Specialization Strategy & Innovation University of Groningen
Title Safety and organizational commitment of bus drivers at Organization X
Author Aljo Pieter Solle Jozef Israëlsplein 3 9718 EN Groningen A.P.Solle@alumnus.rug.nl St. Nr.1466135
Supervisor Iván Orosa Paleo
Faculty of Economics and Business Nettelbosje 2
9747 AE Groningen I.Orosa.Paleo@rug.nl
Date September 3, 2009
Version Public
Status Final version
Abstract
In this research the question is examined whether changes in the relationship between Organization X and their bus drivers have affected the safety (‘sociale veiligheid’) in and around Organization X’s buses. The following research question was used:
How does the organizational commitment of Organization X’s bus drivers affect safety in and around Organization X’s buses?
Organizational commitment is the general preparedness to engage in long-term involvement with and to exert oneself on behalf of an organization. High organizational commitment results in lower turnover, higher willingness to address requests by the organization, higher attendance, higher customer satisfaction and higher perceived service quality. Several factors were found that influence organizational commitment and the related concepts of motivation and job satisfaction: the job characteristics and individual inputs of the bus driver, the labour relations climate and the relationship benefits and termination costs.
The organizational commitment of Organization X’s bus drivers is rather low, they feel much more committed to their branch and to their profession. This low organizational commitment affects Organization X’s safety management, though only indirectly. Organization X manages safety partly on the organizational level: the traffic control center and the department of Health & Safety are based centrally. They rely on information from bus drivers to do their work. In case of serious incidents, this information will usually be provided, because bus drivers need the help of traffic control. However, less serious incidents are often not reported, and thus central departments lack information about these incidents. This information is important, because a large number of smaller incidents can cause commotion among travelers and bus drivers in the long-term. Besides that, many decisions about which measures should be taken to improve safety are taken on the organizational, or even supra-organizational level, and to make the right decisions, complete and coherent information about the frequency and location of safety incidents is required.
There is a tension between regional and central safety management. When safety is managed regionally, incidents are reported more often and can be dealt with immediately. However, only dealing with the safety problems coherently and systematically on a national scale can really solve them, because cooperation with other transport organizations, ministries, police and Public Prosecutors is necessary.
Foreword
Writing this thesis has been the last episode of my years at university. Writing it has not been easy to me:
public transport is a very complicated industry, the problem of safety is a complicated puzzle, and organizational commitment is a very complicated concept to research. Luckily I could always count on the help of my co-workers at Organization X. Even when working on my thesis was sometimes hard, I have always enjoyed my internship at Organization X. Spending 5 months in Location Y, I learned a lot about the practice of business life, which till this point was an unfamiliar world for me. I would especially like to thank my supervisor during my internship, for his unremitting enthusiasm and energy.
I would also like to thank Iván Orosa Paleo, my supervisor at the university, for his help. Even though he was a bit further away than my direct co-workers, his comments on my work were always useful and helped me come to grips with this complicated topic.
Finally, I want to thank everyone who contributed to this research, as an interviewee, a respondent to the survey, or in any other way. I hope I have succeeded in writing something that does justice to the complicated nature of the problem, but that is also readable.
Aljo Solle
Groningen, September 3, 2009
Index
Abstract... 2
Foreword ... 3
Index ... 4
Chapter 1: Introduction ... 6
Research Boundaries ...7
Research Structure & Questions ...7
Chapter 2: Public Transport in the Netherlands ... 9
2.1 Introduction ...9
2.2 General Environment ...9
2.2.1 Political/ Legal Developments...9
2.2.2 Technological Developments ...11
2.2.3 Other General Developments ...12
2.3 Industry Environment...12
2.3.1 Industry Definition and Size...12
2.3.2 Competition in the Dutch Public Transport...13
2.4 Safety in Public Transport ...15
2.4.1 Definition of Safety ...15
2.4.2 Safety in Dutch Public Transport ...15
2.4.3 Measures to Improve Safety...17
2.5 Reporting of Safety Incidents by Staff...18
2.5.1 Reporting Procedures...18
2.5.2 Willingness to Report ...19
2.5.3 Feedback ...19
2.6 Conclusion...19
Chapter 3: Theoretical Framework ... 21
3.1 Literature ...21
3.1.1 Definition of Organizational Commitment ...21
3.1.2 Job Satisfaction...22
3.1.3 Motivation ...22
3.1.4 Relationship Benefits and Termination Costs ...23
3.1.5 Labour Relations Climate...23
3.2 Linking Organizational Commitment and Safety ...24
3.2.1 Incident Report Rate ...24
3.2.2 Another Possible Link between Organizational Commitment and Safety ...24
3.3 Conclusion...25
Chapter 4: Methodology... 26
4.1 Secondary Data...26
4.2 Interviews and Observation...26
4.3 Online Survey...27
Chapter 5: Organization X... 28
5.1 Introduction ...28
5.2 Labour management...29
5.2.1 Terms of employment ...29
5.2.2 Labour relations climate...31
5.2.3 Job Characteristics & Individual Inputs ...32
5.2.4 Job Satisfaction...34
5.3 Organizational Commitment of Organization X’s Bus Drivers...35
5.3.1 Bases of Commitment ...35
5.3.2 Foci of Commitment ...35
5.4 Safety Management ...36
5.4.1 Safety In and Around Organization X’s Buses...36
5.4.2 Procedures & Responsibilities...36
5.4.3 Feedback ...37
5.4.4 Reporting of Safety Incidents ...38
5.5 Conclusion...38
Chapter 6: Conclusions, Recommendations and Discussion ... 40
6.1 Introduction ...40
6.2 Conclusions ...40
6.3 Recommendations...41
6.4 Discussion ...42
References... 44
Appendices... 47
Chapter 1: Introduction
Violence and aggression against service employees with a public function, such as ambulance paramedics, police officers and bus drivers, have caused a lot of societal agitation in the Netherlands over the last few years. The successive cabinets led by prime minister Jan Peter Balkenende have made it an important goal to reduce this kind of violence and aggression and to increase the feeling of safety in the public area in general.
