Developing a weighting scheme for building operational performance: A case study from the Netherlands

• A novel ontology for buildings’ stakeholder analysis is developed. • This study proposes a weighting scheme for buildings’ operational performance. • Occupants’ needs are considered the most important during building operation. • Individual variations in performance priorities are significant. • Results inform on adapting SRI weighting scheme to regional contexts. Building operations must balance the often-competing performance objectives of occupants’ needs, energy efficiency, and power grid demand, posing a complex multi-criteria decision-making problem. Tailored weighting schemes offer practical approaches to synthesize these diverse performance aspects onto a common scale, effectively informing building operations and overall performance evaluations. However, such schemes remain underdeveloped. To address this gap, a stakeholder ontology was first developed to analyze power dynamics and information flows among stakeholders involved in building operational performance. Building managers were identified as key stakeholders to determine weights of such a scheme. Subsequently, building on the Smart Readiness Indicator (SRI) framework, a survey was conducted to calculate the weights for commercial buildings using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Inputs from 27 building managers in the Netherlands were collected, along with 13 building owners and 13 international researchers. Results showed that performance aspects were not equally weighted. Building managers prioritized occupants’ health and wellbeing, building service downtime, and occupant comfort, while assigning the lowest weight to operational cost. Building owners and researchers also agreed with these top three priorities. However, considerable individual variation in priorities was observed, even after accounting for stakeholder roles, building types, and country. These findings suggest that the SRI weighting scheme should be adapted to regional contexts and highlight the necessity for customizable building management dashboards tailored to specific building conditions. Finally, the proposed weighting scheme offers pragmatic insights to support decision making in building operations, policy development, certification systems development, and smart building control and management.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Building and Environment
Published
2025-09-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2025.113762
Primary Topic
Geochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Developing a weighting scheme for building operational performance: A case study from the Netherlands

Building and Environment
Geochemistry and Geologic Mapping
article

Developing a weighting scheme for building operational performance: A case study from the Netherlands

article en

Abstract

• A novel ontology for buildings’ stakeholder analysis is developed. • This study proposes a weighting scheme for buildings’ operational performance. • Occupants’ needs are considered the most important during building operation. • Individual variations in performance priorities are significant. • Results inform on adapting SRI weighting scheme to regional contexts. Building operations must balance the often-competing performance objectives of occupants’ needs, energy efficiency, and power grid demand, posing a complex multi-criteria decision-making problem. Tailored weighting schemes offer practical approaches to synthesize these diverse performance aspects onto a common scale, effectively informing building operations and overall performance evaluations. However, such schemes remain underdeveloped. To address this gap, a stakeholder ontology was first developed to analyze power dynamics and information flows among stakeholders involved in building operational performance. Building managers were identified as key stakeholders to determine weights of such a scheme. Subsequently, building on the Smart Readiness Indicator (SRI) framework, a survey was conducted to calculate the weights for commercial buildings using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Inputs from 27 building managers in the Netherlands were collected, along with 13 building owners and 13 international researchers. Results showed that performance aspects were not equally weighted. Building managers prioritized occupants’ health and wellbeing, building service downtime, and occupant comfort, while assigning the lowest weight to operational cost. Building owners and researchers also agreed with these top three priorities. However, considerable individual variation in priorities was observed, even after accounting for stakeholder roles, building types, and country. These findings suggest that the SRI weighting scheme should be adapted to regional contexts and highlight the necessity for customizable building management dashboards tailored to specific building conditions. Finally, the proposed weighting scheme offers pragmatic insights to support decision making in building operations, policy development, certification systems development, and smart building control and management.

Building and EnvironmentVol. 286
Pennsylvania State University (US), SINTEF (NO), Politecnico di Torino (IT), Atlantic University (US), ETH Zurich (CH), Concordia University (CA), Eindhoven University of Technology (NL), Technical University of Denmark (DK)
Rijksdienst voor Ondernemend Nederland, European Commission, Energiteknologisk udviklings- og demonstrationsprogram, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, Fonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologies, Bundesamt für Energie
Affordable and clean energy
Openalex Percentile: Top 28%
Geochemistry and Geologic Mapping
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.