National Smart Transport Ticket Needed

While Adam Carey's article on the use of motor vehicle electronic toll tags on public transport was an April fools day joke, the idea has some merit ("E-Tags the go as myki take its toll, lobby group says", The Age, 1 April 2013). A traveler from NSW cannot use their MYKI card interstate, but a motorist can use their e-tag on a toll road interstate. This is not due to an inherent technical incompatibility between the smart card technologies, they all use the same standards. State governments have chosen to block the use of smart tickets interstate to protect their own revenue, inconveniencing the traveling public and increasing cost. If state governments wished them to do so, travelers could use their MYKI from Melbourne interchangeably with Translink go card Brisbane, SmartRider Perth, Metrocard Adelaide, and the future Opal card Sydney.

 The federal government could provide a forum to plan this interchange. The encourage states to cooperate, the federal government could threaten to use its banking powers to open up transport payments to all financial institutions. The contact-less smart cards issued by Australian banks are compatible with the state's ticketing systems and the federal government could require the states to accept these cards under federal banking legislation. Faced with ticketing competition from all banks, states are likely to be willing to cooperate as a second best option.

Victorian Government ICT Strategy

A draft "Victorian Government ICT Strategy" (1 October 2012) is available for comment by 17 October 2012. The 25 page document is available in PDF  and Microsoft Word, but not as a native web page. The strategy mentions a couple of successful ICT projects, but contains no references to past Victorian government strategies, nor problems with previous ICT projects. It seems that the Victorian government is unwilling to learn from the past and so is likely to repeat mistakes, such as the MyKi Ticketing Project.

CoMConnect: Exploring Melbourne's Digital Future

The city of Melbourne is hosting "CoMConnect: Exploring Melbourne's Digital Future", 11 August 2012. This is a free "un-conference" on how how digital technology can improve Melbourne.

This may be of interest to teachers, as education is a big part of the Digital City. Also other cities have Digital City programs, including the Wellington Digital Strategy and Action Plan, Digital Manchester and Canberra My Digital City innovation prize.

I booked to attend the event, when I was in Melbourne for ICCSE2012, but the event was delayed due to the Melbourne state by-election. So I will not now be able to attend, but here are some suggestions I have for a digital Melbourne:

1. Fix MiKi Ticketing system: On my recent visit to Melbourne I tried Miki smart ticketing system. This was much more difficult and unreliable than systems in places such as Istanbul and Canberra. I suggest Melbourne and the Victorian government obtain federal government support and funding for making all the state smart ticket systems inter-operable, so that someone with a MiKi could use it in other states (and at the same time they could fix the problems with the MiKi).
   
2. Lego Education Melbourne for Robotics and Renewable Energy : Melbourne has a wonderful resource in the Lego Education Centers. These run courses in robotics and renewable energy using Lego education kits, for school students and teachers. I suggest that similar courses would benefit business and government.
3. Un-conference venues: Modern "un"-conferences require venues with different facilities to last century events. What is needed is a flexible layout which can be reconfigured by the participants, with walls you can write on, display screens and wireless networking. The preeminent example of this in Australia is the University of Canberra's Inspire Center., which as used for the 2012 GovCamp/GovHack. I suggest Melbourne catalog existing such venues and encourage the development of new ones.
4. Teach On-line Communication: A digital city is partly on-line. This requires the citizens, business and cultural community to have good on-line communication skills. As an example, an on-line event, such as CoMConnect requires its own on-line presence (2012 GovCamp/GovHack provides a good example). Melbourne has numerous public and private educational institutions which can teach how to do this. I suggest Melbourne City Council host free introductory courses at its public libraries, for the citizens.
   

Here is the official CoMConnect event announcement:

The City of Melbourne is exploring how digital technology can help keep Melbourne one of the greatest places to be - at work, at play and at home in the 21st Century.

CoM Connect will bring together community leaders, thinkers, designers, technologists, researchers, urbanists and makers over the weekend of the 11th and 12th August to explore Melbourne's digital future.

This is your invitation to join us!

We expect demand for this exciting event to be very high so act quickly to secure your spot.

Important things to know...

• Our hashtag for the event: #comconnect
• We ask that you do your best to commit to participating over both days. We understand this is a big ask and for our part we promise to make sure you are well fed, mentally stimulated and entertained by a diverse mix of fascinating people and conversations.
  
