Final Report
Transportation Safety Board
of Canada
Stakeholder
Consultation 2020
Submitted to
Transportation Safety Board of Canada
Prepared by
Leger
Contract number: 4M024-210046/001/CY
POR # 012-20
Contract Value:
$49,823.97 (HST
included)
Awarded 2020-07-09
Project 14660-006
2020-10-29
Leger
507 Place d’Armes, Suite 700
Montréal,
Québec
G1R
2K2
Phone:
514-982-2464
Fax: 514-987-1960
For more information on this report, please contact Transportation
Safety Board of Canada at: Communications@bst-tsb.gc.ca
Ce
rapport est aussi disponible en français.
Stakeholder Consultation
2020
Final Report
Prepared for Transportation Safety Board Canada
Supplier Name: Leger
October 2020
This public opinion research report presents
the results of a web survey and telephone interviews conducted by Leger
Marketing Inc. on behalf of Transportation Safety Board of Canada. The research
was conducted with Transportation Safety Board of Canada stakeholders in either
English or French.
Cette
publication est aussi disponible en français sous le titre : Bureau de la
sécurité des transports du Canada - Consultation des parties prenantes 2020.
This publication may be reproduced for
non-commercial purposes only. Prior written permission must be obtained from the
Transportation Safety Board of Canada. For more information on this report,
please contact the Transportation Safety Board of Canada at Communications@bst-tsb.gc.ca or at:
Transportation Safety Board of Canada
200 Promenade du Portage
Place du Centre, 4th floor
Gatineau, Québec
K1A 1K8
Catalogue Number:
TU4-42/2020E-PDF
International Standard Book Number (ISBN):
978-0-660-37995-1
Related publications (registration number: POR 012-20):
Catalogue Number: - TU4-42/2020F-PDF (Final Report, French)
ISBN : 978-0-660-37996-8
© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as
represented by the Transportation Safety Board of Canada, 2020.
1.2 Methodology—Hybrid Research
1.3 Overview of
Quantitative Study Findings
1.5 How the Results
Will Be Used
1.7 Notes on
Interpretation of Research Findings
1.8 Political
Neutrality Statement and Contact Information
2.1 Awareness and Familiarity With the TSB
2.2 Effectiveness of the TSB in Advancing
Transport Safety
2.3 Information, Recommendations, Products and
Services
2.5 Advancing Transportation Safety
Appendix
A–Detailed Research Methodology
Appendix D—Survey
Questionnaire
Leger is
pleased to present the Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) with this Stakeholder
Consultation 2020 report on findings from the qualitative interviews and quantitative
survey.
This report
was prepared by Leger who was contracted by the TSB (contract number 4M024-210046/001/CY
awarded July 9, 2020).
In 2015, the TSB undertook a contracted Public
Opinion Research (POR) project to determine the attitudes of key stakeholders
and obtain their input on the implementation of the (then new) Strategic Plan,
and to validate the organization’s thinking/future direction.
Having established vital baseline data
with that survey, the TSB wanted to update that information, and determine
whether stakeholders’ opinions and attitudes toward the TSB have changed—and if
so, in what manner and to what extent. The purpose of this research is to help
with the development of the next Strategic Plan that must be developed during
fiscal year 2020-21.
This project has been carried out to
collect perceptions/feedback from stakeholders regarding awareness/opinion of
TSB products and services, and suggestions for improving TSB products and
services.
The objectives
of the study was to:
·
Measure the
stakeholders’ familiarity/interaction with TSB (incl. role, language
and products)
·
Measure the
stakeholders’ opinion of TSB’s overall effectiveness and credibility
·
Measure the
stakeholders’ satisfaction with TSB information (incl. accuracy, thoroughness,
how/when it’s shared)
·
Measure the
stakeholders’ opinion of TSB’s level of timeliness (issuing reports, deployment
notices, investigation pages)
·
Measure the
stakeholders’ opinion of TSB’s reports and recommendations (includes content
and effectiveness)
·
Assess the
knowledge of SECURITAS
·
Measure the
stakeholders’ overall awareness and opinions of the TSB
·
Assess the
effectiveness of the TSB’s products
·
Assess the
performance of communications, the website, and social media
·
Assess how
stakeholders’ consumer information from the TSB and in general
1.2 Methodology—Hybrid Research
To achieve the study
objectives, a research plan based on a hybrid method, with qualitative and
quantitative components, was developed. The target
population for this whole research project is comprised of the TSB’s key
stakeholders:
·
Government departments and agencies involved in
transportation (i.e., regulators);
·
All types of transportation operators;
·
Manufacturers;
·
Industry Associations;
·
Employee Associations;
·
Training Organizations;
·
First Responders;
·
Chief Medical Examiners;
·
Canadian Federation of Municipalities;
·
Law Associations;
·
Individuals who have interacted with the TSB.
The quantitative
research component was conducted through online surveys, using Computer Aided
Web Interviewing (CAWI) technology. The online survey was conducted from August
25 to September 29. The participation rate for the survey was 24%. For the sake
of comparison, the participation rate in 2015 was 11.3%. The participation rate
is quite good, especially in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020. Calculation
of the Web survey’s participation rate is presented in Appendix A. A pre-test of the survey questions was carried out by conducting 20
interviews. TSB provided a list of stakeholders to Leger consisting of 855
valid addresses that were assigned unique links to the survey questionnaire.
All the contacts on the list received a bilingual invitation to participate in
the study. A reminder was sent weekly for those email addresses with a unique
link that did not indicate that they had not completed the survey in full. A
total of three reminders were sent out.
A total sample of 117 stakeholders were surveyed during the 2020
consultation. For comparison, a sample of 111 was collected in the 2015
consultation.
Having proceeded by logic of census for this project, the results can be
considered valid and representative of TSB’s stakeholders. Where possible, the
results of the 2020 edition of the study were compared to the 2015 results. The
profiles of the 2020 and 2015 samples are quite similar and follow similar
distributions in terms of industry sectors and regional distribution. Both were
probability sample, so we are confident in the comparability of the two
samples. The detailed results chapter presents the profile of the sample for
this study.
The margin of error of this survey is of +/- 8.4%, 19 times out of 20 (a
confidence interval of 95%). In 2015, the margin or error was of +/-11.2%, 19
times out of 20 (a confidence interval of 95%).
Given the nature of
the database and the information available for each contact, no weighting was
done for this project.
Below is the
calculation of the survey’s participation rate.
Table 4.
Participation Rate
|
Total email addresses used |
855 |
|
Invalid Cases |
0 |
|
-invitations
mistakenly sent to people who did not qualify for the study |
0 |
|
-incomplete
or missing email addresses |
0 |
|
Unresolved (U) |
324 |
|
-email
invitations bounce back |
|
|
-email
invitations unanswered |
324 |
|
In-scope
non-responding units (IS) |
50 |
|
-respondent refusals |
7 |
|
-language
problem |
|
|
-early break-offs |
43 |
|
Responding
units (R) |
117 |
|
-completed surveys disqualified—quota
filled |
0 |
|
-completed surveys disqualified
for other reasons |
0 |
|
-completed
surveys |
117 |
|
Participation
rate/response rate = R ÷ (U + IS +R) |
24% |
As a member of the
Canadian Research and Insights Council (CRIC), Leger adheres to the most
stringent guidelines for quantitative research and acts in accordance with the Government
of Canada requirements for quantitative research and Standards of the Conduct
of Government of Canada Public Opinion Research. The details of the methodology
and more information on Leger’s quality control mechanisms are presented in Appendix A. The questionnaire is available in Appendix D.
Leger conducted a series of interviews
with TSB stakeholders. Leger recruited stakeholder participants through a
hybrid methodology. Some stakeholders have been contacted by phone and some
other have been contacted by email for recruitment procedure. The one-on-one
interviews were held over the phone or over the MS Teams platform. Each
interview lasted approximately 30 minutes and covered almost the same list of
themes that in the web survey. Interviews were held in English or French, as
per the participants’ preference.
Given the particular
context of 2020 related to the COVID-19 pandemic, recruitment of
participants for the interviews proved more difficult than anticipated. A total
of 22 stakeholders participated, eight less than the initial target of 30 participants.
A total of 22 recruits participated in the
interviews between September 15, 2020, and October
23, 2020. No financial incentives were offered for participation. The
invitation guide is presented the Appendix B nd the interview guide is presented in Appendix C of this
document.
1.3 Overview
of Quantitative Study Findings
Stakeholders who participated in the survey and interviews were
generally quite positive about the TSB. The organization conveys an image of
expertise, professionalism and rigour. Several
participants in the study believe that industry members give recognition to the
work done by the TSB. The role and mission of the Board are generally well
understood by stakeholders as is the importance of maintaining its independence
from other federal departments and agencies. Only a minority of participants
made negative comments about the TSB or its employees.
Areas for improvement were identified by participants that relate to the
TSB goal of positively influencing safety changes in Canada. Indeed, several
stakeholders consider that the TSB is missing many opportunities to improve
transportation safety. In this regard, stakeholders indicate that the TSB could
take a more proactive approach and not wait for incidents to influence change.
Among other things, the TSB could be present at forums, conferences and
participate in training on a regular basis to inform the industry of changes, investigations and the reasons behind recommendations. Also,
several stakeholders have indicated that they would like to have the
opportunity to also have their say on the direction of investigations from the
outset and have their comments on investigation reports taken into
consideration by the TSB. Some participants in the survey and interviews
believe that it would be good practice for the TSB to publish the investigation
reports more quickly or to publish them in different phases. Stakeholders
believe that these options would allow the TSB to better play its role as an
influencer in improving transportation safety.
TSB’s investigation reports are, for the vast majority
of respondents, perceived very positively. Stakeholders consider them to
be very factual, in-depth and professional. The
reports are, for most of the study participants, read in full. It was noted by
a few participants, however, that there are significant regional differences in
how the investigation reports are rendered. In addition, industry members may
not always have the same reading of events as the TSB, and some felt that some
of the TSB investigators do not always adequately address all
of the important factors in an occurrence. For this reason, some
stakeholders would like to be able to discuss the direction of an investigation
with the TSB early in the investigation process.
It is the timeliness of producing and releasing reports that seems to
pose the most significant concerns to stakeholders. That said, interview
respondents were careful to note, however, that they are well
aware that such a process cannot be rushed; some complex investigations
take time. However, they consider delays of up to more than a year to be too
long. The industry must continue to move forward and take steps to improve
safety. Many noted that industry is much more effective in finalizing
investigations and taking precautionary and preventative measures. In this
sense, many consider that the opportunity to influence changes for safety has
passed when the TSB publishes its recommendations. This is
why many are asking that TSB publish its reports and recommendations in
several steps.
