Office Building Design

“We shape our buildings, thereafter they shape us”

University of Groningen Faculty of Economics and Business MSc Business Administration Strategy and Innovation

Author: Wendy Tempels Student Number: 1385526 Date: October, 2009

1st Supervisor: dr. H. Snijders 2nd Supervisor: dr. T.L.J. Broekhuizen

Preface

During my study I always wanted to go abroad to ‘broaden my horizon’ and to learn about another culture, but it never really happened. The end of my study was in sight I chose to conduct the research for my thesis abroad. Australia was on top of the list and therefore I contacted organizations that might be interested in a research student conducting a research in the area of Strategy and Innovation. Through an acquaintance I came into contact with Arup and together we agreed on a research topic: the strategic design of office buildings.

Before writing my master thesis I had little knowledge of the design of buildings and the complex process of designing buildings. However, with the help of the experts at Arup I was able to shape my research question in such a way that it would add value for the research in Strategy and Innovation and for Arup as a company. In order to be of value for both I look at the design of buildings from a perspective of my master in Strategy and Innovation and I thereby leave the technical aspects up to the experts in the field.

In order to complete my research, I received help from a number of people that I hereby would like to thank. First of all I would like to thank all the interviewees, without their input this research could not have been conducted. I would also like to thank Caroline Edge, the library assistant at Arup for her guidance in finding the right secondary resources and Robert Hobson and Elli Firestone for reviewing my research and giving valuable comments. Furthermore I would like to thank John Tsoukas for giving me the opportunity to carry out my research at the Management Consulting department of Arup in Melbourne. And additionally I thank Arup and in particular the department for taking me up in their team, especially Gideon van der Westhuizen for supervising me and providing me with helpful contacts in the industry.

Another special gratitude goes to Hendrik Snijders for giving me objective feedback and interesting insights that helped me develop this research, being flexible and taking time for discussions. I would also like to thank Thijs Broekhuizen for his willingness to review this thesis.

My time with Arup in Melbourne was wonderful, the experience shaped me as a person and I enjoyed every minute of it. All the world belongs to me, Melbourne, July 2009 I’ve all the world to give Wendy Tempels Full of beans Full of glee Gosh! It’s good to live!

Ove Arup

Abstract

This research is a multiple case study on the factors that positively influence the use value of an office building from an occupiers’ perspective. The concept of design of an office building can be described in terms of functionality, aesthetics, durability and sustainability. The value of an office building is subjectively determined by the occupiers and is determined by the value the design dimensions add to the occupiers of the office building. The factors in the design process that are identified as positively influencing the use value are integrated design, end-user involvement and the statement of organizational needs in the briefing stage of design. Integrated design leads to an office building that will technically be better valued, the end-user involvement will make the design more human- focussed and the end-user more tolerant for change. And the statement of the organizational needs in the briefing stage of the design will lead to a building that fits the needs of the occupying organization.

Contents 1. INTRODUCTION ...... 5 1.1 Research Objective ...... 6 1.2 Research question ...... 6 1.3 Research Approach ...... 6 1.4 Definitions ...... 6 2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND ...... 8 2.1 Design ...... 8 2.2 Value ...... 11 2.3 Adding value with design ...... 14 2.4 Conclusion ...... 18 3. METHODOLOGY ...... 19 3.1 Research design ...... 19 3.2 Data collection ...... 20 3.3 Sample Selection ...... 20 4. RESULTS PART ONE: CASE STUDIES ...... 23 4.1 Case: Council House 2 ...... 23 4.2 Case: Bendigo Bank Headquarters ...... 28 4.3 Case: Eastlink Operations Centre ...... 32 4.4 Case: 1010 LaTrobe ...... 36 4.5 Case: Life.Lab ...... 41 4.5 Case: Southern Cross building ...... 45 5. RESULTS PART TWO: GENERAL PERSPECTIVES...... 48 5.1 Integrated design ...... 48 5.2 Involving end-users ...... 49 5.3 Stating organizational needs ...... 50 6. ANALYSIS ...... 52 6.1 Added value of the buildings ...... 52 6.2 Integrated design ...... 53 6.2 End-user involvement ...... 55 6.3 Stating organizational needs ...... 57 7. CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION ...... 59 8. FUTURE RESEARCH ...... 63 9. REFERENCES ...... 65 8.1 Articles and Books ...... 65 8.2 Websites ...... 69 9. APPENDIX ...... 70

1. INTRODUCTION

During the Second World War in a meeting about the rebuilding of the House of Commons held in the House of Lords, Winston Churchill made his famous observation about the relationship between the two party parliamentary systems and the design of the debating chamber when he said “we shape our buildings, thereafter they shape us ” (1943). This statement would mean that the way our buildings are shaped, influences the way we as persons and businesses are shaped. This then entreats the question: how to shape a building in such a way that it shapes us for the better.

Designers of buildings have been interested in the overall value added through their efforts and the legacy of design decisions on future generations of users, for a long time. Their ability to ‘prove the value of design’ has been intangible and is a problem not unique to the building and construction sector. It is a familiar issue throughout manufacturing and the world of product design. (Gann et al, 2003). The value that can be added by design to the end-customer is hard to describe and firms often do not know how to define value or even to measure it (Anderson and Narus, 1998).

The construction industry has been dominated by the term ‘cost’, with buildings designed down to a budget rather than up to a value (MacMillan, 2006). There is little if any consideration of the wider concepts of value such as the effect of the quality of the built environment on performance or the well- being of the occupants and on the lifetime operating costs of the building. However, the notion is slowly growing that a transformation of the design and construction industry is required and that its new mission should be: to add value for customers and society by shaping and delivering the built environment to meet their needs (Saxon, 2003).

This research focuses on office buildings and seeks to identify factors that are on influence on the added value of an office building for occupiers. It therefore anticipates shedding more light on how the industry can change to a value adding industry.

The research is conducted for Arup, which is a global firm that consists of designers, engineers, planners and business consultants. Mainly it consists of three sectors: buildings, consulting and infrastructure. As this research focuses on office buildings, the main sector that will be addressed is the building sector. Though in the recommendations, notion will also be given to the consulting department.

Arup’s vision for the building sector is to deliver a fully-integrated service for buildings throughout their lifecycle: from design, construction, occupation and adaptation, to decommissioning. Within the firm there are several departments and disciplines to support this vision.

1.1 Research Objective In order for Arup to realize the vision of offering a fully integrated service for buildings throughout their lifecycle, it is significant not only to offer quality but more importantly to add value for clients. Therefore identifying how the design of process of an office building leads to a design that adds value for the occupier, has a direct relation to the business of Arup.

1.2 Research question What factors have a positive influence on the added value of an office building from an occupier’s perspective?

1.3 Research Approach First of all the relevant literature will be investigated to identify the factors that might have an influence on the added value of the office building design. From this theory hypotheses will be derived that will accordingly be tested. The theory will be tested using case studies. Cooper and Schindler (2001) state that case studies put more emphasis on in-depth understanding and a full contextual analysis in fewer events. Buildings are place sensitive, and their design is therefore often more context and culturally dependent than manufactured artefacts (Gann and Whyte, 2003). Therefore a few case studies will be conducted in order to gain in depth understanding of every case in their own context. Accordingly, differences between cases will be distinguished and different views of designers and occupiers will be incorporated. This will eventually lead to answering the main question as to how the design process of an office building can lead to added value for the occupier.

1.4 Definitions In order to continue this study the two important definitions will be provided. First of all it needs to be clear what will be treated as an office building and what not. And second of all a definition of an occupier of an office building will be presented.

Office buildings The building code of Australia makes a distinction between different types of (commercial) buildings, which will be used for this research. The focus will lay on class 5 buildings which are office buildings used for professional or commercial purpose. The exact classification of buildings can be seen in Appendix I.

Occupier Occupiers of an office building can be seen as the users of the building which according to Gray & Tippet (1992) are: occupants (employees who work in the building), these are the true end user of the office building, senior managers or executives in the organization (who may not necessarily work in the building and visitors including members of the community, who have business in the buildings.

2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

In the theoretical background first of all the concept of design will be explained and different design dimensions will be distinguished. Second of all, the concept of value and in particular use value will be further described. When these two concepts are clear, several hypotheses are generated, which will be tested later in the research.

2.1 Design In the study of Gemser and Leenders (2001) the general definition from Ulrich and Pearson (1998) was used to define industrial design, namely, “ the activity that transforms a set of product requirements into a configuration of materials, elements and components. This activity can have an impact on a product’s appearance, user friendliness, ease of manufacture, efficient use of materials, functional performance and so on”. This general definition of design will also be used for this research. And can be translated into the transformation of a ‘brief 1’ that states the office building requirements into the configuration of materials, elements and components.

When designing an office building, four levels can broadly be distinguished that lead to the completion of an office building. In general the building shell and services are part of the base building 2 and the scenery and settings are part of the fit out of the building (Worthington, 1994). The four levels are:

Building shell – structure and skin of the building. Building services – heating, lighting, ventilation and communications. Scenery – Interior elements such as ceilings, dividing walls and finishes. Settings – Furniture and equipment.

Design dimensions When assessing the literature on design in products and buildings, different dimensions of design arise. The four dimensions this research distinguishes will be discussed in this section. The first known

1 A brief is the basis of design and becomes a reference document for the developer, design team and, ideally, the landlord and tenant/occupier as the case may be (Gilliam, 1988).

2 The base building refers to the part of a multi-tenant building that directly serves and affects all tenants. The base building normally includes the building's primary structure; the building envelope (roof and facade) in whole or part; public circulation and fire egress (lobbies, corridors, elevators and public stairs); and primary mechanical and supply systems (electricity, heating and air conditioning, telephone, water supply, drainage, gas, etc.) up to the point of contact with individual occupant spaces (www.open-building.org) .

8 work on the subject of architecture is that of the Roman architect and engineer Vitruvius (Rowland and Howe, 1999). He dedicated his work ‘De Architectura’ to his patron, the emperor Caesar Augustus as a guide for building projects. The work is still one of the most important sources of modern knowledge of Roman building methods and the planning and design of structures, both large (e.g. aqueducts, buildings, baths, harbours) and small (machines, measuring, devices, instruments) (Rowland and Howe, 1999). According to Vitruvius a good building satisfies the three principles of: “firmitatis, utilitatis and vensstatis” which was translated by Morgan (1914) into: Durability – it should stand up robustly and remain in good condition. Functionality – it should be useful and function well for the people using it. Beauty- it should delight people and raise their spirits. The work of Vitruvius forms the basis of constructing the concept of design in this research, which is completed by sustainability that came up in recent years.

Functionality Louis Henry Sullivan (1856- 1924) is the architect of the skyscrapers. Instead of imitating historic styles, he created original forms and details. He insisted that architecture should be about social life and values in its time and place and not be based on historic styles. This means that structural design and aesthetics should be entirely subject to functionality. Sullivan was the first U.S. architect in 1924 to contend that architecture was fundamentally an expression of social life 3 . The one famous quote of Sullivan is: " It is the pervading law of all things organic, and inorganic, of all things physical and metaphysical, of all things human and all things super-human, of all true manifestations of the head, of the heart, of the soul, that the life is recognizable in its expression, that form ever follows function. This is the law ." Normann (2004) describes the behavioural design as the function of the product, or how it works. He adds that the conceptual model of the product plays an important role. The conceptual model of the user should comply with the conceptual model of the designer. He calls this human-centred; the designer should understand and fulfil the wishes of the user. Functionality according to Conran (1996) refers to the functions or tasks the product has to perform. Usability is defined as a measure of the product’s potential to accomplish the goals of the user in a pleasant, easy, efficient and healthy way. Therefore usability includes the efficiency in use (functionality and consistency), but also ergonomics (healthy and easy) and to some extend the aesthetic part (pleasant) (Jacobs, 2006). Aesthetics can be used to make the design look easier to use, in order to increase the probability of the product being used. It thereby is not important whether the design is actually easier to use or not (Lidwell, Holden and Butler, 2003: 18).

Aesthetics

3 www.architecture.about.com

Norman (2004) argues that design should appeal to all the senses, as appropriate, and uses the term visceral design for this dimension of design. An example of this is the taste of bitter, most people do not like this and it is programmed in the brain (because things that taste bitter in nature are mostly toxic). The visceral level of our senses gives us the power to react fast to our environment. The aesthetics according to Conran (1996) is about the visual beauty and appeal of the design. This might for example be determined by the proportion, contours, colours, shape, material and texture. Conran (1996) stated that design is 98% common sense and 2% aesthetics. A lot of products are good for 98% but the products which have that extra 2% have a ‘magic ingredient’ which places them in a whole other category. It makes the difference between acceptable and special. However different appearances may mean something different for one person or another. The ‘object of visual semiotics’ tries to identify the codes, sometimes hidden and unidentified, that connect signs and meaning (Van Leeuwen & Lewitt, 2001). For example, the colour green may have a connection for a person with environmental awareness, nature, permission to pass or the Islam. The designs of brand logos take such connections in consideration (Jacobs, 2004). Kotler and Rath (1984) however, place less importance on the ‘look’ of a product, by saying that most designers honour the principle ‘form follows function’. “They seek forms that facilitate and enhance the functioning of the object rather than form for its own sake” They call this dimension the appearance of the product.

The relationship of functionality and aesthetics becomes clear when looking at ‘design consistency’ as Lidwell et al (2003:46) call it. A design is functional consistent when meaning and action are consistent (the consistent use of well known symbols e.g. a red traffic light). An internally consistent design is consistent with other elements in the system. The design is externally consistent when it is consistent with other elements in the environment of the system. And finally the design is aesthetical consistent when style and appearance are consistent.

