نقش های عبارات کمیت از ساخت و ساز ارزیابی عملکرد در تهیه امکانات و مدیریت
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|21889||2009||12 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||محاسبه نشده|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Building and Environment, Volume 44, Issue 4, April 2009, Pages 773–784
This paper treats rational expressions of building performance in order to better support dialogues between stakeholders. These expressions are based on the notion of objectively quantifiable performance measures, which are introduced through a set of “performance indicators”. The indicators can be used to quantify expectations and fulfillments in structured dialogues between different stakeholders. The focus of the paper is on the introduction of two types of indicators: (1) based on normative models in biophysics and physiology and (2) based on empiricist models of Environment–Behavior studies. The treatment is positioned to support rational decision making during different stages of building delivery and use. The focus of this paper is specifically on informing decisions during design evolution, and facility and portfolio management phases of a building's lifecycle.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
The main argument of this paper pertains to the potential of building performance assessments in structuring complex social negotiations during stakeholder dialogue in building procurement. The authors introduced two kinds of performance indicators: (1) normative principles based and (2) empirical model based, emphasizing that the two classes of indicators help structure comprehensive dialogue among various stakeholders. The authors highlighted the potential of PIs in enhancing and quantifying stakeholder dialogue during design evolution, and facility and portfolio management. The complementary role of the two classes of indicators in aiding dialogue during facility procurement was highlighted. The indicators used in this article are only exemplary, and more indicators, both hard and soft, need to be added to the list to represent relevant issues brought to the negotiation table by stakeholders of a building project. Articulating such indicators constitute a continuing area of research endeavor by the authors. While the example used here is a courthouse, design and facility/portfolio maintenance dialogues in other building types are not very different. Together, the indicators exhibit the potential to offer a rational unbiased starting point for the complex social negotiations that typically occur among stakeholders in facility procurement.