DOI: 10.24053/ IV-2024-0075 International Transportation (76) Collection ǀ 2024 26 Driving Change in Corporate Mobility Management— Comprehensive Perspectives on Mobility Budgets for Employees Corporate Mobility Management, mobility budgets, sustainability, mobility behavior, Mobility as a Service Corporate Mobility Management (CMM) is a key part of the transformation towards sustainable mobility and has an impact on emissions and employee satisfaction. Mobility budgets (MBs), categorized as employee benefits, offer a unique solution for transforming employee mobility. This article summarizes the results of two studies and provides a comprehensive overview. Study I, a representative survey (n=994) in Germany, examines the differences between MB users (MBN) and non-users (NU). NU show longer commuting distances and a lower perception of sustainability, which underlines the transformative effect of MB. Socio-demographic nuances, including gender and socio-economic factors, further influence mobility choices. Study II focuses on three case studies presenting different MB implementations. Overall, our results underline the transformative potential of MBs regarding the change towards sustainability. Policy makers and companies should develop solutions for different socio-demographic groups, take gender preferences into account and consider the impact on commuting behavior. The presented holistic framework contributes to a more sustainable and satisfying mobility experience for workers and is in line with broader environmental goals. Lea Heide Schwehn, Tobias Heußler, André Bruns Relevance / Introduction Corporate Mobility Management (CMM) plays a key role in countering CO2-dominated transportation modes. Innovative mobility and transportation measures can contribute to major sustainability goals such as a reduced emission balance as well as enhanced employee satisfaction which unleashes long-term change. Thus, CMM addresses two challenging business perspectives at once. In addition, CMM can be seen as a supporting action by the private sector in support of its sustainability strategies, helping to promote sustainable change. CMM holds two main functions; First, the pooling effect of measures to tailor the offering to the specific needs of different target groups and second, the integration of supply and demand-oriented measures to foster behavioral change. A promising measure that combines both key features of CMM are mobility budgets that are lately categorized as an additional benefit for employees [4; 1]. They introduce the possibility for companies to change the mobility behavior of their workforce while satisfying increasing demands. Instead of providing employees with conventional mobility services like company cars or public transportation, companies allocate a budget focused on individual purposes and needs to meet the mobility requirements of their workforce [4; 3]. Since this concept is quite new to the mobility and transportation environment and only a few studies exist to this date [4; 3; 2], companies are faced with the challenge of providing a well-designed and adequate budget suiting their business goals and objectives. This article provides a broad overview of the concept and contributes to the understanding of the effects of mobility budgets. More precisely, it aims to illustrate the impact of mobility budgets to change mobility behavior towards more sustainable means of transportation and/ or multimodality. To respond to this rising debate, we combine insights from two different studies. First, we conducted a representative survey for the German working environment (n=994) to provide insights into the differences between users and non-users of such a budget. Second, we analyzed several company workshops and interviews to design three different case studies that show the different approaches of companies to introduce a mobility budget. In summary, this article reveals valid insights into the different attitudes and behaviors of users versus non-users and provides assistance in form of guidelines for companies that want to successfully introduce such budgets. Our results also indicate how MBs need to be flanked by public policies to be fully embedded in a mobility ecosystem. Definition MB The so-called mobility budget is currently a hot subject of debate as a modern and sustainable alternative to travelling solely by a private and/ or company car. It is closely related to Mobility as a Service (MaaS) in which a mobility solution is used according to individual needs and preferences. Instead of providing employees with a single offering such as a company car or a job ticket for public transportation a company provides a budget for personal mobility purposes. Thus, companies can shape the choice of transport of the entire workforce and promote more environmentally friendly options while clearly differentiating CMM from travel management. The arrangement and revision of the business travel policy is a challenging task that deserves a differentiated approach. A mobility budget is particularly valuable in sales and management where company cars are still the standard. Mainly, these business divisions are highly depending on a car. However, a mobility budget can function as a convenient alternative to a company car; either to downsize the current car in return of other benefits/ modes such as a bike, or to replace it completely for payment and/ or more sustainable modes of transportation. However, as a holistic approach, the budget is targeted to influence the commuting behavior of the entire workforce instead of a single entitled sub-group. Study I: Mobility budgets change mobility behavior towards more multimodality. Survey Background MBs seem to have the ability to change behavior of employees. However, there has been hardly any research with significant insights published yet. Hence, we conducted a quantitative field study with employees serving a German business (N=995) screened accordingly to a mobility budget offering from their employer. The questionnaire was mainly targeted to gain insights into daily mobility characteristics, the individual commuting journey as well as attitudes and satisfaction towards the mobility and transportation offering from the employer. Our representative sample consists of 51% women with an average age range between 36 and 55. 