COMMERCE
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover
Towards a benchmark in
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
Workplace Travel Plans
“A company travel plan is…
a strategy for managing the travel generated by your organization, with the aim of
reducing its environmental impact. Travel plans typically combine measures to support
walking, cycling, public transport and car sharing. These are reinforced with promotion
and incentives and by the management of workplace parking. Travel plans also include
action to reduce the need to travel, such as telecommuting. They can focus on both
commuter and business travel.”1
Project lead partner:
London Borough of
Bromley
Project supported by the
London European
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT)
1
Taylor, I (2006), The Essential Guide to Travel Planning, publication funded by Department of Transport (UK)
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 1
Table of contents
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 3
1. COMMERCE.............................................................................................................................. 3
2. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................................ 3
Interim Secretariat 2.1. Desk-study (collection of examples)..................................................................................... 3
Fiona Glover 2.2. Typology ............................................................................................................................. 3
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896 DESK-STUDY RESULTS..................................................................................................................... 5
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
1. FACTS AND FIGURES ..................................................................................................................... 5
2. LIST OF CASE-STUDIES .................................................................................................................. 5
TYPOLOGY: THE RESULTS ............................................................................................................... 7
1. INDICATORS ................................................................................................................................. 7
2. RESULTS PER INDICATOR .............................................................................................................. 7
TYPOLOGY: CONCLUSIONS............................................................................................................ 19
1. GENERAL INFORMATION .............................................................................................................. 19
2. PROCESS INDICATORS ................................................................................................................ 19
2.1. Company reasons/motivations........................................................................................... 19
2.2. Survey and analysis of status quo ..................................................................................... 19
2.3. Objectives of the Travel Plan ............................................................................................. 20
2.4. Roles and responsibilities .................................................................................................. 20
2.5. Communication activities ................................................................................................... 21
2.6. Identification of measures.................................................................................................. 22
2.7. Monitoring and evaluation.................................................................................................. 23
3. RESULTS INDICATORS. ................................................................................................................ 23
TOWARDS A BENCHMARK IN WORKPLACE TRAVEL PLANNING................................................ 25
1. INTRODUCTION TO THE CONCEPT OF BENCHMARKING. .................................................................... 25
2. A BENCHMARK FOR COMPANY TRAVEL PLANS ............................................................................... 25
3. TOWARDS A STANDARD FOR COMPANY TRAVEL PLANS .................................................................... 25
3.1. Quality standards in general .............................................................................................. 26
3.2. Quality standards in mobility management......................................................................... 28
3.3. Examples of steps towards standardization of commuter travel plans ................................ 31
ANNEXE 1 ......................................................................................................................................... 32
ANNEXE 2 ......................................................................................................................................... 41
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................... 54
Project lead partner:
London Borough of
Bromley
Project supported by the
London European
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT)
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 2
INTRODUCTION
1. COMMERCE
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd
Task 1 within WP 2 of COMMERCE envisages the preparations for the setup of a
+44 1534 840896 comprehensive system of standards in Workplace Travel Planning. To do so, a EU-wide desk
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
study of approximately 50 examples of good practice in Workplace Travel Planning (physical,
promotional etc) is conducted, in order to devise a typology and thus a set of standards. Data
was to be found from a variety of sources, including:
• existing data bases (for example ASTUTE)
• examples of good practice collected by the city-partners from their own countries
• European networks (eg EPOMM itself, Eurocities etc)
2. Methodology
2.1. Desk-study (collection of examples)
As stated in the DoW of COMMERCE existing databases were the first direction to look in to
for interesting case-studies. In the list of case-studies you will find that indeed some of the
existing databases provided good examples. Mostly PIMMS and ASTUTE were very helpful.
In a second phase the databases of European networks such as EPOMM and ELTIS were
searched for good examples in Workplace Travel Planning. These networks gave also a
reasonable flow of good examples.
In a last phase a few search engines were used to broaden the search a bit. The engines used
are Google, Dogpile, All the Web. Mostly examples with a more or less promotional objective
came up in this search.
The terms that were used for the internet-based search are the following: Workplace Travel
Plan(s), Workplace Travel Planning, Company Travel Plan(s), Company Travel Planning,
Betriebliches Mobilitätsmanagement, Plan de Déplacements d’ Entreprise,
Bedrijfsvervoerplannen, Mobility Management in Companies, Mobiliteitsmanagement in
bedrijven.
The selected case-studies were compared and analyzed using the framework that can be
found in annexe. The results of this analysis ware brought together in a typology. The typology
results and conclusions are integrated in this report.
The typology results were used to draft a benchmarking structure, creating a questionnaire
which can be used for evaluating Workplace Travel Plans. The benchmarking structure is
developed in such a way that the average score states the benchmark.
Project lead partner:
London Borough of
Bromley 2.2. Typology
In order to create a framework for the typology through which the examples could be analysed
a large number of sources was consulted. (see references list) This framework was sent for
feedback to all COMMERCE-partners and resulted in a comprehensive, userfriendly basis for
Project supported by the the typology. (framework in annexe)
London European
Partnership for The framework of the typology was used as a checklist to analyse the selected examples. Of
Transport (LEPT) course there was some space left open for flexibility and innovative examples that not fitted
the framework. These examples were integrated as the analysis went further along.
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 3
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
Project lead partner:
London Borough of
Bromley
Project supported by the
London European
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT)
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 4
DESK-STUDY RESULTS
1. Facts and figures
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd A grand total of 65 examples was found and identified in the EU-wide desk-study. In a first
+44 1534 840896 quickscan of the examples 57 case-studies were selected for further analysis. That means that
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
8 examples were rejected. The selection criteria were relevance, readability and the extent to
which information was offered in the case-study.
Within this selection of 57 examples a few examples came out as doubles. That narrows the
total down to 51 relevant, readable and unique examples.
Most of the examples are about one company that implemented a Workplace Travel planning
process. Nevertheless, the desk-study shows that it’s also a common practice to look at
mobility problems on a broader scale in terms of companies working together, different
divisions of the same company working together or a Travel Plan for a business park or
industrial zone.
While searching for case-studies a geographical spread was envisaged.
2. List of case-studies
1. Alcatel_FR
30. LCMU_FR_ELTIS
2. Artis_NL_Slimreizen
31. LITEF_GE_ILS
3. BASF_GE
32. Manchesterairport_UK_ELTIS
4. Bregenz_AU_ASTUTE
33. MayhewAnimalHome_UK_PIMMS
5. CEA_FR
34. Micoreelectronics_FR_ADEME
6. Chemicalcompany_UK_VIPRE
35. Mcroelectronics_FR_double
7. Cliniclowns_NL_Slimreizen
36. Micronas_GE_ILS
8. ColchesterHospital_UK_ELTIS
37. Motorola_FR
9. Colruyt_BE_ELTIS
38. Nîmes_FR_ADEME
10. Derriford Hospital_UK
39. NorthernRock_UK_PIMMS
11. De Telegraaf_NL_Slimreizen
40. Novartis_UK_ASTUTE
Project lead partner:
London Borough of 12. DisneylandResortParis_FR_ADEME
41. Oracle_UK_VIPRE
Bromley
13. Eastpoint_UK_VIPRE
42. Pantar_NL_Slimreizen
14. Erasmus_NL_ELTIS_double
43. Pfizer_UK
Project supported by the 15. Erasmus_NL_Slimreizen
London European 44. Pfizer_UK_ELTIS_double
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT) 16. Fokker_NL_VIPRE
45. Pfizer_UK_PIMMS_double
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 5
17. FranceTélécom_FR_ADEME
46. Rijnstaete_NL_ELTIS
18.
47. RoyalHaskoning_UK_PIMMS
FrieslandZorgverzekeraar_NL_Slimreize
n
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover 19. Giant_NL_Slimreizen
Global to Local Ltd 48. Southwark_UK_ELTIS
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com 20. GlaxoSmithKline_UK_PIMMS
49. StPaulie_GE_ILS
21. Goudsepoort_NL_ELTIS
50. Suchard_GE
22. Heathrowairport_UK
51. Swissmill_CH
23. HospitalDublin_IL
52. UniversitatsklinikumBreisgau_GE_ILS
24. IGR_FR
53. Verkeerenwaterstaat_NL_Slimreizen
25. IGR_FR_double
54. VGZ_NL_Slimreizen
26. Infenion_GE_ELTIS_double
55. Vodafone_UK
27. Infenion_GE_ILS 56. VroomenDreesman_NL_Slimreizen
28. Karlstad_SE_ELTIS 57. WilliamSchrikkerGroep_NL_Slimreizen
29. Katwijk_NL_ELTIS
Project lead partner:
London Borough of
Bromley
Project supported by the
London European
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT)
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 6
TYPOLOGY: THE RESULTS
1. Indicators
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd General information In order to give a complete overview of indicators
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com 1. legal, regulatory and fiscal which determine a Travel Plan this first point
framework ‘general information’ was included. As the desk-
study went along it became very clear that this
2. Political and programmatic subject deserves a study on its own. It shows to be
framework impossible to give a complete overview of all the
indicators for 27 EU-countries.
3. Financial framework
Suggestion:
4. Organizational framework
When implementing the practice of Travel Planning
5. Education and qualification it’s very useful to use these indicators to get an
framework overview of the general situation in a specific
country or region. It will enable practitioners to
6. Other proceed quickly when these general conditions are
already known and available.
