Search results

The transition to a circular economy in the built environment is key to achieving a resource-effective society. The built environment can be made more circular by applying circular building components. The purpose of this paper is to present a design tool that can support industry in developing circular building components.

The tool was developed and tested in five steps. In Step 1, the authors analysed existing circular design frameworks to identify gaps and develop requirements for the design tool (Step 2). In Step 3, the authors derived circular design parameters and options from existing frameworks. In Step 4, the authors combined and specified these to develop the “circular building components generator” (CBC-generator). In Step 5, the CBC-generator was applied in the development of an exemplary component: the circular kitchen and tested in a student workshop.

The CBC-generator is a three-tiered design tool, consisting of a technical, industrial and business model generator. These generators are “parameter based”; they consist of a parameter-option matrix and design canvasses. Different variants for circular components can be synthesised by filling the canvasses through systematically “mixing and matching” design options.

The developed tool does not yet support establishing causal links between “parameter-options” and identification of the most circular design variant.

The CBC-generator provides an important step to support the building industry in developing and implementing circular building components in the built environment.

Whilst existing tools and frameworks are not comprehensive, nor specifically developed for designing circular building components, the CBC-generator successfully supports the integral design of circular building components. First, it provides all the design parameters which should be considered; second, it provides extensive design options per parameter; and third, it supports systematic synthesis of design options to a cohesive and comprehensive circular design.

Strategic option generation is a fundamental step in strategy formulation. Several lenses have been proposed to explain its foundations, including the microeconomics positioning school, and the resource and capabilities based view of the firm. These approaches are largely based on inductive and deductive logics, which are not the logics that provide strategic options that are potentially novel, profitable, and largely differentiated from competitive offerings. In this chapter, we propose a unifying framework of the cognitive foundations of strategic option generation. Building on five fundamental cognitive acts – imitation, framing, analogical reasoning, abductive reasoning, and mental simulation, this proposed model both synthesizes the extant literature and provides guidance about promising avenues for future theoretical and empirical research.

Using a sample of 466 grants of stock options to executives of Japanese firms over the years 1997–2001, this study tests the managerial power theory of compensation design developed by Bebchuk, Fried, and Walker (2002) and Bebchuk and Fried (2004). This theory argues that managers of firms with weak corporate governance will use their “power” to design executive compensation that is “manager-advantageous.” Using our option grants sample, we test to determine if any of the firm's governance mechanisms are able to limit managerial self-dealing with respect to executive stock options. We find that smaller boards and a higher percentage of independent directors are important governance mechanisms for the control of managerial influences in the design of stock-option compensation. An alternative hypothesis, that firms elect to grant advantageously designed options to encourage risk taking by managers, is not supported by our empirical results. Finally, we determine that the market response to the announcements of such grants varies inversely with the extent to which the options are managerially advantageous. Overall, we conclude that managerial power effects are present in the design of executive stock options and that theory of managerial power advanced by Bebchuk et al. holds internationally.

The continuous need for change in corporate real estate spaces warrants consideration of flexibility in new space design. To help decision makers invest more effectively in physical infrastructure and its ability to evolve, a formal method of identifying and valuing flexibility is developed. A model, based on real options techniques for valuing managerial flexibility, is constructed to answer the following question: how much is it worth to invest in a space that could be renovated to office space for a specified renovation cost in the future? Decision makers can use the option valuation results to determine whether the initial design and construction costs to achieve flexibility are justifiable. The transparent model is intended to be accessible to design teams in practice. It is an improvement on net present value and first‐cost based decision‐making techniques in that it explicitly accounts for uncertainty and for the ability of managers to make a rational future decision (between renting and renovating). The model considers three sources of uncertainty: the market price of rent for office space (as measured by volatility); date of space need; and amount of space need. Input values and/or probability distributions are needed for these variables. The model is constructed using a binomial lattice technique and Monte Carlo simulation. Results are given in a format that allows for comparison with cost estimates of physical architectural designs. For example, in a case study where current five‐year office‐space leases are estimated at US$98 per square foot and 0.39 annual volatility and the mean amount of space needed in the future is 50 per cent of the total, the real options valuation suggests that it is worth up to US$40 per square foot in initial investment expenses to achieve a space that could be renovated to office space for US$25 per square foot within the next eight years. The concept of addressing risk through ‘flexible design’ and analysing the value of flexibility is pertinent to judicious management of any new building project that is subject to uncertain future conditions.

With the accelerated technological advancement, innovation has become a critical factor, which affects the core competitiveness of a company. However, studies about the relationship between internal stock option mechanisms and innovation productivity remain limited. Therefore, this paper aims to examine the impact of stock options and their elements design on innovation output from an internal mechanism perspective.

Using a sample of 302 stock option incentive plans announced and implemented between 2006 and 2016, this study uses the propensity score matching and difference-in-difference model to find out whether the implementation of stock options improves the innovation outputs of enterprises.

Based on the statistical analysis, it is concluded that: stock options can stimulate corporate innovation; a stock option may drive innovation outputs through two ways, performance-based incentives and risk-taking incentives, with the latter one playing a more dominant role and the risk-taking incentives of stock options, could be optimised when the non-executives granting proportion is larger, the granting range is limited, the incentive period is longer, the exercisable proportion is increasing, the price-to-strike ratio is lower and relatively loose performance assessment criteria are applied.

The conclusion reached in the study may provide valuable information to listed firms in designing and implementing the stock option plans.

