1997 TRAFFIX BENCHMARK MARKETING

RESEARCH FINDINGS

Presented by

THE MARKETING SOURCE, INC

Research Objectives

Identify benchmark measurements among commuters that can be used to track:

– awareness and familiarity of TRAFFIX

– support for ridesharing

– willingness to rideshare

Profile the target audience

Identify the role of employers

Two Research Components

1. Commuter Study among residents in the TRAFFIX service area.

2. Employer Case Studies among targeted employers.

Commuter Study

Methodology

Commuter Study– Phone surveys

» 825 Southeastern Virginia commuters

» 18-65 years old

» worked at least 3 days per week outside their home

– Interview dates: July 1-15, 1997– Margin of error : +/- 3.5 percentage points.

TRAFFIX Service Area

Southside:Virginia Beach

Norfolk

Chesapeake

Portsmouth

Suffolk

Isle of Wight Co.

Southampton Co.

Franklin

Peninsula:Newport News

Hampton

York Co.

James City Co.

Gloucester Co.

King William Co.

Williamsburg

Poquoson

Essex Co.

Middlesex Co.

Mathews Co.

King & Queen Co.

West Point

Tappahannock

Urbanna

Eastern ShoreAccomack Co.

Northampton Co.

Whom did we interview?

Average length of residency: 17 years.

48% male / 52% female 88% employed full-time;

12% employed part-time Average distance to work:

13 miles (one-way) Average commute time:

21 minutes (one-way) 22% are personally responsible for

dropping off/picking up children from child care.

Virginia Beach25%

Norfolk15%

Newport News/

Hampton19%

Other23%

Place of Residence Sample Characteristics

Chesapeake/Portsmouth

18%

The Commute to Work

What are the commuting patterns?How are residents commuting to work?

Do they believe traffic congestion is a problem?

The majority of commuters work in the area where they live.

Commute Patterns:

(Work)

(Home) VA Beach Norfolk Chesapeake N. News Hampton Other Total

(Base) (207) (121) (91) (88) (69)

VA Beach 60% 26% 5% 2% 1% 6% 100%

Norfolk 9 74 3 5 2 7 100

Chesapeake 11 30 50 - - 9 100

Newport News - 8 1 61 15 15 100

Hampton 4 6 0 17 70 3 100

Nearly 9 out of 10 (88%) residents drive alone for their work commute.

Drive Alone (SOV*) 88%Ride in a carpool 8Take a bus 2Ride a bike 1Ride in a vanpool <1Walk <1

SOV : Single Occupant Driver

Over half of commuters agree that traffic congestion is a problem during their work commute.

“Not a problem”

(1-5 ratings)43%

“A problem”(6-10 ratings)

57%

39% of residents agree that traffic congestion is a big problem.

About 4 in 10 commuters believe there is a “big” traffic congestion problem during their work commute.

Commuters in metropolitan areas are more likely

to rate traffic congestion as a “big problem”.

Traffic is a “Big Residence (Base) Problem”

Norfolk (121) 53%

VA Beach (207) 47

Newport News (88) 40

Hampton (69) 39

Chesapeake (91) 35

Other Peninsula (113) 33

Other Southside (113) 19

Eastern Shore (23)* 13

The Commute to Work: Findings

Most commuters travel to work in the areas where they live. However, Norfolk pulls from numerous areas; likely due to the draw of the military and downtown district.

Compared to other markets, there is a high proportion of SOV commuters.

A majority of commuters recognize that traffic is a problem.

Commuters in metropolitan areas are more likely to rate traffic congestion as a “big problem.”

Attitudes about Ridesharing

What factors are important in mode choice?What are the perceived barriers and benefits of ridesharing?What’s important and believable to SOV commuters about the

benefits of ridesharing?

Among commuters, travel time and flexibility are key factors in determining mode choice.

Ability to use car for work-related trips

Ability to run middayerrands/lunch

Transportation costs

Flexibility to arrive/leave whenI want

Travel time

47% 14%

46% 22%

46% 25%

64% 18%

66% 18%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Ability to use car for work-related trips

Ability to run middayerrands/lunch

Transportation costs

Flexibility to arrive/leave whenI want

Travel time

Very important Somewhat important

84%

82%

71%

68%

61%

SOV drivers “believe” they need their car during

the work day.

