Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2015) 118
Transportation
Transportation Research
Research Procedia
Procedia 25C00 (2015)
(2017) 118
36603677 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

World Conference on Transport Research - WCTR 2016 Shanghai. 10-15 July 2016
World Conference on Transport Research - WCTR 2016 Shanghai. 10-15 July 2016

Methodology
Methodology for
for diagrammatic
diagrammatic comparison
comparison of
of transport
transport
planning competences over national borders
planning competences over national borders
a, a a
Takeru
Takeru Shibayama
Shibayamaa,,, Ulrich
Ulrich Leth
Letha ,, Guenter
Guenter Emberger
Embergera
a Research Center of Transport Planning and Traffic Engineering, Vienna University of Technology,
a Research Center of Transport Planning and Traffic Engineering, Vienna University of Technology,
Karlsplatz 13/230-1, A-1040 Vienna, Austria
Karlsplatz 13/230-1, A-1040 Vienna, Austria

Abstract
Abstract
In the border region of Austria, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovakia, cross-border cooperation in the fields
In the border region of Austria, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovakia, cross-border cooperation in the fields
of transport infrastructure and services is becoming important along with the series of events since the fall of the Iron
of transport infrastructure and services is becoming important along with the series of events since the fall of the Iron
Curtain: Austrias accession to the EU in 1995, the EU Enlargement in 2004, and the Schengen treaty to eliminate border
Curtain: Austrias accession to the EU in 1995, the EU Enlargement in 2004, and the Schengen treaty to eliminate border
controls, which went into effect in 2007 in the Eastern European countries, all served as drivers for new cross-border
controls, which went into effect in 2007 in the Eastern European countries, all served as drivers for new cross-border
travel demands within the region.
travel demands within the region.
It is empirically known that the distribution of planning competences to various organizations is different from
It is empirically known that the distribution of planning competences to various organizations is different from
one country to another; however, besides descriptive methods and classical organigrams, there has not been a practical
one country to another; however, besides descriptive methods and classical organigrams, there has not been a practical
way to compare the differences diagrammatically. This paper presents the first attempt to develop a methodology to
way to compare the differences diagrammatically. This paper presents the first attempt to develop a methodology to
overcome this, and its first application to compare Austrian and Slovakian competence distributions for the construction
overcome this, and its first application to compare Austrian and Slovakian competence distributions for the construction
of transport infrastructure and provision of transport services.
of transport infrastructure and provision of transport services.
Through a trial and error process, we found that a two-step methodology is the most practical. The first step is
Through a trial and error process, we found that a two-step methodology is the most practical. The first step is
to make diagrammatic descriptions of planning processes, and the second step is to convert many of them into one
to make diagrammatic descriptions of planning processes, and the second step is to convert many of them into one
competence map. This is because we found that most of the primary information we were able to obtain from various
competence map. This is because we found that most of the primary information we were able to obtain from various
stakeholders is based on the actual planning process of ongoing or completed real-world projects, and an overview of
stakeholders is based on the actual planning process of ongoing or completed real-world projects, and an overview of
competences itself is hardly obtainable. The diagrammatic description of the first step is made based on a methodology
competences itself is hardly obtainable. The diagrammatic description of the first step is made based on a methodology
of business modeling called Swimlane Process Chart, and the second step inherits a methodology for organizational
of business modeling called Swimlane Process Chart, and the second step inherits a methodology for organizational
modeling with Unified Modeling Language (UML).
modeling with Unified Modeling Language (UML).
This method was applied to the case between Austria and Slovakia. Both of the countries have different traditions
This method was applied to the case between Austria and Slovakia. Both of the countries have different traditions
of planning processes and distributions of competences. In this paper, the result from our diagrammatic comparison will
of planning processes and distributions of competences. In this paper, the result from our diagrammatic comparison will
be presented. There are still several important rooms to develop this methodology within this first attempt: for example,
be presented. There are still several important rooms to develop this methodology within this first attempt: for example,
a methodology to obtain information about how long each step of the process will take and which step is controlling the
a methodology to obtain information about how long each step of the process will take and which step is controlling the
procedure of the entire process in a systematic way will enrich the Swimlane Process Chart.
procedure of the entire process in a systematic way will enrich the Swimlane Process Chart.
c 2017 The

Takeru Shibayama,
Authors. Ulrich
Published by Leth and B.V.
Elsevier Guenter Emberger. Published by Elsevier B.V.
c 2017 Takeru Shibayama, Ulrich Leth and Guenter Emberger. Published by Elsevier B.V.

responsibility of
Peer-review under responsibility of WORLD
WORLD CONFERENCE
CONFERENCE ON ON TRANSPORT
TRANSPORT RESEARCH
RESEARCH SOCIETY.
SOCIETY.
Peer-review under responsibility of WORLD CONFERENCE ON TRANSPORT RESEARCH SOCIETY.
Keywords: Cross-border cooperation, Infrastructure planning,, Competence map, Central Europe
Keywords: Cross-border cooperation, Infrastructure planning,, Competence map, Central Europe

