Expectation management in building design - Revision history

Editor at 14:09, 30 October 2024

2024-10-30T14:09:21Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:09, 30 October 2024
Line 49:		Line 49:
	* Carbon Buzz		* Carbon Buzz
	* CIBSE Case Study Elizabeth Fry Building.		* CIBSE Case Study Elizabeth Fry Building.
−	* Performance gap between building design and operation
−	* Performance in use of National Trust’s Heelis building and Woodland Trust’s headquarters.
−	* Post-occupancy Review Of Buildings and their Engineering PROBE
	* Client commissioning.		* Client commissioning.
	* Extended aftercare.		* Extended aftercare.
	* Initial aftercare.		* Initial aftercare.
	* Lessons learned report.		* Lessons learned report.
		+	* Performance gap between building design and operation
		+	* Performance in use of National Trust’s Heelis building and Woodland Trust’s headquarters.
	* Post occupancy evaluation.		* Post occupancy evaluation.
	* Post project review.		* Post project review.
		+	* Post-occupancy Review Of Buildings and their Engineering PROBE
	* Performance in use.		* Performance in use.
	* Performance of exemplar buildings in use: Bridging the performance gap FB 78.		* Performance of exemplar buildings in use: Bridging the performance gap FB 78.

Designing Buildings at 06:17, 23 February 2024

2024-02-23T06:17:58Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:17, 23 February 2024
Line 68:		Line 68:
	* Taking action on climate change.		* Taking action on climate change.
	* Technical guide.		* Technical guide.
−	*

	[[Category:DCN_Commentary]] [[Category:DCN_Project_Knowledge]] [[Category:DCN_Research,_Development_and_Innovation]] [[Category:Education]] [[Category:Projects_and_case_studies]] [[Category:Publications_/_reports]] [[Category:Research_/_Innovation]] [[Category:Design]] [[Category:Operations]] [[Category:Procurement]]		[[Category:DCN_Commentary]] [[Category:DCN_Project_Knowledge]] [[Category:DCN_Research,_Development_and_Innovation]] [[Category:Education]] [[Category:Projects_and_case_studies]] [[Category:Publications_/_reports]] [[Category:Research_/_Innovation]] [[Category:Design]] [[Category:Operations]] [[Category:Procurement]]

Editor at 00:59, 23 February 2024

2024-02-23T00:59:41Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:59, 23 February 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	[[File:Question-mark-~~4682731 1000~~.jpg]]	+	[[File:Question-mark-4682731_1000.jpg\|link=File:Question-mark-4682731_1000.jpg]]

	= Expectation management =		= Expectation management =

−	Expectation management describes a defined approach where specific consideration is given to the anticipated delivery of an item by one party ~~for~~ another. The item being delivered ~~maybe~~ almost anything from products to services or roles, with the parties being clients, customers, employers or employees (for ~~employee~~ see also Expectancy Theory, V.Vroom 1964). It is a management approach that relates to conception, briefing, communication and feedback strategies which in turn can influence programme, progression and ultimately the actual or perceived success of a project, scheme or building.	+	Expectation management describes a defined approach where specific consideration is given to the anticipated delivery of an item by one party to another. The item being delivered may be almost anything from products to services or roles, with the parties being clients, customers, employers, or employees (for employees, see also Expectancy Theory, V. Vroom, 1964). It is a management approach that relates to conception, briefing, communication, and feedback strategies, which in turn can influence programme progression and ultimately the actual or perceived success of a project, scheme, or building.

	= Expectation interest =		= Expectation interest =

−	Expectation interest, more formally is a legal term, sometimes used in construction as one of the two categories of potential damages, the other being reliance expenditure. In quite abstract but legal terms it might be described as the value to a promisee of a promise, which in practical terms might be the difference between the market value of a property without defects (ie where construction promise or contract has been upheld) and the market value of the property with the defects (where the promise or contract has not).	+	Expectation interest, more formally, is a legal term sometimes used in construction as one of the two categories of potential damages, the other being reliance expenditure. In quite abstract but legal terms, it might be described as the value to a promisee of a promise, which in practical terms might be the difference between the market value of a property without defects (i.e. where a construction promise or contract has been upheld) and the market value of the property with the defects (where the promise or contract has not).

