A Descriptive Study of How a BREEAM Certification Affects a Construction Company on a Project Level Master of Science Thesis in the Master’s Programme Design for Sustainable Development LISA LEE KÄLLMAN STINA LUNDQVIST Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Division of Building Technology Sustainable Building CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY Göteborg, Sweden 2013 Master’s Thesis 2013:99 MASTER’S THESIS 2013:99 A Descriptive Study of How a BREEAM Certification Affects a Construction Company on a Project Level Master of Science Thesis in the Master’s Programme Design for Sustainable Development LISA LEE KÄLLMAN STINA LUNDQVIST Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Division of Building Technology Sustainable Building CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY Göteborg, Sweden 2013 A Descriptive Study of How a BREEAM Certification Affects a Construction Company on a Project Level Master of Science Thesis in the Master’s Programme Design for Sustainable Development LISA LEE KÄLLMAN STINA LUNDQVIST © LISA LEE KÄLLMAN & STINA LUNDQVIST, 2013 Examensarbete / Institutionen för bygg- och miljöteknik, Chalmers tekniska högskola 2013:99 Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Division of Building Technology Sustainable Building Chalmers University of Technology SE-412 96 Göteborg Sweden Telephone: + 46 (0)31-772 1000 Chalmers reproservice / Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Göteborg, Sweden 2013 I A Descriptive Study of How a BREEAM Certification Affects a Construction Company on a Project Level Master of Science Thesis in the Master’s Programme Design for Sustainable Development LISA LEE KÄLLMAN STINA LUNDQVIST Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Division of Building Technology Sustainable Building Chalmers University of Technology ABSTRACT The construction business is strongly affected by the emerging environmental trends and the increased demand for sustainable solutions and environmentally friendly alternatives. One result of the green trend is the emergence and spread of a variety of systems to measure the sustainability of buildings. Environmental certifications could today be seen as a market demand rather than an option. This has put pressure on not the least construction companies, which are forced to adjust their business to meet the new demands. There are few studies that address how environmental certification systems affect the project processes in a BREEAM certified project. All of NCC Property Developments proprietary commercial properties are since 2009 certified in accordance to BREEAM. A few years after the first projects were initiated, NCC seek further understanding of the impact BREEAM has had on projects in which a certification have been made. On behalf of NCC the authors of this thesis thus conducted an investigation of the first generation of BREEAM certified projects at NCC in Sweden. The purpose of the study was to find an optimal process design. The aim is for the thesis to function as a support in the planning and implementation of future BREEAM certifications at NCC. The results are based on data compiled from a conducted survey in eight projects and semi-structured interviews carried out in three of these projects. Information and experiences from on-going projects have thus been documented and will now be available as a support for following projects. An in-depth analysis of the results has resulted in the identification of four success factors: An early introduction of BREEAM in the process, Spreading the knowledge about BREEAM out in the project, It will get better in time and Designate a person responsible for BREEAM issues. These factors provide an opportunity for future projects to explore and evaluate what factors they wish to take into consideration given their projects specific properties. The main conclusion drawn from the study is that most of the issues and concerns about BREEAM seem to be connected to broader business issues, rather than being specifically connected to BREEAM. Although no process and organizational structure applicable for all BREEAM certified project could be found, the knowledge gathered and presented in this thesis could still serve as a information resource in future certification processes. Key words: BREEAM, environmental certification system, construction business, project process II En beskrivande studie av hur en BREEAM-certifiering påverkar ett byggföretag på projektnivå Examensarbete inom Design for Sustainable Development LISA LEE KÄLLMAN STINA LUNDQVIST Institutionen för bygg- och miljöteknik Avdelningen för Byggnadsteknologi Hållbart Byggande Chalmers tekniska högskola SAMMANFATTNING Byggbranschen påverkas starkt av nya miljötrender och ökande efterfrågan på hållbara lösningar och miljövänliga alternativ. Detta har resulterat i en spridning av en rad olika system för att mäta miljöpåverkan och byggnaders hållbarhet. Miljöcertifieringar har kommit att bli mer av en hygienfaktor än en valmöjlighet vilket har satt stor press på inte minst byggföretag som tvingats anpassa sina verksamheter för att möta de nya behoven. Få studier har utförts där miljöcertifieringssystemens påverkan på projektprocesserna i BREEAM-certifierade projekt har undersökts. Sedan 2009 är alla NCC Property Developments projekt i egen regi certifierade i enlighet med BREEAM. Några år efter att de första certifierade projekten startade söker NCC nu vidare förståelse för BREEAMs påverkan i de projekt där en certifiering utförts. På uppdrag av NCC har författarna till detta examensarbete valt att genomföra en undersökning av den första generationens BREEAM-certifierade projekt på NCC, Sverige. Undersökningen syftar till att hitta en optimal processtruktur vid implementeringen av BREEAM. Målet är vidare att examensarbetet ska kunna fungera som ett stöd vid planering och utförande av framtida BREEAM-certifieringar på NCC. Studiens resultat är baserade på data från en enkätundersökning som skickats ut till aktörer i åtta BREEAM-certifierade projekt på NCC och från intervjuer genomförda i tre av dessa. Erfarenheter och information erhållen från pågående BREEAM certifierade projekt har på detta sätt dokumenterats och kommer därmed att finnas tillgängliga som stöd för kommande projekt. En djupanalys av de funna resultaten har lett till identifieringen av fyra framgångsfaktorer: Att tidigt introducera BREEAM i processen, Att sprida kunskap om BREEAM ut i projektorganisationen, Att det kommer bli lättare med tiden, och Att tilldela en person ansvaret för BREEAM- frågorna. Dessa faktorer ger möjlighet för framtida projekt att själva göra en bedömning av vilka faktorer som de anser lämpliga att ta hänsyn till i deras projektprocess. Den viktigaste slutsatsen som har kunnat dras utifrån analys och diskussion är att de flesta uppfattade svårigheterna under en BREEAM certifiering ofta är kopplade till mer omfattande branschfrågor, snarare än direkt kopplade till BREEAM. Trots att ingen optimal process- och organisationsstruktur applicerbar på alla BREEAM-certifierade projekt har kunnat identifieras, kan de slutsatser som dragits från undersökningen fungera som ett stöd för framtida BREEAM-projekt. Nyckelord: BREEAM, miljöcertifiering, kvalitativ analysmetod, projektprocess III Contents ABSTRACT I! SAMMANFATTNING II! CONTENTS III! PREFACE V! ABBREVIATIONS VI! 1! INTRODUCTION 7! 1.1! Background 7! 1.2! Purpose and Goal 7! 1.3! Delimitations 7! 1.4! Research Questions 8! 1.5! Outline of the Thesis 8! 2! BACKGROUND 9! 2.1! Sustainability 9! 2.1.1! Trends in Sustainability 9! 2.1.2! Steering the Development in the Right Direction 9! 2.1.3! Environmental Certification Systems 11! 2.2! BREEAM 13! 2.2.1! BREEAM Schemes 14! 2.2.2! The Certification Process 15! 2.2.3! BREEAM in Sweden 18! 2.3! Organizational Theories 18! 2.3.1! Organizational Changes Due to BREEAM 19! 2.3.2! Communication and Relations Within Organizations 19! 2.4! NCC 20! 2.4.1! Environmental Work at NCC 21! 3! METHODOLOGY 23! 3.1! Research Strategy 23! 3.2! Collection of Primary Data 23! 3.2.1! Survey 23! 3.2.2! Deep Interviews 24! 3.3! Collection of Secondary Data 24! 3.4! Validity and Reliability 25! 4! RESULTS 26! 4.1! Survey 26! 4.1.1! BREEAM Experience 28! IV 4.1.2! Project Specific 30! 4.1.3! Actor Specific 31! 4.1.4! Open-ended Questions 33! 4.2! Deep Interviews 38! 4.2.1! Selection of Projects 38! 4.2.2! Presentation of Projects 40! 5! ANALYSIS 49! 5.1! RQ1: The Design of the Project Process 50! 5.2! RQ2: The Perception of BREEAM 53! 5.3! RQ3: Success Factors 54! 5.4! Hypothesis: The Role of the Architect 56! 6! DISCUSSION 59! 6.1! How the Thesis Has Succeeded in Meeting the Purpose 59! 6.2! Interpretation and Explanation of the Results 59! 6.3! How the Choice of Method Have Affected the Results 60! 6.3.1! Sources of Errors 61! 6.4! Connection to Previous Studies 61! 7! CONCLUDING REMARKS 63! 7.1! Reflections From the Authors 63! 8! BIBLIOGRAPHY 65! V Preface With this thesis we end our Civil Engineering studies at Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg. The study involves a survey and interviews carried out in a number of BREEAM certified projects at NCC, a large construction company in Sweden. The aim of the investigation is primarily based on earlier research concerning BREEAM and the primary data collection was carried out from January 2013 to April 2013. The thesis is carried out at the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden. The thesis was initiated by NCC and based on their aspiration for a deeper insight of how BREEAM has affected their own projects. To our help we have had a number of people who have contributed to the results of the study. First and foremost, we would like to dedicate a special thank to our examiner Holger Wallbaum, Full Professor in Sustainable Building, for his support and inspiration when carrying out this thesis. Many thanks also to our supervisors at Chalmers, York Ostermeyer, Assistant Professor in Infrastructure Physics, and Barbara Rubino, Senior Lecturer, who both contributed with great knowledge and support during our many hours of work. Martin Ohldin, Top Manager at NCC AB, Western region, who served as supervisor is also greatly appreciated for all his assistance and encouragement. The interviewees and respondents to our survey are highly appreciated for taking their time to provide valuable knowledge and observations. We are deeply grateful for their help during the work on this thesis. Lastly, we would like to give a special thank to Pernilla Ottosson and Åsa Lindell at NCC for their involvement and support regarding BREEAM issues. Göteborg May 2013 Lisa Lee Källman & Stina Lundqvist VI Abbreviations AP Accredited Professional BRE Building Research Establishment BREEAM Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method DS Design Stage. Phase in the BREEAM certification leading to an interim certificate GreenBuilding An environmental certification system in Europe assessing the energy consumption in buildings LEED Leadership Energy Efficient Design NCC PD NCC Property Development PCS Post Construction Stage. Phase in the BREEAM certification leading to a final certificate SGBC Swedish Green Building Council CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 7 1 Introduction 1.1 Background In later years an increasing demand for environmentally friendly and sustainable solutions have emerged. This has been reflected also in the construction industry, where one of the results is the spreading of environmental certification systems (ECSs), which have become important tools in the evaluation of buildings’ sustainability. There are a number of ECSs used for evaluating environmental impacts during the different phases of a construction project. BREEAM is one of the most commonly used ECSs in the world and was the first system on the market when developed in the UK in 1989. The system was introduced in Sweden in the late 2000’s. NCC have been using BREEAM as their main certification system for commercial buildings since 2009, when it was decided that all of their proprietary projects are to be certified in accordance to BREEAM. A previous master thesis at NCC examined the integration of BREEAM on a company level (Gillén & Kalmner, 2012). As few studies on the implementation process of an ECS have been performed on a project level, NCC sees a need of investigating how a BREEAM certification affects specific project organizations and the actors involved in the implementation. The original question posed by NCC concerned how the involvement of the architect affects the BREEAM certification. Due to the narrow scope and the absence of supportive information this question was however revised and broadened before the final purpose was set. 1.2 Purpose and Goal The purpose of this thesis is to provide a description of the integration of BREEAM at NCC and how it has affected the processes in projects certified in accordance to BREEAM. The goal is to find an optimal project structure in the implementation of BREEAM in order for the thesis to function as a support in future certifications. 