Process indicators Of course, the most important indicators when
1. Company reasons/motivations discussing Travel Planning are motivations,
objectives and results. However, good practices
2. Survey and analysis of status quo show that other indicators such as “roles and
responsibilities” take up an important role in the
3. Objectives of the Travel Plan success of a Company Travel Plan. When working
towards a standard in Travel Planning it’s , of
4. Roles and responsibilities course, very important to have info about the
trajectory of Travel Plans and therefore the point of
5. Communication activities monitoring and evaluation was included.
6. Identification of measures
7. Monitoring and evaluation
Result indicators In the general results indicator, we chose to have a
1. Economical distinction between economical, environmental,
social and results in transport matters. We think it’s
2. Environmental important to have an overview of whether the
results indicated in a case-study meet up to the
3. Social objectives that have been set for the travel plan.
4. Results in transport matters
Project lead partner:
London Borough of
Bromley
2. Results per indicator
Project supported by the
London European
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT)
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 7
1. Parking problems (employees and visitors) 26
1.Company
2. congestion 14
motivations/reasons
3. accessibility 12
for setting up company
4. environmental awareness 12
travel plan
5. WTP mandatory in function of attaining permit 8
Interim Secretariat (building or environmental)
Fiona Glover 6. relocation 6
Global to Local Ltd 7. reduction of costs 5
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com 8. image 4
9. well-being of employees 4
10. restructuring of the company 4
11. health of employees 3
12. ISO 14001 2
13. productivity 1
14. flexibility of employees 1
The results of the indicator “company motivation” show that the main motivation for setting up
a Travel Plan are mobility related problems such as parking problems, congestion and
accessibility. However, in 12 cases also environmental awareness was taken up as an
important motivating factor. Social objectives, such as well being of employees or health of
employees are lesser thought of as a reason for setting up a Travel Plan. In some countries
having set up a Workplace Travel Plan is mandatory in function of attaining a building or
environmental permit. In 8 cases this was mentioned.
The case-studies show clearly that, with a few exceptions, a company’s motivation to set up a
Travel Plan consists of a variety of motivations/reasons. Mobility problems such as parking
problems, congestion and accessibility could be considered as a trigger that sets off a thinking
process on the specific situation of a company towards mobility.
2. Survey and analysis of status YES NO NO INFO
quo
Survey of employees/visitors’ mobility 44 2 9
behaviour (travel patterns)
Travel issues related to the company 46 2 7
activities and HR management, ..
- number of parking spaces
- sector of activities
- number of employees / visitors
- logistics/deliveries
- working times/opening times
- subsidies on traveling
Project lead partner: expenses
London Borough of
Bromley - other: (season tickets, bike
loans, …
- lease/company car scheme
Site assessment (Audit of traffic 46 1 8
related conditions)
Project supported by the
London European - walking and cycling
Partnership for connections
Transport (LEPT)
- facilities s.a; bicycle racks, ..
- PT-connections, service
quality, ..
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 8
- Parking conditions
- Future site development plans
- Potential opportunities or
constraints
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover The results for the second indicator show clearly that the practice of surveying mobility
Global to Local Ltd behaviour, travel issues related to company activities and site assessment is widely spread. In
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com 46 case-studies, a survey was conducted on these three issues.
However, the case-studies show a variety of techniques to conduct these surveys. Some use
indeed scientific questionnaires while others prefer meetings with staff to pinpoint problems,
threats and opportunities.
3. Objectives of Which case-studies?:
company travel 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,28,29
plan ,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,
Y N No info
Economical 20 1
Environmental 19
Social objectives 8
Objectives in 36
transport matters
In 49 of 51 case-studies objectives for a Travel Plan were set. Main objective for companies
seems to be “finding a solution for transport problems. This was the case in 36 case-studies.
In 20 case-studies a direct link was made between Travel Planning and economical objectives.
These companies believe that their economical results can benefit from a good Travel Plan. In
19 case also an environmental objective was mentioned. In these case the attention mostly
goes to CO2-reduction. Last but not least, 8 companies mention social objectives as an
important subject in their Travel Plans.
Most of the analyzed case-studies mention more than one objective. Therefore it’s possible for
a company to relate transport problems to environmental, economical of social objectives.
However, case-studies show that transport problems are the main motivation for setting up a
Travel Plan and this is corroborated in the results we got for the objectives-indicators.
Project lead partner:
London Borough of
Bromley
3.1. Quantification of
Project supported by the objectives
London European
Partnership for Percentage Decreas
Transport (LEPT) e/increas
e
Without
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 9
numbers
0 11 21 31 41 51 61 71 81 91
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 10
0
Interim Secretariat Economical:
Fiona Glover 6
Global to Local Ltd - increase of turnover
5
+44 1534 840896 - increase of productivity
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com 4
- image
2
- other
Environmental
8
- CO2-reduction
7
- Decrease pollution
1
- other
Social objectives
5
- well-being of personnel
2
- less absenteeism
Objectives in transport
matters
1 3 3 13
- modal shift
1 22
- less congestion
When we take a look at the quantification of objectives set in a Travel Plan, we get a less
clearer picture. The analyzed case-studies show almost no quantifiable data such as numbers
of decrease or increase or percentages. When looking at transport matters some companies
take up the challenge to meet a certain threshold.
When quantifying their objectives a total of 7 companies mention a percentage of modal shift
to be attained by implementing the Travel Plan, only 1 company does the same for decrease
in congestion. For the other objectives (economical, environmental, social) no quantifiable data
is provided. When mentioned, these objectives are referred to as set to decrease or increase
but without mentioning concrete numbers.
4. Roles and Which case-studies:
responsibilities 1,2,3,6,10,11,12,13,14,16,17,19,20,23,24,25,26,28,30,32,33,
36,38,39,40,41,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50
Y N No info
4.1 Internal within the
company
is there a mobility (travel plan)
6 2
Project lead partner: co-ordinator
London Borough of
Bromley steering group or working
20
group
role of senior management in
15
travel plan
Project supported by the
London European role of staff representatives 10 1
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT) role of HR-management,
8 1 1
Facility management
Other: …
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 10
4.1.1 Roles
leader facilitator executive
role of senior management in
8 6
travel plan
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover role of staff representatives 7 1
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896 role of HR-management,
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com 6 2
Facility management
other : …
4.2 Involvement of external
stakeholders
Y N No info
PT-provider (train/bus, …) 13 1
Local/regional government
15
body
Private transport consultant 5 2
Communication consultant 4 2
Mobility co-ordinators of other
companies (of same business 5 1
site
Supply organizations 1
Other …
In 20 case-studies a steering group is coordinating the Travel Plan. Most common members of
these groups are senior management and staff representatives. The case-studies don’t give a
clear view on who takes up the leading part in the workload for a Travel Plan. In 8 cases it’s
senior management who’s leading the proceedings, but in 7 cases even staff representatives
are coordinating. Only 6 case-studies mentioned the role of a mobility or travel plan
coordinator.
When looking at the involvement of external stakeholders we see that local PT-providers and
local or regional government bodies are often consulted or even deeply involved in the
Project lead partner: implementation of a Travel Plan.
London Borough of
Bromley
Project supported by the
London European
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT)
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 11
5. Communication Which case-studies:
activities 1,2,4,6,7,8,9,11,12,13,14,16,17,18,20,21,22,23,24,25,28,29,30,
Interim Secretariat
31,32,33,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,47,48,50,51
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd
Y N No info
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com 5.1 Internal information
and promotion of actions
towards target groups
towards senior 5
management
towards staff 38 1
towards visitors 9 1
information channels 28 1
kind of information 22
provided
5.1.1 Information
channels
Meeting 9
Newsletter 13
e-mail 2
Poster / bulletin board 9
Folder/leaflet 4
Website 16
Information day 5
Information package 2
campaign 9
When hiring 1
helpdesk 2
Commuter centre 9
Project lead partner: 5.1.2. Kind of information
London Borough of
Bromley Info about every phase 5
Only info about own role 13
Project supported by the Y N No info
London European
Partnership for 5.2 External public
Transport (LEPT) relations
press releases in local
newspapers, radio,
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 12
television
participation/lecture at 1
seminars
articles
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover Reward 2
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896 case study 51
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
Other:..
Communication activities are taken up in most case-studies as an important part of
implementing a Travel Plan. However, only 39 case-studies give a concrete overview of their
communication activities. 28 case-studies give us an insight in which information channels are
used and 22 case-studies state clearly which kind of information they provide to staff,
management or visitors. Communication is mostly aimed towards staff, as shown in 38 case-
studies. In 9 case-studies there were specific communication activities towards visitors.
Most commonly used information channels are websites and newsletters (electronic or hard
copy). In 9 case-studies a more integrated approach is mentioned. These companies chose to
set up an information campaign which involves of course the use of various types of
information channels. In 9 case-studies the implementation of a commuter centre is
mentioned. This centre can provide staff with all the answers on questions about PT-hours,
PT-rates, cycling information, carshare schemes and other mobility related problems.
When looking at external public relation, the case-studies give us very little data. Only one
company mentions participating or organising a seminar on the results of their Travel Plan. On
the other hand, two companies mentioned their Travel Plans as award winning. Of course, all
the companies submitted themselves or by others, a case-study on their experiences with
Travel Planning.
6. Implementation of Which case-studies:
(mix of) measures 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,26,28,29,3
0,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51
Y N No info
Promotion of walking 7
Promotion of cycling 34
Promotion of PT-use 33
Promotion of car sharing, 27
carpooling
Financial stimuli 18
Project lead partner:
London Borough of Organisational measures 12
Bromley
Infrastructural measures 20
Campaigns (info or 9
awareness raising)
Project supported by the Other…
London European
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT)
Most popular measures taken up in a Travel Plan are measures which promote cycling and
PT-use (34 and 33). Car sharing has been mentioned 27 times as a measure to attain the
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 13
objectives of the Travel Plan. However much less popular, 20 travel plans mention
infrastructural measures, 18 travel plans mention the implementation of financial stimuli and 12
travel plans take up organisational measures. Of course, in most travel plans a mix of
measures is implemented.
