Construction Research Congress 2018 780

Improving Creativity in the Value Engineering Process for Green Building

Construction

Joel Ochieng Wao, Ph.D., A.M.ASCE1

1
Dept. of Construction Science and Management, Taylor School of Architecture and
Construction Science, Tuskegee Univ., 1200 W. Montgomery Rd., Tuskegee, AL
Downloaded from [Link] by Swinburne University of Technology on 03/30/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

36088. E-mail: jwao@[Link]

Abstract
Value engineering (VE) methodology is a strategic systematic process that can
bring together a multidisciplinary team of construction professionals in a workshop
effort to conduct function analysis of systems to provide the owner with the best
value of a project or service. Creativity is central to the success of the VE process. It
aids in finding different ways to fulfill the functions of systems and in developing
alternatives that are then evaluated to select better options suitable for a project.
However, VE team leader may find it challenging to guide the team through VE
creativity phase to produce valuable outcomes especially when sustainability goal is a
requirement. Thus, this research analyzed the conventional VE methodology and
proposed neuro-linguistic programming (NLP) approach to improve the VE creativity
phase relative to green building design and construction. Specifically, the research
aim was to remodel the conventional VE creativity phase to improve green building
construction outcomes. VE course students were the research subjects. The research
design was such that the control group used conventional creativity method while the
experimental group used NLP method where they received training on the method
before using it in creativity. Both the control and experimental groups were examined
using a case study building. The students prepared VE final reports using the two
methods that were then evaluated by faculty sustainability experts who rated the
contribution of each of the recommended systems to building sustainability. Data
analysis employed SAS v.9.4. The hypothesis was that the alternative creativity
method would provide better sustainability outcomes. The results showed NLP
method to be better than the conventional method and could be a useful inclusion in
the VE methodology to provide better green building outcomes.
Keywords: Creativity; Green building construction; Neuro-linguistic programming
(NLP); Sustainable construction; Value engineering.
INTRODUCTION
High performance building, green building or sustainable building are
interchangeable terms in the field of sustainable construction. They imply building
that meets the present needs and not impairing the ability to meet future needs. The
process involves planning, design, construction, operation and deconstruction in the
building life cycle. There should be a balance between environmental, social and
economic benefits (i.e., triple bottom-line) to achieve healthy building solutions.
Ideally, green buildings are constructed in a resource efficient manner with ecological
principles that reduce environmental impacts and create conditions that are
environmentally friendly, healthy, just, and beneficial to occupants/stakeholders.
Such buildings must bring value to stakeholders without negative impacts. So a net

© ASCE

Construction Research Congress 2018

 Construction Research Congress 2018 781

zero energy building that saves the school money in energy usage but making
students sick is not green (Wao, 2014).
Research by the US Environmental Protection Agency had found that 90% of
Americans spend most of their times indoors where the concentration of some
pollutants may be 2-5 times greater than the outdoor conditions (EPA, 2017), and this
may cause problems to occupants if the indoor environmental conditions are not
conducive for living. Thus, constructing buildings that are healthier, comfortable and
Downloaded from [Link] by Swinburne University of Technology on 03/30/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

