User Satisfaction Survey 2022 Summary for RFC Rhine-Danube Corridor

This summary presents key insights from the User Satisfaction Survey 2022 conducted for the RFC Rhine-Danube Corridor. It includes survey design details, participant groups, satisfaction levels, and areas for infrastructure improvement based on respondents' feedback. The survey covered a range of aspects related to user satisfaction and infrastructure standards, highlighting the overall sentiment and proposed enhancements for the corridor.

• User Satisfaction
• Survey 2022
• RFC Rhine-Danube
• Infrastructure Improvement
• Participant Groups

arals Follow

Uploaded on Sep 20, 2024 | 0 Views

Download Presentation

Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.

The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Presentation Transcript

1. User Satisfaction Survey 2022 Summary RFC Rhine-Danube CZ SK FR DE AT HU RO

2. 1 Survey Design 2 Satisfaction with RFC Rhine-Danube 3 Summary RFC USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2022 CONTENT 2 20/09/2024

3. 1Survey Design 2 Satisfaction with RFC Rhine-Danube 3 Summary RFC USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2022 CONTENT 3 20/09/2024

4. SURVEY DESIGN 13 respondents II 13 evaluations* Computer Aided Web Interviews (using the online tool Survio) Contacts (e-mail address) delivered by RFCs 85 e-mail invitations sent Field Phase: 19thSeptember to 6thOctober 2022 * One respondent is counted multiple times if his/her organisation uses multiple corridors. User Satisfaction Survey 2022 - Summary 4

5. PARTICIPATION PARTICIPANT GROUPS IN % Terminal operator / Port authority Railway Undertaking (RU) 13 Evaluations 13 Participants 15% Total 13 RUs 11 Terminals/Ports 2 85% Invitations sent 85 Response rate overall 15% User Satisfaction Survey 2022 - Summary 5

6. 1 Survey Design 2 Satisfaction with RFC Rhine-Danube 3 Summary RFC USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2021 CONTENT 20/09/2024 6

7. SATISFACTION WITH RFC Rhine-Danube Overall, how satisfied are you as a user of the RFC? Answered by: RUs/non-RUs, Terminals/Ports sample size = 12 +1 interview from DB Cargo 0% very satisfied 20% 46% satisfied 50% 8% slightly satisfied 20% 23% slightly unsatisfied 0% 54% 0% unsatisfied 10% 36% Decrease of satisfaction Generally satisfied 15% very unsatisfied 0% 2022 2021 *Answers given were very satisfied, satisfied and slightly satisfied. 20/09/2024 RFC User Satisfaction Survey 2022 - Summary 7

8. WISH FOR IMPROVEMENT IN INFRASTRUCTURE Which topics related to RFC Infrastructure are the priority areas for improvement according to your opinion? Answered by: RUs/non-RUs, Terminals/Ports sample size = 12 +1 interview from DB Cargo 17% 20% generally satisfied 9% 10% geographical routing 54% infrastructure parameters 50% 32% Focus on measures taken to improve infrastructure standards 40% 17% 1 Infrastructure capacity 55% infrastructure capacity 2 Infrastructure parameters Generally satisfied 60% 3 Measures to improve infrastructure standards This is a 3% decrease in satisfaction compared to last year. Sample size 2021: 10 10% 10% other 2022 2021 20/09/2024 RFC User Satisfaction Survey 2022 - Summary 8

9. WISH FOR IMPROVEMENT IN TCR Which areas of the coordination of planned temporary capacity restrictions (TCR) on the RFC are the priority areas for improvement according to your opinion? Answered by: RUs/non-RUs, Terminals/Ports sample size = 12 +1 interview from DB Cargo 17% 20% generally satisfied 50% quality of alternative offers 40% 42% quantity of alternative offers 30% 25% time-table of alternative offers 60% 17% 20% 17% info on works and possessions Focus on 25% 1 qualtity of alternative offers involvement of customers Generally satisfied 30% 2 quantity of alternative offers This is a 3% decrease in satisfaction compared to last year. Sample size 2021: 10 2022 2021 8% 10% 3 time-table of alternative offers and Involvement of customers other 20/09/2024 RFC User Satisfaction Survey 2022 - Summary 9