In the table below, you’ll find every measure mentioned in the case-studies. They are ranked
Interim Secretariat by popularity and theme.
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com Promotion of walking
Facilities for walkers 1
Walk to Work – pack (roadsafety) 1
Walking Buddy’s 1
Promotion of cycling
Expansion of bicycle storage facilities 15
Facilities for arriving cyclers (showers, lockers, ...) 12
Company bikes 11
Bycycle paths on the permises 7
Bike repair service 4
Information about cycling 4
Reward for cycling to work 3
Bicycle kits (rain cover, fluo bandages, badges, …) 2
Registration system for cyclists 2
Bike market 1
Bike excursions 1
Cycle maps 1
Breakfast at work 1
Promotion of PT-use
Refund of PT-tickets for staff 16
Shuttle service / vanpools 15
Individual journey planning 10
New or replacement of PT- stop nearby the company 5
Adjustment of working hours in favour of PT-use 4
Project lead partner: Mobility card (combined PT-use paid by company) 2
London Borough of
Bromley Park & ride facility 1
Promotion of car sharing, carpooling
Car share schemes, database 17
Project supported by the Taxi-service (guaranteed ride) 1
London European
Partnership for Financial stimuli
Transport (LEPT)
Paid parking 2
Differentiation in parking tariffs 1
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 14
Expense system that promotes durable mobility 1
Choice between cash and company car 1
Mobility budget 1
Interim Secretariat Organisational measures
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd teleworking 5
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com Flexible working hours 3
decentralisation 2
Shorter working periods (eg; from 5 to 4 days) 1
Infrastructural measures
Parking lots place further away from company 7
Electrical vehicles 3
Services on the premises (post office, supermarket, 1
…)
Campaigns (info or awareness raising)
campaigns 5
Other…
Joint buy of motorcycles 1
Accessibility by boat 1
7. Monitoring and Which case-studies: 8,9,10,12,14,17,19,23,24,28,29,30,31,35,39,41,42
evaluation
Project lead partner:
Y N No info
London Borough of
Bromley
Progress monitoring 17
Feedback on 5
progress
Adjustments after 4
Project supported by the feedback
London European
Partnership for Frequency of 3
Transport (LEPT) review
7.1 Frequency of
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 15
review
Once
Every six months or
less
Interim Secretariat annually 2
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd Every two years
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
Every 3 – 5 years 1
When needed 11
Only 17 case-studies mentioned their activities or intentions concerning monitoring and
evaluation. Striking fact is that 17 companies conduct some kind of progress monitoring, while
only 5 of those mention giving any feedback on the progress. Furthermore, only 4 case-studies
mention taking up adjustments in the Travel Plan after analysis and feedback of the Travel
Plan. On the frequency of review only 3 case-studies provides us with any information.
Most of the Travel Plans (11) that are being subjected to any form of progress monitoring are
only monitored when needed. It is not clear who makes this decision in the process. Only 2
Travel Plans are monitored annually.
8. Results Which case-studies:
3,4,5,6,7,9,10,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,21,23,24,28,30,31,32,33,35,
36,37,38,39,40,41,43,44,45,46,48,49,51
Y N No info
Economical 15
Environmental 15
Social objectives 5
Objectives in transport 28
matters
8.1. Quantification of
results
Percentage Decrea
se/incre
Project lead partner: ase
London Borough of
Bromley Without
number
s
0 11 21 31 41 51 61 71 81 91
Project supported by the
London European 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 10
Partnership for 0
Transport (LEPT)
Economical: 4
- increase of turnover
1 5
- increase of productivity
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 16
- image
4
- other
Environmental
- CO2-reduction
1 8
- Decrease pollution
Interim Secretariat - other
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd Social objectives 4
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com - well-being of personnel
1 2
- less absenteeism
Objectives in transport 8 9 2 1
matters
- modal shift
- less congestion 1 7
- less parking needed 7
Out of 51 case-studies, 37 case-studies mention achieved results of the Travel Plan that was
implemented. Mostly (28) results in transport matters are addressed to be important outcomes
of the Travel Plan process. Nevertheless, also economical and environmental results are often
mentioned (15 times each).
Again, when taking a look at the quantitative data provided in the case-studies, we must
acknowledge that very little data is given. Remarkable is that mainly in the area of transport
matters (modal shift, congestion) quantitative data is given in terms of percentages. In 19 out
of 20 case-studies the percentage of modal shift towards a more durable mode of transport is
situated below 30% envisaged modal shift.
9. Barriers
Lack of interest with staff 2
Lack of interest with senior management 1
Lack of good monitoring 1
Not enough time 1
Internal working group stopped 1
Car sharing is difficult because staff doesn’t know one 1
another. Car sharers reported some problems concerning
appointments and awkward situations.
Flexible working hours is not accepted by everyone in the 1
company
Project lead partner:
Working together with staff, management, external 1
London Borough of stakeholders is very difficult.
Bromley
Telework, working at home, … are sometimes difficult to 1
adapt to by staff
Project supported by the The least we can say about encountered barriers while implementing a Travel Plan, is that
London European there is very little information available in the case-studies about this specific subject.
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT) However, the barriers that are summed up in the table above seem more or less general and
could occur in any company. They are not site or company related and are therefore useful in
a way that they provide us with possible problems.
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 17
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
Project lead partner:
London Borough of
Bromley
Project supported by the
London European
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT)
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 18
TYPOLOGY: CONCLUSIONS
1. General information
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd As stated in the intro of this report, this part of the framework is very important but fairly difficult
+44 1534 840896 for a non-native to point out for the different European member-states. Nevertheless, a good
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
and pragmatic knowledge of these topics is essential for promoting or setting up Travel Plans.
It would be a great exercise for the partners, and the learner-cities in particular, in
COMMERCE to gain some knowledge about these topics and produce some type of fact sheet
about the situation in their country. Of particular importance is a strengthening of articulation
between transport and land use planning (like urban master plan or sustainable urban
transport plan), helping to anticipate changes with regard to the location of businesses and
homes.
Main topics to be examined are:
• Legal, regulatory and fiscal framework
• Political and programmatic framework
• Financial framework
• Organizational framework
• Education and qualification framework
2. Process indicators
2.1. Company reasons/motivations
Of course, in most case-studies there isn’t one important reason or motivation that stands
above others. In fact, it’s a mix of reasons and motivations that urge companies to set up a
Travel Plan. Items such as parking problems, congestion and accessibility are of high
importance due to their direct economical impact on productivity and the company as a whole.
However, companies often see these problems as opportunities to work, besides their
economical needs, on their environmental impact in terms of CO2-reduction and less
congestion. One could imagine that there’s some kind of hidden agenda within the motivation
to work towards a better environment in terms of image improvement or sheer increase of
profit, but we cannot deny the economical reality which companies have to deal with. On the
other hand, maybe we should focus less on the motivation of companies but more on
objectives and results.
However, working towards a successful Travel Plan, the analysis shows that it’s important to
have a clear view of the motivations or reasons for setting up a Travel Plan. Clear motivations
lead to clear objectives which on their turn make it easy to evaluate and monitor progress and
results.
A clear motivation and a clear set of objectives are also a blessing for the communication
Project lead partner: strategy. When communicating to senior management, staff, visitors or external stakeholders,
London Borough of
Bromley
a clear and simple message about problems and possible measures or solutions is easier to
gain support on than a hazy, vague idea about what should or could be done to counter
mobility problems.
2.2. Survey and analysis of status quo
Project supported by the
London European
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT) The analysis of the case-studies show that it’s widely accepted that surveying mobility
patterns, travel issues and site-related data is necessary to come to a clear picture of
weaknesses, strengths, threats and opportunities of a specific mobility situation. However, the
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 19
examined case-studies show a variety of techniques to do so. Of course, there are some
context conditions that determine whether a staff meeting or a scientific questionnaire is the
better option. Scale of the company, staff numbers, company culture, ... are but a few of these
conditions.
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover
However, working towards a standard in Workplace Travel Planning may benefit from the use
Global to Local Ltd of one, widely accepted and supported, questionnaire. It enables objective and less complex
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com comparison between different mobility situations and companies. It also enables an easier
transfer of knowledge and good practice between EU member-states. At the moment, there
are a few good examples being used in the UK already. As a future action, these examples
could be examined on their transferability to other member-states.
2.3. Objectives of the Travel Plan
As for motivation, the same adagium goes for objectives. A Travel Plan benefits from clearly
formulated objectives. These enable the company or its working group / travel plan coordinator
to pinpoint actions to be taken and how they could be evaluated and monitored properly.
The analysis shows that companies are not eager to quantify their objectives. Yet,
quantification is an essential process in getting a clearly formulated objective. This reluctance
to quantify could be remedied by raising awareness with companies and planners that
quantification is essential. Together with this message, it should be stated that quantification is
not a threat of image loss when objectives are not achieved but an opportunity to monitor
progress and learn from possible mishaps. Of course, quantitative objectives can’t do without
a thoroughly conducted survey.
A possible tool which helps formulating clear objectives is SMARTER. This is an acronym for
Specific, Measurable, Acceptable/Achievable, Realistic, Time-bound, Evaluated,
Reviewed/Rewarded. An objective must meet up to these conditions to make a clearly
formulated objective.