more conducive for occupants’ productivity is key. However, this can be challenging
when quality of indoor conditions are to be improved. Value engineering (VE) can be
a potential tool to provide value to the project owners. This implies providing a
building that has the highest level of performance or quality at the lowest life cycle
cost.
Started at General Electric by L.D. Miles in 1947, VE is a strategic,
systematic, multidisciplinary, and function oriented technique that can be used to
meet project owner’s requirements at the lowest or optimum cost. In developing and
providing meaning to value, Miles upheld that resources are sought only where they
are needed most, or where they can function best (Miles, 1947). This concept has
improved significantly to date through incorporation of value adding methods in the
typical VE job plan and through the analysis of functions using Function Analysis
and System Technique (FAST). Specifically, areas that have been researched on and
possibly improved include the function analysis and identification phase by methods
such as performance-worth method (Wao, 2016). However, creativity phase has not
been addressed, thus, requiring review and refocusing for use.
Recent studies have proposed including sustainability principles in the VE
process to reduce cost and improve the performance and quality of project systems
(Wao, 2017; Karunasena and Ruthnayake, 2016). The idea is that if VE can be used
to select the most preferred system, then it can be used to arrive at better sustainable
solutions. Thus, Rachwan et al. (2016) concluded that VE could influence project life
cycle costs (LCC), quality, environment and trends in sustainable construction.
However, reviewing the conventional VE methodology shows limitations in the VE
job plan, especially when improving sustainability outcome is a goal.
Therefore, the purpose of this research was to review and modify the
conventional VE process to improve green building construction outcomes. The
objective was to identify the limitation in the VE creativity phase and address it by
reviewing the SAVE-International job plan and the American Society for Testing and
Materials standard (ASTM E1699-14). The creativity phase is a key part of the VE
job plan as it determines the alternatives needed for evaluation, and so this study
focused on it relative to green building construction.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Green Building Construction and Value Engineering
Green building design and construction principles can be included in the VE
process to appeal to potential clients by reducing costs and enhancing performance in
projects. This process can link with SAVE International’s VE process that improves
planning for greening during preconstruction and construction stages (Wao et al.
2016). The objective is to reduce life cycle costs without losing the functions and
green goals.

© ASCE

Construction Research Congress 2018

 Construction Research Congress 2018 782

The likelihood of integrating

i green
g princiiples in a prroject and thhe VE tool
deppends entirelly on the lev vel of interest and comm mitment of thee project ow wner and the
knoowledge of thet VE team m involved inn the project . Green featuures need too inspire the
proj
oject owners to pursue su ustainability goals (Waoo, 2014). Efffectiveness oof the whole
pro
ocess requiree early intrroduction off the green principles and maintaaining them
throoughout the project (W Wao et al. 20 016). The deecisions invoolved for suustainability
must develop to o the extent of realizingg overall succcess in greeen building cconstruction
Downloaded from [Link] by Swinburne University of Technology on 03/30/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

sincce the owner’s motivatio on would drrive the teamm to initiate better VE iddeas during
creaativity. In light of this, Wao
W et al. (2016) and K Karunasena aand Ruthnayyake (2016)
pro
oposed VE frramework to o aid in achieeving better sustainable constructionn outcomes.
Theeir processes could red duce LCC but b they lackk tangible ccreativity im mprovement
planns to realize better sustaainability outtcomes. Thuus, a new metthod is needded.
Limmitation of thet Conventtional Valuee Engineeriing Creativiity Phase
The SA AVE-Internattional job plaan and the A ASTM E16999-14 are the two main
valuue methodollogy standarrds that defin ne the steps ffor value anaalysis. In exeecuting the
metthodology, good
g teamwo ork and com mmunication are key to itts success (W Wao, 2017).
Thee convention nal VE proceess requires thatt in the crreativity phaase, brainstorrming and
freee flow of ideeas be encou uraged. In executing thesse, judgmentt of ideas maay need to
be delayed
d untiil all ideas haave been exhhausted and listed by thee team. From m the list of
ideaas, the team then develops potential alternatives to meet the owner’s prooject
requirements (S SAVE Intern national, 201
15; Wao, 20115). Figure 1 shows the jjob plan.

Fig
gure 1: ASTM
M E1699-14, Value Engineering Stuudy Job Plann

© ASCE

Construction Research Congress 2018

 Construction Research Congress 2018 783

Critical review of the creativity phase of the ASTM E1699-14 show

limitations in the creativity phase. Sustainability oriented outcomes, as a relatively
new concept in construction, need new approaches that improve team communication
and idea creation in addition to the existing ones (like brainstorming) in the VE
methodology. The main goal is to improve sustainability outcomes by employing
better approaches to improve creativity of the VE team.
Downloaded from [Link] by Swinburne University of Technology on 03/30/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Solution to the Limitation of Creativity Phase of the Conventional VE process

