Measurement and benchmarking of workplace performance
What is it about?
The purpose of this paper is to present a process model of value-adding corporate real estate and facilities management and indicators that can be used to measure and benchmark workplace performance and the added value of workplace interventions for an organisation. The paper compares the performance measurement and benchmarking theory with current practice and data from different work environments. The paper builds on two books on adding value through buildings, facilities and services, both edited and co-authored by the authors of this paper. The books were based on literature reviews, interviews with practitioners, cross-border studies of performance measurement and benchmarking and in-depth analyses of various value parameters by experts from different countries. In addition, theory and empirical examples of benchmarking have been included. The paper presents 12 value parameters that are seen as relevant in measuring and benchmarking of workplace performance: four people-oriented, four business processes-related, two economic and two social parameters. Because not all values can be easily expressed in monetary units, various other ways of measuring are presented that can help to monitor and to benchmark workplace performance. The 12 values and ways to measure can be used to support a more integrated business case approach that goes beyond “dollar-metrics” and spreadsheet-based decision-making. Both quantitative and qualitative performance indicators, including hard and soft factors, are needed to define the trade-off between the costs and benefits of interventions in corporate real estate, facilities and services and to cope with the interests and needs of different stakeholders.
Why is it important?
To add value to an organisation, workplaces have to provide value for money by a positive trade-off between the benefits, i.e. support of the organisational objectives and the primary processes and the costs, time and risks connected with achieving these benefits. Widely used indicators to measure the costs are the investment costs, running costs and total cost of occupancy. These metrics are primarily connected to efficiency, i.e. to optimal use of the resources of a firm, but much less to effectiveness and benefits such as user satisfaction, productivity, health and wellbeing. This paper presents a more holistic approach.
The following have contributed to this page: Dr. Theo van der Voordt
In partnership with: