The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

www.emeraldinsight.com/0263-2772.htm

F
37,13/14 The prioritisation and satisfaction
on Thai’s Rating of Energy
and Environmental
1104 Sustainability criteria
Received 4 December 2017
Revised 21 July 2018
A case study of Bangkok green condominium
9 January 2019
Accepted 18 April 2019
Chaiwat Riratanaphong
Faculty of Architecture and Planning, Thammasat University, Pathum Thani,
Thailand and Peoplespace Consulting Thailand, Bangkok, Thailand, and
Pongkorn Jermsiriwattana
Frasers Property Holding Thailand, Bangkok, Thailand

Facilities
Vol. 37 No. 13/14, 2019
pp. 1104-1117
© Emerald Publishing Limited
0263-2772
DOI 10.1108/F-12-2017-0119
Abstract
Purpose – The environmental performance of buildings can be measured by using an existing green building
indicator system. In Thailand, the Thai’s Rating of Energy and Environmental Sustainability (TREES) has been
applied to 70 buildings including condominiums. It is important to collect feedback from stakeholders to identify
the criteria of green features that respond to the expectation of condominium’s potential buyers as well as the
satisfaction of current occupants. This paper aims to examine prioritised aspects from potential buyers and
occupant satisfaction of the TREES criteria in the case study, a green condominium in Bangkok, Thailand.
Design/methodology/approach – The case study was conducted at IDEO Mobi Sathorn in Bangkok,
the only condominium certified with the TREES system so far. Research methods include interviews,
observations, document analysis and the surveys from the condominium’s potential buyers and current
occupants.
Findings – The findings indicate that the condominium’s potential buyers are more concerned about site
and landscape, indoor environmental quality and energy and atmosphere, whereas the current occupants are
more satisfied about water conservation, site and landscape and energy and atmosphere in comparison with
the other TREES criteria. Despite the provision of green features in the condominium, occupants are less
satisfied about green innovation as showed in the least satisfied percentage of TREES criteria. In Facilities
Management perspective, the paper shows connections between TREES criteria and FM functions in multi-
unit residential project. The findings show that the application of TREES criteria focuses on the provision of
value in FM, whereas stakeholder perceptions regarding the TREES criteria contribute to the perception of
value in FM.
Practical implications – The findings and reflections upon the finding can help to understand the impact
of green building aspects of the TREES system on perceptions of different stakeholders, that is, potential
buyers and current occupants of the condominium. Recommendations for real estate developers and facilities
managers regarding the development of green building concept on the TREES system are provided.
Originality/value – There has been no prior research in this area. The paper provides better
understanding with regard to prioritised aspects from the potential buyers and occupant satisfaction of
TREES criteria in Bangkok green condominium. This paper provides empirical data regarding stakeholder
perception on TREES criteria that can be used to compare with similar data of the TREES-certified
condominiums when they are available in the future.
Keywords Environmental performance, Occupant satisfaction, Added value, Green condominium,
Prioritisation aspects, TREES criteria
Paper type Case study
1. Introduction Bangkok green
1.1 The Thai’s Rating of Energy and Environmental Sustainability condominium
Various green building standards and certification systems are introduced and have been
applied in several countries such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
(LEED) in the USA, Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment
(BREEAM) in the UK, Comprehensive Assessment System for Building Environmental
Efficiency (CASBEE) in Japan, Green Star in Australia, Building Environment Performance
(BEPAC) in Canada, Green Mark in Singapore and Thai’s Rating of Energy and
1105
Environmental Sustainability (TREES) in Thailand. The common objectives of green
building rating systems include (BREEAM, 2012; LEED, 2016):

to inform design process and to promote integrated design practices;

to increase awareness among customers, owners, occupants, designers and
operators;

to establish standards of measurement; and

to allow organisations to demonstrate progress towards corporate environmental
objectives.

Thai Green Building Institute (TGBI) has been set up in 2008 under the collaboration
between the Engineering Institute of Thailand and The Association of Siamese Architects to
establish building and construction standard and provide understanding regarding the
green building concept in Thailand. TREES is expected to help guiding construction
industry to design and construct architecture that is environmental friendly and can
increase occupant well-being and productivity comprehensively. TGBI expects that
buildings using this rating system would consume less energy, reduce environmental
impacts and reduce pollution while increase quality of life of the building occupants (TGBI,
2016).
In Thailand, the TREES standard has been widely accepted by both public and private
sector building industries. Currently, there are 70 building projects registered and 7 certified
buildings. TREES is based on the US Green Building Council (USGBC)’s LEED system
specifically modified for Thailand to comply with Thailand context (TGBI, 2016). Table I
shows the comparison between TREES and LEED criteria. The first six criteria of TREES
are similar to LEED criteria including:
(1) water conservation (water efficiency in LEED);
(2) energy and atmosphere;
(3) materials and resources;
(4) indoor environmental quality;
(5) site & landscape (sustainable sites in LEED); and
(6) green innovation (innovation in LEED).