Experiencing incidents such as assault or death threats has a large impact on the employees involved. It increases stress and absence rates and decreases job satisfaction. Furthermore, the quality of the services delivered suffers from it. Therefore, besides the moral obligation, increasing the safety of personnel with a public function is also of the highest importance from a business point of view.
Organization X is one of Europe’s largest public transport organizations, and one of the largest in the Netherlands. This thesis will deal with the safety in and around the buses of Organization X, in the light of the changes in the industry structure that over the last 15 years have altered the relation between employees and the transport organizations they work for.
Public transport in the Netherlands is in the middle of a process of deregulation and liberalization.
In the recent past, public transport services in the Netherlands were delivered by state-controlled organizations. However, in the 1990’s national and European politics wanted to liberalize public transport because ‘the market’ would make public transport better and cheaper. Organization X was the first private organization entering Dutch public bus transport, by taking over a formerly state-owned operator in the north of the Netherlands. Currently most bus services (except in some of the large cities in the west) and some regional train services have been brought to the market.
Public transport in the Netherlands has also been decentralized, it is no longer mainly the responsibility of the national government. Nineteen regional public transport authorities regulate bus and regional train transport. These authorities organize tenders every 5 to 8 years, through which concessions for (a network of) public transport routes are granted to the transport organization that does the best offer.
Private companies make their offer based on a program of demand made by the authorities. Some authorities leave the transporter a relatively large amount of freedom to develop services, whereas other authorities are very specific about which and how services need to be performed. Some concessions are granted almost entirely on price, whereas others are granted largely on qualitative criteria.
One of the most intense debates at the time the concession system was introduced revolved around the position of the employees in the tender system. The exchange of concessions between different organizations every few years would also mean collective dismissal of large numbers of employees on a regular basis. The initial idea was to give the employees a protected position until 2011, meaning that the
organization that won the concession would be obliged to hire a large share of the employees working in the concession for the previous operator. This temporary agreement was later made permanent.
The relationship between public transport organizations and their employees has changed due to the developments described above. In this research the question is examined whether changes in this relationship have affected the safety in and around Organization X’s buses.
Research Boundaries
This research has the form of a single case study. According to Yin (2009), case study research is the most appropriate research method when a research seeks to understand or explain an existing social phenomenon that is complex and/or requires in-depth analysis. The topic of this study, the impact of organizational commitment on safety in public transport, seems to be an example of such a phenomenon.
Furthermore, because this study is based on an internship at one particular public transport organization, a case study seems to be the most adequate method to exploit the rich source of data that is available.
Not the entire organization will be included in the research. The scope will be limited to Organization X’s bus concessions. The train concessions and Organization X’s touring car activities will not be included in the research. The reason of this is that bus concessions have some characteristics that seem to make having a good employer-employee relationship more difficult: the duration of a concession is short and there is a strong cost-focus in the exploitation.
Research Structure & Questions
At the centre of this thesis is the case of Organization X. However, before presenting this case, three other chapters set the stage. In chapter 2, the general and industry environment of Organization X will be discussed. There have been many drastic changes in the environment in the last decades, most prominently the introduction of the tender system. This system has altered the relationship between public transport organizations and their employees significantly. This chapter will also discuss the safety1 of public transport in the Netherlands, and how the changing environment affected it. The research questions that will be answered in chapter 2 are:
1. Which developments in the general and industry environment influence the relationship between bus drivers and employers in Dutch public transport?
2. How safe is public transport in the Netherlands?
3. How does the relation between bus drivers and their employers affect safety?
In chapter 3, a theoretical framework will be presented of the factors that influence organizational commitment. The research questions that will be answered in this chapter are:
4. What is organizational commitment?
1 For the definition of the term safety used in this research, see section 2.4.1. It refers to what is called ‘sociale veiligheid’ in Dutch.
5. Which factors influence organizational commitment?
Chapter 4 will shortly discuss the methodology of this research. The fifth chapter will focus on Organization X. After a short introduction of the organization, the practical insights from chapter 2 and the theoretical framework from chapter 3 will be applied to the case of Organization X. The emphasis in this chapter lies on Organization X’s labour and safety management: how the relation between Organization X and Organization X’s bus drivers has evolved over the last years, and on the impact these changes had on safety. The research questions that will be answered in this chapter are:
6. How does Organization X manage safety?
7. How does Organization X manage its employees and how does this affect the organizational commitment of their bus drivers?
