Folie 1

1
26th International Congress of Applied Psychology
(ICAP 2006), Athens, Greece, July 16-21, 2006
Otto-von-Guericke-University, Magdeburg
Environmental Psychology Work Group
Focus of Research
Background
The study presented here is an interdisciplinary
and multi-method approach to aspects of building
performance. It contrasts perspectives of
different groups involved in planning,
construction and operation. Four office buildings
with a particular kind of façade system are
evaluated using semi-structured interviews with
architects, facility managers and building
operators. Architects were further approached
with an online questionnaire. The questions were
mainly about processes of planning and
construction, expectations and experiences
concerning the building concept in focus.
Building users completed a questionnaire about
their perception, well-being and experiences
concerning the building. The following aspects
were analyzed Process monitoring What aspects
of the planning process are realevant to building
performance later on? Perspective taking Are
there differences between the perception of
architects and users? How is the users
perspective seen by architects and how good is
their ability to adopt the users point of view?
Designing a fully functional building requires
the integration of occasionally contradictive
aspects like functionality, efficiency and
aesthetics as well as knowledge about the needs
of prospective users. Especially in working
environments where besides general well-being
and satisfaction economically relevant aspects
like productivity may be affected by building
features (Wargocki, 1999), the quality of the
built environment becomes increasingly important.
Building planners and constructors are often
confronted with multiple and occasionally
moreover conflicting demands (Rambow, 2000). The
future users perception and needs are crucial
variables in the process of designing and
constructing buildings (cp. Linneweber, 1993) and
should be considered thoroughly. Studies have
shown however that e.g. architects often use
implicit, idiosyncratic knowledge concerning
users perspective and needs which is hardly ever
checked in reality (Rambow, 2000).
Results
The data collected so far consists of
half-structured face-to-face and telephone
interviews with 5 building operators or facility
managers and 6 experts (engineers and architects)
for the kind of façade system in focus. 13
architects (Mean Age 39 female 67 Mean
months in building 35) responded to the online
survey. 116 persons filled in the user
questionnaire right at their workplaces (Mean
Age 39 female participants 67 Mean months in
building 35). All qualitative data was
transcribed and dependant on the openness of
question analyzed by fixed or inferred
categories. Quantitative date was subjected to
statistical analyses.

• Perspective-related distance
• Results of the questionnaire show a crucial
  distance in perception and/ or experiences
  between building designers and building users
  that might contribute to later malfunctions and
  users dissatisfaction. The figure below shows
  that
• the importance of different advantages that are
  related to double layered facades differ clearly,
  especially when it comes to aesthetical aspects
• architects do partly misconceive the value users
  attach to some aspects like optical appeal
• there is a distance between attributions that
  are made to the façade system and experiences
• architects and users further seem to have
  contradictive experiences with advantages.

• Procedure-related distance
• Especially the analysis of interviews revealed
  that the different phases of a buildings
  evolution are somehow decoupled what creates a
  procedure-related distance especially between
  actors in construction and performance phase
• the buildings complexity requires an
  implementation of different actors with differing
  interests, their exchange and communication is
  seen as crucial but often not monitored
  thoroughly
• involved groups are likely to fluctuate
  resulting in difficult traceability of decisions
  difficult decreasing commitment
• particularly the exchange across phases between
  building planners and later facility managers is
  seen as insufficient by representatives of the
  latter group, an absence of architects interest
  in the constructed building was mentioned

Double layer facades
Importance user
Architects ascription
Importance architect
... make creativity possible
3,4
5
3,9
...are optically appealing
5,6
5,2
3,4
Architects experience
Users experience
6,1
5,4
3
...allow natural ventilation
provide a comfortable room climate
5,4
3,9
3,2
Importance or experiences could be indicated on a
7 point scale reaching from 1 not important/
not fulfilled at all to 7 very important/
completely fulfilled
Conclusion and Recommendation
The term perspective-related distance was
developed to distinguish the found intergroup
differences from the concept of social
distance. It was introduced to particularly
emphasize practical interventions not just
bringing together different groups involved but
also to encourage their active perspective-taking.
This could ameliorate interdisciplinary exchange
and consideration of user needs. Further an
explicit process-reflecting and anticipative
project-monitoring linking actors in different
phases and especially during formative
evaluations of building performance seems to be
crucial to bridge the gap.
The project is supported by
Contact Dipl.-Psych. Melanie Jaeger melanie.jaege
r_at_gse-w.uni-magdeburg.de More information about
the project http//www.igs.bau.tu-bs.de/_forschun
g/_twinskin/frameset.htm
2
26th International Congress of Applied Psychology
(ICAP 2006), Athens, Greece, July 16-21, 2006
Otto-von-Guericke-University, Magdeburg
Environmental Psychology Work Group
Focus of Research
Background
The study presented here is an interdisciplinary
and multi-method approach to aspects of building
performance. It contrasts perspectives of
different groups involved in planning,
construction and operation. Four office buildings
with a particular kind of façade system are
evaluated using semi-structured interviews with
architects, facility managers and building
operators. Architects were further approached
with an online questionnaire. The questions were
mainly about processes of planning and
construction, expectations and experiences
concerning the building concept in focus.
Building users completed a questionnaire about
their perception, well-being and experiences
concerning the building. The following aspects
were analyzed Process monitoring What aspects
of the planning process are realevant to building
performance later on? Perspective taking Are
there differences between the perception of
architects and users? How is the users
perspective seen by architects and how good is
their ability to adopt the users point of view?
Designing a fully functional building requires
the integration of occasionally contradictive
aspects like functionality, efficiency and
aesthetics as well as knowledge about the needs
of prospective users. Especially in working
environments where besides general well-being
and satisfaction economically relevant aspects
like productivity may be affected by building
features (Wargocki, 1999), the quality of the
built environment becomes increasingly important.
Building planners and constructors are often
confronted with multiple and occasionally
moreover conflicting demands (Rambow, 2000). The
future users perception and needs are crucial
variables in the process of designing and
constructing buildings (cp. Linneweber, 1993) and
should be considered thoroughly. Studies have
shown however that e.g. architects often use
implicit, idiosyncratic knowledge concerning
users perspective and needs which is hardly ever
checked in reality (Rambow, 2000).
Results
The data collected so far consists of
half-structured face-to-face and telephone
interviews with 5 building operators or facility
managers and 6 experts (engineers and architects)
for the kind of façade system in focus. 13
architects (Mean Age 39 female 67 Mean
months in building 35) responded to the online
survey. 116 persons filled in the user
questionnaire right at their workplaces (Mean
Age 39 female participants 67 Mean months in
building 35). All qualitative data was
transcribed and dependant on the openness of
question analyzed by fixed or inferred
categories. Quantitative date was subjected to
statistical analyses.

• Perspective-related distance
• Results of the questionnaire show a crucial
  distance in perception and/ or experiences
  between building designers and building users
  that might contribute to later malfunctions and
  users dissatisfaction. The figure below shows
  that
• the importance of different advantages that are
  related to double layered facades differ clearly,
  especially when it comes to aesthetical aspects
• architects do partly misconceive the value users
  attach to some aspects like optical appeal
• there is a distance between attributions that
  are made to the façade system and experiences
• architects and users further seem to have
  contradictive experiences with advantages.

• Procedure-related distance
• Especially the analysis of interviews revealed
  that the different phases of a buildings
  evolution are somehow decoupled what creates a
  procedure-related distance especially between
  actors in construction and performance phase
• the buildings complexity requires an
  implementation of different actors with differing
  interests, their exchange and communication is
  seen as crucial but often not monitored
  thoroughly
• involved groups are likely to fluctuate
  resulting in difficult traceability of decisions
  difficult decreasing commitment
• particularly the exchange across phases between
  building planners and later facility managers is
  seen as insufficient by representatives of the
  latter group, an absence of architects interest
  in the constructed building was mentioned

Double layer facades
Importance user
Architects ascription
Importance architect
... make creativity possible
3,4
5
3,9
...are optically appealing
5,6
5,2
3,4
Architects experience
Users experience
6,1
5,4
3
...allow natural ventilation
provide a comfortable room climate
5,4
3,9
3,2
Importance or experiences could be indicated on a
7 point scale reaching from 1 not important/
not fulfilled at all to 7 very important/
completely fulfilled
Conclusion and Recommendation
The term perspective-related distance was
developed to distinguish the found intergroup
differences from the concept of social
distance. It was introduced to particularly
emphasize practical interventions not just
bringing together different groups involved but
also to encourage their active perspective-taking.
This could ameliorate interdisciplinary exchange
and consideration of user needs. Further an
explicit process-reflecting and anticipative
project-monitoring linking actors in different
phases and especially during formative
evaluations of building performance seems to be
crucial to bridge the gap.
The project is supported by
Contact Dipl.-Psych. Melanie Jaeger melanie.jaege
r_at_gse-w.uni-magdeburg.de More information about
the project http//www.igs.bau.tu-bs.de/_forschun
g/_twinskin/frameset.htm