The comparison between TREES and LEEDS shows some differences regarding the
assessment criteria. TREES offers points on building management and environmental
protection, whereas LEED includes location and transport, regional priority and integrative
process in the system. There are four award levels of TREES that are identical to LEED
including Platinum, Gold, Silver and Certified.
TREES assessment process is divided into three main periods, starting with registering
the project with TGBI, then submitting the documents in design stage when the drawings
F TREES criteria* LEED criteria**
37,13/14 Item Points Item Points

1. Water conservation 6 1. Water efficiency 11

2. Energy and atmosphere 20 2. Energy and atmosphere 33
3. Materials and resources 13 3. Materials and resources 13
4. Indoor environmental quality 17 4. Indoor environmental quality 16
1106 5. Site and landscape 16 5. Sustainable sites 10
6. Green innovation 5 6. Innovation 6
7. Building management 3 – –
8. Environmental protection 5 – –
– – 7. Location and transport 16
– – 8. Regional priority 4
– – 9. Integrative process 1
Table I. Total points 85 Total points 110
Comparison between Notes: *TREES for new construction and major renovation – Certified: 30-37 points, Silver: 38-45 points,
TREES and LEED Gold: 46-60 points, Platinum: more than 60 points; **LEED v4 for building design and construction –
criteria Certified: 40-49 points, Silver: 50-59 points, Gold: 60-79, Platinum: 80-110 points

are completed and, finally, submitting the documents in construction stage when the
construction is completed (TGBI, 2016). TREES assessment system includes:

points from prerequisite that buildings registered into the programme have to pass,
and

points from the eight criteria above.

TREES system has been used to monitor environmental performance of various types of
buildings including the multi-unit residential project. The implementation of TREES and
other green building rating systems is considered as the process of the added value of
facilities management (FM) (Sarasoja and Aaltonen, 2012).

1.2 Stakeholder perception

In terms of FM that is responsible for the configuration of resources that create value to
customers, there is a need to achieve a common understanding with customers. It is
especially essential to recognise the importance of particular issues to the occupants and to
then consider how well the service is supporting these needs (Vliet, 1997). Differences in user
perceptions and expectations can be effectively applied to a strategic management context
within FM (Tucker and Smith, 2008). In this paper, the impact of green building design on
stakeholders is measured by occupant satisfaction and potential buyers’ prioritised aspects
of the TREES criteria.
1.2.1 Occupant satisfaction. It is widely accepted that the customer (client) plays an
important role in many industries, particularly in the service business (Hui and Zheng,
2010). Customer satisfaction has been linked to higher profit margins, customer retention
and repeat purchases (Appiah-Adu and Singh, 1999; Schneider and Bowen, 1995). Measures
of performance for customers could include customer satisfaction surveys and a recording
the number of complaints (Walters, 1999). Customer satisfaction with facilities can be
measured by survey rating, number of complaints, average call frequency, cost per square
foot help desk and location success factors.
 1.2.2 Prioritised aspects. Individuals prefer different environments to perform tasks Bangkok green
depending on their personal factors. Preference is defined as priority in the right to demand condominium
and receive satisfaction of an obligation (Merriam-Webster, 2013). It is the thing that is
preferred over another. The prioritised aspects of the built environment, therefore, are the
items preferred over the others. User preferences are issues that cause happiness and
satisfaction, but which are not necessary for performing a task (Rothe et al., 2012). Users’
needs and preferences can be identified through questioning the users or key informants
who are spokesmen for the users (Vischer, 2012).
1107

1.3 Facilities management in multi-unit residential project

Facilities management (FM) in multi-unit residential project has a different approach in
comparison with FM in other building types. The practice of FM in multi-unit residential project
consists of the management of common property and services (i.e. common services, residential
services and community activities). The building operation and maintenance is provided to
ensure that a building functions properly so as to create safe environment to the occupants. The
scope of FM functions in multi-unit residential project include (Chotipanich, 2006):

monitor, control and maintenance of buildings;

facilities services;

budget control;

space management;

energy management;

safety, health and environment;

data management for facilities; and

long range planning.

