customer satisfaction survey 2015 report - land … final report 2015...taxi needs to put more...

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY

2015

December 2015

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en C

om

pan

y. C

on

fid

enti

al a

nd

pro

pri

etar

y.

22

TABLE OF CONTENT

Background and design

Public transportation Users

Non – Public transportation users

Taxi vs hire and drive car services

Perception on public transport

Public perception on Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD)

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2014

Th

e N

iels

en C

om

pan

y. C

on

fid

enti

al a

nd

pro

pri

etar

y.

33

BACKGROUND AND DESIGN

4

PROGRAM BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVESUnder the Government Transformation Programme (GTP), public transportation has beenidentified as one of the key pillar in driving national’s growth.

In order to gauge the effectiveness of public transportation initiatives, SPAD would like tounderstand general perceptions and satisfaction of public transportation among Greater KlangValley “Rakyat”.

The report will provide SPAD with actionable insights and strategically guide in crafting next actionsteps.

Programme objectives:

Measure customer satisfaction and future expectations

Prioritize areas of improvements

Understanding the needs for public transportation

5

PROGRAM DESIGN

Methodology Intercept - Face to Face – Computer Aided Paper Interview

Questionnaire structure Structured questionnaire of 15- 20 minutes

Sampling Plann=2,150(Location based sampling with nationality and time period quotas)

Fieldwork location Greater Klang Valley

Fieldwork period 30th October – 8th December

Target respondents• Users of public transportation in the past 3 months• Non-users of public transportation in the past 3 months

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

6

WEIGHTING PLANOverall data is weighted against the universe of population in Greater Kuala Lumpur. Weights are derived from past year study.

CORRIDOR LINE Weighting Factor Unweighted Sample Size

Weighted Sample Size

Ampang 5% 299 114

Ulu Kelang 7% 300 141

Cheras/Kajang 10% 301 217

Sungai Buloh/Kepong 7% 252 161

Damansara 14% 238 300

Klang/Shah Alam 31% 260 676

Selayang/Rawang 14% 250 309

Putrajaya/Seri Kembangan 11% 250 232

TOTAL 2,150 2,150

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

7

COVERAGE AND SAMPLING

CORRIDOR LINE PT USERS NON-PT USERS Total

Ampang 80 34 114

Ulu Kelang 98 43 141

Cheras/Kajang 151 66 217

Sungai Buloh/Kepong 98 63 161

Damansara 180 120 300

Klang/Shah Alam 461 215 676

Selayang/Rawang 199 110 309

Putrajaya/Seri Kembangan 145 87 232

TOTAL 1,412 738 2,150

PEAK VS NON PEAK PT USERS

Peak hours (7am – 10am & 5pm – 8pm)

703

Off peak hours (10am – 5pm)

709

NATIONALITY PT USERS NON-PT USERS

Malaysian 1,083 637

Non-Malaysian 329 101

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2014

Th

e N

iels

en C

om

pan

y. C

on

fid

enti

al a

nd

pro

pri

etar

y.

88

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION USERS

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

9

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION USER’S PROFILEAge group is evenly spread across. However, compare to previous year, gender and race are skewed towards female and Malay.

Gender

37% 63%

Malay

Chinese

Indian

Others

RaceAge Group

19 and below

20-29

30-39

40 and above

13%

18%

39%

30%

Single

Married

55%

45%

72%

15%

12%

1%

5%19% 23%

35%

18%

SEC ERM1,000

below

SEC DRM1,000-RM2,000

SEC CRM2,001-RM3,000

SEC BRM3,001-RM5,000

SEC ARM5,001

above

Monthly household income

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

10

MOST OFTEN USED RAPIDKL BUS, KTM AND TAXIIn overall, compare to last year, the usage frequency of public transport has dropped, especially on train.

Q12. Mode of transport ever used / past 3 months / used most often.

