Download Objectives and methods op POE

Voordt, D.J.M. van der (1999), Objectives and methods of POE. Lecture at FAU, Sao Paulo, Brasil, August 1999. Not published.
Objectives and methods op POE
Lecture of Theo JM van der Voordt, August 1999, Brasil
0. Contents
•
What is POE
•
Objectives of POE
•
Link with the building process
•
Research items
•
Research methods
•
Indicators for success or failure
•
When POE and by whom
•
Reporting on POE
•
References
Voordt, D.J.M. van der (1999), Objectives and methods of POE. Lecture at FAU, Sao Paulo, Brasil, August 1999. Not published.
1. What is POE?
POE refers to Post-Occupancy Evaluation, i.e. evaluations of buildings in use. It is the end of
the building process (SHEET). That's why we use the term 'post'. Evaluation afterwards can
make it clear how the building is actually used and appreciated. This so-called Post-Occupancy
Evaluation (POE) can be focused on the product - the characteristics of the site or building itself
- and on the building process: who made the decisions and why, which information is used,
which economic and legislatorial constraints affected these decisions and so on are important
research questions here. The results can be used as input for following processes. Then the
data is input for the so-called pre-design phase. Most POE's are focusing on user's
perceptions, preferences and satisfaction. So 'occupancy' refers both to the building in use
phase as well as to the users. When also technical aspects, costs, aesthetics etc. are included,
we talk about 'Total building performance evaluation'. Sometimes both terms are used
indifferently.
2. Objectives of POE and other research into user requirements
The main objective of research is the development of knowledge as a basis for adequate design
decisions, leading to an optimal quality of the built environment. Both for economical reasons for example to reduce vacancy rates or exploitation costs - and for ideological reasons: to
promote the quality of life. Within this main objective we may distinguish two types of
knowledge: case oriented knowledge and general knowledge.
Case oriented knowledge can be used as a basis for improvement of the quality of the project
itself. Pre-design research can be focused on e.g. preferred type of housing, number of rooms,
internal layout, price/quality ratio and so on. Post-occupancy evaluation can be focused on e.g.
the assessment of bottlenecks, misfits between spatial characteristics and user requirements, and
preferences for alternative design solutions. The research data can be used as a guide for
adaptations. One may think of:
• spatio-functional adaptations (such as adding lifts, enlargement of rooms by combining two
separate rooms, splitting up one big room into two smaller ones);
• technical improvements (getting quit of maintenance still due);
• social adaptations (other allocation policy focusing on different target groups);
• adaptation of the price/quality ratio (e.g. by reducing rents).
A broader objective of pre- and post-design research is developing general knowledge that can
be used in other projects, too. For instance as a basis for a theory about the relationship between
characteristics of the built environment and people's behaviour and preferences. An example is
the development of a theory on the effects of design choices on crime and fear of crime. Another
concrete objective may be the development of design guidelines and instruments for plandevelopment and testing of plans. An interesting example in this context is the meta-evaluation
of about hundred POE's of residential environments by Claire Cooper Markus and Wendy
Skarsissian (1986), leading to a great number of design guidelines for medium-density housing.
Such research improves and extends present general design knowledge, the 'body of knowledge'
of the design profession. As such development of knowledge is a cyclic process. This can be
illustrated by a scheme of John Zeisel, a sociologist and consultant of architectural firms in the
USA (SHEET).
Voordt, D.J.M. van der (1999), Objectives and methods of POE. Lecture at FAU, Sao Paulo, Brasil, August 1999. Not published.
Another reason for broadening the usefulness of user’s research is policy-oriented. National and
local governments and housing organisations need a clear insight in preferred types of housing,
priorities in consumer preferences, affordability of facilities and so on. Research into user’s
preferences and post-occupancy evaluations of different sites and buildings can help to develop
an adequate and knowledge-based policy with respect to urban planning and housing. The
SHEET gives a brief summary of the objectives mentioned before.
3. Links with the building process
In all phases of the building process user oriented research can help to make better decisions. On
this SHEET five phases have been distinguished.
a. Initiative
Planning and designing starts with the statement of a spatial problem: more houses are needed,
an existing environment should be improved, there is a lack of shopping facilities, etc. Research
can help to understand what is needed (quantities, preferred quality), which location fits best with
the requirements, how much money is needed for investment and exploitation, how the costs can
be financed, etc. In this phase most research will be of a sociological and economical kind, but it
may also include an investigation of adequate building locations.
b. Programme of requirements
In this phase the principal and/or the prospective users should formulate their requirements and
expectations. Important questions are for example:
On site level:
which facilities are needed (how many houses, which types, which public buildings, which level
of integration or separation of functions, which infrastructure (access routes, parking lots,
greenery) etc.
