ORGANIZATIONAL FACTORS
IN TRANSIT
Zaida E. Rico, P.E., M.S.C.E.E.
Ph.D. Candidate
zaida.rico@upr.edu
Department of Civil Engineering and Land Surveying
University of Puerto Rico – Mayagüez Campus,
Dwight David Eisenhower Transportation Fellowship Program,
Coordinator: Prof. Alberto Figueroa, P.E., Ph.D.
Advisor: Prof. Didier Valdés, Ph.D.
August 12, 2010
AGENDA

As this project has being through fully presented
to most of this audience before, this presentation
contains:
Introduction including the main objective, scope and
background general information.
 Brief summary of the methodology that is relevant to
the new work performed
 General results and interpretations
 Concluding discussion and recommendations for
further study resulting from the new work performed

INTRODUCTION
OBJECTIVE

To study if there is an
effect of some
organizational factors
on the effectiveness of
its transit institution.

It is presumed that the
system’s effectiveness is
proportional to the relative
usage of its services.
SCOPE

NTD reporting
institutions

Manage heavy rail
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
 Transportation related systems are comparable to the organizational framework
components.
 NTD includes several organizational capacity variables, however, internal
organizational environment is not well represented.
Organizational Framework
Transportation-Related Systems
External
Operating
Environment
Activity
System
The Organization
Internal
Environment
Flows
Organizational
Performance
Organizational
Capacity
Figure re-drawn from: Douglas Horton et al. EVALUATING
CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT: Experiences from Research and
Development Organizations around the World. International
Development Research Centre, Canada. 2003.
Transportation
System
Figure re-drawn from:
Manheim, M.L.
Fundamentals of transportation systems analysis,
Volume 1. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts,
USA. 1979.
METHODOLOGY
METHODOLOGY
Literature review
 Preliminary analysis using the National Transit
Database (NTD) of 2008



Cluster analysis to select sample
Survey development and execution


All answered that will pass it to appropriate person
None answer received
Data collection through institutions’ websites
 Evaluation of collected data
 Developing
conclusion
and
providing
recommendations regarding the study approach
and organizational factors

CLUSTER ANALYSIS TO DETERMINE
SAMPLE FOR CONCEPTUAL ANALYSIS
Centroid (UPT/
Population)
Cluster
Cases in Cluster System
0.606130
0.322865
0.154466
0.063253
0.012186
2
1
3
5
4
1
7
35
114
421
Total
578
NYCT
MBTA
MARTA
MDT
PATH
PRHTA
category
SELECTION OF FACTORS
Previously performed literature review on both
transportation and organization was used to select
the factors to be studied.
Factors mentioned in literature that, according to
Business Dictionary, are also the major
components of the internal environment of an
organization:
organization's mission statement
leadership styles
organizational culture.
Institutional structure is added, as it was
specifically considered important by Leland &
Smirnova (2008) and Marsden & May (2006).
SELECTION OF FACTORS
Factors
Organization's
Internal
Environment
(1)
Definition
Literature Review
Conditions, entities, events, and factors
within an organization which influence
its activities and choices, particularly
the behavior of the employees.
Major factors considered part of the internal environment of
an organization includes: organization's mission
statement, leadership styles, and its organizational
culture. (1)
Organization’s Written declaration of a firm's core
Mission
purpose and focus which normally
(1)
remain unchanged
Leadership
Style (1)
Formal and informal organizational
structure, policies, and procedures
through which leadership is exercised
Organization's past and current
assumptions, experiences, philosophy,
and values that hold it together, and
are expressed in its self-image, inner
Organizational workings, interactions with the outside
Culture (1)
world, and future expectations
Institutional
Structure (2)
An organization's complex system of
mutually connected and dependent
elements or parts, which make up a
definite manner of arrangement.
(1) businessdictionary.com
Transportation in the New Millennium in 1999 identified,
among others, that for the future it is needed that agencies, in
order to be effective, must have in place well-defined
missions, goals, and objectives; sophisticated strategic
planning tools; and outcome-oriented processes for prioritizing
investment decisions based on customer input.
Leland & Smirnova (2008) concluded that future research
should consider the analysis of variables that specifically relate
to the different types of authority systems
TCRP Report 21 (1997) concludes that unless the agency is
one that encourages innovation and communication up and
down organizational lines, the new view of service will be
thwarted.
Marsden & May (2006) pointed out that a combination of the
following can achieve significant improvements in a short
period of time: right powers and institutional structure, flexible
funding, and a strong political support.
(2) eionet.europa.eu
SURVEY