−	~~Whilst~~ the term as used in expectation management is not necessarily directly linked, it may be more relevant if energy performance in use is part of the contractual obligations, which may for example be the case in energy performance contracting. In this case it would need to be argued that poor energy performance of a building would, under the contract, qualify as a defect and as such the definition of poor, would most need to have been quantified, stated and agreed upon at the start of the contract.	+	While the term as used in expectation management is not necessarily directly linked, it may be more relevant if energy performance in use is part of the contractual obligations, which may, for example, be the case in energy performance contracting. In this case, it would need to be argued that the poor energy performance of a building would, under the contract, qualify as a defect, and as such, the definition of poor would most likely need to have been quantified, stated, and agreed upon at the start of the contract.

	= Performance gap =		= Performance gap =

−	It is not clear when the phrase started to be used particularly in relation to project management, buildings and construction. However the growing realisation that end-user expectations needed to be obtained and managed grew out of post-occupancy studies of non-domestic buildings, notably the Post-occupancy Review Of Buildings and their Engineering (PROBE) studies carried out between 1995 and 2002, and subsequent building performance evaluation research programmes using the PROBE techniques. In this context ~~expectations~~ management is most commonly associated with outturn energy performance and levels of occupant satisfaction. Expectations of performance expected by a user, client or design team need to be assessed and compared with actual measured outcomes, and any disparities investigated and resolved.	+	It is not clear when the phrase started to be used, particularly in relation to project management, buildings, and construction. However, the growing realisation that end-user expectations needed to be obtained and managed grew out of post-occupancy studies of non-domestic buildings, notably the Post-occupancy Review of Buildings and their Engineering (PROBE) studies carried out between 1995 and 2002 and subsequent building performance evaluation research programmes using the PROBE techniques. In this context, expectation management is most commonly associated with outturn energy performance and levels of occupant satisfaction. Expectations of performance expected by a user, client, or design team need to be assessed and compared with actual measured outcomes, and any disparities investigated and resolved.

−	Published post-occupancy studies carried out by the PROBE Team, the Carbon Trust (~~2006 - 2011~~) and more recently by InnovateUK (~~2011-2015~~) often revealed large differences between what was expected in terms of energy performance and occupant satisfaction and what was delivered. This became popularised as the ~~Performance Gap~~. In this context, ~~expectations~~ management is a technique to reduce the risk of performance outcomes diverging from design intentions. It requires reality checks at key procurement gateways, for example at the project stages as defined by the RIBA Plan for Use (the RIBA's interpretation of the Soft Landings Framework developed following the PROBE studies).	+	Published post-occupancy studies carried out by the PROBE Team, the Carbon Trust (2006–2011), and more recently by InnovateUK (2011–2015) often revealed large differences between what was expected in terms of energy performance and occupant satisfaction and what was delivered. This became popularised as the performance gap. In this context, expectation management is a technique to reduce the risk of performance outcomes diverging from design intentions. It requires reality checks at key procurement gateways, for example, at the project stages as defined by the RIBA Plan for Use (the RIBA's interpretation of the Soft Landings Framework developed following the PROBE studies).

	= Managing expectations flowchart for occupant satisfaction =		= Managing expectations flowchart for occupant satisfaction =

−	The occupant satisfaction expectations flowchart below shows issues and watch points throughout the various stages of the procurement process. It is aligned with the RIBA Plan of Work stages and the requirements of the RIBA Plan for Use, and helps with delivering the sustainability competence requirements of the Architects Registration Board (2021) This flowchart can be used as guidance for design teams, helping projects to create feedback loops within the procurement process, reality-checking design specifications and therefore ~~helping to~~ managing end-user expectations.	+	The occupant satisfaction expectations flowchart below shows issues and watch points throughout the various stages of the procurement process. It is aligned with the RIBA Plan of Work stages and the requirements of the RIBA Plan for Use, and helps with delivering the sustainability competence requirements of the Architects Registration Board (2021). This flowchart can be used as guidance for design teams, helping projects create feedback loops within the procurement process, reality-checking design specifications, and therefore managing end-user expectations.