On building level:
which concepts i.e. main spatial configuration could be successful, how many spaces are needed
for which purposes, how big should these spaces be, which spatial interrelationships are
preferred, etc.
c. Design
Assessment of design alternatives on aspects such as useability, efficiency, aesthetics, entrance
of daylight and so on, 'on paper' or by testing design solutions in full-scale models or small-scale
maquettes, and computer-based analyses are here of great value. With reference to the
materialisation research into aesthetics, costs, sustainability and safety of building materials is
important, too.
d. Construction
Both technical research - for example into building systems and production techniques - and
socio-economical research - for example into safety en efficiency issues of production techniques
- are important to guide the construction of sites and buildings.
Voordt, D.J.M. van der (1999), Objectives and methods of POE. Lecture at FAU, Sao Paulo, Brasil, August 1999. Not published.
e. Use and management
Analysis of expected occupancy rates, favourable conditions for communal use of space or
implications of use for different purposes, instruments for facility management, expectations
about frequently occurring adaptations and so on can help to improve the use of a site or a
building.
4. Scope of the research: research items
A next question is, what one should investigate. It is often not necessary to establish a complete
research on all possible issues. If for instance the motive of a case oriented POE is to reduce the
vacancy rate, or to improve feelings of security, the POE may be focused to the causes for these
problems and possible solutions. Evaluations of experiments will usually be focused on
experimental issues, for example measures to reduce energy consumption, or measures to
facilitate individual or collective adaptations simply and cheaply (flexibility/adaptability). For
example a recent POE in the Netherlands of so-called sliding door houses was only focused on
the use of sliding-doors and their appraisal (SHEET). It turned out that most users liked them
very much and were willing to pay a bit more rent for it. However, it was also shown that the
door between the kitchen and the 'deep room' is always closed, and households with more than
two persons have all sliding doors closed all time. So one should be selective in application of
cost flexible solutions.
Examples
a. Evaluation of use of energy
Schools in Almere, a newtown in the north of the Netherlands.
Before: expectations about use of energy for heating of the building and use of electricity for
artificial lighting.
Measures for reduction of energy consumption: strong insulation of facade and roof, extra
attention for daylight entrance and automatisation of artificial.
Results of POE: reduction of energy consumption for heating was higher than expected, but
for lighting more energy was used than was expected.
Second series of schools: extra measures, e.g. wind turbine for supply of electricity to the
heating pump. The floor heating didn't work according to the expectations. Heating took too
much time. Therefore later on a combination was applied of floor heating plus additional
heating of ventilated air.
b. Sliding door house
In an experimental design of Margreet Duinker and Machiel van der Torre the current
internal walls have been replaced by sliding doors. So tenants have a free choice between
subdivision of space or a completely open space. Interviews with 11 respondents showed the
following results:
• 10 out of 11 were very positive.
• 1-person households have often open doors; nevertheless the different spaces are
furnished as if these were seperate rooms;
• 2-person households more often use closed doors to demarcate a territory;
• the more persons, the more chance that the doors are closed;
• the big room is always used as the living room; the wide room often also as a living or
sitting room, but by some residents as a working room, room for hobbies or sleeping room;
the 'deep' room is mostly used for sleeping, sometimes for eating or hobbies;
Voordt, D.J.M. van der (1999), Objectives and methods of POE. Lecture at FAU, Sao Paulo, Brasil, August 1999. Not published.
•
the sliding door between big room and kitchen is almost always open; the door between
the kitchen and deep room is mostly closed (to separate kitchen and sleeping room and to
reduce costs for heating;
• the door between deep and wide room is used quite differently;
• the door between deep and big room is mostly open, sometimes even get out;
• the sliding doors lead to an increase of costs of about 2400 dollars; nobody wanted to
cancel them in exchange for a reduction of the rent with 15 dollars per month.
Conclusion: sliding doors are particularly welcome for small households.
c. Flexible walls with cupboards
In a series of houses for students and working youngsters flexible walls have been applied, in
order to have more freedom in layout. The POE was focusing on its use and perception during
5 years. In one complex the opportunity for change was hardly used. Main reasons:
• There was no user participation in the design phase:
• Most users were not aware of the possibilities;
• The fixed floor-covering was applied around the cupboards, so that by changing its
position one had to buy new floor-covering.
