Key Performance Indicators for Intermodal Transportation

Martin Posset
(1)
, Hans Huslmayer
(1)
, Prof. Dr. Manfred Gronalt
(2)
(1)
h2 projekt.beratung KG, Obere Viaduktgasse 10/7, A-1030 Vienna, Austria.
(2)
University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Feistmantelstrae 4, A-1080 Vienna,
Austria.
consortium | WHO did it
content & aim | WHY did we do it
approach | HOW did we do it
result | WHAT did we do
c
o
n
t
a
c
t
|

r
e
s
u
l
t
|

a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
|

c
o
n
t
e
n
t
&

a
i
m
|

c
o
n
s
o
r
t
i
u
m
agenda
PARTNERS
University of natural resources and life sciences, Vienna
h2 projekt.beratung KG (consulting company)
vienna international airport (air)
OEBB Austrian railway company (rail)
Schachinger Logistik Holding GmbH (road)
Viadoanu sterreichische Wasserstraen-Gesellschaft mbH
(inland waterways)
c
o
n
t
a
c
t
|

r
e
s
u
l
t
|

a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
|

c
o
n
t
e
n
t
&

a
i
m
|

c
o
n
s
o
r
t
i
u
m
c
o
n
s
o
r
t
i
u
m
COCKPIIT: Clear, Operable and Comparable Key
Performance Indicators for Intermodal Transportation
INTERMODAL TRANSPORT
Multimodal Transport: Carriage of goods by two or more modes of transport. (UN/ECE 2001)
Intermodal Transport: The movement of goods in one and the same loading unit or road
vehicle, which uses successively two or more modes of transport without handling the goods
themselves in changing modes. (UN/ECE 2001)
Combined Transport: Intermodal transport where the major part of the European journey is by
rail, inland waterways or sea and any initial and/or final legs carried out by road are as short as
possible. (UN/ECE 2001)
INLAND TERMINALS
Inland container terminals ensure efficient turnover (exchange between transport modes: rail |
road and inland navigation) of loading units (containers, swap bodies and semi trailers) in
intermodal logistic networks.
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
quantifiable metrics that provide a method for measuring the quality of operation
facilitate the understanding of strengths and support continuous improvement
help in monitoring progress and assist active counteraction against undesirable developments
method for working out the causes and effects that directly and indirectly influence the
achievement of goals and corresponding results.
c
o
n
t
a
c
t
|

r
e
s
u
l
t
|

a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
|

c
o
n
t
e
n
t
&

a
i
m
|

c
o
n
s
o
r
t
i
u
m
c
o
n
t
e
n
t
&

a
i
m
DOMAIN
1
2
A
B
Begleiteter Kombinierter
Verkehr
1
2
A
B
Unbegleiteter Kombinierter
Verkehr
unaccompanied
accompanied
Things you cannot measure, you cannot control.
Tom DeMarco
INTERMODAL TRANSPORT
increasing overload of capacity at intermodal transhipment nodes and the concentration of
freight transport on fewer main hubs show the need to understand the cooperation requirements
between all transportation modes
intermodal services and the quality of existing intermodal transhipment nodes will not keep up
with capacity needs
integration of more environmental friendly transport modes and the efficient combination of
transport modes
the number of involved actors, the existing diversity and thus resulting complexity.
INLAND TERMINALS
terminals have to be evaluated as part of the whole transport system because the effectiveness
and efficiency of these intermodal hubs contributes to the overall competitiveness and
attractiveness of intermodal transports
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
performance indicators of hinterland | inland terminals are often defined on company or group level
which leads to different taxonomies and poor comparability between different locations and
companies
until today, no inter-sectorally (between rail, road, inland waterway and air transport) accepted
concept for measuring and evaluating the performance of the different transport modes is available
c
o
n
t
a
c
t
|

r
e
s
u
l
t
|

a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
|

c
o
n
t
e
n
t
&

a
i
m
|

c
o
n
s
o
r
t
i
u
m
c
o
n
t
e
n
t
&

a
i
m
PROBLEM DESCRIPTION
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS FOR INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION
outline the main components of the intermodal freight system
highlight the factors that determine intermodal transport as a complex system
provide a guideline for the definition of comparable performance indicators for
intermodal transport
allow decision makers and interested parties in intermodal transport to analyze
and evaluate (understand) the strengths and weaknesses of the different modes
of transport
make the specific strengths and weaknesses of different transport modes
comparable by providing a standardized and comprehensive integrated concept
c
o
n
t
a
c
t
|

