Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
2 TASK ANALYSIS INTRODUCTION Previous Woods Hole Workshops concluded that the development of an integrated data base (IDB) would mitigate the loss of data and the need to re-create data in the building process. Because the greatest loss of data occurs at the interfaces between the phases in the building process (see Figure 1), the task analysis group was asked to concentrate on the interfaces or boundaries between construction and facility management, and between facility management and the start of a new cycle for a new building loop. Discussions focused on identifying data which .(1) need to be obtained from the IDB, and (2) are generated during the facility management phase that have use in evaluating past performance and improving future facilities. The working group was chaired by Jack Enrico and included Clyde Arnold, Frederick Busch, Ronald King, Malcolm McCollough, Lee Nason, Richard Person, Peter Smeallie, Janet Spoonamore, and James Walton. Approaches Figure 2-1 illustrates the approach used by this working group to determine the general characteristics of data required for facility management from the IDB. Five broad categories of facility management functions or tasks have been determined. Four relate to tasks at individual facilities--operations, maintenance and repair, facility improvement, and space management. One category--asset planning-- applies as a multi-facility management function. The IDB given to the facility owner, and passed to its management units, then was considered to be screened by the application of inclusion/exclusion criteria to develop the three general types of data required to be included in the data base: performance, physical characteristics, and components. This exercise developed the need for the group to focus on definitions, rules for inclusion/exclusion, and the five broad task groupings. It is important to note that facility management activities generally produce analyses and surveys that lead to (1) owner decisions on the need for new or modified facilities, and planning and programming input, and (2) new information inputs into the IDB. A more detailed functional view of typical facility management activities and 13
14 LIFE CYCLE PERFORMANCE/PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS/COMPONENTS 1 ASSET PLANNING MANAGEMENT OPERATIONS MAINTENANCE FACILITY SPACE & REPAIR IMPROVEMENT MANAGEMENT INCLUSION/ EXCLUSION -^â DATA IN CRITERIA DATA OUT FIGURE 2-1 Task analysis approach (single project). relationships is shown in Figure 2-2. Taken from a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers management activities model, the exhibit clearly shows the role of planning/evaluation and work management activities in operating and enlarging a multi-facility installation. Assumptions The primary target of the task analysis group was the facility management phase of the building process, with a focus on benefits, such as improved management control and decision making. The working group reviewed the assumptions from the 1983-85 Woods Hole Workshops about data needs and data element issues, and agreed that the assumptions made at these workshops are still valid. Briefly, these assumptions were as follows: ⢠The IDE concept will drive the technology.
15 ASSETS InstallatIon (communIty, base, flood control + network) FacIlIty (number of occupants, capacIty, etc.) type (buIldIng, road, etc.) use (current, etc.) legal (value, descrIptIon) Subsystem type (contructed, spatIal, furnIture/equIpment) condItIon (current, predIctIve) PLANNING/EVALUATION WORK MANAGEMENT InspectIon/Data CollectIon StudIes Network (transp., utIlItIes) StrategIc & Management Long/Short Range PlannIng Work Order on Subsystem Scheduled/Actual engIneerIng/trades labor equIpment materIals CondItIon Improvement CapItal NEW FACILITY REQUIREMENT Number of occupants, capacIty, etc. Type of facIIIty & actIvItIes RequIred equIpment, etc. Schedule of operatIons SItIng I DesIgn/ConstructIon, AcquIsItIon FIGURE 2-2 Model of relationships.
16 ⢠Only data that facility owners and their organizations decide are necessary and desirable will be contained in the IDB. ⢠The IDB will consist of heterogeneous hardware and software, and will accommodate changing technologies over time. ⢠The IDB will contain pointers or reference elements to enable users to locate data that are not used frequently, such as data of historic value, which may be stored outside the IDB in an external file. ⢠The content of the IDB will evolve. Some of the data will be changed over time as the building changes, and new data will be added as needs are identified or data requirements change. ⢠Data in the IDB will be shared by all participants in the building process and will be an essential element in the owner's management control system for facility management activities. ⢠A data manager or administrator will be needed in order to maintain the integrity, consistency, and security of the IDB. By ensuring data integrity and consistency, and possibly eliminating redundancies, the IDB will have economic advantages over existing practices. ⢠Each IDB will be unique, reflecting the needs of different owner organizations. Each organization must establish for itself what information is important in view of its goals and policies. Individual differences must be allowed in order that the IDB best serves the owner's facility management needs. ⢠Other data bases, including working files and data not meeting the IDB inclusion criteria, will continue to exist. The IDB will contain references to these data bases so that information contained in them can be quickly located, should it be needed by the owner or others. ⢠Effective interfaces between cost accounting and other data systems, and the IDB are in place (or will be) to ensure that decision makers receive complete information on status, condition, and cost. Definitions In order to place the work of the group into the proper perspective and to ensure a clear understanding of the working group's findings, the following definitions are offered. Asset Planning Asset planning is the long-range, integrative strategic planning function for a multi-facility owner. It considers the costs and functional attributes of possible alternative actions and recom- mends optimal directions based on experience, life-cycle economics, organizational policy, and responsiveness to the owner's requirements. Its recommendations are affected by some information from all phases of a facility's life.
