Coleman, S and Robinson, J B (2018) Introducing the qualitative performance gap: Stories about a sustainable building. Building Research & Information, 46(5), pp. 485-500. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
In the design and operations industries, the performance gap is a common discrepancy found between predicted building energy performance and actual energy performance. The performance gap is considered to have negative impacts for the brand of 'green' buildings, designers and operators. A socially based analogue is proposed here: the qualitative performance gap, defined as the perceived gap between what inhabitants expect and their actual experience of the building environment. This concept is explored at a regenerative Living Lab: the Centre for Interactive Research on Sustainability (CIRS) in Vancouver, Canada. 'Official' and 'lived' stories about the building were interpreted from sources of building information and interviews. Expectations about and forgiveness of building performance were gained from pre- and post-occupancy evaluations and interviews. The solution to the qualitative performance gap is not to eliminate it, but, in line with the concept of interactive adaptivity, to use the gap to generate new stories and new consequences for human wellbeing. The qualitative performance gap is thus conceived as positively generative, of new stories of place and identity. This work recommends crafting an 'official story' of social aspirations, and a communication feedback loop amongst designers, operators and building inhabitants, transparently sharing successes and failures.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | branding; expectations; gap analysis; performance gap; post-occupancy evaluation; pre-occupancy evaluation; social context; storytelling; sustainable buildings |
| Index terms: | energy performance, identity, interview, gap analysis, well-being, sustainable building, Canada, feedback loop, building performance, performance gap, designer, post-occupancy evaluation |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, mental health and wellbeing, profession, Geography, evaluation methods, energy systems, quality assurance, performance management, performance measurement, sociology, control systems, sustainable construction |
| Topics: | Geographical Context, Quality Management, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Roles and Professions, Engineering Principles, Sustainability |
| 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