Durability Kotler and Rath (1984) distinguish quality as a dimension, which deals with the many choices a designer has to make in the quality of materials and workmanship. The materials and workmanship will be visible for the consumer and will communicate a certain quality level. Kotler and Rath (1984) distinguish durability as a separate dimension and they argue that the durability will be affected by the performance and the quality characteristic. Kotler and Rath (1984) add another viewpoint by saying that the buyers will want to have some degree of visual durability which means that the product doesn’t start looking ‘out of date’ long before its physical wear out. A similar point was made by Fisk (1996), when he questioned whether the design of a building should be optimized around the first use, especially in the fast-moving and changing economy of today. As Fisk (1996, p. 19) argues: “ it hardly then means much to say ‘form follows function’ when ‘function’ may vary so widely during a building’s life.” The point that Fisk raised is an important one because of the relative long life time of

10 buildings. If these speculations are accurate, it does not mean the end of building design appraisal but possibly the reverse. Rather than making the building for the purpose of today, design becomes an assessment of the options to be left open, not the options to close. Normann (2004) describes his third dimension as the reflective design. He describes the reflective design as the cultural message the design says about the user. These reflections can be different in different countries and in different times.

Sustainability Recently, awareness has been growing for environmentally sustainable design or green design. According to the OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) policy brief (2003) ‘sustainable buildings’ can be defined as those buildings that have minimum adverse impacts on the built and natural environment, in terms of the buildings themselves, their immediate surroundings and the broader regional and global setting. ‘Sustainable building’ may therefore be defined as building practices, which strive for integral quality (including economic, social and environmental performance) in a very broad way. Thus, the rational use of natural resources and appropriate management of the building stock will contribute to saving scarce resources, reducing energy consumption (energy conservation), and improving environmental quality.

The Green building council in Australia has established a ‘green star rating’, which rates office buildings on how sustainable they are 4. The Green Star covers nine categories that assess the environmental impact that is a direct consequence of the buildings site selection, design, construction and maintenance. There are three different certificates:

4 Star Green Star Certified Rating (score 45-59) signifies 'Best Practice' 5 Star Green Star Certified Rating (score 60-74) signifies 'Australian Excellence' 6 Star Green Star Certified Rating (score 75-100) signifies 'World Leadership'

2.2 Value Value is an often used concept, however seldom clearly defined. Due to the fact that this research focuses on ‘value’, the concept will first be described in order to come to a clear definition of value that will be used for this research. The clarification will start with describing value from a resource based view and accordingly the concept of use value will be explained. After this, the value system and valuation will be discussed in the light of use value.

Resource based view of value

4 www.gbca.org.au

When looking at value from recourse based view, authors argue that a firm can be regarded as a bundle of recourses that are valuable, rare, imperfectly imitable and imperfectly substitutable. Therefore these resources are an organizations main source of competitive advantage. A resource is valuable when it exploits opportunities and/or neutralizes threats in the firms’ environment or when they enable a firm to conceive or implement strategies that improve its efficiency and effectiveness (Barney, 1991). However other authors defined a valuable resource as either enabling the needs of customers to be better satisfied (Bogner and Thomas, 1993) or to allow a firm to satisfy those needs at a lower cost than competitors (Barney, 1994).

If resources are valuable when they meet or exceed customers needs, it is important to know how customers judge the extent to which an existing product meets their needs, or whether a new product on the market would better meet their needs; in other words, how customers asses the value of a product. This is traditionally assessed by looking at value and customer behaviour and referred to as functionality theory. The theory states that consumers spend their income to maximize the satisfaction they get from products. Total functionality refers to the satisfaction deriving from the possession of a commodity and marginal functionality refers to the satisfaction that people receive from possessing one extra unit of a good or the satisfaction lost by giving up one unit. Now the question remains on how people develop their expectations and how they judge the value of a product as the purchaser has to judge how the products attributes will satisfy needs prior to actual consumption.

Use value and exchange value In order to describe the concept of value in further depth a distinction has to be made between different kinds of values: use value and exchange value (Bowman & Am). Use value refers to the specific qualities of the product perceived by the user in relation to their needs: the acceleration and styling of the car, the taste and texture of the apple, etc. Thus judgments about use value are subjective; they pertain to the individual consumer. Exchange value refers to price. It is the monetary amount realized at a single point in time when the exchange of the good takes place.

Perceived value can also be translated into monetary terms, as it can be defined as the price the customer is willing to pay for the product if there is a single source of supply (Collins, 1993). This judgment is based on the assessment of the product's value, coupled with the individual's willingness to pay. These monetary judgments cannot, therefore, be made in isolation from the wider needs and economic circumstances of the customer, or from the consumer's awareness of competing offerings. Only in the rare instance of a monopoly supplier, who is cognizant of the customers' valuation, and who can price discriminate, will the price the customer is prepared to pay equate to the price the customer actually pays. In all other circumstances, the price paid will be less than the total monetary value perceived by the customer. The difference between the customer's valuation of the product, and

12 the price paid is 'consumer surplus. Expressed differently, the price the customer is prepared to pay is price plus the consumer surplus. Consumer surplus (Whitehead, 1995) is what consumers refer to as 'value for money’.

Hence, perceived use value is subjective, and it is defined by customers, based on their perceptions of the usefulness of the product on offer. The total monetary value is the amount the customer is prepared to pay for the product. Exchange value on the other hand is realized when the product is sold. It is the amount paid by the buyer to the producer for the perceived use value. This research will further focus on use value, as the monetary and exchange value are both related to the perceived use value defined by the end-user.

Value system In order to place value on a certain offer, Jacobs (2006) explains that supply, is connected with the preference of the selector of the product; demand. The relevant economical selectors are ultimately the consumers; however they are not the only relevant selectors (Jacobs, 2006). The suppliers of the product also have to see value in the product they are offering. This means that the valuation of different kinds of customers has to be high enough to make the activity rewarding for each of the suppliers in a ‘value system’. A value system is the term Porter (1985:34-35) uses to describe the chain of activities from developing raw materials into end products.

The value system of an office building in the traditional process starts with the architect and the owner. The owner or property developer would most of all develop a program of their needs and select the site for the building, this often happens with the help of an architect. The architect then assembles a design team of consulting engineers and other experts to design the building and specify the building to the needs of the owner. Then the general contractor is hired to build the building, who is participating in the design phases most of the time, to help providing a more accurate estimation of the budget and scheduling (Gann and Salter, 1998).

The design-build method on the other hand, is a construction project delivery system where the design and construction aspects are contracted for with a single entity known as the design builder or the design build contractor. The design and construction phase are thereby overlapped in the process, and the architects and engineers are assigned by the contractor.

Valuation Suppliers and demanders can make different choices between different ‘value propositions’ (Jacobs, 2006). Occupants can have different priorities concerning attributes of, in this case an office building. This means that the minimum standard of accommodation will vary with each occupant; one occupant

13 may expect a high level of environmental control and high quality finishes, whereas others may only expect the minimum level of shelter and security.

The technical aspects of design are measurable and could in principle be completed by robots, as they have no personal sets of preferences. However valuation of technical aspects in an economic way is a task remained for the selector. An actor could for example check the speed of a microprocessor; however the selector has to determine beforehand a) that speed makes a microprocessor valuable and b) the type of measurement of speed that is acceptable (Wijnberg, 2004: 1477). The property council of Australia has for example established a document that determines the quality of an office building.5 However, the occupying organization has to determine whether these quality indicators are valuable to them. An office building can for example have an aesthetical foyer, but this does not necessarily have to be of value.

Evaluation on non-technical aspects in the contrary is difficult to objectify, because it is very hard to tell why a person likes for example a certain piece of furniture over another. Even people that agree on the selection criteria might come to different decisions (Jacobs, 2006).

2.3 Adding value with design Now that the concepts of design and added value are discussed, this paragraph will go into the factors that can positively influence the use value and subsequently realize the exchange value, of an office building through design. According to Conran (1996: 18) “ something that is well designed can improve the quality of life of the user ”. He thus states that the customer surplus discussed in the previous paragraph can be created by ‘good design’, followed by the comment that well designed products do not necessarily have to cost more than products that were designed without care and thus, creating more customer surplus without a higher asking price.

Integrated design With his remark, Conran (1996) turned the attention to the processes inside the firm or project group that create use value and subsequently, realize exchange value. Conran (1996) furthermore states that in order for a product to be well designed, the designer has to fully understand the manufacturing, marketing and selling processes, and ensure that the product is efficiently made and competitively priced. The designer must observe what is humanly desirable and technically possible. He consequently suggests that the designer has to be integrated into the whole process of product development. This remark is based on the assumption that in most industries the ‘design movement’

5 www.propertyoz.com.au

14 will first subsist from the inside-out and later from the outside-in (Jacobs, 2006). Meaning that in the beginning the design of a new product will not receive that much attention; see for example the famous quote of Henry Ford about the colour of its first cars: "Any customer can have a car painted any colour that he wants so long as it is black". When the technology begins to level out, designers try to debug the system. Thereafter the design of the product becomes more vital to differentiate from competitors: user friendliness and appearance become more important (Gemser and Leenders, 2001). This is what Jacobs calls designing from the inside-out. Secondly, a more ‘integrated design’ as defined by Conran (1996), will occur. To improve usability and functionality, designers try to simplify the product and its components. In order to do this, they have to start looking externally. And therefore Jacobs (2006) calls this designing from the outside-in.

Figure I design from the outside in

Design integrating the whole process Design shares interface between the company Multi functional team and audience central to corporate success Marketing Design is about Human factors better products Communication Industrial design Design as styling Engineering Market research Aesthetic wrap around Shapes, colours, graphics

Source: Fairhead, 1988

Many authors suggest that integration in building projects is highly needed (Turpin, 2007; Prowler, 2008; Puelo, 2008). Turpin (2007) defines integrated building design as: “ a collaborative, integrated planning and design process that uses a project team to make decisions in all stages of a project's design and construction ”. Puleo (2008) defines integrated building design as “ the means by which firms effectively combine and coordinate separate and diverse disciplines to create an organized team that is focused on the goals of the project”. However, integrated solutions also involve the bringing together of products and services in order to address a customer’s particular business or operational requirements (Slywotzky, 1996; Slywotzky and Morrison, 1998; Sharma and Molloy, 1999; Wise and Baumgartner, 1999; Cornet et al., 2000; Bennett et al., 2001; Davies et al., 2001; Foote et al., 2001).

Prowler (2008) also holds the assumption that each design objective is significantly important in any project, yet a truly successful one is where project goals are identified early on and held in proper balance during the design process; and where their interrelationships and interdependencies with all building systems are understood, evaluated, appropriately applied, and coordinated concurrently from the planning and programming phase. He states that a high-performance building cannot be achieved unless the integrated design approach is employed, resulting in the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1: Integrated design will result in an office building with higher use value

Baiden, Price and Dainty (2005) use a literature review and an empirical study, to develop a framework for measuring team integration in the construction industry. The team can be described as ‘integrated’ when the team has a single focus and objectives, is seamless in operations and has no organizational boundaries, has mutually beneficial outcomes, shares information unrestrictedly, is flexible and responsive to change, is co-located. An integrated team should also be able to predict time and cost better, every member should have equal opportunities for inputs, the team should have equitable relationships and a no blame culture should exist.

End-user involvement As established, in order to create a building that adds value for the customer, it is important that the customers business and operational requirements are met and thereby understood by the design team (Latham, 1994). In software system design, there has been a growing awareness of the importance of consulting users during the system design process. As the end-users are the individuals that will use the eventual system on a day to day basis –as users of office buildings are-, they are the final evaluators on whether the design meets their requirements. In order to meet the requirements of the end-user in the final product, they should be involved throughout the development life cycle and this has been viewed as a key ingredient in the success of the final system (Berry, 1994). Monk et al. (1993) even state that ‘close involvement with users is the only way to get sufficient initial requirements to produce a good user-interface specification. And on the other hand, the highest risk will occur when a system is produced based on a design that had no input from the intended end-users. It therefore is preferable to involve the end-users initially rather than during or after the development of a system (Auterberg and Strohm, 1991). A study of Gruner and Homburg (2000) shows that the intensity of customer interaction in the product development process, indeed, is positively associated with new product success in the machinery industry. Though, this effect varies by process stage. More specifically, customer interaction during early and late stages of the new product development process can increase new product success, whereas interaction during the medium stages yields no performance impact. The study of Alam (2002) shows the same results in researching user

16 involvement in the service industry: involvement of users was reported to be more intense during the initial (idea generation and screening) and later stages (service design, test marketing, and commercialization) of the development process because respondents considered the beginning and end of a process to be crucial.

Hypothesis 2: Involving end-users in design will result in an office building with higher use value

User involvement will be described using a study conducted by Alam (2002). He uses the basis of a literature review and an empirical study to develop a framework for describing user involvement. Users can firstly be involved in different stages of the design process. The intensity of the involvement can also vary. The first stage is the passive acquisition of input which means that the users take the initiative to provide input into the development process. The second stage is Information and feedback on specific issues. The third level is extensive consultation with users. Common examples include detailed interviews with the users, focus group research, and group discussions. Thus, the intensity of involvement is relatively high. The final level is representation. At this level, the users are invited to join a new service development team, where they contribute to the specific stages of the development process in their capacity as a team member. Hence, the intensity of involvement is considered to be extremely high.

Stating organizational needs Use value perception does not only apply to final consumers but also to managers that have to make decisions for the organization as a whole (Bowman & Ambrosini, 2000). To the single customer, or in this case the end-user, the need may be fairly easy to define, however for the manager that need may not be so clear. The logical and rational need could be identified as profit making (Besanko et al., 1996), however, this requires the manager to have a great insight into the cause-effect linkages between the use value of the resource and the ultimate delivery of profit. More specifically, the procuring agent has to have the belief that the procured resource will contribute to the profitability of the organization and this belief will accordingly be rooted in a wider set of beliefs about how the firm competes, which may be further bounded by an industry recipe (Huff, 1982,).

