The Hindu Business Line : Traffic stress: Companies should take the lead

Corporate bodies and trade associations can buy time on television and show video clips on how better driving habits would make traffic flow better. These actionscan directly impact the corporate bottomline.

Companies can organise workshops for better driving practices.

C. Gopinath

I spotted a poster in a Bangalore office that (I am summarising) said ; ‘Stressed in Bangalore, …commuteeasy.com.’ This poster, put out by a Web site, helps you to find ways to carpool to work and thus make your commute less stressful. Even the Bangalore Traffic Police have partnered with them hoping to ease traffic congestion.

I’m glad the Bangalore Police have figured out this connection between traffic and stress, and they can certainly do a lot to make the situation better. But rather than wait for the police to act, there is certainly a role for corporations, who can make the logical connection between traffic, stress and productivity. It is clearly in their selfish interest to do something about it.

To look at the roles for the Police and the Corporations, we need to distinguish between the structural and behavioural solutions to the problem of traffic congestion and the mess on our roads. The police (and the rest of the government along with them), have all the obvious things to do. They need to widen roads, put in additional traffic lights, construct subways and fly-overs, clear the pavements so pedestrians can get off the roads, enforce parking regulations, put up proper road signs, and so on. The list can go on, but there is enough here already.

Problems and corrections

But what about the behavioural issues? Right now, the government seems to think it can solve behavioural problems also with structural solutions. Let me explain.

A recent item in a Bangalore newspaper reports a complaint by a resident of a neighbourhood. His gripe is about the road dividers that are being put up in many prominent roads. The resident complains that the sharp edge of the dividers may prove fatal if someone falls on it and, the dividers being almost two feet high, would prove a hazard to children crossing the road, who would find it inconvenient to stand on it as the top is very narrow. Here is the confusion. Nobody should be crossing the road where there is a divider (behaviour), but the fact that the authorities do not plan for proper pedestrian crossing (structural) only abets the problem.

There are different designs for dividers and the complainant has a genuine grievance, but it would be fruitful to reflect on why there is so much of a reliance on road dividers as a means of traffic control in the first place.

Because drivers get on to the on-coming traffic lane (behavioural) to pass all the vehicles ahead of them, the authorities think that placing dividers (structural) will solve that problem. In addition, in heavy traffic areas, roads are made one-way (structural). It makes sense if this is because the road is very narrow. But when wide roads are made one-way, it only results in traffic zig-zagging (behavioural) though the wide one-way, creating the same kind of chaos.

Widening brief stretches of a road only makes the traffic breakout into more lanes and then creates congestion where it narrows again. Speed breakers (structural), because people do not obey ‘Stop’ or ‘Slow’ signs (behavioural) along roads or near an intersection only means that congestion at the crossing continues to take place, only slowly. Behavioural problems need to be tackled through behavioural corrections.

Let us look at two simple driving habits that can deal with the behavioural side of the problem.

Follow in line: (It does not make sense to call it a ‘lane’ since there are few lanes marked on many of the roads). Following in line only means that you try to follow the vehicle in front of you rather than try to get ahead by squeezing into gaps on the left or the right side of the vehicle in front.

Although the line may seem very long, it ensures that the traffic moves faster through the duration of a light change, without a delay being created while the vehicles that have filled all the spaces try to jostle to get ahead.

Wait for your turn. Intersections that are not manned or regulated by a traffic light are usually a mess. Every vehicle arriving at an intersection does not wait for its turn (i.e., the first to arrive gets right of way, or a major road getting preference over a side road), but continues along its desired path, forcing other vehicles to swerve, causing bottlenecks and congestion.

The problems that arise from not following in line or not waiting for one’s turn are not only a traffic issue. The consequences of this behaviour can be seen at bus stands, ticket counters, and such places. The underlying problem is a societal problem, where the individual feels the need to grab what he can get without consideration for the needs or desires of a fellow human being. It is a pursuit of an individual optimum, ignoring the implications for society, and thereby resulting in sub-optimisation for society.

The response to the results of such behaviour cannot only come from more rules, dividers, and one-way streets. It requires education, and illustration of the consequences of the negative consequences of such behaviour, and to provide suggestions of how that behaviour needs to change.

Impact on corporates

Let’s get stress back into the picture. Length of commute or volume of traffic does not necessarily produce all the stress. It is the mess along the way, constantly negotiating, and keeping all reflexes on high alert, not knowing how the vehicle in front or beside is going to behave, that produces the stress.

Employees who feel stressed because of the commute, reach the work place in a less than conducive state of mind. They are irritable and it affects interpersonal relations, affecting the work environment for others too. The extra time for them to calm down and produce at their potential (and organisational efforts like meditation to help them) are costs that directly affect organisations’ bottom line. Moreover, if commuting takes more time than it should because of traffic, it reduces the time available for the employee to spend at home, increasing stress.

Organisations have a lot to gain here. It is not just the automotive companies that can sell more vehicles if the traffic is better, but all organisations whose employees suffer from the commute time and stress.

Companies can organise workshops for better driving practices, fleet owners can train their drivers better, corporate bodies and trade associations can buy time on television for public service announcements, and show video clips on how better driving habits would make traffic flow better. These are not just social responsibility projects, but actions that can directly impact the corporate bottomline.

(The author is a professor of international business and strategic management at Suffolk University, Boston, US. blfeedback@thehindu.co.in)

Related Stories:
Traffic: New hope for groaning Chennai?

More Stories on : Transport | Roadways | Insight | American Periscope

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
‘Cooperation’ with Beijing

Blocks on reform

Who audits the auditors?

Profiting from poverty

Traffic stress: Companies should take the lead

India not shining in villages

Raja’s royal ‘solute’

Tax compliance

Satyam options