As
previously
mentioned,
a survey
was
developed
and
distributed.
However, it
was nonresponsive.
Control
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Mission Statement
What's your institution's mission statement?
About how many times your institution's mission statement have changed in the past 20 years?
When was the last time your institution's mission statement changed? (Year)
Organizational Culture
Who (position, department, etc.) is responsible/in charg of performing strategic planning in your institution?
How your institution's strategic planning is performed? (leadership, regulations, processes)
How the priorities and processes are established in your institution and by whom? (leader's policy, mission statement,
department's historical goals and objectives, as trouble appears, patron's survey, stakeholder's particular interests, etc.)
Institutional Structure
Can you provide me a copy of your institution's organizational charts (related to other complementary institutions and the internal
one)?
Can I contact you later if I have questions regarding the organizational structure of your institution?
On which decade was your institution created?
What is the service sector of your institution? (municipality, region, state, country)
Which modes of transportation is your institution responsible for?
12
Which are your institution's main fundig sources? (government assignment, service & products income, private support, taxes, bonds)
Leadership Style
I'll be describing you different leadership styles. Please let me know which style best describes your organization's. Please let me know if
different styles apply at different levels. If that's the case, please indicate me at which level each style applies, by indicating the leader position at
which it refers. Please let me know if you would like to add any comment or appropriate discussion.
Style
Description
Authorit The leader dictates policies and procedures, decides what goals are to be achieved, and directs and controls all activities
arian
without any meaningful participation by the subordinates.
Domina Leadership characterized by a clear line of authority that gives the leader the power of delegation, and the power to control
nt
the subordinates' level of participation in decision making process.
Transfor
mationa The leader identifies the needed change, creates a vision to guide the change through inspiration, and executes the change
l
with the commitment of the members of the group.
Achieve
ment Management which sets challenging goals, assists in training, emphasizes improvement, and expects the highest levels of
oriented performance.
Particip The leader involves subordinates in goal setting, problem solving, team building etc., but retains the final decision making
ative
authority.
Delegati
ve
The leader transfers decision making power to one or more employees, but remains responsible for their decisions.
Emphasizes procedures and historical methods regardless of their usefulness in changing environments. Bureaucratic
Bureauc leaders attempt to solve problems by adding layers of control, and their power comes from controlling the flow of
ratic
information.
Laissez faire (French for, allow to pass or let go). Non-authoritarian leadership style. Leaders try to give least possible
Laissez- guidance to subordinates, and try to achieve control through less obvious means. They believe that people excel when
faire
they are left alone to respond to their responsibilities and obligations in their own ways.
INFORMATION GATHERED THROUGH
INSTITUTIONS’ WEBSITES

Mission


Mission Statement
Leadership Style (inference interpretation from structure)

Government Structure




Institutional Structure


Governance
General Leadership
Individual Leadership
Authority Level
Organizational Culture (indirect)
Diversity of operated modes
Existence of fare integration
Own Transportation Police
 History






Agency Enacting Law Date
Transportation History Fact at Date of Enacting
Main Organization Paradigm as per Literature at Date of Enacting
RESULTS
MISSION

Mission Statement
Mission Key Word
MTA
service
x
economic
x
quality
x
regional
x
x
excellence
x
x
community
MBTA MARTA
x
x
x
x
x
x
safe
customer
x
reliable
x
environment
x
x
6
x
x
4
x
3
x
3
x
4
3
x
3
x
x
x
3
x
x
2
x
2
x
2
x
5
Count
x
efficient
Count
Dade PANYNJ PRHTA
8
6
4
x
2
6
33
MISSION STATEMENT

Observations





The most repeated word is “service”, which is found
at all mission statements.
The institution with most of those words in their
statement is MARTA, which have 8.
The system with more usage, MTA, emphasizes the
following: service, economy, quality, region and
excellence.
The system centroid of the lesser usage, PANYNJ,
emphasizes: service, economy, quality and region.
These are the same as MTA, except for “excellence”.
Conclusion

It doesn’t appear to be a relation between the
concepts being important to be included in the
mission and the relative patronage.
LEADERSHIP STYLE
Style
Description
Authoritarian
The leader dictates policies and procedures, decides what goals are to be achieved, and
directs and controls all activities without any meaningful participation by the
subordinates.
Transformational
Leadership characterized by a clear line of authority that gives the leader the power of
delegation, and the power to control the subordinates' level of participation in decision
making process.
The leader identifies the needed change, creates a vision to guide the change through
inspiration, and executes the change with the commitment of the members of the
group.
Achievement
oriented
Management which sets challenging goals, assists in training, emphasizes improvement,
and expects the highest levels of performance.
Participative
The leader involves subordinates in goal setting, problem solving, team building etc., but
retains the final decision making authority.
Delegative
The leader transfers decision making power to one or more employees, but remains
responsible for their decisions.
Bureaucratic
Emphasizes procedures and historical methods regardless of their usefulness in
changing environments. Bureaucratic leaders attempt to solve problems by adding
layers of control, and their power comes from controlling the flow of information.
Laissez-faire
Laissez faire (French for, allow to pass or let go). Non-authoritarian leadership style.
Leaders try to give least possible guidance to subordinates, and try to achieve control
through less obvious means. They believe that people excel when they are left alone to
respond to their responsibilities and obligations in their own ways.
Dominant
Definitions as per BusinessDictionary.com
LEADERSHIP STYLE…

General Governance
Board Appointed
Board Members
By
MTA
Y
17
MBTA
Y
5
MARTA
Y
18
Dade
Y
PANYNJ
Y
12
PRHTA
N
1
Notes
Interpretation
Appears to be Participative or
Delegative as positions, while
appointed by Governor, are
Positions recommended by mayor or
recommended by different
Governor county executives of service region.
leaders.
MassDOT board governs it and MBTA. Appears to be Dominant due to the
MBTA will be part of MassDOT but relation among agencies sharing
Governor will retain a separate legal existence.
the board.
Could be Participative due the big
Members represents service cities
amount of board members and
and counties.
their representation.
Conty governed by board of
comisioners.
Not enough information.
Each governor appoints 6
comissioners, subject to state senate
approval. Comissioners are public Appears to be Participative due the
officials without pay for overlaping 6 role and term of commissioners
years. Governors retains veto for while governors retains veto (final
Governors
acts of his state comissioners.
decision).
PRHTA Board suppressed in 1971, Appears to be Authoritarian, as an
powers given to the Secretary of
unique leader is responsible for
Governor Transportation who governs DTPW.
policy.
GOVERNANCE
As can be noticed, all systems, but PRHTA, are
governed by a Board composed of several members.
 Not all boards have uneven amount of members.



The institutions with more users (MTA, MBTA) have multiple
and uneven amount of members.
The systems with lesser amount (MARTA, MANYNJ, PRHTA)
have either even amount of members or a single one.
Boards are generally appointed by the Governor.
PRHTA used to be governed by a board, but since
1971 it is governed by a single person, the
Secretary of Transportation, who is appointed by
the Governor.
 Remark: The relation between governance or style
and effectiveness is not evident, although the
amount and representation of board members
might be related to it.


…LEADERSHIP…

Leadership Structure…
Principal
Leader
Main Divisions
Chief Operating Officer, Chief of Staff, Senior
Advisor to Chariman, Deputy Executive Director
for Corporate and Community Affairs, Director
for Labor Relations, Chief Financial Officer,
Chairman/Chief Auditor General, Chief Diversity Officer, Deputy
MTA
Executive
Executive Director for General Counsel, Deputy
Officer
Executive Director for Administration, Deputy
Executive Director for Security, Director of
Government Affairs, Director for Policy and
Media Relations, and Director of Special Project
Development & Planning
Other Leadership
Interpretation
Each of 7 MTA agencies
have its president.
Agencies: NYCT, Long
Isaland Rail Road, Long
Dominant /
Island Bus, Metro-North
Bureaucratic
Rairoad, Bridges and
Tunnels, Capital
Construction, Bus
Company.
MassDOT is
A single person occupy
administered by
the positions of General
a Secretary of
Manager of the MBTA
MassDOT oversees four new divisions:
Transportation,
and the Rail & Transit
MBT
Highway, Mass Transit, Aeronautics and the
appointed by
Administrator of
Authoritarian
A
Registry of Motor Vehicles (RMV), in addition to
the Governor to
MassDOT to manage the
an Office of Planning and Programming.
serve as Chief
day-to-day operations of
Executive
the MBTA and MassDOT
Officer.
‘s Transit Division.
MAR
TA
Operations, Maintenance, Finance, Human
Resources
Executive Management
Team
Participative
…LEADERSHIP…

