Search results

This paper aims to model the relationship between innovation and real estate, providing campus managers with a tool that illustrates how campus development stimulates innovation and that guides them to add value to their organisations.

The authors review previous research and build theory from the study of two cases. They shape a hypothesis by linking various theoretical concepts and by verifying it with empirical data to finally model how campus development stimulates innovation.

Findings suggest that campus development facilitates five conditions required to stimulate innovation through decisions and interventions over long-term periods. These findings acknowledge that location is key to explain campus development as a catalyst for innovation. In addition, this paper identifies potential issues in decision-making processes that can inhibit the facilitating role of real estate in innovation.

A framework clarifying the path to stimulate innovation through real estate will allow campus managers to steer their real estate strategies in line with this specific organisational goal and to better communicate how their decisions add value to their organisations.

Findings advocate a more effective and efficient resource allocation for campus development in and around cities.

Until now, studies on stimulating innovation through real estate have focussed on workplace level. A core theoretical contribution of this paper is enlarging the application scope of CREM theories to the urban level involving multiple organisations.

This paper aims to underpin the importance of the availability (or absence) of campus management information (CMI) in supporting universities’ goals.

Four perspectives of campus management were used to develop a structured survey enquiring campus managers about universities’ goals, finances, users and spaces. Its descriptive analysis distinguishes two domains: campus strategy and CMI.

A total of 14 participant universities in nine countries provided substantial data, increasing the available CMI in each of the four perspectives compared with previous research. Three goal-related patterns driving the strategies of universities and their campuses were identified across competitive, social, economic and environmental performance aspects. Accordingly, particular CMI is discussed.

The paper’s overarching approach in four perspectives challenged the collection of data, which needed to be retrieved from different departments in the organisation, with different domains (human resources, finance, facilities and organisational strategy), lingo and accountability cultures.

These findings improve the current understanding of university campuses as strategic resources enabling a variety of university goals and missions in today’s knowledge-based economy, society and cities. Moreover, the authors discuss that a more structural approach to collecting CMI may benefit universities to identify critical aspects of campus management supporting their strategies from which performance indicators can be derived and shared among campus managers with similar strategies to make better future decisions.

The objective of corporate real estate management is to optimally attune corporate accommodation to organisational performance. At universities, the dynamic process to match supply and demand is often hindered by difficulties in the allocation and use of space. This is a challenge for the Dutch universities and perhaps also European universities, which own large and ageing real estate portfolio’s in need of (re)investment: how can universities invest their resources as effectively as possible and not in space that will be poorly used? The purpose of this paper is to explore the use of smart campus tools to improve space use on campus.

First, a survey at 13 Dutch universities is conducted, consisting of a questionnaire and semi-structured interviews with Dutch campus managers. Then, semi-structured interviews are held with a number of parties in other industries to explore the use of smart tools in other contexts.

The universities’ demand for smart tools is mainly directed at the automatic and continuous collection of real-time space use data for education spaces and giving students insight into the availability of study places on campus. The tools at the Dutch universities focus largely on effectiveness: helping their users in their search to find a space that supports their activities. In other industry sectors, the results suggest that the use of smart tools is more directed towards efficiency: maximizing the use of existing space or optimising the operations of the organisation.

Although the use of smart tools in practice has gained significant momentum in the past few years, research on the subject is still sparse. By providing a framework for smart tools, as well as exploring the work done in theory and in practice, the authors hope to increase discussion and research on the subject from the perspective of corporate real estate.

The purpose of this study is to generate knowledge about the use of smart campus tools to improve the effective and efficient use of campuses. Many universities are facing a challenge in attuning their accommodation to organisational demand. How can universities invest their resources as effectively as possible and not in space that will be poorly utilized? The hypothesis of this paper is that by using smart campus tools, this problem can be solved.

To answer the research question, previous survey at 13 Dutch universities was updated and compared with a survey of various universities and other organizations. The survey consisted of interviews with structured and semi-structured questions, which resulted in a unified output for 27 cases.

Based on the output of the cases, the development of smart campus tools at Dutch universities was compared to that of international universities and other organizations. Furthermore, the data collection led to insights regarding the reasons for initiating smart campus tools, user and management information, costs and benefits and foreseen developments.

Although the use of smart tools in practice has gained significant momentum in the past few years, research on the subject is still very technology-oriented and not well-connected to facility management and real estate management. This paper provides an overview of the ways in which universities and organizations are currently supporting their users, improving the use of their buildings and reducing their energy footprint through the use of smart tools.

Across the world, many universities are dealing with a pressure on resources, caused by both organisational developments and ageing campuses. Space utilization studies have a strategic role, providing information on how space is being used, thereby informing decisions about the type and scale of facilities that are needed.

This study reports on the space use measurements conducted at TU Delft over the past five years, complemented by their use to make decisions about the university's real estate portfolio.

The education spaces of the university are found to perform well in terms of frequency rates and can be improved in terms of occupancy rates. The information helped to support short- and long-term decision-making. The study places of the university have a satisfactory occupancy in some types of study places, while in others there is room for improvement. More research is needed here to understand the relationship between space norms and space use.

The space utilization studies have supported discussions with the student council and decision makers on which interventions are required and which current facilities meet students' needs best.

Not much space utilisation studies are reported in the academic literature, and those that do have several limitations. This study may serve as a best practice for benchmarking by other universities and as evidence in other research for the planned and actual use of university facilities.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse 12 assessment tools of sustainability in universities and develop the structure and the contents of these tools to be more intelligible. The configuration of the tools reviewed highlight indicators that clearly communicate only the essential information. This paper explores how the theoretical concept of a sustainable university is translated into more measurable variables to support practitioners and academics in assessing sustainability in universities.

