National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Front Matter
Page 1
Suggested Citation:"Summary ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Use of Web-Based Rider Feedback to Improve Public Transit Services. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22134.
×
Page 1
Page 2
Suggested Citation:"Summary ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Use of Web-Based Rider Feedback to Improve Public Transit Services. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22134.
×
Page 2
Page 3
Suggested Citation:"Summary ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Use of Web-Based Rider Feedback to Improve Public Transit Services. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22134.
×
Page 3
Page 4
Suggested Citation:"Summary ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Use of Web-Based Rider Feedback to Improve Public Transit Services. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22134.
×
Page 4
Page 5
Suggested Citation:"Summary ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Use of Web-Based Rider Feedback to Improve Public Transit Services. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22134.
×
Page 5
Page 6
Suggested Citation:"Summary ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Use of Web-Based Rider Feedback to Improve Public Transit Services. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22134.
×
Page 6
Page 7
Suggested Citation:"Summary ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Use of Web-Based Rider Feedback to Improve Public Transit Services. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22134.
×
Page 7
Page 8
Suggested Citation:"Summary ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Use of Web-Based Rider Feedback to Improve Public Transit Services. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22134.
×
Page 8
Page 9
Suggested Citation:"Summary ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Use of Web-Based Rider Feedback to Improve Public Transit Services. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22134.
×
Page 9
Page 10
Suggested Citation:"Summary ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Use of Web-Based Rider Feedback to Improve Public Transit Services. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22134.
×
Page 10
Page 11
Suggested Citation:"Summary ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. Use of Web-Based Rider Feedback to Improve Public Transit Services. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22134.
×
Page 11

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

1 Introduction The emergence of Web 2.0 technologies over the past decade has empowered consumers to use web-based tools to comment on and rate goods and services ranging from hotels to health clubs. Increasingly, transit riders are joining their ranks. The widespread availability of web- based tools, mobile applications, and social media has made it easier for riders to report ser- vice, maintenance, and safety-related issues like late trains, missing bus stop signs, or broken escalators. While web-savvy individuals are using electronic tools to make their opinions known, public- and private-sector organizations are also taking advantage of these options to learn more about their customers and their opinions and even to change the course of public opinion. Online feedback forms, mobile applications, social media channels, and web-based techniques, such as crowdsourcing, allow organizations to collect formal and informal feedback from their cus- tomers and community. Such forums are also being used to educate the public about their services. As technology gets smarter, the flow of information continues to pick up speed. The advent of the Internet age is bringing more information to and from organizations at a faster and faster pace. This brings a need for increased work flow, which can quickly overwhelm staff, if not care- fully managed. While some transit agencies are comfortable dealing with large volumes of information from multiple social media platforms, online surveys, crowdsourcing, and specialized applications, others are just starting to engage with customers through Twitter. There is a concern in the transit industry about the disparity of knowledge and experience with web-based feedback tools. Therefore, this report is designed to enhance and expand the use of web-based feedback to improve service by agencies at all levels of experience. Smaller and Novice Agencies: This document provides the basics for initiating a web-based feedback program. Definitions are provided to help users understand the differences in types of feedback that can be collected and the types of tools available depending on the feedback needs. The benefits of web-based feedback are summarized to help make the case for moving forward with these tools, as well as challenges that should be considered as the program is developed. Agencies Experienced with Mainstream Tools: Many agencies have experience with main- stream tools, such as social media and web-based complaint/comment forms. The Tool Selec- tion Guide, especially the Tool Information Sheets, provides guidance on expanding that set of tools to reach out and engage a broader audience, such as “games” that ask the public to solve planning and budget dilemmas, and holding public meetings online so the community can join in the conversation from anywhere. S U M M A R Y Use of Web-Based Rider Feedback to Improve Public Transit Services