In the final chapter, conclusions and recommendations will be presented. Based on the previous chapters, the main research question can be answered. After that, practical recommendations can be given. The main research question is:
How does the organizational commitment of Organization X’s bus drivers affect safety in and around Organization X’s buses?
The structure of the research is summarized in figure 1.1. Chapter 2 discusses the general and industry environment of Organization X and, more specifically, the problem of safety. Chapter 3 introduces scientific theory about organizational commitment. In chapter 5, the information from these chapters is used to scrutinize the case of Organization X. The last chapter looks for the lessons that can be learned.
This might be used practically, to increase performance in the industry, and theoretically, in the form of scientific knowledge. Of course, both are eventually two sides of the same coin.
Figure 1.1. Research structure
+
Theory development Industry knowledge development
General and industry environment
Scientific literature
Case Organization X explain
improve
Chapter 2: Public Transport in the Netherlands
2.1 Introduction
Many developments in the general en industry environment have significantly altered the work of bus drivers in the last decades. Whereas public transport used to be a service provided by large monopolist, (quasi-) governmental organizations, it is now often a service delivered by lean and mean private organizations who have to compete for their markets.
Turning public transport from a governmental service into a liberal market has turned out to be a tenacious process, which is far from completed until this moment. The first part of this chapter will focus on some trends in the general environment that shape public transport in the Netherlands. In the second part of this chapter, the industry environment will be discussed, unraveling how and on what terms firms compete in Dutch public transport. The last sections of the chapter deal with safety in public transport and with the reporting rate of safety incidents by personnel.
2.2 General Environment
In this section, the most relevant developments in the general environment of Organization X will be discussed. The general environment encompasses those dimensions in the broader society that affect the industry and the firms in it (Hitt e.a., 2002: p.41). The general environment can be divided into six segments: the demographic, the economic, the sociocultural, the technological, the political/legal and the global segment. In the case of public transport, especially developments in the political/legal and technological segment are very important. Despite deregulation, privatization and liberalization the industry is still strongly entwined with politics and full of governmental regulation. Therefore, the political/legal segment will be dealt with first and most extensively.
2.2.1 Political/ Legal Developments
As in all European countries, public transport in the Netherlands has a long history of strong governmental regulation. Governmental regulation of public transport has several purposes: to ensure social services, to guarantee the safety standard of the services, to protect the market from monopolistic behaviour and to prevent wasteful competition (Ongkittikul, 2006: p.11).
Until the 1960’s, public transport on profitable routes brought in enough incomes to subsidize less popular routes. However, when increasingly more people could afford to buy a car and costs (especially labour costs) increased simultaneously, the Dutch government had to start subsidizing public transport. The amount of money necessary to maintain the standards of service grew heavily until the 1980’s, when the government sharpened control and started to reward good performance. Not much later, in the 1990’s, deregulation came into fashion in politics. The idea was getting popular that the high
subsidies and decreasing market share of public transport were caused by a lack of efficiency, as a result of the monopoly position that public transport organizations had (Van de Velde e.a., 1996).
In 1996, the Dutch cabinet decided to introduce competition in public transport. Instead of competition on the road, in which transporters can offer those public transport services they think are lucrative, they chose for competition for the road. This means that transporters compete with each other for the right to perform services on a certain route or network, for a certain number of years. Denmark, Sweden and the city of London already used this system. The results in these countries showed that when the system was introduced with care and intelligence, efficiency could be improved while coordination of services, service quality and the position of employees were not harmed (Van de Velde e.a., 1996: p.89).
In 2000, the parliament approved the new public transport act, called ‘Wet personenvervoer 2000’ or Wp2000. The act has two main goals2: to achieve selective and regionally differentiated growth and to increase the coverage of exploitation costs (Van de Meent & Stellingwerff Beintema, 2007). The main points of Wp2000 are summarized in box 2.1.
In 2005, the functioning of Wp2000 was evaluated (Twynstra Gudde & MuConsult, 2005). The main conclusions were:
1. The decrease in the use of public transport continues, especially in rural areas.
2. The cost coverage grade has stabilized.
3. Use of public transport grew selectively, especially routes within and towards the larger cities.
4. Exploitation costs have decreased approximately 15-20% in cities and 10-15% in provinces. Because
2 The act initially had two different goals: (1) growth of the usage of public transport and (2) increase in the cost coverage by raising traveler’s incomes or by decreasing exploitation costs. These goals were adapted after a few years into the (slightly less ambitious) goals mentioned above.
Box 2.1: Main points of Wp2000
• Public transport is regulated and put to tender by 19 public transport authorities. They are free to divide their region into several networks or routes and put them to tender separately.
• The authorities prepare a program of demand, which is the basis for the tenders. They also decide on the conditions for selection of transporters and granting of the concession. Transport organizations are invited to do an offer. The authorities, together with the winning transporter, make the concession guidelines with which they can control the transporter’s performance. These guidelines are based on the winning offer and the program of demands.
• The Act arranges the responsibilities of both the public transport authorities and transporters.