65

25

3 2 7

53

151 7

38

8 6

RapidKL Bus Metrobus Bus Rapid Transit Airport Coach Other Buses

4532

198 5

3320

112 2

199 6 1 1

KTM Komuter KJ Line Ampang Line KL Monorail ERL

4332

12

Taxi

Train

Bus

Taxi

Ever used

Past 3 months

Most often

68 41 22 64 37 16 49 25 5 51 18 2 14 4 1

69 34 11

2014 80 59 34 54 25 8 - - - 7 1 - - - -

2014

2014

Base: PT users n=1412

n=916 n=354 n=47 n=27

n=641 n=446 n=270 n=109 n=64

n=602=significantly higher than 2014 at 95% CI

=significantly lower than 2014 at 95% CI

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

12

MAJORITY DO NOT HAVE THEIR OWN PRIVATE VEHICLESWhereas there are users who own private vehicle and use public transport as well; convenience has brought users to choose public transport over private vehicle as parking issue and traffic jam are their main concern.

50% 42% 39% 33% 30%

Do not have a car /motorbike

Do not need to worryabout parking issue

Station is near to myhouse / working area

Cheaper compare toprivate transport

Do not have to worryabout getting stuck in

traffic

Q23. Can you please let me know why do you use public transport?

Train

Bus

1. Do not have a car / motorbike 56%

2. Do not need to worry about parking issue 41%

3. Station is near to my house / working area 40%


2. Station is near to my house / working area 44%

3. Do not have to worry about getting stuck in traffic 39%

1. Do not have a car / motorbike 57%


3. Taxi stand is near to my house / working area 27%

Top 3 reasons for using public transport by category

TaxiBase: PT users n=1412

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

13

INTERCHANGEABILITY BETWEEN PUBLIC TRANSPORT IS HIGHMajority of users walk to bus/train station and they need to switch PT to reach their destination

Q15a/b. When you are travelling using public transportation, where is the origin and ending of your trip?Q16. Imagine on your daily trip, how many types of transportation do you use to reach your destination?Q17. When you are using public transport, what time do you start traveling and time to reach your destination?Base: PT users n=1412

First PT used

Second PT used

Third PT used

Forth PT used

88% of the PT users uses

more than one PT


more than three PT

End destination

Walking

RapidKL Bus KTM Komuter LRT

RapidKL BusLRT Taxi

RapidKL Bus Taxi Walking

School / College / University

Shopping Mall / Super & Hypermart

Office/Workplace

63%

32%

19%

10%

38%

18%

16%

10%

37%

13%

16%

7%

15%

RapidKL Bus

13%

Car / Motorcycle / Bicycle

11%

Top 3 methods used when commuting with public transport


more than two PT

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2014

Th

e N

iels

en C

om

pan

y. C

on

fid

enti

al a

nd

pro

pri

etar

y.

1616

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SCORE ON PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

17

PT USER SATISFACTION SCORE HAS DROPPED COMPARED TO 2014The major drop comes from users who gave a negative 3 rating. However, top 2 box score has increased 3 points to 71 compare to previous year.

Q25. Similarly, using a 5 point rating scale where 1 is not at all satisfied and 5 is very satisfied, how would you rate the overall satisfaction with public transport services available in Kuala Lumpur?

1

1

8

8

7

21

23

44

61

54

40

10

14

9

Not satisfied at all (1) 2 3 4 Very satisfied (5)

CSI = top 2 box (4+5) + rated 3 but satisfied

2015(n=1412)

2014(n=1645)

2013(n=1637)

742015

862014

712013

3% satisfied18% dissatisfied


18% satisfied5% dissatisfied

74%

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

18

LOWER SATISFACTION SCORE IS MAINLY CONTRIBUTED BY TAXITaxi needs to put more effort in improving the service where satisfaction score dropped.

RapidKL Bus

Metrobus

Ampang Line

KJ Line

KTM Komuter

KL Monorail

ERL

Taxi

1

8

4

3

2

7

8

14

17

16

20

20

26

18

15

21

65

68

70

65

56

72

49

54

9

12

7

13

10

10

29

10


74

81

77

78

67

82

77

64

SCORE (T2B)

n=539

n=114

n=78

n=127

n=265

n=15*

n=10*

n=176

65

60

70

83

61

62

76

74

2015 2014


=significantly higher than 2014 at 95% CI


Q25. Similarly, using a 5 point rating scale where 1 is not at all satisfied and 5 is very satisfied, how would you rate the overall satisfaction with public transport services available in Kuala Lumpur? * Small base

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

20

LESS LIKELY TO USE PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN THE FUTURECorresponding to the lower satisfaction score, the likelihood to use PT in future has also dropped compared to 2014.

