Driving up the PPM - Robin Gisby.

Robin Gisby told the January 2006 meeting of the Modern Railways / Railway Forum Fourth Friday Club what he is doing to improve service to Network Rail's customers. Click here to view the PowerPoint presentation used at this meeting.

Network Rail's reorganisation along functional lines in 2004 put one person in charge of relationships with the train operators: the Director of Operations and Customer Services, Robin Gisby. As recent exchanges in our letters column have showed, this is an exposed position which demands an ability to defend Network Rail's case robustly.

Robin Gisby did just that when he addressed the Modern Railways / Railway Forum Fourth Friday Club at the end of January. ‘The Public Performance Measure is getting better' he said, with key indicators heading in the right direction. ‘85% PPM by the end of March is the target, and there is a fighting chance we will do it.'

Integrated Control Centres (ICCs) are one of the planks in the strategy, with the number of control centres across the network down from over 60 two years ago to fewer than 20 today. The pilot ICC at Waterloo has become a fully integrated operation between Network Rail and South West Trains. New ICCs are being established, with one currently under construction for the East Coast at York . ‘We'll need another desk in there soon for other operators' joked Mr Gisby, a pointed reference to the Office of Rail Regulation's deliberation on Grand Central Railway's application for paths to Sunderland which had been announced on the morning of the speech - and a friendly gibe at Great North Eastern Railway Chief Executive Christopher Garnett, who was in the audience.

ICCs help train operators and Network Rail to see the other's problems and overcome distorted incentives that might be introduced by constant focus on PPM. For example, a gas leak at Battersea in January led to widespread disruption. ‘The PPM was awful, but the important thing was we were moving people. Before, it might have been easier for the Network Rail controller to cancel trains – with the effect that some other poor sod would have had to cope with the crowds on the stations. So we have to be mindful about which trains we cancel' said Mr Gisby.

Joint performance improvement plans (JPIPs) involving both Network Rail and the operators are beginning to bear fruit. ‘We had treated our customers in a way that wasn't right' Mr Gisby admitted. ‘If we trust each other enough we can get the JPIPs working better.'

Restructuring timetables has a critical role to play in improving the PPM in the short term. The success of the revamped SWT timetable has gone to prove the validity of the concept, and other operators are champing at the bit to introduce similar restructuring. But Mr Gisby cautioned that operations planning resources are not infinite: timetable specialists are already stretched working on Route Utilisation Strategies and refranchising proposals. ‘We will have to put a change control process in for developing new timetables in the same way we sorted possessions for T-12' he said. ‘That means we will develop a set programme over a rolling 12 months with the industry and stick to it. If others come forward later wanting major recasts we will have to put them at the back of the queue.'

Promoting enhancement schemes

A wide range of proposals for improving the rail network has been put forward by many bodies, and it is Network Rail's job to decide which are worth pursuing. ‘Some of these proposals have been around for some time and/or are common sense and “good for the railway”,' said Mr Gisby, citing as an example a loop at Worthing which was proposed in the days of Network SouthEast 20 years ago but has still not been acted upon. ‘We shouldn't therefore spend time and money optioneering but just get on with them!'

NR is endeavouring not to go back to square one on all these schemes, but finding all the relevant documentation can be a challenge: for example where is all the paperwork regarding Railtrack's Modern Facilities at Stations (MFAS) project? MFAS was stillborn, but lots of the ideas in it are worth following up – the original thoughts might provide useful justification for spending today.

Robin Gisby thinks it unlikely there will be any more multi-billion pound projects like the West Coast Route Modernisation in the near future – a similar upgrade for the East Coast has been put on the shelf. But this does not mean that the railway cannot progress. ‘I would rather see 100 £1million schemes across the network, than one £100million project in one place' said Mr Gisby. The model is installation of Train Protection & Warning System, rolled out across the country on a production line system: ‘we got the unit cost down, and we got the planning issues sorted out: this is the sort of thing we want to replicate'.