1.3 Delimitations Boundaries were added due to limitations in time and in order to focus the investigation on questions relevant to our purpose. • The investigation will only consider the Design Stage of the certification process. No consideration will be put on the Post Construction Stage since only three of NCC’s BREEAM projects yet have been certified in Post Construction Stage (Described in chapter 2.2.2). • No consideration will be taken to other ECSs than BREEAM. Focus is put on the BREEAM process and no additional systems will be considered. • The investigation will only consider projects that NCC have performed on a proprietary basis, with NCC Property Development as client and NCC Construction as contractor. No consideration will be taken to BREEAM certifications at other companies than NCC. CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 8 1.4 Research Questions Three research questions (RQ) were chosen as an extension of the purpose. A hypothesis concerning the initial question formulated by NCC was included in the investigation, described in chapter 1.1 Background. RQ1: The design of the project process How is the BREEAM process designed and how is the organizational structure affecting the certification process? Is there an optimal structure available? RQ2: The perception of BREEAM How do the actors involved in BREEAM certified projects perceive the system, and how much knowledge do they have about the system today? RQ3: Success factors Which are the main success factors when certifying a building according to BREEAM? Hypothesis: The role of the architect Our hypothesis is that the architect has a significant role in the BREEAM certification process. The hypothesis is further that the architects’ greatest possibilities to influence the process are during the early stages, preferably before the completion of the principle documents. 1.5 Outline of the Thesis This thesis comprises of seven chapters. Chapter 2 is the first chapter following the introduction. Here the background to the thesis is presented including information regarding sustainability, BREEAM, organizations and NCC. Chapter 3 present a description of the methods used when conducting this thesis. A description of the structure of the completed survey and the conducted interviews could be found in this chapter. Also a short discussion about the validity and reliability of the methods used is held. Chapter 4 comprises of two sub-chapters where the obtained results from the survey and the interviews are presented. Chapter 5 contains an analysis of the overall results of the study. Finally, a discussion about obtained results and the significances of the methods used can be found in chapter 6, closely followed by the conclusions drawn and the authors own reflections presented in chapter 7. CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 9 2 Background 2.1 Sustainability There are many aspects of sustainability and uncountable ways to define it. The most widely used definition of sustainable development was presented in the report Our common future, also known as The Brundtland Report, as: “Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generation to meet their own need”. (UNWCED, 1987) Sustainable development comprises not only the environmental aspect of sustainability but also the social and the economic aspects. These three aspects of sustainability are all interconnected, and it is important to combine the three in order to achieve sustainable development. Sustainability addresses the question of how the development should proceed with consideration to the potential impacts of our actions, and without compromising the need of future generations. (Gröndahl & Svanström, 2010) The environmental question has been a part of the political discussion in Sweden since the 1960’s, and is in Sweden considered to be one of our times most important societal issues. (Gröndahl & Svanström, 2010) 2.1.1 Trends in Sustainability Through increased communication and the spreading of information we are today more aware of the situation all around the globe. This awareness has caused people to take action and all over the world the environmental awareness has started to gain ground and the demand for sustainable solutions is on the rise. (Gröndahl & Svanström, 2010) The sustainable trend has in later years also had an impact on companies, including the construction industry. Like all trends arising in the commercial sector, companies use sustainability and environmental thinking as a way to promote themselves and in turn, as a means of increasing their revenue. Many companies have experienced that sustainable thinking or environmental questions drive their business. (Gröndahl & Svanström, 2010) 2.1.2 Steering the Development in the Right Direction The choices we make today are deciding what our common future will look like. The construction industry is responsible for a huge amount of resources and energy consumed, carbon emissions and land occupation. As a part of the sustainable development trend, higher demands are put not only on finished products but also on the production methods and the circumstances surrounding the manufacturing of products. On the other hand the construction industry both creates employment and contribute significantly to a country’s GDP.1 Means of control must be used to steer the development in the right direction. 1 Holger Wallbaum, Full Professor in Sustainable Building, supervision May 30, 2013 CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 10 There are greater possibilities to steer the development on a national level than on an international level. This because essentially all international agreements must be incorporated into national efforts in orders to have effect. When working within nations, different instruments can be used. These instruments cover the range of economical, informative and administrate measures e.g. taxes, eco-labelling, laws and regulations etc. (Gröndahl & Svanström, 2010) Another result of the environmental trend is the emergence of organizations, which aim to motivate and support other organizations to plan a long term and strategy with a sustainable social development in focus. The Natural Step (TNS) is an organization developed by the Swedish oncologist Dr. Karl Henrik Robert in 1989. TNS aims to create engagement and competence for a sustainable development. They help organizations to take strategic decisions to be more successful by contribute to a sustainable society. (Sustainable Sonoma County, 2013) The Natural Step (TNS) uses a funnel as a visual metaphor to describe the current situation and the objectives of sustainability, as can be seen in Figure 1. The funnel consists of a descending curve and an upward curve that together illustrate the depletion of the world’s natural resource supply. The descending curve describes the decline of resources and eco system services of the world and the upward sloping side of the funnel represents the increasing demands of human activity, deriving from the a growing population consuming more resources. (Sustainable Sonoma County, 2013) The funnel shows the decreasing margin for action that businesses are facing in today’s social development. Companies must therefore adapt their businesses to the sustainable trends and only engage in sustainable activities in order to fit in the decreasing maneuvering space shown in Figure 1. Figure 1 Maneuvering space through time, freely interpreted from The Natural Step (Bertner, 2008) Decreasing maneuvering space SUSTAINABLE DEMAND SUSTAINABLE SUPPLY Time sustainability Declining resources and eco system services Increasing demands for resources and eco system services CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 11 2.1.3 Environmental Certification Systems There are a number of methods and systems used to estimate the level of sustainability for buildings during and after a construction process (Floyd & Bilka, 2012). An ECS is used to aggregate buildings’ environmental performance by using a predetermined method with known, transparent criteria. Most ECSs use a rating system where the buildings are rated depending on how many of the criteria that are fulfilled. A certification will result in an overall rating of an entire building, a part of a building or a whole area. During the last decennium the number of environmental assessments, applications and certification methods have seen a rapid increase. (Lilliehorn, 2013) 2.1.3.1 Why Use an ECS? There are many reasons for environmentally certifying a building. A certification verify the sustainability of a building and can generate lower operating costs, reduce the risk of poor indoor environment and result in less environmental impact. In addition, ECSs can be seen as a quality guarantee and a way for companies to profile themselves in the environmental field. (Lilliehorn, 2013) Many large scale companies are today requiring that the building they reside in are environmentally certified hence to above mentioned resulted values. Some companies even stress the environmental profile of their partners.2 According to an interview conducted in one of the certified projects at NCC, a construction company does not necessarily increase their revenue by making a construction greener and/or environmentally certified today.3 However, environmental certifications could today be seen as a market demand rather than an option. Companies that are not engaged in the sustainable development trend today will, according to actors involved in certified projects, lose competiveness on the market. Many of the buyers are however not aware of what is meant by green buildings and environmentally certified buildings. Another value expressed is that an ECS also promotes an environmental awareness among tenants and clients and that it indicates a better environmental performance. It is also said to be used as a tool for a company to work systematically with environmental issues.4 2 Property Developer Project A, interview February 21, 2013 3 Property Developer Project B, interview March 11, 2013 4 Project Leader Project A, interview February 21, 2013 CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 12 2.1.3.2 ECSs Used in Sweden There are a number of certification systems in use around the world. Most of them emphasize on different parts of the construction process. In Table 1, the most used certification systems for buildings in Sweden are presented (SGBC [1], 2013). Table 1 Four of the certification systems used in Sweden today (SGBC [1], 2013). Miljöbyggnad Miljöbyggnad has since 2005 been under continuous development and more than 50 buildings hold the Miljöbyggnad trademark in Sweden today. Miljöbyggnad is a Swedish system and was developed for