Shaw, C; de Andrade Pereira, F; Farghaly, K; Hoare, C; Hartmann, T and O'Donnell, J (2024) Life cycle cost analysis at scale: a reference architecture-based approach. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 14(5), pp. 713-733. ISSN 2044-124X
Abstract
Purpose: This research demonstrates the theoretical merit of a reference architecture-based approach to life cycle cost (LCC) analysis system provision in the built environment. LCC insight is considered fundamental to sustainable decision making by asset managers; however, the current capabilities in practice do not align with the political ambition and the scale of competencies required to realise sectoral emissions-reduction targets. Design/methodology/approach: In pursuing practical outcomes, the study employs a custom design science research-inspired methodology. Domain requirements are gathered via literature research as an initial top-down software reference architecture which is refined, bottom-up, through testing and implementation in a representative case study. A prototype IT system and reference architecture artefact are developed and used to evaluate the concept qualitatively through broad practitioner focus groups. Findings: Sentiment analysis of the expert opinions is broadly positive and helps to substantiate the proposal’s theoretical suitability in addressing the scalability challenge. Additionally, constructive feedback provides guidance towards this trajectory, highlighting the importance of aligning with existing communities and standards, broadening future research scope to consider further scenarios and prioritisation of efforts to build trust around contracts and data quality. Originality/value: The novelty of the work is the provision of the reusable LCC reference architecture development methodology. Practical implications: The concept has the potential to provide LCC capabilities to industry at scale while the artefacts developed herein can be appended to existing LCC standards as implementation guidance to support IT system developers. Furthermore, the developed methodology can be employed in harmonisation efforts between policy and practice.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | asset management; design science research; life cycle cost analysis; reference architecture; scalability |
| Index terms: | suitability, implementation, testing, custom design, methodology, practitioner, artefact, built environment, life cycle cost analysis, asset management, science, sustainable decision making, prototype, life cycle cost, proposal, manager, focus group, design science research, case study |
| Subjects: | research methods, economics, design practice, sustainability assessment, design process, asset management, sociology, infrastructure and transport systems, design criteria, data collection methods, practitioner, specialized education, modelling and simulation, professional practice, contractual arrangements, project planning |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Roles and Professions, Procurement, Sustainability, Design Practice, Urban Studies, Education |
| 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