Search results

The purpose of this paper is to determine the reason for faculty and staff (N=657; 35 percent males; M _age=45.20) at a large Southern university, for either using or not using the free fitness facilities on campus.

Participants identified themselves as either current (n=306), former (n=213), or never-users (n=138) of the facilities, and completed an on-line self-report qualitative questionnaire asking them to describe their reasons for using or not using the campus fitness facilities.

Thematic coding revealed that motives fell into three broad categories for all user types: personal (i.e. cost, location, social support), facility-specific (i.e. quality and amount of equipment, class variety, hours of operation), and motivational climate (i.e. feeling valued, welcomed, best effort was emphasized). Current users highlighted positive aspects of each category whereas former and never users described each category as a barrier to their exercise routines.

The identified themes offer campus administration specific suggestions to entice more non-users and former-users to exercise in the fitness facilities available on campus.

While researchers have considered barriers to exercise in past studies, the barriers identified were not specific to fitness facilities. The current work not only examines individuals’ reasons for choosing or not choosing a campus fitness facility for their exercise, but also compares the perspectives of former- and never-users to current-users.

The purpose of the study is to evaluate and discuss the extent of the satisfaction as perceived by the students and staff towards university facilities and services in two campuses in Finland. The aim is to analyse which facility-related factors have the greatest impacts on students’ and staff’s overall satisfaction.

The extensive survey was conducted to investigate how the university students and staff assess the university campus and facility services. A framework was developed to prioritise the satisfaction factors towards the facilities in two campuses in the both groups. The study was executed with the statistical assessment method, which combines each question’s mean value and how it affects overall satisfaction.

The findings show that there are differences in the main features of the satisfaction as assessed by the groups and between the two campuses. Student satisfaction consist of factors related to comfortable learning environment, where public spaces and campus accessibility play vital roles. Staff satisfaction can be characterised as a comprehensive campus experience and where laboratory and teaching facilities create value to the staff. In general, results show that the factors related to the research and teaching spaces have the greatest impacts on the overall satisfaction in the both groups. The improvement of the quality of these spaces will then directly assist staff and students in achieving their objectives.

The measurement method developed in the study helps campus facilities’ management to prioritise satisfaction factors and identify the areas of the quality improvements. This information can be used widely, for instance, in the campus development, facilities management and improvement of the university services.

The framework analyses which factors of the facilities have the greatest impacts on the overall satisfaction as perceived by the students and staff. The outcome of the study will improve the knowledge of which aspects of the facilities created value to the universities’ core functions.

This paper aims to increase understanding on how co-locating in a multi-firm campus setting could be of value to healthcare organizations.

The paper presents a qualitative case study of two health campuses in Finland. The data comprises interviews with different organizations operating on the campuses, complemented by onsite observations, and analysis of archival data.

Based on the empirical analysis, the value of co-locating as perceived by the organizations operating on campus is grouped into four categories: connectivity, cost-efficiency, community and collaboration (or the “four Cs”).

The study does not aim at statistical genaralizability but rather seeks to draw analytical generalizations based on identified empirical regularities. The developed value framework, the four Cs, contributes to current scholarly knowledge on location strategies.

Furthermore, the managerial implications of the four Cs entail a new twofold role for property management: the traditional facilitator role, which is suitable for delivering the two tangible values of connectivity and cost-efficiency, and the modern era integrator, a community builder that is able to deliver community and collaboration.

Previous literature on healthcare facilities has focused on the technical performance of the buildings, while previous literature on the collaborative value of co-location has studied mainly single-firm corporate campuses. This study uniquely explores the potential value of health campuses, where different private, public and third sector organizations co-locate.

This paper aims to assess the level of occupants’ satisfaction, comparing older and newer on-campus accommodation buildings in Sydney, Australia, aiming to identify their comfort factors deficiencies in terms of design and construction solutions/strategies (e.g. spatial arrangements, materials, thermal comfort).

A post occupancy evaluation survey was used to assess the occupant satisfaction with three on-campus accommodation buildings in The University of New South Wales (UNSW) Sydney. One of the selected buildings is an older building opened for occupation in 1996, and the other two are more recent on campus accommodations buildings. The survey included 11 post occupancy evaluation elements identified through literature review which were categorised into three dimensions: technical, functional and behavioural.

The results show that the satisfaction levels with thermal and acoustic comfort were below standards for both older and newer buildings. In addition, the older building used in this study was rated low in terms of: indoor air quality, lighting, maintenance and management, vertical transportation facility, room layout and furniture quality, building layout and aesthetics and level of privacy. Such factors related to both functional and behavioural dimensions were of greater satisfaction in newer buildings.