Roughly, three functions can be recognized: the policy function, the development function and the exploitation function. These can be seen as transport-equivalents of the strategic, tactic and operational level. The policy function is always in the hands of the authorities and the exploitation function in those of the transport organization. The developmental function can be performed by both, though in practice it is done most often by the authorities.
• To prevent that competition would occur at the expense of employees, their position is protected.
When they take over a concession, transporters are obliged to take over the personnel of the previous transporter, under the same collective labour agreement. This arrangement accounts for direct personnel and for indirect employees whose work is connected to the concession.
of benchmarking, the introduction of the tender system also lowered exploitation costs in areas that had not been put to tender, though the cost decrease in those areas was less strong. The money saved by efficiency gains was most of all spent on increasing services on unprofitable routes, to maintain or increase the social function of public transport.
5. Some things did not change. Employment in the industry decreased only very little. Safety of vehicles and traffic in general also remained the same.
Quality and quantity of service increased and exploitation costs decreased, while the fare prices for travelers have risen. Therefore, taxpayers who do not use public transport have benefited as much (maybe even more) from the liberalization of public transport than those who do use public transport.
Even though these results seem mainly positive, there was also critique on the functioning of Wp2000. Especially trade union FNV Bondgenoten and political party SP (socialistic party) remain critical. They state that the focus on costs by commercial transporters has led to an increased workload for personnel and that the overall quality of public transport suffered. Indeed, public transport organizations do more work with fewer employees (Ministerie van Economische Zaken, 2008). The productivity of employees in public transport has thus increased; basically they have to work harder.
In the last few years, there is also a more general skepticism towards market liberalization, which has melted away the political basis for further unrolling of the tender system in the Netherlands.
Consequently, the liberalization of public transport has not reached as far as initially planned, and it can be questioned whether it eventually will. Initiated by the PvdA (social-democratic party), the cities of Amsterdam, Den Haag and Rotterdam are now allowed again to grant their concessions directly to the public transport operator in their area. Liberalization of the national intercity rail network (‘Hoofdrailnet’), planned for 2015, is also questioned explicitly by some political parties.
2.2.2 Technological Developments
Over the years, public transport became safer, easier accessible and less polluting. For instance, usage of surveillance cameras improves safety. These cameras scare off offenders and increase the probability of arrest, in case something does happen.
However, the most important developments in the technological segment are new communication technologies. Technologies such as GPS and GPRS enable real time communication between vehicles and traffic control rooms, and between vehicles and their direct environment. This makes it possible to provide travelers with dynamic traveling information, which can be shown inside the vehicle, but also on screens at stations and bus stops. Traffic controllers can use the same information to track vehicles and deliver quick solutions to logistic problems that may arise.
A major event in the technological segment is the introduction of the ‘OV-chipkaart’, an electronic card with which people pay for their use of public transport. The OV-chip will replace all
existing means of payment, it is introduced gradually throughout the country. The main goal of the transport organizations that developed the chip card was to achieve a more precise method to distribute national public transport incomes among transport organizations. The first experiences with the OV-chip card, in the Rotterdam region, are positive. The number of people traveling without a valid ticket has decreased and most people are satisfied with the ease of use of the card (DOC Advies, 2009). The chipcard seems to have a positive influence on safety because it is harder to enter public transport without a valid ticket, and debate between travelers and the driver/steward about the tariff is not possible.
Technological progress does not change the essence of bus driving, which is driving a bus from A to B, but it makes managing it easier and more precise. Complex networks can be managed by just a few people, located on a distant location. There are even tests with public transport vehicles driven by a computer, making the driver completely obsolete (NRC Handelsblad, April 21, 2009).
2.2.3 Other General Developments
The liberalization of the public transport in some European countries, most notably France and the UK, has led to the rise of a few large multinational public transport organizations. Some scale-advantages can be reached in public transport, specifically in financing and in supporting activities, such as legal support and product development. The nature of public transport as a service that is produced and delivered locally, and the strong regulation by governments, prevents it from becoming truly global. However, the rise of large multinationals is likely to affect bus drivers, because the distance between them and the management of their employer will become larger, both physically and mentally.
The economical crisis that the Dutch economy is currently in will also affect the public transport industry. The total Dutch economy is expected to decline with 4.75% in 2009 and with 0.5% in 2010 (CPB, 2009). There are signs that time schedules have to be made thinner and banks are more precautious with lending money. Finally, the recent rise in safety incidents and the accompanying negative media attention have not been beneficial for the image of public transport.
2.3 Industry Environment
In this section, I will discuss the definition, size and importance of the Dutch public transport industry, as well as some characteristics of the industry and the way its incumbents compete.
2.3.1 Industry Definition and Size
As we have seen in the previous section, the public transport industry in the Netherlands is to a large degree shaped and regulated by the Wp2000. However, because competition is not (yet) introduced in all segments of the industry, different definitions can be used to express the actual competition between different parties. The Dutch competition authority NMa uses five different market definitions, which can
be found in table 2.1. These definitions are formed with two main criteria: modality (bus, train, tram, metro) and urban or non-urban.
