Services Procurement

This Services Procurement Report incorporates the previous benchmarking research and aims to develop innovative methods and guidelines for the procurement of FM services, applicable to iconic and / or performing arts centre facilities, or facilities with similar FM functions. The FM Exemplar Project utilising the Sydney Opera House produced its initial procurement report in June 2005 which analysed the strategic objectives and operational requirements that provide ‘demand statements’ as evaluation criteria in the service procurement process. The subsequent interim procurement report in September 2005 discussed the elements contributing to the criteria for decision-making in the service procurement process. This procurement report concentrates on the research on procurement strategies and innovative methods using a case study approach. The objectives of this report are to: Investigate service procurement methods and process in iconic and/or performing arts centre facilities; Showcase FM innovation in Sydney Opera House through a case study; Establish a preliminary decision-making framework and guidelines for selection of appropriate FM procurement routes to provide a useful model for FM community

Capital Works Procurement: The Selection of a Building Procurement Method

The determination of the most appropriate procurement method for capital works projects is a challenging task for the Department of Housing and Works (DHW) and other Western Australian State Government Agencies because of the array of assessment criteria that are considered and the procurement methods that are available. A number of different procurement systems can be used to deliver capital works projects such a traditional, design and construct and management. Sub-classifications of these systems have proliferated and continue to emerge in response to market demands. The selection of an inappropriate procurement method may lead to undesirable project outcomes. To facilitate DHW in selecting an appropriate procurement method for its capital works projects, a six step procurement method selection process is presented. The characteristics of the most common forms of procurement method used in Australia are presented. Case studies where procurement methods have been used for specific types of capital works in Western Australia are offered to provide a reference point and learning opportunity for procurement method selection.

International review of environmental assessment tools and databases

Existing widely known environmental assessment models, primarily those for Life Cycle Assessment of manufactured products and buildings, were reviewed to grasp their characteristics, since the past several years have seen a significant increase in interest and research activity in the development of building environmental assessment methods. Each method or tool was assessed under the headings of description, data requirement, end-use, assessment criteria (scale of assessment and scoring/ weighting system)and present status

Nation & internation practices in decision support tools in road asset management

This document provides a review of international and national practices in investment decision support tools in road asset management. Efforts were concentrated on identifying analytic frameworks, evaluation methodologies and criteria adopted by current tools. Emphasis was also given to how current approaches support Triple Bottom Line decision-making. Benefit Cost Analysis and Multiple Criteria Analysis are principle methodologies in supporting decision-making in Road Asset Management. The complexity of the applications shows significant differences in international practices. There is continuing discussion amongst practitioners and researchers regarding to which one is more appropriate in supporting decision-making. It is suggested that the two approaches should be regarded as complementary instead of competitive means. Multiple Criteria Analysis may be particularly helpful in early stages of project development, say strategic planning. Benefit Cost Analysis is used most widely for project prioritisation and selecting the final project from amongst a set of alternatives. Benefit Cost Analysis approach is useful tool for investment decision-making from an economic perspective. An extension of the approach, which includes social and environmental externalities, is currently used in supporting Triple Bottom Line decision-making in the road sector. However, efforts should be given to several issues in the applications. First of all, there is a need to reach a degree of commonality on considering social and environmental externalities, which may be achieved by aggregating the best practices. At different decision-making level, the detail of consideration of the externalities should be different. It is intended to develop a generic framework to coordinate the range of existing practices. The standard framework will also be helpful in reducing double counting, which appears in some current practices. Cautions should also be given to the methods of determining the value of social and environmental externalities. A number of methods, such as market price, resource costs and Willingness to Pay, are found in the review. The use of unreasonable monetisation methods in some cases has discredited Benefit Cost Analysis in the eyes of decision makers and the public. Some social externalities, such as employment and regional economic impacts, are generally omitted in current practices. This is due to the lack of information and credible models. It may be appropriate to consider these externalities in qualitative forms in a Multiple Criteria Analysis. Consensus has been reached in considering noise and air pollution in international practices. However, Australia practices generally omitted these externalities. Equity is an important consideration in Road Asset Management. The considerations are either between regions, or social groups, such as income, age, gender, disable, etc. In current practice, there is not a well developed quantitative measure for equity issues. More research is needed to target this issue. Although Multiple Criteria Analysis has been used for decades, there is not a generally accepted framework in the choice of modelling methods and various externalities. The result is that different analysts are unlikely to reach consistent conclusions about a policy measure. In current practices, some favour using methods which are able to prioritise alternatives, such as Goal Programming, Goal Achievement Matrix, Analytic Hierarchy Process. The others just present various impacts to decision-makers to characterise the projects. Weighting and scoring system are critical in most Multiple Criteria Analysis. However, the processes of assessing weights and scores were criticised as highly arbitrary and subjective. It is essential that the process should be as transparent as possible. Obtaining weights and scores by consulting local communities is a common practice, but is likely to result in bias towards local interests. Interactive approach has the advantage in helping decision-makers elaborating their preferences. However, computation burden may result in lose of interests of decision-makers during the solution process of a large-scale problem, say a large state road network. Current practices tend to use cardinal or ordinal scales in measure in non-monetised externalities. Distorted valuations can occur where variables measured in physical units, are converted to scales. For example, decibels of noise converts to a scale of -4 to +4 with a linear transformation, the difference between 3 and 4 represents a far greater increase in discomfort to people than the increase from 0 to 1. It is suggested to assign different weights to individual score. Due to overlapped goals, the problem of double counting also appears in some of Multiple Criteria Analysis. The situation can be improved by carefully selecting and defining investment goals and criteria. Other issues, such as the treatment of time effect, incorporating risk and uncertainty, have been given scant attention in current practices. This report suggested establishing a common analytic framework to deal with these issues.

