Click for next page ( 9

The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 8
8 costs, benefits, and risks of changing the way services are Midway through this study, TCRP reduced the scope of delivered--face challenges to their knowledge bases and skills. the emerging technologies portion in order to provide the There is a need to understand the ground rules for choosing resources necessary for a thorough treatment of best prac- and sequencing investments in technologies, processes, and tices, including greater investigation of techniques such as people to reduce costs and increase productivity. Enterprise Architecture Planning and Change Management. TCRP's e-Transit research program seeks to identify, de- That reduction in scope eliminated consideration of the more velop, and promote research to maximize the benefits of distant emerging technologies--those expected to be avail- e-commerce and other new technology applications for pub- able to transit between 11 and 20 years from today (the lic transportation and mobility management. The e-Transit analysis included in this report considers technologies up research program seeks to develop a road map for transit to 10 years out)--and hypothetical case studies describing professionals to understand immediate as well as short- and how the high potential emerging technologies might be im- long-term products and strategies, with an emphasis on plemented by various types of agencies. quick delivery. 1.2 Approach 1.1.2 Study Objectives 1.2.1 Interviews The objectives of this research are the following: Interviews were conducted with technology decision mak- 1. Provide those responsible for public transportation with ers from eight U.S. public transportation agencies of varying the best thinking available on technologies and how they sizes, seven international public transportation agencies and might be deployed in the service of public transportation. research organizations, and the United Parcel Service (UPS). 2. Provide transit agencies with specific, proven techniques In identifying interviewees, the objective was to include only and "best practices" for overcoming the significant obsta- those organizations that have been successful in adopting ad- cles they face in taking full advantage of technologies. vanced technologies. This was critical because understanding 3. Provide information on emerging technologies, identi- how to overcome obstacles to technology adoption was a key fying five technologies that hold the most promise for objective of the interviews. Another objective in selecting in- public transportation and mobility. (In this research, terview subjects was to include agencies of varying sizes. In- mobility is defined as the ability and knowledge to travel ternational organizations and a commercial organization from one location to another using a multimodal ap- were included to bring in perspectives from outside the U.S. proach, with one of the modes being a public transporta- transportation agency environment. Working with these cri- tion service.) teria, a list of interview subjects was developed based on the knowledge of the research team and with input from the For purposes of this research, current technologies are TCRP panel members. understood to be those currently in use in a transportation Most of the interviews were between 60 and 90 minutes application, including applications in Asia and Europe; emerg- in duration and were completed between February and ing technologies are those that could be implemented in trans- May 2005. Table 1 lists the organizations and individuals portation applications within the next 3 to 10 years. interviewed. Interview discussions centered on the following four topics: 1.1.3 Research Tasks 1. The next steps in the organization's information tech- This study has two major parts. The first part focuses on nology program (i.e., their current design and imple- providing transit agencies with practical, proven techniques mentation focus). for surmounting technology-related challenges. This first part 2. The organizational structure and processes that have been includes documentation of current technologies and their successfully utilized to identify, plan, implement, and op- benefits, identification of methods that have been used to erate advanced technologies, including keys to overcom- build business cases for investing in those technologies, doc- ing obstacles. umentation of the obstacles to technology exploitation, and, 3. Promising developing technologies currently being tracked most importantly, identification of best practices to address and investigated. those obstacles. The second part of the study focuses on pro- 4. Trends and factors that are anticipated to significantly viding transit agencies with a few "promising technologies to impact future operations, including utilization of tech- watch" to facilitate their consideration of the uses of such nology (e.g., changes in costs or funding and demographic technologies. changes).

