| Summary: | Purpose: This research is about the added value of occupancy sensing and the factors that influence the added value. The objective of this research is to gain insight into the added value of occupancy sensing from a facility management perspective and the factors that influence the perceived added value. Design/methodology/approach: The paper provides insight into the added value of occupancy sensing from a facility management perspective, obtained through qualitative research. By conducting interviews with suppliers, users and an organisation that consciously chooses not to use occupancy sensing, the added value becomes apparent. The interviewed experts were approached as a result of selected articles or through the Saxion UAS network. The people who responded were interviewed. A limited number of 10 interviews was chosen because that was the minimum number of interviews required for this study. Findings: Several factors influence the added value of occupancy sensing. From the literature, these are data maturity, human behaviour and the quality of sensors. For the study, goal/motivation, preconditions and data or Information Technology (IT) were added. The interviews showed that organisations choose occupancy sensing mainly because smart buildings are on the rise, it is popular and they can make decisions based on the data and evidence. The most important precondition is that it must be known in advance what needs to be measured and that the facility managers are included in the process. The most significant influence on the success of added value is human behaviour. If the end users are not included in the new way of working, there is a good chance that they are not satisfied and that there is no added value. The functioning of IT and the use of the data also influence the added value. This research shows that added value is only achieved if the preconditions are met and factors such as human behaviour are taken into account. When this works well, facility management as a department will also be able to deliver substantial value to the entire organisation. Research limitations/implications: The limitations of this research were that there was only one interview with a non-user. Their opinion would be more valuable where the respondents are asked more about the data maturity of the organisation and their alignment with the organisation’s strategy. The limitations mainly have to do with the limited time frame of the research. In further research, it is also indicated that for a more complete study, this time frame should be extended. Practical implications: The results can be used by everybody who needs to get insight into the use of occupancy sensing from a facility management perspective and the added value for facility management. Originality/value: While there is a significant amount of literature on occupancy sensing and the use of sensors in office environments, there is only limited research on the added value of occupancy sensing from a facility management perspective. Paper type: Research paper. The literature review shows that the added value of facility management is difficult to make tangible. Many organisations see facility management as a cost item, and therefore, the costs must always be taken into account. There is a shift from cost to added value for the organisation, but this only works if the strategy of facility management (FM)/corporate real estate management (CREM) is aligned with the strategy of the organisation. In many cases, this does not yet appear to be the case. For future research, the advice is to look more into other smart features and their added value. Data maturity is a limitation of this research, and the relationship between data maturity and facility management should be studied more. The future is digital and data-driven, and there are not sufficient studies on that.
|
|---|
