Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Indoor Environmental Quality in LEED Certified Buildings in The U S
Indoor Environmental Quality in LEED Certified Buildings in The U S
Indoor Environmental Quality in LEED Certified Buildings in The U S
To cite this article: Young S. Lee & Suk-Kyung Kim (2008) Indoor Environmental Quality in
LEED-Certified Buildings in the U.S., Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering, 7:2,
293-300, DOI: 10.3130/jaabe.7.293
1
Assistant Professor, School of Planning, Design, & Construction, Michigan State University, USA
2
Assistant Professor, School of Planning, Design, & Construction, Michigan State University, USA
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the indoor environmental quality (IEQ) of workplaces in
the LEED–certified buildings in the United States. LEED®, standing for the Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design, is a U.S. national sustainable building benchmark as well as green building
rating system adopted nationally and internationally. The study compared seven IEQ criteria in relation
to occupant's satisfaction and performance between LEED-certified buildings and non-LEED-certified
buildings. The seven IEQ criteria included qualities of office layout, office furnishings, thermal comfort,
indoor air quality (IAQ), lighting, acoustics, and cleanliness and maintenance. The study found that LEED-
certified buildings showed higher occupant satisfaction with office furnishings quality, IAQ, and cleanliness
and maintenance quality than non-LEED-certified buildings. However, non-LEED-certified buildings
presented higher occupant satisfaction with office layout quality, lighting quality, and acoustic quality than
LEED-certified buildings. LEED-certified buildings had higher occupant performance in office furnishings
quality, thermal comfort quality, IAQ, and cleanliness and maintenance quality than non-LEED-certified
buildings. But non-LEED-certified buildings showed higher occupant performance in office layout quality,
lighting quality, and acoustic quality. The implementations of the study include emphasis on various issues of
IEQ in workplace design when complying with LEED and refinement of current LEED IEQ criteria.
Duration at the current workspace Less than 3months (1); 4-6months (2); 7-12months (3); More than 1year (4)
Duration at the workspace per day 10 or less (1); 11-30 (2); More than 30 (3)
Administrative support (1); Technical (2); Professional (3);
Type of work
Managerial/supervisory (4); Other (5)
Age 30 or under (1); 31-50 (2); Over 50 (3)
Gender Female(1); Male(2)
Personal workspace location in building North(1); East(3); South(2); West(4); Core(5); Don't know (6)
Characteristics
Workspaces
Direction of Closest Window to Workspace North(1); East(3); South(2); West(4); No windows(5); Don't know (6)
Proximity to a Window within 15 feet Yes (1); No (2)
Enclosed private office (1); Enclosed shared office with other people (2); High-
Type of Office paneled cubicles about 5 feet or higher (3); Low-paneled cubicles below 5 feet
(4); Workspace in open office with no partitions (5); Other (6)
the study. The study compared between 15 LEED- similar distribution patterns in most questions between
certified buildings and the rest 200 non-LEED-certified LEED-certified buildings and non-LEED-certified
buildings. The total number of respondents was 3769 buildings.
in LEED-certified buildings and 36719 in non-LEED- The majority of the respondents in both LEED-
certified buildings. certified buildings and non-LEED-certified buildings
3.2 Analysis were between 31 to 50 years old, worked more than
The data was analyzed by descriptive statistics. one year for more than 30 hours per week in the
Descriptive statistics explained the occupant's current personal workspace, and had a professional
responses to the seven IEQ criteria and their job. However, there were more males in non-LEED-
background information with frequencies and central certified buildings (58%) than LEED-certified
tendencies. buildings (50%). Table 3. shows the characteristics of
A limitation of this study included unbalanced occupant's demographics between two building groups.