2 Use of Web-Based Rider Feedback to Improve Public Transit Services Larger and Experienced Agencies: This document provides guidance on creating and imple- menting a web-based feedback plan. It provides a structure for organizing the information, the tools, and the work flow. It also looks at the “backend systems,” the applications that manage the information flow for efficient data collection and retrieval. The appendices provide options for how to categorize comments to facilitate integration between legacy comment/complaint systems and web-based systems. Research Problem Statement The objective of TCRP Project B-43, Use of Web-Based Customer Feedback to Improve Public Tran- sit Services, was to develop a user-friendly toolkit that presents best practices, cutting-edge appli- cations, and promising approaches that transit agencies can use to engage customers and obtain actionable feedback. To develop this toolkit, the study team set out to answer several key questions: What do transit agencies want to know from their customers and the public? Can these tools create efficiencies in processing customer comments on safety and security, maintenance, and service delivery issues? Which web-based tools are useful for obtaining ideas for new service, comments on short- or long-range plans, origin-destination data, or rider demographics? How can transit properties solicit positive comments and constructive criticism? What are the benefits and challenges of using web-based tools to solicit rider feedback? Can these tools enhance the speed, volume, structure, and richness of customer communications? Can agencies use web-based tools to supplement staff resources by encouraging customers to serve as their eyes on the street? Do web-based tools encourage feedback from previously silent rider groups, especially young adults? Do customers have access to the technologies needed to use web- based feedback tools? Will staff be overwhelmed with the volume of comments and will they know how to respond in the more public forums? Are there institutional barriers, such as open records laws, that make it difficult to successfully use web-based feedback? Will customer feedback be located in multiple silos across an agency, making it difficult to see patterns and trends? What best practices are in use among transit agencies and in other industries? What tools do transit agencies use for time-sensitive feedback (safety and security issues) and which are better for general comments (requests for more service)? How do organizations use web-based feedback tools, externally, to gather feedback from their customers, stakeholders, opinion lead- ers, and the general public? What tools are currently available for obtaining feedback and what approaches are on the horizon? Which tools are best for collecting feedback from the customer and general public? Which tools are best for internal employee use? What tools now used in other industries can be adapted to transit? What approaches are currently under development in the transit industry and elsewhere? How can agencies manage the increasing speed and volume of data flowing into the agency from web-based feedback tools? How can the transit industry best use web-based tools to improve service on the street? What is needed to integrate web-based feedback into operations, maintenance, planning, mar- ket research, and other agency processes? How can transit providers use web-based feedback to demonstrate customer orientation and improve credibility for the agency? Overview of Findings Part 1 of the report provides guidance on managing web-based feedback. Following are the findings based on the literature, industry surveys, and case studies.

Summary 3 Understanding Web-Based Feedback Chapter 1 provides background information that defines web-based feedback, the needs it can address, and benefits and challenges of implementing a web-based feedback program. Agency Needs for Web-Based Feedback Agency needs for web-based feedback tools have been divided into four categories, each of which has several subcategories, as defined below. 1) Collect unsolicited comments. This is feedback that the public sends to the agency, such as complaints, comments, or requests for service. There are two subcategories of unsolicited comments: time sensitive, such as safety and security concerns; and ongoing, which includes all other unsolicited comments. 2) Solicit comments. This includes all activities where the agency is reaching out to riders, the public or other defined stakeholders to gather information, opinions, and ideas. The two subcategories are: policy and planning activities, such as public comment on service changes; and public opinion polling, for collecting structured feedback on any topic of inter- est to the agency. 3) Encourage civic engagement. Agencies often wish to engage with a target audience rather than simply solicit input. The three subcategories of encouraging civic engagement are: build- ing community by establishing a dialog around transit issues; open houses using web-based tools; and education, such as teaching the public about transit budget challenges. 4) Manage web-based feedback. This category includes tools to manage web-based feedback. The three subcategories are comment tracking, contact management, and reporting and analysis. These categories are used as the foundation for the Tool Selection Guide in Part 2 of the report. Benefits of Web-Based Customer Feedback Real-Time Feedback. Mobile applications and social media are especially well-suited for reporting time-sensitive situations in the moment, including safety and security concerns. Safety and Security. Transit riders can help police monitor the complex and often extensive transit environment by serving as additional eyes and ears on the system. Likewise, real-time feedback can allow police and transit agencies to act quickly and appropriately to address the situation. Increased Public Participation. Email, social media, blogs, and websites used to notify the public about events are free or very affordable and may reach more people than traditional means. Online public comment tools can help to increase participation among those who are too busy or otherwise reluctant or unable to speak at public hearings. Reduced Call Center Wait Times. More call-takers are available to help people who have an immediate question and those without access to technology, making call centers more efficient and effective. This can improve public perception of the transit agency by providing shorter wait times and better responsiveness at the call centers. Enhanced Agency Image. Helpful, timely interactions with users online can improve public perceptions of an agency’s trustworthiness when individuals feel that their feedback and ideas are important to the agency. Responsiveness gives customers a sense that someone is listening who cares about their experience and can take appropriate action. Cost Effectiveness. Signing up for web-based tools is often free and little or no customiza- tion is required. It is also possible to analyze feedback quickly using analysis functions.