These FM functions can be explained in connection to the TREES criteria. Energy

management relates to water conservation and energy and atmosphere. Data management
for facilities and the monitor, control and maintenance of buildings are considered as
functions in building management. Safety, health and environment relates to materials and
resources, indoor environment quality, site and landscape, green innovation and
environmental protection criteria.

1.4 The added value of facilities management

Several authors emphasised the significance of the added value of FM (Coenen et al., 2012;
Jensen and Van der Voordt, 2017). Zeithaml (1988) defined value as the trade-off between
benefits (“what you get”) and sacrifices (“what you give”) in a market exchange. Berry (2009)
mentioned that value, to the customer, is benefits received for sacrifices given, in terms of, for
example, money or time. The benefits are what the customer seeks to buy. In FM, value is
mostly based on economic perspective in which value is created when financial value is added
such as lower costs and/or higher revenue for the client organisation. Value can be regarded
as the essence of FM, because its activities are used as input into the client’s resource-
integrating and value-creating activities as described in the value chain of Porter (1985),
where FM is part of the organisations’ infrastructure. Jensen (2010, p. 186) stated that if:
FM is going to survive as a discipline, it is important to develop the field from not only being able
to provide the same services as before to a lower cost, but also to deliver qualitatively better
services to their clients, customers and end users.
F With regard to value provision, four key conclusions taken from Jensen et al. (2012) include:
37,13/14 (1) Value in FM reflects a holistic value concept, that is, moving from the focus on
shareholder value to a more holistic stakeholder perspective.
(2) Value in FM takes several stakeholders into account. The appraisal of value in FM
depends on who benefits from the value and who bares the risks and burdens.
(3) Value in FM is created within a network of relationships in which FM is the
1108 management of internal or external customer/client supplier relationships.
(4) Value in FM is subjective. The character of value within these relationships
includes a strong subjective element that is dependent on the customer’s, client’s
and/or end user’s perception.

In this study, the assessment of stakeholder perception on TREES criteria in different

stakeholders’ perspectives reflects value in FM.
1.4.1 Value dimensions in FM. Various dimensions of value have been mentioned (Jensen
et al., 2012; McMillan, 2006). The study of McMillan (2006) focuses on the role of design as the
prime value driver in the built environment. He then suggested six key categories of the value
in the built environment – exchange, use, image, social, environmental and cultural value.
Based on the dimensions of the typology offered by McMillan, Coenen et al. (2012) described
value dimensions considered relevance in the field of FM.

Use value – the presence of service attributes, and performances against those
attributes, for which the customer is prepared to pay (Vargo and Lusch, 2008);

Social value – social value is: created by making connections between people,
creating or enhancing opportunities for positive social interaction, reinforcing social
identity and civic pride, encouraging social inclusion and contributing towards
improved social health, prosperity, morale, goodwill, neighbourly behaviour, safety
and security, while reducing vandalism and crime (McMillan, 2006, p. 266);

Environmental value – a “concern for intergenerational equity, the protection of
biodiversity and the precautionary principle in relation to the consumption of finite
resources. Principles include adaptability and/or flexibility, robustness and low
maintenance, and the application of a whole-life cost approach” (McMillan, 2006, p. 266);

Relationship value – relationship value consists of relationship benefits and sacrifices,
for example, service support, delivery performance, supplier know-how or personal
interaction. Kok, Mobach, and Omta (2011) emphasised the relationship between FM
and the customer as one of the key elements to the added value of FM; and

Financial value – the realised value “when the product is sold. It is the amount paid
by the buyer to the producer for the perceived use value” (Bowman and Ambrosini,
2000, p. 4) and focuses on cost and the connection between output and input in a
business process (Jensen, 2010, p. 177).

Impacts and implications regarding the implementation of TREES system on different

stakeholders of the green condominium are discussed in relation to various perspectives of
value dimensions in Section 5.

1.5 Problem formulation and research questions

Previous studies investigated occupant satisfaction of a building applied BREEAM
assessment system (Sawyer et al., 2008) and occupant satisfaction of a green multi-
residential building (Zalejska-Jonsson, 2014). Their studies highlighted the importance of Bangkok green
occupant feedback from green buildings. However, the assessment of the impact of green condominium
building on stakeholder perception has not yet been well-known in Thailand.
The analysis of this paper is how it is possible to assess stakeholder perception on
TREES criteria in regard to the contribution to the added value of FM in multi-unit
residential project. The purpose of this study is to examine the potential buyers’ prioritised
aspects and occupant satisfaction of a green condominium on the TREES criteria. The paper
aims to answer the following questions:
1109

What is the impact of TREES criteria on the potential buyers’ prioritised aspects
and occupant satisfaction of a green condominium?

