clean and fresh inside.

o o o o o o o o o o

P. Receiving a friendly reception from the driver and other staff.

o o o o o o o o o o

Q. Not hearing chatter or other noise from other travelers.

o o o o o o o o o o

R. Shelter from the rain/wind by the o o o o o o o o o o

bus stops. S. Lighting at bus stops. o o o o o o o o o o

T. Seating at bus stops. o o o o o o o o o o

U. Being able to pay cash for your fare.

o o o o o o o o o o

V. Being able to pay for your fare electronically (e.g., by credit card or texting).

o o o o o o o o o o

W. Access to travel information electronically regardless of location (on a mobile device).

o o o o o o o o o o

X. Reliable information regarding your travel (e.g., departure times, payment methods and fares) by the bus stops.

o o o o o o o o o o

Y. Receiving live updates regarding your travel.

o o o o o o o o o o

Appendix ii

Intervjuguide Organisation

1. Var ligger ansvaret för den regionala kollektivtrafiken i länet?

2. Hur är det ekonomiska ansvaret fördelat och vem beslutar om budget för den regionala kollektivtrafiken?

3. Hur finansieras kollektivtrafiken? Har skatteväxling genomförts eller finansiering genom medlemsbidrag?

4. Hur ser organisationen ut? (organisationskarta, beslutsvägar)

5. Vad var motivet kring valet av organisation?

6. Kan organisationen göras mer effektivt?

7. Om ni hade fått göra om organisationen idag, vad hade ni gjort annorlunda?

Roller och ansvar 8. Vad är nämndens (motsvarande) roll? Vilka uppgifter har den ansvar för och vilka

befogenheter har nämnden? Finns styrdokument som reglerar detta?

9. Hur ser delegeringen av uppgifter och befogenheter ut i den operativa organisationen inom myndighetens ansvarsområde? Har ni valt behålla länstrafikbolaget eller flyttat all verksamhet in i myndigheten? Finns styrdokument som reglerar detta?

10. Hur arbetar myndigheten internt? (Värmlands län är en Regionförbund och beskriver under denna punkt arbetsfördelningen mellan myndighetens olika delar, regionfullmäktige, regionstyrelse, kollektivtrafiknämnd, enheten för kollektivtrafik samt trafikorganisatörerna(Värmlandstrafik och Karlstadsbuss)), Finns styrdokument som reglerar detta?

11. Hur ser ansvarsfördelningen ut? Både inom myndigheten och mellan myndigheten och övriga aktörer. Finns styrdokument som reglerar detta?

12. Hur sker sakgranskningen av olika ärenden? (Kundärenden, intressentärenden) Finns styrdokument som reglerar detta?

Styrning 13. Finns det några styrdokument som beskriver organisation och styrmodellen samt

arbetsgång?

14. Hur arbetar myndigheten för att säkerställa att programmet följs? (Till exempel rapporter, samråd, dialoger, uppföljning)

15. Hur sker samråd och dialog mellan myndigheten och de kommunala aktörerna?

16. Används programmet aktivt som ett styrdokument? Hur?

17. Vilka styrdokument finns det för att säkerställa att målen följs? (Strategier,

handlingsplan/affärsplan/verksamhetsplan)

Mål

18. Vilka mål arbetar myndigheten mot?

19. På vilket sätt arbetar ni mot de transportpolitiska målen?

20. Finns det andra mål än de som står i programmet? Till exempel i regional utvecklingsstrategi, länstransportplan.

21. Vilka av målen i dessa styrdokument arbetar ni aktivt mot och använder som underlag till beslut?

22. Hur går uppföljning av mål till?

23. Kundfokus och kundorientering nämns både i lagen och i de flesta

trafikförsörjningsprogram, hur arbetar myndigheten för att uppnå detta?

Intressenter och samråd 24. Vilka är intressenterna?

25. Hur förhåller sig myndigheten till sina intressenter?

26. Hur sker samråd mellan myndigheten och dess intressenter?

27. Hur hanterar myndigheten den information och synpunkter som kommer fram vid

samråden?

28. Hur arbetar ni med att utveckla samrådsförfarandet och tillvaratagandet av den informationen som kommer fram vid samråden?

29. Hur utvecklar ni relationerna till de olika intressenterna?

30. Vad har Trafikverkets roll varit i framtagandet av trafikförsörjningsprogrammet?

31. Hur är relationen med Trafikverket och hur sker dialog/samråd?

32. Hur utvecklar ni samarbetet med Trafikverket?

33. Vad förväntar myndigheten sig av Trafikverket med hänsyn till lagstiftningen?

34. Finns det några län som man anser varit mer framgångsrika än andra i sitt

myndighetsarbete?

Övrigt 35. Vilka skillnader tycker ni att det har blivit sedan den nya lagstiftningen trädde i kraft?

• finansiering? • Fördelning av uppgifter i den operativa verksamheten? • Den politiska styrningen? • Allmän trafikplikt? • Marknadsöppning för kommersiell trafiken?

36. Hur arbetar myndigheten för att främja och underlätta kommersiell trafik?

 

Innovative Value Creation in Public TransportLearning to Structure for Capability

Sara Davoudi

Sara Davoudi | Innovative Value C

reation in Public Transport | 2016:6

Innovative Value Creation in Public TransportPublic transport is one of the few public services with a mandate toattract users, and therefore, this thesis suggests that Swedish publictransport organizations must understand how various services inmultiple dimensions affect users’ preferences for public transport.With this understanding, public transport organizations caneffectively and efficiently allocate resources and increase the appealof future public transport. Such an approach requires not only a deeporganizational knowledge of customer needs, but also a detailedknowledge of how the achievement of the various demands affectsusers and their value creation. This thesis further shows thatorganizational structures are based on political comprises ratherthen the needs to solve coordination challenges and facilitatecustomers’ value creation. It is here argued that the organizationalstructures and personal or impersonal information processingmechanisms in Swedish public transport influence the search forinformation and subsequent organizational learning influencing theRPTAs’ capabilities to include and understand public transportusers’ needs. This thesis offers insight into how public organizations,such as Swedish public transport authorities, can make decisions instructural design to learn from customer perceptions and adaptorganizational policy accordingly.

LICENTIATE THESIS | Karlstad University Studies | 2016:6 LICENTIATE THESIS | Karlstad University Studies | 2016:6

ISSN 1403-8099

Faculty of Arts and Social SciencesISBN 978-91-7063-684-4

Business Administration