−	The author, Roderic Bunn, has extensive experience of post-occupancy evaluations. He was a primary author of the definitive edition of the Soft Landings Framework (2014) published jointly by BSRIA and the Usable Buildings Trust (UBT), and authored many supporting guides on Soft Landings. The flowchart provides a process to fill the large gap between early stage end-user involvement and project handover, during which time design intentions can be compromised by changes in a wide range of project variables. These are often caused by pressures on budget and time, but also by inappropriate value-engineering and price gouging that usually introduce performance penalties. Such penalties usually emerge in degraded comfort conditions, poor usability and ~~systems~~ control, and ultimately operational energy wastage and excessive carbon dioxide emissions. The flowchart provides a way by which project teams can track and communicate these risks during procurement, ensuring that emerging performance is made visible to key project stakeholders and prospective end-users, from concept, briefing and detail design stages to project handover and post-occupancy evaluation. Image provided with permission by Roderic Bunn for industry use (copyright retained).	+	The author, Roderic Bunn, has extensive experience with post-occupancy evaluations. He was a primary author of the definitive edition of the Soft Landings Framework (2014), published jointly by BSRIA and the Usable Buildings Trust (UBT), and authored many supporting guides on Soft Landings. The flowchart provides a process to fill the large gap between early-stage end-user involvement and project handover, during which time design intentions can be compromised by changes in a wide range of project variables. These are often caused by pressures on budget and time, but also by inappropriate value-engineering and price gouging that usually introduce performance penalties. Such penalties usually emerge from degraded comfort conditions, poor usability and system control, and ultimately operational energy wastage and excessive carbon dioxide emissions.
		+
		+	The flowchart provides a way by which project teams can track and communicate these risks during procurement, ensuring that emerging performance is made visible to key project stakeholders and prospective end-users, from concept, briefing, and detail design stages to project handover and post-occupancy evaluation. Image provided with permission by Roderic Bunn for industry use (copyright retained).

	[[File:Expectations_flowchart_with_permisson_Rod_Bunn_Copyright_large.jpg\|link=File:Expectations_flowchart_with_permisson_Rod_Bunn_Copyright_large.jpg]]		[[File:Expectations_flowchart_with_permisson_Rod_Bunn_Copyright_large.jpg\|link=File:Expectations_flowchart_with_permisson_Rod_Bunn_Copyright_large.jpg]]
Line 27:		Line 29:
	= Expectation types =		= Expectation types =

−	In management terms expectations might be categorised by different characteristics, such as.	+	In management terms, expectations might be categorised by different characteristics, such as.

−	* Realistic ~~Expectations~~, setting objectives and goals within the scope of a budget, resources and timelines.	+	* Realistic expectations, setting objectives and goals within the scope of a budget, resources, and timelines.
−	* Unrealistic ~~Expectations~~, setting unachievable goals, depending the view point, ~~which~~ can lead to disappointment.	+	* Unrealistic expectations, setting unachievable goals, depending on the view point, can lead to disappointment.
−	* Adaptive ~~Expectations,~~ goals based on past experiences, that may change and adapt.	+	* Adaptive expectations are goals based on past experiences that may change and adapt.
−	* Implicit ~~Expectations,~~ objectives of goals that are given as accepted or standard, within the project.	+	* Implicit expectations are objectives or goals that are given as accepted or standard within the project.
−	* Explicit ~~Expectations,~~ formalised, standardised of legally stated goals, objectives or standards.	+	* Explicit expectations are formalised and standardised for legally stated goals, objectives, or standards.
−	* Rational ~~Expectations~~, in between the above based on common knowledge or industry standards.	+	* Rational expectations, in between the above, are based on common knowledge or industry standards.