What is the implication of the TREES criteria on the added value of FM in multi-
unit residential project?

2. Research methods
To answer research questions within real-life contexts, a case study approach has been
chosen for the research approach. In the study of stakeholder perception appraisal, some
elements can be described objectively such as green space area, distance to public transport
and satisfaction and prioritisation percentages. However, to identify the assumed cause–
effect relationships between variables including physical environment characteristics, FM
arrangements and potential buyer and occupant responses to green building aspects,
qualitative data are required. The qualitative data such as building quality (i.e. location,
architectural design and interior environment) are described in Section 3. The perception of
current occupants, potential buyers and real estate developers through interviews is
included in the data analysis. This paper applied mixed-method approach, including
interviews, observations, document analysis and the use of two questionnaires.
The impact of TREES criteria on stakeholder perception was examined through
potential buyers’ prioritisation and occupant satisfaction. The first questionnaire collected
data on the satisfied aspects of TREES criteria from occupants of the Ideo Mobi Sathorn
condominium, the only green condominium in Thailand certified with TREES rating
system. The sample size of this study is calculated by using Taro Yamane formula
(Yamane, 1973) with a 95 per cent confidence level and 5 per cent error.
 
n ¼ N= 1 þ Ne2

n = sample size, N = size of population and e = error of 5 per cent points.

The calculation from a population of 500 condominium units came up with 222
occupants of the case study. The satisfaction survey asked the occupants how they satisfy
the following TREES criteria:

water conservation;

energy and atmosphere;

materials and resources;

indoor environmental quality;

site and landscape;

green innovation;

building management;
F
environmental protection; and
37,13/14
on a five-point Likert scale, with 1 = very dissatisfied, 2 = dissatisfied, 3 = neutral,
4 = satisfied and 5 = very satisfied.

Satisfaction percentage is calculated from the average percentages of satisfied and very
satisfied respondents.
1110 The second questionnaire collected data on prioritised aspects of a green condominium
from the potential buyers. Sampling numbers of the potential buyers used the same number
as the first questionnaire (222) to compare with findings on occupant satisfaction. The
potential buyers are considered as the working age population (age between 15 and 64
years) who reside and work in Bangkok CBD, the area situated with a number of
condominiums and office buildings. The prioritisation survey asked the potential buyers
rank the three most important aspects of the TREES criteria. The findings present the
ranking of the per cent of respondents making a particular aspect as one of three most
important aspects of the TREES criteria from eight criteria.
A semi-structured interview was developed to be used for six participants’ interviews
with the real estate developer, three potential buyers and two current occupants. Interview
questions referred to the overall understanding of green building concept, opinions
regarding the results from the questionnaire surveys, the interests towards green building
condominiums and the suggestions for green condominium developers. The research took
place from December 2015 till March 2016.

3. Case study
This project has been awarded with TREES Silver certification (Table I). The Ideo Mobi
Sathorn is a condominium project, developed by Ananda Development, located at Krung Thon
Buri road, Khlong San district, Bangkok. Construction of the Ideo Mobi Sathorn was completed
in 2014. The condominium comprises a single building, having 31 storeys and includes 529
units. The condominium located within 930 metres or about 11 minutes walk from the Wong
Wian Yai, a large roundabout in Thonburi province, and within 80 metres from Bangkok Sky
Train. The nearest tollway entrance is located 2.4 kilometres by car from the condominium.
The building comprises residential units from 6th-31st floor. Common facilities include elevator,
parking, 24-hour security, CCTV, swimming pool, fitness, library, garden, laundry and shop on
the premises. There are restaurants, shops, schools and office buildings nearby. The building
has a gross floor area of 30,528 square metres and a total green space of 2,133 square metres
(Plates 1 and 2).

4. Research findings
4.1 Assessment from potential buyers
The assessment from potential buyers of green condominium focuses on the prioritised
aspects of the TREES criteria. The questionnaire surveys were filled out by 222 participants
(100 per cent response rate), 112 male and 110 female. The participants were between 31 and
40 years old (49 per cent), below 30 years old (39 per cent) and over 40 years old (12 per cent).
More than half of the participants are single (71 per cent), and the other 29 per cent are
married. Most of the participants are well-educated with 70 per cent holding a bachelor
degree and 21 per cent holding a degree above bachelor degree. Most of the participants
indicated the wish to buy green condominium (82 per cent). The average percentage of
participants that indicated the preference to buy condominium that has lower price than
2,000,000 Baht (46 per cent) is slightly higher than the preference to buy with the price
between 2,000,000 and 4,000,000 Baht (44 per cent).
 Bangkok green
condominium

1111

Plate 1.
Exterior of the Ideo
Mobi Sathorn
condominium

Plate 2.
Common facilities:
lounge (left) and
swimming pool
(right)

The participants found that the most important aspects of the TREES criteria to be site and
landscape (mentioned by 62 per cent in their top three most important aspects, Table II),
indoor environment (50 per cent) and energy and atmosphere (49 per cent). The least
prioritised aspects include water conservation (22 per cent), materials and resources (23 per
cent) and building management (28 per cent).

