Robust independent data quantifying the return on investment from driver training and telematics is a major barrier to uptake, according to a report commissioned by the Department for Transport (DfT).

‘Efficient Driving’, by research and strategy consultancy Brook Lyndhurst, questions the case for implementing training due to the current evidence base being “patchy, of variable quality and occasionally ambiguous”.

Focusing on what it says is a lack of independent evidence, the report said: “Most of the research in this area has also been produced by companies with a commercial interest in the fleet sector, meaning there is some potential for bias.”

However, Edmund King, president of the AA, which owns driver training company AA DriveTech, criticised the report. He told Fleet News: “It certainly isn’t patchy to companies like the AA or indeed AA DriveTech.

“The introduction of telematics to monitor driving and idling amongst the AA’s 3,000 patrol vehicles saved £1 million in the first year alone. These are hard figures and excellent savings.”
Safety was also cited as an incentive to take action,  due to duty-of-care concerns and reputational risk.  These issues were well-researched and understood, said the report. But the actual extent of efficient driving  techniques among employers and employees was not  well documented. 

It continued: “Saving money does not feature prominently as a motivation for efficient driving amongst employees themselves, as most fuel and other costs are generally met by their employer.”

Around half of UK organisations with a car/van fleet have taken action aimed at increasing efficient driving by their employees and a quarter had introduced in-vehicle technology, according to the report.

However, it suggested a barrier for further uptake was the “current lack of robust, independent data quantifying the return on investment”.

The Energy Saving Trust (EST) saw 5,300 fleet drivers complete its ‘Ecodriving’ course in 2015/16 (a 50% increase on two years ago), which is delivered by a portfolio of driver training companies. 

Drivers completing the course returned an average 14% mpg improvement on the day, but over a period of time in real-world motoring that reduces.

However, Tim Anderson, the EST’s senior knowledge manager transport, said that the report did not come as an “immense surprise”.

“The evidence base is somewhat patchy and we have raised that as an issue with the Department for Transport,” he said. “While there is a clear correlation between fleet incident rates and interventions, fuel economy is more difficult to measure over a longer period of time.”

Highlighting the fact that vehicles and drivers change and road conditions alter, along with fuel prices, Anderson said: “There is a challenge as to how the evidence is compiled and the relationship between driver training, telematics and other interventions such as best performance league tables and other incentives in establishing driver fuel efficiency.

“There is evidence available on the impact of driver training and technological interventions, but it is the measuring of the evidence and how it is compiled which is the issue rather than the actual benefit.”

To that end, in 2016/17 EST is embarking on a 12-month trial involving telematics and driver training providers to bring together evidence in a bid to answer that question.

Anderson said: “We want to understand more clearly, and support Government in finding, what is the best combination of interventions to measure the benefit of eco-driving.”

The Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM) told Fleet News that most of the companies it worked with doon report savings on their fleet fuel bills. However, Neil Greig, IAM director of research and policy, said: “They don’t tend to shout out about it enough or share what they often see as commercially sensitive information.  

“Government schemes such as SAFED have helped to raise awareness among van and lorry drivers but more could be done for company car drivers.
“Some reports suggest that fuel efficiency can be increased by an average of 10% after training and major companies such as Yodel say they have used SAFED courses to save a minimum of £2.2m a year through reduced accidents and fuel costs.”

IAM Drive and Survive teamed up with in-vehicle driver behaviour technology company Ashwoods Lightfoot to further improve eco-driving performance. 

Greig said: “Immediate feedback linked to tailored driver training offers the best opportunity to really influence driver behaviour.”

King believes driver training and information campaigns can help focus the minds of drivers on how much money they can save. But he added: “We have also found that simple in-car dashboard mpg gauges that clearly show drivers the mileage they are getting are a great help.”  

That is an approach taken by Britvic, which says it has improved fuel economy by 10% to an average 52mpg as a consequence of fitting telematics to 91 vans.

The Masternaut system operates as an ‘in-cab’ coach notifying employees of poor driving behaviour, while a dashboard reporting system monitors total running costs.

Simon Mohun, regional technical services manager at Britvic, said: “Whilst initially drivers were sceptical, the data has unequivocally shown that the scheme works and it is now embraced by all the team.”

While the case study is highlighted in the DfT report, it argues that it is “not a robust, independent study”.

Despite the lack of “robust data” for introducing efficient driving measures, the report highlighted the fact that the immediate impact of training on employee drivers was calculated to be a reduction of up to 25% in fuel use, and up to 6.5% in the long-term. 

Meanwhile, the introduction of technology in vehicles was suggested to deliver a long-term 5-10% reduction in fuel use and the equivalent in CO2 emissions.

The report added that there was also “strong evidence of road safety benefits arising from efficient driving”, with training reported to correlate with reductions in subsequent accident rates of between 14% and 35%. 

Kevin Clinton, head of road safety at the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA), said: “Companies need to be confident that their investments will results in better, safer drivers, as well as reducing costs and emissions. They also need help to be able to make effective use of telematics to ensure their managers understand what the data shows about their staff’s driving, and how to use this feedback to improve their driving.”

TRL, the Transport Research Laboratory, says a truck-related simulator study involving Allied Bakeries’ drivers highlighted a fuel efficiency improvement of more than 25%, with real-world results showing that simulator training was associated with a sustained improvement in mean fuel efficiency of more than 7%. 

A further simulator truck study revealed a 15.7% improvement in on-road performance compared with the real-world performance of the 36 drivers taking part.

However, a TRL spokesman said: “The consensus from the team here is that more research is required to validate the scale of benefits achievable by fuel efficiency training.”

To encourage the further uptake of efficient driving, the report says the links between efficient driving, safety and insurance need to be investigated, and interventions should be segmented and targeted at key types of driver and organisation. 

 

More articles on: