Talk:Key Performance Indicators

From CESBA-Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Introduction and problem description

Here, you have space to discuss the CESBA tool indicators and Key performance indicators.

The CESBA tool indicators have been criticized, among others, because they make use of the PHPP standard which is not applicable to all European regions. The CESBA tool has therefore been renamed in CESBA generic tool and in the Feasibility study of CESBA tool CEC5 its practicability has been tested. It came out that using the CESBA tool currently might be too complicated because tools for simplyfying calculation are missing.

The CESBA Key performance indicators were commonly developed at the 1st CESBA SPRINT Workshop but still need concrete definitions and especially the KPI for European Macro Regions require a revision and endorsement.

Inform yourself on the KPI and the CESBA tool and tell your opinion on this page!

Discussion contributions

"In my opinion, the CESBA actors should make a survey on the harmonized, transnational indicators identified in other projects like SuPerBuildings, OpenHouse or IRH med in order to evaluate potentials for synergies with CESBA indicators." (N.)

"I believe that the KPI are a very valuable contribution of CESBA. They are the core element for a harmonization of building assessment systems in Europe. In order to make the KPI credible it has to be clear who has developed them and which organisations have adopted them or are willing to adopt them." (RM)

"Useful but difficult to edit" (MBD)

"The indicators expressing the aesthetic and cultural values of buildings are still missing." (DB)