27% are already offered a MB but only 11% make use of it. This forms three subgroups: 73% of non-users (NU), 11% of users (MBN) and 16% of the ones with an offering but not making use of it (MBNU). There are already many studies available that provide insights into the mobility behavior of employees (e.g., Mars et al., 2022; Liu et al., 2021; Zhang et al., 2019). However, we want to provide insights on the impact of MB. This is why we compare the groups of NU and MBN in the following chapter for insights on their potentially differing attitudes and mobility behavior. Results of Study I (NU vs. MBN) The NU subgroup is 55% female, compared to only 40% at MBN. Particularly the differences between the stated multimodal mobility behavior and sustainability aspects regarding mobility and transportation are prominent: Only 11.8% of NU regularly make use of different modes of transportation while 45.5% of MBN use different modes for commuting and on private routes. Most of the NU commute between 10 to 30 km (35.6%). Among MBN the majority needs 5 to 10 km to get to work (40%). According to the individual importance of sustainable mobility and transportation 43.2% of NU compared to 64.5% of MBN Science MOBILITY DOI: 10.24053/ IV-2024-0075 International Transportation (76) Collection ǀ 2024 27 MOBILITY  Science DOI: 10.24053/ IV-2024-0075 International Transportation (76) Collection ǀ 2024 28 enhance employer loyalty and cater to the diverse needs of its workforce, The Family Corporation embarked on a transformative journey by introducing mobility budgets as a pioneering employee benefit. Objective: The primary goal was clear—to establish mobility budgets as a valuable and inclusive benefit that not only attracted top talent but also promoted a holistic approach to employee well-being. Three-Purpose Implementation: Inclusive Transportation Options: The Family Corporation broke away from traditional benefits by providing mobility budgets with no limits on the means of transportation. From public transit to ridesharing services, every mode was included, ensuring that the benefit catered to the unique needs of each employee. Holistic Approach: Unlike benefits tailored to specific entitled groups, mobility budgets were designed to value the entire workforce. This inclusive approach aimed to create a workplace culture that prioritized diversity and equal treatment for all employees. Autonomy and Flexibility: A distinctive feature of the mobility budget program was its hands-off approach to nudging employees towards a specific mobility behavior. Instead, employees were empowered to make their own transportation choices, fostering a sense of autonomy and flexibility in their work routines. Challenges and Solutions: Above all, The Family Corporation defined a clear vision of its purpose for the business to ensure the success of MBs. Aligning the benefit with overall company goals helped communicate its value and foster employee satisfaction and productivity. Contrary to expectations, The Family Corporation found that a small budget was often sufficient to implement an effective mobility program. The key was strategic and thoughtful implementation, emphasizing the importance of the benefit rather than its financial magnitude. Contrary to the ‘Small Budget, Big Impact’ outlook, was the challenge of dealing with rising demands. As employees embraced the mobility budget, expectations evolved. The Family Corporation remained agile and responsive, adjusting the budget to meet the changing needs and preferences of its workforce. Regular assessments ensured that the benefit remained relevant and impactful. Emerging from rising demands another concern emerged: the potential loss of control over employees’ transportation choices. However, by shifting towards a culture of trust and responsibility, The Family Corporation successfully managed this challenge, realizing that empowering employees led to a more engaged and accountable workforce. Results: The implementation of mobility budgets at The Family Corporation resulted in a significant boost in employer loyalty. Employees appreciated the freedom to choose their modes of transportation, which also led to attitudinal changes that disrupted established mindsets and habitualized mobility behaviors. The inclusive nature of the program contributed to a positive and productive work environment. The success of this innovative employee benefit positioned The Family Corporation as a trailblazperceive sustainability important regarding their active mobility and transportation. More than half of the group of MBN specifically focus on sustainability. Both subgroups strongly identify as car drivers (66.2% NU vs. 54.5% MBN) and show a strong car use habit strength. Nevertheless, almost twice as many MBN identify as public transport users (15% NU vs. 27.3% MBN). There are no major differences between both groups regarding the modal split on private routes. For the commuting split however, there is a distinct difference between public transport usage (16.3% NU vs. 23.6% MBN). For both ways the car is dominating as the most used means of transportation on average. Very interestingly, the NU are way less satisfied with the corporate mobility and transportation offerings (CMTO) than MBN. However, both groups show high employee loyalty through a positive rating of their employers. Finally, it seems valuable to look deeper into sociodemographic differences. We focused on education, wage, household composition and living environment. MBN show higher wage ranges than NU. They are also more likely to live in or near the city center (51.8%), while most NUs live in the suburbs (28.6%). There are slight differences in marital status; we see that more people in a relationship with children opt for MB, while most NU are alone without children (33.1%). In addition, the more people in a household, the more likely they are to use a MB. In summary, we identified recognizable differences between NU and MBN, particularly according to multimodal mobility behavior and satisfaction. This indicates and supports previous work, that MB may be able to shift mobility behavior towards the use of sustainable modes [2]. Accordingly, an investment is worthwhile for a contemporary CMM. In the following we present three examples (based on case studies) of how a MB can be successfully introduced in companies. Study II: Three approaches to effectively introduce mobility budgets in companies according to culture and objectives. We conducted in-depth interviews and workshops with several companies that had already introduced MBs, were in in the introduction phase, or at least considering implementing them. By means of a qualitative analysis we designed three different case studies to successfully introduce a MB according to a company’s individual culture and objectives. Case Study I: Driving Loyalty: Mobility budgets as an employee benefit to enhance employer loyalty. BasicCorp, a leading player in the competitive business landscape, recognized the need for innovative employee benefits to stay ahead in the talent game. In a bid to Additionally, a transparent and precise alignment with business goals was crucial. Sustainable mobility was not just a checkbox but an integral part of the company’s mobility culture. GreenWheels Corp. emphasized that it wasn’t just about reducing emissions but also about aligning with the company’s broader commitment to environmental stewardship. Striking a fine line between actual sustainability and greenwashing was also a challenge. GreenWheels Corp. ensured that its initiatives were substantive and had a real impact, steering clear of superficial gestures and ensuring authenticity in its commitment to sustainability. Results: The implementation of mobility budgets at GreenWheels Corp. led to a notable reduction in the company’s internal emission balance. Employees embraced sustainable mobility behavior, and the gamification elements added an element of fun and motivation. Leadership commitment and visibility at the highest level reinforced the company’s dedication to sustainability, setting a benchmark for responsible corporate mobility. GreenWheels Corp. successfully navigated the challenges, fostering a culture where sustainable mobility became an Integral part of the company‘s Identity and values. Case Study III: Driving both: Mobility budgets to support mobility satisfaction as well as more sustainable mobility behavior. Ideally, the budget functions as both, an additional employee benefit to increase mobility satisfaction as well as fostering more sustainable mobility behavior within the workforce. HarmonyHub represents the company for the third case study. HarmonyHub, an industry leader committed to corporate responsibility, embarked on a pioneering journey by integrating mobility budgets as a comprehensive corporate mobility management tool. This innovative approach aimed to elevate employee satisfaction and encourage more sustainable mobility behavior, aligning seamlessly with the company‘s dedication to environmental stewardship. Objective: HarmonyHub set out with a dual objective: to bolster mobility satisfaction among employees and promote a shift towards more sustainable transportation choices through the implementation of mobility budgets. Implementation: To achieve a dual objective, HarmonyHub combined the approaches from prior cases with a focus on a sustainable fleet transition including downsizing, integrating inclusive sustainable means of transportation, gamification as well as leadership as sustainability role models. Challenges and Solutions: HarmonyHub took a similar combining approach to the challenges and solutions. A particular focus was on the behavioral change and adequate communication including the avoidance of greenwashing, a genuine alignment er in the industry, setting a new standard for employee-centric benefits in the corporate landscape. Case Study II: Driving Sustainability: Mobility budgets to foster more sustainable mobility behavior and decrease internal emission balance. GreenWheels Corp., a forward-thinking company committed to environmental responsibility, undertook a bold initiative to foster more sustainable mobility behavior among its employees. The implementation of mobility budgets aimed not only to decrease the internal emission balance but also to redefine the company’s approach to corporate mobility. Objective: The primary objective was twofold: to downsize the carbon footprint of internal operations and replace traditional company cars with mobility budgets that encouraged employees to opt for more sustainable means of transportation on both, private and business-related routes. Implementation: GreenWheels Corp. took a bold step by downsizing its company fleet, recognizing the environmental impact of traditional company cars. This move was pivotal in aligning the company’s commitment to sustainability with its everyday operations. Instead of providing company cars, GreenWheels Corp. introduced mobility budgets, allowing employees the flexibility to choose from a variety of sustainable transportation options. This not only reduced the environmental impact but also empowered employees to make conscious mobility choices. Mobility budgets were allocated exclusively to more sustainable modes of transportation, such as public transportation, electric scooters, and bicycles. This deliberate inclusion aimed to create a culture of environmentally responsible commuting among employees. To further incentivize emission-free mobility behavior, GreenWheels Corp. incorporated gamification elements. Employees were rewarded for choosing environmentally friendly options such as walking or biking, fostering a sense of competition and team spirit. Managers and the corporate board took on the role of sustainability ambassadors, leading by example in their transportation choices. CMM became a key agenda item for CEOs, ensuring high-level visibility and commitment to the cause. Challenges and Solutions: GreenWheels Corp. faced several different challenges, particularly arising from the goal to achieve a change of behavior while facing higher expenses. This required an increased level of support and communication. Green- Wheels Corp. implemented comprehensive awareness campaigns, educating employees about the environmental impact of their transportation choices and the benefits of sustainable mobility. Recognizing the need for a more significant impact, GreenWheels Corp. acknowledged the importance of a bigger budget. An adequate amount was deemed necessary to make mobility budgets attractive enough for employees to willingly eliminate or downsize their reliance on traditional company cars. Science MOBILITY DOI: 10.24053/ IV-2024-0075 International Transportation (76) Collection ǀ 2024 29 MOBILITY  Science International Transportation (76) Collection ǀ 2024 30 DOI: 10.24053/ IV-2024-0075 reducing emissions while increasing employee satisfaction. However, this is a challenge for CMM. Again, the consideration of mobility demands across the workforce with different sociodemographic backgrounds should be considered wisely. A proper process management including a frequent performance evaluation regarding the intended goals is a key feature to adjust the MB during the implementation process. In an encompassing perspective, our research provides a holistic framework for the effective incorporation of MBs into mobility management strategies. By addressing different commuting patterns, sociodemographic diversity, and corporate strategies, our findings pave the way for a more sustainable and satisfactory mobility experience for employees while aligning with broader environmental goals. ■ REFERENCES [1] Schlegel, M., & Stopka, U. (2022, June). Corporate Mobility Budgets as a Contribution to the Enforcement of Sustainable Mobility. In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 600-617). Cham: Springer International Publishing. [2] Schwehn, L., & Heußler, T. (2022). Zur Attraktivität von Mobilitätsbudgets: Modellentwicklung und Ableitung kommunikativer Handlungsempfehlungen. Transfer: Zeitschrift für Kommunikation & Markenmanagement, 68(4). [3] Zijlstra, T., Goos, P., & Verhetsel, A. (2019). A mixture-amount stated preference study on the mobility budget. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 126, 230-246. [4] Zijlstra, T., & Vanoutrive, T. (2018). The employee mobility budget: Aligning sustainable transportation with human resource management? . Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 61, 383-396. Photo credit: © iStock.com/ Tirachar with business goals as well as budget considerations, principally managing higher expenses. Results: The integration of mobility budgets as a corporate mobility management tool at HarmonyHub yielded remarkable results. The company experienced a substantial decrease in its internal emission balance, achieved through a successful downsizing of the fleet and the adoption of sustainable transportation options. Employees embraced the mobility budget program, not only increasing their satisfaction with mobility choices but also contributing to a more sustainable corporate environment. HarmonyHub emerged as a beacon of corporate responsibility, setting a new standard for organizations looking to simultaneously enhance employee satisfaction and promote sustainable mobility behaviors. Implications/ Conclusion Our findings are two-fold. According to our data we can draw several conclusions for CMM and the introduction process of MBs. First, we can see that a MB has an actual impact on mobility attitudes and behavior. Results from Study I give insight into the basic mobility behavior and commuting patterns of German employees among the groups of NU and MBN. The analysis reveals intricate patterns in multimodal mobility behavior, sustainability perceptions, and sociodemographic differences. To foster more sustainable and inclusive transportation systems by means of MB, policymakers and companies should consider addressing gender-specific preferences, understanding the factors influencing commuting patterns, and tailoring transportation solutions to meet the diverse needs of different sociodemographic groups. This implicates a systematical implementation of MB, especially based on differentiated data revealing individual mobility needs and preferences. Additionally, efforts to improve public transport services and enhance employee satisfaction with CMTO could contribute to more sustainable and satisfactory mobility experiences for both groups. Second, our conclusions from Study II are particularly helpful for companies that are planning to introduce mobility budgets. MBs are a trendy topic but there are hardly any insights on a proper implementation into CMM. The compiled cases provide an overview of an in-depth analysis of several different firms located in Germany that already introduced MBs or were at least in the introduction phase. They represent three different approaches of implementing MBs while also pointing out the relating challenges and solutions. We conclude that the ideal of the concept of MBs is the last case that combines both goals, Lea Heide Schwehn, RheinMain University of Applied Sciences, Bleichstraße 3, 65183 Wiesbaden, Germany Tobias Heußler, RheinMain University of Applied Sciences, Bleichstraße 44, 65183 Wiesbaden, Germany André Bruns, RheinMain University of Applied Sciences, Kurt-Schumacher-Ring 18, 65197 Wiesbaden, Germany