RoundTable Health, wellbeing and productivity taking the temperature There is a move in the property industry to score building success according to the productivity and health of occupants, but does industry know what influences wellbeing in the workplace? Alex Smith hosts a roundtable debate in an attempt to uncover the evidence H ealth and wellbeing in buildings is a hot topic right now. There have been a number of reports1,2 and discussions around the area, looking at the factors affecting occupant productivity and how the industry might feed research into new metrics and certification schemes, aimed at creating healthier, more productive spaces. In the US a Well Building Standard3 has already been launched to certificate such buildings. In response, CIBSE Journal assembled a high-level panel of academics, practitioners and clients to look at the evidence, and to see whether the right research was feeding into reports being made available to the property industry. Academic heavy-hitters included Adrian Leaman and Gary Raw and Roderic Bunn The debate kicked-off with a rather gloomy analysis from one of the founding fathers of post-occupancy evaluations (POEs), Adrian Leaman. Alongside Bill Bordass, he has been surveying occupants hundreds of properties to understand the links between buildings and productivity, and conducted the Probe studies that appeared in the forerunner of the Journal. There is a deep level of frustration that underpins what I do, said Leaman. Its about understanding occupant needs, and getting people to listen, but 80% of findings have not reached the public domain. Were in danger of not learning from the worst thats happened. Ashley Bateson agreed that research needed to focus on occupant needs, and said too many professionals focused on design but not operation. People arent always designing buildings as though people matter it is crazy that operational outcomes are not a key objective in architecture or engineering. While working on a student residential project, Bateson said he struggled to communicate the importance of daylight. People just looked at the client brief, which had no metrics for lighting or wellbeing. They were happy with the design because it was compliant. They who, between them, had undertaken pioneering research into productivity, sick building syndrome and Soft Landings. The roundtable also heard from experienced designers and architects from Max Fordham, Hoare Lea and AHMM, and Ann Bodkin formerly of Bennetts Associates and now head of design at the Education Funding Agency. From the client side, there were representatives from Stanhope one of the most enlightened property firms in the industry including Ron German, who worked on the original launch of the Breeam certification scheme. Its outrageous that we design buildings without measuring building performance Bodkin: One needs vanguards who can manage the risk Raw: Allow users to work with building systems didnt want to rock the boat. We must not forget that students have to live in these buildings for 50 years, so its important to consider the wellbeing aspects of design. gold dust One ambition of mine is to make designers go into buildings a year after theyve been completed and ask people how they feel, as part of building performance evaluation. Its outrageous that we design buildings without measuring performance outcomes, he said. Bateson said the standard appointments of design teams are an issue, as professional engagement normally ends at practical completion (PC) and the client often isnt prepared to pay for building evaluations. How can you procure a 30m building and not want an evaluation report, he asked. Raw likened it to a new car being delivered on time, for the agreed price, but then finding out that the alternator had not been connected to the battery. Bunn said designers must study their buildings. We need to focus on performance outcomes that is a new way of thinking, more a philosophy. Designers have to look upon information on building operation as gold dust not Bateson: designers must go into buildings German: Certification could move us forward eade Rmor roUnDtable Panel just as interference to their habits and preconceptions. Robertson said that indemnity insurers discouraged architects from going into buildings. They think it will expose them to extra liability for their design services, he said. Guy Nevill agreed more research needed to filter through to practitioners, in part to back up designers instincts. You know it works, but you dont always know why, said Nevill, who has worked on pioneering Max Fordham projects such as the Hive, and the Woodland and National Trust HQs. We have carried out POEs, so design teams have learned what challenging the rules German agreed that the industry knew about the hygiene factors heating, cooling, lighting, ventilation and noise and that other variables needed exploring. At Stanhopes Chiswick Park, he says the firm looked at what made people happy and, as a result, there are amenities such as fitness centres and cafes. To gain an understanding of occupant wellbeing, German said Stanhope carried out short questionnaires to measure how occupants felt about workplaces. Its not scientific, but the results enable us to understand why there are variables, and to work out whether its because the building isnt working properly or because its not being managed in the right way. German said research knowledge had not yet worked itself into guidance. Research reflecting the way we work is not finding its way into the BCO Guide to Specification, said German. Its become a victim of its own success; its become something of a bible, which people think is some kind of rulebook. Bateson said property agents often refer to strict BCO compliance when faced with unfamiliar designs. He cited the example of a new office, where Hoare Lea suggested exposing the concrete ceiling to provide passive cooling and give tenants generous floor-to-ceiling heights, but it was perceived to be too unfamiliar for the market, so the agent insisted on false ceilings, which are the norm for the office market. Parts of the BCO Guide discuss opportunities to be flexible, but because theyre not in the summary of metrics, its challenging to have that discussions with agents, he said. Craig Robertson also recalls a rude challenge to the standard market suspended ceiling. He said AHMMs design for the White Collar Factory in London, really pushed the way that Nevill: We need to look at the science to be told what to do rather than