-------% Important------Factors that play a role Alternatein mode choice SOV drivers mode users Difference(Base) (730) (95)

Travel time to work 84% 87% -3

Commuting costs 72% 74% -2

Flexibility to arrive/leave 84% 71% +13work when you want

Ability to leave work to 68% 56% +12run personal errands/lunch

Use car for work-related trips 64% 43% +21

Most commuters agree that ridesharing helps the environment and lowers transportation costs.

Residents who share a ride to work...

13% 9%

18% 9%

23% 18%

27% 14%

58% 15%

59% 14%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

"5" (Strongly Agree) "4" Ratings22%

73%

73%

help the environment

lower their transportationcosts

are more likely to arriveat work on time

are less stressed at work

get to work faster

are more productive at work

27%

41%

41%

Drive-alone commuters need to be educated

about the benefits of ridesharing.

-------% who agree------Those who share a ride Alternateto work… SOV drivers mode users Difference(Base) (730) (95)

have lower transportation 73% 73% 0 costs

help the environment 72 78 -6

are less stressed at work 39 48 -9

get to work faster 26 39 -13

are more productive 19 35 -16at workare more likely to arrive 39 55 -16at work on time

What’s important AND believable to SOV drivers?

Among SOV drivers, saving money is both important and a believable benefit of ridesharing.

Yet, while a majority (84%) of SOV commuters say that commute time is also important in their mode choice, only 26% believe that ridesharing saves time.

Save time

Savemoney

26%

84%

73%

72%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Save time

Savemoney

Importance

Believability

The number one barrier to ridesharing among SOV drivers is not knowing anyone to share a ride with.

Why do you not share a ride to work? (SOV drivers)

Don’t know anyone to 43%share a ride with

Inconvenient21%

Inflexible schedule20%

Need my vehicle during12%the day

Like freedom/solitude 9%

Have a short commute 6%

Attitudes about Ridesharing: Findings

SOV commuters want the flexibility to arrive and leave work when they want.

A number of commuters believe that they need their car for mid-day and work-related trips.

SOV drivers believe that ridesharing saves money and helps the environment, but they are not convinced of the other benefits of sharing a ride to work.

Reducing transportation costs is both an important factor and a “believable” benefit of ridesharing.

The number one reason for not ridesharing is “ not knowing anyone to share a ride with”.

Identifying the Target Audience

Who is already using alternate modes?Who are the SOV commuters who are most likely to try ridesharing?

What is the alternate mode preferred?How do incentives affect willingness to use alternate modes?

One in ten (12%) commuters are already using alternate modes.

Drive alone88%

Alternate mode users12%

• be more likely to rate traffic congestion as a “big” problem (50% vs. 37%)

• have longer commute times and distances.

• have lower annual household incomes.

• be less likely to hold managerial/administrative occupations.

Current alternate mode users tend to ...

Among alternate mode users, the primary motive to rideshare is saving money.

Why do you share a ride to work? (alternate mode users)

Save money 38%

Do not have a car 19%

Enjoy the company of others 17%

Saves time 13%

Avoid traffic congestion 6%

Reduce wear/tear on car 5%

Use HOV lanes 4%

About one-fifth (19%) of SOV commuters are at least somewhat likely to occasionally use an alternate mode.

Very likely6%

Not very likely33%

Somewhat likely13%

Not at all likely49%

Those who are likely to occasionally use an alternate mode tend to …

• be more likely to live or work in Norfolk.

• have lived in the area a shorter period of time.

• believe that ridesharing reduces stress and travel costs and increases job productivity.

• be more likely to have seen advertising promoting ridesharing.

SOV Commuters

Incentives significantly heighten interest in ridesharing among many SOV commuters.

Ridematching

Reserved parking

Guaranteed Ride

Employer subsidies

Base SOV interest

19% 13%

22% 10%

21% 13%

30% 15%

6% 13%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Ridematching

Reserved parking

Guaranteed Ride

Employer subsidies

Base SOV interest

"5" (Very willing) "4" Ratings

32%

45%

32%

34%

19%

Percent SOV drivers willing to occasionally use alternate modes

Incentives will likely increase the frequency of ridesharing among current alternate mode users.

