THE DEVELOPMENT OFA BENCHMARKING HANDBOOK FOR PUBLIC

TRANSPORT OPERATORS

Jenny Mageean
Corinne Mulley
John Nelson

Transport OperationsResearch Group

University of Newcastle upon Tyne

1.

INTRODUCTION

Effective passenger transport systems are essential for European economies

and for the quality of life of European citizens. The growth in demand for
transport has been met by an increase in the use of the private car at the
expense of public transport. The use of the private car rose from 1,590 billion
passenger km in 1970 to 3,592 billion passenger km in 1995, while that of
public transport (bus, coach, rail) rose from 478 billion passenger km in 1970
to 632 billion passenger km in 1995 (DG TREN, 1997)o The European
Commission has recognised the need for a modal shift from the private car to
the more sustainable forms of transport (public transport, walking, cycling).
One of the ways in which public transport might be improved and therefore
attract more passengers is the engagement of transport operators in
benchmarking. By benchmarking, an operator is able to compare performance
measures (known as indicators) with other operators, so that areas of relative
strength and weakness can be determined. Once these are known,
benchmarking partnerships can be set up whereby data, information, ideas
and methods are shared for mutual benefit. In order to compare indicators
they must be measured in the same way. The EQUIP Handbook will define
each indicator and explain how it should be measured. Therefore, by using
the Handbook an operator is sure that meaningful comparisons may be made
with others.
~
This paper begins by defining benchmarking and looking at the role of
benchmarking in the Continuous Improvement Process before examining the
extent of benchmarking in the public transport sector and initiatives
undertaken by the European Union (EU) which led to the sponsorship of the
EQUIP project.
r

The next section of the paper concentrates on the 'objectives of the EQUIP
project and summarises the way in which the principal output, the EQUIP
Handbook, has been developed. The nature of the EQUIP Handbook follows
before the section on the EQUIP Network, consisting of public transport
operators and local authorities, which provided the validation of EQUIP's work
and ensured that the Handbook was relevant and useable.

91

The final sections of the paper concern the future. The institutionalising of
benchmarking is discussed, as is the further development of the Network. The
paper concludes by offering a potential way forward to ensure that local public
transport operators reap the benefits offered by entering the Continuous
Improvement Process.
2.

BENCHMARKING

2.1 Whatis benchmarking?

Benchmarking has been a key tool in the business improvement armoury for
many years (Zairi, 1996). It is the search for industry best practice, leading to
improvement in performance. It is an ongoing technique for measuring and
improving products, services and practices against the best that can be
identified in any industry anywhere. It requires data gathering, goal setting and
analysis.

Figure 1: Benchmarking Network Methodology Chart (fromHanman(1997))

Figure 1 shows the methodology of the benchmarking process. In order to
benchmark, the comparison of the key performance indicators (KPIs) must be
valid and relevant. All parties must measure the same process in the same
way. The scope of the EQUIP project is highlighted in Figure 1 as steps 1, 2
and 3. The remaining steps would take place after the publication of the
Handbook.
After the benchmarking phase, the organisation will have gained an in-depth
knowledge of itself. The measurement process provided by benchmarking
provides a baseline data set for improvements and for target setting on a
basis which can be understood throughout the organisetion. The areas for
potential improvement are identified, target values (perhaps with intermediate
milestones) can be set and there will be an estimate of the value gain for the
organisation. The team building achieved in the benchmarking activity will
provide the platform for the action teams which must achieve the

92

improvements. Benchmarking is a key step in the Continuous Improvement

process but does not add value in itself- it is the catalyst to change. Value is
only added through achieving real improvements.
2.2 Benchmarking in the public transport sector