• It was forbidden to move the cupboards by oneself and the tenants had to pay 75 dollars
for a professional.
• The houses are quite small, so that the freedom of choice is almost limited to a bigger or
smaller (sleeping)room at the side of the gallery.
d. Kasbah, Hengelo
This experimental housing estate was particularly designed in order to improve social contacts
between tenants. For this reason the houses themselves were lifted above the ground. The
space on ground level aimed to be used for common activities. By means of a questionnaire
tenants were asked to judge the easiness of making contacts. It turned out that compared to
high rise buildings social contacts were much easier, but compared to single family housing
there were only slight differences.
5. Research methods
In every research one has to decide which methods and instruments are most adequate for
answering the research questions. Important criteria are reliability and validity of the instruments
and cost-effectiveness: how to gather information as much as possible with limited costs. The
SHEET gives an overview of current methods. Most researchers apply a multi-method approach
and use a combination of techniques. Our own research team has nice experiences with a
combination of comparative floorplan-analysis and Post-Occupancy evaluations. If possible at all
we ask our respondents to compare their own situation with other design solutions and ask them
to comment on it. Or, even better, by comparing a wide range of building layouts for similar
organisations we try to achieve a sound understanding of the ways in which goals and values are
or can be expressed in spatial solutions. We try to track down typologically different design
variants, if possible leading to an overall typology of design solutions. A second step is to
understand why differences occur, by linking design alternatives to data from Post Occupancy
Evaluations. This gives insight in underlying arguments, user experiences with different design
solutions, (dis)advantages for use and perception, and (dis)congruencies between spatial systems
and social systems. This process is of an interactive and iterative nature and is passed in various
orders. On the one hand the research is guided by hypotheses, questions and notions of designers
Voordt, D.J.M. van der (1999), Objectives and methods of POE. Lecture at FAU, Sao Paulo, Brasil, August 1999. Not published.
and their clients, review of literature, and our own hunches. On the other hand the plans themselves generate ideas and hypotheses which can be checked in the other sources. As a result of
this process spatial architectural choices become more understandable, recognisable and
debatable. Behavioural aspects can be connected to design variants, while sufficient freedom
remains for making conscious choices on ones own for the most suitable design. The SHEET
shows the interactive nature of the process and possible results.
Every floorplan may be regarded as a reflection of the goals and activities of the users as
interpreted by the architect. Of course flooplans are abstractions from the real buildings.
Such important aspects as the fabric of the building is made of, its constructional system, its
colours and finishes, the type of installations for heating, ventilation, lighting etc. and its costs
are usually left out. These aspects deserve attention in any complete building evaluation study
and a comparative approach can be very useful. But on the other hand floorplans do provide
essential information on the most permanent parts of the building (its 'shell' and structural
grid) whereas most of the earlier mentioned other parts have shorter life-cycles. In the second
place, floorplans embody the social nature of the building, through which it localises people,
and modulates their interactions.
The next SHEET shows the relationship between socio-cultural goals and values on the one side
and spatio-functional characteristics on the other side in a schematic way. Rows and columns
should be described, analysed and evaluated both in itself and interconnected (the cells). Two
routes may be taken:
a. from row to column: what is the optimum spatial architectural translation of the socio-cultural
goals of an organisation, in this case those of principal and users; this question is especially
relevant for the development of a design;
b. from column to row: to what extent will a certain design solution correspond with different
socio-cultural goals; this question is particularly relevant to the evaluation of either a design
or a building that has been realised.
An example of this approach is a research into the functional quality of Dutch health centres. We
gathered floorplans of 50 health care centres and disseminated questionnnaires in each of them,
with additional interviews in 4 health centres. It turned out that on the scale level of the whole
building three building types could be distinguished, with an increasing amount of integration
and shared spaces between different disciplines (SHEET).
In Type I there is a physical subdivision of the building in detached blocks. Communality is
linked to the combined location of different disciplines on one spot. Each block has its own
entrance, reception desk (if present) and waiting area. A variant of this type is characterised by a
grouping of several blocks with shared walls. Sometimes these blocks are arranged next to each
other (e.g. in a street), in other cases they are arranged around a courtyard. The Dauwendale
Health Centre is an example of type I; here the circulation paths between the disciplines are
located in the open air. Such centres look like shopping centres: together yet apart.
