I am an avid user of New York's mass transit system, the MTA. I am also a fan of helpful information, specifically when it appears in the right place, right time, right dose, and right way.
That is why I'm overjoyed that the MTA, like so many other major mass transit systems around the world, has deployed electronic annunciator signs at subway platforms indicating train arrivals. These signs look like this:
This is a great start. You may say, "hey, in this era of smartphones, who needs such things?" In the tunnels of the NYC subway system, you will seldom find WiFi or mobile signal. Additionally, some people don't have data plans (or could be roaming), and some don't have smartphones at all. And even if everyone had a smartphone with perfect connectivity, the cognitive overhead of the phone's interface is too much for retrieving such handy and topical information. These signs still provide great value. But, as they are today, they need much improvement.
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." -Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
A lack of useful information is definitely unjust. Let me tweak the above quote into a suitable first rule of thumb for this blog post:
Rule of thumb #1: An information gap anywhere is a threat to information everywhere.
For Information to be useful, it needs to be predictably retrievable and reliable. If information is hard to find, or altogether absent, it's of limited utility. At the moment, passengers cannot rely on these signs being present throughout their journey. They could be burned by the absence of a sign when mistakenly assuming one would be present. This is especially true for international travelers who assume that, throughout the civilized world, transit systems provide ample information regarding train arrivals. With inconsistent coverage, these signs are, at best, a pleasant surprise to passengers fortunate enough to stumble upon one.
Note that if all passengers had ample information about train arrivals, they would each potentially make better travel decisions. This is what pretentious intellectuals say would lead to an "emergent phenomenon". If a whole bunch of individual ants coordinate their decisions, an anthill "emerges". In the same way, an efficient subway system emerges from efficient passengers. This could improve the subway system as effectively as would system expansion or more frequent train service. Imagine average train crowd size and average journey time dropping just from the consistent placement of simple signs at train platforms. Who would need the new Second Avenue Subway? (That's a joke. Please finish that project, dear MTA).
London (and probably most major cities in the world) has fully deployed such electronic annunciator signage (at bus stops, even). This is frustrating, as between NYC and London, the former clearly has a more dire need for signage. London has far better underground WiFi and mobile network coverage, facilitating smartphone use. Additionally, average and maximum wait times for subways in London are far shorter than those in NYC. In London, a train typically arrives by the time I finish reading the sign, thus rendering the sign unnecessary. In NYC, I can find myself waiting upwards of twenty minutes for a train, in an information-deprived purgatory of constant anticipation.
Why hasn't the MTA fully deployed these yet? Would it be too expensive? Let's estimate the costs. On Amazon, at the moment of writing this, one can purchase the kind of programmable LED sign I played around with in middle school for $106. Note that this item is likely to be far more sophisticated than that which the MTA needs. There are 468 stations. If we provision an average of 10 signs per station (likely to be more than enough), the total cost is $496,080. I am going to ignore the cost of electricity and labor for installing and programming the signs (these should both be negligible given that the MTA has existing sign infrastructure and expertise). Also note that the signs could be substantially cheaper when purchased wholesale.
The MTA's annual revenue is on the order of $7 billion, which is one side of an almost balanced budget. Even if I round up the cost to $700,000, it would run to 0.01% of 1 year's revenue. And this is a one-time cost; annual upkeep should be far cheaper. Also, this purchase falls in the category of capital investment. In other words, should the MTA walk into any bank in the world, they would likely walk out with the money to buy all the signs they would ever need.
So, in summary:
It's not enough for information just to be present (although that's 99% of it). Information must be presented well. This isn't straightforward, but it's easy to improve, since it can be addressed in the software. Before we go into any specific improvements, I must lay down a general rule of thumb.
Rule of thumb #3: There exists a field of study named "information architecture". It is valuable. Go to your nearest library and borrow a book on it, for free. It will be the best zero cents you have ever spent.
Information should be consistent. Compare these two signs of the same subway system:
That is why I'm overjoyed that the MTA, like so many other major mass transit systems around the world, has deployed electronic annunciator signs at subway platforms indicating train arrivals. These signs look like this:
Lack of Station Coverage
Why are these signs not present at every last station throughout the system? I only find them at a small, seemingly arbitrary smattering of stations. To help explain why this is outrageous, let me borrow a quote from one of the greatest speakers of all time:
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." -Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
A lack of useful information is definitely unjust. Let me tweak the above quote into a suitable first rule of thumb for this blog post:
Rule of thumb #1: An information gap anywhere is a threat to information everywhere.