Much of the railway is being renewed year-by-year, and this presents the ideal opportunity to introduce enhancements, but many recent projects such as the renewal at Woking over Christmas 2005 were straight like-for-like replacements. ‘It is an added complication to think about incremental enhancements on top of a major renewal but it is worth doing because of the extra benefit at the time we are causing disruption anyway - it just needs integrating' said Mr Gisby. ‘The Woking job was developed and planned years ago, so adding enhancements in at a late stage would have complicated matters. The trick is to start thinking of enhancements now for the jobs we will be doing in 2007+.

‘We are already on the case. Examples include the remodelling of Trent South Junction, which will see the turnout speed raised, and signal spacing at Loughborough will be improved.'

Improving relations with customers

‘We have to make the relation between our people on the ground and those of the train operators work better if the PPM improvement is to be sustained' said Mr Gisby. For its part, Network Rail is investing in better training for signallers: £11million has been spent on signalling simulators, and training centres for signallers have been opened in Watford and Leeds .

Mindful of the ‘bloke railway' syndrome of sloppy communication procedures (‘Informed Sources', passim) Network Rail is working with operators to enforce a protocol for communication between drivers and signallers. A pilot for a nationwide scheme has been set up in Kent , with ex-military trainers brought in to oversee the project.

In another training issue, computerised staff assessment procedures have been introduced, freeing up supervisory management time and taking subjectivity out of the equation. Importantly, tests ask not only for the right answer to railway operating questions but also for the respondent to rate the confidence they have that the answer they have chosen is the correct one. Thus someone could choose an incorrect answer but nevertheless be absolutely convinced that they have got the right one: this would be flagged up. ‘This is crucial,' said Mr Gisby, ‘because it is when you have people who think they are brilliant – when they are not – that danger creeps in'. The assessment process allows Network Rail to identify the high risk people and get them properly trained.

Concerns for the future

Robin Gisby concluded by identifying issues that the railway industry needs to start addressing. One is the dual role of Network Rail as both monopoly infrastructure provider and industry performance manager. ‘Now that the Strategic Rail Authority has gone, the Government turns to Network Rail for advice about performance – which means I have to be an expert on everything from point machines, which are Network Rail's responsibility, to HST engines, which are not. Performing this dual role is tricky.'

The Government is pressing Network Rail to reduce operating costs, but the Operations and Customer Services Director is sceptical about the scope for this, given developments such as the 35-hour week pushing up labour costs.

At the same time, the heat is on to improve PPM further. A big chunk of the railway is changing hands with refranchising: second round franchises at Greater Western and Thameslink, the coming of Integrated Kent, the disintegration of Central and so on mean that 44% of the national PPM score is prone to some form of organisational disruption between now and 2008. With new franchise agreements being struck, ‘there is a danger that incentives, commitments and obligations could be misaligned, and small-scale enhancements might get missed out' said Mr Gisby.

It is a sobering thought that the passenger growth of the past few years has been accommodated within essentially the same railway. One way of looking at this is that to get the same absolute number of people to their destinations on time as five or six years ago, the railway would only have to achieve around 70% PPM – whereas actually it is approaching 85%.

The same has happened with freight: for example, a huge increase in coal flowing between central Scotland and power stations in the north of England has been accommodated without new infrastructure, by lengthening signal box opening hours and other minor changes.

But shifting more and more people and freight with an improving railway performance cannot go on for ever if there is no investment in the future. And improving the PPM should not be the only goal: with 100% focus on the PPM, there seems to be no incentive to grow the railway. ‘The PPM is getting better, but now people want to sit down. What I want to see is a massive improvement in train lengths and platform lengths, so that we can handle those growing commuter volumes' said Mr Gisby. And for freight, there should be a drive to permit higher axleloads and bigger tonnages.

‘Not only do people want a seat, they also want a safe and secure travelling environment - so there are other things to think of besides performance' said Mr Gisby.

The balancing act will be to achieve this while continuing to drive up the PPM. ‘Performance is still too variable across the network. We only have a few months' experience of running at 85% PPM and even that is well down on where it was ten years ago. So while the progress is good there is more to do on performance, while we also turn our eye to capacity.'