In Type II there is still physical subdivision of the building into different blocks - horizontally
into floors or vertically into wings - and most of the disciplines have their own waiting areas, but
now the blocks are accessible from one shared and interior circulation area. An example is the
Maarssen health centre.
Voordt, D.J.M. van der (1999), Objectives and methods of POE. Lecture at FAU, Sao Paulo, Brasil, August 1999. Not published.
Type III is characterised by one shared waiting area and a lot of shared circulation space, without
subdivision by inner doors into separate compartments. In some centres waiting and circulation
are separated, in other centres these two functions are combined into one shared area (type III1).
It turned out that small teams are often housed in Type III buildings whereas in type I premises
both small and larger teams are found. There is also a manifest correlation between team size,
size of the building and degree of integration or differentiation of space. The majority of small
buildings have one entrance with one communal reception area, whereas larger centres often
have a main entrance with one or more additional doorways and several reception desks. So
large organisations correspond with large-sized buildings and an increasing differentiation into
more or less self supporting parts.
Within each type there are different spatial configurations too. The various units of which a
centre consists can be grouped together around a central hall ('centroid type'), along corridors
('linear type') or by a combination of both systems. A centroid type occurred especially in small
buildings of functional type III or III1.
Efficiency and privacy in the General Practitioner's area
Another example of varying separation is that between the consulting and examination space of
the General Practitioner. Three basic types were found (SHEET). In Type A the suite is
subdivided into a dressing cubicle (DR), an examination space (EX) and a consulting space
(CON), all surrounded by solid walls with heavy soundproof doors. In type B the dressing
cubicle has disappeared, but sometimes a curtain can be drawn to separate a dressing space. In
type C the solid wall with a door between with the examination and consulting space has been
replaced by a curtain or a high book shelf. Door c has disappeared as well. What is the meaning
and purpose of this variation?
In earlier Dutch design guidelines, the provision of a separate examination room with sound
proof doors (a and b) was strongly recommended as a time saving solution. The patient's flow
can be settled then as follows. A patient is called into the consulting room through door a. When
during consultation the need for closer examination arises, the patient is sent into the
examination room through door b and asked to undress. In the meantime door b is shut and the
next patient can be called into the consulting room and asked to wait, while the doctor returns to
the patient waiting undressed in the examination room. Having finished examining, he asks the
patient to dress and leave the room through door c while he returns through door b to the patient
waiting in the consulting room, etc. Technical problems with this procedure arise when patients
are escorted by one or more relatives or friends. In general this pipe-line procedure proved to be
impractical and impersonal to both doctors and patients. Although door c still can be found in
most health centres it is put out of use, by locking it, placing cupboards in front of it, or even
sealing it permanently to improve sound isolation. The resulting relational pattern becomes the
same as in type C. However, there still remain strong objections to combine consulting and
examination into one room, even if they are separated by a curtain or high bookshelf. Part of the
reasons are functional: some examinations require complete darkness, and odours generated by
undressing should be confined to, and extracted from, the examination room. Another reason is
that consulting and examination activities require a completely different 'decor': consulting either
in a 'businesslike' office' surrounding or in a more informal 'living-room like 'atmosphere,
whereas undressing and examination are more associated with and possibly facilitated by a
Voordt, D.J.M. van der (1999), Objectives and methods of POE. Lecture at FAU, Sao Paulo, Brasil, August 1999. Not published.
clinical, 'bathroom like' atmosphere. Since 'you don't undress in an office or living room', clear
separation of these two atmospheres seems to be desired by most doctors and their patients.
Again this analysis shows the link between different spatial configurations and their perceptual
and behavioural effects. This information can be used in pre-design research to weight
advantages and disadvantages of different design sketches, as a basis for an optimal final
decision.
Techniques and instruments
SHEETS
Scalings:
• ITS-label for Integral Accessibility
• Delft checklist on safe neighourhoods.
• VAC-Kwaliteitswijzer
• REN and Quick Scan
• Building Quality Assessment Method (BQA)
• Serviceability Tools and Methods (STM)
• Healthy Building Quality (HBQ)
• Manual for Sustainable Buildings
Points of attention
Social desirability
Cognitive dissonance reduction
6. Indicators for success or failure
In order to understand if there is fit or misfit between spatio-functional features and sociocultural goals, various indicators for success or failure can be used (SHEET).
7. When and by whom
When
Preferably by briefly monitoring continuously + an intensive POE 6-12 months later, so that
the users have had time to get accustomed to their new situation.
By whom
Case based POE: the owner or manager should take the initiative.