For Information to be useful, it needs to be predictably retrievable and reliable. If information is hard to find, or altogether absent, it's of limited utility. At the moment, passengers cannot rely on these signs being present throughout their journey. They could be burned by the absence of a sign when mistakenly assuming one would be present. This is especially true for international travelers who assume that, throughout the civilized world, transit systems provide ample information regarding train arrivals. With inconsistent coverage, these signs are, at best, a pleasant surprise to passengers fortunate enough to stumble upon one.
Note that if all passengers had ample information about train arrivals, they would each potentially make better travel decisions. This is what pretentious intellectuals say would lead to an "emergent phenomenon". If a whole bunch of individual ants coordinate their decisions, an anthill "emerges". In the same way, an efficient subway system emerges from efficient passengers. This could improve the subway system as effectively as would system expansion or more frequent train service. Imagine average train crowd size and average journey time dropping just from the consistent placement of simple signs at train platforms. Who would need the new Second Avenue Subway? (That's a joke. Please finish that project, dear MTA).
London (and probably most major cities in the world) has fully deployed such electronic annunciator signage (at bus stops, even). This is frustrating, as between NYC and London, the former clearly has a more dire need for signage. London has far better underground WiFi and mobile network coverage, facilitating smartphone use. Additionally, average and maximum wait times for subways in London are far shorter than those in NYC. In London, a train typically arrives by the time I finish reading the sign, thus rendering the sign unnecessary. In NYC, I can find myself waiting upwards of twenty minutes for a train, in an information-deprived purgatory of constant anticipation.
Why hasn't the MTA fully deployed these yet? Would it be too expensive? Let's estimate the costs. On Amazon, at the moment of writing this, one can purchase the kind of programmable LED sign I played around with in middle school for $106. Note that this item is likely to be far more sophisticated than that which the MTA needs. There are 468 stations. If we provision an average of 10 signs per station (likely to be more than enough), the total cost is $496,080. I am going to ignore the cost of electricity and labor for installing and programming the signs (these should both be negligible given that the MTA has existing sign infrastructure and expertise). Also note that the signs could be substantially cheaper when purchased wholesale.
The MTA's annual revenue is on the order of $7 billion, which is one side of an almost balanced budget. Even if I round up the cost to $700,000, it would run to 0.01% of 1 year's revenue. And this is a one-time cost; annual upkeep should be far cheaper. Also, this purchase falls in the category of capital investment. In other words, should the MTA walk into any bank in the world, they would likely walk out with the money to buy all the signs they would ever need.
So, in summary:
- Money is not an obstacle.
- This fits existing internationally accepted standard expectations held by travelers.
- This would lead to a more efficient, optimized subway system without digging new tunnels or adding new trains.
- This is the most obvious improvement to the subway system that I can think of.
So... do it now, MTA!
I must pause at this point. I'm afraid that I have veered this blog off course. This blog is not about proposing big, costly changes. It's about finding obvious pain points and easy, cheap fixes with huge impact. Let's investigate one particular case:
34th Street – Penn Station (IND Eighth Avenue Line)
Like tens of millions, I matriculate through New York Penn Station (a major North American mainline train station). Like tens of millions, I exit Penn Station by connecting to the NYC subway system via the station titled "34th Street – Penn Station (IND Eighth Avenue Line)". This is where you catch A-C-E service, and is probably one of the most heavily trafficked stations of the entire system. There are annunciator signs on the train platform, but outrageously, they tell you nothing but the current date and time of day.
Train arrival information is critically important here. Going through the turnstiles at the entrance, you are immediately presented with a room that has three doors, and are asked to choose one.
Just kidding. The room doesn't have doors, it has stairways leading to the three platforms of the station.
- Downtown Local (C, E service)
- Uptown and Downtown Express (A service)
- Uptown Local (C, E service)
Each passenger must choose one. This set of choices, however, is less than ideal.
- Each passenger wants to get to their destination as soon as possible.
- Each passenger needs to go either uptown or downtown, but not both.
- There are three services on this line: A, C, and E. Some passengers need to select a particular service. Many (maybe most) are fine with taking whatever comes their way, since all three services run on the same line in Manhattan (8th Avenue).
In sum, many passengers just want to take the first train arriving in the appropriate direction. Forcing them to decide on local versus express prematurely is a mistake. Ideally, there would be two doors instead of three: one for uptown and one for downtown. That decision is easy for passengers to make. Then, each door would lead to a platform (or platforms) featuring full A, C, and E service. This would satisfy those passengers interested in a particular service, as well as those on the "first-train-that-comes" strategy.