• Due to the anticipated high demand we've had to limit the number of tickets to 1 per person. If you had previously registered to 'save the date' on behalf of friends or colleagues please forward them the invitation so they may register themselves.
  
• In order to make sure we have a healthy mix of backgrounds and perspectives participating over the weekend a small number of invitations have already been issued. The remaining places will be allocated on a first come/first served basis.
• In the event that all tickets are snapped up a waitlist will be used for the overflow. This means if you find yourself unable to make it please let the organisers know so someone else can take your place.

More about the event...

The Aims of CoM Connect...

• Build Community – Start to build a network of people and companies interested in working alongside the City of Melbourne to explore ways we can deliver better experiences and services to those who live, work and play within the municipality.
• Build Knowledge - Create an environment where leading Urban and Digital thinkers, researchers and practitioners can share share their knowledge about emerging trends and what they might mean for the City and its residents and visitors.
• Inspire – Showcase examples of cutting edge ideas, projects and research already taking place across Melbourne.
  

The Format...

• CoM Connect will be run as an unconference or open space event where the topics of discussion and the agenda are set by the participants.
• Each day will start with a blank timetable that we'll populate with the talks and discussions the participants (yes, that means you!) want to lead and initiate.
  
• Our venue at The Hub provides us with a multitude of adaptable spaces that can just as easily accommodate a plenary session for 200 as a conversation between a few people.
• Once the timetable is populated it's up to you to decide which sessions you would like to attend and which talks and discussions you'd like to participate in.
• For each session or discussion we ask that notes are kept and shared so all our creative and intellectual output is captured.

The Outcomes...

• In the days following the event the City of Melbourne (along with everyone who participated) will be presented with a summary that outlines the main themes, opportunities and areas for further investigation. This will help guide the City of Melbourne's future research and engagement activities as we work towards developing a Digital City Strategy.

Victorian Whole of Government ICT Strategy

The Victorian government has announced work on a Whole of Government ICT Strategy. This follows an Ombudsman and Auditor-General released a "Own motion investigation into ICT-enabled projects" (November 2011).

The Ombudsman and AG looks at ten major Victorian IT projects which were over-budget and under performed. The best known of the problem projects is the MyKi smart ticketing system. The problems found are common to IT projects in the public and private sectors and the remedies will be familiar to any student of IT.

It is well know in the IT profession that many IT projects fail and that these failures are usually due to problems of project governance, not technical issues. When working for the Defence Department I part of a team which did a quick investigation of an IT project each week. These projects had sincere hardworking staff, who in most cases knew what was wrong, but were trapped in a system which would not admit failure.

Unfortunately, these days as an ICT consultant, I am called in only after a project has failed to be an expert witness in court cases, when blame is being assigned. Given a pile of project documents about a metre high, I can usually find the point (about one third from the start of the project), where it started to go wrong. This is where the project plan said the project was to meet a milestone, but did not. Rather than stop the project at this point and rectify the problem (or cancel the project), the management choose to keep going and hope for the best, which does not happen.

This "hope for the best" attitude is something I help teach IT students at the Australian National University to avoid. It will be interesting to see how the Victorian Government's new strategy evolves.

Some excerpts from the 125 page report:

Contents
Foreword
Executive summary

• Common themes
  
• Framework to better manage ICT-enabled projects

Background

• What is ICT?
  
• History
• Investigation
• Cabinet documents
• CenITex
• Report structure

Common themes

1. Leadership, accountability and governance
2. Planning
3. Funding
4. Probity and procurement
5. Project management

Framework to better manage ICT-enabled projects and recommendations

1. Leadership, accountability and governance
2. Planning
3. Funding
4. Probity and procurement
5. Project management

Case studies

1. Link
2. HealthSMART
3. myki
4. RandL
5. Client Relationship Information System (CRIS)
6. Ultranet
7. Integrated Courts Management System (ICMS)
   
8. Property and Laboratory Management (PALM)
9. HRAssist
10. Housing Integrated Information Program (HIIP)

...

Framework to better manage ICT-enabled projects ...

