Factors Influencing Office Building Occupation Decision by Tenants ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Yasmin Mohd Adnan, Md Nasir DaudSince Delphi is founded on the oldpremise that the opinions of more than aperson are better, it utilises the use ofpanels of experts for obtaininginformation. It will then systematicallyattempt to produce a consensus ofopinion, and sometimes more importantlyidentify opinion divergence. It providesanonymity of both the experts andidentification of the expert’s statementsthroughout the exercise.Within the extended use of theDelphi Method, a series of rounds ofcommunication between the experts shallbe made and between which a summaryof the results of the previous round iscommunicated to and evaluated by theparticipants. The second and successiverounds often produce “a narrowing of theinitial spread of opinions and shifting ofthe median .... If no consensus emerges,at least a crystallizing of the disparatepositions usually becomes apparent”(Gordon, 1971).Strengths and WeaknessesThe major advantage of using the DelphiMethod is that it permits the researcherto obtain an objective consensus of expertjudgment on the subject under study. Italso makes the rationale underlying aspecific estimate or prediction explicit foreveryone. There have been several studies(Ament, 1970; Wissema, 1982; Helmer,1983) supporting the Delphi method.These studies seem to suggest that ingeneral, the Delphi method is useful toexplore and unpack specific, singledimensionissues. As Enzer et al (1971)observe, Delphi sessions are usuallybetter than other methods for eliciting andprocessing judgmental data, since theymaintain attention directly on the issue,provide a framework within whichindividuals with diverse backgrounds orin remote locations can work together onthe same problems, and produce precisedocumented records.On the other hand, the mainweakness of the Delphi Method is that atruly perspicacious expert’s judgmentmight be lost when a consensus thatactually represents a range of judgmentsis presented. Therefore, it is important toinclude judgments outside the consensusin footnotes or appendixes, asappropriate. Another weakness is that inface-to-face Delphi sessions, “GroupThink” problems may occur when someexperts may be swayed more by therhetoric or strength of personality of oneexpert and tend to discount the validityof other experts’ arguments. It is usuallyslow and time-consuming. If the Delphiis carried out through the mails with alarge panel, each round could take severalmonths. However, if it is conducted in aconference environment, the preparationof rounds and collation of responsescould be a matter of hours.Administration and ImplementationThe basic Delphi Method begins with aseries of first round questions askedindividually of experts to submit theirjudgments on the subject. The results ofthe first round judgments are thentabulated and the results are sent back tothe experts for modification. In essence,the experts are asked in the second roundto reevaluate their original judgments inlight of the average estimates calculatedin the first round. This procedure ofreevaluation is continued for several74
Factors Influencing Office Building Occupation Decision by Tenants in Kuala Lumpur city centre – a Delphi Studyrounds until a fairly high degree ofconsensus is reached, or until the expertsno longer modify their previousestimates.Selecting research participants is acritical component of Delphi researchsince it is their expert opinions uponwhich the output of the Delphi is based(Ashton 1986; Bolger & Wright 1994;Parente, Anderson, Myers, & O’Brien,1994). The sample size varies in theirstudies from 4 to 171 “experts”. As such,it can be concluded that there is no“typical” Delphi; rather that the methodis modified to suit the circumstances andresearch question.Undertaking the Delphi Method forthis StudyThe Delphi Panel and the DelphiProcessThe focus of the study was the elicitationof knowledge and opinion fromindividuals with broad cross-sectionalperspectives on tenants’ selection foroffice space occupation decisions. Theaim here was to survey field experts’perspectives of tenants’ selection of therelevant and important factors with a viewto consolidating the factors listed in Table1. Thus tenants were not selected asrespondents in this survey but rather wereinvolved separately in a different part ofthe study. The panel of respondents wasdesigned to have representatives fromtwo groups comprising the propertyconsultants/leasing agents fromestablished firms who generally interactwith prospective tenants and property/leasing managers of top grade officebuildings in Kuala Lumpur. A total offorty persons i.e. twenty from each groupwere invited to participate in the firstround of the study. The study wasconducted in the strict confidencethroughout and anonymity wasguaranteed to respondents.The first round of the questionnairewas emailed to the panellists in midNovember 2009. Reminder notices viaemail and telephone calls were sent to allexperts who had not replied between lateNovember and early December 2009. Atotal of 27 panellists agreed to participatein the first round of the survey, giving aresponse of 70 percent. They compriseseventeen (17) property consultants/agents who hold senior managementposts and ten (10) property/buildingmanagers. The questionnaire wasdesigned on a five-point Likert scale tomeasure a range of opinions from “Notvery important” to “Very important”. TheStatistical Package for Social Sciences(SPSS) was employed to analyse the datausing the Descriptive Statistics.The first round responses werecollated and analysed and an interimfinding was sent back to the first roundparticipants in late December 2009 inorder to get feedback and comments.During the second round of the survey,the experts are given only the measuresof central tendency for the responsesselected by experts in the first round, andare asked to explain in detail when theirsecond round judgments differsubstantially from the first round’smeasures of central tendency. Theprocedure however stopped at the secondround when most of the experts decidedagainst varying from their first roundresponses despite being presented withevidence of different opinions from other75
Page 1 and 2: Journal Factors of Influencing Desi
Page 3 and 4: Factors Influencing Office Building
Page 11: Factors Influencing Office Building

Factors Influencing Office Building Occupation Decision by Tenants ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?