When relating this to the design of an office building it can be said that prior to becoming involved in issues of design, the need for a new building should be determined by the extent to which it contributes to the client's 'value chain'. Managers are therefore an important link in the design process as designers themselves do not understand the business processes of the occupying organization (Kaya, 2004). The knowledge that the manager or procurement agent has and shares with the design

17 team especially in the earliest phases of the design (the brief), is therefore believed to be of influence on the end result of the office building.

The briefing process is divided in two major stages: the first is a strategic review of the clients’ organizational needs and the second is more tactical in nature and concerned with performance issues. The recognition of the initial need to understand a client's business processes clearly goes beyond the simplistic checklists offered by the more traditional briefing literature (O'Reilly, 1987; Salisbury, 1990). The emphasis given to understanding the client's strategic context directly addresses the criticism of Pena et al. (1987) that often designers give far too little time and attention to " exploring the problem ". It is essential to understand the way in which any proposed built solution would impact upon the business processes of the occupying organization. And therefore, when organizational needs are not clearly identified and specified in the brief, the building could have less use value in the end result (Shen e.a., 2006).

Hypothesis 3: Stating organizational needs in the briefing stage of the design of an office building results in higher use value

2.4 Conclusion Design is the transformation of a ‘brief’ into the configuration of materials, elements and components of an office building. This will ultimately result in an office building with different outcomes that can be described as; functionality, aesthetics, durability and sustainability. Occupiers value the different design dimensions according pre-determined requirements, their personal and organizational preferences and industry recipes, which can be described as the use value of the office building. The price the client is paying for the building or to rent the office space is the exchange value at a certain point in time. The use value of an office building can be determined by the assessment of the different design dimensions and the value the selector is placing on these dimensions.

Furthermore, this research proposes that integrated design, end-user involvement and the statement of organizational needs, will result in a higher fit between the valuation of the different design dimensions and the actual design dimension present in the office building, and therefore in higher use value.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Research design Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill (2003) distinguish between deduction and induction. Deduction is the development of theory and hypotheses, which will be tested with the use of a research strategy. Induction is the collection of data and the development of theory using data analysis. This research uses a deductive research approach. First of all, secondary data, which was found in articles, websites, books and the internal library of Arup was reviewed and discussed. Secondly an experience survey was conducted to seek information from persons within Arup in different areas. Because it was necessary to gather some background information in order to refine the research question. The experience survey was comprised of short interviews with different people within Arup and with the Property Council of Australia (Table I gives an overview of the roles of people that were interviewed). Thereafter hypotheses were formulated and accordingly tested, which classifies this research as a deductive research.

TABLE I Respondents in exploratory research Position N %

Building structure 3 30%

Façade engineer 2 10%

Project management 1 10%

Organizational 1 10% psychologist Fire engineer 1 10%

Sustainability 1 10%

Property industry 2 20% advocacy Total 10 100%

The topical scope of a study can be statistical or a case study (Cooper and Schindler, 2003), the statistical research is designed for breadth rather than depth. They have the goal to make inferences on from the characteristics of a sample. The case study places more emphasis on a full contextual analysis of fewer events or conditions and interrelations. This study seeks to investigate whether the design

19 process of an office building has in influence on the eventual added value for the occupiers of that building. This study will therefore be conducted in the form of multiple case studies.

3.2 Data collection Arup is a global firm and worked on buildings in many places in the world. However, this research was conducted in the form of semi-structured questionnaires administrated during face to face interviews with various people who were involved in the building process. And since I was located in Melbourne, buildings in around Melbourne were chosen. Another important reason why buildings only in the region of Melbourne were chosen is that buildings are place sensitive, their design is therefore often more context and culturally dependent than manufactured artefacts (Gann and Whyte, 2003). Second of all,

The data was collected once and is therefore cross-sectional. The other way of collecting data would be longitudinal, which means that the study is repeated over an extended period of time. Since this research seeks to compare the added values of buildings with different design processes, the development of the building had to be fully completed, to first of all understand the process as a whole. And second of all, to measure the added value for the occupiers, which can only be identified after the occupiers have occupied the building.

This study focuses on the early stages of occupation of a building. The reason that was chosen to concentrate on new buildings was that the design process is still ‘fresh’ in the minds of the occupiers and the designers.

3.3 Sample Selection To test the varying hypothesis, several buildings were chosen. A differentiation was made between buildings occupied by one organization and buildings that are occupied by multiple tenants.

The Council House 2 (CH2) was selected as the first single-occupant building, as the organization (the Victorian government) highly promotes the user friendliness and the sustainability of the building. Furthermore it was stated that the building was built using a highly integrated team and with occupier involvement. To compare the CH2 building with a similar building, another organization was sought. The Bendigo Bank headquarters also promoted their user friendliness, the focus on the community and their sustainability, and therefore this building was chosen to compare the design process with the design process of CH2. The Eastlink Operations Centre (ELOC) building was accordingly chosen because Arup was involved in fourteen of the engineering disciplines and the design could therefore be expected to be fairly integrated. The occupiers of the building were not included in the design of the

20 base building as the organization was not yet established at that time. It can therefore be compared to the CH2 and the Bendigo bank buildings were the organizations were known prior to the projects.

Two other buildings were chosen that were occupied by multiple tenants: the 1010 LaTrobe building and the Life.Lab building at the Docklands were chosen, as they were developed by the same property developer, which thereby levels out the influence of the approach taken by a certain property developer. In the LaTrobe building, two organizations were investigated: one that was involved in the design early in the project and one that was moved in after the building was delivered. Only one of the tenant organizations of the Life.Lab building was chosen as all the tenants moved in after the building was delivered. The two buildings are expected to be a good comparison as it can contrast two organization that moved into a base building. The organization in the 1010 LaTrobe building that was involved early in the process will accordingly be compared with the organization that moved into a delivered building to compare whether the different design processes had an influence on the use value for the occupier in the end.

To compare the results of the studies to other buildings, in the final weeks of the research two more buildings were selected. First of all the Monaco House was included and two interviews were held. The results are however not included in the case study research because the owner and user of the building cancelled the interview and was not able to reschedule. The general perspective, of the interviewed architect and engineer, on the stated hypotheses were however included. Furthermore a property advisor of the Southern Cross building is included. This interview was used to enlarge results on multiple tenants’ buildings and to broaden the perspective as the 1010 LaTrobe and the Life.Lab building were both developed by the same property developer.

Although the response to this research was good, more buildings were selected and actors of the project team were contacted without receiving reply. Both single-occupant buildings and multiple- tenant buildings were selected. The single occupant buildings that were selected without reply were the Melbourne Fire Brigade, occupied and custom made for the fire brigade of Melbourne; the Gauge, designed and occupied by Lend Lease. This building also housed another tenant and it would have been interesting to see whether and what the differences in use value were when Lend Lease and the other tenant were compared. Also, members of the project team of the Freshwaterplace were contacted without reply; the reason why this building was selected was to enlarge the number of multi tenant buildings in the research.

To create a more in-depth understanding of the complex process of developing a new office building, the choice was made to interview several actors in every project team. The general perspectives on team integration and occupier involvement will be investigated. The CH2 building has an extensive

21 website about the design and the design process of the building; therefore only two persons were interviewed. In appendix 2 a full list of interviewees can be found and in appendix 3 the interview questions are enclosed. The names of the positions that are used in table II are general names in order to create consistency in the report. In appendix 2, the exact title of the interviewees can be found.

Table II, list of interviewees Position N %

Architect 5 18.5%

Engineer 7 25.9%

Contractor 3 11.1%

Property Developer 2 7.4%

Advisory 2 7.4%

Occupier 8 29.6%

Total 27 100%

4. RESULTS PART ONE: CASE STUDIES

4.1 Case: Council House 2 The Council House 2 building (CH 2) is the second Council House of the City of Melbourne. The building is totally occupied by the Melbourne City Council and is owned by the city of Melbourne. In the late 90s the Melbourne city council decided to go to zero emissions by 2020. The best way to achieve this was to design sustainable office buildings, as they were its biggest contributors to emissions.

Design Staff members of the city council of Melbourne were housed in dated office buildings that were nearing the end of their lifespan. The city council decided not to relocate staff to alternative offices but to embark on a plan to construct a new office building, the Council House 2. The building would have to lead the way in the development of a holistic green environment.

Functionality The functional goals of the city council for their new office building were mainly to create a human- centred, pleasant building that would improve the social relations of their staff. To stimulate this, the operation of the CH2 building was made to look like a termite nest: "I funnily enough spent a lot of time studying termite nests and the reason for that is that they're very much cleverer than we are at manipulating the natural environment. These great mounds that they build in nature, aren't like the castles we build to show off, they're actually lungs. The purpose of them is to extend the organism. The organism is the whole termitery ... and the termites are in fact like blood moving around in it. So they build these mounds and they breathe. They actually allow transference of air, and/or gases through a membrane, which is porous and you can study it from the point of view of diffusion of gases. There's quite a lot of science that we've done that would apply to a termitery” Mick Pearce (Principle design architect, City of Melbourne, 2004). Another metaphor that was used was that of human skin. First of all the skin makes sure that humans are comfortable via complex interaction of temperature, humidity and radiant heat. Secondly the skin is a complex filter that interacts with the environment rather than a tight cover. The outcome of the building is a human centred building with office spaces to stimulate communications and flexibility of staff, which supports the functional goals of the organization. The building management has conducted post-occupancy research which shows that absenteeism has reduced and productivity has improved. “ In any organization if you can make people healthy and happy there is a huge savings potential ” Rob Adams (Director, City Design, City of Melbourne, 2004).

Aesthetics The aesthetic intends of the building were to internally and externally show the sustainability and innovativeness of the building. The building also had to look like a ‘Melbourne-building as it was designed for the city of Melbourne. The towers represent a natural landscape such as tall forest or a series of stoned pinnacles or mounds. The colours on the north and south reinforce natural irregularity, just as the mosses that are attached to the side of a rock. The weathering of the façade and the choice of the external materials stand for the changing of natural elements but is also literally that process in action, which creates a responsive façade. However, besides the natural influences in the design, the

24 building was also designed to show urbanism. The proportion and scale of the building show affinity with art deco buildings of the rest of the street where it is situated and the building on the opposite. This makes it more consistent with the environment. The building was also designed to look theatrical; like a magical castle that counters the ‘dryness’ of most modern buildings. The buildings aesthetics says it is different, with the underlying message that there is another way to design city office buildings, showing its innovativeness. But at the same time it is saying that is part of the urban environment showing it is a building that fits in Melbourne.

Durability The goal of the building was to serve as a long-term office space for the city council of Melbourne. The building was designed to weather and thereby shows natural aging, which makes the visible durability of the building high. The functional durability is somewhat lower as the building was specifically designed for the City Council of Melbourne and because of the avant-garde design, which it supposedly will be associated with in the future. The building resulted in a high quality building that can serve the city council of Melbourne for a long time.

Sustainability CH2 emerged from a genuine commitment to explore how sustainable technologies could be integrated in every conceivable way, delivering concrete rewards to the property owner and its occupants. The building was aimed at the highest Green Star Certified Rating and indeed received the highest rating of 6 Stars, which signifies 'World Leadership'. It was the first Australian building to obtain the highest rating.

Adding value with design CH2’s collaborative design process explored and challenged every aspect of a contemporary office design. This focus on collaboration was said to be critical for the achievement of an integrated design concept for CH2 6. The CH2 design and development process was documented to enable others to learn from the experiences.

Integrated design The process began with the assembling of an expert team of consultants from around Australia and beyond. Firms were selected for their credentials and potential to work as part of a team. Working collaboratively with Council’s own designers and project managers, the CH2 multi disciplinary project team began by attending a two week workshop, followed by a series of weekly design meetings across

6 http://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/info.cfm?top=171&pg=1933

25 an eight-month period. The team was named ‘the charette’, which can literally be described as an intense period of design activity. Both the interviewees of the CH2 building implied that the design team of the building was highly integrated. The positive aspects of designing in the charette were, according to the architect, the fact that everyone had ownership over the building in the end as opposed to only their own specialized aspect of the building. Also, every design aspect was taken into consideration. And the project manager added to this by saying that everyone had a say in the design. Both interviewees agreed that one of the downsides of the charette was the long time it took to make decisions, because of the large size of the team. The project manager also said that the industry is not used to designing in a charette which slowed the process down. Furthermore, the architect stated that some people in the team felt ‘left out’ sometimes because not everyone understands each other’s profession.

End- user involvement The end-user was represented in the Charette and several staff meetings were undertaken throughout the project in order for the staff members to provide the representative with input. A professional organization was hired to lead this undertaking. The user-representative had previous experience in making alterations in the old office buildings of the city council. The end-users were involved in the design of the base building and the fit-out. The project manager stated that involving the end user in the process kept them exited and positive about moving in to the new building. The CH2 building was a very non-contemporary office building and the staff had to be trained to use the new building. He stated that the process of involving users takes more than just asking them what they want. There is also change management involved because people have open up to the change of their new office spaces. People have to be trained and there has to be communication with them so they can understand their new building and the design decisions that were made. This makes them more tolerant for the change. Another comment the project manager made was that staff members cannot all be pleased, and that they like to have power over their environment. The design of the building incorporated this by giving staff members more control over their workspace. The architect of the building added that he thinks buildings should be more like zoos. He thinks that not much is known about human beings and their relationship with offices or buildings in general and therefore the CH2 building incorporated this in the design of the building.

Stating organizational needs The clear goal of the City of Melbourne consisted of creating a ‘model building’ for others to learn from and follow in leading edge holistic, human focused design. And as the city council communicated this to the design team, as it was part of the charette. The open minded attitude of the City of Melbourne made it possible for the design team to explore and challenge every aspect of a

26 contemporary office design. Also worth mentioning is the fact that the City of Melbourne did not have as much monetary restrictions as other companies would have during the design of an office building.