International practices in investment decision making in road sector

This document provides the findings of an international review of investment decision-making practices in road asset management. Efforts were concentrated on identifying the strategic objectives of agencies in road asset management, establishing and understanding criteria different organisations adopted and ascertaining the exact methodologies used by different countries and international organisations. Road assets are powerful drivers of economic development and social equity. They also have significant impacts on the natural and man-made environment. The traditional definition of asset management is “A systematic process of maintaining, upgrading and operating physical assets cost effectively. It combines engineering principles with sound business practices and economic theory and it provides tools to facilitate a more organised, logical approach to decision-making” (US Dept. of Transportation, 1999). In recent years, the concept has been broadened to cover the complexity of decision making, based on a wider variety of policy considerations as well as social and environmental issues rather than is covered by Benefit-Cost analysis and pure technical considerations. Current international practices are summarised in table 2. It was evident that Engineering-economic analysis methods are well advanced to support decision-making. A range of tools available supports performance predicting of road assets and associated cost/benefit in technical context. The need for considering triple plus one bottom line of social, environmental and economic as well as political factors in decision-making is well understood by road agencies around the world. The techniques used to incorporate these however, are limited. Most countries adopt a scoring method, a goal achievement matrix or information collected from surveys. The greater uncertainty associated with these non-quantitative factors has generally not been taken into consideration. There is a gap between the capacities of the decision-making support systems and the requirements from decision-makers to make more rational and transparent decisions. The challenges faced in developing an integrated decision making framework are both procedural and conceptual. In operational terms, the framework should be easy to be understood and employed. In philosophical terms, the framework should be able to deal with challenging issues, such as uncertainty, time frame, network effects, model changes, while integrating cost and non-cost values into the evaluation. The choice of evaluation techniques depends on the feature of the problem at hand, on the aims of the analysis, and on the underlying information base At different management levels, the complexity in considering social, environmental, economic and political factor in decision-making is different. At higher the strategic planning level, more non-cost factors are involved. The complexity also varies based on the scope of the investment proposals. Road agencies traditionally place less emphasis on evaluation of maintenance works. In some cases, social equity, safety, environmental issues have been used in maintenance project selection. However, there is not a common base for the applications.

National practices in investment decision making in road sector

This document provides the findings of a national review of investment decision-making practices in road asset management. Efforts were concentrated on identifying the strategic objectives of agencies in road asset management, establishing and understanding criteria different organisations adopted and ascertaining the exact methodologies used by different sate road authorities. The investment objectives of Australian road authorities are based on triple-bottom line considerations (social, environmental, economic and political). In some cases, comparing with some social considerations, such as regional economic development, equity, and access to pubic service etc., Benefit-Cost Ratio has limited influence on the decision-making. Australian road authorities have developed various decision support tools. Although Multi-Criteria Analysis has been preliminarily used in case by case study, pavement management systems, which are primarily based on Benefit Cost Analysis, are still the main decision support tool. This situation is not compatible with the triple-bottom line objectives. There is need to fill the gap between decision support tools and decision-making itself. Different decision criteria should be adopted based on the contents of the work. Additional decision criteria, which are able to address social, environmental and political impacts, are needed to develop or identify. Environmental issue plays a more and more important role in decision-making. However, the criteria and respective weights in decision-making process are yet to be clearly identified. Social and political impacts resulted from road infrastructure investment can be identified through Community Perceptions Survey. With accumulative data, prediction models, which are similar as pavement performance models, can be established. Using these models, the decision-makers are able to foresee the social and political consequences of investment alternatives.

Evaluation of functional performance in commercial buildings

This report fully summarises a project designed to enhance commercial real estate performance within both operational and investment contexts through the development of a model aimed at supporting improved decision-making. The model is based on a risk adjusted discounted cash flow, providing a valuable toolkit for building managers, owners, and potential investors for evaluating individual building performance in terms of financial, social and environmental criteria over the complete life-cycle of the asset. The ‘triple bottom line’ approach to the evaluation of commercial property has much significance for the administrators of public property portfolios in particular. It also has applications more generally for the wider real estate industry given that the advent of ‘green’ construction requires new methods for evaluating both new and existing building stocks. The research is unique in that it focuses on the accuracy of the input variables required for the model. These key variables were largely determined by market-based research and an extensive literature review, and have been fine-tuned with extensive testing. In essence, the project has considered probability-based risk analysis techniques that required market-based assessment. The projections listed in the partner engineers’ building audit reports of the four case study buildings were fed into the property evaluation model developed by the research team. The results are strongly consistent with previously existing, less robust evaluation techniques. And importantly, this model pioneers an approach for taking full account of the triple bottom line, establishing a benchmark for related research to follow. The project’s industry partners expressed a high degree of satisfaction with the project outcomes at a recent demonstration seminar. The project in its existing form has not been geared towards commercial applications but it is anticipated that QDPW and other industry partners will benefit greatly by using this tool for the performance evaluation of property assets. The project met the objectives of the original proposal as well as all the specified milestones. The project has been completed within budget and on time. This research project has achieved the objective by establishing research foci on the model structure, the key input variable identification, the drivers of the relevant property markets, the determinants of the key variables (Research Engine no.1), the examination of risk measurement, the incorporation of risk simulation exercises (Research Engine no.2), the importance of both environmental and social factors and, finally the impact of the triple bottom line measures on the asset (Research Engine no. 3).