Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that the result of an optimisation via life cycle costs (LCC) depends on the assumptions made throughout the process of calculating LCC. Design/methodology/approach -A framework is used to structure the assumptions made in the process of calculating LCC. These include the following three pairs: technical versus economic life-span, static versus dynamic calculation method or costs only versus income minus costs. In a broader sense, these LCC are referred to as the life cycle economy (LCE). Two case studies form the basis for the LCC calculations. Using different assumptions, the LCC of virtual design variations of these buildings are compared to each other. Findings -The rankings drawn from the calculations differ according to the chosen calculation method, i.e. the chosen variation for the optimisation of a building is not consistent. Research limitations/implications -This is essentially an exploratory study and the prognosis of future cash flow in relation to certain design variations requires further research. Practical implications -The credibility of life cycle costing should improve with a greater transparency of assumptions in the context of the outlined framework. Originality/value -All players in facilities management who support their decisions with LCC will benefit from this quantification of the impact of different calculation methods. The extension of LCC to LCE will help planners, investors and owners of real estate in evaluating building options with respect to quality, image, flexibility or comfort.
Purpose: Empirical studies suggest that corporate social responsibility (CSR) impacts young job seekers’ choices of an employer. Values seem to affect CSR preferences, influencing the felt fit between the person and the organization and hereby the valence of working for that company. This article aims to research in more detail the preference structure of young graduate job seekers. In particular, it seeks to understand whether CSR is important when there is a trade-off between CSR and non-CSR attributes and whether basic value orientations of job seekers have a moderating effect on their employer preferences. Design/methodology/approach: This article used a quantitative approach with a survey sample of 577 German students who were in their last year of study. To gain information on the relative impact of CSR- and non-CSR-related employer characteristics on employer attractiveness, an adaptive conjoint analysis was applied. Correlation analysis and a two-step hierarchical regression were conducted to detect the effects of individual value orientations. Findings: Only a few CSR attributes are relevant for young job seekers compared with other traditional employer attributes. Specific value orientations can be identified as having a moderating effect on CSR preferences. This is particularly the case for value orientations indicating a concern for the welfare of others and the environment positively affect the importance of most CSR attributes while more selfish value orientations have a negative effect. Originality/Value: This study sheds light on the relative importance of CSR attributes when compared with non-CSR attributes. Moreover, it relates employee-related preferences to individual value orientations and shows that selected values have a modifying effect on the importance of CSR for job choice.
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to present the development of an action and assessment framework to make sustainability in German facility management (FM) transparent, measurable and assessable. Design/methodology/approach – The underlying research project’s approach to develop the new action and assessment framework consisted of a three-step methodology: to define and substantiate sustainability in FM, to operationalise and quantify sustainability in FM and to validate the developed system draft through an initial pilot study. Findings – The main result of the presented research project is a set of 24 criteria, organised into the separate areas of environmental, economic and sociocultural quality, as well as the quality of FM organisation and the sustainability of building/contract-specific facility services. The assessment methodology reflects the strategic approach of a plan–do–check–act loop to create a transparent and objective appraisal and a practical action framework. Research limitations/implications – The outcome of the study is initially only a measurement and assessment framework. To transform the finalised system draft and assessment tool into a certification system, further steps of development are necessary. Practical implications – The newly developed action and assessment framework is able to cure the blind spot that the relevant players (building owners, users and service providers) suffer from while developing, purchasing and comparing concepts for sustainable FM. The results and practical experiences of its initial pilot study show that this new framework can make the building operation phase and its processes transparent, measurable and assessable. Social implications – The guideline is also able to establish a crucial basis for the development of corporate sustainability strategies and sustainability reporting. This is an important step in closing the existing gap in numerous corporate social responsibility reports. Originality/value – Due to its assessment methodology and the calibration of its criteria, this new action and assessment framework both diversifies and completes the range of existing sustainability certification systems.
Assessment systems 2 -Sustainable operation GEFMA 160, criteria procurement, water management, catering Exercise on GEFMA 160 Key figures 1 -CO 2 Carbon footprint, GEFMA 162, evaluation concept, examples, optimisation, innovations Apply carbonFM, research innovations on low carbon facility services Questions about the project, support Key figures 2 -LCA Procedure, impact categories, eLCA Apply and evaluate different building materials in case study Guest speaker from the business sector Key figures on the life cycle of real estate Hold a discussion round Key figures 3 -Maintenance Lifetimes, maintenance strategies, guidelines, calculation concept, optimisation of maintenance Research and group lifetimes, calculate costs for case study Key figures 4 -LCC Life Cycle Costs, GEFMA 220, calculation concept, case study Apply GEFMA 220 to case study Evaluation systems 3 -Sustainability report
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.