Bordass, B and Leaman, A (2005) Making feedback and post-occupancy evaluation routine 1: A portfolio of feedback techniques. Building Research & Information, 33(4), pp. 347-352. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
Over forty, years ago, the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) published its Plan of Work for Design Team Operation (1963), which included Stage M - Feedback. In spite of this, designers, builders and sometimes even procuring clients do not engage closely with the performance of the buildings they have created. Hence, low-level, chronic problems tend to persist, innovations miss their targets, and true successes may be overlooked - even in some of the best buildings, as the Probe series of post-occupancy surveys revealed. This paper discusses how feedback, follow through from design and construction into occupancy, and post-occupancy evaluation could become a natural part of project delivery, and how this could improve the quality and sustainability of our buildings. It describes progress made since the Probe series of post-occupancy ended in encouraging the use of feedback, including a portfolio of established techniques, development of the Soft Landings technique, and setting up a charity to promote and support feedback. The results of tests with a user group are also discussed.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building performance; continuous improvement; feedback; follow-through; learning; post-occupancy evaluation; probe; project delivery; quality control; user surveys |
| Index terms: | project delivery, building performance, Royal Institute of British Architects, design and construction, soft landing, post-occupancy evaluation, user group, routine, design team, plan of work, designer, builder, quality control, continuous improvement, survey |
| Subjects: | client relations, practitioner, professional practice, operations management, profession, professional institution, design practice, quality assurance, project delivery, data collection methods, evaluation methods, performance measurement, sociology, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Design Practice, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Project Management, Stakeholder Management, Procurement, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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