OCR for page 8
9 Table 1. Organizations and individuals interviewed. Organization Interviewees U.S. Public Transportation Agencies Ann Arbor Transportation Authority Greg Cook, Executive Director Cape Cod Regional Transit Authority Kirk Dand, General Manager (contracted) Mark Nawrath, Director of Project Management (no Central Ohio Transit Authority (COTA) longer with the agency) Ride On (Montgomery County, MD) Alfie Steele, Communications Manager Kathryn Heatley, President & Chief Executive OUTREACH (San Jose, CA) Officer King County Metro (Washington State) Kevin Desmond, General Manager TriMet (Portland, OR) Ken Turner, Manager of Operations Edward Thomas, Assistant General Manager, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Department of Planning and Information Authority (WMATA) (Washington, D.C.) Technologies International Public Transportation Agencies and Research Organizations Gothenburg (Sweden) Transit Agency Anders Kabjorn, Director of Marketing (retired) Chalmers Institute of Technology Stig Franzen, Professor (Gothenburg) Transport Direct (London) Nick Illsley, Project Director United Kingdom (UK) Department of Chris Gibbard, Development Manager Transport Guy Bourgeis, Director INRETS (former Director of INRETS (Paris) Strategies for RATP) Peter Hendy, Managing Director of Surface Transport for London Transport, and Robert Kiley, Commissioner (part of the interview) Hong Kong Transit Tony Yeung, Manager of Operations Commercial Package Delivery Service Donna Barrett, Technology Public Relations United Parcel Service (UPS) Manager All of the international interviews were conducted in per- consulted to identify the issues associated with traveler son; all others were conducted by phone. In the case of the information systems.1 The TCRP reports that covered the transportation agencies, interviewees were generally individ- "new paradigms" research were reviewed to identify the uals with job titles such as general manager (GM), who had a changes that could help transit agencies in overcoming obsta- high-level perspective on technology-related issues and an cles in technology implementation.2 appreciation for overarching issues such as policy, organiza- tional culture, etc. In several cases, additional agency person- 1 C. L. Schweiger, TCRP Synthesis 48: Real-Time Bus Arrival Information Systems nel with firsthand technology planning and implementation (Washington, D.C.: Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, experience also participated. 2003),; Multisystems, Inc., TCRP Report 92: Strategies for Improved Traveler Information (Washington D.C.: Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, 2003), http://gulliver. 1.2.2 Literature Review 2 Cambridge Systematics Inc., Matthew A. Coogan, Multisystems Inc., Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service, and TransManagement Inc., TCRP A literature review was conducted to identify the value of Report 58: New Paradigms for Local Public Transportation Organizations--Task 5 current technologies, the obstacles associated with deploy- Report: Opening the Door to Fundamental Change (Washington, D.C.: Transporta- ing technologies, methods of overcoming these obstacles, tion Research Board, National Research Council, 2000), and the best practices associated with deploying the tech- publications/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_58.pdf; R. G. Stanley, Matthew A. Coogan, M. P. Bolton, S. Campbell, and R. Sparrow, TCRP Report 97: Emerging New Paradigms: nologies. Information was obtained from a variety of re- A Guide to Fundamental Change in Local Public Transportation Organizations sources, including TCRP reports, U.S. DOT and other intel- (Washington, D.C.: Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, ligent transportation systems (ITS) evaluation reports, the 2003),; Cambridge Systematics Inc., TCRP Report 53: New Paradigms for Local Public Transportation ITS Cost-Benefit Database, and general information tech- Organizations--Task 1 Report: Forces and Factors That Require Consideration of nology literature such as the Massachusetts Institute of New Paradigms (Washington, D.C.: Transportation Research Board, National Re- Technology (MIT) Technology Review. TCRP reports were search Council, 1999),

OCR for page 8