Swedish conditions as a simple and cost effective way to certify buildings without compromising quality. The system can be used on both new and existing buildings, regardless of size. GreenBuilding EU GreenBuilding is targeting companies and organizations that want to improve energy efficiency in their facilities. The requirement is that the building uses 25% less energy than what is stated in the BBR. More than 290 buildings are currently certified in accordance to GreenBuilding. BREEAM BREEAM (BRE Environmental Assessment Method) developed in the UK and is the most widely used environmental assessment method in the world. It is developed and administrated by BRE, a previously governmental institution, but is now owned by a consortium of industry actors. Only industrial, commercial and retail premises can be certified by the international BREEAM version today. LEED The United States Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) green building certification scheme was launched in 1998. (Barlow, 2011) LEED includes all types of buildings and more than 25 000 buildings hold the certification today. The most commonly used certification system in Sweden is Miljöbyggnad (SGBC [1], 2013). From a global perspective, BREEAM is the most widely used certification system of the four. BREEAM, LEED and Miljöbyggnad are all so-called third-party certifications. A third-party certification means that a third independent party is the one who implement and determines the certification level that the building reaches. (BRE Global [1], 2011) CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 13 In Table 2, the certification systems described above are compared to each other with regard to which aspects they take into consideration. As evident in the table, LEED and BREEAM are the most comprehensive of the four certification systems mentioned. In both systems the environmental aspects are divided into a number of categories within which it is possible to achieve a number of credits. These credits are thereafter weighted (see example in Figure 4 The BREEAM rating ) and summed to a final score which correspond to a certain certification level. (Hagetoft, Kristiansson, & Pagrotsky, 2013) Table 2 A comparison of which environmental aspects considered by the different ECSs (SGBC [1], 2013). Aspect/system GreenBuilding Miljöbyggnad BREEAM LEED Energy ! ! ! ! Material ! ! ! Indoor environment ! ! ! Water ! ! Management ! ! Construction waste ! ! Infrastructure & communication ! ! Ecology and location ! ! Pollution ! ! Process and innovation ! ! 2.2 BREEAM Since its development in in the UK 1989, BREEAM has spread internationally. There are over a million buildings registered for assessment and 250 000 buildings with a completely performed BREEAM certification in the world today. (BRE Global [2], n.d.) The primary aim of BREEAM is to mitigate the life cycle impacts of new construction and refurbishment on the environment in a sustainable and cost effective manner. (BRE Global [3], 2013) CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 14 2.2.1 BREEAM Schemes There are five different BREEAM schemes available in the UK today (see Figure 4), adapted for different types of building. When BREEAM initially began to establish outside the UK an international scheme was developed, customized for application in the rest of Europe. The international BREEAM scheme consists of two schemes that could be used by countries outside the UK: BREEAM Europe Commercial and BREEAM International bespoke for unspecified buildings. (BRE Global [4], n.d.) A new version of the international BREEAM scheme – BREEAM International New Construction – was launched 1st of June 2013.5 Figure 2 The set of BREEAM schemes available in the UK are more comprehensive than the international set, which was used in Sweden until the Swedish version, BREEAM-SE was released in May 2013. All BREEAM schemes include a corresponding manual with technical guidance documents aimed to assist design teams and the licensed BREEAM assessors in carrying out assessments (Barlow, 2011). BREEAM Europe Commercial is the BREEAM scheme that has been used in Sweden until the launch of BREEAM-SE (released May 2013). The latest updated version of the manual connected to this scheme is the BREEAM Europe Commercial 2009 Assessor Manual, which is the scheme used in the projects examined in this thesis. 5 BREEAM Consultant [1] NCC Teknik, interview April 15, 2013 INTERNATIONAL SWEDEN BREEAM-SE (2013) Swedish manual UK BREEAM Refurbishment for refurbishment and renova! on BREEAM New Construc! on for non domes! c buildings BREEAM Communi! es cer! fi ca! on of urban districts Code for sustainable homes for domes! c buildings BREEAM In-Use for in-use assessment of an exis! ng building 20132013 1989 2008 BREEAM Europe Commercial BREEAM Interna! onal Bespoke New construc! on Offi ce Refurbishment Retail Industrial Refurbishment for refurbishment and renova! on M New Construc! on for non domes! c buildings Communi! es cer! fi ca! on of urban districts sustainable homes for domes! c buildings In-Use for in-use assessment of an exis! ng building CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 15 2.2.2 The Certification Process All BREEAM schemes include 10 BREEAM categories. Each category responds to a number of issues, a total of 48 issues, which address environmental aspects to consider within the categories. For each of the 48 issues there are a number of available credits with various importances for the certification. (Barlow, 2011) As evident in Figure 2 the BREEAM Europe Commercial scheme is applicable on three types of buildings: office, retail and industrial buildings. The three building types are evaluated against the same categories and issues, but the number of available credits in each issue varies among them. Figure 3 The BREEAM categories, an example of category issues and the difference between different types of buildings. The relation between the categories and the issues as well as available credits for each building type and issue is exemplified through a presentation of the Materials category in Figure 3. An example of the difference in requirement for each building type is shown in the red circles in the rightmost box in the same figure. The differences are minor but can involve complications when certifications are performed on project that comprises of more than one building type. The issues are divided into three groups of different importance for the final certification. The first group is named Minimum Standards (A) and represent the minimum number of credits in each category that must be achieved in order to reach a particular BREEAM rating level. The higher certification level aimed for the more of these credits must be achieved. In addition to the Minimum Standards there are Tradable Credits (B), i.e. optional credits given that the Minimum Standards for a certain rating level is achieved. (BRE Global [3], 2013) Once credits have been awarded for each issue, the credits from box A and B (see Figure 4) are all totalled into Category scores. An Environmental weighting is then used to calculate a Final score, presented as a percentage. As an additional way to earn credits a number of Innovation credits (C) available (see Figure 4) was introduced in the BREEAM 2008 scheme. These are given as an additional recognition for a building that innovates in the field of sustainable performance. Innovation credits can add a maximum of 10 credits, representing 10 per Issues within Materials Category Mat01: Life-cycle impacts Mat02: Hard landscaping and boundary protec! on Mat03: Responsible sourcing of materials Mat04: Insula! on Mat05: Designing of robustness Total credits available in Materials Category Weighted % score of 1 credit in Materials Category Cer! fi ca! on Categories • Management • Health and Wellbeing • Energy • Transport • Water • Waste • Pollu! on • Land Use and Ecology • Materials • Innova! on 5 1 3 2 1 12 1.04 5 1 3 2 1 12 1.04 2 1 3 2 1 9 1.39 Offi c e Reta il Industr ial CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 16 cent, to the Final score. When the innovation credits are added the building is given a BREEAM rating depending on the final BREEAM percentage score. (Barlow, 2011) There are five BREEAM rating levels: Pass, Good, Very Good, Excellent and Outstanding, which each corresponds to a specific percentage score. The design team of each project do themselves decide which of the tradable credits to take, based on which rating level aimed for and which preconditions applied for their projects. Figure 4 The BREEAM rating process which a building undergoes to reach its final BREEAM rating level. Ca te go ry S co re s Final Score Excel Minimum Standards - Energy - Management - Health & Well-being - Water - Waste - Land Use & Ecology Tradable Credits - Energy - Water - Materials - Transport - Waste - Health & Well-being - Management - Land Use & Ecology - Exemplary Performance Requirements Max 10% A B C CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 17 Barlow (2011) presents the BREEAM certification process in seven stages, presented in Table 3. Table 3 Barlow's seven key stages of the BREEAM certification process. 1 Decision to carry out a BREEAM assessment The prerequisite for the BREEAM certification to be successful is set early in the program stage. A decision to carry out a BREEAM assessment is to be taken as early as possible to avoid unnecessary complications and additional costs. 2 Appointing a BREEAM assessor Once the decision is made an assessor has to be appointed. This person must be registered under the BRE Global Competent Persons Scheme, have completed a training course, passed the examination and undertaken a test assessment. Assessors are always audited by BRE to ensure they achieve a satisfactory standard. 3 Appointing a BREEAM Accredited Professional (AP) Not yet incorporated in the scheme used in Sweden. Added in BREEAM-SE, release in May 2013 A BREEAM AP is a consultant with specialist skills in sustainability and environmental design that own great competence in the assessment process. The AP is to provide expert advice on a regular basis, i.e. beyond the role of an assessor. Appointing a BREEAM AP is worth up to three credits in the assessment, depending on when and for how long the BREEAM AP is appointed. 4 Carrying out the pre-assessment The client and design team agree a target rating together with the assessor. This very important stage of the BREEAM certification is performed before the design brief is completed. This step reveals which issue credits to aim for and which are not possible to achieve. 5 Registering the project The assessor register the project online, using the BREEAM extranet website for assessors. General information about the client and assessor is needed, and also information about the building to be certified regarding what type of project and assessment that is to be performed. 6 Carrying out the Design Stage assessment A Design Stage Assessment Report is preferably produced before the construction start or shortly afterwards. The assessor determines whether the evidence provided complies and awards the appropriate number of credits, thus determining the Interim BREEAM score. Any complementing evidence must be added. 7 Undertaking the Post Construction Stage assessment A last review of the evidence of the building’s complete constructed condition against the performance standards achieved in the DS Assessment Report and the requirements for PCS evidence is made. In the PCS Assessment Report the assessor determine a final score. The assessor is the actor who has the direct contact with BRE. The assessor is also the one who owns the responsibility to review and compile all the evidence into a final report in the two stages of the certification: the Design Stage and the Post Construction Stage. The evidence needed in the Design Stage aim to demonstrate the CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 18 commitment whereas the evidence needed in the Post Construction Stage is meant to display the final outcome.6 As soon as the certification is complete and the building is rated in both Design Stage and Post Construction Stage, there are no further requirements of controls or renewed certifications. The certification will remain throughout the entire lifetime of the building regardless of physical changes, refurbishments, abrasions and changes in standards. 