Conclusion The CH2 building resulted in one of the most famous buildings in Melbourne and does what it intended to do on all the design aspects. It is an example building that others can learn from; all the aspects of the design are published in a special website. The design process was carried out to challenge the contemporary office building design. An integrated team was used that was called ‘the charette’, users were represented in the design team and a specialized consulting organization was used to lead the change process for the users. The city council had a clear vision and communicated this to the design team.

4.2 Case: Bendigo Bank Headquarters The Bendigo Bank's new head office building in Bendigo comprises two buildings; the existing Fountain Court and the new Bendigo Centre building linked by a glass-walled skywalk. The structure occupies an entire block in downtown Bendigo and comprises a six-storey building that can accommodate approximately 900 staff members.

Design The Bendigo Bank also wanted to relocate all their staff that was now spread over different buildings, to one office building, specially designed for the Bendigo Bank. The mission statement of the Bendigo Bank is: " We will focus on building and improving the prospects of our customers, communities and partners in order to develop sustainable earnings and growth for our business, and thus provide increasing wealth for our shareholders .” 7 The building was built to support this mission statement.

Functionality The functional goals of the building were to deliver a building that is pleasant to be in and creates a social environment for staff members. The other functional goal was the community focus, which resulted in some choices that are not justifiable in monetary items. For example, the choice was made to recycle water in the building itself. Bendigo is a very dry area, and water is therefore even more precious than in the rest of Australia. The installation of the recycling system, would not pay itself back during the life cycle of the building, however, the project team did decide to adopt the system because it would be good for the community in general. The building houses ‘social places’ that for example consist of a barbeque area. Good working conditions also show through the adopted air- conditioning system that works from the floor instead of from the ceiling down. Bacteria do not get spread around this way but get directly sent to the ceiling and out of the building because the air is not recycled but blown out of the building. It can therefore be said that the building is human centred and community focused.

Aesthetics Externally the building had the goal to send out an ‘open’ image to the community. For this reason the first idea for the design was a glass building. However, this would not have been good for the staff as it would generate too much glare. Therefore the architect proposed another design with sunshields in order for both the objectives (employer friendly and community focused) could be obtained. Internally the building also had to illustrate ‘openness’ to the staff members, which was created by a long hallway that connects the whole building. Furthermore the building is a landmark building in the small town Bendigo and really stands out in its environment, even more than expected as was stated by one the occupier representative. The colours and interior design are aesthetically the same internally as they are externally, making the design consistent.

7 www.bendigobank.com.au

Durability The Bendigo Bank Headquarters is a high quality office building and developed for long-term occupation. Therefore high quality materials were used for the creation of the building. The functional durability is also high since the building can be used for other businesses if the Bendigo Bank would decide to move out of the building. However, although the functional durability is high the building might still be associated with the Bendigo Bank if another organization would eventually move in the building due to its apparent aesthetics.

Sustainability The sustainability of the building is reflected in the mission statement and is therefore very important to the business of the Bendigo Bank. The building received a 5 Star Green Star Certified Rating, which signifies 'Australian Excellence'. The sustainable office building that is created is therefore valuable for the bank. Not only ‘give back’ to the community but also to show to clients and provide a healthy work environment for staff members.

Adding value with design The Bendigo Bank building is the result of a collaborative design team process and a willingness to look at new ways of doing business.

Integrated design The Bendigo bank used a traditional process for the development of their new headquarters. A professional property advisor was also appointed to lead the project. Although not every member was assigned from the start, they all attended the monthly meetings as soon as they became part of the team. “From the outset, the project team worked together to establish how the building could best relate to the people working in it, building up layers of its fabric and relating them to the ESD initiatives we set out to achieve ” (Peter Mathieson, 2006, Aurecon’s Buildings Sustainability Group Leader). The building was funded by the bank itself and one of the managers was assigned full time to the project. Some departments of the bank also had a representative in the project team, for example the marketing and the IT department. All the interviewees were very positive about the project team; they all agreed that communications were easy and pleasant. And two of the interviewees further mentioned that the team was ‘all-round’, and felt that this was important for the good end result of the bank. As one of the downsides of the project team the end-user representative brought up, that highly technical things discussed in meetings were not always understandable. Because design decisions were adopted instead of integrated in the design, the design is not totally integrated. This is due to the traditional process that was used throughout the design of the building, as opposed to a multi disciplinary team from the start of the project. Examples of adoptions are mostly sustainable features

30 like water recycling and solar hot water. A lot features were additional and were not in the plan in the first place, which suggest less integration.

End- user involvement The users were represented in the design team and were involved from the beginning of the process. They were also intensely involved in the fit out stage of the building and several steps were undertaken by the Bank. The first step was a needs-analysis to establish for example how many desks were needed, the growth of the organization, storage space, meeting areas etc. Following this, an analysis was done to determine the interdepartmental dependencies and links in order to determine where all the departments were to be located. The third step involved the determination of the furniture preferences of the users. Then the users were asked for their wishes in the new building. The fifth step involved creating relocation scheduled and timing, the sixth step involved the establishment of the IT equipment and the final step was the introduction of the new building which consisted of a morning tea with a presentation of the building. The end-user representative stated that it was important that the users were represented in the design team to address the ‘smaller issues’ as the user perspectives and needs are not always considered by the design team. The assigned project manager mentioned that end result of the building shows that the employees are important to the Bendigo Bank and that real attention paid to their needs.

Stating organizational needs The manager of the Bendigo Bank who was in charge of the project was knowledgeable about the business of the bank and he was part of the team. The manager believed that believed that good design can add value for the organizations’ business. The property advisor agreed that the manager saw the value that a building can bring, he said that the Bendigo Bank believes that they became a better organization trough their building. Three of the interviewees mentioned that the vision and the flexibility of the bank contributed to its success. Two of the interviewees stated that value in the end result of the building was seen as more important than the design and construction costs.

Conclusion The Bendigo Bank headquarters resulted in a landmark building in Bendigo and all the objectives were reached, although this costed more than expected. A traditional design approach was used which resulted in less integration than the CH2 building, which resulted in some design decisions being ‘adopted’ instead of integrated in the design. The characteristics of integrated design were present in the design team, which was conceived as very positive. End users were involved throughout the whole process by representation. And there were clear statements of organizational needs through the whole process.

4.3 Case: Eastlink Operations Centre The Eastlink Operations Centre (ELOC) is a set of three buildings that provide commercial space for ConnectEast, the governing body and operator of the new EastLink freeway; EastLink is electronically tolled with no cash booths. The predominant of the three buildings, The Administration Operations Centre, houses 2165sqm of commercial space over two stores. This building was specifically designed to incorporate the latest international technology for freeway systems and surveillance. The two supplementary buildings consist of a single storey maintenance building and a single storey garage building. The main building is used as an office building and is therefore subject of this study.

Design The EastLink Operations Centre was intended to establish a strong and identifiable corporate identity for Connect East, it needed to be sustainable and the complex internal systems needed to function well.

Functionality The form of the ELOC building is curvilinear, which is not very functional, storage space had to be given up and the windows in the building are small and therefore parts of the view are missed. The internal function of this building is very important as the business of the organization is to operate the EastLink freeway. The internal systems are working for the organization, but could have been better due to time and money constraints in the design and construction of the building, which will be discussed later. The fit-out of the building is however believed to be pleasant and the occupiers are happy with the design.

Aesthetics The bright coloured and rounded façade of the building is part of the surrounding sound barrier system and leans over the freeway below, providing styling between the surrounding landscape and the company. The façade draws upon a green colour scheme that unifies the entire EastLink project and was designed to reinforce a strong, cohesive corporate image. Even though the building is attractive and recognizable, the initiative to reinforce a strong image was a hard task as the image of the organization was not clear to the architect. The colour green was for example chosen to show the sustainability of the organization, but in the end the organization did not even receive a Green Star Certified Rating. The building is however consistent with its external environment. Internally and externally the aesthetic design is also consistent as the colours are matching and the curvilinear forms are coming back in the settings of the office space.

Durability As the building was especially designed to operate the EastLink Freeway, the functional durability of the building is low. The visual durability of the building is moderate; the building was designed to be low-maintenance because sustaining it is a hard task due to its placement. Due to the fact that the building had a low budget and had to be delivered in a very short time, the quality of the building could have been better.

Sustainability The building brief specified the building to be sustainable; however the design did not receive a Green Star Certified Rating.

Adding value with design Connect East is the sole occupier and owner of this building in a joint venture with the builder. Connect East communicated with the builder and the builder communicated with the design team. The building had to be established before the road was finished and was therefore under time constraints.

Integrated design The contractor formed a joint venture with the owner of the building, and was assigned before the architect. All the engineering services were performed by the same company and were assigned by the builder. The architect was assigned by the builder as well. Since the office building was specifically built to provide operation services for the freeway, it had to be finished before the road was completed. This put enormous time constraints on the project and therefore the builder had a low-cost and fast delivery focus. The architect and engineer that were interviewed felt that this made them less open minded for design suggestions from them. The occupier also felt that the focus of the builder was on low-cost delivery of the building. Because of the time constraints and complexity of the internal systems of the building, all the engineering aspects were performed by Arup. The ‘fast and furious’ project did result in everyone at Arup pulling together to deliver the design according to the interviewee. The architect and engineer also stated that they worked together pleasantly.

End- user involvement The end-users as a group were not involved with the fit-out or base building design because the organization was not yet established. The project leader of ConnectEast did work closely together with the interior architect that was of the same organization than the base building architect.

Stating organizational needs The person of ConnectEast, who was experienced in a previous project in Sydney, was assigned to lead the project in Melbourne. However, as a joint venture was formed with the builder, the builder was the one that communicated with the architects and the engineers. Therefore there was no direct contact between the manager and the design team. The manager mentioned that the brief for the building had to be established in a week and was therefore imperfect. All three of the designers affirmed that the requirements and vision of ConnectEast for their building were not clear and that less value could be created for the occupiers. Both the organization and the design team would have wanted more contact with one another and a clearer vision for the project.

Conclusion The ELOC building resulted in a landmark building, but could have added more value to the occupier. Functionality was highly valued but the design was not functional due to its form and internal systems work, but could have been better. High importance was also placed on the sustainability; however, the

34 building did not result in a sustainable building. Although it resulted in a building that is highly recognizable, the functionality of the building was sacrificed for its aesthetics. The functional durability of the building is low, but this was also not highly valued by ConnectEast. The building is only used for the operations of the EastlinkFreeway and has no further purpose. The quality of the building was on the other hand said to be valued by the occupier, but importantly they were not prepared to pay for the extra costs related to this, suggesting that the valuation of the quality was not that high after all. The integration of the design was mainly focused on the internal processes and engineering. End users were not involved as the organization was not yet established and the needs of the organization were not clearly stated.

4.4 Case: 1010 LaTrobe The 1010 LaTrobe building is an eight storey office building that was developed by a property developer and is rented out to three governmental organizations: the Australian Customs and Border Protection Services, the Bureau of Meteorology and VicTrack. 1010 LaTrobe is situated at the Docklands as part of the 4.4 hectares that will be used for the development of commercial and residential space for research, education, training and high growth enterprises.

Design The architect used the Green Building Council to see why commercial tenants choose one space over another, how they use the space and how they assess their own productivity in a feedback loop with the building itself. The property developer also researched what organization of these days want out of their building and included this in the building. The main aspects were flexibility of office space because organizations experience churn, sustainable buildings because organizations want to be environmentally friendly and affordable office space because organizations do not want to have high costs.

Two out of the three occupying organizations were interviewed for this research, the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service and the Bureau of Meteorology. The Australian Customs and Border Protection Service, manages the security and integrity of Australia's borders. It works closely with other government and international agencies, to detect and deter unlawful movement of goods and people across the border. The agency is a national organization employing more than 5500 people in Australia and overseas, with its Central Office in Canberra 8. The main role of the Bureau of Meteorology is “ to observe and understand Australian weather and climate and provide meteorological, hydrological and oceanographic services in support of Australia's national needs and international obligations ”9.

Functionality To give reach the goal of a flexible office space, the building is internally flexible in the buildings’ overall configurations; the building has no ceiling plates and an open-plan layout. This means that internal services remain exposed and no acoustic tiles are used. This had the twofold benefit of the occupier to refit the floor up to their needs at a specific point in time and it reduces the energy usage. It also feels more spacious without the ceiling plates.

The fit-out of the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service was integrated with the base building, this resulted in higher functionality because design decisions could be made or changed early in the process. Specialized high security rooms could for example be configured with internal systems in order to operate 24 hours a day.

8 www.customs.gov.au 9 www.bom.gov.au

The bureau only became involved when the base building was fully delivered and had to make some changes in order for it to fit their organization. For example, ceilings were placed to hide the extensive cabling and simple things like emergency signs that are not placed in relation to the fit out of the space.

Aesthetics The building is a reconstruction of the Munsterberg illusion which is a visual pattern that was discovered on the tiles of a café in Brisel in France. The aesthetic appeal of the building was not said to be very valuable by both tenants however, there were no extra costs involved in this design, as the building was kept simple ‘with a nice wrap around’. The aesthetics thereby created extra value, without extra costs. The building was built to be sustainable, but it was designed not to look sustainable. The architect of the building believes that green buildings should look however you want them to. Furthermore, the design of the building was kept very simple, in order for the building to stay cheap. The ‘wrap around’ however, was made special, so that the building is aesthetically interesting. Another thing the interviewees mentioned was the stunning view in the building. Because the base building design is quite special and standing out, it becomes very obvious that the fit-out does not have that same aesthetics, making the aesthetic design for the building as a whole inconsistent. This can be seen on the pictures at page 37; the aesthetic design of the corridor is obviously different than the design of the office space.

Durability The building was built simplistically, and the focus was on low-cost. One of the occupiers of the building stated that the quality and the finishes of the building could have been better. The functional durability on the other hand is very high. Due to the flexibility of the base building, various different organizations can move into the building and fit it out up to their wishes. Furthermore, the building is sustainable, which is also attractive for future tenants 10 .

