Beauregard, M A (2019) Maintaining performance evidence-based educational facility management through a decision-support tool leveraging prior empirical research. PhD thesis, Arizona State University, USA.
Abstract
Public institution facility operations and maintenance is a significant factor enabling an institution to achieve its stated objectives in the delivery of public service. To meet the societal need, Facility Directors must make increasingly complex decisions managing the demands of building infrastructure performance expectations with limited resources. The ability to effectively measure a return-on-investment, specific to facility maintenance indirect expenditures, has, therefore, become progressively more critical given the scale of public institutions, the collective age of existing facilities, and the role these institutions play in society. This research centers on understanding the method of prioritizing routine work in support of indirect institutional facility maintenance expense through the lens of K-12 public education in the state of Arizona. The methodology documented herein utilizes a mixed method approach to understand current facility maintenance practices and assess the influence of human behavior when prioritizing routine work. An evidence-based decision support tool, leveraging prior academic research, was developed to coalesce previously disparate academic studies. The resulting process provides a decision framework for prioritizing decision factors most frequently correlated with academic outcomes. A purposeful sample of K-12 unified districts, representing approximately one-third of the state’s student population and spend, resulted in a moderate to a strong negative correlation between facility operations and student outcomes. Correlation results highlight an opportunity to improve decision making, specific to the academic needs of the student. This research documents a methodology for constructing, validation, and testing of a decision support tool for prioritizing routine work orders. Findings from a repeated measures crossover study suggest the decision support tool significantly influenced decision making specific to certain work orders as well as the Plumbing and Mechanical functional areas. However, the decision support tool was less effective when prioritizing Electrical and General Maintenance work orders. Moreover, as decision making transitioned away from subjective experience-based judgment, the prioritization of work orders became increasingly more consistent. The resulting prioritization, therefore, effectively leveraged prior empirical, evidence-based decision factors when utilizing the tool. The results provide a system for balancing the practical experience of the Facility Director with the objective guidance of the decision support tool.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Ayer, S K |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | decision support; education; population; validation; decision framework; decision making; investment |
| Index terms: | testing, prioritizing, decision-making, population, decision framework, society, evidence, judgment, mixed method, educational facility, routine, human behaviour, plumbing, documents, research centre, methodology, validation, decision support |
| Subjects: | communities and social development, health behaviours and lifestyles, professional practice, construction type, sociology, decision analysis, mechanical systems, evaluation and assessment methods, dispute resolution, professional development, data collection methods, demography, research methods |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Construction Technology, Urban Studies, Stakeholder Management, Engineering Principles, Design Practice, Legal Issues, Research Practice, Organizational Design, Information Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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