De Wilde, P; Augenbroe, G and Van Der Voorden, M (2002) Managing the selection of energy saving features in building design. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 9(3), pp. 192-208. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
This paper discusses how project management styles and methods impact on energy conscious design decisions by building design teams. Within the broad field of energy conscious design the emphasis of this paper is on the selection of energy saving technologies in appropriately configured building components. The premise of the research is that these selections are not well rationalized. Choices of energy saving features in current practice are discussed against the background of available computational tools and the way these tools are used (or not) to enhance the decision-making process. Through empirical data gathering based on case studies, improved project management techniques that enable a more timely and rational selection of energy saving technologies will be identified. A follow-up research project that implements the findings in an operational design system is briefly presented to sketch the practical implications of the reported research.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building design; energy saving; process management; process modelling |
| Index terms: | design decision, process modelling, project management technique, decision-making process, energy-saving, case study, building design, building component, process management, project management |
| Subjects: | management, operations management, energy systems, architectural elements, decision analysis, project management theory and practice, design analysis, design practice, architectural design, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Project Management, Business Strategy, Design Practice, Research Practice, Risk Management, Sustainability |
| 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