In the public transport sector, little benchmarking has been carried out to date.
Notable exceptions are the COMET and Nova Benchmarking Clubs facilitated
by the Railway Technology Strategy Centre at Imperial College, London, UK,
involving 16 urban railway operators from around the world. The COMET Club
of operators was established in 1995 and it comprises BVG (Berlin,
Germany), MTRC (Hong Kong), LUL (London, UK), STC (Mexico City), MoM
(Moscow, Russia), NYCT (New York, USA), RATP metro and RER (Paris,
France), MSP (Sao Paulo, Brazil) and TRTA (Tokyo, Japan). The Nova Club
of urban railways was established in 1998 and consists of SPT (Glasgow,
UK), KCRC (Hong Kong), Metrepolitano de Lisboa (Lisbon, Portugal), Metro
de Madrid (Madrid, Spain), Nexus (Newcastle, UK), AS Oslo Sporveier (Oslo,
Norway) and SMRT (Singapore).
The Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) used in the COMET and Nova
Benchmarking Clubs are grouped into six key areas: asset utilisation,
efficiency, cost, reliability, service quality and safety. Detailed definitions of
the indicators used in each cluster are confidential to the two Clubs.
In Mongolia, the national Ministry for Transport Infrastructure, supported by
the World Bank, implemented the Urban Passenger Transport project (19951997) which had an objective to achieve sustainability of the urban transport
sector in Ulaanbaatar, as well as a significant increase in service quality (Finn
& Barrett, 1997). The project provided an efficiency review, including the
development of indicators with current and target values.
In Finland, one of the first initiatives towards benchmarking in public transport
was the project for developing and realising competitive transportation
services (KiPa). The project was led by Bussialan Kehitt~imispatvelut Oy
which is a development company owned by the Finnish Bus and Coach
Association. In the KiPa project there are 14 inter-urban bus companies
working together with the aim of assessing their level of competitiveness and
finding ways to improve their business. The indicators used in this study are
grouped into six areas: customer satisfaction, employee satisfaction,
efficiency of operations, acquisition of resources, financial performance,
strategic status and know how. A fundamental difference between this study
and the EQUIP project is that the KiPa system is designed to be implemented
by an outside organisation (the suggested timetable is 4 weeks for planning,
data collection and reporting), whereas the EQUIP Handbook is suitable for
completion by the operators themselves.
2.3

The citizens' network and other EU initiatives

Recognising the need to encourage a modal shift from the private car to the
more sustainable forms of transport (public transport, walking, cycling), the

93

European Commission published its Green Paper "The Citizens' Network fulfilling the potential of public passenger transport" (COM (95) 601) in 1995.
In this Paper, ways of making public passenger transport more attractive and
usable were suggested, such as improvements to vehicles and rolling stock,
system integration, information provision, quality of service, increased
convenience, and planning priority for public transport. In total, 176
organisations responded to the Green Paper's consultation process and a
further 250 representatives of public authorities, transport operators and user
groups took part in the Citizens' Network Forum in Brussels in June 1996.
From these sources, and other work assessing potential for improvements in
passenger intermodality, arose a Communication from the Commission
entitled "Developing the Citizens Network - why good local and regional
passenger transport is important, and how the European Commission is
helping to bdng it about" (COM (98) 431) in 1998. This described the
Commission's 1998 to 2000 work programme as being designed "to support
the role of local and regional passenger transport in contributing to economic
development and employment, reducing congestion, using less energy,
producing fewer pollutants, making less noise, reducing social exclusion and
improving quality of life". The work programme was to be integrated and to
include the support for stimulating benchmarking in local and regional
passenger transport and to establish a policy and legal framework that
promoted better use of local and regional passenger transport systems.
The Commission sponsored work to identify the best organisational structures
for public transport operations in European countries - the ISOTOPE (1998)
project (Improved Structure and Organisation for Transport Operations of
Passengers in Europe). A subsequent step of the Commission's plan to
support the actors in public transport was the funding of the QUATTRO (1998)
project (Quality approach in tendering urban public transport operations).
QUATTRO made specific recommendations to authorities, operators and
manufacturers to enhance public transport quality and this included the use of
benchmarking. QUAI-rRO then teamed up with experts from the European
Committee for Standardisation (CEN) to define service quality in public
transport. CEN TC 320 WG 5 issued draft recommendations for the definition,
targeting and measurement of service quality in March 1999. These criteria
represent the customer view of the service provided.
Public transport operators form one strand of the local transport system as a
whole. In the context of the local transport system it should be recognised
that there are many issues outside the operator's own control, for example
traffic management or land-use planning, but which clearly affect their
performance. During 1998, the Commission set up a pilot benchmarking
exercise for local passenger transport systems, working with 15 urban areas
across the EU from which a new initiative is expected to increase the number
of cities involved to over 100.

94

3.
3.1

THE EQUIP PROJECT

Objectives

The EQUIP project takes place within the Transport Research programme of
DG TREN within the broader Fourth Framework Program for R&TD of the
European Commission.
The core objectives of EQUIP are to develop a toolbox in the form of a
Handbook for the self-assessment of internal quality performance by local
passenger transport operators and to ensure, by means of awareness raising
activities and liaison activities, that potential users are aware of its existence.
EQUIP has focused primarily on the provision of local public transport. The
concepts and principles are likely to be equally applicable to the provision of
planned or procured inter-urban services as well as in the wider total
passenger transport system, although the reference values are likely to be
different.
Achievement of higher quality and consistency in passenger transport
requires the operator to implement systems of continuous improvement based
on measuring performance, setting targets, developing strategies and
implementation plans, and monitoring their implementation. The use of
benchmarking is an invaluable tool to guide operators towards achievable
high-quality objectives. Ultimately, EQUIP wants operators to utilise the
approach developed within the project, and in this way, to achieve quality,
effectiveness and efficiency gains In addition, EQUIP wants decision takers,
procurers of passenger transport services and associations of transport
operators to be aware of the EQUIP approach and to promote the
achievement of better quality by individual operators.
The major, and most tangible, output of EQUIP is the Handbook which has
been developed through an iterative process with deep participation of the
industry sector. An extensive search was carried out to identify relevant
indicators which were then refined and clustered, and supported by a
comprehensive measurement methodology. The first version of the Handbook
was developed and used by the EQUIP Network of operators for selfassessment. This provided validation and needed feedback to produce the
final version for public release.
3.2

Programme of Work

EQUIP deals with Benchmarking of Efficiency in Public Transport.

Specifically, EQUIP deals with the "internal" efficiency of the public transport
operator - in other words, the capability to achieve planned outputs within
performance targets, and the optimisation of the use of resources to achieve
this. "Quality" of service and customer satisfaction are considered as "external
factors" and are only considered within EQUIP where they have internal
relevance. This is not to say that they are somehow less important - it is
simply that the extemal factors are well considered in other work, whereas
EQUIP focuses on the operator.

95

EQUIP has carried out an extensive literature search to establish the baseline
of current knowledge in benchmarking the internal efficiency of local public
transport operators. In this context EQUIP has identified some 139 literature
references, 16 projects, 11 workshops and 10 benchmarking projects which
provide both research and real-world source material which is now available
on a publicly available website (httpllwww.europrojects.ielequipl).
This
website will later contain all the EQUIP output. EQUIP provides an in depth
and mode based analysis and builds on builds on prior work within the
Transport Research programme of DG TREN.
This collective of contextual work involving literature and previous projects has
been combined with the direct participation of industry to assure a high level
of completeness and stability for the EQUIP Handbook
4.