4 Use of Web-Based Rider Feedback to Improve Public Transit Services Increased Outreach and Documentation of Agency Needs. Web-based feedback can help agencies obtain diverse opinions. The more feedback that an agency receives, the more issues are typically documented and, with an effective feedback and issue management system in place, addressed. Lists of Interested Future Participants. More feedback from active known users can be leveraged for strategic joint gains, such as to mobilize them in support of better funding for the agency to improve service. Interagency Communication and Coordination. Transit agencies often depend on effec- tive coordination between their staff, police from one or more jurisdictions, planning bodies, municipal, county, and state governments, and more. Web-based tools can recognize interagency and interdepartmental coordination to direct feedback appropriately. Reporting. Web-based tools have the ability to generate summary reports and statistics that make it easier to process, analyze, and convey information than traditional in-person or written feedback. Rider Retention. Web-based feedback allows agencies to keep riders by listening to them and addressing their needs, thereby improving service for everyone. Challenges of Web-Based Customer Feedback Equity/Accessibility. Some riders may have mental or physical disabilities, language barri- ers, or no access to a smartphone or the Internet. Agencies need to offer a diversity of methods for submitting comments and reporting incidents or concerns, including non-web based traditional approaches. Public Acceptance. Some people simply choose not to use web-based tools due to the learn- ing curve associated and for a variety of other reasons. Agencies should choose easy to use tools with limited registration requirements that may be burdensome or seen as intrusive. Privacy Concerns. Individuals may be uncomfortable sharing detailed personal informa- tion through an Internet connection. Personal Contact. Dialog via telephone or in-person can relay more complete and accurate information with less frustration due to incomplete communication that may cause delays. Negative Feedback. Psychological distance and higher levels of anonymity make the Inter- net a more welcoming space for criticism. Agencies must understand how to manage the often unsolicited negative feedback. Internal Support of Web-Based Feedback. Getting management to recognize the impor- tance of web-based feedback despite possible increased public accountability and unfamiliarity. Also internal staff acceptance creates a need for a paradigm shift in functions that may be seen as adding more workload. Internal Processes may need to change to respond to web-based feedback. One challenge is the loss of direct, personal two-way communication. Engaging individuals in-person or on the phone allows for conveyance of visual cues, tone, and inflection, which can help to calm down angry people. Another recommended practice is collecting enough information to act and follow-up, yet respect privacy. Many comments that are not in a specific form are missing one or more critical pieces of information. Finally, knowing when to respond can be tricky and