Findings suggest the high priority of strategies that address and improve the thermal and acoustic comfort of older and newer on-campus accommodation buildings if the intention is to enhance students’ satisfaction, especially considering the impact that these facilities have on students’ performance. Thermal performance in different seasons and adaptive thermal comfort activities should be considered in the design of new on-campus accommodation buildings and the retrofit of existing old buildings.

On-campus accommodation is an important facility that supports student learning outcomes and helps students adapt in a new learning environment. A post occupancy evaluation study to assess the adequacy of this facility is still lacking because previous studies have generally focussed on class rooms and work spaces in the education sector. This research compares the user satisfaction of older and newer on-campus accommodation buildings in Australia, to highlight deficiencies and areas for improvement in the design of existing and future buildings.

This study aims to convey lessons learned from two sustainability initiatives at Norway’s largest university. This contributes to knowledge-based discussions of how future, sustainable higher education institutions (HEIs) infrastructures should be envisioned and planned if the fundamental uncertainty of the future development of learning, researching and teaching is acknowledged.

This study was submitted on 24 January 2023 and revised on 14 September 2023. HEIs, particularly when they are engaged in research activities, have a considerable environmental footprint. At the same time, HEIs are the main producers and disseminators of knowledge about environmental challenges and their employees have a high awareness of the urgent need to mitigate climate change and biodiversity loss. In this study, the gap between knowledge and environmental performance is addressed as a question of infrastructural change, which is explored in two case studies.

The first case study presents limitations of ambitious, top-down sustainability planning for HEI infrastructures: support from employees and political support are central for this strategy to succeed, but both could not be secured in the case presented leading to an abandonment of all sustainability ambitions. The second case study exposes important limitations of a circular approach: regulatory and legal barriers were found against a rapid and radical circular transformation, but also more fundamental factors such as the rationality of an institutional response to uncertainty by rapid cycles of discarding the old and investing in new equipment and facilities.

Being based on qualitative methods, the case studies do not claim representativity for HEIs worldwide or even in Norway. Many of the factors described are contingent on their specific context. The goal, instead, is to contribute to learning by presenting an in-depth and context-sensitive report on obstacles encountered in two major sustainability initiatives.

Research reporting on sustainability initiatives too often focuses descriptively on the plans or reports the successes while downplaying problems and failures. This study deviates from this widespread practice by analysing reasons for failure informed by a theoretical frame (infrastructural change). Moreover, the juxtaposition of two cases within the same context shows the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches to infrastructural change particularly clearly.

The purpose of this paper is to create an overview of current literature and identify gaps in what is known about stimulating interaction through spaces and services provided on university campuses.

The authors used the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement methodology for systematic literature review. In total, 3,616 articles were screened, 31 articles were included. Facility Directors from 13 Dutch Universities were asked to define the search terms related to services.

Spaces and services were mostly studied separately. The majority of papers (18/31) were based on perceptions (surveys or interviews). The following critical success factors were identified in the literature: geographic proximity, cognitive proximity, scale, transitional spaces, comfort and experience, shared facilities and events, local buzz and networks. These factors are interrelated. The authors present a new relational model, from spaces and services, through interaction to innovation, visualising how the identified papers are related.

The scope of possible findings may have been narrowed because prior relevant studies were rather limited and as a consequence of the search strategy designed to limit the number of unrelated hits. Some knowledge gaps may not have been identified, as only a few mainstream concepts related to the critical success factors were used for comparison. Nevertheless, the literature review provides a reliable overview of current academic knowledge regarding critical success factors for spaces and services that stimulate interaction on campuses.

This paper offers a novel perspective by emphasising the relational chain from interaction to innovation, visualising the large diversity in research fields and summarising the critical success factors in the literature.

This paper aims to present the development of a holistic campus facility management (CFM) performance assessment framework that incorporates a fuzzy logic approach and integrates a comprehensive set of key factors for successful management of campus facilities. The devised framework aims to cater to the needs of campus facilities management firms and departments for the purpose of gauging and assessing their performance across different management domains. Through this approach, facility management organizations can detect potential areas of enhancement and adopt preemptive steps to evade issues, foster progress and ensure success.