2.2.3 BREEAM in Sweden In 2009, the non-profit organization Swedish Green Building Council (SGBC) was founded for all companies and organizations within the Swedish construction and property sector. The organization was formed with the prospect to lead the management of environmental certification systems in Sweden. SGBC was responsible for developing a Swedish version of the International BREEAM scheme, BREEAM-SE, which is adapted for commercial buildings. The scheme was recently completed and approved by BRE Global and it was launched on the Swedish market May 1, 2013. No categories are removed in the Swedish version, some issues are however added and the existing categories are adapted to Swedish conditions i.e. adaptions to Swedish standards and minor adjustments and exclusions. (NCC [1], 2012) The greatest differences between the International scheme and the Swedish scheme are in the areas of energy efficiency, materials selection and quality of the indoor environment. A new and credit generating role is also introduced in BREEAM-SE, a sustainability specialist entitled the Accredited Professional (AP). (BRE Global [5], n.d.) The AP is to take an active role within the design team in difference to the role of the assessor, which is to review and give feedback on evidence provided. (Pascoe, n.d.) BREEAM recognises the importance of involving an AP at an early stage by awarding the role with up to three credits. (Barlow, 2011) SGBC have during the spring of 2013 held educations for Swedish assessors for them to learn how to certify in accordance to the Swedish manual (SGBC [2], 2013). 2.3 Organizational Theories It is important for a company to find an adequate organizational structure adapted for the business and its activities. A considerable amount of research and development in the area have resulted in a myriad of organization models available. A model suitable for all types of organizations are however not to be found. (Bakka, Fivesdal, & Lindqvist, 2006) In recent years, there has been a call for an increased ability to adapt and capability to develop among organisations, and thus also on their organizational flexibility. (Bakka, Fivesdal, & Lindqvist, 2006) This further complicates the search for a general organization structure. The ability to implement changes is today a necessity for companies as the spreading of knowledge and competence is vital for the organisation to be able to implement changes in an efficient way. (Lægaard & Bindslev, 2006). 6 BREEAM Consultant [1] NCC Teknik, interview April 15, 2013 CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 19 Future organizations must be able to change relatively to a rapidly changing world, and in the implementation of new systems in the organization. A management team should therefore be assigned the responsibility for control and decisions for change, as one person alone, regardless of their talent, is incapable of making the necessary changes and decisions themselves. (Lægaard & Bindslev, 2006) 2.3.1 Organizational Changes Due to BREEAM When implementing a certification system as comprehensive as BREEAM in a company, this will result in the need of some organizational changes. As the system is implemented in many professional areas many involved actors will be affected by the certification. As described in chapter 2.2.2, it is the project team that choose which credits to aim for to achieve desired BREEAM level. Which credits they chose to work for will impact the construction process and have a significant effect on the organization, since some of the credits must be seized in an early stage in order to be achieved, depending on the preconditions that apply. The introduction of new actor roles is one of the most evident changes in the project organizational structure due to BREEAM. All certified projects must have an appointed assessor that is responsible for the evaluation and rating of the building. A certification also results in many new duties in various fields that have to be coordinated. This may recall for some sort of coordinator person. This person may be a person who already works in the project, but this may also imply a new recruitment. 2.3.2 Communication and Relations Within Organizations The communication processes are some of the most important processes in a company. Key words in accomplishing a good communication are according to Persson and Sköld (2006) control, motivation, interaction and feedback. In many organizations, the communication is perceived to be insufficient to some extent. It is important to encourage and inform individuals since information provides the knowledge needed to understand an organization, predict changes as well as adapting their activities according to the development of the organization. (Heide, Johansson, & Simonsson, 2012) Several surveys have been conducted within NCC where it has been revealed that the closest manager is considered to be the most important source of information. (Pálffy, Usage of Starnet, 2013) According to NCC’s communication policy every manager own the responsibility to provide their associates with the necessary information for them to perform their work. At the same time, every associate is responsible to stay updated and informed. (Pálffy, 2013) According to Barnard (1938) organizations are built on the connections between people, and the communication must be seen as vital for everyone within the organization. All members need to be familiar with the organizational objectives to be able transform the goals into action. (Tompkins, 1984) CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 20 2.4 NCC NCC is a construction and property development company operating in four business areas: NCC Construction, NCC Housing, NCC Roads and NCC Property Development (see Figure 5). In Sweden, NCC AB have become one of the leading companies in the construction industry with their main business within industrial, construction and civil engineering, and development. Their vision is to be the leading company on the markets they operate in. (NCC [2], 2013) Figure 5 The NCC organization scheme (NCC [3], 2009). Since the BREEAM certifications at NCC are mainly covered by the business areas of NCC Property Development and NCC Construction, these are the only divisions to be discussed further. NCC construction’s main business covers the construction of homes, offices, industrial facilities, commercial properties, roads and infrastructure. The business of NCC Property Development mainly regards the development of commercial properties in emerging markets in Scandinavia and the Baltics. NCC strive for an open information climate where the company’s key values have a strong impact. They advocate that communication should take place both between associates and between management and employees. They are therefore currently making large investments in the development of their information and communication channels within the company. (Pálffy, Intern kommunikation, 2013) In 2012 they introduced a new system, Projektportalen, which aims to work as a support for project management and production activities in large projects. (Sällström, 2013) The system additionally facilitates interaction between actors involved in a project and eases the transmission between tendering and production projects. The portal is directly linked to the internal Project Document System, PDS, which is NCC’s document management system. The idea is that all general information that can be of use to others should be found on the portal.7 NCC’s intranet Starnet was in 2012 awarded “Best intranet in Sweden” by the association Redakörer interna medier (2012). The purpose for the intranet is to provide associates with easy access information, internal news and events and also possibilities for increased communication between different parts of the organisation. 7 Employee Process Development NCC AB Western region, interview May 15, 2013 NCC AB HousingConstruc! on Sweden Construc! on Norway Construc! on Denmark Construc! on Finland Bal! c countries St. Petersburg Sweden Denmark Finland Norway Germany Bal! c countries St. Petersburg Sweden Denmark Finland Norway St. Petersburg Sweden Denmark Finland Norway Bal! c countries St. Petersburg Roads Property Development NCC Construc! on Sweden AB Southern Swe Stockholm/ Mälardalen Construc! on system /produc! on Western Swe Northern Swe Subsidiaries Financial & IT HR Marke! ng Process Development Subsidiaries Armeringsfa- briken... Anjobygg NCC Teknik Infrastructure Hercules ... NCC Property Development Sweden AB Southern Swe Project TriangelnWestern Swe Stockholm Region HR & Organiza! onal development Legal Marke! ng Communica! on Backoffi ce Admin QHSE Business Controlling Business Development CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 21 It has shown to significantly contribute to increase the amount of information available in the house.8 2.4.1 Environmental Work at NCC NCC have for a long time been working actively with environmental issues (NCC [4], 2012). They have the ambition to be the customers’ first choice and be the leading company on the markets they operate in, by offering sustainable solutions and creating value for customers and shareholders. (NCC [2], 2013) NCC’s environmental efforts resulted in NCC Property development being one of the first GreenBuilding partners in Sweden (NCC [5], n.d.). From an interview with a top manager at NCC AB conducted by Gillén and Kalmner (2012), a more comprehensive certification system was however sought since GreenBuilding only focus on energy consumption, why NCC started to investigate other ECSs. BREEAM was at that point one of the more extensive systems on the market, and a system adapted to European conditions. As NCC work on the European market, BREEAM the first choice for NCC. In 2009 NCC further decided that all of their propriety projects were to be certified in accordance to BREEAM. NCC was also one of the initiators of SGBC, a non-profit organization founded in 2009 and owned by its members. The members of SGBC have created a common set of values from which they are operating for faster development through joint certification systems, focusing on Swedish needs and values. (SGBC [3], 2012) In connection to the decision that all of NCC Property Development’s projects should be certified in accordance to BREEAM, NCC also set the goal to reach a minimum BREEAM level of Very Good in their certified commercial buildings. (NCC [6], n.d.) In a press release issued in February 15, 2013 it was stated that one of NCC’s BREEAM certified projects, RPG Logistikcenter, had reached the highest ever classification level of an industrial building (NCC [7], 2013). Another press release in April the same year presented the project Koggen 2 as the first office building in the Nordic region to achieve a BREEAM Excellent certification level (NCC [8], 2013). 