At the UITP conference in 1982, London Underground and Hamburg Hochbahn agreed to carry out a benchmarking exercise to compare their two railways in depth, with additional data for 24 other metro railways. The metros were very different in size, organisational structure and accounting practices, so many figures were difficult to compare. Even so, the project led to highly successful productivity improvement programmes and the innovative use of key performance indicators (KPIs).
In Hong Kong, the Mass Transit Railway Corporation (MTR) also used KPIs successfully, showing a regular year-on-year improvement in their selected indicators. In 1994, MTR felt that it would be of value to exchange performance data and investigate best practice amongst similar heavy metros. They proposed to metros in London (LUL), Paris (RATP), New York (NYCT) and Berlin (BVG) to form a benchmarking consortium, which became known as the “Group of Five”.
Growth into CoMET, the Community of Metros
The issues of control and cost for the group were addressed by using the Railway and Transport Strategy Centre (RTSC) at Imperial College London. The centre facilitates the benchmarking programme as a venture under the control of the metro participants themselves, rather than offering a pre-determined programme. The group is under the control of a President from one of the participants, a post which revolves on an annual basis from metro to metro. This enabled the participants to direct efforts towards the areas which they felt would produce the greatest benefits or which were for them “hot topics” dictated by immediate issues arising from their own situations. Such issues included exploring reductions in maintenance cost and their relationship with reliability levels, or the impact of fare regulation on metro performance.
The first tasks carried out under the programme were to design and select a system of KPIs. At the same time, case studies identifying best practice in line capacity, investment effectiveness and maintenance were completed. The line capacity study showed that one of the best ways to increase capacity was by the control of the “dwell time” in stations. It was a bilateral study between London and Hong Kong, but according to the philosophy of the group, the results were shared with the other members. NYCT seized on them immediately and launched a pilot project in New York entitled “Step Aside – Speed Your Ride”, which produced an immediate 4.5% improvement in capacity on one of New York’s busiest lines, with about 17% considered as achievable. This was done with minimal investment, merely some markings to tell people where to stand and some departure clocks to allow the drivers to standardise their “dwell time”.
As news of the group’s progress filtered out, Mexico City STC, São Paulo Metro and Tokyo Metro decided to join in 1996. With eight members onboard, the group became known as CoMET. Over time, the group has grown and responded to the tremendous growth of metro systems around the world, including the construction of many new systems in Asia.
The Creation of Nova, CoMET’s Sister Group
The Nova Group of Metros was formed in 1998, following the success of CoMET. Nova was originally comprised of seven small to medium-sized metro systems: Glasgow Subway (SPT), Kowloon-Canton Railway Company (KCRC – Hong Kong), Metropolitano de Lisboa, Metro de Madrid, Tyne & Wear Metro (Newcastle), Oslo Metro (Sporveier) and Singapore SMRT. Nova used the same benchmarking principles developed and proven in CoMET. Over time, Nova also grew significantly in response to the growing importance of metros and the creation of new metros in cities around the world.
CoMET and Nova together form the world’s metro benchmarking community. Together, they comprise 34 metro systems in 32 cities around the world (see details of current members). Although the two groups meet separately, they collaborate on KPI data benchmarking, in-depth case studies, and more informal contact through this website. Based on the principles and successful benchmarking model of CoMET and Nova, the International Bus Benchmarking Group (IBBG) was established in 2004, the International Suburban Railway Benchmarking Group (ISBeRG) was established in 2010, and the American Bus Benchmarking Group (ABBG) was established in 2011.
Each metro tends to have some areas in which it excels, but other areas where it can learn from other participants – and the group then offers a forum in which members can identify how to implement those lessons. In many cases, the more informal contacts between the metros have been as positive and productive as the formal programme, with increasing numbers of bilateral visits and technical collaboration. One metro even used the internet to explore the possibility of acquiring some used rolling stock from other members of the group, in order to cut down the acquisition cycle time by a year. Another stated that they expected the group to carry on indefinitely, since the benefits were continuing to increase.