Application of data envelopment analysis to benchmark building outputs

Abstract

Purpose -To present practical examples of a new approach to facilities benchmarking that uses data envelopment analysis to compare multiple output per m 2 ratios. Design/methodology/approach -Demonstrates the first known use in facilities management of a new analytical technique. Findings -A practical comparison of office buildings demonstrates that a combination of high user satisfaction and better than average accommodation efficiency can be obtained. Suggests a threshold density above which user satisfaction will decrease.Research limitations/implications -The full potential for this new approach remains an active research project. Practical implications -The new approach has already been applied in practice. Originality/value -Original research using a technique that is new to facilities management and a challenge to prevailing conventions for facilities benchmarking metrics.

An output approach to property portfolio performance measurement

“…Such spaces, if they are to be kept in good condition do tend to cost more (per unit area at least); an assertion that should not under value the fact that some facilities management regimes, given the same level of funding, manage to produce different levels of quality (Price and Akhlaghi, 1999;Macdonald 2007;Macdonald et al, in prep ). A generic solution is to develop measures, or indicators, based on outputs per unit area (Pinder and Price, 2005) that are specific to the sector being examined (Price, 2004;2007), This paper presents some examples and suggests the unintended, Goodhartian, consequences of ever greater reliance on cost per m 2 as not just an indicator but a target.…”

“…The effect (Pinder and Price, 2005) is to weight measurements of Full Time Equivalent Staff and satisfaction Corrected NIA…”

“…This paper describes the development and deployment of an alternative approach applicable to such properties. It develops an approach described three years ago (Pinder and Price, 2005) ,refined by three years worth of date gathering, and extended to cover whole portfolios and compare different types of building and Councils.…”

“…Our analysis follows the method outlined by Pinder and Price (2005) using Data Envelope Analysis (DEA) to contrast satisfaction and building density. Area is measured as Net Internal (NIA) and is corrected for democratic space (council chambers and support facilities provided primarily for elected representatives) and anomalous space (such as halls used for private / community functions).…”

“…FM in general, and Public Sector FM in particular is overtly focused on the indicator of cost per unit area as the ubiquitous comparator of building performance enshrined in various guides, codes, and benchmarking schemes (Price, 2004;2007;Pinder and Price, 2005;Hinks et al,. 2007).…”