think more deeply about things. Bunn said more should be done to manage the expectations of clients about the way their buildings work, and to engage regularly with occupants after PC to help them understand what they have got. People are forgotten, said Sara Kassam, who was previously sustainability and energy manager at the University of East London before joining CIBSE. Theres a lack of engagement with stakeholders. Theyll be more likely to respond if they have some ownership. If they understand the building, they are more likely to adapt. The panel agreed that occupants had BCO standards can be delivered with its exposed concrete incorporating embedded cooling coils, exposed suspended services, natural ventilation and minimal air conditioning. Robertson said Arup used extensive modelling to try to prove it was a viable commercial space but, to convince the market, a prototype had to built. Robertson: defining wellbeing as a metric is difficult Andy Highton said ideally there should be more flexibility in the BCO Guide. Agents will reject a design from a long list if it doesnt follow BCO guidelines, said Highton. Otherwise they see it as a risk, even though the design might work really well. When you put a lot of effort into a document like the BCO Guide, theres a tendency not to want to change it, and it remains static, said Raw. Rules are for the guidance of the wise, and the obedience of the foolish, said Bunn. There is a tendency to try and distil health and wellbeing factors into a number that you just cant apply. Im having this problem with Soft Landings, where some people just want a number works. We have anecdotal evidence we share, but we want to look further at the science behind it, so we can understand what people want and how we can influence behaviour. Leaman wrote a paper on productivity4 with Bordass 10 years ago that resonates today. They devised a series of questions for occupants that aimed to identify links between productivity and the actions of building designers and managers, and found five killer variables which influence productivity. (See panel, left). The focus now needs to turn away from classical building science areas, said Leaman. The research here is robust, especially on indoor air quality and temperature. There are several areas that need more attention, he said. One that has cropped up recently is occupant density. If you put too many people in a space, there will be a nasty impact. No important work has been done on it. Leaman said there needed to be more research on how the time of day impacted occupants, such as schools when children move to different lessons, and the effect of glare on screens. How well the building is resourced is another factor, said Leaman. If its relatively complicated and not well resourced, it will cascade down to occupants. could be another tick-box exercise, he said. Its about defining a meaningful and concise way of integrating it into our processes without spawning a bureaucratic exercise. Bunn agreed: It cant be easily certified. Not everything that matters can be measured, and not all that can be measured matters. Some things just need to be better understood. But Bodkin believed that it might be worth at least testing a standard, in the same way Bennetts Associates piloted Breeam 95 on Wessex Waters headquarters in Bath. One needs vanguards who can manage the risk, and test the standards, said Bodkin. German sounded as though Stanhope might be willing to take up the baton. I agree, even if its less than perfect it might move us forward. The way to get under the skin of these things is to give it a go. Bunn urged caution. He insisted there needed to be evidence that outcomes showed a return on investment while Robertson said: The underlying indicators are key, if they are to be the basis for design decisions or changes. Robertsons point brought the discussion back to where it started Kassam: People are forgotten the industry has to make sure that the right type of academic research is being undertaken, and that it is translated into meaningful guidance and metrics that can be adopted and understood by practitioners and clients, alike. As Paddy Conaghan wrote in last months CIBSE Journal: the industry has to find a way of bringing key research to the fore, to ensure designers arent administering the wrong medicine to building occupants. cJ If you put too many people in a space, there will be a nasty impact. No important work has been done on it Adrian Leaman Highton: More flexibility needed in tbe BCO Guide a more positive view of a building if they were given more control. My ambition is to permit occupants to create an environment that works for them, said Raw. You dont all necessarily want to be at the same temperature at the same time. Allow the users to work with the building systems and envelope. eor Rmade Killer variables The trouble with metrics Robertson said his firm had trouble in defining wellbeing and productivity as a metric to base design decisions on, despite doing a lot of work comparing BUS survey perceived productivity against issues such as absenteeism and profitability. My concern is that certification schemes Bunn: Cant tick-box our way to health and wellbeing References 1. Health, Wellbeing and Productivity in Offices, the Feeling Good Foundation, 2014 2. Health, Wellbeing and Productivity in Offices: The Next Chapter for Green Building, the World Green Building Council, 2014 3. WELL Building Standard, Well Building Institute, 2014 4 Productivity in buildings: the killer variables, Adrian Leaman and Bill Bordass, 2005 roUnDtable Panel Ashley Bateson MCIBSE, partner, Hoare Lea Ann Bodkin, head of design, Education Funding Agency Roderic Bunn, BSRIA principal consultant Craig Robertson, sustainability specialist at architect AHMM Ron German, director at Stanhope Andy Highton, development director at Stanhope Sara Kassam, head of sustainability at CIBSE Adrian Leaman, managing director at Building Use Studies Guy Nevill, senior partner, Max Fordham Gary Raw, visiting professor, UCL Killer variables The variables affecting productivity identified by Bill Bordass and Adrian Leaman are: Comfort including personal control: People are more forgiving of discomfort if they have some effective means of control over alleviating it Responsiveness to need: Ability to anticipate or quickly fix building issues Ventilation type: Closely related to depth of building Workgroups: Smaller groups are more productive Design intent: How this is communicated to users and occupants