	--[[User:Little_red\|Little red]]		--[[User:Little_red\|Little red]]

Editor at 07:06, 21 February 2024

2024-02-21T07:06:42Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:06, 21 February 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	[[File:Question-mark-4682731 1000.jpg]]
		+
	= Expectation management =		= Expectation management =

Editor at 06:12, 18 July 2023

2023-07-18T06:12:46Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:12, 18 July 2023
Line 33:		Line 33:
	* Explicit Expectations, formalised, standardised of legally stated goals, objectives or standards.		* Explicit Expectations, formalised, standardised of legally stated goals, objectives or standards.
	* Rational Expectations, in between the above based on common knowledge or industry standards.		* Rational Expectations, in between the above based on common knowledge or industry standards.
		+
		+	--[[User:Little_red\|Little red]]

	= Related articles on Designing Buildings =		= Related articles on Designing Buildings =

Designing Buildings at 17:10, 16 February 2023

2023-02-16T17:10:25Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:10, 16 February 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
	= Expectation management =		= Expectation management =

−	Expectation management describes a defined approach where specific consideration is given to the anticipated delivery of an item by one party for another~~, the~~ item being delivered maybe almost anything from products to services or roles, with the parties being clients, customers, employers or employees (for employee see also Expectancy Theory, V.Vroom 1964). It is a management approach that relates to conception, briefing, communication and feedback strategies which in turn can influence programme, progression and ultimately the actual or perceived success of a project, scheme or building ~~by managing the expectations~~.	+	Expectation management describes a defined approach where specific consideration is given to the anticipated delivery of an item by one party for another. The item being delivered maybe almost anything from products to services or roles, with the parties being clients, customers, employers or employees (for employee see also Expectancy Theory, V.Vroom 1964). It is a management approach that relates to conception, briefing, communication and feedback strategies which in turn can influence programme, progression and ultimately the actual or perceived success of a project, scheme or building.

	= Expectation interest =		= Expectation interest =
Line 21:		Line 21:
	The author, Roderic Bunn, has extensive experience of post-occupancy evaluations. He was a primary author of the definitive edition of the Soft Landings Framework (2014) published jointly by BSRIA and the Usable Buildings Trust (UBT), and authored many supporting guides on Soft Landings. The flowchart provides a process to fill the large gap between early stage end-user involvement and project handover, during which time design intentions can be compromised by changes in a wide range of project variables. These are often caused by pressures on budget and time, but also by inappropriate value-engineering and price gouging that usually introduce performance penalties. Such penalties usually emerge in degraded comfort conditions, poor usability and systems control, and ultimately operational energy wastage and excessive carbon dioxide emissions. The flowchart provides a way by which project teams can track and communicate these risks during procurement, ensuring that emerging performance is made visible to key project stakeholders and prospective end-users, from concept, briefing and detail design stages to project handover and post-occupancy evaluation. Image provided with permission by Roderic Bunn for industry use (copyright retained).		The author, Roderic Bunn, has extensive experience of post-occupancy evaluations. He was a primary author of the definitive edition of the Soft Landings Framework (2014) published jointly by BSRIA and the Usable Buildings Trust (UBT), and authored many supporting guides on Soft Landings. The flowchart provides a process to fill the large gap between early stage end-user involvement and project handover, during which time design intentions can be compromised by changes in a wide range of project variables. These are often caused by pressures on budget and time, but also by inappropriate value-engineering and price gouging that usually introduce performance penalties. Such penalties usually emerge in degraded comfort conditions, poor usability and systems control, and ultimately operational energy wastage and excessive carbon dioxide emissions. The flowchart provides a way by which project teams can track and communicate these risks during procurement, ensuring that emerging performance is made visible to key project stakeholders and prospective end-users, from concept, briefing and detail design stages to project handover and post-occupancy evaluation. Image provided with permission by Roderic Bunn for industry use (copyright retained).

−	[[File:~~Expectations flowchart with permisson Rod Bunn Copyright large~~.jpg]]	+	[[File:Expectations_flowchart_with_permisson_Rod_Bunn_Copyright_large.jpg\|link=File:Expectations_flowchart_with_permisson_Rod_Bunn_Copyright_large.jpg]]