The recommendations made by the TSB were also the subject of some
comments and suggestions. The majority of participants
in the survey and interviews felt that the TSB is doing a very good job in this
regard. However, they noted their disappointment that many recommendations have
not been addressed after several years or are simply ignored. Some interview
participants indicated that there should be a forum bringing together the
industry member, TSB and Transport Canada to discuss
and debate the recommendations in a timely manner. Some other participants
pointed out instead that some of the recommendations do not reflect the actual
constraints of the industry or are too general as to why they are not
implemented through regulation.
In addition to recommendations and reports, which are the most notorious
TSB products, industry presentations and the website are the most well-known
products and services, both in terms of familiarity and relevance. The website
is clearly the gateway for many stakeholders to investigation reports and
updates. It is therefore obvious that it is visited by stakeholders. In fact,
it appears that more stakeholders are visiting the website than previously. As
for the other products and services, their lower level of familiarity and
awareness among stakeholders is not an indication that they are not important.
This is the case for statistics and databases, corporate publications,
SECURITAS, and Safety Issue Investigation on air-taxi operations. They are just
less useful to a majority of stakeholders in the
context of their work.
The TSB website is visited by the majority of
stakeholders. Only one respondent out of ten has never visited the website.
They visit the website primarily to find reports, updates
and recommendations. Most visits are made from a computer or a laptop. Ease of
navigation on the website is the main irritant for respondents. Many
respondents called for a better search engine on the website to find reports.
They would like to have the ability to filter the results more accurately. They
would like more refined search results. This is also the comment that several
interviewees gave about a possible mobile application from TSB. They would be
very reluctant to download it unless there is a way to effectively manage and
filter the information.
Over the last few years, traditional media have lost a lot of ground to
the web, mobile applications and social media. Almost
all TSB stakeholders listen to online videos on social media. Only a very small
minority do not.
1.5
How the Results Will Be Used
This project
will provide the TSB of Canada with first-hand information on stakeholder
opinion, perception and attitude regarding TSB’s work, products
and tools. Findings will be made public at Library and Archives Canada. Collecting
primary information will support TSB’s efforts in its strategic planning.
TSB provided
Leger with a list of its stakeholders to conduct this study project. Leger
carried out the data collection through a census logic. That is, all contacts
on the list received an invitation to participate in the study. Having
proceeded in this way, and not through a group of volunteers, the results can
be considered valid and representative of TSB’s stakeholders.
The qualitative
portion of the research provides insights into the opinions of a population,
rather than providing a measure in percent of the opinions held, as would be
measured in a quantitative study. The results of this type of research should
be viewed as directional only. No inference to the stakeholder population can
be done with the results of this research. These results are used to deepen the
understanding of a phenomenon or to put results into perspective.
1.7 Notes
on Interpretation of Research Findings
The views and observations
expressed in this document do not reflect those of the TSB. This report was
compiled by Leger based on the research conducted specifically for this
project.
1.8
Political Neutrality Statement and
Contact Information
I hereby certify as Senior Officer
of Leger that the deliverables fully comply
with the Government of Canada’s political neutrality requirements outlined in
the Policy on Communications and Federal Identity and the Directive on the Management of Communications—Appendix C (Appendix C: Mandatory
Procedures for Public Opinion Research).
Specifically, the deliverables do not include information on electoral
voting intentions, political party preferences, standing with the electorate,
or ratings of the performance of a political party or its leaders.
Signed:
Christian Bourque
Executive
Vice-President and Associate
Leger
507 Place d’Armes, bur 700
Montréal, Québec
H2Y 2W8
Additional information
Supplier name: Leger
Contract Number: 4M024-210046/001/CY
Contract Award Date: July 9, 2020
The cost of this research
was $49,823.97 (HST included).
To obtain more information on this study, please
email: Communications@bst-tsb.gc.ca
As previously mentioned,
this study is directed towards TSB stakeholders. The following tables show the
distribution of the sample according to certain profiling indicators. The first
table shows the distribution of the sample according to the primary sector of
activity. Most of the sample respondents came from the Marine and the Air sectors.
The third most important sector of activity of respondents was industry
association and union. A distribution that resembles the
distribution of the 2015 sample.
Table 1. Respondents Profile by Sector*
|
PRIMARY
SECTOR |
n=117 |
|
Commercial air operators (Max Take-off Weight
less than 8618 kg) |
7% |
|
Commercial air operators (Max Take-off Weight
more than 8618 kg) |
12% |
|
Aerial work operators |
2% |
|
Private air operators (recreational pilots, not
for hire) |
3% |
|
Business
aviation |
1% |
|
Flight
training operators |
2% |
|
Commercial marine operators (cargo vessels,
ferries, tankers, passenger vessels, tugs and
barges) |
22% |
|
Commercial
fishing vessel operators |
8% |
|
Canadian federally regulated freight train
operators |
3% |
|
Provincial
freight train operators |
0% |
|
Canadian federally regulated passenger train
operators |
2% |
|
Canadian federally regulated pipeline operators |
1% |
|
Manufacturer—transportation industry |
6% |
|
Transportation industry association or union |
13% |
|
First responders (police, fire, and emergency services) |
0% |
|
Medical examiners |
0% |
|
Federal government |
6% |
|
Provincial government |
6% |
|
Other |
5% |
|
Other education and
training |
3% |
** Respondents
were given the option of listing more than one location, so the total may
differ from 100%.
As Table 2 indicates, about eight out of ten
respondents were English-speaking while nearly two out of ten were French-speaking. This distribution follows the same trend as
the 2015 sample, with English speakers representing 88% of the sample and
French speakers 12%.
Table 2. Respondents Profile by Language
|
n=117 |
|
|
LANGUAGE |
|
|
English |
81% |
|
French |
19% |
Table 3 details the regional distribution of the
sample. The majority of the sample comes from four
regions/provinces: Atlantic Canada, Quebec, Ontario, and British Columbia. Just
under one in ten respondents say that the head office of their organization is
outside of Canada. Compared to the 2015 sample, we under-represent international
respondents in the sample while we over-represent respondents from British
Columbia and the Atlantic region of Canada.
Table 3. Respondents Profile by Location*
|
n=117 |
|
|
HEAD OFFICE |
|
|
British
Columbia |
30% |
|
Alberta |
15% |
|
Saskatchewan |
5% |
|
Manitoba |
7% |
|
Ontario |
29% |
|
Quebec |
39% |
|
New Brunswick |
7% |
|
Prince Edward
Island |
3% |
|
Nova Scotia |
15% |
|
Newfoundland
and Labrador |
11% |
|
Yukon |
2% |
|
Northwest Territories |
4% |
|
Nunavut |
9% |
|
France |
2% |
|
United States |
3% |
|
National/all
over Canada |
3% |
|
Other |
2% |
* Respondents were given the option of listing more than one location, so
the total may differ from 100%.
In this report, given the
overall small sample size, analysis by primary industry sectors, or provinces
are not always possible. They will be discussed only when significant
statistical differences are found between subgroups of the sample.
Given the distribution of
the sample in the Canadian regions, multivariate analyses are not possible
because the sample sizes do not allow for it. For example, doing an analysis by
industry sector in the different regions of Canada would be unsound because the
sample sizes for this analysis would be too small in most regions. Therefore,
analyzes by industry sectors and regions will be done on the
basis of the overall sample when applicable.
Note on Testing for Statistical Differences
According to the normal
distribution, a two-tailed test is always done between two proportions and
based on the unweighted total columns. The test is performed by comparing a
percentage with the percentage formed by the complement of the relevant
category (e.g., of the English-speaker subgroup is the French-speaker subgroup;
the complement of the Atlantic region is the rest of the sample). The test
results (if they are significant at a confidence level of at least 95%) are
mentioned in the analysis.
In the report, when we
indicate that a sub-group of the sample is “more likely” or “less likely,” it
means that the statistical testing returned a valid statistically significant
difference between this subgroup and the rest of the sample, even if the
percentage is low because the statistical test takes into account the sample
size.
Qualitative component
The following tables detail the profile of the 22 participants in the
qualitative in-depth interviews by sector and geographic distribution.
Table 4.
Participants Profile by Sector
|
n=22 |
|
|
Air |
11 |
|
Rail |
3 |
|
Marine |
3 |
|
Education and training |
2 |
|
Other
transportation industry |
3 |
Table 5.
Participants Profile by Location*
|
n=22 |
|
|
British Columbia |
5 |
|
Alberta |
2 |
|
Ontario |
2 |
|
Quebec |
4 |
|
New Brunswick |
4 |
|
Nova Scotia |
1 |
|
Newfoundland and Labrador |
3 |
|
Northwest Territories |
1 |
2.1 Awareness and Familiarity
With the TSB
Survey
respondents are generally familiar with the TSB (See Figure 1). Slightly
more than half of them (54%) were very familiar while one third (35%) were
somewhat familiar with the TSB. Only a small minority of stakeholders (11%)
said they were not familiar with the TSB. These results are really
stable from one consultation to another. In 2015, the proportion of
stakeholders who were very familiar with the TSB was 54%, 33% were somewhat
familiar and 13% were unfamiliar. These are minor changes that cannot be
considered significant.
Figure 1: Answer to Q3A. Using a scale of
1–10 (1 = not at all familiar, and 10 = very familiar), please rate your level
of familiarity with the mandate of the TSB.
Sample frame: All respondents
(n=117).
The stakeholders became aware of the
TSB mostly through their work or through work-related activities (See Figure 2).
Three quarters (76%) of survey respondents indicated that this is how they
became aware of the TSB. This number remains stable since 2015 while the same
proportion of stakeholders (76%) said the same. Other sources of awareness of
the organization were really marginal when compared to
this main reason. Being a technical expert (8%), the news (2%), the
presentations (2%), being an observer for the Minister (2%), social media (1%),
being a designated reviewer (1%) are the other sources of awareness of the TSB.
One out of ten respondents (11%) mentioned another source of notoriety for the
TSB without further details.
Figure 2: Answer to Q3B. How did you
become aware of the TSB?
Sample frame: All respondents
familiar with the TSB (n=98).
It is through direct interaction
with the TSB and its employees that stakeholders primarily obtained information
produced by the Board (22%) (See Figure 3). It is through industry
presentations (15%) as well as through direct email from the TSB (e.g., the
Quarterly Review) (14%) and transportation industry publications (10%) that TSB’s
information is shared with respondents. Other channels were mentioned by less
than one stakeholder out of ten: traditional media (7%), daily notifications
(4%), online news sites (3%), social media (2%) and RSS feeds (2%).
Figure 3: Answer to Q20. Please indicate the main method by which
you obtain information about the TSB and its work.
Sample frame: All respondents
(n=117).
Qualitative component
The majority of
the interviewees indicated that they had a fair or very good knowledge of TSB,
its role, and mission.
Several
interviewees are required to interact with TSB several times during a regular
year as part of their work.
Interactions
are primarily through direct interaction with TSB investigators, through the
exchange of information, or through the website and investigation reports.