Sustainability The 1010 LaTrobe building received a 5 Green Star Certified Rating as was one of the objectives. And also, one of the most important aspects of the three governmental organizations to move into the building was the sustainability. The use value of the sustainable aspect of the building is therefore high.

10 www.gbca.org.au

Adding value with design The design process can be classified as a design-build process which means that the builders are on board long before the design is completed. This allowed the builders to make suggestions in the design and provide ideas for cost cutting.

Integrated design All the interviewees described the relationships amongst the team members as pleasant and regular team meeting were held. The architect was appointed first and was open to suggestions from the builder and the engineers, which was confirmed by the interviewed engineer and builder. The architect stated that most value is created when the architect does not act in a vacuum but in collaboration with the rest of the team. The builder agreed by stating that having contact with the engineers was important for them because the engineering disciplines are interdependent with the work of a builder. The builder also stated that the experienced architect made the process go smoother. And the property developer said that he liked to work with this architect that he had worked with before because it ‘worked’.

End- user involvement In the fit-out of the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service end-users were involved through focus groups. The groups were asked to specify the needs of the end users and this was incorporated in design decisions. The organization used an integrated fit-out approach which made it possible for the end-users to be involved in part of the base building design as well. The manager believed that consulting end-users resulted in a better change process of the move to another building. This was especially important in this case because the employees were very happy with the location of their old building and not keen on moving. However due to the involvement the resistance to change was believed to be lower.

In the fit-out process of the Bureau of Meteorology, end users were involved by organized staff meetings to discuss major decisions, and there were focus groups of users for the day to day decisions. The Bureau of Meteorology also experienced more willingness of staff to accept the change of the office building by including them in the fit-out design.

Stating organizational needs As base building1010 LaTrobe building was designed as a speculative building, which means that tenants were unknown at the pre-design stage. When the building went into development 70% of the tenants were known. And because of the sustainability of the office space, all the tenants are governmental organizations as they are obligated to have a sustainable office space. The Australian Customs and Border Protection Service chose for an integrated fit-out as was discussed. The other

39 interviewed organization, the Bureau of Meteorology did not choose for an integrated fit-out and differences can be seen in the two office spaces. The Bureau of Meteorology had to make changes in the office building prior to moving in. Some walls were demolished and ceiling plates were installed. The flexibility and spacious look of the design as was anticipated by the property developer was thereby reduced. It also makes this office space less consistent with the rest of the building according to the architect. However the interviewee of the Bureau of Meteorology stated that the ceilings were placed to hide the extensive cabling that is needed for their services. The Australian Customs and Border Protection Services did integrate their fit-out with the base building and they did not have to make any changes in the structure of the building as this was already incorporated in the base building. The interviewee stated that there was intense contact with the builder and engineers, although communications were not directly with the intended person. This sometimes resulted in mistakes in the structure that could not be changed in the end-result.

Conclusion The main aspects that the property developer and the architect established to be important in the building were flexibility of office spaces, sustainability and low cost. And all those objectives were reached. The sustainability aspect was the most important for the two organizations to move into the building. The office building is functional because it is flexible in its configurations and extra value is created with the low-cost aesthetic wrap around, the durability of the building could have been better.

The project used a design-build method thereby improving the constructability. And although the design was only used as a ‘wrap around’, there were characteristics of integration present like the good working relationships. The Australian Customs and Border Protection service was involved earlier in the process by ‘integrating’ their fit out in the base building design. This resulted in the fact that they could move in right away and no further changes had to be made as opposed to the Bureau of Meteorology that had to make alterations in the building. The Bureau of Meteorology and the Australian Customs and Border Protection service both used focus groups for the arrangements of their fit-out.

4.5 Case: Life.Lab The Life.Lab building was developed by the same property developer as the1010 LaTrobe building and houses multiple tenants. The building contains commercial and residential space, comprising an eight storey building located at the Docklands next to the 1010 LaTrobe building. It offers office facilities within Digital Harbour’s technology ‘urban campus’ and a feeling of living in a community.

Design

The property developer and the architect developed a clear vision for this building on the basis of market research and research on the new concept of living and working in the same office building. The building was targeted towards small technology oriented organizations. The Life.Lab building housed multiple tenants and one of them was interviewed. The occupant interviewed in the Life.Lab is Entermo Limited; a relatively new company with a few employees. EnterMo Limited is developing cost-effective solutions in the area of wireless mobile technology. The main value aspects why Entermo chose to move into the Life.Lab were the location and aspects of the building. The Docklands is situated close to the highway and as a lot of the staff members have to travel from a small town to work, easy access to the building was a great necessity. The novelty of the area (the Docklands) also suited the newly founded company in their culture. Moreover, the company makes a technological product and is small, which means that it falls in the target group for the building. Another aspect that was of interest was the relative low cost of renting the space compared to renting the same space in the city centre of Melbourne.

Functionality The Life.Lab building is designed to help occupants project an image of 'business on the move', and is targeted towards small organizations with an emphasis on technology. It has special meeting rooms and presentation facilities that are designed to be of shared use by the companies. Another value adding aspect of the Life.Lab is that it can be used for living purposes, as well as business purposes. Life.lab also delivers the “Telstra Velocity fibre” to the office network, into offices and homes where occupants can benefit from technology for home learning, the home business or for accessing online services 11 .Occupants will be able to 'tap into' the vast range of resources and services of Telstra. The design philosophy was to design a building with high flexibility, a community focused, simplistic with a semi-industrial look and an exciting, innovative and forward looking building.

Aesthetics The building therefore looks quite simple in the inside and colourful on the outside. The building is a simple and low cost base building with again, a nice aesthetic ‘wrap around’. The occupier describes the inside of the building as ‘warehouse’ looking and as simplistic. The building is of average quality but not overly sophisticated due to the budget constraints. But the building was not designed to look luxurious.

11 www.lifelab.com.au

Durability The building was designed to be cheap and is kept very simple. Functional durability of the building is questionable because it was specifically targeted towards a niche market. The visual durability of the building is good, it is to be expected that the building will not start looking out of date.

Sustainability The Life.Lab project did not have the goal of attaining a Greenstar Certified rating, and it did not receive a star.

Adding value with design The design process of the Life.Lab can also be described as a design-build process. Also worth mentioning is that the building is developed by the same property developer and builder as the 1010 LaTrobe building.

Integrated design Although the team had good relationships, and met often, they all worked on their own project. The architect stated that there were meetings were everybody that wanted to come, could come. Sometimes the people just came for their part of the project and sometimes they stayed for the whole meeting, it was up to them. The builder mentioned that the architect did not have much previous experience with large office buildings and was quite small in scope which made the process less smooth than the process of the 1010 LaTrobe building. The team of the builders also consisted of young people in the profession and the design manager was new, this resulted in some minor mistakes being made. As for the property managers he noticed that a learning curve existed for the development of office buildings. The property manager himself supported this statement.

End- user involvement The end-users were not involved in the base building design. The office space was fitted out by the organization as a whole as there were two office spaces to set up.

Stating organizational needs The clear vision and goals for the building resulted in a base building that could be of high value for the target market which consists of young technology focused companies. Worth mentioning is that not all the offices are occupied up to this point, suggesting that the target market might have been too small. The reason why Entermo chose this building was indeed the low cost, the surrounding by other young companies and its location. The downside of not being involved in the early design stages was that the base building was not ready for use right after delivery. One of the base building an internal wall had to be taken out, in order for them to create an internal door between the two office spaces

43 they rented. And because Entermo uses another network provider the Telstra network that was already set up in the building, expensively, had to be replaced by another network.

Conclusion The main value aspects why Entermo chose to move into the Life.Lab were the location and aspects of the building. Another aspect that was of interest was the relative low cost of renting the space compared to renting the same space in the city centre of Melbourne. The value aspects of the design of the building were not mentioned by the occupier as creating use value. The functionality of the building could be high for the small technology based organizations; however the interviewed person of Entermo stated that it did not use the facilities that were provided by the building.

The team of the Life.Lab building was not integrated and everybody worked on their own project. Entermo was not part of the design process until the fit out. The fact that the end users themselves were not able to be involved in the process up to the fit-out resulted in extra costs and time in changing the office space up to the organizational needs. The stating of organizational needs was mostly done by the predictions made by the architect and the property developers, and although the characteristics of the building could add value for occupiers, the building is not totally occupied and the interviewed occupier chose this building for different reasons than were intended by the developer and architect.

4.5 Case: Southern Cross building The Southern Cross building comprises two large transparent glass office towers known as the East and West towers. The east tower comprises 40 levels (165 meters high). And the west tower is a future 21-level building that is planned to occupy the western end of the site; this tower is subject of this research. The tower will be fully occupied by the Australian post in late 200. Only one interview was held in this case and therefore the description is less extensive than cases that were described previously.

Design Australia Post Group Manager - Corporate Real Estate, Adam Treffry, said that the company had considered development of their own site at Spencer Street, as well as a number of other leasing options. “We have been investigating all possible opportunities for our Headquarters requirements,” Mr Treffry said. “The Southern Cross West Tower is the most prudent option both financially and in relation to the expiration of our current leasing agreement at 321 Exhibition Street” (Adam Treffry, 2007, Australia Post Group Manager - Corporate Real Estate). The reason they were looking for other office space was that the staff were spread over 6 buildings and either had to refurbish 20 year old buildings for the third time or move into a new building.

Sustainability The building will deliver Australia Post a 5 star Greenstar Certified rated building, which includes a Black Water recycling plant. The Owners’ commitment to sustainability was a major factor in Australia Post’s decision to relocate to the Southern Cross site.

Adding value with design As mentioned in the methodology, another interview with the property Advisor of the Southern Cross office building was held to shed more light on the multiple tenant buildings. An integrated fit-out and the Design-Build process was also used in this building, making it interesting to compare with the two cases of the 1010 La Trobe building. Again, it has to be taken into account that only the view of the property advisor is taken into account and no occupier interview was held.

Integrated design As with the 1010 La Trobe building, the Design-Build process was used to develop the building. The interviewee mentioned that it is quite normal for developers do built with a design-build contract in order for the builder to carry the risk of the design and construction. It also results in more cost effective solutions as the builders will search for better options.

End user involvement End-users were involved in the fit-out process through consultation. And it was also mentioned that the organization dealt with the change management process very well, making the transition better.

Stating organizational needs The Australian Post will integrate their fit-out with the base building and therefore no structural changes are expected to have to be made in the end. When the Australian Post wanted to make changes in the design, they always advised the design team early on so that the changes were still easy to implement.

The comment the interviewee made as to the statement of organizational needs was that the ‘anker tenant’, which is the largest tenant providing an important income percentage for the developer has a lot to say as they want to tie this tenant to the building. The Australian post and the developer used a milestone plan in order for the process to run smoothly. The milestones involved little steps of the design that were established in collaboration with the builder. The reason that a milestone plan was chosen was because the Australian Post wants to move in at a specific date, but the developer wanted to make the Australian Post responsible for this by setting them in charge of the completion of the milestones.

Conclusion The Australian post chose the building due to the sustainability and the costs aspects. The design-build method that was used resulted in more cost effective solutions. End-users were involved through consultation and the main value of this, according to the interviewee, was that the change process proceeded smoothly. The Australian post will have an integrated fit-out and the statement of needs was set out in a milestone plan in collaboration with the builder and the property developer.

5. RESULTS PART TWO: GENERAL PERSPECTIVES

In this chapter, the interview findings on the general remarks about the three stated hypothesis will be described. It was interesting to see that the different actors in the industry all have different opinions about the subject. Although this research is written from an occupier perspective, the perspectives from the other project member are valuable for making a complete analysis. It will therefore be used in the analysis to further develop the findings of the case studies.

5.1 Integrated design Six out of the seven engineers that were interviewed for this research stated that integrated design teams are beneficial for the eventual design of an office building. They experience that in the traditional bid-structure they get employed late in the process, too late. When the engineers get engaged when the design of the shell is already completed, they have less option to fit in the design for the building services. One engineer stated “ the engineer has to deliver its proposals within the space the architect has created, latterly and figural ”. This takes more time. Another quote was made by an engineer that described the general standpoint of architects towards engineers: “ prove to me that it doesn’t work .” In this sense, it was also said that resolving issues at the beginning of the project, and taking more time at this stage, could result in enormous time savings in the end of the project. Five of the seven engineers also recognize that green buildings need a more integrated approach as integrating systems requires to be carried out at the beginning of the project and are less effective when they ensue as a checklist at the end of the project, by for example adding green features to the building. Complex projects also need a more integrated approach according to the six of the seven engineers. The one engineer that did not see the added value of an integrated approach stated that the architect has the ‘bigger picture’ and is better in overseeing and leading the whole process, whilst the engineers are more practical. As the downside of integrated design, one of the engineers mentioned that the process can take longer, because of the longer decision making and the budget is uncertain because of the unfixed bid.

All the interviewed architects commented that the engineers overstate technology, and are too detailed. One quote of one of the two architects favouring collaboration was: “ The good engineers don’t go asking for frozen backgrounds so they can build a structure on it, but they think with the architect ”. Three out of the four architects stated that there needs to be a person leading the design process but one out of these three also thought that everyone should have a say in the process. He stated that “Everybody should be treated as the experts in their field but this accordingly has to be managed ”. Thereby he also mentioned that this does not necessarily have to be the architect. The other two

48 architects did not want as much interference in the design as it speeds up the process and because they believe that the architect is the best person to lead the design process. One out of these two did state that integrated design could add value when money is not an issue. Two other architects, the one believing in collaboration and the architect of the CH2 building, believe that integrated design can add value. One of them declared that the ideal team consists of an architect, engineer, somebody that knows about building and somebody that knows about the functioning of humans in an office building. He also stated that that the personality of people matters more than the expertise in their field meaning that they have to be able to see the ‘bigger picture’.

