Good day my good friend.

Yeah, so this newsletter was meant to go out to everyone on Friday. But on Friday morning as I was writing it a few issues came up that needed my attention. So Friday did not happen, and you are getting this today. Sorry about that.

📕 I have co-authored a book on Mobility-as-a-Service, which is a comprehensive guide on this important new transport service. It is available from the Institution of Engineering and Technology and now Amazon.

💼 I am also available for freelance transport planning consultancy, through my own company Mobility Lab. You can check out what I do here.

🥇 5 Golden Rules

Nearly two weeks ago, I posted on LinkedIn about a pet peeve of mine: big transport strategies. It seemed to get a lot of you very animated, and after some messages from a few of you, I thought I would expand this out a bit into a post covering the “art” of transport strategy writing. Namely, based on nothing but years of experience, what rules you should stick to when writing them. To ensure that they are engaging, simple, and visionary documents that can actually be delivered.

In this, I will also cover the points against them which are usually raised, and what you can do about tackling them. I should also stress at this point that these are not strict, rigid rules that should never be broken. Heck, even I break them occasionally. But hopefully, sticking to these will result in better strategies.

Rule 1 – Write it yourself

This is not a question of capability of writing a good document, but of ownership. Too many of us farm out the entire process of strategy development and writing to someone external to simply “get it done.”

When you write a strategy, you don’t simply put words on a page, but you place a sense of ownership into the pages of the document. Because you or your team wrote those words, you feel bound by them. You feel responsible for their delivery, and for working with others to ensure the same. You feel pride in the document you created.

Owning its delivery is the first step to delivering it. And you don’t own it in the same way if you don’t write it.

But James, I have no time to dedicate to writing a strategy. It’s simple: make time. If its a priority, make sure you dedicate the time to making it one.

I am not a writer, and the writing quality of consultants is so much better. That can be true. Consultants produce very good quality work, and some people are not natural writers. In such cases, you can make it a collective endeavour. Maybe write the introduction and others write the rest of the document. Just make sure that you have a strong hand in what is written so that you own it.

Rule 2 – Lead with active language

Too many strategies don’t get to the point. They spend a long time giving the rationale for the action to come, and then tell you the action only once you have read four paragraphs, gone on a sacred quest to the dark forest, and sacrificed your first born to the Sun God.

Say what you need to first, then justify it later. For example, if a challenge you face is that carbon emissions are not coming down quickly enough, SAY IT. Write “Carbon emissions from transport in our area are not coming down quickly enough. Since 1990, carbon emissions from transport have only reduced 20%, compared to a national figure of…” Doing this, you are saying exactly the same thing as you were the other way, but getting to the point quicker.

Oh James, if we don’t put the evidence up front people will not get our justification for what we are doing in the strategy. You know how people mostly read the headlines and the first paragraph of news stories, and few read the entire thing? This is what you are up against. While some of us transport planners may wade through hundreds of pages, most people reading your strategy won’t. Play into it.

Rule 3 – Your Draft Strategy does not need to be the final one in all but name

There is a tendency to produce a Draft Transport Strategy that is a final one in all but name. Every major decision on the strategy has been made. The content has been agreed, the vision set, the objectives finalised, and even the delivery plan set. In my view, this makes any consultation on the draft strategy effectively pointless.

We need to be comfortable that, with the probable exception of the vision and objectives, the final version of the strategy could look very different to the draft. Not only do some people who challenge your strategy actually have some reasonable points (sometimes), but the world can radically change after you publish the draft.

Besides – what do you think people will say? How amazing your strategy is? And if you are consulting them on it, what opportunity do they have to change it? If its “very little” then the consultation is pointless. So make it worthwhile.

Our draft needs to be finalised so that people know what is being planned, and so they can provide their views on it. That maybe the case, but ask yourself this. If they have little opportunity to change things or suggest improvements, what is the point in them providing feedback? Besides, there are lots of ways of getting constructive feedback that could make meaningful changes to the strategy itself, that you can control.

Rule 4 – The Delivery section should be the biggest section of the strategy

Too many strategies spend a long time going through the evidence base. This can be shortened by simply summarising the evidence on what the challenges are. Nobody wants to spend 50+ pages reading about how in the 18th Century the first canals came to your town or county (I have seen this kind of thing written).

But they are more likely to read 20 pages that set out what you are going to do about it. You might not be able to list every scheme that you want to do, but you need to set out very clearly what your priorities are, how you plan to fund them, and over what timescale. How you structure this section is up to you, but it needs to set out clearly how you plan to achieve your vision.

James, we need this detail in the strategy to show the evidence behind what we want to do. Let me show you this amazing, miraculous thing. Its called an Appendix. Its where the detail goes. If people want to read the detail, they go there to read it. You don’t even need to link to it in the strategy. You just summarise it in a way that is useful for the strategy.

Rule 5 – It’s better to have an ambitious strategy that falls just short than have a realistic one that you achieve in its entirety

This will be a controversial one, but hear me out. Ambitious strategies usually have one of two reactions. The first is the “it will never be achieved so why bother” reaction. The second is the “that’s inspiring and I want to achieve that” action. The former is understandable, but if you managed to secure the second, it is like gold dust.

A under-appreciated element of strategy is selling it. The best strategy teams in the world do three things. One is to develop the strategy, obviously. Two is to provide intelligence on the latest trends to senior decision makers. And the third? Constantly talk to people in the organisation to sell the strategy and what it could achieve. Most strategy teams in transport do the first one if you are lucky.

When you fall just short of a stretch target, you are falling just short of radical action. But doing so is going above and beyond what you would have otherwise done.

But what if you have an ambitious strategy that falls miles short. I don’t deny that is a risk. On the other hand, what if you have a realistic strategy that falls way short? Then, you were unambitious and still failed. Being ambitious does not mean taking stupid risks. It means pushing what you do much more to deliver something more radical.

Wow, that was therapeutic. I’m sure there are loads of things I have missed, and if you can see any let me know in the comments. But hopefully, by sticking to these, you should get yourself a good strategy. Now, to deliver it…

👩‍🎓 From academia

The clever clogs at our universities have published the following excellent research. Where you are unable to access the research, email the author – they may give you a copy of the research paper for free.

Decision-making optimization for post-disaster restoration of multimodal transport networks in terms of resilience

TL:DR – Here is a way of making decisions during a public health emergency. It mentions weeds a lot.

The ambivalent relationship of e-scooters and public transport: evidence from France

TL:DR – E-scooters are better for shorter trips, public transport for longer trips.

Has the low sulfur strategy benefited the maritime supply chain?

TL:DR – It’s complicated.

Examining the health effects of public transport use on older adults: A systematic review

TL:DR – Buses make old people healthier and less depressed.

📺 On the (You)tube

Can ships help save the world? Looks like it will be hard, and we will have no choice.

🖼 Graphic Design

The three countries that dominate global ship building (Source: Visual Capitalist)

Yeah, this graphic says it all. Just 3 countries build 95% of the ships in the world – China, South Korea, and Japan.

📚 Random things

These links are meant to make you think about the things that affect our world in transport, and not just think about transport itself. I hope that you enjoy them.

• An ode to aimless wandering (New Statesman)
• What Ikea learned when it ditched its old climate goal—and got more ambitious (Vox)
• Sick of AI hype? I have some bad news. (Vox)
• Social Media Swallowed Gen Z. This Film Shows Exactly How (Wired)
• Analysis: Solar surge will send coal power tumbling by 2030, IEA data reveals (Carbon Brief)

Your feedback is essential

I want to make the newsletter better. To do this, I need your feedback. Just fill in the 3 question survey form to provide me with quick feedback, that I can put into action. Thank you so much.