10 Several ITS deployment evaluation reports, such as the The objective in identifying focus group participants was Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative (MMDI) reports to keep the size of the group small enough to allow significant and the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission interaction among all participants while at the same time (NVTC) evaluation report, were consulted to study the cus- sampling a range of opinion from agencies in different geo- tomer perception of transit ITS.3 These reports provided an graphic regions and of different sizes. The focus was on sen- overview of customer acceptance of transit technology. An ior transit leadership because, based on the preliminary find- earlier FTA report was also consulted to study customer ac- ings of Tasks 1 through 4 of TCRP Project J-9/Task 12, the ceptance of existing transit technologies.4 The ITS Cost- discussion of best practices was expected to center primarily Benefit Report and Database were reviewed to study the fi- on institutional issues. Members of the TCRP project panel nancial impacts of transit ITS.5 Several other resources were instrumental in the identification and recruitment of were consulted to identify emerging technologies that may focus group participants. In addition to members of the re- have the potential to improve transit service, operations, search team, focus group participants included the following: management, customer service, and information. Finally, technical papers from several of the most recent ITS America Ron Barnes, GM, Valley Metro East Valley Operations, annual meetings and ITS World Congress conferences were Veolia Transportation. reviewed to determine the most recent research and develop- John Inglish, GM, Utah Transit Authority (UTA). ment, and actual efforts related to advancements in transit T. J. Ross, GM, Pace Suburban Bus Service. technology. Michael Setzer, CEO/GM, Southwest Ohio Regional Tran- sit Authority. Edward Thomas, Assistant GM, Washington Metropoli- 1.2.3 Focus Group tan Area Transit Authority (WMATA). A day-long facilitated focus group was conducted with sev- Gwen Chisholm-Smith, TCRP Senior Program Officer. eral transit agency chief CEOs, GMs, and information tech- Paul Toliver, Former Transit Director, Seattle Metro, and nology (IT) and Planning Department Managers at the Beck- Director, King County Department of Transportation, man Center in Irvine, California, on August 28, 2006. The King County, Washington; currently President of New purpose of the focus group was to validate and expand upon Age Industries, LLC (Panel Chair). draft findings related to the value of technologies, methods Robin Cody, Chief Information Officer and Manager of used to evaluate and demonstrate the rationale for deploying the Information Technology Department, Bay Area Rapid technologies, and best practices for overcoming obstacles to Transport (BART) (Panel Member). taking full advantage of technologies. Peter Anderson, Chief Information Officer, City of Fort Worth (Panel Member). Each focus group participant was provided a read-ahead 3 J. Lappin, Advanced Traveler Information Service (ATIS): What Do ATIS Cus- tomers Want? (Washington, D.C.: Intelligent Transportations Systems Joint Pro- package in advance of the focus group summarizing the pur- gram Office [ITS JPO], U.S. DOT, January 2000), pose and objectives of the project and the preliminary find- JPODOCS/REPTS_TE/12284.pdf; S. Radin, B. Sen, and J. Lappin, Advanced ings related to obstacles to technology deployment. The focus Traveler Information Service (ATIS): Private Sector Perceptions and Public Sector group consisted of four main activities. First, Mr. Toliver, Activities (Washington, D.C.: ITS JPO, U.S. DOT, January 2000), www.; J. Lappin, Advanced Mr. Cody, and Mr. Thomas gave short presentations high- Traveler Information Service (ATIS): Who are ATIS Customers? (Washington, lighting their experiences and lessons learned in implement- D.C.: ITS JPO, U.S. DOT, January 2000), ing advanced technologies. The second activity was a facili- REPTS_TE/12285.pdf; TranSystems Corporation, Development of a Continuing Process for Monitoring Performance Data on Transit-Related ITS Investments, tated group discussion of best practices--what works and final report of a study conducted for the Northern Virginia Transportation what doesn't--in areas ranging from institutional to techni- Commission (Arlington, VA: Northern Virginia Transportation Commission, cal. The third activity was a facilitated group discussion of 2003), Performance%20its%20Investments.pdf how the results of this study can benefit transit agencies, in- 4 Battelle Memorial Institute and Multisystems Inc., Customer Preferences for Tran- cluding consideration of the concept of "prerequisites"-- sit ATIS: Research Report, FTA-OH-26-7015-2003.1 (Washington, D.C.: FTA, U.S. basic conditions and capabilities needed in order to success- DOT, August 8, 2003), fully apply more specific, technical best practices--and how 5 Mitretek Systems, Inc., Intelligent Transportation Systems Benefits and Costs: 2003 Update (Washington, D.C.: FHWA, U.S. DOT, May 2003), to disseminate the results of this study. A summary of the jpodocs/repts_te/13772.html. focus group is presented in Appendix A.