8 Top Manager NCC AB Western region, interview April 16, 2013 CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 22 Figure 6 List of all BREEAM certified projects developed by NCC in Sweden. There are currently eight BREEAM certified projects in Sweden constructed in NCC’s regime. These are the projects taken into consideration in the forthcoming analysis in this thesis. All projects, presented together with the different characteristics and the conditions connected to each project are shown in Figure 6. All eight projects hold a certification from the first implementation phase of BREEAM. This implies that none of the projects have had any previous experience to rely on.9 9 BREEAM consultant [2] NCC Teknik, supervision May 21, 2013 Project A Office/retail 2014 Largesep-2011 Yes Excellent N/A Project Move in date City siz e Constru ction sta rt GreenBuilding BREEAM level, PCS Project E Retail 2012 Mediumoct-2011 Yes Very Good N/A Project B Office/retail 2013 Largejan-2011 Yes Very Good N/A Project F Retail 2013 Small oct-2011 Yes Very Good N/A Very Good Project C Office/retail 2013 Largesep-2010 Yes Very Good N/A Project G 2012 Largedec-2010 No Very Good Very Good Project D Office 2013 Largeapril-2011 Yes Excellent Excellent Project H 2013 Largeoct-2011 N/A Very Good CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 23 3 Methodology 3.1 Research Strategy The research approach of the thesis was decided with help from supervisors at Chalmers and NCC, and in accordance to the stated purpose and the formulated research questions. When deciding a research strategy, one of the first aspects to consider is whether the research is to be of a qualitative or a quantitative nature. A quantitative study aims to examine the distribution of, or relationship between, pre-defined phenomena and implications. A quantitative study on the other hand aim to identify or discover yet unknown, or inadequate known, phenomena, characteristics or consequences. (Yin, 1994) Due to the lack of previous research about BREEAM and because of the type of information sought by NCC, a qualitative study approach was considered the most appropriate method for this thesis. Too few projects with a full-performed BREEAM certification have yet been performed for a quantitative investigation to be done with sufficient results. All on-going projects have very different characteristics making it difficult to obtain enough data for a proper comparison. It was therefore agreed that a descriptive qualitative study was the most favourable approach for this study. There are different methods to choose from when performing a qualitative study, one of them is the case study. A case study is an accepted and proven method that facilitates a deep insight in the cases investigated. (Merriam S. B., 1988) As the aim of this study is to identify and describe the characteristics of a limited number of projects, a case study is found to be a suitable research approach. Experience data from individuals involved in the BREEAM-implementation is considered to give a more accurate picture of the process than a deductive study would have given. Merriam (1988) argues that a case study is the preferred method when the aim of the investigation is to create understanding of the dynamic of a specific project. 3.2 Collection of Primary Data Because of the chosen research approach the experience data from the investigated projects is the most important data in this thesis. The primary data consists of information collected from the responses of an online survey together with the results from a number of deep interviews. 3.2.1 Survey From initial meetings and reasoning about the further approach of the investigations, it was decided that an introducing evaluation in form of a survey should be conducted. The aim of this investigation was to give a general overview of how the implementation process of BREEAM was perceived by involved actors. There was also hope to find distinctive patterns that could lead to further knowledge for the deep analysis, and in the decision of which projects to be further analysed. The survey questions were developed in accordance with the previously formulated research questions. The survey was then sent out through the online feedback service software QuestBack. The respondents got one week to answer the survey, but because CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 24 of technical disturbances this time frame was extended one week. A total of three reminders were sent out to the recipients of the survey. The sample group receiving the survey included people from different positions and departments within NCC Sweden, and selected consultants from partnering companies involved in the projects. Among the respondents were entrepreneurs, architects, BREEAM assessors, BREEAM coordinators, coordinators of installations, project managers, project leaders and design leaders. The data collected from the survey was thereafter gathered and evaluated in Microsoft Excel, where tables and graphs were created to help present the data in a clear way. This data is presented in Appendix A. 3.2.2 Deep Interviews Semi-structured interviews were performed in three of the investigated projects. This was done to gain further credibility and understanding in the findings from the initial survey. The interviewees were selected according to a stratified purposeful sampling, i.e. when a target population is broken down into identifiable groups (strata) and then samples are selected from each of the groups (Sandelowski, 2000). The interviewees were asked to answer from their point of view and encouraged to relate to actual past/on-going events. The interviews were digitally audio-recorded with the participants’ consent. A total of 10 interviews were carried out with a total of 15 involved actors, see Appendix B1. The interviews were between 35-85 minutes each. An interview guide was prepared, where questions were formulated within a number of disciplines (presented in full in Appendix B2). The guide was revised after every interview session, in accordance to a qualitative interview methodology formulated by Trost (2004). One of the goals with semi-structured interviews is to learn and absorb enough from a situation to be able to formulate further questions for upcoming interviews. (Merriam S. B., 1988) The interviews generated deeper information, mainly in form of personal experiences, concerning aspects identified as important in the implementation process. The content analysis method was used to analyse the primary data collected from the interviews. The material was reviewed several times to ensure that its essence had been understood and interpreted properly. The gathered data was thereafter coded under a number of topics. These topics were scaled down and refined to form seven themes, under which the data was presented. The goal of the content analysis was to, through systematic coding and identification of themes, provide knowledge and understanding of the phenomenon being studied (Downe-Wamboldt, 1992). 3.3 Collection of Secondary Data The theoretical framework was based on articles, documentations and books together with documents from previous research performed within NCC. Both documents from public websites and NCC’s non-public intranet have been used in the investigation. The non-public information has been a vital source of information and has been treated very carefully. Efforts to find previous national and international research documentation from BRE and SGBC have given poor results. CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 25 Documents and published reports from a total of eight different projects were studied. 3.4 Validity and Reliability Validity means that what is measured is truly what the researcher is aiming for to measure. There are a number of approaches available for researchers to ensure that the measurement is performed according to their purpose. In his book Qualitative research in practice, Merriam (2002) specifies some practices available for this type of study. One of the practices is triangulation. Triangulation can be performed in different ways, most commonly by using more than one data collection method. To accomplish triangulation in this thesis, data was collected through interviews in combination with survey results and literature studies. By combining many different methods, one method's weaknesses can often be outweighed by the others' strengths. (Merriam S. B., 2002) To strengthen the validity of the conducted results, all the interviewees were given the opportunity to verify the raw material from their interviews before it was presented in the thesis. Reliability refers to the extent to which there is a context and logic in the presented results. The reliability will in this thesis be reinforced by the use of a structured and transparent research strategy together with the use of more than one valid data collection technique. CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 26 4 Results 4.1 Survey A survey was handed out to a selection of actors involved in NCC’s eight BREEAM certified projects. A total of 56 surveys were sent out and 47 actors responded to the survey, which represents a response rate of 81%. According to Trost (Enkätboken, 2007), a response rate of 50-75% is considered to be acceptable. This, together with information from the service software used, the assumption could be made that the response rate of the performed survey should be considered acceptable. Which actors to receive the survey were decided together with a BREEAM consultant at NCC Teknik, and in accordance with the stated research questions. The selected actors are all strongly connected to the core processes in the projects they have been involved in. The survey was sent out to representatives from the same professional groups in each project, see Table 4 for the surveyed actor and their abbreviations. Ass Assessor A Architect PD Property Developer BC BREEAM Coordinator CoI Coordinator of Installations SM Site Manager PM Project Manager DL Design Leader PL Project Leader There were only two project leaders receiving the survey, the Project Leader from Project A and the Project Leader who worked at Project G and H. The Project Leader in Project A attended one of the interviews and did therefore receive a copy of the questionnaire. The Project Leader at Project G and H received the questionnaire since she functioned in a different role in another project. The data collected from the Project Leaders has only been considered when looking at the open-end questions and at actor responses in total. The Project Leaders will not be evaluated as a sample group and are therefore marked in red in Figure 7. The diagrams (Figure 7) show the survey responses distributed over the different projects and over the actors who received the questionnaire. As evident in the diagrams, there was an even distribution of answers over the surveyed projects and a more dispersed distribution of answers over the recipient actors. The coordinators of installations showed the lowest response rate with 8 per cent of the total number of Table 4 Surveyed actors and associated abbreviations. CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 27 responses, while the architects stand for the highest response rate of 17 per cent of the responses. Figure 7 Distribution of survey answer by project to the left and distribution of survey answer by actors to the right. The survey comprises of a total of 14 questions where 3 questions treated the interviewees background and experience, 10 questions addressed topics connected to BREEAM and its impact on the construction process and 1 was an open question about further feedback (see Table 5). The questionnaire used and a compilation of all data from the survey could be found in Appendix A1-A10. Table 5 Scheme displaying the structure of the survey. Question no. Question type Type of answer 1-3 Personal information/Background Short answer 4-13 4-8 BREEAM specific questions Likert scale 9-13 BREEAM specific questions Open ended questions 14 Additional reflections Optional In question 4-8, the respondents were asked to mark their opinions on a likert scale. A likert scale is psychometric scale designed to measure attitudes or opinions where the respondents specify their opinions on a scale. In the most common form of likert scale there are an uneven number of pre-coded responses available to choose