SIE2016 Effective Communication: October 2017

Thursday, 26 October 2017

Technical Report Draft 1

Background

What is the current situation?

The handrails in public trains are important safety features to help commuters keep their balance. We discovered there are issues on the handrail regarding the hygiene and the obstruction in posses.The problem situation that we have decided to address, occurs in any Mass Rapid Transport (MRT) Trains in Singapore. This could be better elaborated by narrowing our views during peak hours (From 7am to 8am and 6pm-7pm), commuters would be seen rushing in and out of the carriage to board the train upon arrival.

How did you become aware of this problem and/or related issues?

As daily users of MRT, we have noticed some of the problems commuters experiences when taking MRT. We have realised that the current handrail design is causing discomfort to the commuters as well as some hygiene issues.

What is the context of the problem?

Given the average height of Singaporean male is 171cm. Some commuters find the handrails to be an obstruction as its height is rather low when they are walking through the carriage. Moreover, when the train experience a sudden movement, the handrail will sway back and forth, thus causing one to get hit (e.g. head, hands and body). While this does not cause any serious injury, it causes inconvenience and discomfort to commuters. Which affects the overall travel experience of the commuters.

Additionally, some commuters find it unsafe to hold onto the handrails as they find it not sturdy. We have seen commuters being thrust forward when the train jerks or stops abruptly. Hence, causing commuters to knock onto each other.

Apart from that, We had observed that some commuters are unconcerned of their personal hygiene. For example, a few would practice the use of their hand to cover their mouth while they sneeze, immediately after he/she would hold onto the handrail. We find that this process hinders the cleanliness of the train in a large scale. This also creates a platform for outspread of diseases to the mass public, when we consider the number of commuters that use the train daily.

In a survey conducted among over 100 people, 43% indicated that they would prefer the handrails to not be in their way, given the same level of safety. Then 20% indicated that the current design is uncomfortable and 41% indicated that cleaning the handrail daily is significant in promoting good hygiene practices.

Who are the main stakeholders?

The main stakeholders would be the commuters, Land Transport Authority of Singapore (LTA) and Train provider of Singapore (SBS Transit and SMRT).

Why is this important?

This is important as this project can enhance and improve both the safety and user experience of the commuters. At the current state, commuters can be hurt by the swinging handrail and commuters could fall down if the trains move abruptly. Through designing a retractable handrail, this problem could be solved.

We came about this problem when we were sharing during our discussion as a group. The three of us actually witness this problem while travelling individually in the past. The context of this problem situation is in the train carriage of the MRT system.

Monday, 16 October 2017

Reader Response (Final)

In the article, “Dubbed 'the best in class': 6 things about Hong Kong's MTR rail system.”, Lee (2015) states that Transport Minister Khaw Boon Wan, looks up to Hong Kong’s Mass Transit Railway (MTR) and suggest that local transportation sectors should use MTRC as a guideline for its “reliability standards”. Based on MTR’s and SMRT’s annual reports, by comparing between Hong Kong and Singapore. Hong Kong’s subway system yields the highest “system’s farebox recovery ratio”. Looking at both the MTRC and SMRT’s railway systems, the length of MTR’s railway surpasses SMRT’s by 59km. The punctuality of SMRT trains is 3.9% lesser than MTR even though both countries face the same amount of significant hold-ups. Looking at the expenditure of profits on enhancing train systems, MTRC invests a larger amount of their earnings compared to SMRT. MTR also make sure that their passengers enjoy a worry-free and smooth ride by having higher inspection frequency compared to SMRT and being more detail in examining the railway lines. MTRC aims to rectify any issues or faults that arise under two minutes with the introduction of the “Super Operations Control Centre” which oversees the entire railway system, resolving emergencies with their fast reaction. While benchmarking is a systematic process used by organizations to improve their performance, the practices highlighted by Lee do not address pertinent questions as to why Singapore’s rail system falls short; rather LTA has much to improve on in terms of the frequency of the trains, having rapid response team and effectiveness in investment made.

Firstly, despite having lesser track area than other major metropolitan subway systems, the MTR system transports more than five million passengers daily. London has 402 kilometres of line, New York City has 373 kilometres, while Hong Kong MTR tracks only stretches 218 kilometres. With a shorter length of railway tracks, Hong Kong’s MTR system still carries more commuters around the country when compared to London and New York subway systems. This show how efficient is Hong Kong’s MTR system in passenger transportation when placed side by side with renowned subway systems from other countries.

Secondly, for a smooth operation for directing commuters to alternatives travel options during train disruption, SMRT personnel have to be clear and concise in their roles during these unforeseen events. According to MTR Sustainability Report 2016, MTR has various rapid response units on standby when the operation of MTR is trouble-free. As compared, SMRT has to recall staff from different departments and other stations to provide backing at the disrupted stations through the command centre. Precious times are wasted here, delaying the already long recovery period. A proper contingency plan or team would increase the readiness of SMRT to handle train disruption in the future.

Lastly, Singapore’s Land Transport Authority (LTA) has invested S$12.5 million to develop manpower for the industry. The MTRC also spent S$1.09 billion in 2016 on maintenance and system upgrades. Singapore is seen investing a significantly smaller amount of money as compared to Hong Kong in regards with the railway system. Hong Kong’s consumers were more satisfied as compared to Singapore. Singapore 66.8% satisfactory in 2015. While Hong Kong’s MTR customer satisfaction reached a record high score of 73.5% in 2015. Hong Kong's MTR system is seen to be much more proactive to providing a better commuting experience to the public. Demonstrating how willing and smart is Hong Kong’s MTR on investing and making concise decision to have satisfactory commuters.