Agency theoretic models have been used in the past to justify the use of stock options as an effective incentive alignment mechanism to create a common fate between principals and agents. In this paper, we use behavioral theory to reach the opposite conclusion – namely, that the design characteristics of the typical stock option plan foster perverse incentives for loss‐averse agents, leading to decisions with detrimental consequences for principals. We also consider alternative stock option designs and other equity‐based executive compensation plans and argue that they may suffer from the same problems as traditional stock option plans – namely, that loss‐averse executives will try to protect the endowed value of that equity through self‐serving decisions that do not enhance shareholder wealth.

This paper revisits the concept of compatibility between old and new architecture to clarify its meaning.

Document analysis is employed to critically review relevant literature, including Charters and UNESCO Recommendations.

Visual and/or tangible indicators such as forms and materials are often suggested in the literature to determine compatibility and to inform decision makers whether new architectural projects should reproduce, or reinterpret, or rather contrast with, historic buildings in situ. As a consequence, compatible design becomes confined to a visual, object-based, worldview. Yet, architecture transcends the sense of vision.

Examples of architectural projects are given to explain each design option, but are not thoroughly described. Still, this paper provides a useful reference for future dialogue and research that aim at reducing the conservation vs development struggle in historic places, whether urban areas or entire cities, such as World Heritage Cities.

The lessons learned may stimulate reflection on the effectiveness of design criteria and other tools in guiding decision makers in their search for, and assessment of, compatibility.

This paper reveals that compatibility is an evolving concept, associated with human, man-made and natural indicators. Design options are not simply aesthetic categories. The author proposes that the selection of a design option for new architecture should follow the process that guides the selection of a conservation treatment for old architecture.

This paper aims to find out what product features become salient when consumers are exposed to many market offerings, demonstrating how choice set size influences construal mindset, which then affects the type of product consumers choose.

Experiment 1 provides preliminary evidence that being exposed to a large (vs small) choice set may drive people to focus more on the feasibility (i.e. a secondary feature) of a product and less on the desirability (i.e. a primary feature) when making a choice. Experiment 2 unveils the serial mediating roles of construal level and importance of price/design.

Consumers are more likely to select feasible (i.e. affordable) market offerings and not desirable (i.e. well-designed) ones when choosing from a large (vs small) choice set. This effect is serially mediated by mental construals and by the importance of price or design. Choosing from a large (vs small) choice set leads to low-level mental construals, which increase the importance of price (a feasibility attribute) while decreasing the importance of design (a desirability attribute), resulting in choice of feasible (affordable) market offerings over well-designed ones.

Although consumers generally focus on the desirability of a choice or an action, choosing from large choice sets makes them focus more on the feasibility of market offerings because of low-level mental construals.

In today’s era of e-commerce, as consumers are exposed to too many product offerings, retailers should emphasize the feasibility of their market offerings (e.g. affordability) to increase the chance that consumers purchase their products. This research shows that people rely very much on product price to make selections when provided with a large choice set.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this research is the first to show that large choice sets make consumers choose affordable products over well-designed ones and introduces the serial mediation effect of construal level and importance of price/design. Accordingly, this research establishes that large choice sets activate low-level mental construals, which associate with a feasibility mindset that ultimately makes consumers choose an affordable product instead of a well-designed one. It adds to the literature on choice overload by showing that the importance of price overshadows the importance of design (aesthetics) when people are exposed to large choice sets.

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the potential value of significant vertical phasing – that is, the addition of five or more stories to an existing building – as a valuable real option in real estate development, in particular for corporate real estate strategy.

The demonstration is done through in‐depth case studies of four major projects in North America: the 24 story, 880,000 square feet expansion of the Health Care Service Corporation building in Chicago; the Court Square Citicorp Campus in New York City; the Bentall Five project in Vancouver; and the Tufts University School of Dental Medicine building in Boston.

Vertical expansion appears to have significant organizational and logistical advantages for corporate developers, such as the ability to keep staff in one building, and the elimination of the need to relocate with its resulting inconvenience and potential to lose employees. Further, the financial analysis indicates that the option to expand vertically is a reasonable way for corporate developers to access convenient expansion space, while limiting their downside risk. Commercial developers on the other hand may find that the ability to scale back designs in the case of market downturns is particularly valuable. The case studies also confirm by example that the vertical expansion of buildings is technically possible. Although the process of erecting a major new building on top of a fully occupied building is clearly complex, it is not extraordinary difficult so long as the possibility of vertical expansion is built into the original design.

Vertical expansion of buildings has not been appreciated as an attractive feasible option for flexible development of real estate in a risky environment. These case studies and analysis bring this possibility to the attention of the real estate industry and corporate real estate managers.

In mid-2013 Deepak Kumar, Chairman and Group CEO of MakeMyTrip (MMT), was headed to the Hindustan conference room of the company's head office in Gurgaon, India, for deciding the new homepage design. A day earlier, Ajay, Product Head, had shared the consolidated results of the trials of different options (see Exhibit 1 for the results of testing the options) with the homepage website redesign team, responsible for the entire project. The team consisted of the head of business (CBO), the Analytics Head, the user experience (UX)head, the Product Head and the Tech Head (CTO).

Looking at the results, Deepak Kumar reflected that there were a lot of surprises in how the different options had performed. While the tracking tools in online businesses had a huge advantage over traditional businesses in that almost every customer interaction could be measured, there was still a lot of reading between the numbers that had to be done. Deepak was looking forward to a fruitful discussion to evaluate the options and finalise the new homepage design to be rolled out. As he opened the door to the conference room, he heard an excited chatter.