between. A six-point scale was however used in this investigation, since the aspiration was to avoid neutral answers. The remaining BREEAM specific questions were formulated as open-ended questions. Project A 11% Project B 12% Project C 12% Project D 12% Project E 14% Project F 13% Project G 13% Project H 13% Architect 17% Assessor 10% Property Developer 10% BREEAM Coordinator 15% Coordinator of Installations 8% Site Manager 12% Project Manager 14% Design Leader 10% Project leader 4% CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 28 The aim of the survey was to get essential information about the projects and to get an appreciation of the impact of BREEAM. The information gathered from the survey was used as the foundation on which further assumptions were built. The relation between the research questions and the survey questions are further described in Appendix A11. In order to distinguish different patterns in the responses, the data in Appendix A2 was compiled in a number of graphs (presented in Appendix C). In a first stage, graphs were designed and evaluated according to three criteria: • BREEAM experience To see potential impact from shifting level of experience • Project specific To distinguish possible project specific opinions • Actor specific To distinguish possible actor specific opinions 4.1.1 BREEAM Experience To answer RQ3, Success factors, the BREEAM experience of the involved actors should be investigated, as it could be an important factor in the BREEAM certification process. The number of actors distributed on how many BREEAM projects they have been involved in is presented in Table 6. Table 6 Actors distributed according to how many BREEAM projects involved in. Total number of survey respondents 47 100 % Number of respondents involved in one project 32 68 % Number of respondents involved in two projects 7 15 % Number of respondents involved in three projects 5 11 % Number of respondents involved in four or more projects 3 6% When assessing the collected data it became clear that the results from respondents involved in more than three projects could not be seen as representative. This sample group only include three actors, all of them assessors. This could have affected the ratings given to the assessor in the sample group, and might be a contributing factor to their high ratings. In accordance to our methodology only representative figures should be taken into consideration in the evaluation. Findings from the Involved in four-or-more projects sample group is therefore marked in red in Figure 8 and Figure 9 and will not be considered in further evaluation. CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 29 The suggested distribution of responsibility and workload is in Figure 8 and Figure 9 presented with regard to how many projects involved in. Following data is inferred from the graphs. • All graphs are relatively similar • Respondents involved in two projects have given a lower score than the other sample groups concerning five of the eight investigated actors. • Neither a significant increase nor decrease between one, two and three participated projects could be distinguished for any of the actors, concerning either responsibility or workload. • A decrease in desired responsibility among the actors involved in three projects compared to the actors compared in one or two projects is discernable only concerning the BREEAM Coordinator. • The BREEAM Coordinator and the assessor are the only actors suggested to decrease their workload, in the sample group of actors involved in three projects. Figure 8 The bars show how the actors involved in one, two, three, or four-or-more projects suggest that the distribution of responsibility should be for each of the actors presented on the horizontal axis. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Property Developer BREEAM Coordinator Architect Design Leader Coordinator of Installations Assessor L ik er t s ca le s co re Assessed actor Suggested distribution of responsibility Involved in one project Involved in two projects Involved in three projects Involved in four-or-more projects CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 30 Figure 9 The bars show how the actors involved in one, two, three, or four-or-more projects suggest that the distribution of workload should be for each of the actors presented on the horizontal axis. Overall it could be stated that it is difficult to see any direct connections between experience and desired distribution of responsibility/workload, only by assessing the data compiled in this survey. 4.1.2 Project Specific High bars in the Figure 10 imply significant differences between perceived responsibility/workload today and the respondents suggested distribution of responsibility/workload. I.e. when the bars approach zero this mean that the general opinion of the actors involved in the specific project is that the responsibility/workload is today distributed in accordance with their suggestions. According to the data presented in Figure 10 the overall responsibility and work in the projects should be higher among the actors in nearly every project. • Project A seem to have the distribution of responsibility and workload closest to what is desired in the project. • Project A is also, with a negative responsibility bar, the only project in which a decrease in any of the areas is desired. • Project E seem very satisfied with the distribution of responsibility when looking at the average rating. • Project G and Project H do also seem satisfied with the distribution of responsibility in their project. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Property Developer BREEAM Coordinator Architect Design Leader Coordinator of Installations Assessor L ik er t s ca le sc or e Assessed actor Suggested distribution of workload Involved in one project Involved in two projects Involved in three projects Involved in four-or-more projects CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 31 • The actors in Projects G and Project H have quite similar responses on the survey questions. This might be explained partly by the many similarities between them concerning involved actors, type of project, location etc. • The actors involved in Project C and in Project F request a large increase of the overall workload in the project. • The bars representing the workload, i.e. the demand for increased workload in the project, are in general higher than the bars representing responsibility. Figure 10 Summation of ratings from all actors regarding responsibility and workload in the specific projects. 4.1.3 Actor Specific High bars in Figure 11 imply significant differences between perceived responsibility/workload and the respondents suggested distribution of responsibility/workload. I.e., when the bars approach zero this mean that the general opinion among all the respondents is that the specific actor has the right amount of responsibility/workload. As evident in the figure, all actors except the BREEAM Coordinator are suggested to increase their proportion of responsibility and workload. They are also quite satisfied when it comes to the distribution of work and responsibility concerning the assessor. The responsibility of the architect is desired to be higher than other actors when the opinions of all respondents are considered. The desired increase is however barely half a credit. The need for increased workload is generally higher than the need for increased responsibility according to the data discernible from the survey. As seen in Figure 11 -0,5 0,5 1,5 D iff er en ce b et w ee n pe rc ei ve d an d su gg es te d ra tin g Assessed project Responsibility Workload CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 32 it is primarily the Property Developer who should increase their workload. The suggested increase as almost twice as high as other actors assessed. None of the projects wish to decrease the responsibility of the architects. Figure 11 Sum of the ratings from each actor in all projects regarding specific actors' responsibility and workload. Following results can be deduced from the data in Appendix C. • When assessing the projects one at a time it its evident that it is primarily the Property Developer in Projects D, H, G and A who need to increase their workload. (C10) • Project D is also the only project where the BREEAM coordinator's responsibility is proposed to increase by more than 1 credit. (C9) • A decrease in BREEAM Coordinator responsibility is suggested only in Project B and C. (C9) • Project A, B and H want the responsibility of the architect to remain the same. The same projects consider the role of the architect to be less influential than the other actors involved in the projects. (C9) • In Project C the Architect considered himself to have minimum possibility to influence the certification process and to make the implementation of BREEAM easier. (C14) According to data presented in Figure 12 the general opinion among the people working in BREEAM certified projects seem to be that the most influential role is the Property Developer, followed by the BREEAM coordinator and the Design Leader. The architect seem to be the actor with the least influence on the processes connected to the BREEAM certification with an average rating of 3,2. -0,5 0,5 1,5 Property Developer BREEAM Coordinator Architect Design Leader Coordinator of Installations Assessor D iff er en ce b et w ee n pe rc ei ve d an d su gg es te d ra tin g Assessed actor Responsibility Workload CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 33 • The average opinion among the architects responding the survey was that all actors should take more responsibility and increase their workload. The role of the architect in particular. • Most Property Developers share the opinion that the BREEAM Coordinator should have maximum responsibility (6), and that Property Developers should have medium responsibility (4). • The Property Developers further think that their workload should increase by 1 step on the likert scale, and that the BREEAM Coordinator should continue to have maximum workload as well. • The Property Developer at Project D is the only Property Developer who considers his role as influential in the BREEAM processes. Figure 12 The surveyed actors was asked to mark the level of influence of each assessed actor on a likert scale from “little influence” to “great influence”. The answers from all surveyed actors are compiled in the figure, showing average rating given to the actors on the horizontal axis. Detailed graphs showing the differences in responsibility and workload in all projects are presented in Appendix C9-C10. 4.1.4 Open-ended Questions The open-ended questions are meant to give the respondents a chance to more freely express their opinions regarding how the projects they have been involved in have been affected by BREEAM and how the processes could be improved. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Property Developer BREEAM Coordinator Architect Design Leader Coordinator of Installations Assessor L ik er t s ca le r at in g Assessed actor Who has the greatest influence on how smooth the BREEAM process is implemented? CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 34 Question 9 Do you consider the communication and exchange of information between different actors to be sufficient? As presented in Figure 13, the respondents share different views of the sufficiency of communication and information exchange within the projects they have been involved in. Almost 50 per cent of the respondents consider the information/communication to be sufficient, but a third of the respondents have expressed it to be insufficient. Figure 13 Diagram showing the distribution of answers from survey question 9: “Do you consider the communication and exchange of information between the actors to be sufficient?” The answers differ without following any patterns regarding which actor role the respondent had in the concerned project. From the respondent group saying that the communication is sufficient, the design team was considered to have had enough meetings where BREEAM had been discussed. The actors involved were further satisfied with the continuous dialogues and the clear information. Three of the respondents express that the communication between Assessor and BREEAM Coordinator is the most important. “The communication works at its best where you have a clear communication channel between the BREEAM Coordinator and the Assessor” – Assessor, Project D, G and H In Project A both the Architect and the Assessor do however request more communication: “There is not nearly enough communication between different disciplines.“ – Architect, Project A Yes 47% No 30% Uncertain/no answer 23% CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 35 There is also an expressed concern about the poor knowledge of BREEAM, why a certification is performed and its consequences. The Assessor at Project B expressed that: “No, still not sufficient knowledge. The knowledge must increase also among those who are not working directly with BREEAM. Flaws can be directly linked to the shortage of knowledge about the certification process.” Question 10 How do you think that communication and information exchange could be improved in a BREEAM project? The answers from question 10 gave a number of notable advices and thoughts on how to improve the present communication and information exchange within projects. Presented in the list below are the most reoccurring suggestions. • BREEAM related work has to become part of the planning and design work. • The release of a Swedish manual in May 2013 will make the interpretations easier. • The coordinators must gain higher status among the team members. They should attend meetings on the same conditions as actors from other disciplines. • A standardisation of the process would facilitate the integration of BREEAM. • There will have to be a better distribution of responsibility with less responsibility put on the BREEAM coordinator. • Determine the actions necessary in order to implement BREEAM in an early stage. • Communicate which conditions demanded for each target level early in the process. • Present clear corporate guidelines in connection to BREEAM and the company’s environmental objectives. • The use of experience feedback between actors and between projects. • Enable an easy access experience and knowledge exchange, where templates and other BREEAM related material could be shared between projects. Question 11 Which are the greatest differences between a BREEAM certified project and a project without a certification? Apart from additional environmental work, the majority of the respondents agreed that the BREEAM certification resulted in more time consuming processes for all actors involved: • BREEAM has resulted in a greater share of documentation and administration etc. • BREEAM has resulted in a greater share of accurate planning • BREEAM has increased the workload • BREEAM has created a demand for additional employees CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 36 Question 12 In what way is your role/work situation affected by BREEAM? How do you perceive the difference between a certified and a non-certified project? As presented in Figure 14, the distribution between the respondents who think that BREEAM has resulted in a more time and work and the respondents who have not experienced any major changes in their role appears to be fairly even. As evident in the figure the BREEAM Coordinator and the Assessor are disregarded in the evaluation of the results since their work by definition is connected to BREEAM. Of the 35 respondents, 15 are of the opinion that the integration of BREEAM has resulted in more time and work for the involved actors. Figure 14 How the different actors have responded (presented in number of actors in the figure above) that their roles are affected by the BREEAM certification and how they perceive that their roles differ compared to a project that is not certified. Many of those who answered that the BREEAM certification has affected their work agree that it has resulted in a greater need of planning and administrative work. “.. it has forced us as property developers to think ahead and make conscious choices and to be more engaged in the project..” – Project Leader, Project E, G, H The group most affected by the integration of BREEAM appear to be the coordinators of installations where all of the inquired actors are experiencing that more time is spent, mainly on planning and administration. The group of professionals least affected was found to be the architect, where five out of seven respondents experienced minor or no differences in their role and only one of them claimed it resulted in more work. “Planning and review of BREEAM points” – Architect, Project B BC & Ass, 14 Impossible to say, 4 Requires more time/ work, 15 Minor/no difference, 14 Other, 33 CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 37 The architects represent the actors who perceive themselves to have been the least affected by the certification in their work role. In Figure 15 the opinions of how the architects perceive their own role to be affected by the certification is shown. Figure 15 The figure presents how the architects perceive their own role to be affected by the certification. Question 13 In which stage should BREEAM be integrated in a project, according to you? All of the respondents agreed that BREEAM should be integrated as soon as possible in the process. Two of the actors pointed out that the time of integration of BREEAM depends on what BREEAM level aimed for, i.e. the higher BREEAM level aimed for, the earlier BREEAM should be integrated. “It depends on what level you aim for, since you can not change some credits as soon as the project is up and running. Therefore, the earlier the better.” – BREEAM Coordinator, Project E Question 14 Do you have additional reflections regarding the process in the BREEAM certified projects you been involved in? The additional reflections in question 14 mainly concerned the importance of engagement and involvement within the project. “It is of great importance that everyone involved in a BREEAM project are aware of the reason for the certification and what is expected of them. BREEAM should work as a motivation in the project and not become an administrative burden. Therefore, enough time and resources must be allocated for the certification.” - Assessor, Project B Impossible to say 14% More time for planning/admin 14% Minor/no difference 72% CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 38 The BREEAM Coordinator in Project G and H agreed that the involvement of the property developer is of great importance: “The involvement of the property developer has differed in the two projects I have been involved in, and for me as coordinator this has resulted in large differences in workload.” The communication was another popular topic: “The communication is of great importance. A precondition is to educate and inform everyone involved.” – Assessor, Project D, G, H The respondents also expressed an understanding of the difficulties of integrating a new system in the construction process and many of them believe that the process will become easier over time. “I reckon the bar was set higher than what was really needed, and this can be seen as a lesson learned for the next time.” – BREEAM Coordinator, Project A The importance of distributing the work and responsibility and to have continuous dialogue with other actors involved was an important subject according to the Project Leader at Project A: “Our key of success has been the distribution of responsibilities and workload and the regular meetings.” 4.2 Deep Interviews The survey generated essential data about the BREEAM certified projects at NCC, which formed the basis for further research. To develop a deeper knowledge of how the BREEAM implementation affect the project processes, a number of projects were further analysed. By performing a deeper research of these projects, a more reliable investigation could be accomplished. 4.2.1 Selection of Projects Of the projects presented in chapter 2.4.1, three were chosen for further analysis. No more than three projects were studied due to a limited time frame. To ensure the validity of the case study, a total number of three projects were however chosen for further investigation. Only the information gathered and presented in Figure 6 was used in the selection of projects. In Table 7, an evaluation of all criteria in Figure 6 was performed in order to identify which criteria are relevant for this investigation. CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 39 Table 7 Evaluation table showing the criteria considered in the selection of projects, and the justification for each selection. Evaluation criterion Justification Considered Size of project The sizes of the projects differ widely concerning economical aspects, total area and number actors involved. This makes the size difficult to define and it is therefore difficult to choose projects of the same size. No Move in date This criterion will not affect the certification process since only the design stage is considered in this thesis. No GreenBuilding BREEAM is a more comprehensive system than GreenBuilding. A GreenBuilding certification should therefore not affect the BREEAM certification. No BREEAM rating level NCC have a set goal to achieve at least Very Good in all of their BREEAM certified projects. The rating in Post Construction stage is yet not available in a majority of the projects. Rating level is therefore not taken into consideration. No Construction start Projects with similar construction start would have similar basic conditions in terms of previous knowledge and experience of the certification process. All projects examined had a construction start within the time frame 2010-2011, i.e. in the early implementation phase of BREEAM. Time is hence not relevant as selection criteria in this process. No Type of building This criterion was of great importance as different buildings have different requirements in the BREEAM evaluation. Yes Location To ensure independence between the three projects, i.e. same actor, same conditions; this criterion was of great importance. Yes To facilitate a comparison between the projects it was decided that the buildings to be investigated deeper would be of the same type and hence assessed in accordance to the same BREEAM evaluation scheme. The eight projects could be divided into four different types of building: • 2 warehouses • 2 retail buildings • 1 office building • 3 combined office and retail buildings To achieve the decided number of three deep investigated projects, combined office and retail building was chosen to be the basic prerequisite since it was the only building type with three or more representatives. The four projects were located in three large cities in Sweden, with Project C and Project D located in the same city. Since Project D, in difference to the other projects, CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 40 did not have to consider multiple certifications, this project was eliminated from the process leaving Project A, B and C for further analysis. 4.2.2 Presentation of Projects All of the chosen projects are, equivalent to what was decided in 4.2.1, constructed for both office and retail and located in large cities. Deep interviews were conducted with fifteen actors in the three chosen projects. Which actors to be interviewed were determined in discussion with a consulting BREEAM assessor at NCC Teknik, Göteborg. The aim was to conduct interviews with representatives from the same actor groups in all projects. This was however not possible due to time limits and planning issues as the interviews in some projects had to be conducted at a single occasion. The interviewed actors are presented in Table 8. The method employed when carrying out the interviews is described in Chapter 3.2.2. Table 8 The table below show the interviewed actors in each of the deep investigated projects. Interviewees Project A Project B Project C Assessor ! ! ! Assessor assistant ! BREEAM Coordinator ! ! Coordinator of Installations ! Design Leader ! ! Project Leader ! ! Project Manager ! ! Property Developer ! ! 