The main method for this paper was a desk study approach, which incorporated reviewing research papers, graduate theses, academic books, network platforms and websites.

The tools reviewed share similar traits in terms of criteria, sub-criteria and indicators. Five benchmarks are essential for a holistic framework: management; academia; environment; engagement and innovation.

This research can not only be used to improve existing assessment tools but also as a means to develop new tools tailored for universities that face a variety of challenges and lack the ability to measure their sustainability policies.

Making higher education more sustainable through all the criteria mentioned influences students, as well as staff, to maintain a culture of sustainability.

This study contributes to the literature by simplifying and detailing the structure and contents of the tools in a way which indicators are shown, giving a full picture of these tools to enable universities to be more aware of the sustainability issues that affect them.

This paper aims to describe the different locations of campuses developed to stimulate innovation. The paper aims at supporting strategic decisions in the development of new and existing campuses and similar innovation-driven areas. Additionally, it aims to outline the key role of location for urban and regional competitiveness in the knowledge economy.

This paper tests an existing planning tool that proposes location and connectivity as key aspects to stimulate innovation in campus development. This tool is used to analyse and compare 39 campuses with different locations characteristics worldwide.

Findings describe five types of location characteristics in existing campuses developed to stimulate innovation. These characteristics are dynamic, and exhibit differences in connectivity aspects enabling more or less efficient access to amenities and knowledge networks.

Empirical findings were used to revise and improve the planning tool. Further research exploring the relation between connectivity aspects and innovation processes is recommended.

This paper supports decision-makers of new and existing campuses struggling with location decisions, by outlining that campus’ connectivity is crucial regardless of whether the campus is in an inner-city or a peripheral setting. Improving campus connectivity may be an efficient way to spend the many public and private resources invested on campus development to stimulate innovation.

This paper provides a unique comparison of cases that can be useful to planners of existing campuses to benchmark their current locations in relation to their ambitions on innovation.

The objective of stadium owners is to attract visitors to their stadiums and by this optimally use their business potential. Stadiums face increasing competition from home-viewing options, with which especially aging stadiums have trouble competing. This paper aims to study the concept of smart stadiums as a solution to this problem, adding the corona age as an additional challenge.

First, (smart) stadium literature and theories are reviewed. Then, a case study is conducted, consisting of document review, observations and semi-structured interviews with specialists. The case that is studied is the Johan Cruijff Arena in Amsterdam – the stadium has the ambition to be the most innovative stadium in 2020.

Nine different smart tools were identified in the case study, which supports the optimization of various processes in the stadium such as ticketing and crowd control. The findings from this case study showed the potential of the smart stadium concept and how it can add value for the stadium’s stakeholders. The use of smart tools can improve the effectiveness and efficiency of stadium operations, and it can be used to improve the visitors’ experience. However, concrete numbers of progress were difficult to obtain because the smart tools were only recently implemented.

As seen in the past few years, more and more stadiums are branding themselves as a smart stadium. However, research on this subject is still scarce: existing research focused on other types of real estate. By exploring the work done in theory and practice, the authors hope to increase research on the subject of smart stadiums.

Since corporate real estate management (CREM) emerged in the 1990s, it has been modelled in many ways. The Delft model views the corporate real estate management function as a coordinator of four distinct accommodation perspectives. Although the model has been used in education and practice for years, there is no consensus on its interpretation and application, and various versions circulate. This paper aims to first reconstruct the history of the conceptualisation of the Delft CREM model and then seeks to develop an understanding of its nature that provides clearer interpretations of the model.

Because the developers of the Delft CREM model did not maintain archives, the reconstruction of the model’s genesis is based on the developers’ publications from 1985 to 2015 and eight semi-structured interviews conducted with these developers in 2017 and 2018. The collected information, which was by its very nature incomplete and imperfect, was triangulated, contextualised and assembled chronologically. This served as the basis for an analysis of the model’s nature, which in turn generated a list of practical implications for its future application.

The historical reconstruction revealed two parallel but distinct lines of reasoning, whose resulting models appear similar but are distinct. One line of reasoning models CRE viewpoints, while the other models CRE management activities, i.e. the first line of reasoning models CREM across the organisation, while the second models CREM within the function. These two lines of thought have converged in the research-through-design approach of the developers, which evolved against the backdrop of a growing interest in the contribution of organisational resources to organisational objectives and the emergence of the demand-supply model in management practices in general and in the built environment in particular.

The research is limited to reconstructing the genesis and analysing the nature of the Delft CREM model. It is not intended to provide a conclusive narrative, update the model or compare it to other CREM models. As is typical in oral history, it is based on imperfect documentary evidence and imperfect recollections. The reconstruction and analysis are stepping stones towards a more precise interpretation and application of the model in both research and practice, and may eventually contribute to its evolution. When using the model, it is recommended to (1) be clear about whether the model applies to the CREM department, the entire organisation or the organisation’s environment; (2) be clear about what is being modelled (activities, viewpoints or something else); and (3) use labels that reflect the selections made in (1) and (2).

The value of this paper lies in the historical reconstruction of the intentions of the developers of the four-view scheme, including the detailed analysis of its consecutive graphical representations and the investigation of its relationship with the seminal strategic alignment model.

The purpose of this paper is to present an extended book review of “The Physical University”.

This article takes the form of a literature review focusing on one title.

This is an uneven collection of fragments of conventional late twentieth-century thinking about the physical campus. The future of the physical university, the campus is in doubt. Yet, only two of the dozen authors engage in this existential question.

The collection of articles ranges from purely philosophical to moderately practical. It is a poor summary of current thought and offers little guidance for dealing with the evolving future of the physical university.