After a comprehensive analysis of the literature, conducting in-depth interviews with industry experts and employing the Delphi technique in two rounds, a total of 45 indicators critical to CFM success were identified and subsequently sorted into seven distinct groups. Through an online questionnaire, 402 subject-matter experts proficiently assessed the significance of the critical success indicators and their groups. A fuzzy logic framework was developed to evaluate and quantify a firm's compliance with the critical success indicators and groups of indicators. The framework was subsequently weighted using computations of the relative importance index (RII) based on the responses received from the questionnaire participants. The initial section of the framework involved a comprehensive analysis of the firm's performance vis-à-vis the indicators, while the latter part sought to evaluate the impact of the indicators groups on the overall firm's performance.

The utilization of fuzzy logic has uncovered the significant effects each effective CFM key indicator on indicators groups, as well as the distinct effects of each CFM indicators group on the overall performance of CFM. The results reveal that financial management, communications management, sustainability and environment management and workforce management are the most impactful indicators groups on the CFM performance. This suggests that it is imperative for management to allocate increased attention to these specific areas.

This study contributes to the advancement of current knowledge by revealing vital indicators of effective CFM and utilizing them to construct a thorough fuzzy logic framework that can assist in evaluating the effectiveness of CFM firms worldwide. This has the potential to provide crucial assistance to facility management organizations, facility managers and policymakers in their quest for informed decision-making.

Purpose – Academic campuses in India in recent years have witnessed an increase in the proportion of older people due to the rise in the age of superannuation of faculty and their cohabitation with older parents. However, such campuses continue to have a skewed program which favor the needs of the younger population. For the present study, a residential academic campus equipped with a health care facility was selected to understand the challenges of the family caregivers of older people residing in it.

Methodology/Approach – Exploratory in-depth interviews were conducted with 154 family caregivers. Secondary data were obtained from the campus hospital records.

Findings – Data revealed that family caregivers experienced various challenges in providing older care in the campus due to unavailability of paid supportive caregivers, lack of community support, and inadequate housing. Though the academic campus has a health care facility, the entitlement rights to it varies among the older people in campus. While the campus health facility was not congenial for family caregiving, it was utilized as a space for providing long-term care. This chapter suggests the need to extend a public heath model of family caregiving in campus.

Research limitations/implications – The study has implication for modifying similar academic campuses in India for facilitating family caregivers of older people.

Originality/Value of Paper – This is the first study of its kind which explored the challenges of family caregiving for older people in academic campuses in India.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the evolution of a sustainability network at a large California public university, as an example of organizational change.

The paper combines participant observation and case study techniques over a three‐year period. From 2007 to 2010, the author helped found the university's Institute for Sustainability and sat on both the Institute's first Advisory Board and the university's first Core Green Team. The author also interviewed 19 key informants to the sustainability network, including upper administrators, physical plant management (PPM) staff, faculty, and students.

This campus sustainability initiative evolved over three decades in three phases. Phase I evolved from the 1980s in facilities management and student recycling because of changing environmental demands, the 1994 Northridge earthquake, and strong leadership who believed in developing human resources. In Phase II, faculty and Academic Affairs established the Institute for Sustainability. Phase III examines the current state at May 2010. Forces driving change include leaders' core values, incentives, communication, and community outreach. Forces inhibiting change relate to funding, information, policies, shared values, time, and training. Key informants defined success in campus sustainability as actions which: increase efficiency (and reduce waste); educate and prepare graduates for a fundamentally different world; achieve broad‐based support; and improve the university's sustainability image.

This study points to at least four avenues of future research. One, scholars interested in more completely revealing their organization's sustainability network can map it using social network analysis techniques. Two, scholars could seek to answer the extent to which a campus institute becomes a center of gravity or an excuse for others to step away. Three, scholars can directly measure the four parameters of success respondents in this study identified (increase efficiency/reduce waste, educate/prepare graduates, achieve broad‐based support, improve image). And four, scholars can examine how an organization's commitment to recycling affects its image.

This paper provides a longitudinal look at the evolution of a campus sustainability network. It highlights how sustainability efforts evolve in different parts of the university at different rates, and in the present case how PPM and facilities planning influenced Academic Affairs to embrace sustainability.

This paper aims to explore smart facilities services in the context of university campus by aiming to understand how the service development processes can be classified.

The qualitative study is based on literature review about smart facilities services and a case study about developing visualisation, data and smart service in one building in Finnish campus. The case study data were gathered by diverse methods and analysed by content analysis.

Three smart facilities service processes were identified: experience processes for users, data-based service processes and technology processes. All the processes require more than only technocratic approach.

Single case study without longitudinal data gathering is not strong in terms of generalisation.

The process classification can help different stakeholders to identify their role and tasks in smart facilities service development.

The research aims to understand how to develop smart services in addition to more investigated topic what the services include.