…Leadership Structure…
Principal Leader
Main Divisions
Miami-Dade has a Mayor with the
Departments (sample): Transit,
power to veto Commission action
Public Works, Sustainability, Port of
items. In January 2007, the
Miami, Planning & Zoning,
Dade
Mayor was given additional
Environmental Resources
powers providing for the
Management, Aviation, Building
oversight of the day-to-day
Code Compliance, among others.
operations of Miami-Dade.
Other Leadership
Interpretation
Department Directors
Authoritarian /
Bureaucratic
An Executive Director, appointed
Under the Chief Operating
by the Board of Commissioners,
Officer there are the
There are four main officers under
is responsible for managing the
following
PANY
the Executive Director: financial,
operation of the Port Authority in
divisions/modes: aviation,
NJ
administrative, operating and
a manner consistent with the
tunnels/bridges/terminals,
capital planning.
agency's policies, as established
rail tranist, port
by the Board.
commerce.
There are common divisions of
legal affairs, communications &
public relations, and strategic
planning that are shared among
PRHTA has an Executive Director, the DTPW and PRHTA. In general,
Each PRHTA main division
appointed by the DTPW Secretary PRHTA builds infrastructure and
has a Deputy Executive
PRHTA
with the approval of the
DTPW maintains it. PRHTA also
Director.
Governor.
operates the freeway and heavy rail
systems. PRHTA main divisions:
Infrastructure, Traffic and
Freeways, Transportation, Finance,
Human Resources.
Dominant
Authoritarian /
Bureaucratic
LEADERSHIP

Remark:

The relation between structure or style and
effectiveness is not evident from this exercise.
INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE

Authority Level
The three representatives of the clusters with more
usage have a master institution that manages several
modes at a regional level, covering several counties or
several cities.
 The representative of the clusters with mid level
usage have a smaller coverage area in terms of
amount of jurisdictions (one county).
 The representative of the clusters with less usage
have state or bi state jurisdiction.
 Remark: Authority level might have some influence
with effectiveness.

ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE…


Modes
 All institutions from the different cluster representatives manage
several modes.
 Could be interpreted that the general culture includes the
multimodal point of view.
 Therefore, this might not be a differentiating characteristic.
Fare Integration
 All institutions have some level of fare integration.
 The cluster with the major usage have a single fare pass
integrating other modes managed by the institution and also
another heavy rail managed by other institution (this one is in the
smaller usage cluster).
 It appears that level of integration might be a differentiating
factor.
 Could be interpreted that the integration vision could be part of
the culture.
…ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