Leadership, accountability and governance
• Agency executives are to show stronger leadership; robust governance practices are to be implemented; and project staff are to be held to account for the performance of ICT-enabled projects.
• The role of DTF in ICT-enabled projects is to be enhanced and the value of Gateway as a mechanism for external oversight and accountability is to be capitalised.

Planning
• Business cases for some of the projects I examined were not subjected to adequate scrutiny. I have made recommendations to improve the level of scrutiny applied. The government’s ’high-value and high-risk’ process introduced in 2010 also provides for increased
scrutiny of business cases.

Funding
• Agencies are to adopt a whole of life approach to costing and funding major ICT systems and DTF is to assist by establishing a maintenance and replacement fund for these systems.
• The government is to consider refining how projects are funded to make agencies more accountable to government throughout the life of major ICT-enabled projects.

Probity and procurement
• Agencies are to adopt stricter probity practices.
• Agencies are to adopt robust approaches to purchasing ICT systems; DTF is to explore the potential to harness best practice procurement practices from other countries; and the Victorian Government Solicitor’s Office is to examine and endorse all proposed contracts before they are signed to ensure the contract protects the interests of the state.

Project management
• Agencies are to adopt established project management methods.
• DTF and the State Services Authority (SSA) are to develop strategies to recruit and retain skilled ICT staff within government and better monitor the quality of work provided by contractors. ...

3. myki

Key issues
• The project is at least $350 million over budget and at least four years behind schedule.
• The Transport Ticketing Authority (TTA) was overly optimistic in believing it could achieve a two-year delivery of the system: less than half that achieved elsewhere in the world.
• The project proposed an ‘open architecture’43 solution: an approach not previously undertaken, heightening associated risk.
• The ‘outcomes-based’44 agreement proved problematic to manage and led to ambiguities and specification ‘creep’.
• Two Chief Executive Officers departed the TTA shortly following failure by the TTA to meet key delivery dates.
• Initially, the TTA board did not have the requisite number of appointees with relevant experience when needed.
• The Department of Transport (DOT)45 had responsibility for ticketing policy issues, but did not have a representative on the board. In my view, it should have.
• The TTA was highly critical of the quality of the project managers employed by the vendor. ...


From: Own motion investigation into ICT-enabled projects, Victorian Ombudsman and Victorian Auditor-General, November 2011

Simplifying the Myki ticket system

Media reports indicate that the new Victorian government is considering scrapping or modifying the Myki transport ticket system. The contact-less smart card system has had problems with capacity.

MyKi was modified so that most tram commuter do not need to "touch off" the card at the end of their journey. It is likely this change would be extended to short journeys in other transport modes. This will make the system more like Istanbul's Akbil electronic ticketing system, which simply charges a fixed amount for a journey.

Canberra's ACT government run ACTION bus system is introducing a "MyWay" smart card touch on - touch off system. This was due to commence in the second half of 2010. The card readers have been installed on buses, but tickets have not yet been issued. This is resulting in a loss of revenue, as some buses have had the old ticket system replaced with MyWay, resulting in passengers with old tickets getting a free ride.

Mobile phones as transport tickets

Deutsche Bahn (DB) are trialling an electronic ticketing system Touch&Travel which may overcome problems with the smart card systems of Victorian and NSW. The DB system uses mobile phones and Near Field Communications (NFC). The key difference to contact-less smart cards, as tried with limited success in Victoria and NSW, is that the system is reversed: the card is attached to the train and the passenger's mobile phone is used as the card reader. As a result little infrastructure is needed to be installed by the transport system: the mobile phone provides most of the smarts.

Problems with Myki Smart Transport Card Website

The Victorian Public Transport Minister Lynne Kosky has announced that the myki smart card ticketing system is available for trains in metropolitan Melbourne. However, there appear to be some problems with the myki web site.

1. The W3C Markup Validation Service reported 47 Errors and 65 warnings.
2. The W3C mobileOK Checker reported "This page is not mobile-friendly!".
3. The TAW automated accessibility test reported 4 Level One, 30 Level Two and 29 Level Three problems.

These would tend to make the web site less responsive and usable.

The accessibility problems are of particular concern. The web site says:

"We make every reasonable effort to ensure that this website reaches level AA conformance with World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 (WCAG), and conforms to the Victorian Government's Accessibility Standard. ..."