Table II.
TREES criteria (%) Ranking of % score
awarded by
Site and landscape 62
Indoor environment quality 50 participants showing
Energy and atmosphere 49 a particular aspect as
Green innovation 42 being one of the three
Environmental protection 32 most important
Building management 28 aspects of the
Materials and resources 23 TREES criteria
Water conservation 22 (N = 222)
F 4.2 Assessment from occupants
37,13/14 The assessment from occupants of the green condominium, the IDEO Mobi Sathorn, aims to
collect occupant satisfaction on TREES criteria. The questionnaire surveys were completed
by 222 participants (100 per cent response rate), 170 male and 52 female. The participants
were between 31 and 40 years old (50 per cent), below 30 years old (46 per cent) and over 40
years old (4 per cent). Slightly more than half of the participants are single (51 per cent), and
1112 the other 49 per cent are married. Most of the participants are well-educated with 99 per cent
holding a bachelor’s degree and 1 per cent holding a degree above bachelor’s degree. The
majority of participants are state enterprise employees (78 per cent). The majority of the
participants indicated the payment of current accommodation in monthly installments is
less than 15,000 Baht (79 per cent) (Table III).
Criteria that occupants appreciate most are water conservation (98 per cent), site and
landscape (97 per cent), energy and atmosphere (96 per cent) and materials and resources (93
per cent). The least satisfied aspects include green innovation (81 per cent), environmental
protection (83 per cent) and building management (84 per cent).

4.3 Findings from the interviews

The findings show that all participants of the interviews understand the application of green
building concept in a condominium project such as the environmental impact and energy
efficiency aspects. With regard to the attitudes towards green building concept, the current
occupants perceived that this concept helps improving environmental quality, occupants’
health and well-being as well as reduce energy costs. All participants agreed with the
findings of the prioritised and satisfied aspects, particularly in the satisfaction on water
conservation that helps in terms of the environmental impact using recycled water and the
economic benefit from the decreased water cost.
When asked the participants’ opinions about green building concept, most participants
were interested in the development of green buildings. Both potential buyers and current
occupants required the provision of knowledge and information on the green building concept
from real estate developers. The information provided should describe the specific features of
green buildings and show how the potential buyers and occupants will benefit from the
investment in this type of building. On the other hand, the real estate developer considered the
other factors relating to the development of green building in Thailand such as government
policy, economic situation, location, size of the project and competition in the market.

5. Discussion
The findings show various factors influencing different responses from potential buyers
and current occupants with regard to the prioritised aspects and satisfaction percentages on

TREES criteria (%)