Q27a. Using the scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is highly unlikely and 5 is highly likely. How likely are you to continue using public transport in Kuala Lumpur in future.

0

1

1

2

31

19

55

53

12

25

Highly unlikely (1) 2 3 4 Highly likely (5)

Likelihood to use= Top 2 Box (4+5)

672015

782014

2015(n=1412)

2014(n=1645)


Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

21

ALMOST ALL PUBLIC TRANSPORTATIONS ARE AFFECTEDThe drop in the likelihood to use PT in future score is contributed by the ratings of urban rail and taxi.

Q27a. Using the scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is highly unlikely and 5 is highly likely. How likely are you to continue using public transport in Kuala Lumpur in future.

RapidKL Bus

Metrobus

Ampang Line

KJ Line

KTM Komuter

KL Monorail

ERL

Taxi

1

2

1

3

29

14

27

27

38

6

8

38

59

74

52

55

49

82

50

45

11

11

18

18

11

13

42

14


70

85

70

73

60

94

92

59

SCORE (T2B)

76

70

92

90

68

94

76

86

2015 2014


n=539

n=114

n=78

n=127

n=265

n=15*

n=10*

n=176



* Small base

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

22

PRICE IS THE MAIN CONCERN

Q26. Why would you give a rating of on overall satisfaction with public transport services available in Kuala Lumpur?

63%

37%

6% 3% 3%

The price is expensive Public transport is slowand not on time

The public transport iscrowded

Drive attitude is poor The service is poor

Train

Bus

1. The price is expensive 39%

2. Public transport is slow and not on time 34%

3. The public transport is crowded 7%



3. The public transport is crowded 6%



3. Price is inaccurate 4%

Top 3 reasons for giving a low rating on public transport

Taxi


With the current price increase in PT, users are not satisfied with the service offered by PT

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

24

MAJORITY WILL CONTINUE TO USE PUBLIC TRANSPORT IF CONCERNS ARE ADDRESSED

Q20a. If your concerns were addressed, how likely are you going to use public transport?

9 39 42 10

Very unlikely (1) 2 3 4 Very likely (5)

Likelihood to continue using

= Top 2 Box (4+5)

522015

2015(n=1412)


Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

25

WHAT DRIVES IMPROVEMENT ON OVERALL SATISFACTION SCORE?

Q24a. Statement on experience in using public transport in Kuala Lumpur. Please use the rating from 1 to 5.Base: PT users n=1412

Frequency of service is sufficient

2014

642015

65

Value for money

2014

882015

72

Interior cleanliness of public transport

2014

672015

71

Clarity of the route map

2014

792015

68

Clarity of the fare

2014

762015

71

Time saving on travel

2014

-2015

67

Focus on improving frequency of service and price perceptions for 2016 overall satisfaction score

1 2 3

4 5 6

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2014

Th

e N

iels

en C

om

pan

y. C

on

fid

enti

al a

nd

pro

pri

etar

y.

2727

NON - PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION USERS

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

28

PROFILE OF NON PUBLIC TRANSPORT USERS

Gender

59% 41%

Malay

Chinese

Indian

Others

RaceAge Group

19 and below

20-29

30-39

40 and above

5%

23%

37%

35%

Single

Married

40%

60%

76%

13%

11%

0%

1% 10%

22%

45%

23%

SEC ERM1,000

below

SEC DRM1,000-RM2,000

SEC CRM2,001-RM3,000

SEC BRM3,001-RM5,000

SEC ARM5,001

above

Monthly household income

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

29

NON PT USERS GENERALLY DON’T LIKE WAITINGStation availability is one of the reason why they choose not to take public transport. Could extend the accesibility to attract more people to use public transport.

Q41. Now, I would like to understand some of the reasons why you do not use the public transport in Kuala Lumpur?

