Evaluation Methodology
The Commuter Monitor is a standardized monitoring and evaluation
system that tracks the effectiveness of marketing activities at
the regional and sub-regional level. This consumer research methodology
measures and assesses changes in commuter awareness and attitudes
of -- and behaviors in -- all transportation modes within a geographic
region so transportation agencies and policymakers can plan and
develop products and services that consumers desire and will use.
The Commuter Monitor's standard research methodology compares
timely survey research and transportation data by mode within
a specific region, examining variances and trends in each set
of data. The Commuter Monitor is designed to operate three times
a year within each region in order to continuously track and evaluate
the effectiveness of marketing and consumers' attitudes, perceptions
and behaviors.
The Commuter Monitor focuses on collecting and evaluating data
in five major areas:
Mode: Awareness
and perceptions of specific modes available in the region or corridor.
Marketing Promotion:
Awareness and perceptions of marketing activities, which speak
to the marketing ability to communicate effectively with target
audiences.
Stated Effect: Assessment of
the effect of marketing activities on commuters, as stated by
the consumers themselves.
Stated Behavior: Commuters'
behavior at the corridor level, again, as stated by consumers.
Subsequent waves of research will panel back to previous respondents
in order to examine their commute behavior over the course of
various marketing activities taking place in their region or corridor.
Real World Transportation Data:
Transportation data collected at the local and regional levels
simultaneous with the survey research.
California Rideshare Week Promotion
Commuter Monitor
This Commuter Monitor was conducted by telephone among 800 randomly
selected participants in California Rideshare Week (CRSW) within
the Sacramento region. This evaluation research was conducted
December 10 - 23, 1994.
The margin of error for this data is + 3.46 % in 95 out
of 100 cases. That is, if we conducted 100 identical surveys,
the results in 95 of them would be identical to this survey within
the margin of error. Readers are cautioned that the margin of
error for sub-groups is significantly higher. In addition to
theoretical sampling error, administration of the survey elements
and questionnaire design may bias some responses, although precautions
have been implemented to minimize any bias.
All respondents participated in the CRSW promotion, and were selected
from two universes: "active" participants and "inactive"
participants. The active universe represents participants who
submitted a pledge card seeking more information about commuting
alternatives. The inactive universe represents participants who
returned the CRSW pledge card without seeking any further information.
Pledge cards submitted by all respondents were sampled randomly
using the "every nth" method, and grouped randomly into
cluster cells for the purpose of administering the random sample
in the Monitor survey. This multi-stage, sampling method maximizes
randomness and statistical integrity.
The participation rate, or incidence, of the survey was 64%.
The incidence is calculated as completions and terminations (respondent
and interviewer) divided by completions plus terminations plus
non-eligible respondents (including those excluded due to gender
or occupation). The non-participation rate for respondents that
were screened-out or not eligible was 6%. Refusals and terminations
generated an 11% non-participation rate.
Key Findings
59% of all Sacramento CRSW participants
who submitted a pledge card say they are aware of available alternative
mode products:
Major differences in the mode awareness are evident between commuters
who drive alone and commuters who use alternative modes.
Promotion and Product Awareness
As a promotion, CRSW Sacramento did not raise participants' awareness
of carpool products (lanes, ramps, Park-n-Ride lots, etc.) and
other alternative modes.
Participants who said they are aware of the CRSW promotion were
no more likely than those who were not aware to be cognizant of
alternative mode products, yet the promotion did not strongly
advocate alternative mode use. Rather, the promotion stressed
participation in the promotion itself (i.e. submitting a pledge
card or entering a drawing). If anything, this finding demonstrates
the ineffectiveness of the promotion in encouraging alternative
mode use.
More commuters are unaware of carpool lanes and ramps than
are aware, even after participating in the CRSW promotion.
Twice as many commuters are aware of buses and Light Rail than
of carpool lanes or on-ramps, whether or not they are aware of
the promotion.
Analysis and Conclusions:
Building awareness of products is the crucial first step in the
process of raising a target audience's "purchase intent."
Without the awareness of available products, audiences cannot
sample or convert to regular use.
The principle objective of the CRSW promotion was to encourage
participation in the promotion itself and generate ridesharing
information requests (it was, in effect, an inquiry about carpooling
and vanpooling). 11% correctly recalled the promotion to be a
contest and 4% recalled submitting a pledge card. CRSW was not
directed toward building multi-modal awareness or trial and sample.