When working towards a EU-standard, transferability is essential. Thus, quantitative objectives
are very useful in an international context. Of course, not all objectives or variables are
quantifiable. However, the analysis shows that the most important objectives are fairly easy to
quantify in terms of percentages increase/decrease. (see point 3.1 Quantification of objectives)
2.4. Roles and responsibilities
Project lead partner:
London Borough of
Bromley
In most case-studies that mention roles and responsibilities, a steering group is coordinating
the Travel Planning process. The steering group consists in most cases of senior management
and staff representatives. As a start, this is a good basis for a Travel Planning process which
has to be implemented, communicated and monitored but also has to gain support with those
Project supported by the
London European
who will experience the consequences of it on a daily basis. In order to be able to take up this
Partnership for challenge, it would be wise to have a steering group which consists of all internal stakeholders.
Transport (LEPT)
Of course, the size of the group has to be workable, so working with representatives is
necessary. Nevertheless, other than management and staff, the steering group and the Travel
Plan could benefit from the presence of HR-management, facility-management or even
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 20
mobility-coordinators from other companies who have already some experience in setting up
Travel Plans.
Apart from internal stakeholders, one could think of a number of external stakeholders who are
all to some extent involved in the Travel Plan. The analysis shows that mostly local PT-
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover
providers and local or regional government bodies are invited to share some ideas or to be
Global to Local Ltd deeply involved in the process. The analysis shows that having a good contact with external
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com stakeholders can broaden the terrain on which actions or measures can be taken. The Travel
Plan can benefit from a larger, integrated plan for the local situation. It’s also important for
Travel Planners to know what are the objectives or concrete plans which governmental
planners or policy makers have in mind for the surroundings of the company. This way, double
work and disappointments can be avoided.
Of course, it’s elementary to any planning process or work in progress that good agreements
on tasks and responsibilities are made. The case-studies show very little data on this particular
subject, which could point out that there isn’t much thought given to this. On the other hand,
some case-studies have a very accurate and thorough description of roles and responsibilities.
So it’s possible and there is yet some experience. Remarkable fact is that 5 out of 9 barriers,
mentioned in the case-studies, are about failures in working together or keeping people
involved. This means that, however considered less important in successful stories, the
subject of roles and responsibilities is a possible factor for failure of the Travel Plan process.
This particular subject could turn out to be the most difficult one to transfer into a EU-standard.
Roles and responsibilities seem fairly objective, easy to define terms but in reality they are
intertwined with a lot of cultural differences. For this, I want to refer to the study conducted by
ITIM (see references list). In a EU-standard there should be at least something mentioned
about who are the stakeholders, who’s taking up which task and who bears responsibility for
what.
2.5. Communication activities
The analysis shows us that communication is considered an important part of the Travel Plan
process. As we look more in depth, we see that much effort goes in to communicating towards
staff about their own role in the Travel Plan process. In other words, staff are often addressed
with what they should or shouldn’t do in order to meet up to the objectives the company has
set for itself. This could lead to a negative attitude towards the Travel Plan and could result
finally in failure (see point 9 Barriers). This can be remedied by an open communication
process about every phase of the Travel Plan. Furthermore, through a participation process a
Project lead partner:
London Borough of
company could make the Travel Plan a subject of discussion between staff and management.
Bromley This way, you can create more involvement with staff.
Most popular information channels are newsletters (electronic or hard copy) and websites. Of
course, these are all good examples of sharing information with stakeholders. In some case-
Project supported by the studies, the setup of an information campaign is mentioned. It is, to my opinion, quite evident
London European that a mix of information channels will turn out to be more effective than only one. However,
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT) also in this case we have to consider certain cultural differences between companies of one
country on one hand, but also between different member-states.
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 21
The case-studies give us very little data on communication towards external stakeholders or
the public in terms of press releases, rewards, …. This could point out that external public
relations are considered to be of minor importance. However, 4 companies mention
improvement of the company image as an objective for the Travel Plan. Improving your image
can, of course, only be done by communicating to the world.
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd For a EU-standard or benchmarking process, shared information on good practices and
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com successful plans is essential. It would have been virtual impossible to conduct this research if
there wasn’t any data available in the form of press releases, data bases, case-studies. Thus,
any Travel Plan that wants to compare itself with others, should contain a few measures on
external communication.
2.6. Identification of measures
Evidently, the most popular measures are to be found in the area of promotion of cycling,
promotion of PT-use and promotion of car sharing. Remarkable is the varied mix of measures
that most companies take in order to meet up to their objectives. Out of 51 case-studies, a
variety of 41 unique measures came up. In order to analyze them properly they were in fact
even more or less summarized. It points out that every situation is more or less unique and
therefore requires a unique and adapted approach. Nevertheless, we could derive some basic
measures which should be a part of any Travel Plan in Europe. Based on popularity and
relevance, I would suggest the following.:
Promotion of walking Facilities for walkers
Promotion of cycling Expansion of bicycle storage facilities
Facilities for arriving cyclers (showers, lockers, ...)
Company bikes
Bycycle paths on the permises
Incentives such as breakfast at work, bike repair service,
cycle kits,…
Promotion of PT-use Refund of PT-tickets for staff
Shuttle service / vanpools (if no PT present)
Individual journey planning
Promotion of car sharing, Car share schemes, database
carpooling
Project lead partner:
London Borough of
Financial stimuli Paid parking
Bromley
Differentiation in parking tariffs
Expense system that promotes durable mobility
Choice between cash and company car
Project supported by the Mobility budget
London European
Partnership for Organisational measures teleworking
Transport (LEPT)
Flexible working hours
Infrastructural measures Parking lots place further away from company
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 22
(other than those who
specifically promote a
mode of transport)
Campaigns (info or campaigns
Interim Secretariat awareness raising)
Fiona Glover 2.7. Monitoring and evaluation
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
The analysis shows us that very little data is given on monitoring and evaluation of Travel
Plans. However, this is an important part of any planning process. In order to get a clear view
on factors of success and failure monitoring and evaluation is essential. It is not very clear
whether companies consider this less important or that they simply do not wish to provide this
information in a case-study.
In order to come to a standard or a benchmark and thereby giving the opportunity to
companies to learn from one another, good and objective information on factors for success
and failure is indispensable.
In international literature there are ample tools for conducting an monitoring or evaluation
process. (eg.: SWOT-analysis, EFQM, ….) Future action could be to examine which
evaluation tool could be used as a standard for all travel plans.
3. Results indicators.
Striking fact in the analysis is that less information has been found on objectives than on
results. Apparently, however only a few objectives has been set, companies tend to find that a
lot more is achieved, mostly in other areas than they first aimed at, according to the case-
studies. Given the fact that little data is available on progress monitoring, evaluation and
quantitative objectives or results, it is very difficult to determine the effectiveness of a Travel
plan. Again we must plea for the use of quantitative data to be able to compare results with the
set objectives on one hand, and with other companies on the other.
Another striking fact is that a lot of attention is given to results achieved in transport matters
such as modal shift and less congestion. However very important and probably the most
important, enough attention must also be given to the other fields of results as well
(economical, environmental, social). The economical results can convince management to
carry on with Travel Planning or can provide good arguments in convincing other companies to
set up a Travel Plan. The environmental results can convince policy makers and the public
Project lead partner:
London Borough of
that finally measures are being taken to tackle the climate problem. The social results can
Bromley convince staff of the benefits of the Travel Plan and could result in deeper involvement of staff
and a positive attitude towards the Travel Plan.
It is very difficult to give an insight in what a company should be able to achieve in terms of
Project supported by the results. This, of course, depends on a wide array of conditions such as general context,
London European geographical position, scale, number of staff and so on. However, to determine whether a
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT) Travel Plan has been effective and has achieved some nice results, it is essential that as
much information as possible is provided on all of these so-called context conditions. Only
then an outsider can judge a plan on its merits.
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 23
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
Project lead partner:
London Borough of
Bromley
Project supported by the
London European
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT)
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 24
TOWARDS A BENCHMARK IN
WORKPLACE TRAVEL PLANNING
Interim Secretariat 1. Introduction to the concept of benchmarking.
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896 The concept of benchmarking has been used widely by many different types of organisations
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
seeking to learn more about their operational merits and shortcomings (Taylor, 2006)2. The
process of benchmarking involves comparing operational performance with similar institutions,
organisations or enterprises in order to gain some understanding of the best practices
employed within a given industry. Once performance differences across an industry are
understood, each participating organisation has the potential to integrate best practices within
the scope of its own operations in order to attain measurable performance improvements.
Successful Benchmarking =
Self Analysis + Identify Best Practices + Analyse Performance Differences + Implement
Findings
Result =
Narrowed Performance Gaps & Tangible Performance Improvements
The benchmarking process is usually centred upon performance indicators, which operate as
a means of self-analysis and help to identify key differences between participating
organisations.
The participants of a benchmarking exercise will collect data for these indicators in order to
establish best practices in a particular field. Site visits or case studies are often used to
showcase best practices, because this helps participants to understand more fully how the
best practices have been developed and how they work on a daily basis.
Once benchmarks have been established it is the responsibility of individual participants to
return to their respective organisations and implement the process changes that should
improve performance levels. This requires a commitment from participants that the
organisation is willing to co-operate not just in the process of benchmarking, but in following up
the recommendations in order to implement change. This is not simply a case of “following the
leader”, but of constructively integrating the best practices that leading organisations have
established into existing procedures.
2. A benchmark for Company Travel Plans
The results of the typology enabled the development of a benchmarking structure. This
Project lead partner:
structure is created as a questionnaire (in annexe 2) which can be used by companies as well
London Borough of as by practitioners to evaluate company travel plans.
Bromley
The average score (cf. manual in annexe 2) is 30 on 50. This score states the benchmark for
Workplace Travel Plans, based on the analyzed case-studies. The items that are included in
the questionnaire are those that came out of the typology to be the most popular, relevant or
successful.
