Omnibus | News | Rubber Bands

Rubber Bands & Coloured Pencils

COMPUTERISING THE BUS INDUSTRY
By Jeremy Howat

Back in the days when schedulers measured the distance between timing points with a piece of string or even an elastic band, and wrote up service alterations in different coloured pencil so they could keep a track of changes, full working schedules for bus operations could take several skilled schedulers anything up to two months to produce. Move forward some twenty years (a little less for some) and, coupled with a growing shortage of skilled planners and schedulers, the computer has become a serious tool for both planning and day to day working for bus operators.

So, why use computers to produce timetables and schedules? Well, even for experienced schedulers manual scheduling is a slow and laborious task, with a lot of trial and error in trying to produce the most efficient duty schedules. However, with a good piece of software, timetables and schedules can be produced in a fraction of the time than when produced manually. In addition, fine-tuning and checking can be handled speedily too. Computerised scheduling data can be used to produce all the required outputs for buses and drivers, together with statistics on operational efficiencies.

The latest generation of software available enables operators to conceive, plan, schedule and manage all aspects of their operations, including vehicle and crew duties. To enhance a user’s return on investment, additional services, such as the export of information to create stop displays, maps and travel guides, as well as feeding timetable data to Real Time systems, are available. Collection and management of asset information can be added to the most comprehensive systems to create a computerised ‘environment’ where duplication and error can be avoided. At the cutting edge, swipe card, on-board computers and satellite tracking of vehicles gives management an up-to-the-minute view of their operations.

So, has the increase in the availability of software de-skilled the scheduler? Not according to Michael Meilton of Omnibus, who has indeed used coloured pencils to make adjustments to forty seven page schedules in London. “Good software will allow those with little experience to pick up the concept of scheduling, and produce reasonable results. This doesn’t replace experience, however, and services are still dependant on the scheduling skill of the person creating them for optimal results. It’s best to think of software as an aid – an extremely useful aid!”

The ultimate aims for any company when using software is to save money and improve service quality. It’s no surprise that the most popular software is designed to assist, rather than dictate to, schedulers in getting the most out of vehicle and crew. However, in the UK, we are at a time when older software is now being replaced with new – and it would seem that some lessons have needed to be learned in order to maximise efficiency and the return on investment.

So, before committing an organisation to a potentially long relationship with a supplier, there needs to be a process of identifying the most suitable partner for the job. Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be a ‘standard’ or ‘best practice’ established to help. And there are pitfalls.

There is no magic formula to supplier selection that fits everybody. However, there are some guidelines that come from software purchase in general – plus some lessons to learn from others who have been either well advised or a little stuck with their supplier. The first is; what do you need?

Best practice - Requirements

This may seem obvious to most, but there are a not insignificant number of users who have been ‘over-sold’ a solution, and have regretted it. Many problems arise when the sales pitch says one thing and reality reveals another. And in an environment where suppliers sometimes buy each other to ‘bolt-on’ to their own solution, issues of consistency take a long time to resolve.

The process of analysing what an operation needs requires management, buyer and scheduler to work as a team to come up with the best requirements list. Once the cost drivers (those elements which determine the cost of the scheduling process) have been identified, a set of purchasing criteria can be worked out which meets with those needs.

The right solution must not only fit the purse, but the operation too. This is why the users must be involved in the process. Choosing the right software can bring much efficiency into an operation. However, budgets can be blown by purchasing the wrong software and then having to adjust it – or worse, being stuck for five years with software that can’t/won’t work for the business.

Generally, schedulers are a chatty bunch, and will have an idea about software being used elsewhere. Ultimately, the users are the key to making a system pay or not. They will ‘out’ software that could potentially cause operational problems and help draw up an effective short list of suppliers who can fulfil the requirements specification.

Once potential suppliers are counted, the second question to ask is – will it work for us? It is surprising to learn that this is not always an easy question to answer. Certainly each supplier will feel that, if they have completed the tender and responded completely, the software will work.

Best Practice – Ability

Demonstrations will be offered almost as a matter of course, and generally these will work faultlessly (although not always!). More usefully, make time to visit a sample of existing clients to test the software independently. And watch that word, independently. Make sure suppliers offer plenty of choice, as there are companies who will nudge you towards their ‘pet’ client – generally, the more choice on offer, the more likely you are to get an honest opinion. Also, you will want a site visit that is as close to your own size and operational type as possible. Omnibus, one of the largest suppliers of software to the bus industry, offers an open book of clients (with obvious restrictions for travelling to Hong Kong or New Zealand!). Managing Director, Peter Crichton, comments; “Being a company that has grown out of the bus industry, we have developed software that meets the needs of our clients, yet is easy to use from the end user’s perspective. Effective scheduling software should make the job quicker, with cost effective results. We pride ourselves in doing this; we should not be afraid of what any of our clients have to say”

It’s not just the implementation and resilience of the software either. Look at each supplier’s track record for support, and whether the supplier is willing to adjust their software to fit your operation. There will usually be some need to resolve issues along the way – be it training needs or bespoke documentation output. Make sure that the supplier is not just a supplier, but more like a partner in business.

What comes out of this process? Solent Blue Line, part of the Go-Ahead Group, has been through the process of purchasing scheduling software; “We were impressed,” commented Solent Blue Line Managing Director Phil Stockley “at the speed from our initial enquiry to full installation of the system. From an initial enquiry in November the system was installed and working by December and used fully for our changes that took place at the end of January. We have also been impressed by the willingness of Omnibus to adapt the software to meet our specific requirements rather than our having to fit the software”

FirstGroup also went through the process. After consulting with all schedulers within the group, a detailed Requirements Specification was produced. Suppliers were then asked to indicate the capabilities of their software against the specification. In addition to demonstrations to a project group, suppliers were also required to produce a set of working schedules for a current operation. This provided a comparison of the results all the potential systems could produce on identical based data and allowed the potential savings of one system over another to be evaluated.

Best Interests

It is in a good supplier’s interest to encourage best practice in the purchase of their software. Peter Crichton again, “It’s not something suppliers should be frightened of; we actively encourage potential clients to test us to ensure our solutions are right for them. This is good for client’s confidence and expectations, and it’s good for us, making sure we are honest and transparent in what we offer”. John Birtwistle of FirstGroup agrees, “Working closely with our supplier we now have an excellent product tailored to meet our special local needs whilst allowing the introduction of a standard scheduling system across our UK bus operations. Omnibus has given us a high level of service and support in developing these new packages.”

“Our staff are now able to share knowledge and expertise with their colleagues. This brings further benefits in terms of speed in schedule compilation and staff flexibility. The end result is improved scheduling efficiency bringing direct benefits to the bottom line.”

There is no doubt that timetable and scheduling software can offer significant savings and returns on investment, and services exist to encompass smaller companies, who may not see the justification for purchasing software, but who would benefit from time to time. And with the trend towards the integration of transport, who knows what will be on offer in the next decade