Post-occupancy evaluation (POE)
Contents |
Abstract
In the 1960s, problems in building efficiency, especially from the building user perspective were observed. That led to the emergence of post-occupancy evaluation (POE) as a tool and system that supports the identification and evaluation of critical aspects of building performance [1]. Zimring and Reizenstein described POE as the “examination of the effectiveness for human users of occupied designed environments” [2].
Nowadays, POE is applied in the building industry, primarily in the early or late stages of project management, with a focus on energy performance, indoor environment quality, occupants’ satisfaction, and productivity [3]. Applying POE in the early stages of a construction project helps to reflect on mistakes identified in similar previous projects, optimize the new building according to the most recent standards, and to extend its life cycle. Using POE in the late stages of project management mainly serves as a feedback provider on the performance of a building after construction and occupation.
Depending on the level of detail for each evaluation, three analysis options can be used: indicative, investigative, and diagnostic. Thus, the POE can be a simple walk-through evaluation (indicative), a more detailed and formal data collection (investigative), or a large-scale project review (diagnostic) [4].
Introduction
Per definition, a project is “a temporary organization that is created for the purpose of delivering one or more business products according to an agreed business case.” [5]. Adapting it to the construction industry, a project will be the creation of one or more buildings within an agreed project and design brief. Due to it being temporary, project managers are needed to ensure the targeting of project objectives and performance targets such as for time, cost, quality, scope, benefits, and risks [6]. Because projects are mainly case-dependent, gained knowledge is often not shared with a broader group outside the project team and consequently lost in the long term. As a result, similar mistakes are repeated, and slow improvements across projects are observed. However, projects are how change is introduced, and not using the experiences of former projects will stop this [7]. Among others, project management principles are to recognize, evaluate, and respond to system interaction and to enable change to achieve the envisioned future state. [8]. To implement change and ensure compliance with project objectives and performance targets in the construction environment, the analysis tool “post-occupancy evaluation” (POE) can be used. The tool helps to highlight problems that can be addressed and solved as well as provide lessons to improve the design and procurement and optimize services [9]. Regarding future buildings, it enables the collection of relevant information to impact the design and functionality. The data can help the industry to avoid the same mistakes and especially save time and money.
History
An evaluation assessing the building performance was introduced in 1960 for the first time. The reason for this was significant problems experienced in the building performance from the occupant’s perspective, first noted in institutional care facilities (hospitals, nursing homes) and correctional facilities [10]. Sim van der Ryn & Victor Hsia called it a “Systematic assessment from the occupants’ point of view” and Georg Baird a “Study of the physical environment and emotional sensations experienced by people with office buildings” [11]. In 1975, the term “post-occupancy evaluation” (POE) was introduced as the generic term for such assessments which were seen as a logical final step of the cyclical design process in 1981 [12]. Among other publications, in 1995 a book on Building Evaluation Techniques was developed with 120 evaluation concepts, techniques, and tools [13]. In 2002, the building industry accepted the following definition: “Any activity that originates out of an interest in learning how a building performs once it is built (if and how it has met expectations) and how satisfied building users are with the environment that has been created” [14].
The tool
Post-occupancy evaluation (POE) is an analyzing tool for the built environment and a process of obtaining information on the building’s performance. This evaluation is used to generate a feedback loop and enhance continuous improvement. The evaluation usually will be undertaken after the building is occupied for a specific time and collects information on energy use and user satisfaction. The feedback will be used to improve the fit between occupants and their building.
Levels of POE
1. Indicative
- Rapid evaluation, before the building contract is concluded, no reflection on the final performance, useful insights, and can impact future projects (architecture.com)
- Simple as a walk-through evaluation, selected interviews as part of it or separately, simple occupants’ surveys (Ministry of education)
2. Investigative
- More detailed, independent evaluators, during the second year of occupation (architecture.com)
- Requires formal data collection techniques, interviews, and questionnaires, used for a detailed evaluation of physical project outcome and project success (ministry of education)
3. Diagnostic
- Investigations by independent evaluators, resolve significant persistent performance issues and can start at any time (architecture.com)
- Reviews are comprehensive and generally initiated for large-scale project reviews, in case of serious problems, as part of research projects, require expert advice and management (ministry of education)
Application
Limitations and future improvements
Limitations
Future improvements
Annotated bibliography
References
- ↑ Preiser, W. F. E. (1995). Post-occupancy evaluation: how to make buildings work better. Facilities, 13(11), 19–28. https://doi.org/10.1108/02632779510097787
- ↑ Zimring, C. M., & Reizenstein, J. E. (1980). Post-Occupancy Evaluation. Environment and Behavior, 12(4), 429–450. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916580124002
- ↑ Li, P., Froese, T. M., & Brager, G. (2018). Post-occupancy evaluation: State-of-the-art analysis and state-of-the-practice review. Building and Environment, 133, 187–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.02.024
- ↑ Ministry of education. (2016, February). Post-occupancy evaluation report. Stonefields School. https://www.education.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Primary-Secondary/Property/Design/Post-occupancy-evaluations/POE-Stonefields.pdf
- ↑ Managing Successful Projects with PRINCE2. (2017). Managing Successful Projects With Prince2. TSO.
- ↑ Managing Successful Projects with PRINCE2. (2017). Managing Successful Projects With Prince2. TSO.
- ↑ Managing Successful Projects with PRINCE2. (2017). Managing Successful Projects With Prince2. TSO.
- ↑ The standard for project management. (2021). A Guide To the Project Management Body of Knowledge (pmbok® Guide) – Seventh Edition and the Standard for Project Management (english) (pp. xxvi, 67, 274 Seiten (unknown). Project Management Institute, Inc.
- ↑ McNeil, T. (n.d.). Post Occupancy Evaluation. Net Zero Carbon Guide. https://www.netzerocarbonguide.co.uk/guide/operation-and-in-use/post-occupancy-evaluation/summary
- ↑ Preiser, W. F. E. (1995). Post-occupancy evaluation: how to make buildings work better. Facilities, 13(11), 19–28. https://doi.org/10.1108/02632779510097787
- ↑ Li, P., Froese, T. M., & Brager, G. (2018). Post-occupancy evaluation: State-of-the-art analysis and state-of-the-practice review. Building and Environment, 133, 187–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.02.024
- ↑ Zimmerman, A., & Martin, M. (2001). Post-occupancy evaluation: Benefits and barriers. Building Research and Information, 29(2), 168–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613210010016857
- ↑ 9. Baird, G., Isaacs, N., Kernohan, D., McIndoe, G., George Baird & Victoria University of Wellington Staff. (1995, December 1). Building Evaluation Techniques. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2759399-building-evaluation-techniques
- ↑ Li, P., Froese, T. M., & Brager, G. (2018). Post-occupancy evaluation: State-of-the-art analysis and state-of-the-practice review. Building and Environment, 133, 187–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.02.024
