STAFF REPORT nsert TTC logo here INFORMATION...
Transcript of STAFF REPORT nsert TTC logo here INFORMATION...
Staff report for information on Q1-Q2 Customer Satisfaction Survey Results 1
nsert TTC logo here
STAFF REPORT
INFORMATION ONLY
Q1-Q2 2016 Customer Satisfaction Survey Results
Date: September 28, 2016
To: TTC Board
From: Chief Executive Officer
Summary
Overall customer satisfaction rebounded in Q1 2016 (79%) and remained at the same
high levels in Q2 (80%). In 2015, improvements in customer perceptions of key service
reliability attributes (the length of time they waited for the vehicle, trip duration, and the
level of crowding inside the vehicle) led to the highest customer satisfaction score
observed in several years, 81%. After a brief decline in Q4 which can be attributed to the
removal of very visible PanAm specific service enhancements, overall customer
satisfaction has returned to 79% (the proportion of customers who were satisfied with
their most recent trip on the TTC). This can be linked to our improved consistency
delivering a reliable service, which has led to higher customer perceptions of trip
duration on buses and streetcars, wait times on streetcars and level of crowding on buses.
Customer perceptions of subway service also remained high.
Customer perceptions of value for money remain high, with 92% saying they received
average, good, or excellent value for money on their last TTC trip.
Pride in the TTC and what it means for Toronto also continues to improve. In Q2 2016
73% of customers agreed with this statement compared to 69% of customers a year ago,
indicating significantly higher levels of pride compared to last year.
Financial Summary
There are no financial implications resulting from the adoption of this report.
The Chief Financial & Administration Officer has reviewed this report and agrees with
the financial impact information
Comments
The TTC will continue to conduct the Customer Satisfaction Survey (CSS). The Board
will be provided with an update on CSS in February 2017.
Staff report for information on Q1-Q2 Customer Satisfaction Survey Results 2
Contact Arthur Borkwood, Head of Customer Development
Strategy & Customer Experience Group
Toronto Transit Commission
Tel: 416 393 6085
Email: Arthur. [email protected]
Attachments Q1 –Q2 2016 Customer Satisfaction Survey Results
Q1- Q2 2016 Customer Satisfaction Survey Results
September 28 2016
Arthur Borkwood – Head of Customer Development
Outline
• Top Line Results
• Key Drivers of Satisfaction
• Summary
• Appendix
Top Line Results
4
Customer satisfaction has rebounded and
remained steady
77% 75% 74%
72% 75%
79% 75% 74%
71% 72% 74% 72%
75%
79% 81%
72%
80%
Q1 2012 – Q1 2015
74%
↑Wait times ↑Duration of trip ↑Crowding
79%
Q2 2015 – Q2 2016
78%
2014-2016 service improvements
Delay incidents
10%
Delay minutes
35%
Short turns a week
2000 1000
Short turns a week
2600 500
2016 service planning improvements
Q4’15
Increased service on
major routes
Improved overnight
services
Operating earlier & later
on neighbourhood routes
ACCESS TO
SERVICES
CROWDING
WAIT TIMES
Q1’16
Increased service in
peak periods on 25
bus routes
CROWDING
WAIT TIMES
Q2’16
New express bus
services on five
major corridors
CAPACITY
TRIP TIME
Frequent customers are less satisfied
82% 79%
83%
77% 73%
83% 85%
87%
75% 71%
77%
68% 71% 69%
80%
69%
76%
85%
78%
Occasional: Once a week or less Frequent: Daily to several times a week
8
Customer satisfaction remains steady for
subway & bus riders
9/21/2016
= sig. higher/lower than other subgroups
= higher or lower than previous wave or year at C.I. = .95
75% 78% 73%
80%
78%
79%
73%
78%
71% 78%
78%
79% 76%
77%
63%
76%
82%
77%
9/21/2016 9
Higher customer satisfaction by single
mode vs. multi mode
77% 80%
75% 74% 79%
73% 80%
83%
71% 77%
72% 69%
79% 82%
71% 77% 76%
Single Mode Multi Mode
= sig. higher/lower than other subgroups
= higher or lower than previous wave or year at C.I. = .95
9/21/2016 10
Perceived value for money over time
Overall perception of value for money has remained high (Average/Good/Excellent)
92%
90% 90% 91%
92%
89% 91%
94%
92% 92%
60% 57% 58% 58% 59% 60% 59% 60% 58% 60% 59% 60% 61% 62% 68% 62% 64% 64% Good/Excellent
= higher or lower than previous wave or year at C.I. = .95
9/21/2016 11
Pride in the TTC and what it means to
Toronto
Pride in the TTC has improved since Q2’15
77% 72%
70%
71%
70%
72%
71%
73%
68%
72% 71% 66%
67%
69% 75%
71%
74%
73%
Q2 ’15
=sig. higher/lower than other waves at .95
Q18. Can you tell me if you agree, disagree or have no opinion about these statements?