	= Expectation types =		= Expectation types =

Editor at 11:39, 15 February 2023

2023-02-15T11:39:38Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:39, 15 February 2023
Line 21:		Line 21:
	The author, Roderic Bunn, has extensive experience of post-occupancy evaluations. He was a primary author of the definitive edition of the Soft Landings Framework (2014) published jointly by BSRIA and the Usable Buildings Trust (UBT), and authored many supporting guides on Soft Landings. The flowchart provides a process to fill the large gap between early stage end-user involvement and project handover, during which time design intentions can be compromised by changes in a wide range of project variables. These are often caused by pressures on budget and time, but also by inappropriate value-engineering and price gouging that usually introduce performance penalties. Such penalties usually emerge in degraded comfort conditions, poor usability and systems control, and ultimately operational energy wastage and excessive carbon dioxide emissions. The flowchart provides a way by which project teams can track and communicate these risks during procurement, ensuring that emerging performance is made visible to key project stakeholders and prospective end-users, from concept, briefing and detail design stages to project handover and post-occupancy evaluation. Image provided with permission by Roderic Bunn for industry use (copyright retained).		The author, Roderic Bunn, has extensive experience of post-occupancy evaluations. He was a primary author of the definitive edition of the Soft Landings Framework (2014) published jointly by BSRIA and the Usable Buildings Trust (UBT), and authored many supporting guides on Soft Landings. The flowchart provides a process to fill the large gap between early stage end-user involvement and project handover, during which time design intentions can be compromised by changes in a wide range of project variables. These are often caused by pressures on budget and time, but also by inappropriate value-engineering and price gouging that usually introduce performance penalties. Such penalties usually emerge in degraded comfort conditions, poor usability and systems control, and ultimately operational energy wastage and excessive carbon dioxide emissions. The flowchart provides a way by which project teams can track and communicate these risks during procurement, ensuring that emerging performance is made visible to key project stakeholders and prospective end-users, from concept, briefing and detail design stages to project handover and post-occupancy evaluation. Image provided with permission by Roderic Bunn for industry use (copyright retained).

−	[[File:~~Expectations_flowchart_copyright_Rod_Bunn.jpg\|link=File:Expectations_flowchart_copyright_Rod_Bunn~~.jpg]]	+	[[File:Expectations flowchart with permisson Rod Bunn Copyright large.jpg]]

	= Expectation types =		= Expectation types =
Line 64:		Line 64:
	*		*

−	~~[[Category:Articles_needing_more_work]]~~ [[Category:DCN_Commentary]] [[Category:DCN_Project_Knowledge]] [[Category:DCN_Research,_Development_and_Innovation]] [[Category:Education]] [[Category:Projects_and_case_studies]] [[Category:Publications_/_reports]] [[Category:Research_/_Innovation]] [[Category:Design]] [[Category:Operations]] [[Category:Procurement]]	+	[[Category:DCN_Commentary]] [[Category:DCN_Project_Knowledge]] [[Category:DCN_Research,_Development_and_Innovation]] [[Category:Education]] [[Category:Projects_and_case_studies]] [[Category:Publications_/_reports]] [[Category:Research_/_Innovation]] [[Category:Design]] [[Category:Operations]] [[Category:Procurement]]

Little red at 09:52, 15 February 2023

2023-02-15T09:52:06Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:52, 15 February 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
	= Expectation management =		= Expectation management =

−	Expectation management describes a defined approach where specific consideration is given to the anticipated delivery of an item by one party for another, the item being delivered maybe almost anything from products to services or roles, with the parties being clients, customers, employers or employees (for employee see also Expectancy Theory, V.Vroom 1964). It is a management approach that relates to conception, briefing, communication and feedback strategies which in turn can influence ~~program~~, progression and in the ~~end success~~ or perceived success of a project, scheme or building by managing the expectations.	+	Expectation management describes a defined approach where specific consideration is given to the anticipated delivery of an item by one party for another, the item being delivered maybe almost anything from products to services or roles, with the parties being clients, customers, employers or employees (for employee see also Expectancy Theory, V.Vroom 1964). It is a management approach that relates to conception, briefing, communication and feedback strategies which in turn can influence programme, progression and ultimately the actual or perceived success of a project, scheme or building by managing the expectations.

