IntroductionIn an era of the evolving building technology and clients wantinghigh performance buildings and spaces which foster the performance of users,Post Occupancy Evaluation (POE) has become a tool which has become morevaluable in the design process. But yet, a shockingly low amount of architectscarry out ‘Post Occupancy Evaluation’ (POE). According to a poll on Architectsjournal, only thee percent of architects carry out post-occupation evaluation.(AJ)This essay will examine the RIBA plan of work 2013 and examine thebenefits of the new stages stage 0 and stage 7, and the value that ‘Postoccupancy Evaluation’ (POE) can bring to a project. The essay aims to highlight the benefits and problems with POE andsuggest way to better incorporate architects and clients. This will then befollowed up by examples where POE has been hugely beneficial to a practice andhow the practices used this information to manage their design process.The RIBA PLAN OF WORKThe RIBA plan of work (POW) was first developed in 1963.
Since itwas first developed, it was the ‘definitive’ UK model for the building designand construction process, having also a significant influence internationallyas well.The plan of work has been a foundation for both the architecturalprofession and construction industry by setting a framework for theorganisation and the management of how architectural projects are run, whichalso provides a process map and management tool to architects. The POW Splitinto a number of key stages, the Plan of work also provides stage referencepoints in a multitude of contractual and appointment documents and a goodpractice guide.
(RIBAPlan of work overview)During the time since it had been developed, the POW has evolvedand amended several times during its lifetime to reflect the increasingcomplexity of projects, and to incorporate regulatory requirements thatreflects the demand of industry and government reports, which had criticised theindustry.The recent version of the POW, POW 2013, has undergone a drasticoverhaul with the intention of making it as ‘more flexible’. Stages such asplanning permission and procurement are now being described as adjustable (Planof work overview). It reflects increasing requirements for sustainability andBuilding Information Modelling (BIM) and it allows simple, project specificplans to be created. Unfortunately the POW 2013 has come under criticism due tonot properly integrating sustainability as they could effectively be ‘turnedoff’ which sends the wrong message on sustainability (messag onsustainability).
The POW has also come under criticism as it has significantlyless detail than the plan of work before that (The 2007 plan of work) and thatit’s flexibility and customisability is very limited. The definition and namingof the work stages didn’t reflect the terminology that is used in the industryto date leading to some confusion within the profession.The work stages were restructured with Stages 0 and 7 as newstages which were included in the POW 2013 and renamed into the following: – Stage 0 – Strategic Definition; – Stage 1 – Preparation and Brief- Stage 2 – Concept design- Stage 3 – Developed Design- Stage 4 – Technical Design- Stage 5 – Construction- Stage 6 – Handover and Closeout- Stage 7 – In Use.Stage 0 gives the opportunity for the architect and client toproperly appraise a project before the brief is created. There are certain activitieswhich are derived from the former RIBA POW 2007). In stage 7 we see that thingssuch as post occupancy evaluation and a review of project performance as wellas other new duties can be taken during this perid. They were introduced in thePOW 2013 as a learning process for the industry to reflect on a project and toalso help better understand similar projects for future referencesAlthough there are many benefits in the RIBA POW 2013 towards thearchitectural process, there are many concerns that the POW 2013 doesn’t makesufficient necessities for the aftercare of construction projects (AJ) Otherarchitects think that the POW could involve architects in unnecessary andunpaid soft landing activities, leading to use of resources which some practicescannot afford to.