Own Police
 The following have their own police force:
 MTA
 MARTA
 Miami-Dade County
 Port Authority NY/NJ
 DTPW has an order corps to emit parking violation
tickets.
 Having an own police for enforcement could be
interpreted as a culture of empowerment to enforce
policies and strategies.
 Doesn’t seem to be a differentiating characteristic.
…ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE: HISTORY…
Agency Enacting Law Date
Transportation History at Date of Enacting
MTA
1968 (1st MTA Board Chair)
On 67, Public Roads Administration, Bureau of Motor
Carrier Safety and National Highway Safety Bureau
becomes part of the Federal Highway Administration;
under the Department of Transportation. On 68,
Federal Aid Highway Act amended to include a section
of Civil Rights within the Office of the Secretary of
Transportation. Office of Civil Rights turned into a
departmental office on 69.
MBTA
1964 (Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority,
having been voted into law in June of that year by the
General Court)
On 63, Vietnam war. On 64, Under president Lyndon
Johnson, Urban Mass Transportation Act (3-year
program).
MARTA
1965 (the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority Act
was passed by the state legislature and subsequently
approved in four counties and the City of Atlanta, creating
MARTA)
County: 1957 (Metropolitan Dade County government
was officially established) Transit: 1960 (The County
Commission passed an ordinance creating the
Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) to unify the different
transit operations into one countywide service. This
ordinance provided for the purchase, development, and
operation of an adequate mass transit system by the
County. These companies included the Miami Transit
Company, Miami Beach Railway Company, South Miami
Coach Lines, and Keys Transit Company on Key Biscayne
and would be managed by National City Management Co.)
On 64, Under president Lyndon Johnson, Urban Mass
Transportation Act (3-year program).
Dade
PANYNJ Port Authority 1921. PATH 1962
PRHTA
DTPW: 1952. PRHTA: 1965 (Highway Authority, 1991
ammended to Highway and Transportation Authority)
On 56, Under Dwight David Eisenhower presidency,
Federal Aid Highway Act to support National system of
Interstate & Highway Defense, creation o f Highway
Trust Fund.
On 56, Under Dwight David Eisenhower presidency,
Federal Aid Highway Act to support National system of
Interstate & Highway Defense, creation o f Highway
Trust Fund.
On 64, Under president Lyndon Johnson, Urban Mass
Transportation Act (3-year program). On 91, Under
president Bush Sr., Intermodal Surface Transportation
Efficiency Act, creation of Federal Transit
Administration, and Intermodalism office at the Bureau
of Transportation Statistics.
Organization Paradigm in
Literature
Recognition of specialization
and that its rate of increase is
faster than rate of change of
organizational culture.
Recognition of specialization
and that its rate of increase is
faster than rate of change of
organizational culture.
Recognition of specialization
and that its rate of increase is
faster than rate of change of
organizational culture.
Organization is a mean to
satisfy performance. Its
efficiency is tied to its
simplicity, short chain of
command and manager's
training.
Recognition of specialization
and that its rate of increase is
faster than rate of change of
organizational culture.
Recognition of specialization
and that its rate of increase is
faster than rate of change of
organizational culture.
…ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

History





Enacting year of the institutions was compared to an
historical event related to transportation and to the
main transportation paradigm as per literature of
that time.
Most institutions were created around the 1960’s.
At that time, federal agencies were re-arranging and
laws were created to emphasize mass transit.
Organization literature of the time emphasized the
fact of specialization.
Remarks:
The historical perspective might have influenced on the
creation of subdivisions. This could lead to confusion of
roles if not well planned or if the intention is merely to
comply with regulations.
 Since is similar for most, might not be a differentiating
factor.

CONCLUSION AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
CONCLUDING DISCUSSION

Since the greater usage was found on the institution that integrated its fare,
not only with all its modes but with some modes managed by other
institution, the study of mode integration deserves further study.


As the three institutions with greater usage are ones that serve at regional
level, while the lesser usage is observed at institutions that serve at state or
greater level, it can be said that to study the service area level may be
worthwhile.


While a regional level appear to be beneficial in considering several stages of its
user’s trips, this ability seems to diminish in greater areas of service.
Other aspect that seems to deserve be further studied is the configuration of
the boards governing and taking decisions in the institutions.



It may appear that if an institution finds out that its users needs other existing
services managed by others, the service quality and its usage may be improved with
some kind of coordination, fare and/or other integration measures.
The ones with greater usage have multiple and uneven amount of members.
The ones with less usage have either even amount of members or a single one,
situation that could make the decision making process a time consuming one (in the
case of even members) or bias it (in the case of a single member).
The organizational configuration is the other factor that is recommended to
be further investigated.

The institutions with the greater usage have operational divisions per modes,
however, the rest of the administration is considered as a whole or as a system.
RECOMMENDATIONSFOR FURTHER STUDY

Consider the following factors as they might have
some influence on transit usage:

Mode integration


Jurisdiction of service area


Coverage and how it is considered
Governing board configuration


How is it considered
How is the decision making process
Organizational configuration

How are the responsibilities distributed
THANK YOU
Questions & Comments