Capturing the Stakeholder Values of a Construction Project

Transcription

1 Capturing the Stakeholder Values of a Construction Project Ken Dooley Sustainability Consultant Olof Granlund Oy Finland Piia Sormunen Manager, Energy and Environment Olof Granlund Oy Finland Summary The significance of the integrated design process and its influence on the sustainability and life cycle environmental impact of the final building design has been widely been reported. Our study focuses on the method of capturing the values (needs) of the many stakeholders required by this process. We aim to develop a framework of design methods that enables all project stakeholders to be involved in the initial decision making process. A detailed briefing process is chosen to capture the stakeholder s values. The briefing process is an iterative process progressing from initial project goals, to values, design requirements and eventually performance parameters. The wide ranging values of the multiple stakeholders are managed and ordered into operational and technical briefs using the concurrent design methodology from the aerospace design industry. The methodology of concurrent design in relation to the construction industry is further defined as is the role of the team leader, systems engineer, discipline engineers and the customers. Also included are two design case studies. In the first case study, the reduced energy consumption due to collaborative design supported by early stage dynamic thermal models is explored. The benefits of using software that can generate detailed energy calculations based early project data and typical assumptions may clearly be seen. The second case study investigates the use of a detailed briefing process and the concurrent design methodology to define the stakeholder values of a large office building. As a result of this process a list of actual project stakeholder values and their interactions within the design team has been generated. The success of the concurrent design methodology is deemed to depend on the attitudes and willingness to communicate of the stakeholders involved. Keywords: stakeholder values, concurrent design, integrated design process, design team collaboration 1. Introduction Traditional construction design practices dictate that the early stages of a design involve a client representative, an architect and a cost consultant only. The client s role in this process is to convey the project s ambitions to the design team. This may be as simple as requesting an office building to accommodate 500 people. The architect translates the client s demands into a tangible building design while the cost consultant monitors the design in relation to the client s budget. The goal of this design stage is to create a set of building plans to submit to the local planning authority for planning approval while also confirming the project budget. Once the plans are approved the project moves to the next stage of design and other team members are included. However, the initial stages of design that occur before planning approval have a dramatic influence on the sustainability and life cycle environmental impact of the building. It is claimed by Romm [1] that when just 1% of a project's up front costs are spent, up to 70% of its life cycle costs may already be committed and that when 7% of project costs are spent, up to 85% of life cycle costs

2 have been committed." For example the client may have already chosen the project site before consulting with any member of the design team even though the building location will heavily influence the transportation life cycle impact. An urban city centre site with good public transport links and little opportunity for car parking will have substantially less environmental impact than a development on the edge of a town where the majority of users will choose to drive to work. 2. Project Stakeholders In construction projects numerous stakeholders are involved at each stage directly or indirectly. An integrated design process (IDP) involves all participants in the early design phase of the project. This means that all stakeholders collaborate throughout the initial design process from the setting of the project goals to the definition of measurable design parameters that represent these goals. The different stakeholders of the early design stage have been divided into three main groups. These groups are as follows: (a) society and citizens: local authorities, citizens; (b) clients and users: end users, investors, initiators, developers, building owners, facility managers and (c) construction sector: builders, designers, suppliers [2]. Traditionally the most powerful stakeholders have been (a) local authorities through the building regulations and (b) investors who have been overly concerned with project capital cost and have disregarded future savings through reduced life cycle costs. When life cycle environmental impact is considered all stakeholders are recognised and encouraged to collaborate, interact and influence each other s designs. Each stakeholder introduces their own expertise and personal agenda to the design process and the result is a more informed and balanced design. Building owners are concerned with the running costs over the building lifetime and favour reduced energy consumption. Facility managers are generally concerned with practical matters such as façade cleaning and system maintenance. They are directly responsible for the actual everyday performance of the building and their contribution to the design process is invaluable. Building users must be satisfied with the facilities and comfort level provided. Failing to provide the needs of the user may lead to wasteful post occupancy alterations to the building design and decreased building value. Building services engineers are concerned with the building geometry and material properties which are traditionally fixed after the planning stage. Reduced levels of energy consumption can be achieved when architects and engineers design the building shape in parallel. The building orientation may be changed or external shading may be added to reduce solar gain and save on cooling energy. Glazing size and properties may be optimised to maximise on daylighting or to reduce annual heating and cooling loads. Environmental impact consultants may wish to comment on the suitability of the project site to reduce the development of unsuitable sites due to biodiversity and ecological concerns, to reduce light pollution and to reduce the transport related carbon footprint of the building. Contractors may provide comments on the buildability of the building design and may propose practical measures to simplify the building process thus saving energy and materials. Material suppliers can inform the design team with regard to the embodied energy of materials. Material options can then be categorised and selected based on where the material will be sourced from and how it will be processed before arriving to the site. An integrated design process can achieve improved building performance with lower costs and fewer disruptive changes during the later project stages. Figure 1 shows that the earlier in the process that IDP occurs, the greater the impact on building performance and the lower the impact on costs [3].

