One of the ways in which tasks and roles can be divided within target group transport is by placing the control in the hands of the passenger. With this control model, the traveler chooses a carrier himself. Does this method mainly offer advantages or is it inefficient? Jacky Lodewijks, senior advisor at Forseti, answers.

With this model, the traveler has a lot of freedom to organize the transport himself. Placing the choice between carriers with the traveler creates competition between carriers ‘on the street’. This should guarantee the quality of the transport. After a bad experience with a carrier, the traveler can call another company next time.

“The most free solution would be to give the traveler his own budget with which to order transport. ”, says Louis. “As a government, however, you then no longer have any control or insight into the quality of transport and how the budget is spent.” An alternative is to spend anyway. Several carriers are then selected in the tender from which the traveler can then choose.

No tender procedure necessary An intermediate form is According to Lodewijks, this is also an option: a construction between the municipality(s) and several transporters in an area, in which agreements are made about the submission of declarations for journeys driven and the conditions for this. “The advantage of this is that, in principle, every carrier can participate as long as they comply with the conditions and that no tendering procedure is required.”

The disadvantage of this is that there is less influence on implementation aspects and the supervision thereof by the municipality, for example that there must always be an offer for the traveler. “On the other hand, it is precisely the passenger that you want to give direction and who can therefore choose another carrier if the execution is not good. However, this form of market forces does not always work well with the social welfare target group.”

Management based on smart combinations not possible Another major drawback of this model, in whatever form, according to Lodewijks, is that it is no longer possible to control smart combinations of rides. “It is possible that Riet orders a journey from carrier A and Piet plans his journey with carrier B, while their journeys could have been combined perfectly. The average costs per trip are therefore almost always higher in this model.”

The fact that you do not have to tender would make this model interesting if you look at the latest developments. “For example, when a MaaS application provides insight into the total range of carriers. Or that the possibilities to continuously measure customer satisfaction provide better insight into the performance of carriers.” According to him, this makes the choices made by the traveler more transparent and the data can be used to improve quality. “This really requires a different way of thinking and less control over transport than municipalities are used to. And above all leave more responsibility with the traveler.”

Forseti previously explored the model with the separate ride assumption, whereby a party other than the carrier accepts the journeys by telephone or a digital booking platform. This article can be read here.

Read also:

Focus on price in tenders: what is the changed in recent years? More insight into student transport for parents with the new Cabman app How can vehicle data help governments in locating charging stations? 2022

Comments are closed.