Corresponding author. Tel: +43-(0)1-58801-23114; fax: +43-(0)1-58801-23199

Corresponding
Email address: author. Tel: +43-(0)1-58801-23114; fax:(Takeru
takeru.shibayama@tuwien.ac.at +43-(0)1-58801-23199
Shibayama)
Email address: takeru.shibayama@tuwien.ac.at
URL: http://www.ivv.tuwien.ac.at/ (Takeru Shibayama)
(Takeru Shibayama)
URL: http://www.ivv.tuwien.ac.at/ (Takeru Shibayama)

2352-1465 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Peer-review under responsibility of WORLD CONFERENCE ON TRANSPORT RESEARCH SOCIETY.
10.1016/j.trpro.2017.05.334
 Takeru Shibayama et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25C (2017) 36603677 3661
2 T. Shibayama, U. Leth and G. Emberger / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2015) 118

1. Introduction and researchs background

The region where Austria, Hungary, Czech Republic and Slovakia border, sometimes referred to as the
Centrope region, has observed the political and socioeconomic pendulum swinging drastically and dramati-
cally in the last century. The former capital region of Austro-Hungarian Empire saw the new first Republic
of Austria which is rather small compared to the former empire and the independence of Czechoslovakia
and Hungary towards the end of the World War I. After the World War II, in Austria the second Republic
was established, while in parallel the communist regimes in Czechoslovakia and Hungary came into power.
The region was divided by the Iron Curtain, and the both sides were put into peripheries of the East and the
West.

Fig. 1. Location of the region focused on this research (Source: own graphics)

The fall of the Iron Curtain made the pendulum in the region start to swing drastically again. Czechoslo-
vakia was dissolved into Czech and Slovak Republics in 1993. Austria joined in the European Union (EU)
in 1995, followed by Hungary, Czech Republic and Slovakia joining in 2004. Schengen Treaty came into
force in Austria in 1995 and in the other three countries in 2007, making it possible to cross the borders
without travel documents being controlled each time. These series of events boosted the cross-border travel
demands, not only for occasional leisure or business trips, but also for daily commuting trips drastically. As
a consequence, needs for cross-border transport projects are becoming larger in the region.
In this context, the research institute of the authors as well as other researchers and practitioners has
cooperated with its partners across the border to develop cross-border regional transport models ([e.g. 1]),
to adopt common methodology for travel survey ([e.g. 2]), to research the potentials of companies mobility
management in a cross-border context ([e.g. 3]) and reopening the once-closed railway lines ([e.g. 4]), and
so on.
Through this kind of cooperation as well as formal and informal interviews with the practitioners, one
of the major barriers against cross-border cooperation in the transport sector turned out to be the different
decision-making structures, authorization processes and competences of various organizations. A compe-
tence on the regional level in a country may be on the national level on the other side of the border. Or, a
process that is completed within a few days on one side may call for a several months on the other side of
the border. Sometimes even the contact partner on the other side of the border is difficult to find.
The research presented in this paper aimed (1) to find a methodology to depict such differences in the
decision-making and competence structures in the field of transport infrastructures and services, and (2) to
analyze the differences between the eastern part of Austria and the western part of Slovakia. The reason to
select this specific part of the Centrope region is that the two major cities, Vienna and Bratislava, are in this
part, forming the core of the Centrope region. In addition to this, the information is better accessible for
the research team compared to the other parts of the region, and limiting the scope to this part of the region
makes the research more feasible within the designated ten-month timeframe of the research. This research
is co-funded by the European Unions European Regional Development Fund (ERDF).
3662 Takeru Shibayama et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25C (2017) 36603677
T. Shibayama, U. Leth and G. Emberger / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2015) 118 3

This paper is structured as follows. First, background information and a short history of the develop-
ment of the relevant organizations in Austria and Slovakia is presented in Section 2. Following the literature
review on methodologies for business modeling (Section 3), the methodologies that we found for data col-
lection and analyses are presented (Section 3.3). These methodologies being made use of, the visualizations
of the planning process (Section 5) and the competence structure (Section 6) are presented. Based on these,
an analysis of the differences is carried out (Section 7) and the paper is concluded (Section 8).

2. Background information and short history of the developments of organization

To begin with, it is important to be informed about (slightly) different terminologies used in Austria and
Slovakia, as well as different development history. In the very first phase of the research, we made an effort
to clarify these points, which is summarized in this section.

2.1. Background information

One of the key information is the different road classification in Austria and Slovakia. Road infras-
tructure is classified based on the role of each category of the roads, in accordance with the owners and
organizations or companies that are in charge of maintenance and operation. They typically have acronyms.
The comparison is made in Figure 2.

Fig. 2. Comparison of Classes of Roads in Austria and Slovakia (Source: own graphics)

2.2. Short history of the developments of organization

At the beginning of the research, we carried out an extensive literature review in order to gain key back-
ground information. This enabled us to have a good overview of the development of relevant organizations
such as ministries on the both sides of the border. The focus was set after 1918, when the Austro-Hungarian
Empire was dissolved and the region was divided into two independent countries, the Republic of Austria
(the first republic) and the Republic of Czechoslovakia. In this section, a short summary of this research is
presented, based on the websites of the ministries ([5], [6]) as well as in-house interviews within the research
institutes.