Summary 5 there may be inconsistency from one staff person to the next. Agencies need to develop policies and guidelines to set expectations. Resources Are Needed to Properly Use Web-Based Feedback. Responding to customer feed- back can be time-consuming and drive up labor costs, but irate customers who did not get a timely response may complain. Managing effectively may require training programs for employees, con- tractors to manage tools, and additional support. Public expectations are not always in line with how agencies operate, as social media and other online platforms operate all day, every day. Most agencies do not support a 24-hour customer service center. Even if guidelines for the operating hours of feedback channels are given, agencies can have trouble managing the expectations of riders to respond and may have trouble controlling the large quantity of information that riders provide them. Finally, it is difficult to measure the impact of web-based feedback tools. It is not easy for agencies to link standard measures, such as hits or likes, to agency benefits, such as brand loyalty and ridership. Managing Web-Based Feedback Chapter 2 provides a discussion of the major issues and concerns with managing a web-based feedback program. Following is a summary of the topics covered. Audience Understanding the target audience is important when considering any tool for collecting feed- back. Web-based tools will be ideal for some markets and inappropriate for others. As market penetration of the Internet and mobile devices continues to grow, web-based feedback will reach an increasingly diverse audience and create greater transparency. As web-based communication channels mature, agencies will need to continue to assess which tools are most appropriate for the need, and how the tools can be made useful to a larger audience. Promise to the Public An agency can create an open and effective web-based feedback program by informing the public about when it monitors comments, how it intends to use and respond to feedback, and acceptable behavior regarding publicly visible comments. This information is typically posted on the agency’s website and through the various feedback tools. Hours for monitoring public comments may correspond to regular agency business or customer service hours. When solicit- ing feedback, three possible options for how feedback will be used are presented: to share infor- mation and answer questions; to gather information and input; and to engage in dialog. In terms of acceptable behavior in a public forum, an effective approach has been to use the “community standards” developed for social media. Legal Issues Freedom of speech, freedom of information, and privacy are three issues of critical concern to agencies and the public. These topics are explored to provide an overview of the issues to be aware of, and the need to create a policy that is consistent with state and local regulations. In addition, the agency may wish to monitor parody and imposter accounts to protect their brand. While free speech is protected, the agency can take steps to protect itself from copyright infringe- ment and ensure brand clarity. Staffing There is no one “best” organizational structure for managing web-based feedback. Three alternatives presented include centralized, coordinated, or dispersed responsibility.

6 Use of Web-Based Rider Feedback to Improve Public Transit Services The level of staffing needed to establish a successful web-based feedback program varies depend- ing upon many factors, such as agency size and operating environment. In addition to these typical factors the report discusses management and technology related factors that impact the level of staff- ing needed for web-based feedback programs. The roles and responsibilities related to managing web-based feedback will depend on the agency’s organizational structure and culture. Training is a critical issue for the successful implementation of web-based feedback tools. Topics of training include technical training on the Internet, specific tools used by the agency, agency policies and procedures for handling web-based feedback, and the message and tone to be used when responding to web-based feedback in a public forum. Responding to Web-Based Feedback Responding to web-based feedback is similar to responding to feedback from any other com- munication channel. Customers wish to be treated with respect, receive a response in a timely manner, be able to track the progress of their concern, and know the final outcome. With some online formats, such as Twitter, customers may expect real-time responses. Posting the policy regarding hours when the agency monitors the feedback and the timeframe for responding will help manage public expectations. An example flowchart for determining when to respond to comments on social media is provided. Monitoring and Responding to Comments in Public Forums Monitoring web-based feedback can be a staff-intensive process. Not only are there legitimate comments to track, but there may be inappropriate, negative, or irrelevant comments that can distract from more constructive conversations. Five strategies for monitoring comments include: (1) set expectations with the public by posting comment guidelines; (2) control the ability to post comments by allowing posts on specific sites or on certain topics; (3) let the conversation run, recognizing that other posts will create a dialog and may become self-policing; (4) speed up agency postings to move unwanted posts further down the list, making them less visible; (5) establish an online collaborative site for specific stakeholder groups that is not generally visible to the public. In addition to monitoring comments on agency sites, other sites may be used to engage in discussions regarding transit, both positive and negative. Each agency will need to determine its threshold for monitoring and engaging with these sites. Some agencies only respond if there is misinformation that can be easily clarified, but otherwise, monitor sites without engaging the other users. Data Processing, Analysis, and Metrics The Internet has greatly increased the ways people can send feedback to transit agencies, which can lead to a significant increase in comments. Processing of comments can be facilitated by taking advantage of the built-in features of software, especially the electric format. Categories of comments for online tools can be developed to mirror legacy comment tracking systems, while being simplified to make it easier for the public to “pre-code” their concerns. Having all comments in a centralized database facilitates analysis of the comments received to improve service, and allows for the use of metrics to track performance. Options for integrat- ing comment databases are to use web-based feedback applications that will export comments in a format that can be imported into an existing tracking system, or to purchase a new system that provides a variety of integrated web-based feedback tracking tools. Currently, metrics for measuring the performance of web-based feedback tools are in their infancy. Number of com- ments received and the timeliness of responses are two measures that are available through most web-based feedback systems.