THE EQUIP HANDBOOK

Four clearly identified stages marked the development of the EQUIP

Handbook over a period of eighteen months. It began with a list of over 400
diverse indicators sourced from an extensive literature review, followed by an
iteration of these into clusters which were examined by operators and
authorities in the EQUIP Network. This output contributed to the draft
Handbook, which was piloted throughout the Network. Feedback led to the
production of the final documents. The Handbook is available in printed or
electronic formats.
The final Handbook is available in a number of formats. There are five
separate but compatible Handbooks for each of the land based modes (bus,
trolley bus, tram/light rail, metro and local heavy rail) as well as a short version
of 27 'super' indicators to provide an entry to benchmarking. The final EQUIP
Handbook is composed of two parts. Part I contains the Method, which
covers the background to benchmarking and the motivation for carrying it out.
Part II is divided into two sections: the list of indicators is in a format that is
ready to be completed by the users. It is accompanied by a separate Guide to
Completion. This Section looks at each part in turn.
4.4

The Method

Part I of the Handbook is intended to support companies carrying out

benchmarking. It provides a reference document for the co-ordinator and it is
not essential reading for all those involved in data collection at a company.
The Method examines the rationale for the EQUIP Handbook by discussing
the aims of the project (to enable operators to improve their competitiveness
as a result of using the Handbook), the target audience of five land based
local public transport modes, the need for the Handbook and the EQUIP
approach of the nine stage cyclical process of benchmarking (see Section
2.1). The way to use the Handbook for improvement considers the different
levels of use for benchmarking and how these are initiated with performance
improvement teams. The importance of sound measurement methodologies
emphasises the need for unbiased, precise and comparable data. Different

96

types of records and surveys are discussed. In the Method, three examples
demonstrate the rationale for sampling.
4.2

The Guide

The Guide is designed to be referred to whilst completing the indicators. The

introduction summarises the methodology as applied to the EQUIP Handbook.
The process for taking samples of on-road data (technical performance and
passenger opinion surveys) and off-road data (technical performance and
employee opinion surveys) is followed by the recommendation of the
minimum size for samples. The layout of the Handbook is described, followed
by how to complete it, referring by example to the colour-coded boxes that are
used to assist in the completion of the indicators. Particular attention is drawn
to the requirement to use the definitions given in the Handbook, rather than
those normally used. Three worked examples typify variations in the final
layout of indicators. Reproducible examples of opinion survey forms are
accompanied by the rationale and an example of the calculation of weighted
averages from the surveys.
4.3

The Indicators

This is the second part of Part II of the EQUIP Handbook. This contains a full
list of indicators and their definitions in an Excel format that is ready to be
completed by the operator. A separate Handbook is available for each of the
five modes. The layout of the indicators is the same in all modal versions, but
additional information differs in some cases.
Table 1 shows the eleven clusters which collate the 91 indicators which form
the EQUIP Handbook.
Cluster

1
2
3
4
5
6

7
8
9

10
11

Cluster title

Company profile
External influences on operator
Revenue and fare structure
Asset/Capacity utilisation
Reliability
Production costs
Company performance
Technical performance
Employee satisfaction
Customer satisfaction
Safety and security
Total:

Number in
cluster

21
13
9
8
5

3
4
6

12
7
3
91

Table 1: EQUIP Cluster titles and the number of indicators

Most of the indicators rely on specific system definitions. In order to ensure

that the EQUIP definition is used, this part of the Handbook contains
information on the items shown in Table 2.

9?

Passengerjourney
Passenger trip
Premium services
Route length
Service areas
Service journey
Service kilometres
Special transport services
Vehicles
Vehicles hours
Vehicle Idlometres

Bus systems
Dead (or light) kilometres
Demand responsive transport services
Employees (staff)
Employees, number of
Mode
Network length
Night services
Operationalarea
Operator