	= Expectation interest =		= Expectation interest =
Line 11:		Line 11:
	= Performance gap =		= Performance gap =

−	It is not clear when the phrase started to be used particularly in relation to project management, buildings and construction. ~~however~~ the ~~phrase indication is~~ that ~~it was used~~ to ~~describe a way~~ of ~~tackling some of the many outcomes~~ of the Post-occupancy Review Of Buildings and their Engineering PROBE studies carried out between 1995 and 2002. In this context ~~the phrase~~ is most commonly associated with ~~the~~ energy performance expected by a user, client or design team and ~~the~~ actual ~~energy performance of a building after it is completed~~ and ~~occupied~~.	+	It is not clear when the phrase started to be used particularly in relation to project management, buildings and construction. However the growing realisation that end-user expectations needed to be obtained and managed grew out of post-occupancy studies of non-domestic buildings, notably the Post-occupancy Review Of Buildings and their Engineering (PROBE) studies carried out between 1995 and 2002, and subsequent building performance evaluation research programmes using the PROBE techniques. In this context expectations management is most commonly associated with outturn energy performance and levels of occupant satisfaction. Expectations of performance expected by a user, client or design team need to be assessed and compared with actual measured outcomes, and any disparities investigated and resolved.

−	~~In many cases Post Occupancy~~ studies ~~show there can be significant~~ differences between what is expected in terms of energy performance and what is delivered ~~on completion, also known~~ as the ~~performance gap~~. ~~Expectation~~ management ~~in these terms refers~~ to the ~~need for a~~ reality ~~check~~ at the ~~briefing~~ stages ~~to help manage~~ the ~~expectations~~ of ~~a project, something that was more formally described in~~ the Soft Landings ~~framework~~ developed following the PROBE studies.	+	Published post-occupancy studies carried out by the PROBE Team, the Carbon Trust (2006 - 2011) and more recently by InnovateUK (2011-2015) often revealed large differences between what was expected in terms of energy performance and occupant satisfaction and what was delivered. This became popularised as the Performance Gap. In this context, expectations management is a technique to reduce the risk of performance outcomes diverging from design intentions. It requires reality checks at key procurement gateways, for example at the project stages as defined by the RIBA Plan for Use (the RIBA's interpretation of the Soft Landings Framework developed following the PROBE studies).

−	= Managing expectations flowchart =	+	= Managing expectations flowchart for occupant satisfaction =

−	The ~~expectation~~ flowchart shows issues and watch points throughout the various stages of the procurement process aligned with the RIBA Plan of Work. This flowchart can be used as guidance for design teams, helping projects to create feedback loops within the procurement process, reality checking design specifications and managing expectations.	+	The occupant satisfaction expectations flowchart below shows issues and watch points throughout the various stages of the procurement process. It is aligned with the RIBA Plan of Work stages and the requirements of the RIBA Plan for Use, and helps with delivering the sustainability competence requirements of the Architects Registration Board (2021) This flowchart can be used as guidance for design teams, helping projects to create feedback loops within the procurement process, reality-checking design specifications and therefore helping to managing end-user expectations.

−	The author ~~Rod~~ Bunn has extensive experience of post occupancy evaluations ~~and~~ was ~~one~~ of the ~~leading contributors for~~ the Soft Landings ~~framework led~~ by BSRIA and the Usable Buildings Trust (UBT). ~~This flowcharts takes~~ the ~~lessons learned around performance gaps found~~ between design and ~~completion through post occupancy evaluations~~ and ~~feeds this knowledge into the~~ concept, briefing and ~~details stages of~~ design ~~in order~~ to ~~help better~~ handover ~~of buildings reducing performance surprises~~. Image provided with permission by ~~Rod~~ Bunn, copyright retained.	+	The author, Roderic Bunn, has extensive experience of post-occupancy evaluations. He was a primary author of the definitive edition of the Soft Landings Framework (2014) published jointly by BSRIA and the Usable Buildings Trust (UBT), and authored many supporting guides on Soft Landings. The flowchart provides a process to fill the large gap between early stage end-user involvement and project handover, during which time design intentions can be compromised by changes in a wide range of project variables. These are often caused by pressures on budget and time, but also by inappropriate value-engineering and price gouging that usually introduce performance penalties. Such penalties usually emerge in degraded comfort conditions, poor usability and systems control, and ultimately operational energy wastage and excessive carbon dioxide emissions. The flowchart provides a way by which project teams can track and communicate these risks during procurement, ensuring that emerging performance is made visible to key project stakeholders and prospective end-users, from concept, briefing and detail design stages to project handover and post-occupancy evaluation. Image provided with permission by Roderic Bunn for industry use (copyright retained).