Summary 7 Web-Based Feedback Tools Chapter 3 provides the planning considerations for web-based feedback tools, definitions of the types of tools and tool features, and guidance to facilitate the decision-making process for procuring web-based feedback tools. Planning Considerations The following six topics should be considered by agencies as they adopt and implement web- based feedback tools. Public expectations. Understanding what tools are most popular in the area and the type of feedback that the public wants to provide is important to consider in selecting the most appro- priate tools. Internal support. Gaining buy-in from and training the staff that will be implementing the applications. Keep it simple. Despite the availability of many new tools on a regular basis, focusing on standard and well-tested applications is a key to managing tools internally and encouraging use by the public. Changing technology. Software is continuously evolving and software upgrades may be required to keep applications working correctly. Interdependence with other technologies. Web-based tools run on a variety of platforms, including web-browsers and smartphones, and may also use other software or hardware. Usabil- ity of the feedback tools requires maintaining all supporting platforms as well. Money isn’t everything. This guide is intended to provide issues to consider when adopting a web-based feedback system. There is often a trade-off between cost, functionality, and ongoing maintenance that needs to be included in the decision process. Categories of Web-Based Feedback Tools Web-based feedback tools have been divided into the following four categories, each with several subcategories: 1) Issue Reporting. These systems are primarily for unsolicited comments, such as commen- dations and complaints. There are four subcategories of issue reporting tools: customer information mobile applications, where the ability to comment is appended to existing agency information tools, such as real-time arrivals; security-related mobile applica- tions that are designed to be monitored by transit police or other security organizations; community issue reporting tools designed for reporting of community issues, not nec- essarily related to transit; and social media, where users interact with the agency and other users. 2) Online Public Comment Forums. These tools are used to solicit feedback and discussion on topics generated by the agency. There are four subcategories of public comment forums: idea management, which encourages the public to generate, discuss, and prioritize ideas; online public meetings, where the agency can use the Internet to broadcast or create interactive online public meetings; map-based forums that encourage feedback through a map-based interface; and system-building games, where a virtual exercise is presented in a game format with trade-offs and issues involved in real-world transit decisions.

8 Use of Web-Based Rider Feedback to Improve Public Transit Services 3) Customer Research. These tools are used to solicit opinions in a structured format and have built-in reporting. There are three subcategories of customer research tools: surveys, that recreate traditional telephone or on-board surveys, but differ from traditional tools in the specific population they will reach; live polling, which allows the agency to set-up questions that may support live public meetings or for use at a specific location; and feedback panels, which involve pre-recruited and screened survey respondents. 4) Feedback Management. Agencies use feedback management tools to manage all aspects of the feedback system, including taking comments, internal review, responding to the cus- tomer, analyzing results and trends, and reporting. There are three subcategories of feedback management: social media dashboards, used to aggregate and track activity from multiple social media accounts; internal tracking, used to log, track, and respond to customer com- ments, and analyze and report trends; and customer relationship management, used to track an individual’s communication history with the agency. Tool Features The types of features available for web-based feedback tools are divided into two main categories: Features of Tool Types. These features are used to differentiate the categories of tools, and are used in the Tool Selection Guide to match tools with the agency need. The seven features are: user identification, visibility of comments, dialog capabilities, immediacy, geography-based, level of technical support needed, and cost. Application Specific Features. These features are available across a wide variety of tools. They may be considered when procuring a specific tool, and can be required, desired, optional, or not needed. The 11 application specific features are: ability to customize the application; market penetration of the tool; who has control of the data; level of training and support; acces- sibility for persons with disabilities; translation for persons with limited English proficiency; mobile photography for reporting problems; reporting functionality; ability to rank or prioritize options; data processing; and ability to create custom and personalized responses. Procurement Guidance is provided to help agencies navigate the challenges of procuring software and working with software vendors. The topics are integration of web-based feedback tools, custom development versus off-the-shelf tools, and working with software developers. Integration of web-based feedback tools occurs in many ways. There is often a desire to inte- grate comments from web-based tools into legacy comment tracking systems. Integrating feed- back tools into existing agency web applications, such as real-time vehicle arrivals, puts feedback capabilities into the hands of an existing customer base. Social media creates many discussions and opportunities for the public to provide feedback to the agency. Integrating with social media allows the agency to capture a wide conversation with minimal staff effort. The same advantages exist for pulling comments from agency websites and blogs. Custom development versus using off-the-shelf tools is a critical decision for the agency. Each option has its benefits, which need to be balanced against the costs based on the needs of the agency. Custom development allows the agency to specify exactly what it needs, including the ability to integrate with existing customer feedback systems. However, development can be slower than desired and more costly. In addition, resources will be needed to provide mainte- nance and upgrades to keep it compatible with common operating systems. Off-the-shelf tools can often meet the basic needs of the agency at a lower cost. The vendor typically provides