Table 2: Elements of Indicators which have EQUIP system definitions

Some of the indicators use the same information in their calculation and the
Handbook contains a Common Elements sheet to assist the completion of the
Handbook. This sheet identifies the elements used more than once and links
these elements to the specific indicators where they are used. The user is
advised to complete this page first so that the information is readily available
when completing the indicators. If this is done in the electronic version of the
Handbook, the data is automatically copied to the relevant indicators.
For the rest of this part, each cluster is taken in turn. The contents of each
indicator are colour-coded and additional aids to completion include
instructions for measurement where required, e.g. comments about the
measurement of the indicator, links with the Common Elements and the
System Definitions sheets.
The user identifies the measurement and
sampling methods that have been used: by specifying the actual date for the
measurement period, the operator has a powerful tool for making on-going
internal comparisons, as well as explaining unusual differences between
companies. All relevant data can be recorded directly in the Handbook,
including both component and final values. Users of the electronic version will
find that the final values for quantitative indicators are automatically calculated
after the insertion of the component values. Finally, a commentary is added
to the indicators containing cross-references to other relevant indicators in the
Handbook and suggesting how the indicator could be looked at in greater
depth.
A subset of 27 'super' indicators have been chosen in order to help operators
with limited resources to begin benchmarking. These indicators were selected
because they are important to operators for benchmarking their performance,
they allow operators to select suitable benchmarking partners from the
reference database and because they have been found to be important in a
survey of nine other reports of benchmarking performance.
5.

THE EQUIP NETWORK

EQUIP aimed at contributing to raise benchmarking awareness through its

activities and the creation of the EQUIP Network, consisting of public transport

98

operators and local authorities. The EQUIP Network was an important part of
the development of the Handbook: it was the forum for meeting key transport
actors and to ensure that the work in EQUIP was relevant to potential users.
The first version of the Handbook was developed and used by the EQUIP
Network of operators for self-assessment. This provided validation and
needed feedback to produce the final version for public release. The EQUIP
Network thus offered the opportunity to focus on a series of comparison
procedures amongst operators in order to identify the most suitable indicators
to measure the strength aspects and the areas needed to be improved
EQUIP was successful in building a Network spanning all the Consortium
member countries, as well as other EC countries and Eastern Europe. The
creation of a benchmarking Handbook was timely for both operators and
authorities in terms of a response to changes in their working environment.
However, the experiences of the EQUIP Network in the different countries
highlighted some important issues.
Whilst operators in each country were overtly interested in participating in
benchmarking activities, many were clearly felt isolated at the start of a new
exercise.
EQUIP organised National Workshops and these fora for
communication demonstrated the principle of benchmarking at the highest
level, i.e. the need for face-to-face discussions.
For lower level
benchmarking, where personal interaction is not envisaged, an established
external helpline mechanism to assist with completing the Handbook would be
very beneficial.
The greatest problem facing operators in the EQUIP Network was the lack of
resource - time and manpower to establish the necessary systems to collect
and record data for the Handbook. This issue was present in all types of
company, whether large or small, privately or publicly owned. The impetus for
assisting the companies could come from several institutional sources, e.g.
support from national governments, support from national and international
organisations that represent the interests of public transport operators, and
support internally from decision makers within the organisation.
-

The lack of manpower resource could be resolved by the external completion

of the Handbook. Whilst the Handbook is designed to enable selfassessment, i.e. it contains all the information that an operator should require
in order to complete the Handbook, this does not preclude an external agency
carrying out the task. The assistance could cover some or all aspects of the
Handbook, i.e. access to internal systems, opinion surveys, on-road and offroad technical surveys
Throughout Europe there is a trend towards greater privatisation and more
competition for public transport services. This is reflected by rapid changes in
the character of companies. During the course of EQUIP there were
numerous instances of company reorganisation in the private sector. Such
activities may be seen as initial obstacles to benchmarking, e.g. company
accounts and other data may be reorganised, making it difficult to access
relevant data and to make internal comparisons over a period of time.

99

However, reorganisation could be regarded as an opportunity to introduce

new systems such as those required for benchmarking.
Cost related indicators present difficulties of comparison at the European level
and it is particularly difficult to compare companies from different operational
and economical environments. This is a very important issue for international
benchmarking.
However, evidence suggests that many difficulties are
perceived rather than actual (Trans Control, 2000).
6.