10. WISH FOR IMPROVEMENT IN RFC COMMERCIAL OFFER In the current RFC commercial offer, which are the priority areas for improvement according to your opinion? Answered by: RUs/non-Rus sample size = 10 +1 interview from DB Cargo 9% generally satisfied 13% 9% quantity of PaPs 0% 4% time-table of PaPs 2022 2021 7% 4% relations (PaPs origins/destinations) 0% 13% 13% parameters of PaPs (train lenght/weight) 9% commercial speed of PaPs 13% 13% quality of the Reserve Capacity offer 7% 0% Focus on allocation process 7% 9% 0% conflict-solving procedure by the C-OSS 7% 1 protection of PaPs from TCRs 13% 13% collection of needs (wish list) 2 parameters of PaPs Generally satisfied This is a 4% decrease in satisfaction compared to last year Sample size 2021: 10 17% protection of PaPs from TCRs 20% 3 collection of needs 9% other 0% 4 quality ot the Reserve Capacity offer 20/09/2024 RFC User Satisfaction Survey 2022 - Summary 10

11. WISH FOR IMPROVEMENT IN TPM Which aspects of the Train Performance Management (TPM) activities are the priority areas for improvement according to your opinion? Answered by: RUs/non-RUs, Terminals/Ports sample size = 12 +1 interview from DB Cargo 13% generally satisfied 10% 27% regular RFC monthly punctuality report 40% 27% efficiency of measures taken to improve punctuality 50% Focus on 13% Generally satisfied This is a 3% increase in satisfaction compared to last year. Sample size 2021: 10 27% RU/terminal involvement 20% 1 Efficiency of measures taken to improve punctuality 0% 2 Regular train performance in report other 2022 2021 10% 3 RU/terminal improvement 20/09/2024 RFC User Satisfaction Survey 2022 - Summary 11

12. WISH FOR IMPROVEMENT IN ICM Regarding the implementation of the process outlined in the International Contingency Management (ICM) handbook which are the priority areas for improvement according to your opinion? Answered by: RUs/non-Rus sample size = 10 +1 interview from DB Cargo 36% generally satisfied 13% 0% implementation of new processes 12% 55% quality and usability of re-routing scenarios 50% Focus on 36% Generally satisfied This is a 23% increase in satisfaction compared to last year. 9% information/support on ICM by RFCs 25% 1 Quality and usability of re-routing scenarios 0% 2 Implementation of new processes 2022 2021 other 0% 3 Info/support on ICM Sample size 2021: 8 20/09/2024 RFC User Satisfaction Survey 2022 - Summary 12

13. WISH FOR IMPROVEMENT IN RU/TERMINAL ADVISORY GROUP Which aspects of the RU Advisory Group/Terminal Advisory Group (RAG/TAG) are the priority areas for improvement according to your opinion? Answered by: RUs/non-RUs, Terminals/Ports sample size = 12 +1 interview from DB Cargo 21% generally satisfied 33% 16% topics discussed during RAG/TAG meetings 0% 16% 17% consideration of AG's opinion in the MB 16% consideration of AG's opinion in the ExB 8% 11% Focus on organization of meetings 21% Generally satisfied This is a 12% decrease in satisfaction compared to last year Sample size 2021 10 0% 1 RAG/TAG meetings useful 21% RAG/TAG meetings useful 33% 2 topics discussed during RAG/TAP meetings 2022 2021 0% 0% other 3 consideration of AG s opinion In the MB and ExB 20/09/2024 RFC User Satisfaction Survey 2022 - Summary 13

14. COMPANY PARTICIPATION IN RAG TAG MEETINGS Participation in RAG TAG meetings Does your company regularly attend RAG/TAG meetings? Answered by: RUs/non-RUs, Terminals/Ports sample size = 12 + 1 interview from DB Cargo 67% Yes Compared to the past year it has been a 16 % decrease. 20/09/2024 RFC User Satisfaction Survey 2022 - Summary 14

15. WISH FOR IMPROVEMENT IN COMMUNICATION SERVICES Which of the following statements on the communication services of the RFC are the priority areas for improvement according to your opinion? Answered by: RUs/non-RUs, Terminals/Ports sample size = 11 +1 interview from DB Cargo 25% generally satisfied 33% 20% information on the RFC website 25% 20% information on social media channels 2% 5% 6% information in annual reports 5% information provided in CID books 8% Focus on 25% Generally satisfied This is a 8% decrease in satisfaction compared to last year. 15% information provided on the CIP 10% 1 information on RFC website 5% 6% information provided on the NCI 2 information on social media channels 2022 2021 5% other 3 information provided on CIP 9% Sample size 2021: 10 20/09/2024 RFC User Satisfaction Survey 2022 - Summary 15

16. WISH FOR IMPROVEMENT IN PERFORMANCE Which topics would your company be interested in for the RFC to improve your rail-related performance? Answered by: Terminals/Ports sample size = 2 International End-to-End monitoring projects with the involvement of IMs, RUs, and Terminal Operators 50% 50% 50% Integrated capacity offer of PaPs with Terminal slots 0% 0% 0% Creation of business opportunities/links Focus on 0% Support of electronic data exchange (TIS) within the rail sector 50% 1 international end-to-end monitoring projects 0% 0% Facilitation of information provision 2 Integrated capacity offer of PaPs with Terminal slots 0% 0% other 2022 2021 20/09/2024 RFC User Satisfaction Survey 2022 - Summary 16

