Korkmaz, S; Riley, D and Horman, M (2010) Piloting evaluation metrics for sustainable high-performance building project delivery. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(8), pp. 877-885. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Sustainable high-performance buildings are being more widely adopted around the world to reduce energy costs and improve the well being of occupants. To achieve the set goals for these building projects within realistic financial and time constraints, superior planning, design, and construction processes are needed. The available literature lacks the descriptive project delivery metrics identifying scientific methods for providing insight or feedback about the performance of project delivery processes for sustainable high-performance buildings. This paper describes an exploratory study examining more than 100 variables in green project delivery to scientifically identify important metrics. Limited by a rather small sample due to the relatively young market of green buildings, the outcome of this paper, nevertheless, provides important direction for the continued development of meaningful metrics to assist in the establishment of a decision making support tool for project teams to facilitate optimum project delivery processes for sustainable high-performance buildings.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | buildings; delivery; project delivery; project management; quantitative analysis; sustainable development |
| Index terms: | quantitative analysis, green building, well-being, construction process, decision-making, exploratory study, sustainable development, energy cost, project management, project team, project delivery |
| Subjects: | data analysis and analytics, project delivery, mental health and wellbeing, cost management, building construction, decision analysis, health safety and environment, project management theory and practice, design practice, research methods |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Site Management, Health and Safety, Project Management, Research Practice, Risk Management, Procurement, Sustainability |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here