r
e
s
u
l
t
|

a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
|

c
o
n
t
e
n
t
&

a
i
m
|

c
o
n
s
o
r
t
i
u
m
c
o
n
t
e
n
t
&

a
i
m
AIM
STANDARD PROCESSES of the intermodal transport chain and its
actors
INDICATOR FRAMEWORK which enables us to apply this set to
any of the selected sectors of the particular intermodal chain and
finally aggregate them for the whole chain
PERFORMANCE TABLES are structured in such a way that a user
may easily extend it and can further refine the intended indicator set
c
o
n
t
a
c
t
|

r
e
s
u
l
t
|

a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
|

c
o
n
t
e
n
t
&

a
i
m
|

c
o
n
s
o
r
t
i
u
m
a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
cockpiit approach
(
A
)
s
y
s
te
m
d
im
e
n
s
io
n
r
o
a
d
r
a
il
in
la
n
d

n
a
v
ig
a
tio
n
(
C
)
t
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
m
o
d
e
v
ie
w
container
yard/carrier
placing the load unit
consignor
terminal
consignee
vessel/open sea
stripping
M2
truck / road
train / rail
light grey objects are not considered in detail
truck/road
train/rail
inland ship/inland waterway
aircraft/air network
M3
M4
P1
P2
1
E1
E2
P1
P2
E1
E2 M2
M3
M4
prehaulage truck/road endhaulage truck/roa
prehaulage train/rail mainhaulage train/rail endhaulage train/rail
mainhaulage inland ship/inland waterway
mainhaulage inland aircraft/air network
port,
airport
vessel/open sea
2
3
4
aircraft/airway
P3
shunting
terminal
shunting
Stuffing P: prehaulage M: mainhaulage E: endhaulage T: transhipment T: transhipment
M1 mainhaulage rolling road
shunting shunting
M1
M3 mainhaulage floating road
M3
TN TN
loading unit
c
o
n
t
a
c
t
|

r
e
s
u
l
t
|

a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
|

c
o
n
t
e
n
t
&

a
i
m
|

c
o
n
s
o
r
t
i
u
m
a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
standard process
stages
flows
DOOR-TO-DOOR TRANSPORT
c
o
n
t
a
c
t
|

r
e
s
u
l
t
|

a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
|

c
o
n
t
e
n
t
&

a
i
m
|

c
o
n
s
o
r
t
i
u
m
a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
framework
loading
unit
documents information
transhipment mainhaulage
end
haulage
pre
haulage
labour infrastructure equipment
(1)
chain
(3)
process
(4)
resource
(2)
entity
financial
performance
service quality
performance
operational
performance
environmental
performance
order
door-to-door
(B) performance dimension
PERFORMANCE FRAMEWORK
c
o
n
t
a
c
t
|

r
e
s
u
l
t
|

a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
|

c
o
n
t
e
n
t
&

a
i
m
|

c
o
n
s
o
r
t
i
u
m
a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
performance tables
Focus: the specific element the performance indicator focuses on system dimension performance dimension
ID
Indicator name
CATEGORY:
measurement unit
hours
kilograms
liftings
...
PARAMETER FOR CALCULATION
detailed specification of parameters
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION |
FURTHER CALCULATIONS
ADVICE | REFERENCE | SEE ALSO
operator
PARAMETER FOR CALCULATION
detailed specification of parameter
Description
Indicator category: The name of the performance indicator / indicator group
Influencing PI Influenced PI
IN: Other performance indicators which influence this
performance indicator
Specification Calculation
COCKPIIT Dimension
Recording
the collection regularity of the performance indicator
OUT: Performance indicators which are influenced by this
performance indicator
entitiy
process
resource
chain operational performance
service quality performance
financial performance
environmental performance
the detailed description of the performance indicator
12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
1 2 3 4
1 2
1
1 - 52
1 - 365
monthly
quarterly
six-monthly
yearly
weekly
daily
infrastructure equipment labour
prehaulage transhipment mainhaulage endhaulage
information loading untis documents
order door-to-door
/
+
-
:
*
divide
add
minus
compare
multiply
1
2
3
TIME
QUANTITY
MONEY
PI
INDICATOR TABLES
c
o
n
t
a
c
t
|

