Part One: “Misconduct” in the building and the methods of systems thinking

From: Smart office buildings – curse or blessing? Human needs and “smartification”

“Understanding human needs is certainly not a classic discipline in building technology. Without wanting to generalize: Many old warhorses from building automation have told me about “user misbehavior”. Individual behavior is therefore viewed as a disruption to the control programs. In the best case, this perspective leads to a desire for clarification on the part of the “professional”: “The technology works this way, you as a user are expected to behave in this or that way!” The wishes and needs underlying the (mis)behavior are acknowledged at the most superficial level. The result is conflicts, the expected or calculated energy efficiency of the building is not achieved and comfort suffers.” (imho)

The measurable effects of unconsidered human behavior in terms of energy efficiency and comfort can be easily assessed using the method of robustness analysis (Part 3 Tuesdaythis series of articles) to be examined. In order to understand the underlying human needs, the system thinking method is recommended.

Systems thinking and the understanding of behavior, needs and overall relationships

The construction industry now sees people in buildings much less as a “problem” and more as customers. For example, some real estate development companies create user journeys not only related to marketing, but also to interaction with and within the building. However, user journeys are only a first step towards a design that puts people first. Without a deeper understanding of behavior, needs and overall context, many reasons for dissatisfaction remain undiscovered.

Promoting and disseminating this deep understanding in order to lay the foundations for the improved development of buildings and building technology was the aim of a cooperation between the SBIF and students of the “System Thinking” course at HTW Berlin. The HTW describes system thinking as follows:“['Systems Thinking'] provides an approach for the analysis and optimization of decision-making and problem-solving processes [...]. Studying in this focus enables students to work on so-called “wicked problems” and to develop complex systems such as product systems, processes, regulations and components. Using the system thinking method, the conditions are analyzed, dynamic connections are recognized, and principles and processes are conveyed. Systems thinking also serves to promote empathy in order to be able to recognize and formulate overall connections and topics.” (System design HTW-Berlin)

As part of the cooperation, the students accompanied and interviewed several people on the Schindler Camus in Berlin in their daily work.

An initial recognition of expectations, responsibility and communication

One insight that the students developed with the Schindler employees concerns expectations, responsibility and communication:

It is expected that the “smart” technology has everything under control and operates the building in an energy-optimized manner. All of this is done fully automatically, without manual intervention and with maximum comfort.

This means that the responsibility for energy efficiency lies with the technology, the development departments and the building's operating staff. However, since the technology itself does not know (and cannot know) the individual needs of the user depending on their daily form, it is not possible to permanently ensure the optimal desired comfort. A well-functioning efficiency-comfort optimization requires collaboration between technology and people, which is why a certain type of interaction and two-way communication is essential. The usual setting and overcontrol options do not have a feedback channel that provides feedback to the person operating them and are therefore not sufficient. There is a lack of suitable solutions that inform users about the (effects) of their actions. In the following articles in our series, we will apply this knowledge to some examples.