Table 2.1: Different market definitions used by the NMa (ECORYS, 2004)
Annual turnover
Definition Contains (billion €) 1. Total PT market - Regional public bus transport
- Urban (municipal) public transport
- Intercity public train transport (‘Hoofdrailnet’) - Regional public train transport
3.1
2. Contestable PT market - Regional public bus transport - Urban (municipal) public transport - Regional public train transport
1.9
3. Urban & regional PT market
- Regional public bus transport - Urban (municipal) public transport
1.7 / 1.8*
4. Public bus transport market
- Regional public bus transport
- Urban (municipal) public transport, excl. tram and metro
1.2
5. Present contested public bus transport market
- Regional public bus transport - Public transport in smaller cities
0.9 / 1.1*
*Annual turnover according to a more recent source (Ministerie van Economische Zaken, 2008)
The size of the public transport industry, in terms of turnover, can also be found in table 2.1. According to the broadest definition, the annual turnover is 3.1 billion euro. When heavy rail is excluded, the annual turnover is 1.8 billion euro. Employment in the industry has slightly decreased over the last years, possibly because of increased productivity (Ministerie van Economische Zaken, 2008). Currently the Dutch public transport employs approximately 36,600 people (CBS, 2008).
The importance of public transport is better described in social terms than in economical ones.
Public transport in the Netherlands is used by 1 million people every day. It accounts for 5% of total movements and 11% of all traveled kilometers. An average kilometer traveled with public transport causes half the disturbance for the living environment as an average kilometer traveled by car (CPB &
KiM, 2009). The social importance is the reason why the national government supports public transport financially. In 2004, the 19 public transport authorities received approximately 1.08 billion euro from the national government to finance public transport. The other 0.63 billion (37%) needed to cover the costs was generated by travelers (Van der Meer e.a., 2007).
2.3.2 Competition in the Dutch Public Transport
The profit potential and attractiveness of being in an industry can be described using Porters Five Forces model. This model examines the internal rivalry within the industry, the threat of buyers and suppliers,
the threat of substitutes and the existence of barriers of entry and exit. A five forces analysis of the Dutch public transport industry can be found in appendix B. There I also explain why I added a sixth force, the power of trade unions. Figure 2.1 summarizes the analysis.
As can be seen in figure 2.1, the profit potential for public transport organizations in the Netherlands is under severe pressure from several directions. Most important for operators are the public transport authorities. They make, on behalf of the travelers, the program of demands and decide which transport organization gets to operate the concession. The interactions with the authorities in a certain concession area determine to a very large degree the amount of profit a transport organization can make from the operation. However, good cooperation is often lacking. There is often distrust between operators and there have been many lawsuits between transporters and authorities.
For public transport authorities, it is of the greatest importance to make clear concession guidelines and to strictly maintain them (or at least have a reputation of doing so). They might pay a higher price initially, but in the end, they will benefit. When a principal does not have a strong reputation, the agent will anticipate that it will be able to disregard part of the contract agreements (Lo e.a., 2007). The authorities, thinking they made a cheap deal, and the travelers will be the victim of this.
Internal Rivalry: high
• Three large commercial PT operators (Connexxion, Veolia, Arriva) and one new entrant (Qbuzz)
• High fixed costs (staff, material), therefore limited room for competition
Power of buyers: high
• PT authorities have very strong position, based on Wp2000.
• Travelers have indirect power Threat of entry: moderate
• High investments (staff, material)
• Knowledge about market is required
• Unique system of fare allocation (WROOV)
• Authorities try to stimulate competition
Threat of substitutes:
high
• In 90% of the cases, traveling by car is at least twice as fast as by public transport
• Despite efforts by governments, share in mobility of PT vis-à-vis car has not improved Power of suppliers: low
• Competition between suppliers
• Quality of vehicles is rather similar, because of (safety) regulation
Power of trade unions:
moderately high
• About 85% of Dutch PT personnel is union member
• Staff is crucial in operation, thus strong position towards employers Figure 2.1: Six Forces Analysis
2.4 Safety in Public Transport
In this paragraph, some general facts about safety in Dutch public transport will be discussed, as well as some measures that can be taken to improve safety. In 2008, 7.1% of travelers stated they made less use of public transport because of safety incidents they had experienced or witnessed (KpVV, 2009b). This is just one example that shows the importance of safety in public transport.
2.4.1 Definition of Safety
Before going into detail about safety in public transport, it is necessary to set some boundaries. This research will focus on the reporting of safety incidents by bus drivers. It will thus consider all safety incidents in and around the bus, but with a strong focus on the role of the bus driver. In this research, the term ‘safety’ refers to the following three overlapping categories (CROW, 2007):
• Person-related crime: crime that directly harms the person’s integrity and/or possessions.
Examples are theft, threat and assault.
• Annoyance: behaviour that is not criminal, but that annoys people around it. For instance noise, or groups of young people hanging around on the streets.
• Subjective safety: people sometimes feel unsafe, even when there is no crime or annoyance.
In the Netherlands, these three categories together can be referred to as ‘sociale veiligheid’. A number of safety issues is clearly excluded from this definition. Safety issues related to traffic and technical features of the vehicle are not included, and neither are security threats such as terrorism and natural disasters.
