Kullanım Sonrası Değerlendirme (POE) Yöntemlerinin Çeşitliliği: Farklı Bina Türlerine Göre Bir Analiz

Öz

Kullanım sonrası değerlendirme (POE), yapıların kullanım aşamasındaki performansını ve kullanıcı deneyimini değerlendirmeye olanak sağlayan sistematik bir yöntemdir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, güncel POE uygulamalarında karşılaşılan yöntemsel çeşitliliği tanımlamak ve bu yöntemlerin uygulandığı yapı türleri ile değerlendirme alanlarını tematik bir çerçevede incelemektir. Çalışma, 2000–2024 yılları arasında yayımlanmış literatür üzerinden yürütülmüş, POE teknikleri sınıflandırılmış ve hangi yapı türleri ve değerlendirme alanlarıyla ilişkilendirildiği analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular, POE yöntemlerinin anket, gözlem, teknik ölçüm ve karma yöntemler gibi temel kategorilere ayrıldığını ve konut, eğitim, sağlık, ofis gibi farklı yapı türlerinde uygulandığını göstermektedir. Ayrıca, yöntemlerin sağladığı çıktılar ve literatürdeki boşluklar tematik olarak özetlenmiş, POE’nin tasarım geri bildirimi ve performans iyileştirme süreçlerindeki önemi vurgulanmıştır. Bu çalışma, POE uygulamalarının sistematik bir çerçevede anlaşılmasına katkı sağlamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kullanım sonrası değerlendirme
• POE
• bina performansı
• kullanıcı memnuniyeti

Etik Beyan

Makalede ulusal ve uluslararası araştırma ve yayın etiğine uyulmuştur. Çalışmada etik kurul izni gerekmemiştir.

Methodological Diversity in Post-Occupancy Evaluation (POE) Methods: An Assessment Across Different Building Types

Öz

Post-Occupancy Evaluation (POE) is a systematic method that enables the assessment of building performance and user experience during the operational phase. The aim of this study is to identify the methodological diversity in contemporary POE practices and to examine the types of buildings and evaluation domains in which these methods are applied within a thematic framework. The study reviews literature published between 2000 and 2024, classifies POE techniques, and analyzes their application across different building types and evaluation areas. Findings indicate that POE methods can be categorized into surveys, observations, technical measurements, and mixed methods, and are implemented in residential, educational, healthcare, and office buildings, among others. Additionally, the outcomes provided by these methods and gaps in the literature are summarized thematically, highlighting the importance of POE in informing design feedback and improving building performance. This study contributes to a systematic understanding of POE applications in the built environment.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Post-occupancy evaluation
• POE
• building performance
• user satisfaction

Etik Beyan

Makalede ulusal ve uluslararası araştırma ve yayın etiğine uyulmuştur. Çalışmada etik kurul izni gerekmemiştir.

Kaynakça

1. Adegoke, A. S., Ajayi, C. A., Oladokun, T. T., & Ayodele, T. O. (2020). A post-occupancy evaluation of students' halls of residence in obafemi Awolowo University, ile-Ife, Nigeria. Property Management, 39(2), 163-179. https://doi.org/10.1108/pm-01-2020-0003
2. Ahmed, H., Edwards, D. J., Lai, J. H., Roberts, C., Debrah, C., Owusu‐Manu, D., … & Thwala, W. D. (2021). Post occupancy evaluation of school refurbishment projects: multiple case study in the UK. Buildings, 11(4), 169. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings11040169
3. Bengi, S. I. & Topraklı, A. Y. (2020). The perspective of turkey in the post occupancy evaluation studies. Periodica Polytechnica Architecture, 51(1), 83-91. https://doi.org/10.3311/ppar.15318
4. Bae, S. & Martin, C. S. (2023). The impact of measurable findings from pre- and post-occupancy evaluations of indoor environmental quality in the primary workspace. Buildings, 13(10), 2486. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13102486
5. Borrmann, A., Schlenger, J., Bus, N., & Sacks, R. (2022). AEC digital twin data-why structure matters. In International Conference on Computing in Civil and Building Engineering (pp. 651-669). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
6. Blanch, S. & Frazer, A. (2023). Understanding post-occupancy evaluation processes for public healthcare facilities in australia and aotearoa new zealand. HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 16(4), 69-81. https://doi.org/10.1177/19375867231171706
7. Coates, P. M., Arayıcı, Y., & Ozturk, Z. (2012). New concepts of post occupancy evaluation (poe) utilizing bim benchmarking techniques and sensing devices. Sustainability in Energy and Buildings, 319-329. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-27509-8_27
8. Demir, T. (2006). İnşaat projelerinde kritik başarı faktörleri ve proje başarısının ölçülmesi. (Yüksek lisans tezi, İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü). İTÜ POLEN. https://polen.itu.edu.tr/bitstreams/d063d69b-da19-4352-8bf6-ff297e12d68f/download