	[[File:Expectations_flowchart_copyright_Rod_Bunn.jpg\|link=File:Expectations_flowchart_copyright_Rod_Bunn.jpg]]		[[File:Expectations_flowchart_copyright_Rod_Bunn.jpg\|link=File:Expectations_flowchart_copyright_Rod_Bunn.jpg]]

Editor at 12:07, 14 February 2023

2023-02-14T12:07:31Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:07, 14 February 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
	= Expectation management =		= Expectation management =

−	Expectation management describes a defined approach where specific consideration is given to the anticipated delivery of an item by one party for another, the item being delivered maybe almost anything from products to services or roles, with the parties being clients, customers, employers or employees (for employee see also Expectancy Theory, V.Vroom 1964). It is a management approach that relates to conception, briefing ~~and~~ communication strategies which in turn can influence program, progression and in the end success or perceived success of a project, scheme or building.	+	Expectation management describes a defined approach where specific consideration is given to the anticipated delivery of an item by one party for another, the item being delivered maybe almost anything from products to services or roles, with the parties being clients, customers, employers or employees (for employee see also Expectancy Theory, V.Vroom 1964). It is a management approach that relates to conception, briefing, communication and feedback strategies which in turn can influence program, progression and in the end success or perceived success of a project, scheme or building by managing the expectations.

	= Expectation interest =		= Expectation interest =

−	Expectation interest, more formally is legal term sometimes used in construction as one of the two categories of potential damages, the other being reliance expenditure. In quite abstract but legal terms ~~this is~~ described as the value to a promisee of a promise, which in practical terms might be the difference between the market value of a property without defects ( ie where construction promise or contract has been upheld) and the market value of the property with the defects (where the promise or contract has not). Whilst the term as used in expectation management is not necessarily directly linked, in may be more relevant if energy performance in use is part of the contractual obligations, which may for example be the case in energy performance contracting.	+	Expectation interest, more formally is a legal term, sometimes used in construction as one of the two categories of potential damages, the other being reliance expenditure. In quite abstract but legal terms it might be described as the value to a promisee of a promise, which in practical terms might be the difference between the market value of a property without defects (ie where construction promise or contract has been upheld) and the market value of the property with the defects (where the promise or contract has not).
		+
		+	Whilst the term as used in expectation management is not necessarily directly linked, it may be more relevant if energy performance in use is part of the contractual obligations, which may for example be the case in energy performance contracting. In this case it would need to be argued that poor energy performance of a building would, under the contract, qualify as a defect and as such the definition of poor, would most need to have been quantified, stated and agreed upon at the start of the contract.

	= Performance gap =		= Performance gap =

−	It is not clear when the phrase started to be used particularly in relation to project management, buildings and construction. however the phrase indication is that it was used to describe a way of tackling some of the many outcomes of the Post-occupancy Review Of Buildings and their Engineering PROBE studies carried out between 1995 and 2002. In this context the phrase is most commonly associated with the energy performance expected by a user, client or design team and the actual energy performance of a building after it is completed and occupied. In many cases Post Occupancy studies show there can be significant differences between what is expected in terms of energy performance and what is delivered on completion, also known as the performance gap. Expectation management in these terms refers to the need for a reality check at the briefing stages to help manage the expectations of a project, something that was more formally described in the Soft ~~landings~~ framework developed following the PROBE studies.	+	It is not clear when the phrase started to be used particularly in relation to project management, buildings and construction. however the phrase indication is that it was used to describe a way of tackling some of the many outcomes of the Post-occupancy Review Of Buildings and their Engineering PROBE studies carried out between 1995 and 2002. In this context the phrase is most commonly associated with the energy performance expected by a user, client or design team and the actual energy performance of a building after it is completed and occupied.
		+
		+	In many cases Post Occupancy studies show there can be significant differences between what is expected in terms of energy performance and what is delivered on completion, also known as the performance gap. Expectation management in these terms refers to the need for a reality check at the briefing stages to help manage the expectations of a project, something that was more formally described in the Soft Landings framework developed following the PROBE studies.