17. WISH FOR IMPROVEMENT IN CERTAIN FIELDS RFC Specific Question: The 3 main areas for improvement 30% Temporary Capacity Restrictions 19% 18% Which are the top 3 main areas, where you experience the most of the difficulties for international traffic on RFC Rhine- Danube? (multiple markings possible) Answered by: RUs/non-RUs Sample size= 8 Border dwelling times and processes at borders 22% 0% Interoperability issues 4% 9% National rules / regulations 15% 4% Language and Communication 4% 13% Train monitoring (incl. punctuality, performance, etc.) 7% 4% Infrastructure parameters 7% 0% IT tools 0% Focus on 4% Cooperation with IMs 7% 0% Cooperation with other RUs 4% 1. Temporary Capacity Restrictions 18% Slow development of railway infrastructure 7% 2. Border dwelling times and processes at borders 0% RFC capacity product development 4% 0% Other 3. Slow development of railway infrastructure 0% 2022 2021 20/09/2024 17 RFC User Satisfaction Survey 2022 - Summary

18. 1 Survey Design 2 Satisfaction with RFC Rhine-Danube 3 Summary RFC USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2022 CONTENT 20/09/2024 18

19. SUMMARY SATISFACTION RATING 2022 2021 17% Infrastructure 20% General satisfaction This question was not asked in all topics of the survey Answered by: RUs/non-RUs, Terminals/Ports Different sample sizes on every topic 17% Temporary capacity restrictions 20% 9% Commercial offer 13% 13% Train performance management 10% 36% Int. Contingency management 13% 21% RU/Terminal Advisory Group 33% 25% Communication services 33% User Satisfaction Survey 2022 - Summary 19

20. SUMMARY WISH FOR IMPROVEMENT quality and usability of re-routing scenarios 60% infrastructure capacity 55% infrastructure parameters 54% international end-to-end monitoring projects 50% integrated capacity offer of PaPs with Terminal slots 50% quality of alternative offers 50% quantity of alternative offers 42% RAG/TAG meetings useful 33% measures to improve infrstructure standards 32% efficiency of measures taken to improve punctuality 27% regular train performance in report 27% RU/terminal improvement 27% topics discussed during RAG/TAg meetings 25% time-table of alternative offers 25% involvement of customers 25% consideration of AG's opinion in the ExB 25% consideration of AG's opinion in the MB 25% information on the RFC website 20% information on social media channels 20% Focus topics chosen Answered by: RUs/non-RUs, Terminals/Ports Different sample sizes on every topic organization of meetings 17% protection of PaPs from TCRs 17% info on works and possessions 17% information provided on CIP 15% parameters of PaPs (train lenght/weight) 13% quality of the Reserve Capacity offer 13% collection of needs (wish list) 13% info/support on ICM 10% quantity of PaPs 9% commercial speed of PaPs 9% geographical routing 9% information provided on the NCI 5% information in annual reports 5% information provided in CID 5% relations (PaPs originis/destinations) 4% time-table of PaPs 4% facilitaton of info provision 0% support of electronic data exchange (TIS) 0% creation of business oportunities/links 0% implementatio of new processes 0% allocation process 0% conflict-solving procedure by the C-OSS 0% User Satisfaction Survey 2022 - Summary 20

21. SUMMARY TOP 10 FOCUS TOPICS The lowest 10 topics of the survey which the participants had the most wish for improvement. They were least satisfied with these 10 topics and the RFC will focus on improving those. Answered by: RUs/non-RUs, Terminals/Ports Different sample sizes on every topic 2021 2022 most wish for improvement quality and usability of re-routing scenarios 60% infrastructure capacity 55% infrastructure parameters 54% international end-to-end monitoring projects 50% quality of alternative offers 50% 60% time-table of alternative offers 60% infrastructure capacity quantity of alternative offers 42% quality and usability of re-routing scenarios 50% measures to improve infrastructure standards 32% 50% infrastructure parameters efficiency of measures taken to improve punctuality efficiency of measures taken to improve punctuality 50% 27% 40% regular RFC monthly punctuality report time-table of alternative offers 25% 40% RAG/TAG meetings useful 40% less wish for improvement quality of altnerative offers measures taken to improve infrastructure standards 40% 40% CIP not used 20/09/2024 User Satisfaction Survey 2022 - Summary 21