Search results1 – 4 of 4
This paper aims to put the building manager (BM) as the professional responsible for implementing occupant engagement initiatives (OEIs) in the work environment and…
This paper aims to put the building manager (BM) as the professional responsible for implementing occupant engagement initiatives (OEIs) in the work environment and discusses the challenges they may experience in fulfilling their responsibilities.
This paper is based on a review of nine studies (six academic journals and three conference papers) that discuss the design and implementation of OEIs in office buildings.
The following categories and sub-categories were identified: mediator (facilitative, stakeholder alignment and persuasive) and educator (context indifferent advice, context-dependent advice and expert knowledge). The authors argue that embodiment of these roles should be supported through the delivery mechanism of the OEIs, rather than assume them as given traits in organizational environments.
Proponents of OEIs should expand their focus from supporting engagement of building occupants to fostering engagement of BMs and senior executives.
This study adopts the perspective of the building management profession to expose a gap in the design of energy-related occupant engagement interventions.
Widely accepted classifications of benchmarking distinguish between different levels of benchmarking. Strategic‐level benchmarking is considered to be of a higher…
Widely accepted classifications of benchmarking distinguish between different levels of benchmarking. Strategic‐level benchmarking is considered to be of a higher sophistication than product‐level benchmarking. Such strategic benchmarking would be based on process information instead of product information. The purpose of this paper is to research the possibility of obtaining strategic‐level information based on an extensive amount of product‐level benchmark data.
The data used in this paper originate from the environmental benchmarking program of Philips Consumer Electronics (CE). Philips CE has successfully implemented benchmarking as an environmental improvement strategy for its products. Product‐level competitive benchmarking is used to assess the environmental performance of a Philips' product compared to its main economic rivals. Since the start of environmental benchmarking a considerable pool of product‐level benchmark data has been generated. This paper reports on an extensive data analysis of product‐level benchmarking data concerning the packaging of these consumer electronics products.
It is shown how strategic‐level information is obtained from a data analysis of these separate benchmarking studies, resulting both in useful strategic‐level managerial information and practical design input. Finally, advantages of this approach as compared to classic strategic‐level benchmarking are identified.
The study has yielded empirical data indicating a limitation in current benchmarking classification.
The paper offers insights into the benefits of product level benchmarking for strategic eco‐efficient decision making.
Environmental benchmarking has, since 1997, been the basis of many ecodesign‐related activities at both Delft University of Technology and Philips Consumer Electronics in…
Environmental benchmarking has, since 1997, been the basis of many ecodesign‐related activities at both Delft University of Technology and Philips Consumer Electronics in Eindhoven, The Netherlands. Cooperative efforts have led to a robust, reproducible and practical environmental benchmark method. The method is based on the assessment of the five focal areas: energy, material and weight, packaging, potentially toxic substances, and recyclability. The generation and prioritisation of green improvement options is done by addressing consumer and societal feasibility as well as technical and financial feasibility. Ongoing research continuously stimulates the methodology and practical implementation. This has created a tremendous awareness in the Philips Consumer Electronics organisation regarding product‐related environmental matters, because the method is embedded in an overall strategy that considers the interests of all internal and external stakeholders.