| 1. |
- Hansson, Bengt, et al.
(författare)
-
Project Assessments in Construction and Real Estate - Analysing management of end-user needs and ensuring performance in the building life cycle. CREDIT Report 4
- 2010
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- In this report a generic model for the capture and assessment of end-user requirements and needs, the CREDIT carpenter model, has been developed. The main determinants of the model is the need for the project organisation (including the facilities management organisation) to ensure a thorough understanding of the end-user requirements and needs as well as an assessment through out the project process. The end-users and the project organisation are often working in two different value chains. This, among other things, means that they may not share a common understanding of the process. Apart from just assessing to what extent the requirements and needs has been achieved it is important to assess the process of accomplishing the desired result. This way it is possible to learn from what has worked well and what has not. There is some variation in what and how it is being assessed depending on what type of building it is. Assessments on housing are more inclined to focus on softer aspects, for example perception etc. In the other cases there are, generally, a more technical perspective. It may be an affect of how knowledgeable the users are. In regard to housing the users have possible less experience of construction and communicating their needs than in the case of offices etc. There is also a notable difference between approaches and interest on what to assess in the different countries. Sweden has a much more soft approach and an ambition of getting as many as possible to understand what is being assessed and for what reasons while Finland has a much more technical and measurable approach. The clients, naturally, play a large part in the construction process, also when it come to capturing and transferring the requirements and needs of the end-users. It is mainly the clients that initiate it. Maybe more surprisingly, they do perform a lot of the work themselves as well. Designers play an important role as do known end-users as well. During the project it is mainly the client that initiates the assessments, but the actors of the project process, designers and producers that perform it. Evaluating the degree of fulfilling the requirements and needs as well as assessing the process to enable learning is again mainly a client action both initiating and performing, the rest of the actors do not engage to any larger degree. The processes from begin of the brief to the end of construction have well developed routines as a part of the project management system. These routines are good enough to successfully fulfil the studied project and the control of the process in order to get internal efficiency in the short run perspective. But there is almost no case that shows any assessment tool that support feedback, the knowledge development and the innovation process which is important in the long-run perspective. The missing feedback is marked in the carpenter model. Found in the study there are two examples of tools that together may to some extent overrun this issue. Building Information Models have the potential of acting as an information carrier within a project, storing all types of information needed for assessing a number of different aspects. The main issue is to get the right information and presenting it in a way suitable for the target group. This is done in the case of Falk in Skanska (in Norway). It is a system gathering and presenting a multitude of KPIs, from a number of different systems, in an easy to understand layout.
|
|
| 2. |
- Huovila, Pekka, et al.
(författare)
-
National and International Benchmarking - CREDIT Report 5.
- 2010
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- This report summarizes findings and recommendations from 24 case studies from seven participating countries addressing performance indicator benchmarking at a sectoral, national or international scale. Their distribution in scope is: – benchmarking systems and indicators (4 case studies) – offices (7 case studies) – housing (6 case studies) – school and nursery (4 case studies) – shopping centres (3 case studies). In addition, actual performance benchmarking was done between six Finnish and Norwegian office buildings using CREDIT Key Performance Indicators and a web-based benchmarking tool, developed in CREDIT for that purpose. Some good benchmarking practices exist already at a national and international level. They focus on process issues, investment aspects and environmental properties. These existing schemes contribute to the CREDIT framework, but don't cover well the performance dimension. There isn't yet any commonly agreed European Key Performance Indicator system, or building and real estate performance indicator standard. CREDIT made a contribution to their development from the Nordic/Baltic perspective. It also provided valuable input from the performance and social sustainability point of view to existing economic and environmental oriented schemes that are continuously updated and amended. CREDIT made progress in performance indicator framework and actual performance indicators and tools, some of which were already tested in the case studies. Understanding on existing benchmarking schemes is also improved. The results of CREDIT WP6 performance indicator benchmarking at a sectoral, national or international scale can be exploited in number of ways, such as – the front runner companies adopt the core performance indicators in their practices and influence in forming their use a sector based practice – further development of standardization, tool development (IFCs), benchmarking schemes and rating systems makes use of the results.
|
|
| 3. |
- Porkka, Janne, et al.
(författare)
-
Nordic and Baltic Case Studies and Assessments in Enterprises - CREDIT Report 2
- 2010
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- This report summarizes 28 case studies addressing the common interest for indicators in case studies in Nordic and Baltic countries and is distributed to different building types – Benchmarking systems and indicators (4 case studies) – Offices (7 case studies) – Housing (8 case studies) – School and nursery (5 case studies) – Shopping centres (3 case studies) – Hospital (1 case studies) There are some good practices for benchmarking in large scale. At the moment, those are addressing mostly process and investment indicators, and do not yet cover performance indicators. Front-runner enterprises are already recognizing the potential of benchmarking, rating to highest class may increase interest from investors and building owners. Otherwise, some national and international rating systems are available in the market. Few frontline owners are already using cost and performance indicators in daily operations, such as Senate Properties in Finland and Statsbygg in Norway. Their focus is mostly directed to investment, costs, and energy efficiency. Altogether, it seems that systematic procedures are needed in the industry for evaluating performance and compliance to end result to needs. There is no commonly agreed or standardized global or European Key Performance Indicator system, but some national and international rating schemes are available. During the past five years a number of rated buildings has grown greatly, and motivation for using those is increasing. Market signals are also showing paradigm shift towards end user involvement, and standardized methods for involving end users and making continuous monitoring of satisfaction should be agreed. When committing end users, they need help in order to be able to contribute in value adding way. Workplace management in office buildings is used for tailoring spaces better to end user needs. Senate Properties in Finland develops services where spaces are a strategic asset that can help to contribute an organizational change. National and international indicator systems do not cover all important business matters and companies are developing their own systems. Some contractors have been developing national systems for process performance monitoring. Indoor environment is important in shopping centres, and performance level for spaces is an opportunity to owner to enhance cash flow through rental agreements. In the future, building automation systems could provide real-time monitoring of performance indicators continuously contributing changes automatically to reach desired performance. Organizations are looking for an indicator system that could help them to measure and enhance performance of buildings. Apparently some indicators are more important than others; regulations for accessibility have become tighter, location is still the core driver, common interest towards operations and reducing annual energy consumptions is growing. There is potential to improve energy efficiency of buildings. Indicator systems should be implemented in tools to encourage usage in projects; those processes are now rather manual. Building Information Models (BIMs) may be suitable tool for managing those more automated way. Based on findings in CREDIT project, offices and shopping centres are most attracting building types in terms of benchmarking. Enterprises are benchmarking indicators to some extent but systematic process has not yet been developed and a uniform indicator system considering also building performance and value creation is missing. CREDIT project has increased understanding on indicators and transparency and industry needs more research on this matter.
|
|