Out of the three interviewed constructors, one did not have enough experience in the delivery office buildings to comment on integrated design. The constructor was of the ELOC project and was mainly concerned with the development of the road, although he did know how the project itself proceeded. The two other constructors felt that an integrated approach is beneficial for occupiers. Both of them commented that integrated teams come with more suggestions that can be beneficial for the owners. The two constructors also felt that especially contact with the engineers is important as the services are interdependent. One of them even stated that most of the engineering firms as a whole do not even work together; he stated that they offer a wide variety of services in one company, but that does not mean that they actually act as a team. As the downside of integrated design, the builder mentioned that there is a ‘lock-in effect’ for the owner of the building, because there is no bidding structure. This means that everyone is present from the start and parties cannot be chosen on their fixed brief and price, but the design will evolve out of the collaborative process.

The two advisors, one property advisor and one strategic consultant agreed that an independent party is needed to lead the project process. One reason was that architects can miss certain aspects because they sometimes are too focussed on the aesthetic design and are strong minded people.

5.2 Involving end-users Six out of the seven engineers that were interviewed did see an added value in having direct contact with the end-user. One of the engineers did not see this value and thinks the brief is sufficient. He believes the architect is the communicator that should get into contact with the end-users and accordingly tell the engineers what to do. The other engineers believe that targeting the end-user can add more value as opposed to designing ‘what they are told’, the more information, the more value can be created. Another positive aspect of involving end-users that was mentioned was that it makes them feel as co-owners of the building, which in turn makes them more acceptant of the change to another office building. One engineer thought there was not enough time to get into contact with the end-users and another did not see possibilities because of the traditional way the industry is set up and therefore sometimes the end-users is not even known to the engineers.

Three out of the four architects feel that in the base building design, end-user involvement is not important. One of them declared that the base building can be the same for every organization, but that it has to be more human-focussed in general, stating that “ buildings should be more like zoos ”. Be which he meant that not a lot is known about the functioning of human beings in relation to their building. The second architect thinks that with market research a target market can be reached and the third did not believe in dialogue at all. At the fit-out phase in the design process, the involvement of end-users was more important as decisions are made about their desks, all architects agreed on this. The architect does believe in involving end-users in the whole process stated that the end-user is king, although there can be some struggling between the owner and the end-user sometimes in the case of multiple tenants. He believes that the end-user should be part of the design team, but they should stay in their own level of expertise, meaning that they should not act as the designer.

One of the two property developers agreed with the architects that a base building should not be built totally up to the occupier wishes; he believes flexibility is the key to success. The property advisor of the Bendigo Bank added that a so called ‘exit strategy’ is used with building that house one tenant in order for the building to be useful for other organizations, this was also executed in the design of the Bendigo Bank.

The strategic consultant had a clear view on the involvement of occupiers in the fit-out of their office space. He stated that it was important to engage clients in order for them to know how to use the building, especially in sustainable buildings. He stated that the end-user has to use the building the right way in order for the building to really add value. One of the project managers agreed by stating that there is a change process involved in the move to another building, and involving users will make them more acceptant of this change. He added that during the design process it is impossible to please every single occupier; therefore representatives are needed in the design team to be most effective.

5.3 Stating organizational needs All of the interviewees agreed that the clear statement of needs by the client is crucial for the success of the project and for the building to add value in the end. However, when talking about the client, they not always referred to the occupying organization; this was especially true for the engineers. One of the engineers commented that architects could interpreter the wishes of the occupying organization differently than they would have done themselves.

However, the organizations themselves do not always see the value of the clear statements of their needs. A property developer explained: “Clients don’t really care about their building design because the building standards in Australia are pretty high anyway.” This suggests that occupiers do not have

50 an understanding of the value a building can create for their business. One builder also commented that a lot of the times organizations do not know what they want out of a building.

A returning comment by people in different positions was that experience in previous buildings is smoothing the process as well. The property developers of the 1010 LaTrobe and the Life.Lab building stated that a learning curve had occurred. The builder of these two buildings also noticed that the property developers had learned from previous experience. The occupier representative and the assigned project manager of the Bendigo Bank both replied that their inexperience in the development of a new office building was a negative aspect of the project. They did however reply that during the process a learning curve had occurred. The interviewed manager from the Bureau of Meteorology replied that his experience in the design of a previous office building helped him with this project. He is working on a new project right now, which according to him is working even better. The interviewed manager of the ELOC building also replied that his experience in a previous building in Sydney helped him in this project. The strategic consultant thereby commented that the way to overcoming inexperience is to hire a professional organization to manage the process on behalf of the organization. Developing a strategic brief in this stage was seen by him to be the most important to add value for the business of the occupier in the end. A shared vision will evolve out of this and this makes the building in the end more valuable as it is designed up the business needs of the occupier. When hiring a professional organization, another advantage is their objective view and understanding of business. “ Designers ask questions with the solutions already in mind ”, whereas the specialist tries to understand the business of the client in dept. Another way of overcoming inexperience in the industry in general is evaluation of the project. One of the engineers, the project manager of the CH2 building and the strategic consultant, agreed that evaluation of the project is not conducted enough and a lot can be learned from this.

For property developers, as two of them specified, developing an office building special for organizations’ needs is a great risk. It occurs often that organizations decide not to occupy the building anymore. When the building was designed for that tenant specifically, it is less attractive for other tenants. However it is also less risky for the property developer as the assigned tenant put a great deal of effort in the office building and is therefore less likely to not move into the building. The property developers interviewed for this research therefore chose to be either flexible in the design, meaning that occupiers have more freedom in their fit-out, or to integrate the fit-out with the base building.

6. ANALYSIS

In this chapter the results will be analysed in order to come to a conclusion in the next chapter. First the success of the cases will be discussed after which it will be analysed why one case was more successful than another in the sense of adding value for the occupiers.

6.1 Added value of the buildings The Bendigo Bank and the CH2 buildings both did exactly what they intended to do in their functionality, aesthetics, durability and sustainability aspects and are therefore both successful cases. Both buildings add the most value to the occupying organization as they were specifically developed for them and all the design goals were reached. The difference between the cases is that the CH2 building has a higher Greenstar certified rating than the Bendigo Bank. The ELOC building did not reach all of the goals that were set and therefore adds less value than the previous buildings. The functionality of the building was sacrificed for its aesthetics and the building did not receive an intended Greenstar certified rating. The durability of the building was high as it had to be low in maintenance.

As for the 1010 LaTrobe building, the sustainability aspect was the most important for the two organizations to move into the building. The office building is functional because it is flexible in its configurations and extra value is created with the low-cost aesthetic wrap around, the durability of the building could have been better. The main value aspects why Entermo chose to move into the Life.Lab were the location and aspects of the building. Another aspect that was of interest was the relative low cost of renting the space compared to renting the same space in the city centre of Melbourne. The value aspects of the design of the building were not mentioned by the occupier as creating use value. The functionality of the building could be high for the small technology based organizations; however the interviewed person of Entermo stated that it did not use the facilities that were provided by the building. The aesthetics are not seen as valuable by the occupier, the durability of the building is moderate but the occupier did not see this as a problem and the building did not receive a Greenstar certified rating, but the operation costs are included in the renting price and the interviewed tenant did not find a sustainable building important. The Southern Cross building will only shortly be addressed and it will be used as a nuance as only a minimum amount of information is obtained. The main reason why the Australian post chose the building is due to the sustainability and the costs aspects.

To conclude, in the sole tenant building, the CH2 and the Bendigo Bank building were the most valuable buildings for the occupiers, and ELOC created less value. From the multiple tenant buildings the 1010 La Trobe building created more value than the Life.Lab building. Since there is too little

52 information on the Southern Cross building, it will not be included in this classification, but only used as a nuance on the analysis in the next paragraph.

6.2 Integrated design Case studies

After describing the cases in chapter four, a visual representation is made in order to conduct a better analysis. The figure is based in figure I on page 16

Figure II

CH2

Bendigo Bank Design integrating the whole process Design shares interface

between the company Multi functional team and audience central to corporate ELOC success Marketing Design is about Human factors 1010 LaTrobe better products Communication Life.Lab Industrial design Design as styling Engineering Market research Aesthetic wrap around Shapes, colours, graphics

Own elaboration, 2009

The CH2 building was the perfect example of integrated design and led to a building that had very high value for occupiers. The design was integrated in the whole process and a multifunctional team was used, the building is therefore placed on the highest ‘step’ in figure II. The positive aspects of the project were the multi disciplinary and highly experienced project team, the fact that everyone had ownership over the end result and the fact that every aspect of design was taken into consideration. The negative aspects were that it took a long time to make decisions, the fact that the industry is not used to designing in a charette, which made the process tougher and some people felt left out during the meetings when their level of expertise differed from the issue that was discussed. The Bendigo Bank was less integrated in its design, as it used the traditional approach, but although the design was not integrated the factors of integrated design were present in the project team as defined in the theoretical part of this research. It is placed on the third ‘step’ in figure II. There were for example good and pleasant communications, the all-round team met regularly and the team had a shared vision.

The downside that was mentioned by the occupier representative was that she sometimes did not understand highly technical things. And that the assigned project manager and the occupier representative were unexperienced in the design of a new office building. The design of the Eastlink Operations Centre was focussed on engineering, and is therefore placed on the ‘second step’ in figure II. Although the architect and the engineer worked well together, the relationships with the builder were less collaborative and the builder was less open minded for suggestions because of the time and budget constraints. The time constraints did result in everyone within Arup, the firm providing all the engineering services, pulling together, which resulted in a complex system in the building that works.

The positive aspects of the design team that the Bendigo bank and the CH2 building thus had in common that they were a multi-disciplinary project team and easy communications. The two interviewed employees of the Bendigo Bank did have little experience, but a property advisor was hired to overcome problems associated with inexperience. The rest of the team of the Bendigo Bank consisted of highly experienced members as the CH2 team did. The negative aspect that came to the surface in both projects was that some team members do not always understand each other when issues out of their expertise were discussed. The differences between the two projects were that in the CH2 project, the team members replied to have ownership over the whole building and that everybody had say in the design, which was not mentioned by the interviewees of the Bendigo Bank. Importantly the CH2 project members replied on two negative aspects that were not present in the Bendigo Bank project. Namely the long time it took to make decisions and the fact that people are not used to designing in a charette.

The base of the 1010 LaTrobe and the Life.Lab buildings were delivered by a Design-Built method, the project members met regularly and good relationships existed. The builder, which was the same for both projects, mentioned the advantage of being involved earlier in the process resulted in the generation of ideas to make the design more efficient and cost effective, which was also supported by the findings on the Southern Cross building. The knowledge of the builder thereby was of great importance for both projects. The engineers on both projects were engaged after the architect and in both cases were asked to fit-in their services with the base building, which according to the engineer of the Life.Lab building did not result in less efficiency.

When comparing the findings of the two projects, it can be said that in both projects collaboration was present, although in the Life.Lab building, team members all worked on their own project, which was less so in the 1010 LaTrobe building. Another difference is that that the architect of the 1010 building was open to suggestions from everyone. The final difference between the projects was that the team of the Life.Lab was less experienced in general.

General perspectives The findings show that engineers in general appreciate integrated design, the only one engineer that did not see added value of integrated design was the one interviewed for the Life.Lab case. Integrated design was believed to result in better functioning buildings, especially in the systems of the buildings, and was mainly found important in complex and sustainable buildings. Architects remarked that engineers are ‘system thinkers’ and overstate technology. Meaning that they do not see the bigger picture and might place to much emphasis on the perfect working of internal systems instead of seeing it as part of the total building design that was designed ‘from the outside in’ and thus making it fit for the user. The findings relating to the constructors were that they feel they can add value by suggesting more effective and cost-cutting solutions.

6.2 End-user involvement Case studies In the CH2 building and the Bendigo Bank the end-users were involved from the start of the project through representation in the project team. This is the highest level of involvement this research distinguishes. Both buildings, as stated, had a very high use value. The reason the interviewees gave for the added use value and end-user involvement were ‘addressing the smaller issues’ and in so doing giving the design team a user perspective. End-user involvement was also seen to be important at the final stage of the project, namely the fit-out process. The involvement of end-users thus did not resulted in a better building on itself, but it made it possible for the design team to incorporate end- user wishes in the design and thus resulted in higher value for the occupiers. However during the design process it is impossible to please every single occupier, and therefore flexibility in especially the settings. As discussed previously, the two interviewees of the CH2 project stated that the change process of moving occupiers from one building is very important especially if changes the way the people do their work as was the case in the CH2 building. When the new building is sustainable and the old building was not, it is also important to educate occupiers about their building because they have to use the building and they have to use it in the right way. The project does not stop at the move- in date but goes on after that. In the ELOC building end-users were not involved at any stage of the design of the office building, due to the fact that the organization was not yet established. Although they were not involved they do are be happy with the interior design of the office space, apart from the un-functional form of the building.

The end-users of the 1010 LaTrobe building, were involved at the fit-out stage of the building. Both interviewed organizations used focus groups that gave information and feedback for the users on certain issues. This means that second stage of user involvement was present. For the base building the architect used the Green Building Council to see how tenants use an office space in relation to

55 sustainability. The manager believed that consulting end-users resulted in a better change process and lower resistance of the occupiers during the move to another building. In the Life.Lab building the end-users fitted-out their office space themselves, as they are a small organization; therefore the highest level of involvement was present. The office space is however not yet finished and they are still looking to find an architect to ‘fix it up’ as the occupiers are not yet satisfied with the results.