THE NEXT STEPS

It was originally envisaged that the EQUIP Handbook would become a

powerful public toot utilised by a well-established network that would generate
good quality data. It was also hoped that a potential "sponsor" such as
International Union of Public Transport (UlTP), which represents public
transport operators world wide, would welcome the initiative and support the
development of the process. There is interest by operators in benchmarking
and the value of networking has been established. In the light of demand
from the industry it was expected that the consortium would generate further
initiatives. The reality is a little different. The Handbook has been created
and is a good product, but UITP has not been in a position to take ownership
of the products and no active proposal is in place. Additionally, few operators
have yet committed the resource necessary to generate data of a suitably
high quality.
One of the clear outcomes of the EQUIP project is the necessity to move
towards the institutionalisation of the benchmarking process. It is clear that
effective benchmarking must be a permanent process in order to increase
quality and competition in the public transport sector. Similarly, a permanent
process needs an institutionalised framework with clear responsibilities for
managing the benchmarking exercise.
There are a number of products from the EQUIP project which strengthen the
argument for institutionalising the process. EQUIP has created a list of
standardised indicators to measure technical performance and quality of
o~tgut t(~c3etherwith a ~cumented methodalogT. The collection of data gives
a start to the reference database and it is essential that the expansion of the
database should be based on standardised and comparable indicators.
Lastly, the results can be used to benchmark dynamic changes and to support
the tendering process.
The EQUIP project has put forward a number of suggestions for reaching the
goal of institutionalisation. First, it is essential that the Handbook is translated
into the relevant national languages. There should be a manager of both the
database and the Handbook who is responsible for both regular maintenance
and updating and who could not benefit from having access to the data. The
collection of data should be carefully organised by operators, perhaps via
membership of a benchmarking club or a network or by a commercial body.
The analysis of data should also be formalised. The responsibility for the

100

benchmarking exercise should lie with the operators, who need to bear the
responsibility for the cost of improvements. Management of the database
should lie in the public sector or with members of a benchmarking club or
network.
However, institutionalisation is not straightforward and five scenarios have
been identified as possible models for institutionalising benchmarking.

Scenario
1 International

Interest Group

One private
company at
international
level

National
associations
(e.g. chamber of
commerce,
quality groups,
public transport
consortia)
Several private
companies on
national level

A mixture of
private
companies and
interest groups

Advantages

Standardised data collection on

an international level
Easy access to the database for
public transport operators
Low cost for benchmarking
exercise
Indicators and Handbook will be
developed further
Very convenient for public
transport operators
Professional management
Easy access to the database for
public transport operators
Low cost for benchmarking
exercise

Developing tailor-made
indicators for clients
Very convenient for public
transport operators
Professional management

Disadvantages

Data collection must be done by

operators themselves

Operators have to pay for a

commercial service
The company could be a
monopoly
If indicators are developed
further they are no longer
comparable at an international
level
Data collection must be done by
operators themselves
Low resources
The indicators are no longer
comparable at an intemational
level
Operators have to pay for a
commercial service

Combine the advantages of both Distribution of responsibilities

alternatives
Data collection and analyses are
carded out by the private sector
Good access for operators, the
interest group can change their
partners in the pdvate sector if it
is worthwhile to do so

Table 3: Possible scenarios for the institutionalisation of benchmarking

The preferred scenario of the EQUIP consortium is Scenado 3. It is
recognised that international comparisons using EQUIP should follow soon
after the project is completed since any significant gap in time will lead to
different indicators being pursued in different areas. An international public
transport association or interest group is ideally placed to make the
information available to its members. It is clear that a party which does not
stand to gain should hold the data in order to prevent any conflicts of interest.

101

8.

DEVELOPING A BENCHMARKING NETWORK

The development of a successful network of operators and operators is part of

the institutionalisation of benchmarking. The EQUIP international network (see
Section 6) has brought together operators, authorities, user groups and
representatives of users. The Network has been successful in supporting the
development of the Handbook, for example in commenting on the layout of
the Handbook, providing feedback on indicators and in piloting the Handbook.
Various lessons have been learnt from the experience of the EQUIP Network.
Mutual support in benchmarking is.extremely valuable and it has been a very
important outcome as it is important for operators (especially small ones) not
to work in isolation. Language can be a most effective impediment to
benchmarking and native languages must be used. It has been shown that
formal networks generate informal networks and that this sometimes creating
new business opportunities as well as new business contacts. The importance
of an independent trusted party as the holder of the data has been firmly
established.
9.