4.2.2.1 Project A Five actors were interviewed during three interview sessions at Project A. Overall, the actors involved in Project A seem satisfied with the process even though the implementation of BREEAM has been tough at times. They seem to agree that it has been a time consuming mission to integrate BREEAM into the standard processes, and that the knowledge was scarce in the beginning. > On the question of when BREEAM should be introduced in a project, the interviewees all agreed that it should happen as soon as possible. The Project Leader explained that it is important to have a clear picture of which credits to take in an early stage, since it is hard to keep in mind things you are not informed of. There is therefore a need to sit down early in the process, with the right competence, and decide which credits and areas to be prioritized. There should be a prerequisite from CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 41 the beginning and the whole team should know which areas fall under their responsibility. Figure 16 The timeline above show the introduction of important events in the BREEAM process, as described by the Project Manager in Project A. The Assessor was one of the actors who saw possibilities by integrating BREEAM in an early stage: “The more time put on each actor in the beginning of the process, the easier it gets. If this is done properly, only adjustments are needed afterwards.” – Assessor, Project A When BREEAM was integrated in Project A, the project was already partly developed. The knowledge of what BREEAM was and what it meant for the project was insufficient since it had just been introduced in Sweden. The introduction of BREEAM in the project has resulted in a total of at least one full time employment from construction start in 201110, distributed as: ! 50 per cent on design leader ! 25 per cent on BREEAM Coordinators ! 25 per cent on other actors > On the question of how the organization structure had changed due to BREEAM, the involved actors agreed that the organization structure had not been adapted to BREEAM. A few efforts were however made to facilitate the BREEAM processes, such as assigning two project leaders for BREEAM (BREEAM Coordinators), see Figure 17, who has been working periodically with BREEAM questions additional to their regular duties. The decision of having two BREEAM coordinators was according to the Project Manager made with the intention of them supporting each other in this rather extensive, long-term project. 10 Project Manager, Project Leader, Design Leader Project A, Interview February 21, 2013 BREEAM Assessor Construc! on Architect Property Development 2010 20132008 2011 20142009 2012 Co ns tr uc ! o n St ar t BR EE AM in tr o at N CC BREEAM work started BREEAM Project LeaderBREEAM Project Leader Project Manager Coordinator of Installa! onsDesign LeaderProject Leader Site Manager Site Manager Architect BREEAM Assessor NCC Property Development NCC Construc! on Property Developer ContrractorClienent CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 42 Figure 17 Organization scheme describing the connections between different actors in Project A According to the Property Developer, the BREEAM Coordinators are not intended to perform all the work themselves in Project A, but rather be the ones coordinating and assisting others in handing in the evidence needed. Their function have been to follow up procedures and to make sure that all evidence are developed and assembled as well as to tell everybody how much time they need to put on BREEAM. > On the question on what Project A was most satisfied with in the project process, the early decision to spread the responsibility and work connected to BREEAM, instead of putting all on one single person, was a success factor expressed several times. The interviewees also expressed that BREEAM resulted in positive effects other than the environmental connected effects. “The BREEAM certification result in a number of positive side effects, like forcing to keep a certain structure and to attack questions at the right time. There are also other values, not as easy to identify.” – Project Leader, Project A The Assessor expressed the suggestion to have a full time BREEAM Coordinator, which when the workload is low could have other duties, instead of having an employee with other primary tasks take on the job and then not having time with their certification tasks. The Design Leader argued, with support from the Project Manager and the Project Leader, that the coordinator should be a person that is secure enough to stand up against both the questioning and audit from the assessor and also the questioning from entrepreneurs and involved actors. > On the question of how important the role of the architect is in the BREEAM implementation, the Assessor was of the opinion that the architect is important, however not more important than other roles in the project. The Property Developer expressed that the architect role can have significant impact on the certification depending on which credits aimed for in the project. The earlier the architect is introduced to BREEAM, the better. BREEAM Assessor Construc! on Architect Property Development 2010 20132008 2011 20142009 2012 Co ns tr uc ! o n St ar t BR EE AM in tr o at N CC BREEAM work started BREEAM Project LeaderBREEAM Project Leader Project Manager Coordinator of Installa! onsDesign LeaderProject Leader Site Manager Site Manager Architect BREEAM Assessor NCC Property Development NCC Construc! on Property Developer ContrractorClienent CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 43 The assessor was another actor perceived to be of great importance. In Project A, the assessor considered herself as a “reviewing body”, but other actors interpreted the assessor function as more of the supporting role of an Accredited Professional, which resulted in some confusion at times. > On the question of how the actors perceived the BREEAM process, the general impression in Project A was that it had been tougher than expected but that they were very satisfied with their choice of approach. As the Property Developer put it: “It was easy for me to say ’lets aim for excellent’ in 2009, but it is 20 people who have been working here on trying to get it together. And it's been tough, but I absolutely believe that it was worth it.” A majority of the interviewees are satisfied with the internal communication in the project but see problems with the external communication and sharing of knowledge, experience and documents between projects. > On the question concerning the sufficiency of information and communication in the project, the general opinion was that the experience feedback has been insufficient in the project. Project A was one of the first to perform a BREEAM certification in Sweden and did therefore not have any previous knowledge or reference projects to ask concerning information, proposed solutions or support. Due to the absence of reference projects and therefore knowledge in the area of BREEAM, many of the actors seemed to have a hard time understanding what BREEAM meant for the project. “Everybody has sworn over everything. They did not know what was expected from them, what they needed to prove. They did not understand the manual and complained over the lack of proper and predesigned templates” – Project Leader, Project A Concerning predefined templates, the Assessor argued that it is a possible option but see a drawback with templates and checklists as there is a certain risk of people ticking the box and attest without actually assessing if their work is done accurately. She felt that as an assessor you prefer to interpret the documents, and whether they are done according to the manual, yourself. Otherwise there is a risk of approving work that is not done properly. 4.2.2.2 Project B Five actors were interviewed during four interview sessions at Project B. > On the question of when BREEAM was introduced in the project the involved actors in Project B answered that it was introduced late in the process. The work with the system documents in the project started in 2006, but BREEAM was not introduced in the project until 2009. By then, the contractors had already been procured and the system documents completed. This resulted in late adjustments and extra costs. The construction start was in 2010. A timeline with important events in the construction process is described in Figure 18. CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 44 Figure 18 The timeline above show the introduction of important events in the BREEAM process, as described by the BREEAM Coordinator in Project B. > On the question of how the work was organized, the Project Leader and the BREEAM Coordinator explained that a group of five professionals discussed their approach as soon as it was decided that the building was to be certified. An environmental plan and an activity list were made and all criteria gone through. The group consisted of the project manager, a project leader from NCC PD, an external assessor, an environmental and quality manager from NCC PD and the BREEAM coordinator assigned to the project. The organization scheme with the actors involved in the BREEAM processes is described in Figure 19. Figure 19 Organization scheme describing the connections between different actors in Project B BREEAM team meetings were held once a month, a total of 18 meetings all and all, which were appreciated and considered necessary. The Project Leader mentioned that it might have been possible to have fewer meetings if they would have had deeper knowledge about BREEAM. He argued that the vague demands on specific actors made the implementation difficult and in the end made the meetings necessary. One of the tasks of the above mentioned group was to decide who was responsible for each BREEAM issue. The main responsibility of BREEAM was however put on the BREEAM Assessor Construc! on Architect Property Development 2010 20132008 2011 20142009 2012 Co ns tr uc ! o n St ar t BR EE AM in tr o at N CC BREEAM work started BREEAM Coordinator Project Manager Coordinator of Installa! ons Design Leader Project LeaderArchitect Site Manager BREEAM Assessor NCC Property Development NCC Construc! on Property Developer ContrractorClienent BREEAM Assessor Construc! on Architect Property Development 2010 20132008 2011 20142009 2012 Co ns tr uc ! o n St ar t BR EE AM in tr o at N CC BREEAM work started BREEAM Coordinator Project Manager Coordinator of Installa! ons Design Leader Project LeaderArchitect Site Manager BREEAM Assessor NCC Property Development NCC Construc! on Property Developer ContrractorClienent CHALMERS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master’s Thesis 2013:99 45 BREEAM Coordinator alone. This decision was based on the notion that it would be easier for a single person to learn the large amount of new information and thereafter spread this knowledge to the appropriate actors instead of involving all actors in every step of the process. > On the question of how the BREEAM work best should be performed and what resources needed to achieve a BREEAM certification, the opinions differed between the actors involved. The Assessor in Project B was satisfied with the strong dedication of the BREEAM Coordinator claiming that she was the reason why the structure was so successful in Project B. The fact that the BREEAM Coordinator had attended the as