Interview results are fairly consistent with the
results of the quantitative survey.
It seems that there has been a
slight decline in the number of interactions between stakeholders and the TSB
over the last five years due to transportation occurrences (See Figure 4).
Indeed, four out of ten respondents (40%) reported that they had no contact
with the TSB during this period. This is similar to
the 2015 proportion of 36%. It is a decrease in the overall number of occurrence-related
interactions in recent years for respondents who have had any. The average
number of interactions is 4.9 incidents in the 2020 consultation whereas this
figure was 9.7 occurrences in 2015.
Figure 4: Answer to Q4. During the past five years, how many
occurrences have you been involved in that required working with the TSB?
Sample frame: All respondents
(n=117).
Survey respondents employed mostly
positive words to describe the TSB (See Figure 5). Negative words were
also used but to a lesser extent. The three most used words or expressions were
“professional” (23%); “accident investigation agency” (20%); and “accident
prevention” (19%). These three words or phrases are followed by the words “unbiased”,
“independent from policy makers”, “recommendations to improve safety” and “important”.
These words are, for the most part, closely related to the Board’s mission
statement. This is a positive signal as stakeholders spontaneously associate the
TSB with its mission.
Figure 5: Answer to Q5. What is your perception of the TSB; how
would you describe it? MULTIPLE ANSWERS*
SPONTANEOUS
MENTIONS
Sample frame: All respondents
(n=117).
*Because respondents were
allowed to give several answers, total mentions may be higher than 100%.
Among the negative mentions made by
the respondents, the “lack of efficiency to induce changes (impose changes)
(12%)”, “the lack of interaction or communication (7%)”, “becoming biased (5%)”,
“the need for inspectors with better expertise (5%)”, “too bureaucratic (4%)”, “the
lack of funding” (3%) and “power abuse/intimidation (2%)” were mentioned to
characterize the TSB.
Qualitative component
Spontaneously,
a majority of interviewees mention positive elements
when they think of the TSB. Words such as “factual”, “objectivity”, “expertise”,
“professional”; “investigation” are the most often used words to characterize
the TSB. These characteristics directly relate to the positioning and mission
of the TSB. Therefore, it is good that many stakeholders spontaneously
associate them with the TSB.
A
few words were mentioned to a lesser extent, some with more negative
connotations. As such, words such as “slow”, “vague”, “far-reaching”, “independent
“, “comprehensive” and “prevention” came up regularly in the vocabulary of
stakeholders to describe the organization. However, it should be noted that
several interviewees also used negative adjectives or attributes to
characterize the TSB. These negative adjectives included: “lack of resources",, “bureaucratic”, “broken”. These words with more
negative connotations were mentioned by a minority of interviewees and did not
come up regularly in the discussions.
Several
interviewees stated that they perceived a lack of resources (financial and
human) at the TSB. This seems to influence the choices and actions of the Board
in a negative way. It is not only driven by safety considerations. That is not
good for the image and reputation of the TSB. Several interviewees stated that
the TSB should collaborate more with the companies in the industry. It is an
opportunity for the Board to improve its effectiveness. At
the moment, some stakeholders feel that the TSB taking them with a
guilty attitude and that is not good for collaboration.
Some
pointed out to the fact that there seems to be a clash between TC and TSB at
certain moments. The relationship between the two organizations could certainly
be better.
Many of the mentions, both positive
and negative (from quantitative and qualitative component), had already been
mentioned in the 2015 consultation. Thus, there is continuity in the
perceptions associated with the Board.
Two out of six performance indicators
are below a score of eight out of ten points. TSB’s “capacity to influence the
advancement of transportation safety in Canada” (7.6) and “the ease of finding
TSB’s information” (7.2) are the two performance statements that were rated the
lowest by stakeholders (See Figure 6). These were the same two statements
that scored the lowest in 2015. While the ease of finding TSB’s
information has been fairly stable over the past five years, the ability to
advance safety has decreased from 8.0 in 2015 to 7.6 in 2020.
Figure 6: Answer to Q16. Please rate your level of agreement with
the following statements. Please use a scale of 1 to 10 where 1 means
completely disagree, and 10 means completely agree.
Sample frame: All respondents
(n=117).
The other four indicators showed
average scores above 8.0 out of 10. The “importance for the TSB to be
independent from the regulators” (9.1) is the indicator with the highest score.
This is a very clear indication that stakeholders agree with and expect a clear
separation between the Board and the regulators. The perception that “confidentiality
and anonymity are taken seriously by the TSB” (8.9) was also highly rated by
respondents. The assessment of these two indicators has been fairly
stable over the past five years.
The last two performance indicators
have been well assessed. One of the two even has a better score than in the 2015
consultation. The perception that “the TSB is independent of other agencies or
departments” (8.8) has increased since 2015 (8.3). Finally, the perception “that
the TSB is credible and a reliable source of information” (8.4), a new
indicator this year, scored well.
2.2 Effectiveness of the TSB
in Advancing Transport Safety
The 2020 survey results showed a
slight decline in the stakeholder perception that the TSB is effective in
influencing changes that improve transportation safety in Canada (See Figure 7).
The 2015 average was 6.9 out of 10; it is now 6.6 out of 10. An important indicator
is the decline of the number of respondents who perceive that the TSB is truly
effective. This indicator went from 21% in 2015 to 9% in 2020; a sharp drop of
12%. This decrease is in favour of the proportion of respondents who believe
that the TSB is somewhat effective; from 48% in 2015, this proportion is now at
62%.
Figure 7:
Answer to Q6. Based on your current
knowledge of the TSB, how would you rate its overall effectiveness in
influencing changes that advance transportation safety? Use a scale of 1–10
(1 = not at all effective, and 10 = very effective).
Sample frame: All respondents
(n=117).
The reasons for the perceived
effectiveness of TSB in influencing changes to improve transportation safety in
Canada differ according to the perception of the effectiveness of the TSB (See
Figure 8). For those who consider the TSB to be ineffective or not very
effective, the reasons given are that the recommendations made by the TSB are
ineffective or ignored (54%) or that the Board does not address real safety
issues in the transportation industry (46%). On the other hand, respondents who
believe that the TSB is somewhat or really effective are more likely to
consider their recommendations to be relevant and necessary (30%), that their
investigations are thorough and complete (26%), and that the TSB contributes to
transportation safety regulation (16%).
Figure 8:
Answer to Q7. Please briefly explain
your answer to the previous question. —MULTIPLE MENTIONS ALLOWED*
Sample frame: Respondents who
had an opinion on TSB’s effectiveness (n=111).
Qualitative component
Several
interviewees stated that the TSB is effective in improving transportation
safety in Canada. They believe that through its investigations, analysis,
publication of reports and recommendations, the TSB is an important agent of
change and safety improvement.
However,
other interviewees, while not completely opposed to this view, believe that the
TSB is not very effective and is missing opportunities to improve
transportation safety. As such, greater collaboration with industry members
would be effective. More proactive information sharing and systematic
follow-ups with companies that have had incidents could also help improve the
effectiveness of the TSB. The TSB could organize more presentations and also offer training for youth (apprenticeship—pilot and
others).
The
time taken by the TSB to publish reports and recommendations is also an aspect
that hinders the effectiveness of the Board. The industry cannot wait years for
a report and recommendations. The industry must move forward and take action to
prevent future occurrences. Often when the TSB publishes a report, the
opportunity for change has passed. Some interviewees recommend that the TSB
publish its reports and recommendations in different stages to maximize their
scope and influence change.
The
TSB should also continue to put pressure on regulators, as they are currently
doing, to push for the implementation of recommendations.
For most stakeholders who took part
in the survey, the TSB is an organization that receives broad (23%) or moderate
(40%) recognition in their respective sectors for advancing transportation
safety in Canada (See Figure 9). Nearly one in five respondents (22%) felt
that the TSB received little recognition (22%) while a minority (7%) felt that
the TSB did not receive recognition in their sector for advancing safety in
their sector. No comparison with previous years is possible because the wording/labels
have changed.
Figure 9:
Answer to Q8. Which of the following
statements best matches your opinion regarding the level of recognition that
the TSB receives for its role in advancing transportation safety?
Sample frame: All respondents
(n=117).
The top three solutions proposed by
respondents to increase awareness of the TSB’s role and mission are: a greater
presence at industry forums and conferences and more advertising (17%); an increase
in social media presence (16%); and communicating more frequently, by email and
newsletters, with stakeholders (15%) (See Figure 10). Respondents in the
air sector are more likely to suggest a greater presence at industry forums and
conferences and more advertising (33%), while those in the marine sector are
more likely to suggest an increased presence on social media (29%).
Figure 10:
Answer to Q23. The TSB would like to
increase stakeholders’ awareness of our role, responsibilities, and key safety
messages. In your opinion, what is the best method to do this? —MULTIPLE
MENTIONS ALLOWED*
Sample frame: All respondents
(n=117).
Other solutions suggested by
respondents were mentioned in smaller proportions. Some should be highlighted
as they are consistent with many of the comments received during the
interviews: increased engagement with stakeholders, regular communication, direct
contact with the industry and its representatives, face-to-face meetings, and
presentations at industry events. All these solutions suggest a more proactive
and dynamic engagement of the TSB with the industry and its stakeholders; an
element that was regularly mentioned during the one-on-one interviews.
2.3 Information, Recommendations,
Products and Services
The clarity of the information
produced and published by the TSB is relatively well assessed by stakeholders.
One third of respondents say that the information is really
clear (32%) while more than half consider it to be somewhat clear (55%).
Only one respondent in ten (9%) considers that the information is not really clear (See Figure 11). Respondents with head
office in British Columbia are less likely to think than the other respodents that TSB’s information is very clear (17%); but
they are more likely to think that TSB’s information is somewhat clear (74%).No
other significant differences between subgroups in the sample were found in the
results.
Figure 11:
Answer to Q12. How would you rate the
information that the TSB provides? Use a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 means not
clear at all, and 10 means very clear.
Sample frame: All respondents
(n=117).
The timeliness of the information
provided by the TSB is a characteristic that is less well rated by stakeholders
(See Figure 12). Only one respondent in ten (11%) considers that the
release of information is actually timely. Slightly less than half of the
respondents (47%) consider the dissemination of information to be fairly rapid, while a quarter (26%) say it is not timely.
Respondents whose organization operates in BC appear to be more negative than
other respondents on this aspect. Almost half of BC respndents
(46%) think TSB’s information is not timely. While the average out of ten is
6.3 overall, it is 5.2 for those in British Columbia;
a significant difference. That said, survey respondents do appear to perceive
an improvement in this area; the average rating for this characteristic was
only 5.5 in 2015.
Figure 12:
Answer to Q14. How would you rate the
timeliness of the information that the TSB provides (excluding investigation
reports)? Please use a scale of 1 to 10 where 1 means not at all timely, and 10
means very timely.