CONCLUSIONS

The basic requirements for a successful benchmarking exercise in public

transport include motivating the operators to put effort into participating in the
process and this relies on there being evident benefits that are easily available
and noticeable from the use of the tool. There should also be a clear
definition of how the benchmarking process can be accomplished as a selfassessment process. Lastly, it is important that there is a clear definition and
of the indicators that measure the performance of the operator, including the
methods for calculating values.
The EQUIP project has addressed these issues and has demonstrated that
operators can achieve an improvement in performance through on going selfassessment; and by comparison with other operators using a reference
database. The practical exercise has raised the awareness of cdtical success
factors for operators and the need to learn from best practice in order to
improve competitiveness.
The main challenge that remains is to mobilise the industry to embrace
benchmarking. For operators proposing to take benchmarking sedously there
are still many unanswered questions: what resources will they need to
commit, to what extent are they interested in continuous improvement, how
can they make benchmarking part of their business, who will "champion" the
initiatives required? This paper produces a possible approach towards the
institutionalisation of benchmarking. The UITP is identified as a possible
"common access point" to international benchmarking for local public transport
operators and as the co-ordinator of National Associations who in turn could
be responsible for National Networks.

102

BIBLIOGRAPHY

CEC (1995) The Citizens' Network- fulfilling the potential of public passenger
transport. European Commission Green Paper, COM (95) 601.
CEC (1998) Developing the Citizens' Network: Why good local and regional
passenger transport is important and how the European Commission is
helping to bring it about. Communication from the Commission, COM (98)
431.
CEN (1999) TC320 WG5 Transportation services - Public passenger
transport- Service quality definition, targeting and measurement, draft of 11th
March 1999.
DG TREN (1997), EU Transport In Figures Statistical Pocketbook, 2nd Issue.
EQUIP Consortium (1999), State-of-the-Art of Benchmarking in Public
Transport, Deliverable 3, DG TREN.
Finn, B., Barrett, I. (1997), Mongolian Urban Passenger Transport Project,
Internal Report to World Bank.
Hanman, R (1997) "Benchmarking your firms performance with best practice",
International Journal of Logistics Management, Volume 8(2), ppl-8, 1997).
ISOTOPE (1998) Improved Structure and Organisation for Transport
Operations of Passengers in Europe, Final Report by ISOTOPE Consortium
on behalf of European Commission DG TREN, Luxembourg, Office for Official
Publications of the European Communities.
OECD (1980), Urban Public Transport: Evaluation of Performance, Pads,
France.
QUATTRO (1998) Quality Approach in Tendering Urban Public Transport
Operations, Final Report by QUATTRO Consortium on behalf of European
Commission DG TREN, Luxembourg, Office for Official Publications of the
European Communities.
R0nnqvist, T. (1999), New tool for measuring the competitiveness of the bus
company. (Bussiyrityksen kilpailukyvyn mittaamiseen uusi ty6kalu),
Bussiammattilainen, Vol 3 (in Finnish).
R0nnqvist, T. and Keskitalo, J. (2000) Report on the EQUIP Draft Handbook
(Confidential). Trans Control, Finland.
Zairi, M. 1996), Benchmarking for Best Practice: Continuous Learning
Through Sustainable Innovation, Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford, UK.

103

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors of this paper recognise the contribution of the other EQUIP
Consortium partners (Viatek Ltd, Tampere, Finland, ASM Brescia SPA, Italy,
Universit~it fur Bodenkultur, Austria, European Transport and Telematics
Systems Ltd, Eire, and Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands)
and all the members of the EQUIP Network for their input.
The European Commission for funding the EQUIP project under the Transport
RTD Programme of the 4th Framework Programme

104