Integrated Mobility Platforms
How to win the customer in tomorrow’s worldof smart mobility

January, 2018

Content
Executive summary3

1. Integrated Mobility Platforms – The working principle

4

2. Value propositions and requirements

6

3. IMP key success factors

10

Authors:

Ralf Baron

Michael Zintel

Global Practice Head Travel & Transportation, Frankfurt
baron.ralf@adlittle.com

Partner, Travel & Transportation,
Frankfurt
zintel.michael@adlittle.com

Niklas Schemken

Christoph Uferer

Consultant, Travel & Transportation,
Frankfurt
schemken.niklas@adlittle.com

Consultant, Travel & Transportation,
Viennauferer.christoph@adlittle.com

Executive summary
Global trends towards urbanization are confronting cities and governments withnew sets of challenges related to public safety and security, the supply andconsumption of energy, waste treatment, and traffic management. In 2013 alone,
the cost of congestion in the US – defined as fuel plus opportunity costs (time)– totaled 124bn USD. In metropolitan areas, smart mobility turns out to be one of
the most difficult topics and, at the same time, one with the most impactfulprospects to face.
Integrated Mobility Platforms (IMPs) are a key solution to urban traffic
management. By integrating different modes of transport, IMPs drasticallysimplify route planning and make traveling more efficient, while being able toprovide highly customer-tailored solutions. As a result, IMPs are being established
all over the world, with different kinds of integration levels and value propositions(i.e., Citymapper, GoEuro, Google Maps, Moovel, Moovit, Qixxit, Rome2Rio). Yet,none of these players has yet emerged as a prevailing provider with a superior
offering. Consequently, we must ask what the key success factors of integrated
mobility are, and what the future of integrated mobility will look like.
With an increasing number of players involved, and an enlarging as well as more
integrated product portfolio, direct access to the customer moves from transportmode operators into the digital space. This risk needs to be understood andeventually handled by all players looking to enter the smart-mobility ecosystem.
Are you ready?

3

1. Integrated Mobility Platforms –The working principle
In 2050, 67 percent of people will be living in urban areas, incontrast to 52 percent in 20101. Because of urbanization, cities
and governments are increasingly confronted with new setsof challenges related to public safety and security, the supply
and consumption of energy, waste treatment, and traffic
management. The smart-city concept is perceived as a winning
strategy to cope with the emergence of these urban problems,and estimated to grow to a more than 45bn USD market
by 2022 in Germany alone2. At the core, a smart city is theaggregation of all major urban policies, such as digital city, green
city, and knowledge city, in a unified digital space, aiming to
reduce the environmental footprint and create a better quality oflife for citizens. In this context, smart mobility is one of the mostdifficult topics to face in metropolitan areas, but at the sametime, the one with the highest impact. In this report, we focus
on an essential centerpiece of smart mobility: the Integrated
Mobility Platform.

The cost of congestion – defined as the time and fuel wasted
plus opportunity costs (increased indirect cost of doing
business) – in the US totalled 124bn USD in 2013. As one
solution, smart mobility is poised to ease urban traffic flow,
involving both economic and environmental aspects. It is
traditionally enabled by ICT infrastructure catering to backend and front-end applications. Whereas the former aims at
optimizing traffic fluxes from an infrastructure-planning point ofview, the latter is supposed to bring smart mobility to the end
consumer.
The development of smart mobility front-end solutions is mainly
driven by shifts in traffic-usage patterns, combined with therise of digital solutions and the increasing number of transport
players available to customers around the globe. In the ageof digitization, consumers become more and more used toreceiving customized product and service offerings, which

Figure 1: By design, an IMP can accurately distribute transit modes and efficiently match customer requirements at any point in timeA

Customization / setting of preferences

1

Choosethe modes

2

Personalize
the modes

3

Personalize
the journey

B
4

Trip planning / information on trip
Select thestarting point

5

Select the route6

Receiverouting details

7

Visualize
the routeMunich main station

Munich main station
Munich main station

MunichC

Booking & payment

89Book the journey

Make thepayment

D
10

Receive one
single ticket

11

Guidance
Get en-route
guidance

Source: Arthur D. Little, Qixxit

1
2

UN Population Division
Arthur D. Little estimate

41

Figure 2: Players in the smart mobility ecosystem

Mobile application provider

Public transport & OEMs

Connectivity provider

Platform technology provider

Smart mobility
ecosystem

Traffic flow monitoring

Payment engines

Mobile ticketing

Source: Arthur D. Little

allows for the highest level of convenience. In mobility, andeven more so in public transport, this means that users careless about single transport modes or operators, and are, rather,interested in simple, integrated and highly customized, end-toend solutions incorporating their individual travel preferences,such as speed, price, convenience and environmental impact.
An Integrated Mobility Platform (IMP) is a key solution toaccommodate these customer preferences under a unified
digital roof. By integrating different modes of transport, IMPs
drastically simplify route planning, making traveling more
efficient while providing a customized offer based on selected
preferences. As IMPs also feed data back into smart-mobility
back-end applications, thereby supporting future infrastructuredevelopment, these platforms will increasingly become thenucleus of modern mobility ecosystems. Figure 1 provides anillustrative user journey outline of an IMP.
Yet, setting up an IMP is a considerable challenge from botha business and a technical perspective. The sheer numberof stakeholders involved means an IMP needs to merge
multiple platform types, technologies, and value propositions
strategically. This must be combined with sophisticated data
analysis and projection capabilities in order to satisfy the needsof all parties involved. Figure 2 provides an illustrative overview
of key segments and players in the smart-mobility ecosystem.

Smart-mobility ecosystem players, depending on their natureand competitive positioning, have a strategic incentive either tojoin existing platforms or to establish their own. Whereas privatecompanies are aiming to increase their user bases to growrevenues, public companies generally have stronger interest inpromoting mass transit. Similarly, automotive OEMs are seeking
to capture a large share of the car-sharing market and push theirown vehicles into municipal transportation systems. For large
tech companies, such as Google, which seek to expand their
map services, the data collection aspect of an IMP is of themost value.
As a result of this divergence in objectives, two main strategies
of Integrated Mobility Platform providers can currently beobserved in the market.
On the one hand, infrastructure-heavy “back-bone” platform
providers, which traditionally originate from well-establishedpublic-transport operators, aim at long-term traffic improvements
while, at the same time, offering more convenience forcustomers.
On the other hand, over-the-top (OTT) players often operate
under the maxim of short-term user maximization to drive
enterprise value. Yet, both strategic approaches rely on key
factors to demine the future success of an IMP.

51

2. Value propositions and requirements
One of the main questions that emerges from theseobservations is “How to make integrated mobility work?”.
Aforementioned factors favor the concept of an Integrated
Mobility Platform in general, as it addresses many of the current
mobility challenges. In fact, one can observe that IMPs are being
established all over the world, with different kinds of integrationlevels and value propositions (i.e., Citymapper, GoEuro, Google
Maps, Moovel, Moovit, Qixxit, Rome2rio).
However, none of these players have yet emerged as prevailingproviders with superior solutions. Consequently, it must be
asked what the key success factors of integrated mobility are,and what the future of integrated mobility will look like.
From our viewpoint, there are three different business models
along which those criteria can be explained (see Figure 3: IMPbusiness models):
1. The Holding: Integrator of own transport modes
A “Holding” player integrates its own modes of transport
on one platform. Third-party modes must be accessed
separately through proprietary apps. This integration
allows the player to offer one ticket for different modes

and reduces barriers between travel segments for users(extra tickets). The revenue source in this business model
consists primarily of ticket sales, whereas tickets paid via theplatform cost the same as or less than if bought individually.
Examples of integrating players include rail companies thatprovide long- as well as short-distance transport, and traffic
authorities that operate several public-transport modes.
2. The Reseller: Integrator of own and broker of third-party
transport modes
The “Reseller” commissions third-party services. In
addition, a Reseller may also assume the role of a “Holding”
player and integrate its own modes of transport. On themobility platform, there is no distinction between own andforeign modes, as the user is offered all services in one
place. However, whereas tickets may be consolidated for
own transport modes, separate tickets need to be issued
for third-party services. This opens up the possibility ofparticipating in sales of third-party tickets via the platform(margin) or benefiting from partner fees.

Figure 3: IMP business models

Customer
C The Operator
B The Reseller

A The Holding
Local public
transport(e.g. metro,tram)

Longdistancetransport(e.g. rail)

Source: Arthur D. Little

3

6

Application Programming Interface

Car/bikesharing

Car/bikerentalCar poolingTaxi/limousine…

Third-party
modes
(i.e.
e-hailing)…

In fact, most IMPs are over-the-top aggregators without theirown transport-service offerings (i.e., GoEuro, Google Maps,
Rome2Rio). Those players do not have proprietary assets,
but commission the services of monomodal specialists(reseller model without integration). Examples of IMPs that
follow the approach of Resellers plus Holding players include
Moovel, Qixxit, and WienMobil Lab. This model has major
downsides for the customer: the Reseller is not a single
contact point for all sub-segments of the journey, and hence
does not assume liability for all sub-segments.
3. The operator: Operator of own as well as third-party
transport modes
If an IMP offers its own modes of transport and third-party
services together under one brand, it acts as an operating
aggregator. A user may buy one ticket for each trip thatcovers all relevant modes/segments of the trip. To do so,
the IMP acts as an intermediary and forwards a share of
the ticket fees from the users to the relevant third-party
providers (subcontractors). As much as this model offers
higher convenience and a better customer experience, it
creates exposure to third-party obligations and liabilities for
the IMP provider.
The idea of converging all transport modes relates toproviding mobility-as-a-service, such as ITS Finland andthe IMP in Dubai, S’Hail. (See showcase.)

Showcase Dubai
In 2016, Arthur D. Little supported Dubai’s Roads andTransport Authority (RTA) in developing an IMP concept for
the Gulf state. It gives Dubai citizens and tourists easy accessto all mass-transit systems through a single interface – frominformation to payment.
The decision to introduce an IMP allows Dubai to ensure
safe and smooth transport, as well as facilitate the Sheik’s
strategy of making it a smart, integrated and happy place.
The decision of which operating model is pursued, in turn,has an effect on which functionalities along the customer
journey an IMP provides. Although most IMPs offer
authentication as well as information and routing services,
they fail to include later steps of the value chain (booking
and reservation, payment, billing and clearing, customercare). Over-the-top aggregators, in particular, only provide
booking and reservation functionalities in very selective
cases. Despite APIs3 increasingly allowing platform providers
to access external systems and information, it is still3

advantageous to be a transport company, as these can offer
more functionalities from a single source.
The decision of which modes should be integrated into an
IMP is essential for the success and further developmentof the platform. There are two dimensions to consider withregard to ecosystem coverage:
nn Transport-mode coverage
In a nutshell, comprehensiveness is key when it comes tothe inclusion of available transport modes. If an IMP wants
to serve as a single point of contact for the customer, itneeds to offer access to all available transport services.
If it fails to do so, an IMP is likely to by aggregated itself
by a third-party provider, while being complemented withthe remaining services. As the barrier to users switching
applications is relatively low, transport-mode coverage is
one of the most relevant decision criteria for an IMP.
nn Geographical scope
The extension of geographical coverage strongly requiresa sound transport mode coverage. In other words, before
geographical scope is enhanced, a provider should establish
a solid market positioning in one region. However, as
geographical reach, in turn, impacts customer reach, acircular effect can be observed: the more transport modes
are available on a platform, the more attractive an IMP
becomes for users. On the contrary, platform providers are
more likely to join IMPs which already exhibit solid userbases.
On top of the degree of ecosystem coverage, generatinga superior experience for the customer is crucial. From ourviewpoint, there are three major aspects that determine
whether an IMP solution has the potential to outperform
competition in this regard:
nn Price transparency
Customers must be able to retrieve price information easily
and transparently – without hidden charges, conditional fees,or indicative prices. Aside from the fastest or most ecofriendly trip, consumers often decide based on the cheapest
route. Hence, transparency is key.
nn User friendliness
The number of interaction points required to book a ticket
heavily determines the completion rate, i.e., the share ofusers that actually finalize bookings. The fewer steps thatare needed, the likelier users are to use an app. Three steps
or less to buy a ticket can be considered optimal – ideally

Application Programming Interface

7without the need to set up an account, or giving users
freedom of choice.
nn Customer interface
Although the intelligence of an IMP lies on the back end,
the first point of contact of a user is the application.
A lean, stable, and compelling interface with all relevant
functionalities is required to catch and maintain interest in
using the IMP. An agile software development approachhelps to react to user requests and changes in preferences,and keep the solution up to date.

8

Those dimensions will also define the extent to which there
will be customer pull or operator push for those solutions. In
other words, are users the driving force in spurring demand forappealing mobility platforms, or are cities/authorities the pushingparty? Both have their own interest – it might be the demand forseamless travel or to create a shift in transport-mode usage. In
any case, Integrated Mobility Platforms are an essential puzzle
piece in defining the mobility landscape of the future.

93. IMP key success factors
According to our observations, there are seven key successfactors that are prevalent for leading IMP providers:
1. Start small but fast: Do not target the final picture fromthe start. Start with a limited set of transport modes andfunctionalities to be extended gradually. This approachenables early launch, as well as high agility, for quick
reaction to new market developments. It also reduces
implementation risks of a “big-bang” approach, such as
ending up, in the worst case, with an outdated system after
a long and costly implementation period.
2. Stay agile and add new modes: The transport mobility
market is rapidly developing. We recommend keeping
flexibility in defining the modes to be integrated/aggregatednext. Fixing the full plan of transport modes at the beginningmight not be seen as beneficial, as priorities might shiftquickly, and thus opportunities can be missed.
3. Offer end-to-end functionalities: New global start-ups
in the IMP space mostly offer routing and information
functionalities. Nevertheless, the key benchmarks leverage
their local presence to offer wider sets of functionalities,
from information and routing over booking to payment
functionalities. This creates a unique selling point compared
to globally focused platforms.

4. Keep it simple: To gain user acceptance quickly and enable
the smoothest interaction for the customer, the customerfacing processes should be as simple as possible. Bestpractices show lean booking and payment processes in not
more than three steps.
5. Use advantages of personalization: Offering a wide rangeof functionalities and transport modes also bears the risk ofcreating complexity. Customer preferences differ from one
person to another. With a high degree of personalization,a customer can select the optimal transport modes andfunctionalities that enable superior, customized experienceand value-add.
6. Offer security functionalities: Superior security
functionalities cannot be observed in the market of IMPsyet. Nevertheless, the need is rising and first players arestarting to address it. An IMP should comprise functionalities
aimed at increasing the security/safety of its customers
for any kind of travel (i.e., automatic emergency calls andlocation-sharing features).
7. Balance liability and customer experience: While
discussions on mobility-as-a-service offerings might bepresent these days, many existing IMP benchmarks operate
as Resellers. The key reason is the high liability risk ofoffering third-party services under the own brand to generate
a substantial impact on customer experience.

Conclusion – Who owns the customer?
IMPs offer tremendous opportunities for both platform providers and end users. Platform providers can significantly profit fromIMP back-end applications to predict and manage future traffic flow, as well as benefit from front-end applications to drive sales
through new (digital) channels.
End users, on the other hand, have the possibility of fully customizing their travels and thereby significantly improving theconvenience factor of public transport.
Simultaneously, all service providers along the mobility value chain find applications for their products and services, thus receiving
access to the most valuable part of an IMP – customer data. With an increasing number of players involved and an enlarging aswell as more integrated product portfolio, direct access to the customer moves from transport mode operators into the digitalspace. This is a risk that needs to be understood, and eventually handled, by all players looking to enter to the smart-mobility
ecosystem. Are you ready?

10Contacts
If you would like more information or to arrange an informal discussion on the issues raised here andhow they affect your business, please contact:

Austria
Karim Tagataga.karim@adlittle.com

Italy
Saverio Caldani
caldani.saverio@adlittle.com

Spain
Salman Ali
ali.salman@adlittle.com

Belgium
Francois-Joseph VanAudenhove
vanaudenhove.f@adlittle.com

Japan
Yusuke Harada
harada.yusuke@adlittle.com

SwedenKlas Anderlind
anderlind.klas@adlittle.com

BrazilRodolfo Guzman
guzman.rodolfo@adlittle.com

Korea
Kevin Lee
lee.kevin@adlittle.com

Switzerland
Ralf Baron
baron.ralf@adlittle.com

China
Russell Pellpell.russell@adlittle.com

Latin America
Guillem Casahuga
casahuga.guillem@adlittle.com

TurkeyCoskun Baban
baban.coskun@adlittle.com

Czech Republic
Dean Brabec
brabec.dean@adlittle.com

Middle East
Morsi Berguiga
berguiga.morsi@adlittle.com

UK
Andrew Smith
smith.andrew@adlittle.com

FranceVincent Bamberger
bamberger.vincent@adlittle.com

The Netherlands
Martijn Eikelenboom
eikelenboom.martijn@adlittle.com

USA
Mitch Beaumontbeaumont.mitch@adlittle.com

Germany
Ralf Baron
baron.ralf@adlittle.com

NorwayDiego MacKee
mackee.diego@adlittle.com

India
Srini Srinivasansrinivasan.srini@adlittle.com

Singapore
Akitake Fujita
fujita.akitake@adlittle.com

Integrated Mobility Platforms – How to win thecustomer in tomorrow’s world of smart mobility

Arthur D. Little
Arthur D. Little has been at the forefront of innovation since1886. We are an acknowledged thought leader in linking
strategy, innovation and transformation in technology-intensive
and converging industries. We navigate our clients throughchanging business ecosystems to uncover new growth
opportunities. We enable our clients to build innovation
capabilities and transform their organizations.
Our consultants have strong practical industry experience
combined with excellent knowledge of key trends anddynamics. Arthur D. Little is present in the most importantbusiness centers around the world. We are proud to serve mostof the Fortune 1000 companies, in addition to other leading
firms and public sector organizations.
For further information, please visit www.adl.com.
Copyright © Arthur D. Little 2018. All rights reserved.

www.adl.com/IMP