Sample frame: All respondents
(n=117).
The effectiveness of the TSB recommendations
is somewhat better assessed than the timeliness of information production and
distribution (See Figure 13). About one in five respondents (21%) consider
the recommendations to be very effective, while more than half (55%) consider
them to be somewhat effective. One in five respondents (20%) say that the TSB’s
recommendations are not effective. The perception of effectiveness has been
stable since 2015, with no change in the average score for this characteristic
(7.0). No significant differences between subgroups in the sample were found in
the results.
Figure 13:
Answer to Q17A. Do you feel that TSB
recommendations are effective? Please use a scale of 1 to 10 where 1 means not
at all effective, and 10 means very effective.
Sample frame: All respondents
(n=117).
Qualitative Component
INFORMATION
An
important majority of interview participants consider the information
disseminated by TSB to be satisfactory. It is perceived, the
majority of the time, to be clear, factual, accurate, reliable,
objective and thorough. Several interviewees would give the information a score
of 10/10. Very few interview participants were dissatisfied with the
information disseminated by TSB.
A
few interviewees identified gaps in the information distributed by TSB. Some
mentioned that the reports may contain certain aspects of subjectivity or
omissions. It was indicated that some investigators leave out some important
factors in their investigation to focus only on other factors. Industry members
and TSB investigators do not always have the same reading of events. For this
reason, many stakeholders would like to be able to intervene and comment on the
direction and focus of the investigation and not just comment on a report at
the very end on the factual aspect. It is considered important by some
stakeholders to have a say in the direction of an investigation that affects
them. Significant differences in
reporting and depth of analysis between regions and sectors was also
identified.
TIMELINESS
The
timeliness of TSB’s reports and recommendations must be addressed. The majority of interviewees understand that investigations
cannot be rushed. They are aware that the process is lengthy and should not be
rushed. That said, many consider delays of more than a year to be abnormal.
EFFECTIVENESS
TSB
recommendations and their effectiveness are judged to be neither very effective
nor not effective. It is said that several recommendations are too general and
not sufficiently in line with the reality of the different sectors of the
industry, their reality and their resources. Many also
point to the fact that recommendations have been made for years without being
implemented or regulated as a sign of TSB’s lack of effectiveness in
implementing recommendations.
Most TSB stakeholders are not very
familiar with TSB products or tools (See Figure 14). Even for the most
familiar product, investigation reports and updates, less than half of the
stakeholders (46%) say they are really familiar with
it. TSB recommendations get about the same level of familiarity among
respondents. Just over four in ten respondents (44%) say they are very familiar
with the TSB’s recommendations. A similar proportion (41%) say they are very
familiar with the TSB website. These are the three products/tools with which
stakeholders are most familiar.
Figure 14:
Answer to Q9. Please rate your level
of familiarity with each of the following. Use a scale of 1–10 (1 = not at all
familiar, and 10 = very familiar).
Sample frame: All respondents
(n=117).
Respondents are much less familiar
with the other TSB products/tools. In fact, more than half of the respondents
indicate that they are not familiar with a large number of products/tools: TSB
social media (75%); Safety issue investigation on air-taxi operations in Canada
(66%); Daily notifications (64%); SECURITAS (63%); Corporate publications
(63%); Monthly/annual statistics and modal datasets (56%) and Policy on
Occurrence Classification (51%).
The perceived relevance of TSB’s
various products and tools follows the same trends as the level of familiarity,
which in itself makes sense (See Figure 15).
Investigation reports and updates, recommendations, presentations to industry
and the TSB website are the products/tools that are deemed most relevant by
respondents. Although many products/tools are deemed relevant by only a small
proportion of respondents, this does not constitute a negative judgment as to
their importance. They are most likely to be less relevant to the specific type
of work being done by the respondents. Some significant differences are worth noting: stakeholders working in the aviation industry are
more likely to consider the TSB Watchlist and the Safety issue investigation on
air-taxi operations in Canada to be relevant to their work.
Figure 15:
Answer to Q10. Which of the TSB
products and services below are relevant to you? —MULTIPLE MENTIONS ALLOWED*
Sample frame: All respondents
(n=117).
It should be noted that for all
products/tools (those that can be tracked in previous waves), there has been an
increase in relevance over the past five years.
Qualitative Component
Investigation reports are unquestionably the
best-known products of stakeholders. They are also the reports that are the
most consulted and the most relevant for the stakeholders. They are also the
investigation reports that bring people to the TSB website and their updates.
Awareness of other products and tools is relative
to the industry sector and the role of stakeholders. It is therefore normal
that very few interviewees are very familiar with many of these tools and
products. It is clear, however, that the majority of
interviewees who are familiar with and use the products are generally satisfied
with them.
A few interview participants mentioned areas for
improvement for certain products:
·
Watchlist: too general inapplicable to all sectors
·
Datasets: often incomplete. Some information is
missing to perform calculations.
·
Occurrence Classification: not up to date. Several
definitions are outdated. Needs to be updated.
·
Social media: be careful not to fall into
sensationalism or to publish information too quickly while investigations are
in progress.
TSB investigation reports are
considered relevant by a strong majority of respondents (81%). These reports
are read in their entirety by nearly three quarters of respondents (74%). Respondents
from the air sector are more likely (90%) than the other respondents to read
TSB’s investigation reports in full. Just under one in five respondents (17%)
read only certain sections of the reports (See Figure 16).
Figure 16:
Answer to Q11D. Turning to our
investigation reports, which sections of the reports do you read? —MULTIPLE
MENTIONS ALLOWED*
Sample frame: All respondents
(n=117).
The main reasons respondents gave
for reading investigation reports are: to find out if there are safety
recommendations that affect their industry (79%); to be proactive in improving
safety in the industry (77%); and to find out what has happened (70%) (See
Figure 17). Slightly less than half of respondents (49%) say that reading
investigation reports is part of their job and training. Respondents working in
the air sector are more likely to mention wanting to be proactive about changes
in their industry (90%). Respondents in the marine sector are, in their case, less
likely to mention that reading investigation reports is part of their job or
training (30%).
Figure 17:
Answer to Q32. Why do you read TSB
investigation reports? —MULTIPLE MENTIONS ALLOWED*
Sample frame: All respondents
(n=107).
The lack of time is mentioned by
three in ten respondents (30%) as the reason for not reading the reports and
one in ten (10%) say it is because the reports are not published quickly
enough. Six out of ten respondents (60%) said that other reasons explained the
non-reading of the investigation reports.
The timeliness of investigation
reports is one of the characteristics that is not so well assessed by
respondents (See Figure 18). A very small minority of respondents (6%) say
that the publication of investigation reports is very timely and just over four
out of ten (44%) indicate that the release is somewhat timely. This leaves half
of the respondents (50%) who do not consider the publication of reports to be
timely. The TSB is rated an average of 5.3 out of 10 on the timeliness of
investigation reports attribute. This rating is higher among respondents from
the Prairies (6.2) but is significantly lower (4.6) among respondents from the
marine sector.
Figure 18:
Answer to Q34. How would you rate the
timeliness of our investigation reports? Please use a scale of 1 to 10,
where 1 means not at all timely, and 10 means very timely.
Sample frame: All respondents
(n=107).
Half of the respondents agreed that
all sections of the investigation reports are useful (50%), while a little more
than a third of respondents (35%) pointed to the executive summary as the most
useful section for them (See Figure 19). The remaining sections are
considered useful, but to a lesser extent. The video summaries are considered
useful by a minority of respondents (3%) but respondents from the marine sector
are more likely than others to find this section useful (9%).
Figure 19:
Answer to Q35. Which of the following
investigation report summaries would be most useful to you?
Sample frame: All respondents
(n=117).
Respondents were informed directly
by the TSB (21%) or on the TSB website (21%) that an investigation report has
been published (See Figure 20). A smaller proportion of respondents learn
about it through industry associations (14%) or from colleagues (12%). Other
sources of information about the publication of investigation reports were
mentioned by fewer than one in ten respondents.
Figure 20:
Answer to Q36. How do you usually
find out when an investigation report is released?
Sample frame: All respondents
(n=117).
The two most common comments
mentioned about the investigation reports are that they are detailed/precise
and thorough (20%) and that there is too much of a delay before they are
published (19%) (See Figure 21). These two comments stand out from the
other comments mentioned by less than 15% of respondents. On the other hand,
the reports are perceived to be of good quality and professional (14%), well
presented/illustrated/written (13%); and useful (11%). Other comments were
mentioned by less than 10% of respondents.
Figure 21:
Answer to Q11E. We’re interested to
hear your comments about our investigation reports. Please enter your comments
in the following box. —MULTIPLE MENTIONS ALLOWED*
Sample frame: Respondents who
read the investigation reports (n=107).
It seems that the SECURITAS program
is not very well known by a majority of stakeholders
(See Figure 22). In fact more than two thirds of respondents are not
familiar with the SECURITAS program (66%), about the same proportion of
respondents do not know what its purpose is (65%), or do not know how to make a
confidential report (57%).
Figure 22:
Answer to Q18A. Using a scale of 1 to
10 where 1 means not at all aware, and 10 means very aware; please rate your
awareness level of…
Sample frame: All respondents
(n=117).
Indeed, only a minority of
stakeholders (6%) have ever had to submit a SECURITAS report (See Figure 23).
Figure 23:
Answer to Q37. Have you ever
submitted a SECURITAS report?
Sample frame: All respondents
(n=117).
The TSB Watchlist seems to have
gotten better over the last few years. The Watchlist’s perceived effectiveness
has improved (See Figure 24). While the average score in 2015 was 5.8 out
of ten, the average score for 2020 is 6.6. A significant increase in the
perceived effectiveness. More than one in ten respondents (13%) believe that
the Watchlist is effective, while six in ten (61%) believe that it is somewhat
effective. Slightly more than one quarter believe it is not effective (27%).
Figure 24:
Answer to Q19A. How would you rate the
effectiveness of the TSB’s Watchlist? Please use a scale of 1 to 10 where 1
means not at all effective, and 10 means very effective?
Sample frame: Respondents of
TSB Watchlist (n=64).
A clear majority of TSB’s
stakeholders have previously visited the TSB website (See Figure 25). It
seems that the website’s traffic has increased over the last five years. In
2015, 20% of the stakeholders had never visited the website while this
proportion is 10% in 2020. In fact, the majority of
respondents have visited the TSB website in the last six months and about a
quarter of the respondents have visited the TSB website more than six months
ago.
Figure 25:
Answer to Q11A. When did you last
visit the TSB website?
Sample frame: All respondents
(n=117).
The most popular pages viewed by
stakeholders on the TSB website are reports and updates (80%); and recommendations
(63%) (See Figure 26). The other pages that are definitely
less visited by stakeholders are the Watchlist (37%); other security
communications (31%); and monthly/annual statistics and modal databases (20%).