Project supported by the
London European
Partnership for 3. Towards a standard for company travel plans
Transport (LEPT)
2
Taylor, N (2006), The Urban Transport Benchmarking Initiative, year three final report, july 2006.
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 25
In the perspective of COMMERCE it’s very useful to integrate the findings of the MAX-project
on Quality Management and Mobility Management. Hereby, I give an overview of their
research topics and the conclusions. The report is fully downloadable from the MAX-website
for more in depth information.
Interim Secretariat 3.1. Quality standards in general
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896 Regarding quality standards in general these are the topics that came up in the State of the Art
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com of MAX:
• Concepts of quality and quality management
• Total Quality Management (TQM)
• ISO 9000 Family of standards for quality management systems
• EFQM Model of Excellence
• Common Assessment Framework (CAF) and the UK Charter mark: TQM in Public
Services
• Gap analysis and SERVQUAL
These were the conclusions:
“Mobility management initiatives, as defined in the Mobility Management User Manual
(MOMENTUM / MOSAIC 1999) are practically in direct analogy to organizations:
• At the policy level, system coordinators can be viewed as top management.
• At the management level, personnel, infrastructure, internal processes and plans form a
“Mobility Management organization”.
• At the user level, services such as information, consulting, coordination etc are provided
to the public.
A Mobility Management system is by its definition an approach oriented towards planning,
implementing and managing soft measures; there are specific services provided by a Mobility
Management system but these involve only a fraction of the total potential stakeholders
(especially in small and medium size cities). Moreover, a Mobility Management system
normally has concrete goals, provides specific types of services and may also have an
adequately clear organizational structure, resembling to that of a service-providing
organization. Overall, Mobility Management may be viewed as a service provided by an
organization, and as such, it can be incorporated in a quality management environment.
The structure and characteristics of Mobility Management make it possible for a total quality
management approach to be implemented. Addressing Mobility Management within a context
Project lead partner:
London Borough of
of planning and providing services in the form of soft measures would benefit from a total
Bromley quality approach. Mobility management initiatives may be developed in a form that embraces
basic principles of quality management such as planning and organization, customer focus, a
concern for quality, commitment, teamwork, education and training etc. For instance, Mobility
Management should be driven by customer preferences and expectations and should aim to
maximise the quality of soft measures implemented. Moreover, quality management measures
Project supported by the must be improved continuously to meet customer needs.
London European
Partnership for Nevertheless, TQM is a generic quality management strategy providing policies, instructions,
Transport (LEPT)
best practices and recommendations for efficient management and performance improvement.
TQM suggests improvement but does not give any specific measure or technique for
assessing it, nor any clear procedure for implementation of its principles. Implementation
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 26
details on the other hand are provided by specific standards and models, such as ISO 9000
and EFQM, which provide the guidelines and tools for succeeding in total quality management.
The literature (Dale 1999, Hoyle 2001, Goetsch and Davis 2006) views ISO 9000 as either a
subset of TQM or a TQM approach. Nevertheless, as Goetsch and Davis note, while these two
approaches are not in competition, differences among them exist. Some of the points they
Interim Secretariat indicate are the following:
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896 1. ISO 9000 and TQM cannot be interchanged.
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
2. ISO 9000 can be addressed as a subset of TQM.
3. ISO 9000 may exist in a non-TQM environment.
4. ISO 9000 may be implemented in a non TQM environment but may prove a redundant
factor in a mature TQM environment.
A major reason for the lack of complete interchange ability is that while ISO focuses on quality
management systems for the design, development and production of products or services,
TQM is broader by including all aspects of the organization related to the product or service.
This means that ISO 9000 is less concerned about the level of the organization that is involved
with a delivering a product or service. In addition to the above, as mentioned by Goetsch and
Davis (2006) TQM characteristics such as teamwork and obsession with quality are not
explicitly taken into account in ISO 9000. Overall, as noted, ISO 9000 can be a good point
from which to start moving towards the introduction of TQM.
EFQM incorporates total quality management principles and rationale; according to Russel
(2000) EFQM provides a holistic framework compared to ISO 9000 (with ISO characterized as
a complimentary approach to excellence). Russel (2000) indicates differences between EFQM
and ISO 9000: EFQM requires a greater focus on leaders and their performance is concerned
with the organization’s wider policies and strategy and not just quality and, in addition,
addresses more aspects related to human resources management. For instance, EFQM takes
partnerships explicitly into account, (a critical element in a Mobility Management system),
which does not exist as a requirement in ISO 9000. On the other hand, ISO 9000 focuses on
process realization while in the EFQM model all key-processes for achieving the organization
strategy are considered; moreover ISO 9000 does not define requirements for measuring
customer perception, nor is there a requirement to compare performance with targets and
external comparisons. Finally, ISO 9000 takes into account only performance indicators
related to processes, products and suppliers, while EFQM addresses more areas with respect
to an organization’s performance (for instance financial performance). These differences have
an impact throughout the certification procedure, making EFQM more comprehensive in terms
of the organization’s aspects assessed.
As for CAF, while it is based on the EFQM, it is less rigorous in its assessment procedures
and therefore more suitable to public organizations. Since Mobility Management initiatives are
closer to (if not part of) public services, the potential applicability of this EFQM variant to
Mobility Management is worth investigating. On the other hand, although a national standard,
Project lead partner: Charter Mark may be efficient in the case of Mobility Management, because of its unique
London Borough of characteristic of concentrating on results, along with its simplicity in implementation. Finally,
Bromley
SERVQUAL is merely an instrument for measuring and assessing service quality, widely
applied worldwide.
Cost estimates for implementing ISO 9000, EFQM or CAF depend upon the type and size of
the organization, needs for training, types of processes included etc. Implementation costs
Project supported by the may be high and the relation between benefits and costs for an organization after the
London European
Partnership for
introduction of TQM appears to be favourable (Hendrick and Singhal 1999a,b). Cost estimates
Transport (LEPT) for assessment procedures are provided in the case of EFQM; nevertheless these costs are
only a fraction of the possible costs for an organization as it puts into practice and maintains
EFQM logic in its operation and processes.
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 27
In conclusion, requirements for successful Mobility Management should be implemented on
the basis of total quality management. Models such as EFQM and CAF show potential in that
direction, since they provide an holistic yet practical and efficient approach for managing
elements and processes related to organizational structures that have similarities with Mobility
Management initiatives. MAX is expected to built on these models for developing quality
Interim Secretariat management schemes for quality management.”
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896 3.2. Quality standards in mobility management
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
Regarding quality standards in mobility management these are the topics that came up in the
research in the MAX-project:
• EN Quality Standards for Transport
• The QUATTRO project: Quality In Public Transport services
• TCRP Project F-03: Total Quality Management in Public Transportation
• The “Standard Mobility Centres” project.
• BYPAD: Quality management in cycling
• The MOST project: Quality Insights for Mobility management
• Mobility management for companies
o The German project: “Mobility management for companies – status and
development in Germany”
o The Flemish Mobile Company Award
• Travel Planning Impacts in the UK: The UK Standard for measuring travel plan
impacts, the ACT and Avon Area Travel Plan Awards
• Traffic Safety Audits in Sweden
• The Urban Transport Benchmarking Initiative
• Insights from quality elements in other transportation projects and studies
• EMAS and Quality efforts in related areas
These were the conclusions:
“The applicability and implementation of quality elements and management tools has been
investigated in a number of studies and projects within the transport sector, including public
Project lead partner: transport, cycling, travel planning etc. Research has indicated positive impacts of quality
London Borough of
Bromley
management in transport such as better customer service, increase in demands and lower
costs. The Total Quality Management approach dominates among major quality management
efforts in transportation. The TCRP-F03, BYPAD, MOST and TAPESTRY projects are based
on or supported by total quality management principles. On the other hand, EN norms are
based on ISO 9000 principles, which, as mentioned earlier, are complementary to and in many
Project supported by the cases common with TQM. As for QUATTRO, it recommends adoption of either EFQM or ISO
London European 9000 by public transport companies. Other projects in the national and European levels have
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT) examined the development of standards for mobility elements, transportation plans, Mobility
Management for companies and benchmarking. Moreover, standards and awards exist for
Mobility Management in companies and travel planning. General insights gained from the
review can be summarized as follows:
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 28
• Total Quality Management and its European model EFQM have already formed the
basis for quality management in transportation related areas and therefore TQM can be
applied to Mobility Management. Successful applications of the EFQM model have been
presented in BYPAD, MOST and TAPESTRY, while TCRP-F03 provides insights on
developing a framework for implementing TQM in a transportation organization. More
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover specifically:
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896 o BYPAD is entirely based on the EFQM model of excellence for developing best
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
cycling policies. What is important about BYPAD is that it provides an overall
framework for introducing and retaining TQM in a city’s cycling policy.
Therefore, an application of TQM in a policy relative to Mobility Management is
readily available and MAX can move on to developing similar comprehensive
schemes for other Mobility Management elements and Mobility Management in
general.
o MOST incorporates an EFQM inspired self-assessment process for Mobility
Management strategies. A quality tool (self-assessment) for Mobility
Management is readily available from MOST and could be the basis for tools
developed by MAX.
o TAPESTRY’s approach focuses on assessing campaigns using the CAF model;
these are part of Mobility Management measures.
o TCRP F-03 gives a detailed description and guidelines for transport
organizations: these guidelines have succeeded in improving the performance
of pilot transport authorities in the USA.
• QUATTRO discusses elements and tools for measuring and improving quality in public
transportation; these tools have the potential to be used for managing quality in
Mobility Management systems. Moreover, QUATTRO recommends that transport
operators adopt EFQM for their management or reach standards for formal
qualification, such as ISO.
