Facilities Planning

FM HT-2011
Sofia Pemsel and Stefan Olander
Table of content

• Facilities planning vs. Facilities management

• Space management
• Briefing
• Evaluate facilities in use

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

 Facilities planning
vs.
Facilities Management

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

Facilities management vs.
Facilities planning

• FM is a strategic role with life-cycle perspective

• Which comes first facilities planning (FP) or facilities
management (FM)?
– Where is the organisation in its business cycle?
– How do present arrangement satisfy current needs?

FP FM

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

 Finding proper facility

End users core business

Proper
facility
Owners FM and REM

• Identifying ‘right’ needs (unconscious) and requirements

(explicit)
• Ongoing communication and discussions
• Measurements, reviews, evaluations etc.

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

 Finding proper level of satisfaction

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

Example: FM – FP during a
refurbishment project

• Before the project

– Needs analysis
• The Client and the
end-user/s analyse
the needs
– Existing
– Re-build
– New-build
• Input to the project

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

Example: A refurbishment project

• During the project

– Assessment and
verification
• Cannot measure over the
whole project.
• Define milestones where
to measure, potential:
– Start of the project
– After brief
– After design
– After construction
– During FM

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

Example: A refurbishment project

• After the project

– Evaluation
• Did the end-users get
what they wanted
• Lessons learned to
the next project

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

Existing end-user focusing methods
Phase Briefin Desig Constructio Occupanc
s g n n y Main Actors
Methods/tools

• Mainly looking at one Dynamic briefing process (DBP)

Design Management (DM)

Concurrent engineering briefing (CE)
A, C

C, D, A
C

part of the Project briefing (PB)

Strategic needs analysis (SNA)
Situation structuring process (SSP)
U, S, D, Sp
S, C, PM, D
S, PM

construction chain Soft system methodology (SSM)

Problem seeking (PS)

ICOP
C
C

C, D, A
Quality function deployment (QFD) Cu
Knowledge based system (KBS) Cs, PM
Project definition rating index (PDRI) PM

Multi-criteria decision maker (MCDM) Cs

• Focusing on the early

Housing quality indicators (HQI) D, PM, G
Technical standard (TS) C
Early contractor involvement (ECI) Con, PM
Early supplier involvement (ESI) Sup, Con

or the late phases BriefMaker

Design quality indicator (DQI)

EcoProP
**
**
*
*
C, Cs
FM, C, O, CR, S, D,
A
C

only a few found Scope management (SM)

Total quality management (TQM)
Project management (PM)
* ** ** PM
PM
PM

during production Value management (VM)

Intergral client s brief (ICB)

Contractor quality performance (CQP)
C, (FM), PM

C
C, Con
System dynamics (SD) PM

Post-occupancy evaluation (POE) O, A, FM, D

Post-occupancy review of buildings and their engineering
(Probe) O, EU, E, FM
IPA model FM,C, A, D, PM
Behavior-performance-outcome paradigm (BPO) O, EU, S, PM
Satisfied customer index (SCI) FM
Building Performance indicators (BPI) FM

Manpower sources diagram (MSD) FM

Maintenance efficiency indicator (MEI) FM
Managerial span of control (MSC) FM
Quality of professional life (QPL) O, PM, FM
Customer percieved value (CPV) FM

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

 Space management

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

Space management

• Ensure space efficiency in “We shape our buildings,

the design of new and afterwards
buildings
our buildings shape us”
• Efficient and cost effective
use of space
– Satisfying requirements Sir Winston Churchill
• Different types of facilities 1924 & 1943

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

Space efficiency in practice
1. appoint a champion for space management and operating
costs
2. systematically collect and update space utilisation and cost
information
3. agree targets and monitor their achievement
4. incorporate space efficiency concepts into the facilities
management strategy
5. incorporate the need for space efficiency into project design
briefs, feasibility studies, option appraisals and design reviews
6. develop and maintain a clear decision and communication
structure for building projects, including stakeholders
7. promote the benefits of adaptable spaces and furniture
8. assess space efficiency through post-occupancy evaluations

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

 Briefing

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

Briefing and brief documents

• Briefing is a process where the brief is the outcome

There exist different briefs:

• financial arrangements
• procurement and contracts
• stakeholder engagement and communication
• design
• construction management
• commissioning and handover
• facilities management

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

Facilities management brief

• Developed by the facilities manager who analyse the

owners statements of needs

Includes, for instance:

• Advise during developments of design brief (scheme
design)
• Strategy for managing the facility
– Operations and activities (overall concepts, internal
operations and external operations)
• Performance requirements
– Long-term operational costs

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

Design brief

• Developed jointly by the building owner or a client’s

representative and designers

Includes, for instance:

• Statement of needs
• Functions
• Performance requirements, like space efficiency and
energy use
• Design concept
• Feasibility studies

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

Degree of participation

Informed Express opinion Take decisions in

cooperation

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

Degree of Involvement in the User
Organisation

Workplace Workplace
consultant (WPC) 1 strategist
(WPS)
2
Internal 3 Architects in
project projects
manager without WPC (A)
(IPM) External project
Briefing consultant manager (PM)
(BC) Architects in projects
with involved WPC
Facility
(A)
planner (FP)

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

Workplace consulting in construction project

CLIENT/BUILDER MINISTRY
Director
Technical Project
(business END USER ORGANISATION
experts manager
area)

Director Cost Workplace CRE

Project
(region) mgmt expert specialist Steering
manager
group HR

Property Project
KAM ICT Staff
manager group

Communi-
Top mgmnt
cations
Workplace
consultant

Project mgmnt Briefing Other designers Building

Chief architect
consultant consultant (HVAC, acoustics etc.) contractors

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011 20

Stakeholders: roles and responsibilities
-funding the end user´s
operations and facilities
MINISTRY -steering the performance
CLIENT and efficiency in branch of
government

-Procurement
-Contracts END USER ORGANISATION
-Project management
Steering
-background information
-Knowledge sharing in project group
-resources for developing
and between different phases
-project management
-staff interaction and
communication
-after project: workplace
-end user commitment management
-communication plan in project Workplace
network consultant
-collaboration with other consultants

Project mgmnt Briefing Other designers Building

Chief architect
consultant consultant (HVAC, acoustics etc.) contractors

-workplace process -collaboration with workplace

follow up consultant and other
Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011 21
stakeholders
 Evaluate facilities in use

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

Evaluations, reviews and follow-ups

• Needed to ensure that buildings support the users’ needs

in use
• Identify emergent aspects
• Improve every day activities
• Cross functional evaluation groups
• New thinking, finding new solutions
• Feedback into the briefing

 continuous improvements

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

 Evaluation – 5 step process
1. Defining the Evaluation (for 4. Workshop with User Organisation
WHAT?) (WHY?)
− Objective and scope for the evaluation − Choosing participants
− Review user organisation − Presentation of the objective and review
− Planning and anchoring evaluation findings
− Discussion of the findings towards the
2. Mapping Usability (WHAT?) objective
− Collecting facts − Structuring and systematising the results
− Conducting mapping (structure group
interview) 5. Action plan/Final Report
− Analysing and comparing data − Review and analysis of results from
− Defining the focus of further evaluation evaluation
− Improving existing buildings/premises –
3. Walkthrough Usability (WHERE AND action plan
WHICH?) − Input programming new buildings – final
− Defining topics/subtopics report
− Choosing participants
− Defining route and steps
− Summarising the result Reference: Hansen et al., 2011

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

 How would you design an
evaluation of V-huset?

Which are the crucial

performance criteria in need to be
evaluated?

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

Post Occupancy Evaluation (POE)

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

POE tools and methods
– Interviews
– Staff survey
– Space utilization survey (observations)
– Workshops and communication
– Walk through evaluations

 Workplace alterations based on feedbacks

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

POE: Develop the building in use
– Advantages
• Analysis from a technical, functional and
behaviour perspective
• Improved understanding of end-users needs
• Identify problems in the building
• Measure functionality
• Improve communication between stakeholders

– Disadvantages
• Difficult to manage the collected information
• Requires education to manage properly

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

Building Performance Evaluation
Aim
– Improve the quality in every decision point
throughout the lifecycle of the facility
– Only measure important aspects to avoid waste
of cost and time

Procedure
– Identify criteria
– Measure
– Compare measurements with criteria
– Feed gained knowledge into the next phase

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

What is BPE evaluating?

• The building is reviewed from different

perspectives
– Health, security and safety
– Functionality, efficiency and workflow
– Psychological, social, cultural and aesthetical
• Level of user analysis
– Individual, group, organisation
• Other units of analysis
– Furnishing, room, buildings and facilities

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011

 (Feedback into the briefing)
Explain results with a
clear storyline avoiding
technical language

Main positive features Main negative features

Successes Problems
Incorporate into Correct and
new briefs. Public monitor outcomes.
domain Risk/relevance
dissemination Context of successes Context of problems analysis. Share
where appropriate experiences

Look for relevant projects Examine internally. Agree

for immediate crossovers.
Advocacy
Build into briefs on
current/new jobs.
courses of action.
Diagnosis
Implement
solutions/palliatives.
Compare current jobs for
similarities and correct if
possible

Feedback into the briefing process Bordass et al 2005

Lund University / Construction Management/ VBEN05 Facilities management/ HT 2011