All other pages are visited by fewer than one out of five respondents. Marine
respondents are less likely than other respondents to consult recommendations
(47%) and monthly/monthly/annual statistics and modal databases (20%).
Figure 26:
Answer to Q11B. When did you last
visit the TSB website?
Sample frame: All respondents
(n=117).
In addition to consulting the pages
of investigation reports, whose consultation has remained stable over the past
few years, the pages of recommendations, the Watchlist, and media products have
all seen their frequentation increase over the past five years.
It is with a laptop that
stakeholders mainly access the TSB website followed by the desktop computer
(See Table 4). Smartphones are the third most popular device for
respondents to access the website. Tablets come in last place among the devices
that allow respondents to visit the TSB website.
Figure 27. Answers
to Q26. What type of device do
you use the most when accessing the TSB website? Modulate your answer using a
scale of one (1) to four (4) where 1 means the most frequently used and 4 the least
frequently used?
Sample frame: Respondents who have
visited the website (n=105).
Device Used to Access the TSB Website
The information available on the
website is judged understandable (See Figure 27). This is true for the majority of respondents (70%). Respondents consider that
the information available on the website is always useful (52%); always
findable (43%). Ease of navigating the site content is clearly the least rated
element of the website (36%).
Figure 28:
Answer to Q28. How often does each of
the following statements apply to your experience on the TSB website?
Sample frame: Respondents who have
visited the website (n=105).
A better search tool, ease of navigation and having access to archives
with older content are the most often mentioned changes that stakeholders would
like to see on the TSB website (See Figure 28).
Figure 29:
Answer to Q30. What would you change
or add on the website to make it easier for you to use? —MULTIPLE MENTIONS
ALLOWED*
Sample frame: Respondents who have
visited the website (n=105).
Qualitative component
The
website is mainly a gateway to investigation reports and updates. This is the
main reason why interviewees will go to the website.
Most
of them are quite satisfied with the website, the navigation
and the ease of finding the information they are looking for. That said, it is
on this last point that we received the most negative comments. Interviewees
would like a better search engine, more filter options
and a better classification according to activity sectors and transportation
industry.
There are notable differences
between the devices used to consult the TSB website and those used to consult
information on the Internet in general (See Table 5). The laptop and the
desktop are still the two most used devices but to a lesser extent than for
consulting the TSB website. Smartphones are much more used in general to
consult information on the Internet than to consult information on the TSB
website. Tablets are the least frequently used for this purpose as well.
Figure 30-. Answers
to Q27. And what type of
device do you use the most when accessing everyday information on the Internet?
Modulate your answer using a scale of one (1) to four (4) where 1 means the
most frequently used and 4 the least frequently used.
Sample frame: All respondents (n=117).
The type of media consulted by
stakeholders has undergone a huge change in the last five years See Figure 19).
Traditional media such as television, radio and newspapers have been in sharp
decline over the last five years. Conversely, mobile applications, Facebook and
other social media have clearly progressed in recent years.
Figure 31:
Answer to Q22. Please indicate how
frequently you use the following types of media.
Sample frame: All respondents (n=117).
The vast majority
of TSB’s stakeholders watch videos online.
About three out of ten respondents never or rarely listen to online videos (See
Figure 30). All others listen to online videos on a weekly basis. One in
five respondents (21%) watch online videos on a daily basis.
Figure 32:
Answer to Q40. In general, how often
do you watch videos from social media channels such as YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and Instagram?
Sample frame: All respondents (n=117).
Qualitative Component
SOCIAL
MEDIA
A majority of
interviewees use social media such as Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Instagram
and YouTube. However, apart from Linked In, the use of social media is mainly
personal and not professional. But few interviewees claimed to use social
platforms professionally. But some of them use social media to get daily news.
Almost
all interviewees occasionally listen to online videos via YouTube.
Only
a few interviewees mentioned following the TSB Twitter account or having seen
content shared by TSB. They are particularly satisfied with the information
that is shared. This even serves as a reminder for ongoing investigations that
are being reported on. However, respondents are concerned about sharing
sensitive information while investigations are not completed and the
possibility that TSB may fall into sensationalism. They expect TSB to stick to
its role and mission. TSB is not a news media.
MOBILE
APPLICATION
Very
few interviewees would be interested in downloading a TSB mobile application.
It would depend greatly on the type of information shared, on the ability to
filter the desired information according to several criteria.
2.5 Advancing Transportation
Safety
Many suggestions were made to improve the effectiveness of TSB. The
following chart details the solutions or courses of action proposed by the
survey respondents. Many solutions echo the content heard during the stakeholder
interviews.
Figure 33:
Answer to Q24. In your opinion, what
more should the TSB do to be more effective at advancing transportation safety?
Please provide concrete methods/examples?
Sample frame: All respondents (n=117).
Appendix
A–Detailed Research Methodology
A.1 Quantitative
Methodology
A.1.1 Methods
Quantitative research was conducted through online
surveys, using Computer Aided Web Interviewing (CAWI) technology.
As a CRIC Member, Leger adheres to the most stringent
guidelines for quantitative research. The survey was conducted in accordance
with Government of Canada requirements for quantitative research, including the
Standards of the Conduct of Government of Canada Public Opinion Research—Series
E—Qualitative and Quantitative Research.
Respondents were assured of the voluntary, confidential and anonymous nature of this research. As with
all research conducted by Leger, all information that could allow for the
identification of participants was removed from the data, in accordance with
the Privacy Act.
The questionnaire is available in Appendix D.
A.1.2 Sampling Procedures
Computer Aided Web Interviewing (CAWI)
Leger
conducted a web-based survey with TSB’s stakeholders. A total of 117 respondents participated in the survey. The exact
distribution is presented in the following section. TSB provided a list of 855
contacts with valid email addresses to Leger. We invited all contacts on this
list to participate in this consultation. Three reminders were made to maximize
the participation rate.
The target population for
this whole research project is comprised of the TSB’s key stakeholders:
· Government
departments and agencies involved in transportation (i.e., regulators);
· All types
of transportation operators;
· Manufacturers;
· Industry Associations;
· Employee Associations;
· Training Organizations;
· First Responders;
· Chief
Medical Examiners;
· Canadian
Federation of Municipalities;
· Law Associations;
· Individual
who have interacted with the TSB.
The
quantitative research component was conducted through online surveys, using
Computer Aided Web Interviewing (CAWI) technology. The online survey was conducted from August 25 to
September 29. The participation rate for the survey was 24%. Calculation of the
Web survey’s participation rate is presented below. A pre-test of the survey
questions was carried out by conducting 20 interviews. All the contacts on the
list received a bilingual invitation to participate in the study. A reminder
was sent weekly for those email addresses with a unique link that did not
indicate that they had not completed the survey in full.
A total sample of 117 stakeholders were surveyed.
Having proceeded by logic of census for this project,
the results can be considered valid and representative of TSB’s stakeholders. Where
possible, the results of the 2020 edition of the study were compared to the
2015 results. The profiles of the 2020 and 2015 samples are quite similar and
follow similar distributions in terms of industry sectors and regional
distribution. We are confident in the comparability of the two samples. The
detailed results chapter presents the profile of the sample for this study.
The margin of error of this survey is of +/- 8.4%, 19
times out of 20 (confidence interval of 95%).
Given the nature of the database and the information
available for each contact, no weighting was done for this project.
Below is the calculation of the survey’s participation rate.
Table 4.
Participation Rate
|
Total email addresses used |
855 |
|
Invalid Cases |
0 |
|
-invitations
mistakenly sent to people who did not qualify for the study |
0 |
|
-incomplete
or missing email addresses |
0 |
|
Unresolved (U) |
324 |
|
-email
invitations bounce back |
|
|
-email
invitations unanswered |
324 |
|
In-scope
non-responding units (IS) |
50 |
|
-respondent refusals |
7 |
|
-language
problem |
|
|
-early break-offs |
43 |
|
Responding
units (R) |
117 |
|
-completed surveys disqualified—quota
filled |
0 |
|
-completed surveys disqualified
for other reasons |
0 |
|
-completed
surveys |
117 |
|
Participation
rate/response rate = R ÷ (U + IS +R) |
24% |
The following tables show
the sample distribution by industry sector, by language and by location.
Table 1.
Respondents Profile by Sector*
|
PRIMARY SECTOR |
n=117 |
|
Commercial air operators
(Max Take-off Weight less than 8618 kg) |
7% |
|
Commercial air operators
(Max Take-off Weight more than 8618 kg) |
12% |
|
Aerial work operators |
2% |
|
Private air operators
(recreational pilots, not for hire) |
3% |
|
Business aviation |
1% |
|
Flight training operators |
2% |
|
Commercial marine
operators (cargo vessels, ferries, tankers, passenger vessels, tugs and barges) |
22% |
|
Commercial fishing vessel operators |
8% |
|
Canadian federally
regulated freight train operators |
3% |
|
Provincial freight train operators |
0% |
|
Canadian federally
regulated passenger train operators |
2% |
|
Canadian federally
regulated pipeline operators |
1% |
|
Manufacturer—transportation industry |
6% |
|
Transportation industry
association or union |
13% |
|
First responders (police,
fire, and emergency services) |
0% |
|
Medical examiners |
0% |
|
Federal government |
6% |
|
Provincial government |
6% |
|
Other |
5% |
|
Other education and training |
3% |
** Respondents
were given the option of listing more than one location, so the total may
differ from 100%.
As Table 2
indicates, about eight out of ten respondents were English-speaking while
nearly two out of ten were French-speaking.
Table 2.
Respondents Profile by Language
|
n=117 |
|
|
LANGUAGE |
|
|
English |
81% |
|
French |
19% |
Table 3
details the regional distribution of the sample. The majority
of the sample comes from four regions/provinces: Atlantic Canada,
Quebec, Ontario, and British Columbia. Just under one in ten respondents say
that the head office of their organization is outside of Canada.
Table 3.
Respondents Profile by Location*
|
n=117 |
|
|
HEAD OFFICE |
|
|
British Columbia |
30% |
|
Alberta |
15% |
|
Saskatchewan |
5% |
|
Manitoba |
7% |
|
Ontario |
29% |
|
Quebec |
39% |
|
New Brunswick |
7% |
|
Prince Edward Island |
3% |
|
Nova Scotia |
15% |
|
Newfoundland and Labrador |
11% |
|
Yukon |
2% |
|
Northwest Territories |
4% |
|
Nunavut |
9% |
|
France |
2% |
|
United States |
3% |
|
National/all over Canada |
3% |
|
Other |
2% |
* Respondents
were given the option of listing more than one location, so the total may
differ from 100%.
A.2 Qualitative Methodology
Leger conducted a
series of interviews with TSB stakeholders. Leger recruited stakeholder
participants through a hybrid methodology. Some stakeholders have been
contacted by phone and some others have been contacted by email for recruitment
procedure. The one on one person interviews were held over the phone or over
the MS Teams platform. Each interview lasted about 30 minutes and covered
almost the same list of themes that in the web survey. Interviews were held in
English or French, as per the participants’ preference.