2.4.2 Safety in Dutch Public Transport
Safety in public transport is monitored regularly by authorities and transport organizations. The most comprehensive researches are the ‘Reizigersmonitor Sociale Veiligheid’ and the ‘Personeelsmonitor Sociale Veiligheid’, both organized by KpVV. In these annual researches in which most Dutch public transport organizations participate, the
objective and subjective safety of respectively travelers and personnel in Dutch public transport are measured.
The definition of safety used in these studies is the same as in this research.
In 2008, 7.7% of all travelers were victim of a safety incident (KpVV, 2009b). Travelers grade the safety in Dutch public transport with a 7.5. In 2008, 41% of personnel in public transport were victim of a crime, while
Figure 2.2: Percentage of travelers and employees in public transport who were victim or witness of a safety incident in the
years 2004 – 2008 (KpVV 2009a; 2009b).
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 59,0% 56,0% 65,0% 69,0%
23,4% 23,1%23,6%
22,9% 21,4%
0,0%
10,0%
20,0%
30,0%
40,0%
50,0%
60,0%
70,0%
Travelers and employees victim or witness of safety incident
Traveler victim or witness of safety incident Employee victim or witness of safety incident
69% were victim or witness of a safety incident (KpVV, 2009a). The overall feeling of safety was graded a 6.3 by employees. Employees are more often victim or witness of a safety incident than travelers (see figure 2.2). Accordingly, they also have a lower feeling of safety (see figure 2.3).
Guarding the safety of public transport is a shared responsibility of public transport organization, the police and the Public Prosecutors. Safety incidents are divided into three categories when they are reported. Criminal offences, for instance assault, robbery or death threats, are classified as A. Incidents such as annoyance, bullying and threatening are classified B.
Less serious incidents and violations of the house rules, for instance smoking or making too much noise, are classified as C. Because incidents in category A are criminal
offences, the police are notified when they occur. Incidents in categories B are forbidden based on the Wet Personenvervoer and are maintained by transport organizations. Transport organizations also maintain their own house rules, which differ between transport organizations.
The first to guard safety in the bus is the bus driver, who inspects and sells tickets at the door and maintains the house rules. Public transport organizations also employ Boa’s (Buitengewoon Opsporingsambtenaar, or ‘special investigator’). These Boa’s have the authority to fine people who violate the ‘Besluit Personenvervoer’, for instance when they do not have a valid ticket. When criminal offences occur, transport organizations have to contact the police. Because violence against employees with a public function is considered to harm society stronger than other violence, offenders can be punished double.
Though safety in public transport is the primary responsibility of the transport organization, authorities can also influence it through their program of demands. In practice, this strongly influences the emphases the transporter places in its safety management in the concession. Article 32 of the Wp2000 obliges public authorities to set requirements about safety of personnel and travelers in the program of demands. This can be done in many ways. Usually authorities ask for an annual safety plan, but the form requirements and the way the results are measured differ, as well as the importance of the safety plans in the tender process. Some authorities ask for specific inputs, such as training programs for bus drivers, camera surveillance in all buses or specific number of Boa’s. They can also demand certain outputs, for example a percentage of all bus routes being inspected. Other authorities demand certain outcomes, such as stabilization of the traveler feeling of safety or a 5% decrease in incidents. In some tenders, the safety
Figure 2.3: Feeling of safety of employees and travelers on scale 1-10, years 2004 – 2007 (KpVV 2009a; 2009b).
Feeling of safety in Dutch public transport
7,50 7,50 7,50 7,40 7,30
6,3 6,3 6,5 6,5
5,50 6,00 6,50 7,00 7,50 8,00
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Year
Grade (scale 1-10)
Traveler feeling of safety
Employee feeling of safety
plans in the offer can weigh up to 10% in the decision to whom the concession is granted, whereas in other tenders the safety plans do not have any weight.
Finding the best way to improve safety in public transport is extremely important now that there is a lot of societal commotion, and consequently political attention, for this problem. To improve the safety situation significantly, measures have to be taken on the industry or national level. These measures on the industry and national level can be seen as boundary conditions, within which specific measures can be taken on the concession or organizational level, that are best suitable for a specific situation. Examples of boundary conditions are the funding of safety measures and strategic covenants between police and transport organizations. Specific measures that can be taken include hiring extra security guards for specific routes on specific times of the day and week, placing surveillance cameras on buses or at stations, or organizing joint control actions with the police, or even with tax officers or school attendance officers.
2.4.3 Measures to Improve Safety
There are many ways to improve safety. Possible strategies are legislative measures, support and assistance of (potential) offenders and opportunity reduction (Van Noije & Wittebrood, 2009). These broad safety strategies have to be translated into concrete measures. Specific safety measures that can be taken in public transport include (KpVV, 2007):
• Increase / improve supervision and ticket inspection
• Fight ticket fraud
• Improve communication possibilities
• Security (measures) onboard vehicle
• Increase / improve assistance
• Repulse of people who are not at the station / near the bus for traveling
• Security (measures) at bus stops and stations
• Improve behaviour and attitude of staff
• Improve skills of staff (by training)
• Increase formal authority of staff
Some of these measures improve safety directly. Others, such as fighting ticket fraud and increasing ticket inspection, fight (perceived) causes of aggression. A meta-study for the SCP (Van Noije & Wittebrood, 2008) allows some cautious conclusions about which general measures for improving safety (‘sociale veiligheid’) are potentially fruitful, and which are not. Strong and focused police presence seems a promising measure, especially at times and locations were risk of offence is high. High penalties do not have a preventive function and do not reduce recidivism. Against young offenders, alternative punishment and behavioural approaches are most promising, while high punishment is not. Camera surveillance is
most effective when the images are watched in real-time, so that police can intervene when necessary.