From: Accessibility, MyKi, Victorian Government , 2009

This statement is clearly false (even this page with the accessibility claim on it had dozens of accessibility problems). A reasonable effort has not been made and the web site does not conform with level Double-A of the W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. Not even the description of the level of compliance aimed for complies with the guidelines (the term "level AA" is incorrect: the correct term is "level Double-A"). On the face of it the Victorian Government is in breech of federal anti-discrimination legislation.

As an example the home page says: "Click the 'BUY' button below to take advantage of the FREE registered myki offer." The image below says "Buy", but the ALT text for the image does not say "Buy" it says "Get myki". This is very likely to confuse any user of the system who can't see the image because they are blind, would not be easily able to identify where "below" was and so would not be able to find a "buy" button. This very obvious problem should have been picked up if even the most minimal accessibility testing had been done.

Victorian Transport Plan

The Victorian government has been promoting a "Victorian Transport Plan" on free to air TV using advertisements. This may have some unintended negative effects. I am in Canberra, which is not in Victoria, and yet I see the ads. This makes me wonder if the Victorian government is spending its transport money wisely.

The Victorian advertisements looks very similar to those which the NSW Government used to promote its "North West Metro". These advertisements were designed to reassure the public that this plan was going to be implemented very soon, unfortunately this turned out not to be true.

The Victorian government might usefully reallocate money from advertising a transport plan to replace its stalled MyKi smart card ticketing system. The Victorian Minister for Transport might like to visit Istanbul and ride their integrated public transport system, using an Akbil electronic token. Istanbul's Akbil is less technically sophisticated than Melbourne's MyKi, but has the advantage of being proved in daily use. Melbourne could benefit from such a system.

The Victorian government is renaming Melbourne's train system a 'Metro'. A metro system is distinguished by having a high capacity, frequent service. Usually with a metro there is no timetable, with services running at specified frequencies, such as every five to fifteen minutes. The Melbourne trains are not such a system and are therefore not a metro. As with the NSW failed North West project, simply relabeling a rail line a "Metro" will not make it one. In the case of Melbourne rail, the service is provided by a private operator, who could be taken to court for falsely offering a Metro service.

The last problem is that the Victorian government has made it very difficult to obtain the actual plan advertised. The plan is in the form of numerousdifficult to read files, some of which are very large, under an obscure link: "Download the plan":

Summary document

• The Victorian Transport Plan Overview (PDF, 1,535 KB, 28 pp.)
• The Victorian Transport Plan Overview (Rich Text Format, 325 KB)

Full document

• The Victorian Transport Plan (PDF, 13,514 KB, 164 pp.)
• The Victorian Transport Plan (Rich Text Format, 820 KB)

Document in parts

• Introduction and highlights (PDF, 919 KB, 13 pp.)
• Shaping Victoria for future success (PDF, 1,745 KB, 18 pp.)
• Shaping Victoria: Road demand map (PDF, 2,450 KB, 1 p.)
• Shaping Victoria: Rail demand map (PDF, 1,374 KB, 1 p.)
• Priority 1: Shaping Victoria (PDF, 906 KB, 9 pp.)
• Priority 2: Linking rural, regional and metro Victoria (PDF, 1396 KB, 15 pp.)
• Priority 3: Creating a Metro system (PDF, 1,621 KB, 23 pp.)
• Priority 4: Moving around Melbourne (PDF, 3,409 KB, 21 pp.)
• Priority 5: Taking practical steps for a sustainable future (PDF, 986 KB, 13 pp.)
• Priority 6: Strengthening Victoria's and Australia's economy (PDF, 2,250 KB, 20 pp.)
• Delivering The Victorian Transport Plan (PDF, 509 KB, 3 pp.)
• Appendices (PDF, 464 KB, 14 pp.)

