Editorial

Citation

Lavy, S. (2013), "Editorial", Facilities, Vol. 31 No. 11/12. https://doi.org/10.1108/f.2013.06931kaa.001

Editorial

Article Type: Editorial From: Facilities, Volume 31, Issue 11/12

This issue of Facilities presents six papers with one common feature of value creation. These six papers represent different perspectives of the industry, which demonstrates how broad the scope of facility management is.

Lean theory has gained popularity in the built environment, and particularly in construction. The concept behind “lean” is centered on the creation of value through the elimination of waste. A paper by Jylha and Junnila addresses the question of why current FM processes do not support customer value creation. The paper utilizes a case-study method in which an energy management service provider is studied. The focus of this analysis is placed on three major aspects: how value is perceived by the end-customer; how value is created; and how the value creation process can be improved. So far, lean thinking is not considered to be implemented in facility management processes, which makes this paper pioneering and innovative.

The Chinese construction industry is one of the largest markets in the world. A paper by Zhao, Zuo, Chan, Zillante, and Xia examines the potential of partnering in China’s construction industry. The authors conducted a review of building construction laws, regulations, and government policies, as well as a set of interviews in order to analyze the restrictions that still exist on the implementation of construction partnering in China. The paper presents the results of this analysis by providing a list of supporting factors vs. impeding factors for partnering, as it pertains to the Chinese unique environment and culture. Based on this, six strategies have been suggested by the authors for government and industry’s consideration to facilitate the implementation of partnering in China’s construction market.

A paper by Vidalakis, Sun, and Papa discusses the contribution of facility management services to the value creation of higher education facilities. This study utilizes an expert panel member, as well as a case-study survey of one university campus in the UK where several groups of students and academic staff were surveyed. It is interesting to learn that in this particular case-study, the opinions of the expert panel members tend to be closer to the opinions of the students, rather than to the opinions of the academic staff, which were described by the authors as the most criticizing group. This may be explained by the fact that out of all three groups, the academic personnel get to live in these buildings for the longest period of time, and therefore, their perspective of value and quality is significantly different than the one of the other groups.

Workplace productivity is a common concern for facility managers within almost any type of organization. A paper by Purdey aims to develop an understanding of the behavioral challenges in workplace performance evaluation and how issues raised regarding validity and reliability of Likert-scale measurements could be addressed in future occupant surveys. The study found that with information becoming easily accessible and much richer, sophisticated occupant performance evaluation tools and methods are needed to replace simplistic self-assessment questionnaires in today’s studies of workplace productivity. The author also points out that the aviation sector can be used as a model for future developments in the built environment arena.

A paper by Chileshe, Khatib, and Farah is a continuation of a paper published earlier on in Facilities, which dealt with tenants’ perceptions of refurbishment of tower blocks. In this paper, the authors examine the perceptions of contractors and landlord representatives (of housing associations) to various aspects that affect the refurbishment process. Contactors and landlord representatives were asked to rate the benefits of undertaking refurbishment works of tower blocks or high-rise buildings through interviews and questionnaires. It was interesting to see the different views among the respondents as to the achievements to be gained from refurbishments; among them are client satisfaction, budget and time, improved security, profit-oriented, and provision of decent homes at affordable prices.

Dealing with historic value of buildings is also a common issue of concern for facility managers who manage buildings of historical significance. A paper by Yung and Chan examines whether there are differences between the laymen and professionals’ evaluations and that of policy makers on the conservation of historic buildings. The authors analyzed a sample of 25 historic buildings in Hong Kong, in addition to the debated case of Queen’ Pier building, and found out that the laymen and professional groups consider slightly different criteria to evaluate the value of historic buildings, and their preference on what is worth conserving seem to be different from the views of policy makers. This study may assist policy makers in formulating a more holistic approach in the designation of historic buildings.

Sarel LavyCo-Editor