17 Construction The building of a new facility; the replacement of a facility; or the modification, alteration, addition to, or conversion of a facility so that the facility may be more effectively used. Facility A building or structure which makes possible some activity. A facility can consist of a group of buildings or structures that are considered a single unit or entity, such as a military facility (e.g., base, fort, station, or installation). Facility Improvement Process The modification, alteration, addition to, or conversion of a facility so that it may be more effectively used. Responsibilities in this area include the following: proposed design changes to facilities; award of contracts and management of construction; design and procurement of specialized technical equipment, such as security systems; development of cost estimates; and monitoring of costs during projects. Facility Management The International Facility Management Association (IFMA) describes facility management as follows: It coordinates the physical workplace with the people and work of the organization. Its goal should be to combine the best management practices with the most current professional and technical knowledge to provide humane and effective work environments. Furnishings and Equipment Major parts or subsystems of a building. Examples are the foundation, superstructure, roof, mechanical systems, transportation systems (elevators and escalators), and telecommuni- cation systems. Maintenance/Repair The work required to keep and/or restore a facility in such condition that it may be used for its intended purpose. This includes ensuring an efficient, safe, and cost-effective facility and its daily operation through the following functions: proper mainte- nance, both preventive and breakdown; housekeeping; trash disposal; maintenance of the building shell and grounds; monitoring and reporting maintenance costs; and managing cost reduction efforts associated with maintenance and repair functions. Master Planning The determination of new facility requirements to include type, size, number, and location to satisfy a strategic plan usually over a two- to three-year period. Master planning considers mission requirements, existing facilities, available utilities, and environmental requirements, and includes a cost analysis. Operations The day-to-day use of a facility, its systems, and related supporting activities, exclusive of those activities considered to be maintenance or repair functions. Performance The measure of how well a building, structure, subsystem, or material does what it was designed to do; or how well a person executes specified or assigned tasks.
18 Physical Description Data that describe the physical attributes of a facility. Examples include room dimensions (length, height, and width), material types (concrete, steel, and wood), and major building components and equipment included in each building. Space Management Efforts required to provide an efficient and func- tional workplace to accomplish economically and effectively the organi- zation's objectives within budgetary constraints. This includes: (1) developing and implementing space use policies and standards, (2) developing short- and long-range space use plans based on future operational expectations, (3) allocating and reallocating available space among competing requirements, (4) monitoring assigned space to ensure that it is being effectively and appropriately used, (5) over- seeing all interior moves, additions, and changes, (6) maintaining space and furnishings inventories for management control and evaluation purposes, and (7) gathering historical data on space allocations and use, growth rates, and costs for use in revising policies and stand- ards, and for forecasting future needs. Space Planning Planning for the effective use of existing spaces and facilities within requirements and budget constraints. DATA REQUIREMENTS FROM THE IDB FOR FACILITY MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES The working group's first task was to provide guidance on information required from the IDB for facility management activities by the owner, and to identify priorities for use of facility management data. The owner operates (or designates others to operate) the individual facility. The information generated during the development process contains considerable data regarding life-cycle costs for the facility--costs which normally dwarf design and construction expenses. The term owner covers a broad classification of organizations respon- sible for the construction and use of the facility. These organiza- tions differ in terms of organizational structure, goals and objectives, reporting methods, and facility evaluation techniques. The content and structure of the data base provided would have to be tailored to the individual user, but generally would contain information in the following general categories: ⢠Performance. Design assumptions and intent of the architect/engineer, estimated system functional abilities, and costs. ⢠Physical characteristics. Physical description of the actual facility, systems, spaces. ⢠Components. Movable, relocatable, and often user-specific equipment such as lighting, furniture, and so forth.