Water conservation 98
Site and landscape 97
Energy and atmosphere 96
Materials and resources 93
Table III. Indoor environment quality 89
Percentages of Building management 84
satisfied participants Environmental protection 83
(N = 222) Green innovation 81
the TREES criteria. The potential buyers perceived water conservation as the least Bangkok green
important aspect (22 per cent), whereas this item is most satisfied from the current condominium
occupants (97 per cent). Water conservation concerns water saving and water efficiency.
Findings from the company’s performance assessment report show the use of greywater to
water plants in green areas of the condominium (Ananda Development, 2015). However,
findings from the interview show that the potential buyers have not realised the link
between water efficiency and cost-saving benefits that resulted in the least prioritised aspect
of this item. On the contrary, the occupants experienced cost savings from water efficiency 1113
that has had an effect on the high satisfaction percentage in water conservation from the
green building features. This item has rather low allocated points of the TREES assessment
system (six points; Table I). In terms of energy management, the development of green
condominiums concerning water conservation helps improving occupant satisfaction.
Materials and resources aspect is less prioritised from the potential buyers (23 per cent)
in comparison with other TREES criteria, whereas this item showed to be higher satisfied
than most criteria from the occupants (93 per cent). Materials and resources aspect
concentrates on construction waste management, the use of recycled materials, the use of
local or regional materials and the use of materials with low pollution or low environmental
impact. These items contribute to brand image of the Ideo Mobi Sathron, which resulted in
the high average satisfaction rating of materials and resources. This item also has high
allocated points of the TREES system (13 points). The focus on materials and resources
aspect promotes occupant satisfaction and contributes to a high certification level of the
TREES system.
Site and landscape focuses on the approaches to avoid inappropriate construction site, to
reduce negative impact to green field areas, to reduce using private cars, to locate project on
the developed land and to allocate sustainable site planning. Findings from the observations
show the use of local plants in several parts of the condominium building including on the
ground floor and surrounding area, the sixth floor and the rooftop that aligns with site and
landscape requirements in sustainable site planning category. However, the growing of
plants on the sixth floor and the rooftop requires more attention in terms of FM arrangement
such as replacement of large trees that concerns capacity of elevator and fertilisation of
plants, especially in the garden next to swimming pool on the sixth floor that some
substance (natural or artificial) from fertilisers may run to the pool when soaked in rain. The
issue of real estate sites relates to location success factors (i.e. proximity to required
transportation, access to customers, distance to other sites and businesses) that are
performance measures of customer satisfaction with facilities in stakeholder perception
category (Bradley, 2002; Riratanaphong, 2014). This item showed to be both high
satisfaction percentage from occupants and high priority from potential buyers (62 and 97
per cent). This item also has the high allocated points of the TREES system (16 points).
The highest allocated points of the TREES assessment system were awarded to energy
and atmosphere (20 points). From the occupants’ perspective, this aspect achieves high
satisfaction percentage (96 per cent). The potential buyers perceived this item as one of the
top three most important aspects (49 per cent). Energy and atmosphere concerns about
building system commissioning, energy efficiency, renewable energy and energy saving.
According to the FM Value Map (Jensen et al., 2012), this item focuses on the use of
organisation’s resources that impacts stakeholders in terms of cost, environmental and
satisfaction parameter. The assessment of resource use (i.e. energy consumption, number of
energy audits) is an area of the proposed list of performance measures in environmental
responsibility category (Bradley, 2002; Riratanaphong, 2014). This area concerns with the
controllers’ decisions that are strategically made in regard to minimising the resource use.
F The development of green building focusing on site and landscape and energy and
37,13/14 atmosphere criteria not only helps to achieve positive feedbacks from occupants and
potential buyers, but also contributes to a high certification level of the TREES system.
Environmental protection considers the reduction of pollution from construction, waste
management and external glazing. Findings from the company’s performance assessment
report show the systematic processes of waste management including the provision of trash
1114 collection points as well as the separate litter bins for different types of waste (i.e. garbage,
hazardous waste and rubbish) and the provision of cleaning staff with methods to collect
and manage waste. In addition, the condominium building is equipped with specific meter to
measure electricity using for waste water treatment systems that is the criterion of
environmental protection (Ananda Development, 2015). The occupants are satisfied about
this item (83 per cent), whereas the potential buyers perceived this item as less important
than the other TREES criteria (32 per cent). This may result from the misconception that
environmental protection only concerns about environmental impact rather than the impact
to particular stakeholders. In terms of the TREES assessment system, the allocated points of
this item is much lower than the other TREES criteria (five points). Although this item
shows low prioritisation and satisfaction percentages as well as the low allocated points,
this aspect has an effect on safety, health and environment of the condominium occupants.
Indoor environmental quality concerns about ventilation rate, luminance in the building,
reducing impact from pollution, low emitting materials, indoor lighting system control and
the use of natural light. These areas relate to occupant health, safety and well-being. The
indoor environmental quality achieves rather high satisfaction percentage from
the occupants’ perspective (89 per cent). The potential buyers indicated this item as one of
the top three most important aspects (50 per cent). The high allocated points of this item (17
points) are important to the development of green condominium on the TREES system. This
aspect also affects occupants in terms of safety, health and environment.
Building management focuses on green building preparation, promoting green building,
building manual and building operation and maintenance training and monitoring and
evaluating green building activities. This item has the lowest allocated points of the TREES
system (three points). The occupants are satisfied with this aspect (84 per cent), whereas the
potential buyers perceived this item as less important than several aspects of the TREES
criteria (28 per cent). The focus more on the operational aspects of the building and less user
involvement may result in the less significant rating from the potential buyers. The focus on
improving existing accommodation is considered as an operational level of FM
(Riratanaphong, 2014). Findings from the interviews show that both potential buyers and
current occupants require more information on green building concept. The provision of
information regarding building management is essential to engage stakeholders in the
project and important to the development of green buildings.
Green innovation is about techniques which are not specified in the rating system. This
item has lower allocated points of the TREES system than the other aspects (five points).
From the interviews conducted with the occupants, it was concluded that there is no
significant difference of building characteristics perceived between the green condominium
case study and general buildings. Whereas the potential buyers perceived this item as
higher priority (42 per cent), the occupants are less satisfied about this aspect in comparison
with most TREES criteria (81 per cent). Although the allocated points of the TREES system
on this item is lower than the other criteria, information regarding specific features of a
green building is required to promote occupant satisfaction.
In terms of the added value of FM, all TREES criteria concern various aspects of green
building features.
 The specific requirements of green building features are considered as the focus on the Bangkok green
supply side perspective of value provision. On the other hand, the different responses from condominium
potential buyers and occupants of the condominium with regard to the TREES criteria are
considered as the demand side perspective of value perception. All TREES criteria focus on
environmental concern and green strategies that contribute to environmental value. The
application of green building concept supports brand image of the project as well as
promotes social identity that are considered as social value attributes. According to CEN
(2006), the use value of FM arises from supporting and improving the effectiveness of the 1115
primary processes as stated in the definition of FM. Findings from the interviews show that
the green building concept helps improving occupants’ health and well-being and, thus,
promotes use value. Findings from the interviews also show that both potential buyers and
current occupants required for more information on green building concept from real estate
developers. The requirement for interaction between the customer and FM organisation
affects relationship value.
Findings from the interviews show that the real estate developer concerns about external
factors such as government policy, economic situation and competition in the market. These
factors influence internal factors including policy of condominium juristic person, occupant
demand and building characteristics (i.e. location and building size). The external and
internal factors impact organisation’s objectives, scope and planning for residential FM
arrangement of a green condominium project.