Let’s start with [READ FIRST STATEMENT]. Do you ____
9/21/2016 12
Pride in the TTC is highest amongst bus
riders
Pride in the TTC By Mode Over Time
72% 70%
71% 68% 74%
70%
73% 75% 74%
70%
78% 77% 76%
75%
71%
71%
76% 72%
Used Subway Used Bus Used Streetcar
Q2 ’15
= sig. higher/lower than other subgroups
= higher or lower than previous wave or year at C.I. = .95
9/21/2016 13
Key Drivers
9/21/2016 14
Key drivers of customer satisfaction
Most
Influential
Less
Influential
Subway
Trip duration
Wait time
Trip smoothness
Vehicle crowding
Staff helpfulness
Personal Safety
Bus
Wait time
Trip duration
Operator helpfulness
Vehicle crowding
Operator appearance
Personal Safety
Trip smoothness
Streetcar
Wait time
Trip duration
Vehicle crowding
Operator helpfulness
Trip smoothness
Helpfulness of announcement
9/21/2016 15
2012 – 2016
Comfort & ConvenienceOverall Satisfaction – Importance vs. Performance Maps: Subway
Crowding in the vehicle
Smoothness during trip
Wait time
Trip duration
Maintain Monitor
Protect Improve
Imp
ac
t o
n O
vera
ll S
ati
sfa
cti
on
Overall Satisfaction Performance
9/21/2016 16
2012 – 2016
Customer Service & EnvironmentOverall Satisfaction – Importance vs. Performance Maps: Subway
Station maps and signs
Maps & info on-board
Cleanliness
Ease of buying token/ticket Appearance of
collector booth
Station cleanliness
Station staff available to
help
Staff helpfulness /appearance
Maintain Monitor
Protect Improve
Imp
ac
t o
n O
vera
ll S
ati
sfa
cti
on
Overall Satisfaction Performance
9/21/2016 17
2012 – 2016 Announcements
Overall Satisfaction – Importance vs. Performance Maps: Subway
Ease of hearing in station
Clarity of delays
Quality - stops
Helpfulness Frequency - delays
Maintain Monitor
Protect Improve
Imp
ac
t o
n O
vera
ll S
ati
sfa
cti
on
Overall Satisfaction Performance
9/21/2016 18
2012 – 2016 Trip Experience
Overall Satisfaction – Importance vs. Performance Maps: Bus
Personal Safety
Operator Appearance
Operator Helpfulness
Ease of hearing PA
Helpfulness of PA Maps & Info
Trip duration
Vehicle cleanliness
Trip smoothness
Wait time
Vehicle crowding
Protect
Maintain
Improve
Monitor
Imp
ac
t o
n O
vera
ll S
ati
sfa
cti
on
Overall Satisfaction Performance
9/21/2016 19
2012 – 2016 Trip Experience
Overall Satisfaction – Importance vs. Performance Maps: Streetcar
Personal safety
Operator Appearance
Trip Smoothness
Operator Helpfulness
Vehicle Cleanliness
Ease of hearing PA
Helpfulness of PA
Maps & Info
Trip duration
Vehicle Crowding
Wait time
Protect
Maintain
Improve
Monitor
Imp
act
on
Overa
ll S
ati
sfa
cti
on
Overall Satisfaction Performance
9/21/2016 20
Summary
Key focus areas
Communications and announcements
Improve the helpfulness, frequency, audibility,
and clarity of announcements on all modes.
Comfort and convenience
The customer experience would improve with
reduced crowding on all modes, and
improving wait times on surface modes.
Customer interaction with station staff
Station staff have a direct influence over
several dimensions that have improved over
the past four years, but still has room to
grow.
How we are addressing the issues
Communications and announcements
Improved customer-facing language and standards for
service alerts
Use of professional voiceover artist for pre-recorded
announcements
Standards for type, frequency and content of pre-
recorded public address announcements
Implementation of external route (pre-boarding)
announcement system on all modes
Comfort and convenience
Improved schedules on 32 bus and streetcar routes to
improve reliability and travel times (+ new streetcars!)
Helpfulness of station staff
Customer Service Standards and Stations Transformation
9/21/2016 23
Appendix
9/21/2016 24
Methodology
Method 10-minute telephone survey
Respondents
100% City of Toronto residents
Aged 13 years old +
TTC user at least once every few weeks or more frequently
Standard industry exclusions
Timing April 2016 – June 2016
Sample Size n=1,000
Changes for
Q1
Added announcement specific statements to bus and streetcar (the quality,
clarity, and frequency)
9/21/2016 25
Respondent Demographic Profile
Gender
57% 43%
AGE DISTRIBUTION
<25
16%
25-54
52%
55-70
25%
71+
6%
HOUSEHOLD INCOME 19% Under $45,000
57% $45,000 + 24% DK/NA
OCCUPATION STATUS 64% Work full-time or part-time
8% Unemployed or at home
11% Student
15% Retired 2% DK/NA
9/21/2016 26
Respondent Behavioural Profile
FREQUENCY OF TTC USAGE
38% 34%
11% 17%
Once a dayor more
often
Severaltimes aweek
Once aweek
Once everyfew weeks
MODE OF TRANSPORTATION OF MOST RECENT TRIP ON TTC
68%
55%
25%
Subway Bus Streetcar
TIME OF DAY OF LAST TRIP
18%
40%
30%
12%
Early/MorningRush
Afternoon Rush Hour Evening/Night
Start – 9:30am
9:31am – 3:30pm
3:31pm – 6:30pm
6:31pm - End
PURPOSE OF LAST TTC TRIP
43%
26% 16%
8% 3% 3%
Goingto/from
work
Attendingto personal
business
Pleasure orrecreation
Going to orcoming
from school
Othershopping
Groceryshopping
PURCHASE METHOD
14%
51%
24%
8% 0%
Cash Ticket/Token Monthly Pass PRESTO Other
Token=38%
Adult Monthly Metropass= 20%
62% purchased from TTC Subway Collector/Ticket Agent