• EN standards are in fact clarifications of ISO 9000 quality management systems; they
indicate the additional actions or precautions that must be taken to ensure that a
quality management system is effective in the transportation sector. Therefore they
could provide interesting insights for detailed implementation of any quality
management approach to Mobility Management.
• Mobility centres are elements of Mobility Management systems; any quality
management approach implemented in Mobility Management should take into account
Project lead partner: these centres. The “Standard Mobility Management centres” project has developed
London Borough of
Bromley
standards for these centres, based on EFQM and ISO, which can be further exploited
in Mobility Management.
• Traffic Safety Audits and Safe Green Taxis are another process, based on ISO, for
assessing traffic safety and managing quality and safety in taxis respectively.
Project supported by the
London European
Partnership for • The Urban Transport Benchmarking Initiative provides a comprehensive view of the
Transport (LEPT) application of benchmarking in the transport sector.
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 29
• Mobility management for companies has been examined at a national and European
level. Research in Germany indicated difficulties for companies wanting to embrace
Mobility Management; a standardized approach was developed for companies willing
to develop their own Mobility Management scheme. On the other hand, the Flemish
award for mobility includes criteria for assessing Mobility Management in companies
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover which could be adapted for wider use.
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
• Travel plan standards and awards have been developed in the UK; these can provide
information on assessing the quality of an individual Mobility Management element
such as travel planning.
• Application of quality management principles has been extensive. EMAS for instance is
focusing on improving the environmental performance of organizations.
Existing quality management related activity in the transport and related areas is mostly
focused (a) on aiding transport operators in adopting quality management tools and policies
and (b) on developing assessment tools and principles for transport services. QUATTRO,
TCRP F-03 and the “Standards for mobility centres” project discuss elements of introducing
total quality management into transport authorities and agencies. However, most studies and
projects consider mainly assessment tools, based on EFQM or customized evaluation
approaches; this means that, except for QUATTRO’s suggestions of various quality
improvement tools (such as certification, standardization, benchmarking, warranty of service
etc), assessment remains in most cases the major quality tool. Therefore, while extensive
assessment, audit and evaluation examples can be found in the review, there is less research
on examining other aspects of total quality management in transportation services:
implementation of other quality tools, adaptation of a total quality management philosophy in
transport organizations, monitoring etc. Certification for example has been a result of BYPAD
and the Swedish “Safe Green Taxis” project, while awards exist for Mobility Management in
companies and travel planning. Moreover, a comprehensive approach for managing quality is
missing; only Macário (2005) has proposed such a framework for introducing quality
management in urban mobility systems. Overall, apart from a few cases (QUATTRO, BYPAD,
TCRP-F03), projects focus on assessment tools and do not examine the broad picture of
applying quality management in different aspects of a system which includes a transport
operation and service. While this may not have been the scope or intention of the earlier
projects, it is necessary for MAX to examine quality management in Mobility Management in
an integrated manner (process, stakeholders and elements) and not just focus on a quality
assessment of applied measures.
In addition to the above, it has to be noted that information on the cost and/or resources
needed is limited within the projects investigated: only estimates for processes such as
assessment procedures were found. For instance, BYPAD required audits of 120-150 person-
hours, while there is a cost estimate of €40,000 for applying the UK Standard for measuring
Travel Plan impacts, plus €3000 for evaluation. Also, as reported, in Sweden, the cost for
Project lead partner: safety audits ranges from €7000-€13000. Certainly, there cannot be a clear view on the costs
London Borough of and resources necessary to implement a quality management standard. Both depend upon
Bromley
various factors, which are country, project and size specific. The cost and resources for
introducing quality management in an organization is related to its size, structure, goals and
processes; similarly, costs and resources for implementing quality management in a Mobility
Management scheme depend upon its type and extent. Therefore, models for estimating costs
Project supported by the and resources of establishing quality management in Mobility Management standards should
London European be part of future research. As for the applicability of quality management standards in small
Partnership for and medium size cities, the BYPAD and TCRP F-03 results indicated that quality management
Transport (LEPT)
tools and processes can have a positive impact in cities of that size.
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 30
Overall, the review highlighted cases of applying quality management processes in
transportation and Mobility Management. Prevailing approaches such as EFQM and ISO 9000
have been exploited for that purpose with their tools implemented in managing and assessing
quality in transport organizations and services, while standards and awards have been
developed for Mobility Management elements such as mobility centres and travel planning.
Interim Secretariat These constitute a promising basis for the introduction of quality management in future
Fiona Glover Mobility Management schemes.
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
3.3. Examples of steps towards standardization of commuter travel plans
3.3.1. ACT: UK Association for Commuter Transportation – Community award www.uk-
act.com
• Only for ACT members (approx. 800 in the UK)
• Annual award for high quality travel planning since 2001
• 4 categories: public sector, private sector, marketing, innovation
• set of fixed assessment criteria:
o effective project management and development of the travel plan
o successful partnerships developed with PT-operators, the private sector/public
sector or other organizations in delivering travel plan
o evidence in the positive change in staff travel patterns and hence success in
achieving a reduction in single occupancy vehicle journeys
o the benefits of the initiative in further promoting the concept of travel planning to
other organisations locally and nationally
o
3.3.2. Avon Area Travel plan awards – UK
3.3.3. Eco dynamic label – Brussels capital Region, Brussels (Be)
www.ibgebim.be/nederlands/contenu/content.asp?ref=902
special procedure for application of label:
1. signing a charter for eco-dynamic company (management shows interest in getting the
label)
2. the company gets a signalisation card: filling out all eco-friendly measures already
taken
3. 2 years later: company has to submit a nomination report for the eco-dynamic label (=
Project lead partner:
London Borough of
eco-analysis (base on 92 criteria) and eco-program (what will company do ?)
Bromley 4. jury + site visit assesses step 3
5. if positive: eco-dynamic label for 3 years
3.3.4. EMAS: eco-management and audit scheme
Project supported by the
London European http://europa.eu.int/comm/environent/emas
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT)
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 31
ANNEXE 1
FRAMEWORK used for typology
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896 Overall framework conditions
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
1. legal, regulatory and fiscal e.g. specific laws and regulations dealing directly or
framework indirectly with MM; regulation on air quality,
mandatory commuter plans in Italy, Transport Bill in
the UK, taxation rules regarding different transport
modes,
This might be a law hindering or facilitating MM
Eg linkages between transport and land use
planning (like urban master plan or sustainable
urban transport plan,…), helping to anticipate
changes with regard to the location of businesses
and homes.
2. Political and programmatic
framework
3. Financial framework E.g. funding sources- for mobility management,
public grants available for setting up, implementing
travel plans
4. Organizational framework E.g. networks on mobility management, handbooks,
tools, … such as ACT network in the UK, ‘vervoers-
coördinatiecentra’ (NL), ‘mobiliteitspunten’ (Flemish
region of Belgium)
5. Education and qualification E.g. University degrees in mobility management,
framework professional training courses on mobility
management, etc. .
6. Other
Project lead partner:
London Borough of
Bromley
1. Company motivations/reasons Parking problems (employees and
for setting up company travel plan visitors)
congestion
accessibility
Project supported by the
London European
environmental awareness
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT)
WTP mandatory in function of
attaining permit (building or
environmental)
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 32
relocation
reduction of costs
image
Interim Secretariat
well-being of employees
Fiona Glover restructuring of the company
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896 health of employees
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
ISO 14001
productivity
flexibility of employees
2. Survey and analysis of status YES NO NO INFO
quo
Survey of employees/visitors’
mobility behaviour (travel patterns)
Travel issues related to the
company activities and HR
management, ..
- number of parking spaces
- sector of activities
- number of employees /
visitors
- logistics/deliveries
- working times/opening
times
- subsidies on traveling
expenses
- other: (season tickets, bike
loans, …
- lease/company car scheme
Site assessment (Audit of traffic
related conditions)
- walking and cycling
connections
- facilities s.a; bicycle racks,
..
- PT-connections, service
quality, ..
Project lead partner:
London Borough of
- Parking conditions
Bromley - Future site development
plans
- Potential opportunities or
constraints
Project supported by the
London European
Partnership for
3. Objectives of company travel Which casestudies?:
Transport (LEPT) plan
Y N No info
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 33
Economical
Environmental
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd
Social objectives
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
Objectives in transport matters
3.1. Quantification of
objectives
Percentage Decrease/incre
ase
Without
numbers
0 11 21 31 41 51 61 71 81 91
20
10 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Economical:
- increase of turnover
- increase of productivity
- image
- other
Environmental
- CO2-reduction
- Decrease pollution
- other
Social objectives
- well-being of personnel
- less absenteeism
Objectives in transport
matters
- modal shift
Project lead partner:
London Borough of - less congestion
Bromley
4. Roles and Which CS’s:
responsibilities
Project supported by the Y N No info
London European
Partnership for 4.1 Internal within the
Transport (LEPT) company
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 34
is there a mobility (travel
plan) co-ordinator
steering group or working
Interim Secretariat group
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
role of senior management
in travel plan
role of staff representatives
role of HR-management,
Facility management
other : …
4.2 Involvement of external
stakeholders
PT-provider (train/bus, …)
Local/regional government
body
Private transport consultant
Communication consultant
Mobility co-ordinators of
other companies (of same
business site
Supply organizations
Project lead partner:
London Borough of Other …
Bromley
4.1.1 Roles and
responsibilities
Project supported by the leader facilitator executive Other: specify
London European
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT)
role of senior management
in travel plan
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 35
role of staff representatives
role of HR-management,
Facility management
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896 other : …
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
5. Communication Which CS’s:
activities
Y N No info
5.1 Internal information
and promotion of actions
towards target groups
towards senior
management
towards staff
towards visitors
information channels
kind of information
provided
5.2 External public
relations
press releases in local
newspapers, radio,
television
Project lead partner:
London Borough of participation/lecture at
Bromley seminars
articles
Project supported by the
London European
Partnership for Reward
Transport (LEPT)
case study
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 36
Other:..
