Performance indicators
Performance indicators should align with the strategic objectives. They should be able to determine the current and desired service levels and/or operating conditions from both transport and non-transport perspectives.
Performance indicators are used to measure network performance and targets, to determine both current and desired service levels and operating conditions. They tend to align with the strategic objectives. As such, NOPs should include transport and non-transport indicators.
Transport performance indicators form the bulk of the measures used. Level of Service (LoS) measures for modes (and increasingly for place based activities) are particularly useful. LoS measures help to:
- set minimum service levels and/or operating conditions for each mode (and place) being prioritised
- enable consideration of their relative importance and decisions around conflict resolution and trade-offs
- engage non-technical stakeholders by providing a common measure between modes (and place).
Performance indicators provide a quantitative means of comparing performance. Deciding which inputs are required for subsequent transport activities, such as signal operation and coordination, should be derived (ideally as an output) through the performance indicators, or at least the NOPs more generally.
Place-based indicators are also now being developed, as seen in the NSW and Victorian guidance. The Victorian approach will deliver place-based performance indicators in a LoS scale.
An overview of where performance indicators come from and the types used in network operation planning are illustrated in the figure below.
Network Operation Planning Performance Indicators
Source material
Source | Performance indicators |
|---|---|
Phase 1 - Network Operations Objectives in Figure 2 p18 and write-up p19-20, which highlights: "focus on service delivery by road agencies to meet the needs of road users and communities impacted by transport" Also, Section 2.3 p13 indicates other relevant / complementary Austroads publications:
| |
Signal Management Techniques to Support Network Operations (2015) | Section 3.2.3 - Performance Metrics p8-9 indicates: "Austroads has developed a framework in which to establish a level of service (LOS) rating for network operation planning, in order to support Step 4 in the NOP process, involving the establishment of existing and target LOS for the road network from the perspective of road users." |
Development of the Accessibility-Based Network Operations Planning Framework (2015) | Section 3.2.1 - Network Operation and Accessibility Objectives p15-19 provides accessibility indicators for "key road users and their accessibility needs and measuring how well he network supports these needs" for the following:
|
Guide to Traffic Management Part 4: Network Management Strategies (2020) | Section 5.2 - Network Operation Objectives p61 states: "Definitions of measurable performance benchmarks clarify the desired outcomes for the network. Network operation objectives are assigned specific performance metrics and targets. Network performance in network operation planning is quantified for the various road user groups, including metrics for the following:
Also, in this section and with the recommended use of the Network Fit Assessment tool the following is stated: "Road agencies should work with stakeholders to establish agreed and realistically achievable LOS targets, as defined by the LOS framework for the various links within the road network and for the various road users and LOS measures." |
Section 3.1.1 - Application of LOS Frameworks in NOP p8-9 states: "LOS is typically used as the measure of performance in network operation planning. The advantage of LOS, as a measure of performance, is that it provides a non-technical language that enables a broad range of stakeholders to be engaged in network operation planning. Another advantage of LOS is that a similar approach can be applied to each road user group, without necessarily having the same underlying metrics" Example LOS measures are provided in Tables 3.1 to 3.4 p10-11, with further descriptions of relevant considerations provided in Section 3.2 p12-13. | |
Guide to Traffic Management Part 9: Transport Control Systems – Strategies and Operations (2020) | Section 6.3.1 - Role in Network Operation Planning p64 states: "The assigned priorities for each road user determine the aspirational level-of-service (LOS) for the road user group." |
Source | Performance indicators |
|---|---|
Section 1.5 - Performance indicators and targets p28 states: "The Framework incorporates a series of performance indicators and targets that are mechanisms to operationalise objectives. A performance indicator is a measure that enables monitoring of performance in terms of progress towards a specific, defined objective. A performance target is the desired level of performance for a specific, defined performance indicator and hence an objective." Section 2.3 - Transport system indicators and targets p34 states: "A key policy choice for governments is setting transport system performance targets that are linked to the transport system objectives." | |
Road Network Planning Urban Design ‘Place’ Character Assessment Methodology and Guidance Notes (2019) | Appendix A, Section 3.1 - Project Stages and Figure 11 p15 includes the quote below regarding the Network Performance stage in the development of the Road Network Plans. "Network performance:
--> Contribution of the Urban Design report to performance assessment of Place and development of performance targets. |
MRWA Network Operation Planning Framework (2014) | Section2.5 - Phase 4: Network Performance and Travel Demand p9-11 states: "Performance gap analysis helps to identify critical links or sites with operational problems, the time and day they occur, and the road user groups that are most impacted. The nature of the problems then need to be understood to guide the succeeding network operation planning phases. It is useful to examine the nature of problems broadly by examining the performance gaps in the context of the following aspects:
It is also useful to analyse gaps at the network level. For example network level performance can be quantified aggregating LOS and performance gaps of links and nodes. A network-level LOS and gap analysis allows performance trade-offs to be better understood across the network and a network-wide optima can be pursued." |
Module 2 - Network performance p16-17 indicates that the performance of the transport network is considered under the following four themes:
Further detail and example performance indicators are provided in the table on page 17. | |
A comparative study of four network operations planning frameworks guidelines (2010) | Phase 5 – Evaluate network performance (current and future) p22 states: "Evaluating network performance involves establishing an appropriate performance evaluation criteria comprising performance measures and targets (desired service levels or operating conditions), and analysing the performance of the network within PIA at present and at the agreed planning horizon. This is essentially a gap analysis exercise to identify any gaps in operations performance at present and in future, which need to be addressed. The performance evaluation criteria should directly correspond to the operations objectives. The available analytical tools for performance evaluation include capacity and level-of-service analysis as well as performance measures based on real-time data. Local knowledge and anecdotal evidence may provide useful signposts in the path to identify performance issues." |
Section 3 - Measuring the performance of the road network p14 lists the following key performance measures that for part of the strategy:
| |
Performance indicators (goals and supporting operations objectives) are included as part of the fictional examples included in Section 2 - Model Corridors p9-40 and Section 3 - Model Subareas p41- 73. | |
Section 6.1.1 - Users p237-239 states: "The aim of any road operator is to satisfy the users' requirements in the most cost-effective manner."
"Common factors that concern them [users]:
|
Source | Performance indicators |
|---|---|
In the ROP they are the following:
These are generally used and/or relate to the comparative / relative performance of this route against the others, and the network as a whole. | |
| |
Network Principles, road hierarchy definitions and Level of Service definitions where developed based upon strategic documents from the strategic partners. | |
To be completed, but noted as follows:
| |
Warrigal Road Movement and Place – Intersection Operating Principles | Performance Indicators we derived from Movement and Place principles and cover:
Network strategy and sub-regional network plans feed into M&P and this strategic intent informs the performance indicators. Movement and Place classifications are applied to set future minimum performance target performance. Existing and future minimum performance target performance is measured by LoS. The Gap between existing and aspirational / minimum performance target LoS have weightings applied to reflect their relative performance, importance, etc., and then inform what the 'performance Gap' is. |