Audio (MP3) version

• Overview MP3 Announcement (MP3, 135 KB)
• Table of contents (MP3, 360 KB)
• Message from the Premier (MP3, 1,360 KB)
• Message from the Ministers (MP3, 865 KB)
• Our acheivements (MP3, 1,000 KB)
• Highlights (MP3, 2,400 KB)
• Six Priorities for Action (MP3, 256 KB)
• Shaping Victoria (MP3, 760 KB)
• Linking rural, regional and metro Victoria (MP3, 1,110 KB)
• A Plan for all Victorians map (MP3, 1,070 KB)
• Creating a Metro system(MP3, 1,080 KB)
• Moving around Melbourne (MP3, 1,020 KB)
• Taking practical steps for a sustainable future(MP3, 830 KB)
• Strengthening Victoria's and Australia's economy (MP3, 1,140 KB)
• Project timelines (MP3, 2,710 KB)
• Copyright statement and alternative formats (MP3, 155 KB)
• Closing Announcement (MP3, 215 KB)

Consultant reports

1. Victorian Transport Plan Stakeholder Engagement Summary Report (PDF, 228 KB, 28 pp.)
2. Booz and Co: Melbourne Public Transport Standards Review (PDF, 217 KB, 15 pp.)
3. Edward Dotson: East West Link Needs Assessment Recommendations 1, 2, 3, 6 (PDF, 185 KB, 3 pp.)
4. GHD: EWLNA and Northern Link (PDF, 13,861 KB, 81 pp.)
5. GHD: Hoddle Street Advice (PDF, 19,168 KB, 91 pp.)
6. Maunsell: Review and Analysis of Historical and Proposed Commuter Ferry Services on Port Phillip (PDF, 657 KB, 49 pp.)
7. Meyrick: Economic Assessment (PDF, 321 KB, 28 pp.)
8. Price Waterhouse Coopers: Review of Social, Demographic and Land Use Analysis (PDF, 135 KB, 22 pp.)
9. Price Waterhouse Coopers: Additional Impacts Analysis (PDF, 505 KB, 22 pp.)
10. Price Waterhouse Coopers: Critique of Assessment of Conventional Costs and Benefits (PDF, 1561 KB, 41 pp.)
11. Price Waterhouse Coopers: Review of the Estimation of Wider Economic Benefits (PDF, 115 KB, 20 pp.)
12. SGS Economics and Planning: Melbourne Employment Projections (PDF, 933 KB, 34 pp.)
13. SGS Economics and Planning: Valuing Household Sector Non-Transport Benefits in Cost Benefits Analysis (PDF, 632 KB, 39 pp.)
14. Summary of Model Outputs (PDF, 1,802 KB, 23 pp.)
15. The Nous Group: Transport Abatement Wedges (PDF, 706 KB, 54 pp.)
16. Veitch Lister: Zenith Model Establishment And Validation Report (PDF, 2,935 KB, 34 pp.)
17. Veitch Lister: Background Assumptions (PDF, 919 KB, 11 pp.)

Helping Managers Achieve Value from ICT

Last night Peter Outteridge presented a Seminar on Achieving Value from ICT at the ACS Canberra Branch. This was based on a study sponsored by the federal government and conducted by the ANU and company Opticon Australia in 2005. Peter argued that this overlooked study had valuable lessons for helping ICT professionals assist their clients to get maximum benefit from ICT. The full text of the study is available online, along with an accompanying Achieving Value Booklet and the dataset for additional analysis.

Peter warned at the beginning that there would be nothing new for experienced ICT professionals in the talk. But what was new was having one's experience of the value of properly worked out business cases and project management confirmed by careful, detailed empirical analysis. However, what was missing was some idea of where to go from here to have these things implemented widely: if project management is clearly essential to getting value from projects, then why isn't it happening? What do we need to do to make it happen?

One concern I have is that ICT professionals may be expecting too much from the non-techncial managers of their clinet organsiations. The average manager has not been trained in the type of rigirous project management processesd which ICT professionals are. It may be too much to expect them to know how to look after such a project. Perhaps the average company or government agency should simply not do ICT development, and instead only purchase off the shelf, pre-proven hardware and software.

As a bonus at the end Petertalked about the development of the Leo computer, by the Lyons catering company. He humeriously described this as the first example of a vertically integrated computer business applciaiton and outsorucig company. Lyons build their own computer, modelled on Cambridg University's EDSAC and programmed it for oders in a call center and payroll. This was so succesful the company undetook payroll processing for other companies. But this was an exceptional company and I don't think the average organisation today should be doing software development, let alone hardware design. ;-)

Peter also recommended the Investment Management Standard (Victorian Government). However, even here, while the step by step process seems logical and simple enough, this is not an easy task. By making this look easy, this may well lead organisations into difficulty development processes. In many cases ICT will get the blame when the project goes wrong, even though it was a failure of management, not of technology. A case in point is Victoria's troubled Myki transport smartcard project. Like Sydney's failed transport smartcard, the problems are not with the technology but the business model built into the project.