It was established that the Bendigo Bank and the CH2 building added more value for the occupiers than the ELOC building. It was also established that both the Bendigo Bank and the CH2 building had the highest user involvement and that the ELOC building had no user involvement at all, therefore a relationship between added value and end-user involvement expected. The fit-out of the ELOC building was however the aspect that the occupiers were satisfied about and the aspect that ELOC had in common with the Bendigo Bank and the CH2 building was that an architect was hired that arranged for the fit-out in collaboration with the manager of ELOC. The design of the base building was not of high value because of the curves and the operations that could have been better. The occupiers of ELOC did not have to deal with a change as they were not established as an organization yet. The 1010 LaTrobe building adds more value than the Life.Lab building and when comparing their end- user-involvement, it would be expected that the organization with the highest involvement would have the highest added value, but this is not the case. Entermo is less satisfied with their fit-out than the two organizations in the 1010 LaTrobe building. The fact is that Entermo did not finish their fit-out yet and did it on their own without the help of a professional. Entermo might be very satisfied with the fit-out when the professional helped them with the design in collaboration with the whole organization but this cannot be said with certainty. What can be said is that a professional organization is valuable in fitting out an office space. When comparing the two organizations within the 1010 LaTrobe building, it became clear that the organization with an integrated fit-out had more added value than the organization that did not. The integrated fit-out gave end-users the opportunity to be involved earlier in the design process and make suggestions through the focus group.

General perspectives The findings of the previous chapter suggest that in general engineers see an added value in being able to communicate directly with occupiers, but they feel they do not get the change to do this. Most of the architects (three out of four) did not feel that end-user involvement in the base building could add value for them in the end as the base building could be designed for organizations in general. One architect felt that end-users are king all the way through the process. All the interviewed architects agreed that in the fit-out stage end-user involvement is very important.

6.3 Stating organizational needs Case studies In both the CH2 building and the Bendigo Bank, the managers had a clear goals for the building and this helped the design team to create a building up to the needs of both organization. It was also important that the whole design team shared the vision that the origination had created. When this is compared to the ELOC building it can be said that the organization did not have a clear goals and the building was designed literally according to the brief. This resulted in a building with less use value for the occupiers. Another difference between the cases is that the in both the Bendigo Bank and the CH2 building, the owners were open-minded to suggestions from the design team which made it possible for the team to make good design decisions. Both the Bendigo Bank and the City Council also believe in the added value of a building trough its design, which led to decisions based on value instead of cost. In the ELOC case however, the owners were not open to suggestion due to time and budget constraints. This suggests that not only do organizations need to be clear in their wishes they also need to be open for suggestion from the designers.

The Life.Lab and the 1010 LaTrobe building used a target market for its design. The Life.Lab building is fit for the purpose of small companies with a focus on technology, and can therefore have higher use value for them. The building is however not fully rented out which could suggest that the target market is too small. The occupier that was interviewed did not make use of the community facilities and the network that was provided in the building, resulting in less value for them. The 1010LaTrobe building concentrated on sustainability and flexibility in the office space which attracted governmental organizations. One of them; the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service was involved earlier in the process and could therefore make better design decisions about the relation to the base building and the fit-out. This resulted in an office space with higher use value as the building was delivered up to their needs. The Bureau of Meteorology on the other hand decided to fit their office space out after the base building was delivered and they had to make some structural changes in the building resulting in less use value. This shows that the earlier the management is involved in the design process, and thus the earlier goals can be made clear to the design team, the more value will be created. In the integrated fit-out the assigned manager did have some communications mistakes with the design team, which resulted in some aspects of the building not being up to the needs of the organization, suggesting that good communication in stating needs is important as well.

General perspectives The most important finding in the previous chapter is the notion that the management of an office building needs to have a clear statement of their needs. Even the team members working indirectly for the occupying organization needed clear statements because it is logical that when the person that does

57 work directly for the organization, does not receive clear needs, he cannot communicate clear needs to the rest of the project team. The other main finding is that organizations do not always see the value of clear statements of their needs. And that experience in the organization is very important in the clear statement of needs. Designers, property developers and the occupiers themselves stated that when a learning curve had occurred from the design of a previous building, the newer building became better and they had better understanding of what to do in the process. One way of overcoming this was to hire a professional organization as was done in the Bendigo Bank. The property developers did add to say that developing a building totally up to the wishes of a tenant brings certain risks and therefore the flexibility of a base building is the key. The integrated fit-out process is therefore only for ‘anker tenants’ that rent a large part of the building, as was explained by one of the property developers.

7. CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION

This research started with a theoretical framework that firstly identified the concept of design and accordingly that of value. It became clear that value is mostly undefined and seen as the same as quality of a building. And although quality is important, it is the surplus value that customers want to pay the extra for. The higher the use value of the product on offer, the higher the price the customer is prepared to pay for the product. Therefore it is important to find out how this surplus value can be created in the design of an office building and that is what this research has been seeking to do. The research question that will be answered is therefore: What factors have a positive influence on the use value of an office building from an occupier’s perspective?

In order to answer this question three hypotheses were stated and investigated. Possible factors that could be of influence of the use value of an office building were identified. The hypotheses will accordingly be accepted or rejected in order to come to an answer to the stated research question.

Integrated design The CH2 building and the Bendigo Bank both deliver high value to their occupiers, the only difference in the buildings is that the Bendigo Bank is less sustainable in its design. When looking carefully at the results and the analysis, it can be seen that the Bendigo Bank ‘adopted’ design decisions when it comes to design and the CH2 building integrated them in the whole building design. The reason why the Bendigo Bank could not integrate these features in the design as well as the CH2 building did, was that they used the traditional procuring approach meaning that every designer gets assigned step by step. Thus, although the Bendigo Bank has high added value for the occupiers, the sustainability of the building is less than the CH2 building, suggesting that for sustainable design integrated teams work better. However the cases also show that the decision making time in the CH2 project took longer than normal because everyone had a say in the design. And the general findings show that money and time must not be an issue in using an integrated approach.

The ELOC building has complex internal systems that had to be delivered using an integrated engineering approach. The systems were delivered but due to time constraints and pressure they could have been better. The findings in the general perspectives also suggest that engineers think that integration is mostly important for systems. It now becomes clear that engineers look at project from an inside-out approach, and focus mainly on internal aspect of buildings as was defined in the theoretical part of this research, which was supported by the architects that were interviewed for this research. When looking at the ELOC building in further detail it also became clear that the architect

59 focused on the aesthetic design of the building, which in the end went to the cost of its functionality. The building is therefore the perfect example of showing that not only integration within the buildings’ systems is needed but also integration between the different parties in the design team.

In the cases of the 1010 LaTrobe, the Life.Lab and the Southern Cross building, it became clear that the Design-Build method made it possible for builders to make design suggestions to improve constructability and allowed for cost-cutting. Trough the general perspectives it also became clear that builders wish to be involved in the process sooner. It was also stated that a lock-in effect would be created when everyone is on board from the beginning, which does not allow for the client to choose the builder with the lowest cost.

Therefore the following can be said integrated design leads to better functioning buildings as there is a relationship with sustainability and the integration of the team. Integration is also valuable for the development complex internal systems, as long as the building at large is taken into account. Integrated design does take more time and costs more when the building is developed, but in the end it adds value.

Hypothesis 1 :” Integrated design will result in an office building with higher use value”, is therefore accepted

End-user involvement End-user involvement throughout the project in the Bendigo Bank headquarters and the CH2 building had the effect of brining the specific ‘people issues’ to the design team. This resulted in a more human centred design. And specific issues regarding departments in the organization could be addressed in the design. The integrated fit-out of the Australian Customs and Border Protection services showed that specific departments needed specific care and the involvement of these departments in the design resulted in office spaces with higher use value. The Western Southern Cross supports this by illustrating that the end-user involvement in the integrated fit-out resulted in some structural changes that could be made in the design, that otherwise would not have been possible.

Involving end-users in the fit-out process of their office building also lead to less resistance to change. The results of the CH2 building show that the occupiers like as much flexibility as possible in their office design. In the ELOC building, where end-users were not involved in the design did seem to like the design in the end. And importantly they did not have to go to a change process as the organization was not yet established. The occupiers of the office space did not have a comparison to a previous office space, making the new space more tolerable for them. The findings thus show that perception is

60 a very important factor in including end-users in their fit-out and including end-users in the design seems to change the use value perception for the better.

Another important aspect of the involvement of end-users throughout the design process and especially in the occupation stage, is educating people on how to use their new building. A building that is designed to be very sustainable also has to be operated sustainable by its users, in order to be of true value for the organization.

Hypothesis 2 : “Involving end-users in design will result in an office building with higher use value”, is therefore accepted

Stating organizational needs The statement of organizational needs during the design of an office building showed that the building resulted in higher use value for the organization in general. Especially the ELOC building showed that the unclear statement of needs and the lack of management involvement during the process resulted in a building that has less use value for the organization. The Bendigo Bank headquarters and the CH2 building both show that the statement of organizational needs and thereby creating a vision for the design team, results in a building with higher value for the occupiers. The interviewees agreed that the clear statement of needs is necessary but the property developers added that it can be risky for them to listen to organizational needs early in the process. This research focuses on the occupier viewpoint however and it can thus be said that the cases show that the clear statements of needs adds value.

The integrated fit-out in the 1010 LaTrobe and the Southern Cross building, shows that the statement of organizational needs earlier in the process can result higher use value because the building is built more up to the needs of an organization than is the case with moving into a base building.

Hypothesis 3 : “Stating organizational needs in the briefing stage of the design of an office building results in higher use value”, is therefore accepted

When making the conclusion complete by answering the main question, the distinction made in the theory on technical and non-technical valuation becomes important. The cases and other interview results show that integrated design adds use value in the technical aspects of design, by making the office building more efficient in use.

End-user involvement showed that employees accepted the change better leading to higher use value perception of the building. Changes in the building and the fit-out could also be made to fit the end- user better, resulting directly in higher use value. But end-user involvement also had a technical aspect in adding use value by making the occupiers better in using the building when it is completed.

The statement of organizational needs led to a building that better serves the needs of the organization as a whole. Because the valuations of the design aspects are made clear to the design team from the beginning, making it easier for them to make decisions.

Integrated design, end-user involvement and the statement of organizational needs in the briefing stage of the design of an office building therefore all factors that lead to a higher use value of the office building from an occupiers’ perspective.

Discussion The results of this research show that integrated design, end-user involvement and the statement of organizational needs all have a positive influence on the use value of an office building. The influence they have is thereby different for every hypothesis and the in depth case studies made it possible to identify these factors.

The study measures value, which is based on perception. And moreover, as the research was conducted using semi-structured face to face interviews only the managers of the occupying organization were interviewed. The value perception of the manager is thereby used to summarize the perception of the occupiers and could thereby be influenced by the ‘mental model’ of the manager.

This research used face to face interviews as a research approach; therefore the results that are drawn do not suggest exactly how much relationship there is between added value and the identified factors. Future research could use a large scale questionnaire to overcome this.

8. FUTURE RESEARCH

During this study certain topics came up that were worth mentioning but were out of the scope of this research. In this section some of these topics will be discussed and suggestions for future research will be made.

The first subject is the fact that most office buildings are not human-friendly at all. Buildings just are not a natural living environment and people will rather be outside the office building than inside of it. The notion is slowly growing that the internal environment of office building can be improved greatly and the CH2 building in this research was an attempt in this direction. One of the architects mentioned that we should ‘design office building more like a zoo’. All the aspects of the animal are taken into account in designing a zoo and the living environment is made as natural as possible. Further research is needed in how to design a building that provides a natural living environment and that people can actually enjoy working in. This research was focused more on the use value of the organization as a whole whereas focussing on people in general would identify how a building can be designed as if it were closest to a natural environment. And this does not necessarily mean an outside environment but also an environment in home, where people have total control over their own actions.

Building Information Modelling, is the process of generating and managing building data during its life cycle, and could be an opportunity to grow towards an industry that uses a more integrated approach to design 12 . The BIM process makes it possible for all designers and the constructors to work in the same model instead of everybody creating their own separate peace of work. BIM is not commonly used for office building design but it is expected to grow in popularity. Future research could identify what impact the BIM process of designing could have on the industry, and if office buildings that have used BIM in the design process resulted in higher use value for occupiers.

Another important aspect that was brought to light in this study was that post occupation research is often neglected. One major reason for this is the non-repetitive work, as most office buildings are different. Although for a company like Arup it could be very useful to see whether the end-users that the engineers normally do not have contact with value their delivered services.

12 http://bim.arch.gatech.edu

Additionally, the sample of the research is relatively small because the emphasis was on an in depth understanding of every case and comparison between cases. However to generalize the results, the sample size should have been larger.

Finally, future research could compare different industries with the office building industry. The aerospace or automotive are for example interesting industries to compare to the office building industry. Both are further developed in terms of integrated systems design and predictions could be made based on the development of the office building industry by looking at the developments in those two, or other industries.

9. REFERENCES

8.1 Articles and Books

Alam, I. 2002. An Exploratory Investigation of User Involvement in New Service Development State University of New York at Geneseo. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. 30 (250)

Anderson, J.C., Narus, J.A. 1998. Understanding, creating, and delivering value., Business market management . Prentice-Hall Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Auterberg, M. and Strohm, O. 1992. Work organization and software development. Annual Review of Automatic Programming, 16, 121-128.

Baiden, B. K., Price, A.D.F., Dainty, A.R.J. 2006. The extent of team integration within construction projects. International Journal of Project Management . 24 (1) p. 13-23

Barney, J., B., Zajac, E., J. 1994. Competitive organizational behavior: toward an organizationally- based theory of competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 15, p5-9

Bennett, J., Sharma D.,Tipping, A. 2001. Customer solutions: Building a strategically aligned business model, Insights: Organization and strategic leadership practice. Booz Allen and Hamilton , Boston, p. 1–5.

Berry, D. C. 1994, Involving users in expert system development. Expert systems . 11, 23-28.

Besanko, D., A., Dranove, D., Shaley, M., Schafer D. 2006. Economics of Strategy. John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Bogner, W., C., Thomas, H. 1993. The role of competitive groups in strategy formulation: a dynamic integration of two competing models. Journal of Management Studies . 30(1), p51-67

Bowman, C. and Ambrosini, V. 2000. Value creation versus value capture: towards a coherent definition of value in strategy. British Journal of Management . 11, 1–15.