6. Conclusions and recommendations

Not only the organisations have to consider building and facilities aspects as the provision
of value in FM, but the perception of value in FM from stakeholders also has to be realised.
The assessment of stakeholder perception on the TREES criteria helps real estate
developers and facilities managers to understand different responses from potential buyers
and current occupants in regard to the green building concept. There are criteria including
water conservation, materials and resources, environmental protection and building
management that are not recognised as important criteria for potential buyers but are
essential to the development of green building concept.
Findings on the prioritised aspects from potential buyers and satisfaction from current
occupants can be used to inform real estate developers and facilities managers on various
aspects influencing the provision of FM and green building development that respond to
different needs and preferences of stakeholders. These aspects include areas of concerns
regarding the TREES criteria, the added value of FM (i.e. demand and supply perspectives,
value dimensions) and the impact of internal and external factors on FM arrangements in a
green condominium project.
Green buildings concern more than the design aspects. In terms of FM in multi-unit
residential project, facility managers have to make a connection between green building
design and FM functions including facilities services, budget control, space management
and long range planning. Although these functions have not been linked to the TREES
criteria, they are required for the provision of FM in condominium project (Chotipanich,
2006).
Real estate developers and facility managers should get other stakeholders (i.e. potential
buyers and occupants) involved in the green building development and management
process to provide a better understanding of green building concept and to reduce negative
impacts on the stakeholder perception assessment.
The comparison between TREES and LEED show the differences regarding the
assessment criteria that reflect geographically specific contexts between countries and the
F different objectives of environmental performance assessment systems. The particular
37,13/14 requirements in each TREES criterion impact differently on stakeholder perception and
relate to performance measures in different managerial levels. Different criteria have
different allocated points with regard to TREES assessment system. To develop green
building based on the TREES system, the organisation has to set scope and planning of the
project and prioritise the arrangement of organisation’s resources in regard to each TREES
1116 criterion that respond to different needs and preferences of stakeholders and contribute to
the expected level of TREES certification.