Keeping the environment clean and well lit also helps to reduce crime.
2.5 Reporting of Safety Incidents by Staff
In order to come to a good image of safety and a good safety policy, it is important that all safety incidents are reported. Reports on safety incidents are the most important informational basis for the organization’s safety management. For various reasons, however, safety incidents on buses are significantly under- reported (KpVV, 2009a; Stafford & Petterson, 2006).
For instance, in the Personeelsmonitor Sociale Veiligheid 89% of bus drivers state they always report assault, while only 19% always reports harassment (KpVV, 2009a: p.55). There are several reasons why bus drivers do not report safety incidents (Stafford &
Petterson, 2006; see figure 2.4). The most important boundary condition is that there is a reporting procedure in place and that people are encouraged to use it. Bus drivers need to have the possibility and the willingness to report an incident. Feedback about the actions that have followed on the incident and the outcomes that have been achieved is also important.
2.5.1 Reporting Procedures
The easier it is for bus drivers to report safety incidents, the more likely it is that they will. The possibilities for communication the driver has are therefore important, as well as the procedures by which incidents are processed. It is also important to whom the driver reports.
In the Netherlands, contrary to for example the UK, busses are usually equipped with means to communicate with a traffic control center. These communication systems are also used to report safety incidents. In urgent cases, the traffic controller can send police or an ambulance to the place of the incident. The incident is registered by the traffic controller. However, because the traffic controller focuses at helping the driver who reports the incident, the information he enters is often incomplete and of poor quality. After the incident has been handled, the traffic controller usually has to continue with the next incident, leaving him no time to fill in the gaps in the information.
Some transport organizations use forms to report safety incidents. The advantage of this is that the incident is already behind, so that the driver has time to fill in the form. However, this is also the disadvantage: because the incident is already solved, drivers often do not see the need to report it. For them it just costs time.
Safety management Willingness
to report
Feedback Reporting procedures
Reports of safety incidents
Figure 2.4. Factors influencing the reporting of safety incidents by bus drivers (based on Stafford
& Peterson, 2006)
The cooperation between transport organizations, police and Public Prosecution Service is also a relevant part of the procedure. For instance, in the French city of Valenciennes, bus drivers can fill in a form after a safety incident, which is sent directly to the Public Prosecutor’s Office (UITP, 2004). This leads to concrete and highly visible results.
2.5.2 Willingness to Report
Apart from the technical possibilities and the organizational structure and procedures that are present to report safety incidents, the bus driver also has to feel the urge to report an incident. This willingness depends on the gravity of the incident, but the way the driver feels about the organization he works for also seems to have an influence. A person that is committed to the organization is more likely to agree with and act according to the requests by management of the organization (Morgan & Hunt, 1994). This suggests that a bus driver is more likely to report safety incidents when he feels committed to the organization. In many cases, reporting the incident will not have any direct benefits for the driver, so he will report only when he wants to help the organization and contribute to the its ambition of improving safety.
2.5.3 Feedback
After a safety incident is reported, it is important what is done with this report. When bus drivers never see or hear anything about the incidents they have reported, this will reduce their willingness to report the next time. Good procedures about how an incident is processed and which actions are taken in certain situations are thus important, as well as feedback towards the driver who reported the incident. This feedback is often lacking, only 38% of Dutch bus drivers is convinced that the organizations do something valuable with the incidents that are reported (KpVV, 2009a: p.55).
In March 2009, trade union FNV Bondgenoten published a black book of safety incidents in public transport, based on a ‘reporting week’ for public transport employees who had recently experienced safety incidents (FNV Bondgenoten, 2009). Though this sample is highly biased, some of the outcomes of this black book are interesting. The question ‘if you don’t report an incident to your organization, what is the reason for that?’ was answered by 39.47% of the respondents with ‘they do nothing with it anyway’. The question ‘do you get feedback about the incidents you report’ was answered
‘no’ by 85% of the respondents.
2.6 Conclusion
Which developments in the general and industry environment influence the relationship between bus drivers and employers in Dutch public transport?
The introduction of the tender system in Dutch public transport, in the form of Wp2000, has shaped the industry. For travelers and (other) taxpayers, the results of liberalization are mainly positive: exploitation
costs have decreased and quality has increased. However, the position of employees is under pressure, because of the focus on costs. Though their position is protected by Wp2000 and other legislation, employees feel that the transport organizations’ urge to work as efficient as possible goes at their expense.
How safe is public transport in the Netherlands?
Less than a quarter of travelers were witness or victim of a safety incident in 2008. Over the past years, this figure has decreased, while the travelers’ feeling of safety has been stable for the last three years. For public transport staff, the figures are more or less the opposite. In 2008, 69% of staff was victim or witness of an incident. This figure is rising. The feeling of safety among staff has been stable for the last three years, at 6.3. In general, it seems that the safety of travelers increased, while the safety of employees has decreased over the last few years.