Ridematching

Guaranteed Ride

Reserved parking

Employer subsidies

35% 15%

39% 14%

41% 12%

53% 16%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Ridematching

Guaranteed Ride

Reserved parking

Employer subsidies

"5" (Very willing) "4" Ratings

53%

69%

50%

53%

Percent alternate mode users willing to rideshare more frequently

Employer-sponsored programs significantly boost willingness to try alternate modes.

When asked if they would rideshare occasionally/more often if their employer

sponsored and supported rideshare programs, a majority (67%) of commuters indicated

they would do so.

Carpools are the most attractive form of ridesharing for these SOV commuters.

Most likely Least likely to use to use

Ride in a carpool 50% 10%

Take a bus 16 50

Bike 16 3

Ride in a vanpool 7 7

Walk 7 22

Other 4 8

Identifying the Target Audience: Findings

Alternate mode users tend to have longer commutes and most often say they rideshare to save money.

SOV commuters who express interest in ridesharing are more “in tune” with the benefits of sharing a ride and are more likely to report seeing advertising. They also tend to be newer to the area and more likely to live or work in the Norfolk area.

Incentives boost willingness to try ridesharing among SOV drivers, particularly those with lower incomes.

Incentives are likely to increase frequency and ultimately retention among alternate mode users.

Carpools are overwhelmingly the preferred alternate mode of choice among SOV drivers.

How do we reach the target audience?

What is the current awareness level?What is the most successful source?What should the key messages be?

One-half (54%) of commuters have seen or heard information about ridesharing or commuter services.

Other

Brochures

Newspaper

Radio

Television

Road sign

6%

4%

14%

30%

37%

41%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%

Other

Brochures

Newspaper

Radio

Television

Road sign

Source of information(among those aware)

Unaided awareness of TRAFFIX is low; most likely due to the newness of the organization.

Organizations mentioned (unaided)

TRT 15%

VDOT 6%

PENTRAN 3%

TRAFFIX 2%

Others 6%

Could not recall 34%

Unaware of any 36%

Only a few (5%) commuters can recall any phone numbers of these organizations.

2% unaided awareness

13% aided awareness

Aware of

Ridesharing Aware of

Locality (Base) Info. TRAFFIXVA Beach (207) 61% 18%Hampton (69) 61 17Norfolk (121) 58 13Newport News (88) 58 21Chesapeake (91) 47 15

Overall, fifteen percent (15%) of commuters say they have heard of TRAFFIX.

Media Expenditures for TRAFFIX

A/V8%

Other9%

Radio26%

Newspaper16%

P.R.4%

Television37%

Source: Hambright, Calcagno & Downing

How did commuters learn about TRAFFIX?

Radio

Television

Road sign

Newspaper

Family/friends

Brochures

Employer 2%

3%

7%

12%

20%

24%

39%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Radio

Television

Road sign

Newspaper

Family/friends

Brochures

Employer

Those who are aware of TRAFFIX most often report they learned about the organization on the radio (39%) or television (24%).

Very few commuters are learning about TRAFFIX through their employer.

Among those who are aware of TRAFFIX, many are unfamiliar with the programs available.

Ridematching

Park & Ride lots

Guaranteed Ride

Express Bus service

Bus routes/schedules

Employer programs 27%

39%

39%

41%

42%

46%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Ridematching

Park & Ride lots

Guaranteed Ride

Express Bus service

Bus routes/schedules

Employer programs

% aware

Reaching the Target Audience: Findings

While over half of commuters have seen or heard promotion for ridesharing, awareness levels for specific organizations are low.

Awareness levels of TRAFFIX are low; most likely due to the short time in the market and lack of a recent promotional effort.

Most of those aware of TRAFFIX identify the radio or television as the media source. This is consistent with the media plan.

Of those aware of TRAFFIX, most are unfamiliar with the services offered.

Commuter StudyConclusions

Conclusions: Commuter Study

The groundwork is there…. Commuters perceive a real problem with traffic in

metropolitan areas. Commuters believe that those who rideshare help the

environment and lower their transportation costs. There are signs of some willingness to change the

mode of travel; however…

Conversion of SOV drivers will be difficult.

Conclusions: Commuter Study (continued)

Flexibility is very important to SOV drivers.

Drive alone commuters also believe that they need their car during the day. This may be a real or perceived need.

Time is the most important factor that SOV drivers consider in mode choice. However, they are not convinced that ridesharing saves time.

The number 1 barrier to ridesharing is, “I don’t know anyone to rideshare with.”