	= Managing expectations flowchart =		= Managing expectations flowchart =

−	The expectation flowchart shows issues and watch points throughout the various stages of the procurement process aligned with the RIBA Plan of Work. This flowchart can be used as guidance for design teams, helping projects to create feedback loops within the procurement process, reality checking design specifications and managing expectations. The author Rod Bunn has extensive experience of post occupancy evaluations and was one of the leading contributors for the Soft Landings framework led by BSRIA and the Usable Buildings Trust (UBT). This flowcharts takes the lessons learned around performance gaps found between design and completion through post occupancy evaluations and feeds this knowledge into the concept, briefing and details stages of design in order to help better handover of buildings reducing performance surprises. Image provided with permission by Rod Bunn, copyright retained.	+	The expectation flowchart shows issues and watch points throughout the various stages of the procurement process aligned with the RIBA Plan of Work. This flowchart can be used as guidance for design teams, helping projects to create feedback loops within the procurement process, reality checking design specifications and managing expectations.
		+
		+	The author Rod Bunn has extensive experience of post occupancy evaluations and was one of the leading contributors for the Soft Landings framework led by BSRIA and the Usable Buildings Trust (UBT). This flowcharts takes the lessons learned around performance gaps found between design and completion through post occupancy evaluations and feeds this knowledge into the concept, briefing and details stages of design in order to help better handover of buildings reducing performance surprises. Image provided with permission by Rod Bunn, copyright retained.

	[[File:Expectations_flowchart_copyright_Rod_Bunn.jpg\|link=File:Expectations_flowchart_copyright_Rod_Bunn.jpg]]		[[File:Expectations_flowchart_copyright_Rod_Bunn.jpg\|link=File:Expectations_flowchart_copyright_Rod_Bunn.jpg]]

Editor at 12:00, 14 February 2023

2023-02-14T12:00:42Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:00, 14 February 2023
Line 27:		Line 27:
	* Explicit Expectations, formalised, standardised of legally stated goals, objectives or standards.		* Explicit Expectations, formalised, standardised of legally stated goals, objectives or standards.
	* Rational Expectations, in between the above based on common knowledge or industry standards.		* Rational Expectations, in between the above based on common knowledge or industry standards.
		+
		+	= Related articles on Designing Buildings =
		+
		+	* Better Buildings Partnership.
		+	* BSRIA Soft Landings Awards.
		+	* Building log book.
		+	* Building performance evaluation.
		+	* Building performance evaluation in non-domestic buildings guide – an introduction to the tests and methods in non-domestic buildings
		+	* Carbon Buzz
		+	* CIBSE Case Study Elizabeth Fry Building.
		+	* Performance gap between building design and operation
		+	* Performance in use of National Trust’s Heelis building and Woodland Trust’s headquarters.
		+	* Post-occupancy Review Of Buildings and their Engineering PROBE
		+	* Client commissioning.
		+	* Extended aftercare.
		+	* Initial aftercare.
		+	* Lessons learned report.
		+	* Post occupancy evaluation.
		+	* Post project review.
		+	* Performance in use.
		+	* Performance of exemplar buildings in use: Bridging the performance gap FB 78.
		+	* Soft landings - helping clients lead contractors.
		+	* Soft landings and business-focused maintenance.
		+	* Soft Landings and Government Soft Landings - A convergence guide for construction projects.
		+	* Soft Landings for owners.
		+	* Specialist commissioning manager.
		+	* Success criteria for soft landings projects.
		+	* Taking action on climate change.
		+	* Technical guide.
		+	*

	[[Category:Articles_needing_more_work]] [[Category:DCN_Commentary]] [[Category:DCN_Project_Knowledge]] [[Category:DCN_Research,_Development_and_Innovation]] [[Category:Education]] [[Category:Projects_and_case_studies]] [[Category:Publications_/_reports]] [[Category:Research_/_Innovation]] [[Category:Design]] [[Category:Operations]] [[Category:Procurement]]		[[Category:Articles_needing_more_work]] [[Category:DCN_Commentary]] [[Category:DCN_Project_Knowledge]] [[Category:DCN_Research,_Development_and_Innovation]] [[Category:Education]] [[Category:Projects_and_case_studies]] [[Category:Publications_/_reports]] [[Category:Research_/_Innovation]] [[Category:Design]] [[Category:Operations]] [[Category:Procurement]]