Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 273

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Design Quality Indicator as a tool for thinking

Gann, David, Salter, Ammon, Whyte, Jennifer·2003·Building Research & Information

Abstract

The Design Quality Indicator (DQI) is based on a research project to provide a toolkit for improving the design of buildings. It seeks to complement methods for measuring performance in construction by providing feedback and capturing perceptions of design quality embodied in buildings. The research team worked closely with the sponsors and an industry steering group to develop the indicators that could be readily used by clients and practitioners to better understand and promote value through design. The development and piloting process was explored within a context of lessons from earlier attempts by others. The three main elements of the DQI toolkit (conceptual framework, data-gathering tool, weighting mechanism) mapped the value of buildings in relation to their design for different uses and their ability to meet a variety of physical, aspirational and emotional needs of occupants and users. The DQI pilot studies consisting of five design and construction projects are discussed along with their graphical representation of results generated by end-users, individual team members and project teams. The process raises questions about the difficulties in the description and application of indicators for design quality. It is argued that the benefit of the DQI is a ‘tool for thinking’, rather than an absolute measure, because it has the potential to capture lessons from current building design for strategic future use as well as initiate, represent and inform discussions involving designers', clients', producers' and end-users' perceptions on the tangible and intangible aspects of possibilities within live design projects. The limitations of the approach, the next phase of development and further research issues are raised. Les indicateurs de qualité de la conception (DQI) sont le fruit d'un projet de recherche ayant pour objectif le développement d'une «boîte à outils» à utiliser pour améliorer la conception des bâtiments. Les DQI complètent les méthodes de mesure des performances dans la construction en assurant un retour d'information et en appréhendant la perception de la qualité de la conception dans les bâtiments. L'équipe de recherche a travaillé en étroite coopération avec les commanditaires et un groupe industriel pilote pour développer des indicateurs qui pourraient être facilement utilisés par les clients et les professionnels afin de mieux comprendre et de faire la promotion de la valeur à travers la conception. Le processus de développement et de pilotage a été exploré dans le contexte d'enseignements acquis dans le passé dans le cadre de tentatives antérieures menées par d'autres. Les trois principaux éléments de la «boîte à outils» DQI (cadre conceptuel, outil de collecte de données, mécanisme de pondération) ont permis de mettre en correspondance la valeur des bâtiments et leur conception pour différents usages et leur aptitude à répondre à une variété de besoins physiques, aspirationnels, et émotionnels des occupants et des utilisateurs. Les auteurs de cet article examinent les études pilote DQI comprenant cinq projets de conception et de construction ainsi que la représentation graphique des résultats générés par les utilisateurs, les membres des équipes et les équipes de projets. Ce processus suscite des questions sur la difficulté de description et d'application des indicateurs de qualité de la conception. La discussion porte sur le fait que les DQI sont plutôt un outil de réflexion qu'une mesure absolue car ils sont aptes à tirer des leçons de la conception de bâtiments actuels au profit d'une stratégie d'avenir ; ils permettent également, temps réel, d'engager des discussions, de représenter et de renseigner la perception qu'ont les concepteurs, les clients, les constructeurs et les utilisateurs des aspects tangibles et intangibles des possibilités de projets de conception. Les auteurs examinent les limitations de cette approche, la prochaine phase de développement et les futures recherches.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/0961321032000107564

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 24 references

Cited by

See all 273

Metadata

Authors
Gann, D., Salter, A., & Whyte, J.
Venue
Building Research & Information
Published
2003-01
Volume
31
Issue
5
Pages
318-333
ISSN
  • 0961-3218 (ISSN-L)
  • 1466-4321
OpenAlex
W1985528274
Cited by
273
References
24
FWCI
39.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Design Quality Indicator as a tool for thinking. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/0961321032000107564
The paper
Gann, D., Salter, A., & Whyte, J. (2003). Design Quality Indicator as a tool for thinking. Building Research & Information. https://doi.org/10.1080/0961321032000107564

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.