Summary 9 ongoing updates to keep the software current with new operating systems. However, the agency may not be able to customize the application to their satisfaction, or may have to pay additional fees to create a customized version of the program. Working with software vendors and developers has its own set of challenges, especially for agencies that do not have dedicated IT staff. Developers may be talented programmers, but may benefit from guidance on the particular needs of the transit industry. As public entities, there are procurement requirements for transit agencies that software vendors and developers may not be familiar with, especially if they typically work with the private sector. Agencies can smooth the process by establishing clear goals, and recognizing the timeline for procurement, development, testing, and implementation of new software. Having a clear communication protocol between the agency and vendor will also facilitate the procurement process. Long term, establishing the level and type of ongoing support will help maintain both the application and a positive working relationship between the vendor and agency staff. Lessons Learned and Future Research The case studies are summarized in detail in Chapter 4. They revealed many overarching lessons, which are provided in Chapter 5. Following are a summary of the lessons learned, the concept of an “Ideal Tool,” and topics for future research. Overall Lessons • One Size Does Not Fit All. Not every tool is right for every agency or for accomplishing every goal. Web-based tools have a place in the mix, but transit agencies are well advised to custom- ize their tools to their audience and their resources. • People Want to Be Acknowledged. Agencies can offset the concern of comments ending up in a black hole by acknowledging that a comment was received—ideally within 24 hours—and then following up directly with the individual in a timely way. • Accentuate the Positive. Web-based feedback tools often attract criticism and negative com- ments. To help offset the negative, transit operators can make it easy for riders and stakehold- ers to share positive stories. Riders want to have an easy way to compliment bus drivers who make their morning a little brighter or employees who provided exceptional customer service. • Manage Expectations. The real-time nature of social media can create challenges for agencies in terms of response time. While agencies are encouraged to respond to social comments, they should be realistic about the level of responsiveness they can provide. Many agencies address this challenge by responding to social media comments during normal transit operating hours only and posting those hours on their accounts. Clear information about when these channels are being monitored can help guide customer expectations. • Look Before You Leap. Many platforms have especially low barriers to entry—and sometimes agencies get started without thinking through all the ramifications of inviting comments from these sources. Once an agency starts down a path, it can be very difficult to turn back. Agencies should set ground rules for comments and other forms of feedback. • Use the Customer Feedback Process to Educate. Regular training for employees helps to ensure that customer service personnel are well-informed about the policies and procedures, as well as the internal structure, of the agency. Also for the user, providing information on the front end, such as service alerts, frequently asked questions, policies, plans, and budgets, can help to guide feedback from the public. • Measure Your Success. Evaluating the performance of web-based feedback programs can help agencies understand what worked (and what did not) and documenting success can give staff the information they need to approach managers for additional personnel, budget, or software support. Numerous metrics and evaluation systems are available.