19 User Views and Perspectives: The Private Sector Previous Woods Hole Workshops identified the diversity of views held by the many participants in the life cycle of a facility. This diversity was well illustrated using floor space data as an example. The real estate manager is most interested in rentable areas, the architect is most concerned with gross square footage, and the owner may want to know only about net square footage. The view of this diversity must be expanded to place appropriate emphasis on the operations and maintenance phase of the life cycle. Focusing on organization and management, both time and function can dramatically affect the data needs of a facility manager. Time An essential parameter missing from the workshop's prototype IDB demonstration was time. The architect, engineer, contractor, and related participants perceive the facility as a project; that is, they see that their purpose is to complete the facility and move on to the next job. The facility manager's purpose is to extend the life of the facility to the point of economic feasibility. The facility manager is therefore concerned with issues such as the time value of money, durability of products, life expectancies of facility components, deterioration of materials, and performance of materials over the life cycle of the facility. This observation implies that further development of the prototype IDB should incor- porate time-dependent variables in order to bring potential owners to the realization that the IDB can cope with the subtle changes that occur in the life cycle of a facility. Examples of features that show concern for this issue are the following: 1. Incorporation of the ENR "Construction Cost Index" in all costing functions. Historical records could be used for costing to present day levels, and projections could be used to calculate future costs. 2. Incorporation of component life expectancies to help predict maintenance and repair costs and to help facility managers to more easily schedule periodic inspection and maintenance needs . Design analysis in accordance with value engineering principles would help facility managers to schedule and budget major maintenance, such as roof or cooling tower replacements and would help avoid catastrophic component failures.
20 Function Facility managers perform a wide variety of functions in their day-to-day jobs; their data needs vary accordingly. For example, when involved with a repair on a fan coil unit, the facility manager needs part numbers and perhaps an air-distribution diagram in order to arrange emergency air conditioning to critical areas of the facility. When involved in a furniture inventory, the manager needs the plan showing desk locations. When completing an energy usage study, equipment heat loads and the facility component U-factors become important. In fact, there exist so many data on any given facility that concocting a single textual or graphical representation for a facility manager would be impossible and counterproductive. This observation implies that future prototype IDB efforts should incor- porate task-oriented data access systems with hierarchical levels of detail. Examples that show concern for this issue are the following: 1. Establishment of user software to block out space usage, square footages, occupancies, and schedules on a high-level floor plan which, upon request, can be magnified to show needed floor plan detail and dimensions, and 2. Establishment of user software to show mechanical equipment layouts and required temperature and humidity requirements on a high-level floor plan which, upon request, can be magnified to show air-balancing detail or controls. These functional, task-oriented "slices" through the IDB may consist of derived data for higher level information or primary data for more detailed views. A comprehensive mapping scheme might be developed that would allow users to pick and choose the areas where they are willing and able to purchase and maintain pertinent "slices" of the IDB. User Views and Perspectives: The Public Sector Functional Processes In the public sector, major aspects of the IDB that are related to the operations and maintenance phase include information on real-property related assets that are added to the building stock in the earlier design and construction phases. The major data elements for installations, such as those that the U.S. Army owns, are the facilities themselves, their use (e.g., barracks and hospitals), and specific legal description and capitalization information. Within each facility, the operational and supporting subsystems of the facility are categorized. For example, the constructed elements consist of the mechanical, electrical, and structural subsystems. The spatial elements consist of the available floor space and usable areas of the facility. The related functional components consist of the
21 furnishings and equipment. The operations/maintenance functions address that part of the IDB associated with the in-place facilities (associated through a network) of the owner's installation. Specific attention is made to the subsystems of the facilities that must be maintained. For example, the facility manager assumes that the HVAC systems are maintained, keeps records of fuel usage, and plans for upgrades and replacements of equipment. Work Functions In the operations and maintenance phase, work functions include two major categories: planning/evaluation and work management. The planning/evaluation functions include tasks related to the inspection of the condition of the subsystems of the facilities. Studies are conducted to assure that functional space is adequately allocated and used, capacities of roads are not exceeded, utilities are adequate, and methods of work are cost effective. Short- and long-range planning for preventive maintenance, enhancements, and new facilities to accommodate future needs is conducted. The