The two most likely reasons why awareness of alternative modes
did not increase in response to the CRSW promotion are: 1) the
CRSW promotion was essentially a contest, not a promotion of alternative
mode products; 2) no alternative mode products were specifically
related to the CRSW promotion.
"Placement" -- Understanding Multi-Modal
Alternatives
The CRSW promotion was not directed at increasing awareness of
multi-modal alternatives, therefore, awareness of multiple modes
was generally less than awareness of individual alternative modes.
Carpool Park-n- Buses/ Aware of Lanes Ride Light Rail Multiple Modes
Aware of Buses and ... 30% 39% -- 36%
Aware of Light Rail and ... 35% 48% -- 21%
Aware of Carpool Lanes and ... -- 52% 64% 18%
Aware of Park-n-Ride lots and ... 35% -- 55% 38%
Key Findings
Those who drive alone value flexibility, reliability, ease of
use, convenience and speed -- and attribute these characteristics
to driving alone.
Safety is the most positively perceived attribute of carpooling.
However, by comparison, carpooling and driving alone are perceived
as equally safe modes of transportation (Driving Alone: mean =
5.21; Carpooling: mean = 5.25).
Driving alone may be perceived as more stressful than carpooling,
yet "stressful" is the least accurate description of
driving alone. Additionally, although driving alone is perceived
as more costly than carpooling, cost independently is not a motivating
factor among populations most likely to sample alternative modes.
Tables based on a scale of 1 to 7, where 7 represents
a "perfect" description of the mode and 1 "does
not" describe the mode. Scores from 5 to 7 were combined,
as were scores from 1 to 3. The blue bars represent positive
mode perceptions and red bars represent negative perceptions.
Those who responded "don't know" or attributed the mode
a "4" were excluded.
Among those who use transit, buses are perceived as safe and reliable
(on-time). They are not, however, viewed as flexible or fast
-- two key attributes Drive Alone commuters weigh heavily into
their mode choice.
Commuters' perceptions and opinions about Light Rail are comparatively
neutral or even non-existent (the percentage of commuters who
responded "don't know" averages 46%). Nevertheless,
Light Rail is perceived as reliable as buses.
Tables based on a scale of 1 to 7, where 7 represents
a "perfect" description of the mode and 1 "does
not" describe the mode. Scores from 5 to 7 were combined,
as were scores from 1 to 3. The blue bars represent positive
mode perceptions and red bars represent negative perceptions.
Those who responded "don't know" or attributed the mode
a "4" were excluded.
Analysis and Conclusions:
A comparison of mode perceptions among CRSW participants who recalled
the promotion versus participants who did not, reveals no statistically
significant difference of their respective perceptions
On several key measures -- convenience, flexibility, reliability,
safety -- the CRSW promotion did not significantly alter participants'
perceptions of alternative modes. Commuters consistently perceive
Driving Alone more positively on each key measure.
The heightened awareness and positive perception of driving alone
is strongly tied to its prevalence within a given area or region.
Tables based on a scale of 1 to 7, where 7 represents
a "perfect" description of the mode and 1 "does
not" describe the mode. Scores from 5 to 7 were combined,
as were scores from 1 to 3. The blue bars represent positive
mode perceptions and red bars represent negative perceptions.
Those who responded "don't know" or attributed the mode
a "4" were excluded.
.
Key Findings
Aided Awareness of CRSW Promotion
62% of CRSW participants recalled
specifically the California Rideshare Week promotion while 59%
recall general messages about commuting using alternatives to
driving alone.
When asked if they were aware of anything about commuting using
alternatives, 59% of CRSW participants
say they have seen, read or heard something encouraging commuting
using alternatives to driving alone. 40% are not aware of communications
in general.
Analysis and Conclusions:
This CRSW Commuter Monitor was conducted among participants
in the CRSW promotion. Consequently, it is notable that there
is no statistical difference between respondents' awareness of
the specific CRSW promotion (62%)
and general communications about alternatives to driving alone
(59%).