Focusing on general knowledge: universities and organisations such as an Institute of
Architects or a Consumer's organization.
Voordt, D.J.M. van der (1999), Objectives and methods of POE. Lecture at FAU, Sao Paulo, Brasil, August 1999. Not published.
8. Reporting on POE
Clear language.
Images and pictures.
Use of multimedia (video, CD ROM
9. Concluding remarks
Although POE has a long tradition, its application into practice is quite modest. In the
Netherlands particularly the Women Advice Committees are active in this field. They judge by request or on their own initiative - functional aspects of new houses and houses which are
renovated. They also pay attention to the residential environment. Important tools are their
checklists and the so-called VAC-Kwaliteitswijzer or Guide for Quality.
Voordt, D.J.M. van der (1999), Objectives and methods of POE. Lecture at FAU, Sao Paulo, Brasil, August 1999. Not published.
References
− Baird, G. en N. Isaacs (1994), A checklist for the performance evaluation of buildings and
building services. In: Engineering for Better Building Performance. CIBSE Australia and
N.Z. Third Regional Conference, Melbourne, Australia.
− Baird, G., J. Gray, N. Isaacs, D. Kernohan en G. McIndoe (1996), Building Evaluation
Techniques. McGraw-Hill, New York.
− Becher, F.D., G. Davis, F. Duffy en W. Sims (1985), ORBIT-2: Organizations, Buildings
and Information Technology. The Harbinger, Norwalk, Connecticut.
− Bechtel, R., R. Marans en E. Michelson (1987), Methods in Environmental and Behavioral
Research. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
− Becker, F.D. en W.R. Sims (1990, Matching building performance to organizational
needs in performance of buildings and serviceability of facilities. American Society for
Testing and Materials, Philadelphia.
− Bruhns, H. (1996), CPBR Checklist. In: G. Baird et al, Building Evaluation Techniques.
McGraw Hill, New York, 141-191.
− Bruhns, H. en N. Isaacs (1996), Building Quality Assessment. In: G. Baird et al, Building
Evaluation Techniques. McGraw Hill, New York, 53-58.
− Davis, G. en F. Szigetti (1996), Serviceability Tools and Methods. In: G. Baird et al,
Building Evaluation Techniques. McGraw Hill, New York, 58-68.
− Hoogdalem, H. van, D.J.M. van der Voordt en H.B.R. van Wegen (1985), Comparative
floorplan-analysis as a means to develop design guidelines. Journal of Environmental
Psychology (5), 153-179.
− Jonge, H. en J. Gray (1996), The Real Estate Norm. In: G. Baird et al, Building Evaluation
Techniques. McGraw Hill, New York, 69-76.
− Marcus, M.C. en W. Sarkissian (1986), Housing as if people mattered. Site design guidelines
for medium-density family housing. University of California Press.
− Preiser, F.E. en U. Schramm (1998). Building Performance Evaluation. Time-Saver
Standards for Architectural Data. The reference of Architectural Fundamentals, 233-238.
− Preiser, W.F.E. (1988), Advances in post-occupancy evaluation: kwowledge, methods and
applications. In: H. van Hoogdalem et al (eds), Looking back to the future. Proceedings of
IAPS 10. Delft University of Technology, 207-212.
− Preiser, W.F.E., H.Z. Rabinowitz en E.T. White (1988), Post-Occupancy Evaluation. Van
Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York.
− Stichting REN (1992), Real Estate Norm. Methode voor de advisering en beoordeling van
kantoorlocaties en kantoorgebouwen. Nieuwegein. Tweede versie.
− Stichting REN (1993), Real Estate Norm Bedrijfsgebouwen. Nieuwegein. Eerste versie.
− Stichting REN (1994), Real Estate Norm Quick Scan Kantoorgebouwen. Nieuwegein.
Eerste versie.
− Vischer, J.C. (1989), Environmental Quality in Offices. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New
York.
− Voordt, D.J.M. van der, D. Vrielink en H.B.R. van Wegen (1998), Comparative
floorplan-analysis in programming and architectural design. Design Studies (18), 67-88.
− Zeisel, J. 1981), Inquiry by design. Tools for environment-behavior research. Brooks/Cole
Publishing Company, Monterey, California.
− Zimring, C. (1988), Post-Occupancy Evaluation and implicit theories of organizational
decision-making. In: H. van Hoogdalem et al (eds), Looking back to the future. Proceedings
of IAPS 10, Delft University of Technology, 240-248.