9. Durosaiye, I., Hadjri, K., & Liyanage, C. (2019). A critique of post-occupancy evaluation in the UK. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 34(1), 345-352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-019-09646-2
10. Ejoor, A., Obaleye, O. J., Oniare, A., Ajijola, S., & Ajayi, O. O. (2021). Experts’ identification of post-occupancy evaluation concepts relevant to building performance. Caleb International Journal of Development Studies, 4(2), 158-172. https://doi.org/10.26772/cijds-2021-04-02-08
11. Goulart, F. & Ono, R. (2022). Post-occupancy evaluation and codesign in mental healthcare buildings: user’s input as a driver for functional and technical adaptations in post covid-19 reality. Frontiers in Built Environment, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2022.962940
12. Guinther, L. L., Carll-White, A., & Real, K. (2014). One size does not fit all: a diagnostic post-occupancy evaluation model for an emergency department. HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 7(3), 15-37. https://doi.org/10.1177/193758671400700303
13. Hameen, E. C., Ken-Opurum, B., & Son, Y. J. (2020). Protocol for post occupancy evaluation in schools to improve indoor environmental quality and energy efficiency. Sustainability, 12(9), 3712. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093712
14. Hu, S., Yunong, G., & Chen, P. (2023). How to use poe to intervene in the design and renovation of rail transit public buildings. Academic Journal of Architecture and Geotechnical Engineering, 5(5). https://doi.org/10.25236/ajage.2023.050501
15. Igugu, H. O., Laubscher, J., Mapossa, A. B., Popoola, P. A., & Dada, M. (2024). Energy efficiency in buildings: Performance gaps and sustainable materials. Encyclopedia, 4(4), 1411-1432. https://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia4040092
16. Kim, M. J., Oh, M. W., & Kim, J. T. (2013). A method for evaluating the performance of green buildings with a focus on user experience. Energy and Buildings, 66, 203-210.
17. Kim, H. G. & Kim, S. S. (2020). Occupants’ awareness of and satisfaction with green building technologies in a certified office building. Sustainability, 12(5), 2109. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12052109
18. Li, H., Li, C., Skitmore, M., He, T., & Jiang, T. (2022). The post-occupancy dilemma in green-rated buildings: a performance gap analysis. Journal of Green Building, 17(3), 259-275. https://doi.org/10.3992/jgb.17.3.259
19. Li, P., Froese, T., & Brager, G. (2018). Post-occupancy evaluation: state-of-the-art analysis and state-of-the-practice review. Building and Environment, 133, 187-202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.02.024
20. M, M. S. M. & Eldhose, S. (2023). Post occupancy evaluation of ieq parameters in residential buildings. Sustainability, Agri, Food and Environmental Research-Discontinued. https://doi.org/10.7770/safer-v12n-art770
21. Martinez, J. G., Yeung, T., & Sacks, R. (2022). Production planners’ scope of action in the context of digital twin construction. In Twelth International Conference Construction 21st Century.
22. Menezes, A. C. K. D., Cripps, A., Bouchlaghem, D., & Buswell, R. (2012). Predicted vs. actual energy performance of non-domestic buildings: using post-occupancy evaluation data to reduce the performance GAP. Applied Energy, 97, 355-364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.11.075
23. Motuzienė, V., Lapinskienė, V., Rynkun, G., & Bielskus, J. (2021). Energy performance gap analysis in energy efficient residential buildings in Lithuania. Environmental and Climate Technologies, 25(1), 610–620. https://doi.org/10.2478/rtuect-2021-0045
24. Norazman, N., Nashruddin, S. N. A. M., & Ani, A. I. C. (2023). Post occupancy evaluation (poe) for enhancing satisfaction level of comforts in malaysia’s school buildings. Journal of Technology and Operations Management, 18(2), 9-19. https://doi.org/10.32890/jtom2023.18.2.2
25. Ornstein, S. W., Ono, R., Lopes, P. A., França, A. J. G. L., Kawakita, C. Y., Machado, M. D., et al. (2009). Performance evaluation of a psychiatric facility in São Paulo, Brazil. Facilities, 27 ( 3/4), 152-167. doi:10.1108/02632770910933161
26. Park, J., Loftness, V., & Aziz, A. (2018). Post-occupancy evaluation and ieq measurements from 64 office buildings: critical factors and thresholds for user satisfaction on thermal quality. Buildings, 8(11), 156. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings8110156
27. Rezoug, M., Picinbono, G., Delval, T., Fathy, Y., & TUM, A. B. (2021). D3. 1–Requirements Specification for Digital Twin-Supported Progress Monitoring and Quality Control. BIMTWIN: Prague, Czechia.
28. Riley, M., Kokkarinen, N., & Pitt, M. (2010). Assessing post occupancy evaluation in higher education facilities. Journal of Facilities Management, 8(3), 202-213. https://doi.org/10.1108/14725961011058839
29. Roberts, C., Edwards, D. J., Hosseini, M. R., García, M. M., & Owusu‐Manu, D. (2019). Post-occupancy evaluation: a review of literature. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 26(9), 2084-2106. https://doi.org/10.1108/ecam-09-2018-0390
30. Steinke, C., Webster, L. R., & Marie, F. (2010). Evaluating building performance in healthcare facilities: an organizational perspective. HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 3(2), 63-83. https://doi.org/10.1177/193758671000300207
31. Tanrıkulu, F., & Aytuğ, A. (2025). Konut Açık ve yeşil alanlarının iyi oluş hali üzerindeki etkisi: İstanbul ve Dünyadan on farklı örnek üzerine bir inceleme. Bab Journal of FSMVU Faculty of Architecture and Design, 6(1), 98-118. https://doi.org/10.61807/babdergisi.1483872
32. Turpin‐Brooks, S. & Viccars, G. (2006). The development of robust methods of post occupancy evaluation. Facilities, 24(5/6), 177-196. https://doi.org/10.1108/02632770610665775
33. Zhao, Y. & Yang, Q. (2021). Development of an ontology-based semantic building post-occupancy evaluation framework. International Journal of Metrology and Quality Engineering, 12, 19. https://doi.org/10.1051/ijmqe/2021019
34. Zhao, Y. & Yang, Q. (2022). A post-occupancy evaluation of occupant satisfaction in green and conventional higher educational buildings. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 973(1), 012010. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/973/1/012010
35. Zhao, J., Aziz, F. A., Deng, Y., Ujang, N., & Xiao, Y. (2024). A review of comprehensive post-occupancy evaluation feedback on occupant-centric thermal comfort and building energy efficiency. Buildings, 14(9), 2892. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14092892