Of those who recalled the California Rideshare Week promotion,
many recalled only that the promotion occurred and involved a
contest or drawing -- but not the "call to action" of
the promotion -- to encourage and reinforce ridesharing. Essentially,
respondents did not associate specific alternative modes with
the CRSW promotion: 16% of
commuters aware of general messages about alternatives said the
messages "promoted carpooling," whereas only 10%
of commuters aware of CRSW specifically said CRSW "encouraged
carpooling."
76% of participants who were
aware of general communications about alternatives also were aware
of the CRSW promotion. Yet, a full quarter of CRSW participants
did not recall submitting a pledge card requesting ridesharing
information.
These data represent, in effect, a three-quarter efficiency rate of communicating among those who participated. That is, among those who recalled communications about alternatives to driving alone and who participated in the promotion -- only three-out-of-four recalled the CRSW promotion specifically.
However, slightly more commuters who were aware of the CRSW promotion
specifically stated they are more likely to seek information about
commuting alternatives than those aware of only general messages
about commuting alternatives.
This difference is not statistically significant enough to hypothesize
that the CRSW promotion alone served as the sole catalyst for
information and mode sampling among commuters for two reasons:
1) The CRSW promotion did not ask participants to change their
mode, it asked them to participate in a contest; 2) The cumulative
effect of several separate sources promoting general alternative
mode usage over time.
Key Findings
Correct perception and comprehension of promotional messages is one of the first steps in the purchase intent process -- with positive perceptions of products (information and transportation modes) and messages leading to initial sampling.
62% are aware of the CRSW promotion
specifically. Of them, 44% (or, 25% of all CRSW participants)
correctly identified specific elements of the promotion.
While there are similarities in the understanding the specific
promotion as well as general messages, clearly there are differences.
The perception of general messages relates in small part to the
CRSW promotion; while recollection of participants aware of CRSW
specifically related almost entirely to the promotions' execution,
though not necessarily its objectives (i.e., accessing information
about ridesharing, generating ridesharing information requests
and ridematch lists, etc.).
Usefulness of Information
Accessing information about alternative modes is a critical step
in building purchase intent, and ultimately, converting behavior.
The perceived benefit -- or usefulness -- of the information
is one of the strongest indicators of the propensity to initially
sample alternative modes.
58% of CRSW participants who
requested and utilized transportation information over the past
two months said the information they received was useful.
CRSW participants who were "unaware" of that promotion were as likely to say the information they received was "useful" as those who were aware of the CRSW promotion specifically (57% versus 59%, respectively). This finding demonstrates that CRSW, as an identifiable promotion, was perceived as no more useful than other "general" information or promotions -- even among CRSW participants.
Purchase intent and actual mode sampling is more likely among
commuters who say the information they received was useful, versus
those who initially stated that they are likely to sample alternatives.
Analysis and Conclusions:
Perception, or comprehension, of promotions is a crucial element
to encouraging "purchase intent," especially in social
marketing. Whereas products hold inherent value (perceived benefits
are immediate and visible), behavioral change, by comparison,
is often several steps removed from perceived benefits. Perceptions
of the promotion (e.g. understanding what is being promoted, how
it works, perceived benefits, etc.) directly affect the results
of any social marketing activity.
Here, comprehension is examined in detail among two overlapping
sub-groups that participated in the CRSW promotion: 1) Those
aware of general communications about alternative modes; 2) Those
aware of CRSW specifically.
Unaided, CRSW participants' perceptions of these highly targeted
promotions are faint, generally. Perceptions do not include crucial
incentives, benefits or call to action elements which would be
necessary for repeat sample after the promotion. Even aided perceptions
of CRSW specifically centered on the process of promotion itself
rather than the promotions' goal.
To succeed in increasing purchase intent, repeat sample and more regular conversion of behavior, promotions will likely need to focus on elements that will promote and build perceptions of more than the promotion alone. Two such elements, the usefulness of transportation information and the alternative modes themselves, are tangible products with immediate, measurable benefits to the consumer.
Key Findings
Likelihood to access information
Commuters who were either aware of the CRSW promotion or of general
messages about alternatives are more likely to seek information
about alternatives than commuters who were generally unaware of
messages. Yet, commuters aware of the CRSW promotion specifically
are no more likely to sample information than commuters aware
only of general messages about alternatives.
13% of commuters aware of either
general messages or the specific CRSW promotion said they were
"not at all likely" to access information versus 18%
overall.