In conclusion, Hong Kong’s MTR system is certainly one of the best in its field when we look at how efficient and managed overall. However, the practices highlighted by Lee do not address pertinent questions as to why Singapore’s rail system falls short.

References

Maggie Hiufu Wong (2015, March 31). Hong Kong's MTR: Taking a ride on the world's most envied metro system. Cable News Network, Retrieved September 27, 2017, from http://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/hong-kong-mtr-success-story/index.html

Alan Lee (2017, August 31). Time to ease up on the MTR over its service record. Cable News Network, Retrieved September 26, 2017, from http://www.ejinsight.com/20170831-time-to-ease-up-on-the-mtr-over-its-service-record/

Lincoln Leong Kwok-Kuen (2016, May 12). 5 billions MTR sustainability report 2015. Mass Transit Railway, Retrieved September 26, 2017, from http://www.mtr.com.hk/en/corporate/sustainability/2015rpt/pdf/mtrfull2015.pdf

Li Xueying (2015, October 25). HK rail's 'always improving' ethos. The Straits Times, Retrieved September 25, 2017, from http://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/hk-rails-always-improving-ethos

Rahimah Rashith (2016, September 16). Satisfaction level up for MRT service: Survey. The Straits Times, Retrieved September 25, 2017, from http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/transport/satisfaction-level-up-for-mrt-service-survey

Mass Transit Railway (2016). Sustainability Report 2016, retrieved from http://www.mtr.com.hk/en/corporate/sustainability/2016rpt/pdf/Customers.pdf

Mass Transit Railway (n.d.). Understanding Our Crowd Management Measures, retrieved September 17, 2017, from http://www.mtr.com.hk/en/customer/main/crowd_control.html

Lim, K. (2015, December 20). Singapore's train system: What needs to be done to ensure a smoother ride? Channel NewsAsia. Retrieved September 26, 2017, from http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/singapore-s-train-system-what-needs-to-be-done-to-ensure-a-smoot-8246388

Sunday, 1 October 2017

Reader Response's Draft (After Peer Review)

In the article, “Dubbed 'the best in class': 6 things about Hong Kong's MTR rail system.”, Lee (2015) has stated that Transport Minister Khaw Boon Wan, thought highly of Hong Kong’s Mass Transit Railway (MTR) and suggested that local transportation sectors should use MTRC as a guideline for its “reliability standards”. Based on MTR’s and SMRT’s annual reports, comparing Hong Kong to Singapore, New York and London, Hong Kong’s subway system yields the highest “system’s farebox recovery ratio”. Looking at both the MTR and SMRT’s railway systems, the length of MTR’s railway surpasses SMRT’s by 59km. The punctuality of SMRT trains is 3.9% lesser than MTR even though both countries face the same amount of significant hold ups. Looking at the expenditure of profits on enhancing train systems, MTR invested a larger amount of their earnings compared to SMRT. MTR also ensures that their passengers enjoy a safe and smooth ride by having much higher inspection frequency compared to SMRT and being meticulous in examining the railway lines. MTRC aims to rectify any issues or faults that arises under two minutes with the introduction of the “Super Operations Control Centre” which oversees the entire railway system, resolving emergencies with their fast reaction. The article states that Hong Kong’s MTR system is the best in the industry by providing train services in a more reliable and efficient manner as compared to other countries. I agree with the claim of the article that Hong Kong’s MTR is better. However, I disagree with the reason used for the claim. The article could have used points such as the efficiency of carrying passenger, punctuality rate and effectiveness in investment made as evidence to support what it states.

Firstly, despite having lesser track area than other major metropolitan subway systems, the MTR system transports more than five million passengers daily. London has 402 kilometres of line, New York City has 373 kilometres, while Hong Kong MTR tracks only stretches 218 kilometres. With a shorter length of railway tracks, Hong Kong’s MTR system still carries more commuters around the country when compared to London and New York subway systems. The number of commuters a transport system can carry, closely relates to the competency of the system. This shows how efficient is Hong Kong’s MTR system in passenger transportation when placed side by side with renowned subway systems from other countries.

Secondly, running about 20 hours and 8,000 train trips per day, MTR boasts a staggering 99.9% punctuality rate, according to the corporation. In 2016, the overall punctuality rate of the MTR was 99.9 percent. In comparison, the train punctuality rate of the New York subway was only 63 percent, while that of the London underground was 85.2 percent. Hong Kong's MTR standard is miles ahead of its competitors, being near perfect in terms of punctuality rate. This tells us that the Hong Kong’s MTR frequency of being on time at each station is a cut above the rest as compared to other countries. These are concrete evidence to back up why Hong Kong’s MTR system is one of the best in the business when it comes to the punctuality rate of the railway system.

Lastly, Singapore’s Land Transport Authority (LTA) has invested S$12.5 million to develop manpower for the industry. The MTRC also spent S$1.09 billion last year on maintenance and system upgrades. Singapore is seen investing a significantly large amount of money as compared to Hong Kong in regards to the railway system. Singapore’s consumers were more satisfied with the land transport sector, which had a score of 66.8 out of 100.While Hong Kong’s MTR customer satisfaction reached a record high score of 73.5% in 2015. Having to compare the ratio for the amount of money used to the satisfaction, Hong Kong's MTR system is much more productive. This proves that Hong Kong's railway system actually uses a lesser amount of money to have a higher statistics of satisfaction for the commuters. Demonstrating how effective and smart is Hong Kong’s MTR on investing.

In conclusion, Hong Kong’s MTR system is certainly one of the best in its field when we look at how efficient and managed overall. Railway system around the world should see Hong Kong’s MTR as a role model.

References

Li Xueying (2015, October 25). HK rail's 'always improving' ethos. The Straits Times, Retrieved September 25, 2017, from http://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/hk-rails-always-improving-ethos