Willing to use PT if service frequency is sufficient

Willing to use PT if station near my house/office/place

Has a fixed schedule to follow

Improve on public transport punctuality

Improve on safety issues to convertnon-PT users

Needs to have more public transport during peak hours

Others

Base: Non PT users n=738

2015 2014 2015 2014 2015 2014

63% 67% 64% 70% 66% 58%

45% 47% 44% 50% 45% 40%

38% 46% 42% 48% 35% 41%

28% 41% 30% 43% 27% 36%

27% 18% 29% 21% 24% 11%

18% 31% 18% 33% 20% 26%

9% 7% 10% 5% 7% 11%

Total Car n=474 Motorbike n=271



Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

30

OVERALL SATISFACTION HAS INCREASED AMONG NON PT USERSNon PT users perception towards public transport has improved significantly.

Q43a. I understand that you have not taken any public transport in the past 3 months, however I would like to understand your perception on public transport system in Kuala Lumpur, with a 5 point rating scale, whereby 1 is not at all satisfied and 5 is very satisfied, can you please let me know your overall satisfaction with public transport services available in Kuala Lumpur?

1

1

13

15

10

37

36

37

46

45

49

3

4

3


Total

Car owners

Motorcycle owners

2015

49 32

49 30

52 39

2014




Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

31

LIKELIHOOD SCORE HAS IMPROVED COMPARED TO PREVIOUS YEARExtension of accesibility is recommended in order to drive more users as the likeliness to use public transport has increased significantly.

Q42. With a rating scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is unlikely to consider and 5 is likely to consider. If there was a train / LRT / Monorail / BRT / Bus station within 1km from your home / work place, how likely would you to use public transport.

1

1

1

14

16

11

46

45

46

34

33

37

5

5

5


Total

Car owners

Motorcycle owners

2015

39 31

38 30

42 34

2014




Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2014

Th

e N

iels

en C

om

pan

y. C

on

fid

enti

al a

nd

pro

pri

etar

y.

3232

TAXI VS RIDE SHARING E-BOOKING APPS

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

33

AWARENESS AND USAGE RATE OF RIDE SHARING E-BOOKING APPS SERVICE IS STILL LOWMajority of the users know ride sharing e-booking apps from friends and relatives. 2 out of 10 users perceive ride sharing e-booking apps to be legal.

Q28. Are you aware of any ride sharing e-booking apps (e.g. GrabCar / Uber) in Kuala Lumpur? Q29. From which sources, do you know about ride sharing e-booking apps (e.g. GrabCar / Uber)?Q32. Do you use ride sharing e-booking apps (e.g. GrabCar / Uber)?Q33. How often do you use ride sharing e-booking apps (e.g. GrabCar / Uber)? Q37. Which of the following statement best describe ride sharing e-booking apps (e.g. GrabCar/Uber) in Malaysia.

Heard from friends and relatives

Read articles and reviews on the web/forum

Read the information on social media

Saw online ads on website / social networks

Saw app’s logo or ads on taxi

Sources to know about ride sharing

e-booking apps

57%

24%

21%

13%

17%


Awareness

Currently use

People’s perception on ride sharing e-booking apps

2

10

n=148

* Small base

6 out of 10 are not aware of the legality on ride sharing e-booking

apps

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

34

Reasons to prefer Taxi

Easy and convenient to get 43%

Legal and monitored 32%

It is safer to use taxi 22%

Reasons to prefer ride sharing services

Cheaper than taxi 49%

Easy and convenient to get 34%

More comfortable 32%

PUBLIC TRANSPORT USERS STILL PREFER TAXIUsers perceive both taxi ride sharing e-booking apps are convenient to use. Whereas users mentioned taxi is legal and monitored, and it is more safe to use.

Q30. If you are travelling to a destination, which of the following mode of transport would you prefer? Q31. Why do you prefer … when you are travelling?n=148

Preference on Taxi vs Ride Sharing E-Booking Apps n=148

* Small base

79%

21%

Base: Aware of ride sharing e-booking apps

80%

20%

78%

22%

Total Male Female

Users who prefer ride sharing e-booking apps

Users who prefer taxi

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

35

PUBLIC TRANSPORT USERS HAVE A BETTER PERCEPTION ON TAXI COMPARE TO RIDE SHARING E-BOOKING APPSHowever, users of ride sharing e-booking apps have a very good perception on it comparing to taxi.