A total of 22 recruits
participated in the interviews. Interviews were conducted between September 15, 2020, and October 23, 2020. No
financial incentives were offered for participation.
The following tables detail the profile of participants in the
interviews by sector and geographic distribution.
Table 4.
Participants Profile by Sector
|
n=22 |
|
|
Air |
11 |
|
Rail |
3 |
|
Marine |
3 |
|
Education and training |
2 |
|
Other
transportation industry |
3 |
Table 5.
Participants Profile by Location*
|
n=22 |
|
|
British Columbia |
5 |
|
Alberta |
2 |
|
Ontario |
2 |
|
Quebec |
4 |
|
New Brunswick |
4 |
|
Nova Scotia |
1 |
|
Newfoundland and Labrador |
3 |
|
Northwest Territories |
1 |
All focus the
interview sessions were moderated and supervised by a senior Leger researcher. The
invitation guide is available in Appendix B and the interview guide is available
in Appendix C. The interview guide consisted of a semi-structured guide. It
allowed the moderator to follow the thread of the discussion and ensured that
an array of themes were covered while leaving
sufficient room for the participants to express themselves and develop in
detail their experiences, ideas, opinions and perceptions.
The qualitative portion of the research provides
insight into the opinions of people, rather than providing a measure in percent
of the opinions held, as would be measured in a quantitative study. The results
of this type of research should be viewed as directional only. No inference to
the general population can be done with the results of this research.
Good morning/afternoon, my
name is ____ of Léger, a national research firm, and we have been mandated by
the Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) to conduct a targeted
stakeholder consultation over the next few weeks.
If no one
is available or willing to take part, thank and terminate phone call.
Once the
appropriate person is on the line, continue:
As you may know, the TSB is an independent government
agency charged with advancing safety by investigating selected occurrences in
the four federally regulated transportation modes: marine, pipeline, rail, and
air. As part of its ongoing improvement efforts, the TSB is conducting a
targeted stakeholder consultation. The purpose of this consultation is to
collect feedback about various products and activities offered by the TSB to
ensure that it is moving in the right direction.
As part of this stakeholder consultation process, we
are conducting a series of telephone interviews with key stakeholders.
Interviews last 30 minutes and will be conducted by one of Léger’s senior
researchers. Your feedback is essential for the success of the TSB’s efforts to
advance transportation safety in Canada.
Please note that all information obtained will be
entirely confidential. Léger will collect all responses, aggregate them, and
provide the TSB only with a general report on results. Thus, the TSB will not
be privy to any individual responses.
If
needed, provide contact information to verify integrity of the research:
Sébastien Poitras,
Associate Vice President, Léger, via email at spoitras@leger360.com, or by
phone at 514-982-2464, x3112; or 514-244-5351
Geneviève Corbin, Manager,
Strategic Comms & Media Relations/Communications at Transportation Safety
Board of Canada, via email at Genevieve.Corbin@bst-tsb.gc.ca or by phone: 613-867-3271
Would you
be interested in taking part in an interview?
Yes: take contact information and fix appointment.
No: ask if another senior
member of the organization who is involved in making decisions with regards to
transportation safety and is aware of the Transportation Safety Board may be
interested.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH
FOR YOUR PRECIOUS COLLABORATION!
|
BLOC 1 |
Introduction
and explanation |
|
|
Length |
2
MINUTES |
|
|
|
|
WELCOME AND
PRESENTATION
—Introduction of
the interviewer
—Presentation of
Leger
PRIMARY AIM
—The objective of
the meeting is to gain a better understanding of your attitudes,
opinions and perceptions of TSB. The interview will
also focus on your perceptions/feedback regarding
awareness/opinion of TSB products and services and suggestions for improving
TSB products and services.
RULES OF DISCUSSION
—Dynamics of the
discussion (duration, discussion)
—No wrong answers
—Importance of
giving personal and honest opinions
PRESENTATION OF THE PHONE
INTERVIEWS
—Audio recording
for subsequent analysis
—Information
collected for study purposes only
RESULTS
CONFIDENTIALITY
—The discussion we
will have will always remain confidential…
—Your name will never
be mentioned in the report
Do you have any
questions before we get started?
INTRODUCTION OF
PARTICIPANTS
Could you tell me a
little bit about your work?
What is your role?
What do you do?
|
BLOC 2 |
Starter—General awareness and opinion |
|
Length |
5 MINUTES |
Would you say that you are familiar with the TSB (its
role, mission, products and tools)?
Overall, in your own words how would you explain the role of the TSB,
specifically as it relates to your mandate?
What kind of interaction do you have with the TSB?
What are some of the attributes and characteristics that come to mind when thinking about the TSB?
|
BLOC 3 |
Opinion—Satisfaction—Perceptions—Attitudes |
|
length |
5 MINUTES |
On a scale from 1 to 10, how would you rate your level of satisfaction with the work of the TSB, where 10 means that you are very satisfied and 1 that you are very unsatisfied?
Why?
On a scale from 1 to 10, how would you rate your level of satisfaction with the information that the TSB shares with its different stakeholders, where 10 means that you are very satisfied and 1 that you are very unsatisfied?
Why?
On a scale from 1 to 10 how would you rate the accuracy and reliability of the information shared by the TSB, where 10 means the information is accurate and reliable and 1 means that the information is inaccurate and unreliable?
How do you usually receive the information shared by the TSB?
How would you prefer to receive information from the TSB?
What do you think of TSB’s responsiveness to transportation occurrences?
Are you satisfied with TSB’s timeliness in completing its investigations?
PROBE: Why?
Would you say that TSB’s recommendations and reports are useful? Why do you say that?
Is there something that the TSB should do to improve its reports and recommendations?
Do you think the TSB is effective in influencing changes to improve transportation safety in Canada?
Why?
Do you have any recommendations to improve the TSB’s effectiveness in influencing change?
|
TSB TOOLS |
|
|
LENGTH |
10 MINUTES |
For
the next section of the interview, I would like to know what tools, products or
services offered by the TSB do you use or consult.
Are
there any others?
If
nothing comes out spontaneously, PROBE for the following:
What
about the…
·
TSB Watchlist
·
Monthly/annual statistics and modal datasets on the
website
·
Investigation reports and investigation updates
·
Safety advisories or safety information letters
·
Daily notifications
·
Corporate publications (Strategic Plan, Annual Report,
etc.)
·
TSB presentations to industry
·
SECURITAS
·
TSB Quarterly Review
·
Policy on Occurrence Classification
·
Safety Issue Investigation on air-taxi operations in
Canada (FOR AIR ONLY)
For each of the tools,
products or services that have been used, ask:
And, Are
you satisfied with (INSERT TOOL/SERVICE NAME HERE)? Why?
Does it help do you work
more efficiently or effectively? Why would you say that?
|
BLOC 5 |
SOCIAL MEDIA—Messaging—applications—WEBSITE |
|
LENGTH |
10 MINUTES |
Do you use social media?
Which platforms do you use?
PROBE
FOR: Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn, YouTube
PROBE
for other social media.
How
often do you use these?
How
do you use these?
PROBE:
Do you watch videos online? Do you use them to get your news? To chat with friends.
To follow organizational accounts. For work?
TSB
Social media (Twitter, Flickr, YouTube)
Do you follow the TSB on social
media? If yes, which accounts do you follow?
Do you ever engage with the content—ex:
Like/share/comment/retweet
Do you find the content useful/informative/interesting?
Why?
IF NO, PROBE: What type of
information would you like to see?
TSB website
Do you ever visit the TSB website?
If YES: How often do you visit it?
What is the main reason for visiting
the website? What kind of information are you looking for?
Is the website easy to navigate? IF
NO: What kind of problem have you experienced?
Were you easily able to find the
information you were looking for? IF NO: Please give some example.
Do you have any suggestions to
improve the usability of the website? OR What would make your user experience
better?
TSB
App
Do you have a smartphone?
How often do you use mobile apps?
How likely would you be to use a
mobile application to receive information from the TSB?
|
BLOC 9 |
CONCLUSION |
|
DURÉE |
3 MINUTES |
We have covered all
the topics we needed at this time, but before we end our conversation, do you
have any other comments that will be helpful for the TSB moving forward?
CONCLUDE AND END
THE MEETING.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH
FOR YOUR PRECIOUS COLLABORATION!
Appendix D—Survey Questionnaire
Project Info
[TYPE OF
PROJECT:
[LANGUAGES:
[TRACKING:
Yes]
[PROGRAMMER
NOTES: List of TSB stakeholders]
Info page
template
[Show
ALL]
QINF1
INSERT LOGO
Dear Stakeholder,
As you may know, the
Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) is an independent government agency
charged with advancing safety by investigating selected occurrences in the four
federally regulated transportation modes: air, marine, pipeline and rail. As
part of ongoing improvement efforts, the TSB is conducting a targeted
stakeholder consultation, as a follow-up to our 2011 and 2015 surveys. The
feedback we collect will help guide and improve our various products and
activities.
As part of this stakeholder
consultation process, you have been selected to participate in the online
survey. We would
appreciate it very much if you would complete the following questionnaire which
should take you about 15 minutes.
Please note that
information obtained is confidential. The survey is being conducted by Leger
Marketing, which will collect all responses, aggregate them, and provide them
to the TSB only in an aggregated form. Thus, the TSB will not be privy to any
individual responses.
Remember, your feedback is
very important to the TSB.
Single
Mention Question
[ASK
ALL]
[SINGLE
MENTION]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q1
What is the primary sector in which you operate?
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
Commercial air operators (Max Take-off Weight
less than 8618 kg) (703,704) |
1 |
|
|
|
Commercial
air operators (Max Take-off Weight more than 8618 kg) (705) |
2 |
|
|
|
Aerial work
operators (702) |
3 |
|
|
|
Private
air operators (recreational pilots, not for hire) |
4 |
|
|
|
Business
aviation (604) |
5 |
|
|
|
Flight
training operators (406) |
6 |
|
|
|
Commercial
marine operators (cargo vessels, ferries, tankers, passenger vessels, tugs
and barges) |
7 |
|
|
|
Commercial
fishing vessel operators |
8 |
|
|
|
Canadian
federally regulated freight train operators |
9 |
|
|
|
Provincial
freight train operators |
10 |
|
|
|
Canadian
federally regulated passenger train operators |
11 |
|
|
|
Canadian
federally regulated pipeline operators |
12 |
|
|
|
Manufacturer—transportation
industry |
13 |
|
|
|
Transportation
industry association or union |
14 |
|
|
|
First
responders (police, fire, and emergency services) |
15 |
|
|
|
Medical
examiners |
16 |
|
|
|
Federal
government |
17 |
|
|
|
Provincial
government |
18 |
|
|
|
Other (Please
specify) |
96 |
O/F |
|
Single
Mention Question
[ASK
ALL]
[SINGLE
MENTION]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q2A
In what official language do you prefer to communicate
with the TSB?