Success of VE exercise depends on good analysis of functions of systems and
engaging teams that have good rapport to be creative. Therefore, improving creativity
is key to realize better VE outcomes that culminate in better value to the project
owner. ASTM E1699-14 creativity phase section 7.3.3 and subsections require the
use of proven methods for stimulating creativity such as brainstorming, multiple
objective analysis, and nominal group techniques. The new VE approach will add a
technique to the existing approaches to enhance creativity. Neuro-Linguistic
Programming (NLP) technique is a communication framework using techniques to
understand and facilitate change in thinking and behavior of people (Sturt et al.,
2012). It is a strategy that can be used to improve communication and could be
applied in VE to improve creativity. This strategy elicits or enhances creative
thinking through good team rapport for effective communication aimed at efficient
idea creation and may significantly enhance the success of a VE exercise.
NLP can create mutual trust between the VE team leader and members,
leading to an effective creativity phase, and achieve VE success relative to green
design and construction. It facilitates freethinking and stimulates creativity by turning
problems into signals and signals into language and communication. NLP can
produce a well-informed outcome because it employs the SCORE model to set
SMART goals (Smith, 2008). SMART goal is one that is Specific, Measureable,
Achievable, Realistic, and within a Time frame. This goal will benefit the VE process
because it is within a specified period and is rigorous in its execution. SCORE model
involves reaching goals from difficult or challenging situations. The abbreviations are
such that Symptoms are what need to be changed, Causes are the origins of the
problems, Outcomes are the goals, Resources are the requirements to solve the
problem, e.g., tools, or skills and Effects are the long-term effects of achieving the
needed outcomes. In this, VE involves developing systems by looking at pros and
cons and the effects (on performance and cost) over the life cycle of a project and so
the SCORE model would be highly applicable. All these two methods/models need
high level of communication for their effectiveness. NLP states that the way we
communicate with others influences the kind of feedback we get (Elder & Elder,
1998). That is, the meaning people attach to our communication style will determine
the response to receive. Also, it identifies that people have different maps. That is, a
person’s mental map of the world is different from the other, and practicing NLP
involves changing the map and not reality. Thus, creativity in VE can be enhanced or
improved when language is appropriately accessed through NLP method.
Having NLP ingrained in the creativity will improve the chances of
developing good alternatives for evaluation assuming the team is comprised of
experts as always recommended for VE methodologies. The VE team will engage in

© ASCE

Construction Research Congress 2018

 Construction Research Congress 2018 784

creativity using a method that stimulates freethinking and team rapport leading to
sound decisions. Sound decisions made will provide the value that show in reduced
cost and improved performance and quality levels. Thus, the project owner can obtain
the best value for the lowest economic investment over the life of a project using
sound VE approach. A research method is developed to test this perspective.

RESEARCH METHODS
Downloaded from [Link] by Swinburne University of Technology on 03/30/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Aim, Objectives and Hypothesis

The aim was to modify the conventional VE process to improve green
building construction outcomes. Objectives were; identify the limitation in the
creativity phase and find redress; and assess the effect of the new VE method to
sustainability. The hypothesis was that the new method would provide better
sustainability outcomes. The study significance was to provide project owners and
practitioners with value focused tool to improve project outcomes. The VE methods
were evaluated with case study.

Case Study Part I

The case study involved a sustainable building ($45 million, 120,000 square
feet) in the construction stage (about 90% complete). The building was aiming at
attaining LEED Platinum certification. Graduate students in the construction
management VE course analyzed the building with the aim of providing sustainability
value to the owner. They prepared VE reports where they recommended systems for
potential integration in the project. Faculty evaluated these reports on their ability to
achieve sustainability goals as set by LEED rating criteria.
Students had two field trips to the project to familiarize with the building and
to determine project/performance requirements through discussion with the owner.
The performance requirements were:
• Carbon neutrality: Meeting the goal of becoming carbon neutral by year 2030.
• Durability: Meeting the goal of materials lasting more than 50 years.
• Sustainable standards: Flexibility to meet present and future green goals.
• Energy performance: Meeting the requirements of energy efficient buildings.