33

40

38

30

38

40

41

37

33

31

76

76

89

75

82

91

78

63

91

77

Value for money

Convenient to book

Convenient to travel with

Good level of security and safety level

Trustworthy

Nice car/taxi condition

Able to get the car/taxi fast

Good driver attitude

Car/Taxi is available in my area

Cheaper compared to traditional taxi

Q34a / Q35b. Now, I'm going to read out a list of statement on how most people feel about taxi / ride sharing e-booking apps (e.g. GrabCar / Uber) in Kuala Lumpur.

33

68

68

57

53

58

64

41

63

42

52

62

46

45

60

55

35

55

RIDE SHARING E-BOOKING APPS (T2B)TAXI (T2B)

Base: Aware of ride sharing e-booking apps n=148

Aware of ride sharing e-booking apps

Uses hire and drive car

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

36

USERS WILL CONTINUE USING RIDE SHARING E-BOOKING APPS

Q36a. Using the scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is highly unlikely and 5 is highly likely, how likely are you going to continue using ride sharing e-booking apps (e.g. GrabCar/Uber)?

23 64 13


Likelihood to continue use= Top 2 Box (4+5)

Base: Ride sharing e-booking apps users n=22*

* Small base

772015

People will move towards using ride sharing e-booking apps if they have started using the service.

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2014

Th

e N

iels

en C

om

pan

y. C

on

fid

enti

al a

nd

pro

pri

etar

y.

3737

PERCEPTION ON PUBLIC TRANSPORT

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

38Q45a. Would like to understand your perception of public transport in Kuala Lumpur. I'm going to read out a list of statements, please use the rating from 1 to 5 where 1 is strongly disagree and 5 is strongly agree.

74

67

67

66

66

65

65

65

64

63

62

There is a comprehensive public transport network in Kuala Lumpur

The government is committed on improving public transport in Kuala Lumpur

The public transport in Kuala Lumpur is modern and up to date

Most people in Kuala Lumpur will use public transport at least once every 3 months

It's easy to transfer from one train system to another

The public transport network has improved in the past few years

Using public transport in Kuala Lumpur offers good value for money

The public transport network is very safe to use and offers good security

Using public transport is often quicker than making the same journey by car

The public transport network in Kuala Lumpur is better than in most other South East Asian capital cities

It is easy for me to take public transport to get to and from where I live

SCORE (T2B)

2014

67

55

48

56

58

56

69

59

44

36

53

PT USERS NON PT USERS

2015 2014 2015 2014

79 77 66 48

71 61 59 42

71 56 59 32

70 63 59 40

69 67 59 40

68 64 60 39

71 79 54 49

68 70 57 37

67 53 59 26

68 41 54 26

67 64 52 30

2015

Base: All Respondents n=2150



NON PT USERS PERCEPTION TOWARDS PUBLIC TRANSPORT HAS INCREASED SIGNIFICANTLYHowever, the PT users perception on value of money has dropped compare to previous year which mainly due to the recent price hike in public transport.

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2014

Th

e N

iels

en C

om

pan

y. C

on

fid

enti

al a

nd

pro

pri

etar

y.

4040

PUBLIC PERCEPTION ON SURUHANJAYA PENGANGKUTAN AWAM DARAT (SPAD)

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

41

SPAD NEEDS TO IMPROVE ON AWARENESSThe awareness of SPAD has dropped compare to previous year. Recommend to continue advertising on public transport and newspaper/magazine which is the main source of information for public.

Q47. Are you aware of Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD), it is a Government authority in charge of public transport system in Malaysia? Q49. From which sources, do you know about Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD)?

Ads in public transport

Friends / Colleagues / Relatives

Newspaper / Magazine

Sharing of social network (Facebook, Twitter, Blog, Instagram)

Official Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD) website

Radio

Outdoor billboards on the road

Ads in building or elevator

47%

41%

34%

20%

18%

15%

15%

8%

Source of awareness

Base: Malaysian n=1720

32%are aware of

SPAD

34%43%

2013 20152014

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

42

SPAD INITIATIVE IS KNOWN AMONG THOSE WHO ARE AWAREBus rapid transit, TR1MA and increasing KTM capacity are the top 3 initiatives people knows.

Q48. If you are aware of Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD), are you aware of any initiatives SPAD did to improve the public transport system?