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
English |
1 |
|
|
|
French |
2 |
|
|
Single
Mention Question
[ASK
ALL]
[MULTIPLE
MENTIONS—MAX:14]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q2B
Please indicate in which of the following region(s)
you are based.
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
British Columbia |
1 |
|
|
|
Alberta |
2 |
|
|
|
Saskatchewan |
3 |
|
|
|
Manitoba |
4 |
|
|
|
Ontario |
5 |
|
|
|
Quebec |
6 |
|
|
|
New
Brunswick |
7 |
|
|
|
Prince
Edward Island |
8 |
|
|
|
Nova
Scotia |
9 |
|
|
|
Newfoundland
and Labrador |
10 |
|
|
|
Yukon |
11 |
|
|
|
Northwest
Territories |
12 |
|
|
|
Nunavut |
13 |
|
|
|
Other
(Please specify) |
96 |
O/F |
|
Single Mention
Question
[Ask ALL]
[SINGLE
MENTION]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q3A
Using a scale of 1–10 (1 = not at all familiar, and 10
= very familiar), please rate your level of familiarity with the mandate of the
TSB.
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
1 - Not at all familiar |
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
4 |
|
|
|
5 |
5 |
|
|
|
6 |
6 |
|
|
|
7 |
7 |
|
|
|
8 |
8 |
|
|
|
9 |
9 |
|
|
|
10 – Very familiar |
10 |
|
|
Single
Mention Question
[Ask
only if Q3A is 7, 8, 9 or 10]
[SINGLE
MENTION]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q3B
How did you become aware of the TSB?
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
Through news
sources |
1 |
||
|
Through an
outreach presentation |
2 |
||
|
Through social
media |
3 |
||
|
Through
work-related activities |
4 |
|
|
|
Was a witness |
5 |
||
|
Was a designated
reviewer |
6 |
||
|
Was a Minister’s
observer |
7 |
||
|
Was a technical
expert |
8 |
|
|
|
Other (Please
specify) |
96 |
Single
Mention Question
[Ask
ALL]
[SINGLE
MENTION]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q20
Please indicate the main method by which you obtain information about the TSB and its
work:
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
Traditional media
(television, radio, newspaper) |
1 |
||
|
Online news sites |
2 |
|
|
|
TSB website |
3 |
|
|
|
Social media
(Twitter, Flickr, YouTube, Facebook, LinkedIn) |
4 |
||
|
Emails directly
from the TSB (TSB Quarterly Review) |
5 |
||
|
TSB presentations
to industry |
6 |
||
|
Daily
notifications |
7 |
||
|
RSS feeds |
8 |
||
|
Meetings/direct
interaction with TSB employees |
9 |
|
|
|
Industry
publications |
10 |
|
|
|
Other (please specify) |
96 |
OF |
Numeric
Question
[Ask
ALL]
[NUMERIC:
RANGE= MIN 1, MAX 500]
[DECIMALS:
0]
[SYMBOL
TYPE: None]
[SYMBOL
LOCATION:
Q4
During the past five years, how many occurrences
have you been involved in that required working with the TSB?
|
INSTRUCTION: |
WRITE IN NUMBER |
|
None |
000 |
Pure
Open-End Question
[Ask
all]
[OPEN END]
Q5
What is your perception of the TSB; how would you
describe it?
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
Please specify |
96 |
O |
|
|
Please specify |
96 |
O |
|
|
Please specify |
96 |
O |
|
|
I prefer
not to answer |
99 |
X |
|
Single
Mention Question
[Ask
ALL]
[SINGLE
MENTION]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q6
Based on your current knowledge of the TSB, how would
you rate its overall effectiveness in influencing changes that advance transportation
safety? Use a scale of 1–10 (1 = not at all effective, and 10 = very effective).
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
1 - Not at all effective |
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
4 |
|
|
|
5 |
5 |
|
|
|
6 |
6 |
|
|
|
7 |
7 |
|
|
|
8 |
8 |
|
|
|
9 |
9 |
|
|
|
10 – Very effective |
10 |
|
|
|
I don’t know |
98 |
|
|
Pure
Open-End Question
[Ask
ALL]
[OPEN END]
Q7
Please briefly explain your answer to the previous
question: [Q6/10].
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
Please specify |
96 |
O |
|
Single
Mention Question
[ASK
ALL]
[SINGLE
MENTION]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q8
Which of the following statements best matches your
opinion regarding the level of recognition that the TSB receives for its role
in advancing transportation safety?
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
In my
sector, the TSB receives no recognition for advancing transportation safety. |
2 |
|
|
|
In my
sector, the TSB receives little recognition for advancing transportation
safety. |
3 |
|
|
|
In my
sector, the TSB receives moderate recognition for advancing transportation
safety. |
4 |
|
|
|
In my
sector, the TSB receives wide recognition for advancing transportation
safety. |
5 |
|
|
|
I
don’t know |
98 |
F |
|
Pure
Open-End Question
[Ask
ALL]
[OPEN END]
Q23
The TSB would like to increase stakeholders’ awareness
of our role, responsibilities, and key safety messages. In your opinion, what
is the best method to do this?
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
Please specify |
96 |
O |
|
Single
Mention Grid Question
[ASK
ALL]
[SINGLE
MENTION GRID]
[LIST
ORDER:
[STATEMENT
LIST ORDER:
Q16
Please rate your level of agreement with the following
statements.
Please use a scale of 1 to 10 where 1 means completely
disagree, and 10 means completely agree.
[RESPONSE
LIST:]
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
1 – Completely disagree |
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
4 |
|
|
|
5 |
5 |
|
|
|
6 |
6 |
|
|
|
7 |
7 |
|
|
|
8 |
8 |
|
|
|
9 |
9 |
|
|
|
10 – Completely agree |
10 |
|
|
|
I don’t know |
98 |
|
|
[STATEMENT
LIST]
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
Information from the TSB
is easy to find. |
1 |
||
|
The TSB is an independent
entity separate from other government departments. |
2 |
||
|
Privacy and
confidentiality are taken seriously by the TSB. |
3 |
||
|
It is important for the
TSB to operate independently from regulators. |
4 |
||
|
The TSB influences the
advancement of transportation safety in Canada. |
5 |
||
|
The TSB is a credible and
reliable source of information about transportation safety |
6 |
|
|
Single
Mention Question
[Ask
ALL]
[SINGLE
MENTION]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q12
How would you rate the information that the TSB
provides? Use a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 means not clear at all, and 10 means
very clear.
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
1 - Not clear at all |
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
4 |
|
|
|
5 |
5 |
|
|
|
6 |
6 |
|
|
|
7 |
7 |
|
|
|
8 |
8 |
|
|
|
9 |
9 |
|
|
|
10 – Very clear |
10 |
|
|
|
I don’t know |
98 |
|
|
Single
Mention Question
[Ask
ALL]
[SINGLE
MENTION]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q14
How would you rate the timeliness of the information that the TSB provides (excluding
investigation reports)? Please use a scale of 1 to 10 where 1 means not at all
timely, and 10 means very timely.
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
1 - Not at all timely |
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
4 |
|
|
|
5 |
5 |
|
|
|
6 |
6 |
|
|
|
7 |
7 |
|
|
|
8 |
8 |
|
|
|
9 |
9 |
|
|
|
10 – Very timely |
10 |
|
|
|
I don’t know |
98 |
|
|
Single Mention Question
[Ask
ALL]
[SINGLE
MENTION]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q17A
Do you feel that TSB recommendations are effective? Please use a scale of 1 to 10
where 1 means not at all effective, and 10 means very effective.
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
1 - Not at all effective |
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
4 |
|
|
|
5 |
5 |
|
|
|
6 |
6 |
|
|
|
7 |
7 |
|
|
|
8 |
8 |
|
|
|
9 |
9 |
|
|
|
10 – Very effective |
10 |
|
|
|
I don’t know |
98 |
|
|
Single
Mention Grid Question
[ASK
ALL]
[SINGLE
MENTION GRID]
[LIST
ORDER:
[STATEMENT
LIST ORDER:
Q9
Please rate your level of familiarity with each of the
following. Use a scale of 1–10 (1 = not at all familiar, and 10 = very
familiar).
[RESPONSE
LIST:]
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
1 - Not at all familiar |
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
4 |
|
|
|
5 |
5 |
|
|
|
6 |
6 |
|
|
|
7 |
7 |
|
|
|
8 |
8 |
|
|
|
9 |
9 |
|
|
|
10 – Very familiar |
10 |
|
|
[STATEMENT
LIST]
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
TSB
Watchlist |
1 |
|
|
|
Monthly/annual
statistics and modal datasets on the website |
2 |
|
|
|
Investigation
reports and investigation updates |
3 |
|
|
|
TSB recommendations |
4 |
|
|
|
Other
safety communications (e.g., safety advisories and safety information
letters) |
5 |
|
|
|
Media
products (news releases, advisories, deployment notices, speeches, etc.) |
6 |
|
|
|
TSB
website |
7 |
|
|
|
Daily
notifications |
8 |
|
|
|
TSB
Social media (Twitter, Flickr, YouTube) |
9 |
|
|
|
Corporate
publications (Strategic Plan, Annual Report, etc.) |
10 |
|
|
|
TSB
presentations to industry |
11 |
|
|
|
SECURITAS |
12 |
|
|
|
TSB
Quarterly Review |
13 |
|
|
|
Policy on Occurrence
Classification |
14 |
||
|
Safety Issue Investigation
on air-taxi operations in Canada |
15 |
|
|
Multiple
Mention
[ASK
ALL]
[MULTIPLE MENTIONS: Min 1, Max 16]
[LIST
ORDER:
[PROGRAMMER
NOTES: The same order of presentation as in Q9]
Q10
Which of the TSB products and services below are
relevant to you?
|
INSTRUCTION: |
Please select all that apply. |
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
TSB
Watchlist |
1 |
|
|
|
Monthly/annual
statistics and modal datasets on the website |
2 |
|
|
|
Investigation
reports and investigation updates |
3 |
|
|
|
TSB
recommendations |
4 |
|
|
|
Other
safety communications (e.g., safety advisories and safety information
letters) |
5 |
|
|
|
Media
products (news releases, advisories, deployment notices, speeches, etc.) |
6 |
|
|
|
TSB
website |
7 |
|
|
|
Daily
notifications |
8 |
|
|
|
TSB
Social media (Twitter, Flickr, YouTube) |
9 |
|
|
|
Corporate
publications (Strategic Plan, Annual Report, etc.) |
10 |
|
|
|
TSB
presentations to industry |
11 |
|
|
|
SECURITAS |
12 |
|
|
|
TSB
Quarterly Review |
13 |
|
|
|
Policy on Occurrence
Classification |
14 |
||
|
Safety Issue
Investigation on air-taxi operations in Canada |
15 |
|
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
Single
Mention Question
[ASK
ALL]
[SINGLE
MENTION]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q11A
When did you last visit the TSB website?
