Perkinson, G M; Sanvido, V E and Grobler, F (1994) A facility programming information framework. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 1(1), pp. 69-84. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
This paper presents a conceptual framework to store, manage and retrieve facility programming information called a Facility Programming Product Model (FPPM). The FPPM represents an open' information framework that members of the facility team (owner, planner, designer, constructor and operator) can utilize to satisfy their individual information needs as providers or users of the facility. The FPPM is a systematized approach to creating, organizing, and presenting facility programming information. The framework allows the owner's representative to review the programming product (the programme) for completeness by establishing a structure designed to access programming criteria at varying levels of abstraction, during any phase of the building life cycle. The result is a programme which can be used as a tool to assist decision making and to evaluate objectively performance criteria during the life of a project.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | architectural programme; framework; planning; product model; programme |
| Index terms: | conceptual framework, programming, decision-making, programme, product model, performance criteria, planner, designer, owner, building life cycle, architectural programme |
| Subjects: | modelling and simulation, profession, programming, decision analysis, sociology, asset management, project controls, performance measurement, theoretical framing, design practice |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Risk Management, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Quality Management, Digital Applications, Design Practice, Time Control |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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