73% knows about

initiatives SPAD did to improve

PT system

Bus rapid transit (BRT)

Teksi rakyat 1 Malaysia - TR1MA

Increase KTM Komuter capacity and ridership numbers

Increase LRT and monorail capacity and efficiency

Increase and integrate existing rail network in Klang Valley (KVMRT)

High speed rail (HSR)

GO-KL city bus - Malaysia's first free bus service

Malaysia-Singapore rapid transit system (RTS)

Bus stop enhancement program

Interim stage bus support fund (ISBSF)

MeterOn mobile app

37%

33%

32%

29%

26%

21%

18%

18%

17%

15%

10%

SPAD initiatives

Base: Malaysians who are aware of SPAD n=546

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

43

PUBLIC ARE CLEAR ON SPAD RESPONSIBILITIESNo much difference among PT and Non PT users as both segments has high understanding on SPAD’s duty.

Q50. Now, I'm going to read out some statement about SPAD, please let me know if the statement is true or false, there is no right or wrong answer just answer based on what you feel.

2015 2014 2015 2014 2015 2014

96% 81% 96% 82% 96% 79%

88% 89% 90% 91% 84% 84%

88% 66% 89% 65% 86% 68%

85% 68% 88% 68% 81% 68%

The Land Public Transport Commission in Malaysia

Responsible for the development of public transport in Malaysia

An organization you can directly address your thoughts on public transport in Malaysia

Responsible for drawing up policies, planning, regulating all aspects of train, bus and taxi services in Malaysia

Total PT Users Non PT Users

Base: Aware of SPAD n=546



Public Perceptions on SPAD

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

44

SPAD NEEDS TO IMPROVE / RE-LOOK ON PRICE AND TIMETABLE

Q51. What suggestion can you give on how Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam Darat (SPAD) can improve?Base: Aware of SPAD n=558

Total PT users Non PT users

20% 21% 20%

20% 21% 18%

14% 14% 14%

10% 16% 4%

10% 9% 11%

9% 6% 12%

7% 8% 6%

8% 5% 10%

7% 9% 5%

6% 5% 7%

5% 3% 8%

8% 8% 8%

Lower the price of public transport

Increase the frequency of public transport

Improve the schedule of public transport

Better regulation on the taxi pricing

Increase the monitoring/control of public transport

Improve the safety level of public transport

Improve the attitude of public transport drivers

Raise awareness of consumers on road safety

Improve the public transport with new vehicles

Improve the road conditions

Expand the reach of public transport

Others

What Should SPAD Improve On?

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2014

Th

e N

iels

en C

om

pan

y. C

on

fid

enti

al a

nd

pro

pri

etar

y.

4545

KEY SUMMARY

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

46

KEY SUMMARY

Overall satisfaction score on PT users has dropped as compared to2014, mainly due to the price hike in public transport, which wasannounced during the survey period.

Main reason for people to use public transport is because, they do nothave any private transport. However, those who own a privatetransport but continue to use public transport are due to the concernof traffic jam and limited parking space.

Likelihood to use public transport in future has dropped. Urban railand Taxi score has a huge dropped which contributed to the drop oflikelihood score.

Pricing is the main reason of satisfaction drop follow by publictransport being slow and not on time. Needs to look into bothattributes as it is the two main drivers.

01

02

03

04

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

47

RECOMMENDATION

TO REGAIN CUSTOMER SATISFACTION...

Needs to focus more on frequency of service and the price of public transport as it is the top two factors.

Reschedule the timetable and have more number of public transport available.

Provide incentives or rebates to frequent users to solve the price issue.

Better regulation apply to taxi as the overall score has dropped the most.

Taxi in particular has the highest drop among all public transport, needs to pay more attention on improving the service.

Co

pyr

igh

t ©

2013

Th

e N

iels

en

Co

mp

any.

Co

nfi

den

tial

an

d p

rop

riet

ary.

48

RECOMMENDATION

ENCOURAGE NON - PT USERS TO USE PUBLIC TRANSPORT...

Overall satisfaction and likelihood to try public transport has increased compare to previous year.

Increasing the reach by providing more locations available for public transport.

Similar to PT users, reschedule the timetable, have more number of public transports available.

customer satisfaction survey 2015 report - land … final report 2015...taxi needs to put more...

Documents