r
e
s
u
l
t
|

a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
|

c
o
n
t
e
n
t
&

a
i
m
|

c
o
n
s
o
r
t
i
u
m
a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
performance tables
example: chain system dimension
Total order lead time | cycle time
On-time service
Order completeness
Transport lead time
Overall damages | losses | thefts
Delays (arrvials | departures)
Noise
Total transport greenhouse gas emissions (CO2)
Transport and economic development
Total transport cost
1.1.1
1.1.2
1.1.3
1.2.1
1.2.2
1.2.3
1.2.4
1.2.5
1.2.6
1.2.7
- Average order to invoice time
- Order to invoice time development
- Percentage of transports on-time
- Percentage of consignments received as contracted
- Percentage of loading units received as contracted
- Physical accounting correspondence
- Percentage of delays
- Percentage of critical delays
- Total origin-destination lead time
- Average origin-destination lead time
- Percentage of transports with damages | losses | theft
- Percentage of damaged loading units
- Damages | losses | thefts per ton-kilometer
- Development of damages | losses | thefts | over time
- Percentage of people exposed to noise class 1
- Status | expansion of noise barriers
- Percentage of vehicles equipped with noise reduction
- Average diesel consumption
- Diesel Co2 per transport
- Equipment electricity Co2 per transport
- Infrastructure electricity Co2 per transport
- Ton-kilometers GDP ratio
- Total origin-destination transport cost | price | proceed
- Development of transport cost | price | proceeds over
Performance Indicator
operational
service quality
financial
environmental
(B) performance
dimension
financial
environmental
service quality
service quality
service quality
operational
loading
unit
documents information
transhipment mainhaulage
end
haulage
pre
haulage
labour infrastructure equipment
(1)
chain
(3)
process
(4)
resource
(2)
entity
financial
performance
service quality
performance
operational
performance
environmental
performance
order
door-to-door
(B) performance dimension
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
3 standard processes and 1 framework covering :
3 transport modes:
rail | road | inland waterways + rolling and floating/swimming road
4 system dimensions:
chain | entity | process | resource
4 performance dimensions:
operational | service quality | environmental | financal
36 Performance Tables including
96 Performance Indicators
24 chain PIs
13 entiy PIs
14 process PIs
45 resource PIs
c
o
n
t
a
c
t
|

r
e
s
u
l
t
|

a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
|

c
o
n
t
e
n
t
&

a
i
m
|

c
o
n
s
o
r
t
i
u
m
r
e
s
u
l
t
cockpiit concept
consignor
terminal
consignee
vessel/open sea
stripping
M2
re not considered in detail
M3
M4
P1
P2
E1
E2
port,
airport aircraft/airway
P3
shunting
terminal
shunting
Stuffing P: prehaulage M: mainhaulage E: endhaul age T: transhipment T: transhipment
shunting shunting
M1
M3
TN TN
loadingunit
(4 .1 ) i n f r as tr uct ur e
(4 . 2) e qu ip m e n t
(4 . 3) l a bo u r
(4) resource
(A) system

dimension
focus
INDICATOR TABLES
DOOR-TO-DOOR TRANSPORT
PERFORMANCE FRAMEWORK
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna
Department of Economics and Social Sciences
Institute of Production and Logistics
Feistmantelstrae 4, 1180 Vienna
http://www.wiso.boku.ac.at/pwl.html
Univ. Prof. Manfred Gronalt | manfred.gronalt@boku.ac.at
h2 projekt.beratung KG
Obere Viaduktgasse 10/7, 1030 Vienna
http://www.h2pro.at
Martin Posset | mcp@h2pro.at
Hans Huslmayer | hh@h2pro.at
c
o
n
t
a
c
t
|

r
e
s
u
l
t
|

r
e
s
u
l
t
a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
|

c
o
n
t
e
n
t
&

a
i
m
|

c
o
n
s
o
r
t
i
u
m
c
o
n
t
a
c
t