work management function concerns the repair, maintenance, operations, and improvements to the subsystems of the facilities. Since the work involves labor, materials, and equip- ment, the operations and maintenance budgets and costs are accounted by the facility subsystem. The condition of the subsystem is updated by the work process, i.e., repair work to restore a subsystem to operating order. Value added through work can also be associated with the facility (e.g., adding air-conditioning). Integrated Data Base Needs The data elements necessary for the planning/evaluation function of the operations and maintenance phase include the assets information, in addition to other data about the organization's needs. Long-range planning may result in future new facilities to be acquired or designed and constructed. New facility requirements are described to the construction or acquisition agent. This information includes the desired type of facility, capacity (number of occupants, beds, etc.), types of activities to be performed in the facility (classrooms, laboratories, etc.), equipment to be housed, and potential siting requirements with respect to other facilities on the installation. Although the work management function uses many sources of data, the only elements used from the IDB are the performance and physical characteristics of the assets information. Data Population The important question related to the assets part of the IDB is how this assets data base can be populated with data. Given the slow
22 turnover of facilities (it is estimated at 1 percent per year), the most likely manner of population is through the inspection and data collection tasks of the facility manager. Further, the work performed on the facilities could likely be used to update the information in the assets data base, which is part of the IDB. This view of the assets part of the IDB will dictate that the data delivered from the earlier phases (design and construction) must be translated to conform to representation needed in the operations and maintenance phase. DECISION RULES The working group attempted to reassess, modify, or add to the inclusion/exclusion decision rules for the IDB developed at the 1985 Woods Hole Workshop. These inclusion/exclusion rules are important to determine the information requirements for facility management, as shown in Figure 2-1. Again, the exact nature of the information required is highly dependent on the type of facility and the owner's needs, but general guidelines can be established. The decision rules are used to screen and group data requirements for various facility management tasks, then identify data needs that the IDB would fill. With a well-conceived set of decision rules, development of information requirements at an owner or project-specific level can occur. The review and adaptation of the inclusion/exclusion rules for facility management information will also provide guidance to modeling efforts associated with the future evolution of the prototype IDB. The following decision rules for inclusion and exclusion of data, based on the 1985 Woods Hole Workshop, are meant to be used to determine what data will be furnished to the owner. It should be noted that the ability of the owner to use data may vary. Some owners may be able to use the raw data, while others may require that the data be processed and furnished as information. This decision should be established early during the project. It is recognized that the owner must be provided guidance about which data should be contained in the IDB. The following concepts of inclusion and exclusion can be used to provide guidance on items to be included in the IDB. In assisting the owner, it is important to review all of the tasks that the owner must perform and to establish which tasks can be enhanced by use of the IDB. Inclusion Rules 1. Life-Cycle Use Data Data that affect the life cycle of the facility should be included in the IDB. The elements should be chosen as early as possible. Cost estimates of owning and operating the building should be made available to the owner as early as possible. Changes made to the project that would affect the life-cycle cost should be reported to the owner so that program changes can be made during the design and construction phases.
23 2. Multiple Use Data Data that are valuable in more than one phase of the building process are considered multiple use data and should be included in the IDB. However, a data element used several times in any one phase is not considered necessary for IDS inclusion. Data valuable only to the owner should not be kept in the IDB, but provided to the owner by another method. An example of multiple use data is the allowable floor area of a facility used in the planning and programming phase, the design and engineering phase, and finally in the operating phase. 3. Physical Description Data that describe the physical attri- butes of a facility should be included in the IDB. This class of data should describe the building attributes and the building component systems. Building attributes include facility dimensions (length, width, height) and material types (such as concrete or steel). Examples of the building component systems are the foundation, super- structure, roofing, mechanical, and exterior utilities location. The building component systems should be described in enough detail to allow the owner to evaluate the component for future building requirements. 4. Intention Performance expectations of the programmer and designer should be included in the IDB for use by the owner. The intention should describe how the facility is to be used, and should also provide a description of how the major building components and systems will operate. It should include design assumptions used in developing the major building components and systems, and any limitations the owner should know. Examples of intentions might be the assumptions used in designing the air-conditioning system, and limita- tions as to the number of personnel and amount of equipment that can be accommodated in the building. 