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
Within the previous week |
1 |
||
|
Within the previous month |
2 |
||
|
Within the previous six
months |
3 |
||
|
Within the previous year |
4 |
||
|
More than one year ago |
5 |
||
|
I’ve never visited the
website |
6 |
|
|
Multiple
Mention
[ASK
only if Q11A=1-5]
[MULTIPLE MENTIONS: Min 1, Max 16]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q11B
Which of the following pages/products do you
view/consult on the TSB website?
|
INSTRUCTION: |
Please select all that apply. |
||||
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
||
|
TSB
Watchlist |
1 |
|
|
|
||
|
Monthly/annual
statistics and modal datasets on the website |
2 |
|
|
|
||
|
Investigation
reports and investigation updates |
3 |
|
|
|
||
|
TSB
recommendations |
4 |
|
|
|
||
|
Other
safety communications (e.g., safety advisories and safety information
letters) |
5 |
|
|
|
||
|
Media
products (news releases, advisories, deployment notices, speeches, etc.) |
6 |
|
|
|
||
|
Corporate
publications (Strategic Plan, Annual Report, etc.) |
10 |
|
|
|
||
|
SECURITAS |
12 |
|
|
|
||
|
TSB
Quarterly Review |
13 |
|
|
|
||
|
Policy on Occurrence
Classification |
14 |
|
||||
|
Safety Issue
Investigation on air-taxi operations in Canada |
15 |
|
|
|
||
Ranking
Question
[ASK
only if Q11A=1-5]
[Scale of 1 to 4]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q26.
What type
of device do you use the most when accessing the TSB website? Modulate
your answer using a scale of one (1) to four (4) where 1 means the most
frequently used and 4 the least frequently used.
You may not
be using all types of tools. In this case, do not rank them.
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
Smartphone |
1 |
||
|
Tablet /
iPad |
2 |
||
|
Laptop
computer |
3 |
||
|
Desktop
computer |
4 |
||
|
I don’t know |
98 |
Grid
Question
[ASK
only if Q11A=1-5]
[Answer Choice in order]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q28.
How often
does each of the following statements apply to your experience on the TSB
website?
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
Always |
1 |
||
|
Occasionally |
2 |
||
|
Rarely |
3 |
||
|
Never |
4 |
||
|
I don’t know |
98 |
STATEMENT LIST
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
I navigate easily to the content
I want |
1 |
||
|
I understand the information
provided |
2 |
||
|
I found the information I was
looking for |
3 |
|
|
|
The information I found was
helpful |
4 |
|
|
Pure
Open-End Question
[ASK only if Q11A=1-5]
[OPEN END]
Q30.
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
Please specify |
96 |
O |
|
Multiple Mention
[ASK
ALL]
[MULTIPLE MENTIONS: Min 1, Max 5]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q11D
Turning to our investigation reports, which
sections of the reports do you read?
|
INSTRUCTION: |
Please select all that apply. |
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
Summary |
1 |
||
|
Factual information |
2 |
||
|
Analysis |
3 |
||
|
Findings |
4 |
||
|
Safety Action(s) |
5 |
||
|
I read it all |
6 |
FX |
|
|
None/I don’t read the
report |
7 |
FX |
|
Multiple
Mention
[ASK
only if Q11D=7]
[MULTIPLE MENTIONS: Min 1, Max 6]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q32.
Why don’t you read the
investigation reports?
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
Too long |
1 |
||
|
Language too technical |
2 |
||
|
Don’t have enough time |
3 |
||
|
Too hard to read on my
mobile device |
4 |
||
|
Limited or no access to Internet |
5 |
||
|
Timeliness of the
report/Report came out too long after the occurrence to be useful to me. |
6 |
|
|
|
Other (Please specify) |
96 |
FO |
|
Multiple
Mention
[ASK
only if Q11D=1-6]
[MULTIPLE MENTIONS: Min 1, Max 5]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q33.
Why do you
read TSB investigation reports?
Select
all that apply.
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
Want to
know what happened |
1 |
||
|
Want to
know if there are any safety recommendations that affect my industry. |
2 |
||
|
Looking
for ways to proactively improve safety in my industry |
3 |
||
|
It is part of my
job/training to read it. |
4 |
||
|
Other (Please specify) |
96 |
FO |
|
Simple
Mention
[ASK
only if Q11D=1-6]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q34.
How would you rate the timeliness of our investigation reports? Please use a scale of 1 to
10, where 1 means not at all timely, and 10 means very timely.
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
1 - Not at all timely |
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
4 |
|
|
|
5 |
5 |
|
|
|
6 |
6 |
|
|
|
7 |
7 |
|
|
|
8 |
8 |
|
|
|
9 |
9 |
|
|
|
10 – Very timely |
10 |
|
|
Simple
Mention
[ASK
ALL]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q35.
Which of the
following investigation report summaries would be most useful to you?
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
News release |
1 |
|
|
|
Executive summary |
2 |
|
|
|
Video summary |
3 |
|
|
|
Infographic |
4 |
|
|
|
All of the above |
5 |
|
|
|
None of the above |
6 |
|
|
|
Other (please specify) |
98 |
|
|
Simple
Mention
[ASK
ALL]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q36.
How do you
usually find out when an investigation report is released?
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
RSS |
1 |
|
|
|
TSB Twitter |
2 |
|
|
|
TSB Website |
3 |
|
|
|
Other social media accounts |
4 |
|
|
|
Traditional media |
5 |
|
|
|
TSB Quarterly Review |
6 |
|
|
|
Referral from industry colleague |
7 |
|
|
|
Industry/Association
communications |
8 |
|
|
|
Your organization’s media
monitoring service |
9 |
|
|
|
Directly from TSB |
10 |
|
|
|
Other (please specify) |
96 |
O |
|
|
None of the above |
97 |
|
|
Pure
Open-End Question
[ASK
only if Q11D=1-6]
[OPEN END]
Q11E
We’re interested to hear your comments about our investigation
reports. Please enter your comments in the following box.
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
Please specify |
96 |
O |
|
Questions
on Securitas
Single Mention Grid Question
[ASK
ALL]
[SINGLE
MENTION GRID]
[LIST
ORDER:
[STATEMENT
LIST ORDER:
Q18A
Using a scale of 1 to 10 where 1 means not at all
aware, and 10 means very aware; please rate your awareness level of…
[RESPONSE
LIST:]
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
1 - Not at all aware |
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
4 |
|
|
|
5 |
5 |
|
|
|
6 |
6 |
|
|
|
7 |
7 |
|
|
|
8 |
8 |
|
|
|
9 |
9 |
|
|
|
10 – Very aware |
10 |
|
|
[STATEMENT
LIST]
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
… the
SECURITAS program |
1 |
|
|
|
… what the
purpose of SECURITAS is |
2 |
|
|
|
… how to
make a confidential report |
3 |
|
|
Single
Mention Question
[Ask
ALL]
[SINGLE
MENTION]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q37.
Have you
ever submitted a SECURITAS report?
NOTE: We
remind you that this survey is confidential and anonymous. No personal
information that could be used to identify someone is shared with TSB.
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
Yes |
1 |
|
|
|
No. |
2 |
|
|
Single
Mention Question
[Ask IF
Q37= 1]
[SINGLE
MENTION]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q38.
Was the
process clear and easy to follow?
NOTE: We
remind you that this survey is confidential and anonymous. No personal
information that could be used to identify someone is shared with TSB.
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
Yes |
1 |
|
|
|
No. |
2 |
|
|
Question on
Watchlist
Single
Mention Question
[Ask if
Q9_1 = 7-8-9-10]
[SINGLE MENTION]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q19A
How would you rate the effectiveness of the TSB’s Watchlist? Please use a scale of 1 to 10
where 1 means not at all effective, and 10 means very effective.
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
1 - Not at all effective |
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
4 |
|
|
|
5 |
5 |
|
|
|
6 |
6 |
|
|
|
7 |
7 |
|
|
|
8 |
8 |
|
|
|
9 |
9 |
|
|
|
10 – Very effective |
10 |
|
|
Ranking
Question
[ASK to
ALL]
[Scale of 1 to 4]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q27.
And what
type of device do you use the most when accessing everyday information on
the Internet? Modulate your answer using a scale of one (1) to four (4)
where 1 means the most frequently used and 4 the least frequently used.
You may not
be using all types of tools. In this case, do not rank them.
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
Smartphone |
1 |
||
|
Tablet /
iPad |
2 |
||
|
Laptop
computer |
3 |
||
|
Desktop
computer |
4 |
||
|
I don’t know |
98 |
Single
Mention Grid Question
[ASK
ALL]
[SINGLE
MENTION GRID]
[LIST
ORDER:
[STATEMENT
LIST ORDER:
Q22
Please indicate how frequently you use the following
types of media:
[RESPONSE
LIST:]
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
Frequently |
1 |
|
|
|
Seldom |
2 |
|
|
|
Never |
3 |
|
|
[STATEMENT
LIST]
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
Television |
1 |
||
|
Radio |
2 |
||
|
Newspapers |
3 |
||
|
Online news sites |
4 |
||
|
Twitter |
5 |
||
|
YouTube |
6 |
||
|
Flickr |
7 |
||
|
Facebook |
8 |
||
|
LinkedIn |
9 |
||
|
Instagram |
|
|
|
|
Other social media tools |
10 |
||
|
Mobile app |
|
|
|
|
Specialized industry publication |
11 |
||
|
RSS/Newsfeed
subscriptions |
12 |
||
|
Government news platforms
(Canada.ca/news) |
|
|
|
Single
Mention
[ASK
ALL]
[LIST
ORDER:
Q40.
In
general, how often to you watch videos from social media channels such as
YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and Instagram?
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
Never |
1 |
|
|
|
Rarely |
2 |
|
|
|
2–3times a week |
3 |
|
|
|
5+ times a week |
4 |
|
|
|
Every day |
5 |
|
|
|
I don’t know |
98 |
|
|
Pure
Open-End Question
[Ask
ALL]
[OPEN END]
Q24
In your opinion, what more should the TSB do to be
more effective at advancing transportation safety? Please provide concrete
methods/examples.
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
Please specify |
96 |
O |
|
Pure
Open-End Question
[Ask
ALL]
[OPEN END]
Q25
Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey.
If you have any additional comments regarding this survey or the TSB, please
provide them in the following space.
|
Label |
Value |
Attribute |
Termination |
|
Please specify |
96 |
O |
|
|
No
comment |
99 |
X |
|
Thank you for your participation.