Hardly a day passes with out some news, comment or blog-post passes across my computer that is related to BREEAM, LEED, POE’s, or even EPC (that’s environmental property code from IPD). Mel at Elemental has posted some interesting observations on a forthcoming BREEAM review, which in conjunction with the UKGBC is aimed to shore up the British scheme in face of the growing influence of LEED, I assume.
Yet each item I read reinforces my feeling these are the wrong tools for the wrong job*. Maybe we are looking down the telescope the wrong way. Are we too pre-occupied with moulding our designs to the needs of the organisation or business and its people, rather than really listening to the organisation or business, its people and the society or community in which it lives (or will live)?
If we were to throw away these schemes, and start again, but start from the facilities users viewpoint, the experience of using the facility, and how the facility contributes to the success of the organisation, I am sure we would end up with a totally different set of schemes. Schemes that are organisational-centric, not building-centric.
The existing LEED BREEAM family needs a good injection of enlightened Facilities Management thinking. FM thinking that supports and adds value to the organisation, not just maintains buildings.
I used the expression FM2.0 the other day – drawing on the web2.0 concept. As the web has engaged users in the popular web2.0 applications, so FM must emerge to engage facilities users, to understand the consumer and community issues and how to add value to the organisation.
In the move from FM1.0 to FM2.0 the dominance of building- centric approaches in the built environment will increasingly be questioned and replaced with user or organisation-centric schemes.
(*I cannot claim this expression – Prof Keith Alexander has used it regularly to describe Post Occupancy Evaluations)