3 Fig. 1 The benefits of early stakeholder collaboration [3] 3. Capturing the Stakeholder Values 3.1 Briefing A detailed briefing process shall be utilised as the framework in which the needs, wishes and ambitions (values) of all stakeholders are defined and taken into account in the design process (captured). The briefing process, being an integral part of the design process, should be iterative and move from the general to the particular. Project goals are defined at the beginning and values are derived from these goals and translated into design requirements. The design requirements eventually become performance requirements. Values are considered as features of the final building design that are a result of the stakeholder s collective efforts while realising the client s business case. In order to incorporate the individual values of the multiple stakeholders into a final technical brief, design team communication is of utmost importance. The process requires a holistic approach and a more balanced team than is usually found in construction projects. All project values must be first defined in non technical user language (functional needs), only then can they be translated to performance language (performance requirements and specifications) and eventually to technical language (technical requirements and specifications) [2]. Fig. 2 Framework to Capture Stakeholder Values [2]

4 3.2 Strategic Brief The first action of the briefing process is for the client, users and local authorities to define the goals of the project and elements required to fulfil the ambition of the client. This shall be done via the strategic brief and occurs during a pre project stage referred to as the business planning stage. At the end of the strategic briefing sessions there shall be a quality gate where goals shall be analysed [2]. 3.3 Operational Brief The operational brief defines the design requirements in terms of functionalities, dimensions and performance. It is independent of whatever choice is made to provide the final building whether it is a new build, refurbishment or by rearranging existing spaces. Traditionally only the client, users and local authorities are involved in this process however we advise that all project stakeholders are involved. The goals defined in the strategic brief are translated to product (completed building) and process values. The product values aid in understanding the purpose of the building and present the goals for the building and its performance. The process values are derived from the product values and are used to select suitable construction processes. Process values define how the product values can be achieved effectively and precisely during the design process. During this process the stakeholders act collaboratively to process the values and requirements into a building design. At the end of operational briefing sessions there shall be a quality gate where each participant shall examine the values and requirements for any conflict with local regulations [2]. 3.4 Technical Brief Technical briefing is the method of defining the quantitative performance parameters of the completed building and is the starting point for the eventual building specification. However, as this process is still an element of the feasibility design stage and thus takes place before the design phase, the performance parameters must allow flexibility. Typical performance parameters may be as follows: energy targets, life cycle costs, alternative building layouts, project schedules and other key performance indicators. Once the feasibility design stage has been completed the client body shall decide whether to continue with the project or not. Once again, at the end of technical briefing sessions there shall be a quality gate where the parameters shall be analysed [2]. Goal Value Design Requirement Performance Parameter Reduce Life Cycle Energy Consumption Heating Energy 21 kwhr/m 3 Costs Electrical Energy 78 kwhr/m 2 Table 1 An example of the Goal, Value, Requirement, Parameter hierarchy 4. Concurrent Engineering The concurrent design methodology is a space born integrated design methodology developed and used by the European Space Agency. The design work is done in sessions with all stakeholders involved and present, creating an integrated design that improves communication and exchange of information between team members. To perform concurrent design successfully, the following is required: (a) a methodology; (b) a platform and (c) a facility (location). The Concurrent Design team includes (a) a team leader (TL), (b) a systems engineer (SE), (c) the identified discipline engineers (domains) and (d) the customers. The TL takes the role of process manager, ensuring that the separate domains work as a team, leading discussions etc. The TL is not necessarily an expert in the actual design, but needs to be knowledgeable in concurrent design. The SE has the responsibility to ensure that the design is a true integrated

