The User Pre-Occupancy Evaluation Method in designer–client communication in early design stage: A case study

Requirements processing for building design: a systematic review

“…Concerning the first one, it is basically due to the high number of stakeholders (Jallow et al, 2014) and the poor definition of the project's objectives and priorities Rezgui et al, 2003). Concerning the second one, the lack of channels and common language are recurrent problems that hinder the communication between stakeholders (Jallow et al, 2014) and it causes many avoidable losses in time, budget and value generation Shen et al, 2013;Jallow et al, 2014). The open communication was the most important factor according to a survey with specialists that indicated thirty-seven critical factors for the success of the briefing process .…”

“…It was also found that flexible tools depend on IT, because they can make the requirements processing less exhaustive. However, most of the software found in the literature are of academic provenance, and are not widely disseminated on the market (Kamara & Anumba, 2001b;Rezgui et al, 2003;Shen et al, 2013), which is an obstacle for practitioners. Only 50% of the papers focusing on tools have presented results based on real situations, the others were based on simulations.…”

“…Regarding RM, in general, software are the tools that supply the greatest contributions in practice (Kamara & Anumba, 2001b;Kamara et al, 2002;Rezgui et al, 2003;Shen et al, 2013;Jallow et al, 2014). Mechanisms such as spreadsheets and matrices can also be useful and effective (Kamara & Anumba, 2001b;Rezgui et al, 2003), but registration and handling of data are more expeditious, flexible and reliable when supported by IT.…”

“…Finally, in the fourth stage, validation, the design solutions should be evaluated by verifications and feedbacks (Bluyssen et al, 2010;Shen et al, 2013). Some alternatives of good practices will be presented next in this paper, but only 12.5% of studies discuss this stage.…”

“…Although the approach to them was not so clearly defined and combined by most subsequent authors and a few studies deepened in the fourth stage when dealing with design reviews and feedback (e.g. Shen et al, 2013). The following description of each stage was achieved by means of content analysis.…”