Churchill, W. (1943) Speech to the House of Commons at a meeting in the House of Lords, 28 October 1943.

Collins , P. 1993. Single source supply. Management Services , 37(7), p10-13

Conran. T. 1996. Terence Conran on design . London, Conran Octopus.

Cooper, R., Schindler P. 2003. Business research methods. McGraw Hill. 8th edition.

Cornet, E., Katz, R., Molloy, R. , Schädler, , Sharma D., Tipping, A. 2000. Customer solutions: From pilots to profits, Viewpoint , Booz Allen and Hamilton , Boston, MA, pp. 1–15.

Davies, A., Tang, P., Hobday, M., Brady, T., Rush, H., Gann, D., 2001. Integrated solutions: The new economy between manufacturing and services. SPRU-CENTRIM, Brighton p. 1–43.

Fairhead, J. 1988. Design for Corporate Culture. NEDC, London

Fisk, D. 1996. Sustainable development and building design, in A. Leaman (ed.): Buildings in the Age of Paradox, Institute of Advanced Architectural Studies, University of York, York, p. 15–19.

Foote, N.,W., Galbraith, J.R., Hope, Q., Miller, D. 2001. Making solutions the answer. The McKinsey Quarterly 3, p. 84–93.

Gann, D.M., Salter, A.J. and Whyte, J.K. 2003. Design quality indicators: tools for thinking. Building Research & Information , 31(5), p. 318–333.

Gemser, G and M Leenders. 2001. How integrating design in the product development process impacts on company performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management , 18(1).

Gray, J., Tippett, H. (1992), Office Space: A Primer for Managers , Centre for Building Performance Research, Victoria University

Gruner K., Homburg C. 2000. Does Customer Interaction Enhance New Product Succes? Journal of Business Research , 49(1), p. 1-14

Huff, A., S. 1982. Industry Influences on Strategy Reformulation. Strategic Management Journal , 3(2), p119-131

Jacobs, D. 2006,. Added Values: Innovation and value creation as a Co-evolving cultural process. University of Groningen and Amsterdam fashion institute .

Kotler, P., Rath, G.A. 1984. Design: a powerful but neglected strategic tool. Journal of Business Strategy , 5(16).

Latham, M. 1994. Constructing the Team: The Final Report of the Government/Industry Review of Procurement and Contractual Arrangements in the UK Construction Industry. HMSO, London

Lidwell, W., Holden, K., Butler, J. 2003. Universal principles of design . Gloucester Mass. Rockport

Macmillan, S. 2006. Added value of good design. Building Research & Information, 34(3), p. 257- 271.

Monk, A. F., Wright, P. C., Haber, J. and Davenport, L. 1993. Improving your Human Computer Interface: A Practical Technique . Prentice-Hall, London.

Morgan, M., H. 1991. The Ten Books on Architecture. Journal of Management . 17 (1), p. 99-111

Norman, D.A. (2004). Emotional Design . New York: Basic Books.

OECD. 2009. Environmentally Sustainable Buildings: Challenges and Policies

O'Reilly, J.J.N. 1987. Better Briefing Means Better Buildings. Building Research Establishment . Garston.

Pena, W., Parshall, S. and Kelly, K. 1987. Problem Seeking: an Architectural Primer , AIA Press, New York.

Porter, M. 1985. Competitive advantage . New York: Free Press

Prowler, D. 2008. Whole building design . Steven Winter Associates, Inc.

Puelo, R., 2008. Come together . Contract. September. 49 (9)

Rowland, D., Howe, T.N. 1999. Vitruvius. Ten Books on Architecture. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Sharma, D., and Molloy, R. 1999. The truth about customer solutions. Viewpoint , Booz Allen and Hamilton. Boston, MA, p. 1–13.

Salisbury, F. 1990. The Architect's Handbook for Client Briefing . Butterworth, London.

Saunder M., L., P., Thornhill, A. 2003. Research methods for business students. Pearson education Limite , 3 rd edition

Saxon, R. 2003. JCT Povey Lecture, RIBA

Shen, O., Yu, A. T. W., Kelly, J., Lin, G. 2006. A Value Management Approach to Strategic Briefing: An Exploratory Study. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, p. 245–259

Slywotzky, A. 1996. Value migration: How to think several moves ahead of the competition. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA

Slywotzky A. and Morrison, D., J. 1998. The profit zone: How strategic business design will lead you to tomorrow's profits. John Wiley and Sons , Chichester

Turpin, J. 2007. Integrated design results in smart buildings. Air conditioning, heating and refrigeration news . June 25

Ulrich, K. T., Pearson, S. 1998. Assessing the importance of design trough product archaeology. Management Science March . 44(3), p. 352-369

Whitehead, J., C. 1995. Differentiating use and non-use value s with the properties of the variation function. Applied Economics Letters , 2(10), p388-291

Wijnberg, N., M. 2004. Innovation and Organization: Value and Competition in selection Systems. Organization Science, 25(8), p1413-1433

Wijnberg, N.M., Gemser G. 2000. Adding Value to Innovation: Impressionism and the Transformation of the selection system in visual arts. Organization Science, 11(3), p. 323-329

Wise R., Baumgartner, P. 1999. Go downstream: The new profit imperative in manufacturing. Harvard Business Review , (September–October), p. 133–141

Wellington Gruner, K., Homburg C. 2000. Does Customer Interaction Enhance New Product Success? Journal of Business Research 49 (1), p. 1-14.

8.2 Websites www.architecture2030.org www.architecture.about.com www.architecture.com.au www.bendigobank.com.au www.bom.gov.au www.customs.gov.au www.entermo.com www.gbca.org.au www.lifelab.com.au www.melbourne.vic.gov.au www.propertyoz.com.au www.yourbuilding.org www.bim.arch.gatech.edu

9. APPENDIX

Appendix 1 Australian Building Code

Class 1 : one or more building which in association constitute a. Class 1a : a dwelling being- (i) a detached house; or (ii) one of a group of two or more attached dwellings, each being a building, separated by a fire-resisting wall, including a row house, terrace house, town house or villa unit or; b. Class 1b: a boarding house, guest house, hostel or the like. (i) with a total area of all floors not exceeding 300m2 measured over the enclosing walls of the Class 1b; and (ii) in which not more than 12 persons would ordinarily be resident. Class 2: a building containing 2 or more sole-occupant units each being a separate dwelling.

Class 3: a residential building, other than a building of class 1 and 2, which is a common place of long term or transient living for a number of unrelated persons, including- a. a boarding-house, guest house, hostel, lodging-house or backpacker accommodation; or b. a residential part of a hotel or motel; or c. a residential part of a school; or d. accommodation for the aged , children or people with disabilities; or e. a residential part of a health-care building which accommodates members of staff; or f. a residential part of a detention centre.

Class 4 : A dwelling in a building that is class 5,6,7,8, or 9 or if it is the only dwelling in the building.

Class 5: an office building that is used for professional or commercial purpose, excluding buildings in class 6,7,8 or 9.

Class 6 : a shop or other building for the sale of goods by retail or the supply of services direct to the public including: a. an eating room, café, restaurant, milk or soft drink bar; or b. a dining room, bar, shop or kiosk part of a hotel or motel; or c. a hairdresser’s or barber’s shop, public laundry, or undertaker’s establishment; or d. market or sale room, showroom, or service room.

Class 7 : a building which is a. Class 7a - a carpark; or b. Class 7b - for storage, or display of goods or produce for sale by wholesale.

Class 8: a laboratory, or a building in which a handicraft of process for the production, assembling, altering, repairing, packing, finishing, or cleaning of goods or produce is carried on for trade, sale or gain.

Class 9: a building of a public nature a. Class 9a - a health care building, including those parts of the building set aside as a laboratory; or b. Class 9b - An assembly building, including a trade workshop, laboratory or the like in a primary or secondary school, but excluding any other parts of the building that are of another class; or c. Class 9c - an aged care building

Class 10: a non-habitable building or structure a. Class 10a - a non-habitable building being a private garage, carport, shed or the like; or b. Class 10b - a structure being a fence, mast, antenna, retaining or free standing wall, swimming pool or the like.

Multiple classifications Each part of a building must be classified separately, and- a. (i) where parts have different purposes-if not more than 10% of the floor area of a story, being the minor use, is used for a purpose which is a different classification, the classification applying to the major use may apply to the whole storey; and (ii) the provisions of (i) do not apply when the minor use is a laboratory or Class 2,3 or 4 part; and b. Classes 1a, 1b, 7a, 7b, 9a, 9b, 9c, 10a and 10b are separate classifications; and c. a reference to (i) Class 1- is to class 1a and 1b; and (ii) Class 7- is to class 7a and 7b; and (iii) Class 9- is to class 9a, 9b, 9c and (iv) Class 10-is to class 10a and 10b; and d. A plant room, machinery room, lift motor room, boiler room, or the like must have the same classification as the part of the building in which it is situated. Parts with more than one classification

71 a. notwithstanding multiple classification, a building or part of a building may have more than one classification applying to the whole building or to the whole of that part of the building b. If a building or a part of a building has more than one classification applying to the whole building or part in accordance with (a), that the building or part must comply with all the relevant provisions of the BCA for each classification.

Appendix 2 Interviewee specification

Building/ function Organization Name Council House 2 Manager Major Project Delivery City of Melbourne Shane Power Senior design Architect Design Inc. Melbourne Mick Pearce Strategic consultant* DEGW Dinesh Acharya Bendigo Bank Assistant facilities manager Bendigo Bank Rosalie Cheyne Project Manager Bendigo Bank Richard Hasseldine Director Property Advisor Grant Samuel Terry Dohnt Associate- Building Science group ** Meinhardt Mirek Peichowski Associate mechanical engineer Meinhardt Ivano Piubellini ESD consultant Meinhardt Paul Thomas Senior mechanical engineer Meinhardt Tony Carristraro Constructor Probuild Constructions Lucas Forsight Eeaslink Operations Centre Chief operating officer ConnectEast Peter Bentley Architect WoodMarch Helen Cheng Structural engineer Arup Sean McGinn General manager construction Theiss John Holland Howard Humffray 1010 La Trobe Facilities Manager Bureau of Meteorology Andrew Hamilton Manager Australian Customs and Border Micheal Harrison Protection Service Property Developer Digital Harbour David Napier Project Architect ARM Jesse Judd Builder, Project Manager Baulderstone Marcus Sadler Life.Lab Employee EnterMo Carl Spencer Executive director, property developer Digital Harbour David Napier Architect Moull Murray Andrew Murray Senior Structural Engineer Irwin Consult Mark Paterson Builder, Project Manager Baulderstone Marcus Sadler Southern Cross Development Manager Baron Corporation David Cohen

*Although DEGW worked with the CH2 team on the project, the interviewee was not involved and therefore no specific questions regarding the project were answered in this interview. The general questions regarding the research were in fact answered

**Mirek Peichowski was the person involved in the Bendigo Bank project, the rest of the interviewees from Meinhardt were able to give general insights on the three research questions. The interview was held as a group.

Appendix 3 Interview schedules Interview Schedule Design team

General

1. Why was this building built? 2. Was the end result what you expected? 3. Was it built on time and within budget? 4. How would you define the integrated design of an office building? 5. Do you think integrated design teams can add value for occupiers? 6. Do you think the involvement of management of the occupying organization can add value for the occupier? 7. Do you think the involvement of end-users can add value for the occupiers?

Added Value

8. In what ways does this building add value to the business of the occupying organization? And in what ways could it have been better? Function (business values-human centred-efficient and pleasant) Aesthetic (special, appeals to senses, consistent, visual beauty) Durable (Quality, visual durable, functional durable) Sustainable (Green star rating)

Team integration

9. How integrated was the team of this particular building? Single focus, organizational boundaries, mutual outcomes, accurate predictions in time and costs, free information sharing, flexible, co-location, equal opportunities, equality and respect, no-blame

10. What were the good things about this project team? 11. How could it have been improved?

Occupier involvement

12. Were users of the occupying organization involved in the design process? Objective/ purpose of involvement, Stages of involvement Intensity of involvement, Modes of involvement

13. What were the best things that came out of this involvement? 14. How could it have been improved?

Management involvement

15. Was the management of the occupying organization involved in the design process? Objective/ purpose of involvement, Stages of involvement Intensity of involvement, Modes of involvement

16. What were the best things that came out of this involvement? 17. How could it have been improved?

Information supply

18. Are there any photos, diagrams, timelines, anecdotes that you can supply to give detail of the building process?

Interview Schedule Occupiers

General

1. What is your role in regards to this building? 2. What were the main reasons that you build/moved in this building? 3. Is the end result what you expected? 4. Was it on time and within budget?

Added Value

5. In what ways does this building add value to the business of the occupying organization? 6. And what things could have been better about this building? Function (business values-human centred-efficient and pleasant) Aesthetic (special, appeals to senses, consistent, visual beauty) Durable (Quality, visual durable, functional durable) Sustainable (green star rating)

Team integration

7. How integrated was the team of this particular building? Single focus, organizational boundaries, mutual outcomes, accurate predictions in time and costs, free information sharing, flexible, co-location, equal opportunities, equality and respect, no-blame

8. What were the best things about this project team? 9. How could it have been improved?

Occupier involvement

10. Were users of the occupying organization involved in the design process? Objective/ purpose of involvement, Stages of involvement Intensity of involvement, Modes of involvement

11. What were the best things that came out of this involvement? 12. How could it have been improved

Management involvement

13. Were users involved in the design process? Objective/ purpose of involvement, Stages of involvement Intensity of involvement, Modes of involvement

14. What were the best things that came out of this involvement? 15. How could it have been improved?

Information supply

16. Are there any photos, diagrams, timelines, anecdotes that you can supply to give detail of the building process?