10 Use of Web-Based Rider Feedback to Improve Public Transit Services • Build Stakeholder Support. By encouraging two-way conversations, web-based feedback has the potential to engage riders and other stakeholders in meaningful interactions with the agency. • Consider the Costs. Web-based feedback could expand the reach of public meetings and free up call centers to focus on complex questions and to serve constituents without access to tech- nology. However, monitoring social media in real time and creating feedback options, such as webcasts, are resource-intensive activities. Cost-benefit analysis is needed to determine whether the tools will help the agency achieve its goals. • Integrate New and Old Systems. It can be difficult to integrate legacy call center based systems with new web-based feedback technologies, including email, online forms, and social media. Ideally all customer communications will come to a central database to facilitate responses and to make it easier to track those responses. However, software systems may not be adapt- able, training may be needed, and union agreements may dictate division of work. • Working with Vendors. Some agencies have the in-house resources and expertise to develop customized web-based solutions, but many will choose to work with outside vendors. In some cases, the agency will want to purchase an off-the-shelf product that can be customized for a better fit. At other times, the agency will want to create a unique product from the ground up. • Maintain a Level Playing Field. Technology-based feedback strategies have the potential to divide customers into those with access to these tools and those without access. Agencies should be concerned that customers with access to technology will receive faster responses than those using traditional communications channels and take measures to ensure this does not occur. The Ideal Tool At an APTA Marketing and Communications Workshop, transit agency staff created their “ideal customer feedback tool.” The tool would take advantage of technology to reduce staff resources to process comments and responses. It would be easy to use, yet collect the detailed information needed to respond appropriately. The tool would be able to accept feedback from, and provide responses in, all standard platforms and applications, including mobile devices. It would allow real-time interaction and provide location information, if appropriate. The tool would be interesting with the ability to vote options and ideas up or down. Future Research Three areas of future research are presented: (1) identifying metrics to measure the benefits of web-based feedback and for performance reporting; (2) standardizing feedback categories for transit agencies and vendors to use, to reduce the amount of customization needed; (3) under- standing rider access to technology, especially given the transportation disadvantaged markets served by transit agencies. How to Use the Tool Selection Guide Part 2 of the report provides a Tool Selection Guide that helps agencies select the most appro- priate web-based feedback tool based on their needs. Organization of Part 2 Chapter 6 summarizes the categories of agency needs for web-based feedback, based on the information provided in Chapter 2. Chapter 7 summarizes the categories of web-based feedback tools and their features, based on the information provided in Chapter 3. Chapter 8 presents an overview of the Tool Selection Guide, including a 3-step process for using the guide, and three examples demonstrating how an agency could use the guide.

Summary 11 Chapter 9 contains the Tool Selection Guide tables and information sheets. The first set of four tables, “Best-Fit Tools for Agency Need,” is organized around agency need, and identifies types of tools that are a best fit or good fit for each category of need. The second set of 10 tables, “Tool Features for Agency Need,” is also organized around agency need, and provides a comparison of features for all of the best-fit and good-fit tools. The third section of Chapter 9 contains Tool Information Sheets, one for each type of tool, organized by type of tool. The information sheets include a summary description, uses, advantages and disadvantages, and features of the type of tool. The 3-Step Process The tables and information sheets provided in Chapter 9 are designed to be used in a 3-step process or individually, depending on the needs of the agency and staff members’ familiarity with the types of web-based feedback tools. The process assumes that the agency has already identified the type or types of feedback it is interested in collecting. Step 1: The agency identifies the appropriate “Best-Fit Tools for Agency Need” table, and identi- fies the best-fit and good-fit tools based on the subcategories of need provided in the table. Those tool options are taken to Step 2 of the process. Step 2: For each of the tool options selected in Step 1, the agency identifies the appropriate “Tool Features for Agency Need” table. The tables provide a listing of features to compare the tool options. Based on the agency’s specific needs and requirements, the tool options are further narrowed down. The final list of potential tools is taken into Step 3. Step 3: The Tool Information Sheets provide additional detail on each of the tools. The final list of tools can be further explored using the information sheet for each type of tool, to come to a decision on which type of tool is best for their needs. Appendices Appendix A provides sample categories used for recording customer comments to facilitate reporting, analysis, and performance measures. Appendix B provides a glossary with definitions of terms used throughout the report. Appendix C contains a summary of the transit agency survey findings regarding web-based feedback.

Next: Part 1 - Managing Web-Based Feedback »
Use of Web-Based Rider Feedback to Improve Public Transit Services Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Report 179: Use of Web-Based Rider Feedback to Improve Public Transit Services provides toolkit of practices, emerging platforms, and promising approaches for customer web-based and electronic feedback to help improve public transit services. Part I of the report identifies promising practices among transit agencies and other industries using in-house or third-party web-based and mobile platforms. These mobile platforms are meant to engage customers and provide guidance on managing web-based feedback. Part II includes a Tool Selection Guide to assist transit agencies with selecting a web-based feedback tool based on their needs.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!