BOSSA: a multidimensional post-occupancy evaluation tool

Cândido, Christhina; Kim, Jungsoo; Dear, Richard de; Thomas, Leena

doi:10.1080/09613218.2015.1072298

Cited by 99 publications

(86 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Office design that proposes optimum balance between encouraging positive interactions and reducing negative distractions [55] could play a significant role in mitigating adverse effects of open-plan offices on workers' satisfaction and perceived productivity. Studies following occupants' pre-and post-relocation scenarios demonstrate that the implementation of well-designed office concepts have a significant impact on workers' perceived productivity and health, specifically in long-term situations [31,32,[56][57][58].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differences in Occupants’ Satisfaction and Perceived Productivity in High- and Low-Performance Offices

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reports the results from a dataset comprising 9794 post-occupancy evaluation (POE) surveys from 77 Australian open-plan offices. This paper specifically focuses on a sub-set of 20 offices (n = 2133), identified from ranking 10 offices each, with the least (n = 1063) and highest (n = 1070) satisfaction scores, respectively. The satisfaction scores were evaluated on the basis of seven factors (i.e., building/office aesthetics and quality, thermal comfort and indoor air quality, noise distraction and privacy, personal control, connection to outdoor environment, maintenance and visual comfort, and individual space). Using the POE survey data from 20 offices, regression analyses and two-way ANOVA tests were carried out to understand the differences in occupants' satisfaction and perceived productivity arising from open-plan offices. According to the statistically significant regression analyses results, it was identified that building/office aesthetics and quality (β = 0.55, p < 0.001) and noise distraction and privacy (β = 0.33, p < 0.001) were the two strongest predictors contributing perceived productivity in low-performance offices. Two-way ANOVA test results for the 10 high-performance offices indicate that the perceived productivity was strongly associated with the office's physical configuration, the employees' working experience, and the working hours at that office.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differences in Occupants’ Satisfaction and Perceived Productivity in High- and Low-Performance Offices

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…. (Whitehead CN29 in [73]) (p. 33) This is particularly useful since it acknowledges that different interpretations of the world, objective physics and subjective beauty, exist simultaneously, implying that we naturally use different methods to understand our world. This does not mean that the methods are wrong (heat transfer physics is clearly useful), but stepping outside of a specific community opens up choices about research methodology and methods.…”

Section: An Argument For Sequential Convergence Of Research Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…158-178). Thermal comfort also extends to biological reward of sensory pleasure, alliesthesia [31,32] and combined with other perception codes, including, but not limited to, personalisation, control, furniture comfort, collaboration space, and other traditional IEQ [33].…”

Section: Coding the Subjective-precedents In Building Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

Translating across Disciplines: On Coding Interior Architecture Theory to Advance Complex Indoor Environment Quality

Pearce

2018

Buildings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:While indoor environment quality (IEQ) measurement is an established process, it omits the pleasure of interior environments, possibly due to its perceived subjectivity in the context of objective productivity and profitability. Given the significant commercial interior design industry, which engages with the complexity of indoor habitation, there exists an opportunity to expand the scope of IEQ appraisal through inclusion of the interior architecture discipline as an IEQ stakeholder. This theoretical paper reframes existing building appraisal as convergent methods that are contingent on the discipline and audience, and proposes a sequential mixed methods research process that allows subjective and objective research methods integration. Drawing on the interior architecture discipline, and its holistic 'interiority', a content analysis of selected theoretical texts identifies candidate quality components for future development and use in environment quality measurement. The intention of this process is to translate across the interior architecture and architectural science disciplines by coding interior architecture perspectives into possible measurable variables. These broader candidate variables would likely be more inclusive of the lived experience and agency of occupants of interior spaces. Furthermore, they offer the possibility for extended complex indoor environment quality data for future use in advanced statistics.

show abstract

“…The design quality literature has addressed a range of outcomes, including the impact of design on recovery rates (Ulrich, 2008), endof-life care (Barnes, 2002;Torrington, 2007) and depression rates in social housing (Wells & Harris, 2007), on attendance (Durán-Naracki, 2008) and learning in school environments (Barrett, Zhang, Davies, & Barrett, 2015), and on satisfaction (Armitage & Murugan, 2013) and productivity in commercial workplaces (Baird, 2010;Leaman & Bordass, 1999). Furthermore, a great deal of applied research has been carried out into the use and value of POE (Deuble & de Dear, 2014;Way & Bordass, 2005), the development of POE methodologies (Candido, Kim, de Dear, & Thomas, 2016;Chiu, Lowe, Raslan, Altamirano-Medina, & Wingfield, 2014;Gann, Salter, & Whyte, 2003;Preiser & Nasar, 2007;Riley, Moody, & Pitt, 2009), as well as the systematic evaluation of a large number of buildings through POE (Baird, 2010;Gupta, Gregg, Passmore, & Stevens, 2015). A wide range of evaluation methods for assessing occupied buildings now exist, including the Probe methodology (Cohen, Standeven, Bordass, & Leaman, 2001), design quality indicator (DQI) and Achieving Excellence Design Evaluation Toolkit (AEDET) (Ruddock & Aouad, 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Post-occupancy evaluation in architecture: experiences and perspectives from UK practice

Hay

Samuel

Watson

et al. 2017

Building Research & Information

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The importance of post-occupancy evaluation (POE) is widely acknowledged in the academic literature, industry press and, increasingly, by professional institutes. Learning from previous projects systematically is central to improving building performance, resulting in a built environment that better fits the needs of clients, end users, wider society and the environment. The key role of architects in pushing forward this agenda has been recognized, however evidence suggests that take up of POE is low across the profession. Whilst research has investigated barriers to POE across the construction industry, very little has considered the unique perspective of architects. In-depth interviews with UK-based architects are presented to explore their experiences in relation to POE and their perspectives on its potential to be a standard part of architectural practice. The findings indicate that a considerable amount of practical work is being undertaken, but uncertainty over what constitutes POE means it is often excluded from the POE label -with significant implications for the development of a rigorous evidence base. An appetite is identified for more holistic evaluation measures that move beyond the current preoccupation with energy efficiency to consider other aspects of building performance, and thereby sustainability, in a wider value framework.

show abstract

BOSSA: a multidimensional post-occupancy evaluation tool

Cited by 99 publications

References 30 publications

Differences in Occupants’ Satisfaction and Perceived Productivity in High- and Low-Performance Offices

Differences in Occupants’ Satisfaction and Perceived Productivity in High- and Low-Performance Offices

Translating across Disciplines: On Coding Interior Architecture Theory to Advance Complex Indoor Environment Quality

Post-occupancy evaluation in architecture: experiences and perspectives from UK practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About