5 design by managing the requirements and calculating budgets. The SE monitors the design consistency and progress, ensuring that that the design converges to a solution. The discipline engineers provide the detailed technical aspects of the design in accordance with their field of expertise and contribute to the integrated design in general. In traditional concurrent design the customers are not usually active in the design and mostly provide feedback on the design and the dynamics of the requirements. However, for the construction industry we have included the customers (client and society stakeholders) in the design sessions. The initial requirements for the design process are defined by the customers prior to the design sessions. This is similar to the strategic brief except that in concurrent design the team leader and the systems engineer shall be involved in the process. In traditional concurrent design the design sessions are used to actually perform the design. However, for the construction industry we have utilised the concurrent design process to manage the values of the multiple stakeholders in order to define the operational and technical briefs. A typical concurrent design process involves 6 to 8 sessions, spread over several weeks. The duration of each session is usually approximately 4 hours. All of the design information relevant to the operational and technical briefs is available to the whole team and alterations to the previous design are immediately visible. A software program referred to as a concurrent design platform is used to exchange data between the team members and to provide overviews of inputs, outputs and information requests. Information exchange between the team is done via a question and answer mechanism. In concurrent design the questions are referred to as requests and they are answered by parameters and actual values. The SE ensures that the requests are valid and are requested by the correct discipline. Each team member defines the parameters that are required to perform their calculations or to continue designing. The parameters are defined as inputs and outgoing requests. The parameters that are exchanged between the team members define the interaction of the different disciplines and clearly illustrate how they depend on each other. At the end of each session the results are presented to the team by the systems engineer. During the wrap up of the feasibility stage the TL and SE review the results of the process. The results at this stage are the identified stakeholder values and their description, as well as the associated requirements and parameters. The interdependence of the disciplines is defined by the relationships formed through requests and answers. Finally, the results are prepared in the form of a table displaying the relationships between the parameters, requirements and the resulting stakeholder values [2]. 5. Project Case Studies 5.1 Case Study 1: Energy Savings through Collaboration In this case study of a Finnish university building, energy consumption and life cycle costs were considered in parallel with the architectural building geometry. This involved the architect and building services engineers working collaboratively in the early design phases. A 3 dimensional spatial model was created by the architect to initially discuss the space and layout requirements with the client bodies. The spatial model also included preliminary information relating to the building structural elements such as walls and windows which was used by the building services engineers and cost consultants. At this point the building services engineers were encouraged to refine the building design with regard to energy. The initial architectural layout incorporated narrow wings and resulted in a high ratio of envelope area to floor area which increased heating and cooling loads. The optimised geometrical solution used inner courts with glazed ceilings as a solution for decreasing the envelope area. The design was further developed by reducing u values and improving the glazing properties. Utilising a dynamic thermal model in the conceptual design stage allowed early phase investment decisions to be made based on calculated results. [4] The dynamic thermal software used in this project enabled the design engineers to quickly generate detailed energy and comfort results by using basic building information and local design

6 assumptions. The building properties that were known in the early concept stage were (a) the building external shape defined by the architectural building information model (BIM); (b) building function; (c) building location; (d) orientation and (e) the floor height. Local building regulations or the clients design guidelines can be used to define the minimum requirements of (a) wall properties; (b) glazing properties; (c) indoor air flows and (d) indoor air quality. The software enables the percentage of glazing evenly spread over the building exterior to be defined by specifying a number. This may be quickly altered to calculate the impact of increasing or decreasing the amount of glazing. Other assumptions that can be quickly altered are (a) supply air temperature; (b) addition of cooling; (c) addition of heat recovery; (d) heat recovery efficiency; (e) equipment time schedules and (f) the addition of night ventilation. Fig. 3 Architectural conceptual design (left) and optimised design (right) [4] 5.2 Case Study 2: Swedish Post The Swedish post head office in the community of Solna was used as a case study building for capturing stakeholder values and preferences. The detailed briefing process and concurrent design methodology was utilised to define all relevant stakeholder values and these values were translated to design requirements including related design parameters for early design. The office building has a total area of 51,000m 2 and includes workplaces for 1250 people. The Swedish Post defined goals for the building at the beginning of the project and these goals acted as the strategic brief and the starting point for the concurrent design sessions that took place over 3 days. In these sessions, each stakeholder was asked to model the characteristics of their discipline in a spreadsheet, using input parameters from other disciplines and generating output parameters for the other disciplines. The first session concentrated on the operational brief and thus the first inputs for all the disciplines were the performance or design parameters linked to the design requirements. Stakeholders also defined which design characteristics were relevant to their discipline that they would eventually create output parameters for. At the end of the first session a verbal round table was held to clarify parameter requests where necessary, to identify stakeholder values and to identify potentially missing stakeholders. In the remaining sessions the work continued with the exchange of parameters in an iterative design process to enable rounds of discussion between the participants. In this process many additional parameters, requirements and values were generated [2].

7 6. Discussion The main goal of the Swedish Post case study was to define a list of actual project stakeholder values and to illustrate the relationships between design requirements and parameters. The list of stakeholder values and their interactions has been generated for this project and it shall be used on future projects to direct discussions on the integrated design process. An additional goal was to experience the concurrent design methodology within the context of a construction project. The success of the concurrent design methodology largely depends on the stakeholders involved. If crucial members are missing or some of the members are not willing to share information, the success of the method is reduced. Communication and being able and willing to understand each others language can avoid misunderstandings and reduce time loss. 7. Acknowledgements The concurrent design knowledge displayed in this document has been derived from the Dutch company J CDS B.V. ( cds.nl) through their involvement in the project Open Information Environment for Knowledge based Collaborative Processes throughout the Lifecycle of a Building. Further information on concurrent design may be obtained by contacting Martin Fijneman at Martin.Fijneman@j cds.nl. 8. References [1] ROMM J., Lean and Clean Management: How to Boost Profits and Productivity by Reducing Pollution, ISBN [2] SORMUNEN P., et al InPro Task 2.3 Capturing Stakeholder Values research report from the Open Information Environment for Knowledge based Collaborative Processes throughout the Lifecycle of a Building project. [3] Energy Efficiency in Buildings: Business Realities and Opportunities, World Business Council for Sustainable Development Report 2007, ISBN [4] HÄNNINEN R. and LAINE T., Product Models and Real Life Cycle Data Management in Real Projects, pub.uni weimar.de/volltexte/2004/156/pdf/icccbe x_050.pdf