Interim Secretariat 5.1.1 Information
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd
channels
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com Meeting
Newsletter
e-mail
Poster / bulletin board
Website
Kind of information
Info about every phase
Only info about own role
6. Identification of (mix Which CS’s:
of) measures
Y N No info
Promotion of walking
Promotion of cycling
Promotion of PT-use
Project lead partner: Promotion of carsharing,
London Borough of
Bromley
carpooling
Financial stimuli
Project supported by the
London European Organisational measures
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT)
Infrastructural measures
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 37
Campaigns (info or
awareness raising)
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover Other…
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
Ranking of most frequent measures will be attached
7. Monitoring and Which CS’s
evaluation
: Y N No info
Progress monitoring
Feedback on progress
Adjustments after feedback
Frequency of review
7.1 Frequency of review
Once
Every six months or less
annually
Every two years
Every 3 – 5 years
Project lead partner:
London Borough of When needed
Bromley
8. Results Which CS’s:
Y N No info
Project supported by the
London European Economical
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT)
Environmental
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 38
Social objectives
Interim Secretariat Objectives in transport
Fiona Glover matters
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
8.1. Quantification
of results
Percentage Decrease/incre
ase
Without
numbers
0 11 21 31 41 51 61 71 81 91
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Economical:
- increase of
turnover
- increase of
productivity
- image
- other
Environmental
- CO2-reduction
- Decrease
pollution
- other
Social objectives
- well-being of
personnel
- less absenteeism
Objectives in
transport matters
Project lead partner: - modal shift
London Borough of
Bromley
- less congestion
9 Barriers and lessons learned
Project supported by the
London European
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT) list of barriers and lessons learned will be attached.
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 39
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
Project lead partner:
London Borough of
Bromley
Project supported by the
London European
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT)
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 40
ANNEXE 2
Benchmarking structure, questionnaire and manual
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover Manual
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
1. General.
This questionnaire consists of 8 main indicators. Each indicator is divided into more concrete
result areas for which the user of the questionnaire can score a Workplace Travel Plan on a
scale from 1 to 5. The score (from 1 to 5) indicates whether and to which extent a certain area
is being addressed in the Travel Plan. When the questionnaire is completed, an overall score
will indicate whether a Travel Plan is below or above the benchmark.
2. Scoring the questionnaire
As already said, the questionnaire uses a scale from 1 to 5. Above each indicator, the values
of the scale are given.
For example:
Absolutely = 5
To a considerable degree = 4
More or less = 3
Poorly = 2
No = 1
1. Company absolutely To a More or Poorly No
motivations/reasons considerable less
for setting up degree
company travel plan
Economical x
motivation
Environmental x
motivation
Social motivation x
Motivation in x
Project lead partner: transport matters
London Borough of
Bromley Motivations for setting x
up a WTP are
communicated to all
staff
Project supported by the There’s a clear vision x
London European on sustainable
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT) mobility and its own
responsibility in the
company
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 41
On this particular indicator (“company motivations”) the Travel Plan will score:
Economical motivation 3/5
Environmental motivation 2/5
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover Social motivation 2/5
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896 Motivation in transport matters 4/5
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
Motivations for setting up a WTP are communicated 3/5
Clear vision on sustainable mobility 2/5
Total 16/30
((3/5 + 2/5 + 2/5 + 4/5 + 3/5 + 2/5)/6 = 16/30)
To give each indicator the same weight in the questionnaire, the scores are brought back to a
score on 5. That means that the score for the example above will be:
16/30 → 2.67 / 5
(16/30 divided by 6 gives 2.67 on 5)
EXCEPTIONS
Indicator 4 “Roles and responsibilities”
To stress the importance of having both internal and external stakeholders involved in the
planning process, these two issues are separated. This means the following:
4. Roles and Always Very often Sometimes Rarely Never
responsibilities
Senior x
management is
committed
Staff x
(representatives)
is involved in
planning
Project lead partner: Staff x
London Borough of
Bromley
(representatives)
is involved in
implementation
Project supported by the The WTP- x
London European process is
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT)
coordinated
PT-providers are x
involved in
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 42
planning
Local x
government
bodies are
involved in
Interim Secretariat planning
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd PT-providers are x
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com involved in
implementation
Local x
government
bodies are
involved in
implementation
External x
stakeholders are
involved in WTP
– working group
The first 4 questions are about internal stakeholders, the last 5 questions are about external
stakeholders.
For the internal stakeholders the score is :
Senior management is committed 3/5
Staff is involved in planning 4/5
Staff is involved in implementation 3/5
The WTP-process is coordinated 3/5
Total 13/20
((3/5+ 4/5 + 3/5 + 3/5)/4 = 13/20)
For external stakeholders the score is :
PT-providers are involved in planning 2/5
Local government bodies are involved in planning 2/5
PT-provides are involved in implementation 2/5
Local government bodies are involved in implementation 2/5
External stakeholders are involved in WTP-working group 2/5
Total 10/25
Project lead partner: ((2/5 + 2/5 + 2/5 + 2/5 + 2/5)/5 = 10/25)
London Borough of
Bromley In order to give these two issues an equal importance in the overall score for the main
indicator the scores are brought back to a score on 2.5.
This means the following:
Internal stakeholders : 13/20 → 1.625/2.5
Project supported by the
London European External stakeholders : 10/25 → 1/2,5
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT) Overall score is: 2.625 / 5 (result of add-up of 1.625 and 1)
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 43
Indicator 6 “Implementation of measures”
Same principle as above, but the overall score is brought on 10 in order to give this indicator
somewhat more weight in the questionnaire.
That means that :
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd Financial stimuli: 5 measures = score on 25 → score on 2,5
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com Organisational measures: 5 measures = score on 25 → score on 2,5
Infrastructural measures: 6 measures = score on 30 → score on 2,5
Campaigns: 4 measures = score on 20 → score on 2,5
Total : score on 10
Indicator 8 “Results”
Same principle as above, the overall score is also brought on 10 but the parts “results” and
“quantification of results” are separated and scored on 5. The results part is scored on 10
because we wanted to give it the same weight as indicator 6 “implementation of measures”.
The two parts are separated because we don’t want the two parts to influence each other
directly.
For example:
8. Results
Quantitative Clearly Set results Vaguely No results
results formulated formulated
results results
Economical x
Environmental x
Social objectives x
Objectives in x
transport matters
Results totally To a More or poorly Not at all
considerable less
degree
Economical x
Project lead partner: objectives are
London Borough of
Bromley achieved
Environmental x
objectives are
achieved
Project supported by the Social objectives x
London European
Partnership for
are achieved
Transport (LEPT)
Objectives in x
transport matters
are achieved
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 44
Quantification of More 20 – 25 % 10-20% 5 -10 % less
results
Interim Secretariat modal shift x
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
Other quantified
results:
4 or more 3 quantified 2 quantified 1 quantified No
quantified results results result quantified
results results
x
The score for first block of results is:
5/20 + 3/20 + 4/20 + 5/20 = 17/20 → 2,125 / 2,5
Score for second block of results is:
3/20 + 3/20 + 3/20 + 3/20 = 12/20 → 1,5 / 2,5
Total = 3, 625 / 5
Score for “quantification of results” is :
3/10 + 2/10 = 5/10 → 2,5 / 5
Total for indicator “Results” is : 6.125 / 10
(this is the result of the add-up of 3.625 and 2.5)
3. Setting the benchmark
When all scores in different indicators are added up a score on 50. The benchmark is
achieved when a Workplace Travel Plan scores 30 / 50.
Project lead partner:
London Borough of
Bromley
Project supported by the
London European
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT)
Questionnaire
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 45
1. Company absolutely To a More or poorly No
motivations/reasons considerable less
for setting up degree
company travel plan
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896 Economical
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
motivation
Environmental
motivation
Social motivation
Motivation in
transport matters
Motivations for setting
up a WTP are
communicated to all
staff
There’s a clear vision
on sustainable
mobility and its own
responsibility in the
company
2. Survey and Very Rather Medium Rather poor No
analysis of status accurate accurate accuracy
quo
Survey of the travel
patterns of
staff/visitors gives an
Project lead partner: insight into the actual
London Borough of mobility behaviour
Bromley
and situation
Survey of the travel
patterns of
staff/visitors gives an
Project supported by the insight about needs
London European
Partnership for and wishes
Transport (LEPT)
Survey of travel
issues related to the
company activities
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 46
and HR
management, …
gives an insight in
current mobility
situation
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd (number of parking
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com spaces, number of
employees / visitors,
logistics/deliveries,
working
times/opening times)
Survey of travel
issues related to the
company activities
and HR
management, …
gives an insight in
what are threats and
opportunities
Site assessment and
audit of traffic related
conditions give an
insight into current
situation
walking and cycling
connections
facilities s.a; bicycle
racks, ..