5. Historical Reference This data class comprises information on the facility that can be useful in determining future uses for the facility. This information may also be a legal reference. Examples of this class of data include codes used during the design and construc- tion phase, and legal limits placed on the facility use by governing authorities. 6. Major Equipment Major equipment should be incorporated as a separate data class in the IDB. This rule insures that descriptions of major equipment furnished with the building are available for the owner's use. Typical of this class is specialized user equipment and furniture. This type of equipment is normally movable in nature and is not an integral part of the building. Exclusion Rules 1. Derived or Generated Data This rule states that data that can be derived or generated from other data should not be stored in the
24 IDB. This rule helps to reduce the size of the data base. For example, a room area need not be included when the room dimensions are stored in the IDB. This rule should not preclude the owner from receiving calculated or generated data. The building owner may not have the software to derive or generate the data and may request that the derived or generated data be furnished when the building is complete. 2. Data in the External Data Base An external data base includes items that are contained in industry standards and other generally available generic sources. The IDB should not contain data that reside in the external data base, although the source of the reference should be captured if the reference is ever to be retrieved. 3. Insignificant Data Insignificant data must be defined and then excluded from the IDB on a project-by-project basis. This exclusion is directly related to the facility owner's organizational policies. Some owners are interested in retaining information on all building fixtures, furniture and maintenance items. To another owner, such data may be considered of such insignificant value that they are not important to track. Based on the policy of the owner, the IDB can be reduced in size when the accounting of insignificant data is not considered important to the future use. 4. Value to Other Data Bases Data whose value are greater in another data base should be excluded from the IDB. This exclusion is directed primarily at the operation and maintenance phase. For example, maintenance records on equipment would be better kept in a working file than in the IDB. IDENTIFICATION OF USER BENEFITS The working group identified important beneficial and demonstrable aspects of the IDB. Specific facility management tasks, notably in maintenance, repair, and operational activities can realize easily comprehended and quantified cost savings. Another highly visible benefit is the information that can be maintained for systems analysis or future programming use. To achieve maximum positive impact in future prototype IDB demonstration efforts, emphasis should be placed on working examples that best display the benefits to the owner. The greatest benefit of an IDB will accrue to the facility owner. In evaluating the benefit-driving mechanism, one must recognize that 80 to 90 percent of a facility's life-cycle cost is attributable to the operation and maintenance of the facility. Furthermore, facility managers have the greatest likelihood of becoming the managers of the IDB. In spite of the promise of computer technology, data base development and ownership have often been perceived as high-risk undertakings with a questionable return on investment. However, the
25 rapidly growing use of computers by facility managers throughout government and industry to assist in the operation and maintenance of facilities indicates that the benefits from computerized information are becoming more apparent. Table 2-1 summarizes some of the benefits of an IDB that the group identified. The IDB offers a vehicle for encouraging innovation. The following list is an indication of some potential opportunities. ⢠Greater understanding of data base technology by facility managers and owners, ⢠Greater ability to correlate questions of quality and life-cycle costs, ⢠Better continuity of data over the physical life cycle of a facility, possibly resulting in a 100-year useful life, ⢠More integration during the planning phase of a facility, ⢠Better tools to manage change rather than only react to change, TABLE 2-1 Benefits of the IDB to the Owner and/or Facility Manager A. Occupancy- (operations-) related benefits: 1. Equipment, furniture, and space inventories 2. Replanning, redesign, and drawings 3. Project management and procurement B. Maintenance-related benefits: 1. Availability of detailed data about physical characteristics and components of facility 2. Structure for creating customized maintenance procedures to track individual components over time a. Maintenance history b. Automatic work/purchase order productions C. Better information to make decisions about the types of maintenance to be applied to each component: 1. Preventive maintenance to reduce the need for future, more expensive rehabilitation or replacement and extend component life 2. Rehabilitation/modification 3. Replacement D. Decisions based on analyses of physical characteristics, maintenance history, and condition indicators (diagnostics) E. Fine tuning of maintenance functions over time can lead to: 1. Reduced costs for labor, materials, and equipment 2. Reduced down time 3. Increased responsiveness F. In the design/construct feedback looping: 1. Performance of original design concept 2. Performance of original and replacement components 3. Improved knowledge base to draw on for future projects
