How do you measure and benchmark quality in rail infrastructure operations?

Johrendt: First we must ensure that track capacity and condition are adequate to meet the requirements of our customers the passenger and freight train operating departments. And we must provide sufficient paths for all the trains they wish to operate.

Train punctuality is a good measure of our service, and we incur financial penalties if we fail to meet the train operators requirements. The most recent operating statistics show that 90 per cent of trains run on time (no more than five minutes behind schedule), and 70 per cent no more than two minutes late. These figures include all intermediate stopping points, not just the final destination.

Delays due to locomotive or rolling-stock problems, of course, are not our responsibility, since both are provided by the train operating departments, not by Infrastructure.

Throughout Europe, a measure of passenger satisfaction is the ability of trains to compete with the airlines. Is raising train speeds part of your infrastructure remit?

Gunsam: From the viewpoint of passenger satisfaction, we believe that what is important is the trains overall comfort, safety and punctuality. The new timetables from 15 December will see faster passenger-train services on all main lines Vienna to Salzburg in less than three hours, for example, despite more intermediate stops. This will primarily be due to the introduction of new locomotives and new coaches capable of 200km/hr. They will have improved braking performance, so can safely run faster within the limits of our existing signalling system. And yes, we are also making track improvements to permit higher speeds.

But major infrastructure improvements, such as modernised signalling, new tunnels and track, are very much subject to government decision.

An important change took place throughout Europes railways during the mid-90s, in that responsibility for infrastructure was separated from that for train operation. How have you maintained the traditional links on ÖBB, ensuring staff at all levels remain committed to quality and safety?

Gunsam: One way, for example, is that we do not contract out maintenance work. All our track and infrastructure staff are still employed directly by ÖBB. So they retain their strong traditional commitment to the railway.

Similarly, the Technical Services department, maintaining locomotives and rolling stock, is staffed largely by the same people as before 1996. We have rationalised facilities and gradually reduced the overall workforce, but we place a strong emphasis on a quality and safety culture, which pays dividends in staff loyalty and motivation.

This is where DNVs contribution is important, in helping establish the measurement of quality and safety. From DNVs first project for ÖBB, looking to accident-free shunting, it has built up quality and safety systematics and an integrated management system which gives staff throughout ÖBB a strong feeling of support from headquarters.

The main achievement has been to place responsibility for quality and safety on each individual employee.

Safety is high on the political agenda
Richard Ulz is ÖBBs overall Safety Manager, responsible for safety throughout the company. He first describes the intentions behind ÖBBs request for DNV to develop a safety mission statement.

In such a large organisation, I believe it is vital to have common guidelines. The first will be safety guidelines, to help establish a safety culture throughout our departments, regions and business units. The safety guidelines are to be a mission statement, or vision, to formalise unwritten rules on safety-related performance. They will place more responsibility on each employee, rather than rely solely on their following written rules and instructions.

In the case of a railway system, unlike a single-site factory or process plant, a large number of employees work individually or in small teams widely removed from management supervision. How do you encourage their concern for safety?

A railway system is always very visible and in the public eye. In recent years Austrian railway safety and industrial safety in general has become high on the governments agenda. So the mission statement is not an end in itself. It must be widely communicated throughout our organisation by means of videos and newsletters for example. And the heads of every unit must set visible signs of a safety culture.

At present, the safety regulations which we establish are monitored by the authority governing rail operation, which is a part of the Ministry of Transport, Innovation and Technology.

In the future, it is likely that the authority will take over this rule-setting role itself. However, a consultant such as DNV brings in some very necessary knowledge and experience from outside the industry, of which we can make good use.