Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11861/7361
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLai, Joseph H.K.en_US
dc.contributor.authorHou, Huiying (Cynthia)en_US
dc.contributor.authorChiu, Betty W.Y.en_US
dc.contributor.authorEdwards, Daviden_US
dc.contributor.authorYuen, P.L.en_US
dc.contributor.authorSing, Michaelen_US
dc.contributor.authorDr. WONG Yat-Lung, Philipen_US
dc.date.accessioned2023-02-01T10:39:10Z-
dc.date.available2023-02-01T10:39:10Z-
dc.date.issued2022-
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Building Engineering, 2022, Vol.45, pp.103428.en_US
dc.identifier.issn2352-7102-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11861/7361-
dc.description.abstractHospitals are critical infrastructure assets and the strategic management of facilities within these buildings are quintessentially important to society who rely upon effective healthcare services. Despite their importance to the optimised functioning of hospital facilities, standardized performance evaluation measures such as key performance indicators (KPIs) have hitherto received scant academic attention. Understanding the views of practitioners working on the different lifecycle stages of a building will help to establish pragmatic KPIs for hospital facilities management (FM). Hence, a multi-stage study was undertaken, within which interpretivism and inductive reasoning was utilised to conduct a systematic review of extant literature on hospital FM and KPIs. In parallel, the initial stage of work shortlisted 18 KPIs, in four categories (physical, safety, environmental and financial), as essential for hospital FM performance evaluation. Using these indicators, a questionnaire survey was developed and disseminated to building practitioners in the hospital sector of Hong Kong. Data gathered was then analysed using both summary and inferential statistics. The analyses reveal that the practitioners generally regarded the physical and financial indicators as more important. When compared between the perspectives of the design/construction practitioners and the FM group, significant differences were found with three particular KPIs: availability of fire services system, energy utilization index and carbon emissions per building area. The paper concludes with direction for future research that seeks to analytically determine the importance weighting of each performance indicator identified, which is requisite for establishing a credible hospital FM performance evaluation scheme. •A systematic review revealed limited research on hospital FM performance measures.•Surveyed building practitioners' perceived importance of 18 hospital FM KPIs.•The practitioners regarded the physical and financial KPIs as more important.•Design/construction and FM practitioners perceived 3 of the 18 KPIs differently.•Signpost future direction to determine importance weightings of the KPIs.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Building Engineeringen_US
dc.titleImportance of hospital facilities management performance indicators: Building practitioner's perspectivesen_US
dc.typePeer Reviewed Journal Articleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jobe.2021.103428-
crisitem.author.deptDepartment of Law and Business-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
Appears in Collections:Law and Business - Publication
Show simple item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

17
checked on Nov 17, 2024

Page view(s)

73
Last Week
0
Last month
checked on Nov 21, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Impact Indices

Altmetric

PlumX

Metrics


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.