26 ⢠Generate multiple alternatives rapidly and employ sensitivity analysis to guide decisions, ⢠Greater ability to validate the decision-making process, ⢠Manage the information explosion more efficiently, ⢠Greater reduction in the time differential between basic facility research and wide dissemination, ⢠Stronger encouragement of a multidisciplinary approach to facility management, ⢠Increase the intelligence level of the lowest common working medium, as work moves from drawings to the computer, and ⢠Develop a creative model for export to other industries. FINDINGS The working group reconfirmed many of the findings of previous workshops, particularly in the area of data requirements and data inclusion/exclusion rules. This group extended these findings to the facility management phase, and the identification of the principal functions or tasks that require data from the IDB. In addition, the views of the facility manager were addressed and findings were identified for this area. Data The 1985 Woods Hole Workshop inclusion/exclusion design rules were validated and extended to include the facility management phase. Data requirements established in previous workshops continue to apply. Other data-related findings are the following: ⢠Facility management data can be categorized and assigned to a specific area of responsibility. ⢠A problem of populating the data base exists due to the exceedingly long life cycle of a facility. For this reason, the time value of data becomes an important issue. ⢠Facility management data contained in the data base fall into the general categories of performance, physical characteristics, and components. Facility Management Data Requirements The group identified five broad categories of facility management functions or tasks that require data from the IDB: (1) operations, (2) maintenance/repair, (3) facility improvements, (4) space management, and (5) asset planning. Table 2-2 lists tasks under these five categories. The group also identified the facility manager as a multi- disciplined participant in the process needing data from every phase of
27 TABLE 2-2 Facility Management Tasks. Multi- Facilitv Single Facility Tasks Assets Planning Operatic Mainten. and Facility Repair Improvement Space Management 1. Minor changes X 2. Planning X 3. Replanning X 4. Furniture installation X 5. Space inventory 6. Major changes X 7. Furniture moving X 8. Operating budgets X 9. Furniture X 10. Furniture maintenance X X 11. Finish maintenance 12. Preventive maintenance 13. Furniture inventory X 14. Furniture purchasing X 15. Furniture disposal X 16. Space standards 17. Code compliance X IS. Housekeeping 19. Security X 20. Telecommunications X 21. Design evaluation X 22. Space forecasting X 23. Construction management 24. Breakdown maintenance 25. Trash removal X 26. Furniture budgeting X 27. Capital budgeting X X 28. System design 29. Energy manager X 30. Architectural/design 31. Grounds 32. Exterior maintenance 33. Long-range planning, 1-3 years X 34. Building programming X 35. Satisfaction evaluation X 36. Long-range planning, 3-10 years X 37. Long-range planning, 10+ years X 38. Hazardous waste removal X 39. Utility services X 40. Space allocation X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
28 the building process that precedes the operation of the facility. The facility manager also needs time-dependent views based on the state of the facility at a queried point in time. Based on its application experience in facility management, the group reconfirmed the opinion that an IDB could provide a significant cost benefit to existing practices in facility management. RECOMMENDATIONS The task analysis group recommends that the prototype IDB demonstration continue to be developed over the coming year with the effort refocused to an area which meets the following criteria: 1. Allows demonstration of a full life-cycle concern. Design and construction data are forwarded to a facility manager for use in operations. Operational data are forwarded to a design/construction team to improve the economic or functional aspects of the facility during rehabilitation. 2. Obtains high value from a potential owner. Owners must be given sufficient incentive to participate in the design and, eventually, to purchase the system. Therefore, the "slice" of the IDB which should be developed must be highly valued because of substantial economic, function, or policy benefits. 3. Applies to a low-technology, well-understood problem area. This criterion not only supports easy comprehension and acceptance by potential owners, but might allow the demonstration prototype project team to build on existing software thus reducing the cost and work effort involved from the volunteer team members. The task analysis group feels that two slice areas meet all of these criteria: (1) energy management and (2) space usage management. A user task force can be convened using task analysis group members as a core, but expanding membership to include a wider variety of multi-facility owners from both the private and the public sectors. Their charter would be to validate (or redirect) efforts toward the establishment of an appropriate slice of the IDB. They would then complete task and information modeling on the slice that they had chosen and pass on their analysis to the demonstration prototype project team which would design and complete an applicable portion of the IDB. If clarification was needed by the team on any functional issue, the task force would be available for advice. This plan would correctly involve potential users in the design process and create a market to which interested vendors may respond. It would enable the demonstration prototype project team to avoid working in a vacuum, uncertain of requirements. As envisioned, it would involve a wide enough representative sample of the owner population so that the results would be generally applicable, regardless of the idiosyncratic requirements of any individual owner.