Commuters are not sure where to turn for help.

Obstacles to SOV conversion are strong:

Employer Case Studies

Methodology

Employer Case Studies

– In-depth telephone interviews

– 45 targeted employers for TRAFFIX

– Qualitative, not quantitative interpretation

– Interviewed policy makers

– Interview dates: July 22 - August 7, 1997

Sample for Employer Case Studies

A total of 98 employer contacts were supplied by TRAFFIX. Of these...

– 45 completed the survey.

– 21 declined to participate.

– 19 were unavailable.

– 9 said company policy was set elsewhere.

– 3 businesses could not be found.

– 1 company was out of business.

Among those who completed the survey, nearly a quarter have 50 or less employees.

50 or less 2451-100 13101-200 11201-500 22501 or more 29

Number of employees %

Most had been approached by TRAFFIX.

Employer Findings

Are employees receptive to employer-sponsored programs? How do employers view ridesharing?

How do employers feel about offering commuter programs?What programs are being offered?

Corporate philosophy

Most employers agree with the following:– The company always considers how decisions will

impact employee morale.

– Employee productivity is the company’s primary focus when making decisions.

– The company’s public image is strongly considered when determining corporate policies.

– The company believes a business that offers good benefits to its employees will maintain a more productive workforce.

Perceptions about traffic congestion

The majority say that traffic congestion is a problem around their worksite.

Most agree that their business has some impact on traffic congestion in the area.

Perceived benefits of ridesharing

Like commuters, employers feel that ridesharing helps the environment and lowers transportation costs.

They are not convinced that employees who use alternate modes get to work faster, are more productive at work, or make better employees.

Awareness of Rideshare Organizations

A majority of businesses have seen or heard information promoting ridesharing.

Like commuters, employers cited radio and television most often as sources of this information.

As with commuters, few employers could identify any phone numbers associated with rideshare organizations.

Awareness of TRAFFIX Recognition of TRAFFIX was high among the targeted employers. Employers most often cited a TRAFFIX representative as the

source for learning about the organization. Businesses interviewed believe that the primary functions of

TRAFFIX are to reduce traffic congestion and facilitate ridesharing.

The majority of companies were aware that TRAFFIX:

– conducts an employee survey.– establishes a ridematching database.– assists in the formation of carpool/vanpool programs.– does not charge for its services.

Willingness to offer employer-sponsored commuter programs

Generally, employers are willing to help with their employees’ commute, but few are willing to pay for such programs.

Employers are most willing to offer:– reserved parking spaces for carpools/vanpools

– ridematching

– a guaranteed ride program

– flexible work hours

Conclusions: Employer Study

Targeted employers seem to agree that traffic congestion is a problem and that their business has impact on the problem.

Employers appear to share many of the same attitudes about ridesharing as commuters.

Most of the targeted employers had been approached by TRAFFIX and were familiar with the organization.

Intent to offer commuter programs to employees is moderate.

Recommendations

The goal is TRIAL.

Educate commuters.

Educate commuters about...– the benefits of ridesharing (saves time, less

stress, arrive at work on time, etc.).– incentives programs that are already available

(guaranteed ride program and ridematching).

Reach the target customer.

Blanket promotional efforts to the service area to increase overall awareness of TRAFFIX.

Pay special attention to commuters who…

– have lower household incomes.

– commute longer distances to work.

– live or work in Norfolk.

– are new residents (New Movers programs, utility hook-ups, new military transfers).

Advertising Recommendations Promote…

– the cost savings from ridesharing.– the Guaranteed Ride program and the use of fleet cars

among large companies to address flexibility barriers.– time savings (i.e. testimonials/HOV lanes).– carpooling as the major alternate mode.– ridematching to confront the issue of “no one to

rideshare with”.– the TRAFFIX name and not the phone number.

Employer Outreach Recommendations

Reconsider the way employers are targeted. Contact largest employers first and consider special targeted efforts in Norfolk.

Thorough research should be conducted on potential employers prior to approaching them.

A market plan should be developed. Encourage companies who are resistant to offer

commuter programs to “start small” in their efforts.

Future Research

Repeat the benchmark study after a promotional campaign to see the impact of advertising.

Interview the remaining large employers, particularly those that have not yet been approached.

Conduct focus groups among employers. Omnibus study to monitor results.