Via Transit Technology Customer Study

Objective and context

Claude commissioned this qualitative study to understand how urban commuters feel about on-demand transit, their core frustrations with public transport, and what would make microtransit more appealing. Across 18 responses, riders consistently evaluated microtransit on pragmatic trust, predictability, and whether it truly closes last‑mile gaps-more than on novelty or stated environmental benefits.

Cross‑question learnings grounded in evidence

• Coverage and last‑mile gaps are the primary pain. All six respondents to the commute question pointed to insufficient route coverage as the top barrier, often forcing unsafe or time‑costly transfers. As Jazmyn Lebeau put it, “It’s not wait times. There is no bus out here.”
• Safety and night reliability are decisive. Safety concerns surfaced in all six commute responses-especially for micromobility and off‑hour travel. Christopher Ly: “Feeling invisible on my scooter… after that 210 hit‑and‑run story, I’m extra jumpy at night.”
• Reliability and frequency remain fragile. Four of six noted unreliable, bunched, or degraded off‑peak service (e.g., “Ghost buses and the tracker lying by like 10 minutes”).
• Infrastructure deficits and climate realities shape mode choice. All six cited missing shelters, broken elevators, exposed bike lanes, or heat/cold impacts; Yolanda Andreasen: “Waiting in 110 F with no canopy or water nearby is a joke.”
• Microtransit is seen as situational today. Most view it as a backup (bad weather, events, downtown hops), not a primary commute, unless it delivers “boringly consistent” ETAs, flat/capped fares, and convenient curb/driveway pickups. Laurel Ramirez wants pass integration (“PRONTO integration so I’m not juggling another app”); Jazmyn: “Driveway pickup… No roadside walking with Ellie.”
• Trust hinges on accurate, vehicle‑tied real‑time and price clarity. All six prioritized real-time accuracy and fare clarity/capping. Yolanda: “Real-time that’s actually real… tied to the vehicle.” Laurel: “Price clarity… fare caps. No gotchas.” Nicole Fowler asked to “Post weekly stats-on-time rate, cancellations.”
• Booking needs to work beyond the app. Consistent calls for SMS/phone and bilingual support to reduce friction and include multi‑generational households.

Persona correlations and adoption levers

• Rural residents (MN/IA; e‑bike/driver fallback): Require 4WD/snow tires, sheltered waits, bike racks, driveway pickup, and non‑data booking; explicit performance guarantees build trust (Jazmyn, Nicole).
• Shift‑hour hospitality/logistics workers: Guaranteed last‑ride backup, well‑lit monitored pickups, vouchers, and bilingual support outweigh marginal fare differences (Christopher, Mackenzie, Laurel).
• Parents and caregivers: Doorstep convenience, car‑seat readiness, stroller/elevator info, and flat fares are non‑negotiable (Jazmyn, Christopher, Laurel).
• Higher‑income suburban professionals: Will switch if the digital experience reduces door‑to‑door uncertainty: polished vehicle‑tied ETAs, fare capping, pass/employer integration, clear privacy (Yolanda, Nicole).
• Micromobility users: Safety infrastructure continuity and night security drive willingness to use microtransit for first/last mile (Christopher, Yolanda, Nicole).

What to build and change now

• Publish reliability-and back it up. Weekly on‑time, wait, and cancellation stats plus a simple reliability policy with credits/guaranteed backup for misses (echoing Nicole’s request).
• Simplify fares and booking. Exact upfront fares with day/week caps; Apple/Google Pay and transit pass integration; SMS/phone booking with full Spanish support; guest/low‑data mode (aligns with Laurel and Jazmyn).
• Control detours, tell the truth on ETAs. Cap to one extra pickup and show honest ETA windows to prevent zig‑zag delays (e.g., Laurel’s “12‑minute ETA turned into 25”).
• Make pickups safe and climate‑ready. Default to well‑lit monitored locations at night; shade/indoor options and water in hot zones; winter‑ready vehicles in snow regions (speaks to Yolanda’s and rural needs).
• Pilot targeted last‑mile zones with employer alignment. Focus where fixed‑route gaps and shift patterns create the biggest pain; include curb/driveway or safe‑lot pickups and stroller/car‑seat policies.

Risks and guardrails

• Cost risks from flat fares and backups in low‑density zones-mitigate via tight zones/hours and employer co‑funding.
• Operational variability breaking ETA promises-hold capacity buffers, proactive rebalancing, temporary request pauses with early comms.
• Infrastructure delays on lighting/shelters-use temporary mobile lighting/canopies and vetted private lots.
• Privacy/localization gaps-guest mode, minimal data, QA’d bilingual support.

Next steps and measurement

1. 0–30 days: Publish weekly performance stats and reliability policy; set detour caps and ETA windows; map well‑lit night pickups; enable Spanish in CX.
2. 30–90 days: Launch SMS booking/alerts; roll out upfront fares with day/week caps; integrate passes; add share‑my‑trip and SOS; sign first employer MOU.
3. 60–180 days: Launch 2–3 last‑mile pilot zones with guaranteed backup and stroller/car‑seat support; activate vehicle‑tied ETAs; deploy climate upgrades (shade/water; winter tires).

• KPIs to track weekly: ETA adherence (≥90% overall; ≥85% late night), average and P95 wait (≤12 min avg; ≤20 min P95), cancellations and 100% backup fulfillment within 15 minutes, detour impact (≥85% ≤1 extra pickup; median detour ≤5 min), and pickup safety (<0.5 incidents/10k; ≥95% at approved sites).