Search results

Web hosted project spaces offer dedicated collaboration and information sharing functions to dispersed members of design, engineering and manufacturing teams. During the recent dot.com boom these so‐called ‘e‐Project’ services became increasingly popular in the A/E/C (Architecture, Engineering and Construction) industry. This industry has started to refer to these products as ‘project web sites’. Their basic service component is a web enabled ‘information space’ for building teams offered through an Application Service Provider (ASP) business model, and accessible via an Extranet requiring only a standard web browser. An expanding set of web hosted applications is meanwhile included in most products, e.g. for messaging and calendaring, data and document management, design reviews and project management. This paper shows how the functionality of project web sites can be enriched by adding advanced task coordination features. Such features are especially relevant for design management. In particular, the paper deals with the need to support the formation and coordination of spontaneous short‐lived sub‐teams in the course of a project. A crucial element of these ‘self‐appointed’ teams is the need to establish rapid agreement on a shared coordination template for the execution of the task at hand. It will be demonstrated how task templates for that purpose can be defined and managed. The chosen solution serves as a task sensitive filter to the overwhelming amount of documents stored typically on a project web site. The approach will be demonstrated on a daily exercise in academic environments: the abstract and paper review process in the preparation of a conference.

This paper discusses how project management styles and methods impact on energy conscious design decisions by building design teams. Within the broad field of energy conscious design the emphasis of this paper is on the selection of energy saving technologies in appropriately configured building components. The premise of the research is that these selections are not well rationalized. Choices of energy saving features in current practice are discussed against the background of available computational tools and the way these tools are used (or not) to enhance the decision‐making process. Through empirical data gathering based on case studies, improved project management techniques that enable a more timely and rational selection of energy saving technologies will be identified. A follow‐up research project that implements the findings in an operational design system is briefly presented to sketch the practical implications of the reported research.

The purpose of this paper is to describe a tool that supports an investment strategy aimed at improving the energy performance of existing buildings. It is particularly aimed at large building portfolios, such as encountered on university and corporate campuses, where typically a plethora of potential refurbishment interventions are candidates for a greening effort.

The investment optimization strategy is implemented in a web‐based software tool. Under a chosen financial constraint and investment time horizon, the tool empowers campus facility management to make the difficult “greening” decisions as part of their continuous building commissioning. The tool calculates and accepts user data that reflect different types of risks, posed by uncertainties in investment costs, energy performance, and energy cost scenarios. In addition, decision makers (DMs) can set different investment priorities, reflecting their financial risk attitude and commitment to “greenness”.

The tool helps DMs determine the best investment options from a set of available energy efficiency improvement options in the light of expected long range energy costs. It will enable the choice of the optimal mix of technologies and buildings within a given budget limit and predict the long‐term monetary as well as “green” return on investment.

The tool has been tested on a portfolio of campus buildings, but needs further validation with a larger set of buildings in a real life campus management setting. The tool can become a trusted instrument in the hands of portfolio managers faced with the problem to select the optimal mix of technologies, and buildings within the given budget. It should be noted that “investment returns (IRs)” and “commitment to greenness” are just two elements considered in the broader decision making framework of portfolio energy management.

The investment tool can provide an essential instrument for campus managers who are faced with the task to refurbish buildings in their portfolio to increase their energy performance. In the current business culture of campus management, the decision to investment in energy savings needs to be weighed against competing initiatives that target greener campuses. The target of the research was to develop an instrument that can help DMs to verify rapidly what can be achieved if a budget line item of, say $10 million would be added to the campus budget for energy performance improvements.

The research output from this paper is valuable for continued efforts in the development of indicators that measure “IRs” and “commitment to greenness”. Other elements that impact portfolio decision making can be identified in a common decision framework of which the investment tool will become an integral part over time.