References
Ananda Development (2015), Ideo Mobi Sathorn Performance assessment report, Bangkok Thailand.
Appiah-Adu, K. and Singh, S. (1999), “Marketing culture and performance in UK service firms”, Service
Industries Journal, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 152-170.
Berry, L.L. (2009), “Competing with quality service in good times and bad”, Business Horizons, Vol. 52
No. 4, pp. 309-317.
Bowman, C. and Ambrosini, V. (2000), “Value creation versus value capture: towards a coherent
definition of value in strategy”, British Journal of Management, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 1-15.
Bradley, S. (2002), “What’s working? Briefing and evaluating workplace performance improvement”,
Journal of Corporate Real Estate, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 150-159.
BREEAM (2012), “What is BREEAM?”, available at: www.breeam.org/
CEN (2006), “Facility management – part 1: terms and definitions, European Committee for
Standardization”, Final draft prEN 15221-1, June.
Chotipanich, S. (2006), “The concept of FM for multi-unit residential project”, Academic Journal of
Architecture, Vol. 2, pp. 103-118.
Coenen, C., Alexander, M. and Kok, H. (2012), “FM as a value network: exploring relationships amongst
key FM stakeholders”, in Jensen, P.A., van der Voortdt, T. and Coenen, C. (Eds), The Added
Value of Facilities Management: concepts, Findings and Perspectives, Polyteknisk Forlag,
Lyngby, Denmark, pp. 75-91.
Hui, E.C.M. and Zheng, X. (2010), “Measuring customer satisfaction of FM service in housing sector”,
Facilities, Vol. 5 No. 6, pp. 306-320.
Jensen, P.A. (2010), “The facilities management value map: a conceptual framework”, Facilities, Vol. 28
Nos 3/4, pp. 175-188.
Jensen, P.A. and Van der Voordt, D.J.M. (2017), “Value adding management”, in Jensen, P.A. and Van
der Voordt, D.J.M. (Eds), Facilities Management and Corporate Real Estate Management as
Value Drivers: How to Manageme and Measure Adding Value, Routledge, New York, NY,
pp. 29-45.
Jensen, P.A., Van der Voordt, D.J.M. and Coenen, C. (2012), The Added Value of Facilities Management:
concepts, Findings and Perspectives, Polyteknisk Forlag, Lyngby Denmark.
Kok, H., Mobach, M.P. and Omta, O. (2011), “The added value of facility management in the educational
environment”, Journal of Facilities Management, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 249-265.
LEED (2016), “leed V.4”, available at: www.usgbc.org/leed
McMillan, S. (2006), “Added value of good design”, Building Research and Information, Vol. 34 No. 3,
pp. 257-271.
Merriam-Webster (2013), “Definition of preference”, available at: www.merriam-webster.com/
dictionary/preference
New Bangkok Condo (2014), “The review of Ideo Mobi Sathorn Condominium”, available at: www.
newbangkokcondo.com/ezine/
Porter, M. (1985), Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance, Free Press, Bangkok green
New York, NY.
condominium
Riratanaphong, C. (2014), “Performance measurement of workplace change in two different cultural
contexts”, PhD Thesis, Delft University of Technology.
Rothe, P.M., Lindholm, A.-L., Hyvonen, A. and Nenonen, S. (2012), “Work environment preferences –
does age make a difference? ”, Facilities, Vol. 30 Nos 1/2, pp. 78-95.
Sarasoja, A.-L. and Aaltonen, A. (2012), “Green FM as a way to create added value”, in Jensen, P.A., van
der Voortdt, T. and Coenen, C. (Eds), The Added Value of Facilities Management: concepts,
1117
Findings and Perspectives, Polyteknisk Forlag, Lyngby, Denmark, pp. 195-204.
Sawyer, A., De Wilde, P. and Turpin-Brooks, S. (2008), “Energy performance and occupancy
satisfaction: a comparison of two closely related buildings”, Facilities, Vol. 26 Nos 13/14,
pp. 542-551.
Schneider, B. and Bowen, D. (1995), Winning the Service Game, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
TGBI (2016), “TREES rating system”, available at: www.tgbi.or.th/trees.php
Tucker, M. and Smith, A. (2008), “User perceptions in workplace productivity and strategic FM
delivery”, Facilities, Vol. 26 Nos 5/6, pp. 196-212.
Vargo, S. and Lusch, R. (2008), “Service-dominant logic: continuing the evolution”, Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 1-10.
Vischer, J.C. (2012), “User empowerment in workspace change”, in Finch, E. (Ed.), Facilities Change
Management. Sussess, Wiley-Blackwell.
Vliet, A. (1997), “Are they being served?”, Management Today, (February), pp. 66-70.
Walters, M. (1999), “Performance measurement systems – a case study of customer satisfaction”,
Facilities, Vol. 17 Nos 3/4, pp. 97-104.
Yamane, T. (1973), Statistics: An Introductory Analysis, 3rd ed., Harper and Row, New York, NY.
Zalejska-Jonsson, A. (2014), “Parameters contributing to occupants’ satisfaction: green and
conventional residential buildings”, Facilities, Vol. 32 Nos 7/8, pp. 411-437.
Zeithaml, V.A. (1988), “Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-end model and
synthesis of evidence”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 52 No. 3, pp. 2-22.

Corresponding author
Chaiwat Riratanaphong can be contacted at: chaiwat@tu.ac.th

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com