PT-connections,
service quality,
Parking conditions
Future site
development plans
Project lead partner:
London Borough of
Bromley
Project supported by the
London European
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT) Site assessment and
audit of traffic related
conditions give an
insight into what are
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 47
threats and
opportunities
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
3. Objectives of always usually More or seldom no
company travel less
plan
Objectives are
based on the
analysis of survey
results
Objectives are
Specific
Objectives are
Measurable
Objectives are
Achievable
Objectives are
Realsitic
Objectives are Time-
bound
Objectives are
Evaluated
Objectives are
Reviewed
Project lead partner:
London Borough of
Bromley
Project supported by the 4. Roles and always Very often sometimes rarely never
London European
Partnership for responsibilities
Transport (LEPT)
Senior
management is
committed
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 48
Staff
(representatives) is
involved in
planning
Interim Secretariat Staff
Fiona Glover (representatives) is
Global to Local Ltd involved in
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com implementation
The WTP-process
is coordinated
PT-providers are
involved in
planning
Local government
bodies are
involved in
planning
PT-providers are
involved in
implementation
Local government
bodies are
involved in
implementation
External
stakeholders are
involved in WTP –
working group
5. Communication always Very often sometimes rarely never
activities
Staff is a target
group in
communication
about the WTP-
process
External
stakeholders are a
target group in
communication
Project lead partner: about the WTP -
London Borough of process
Bromley
Interested persons
are a target group
in communication
about the WTP -
Project supported by the process
London European
Partnership for The public is a
Transport (LEPT)
target group in
communication
about the WTP -
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 49
process
channels Campaign 2 or more 1 channel Info given No
consisting channels when asked channels
of a mix of used used
channels
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896 Kind of info Info about Info about Only info only No info
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
every phase major about own necessary
milestones role info
6. Implementation Significant Significant Started but Part of the Not part of
of measures results progress no results plan but no the travel
yet actions yet plan
Financial stimuli
Refund of PT-ticket
Differentiation in
parking tariffs which
promotes
sustainable mobility
Expense system
that promotes
sustainable mobility
Choice between
cash and company
car
Mobility budget
Organisational
measures
Individual journey
planning
Car share schemes
/ database
Shuttle service /
vanpools
telework
Project lead partner:
London Borough of
Flexible working
Bromley hours
Infrastructural
measures
Facilities for
Project supported by the walkers
London European
Partnership for Expansion of
Transport (LEPT)
bicycle storage
facilities
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 50
Company bikes
Bicycle tracks on
the premises
Facilities for arriving
Interim Secretariat bikers (showers,
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd lockers)
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com Parking lots placed
further away
Campaigns
Setup of information
campaign
Setup of awareness
raising campaign
Incentives such as
breakfast at work,
bike repair service,
cycle kits
Other… specify
7. Monitoring and always frequently rarely Very rarely never
evaluation
Monitoring activities
are planned
Monitoring results
Project lead partner:
London Borough of are discussed by
Bromley executives
Results are used to
revise the WTP
Monitoring and
Project supported by the evaluation are a
London European
Partnership for continuous process.
Transport (LEPT)
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 51
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
8. Results
Quantitative Clearly Set results Vaguely No results
results formulated formulated
results results
Economical
Environmental
Social objectives
Objectives in
transport matters
Results totally To a More or poorly Not at all
considerable less
degree
Economical
objectives are
achieved
Environmental
objectives are
Project lead partner: achieved
London Borough of
Bromley Social objectives
are achieved
Objectives in
transport matters
Project supported by the
are achieved
London European
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT)
Quantification of More 20 – 25 % 10-20% 5 -10 % less
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 52
results
modal shift
Other quantified
Interim Secretariat results:
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
4 or more 3 quantified 2 quantified 1 quantified No
quantified results results result quantified
results results
Project lead partner:
London Borough of
Bromley
Project supported by the
London European
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT)
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 53
Scoring sheet for Workplace Mobility Plans
indicator subindicator values intial score processed score final score
Secretariat 5 4 3 2 1
ver 1 1 …on 5
Local Ltd 2 …on 5
840896 3 …on 5
r@globaltolocal.com
4 …on 5
5 …on 5
6 …on 5
total …on 30 …on 5 …on 5 total of indicator 1
2 1 …on 5
2 …on 5
3 …on 5
4 …on 5
5 …on 5
6 …on 5
total …on 30 …on 5 …on 5 total indicator 2
3 1 …on 5
2 …on 5
3 …on 5
4 …on 5
5 …on 5
6 …on 5
7 …on 5
8 …on 5
total …on 40 …on 5 …on 5 total indicator 3
4 1 …on 5
2 …on 5
3 …on 5
4 …on 5
total …on 20 …on 2,5
1 …on 5
2 …on 5
3 …on 5
4 …on 5
5 …on 5
total …on 25 …on 2,5 …on 5 total of indicator 4
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date 2008 Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 54
5 1 …on 5
2 …on 5
3 …on 5
4 …on 5
5 …on 5
Secretariat 6 …on 5
ver
Local Ltd total …on 30 …on 5 …on 5 total of indicator 5
840896 6 1 …on 5
r@globaltolocal.com 2 …on 5
3 …on 5
4 …on 5
5 …on 5
total …on 25 …on 2,5
1 …on 5
2 …on 5
3 …on 5
4 …on 5
5 …on 5
total …on 25 …on 2,5
1 …on 5
2 …on 5
3 …on 5
4 …on 5
5 …on 5
6 …on 5
total …on 30 …on 2,5
1 …on 5
2 …on 5
3 …on 5
4 …on 5
total …on 20 …on 2,5 …on 10 total of indicator 6
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date 2008 Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 55
7 1 …on 5
2 …on 5
3 …on 5
4 …on 5
total …on 20 …on 5 …on 5 total of indicator 7
Secretariat 8 1 …on 5
ver
Local Ltd 2 …on 5
840896 3 …on 5
r@globaltolocal.com 4 …on 5
total …on 20 …on 2,5
1 …on 5
2 …on 5
3 …on 5
4 …on 5
total …on 20 …on 2,5
1 …on 5
2 …on 5
total …on 10 …on 5 …on 10 total of indicator 8
…on 50 overall score of WTP (benchmark = 30)
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date 2008 Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 56
REFERENCES
Taylor, I , The Essential Guide to Travel Planning, publication funded by Department of
Transport (UK), 2006
Interim Secretariat
Fiona Glover MAX (EC – funded project) , State of the Art Report – WP C – Quality Management and
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896 Mobility Management, UPCR, April 2007
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
Owen E. , Cordy T. PIMMS Best Practice report – Mobility Management Performance in
partner regions and the EU, PIMMS, June 2006
Taylor N.(Transport & Travel Research), The Urban Transport Benchmarking Initiative, year
three Final Report, July 2006
Hyllenius P., Ljungberg C., Smidfelt Rosqvist L., (Trivector Traffic), SUMO System for
evaluation of Mobility Projects, Vägverket (SE), 2004.
Travel Plan template, webdocument, www.tfw.org.uk/documents/travel-plan-template.doc,
Travel for Work, accessed on January 17th 2008.
Take up and effectiveness of travel plans and travel awareness campaigns, Department of
Transport (UK), webdocument, www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/sustainable/travelplans/work/publications,
February 2001
Toolbox voor mobiliteitsmanagement in bedrijven, webbased toolbox,
www.mobiliteitsmanagement.be, Vlaamse Stichting Verkeerskunde, De Lijn, Traject, Vlaamse
Overheid, October 2007
Cairns S., Davies A., Newson C., Swiderska C., Making Travel Plans Work Research Report,
Department for Transport (UK), July 2002.
Newson C., Making Travel Plans Work: Lessons learned from UK case studies, Department
for Transport (UK°, 2002.
Kemming H. (ILS NRW), Müller G (ILS NRW), Stiewe M. (ILS NRW), Holz-Rau C. (Universität
Dortmund), Steinberg G. (Universität Dortmund), Happel T (PGN), Nickel W. (PGN),
Project lead partner: Weiterentwicklung von Produkten, Prozessen und Rahmenbedingungen des Betriebliches
London Borough of Mobilitatsmanagements, ILS, August 2007
Bromley
No author, Travel Plans Good Practice Guide, Surrey County Council, 2006
Project supported by the
London European Banks P., Waisfisz B., Intercultural competencies: Turning global strategy into tangible reality,
Partnership for ITIM, July 2005.
Transport (LEPT)
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 57
Plan des Déplacements d’Entreprise, webdocument, http://www2.ademe.fr/servlet/, ADEME,
accessed on January 17th 2008.
Réseau des Agences Régionales de l’ Energie et de l’ Environment (RARE), Déplacements
Interim Secretariat
Professionnels : nouvelle voie pour l’entreprise, RARE – ADEME, Juin 2001
Fiona Glover
Global to Local Ltd
+44 1534 840896
Fiona.glover@globaltolocal.com
Ritscher G., Burggraf K., Neue Wegen in der Mobilität für Unternehmen, Planungsgruppe Nord
(PGN), August 2003
Müller G., workshop n°8 Setting the Standards, MOST, workshop at ECOMM Rome 2001.
Databases consulted
ASTUTE, Advancing Sustainable Transport in Urban Areas to promote Energy efficiency
www.astute-eu.org
PIMMS, Partner Initiatives for the development of Mobility Management Services www.pimms-
eu.org
ELTIS, European Local Transport Information service www.eltis.org
VIPRE, www.vipre.com
EPOMM, European Platform On Mobility Management, www.epomm.org
CIVITAS, Cleaner and better transport in cities, www.civitas-initiative.org
Project lead partner:
London Borough of
Bromley Slim Reizen, www.slimreizen.nl
ADEME, Agence de l'Environnement et de la Maîtrise de l'Energie, www.ademe.fr
Project supported by the
London European
Partnership for
Transport (LEPT)
COMMERCE is funded under the European Commission’s
www.lept-eu.org Intelligent Energy for Europe programme
15 March
Document Benchmarking report Date
2008
Author jan.christiaens@mobiel21.be Page 58