How does the relation between bus drivers and their employers affect safety?
A well functioning safety management depends on the reporting of safety incidents by staff. This is influenced by the safety procedures in place and the willingness of staff to cooperate, which in turn depends partly on the feedback received about what is done with their reports. Chapter 5 will discuss how Organization X manages this.
The organizational safety procedures and feedback do not need further theoretical underpinning.
However, willingness of staff to cooperate with their organization is more complicated. It has to do with internal characteristics of a person, such as motivation, but it can also be affected by external factors, such as the job design and commitment towards other entities. To come to grips with this important concept, the next chapter contains a short literature study about organizational commitment.
Chapter 3: Theoretical Framework
We have seen that several factors decide whether a bus driver will report safety incidents he experiences or witnesses. It is partly dependent on the organizational procedures in place and the feedback he receives, but the relationship between the bus driver and his employer is also important. I assume that a good relationship is one that employees would like to continue, therefore this relationship is conceptualized as the level of commitment of employees towards the organization. Organizational commitment is a subcategory of ‘commitment’, which is the willingness to continue a relationship.
Commitment is a broad term, which enables inclusion of a broad range of factors influencing it. The aim of this chapter is to find out which factors (personal, organizational, supra-organizational) affect organizational commitment, and to find the ‘buttons’ that can be turned in order to influence organizational commitment. A subsequent section will discuss the links between organizational commitment and safety that can be grounded in theory.
3.1 Literature
3.1.1 Definition of Organizational Commitment
“Organizational commitment is a rather broad concept, which refers to the general preparedness to engage in long-term involvement with and to exert oneself on behalf of an organization” (Meyer e.a., 1993:
p.538). A massive amount of research in the last decades has resulted in an abundance of empirical links between commitment and other concepts in organization theory and psychology.
A first examination of the concept reveals a difference between foci and bases of commitment.
“Foci of commitment are the particular entities, such as individuals and groups, to whom an employee is attached. Bases of commitment are the motives engendering attachment” (Becker, 1992: p.232). Foci and bases are thus located at opposite sides of commitment; on one side commitment is based on certain motives, while on the other side, it is directed at certain entities. Entities that commitment can be directed at are, for example, the employer, the work team or the customer. The former, commitment directed at the employer, is commonly referred to as organization (or organizational) commitment.
This focus can still be based on several bases. The Three Component Model of Commitment by Meyer & Allen (1991) distinguishes between affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization: commitment as an affective attachment to the organization, as a perceived cost associated with leaving the organization and as an obligation to remain in the organization, respectively. These three bases can best be seen as distinguishable components, rather than different types of organizational commitment (Allen & Meyer, 1990: p.3). Employees may experience them next to each other.
Common to the three approaches is the view that commitment is a psychological state that (a) characterizes the employee's relationship with the organization and (b) has implications for the decision to continue or discontinue membership in the organization. Beyond this, however, the nature of the psychological state for each form of commitment is quite different. Employees with a strong affective commitment remain with the organization because they want to, those with a strong continuance commitment remain because they need to, and those with a strong normative commitment remain because they feel they ought to do so (Meyer e.a., 1993: p.539).
Besides the negative link with turnover, there are more outcomes of organizational commitment, such as higher attendance (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990), but also higher customer satisfaction and perceived service quality (Allen & Grisaffe, 2001).
3.1.2 Job Satisfaction
In most research about organizational commitment, job satisfaction also emerges. Both concepts are strongly correlated; they seem to be mutually influencing (Eby e.a., 1999; Mathieu & Zajac, 1990; Tett &
Meyer, 1993). An important component of job satisfaction is safety (Parish e.a., 2008).
There are different views of what causes job satisfaction (Kreitner e.a., 2002). Some models imply that job satisfaction is determined by the degree to which the needs of the employee are fulfilled, or propose that satisfaction is the result of met expectations. There are also models based on the idea that job satisfaction results from the degree to which a job allows fulfillment of a person’s important work values, or from how fairly an employee is treated at work. A last group of models proposes that satisfaction is grounded in a person’s genes and personal traits.
3.1.3 Motivation
Another factor closely related to both organizational commitment and job satisfaction is motivation (Eby e.a., 1999). Motivation can be defined as “the processes that cause the arousal, direction, and persistence of voluntary actions that are goal directed” (Kreitner e.a., 2002: p.176). Similar to commitment and satisfaction, there are several ideas about what causes motivation. A first distinction in the causes of motivation is between intrinsic and extrinsic factors. Intrinsic motivation is independent from other actions and from the consequences of actions. Extrinsic motivation is the opposite, motivation caused by external factors. Intrinsic motivation is often rooted in a person’s believes and values and is hard to influence. Extrinsic value is caused by things such as payment or the threat of punishment and can thus be influenced completely from the outside.
According to Kreitner e.a. (2002), there are six groups of motivation theories: theories of need fulfillment, job satisfaction, job design, equity, expectancy and goal setting. These theories all contain more or less similar concepts, but place different emphases. Some give most emphasis to job contextual