62% of commuters who say they
are likely to sample alternatives are also likely to find out
about alternatives. CRSW had no impact among 36% of those who
say they are likely to seek information and who also participated
in the promotion.
Likely to Sample
CRSW made them more likely to find out about alternatives 62%
CRSW made them less likely to find out about alternatives 2
CRSW message made no difference 36
Information Usage
Among CRSW participants, 48%
sought additional transportation information while 51% did not.
30% of those who said they tried
to find information about carpooling and other commute alternatives
actually used the information.
There is no difference in the actual usage of transportation information
between those aware of the CRSW promotion versus those aware of
only general messages.
CRSW had relatively little impact on information solicitation
among participants -- only 30% of all transportation information
was obtained through ETCs, schools and Sacramento Rideshare combined.
There is no statistically significant difference in the stated
source of information between commuters who recalled the CRSW
promotion versus those who did not. However, commuters who are
"unaware" of any messages regarding alternatives were
twice as likely to use generic "transportation agencies"
than commuters aware of general or CRSW specific messages.
Specific Stated Effect: Usefulness of Information
Purchase intent and mode sampling are strongest among those who
deemed transportation information useful, by a three-to-one ratio.
Likely to Sample
Alternative Modes
Information was useful 61%
Information was not useful 22
Information Inquiry and Trial
55% of those who said they are
likely to sample alternative modes also said they tried to find
out information about alternatives, underscoring the importance
of useful information to sampling alternative modes.
Likely to Sample
Alternative Modes
Likely to inquire 55%
Not likely to inquire 25
Tried to find information 55
Did not try to find information 44
There exists an untapped market in the 44% of commuters who say
they are likely to sample alternative modes yet did not try to
find out transportation information. This group is predisposed
to sampling modes already -- for them to sample information and
perceive it as useful increases their likelihood to sample alternative
modes -- impacting the purchase intent process.
27% of CRSW participants who
said they would be likely to seek more information about alternatives
could not recall this promotion. Essentially one-quarter of those
who participated in the promotion, and who by definition, should
be most responsive to the CRSW message, were ultimately not persuaded
by CRSW.
Trial Propensity
59% of CRSW participants said
they are likely to sample alternative modes (carpools, buses,
trolleys, biking and walking) within the next two years.
36% of CRSW participants say
the promotion made them more likely to rideshare.
Overall, the promotion had little to no effect on commuters' trial
propensity. Only those who said they are likely to sample alternative
modes initially were more likely to sample them after hearing
the CRSW message. Commuters aware of the promotion were no more
likely to sample alternatives than those aware of general messages.
Actual Alternative Mode Trial
79% of commuters aware of the
CRSW promotion said the message did not change the way
they personally commute. Nevertheless, the promotion had a stated
effect on some participants.
There are no differences in stated commute behavior among commuters
aware of general messages or aware of the CRSW promotion specifically
compared to the overall sample.
First Time Trial Effect
During the two months following the promotion, 16%
of CRSW participants say they used an alternative mode for the
first time while 82% did not try an alternative mode.
Again, the similarities in trial effect between commuters aware
of the promotion specifically and those aware of general information
is noteworthy.
12% of Sacramento CRSW participants
say they actually sampled alternative modes directly as a result
of the CRSW promotion, even though 36% said initially that CRSW
made them more likely to rideshare.
Repeat Propensity
72% of CRSW participants who
sampled an alternative for the first time following the promotion
say they are likely to sample again.
Analysis and Conclusions:
Overall, the CRSW promotion did little to change commuters' likelihood
to sample either information or alternative modes.
More participants say they are likely to access transportation
information as a result of the CRSW promotion than say they are
likely to sample alternative modes.
As a point of comparison, consider the typical pattern of trial
and sample of new consumer products. For every 100 samples, typically
one-half -- or 50 -- repeat the sample. Of that repeat group,
four-out-of-five will repeat a third time. That 20% erosion is
commonplace -- yet significant. It necessitates a vigilant marketing
effort to replace that erosion. Without that effort, those products
would likely suffer irreparable attrition.
Key Findings
56% of all commuters Drive Alone in their car to work or school.
16% utilize a Carpool to commute to and from work or school.
24% take public transportation like buses, carpools and Light Rail every day while 72% use public transportation four times a week or less: