Cyclistic is a fictional bike-share company inside Chicago. This
company tasked us with the analysis of this question:
How do annual members and casual riders use Cyclistic
bikes differently?
The “casual” riders are the clients that use single-ride and
full day pass. Those offer are about short term
engagement.
The “member” riders are the clients that buy annual membership.
This offer is about long term engagement.
In order to convert “casual” clients into “member” clients, we could try
to develop new “transition” offer that is about mid
term engagement. This offer would be developed to be
attractive to “casual” clients while being
unattractive to “member” clients since we don’t want to
convert members into casuals. In order to find opportunities for said
new transition offers, we will analyse the riders behaviors.
Let’s break this business task into sub tasks:
Cyclistic’s first-party data from the last 12 months: from march 22 to February 23. Cyclistic is a fictional company so the data is provided by Motivate International Inc. The data contain one row per user’s trip. The variables are about:
The files used are:
Chicago ZIP boundaries Contains a shapefile map that represents the Chicago divided by ZIP areas
dataPath <- 'absolutePath'
knitr::opts_knit$set(root.dir = normalizePath(dataPath))
Both casual and member clients trip’s duration is around 5 min but members are more concentrated around that duration.
Casuals use the service all along the day, with a cliff around 5:30
AM and a peak around 5:30 PM
Member’s graph is similar casual’s graph with two variations:
Casuals use Cyclistic a lot more during the weekend than during the workweek. On the opposite, members have a close to constant usage during the whole week but they use the service slightly more during the workweek than during the weekend.
Casuals enjoy Cyclistic during the sunny
months (more than 15% usage during June to august) and avoid it
during the cold ones (less than 2.5% usage during the December to
February).
Members follow the same trend, but their usage is much more
consistant, with usage under 4% only in December and no
month with usage above 12.5%.
The analysis aims at uncovering the differences between “casual” and
“members” clients in order to understand what could convince a
“casual” client to become a “member” client.
To achieve this goal, we will make 3 recommendations that aims at
producing transitional offer for casuals toward annual pass or
making the annual pass more interesting for casual. Those
recommendations are:
full access during weekends
access between 19h-5h during workweek
Those time ranges interest the casuals. The member shall keep his current offer to have access to the two commuting time range.
At first glance, both members and casuals make a similar usage of Cyclistic in term of location alone: they are both centered on the Lincoln park area of ZIP code 60614. However, by analyzing the difference between member usage we can see that:
casuals prefer Streeterville neighborhood, Lincoln park and South Loop a bit more
members prefer West Loop and Woodlawn a bit more
These tendencies remain the same during the week, but get reinforced
for Streeterville during the weekend.
We only display the graphs based on the trip ending zone because the
graph based on trip beginning zone are similar.
## [[1]]
##
## [[2]]
Casuals are slightly more concentrated on Lincoln Park than members during the workweek
## [[1]]
##
## [[2]]
Members are slightly more concentrated on Lincoln Park during the weekend
## [[1]]
##
## [[2]]
Social usage
We consider that, if the user begin their trip in the same minute and station as another user, then he makes a ‘social usage’ of Cyclistic services.
This measure is far from exact because two user that don’t know each others can take a bike in the same minute and station. Or two user that went on a bike trip could take more than a minute to lend the bike, or they could start in different stations and meet while on bike.
However uncertain, the results are interesting. It shows that casuals use socially Cyclistic’s services 35% of the time while members have a social usage only 20% of the time.