Unfortunately, the layout of the subway station cannot be altered easily, so we must work with this. I am a passenger who is in the "first-train-that-comes" category. Every time I arrive at the three doors, I choose between downtown local and downtown express at random. I often make the wrong decision, in that often the first arriving downtown train is bound for the other platform. The instant that I perceive this to be happening, I start a race against the train. I bolt down the stairs, run across the room, bolt up the other stairs, and try to leap through the train's closing doors. The window of time between my identifying the arriving train's target platform and the train's departure from the station is fairly short... so I need to run pretty fast. Unsurprisingly, there are always other people in the same situation, who make the same humiliating sprint through this obstacle course.
Rule of thumb #2: Place helpful information in places where customers have to make important decisions.
Dear MTA: put one goddamn annunciator sign, with train arrival times, at the bottom of the three stairways. This way, passengers like me can decide where to go. The presence of just this one sign would have a major positive impact on your subway system. Even just programming the showing of arrival times into the existing annunciator signs at the top of the stairs would yield a major improvement.
Information Architecture
Rule of thumb #3: There exists a field of study named "information architecture". It is valuable. Go to your nearest library and borrow a book on it, for free. It will be the best zero cents you have ever spent.
Information should be consistent. Compare these two signs of the same subway system:
Look at the differences in color, capitalization, typeface, spacing, use of arrows, use of list numbering, use of terminus station (Pelham Bay Park) versus borough (Manhattan), use of a "shield" to designate subway service, and the way multipage content is scrolled through (not visible here). The information on these two signs could not be presented more differently!
Rule of thumb #4: Eliminate all inconsistencies in the presentation of information.
While neither sign has perfect information presentation, I greatly prefer the second:
- The use of a shield around "5" and "6" to designate subway service is an instantly recognizable visual cue with a very well-known meaning. Using a shield is consistent with the way visual information, electronic and not, is presented throughout the subway system. People might wonder what the "L" in the other sign references.
- Arrows that point to train platforms anchor the information to the physical world. This is, in fact, one of the most critically helpful components of the sign, and yet is conspicuously missing from the other sign. Note that the subway station in question does have a two-sided platform, with both sides in full use. Thus, arrows do add value.
- The use of terminus station "Pelham Bay Park" is more specific than just referencing a borough "Manhattan". Veteran L train riders know that all Manhattan-bound L trains terminate at 14th Street – Eighth Avenue, but others might not.
Criticisms of both signs:
- Both signs scroll through multiple pages of information, slowly. People need to wait for relevant information, and may not even know what to expect from upcoming pages. It would be substantially better if all useful information fit on one page.
- There isn't anything present on the sign to cue the passenger into expecting scrolling. There is nothing to indicate how much content has already been scrolled through, and how much remains. If scrolling is present, its existence needs to be well indicated.
- If scrolling is present, keep the most useful information fixed, while less useful information is scrolled. The first sign scrolls through 1 page of all the Manhattan-bound train arrivals, 1 page of all the Brooklyn-bound train arrivals, and 1 page with the current date and time. I suggest fixing the current time and the single next arrival for both directions. Using arrows as a helpful and concise way to represent train direction, this could all be compressed into a single row.
- List numbering is unnecessary (the "1." and "3.") and peculiar in this context (what happened to "2."?) Although, the scrolling animation (not visible here) is a strong cue that explains this peculiarity.
- Since so much space is used in "claiming" a row for a particular train service ("L Manhattan" or "6 Pelham Bay Park"), show as many arrivals as can fit in that row. Comma-separated arrival times aggregated together would be handy here. Specifically, compress the two rows of the first sign down to one row of "L Manhattan 1, 9 Min". Passengers are now empowered to make better decisions regarding skipping crowded trains (if I don't take this one, I see than I can just wait X minutes for the next one).
- For passengers in Manhattan stations, final destinations such as "Pelham Bay Park" are usually not as important as service designations such as "6". I don't know how to use this fact to improve the situation.
- Information such as direction of trains (uptown versus downtown) and destination boroughs would be very useful, but is missing. I don't have a suggestion on how to add this.
- A nearby clock with the current time would be extremely handy. People care about wait times late at night, when wait times are substantial. But, in the middle of the day, people have appointments with strict timing. They care much more about expected arrival time, and thus need to know both current time and wait time.
MTA, you are on the way to improvement. You don't need to spend more money... you just need to do things a bit smarter.