sample sizes between two groups. Even though the
Center's IEQ survey was the first successful nationally Table 3. Characteristics of Demographics Analysis Results
standardized survey in assessing occupant's responses Percentage (%)
to their workspaces, participations from LEED- Question Answer Non-
LEED
LEED
certified buildings in the survey just started at the time Female 50 58
of study. Thus, the number of LEED-certified buildings Gender
Male 50 42
participating in the survey was small. 30 or under 20 16
Another limitation was the use of aggregate data, Age 31-50 58 51
Over 50 27 33
which limited further advanced statistical analyses. Duration of Less than 3 months 14 9
Raw data was not accessible for the study due to employment 4-6 months 9 9
confidential issues with organizations who participated at the current 7-12 months 15 13
in the survey. General information regarding subject workspace More than 1 year 62 68
buildings such as buildings' geographic location, Duration of stay 10 hours or less 4 4
in the workspace 11-30 hours 21 14
size of buildings, or year of completion was thus not
in a typical week More than 30 hours 76 82
provided. Due to these reasons, descriptive analysis Administrative
methods were mainly employed. 20 25
support
Occupant's ratings on the IEQ criteria in relation to Technical 20 10
their satisfaction and performance were analyzed in a Type of work Professional 43 28
Managerial/
frequency distribution and translated to a percentage. A supervisory
25 24
mean score was calculated in each criterion to compare Other 10 8
central tendencies between two building groups.
For the demographic and workspace characteristics The characteristics of occupant's personal
questions, frequency distributions were analyzed and workspaces between two building groups showed
translated to percentages. similarities in the locations of personal workspace and
windows. The majority of respondents in both building
4. Findings and Discussions groups had personal workspaces on the north side in
4.1 Characteristics of Occupant's Demographics the building and had a window within 15 feet.
Findings on the demographic characteristics of The differences between two building groups are
respondents indicated that both building groups had shown in direction of closest windows to workspace
similar demographic characteristics. Responses on and office type. Most windows closest to personal
the demographic information of respondents showed workspaces in LEED-certified building were facing
References
1) Center for the Built Environment (CBE). (2005). LEED post-
occupancy evaluation: Taking responsibility for the occupants.
Presented at Green Building International Conference and Expo
2005, Atlanta, GA.
2) Eisenhower, D. (2000). Documentation of the results of the
cognitive testing for the CBE Post Occupancy Evaluation Survey.
Report to the Center for Built Environment.
3) Gonchar, J. (2008). Looking back and moving forward.
Architectural Record, 196(2), pp.160-166.
4) Heerwagen, J. & Zagreus, L. (2005). The human factors of
sustainable building design: Post-occupancy evaluation of the
Philip Merrill Environmental Center, Annapolis, MD. Report
prepared for Building Technology Program of U.S. Department
of Energy. Retrieved January 15, 2006, from http://www.cbe.
berkeley.edu/research/pdf_files/SR_ CBF_2005.pdf.
5) Kooymans, R. & Haylock, P. (2006). Post occupancy evaluation
and workplace productivity. Proceedings of the Pacific Rim
Real Estate Society (PRRES) Conference 2006, Auckland, New
Zealand.
6) Landy, F. J. (1989). Psychology of work behavior. Pacific Grove
CA: Brooks Cole.
7) Leaman, A. & Bordass, B. (2005). Productivity in buildings:
The killer variables. In D. Clemence-Croome (Ed), Creating the
productive workplace. London: Ecolibrium.
8) Lee, Y. S. (2007). The relationship between indoor environmental
quality and worker satisfaction and performance in Leadership in
Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)-certified buildings.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, Twin
Cities.
9) Marlin, N. (2003). Post-occupancy evaluation: Learning
from experience with green buildings. Retrieved March
15, 2006 from http://www.buildinggreen.com/auth/article.
cfm?fileName=120901a.xml
10) Mendler, S., Odell, W., & Lazarus, M. (2005). The HOK
guidebook to sustainable design (2nd Ed.). Edition. Indianapolis,
IN; Wiley.
11) Mendler, S., Woolford, P., & Bannon, R. (2006). Green building
confessions. Presented at AIA 2006 National Convention and
Design Exposition, Los Angeles, LA.
12) PDK Consulting. (2005). Workplace. Retrieved October 12, 2005
from http://www.pdkconsulting.com/aboutpdk/
13) Preiser, W., Rabinowitz, H., & White, E. (1988). Post occupancy
evaluation. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company.
14) Schendler A. & Udall, R. (2005, October). LEED is broken; Let's
fix it. Grist Environmental News & Commentary. Retrieved April
29, 2007, from http://www.grist.org/comments/soapbox/2005/
10/26/leed/index1.html.