2.2.1. Administration and Managementin Austria

In 1896, the Railway Ministry (Eisenbahnministerium) was established and this is the first ministry in
the genealogy of the Transport Ministry in Austria. It was integrated into the State office for Transport in
1918, then in 1920 to the Federal Ministry for Transport. These were the central bodies for administration
of the road and railway.
 Takeru Shibayama et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25C (2017) 36603677 3663
4 T. Shibayama, U. Leth and G. Emberger / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2015) 118

In the post-war time between 1945 and 2000, the competences for the railway and roads were at different
ministries. As for the railway, in 1945, the competences were separated into two ministries: Federal Ministry
for Transport and Federal Ministry for Electrification and Energy. These two were again merged into the
Federal Ministry for Transport and State-run Enterprises. After that, the names were changed several times
while the core competence remained basically same. In 2000 the Federal Ministry for Transport, Innovation
and Technology (Bundesministerium fur Verkehr, Innovation und Technologie BMVIT), which exists until
today, was established with the main responsibility for the construction and planning of railway lines.
As for the road, between 1945 and 1966, the responsibility for the road construction and management
was at the Federal Ministry for Commerce and Reconstruction. When it was dissolved in 1966, the roles
were taken over by the Federal Ministry for Construction and Technology. In 1985, the Ministry for Public
Sector and Transport was established, which was integrated into the Ministry for Science, Transport and
Art. In 2000, it was integrated into BMVIT.
Today, Austrian Railways are categorized into the following ones, and the administrative competences
are distributed to different organizations based on this:

Public Railways (Offentliche Eisenbahnen):

Main Railways (Hauptbahnen): the federal ministry is responsible for the infrastructure;
Secondary Railways (Nebenbahnen): the federal ministry is responsible for the infrastructure;
Tramways (Straenbahnen): the regional government is responsible for the infrastructure;

Non-public Railways (Nicht-offentliche Eisenbahnen):

Connected Side Railway (Anschlussbahnen): the municipalities are responsible for the infras-
tructure;
Industrial Railway (Materialbahnen): the municipalities are responsible for the infrastructure.

As a railway operator, in 1923, an independent, commercial enterprise, the Austrian Federal Railways
(Osterreichische Bundesbahnen) was founded with the abbreviation BBO. In 1938 due to the Anschluss
of Austria into the German Empire, the BBO was taken over by the Deutsche Reichsbahn. In the post-war
time, in 1947 the (new) Austrian Federal Railways (OBB) were established and reformed as a state-owned
company. In 1969, the OBB became a non-independent, economic entity that was run as a branch of the
governments industrial programme and remained entirely within the federal budget. Along with the Aus-
trias accession to the EU in 1995, changes have been made in the area around OBB in line with the EU
regulations. In 1992, OBB was separated from the federal budget and transformed to a single legal entity
under the private law. In 1999, Schienen-Control was created as a separate body from the ministry to oversee
the railway market. In 2004, OBB itself was separated into several subsidiaries under a holding company
including companies for passenger trains (OBB-Personenverkehr AG), freight trains (Rail Cargo Austria
AG), and infrastructure construction and management (OBB-Infrastruktur AG), as well as many other com-
panies. Controlling of the railway infrastructure and vehicles was transformed to Schieneninfrastruktur-
Dienstleistungsgesellschaft mbH (SCHIG), a separate company under BMVIT.
As for the road, BMVIT is in charge of the following duties as for the road infrastructure: principal
transport policy and planning, special transport-related issues, logistics, road traffic, traffic safety, transport
of dangerous goods, scheduled bus lines, local transport, construction and control of the Federal Roads,
bridges and tunnels, transport workers inspections, technology and research policy as well as research fund-
ing. Advisory bodies for BMVIT are, among others, the Council for Research and Technology Development
and Motor Vehicle Council.
In 2002, all federal roads (Bundesstraen) were transferred to state roads (Landesstraen) nine Aus-
trian federal states became responsible for the planning and maintenance of the state roads. Main highways
(Autobahnen) and secondary highways (Schnellstraen) remain as federal roads, but the maintenance and
financial tasks have been undertaken by the national operator ASFINAG since 1982.
3664 Takeru Shibayama et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25C (2017) 36603677
T. Shibayama, U. Leth and G. Emberger / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2015) 118 5

2.2.2. Administration and Management in Slovakia

Competence of roads, rails and inland waterway takes the Ministry of Transport, Construction and Re-
gional Development of the Slovak Republic, Ministry of Environment of the Slovak Republic and the Min-
istry of Interior of the Slovak Republic on the national level.
In the history of the Czechoslovakia, Slovakia had always its own ministry. In 1991, the Ministry
of Transport and Communications. After several changes in the name, in 2010, the ministry took over
the competences of the disestablished Ministry of Construction. Since 2011, the Ministry is in charge
of the central managing authority for the EU funds, which were previously in the Government Office. It
is now called the Ministry of Transport, Construction and Regional Development of the Slovak Republic
(Ministerstvo dopravy, vystavby a regionalneho rozvoja SR MDVRR).
MDVRR is the central body of state administration for transport road transport, railway transport,
civil aviation, waterborne transport, combined transport, posts, telecommunications, construction, regional
development and tourism. The ministry fulfills the functions of the state transport and maritime office.
Under the ministry, there are many organizations including:

Organizations under the state budget:

Transport Authority (Dopravny urad)
Slovak Road Administration (Slovenska sprava ciest)
Waterborne Transport Development Agency (Agentura rozvoja vodnej dopravy)
National business organizations:
Railway of Slovak Republic (Zeleznice Slovenskej republiky)
Other commercial companies with state participation:
The National Highway Company, Inc. (Narodna dianicna spolocnost, a.s.)
Railway Company Slovakia, Inc. (Zeleznicna spolocnost Slovensko, a.s.)
Cargo Slovakia, Inc. (Zeleznicna spolocnost Cargo Slovakia, a.s.)
METRO Bratislava, a.s.
Technical renewal and protection of railways, Inc. (Technicka obnova a ochrana zeleznc, a.s.)
Public ports, Inc. (Verejne prstavy, a.s.)

2.2.3. Public Transport Association

In Austria, already in 1962, when the Viennas suburban railway network (S-Bahn) commenced its
service, the first agreement was made between OBB and Viennas municipal transport operator Wiener
Verkehrsbetriebe: the municipal public transport tickets were accepted on the OBBs S-Bahn, while the
cross acceptance was not realized. The first collaboration was limited to the main S-Bahn line, but step-by-
step in 1967, 1976, and 1980 the collaboration was extended to cover the entire S-Bahn network in Vienna.
In 1967, the through-fare agreement was made among the Wiener Verkehrsbetriebe, private bus operators in
Vienna. These private and Federal bus operators were operating a number of bus lines in the outer districts
of Vienna, where the population was increasing. Under this agreement, all types of the tickets of Wiener
Verkehrsbetriebe are accepted by the other operators.
In 1984, Verkehrsverbund Ost-Region was started, which covers the Austrian side of the area covered by
this research. At this time, all of the public transport in the City of Vienna, and all of the rail-based public
transport within the area of VOR were covered (Phase 1). Then, in 1988, all of the regional buses in the VOR
area were integrated into the VOR, as well as GySEV/Raaberbahn1 (Phase 2). In 2000, Austrian Local and
Regional Public Transport Act came into force and the public transport association (Verkehrsverbund) was

1 The railway companies operating services around the border between Austria and Hungary.
 Takeru Shibayama et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25C (2017) 36603677 3665
6 T. Shibayama, U. Leth and G. Emberger / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2015) 118

legally accredited. Following this, in 2002, the Federal State withdrew its role from the Verkehrsverbund
and new agreement among the three Lander was reached, with Vienna and Lower Austria owning 44%
respectively, and Burgenland owning 12% of the stake in VOR.
In Slovakia, Bratislava Integrated Transport, Inc. (BID) was founded by Bratislava Self-governing Re-
gion and the Capital City of Bratislava in June 2005 to integrate public transport services, which covers
some of the Slovakian side of the research area. In 2013, the first stage of BID was inaugurated. An ex-
tension of the covered area is planned. The main tasks of BID include coordination of activities to create a
full-fledged integrated public transport system, development of specifications, standards for coordination of
transport lines, criteria for assessment of transport, carrying out surveys of quality, performance and cost of
transport.

3. Literature review methodologies for business modeling

3.1. Review of business modeling methodologies

The analysis and visualization methodologies of competence and organization structures have been de-
veloped mainly in the field of business modeling. This field is strongly associated on one hand with the
management science, while on the other hand the modern techniques for business modeling are strongly
oriented on software engineering. This is because such techniques are much called for to design any kind
of computer-based business applications that suit existing business processes. A few examples in the trans-
port sector such as online ticketing application for railways and parcel management software in the logistics
system should be enough to highlight this background.
Such methodologies are categorized into two groups: methodologies to depict static structures, and
methodologies to depict dynamic business processes.

3.2. Methodology to depict the business structure

The organigramm, also known as organogram, organigram, or organization diagram, is one of the oldest
forms to depict the organizational structure [7]. It dates back to the middle of the 19th century when
two engineers of New York and Erie Railroad, Daniel McCallum and George Holt Henshaw drew the first
diagram of its kind for their railway company in the United States [8]. It is drawn in association with
the companys railway lines, and depicts the number of average employees engaged in operation as well
as the powers and duties of each individual position. It started to be widely used when more structured
management became common after the 1920s.
The Unified Modeling Language (UML) is a recent development since the 1990s and it is strongly asso-
ciated with software engineering [e.g. 9, 10, 11]. It originates from object-oriented programming techniques.
Form the beginning, an application for business modeling has been sought. Since then, literature such as
the official ones by Open Management Group (OMG) [12, 13] is made available on the Internet. Some of
the application sought to depict the business process [e.g. 14], while mostly it is applied for the business
structure modeling. The most comprehensive application to depict the business structure, to the best of our
knowledge, has been developed by Noran [15] and Haga [16].
UML consists of 14 different types of diagrams with different purposes, seven of which are structure
diagrams and the other seven of which are behavior diagrams. Among them, the useful one to depict the
structures of competences is the class diagram (a structure diagram). [16, 17]

3.3. Methodology to depict the business process

Many different methodologies have been developed to depict the business process. This appears to be
more commonly used compared to the ones to depict the business structure: the reason for this is thought to
be the fact that in the real-world business, there are more occasions that the depictions of processes are called
for to communicate among employees and other stakeholders rather than depicting the business structure.
Flowchart is one of the most widely used forms to visualize the business process as well as the patterns
of decision-making. It appeared in 1920 in the todays form when Frank Gilberth introduced the concept
3666 Takeru Shibayama et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25C (2017) 36603677
T. Shibayama, U. Leth and G. Emberger / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2015) 118 7

to the American Society of Mechanical Engineers as flow process chart ([18]). Further development and
standardization were undertaken in the 1960s, and in 1985 it was standardized as ISO 5807.
Swimlane process chart is an extension of it with several lanes that represent different stakeholders
(or employees). The phases of the process as well as the timeframe of each phase are shown on top and
at the bottom of the diagram respectively. This is suitable for depicting more complex processes difficult
to be handled only with the classical flowchart. It is standardized to a large extent and implemented in
some of the semi-standard office software such as MS Visio. More advanced business process modeling
methodologies such as BPMN (see below) and UMLs activity diagram inherit the concept of the swimlane
process chart. An advantage of this is that the chart is intuitively understood. Swimlane process chart is
also known as cross-functional flowchart, deployment flowchart, functional band, Rummler-Brache
Diagrams, etc. In this paper, this is cohesively called swimlane process chart.
The swimlane process chart consists of several compartments. Each lane depicts an actor, stakeholder
or personnel involved in a process. Small compartments on top show the phases of the process depicted
with the chart. The compartment below depicts standard time called for in each phase. Each entity in the
lanes depicts a single process or decision to be made. It is possible to use the syntax of the flowchart. Figure
3 shows an example of a swimlane process chart depicting a process for intake of patients in a clinic. It is
worth noting that both vertical and horizontal swimlane process chart is possible.

Fig. 3. An example of Swimlane Process Chart (Source: own graphics based on [19])

4. Approach for data collection and analysis

4.1. Two-step approach

Before developing our workflow, we carried out preliminary online research and two face-to-face inter-
views with practitioners who participate regularly in cross-border projects to gain an insight to the research.
We started by collecting organigrams (see above) from the relevant organizations and institutions in the
transport sector. However, those organigrams only show the hierarchy of organizations, the departments
and sub-departments and sometimes the name of the person in charge of the departments. They do not
provide information on competences and responsibilities on a more detailed level. To get such information,
we decided to interview relevant members of staff, often the heads of departments (see above). However, as
talking about competences turned out to be too vague, we had to find another approach. The practitioners
 Takeru Shibayama et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25C (2017) 36603677 3667
8 T. Shibayama, U. Leth and G. Emberger / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2015) 118

recognize the projects process rather than the organizational and/or competence structure. Thus it is more
straightforward to collect the information about the planning and implementation process of transport in-
frastructure and services rather than about the competence structures. Therefore we chose to concentrate on
processes rather than on competences in this phase of the research.

We had to focus on a few relevant processes: we even went to the project level in order to extract
concrete and detailed process and relevant stakeholders. In the wake of the interviews, we found a
total of six processes that we could map - road construction on national, regional and municipal level,
rail construction for main lines and branch lines and rail operation.

We had to translate processes to competences: stakeholders provided us with the necessary process
steps which we translated to competences and attributed them with the responsible organisations and
departments. When sorting and attributing competences we found another process in each of the
already mapped processes which we decided to extract and deal separately with: the pre-project phase
(decision-making).

Based on this framework, as well as the review of the business modeling methodologies summarized in
the section 3.1, we selected the approach shown in the Figure 4. The key features are:

Information collected from the publications and the interviews are first put into swimlane process
charts. Within the scope of this research, the swimlane process chart is slightly simplified with the
detailed timeframe information excluded. This is because, in the real-world planning process, the
variation is large, and this information cannot be always retrieved from the interviews. Information
about needed time for each phase is omitted as these are not obtained in a concrete manner.

One swimlane process chart will be produced for one type of infrastructure planning and construction
process (e.g. road construction at national level, railway service planning). This means that several
different swimlane process charts are prepared.
In each of the swimlane process chart, each element put into the lanes depicts competences.

The swimlane process charts are collectively converted into one competence map, which inherits the
concept of the UML-based business modeling but significantly simplified.

These workflows are done in Austria and Slovakia separately because the planning process of the
transport infrastructures are carried out separately in each country once the border-crossing point is
defined at the beginning of the project.

Fig. 4. Workflow (Source: own graphics)

3668 Takeru Shibayama et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25C (2017) 36603677
T. Shibayama, U. Leth and G. Emberger / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2015) 118 9

4.2. Data and information collection

Organigrams and descriptions about organizational structures of relevant stakeholders that are needed to
create the competence map (see section 6) were collected from on-line resources.
Detailed information in the infrastructure planning process was collected mainly through interviews.
In total, 23 interviews with the managers or directors of relevant organizations listed below were carried
out within approximately six months. The interviews and the following processing were carried out by
the project partners in their respective country so that their local knowledge about habits, institutions and
German or Slovakian languages can be made most of.

9 interviews in Austria:

Ministries;
Regional governments (Lander);
Regional management agencies (public agencies under regional governments, responsible for or
participating in many of cross-border projects);
Public transport operators;

14 interviews in Slovakia:
Ministries;
Self-governing Regions (Kraje);
Major municipalities in the region;
Public transport operators.

5. Visualization of planning process with Swimlane Process Chart

To visualize the processes we made an application of the swimlane charts (see Section 3.1). The swim-
lanes represents relevant stakeholders by horizontal rectangular next to each other this resembles to a
swimming pool with lanes. The boxes in each lane represents competences. The boxes are linked with lines
in chronological order to show the progress of the processes and possibly parallel processes.
It is possible to use the symbols of the flowchart in this swimlane chart, while this time we adopted the
simplest methodology as the information depicted here is aggregated without too much detailed information.
This is because the main purpose is to gain an overview of the differences in the infrastructure planning
processes in Austria and Slovakia. The color code was set as shown in Figure 5.
In the next step, the swimlane charts were refined with the helps of the organigrams collected in the
first step. In some case, organizations were split to department levels in order to get an in-depth view of
competence distributions in larger institutions and to prepare the transition into the competence map.
As an unexpected side effect, we received much feedback from the interviewed stakeholders concerning
barriers in the cross-border cooperation, which confirmed the need for transparent responsibilities (and for
the project), and which we could back-up with our findings (see Section 8).
Because of the space limitations, only two swimlane charts are presented here one is about the planning
and implementation of regional road (Figure 6) and the other is about the planning and implementation of
the cross-border passenger railway service (Figure 7). The former is chosen because this is the cross-
border infrastructure planned in many places between Austria and Slovakia, and thus the needs for smooth
collaborations between two countries are relatively large. The second one is chosen because there has
been already long-lasting cross-border collaboration and some symmetries can be observed, while the chart
highlights the difference in administration level (national vs. regional) in such cross-border planning.
 Takeru Shibayama et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25C (2017) 36603677 3669

10 T. Shibayama, U. Leth and G. Emberger / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2015) 118

Fig. 5. Legends used in the swimlane charts

In total, 15 swimlane charts were created in the research as listed below. These can be downloaded from
the research projects website ([20]).

Austria:

Transport concept;
Construction of highway and speedways;
Construction of regional roads;
Construction of rocal roads;
Construction of main railways;
Construction of secondary railways;
Railway operation (passenger trains);

Slovakia:

Transport Concept;
Construction of highway;
Construction of speedway;
Construction of regional roads;
Construction of local roads;
Construction of railway lines;
Railway Operation (passenger trains);

Cross-border:

Cross-border Regional Railway Service.

3670 Takeru Shibayama et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25C (2017) 36603677

T. Shibayama, U. Leth and G. Emberger / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2015) 118 11

Fig. 6. Swimlane process chart comparison of regional road planning in Austria and Slovakia

12

Rail operation Cross-border

Phase

Train path
assignment

manager AT
Infrastructure
Decision on Contracting PT
financing operator

Lower Austria)
Lnder (Vienna,
Coordination

VOR
Proposal for Applying for train
Accounting
financing path

BB PV
Idea for regional train
connection Vienna- Operation
Bratisava

Proposal for Applying for train

Accounting

ZSSK
financing path

Decision on Contracting PT
Coordination financing operator

Transport
SK Ministry of
Train path
assignment

manager AT
Infrastructure
T. Shibayama, U. Leth and G. Emberger / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2015) 118
Takeru Shibayama et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25C (2017) 36603677

Fig. 7. Swimlane process chart cross-border passenger railway service

3671
3672 Takeru Shibayama et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25C (2017) 36603677
T. Shibayama, U. Leth and G. Emberger / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2015) 118 13

6. The competence map

The competence maps are created as compilations of several swimlane process charts. The swimlane
process charts focus however is the projects planning process that are on a timeline, while the focus of the
competence map is to provide an overview of the decision-making and other competence structures within
a society. Thus these two different charts contain similar information to a large extent, while the viewpoints
of the two are fairly different.
In the first stage, mainly based on the organigrams, the boxes representing each actor (organisation)
was prepared. Large organisations are subdivided into their departments. Same actors appearing on several
different swimlane process charts are aggregated into one on the competence map. The actor is described as
the outer box that encloses the competence element. (See Figure 9)

Fig. 8. Process of converting swimlane process charts to the competence map (Source: own graphics)

In the second stage, the competence element is derived from the swimlane process chart and put into
each actors box (See Figure 10).
Two competence maps were created, one for Austria and the other for Slovakia. Again, due to the
space limitation, and because the competence map requires large space (larger than the A3 format) to make
it readable. We present only one competence map and a part of it to give a better readability. The full
competence maps can be downloaded from the research projects homepage ([20]).
At this stage, we did not connect each competence element by line in order to give a better readability
and overview of the maps2 . It is however possible to connect the competence elements showing the interre-
lationships among them this may be a potential future development of the competence map, while it has to
be made clear first how such in-depth depiction would help improve the cross-border infrastructure planning
process. Often the current barriers lie on a overall structural level rather than in in-depth differences.

2 Nevertheless, this concept of the competence map inherits the idea of the UMLs class diagram: The outer box inherits the concept

of the package of the UML, and each box representing competence inherits the concept of the element.
14 Takeru
T. Shibayama, U. Leth and Shibayama et /al.
G. Emberger / Transportation
Transportation Research
Research Procedia
Procedia 25C (2017)
00 (2015) 118 36603677 3673

Fig. 9. Outer boxes (Source: own graphics)

3674 Takeru Shibayama et al. /U.
T. Shibayama, Transportation Research /Procedia
Leth and G. Emberger 25C (2017)
Transportation 36603677
Research Procedia 00 (2015) 118

Fig. 10. Overview of Competence Map (Source: own graphics)

 Takeru Shibayama et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25C (2017) 36603677 3675
16 T. Shibayama, U. Leth and G. Emberger / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2015) 118

7. Analysis and Key findings

Based on the swimlane process charts and the competence maps, we analysed the characteristics of the
two countrys cross-border transport infrastructure implementation.

7.1. Road infrastructure

There is a notable difference in authorization process and inspection in the two countries. In Austria,
competences related to them are directly at the project implementing body such as the ministry, regional
governments, and municipalities. Many in-house competences especially at regional level enables the
regional government to work as an one-stop competence center. In Slovakia, when it comes to cross-border
infrastructure, the ministries have most of the competence. In addition to this, more of the specialized
competences are settled in various special organizations. This is especially the case of the competences
related to road infrastructure, as Special Building Authority, Slovak Highway Company and Slovak
Road Administration play important roles in the process for road constructions.
In short, in Austria, same competences are settled at different levels in a decentralized manner. In
Slovakia, on the contrary, many of the competences are settled in a centralized manner, often in a national
organization. This will in turn call for more stakeholders participating in each planning and implementation
process.

7.2. Rail infrastructure and service

In this field, in Austria, there is a clear division of competences to the national-level authorities and the
regional-level authorities. The roles are splitted to the national and regional level based on the types of the
railway3 . This splitting is somewhat different in case of the infrastructure and the service.
As for the infrastructure, the main railway lines (Hauptbahnen) are of the responsibility of the national-
level authorities (i.e. Ministry), while the secondary railways (Nebenbahnen) are of the responsibility of the
regional governments.
In case of the railway service provision, the splitting is made in a different way: the ministry orders key
services from the nationwide point of view, and the regional authority orders the extra local services that
are needed to satisfy region-specific needs. The national and regional authorities are complementary in this
case. In case of the Austrian-Slovakian cross-border region, the cross-border services are ordered by the
regional authority. The regional authority in this case is regional governments (Lander) and VOR, the public
transport association that is responsible for the eastern Lander of Austria, namely Vienna, Lower Austria
and Burgenland4 .
In Slovakia, regarding the railway infrastructure the ministry has all of the relevant competences. This
is the same as for the railway service provision the ministry orders the services directly to the railway
operators.
It is worth noting that the scheme for the railway service provision may change in line with the European
Unions new rule stipulating Public Service Obligations in the near future.

7.3. Applicability of the methodology

The methodology developed and applied in the research presented in this paper combining data col-
lection including organigram, swimlane process chart, and the competence map based on the UMLs class
diagram has a strength to compare and analyse two different organisational or administrative structures. In
the course of the research, the following two key areas of potential applications of the methodology were
identified.
The first potential area of application can be found in other geographical areas near administrative bor-
ders. This is especially the case of areas nearby state borders within the EU, where much cross-border

3 These types are stipulated by Railway Act.

4 For more information about the Verkehrsverbund in the English language, see [21].
3676 Takeru Shibayama et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25C (2017) 36603677
T. Shibayama, U. Leth and G. Emberger / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2015) 118 17

cooperation is called for. The application over the former Iron Curtain is considered to be most useful as the
both sides have developed fairly different administrative structures.
Application in other disciplines is also possible, especially where two or more administrative bodies
have to cooperate. The topics that calls for cross-border cooperation, such as environment protection and
management, public health, and education, could be primary areas of potential application.
Another potential application will be the use of this in case of corporate mergers. In such case, the two
companies to merge typically have different organizational structure and workflows: this methodology could
help to identify the points that will be needed to harmonize before and after the merger of two companies.

7.4. Future outlook

In the research domain in the specific geographic area, deepening the analysis will be one of the most
important future developments. In the first phase of the research presented in this paper, information about
time needed for each phase could not be included in the swimlane process chart because not much reli-
able information could be collected through our data and information collection. Better methodology to
collect such information will have to be developed. With the information about time, identification of tem-
poral barriers will be possible through comparison. This will eventually help accelerate the implementation
process.

8. Conclusion

In this paper, we presented a methodology for the diagrammatic comparison of transport planning com-
petences and its application in the infrastructure planning in the Austrian-Slovakian border region. Begin-
ning with a literature analysis, we found differences in the organizational structure of institutions engaged
in the transport planning and operation processes on the both sides of the border, often stemming from his-
toric developments. Research in methodologies to depict business structures and processes showed that no
suitable form of presenting competence maps exists yet, while the swimlane process charts could ease the
gathering and transformation process from organigrams to competence maps.
Key findings from the analysis of processes and competences show differences in the hierarchy and
centrality of planning and implementing bodies in Austria and Slovakia. While structures in Austria tend to
be on a lower, decentralized level, competences in Slovakia are often externalized in special authorities
on national level.
We think that a mapping of competences in the transport sector can simplify and foster cross-border
cooperation. However we also confront the relevant stakeholders with an in-depth analysis of their systems,
stating that the current different organizational systems hinder cross-border cooperation.
Future applications of this methodology could be other border regions as well as other disciplines such
as environmental protection, public health or education.

Acknowledgements

The research presented in this paper was carried out as a project named WiWiT Who is Who in
Transport. It was co-funded by the European Union through the European Regional Development Fund
(ERDF) Programme for Cross-border Cooperation Slovakia Austria 2007-2013. The research would not
have been possible without the considerable readiness of all the interviewees providing us with valuable in-
depth information about planning, construction and operation processes in the transport sector. The authors
are grateful for the co-funder, the interviewees, as well as the Slovakian research partners contributing to
the research.
 Takeru Shibayama et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25C (2017) 36603677 3677
18 T. Shibayama, U. Leth and G. Emberger / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2015) 118

References
[1] G. Emberger, U. Leth, B. Bezak, M. Schumich, VKM-Centrope 4-stage cross border transport modeling exercise for AT, SK,
HU, in: World Conference on Transportation Researches.
[2] O. Roider, S. Riegler, S. Klementschitz, Working together, planning together! Evaluation of the Cross-Border Survey between
Austria and Slovakia, in: REAL CORP 2015.
[3] M. Sodar, EMAH Okomobilitt in der osterreichisch-ungarischen Grenzregion (2014).
[4] W. Sziderics, Expertenteam empfiehlt Realisierung des Infrastrukturprojekts GrenzBahn (2015).
URL http://www.burgenland.at/landeshauptmann/detail/news/
[5] BMVIT, Homepage (2014).
URL http://www.bmvit.gv.at/
[6] MDVRR, Ministerstvo dopravy, vystavby a regionalneho rozvoja SR (2014).
URL http://www.telecom.gov.sk/
[7] D. Hellriegel, J. W. Slocum, Management, Addison-Wesley, 1989.
[8] D. McCallum, G. Henshaw, New York and Erie Railroad Diagram Representing a Plan of Organization Exhibiting the division of
administrative duties and showing the number and class of employes engaged in each department from the returns of September
1855 (1855).
[9] Rational Software, Microsoft, Hewlett-Packard, Oracle, Sterling Software, M. Systemhouse, Unisys, Computing.
[10] A. Korthaus, Using UML for Business Object Based Systems Modeling, in: M. Schader, A. Korthaus (Eds.), The Unified
Modeling Language, Physica-Verlag HD, 1998, book section 15, pp. 220237. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-48673-9 15.
URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48673-9 15
[11] Z. Kanzaki, The point of analyzing existing system is to make a map of the system (2012).
URL http://codezine.jp/article/detail/6487
[12] Object Management Group, Unified Modeling Language (OMG UML): Superstructure, v.2.4.1 (2011).
URL http://www.omg.org/spec/UML/2.4.1/Superstructure/PDF/
[13] Object Management Group, UML Extension for Business Modeling.
[14] W. van der Aalst, A. Kumar, H. Verbeek, Organizational Modeling in UML and XML in the context of Workflow Systems, in:
SAC 03 Proceedings of the 2003 ACM symposium on Applied computing, pp. 603608.
URL http://wwwis.win.tue.nl/ wvdaalst/publications/p205.pdf
[15] O. S. Noran, Business Modeling: UML vs. IDEF, Report (2000).
[16] M. Haga, Object-oriented analysis for business modeling, Nikkan Kogyo Shimbun-sha, Tokyo, 2011.
[17] M. Fowler, UML Distilled Third Edition: A Brief Guide to the Standard Object Modelling Language, Pearson Education, Inc,
2004.
[18] F. B. Gilbreth, L. M. Gilbreth, Process Charts, in: Annual Meeting of The American Society of Mechanical Engineer.
[19] CHESS/NIATx University of Wisconsin-Madison, Swim Lane (or Cross-Functional) Diagrams (n.d.).
URL https://www.niatx.net/PDF/PIToolbox/swimlane.pdf
[20] T. Shibayama, U. Leth, WiWiT - Who is Who in Transport (2014).
URL http://v20.ivv.tuwien.ac.at/wiwit/
[21] J. Pucher, S. Kurth, Verkehrsverbund: the success of regional public transport in Germany, Austria and Switzerland, Transport
Policy 2 (4) (1995) 279291. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0967-070X(95)00022-I.