Daud, M N; Adnan, Y M; Mohd, I and Aziz, A A (2011) Developing a model for Malaysia's office classification. Building Research & Information, 39(3), pp. 301-313. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
The ability to classify or grade offices accurately is important for the reliable assessment of the quality of office stock in any property market. Research has been ongoing to find an office classification framework of sufficient calibre to be adopted as the national standard in Malaysia. In developing the proposed model, the first challenge is to determine what criteria are relevant to the model. The selected criteria must both recognize the practices in other countries and embrace local values and preferences. The expert focus group method is used to identify locally relevant criteria and, together with the analytical hierarchy process technique, to determine weights for the criteria. The results show a striking similarity between the set of criteria chosen in this exercise and that prepared from a review of international as well as of earlier local practices. A classification model was then developed using the identified criteria and a further expert focus group to determine appropriate decision rules as well as of the classification parameters and measures. Model validation shows that the resultant model performs reasonably well against practitioners' assessment.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building assessment; building classification; Malaysia; market tools; office buildings; property market; real estate |
| Index terms: | office building, property market, focus group, exercise, building assessment, Malaysia, preference, analytical hierarchy process, practitioner, validation, real estate |
| Subjects: | decision-making and reasoning, professional development, Geography, asset management, decision-making and optimization, construction type, data collection methods, health behaviours and lifestyles, practitioner, real estate economics |
| Topics: | Information Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Business Strategy, Construction Technology, Roles and Professions, Urban Studies |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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