Achieving Value from ICT: key management strategies (April 2005)
While there’s clear evidence that information and communications technology (ICT) can substantially improve firm productivity and performance, it’s wrong to assume that the introduction of a new technology alone is sufficient to provide these benefits. Organisations gain the greatest productivity and other benefits from ICT when it is accompanied by complementary management practices and strategies. This was demonstrated through research based on a survey of 1050 firms from 15 industry categories. Achieving Value from ICT: key management strategies examines the types of benefits organisations gain from the use of ICT and the management and organisational strategies that accompany effective ICT use.

The Achieving value dataset (File format: ZIP, File size: 319Kb) from the survey of ICT use in organisations that formed the basis of the Achieving Value report is freely available for fair use by researchers provided the results of any further analysis are shared with DCITA. An accompanying Achieving Value Booklet (File size: 356Kb) is also available.

From: Firm level studies on the influence of ICT on Australian productivity growth, DCITA Archive website, 5 February 2008

Improving Australian Public Transport

Having used efficient public transport in Greece and Turkey, it is disappointing to get back to Australia and find state governments continuing to fail to provide it here. The latest with problems is the Victorian Government's myki electronic ticketing system roll-out (following scrapping of the NSW system). In contrast, Istanbul has a simple and effective electronic system which works on trains, trams, metro and ferries.

Combined national public and private transport payment system

Sydney's transport smart card project (Tcard) has been abandoned and the Victorian project (MyKi)is to be having problems. Technically, smart card ticketing systems are very simple, with hardware available off the shelf. But transport smartcard projects frequently have problems, where the transport companies fail to rationalize their fee structure before implementation.

The hardware for the Victorian system seemed to be workable when I tried it. Projects seem to have been successful in Perth (Smartrider), London (Oyster Card), Hong Kong (Octopus Card) and Beijing (Yikatong). There is a UK based Integrated Transport Smartcard Organisation.

In contrast to the problems with public transport smart cards, the e-TAGs used for electronic toll collection on roads in Sydney and Melbourne are working and interoperable. Perhaps the Australian Government should get the states together to produce a system which would work on public transport and toll roads across Australia. This need not use the same hardware for public and private transport, but could use the same back end payment settlement system. In this way motorists would be encouraged to use public transport as an alternative to driving on toll roads.

Victorian Public Transport contactless Smart Card

The Victorian state government Transport Ticketing Authority (TTA), is introducing a contactless Smart Card for public transport later in 2007. It will operate on trains, trams and bus in Melbourne city and some transport outside the city. The system is (unfortunately) called "myki". There is a "discovery centre" demonstration set up in the Southern Cross Station where I tried out the cards and readers.

To put credit on the card, the traveler can use a ticket machine in a station. This looks much like other ticket machines, except you wave your card in front of the machine to add the credit, rather than inserting it in a slot. The machine has a large touch sensitive LCD screen for entering payment details. I had difficulty using the machine as the screen has a coating which make it hard to read at an angle (perhaps this is needed for the touch screen or is a privacy measure). The screen is placed at a suitable height for a person in a wheel chair, so I could not read the screen or type comfortably when standing upright. I had to bend over uncomfortably to use it. But then this will not need to be done often for regular commuters.

To check the balance on your card you can use a much smaller pole mounted reader. A similar size unit, with fewer buttons, is used to swipe your card when getting on and off buses and trams, to record the fare. For railway stations the same reader is attached to an automatic gate.

Curiously, while the large ticket machine was placed at wheelchair height, the pole mounted readers were placed very high, or of reach of people in wheelchairs. The gate mounted unit was at a suitable compromise height for both wheelchairs and pedestrians.

While I have not looked at the detail of the project, this system looks far more workable than the problematic Metcard system previously brought in for Melbourne trams. This required a large, complex ticket machine to be installed on the trams. As well as taking up valuable space, these were difficult to operate on a lurching tram.

Smartcard ticketing systems for transport have proved to be difficult ICT projects to implement. It will be interesting to see if the new Melbourne system does better than Sydney's Tcard, or Perth's SmartRider.