Systematic Performance Requirements Management of Built Facilities

The successful ‘project definition’ phase is the corner stone in realising satisfying end products. In the building and construction domain, this phase is particularly important, yet it is often rushed and poorly conducted. Jumping straight into technical solutions is the modus operandi. Typically, the architect’s first proposal for a building layout acts as the baseline for the decision-making throughout the entire project. Inclusion of the end user objectives usually happens (unsatisfactorily) by simply asking for comments on the proposed technical solutions. This can easily lead to a loss of value and can cause problems during the use of the building, and lead to disputes during the construction. It is widely recognised that human and organisational questions need more attention than technical solutions in the early phases of the process. The performance approach has been presented as one potential catalyst for positive change in this area. The performance approach is concerned with what the building is required to do, not with describing the technical solutions i.e. how it is constructed. A key driver for the performance approach implementation in Finland has been a software tool called EcoProP. Its next generation version, PRISM, stands for ‘Intelligent Systematic Performance Requirements Management’ and is currently being translated and revised for application in Australia and other countries. In this paper, current problems in the project definition phase are presented. The requirements management and performance approach are introduced, and the barriers to implementation are discussed. The use of EcoProP on projects in Finland is presented, and in conclusion, the use of PRISM for performance requirements management in various countries is discussed.