Research Experimental Design and Sample Size. Groups of three/four students

were randomly assigned in two VE methods each comprising of two teams. Those
who were LEED accredited (mainly LEED GA and LEED AP) led the teams. Table 1
shows the summary of the grouping or experimental design.

Table 1. Summary of Research Design Involving VE Students (N = 13).

Method 1 Method 2
Team 1A Team 2A
Team 1B Team 2B
Total = 6 students Total = 7 students

© ASCE

Construction Research Congress 2018

 Construction Research Congress 2018 785

The methods employed in the study were as follows:

• Method 1 (Control VE method): Teams employed the conventional VE

method that entailed brainstorming of ideas in the creativity phase.
• Method 2 (Alternative VE method): This approach incorporated NLP to
enhance VE team communications and better creativity during VE process.
Downloaded from [Link] by Swinburne University of Technology on 03/30/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Students Team Training and Analysis of Building Systems. Control group teams
1A and 1B did not receive training. Experimental group teams 2A and 2B received
training in using NLP. Figure 2 shows the creativity process using the two methods.

Teams using Conventional Method in the VE Creativity Phase

Reading Leader introduce Brainstorming & Outcome
requirements creative thinking creative thinking generated

Teams using NLP Method in the VE Creativity Phase

Rapport Setting Free communication; free Agreeable
building; Study SMART flow of ideas; fluency; outcome
project goals flexibility; originality; idea generated
requirements awareness; brainstorming
Figure 2. Creativity Process using the Conventional VE and NLP Method

All the teams conducted value analysis of the systems, prepared VE reports
and presented their findings and recommendations. The reports were then analyzed.
This was to find any similar recommended systems developed with green building
construction goals in mind and to determine the level of sustainability each attained.

Case Study Part II

Faculty experienced in sustainable design and construction (N = 4) evaluated
the VE reports. Their experience in LEED assessment tool was a prerequisite in the
research involvement. Three LEED credit categories were in use: energy &
atmosphere, materials & resources, and indoor environmental quality; and they were
chosen because of their abilities to gather more LEED points in certifying green
buildings. A modified rating scale was developed to assist in detailing the
contribution of each system to sustainability: somewhat fair contribution = 1, fair
contribution = 2, good contribution = 3, very good contribution = 4 and excellent
contribution = 5. This provided the data to assess the effectiveness of the two VE
creativity methods in attaining better sustainability outcomes. SAS v.9.4 aided in data
analysis.

Data Analysis Process and Related Assumptions Employed

The analysis of data involved descriptive statistics, Analysis of Variance
(ANOVA), and pooled t-test. Descriptive statistics reported the average measures.
One-way ANOVA utilizing Duncan’s Multiple Comparisons Test was conducted at p

© ASCE

Construction Research Congress 2018

 Construction Research Congress 2018 786

= 0.05 to detail the level of statistical significance between the two VE creativity
methods. The p-value is interpreted as rejecting the null hypothesis if p < 0.05
suggesting a statistically significant difference in the statement or fail to reject the
null hypothesis if p > 0.05 signifying little evidence to reject the null hypothesis.
Further test with pooled t-test follow if the result between the methods is significantly
different. Assumptions underlying univariate statistical procedures were closely
considered.
Downloaded from [Link] by Swinburne University of Technology on 03/30/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

RESULTS

Faculty Evaluation of the VE Reports

The reports as analyzed showed some similarities in the systems developed
and recommended. These consisted of curtain walls, Heating Ventilating and Air
Conditioning (HVAC), plumbing, lighting, window, flooring, as well as the ceiling
systems. Of the possible LEED v.4 credit categories, energy & atmosphere, materials
& resources, and indoor environmental quality were in focus. Results are shown in
Tables 2, 3 and 4.

Descriptive Statistics of the Recommended Building Systems

Table 2. Summary of the Ratings of the Contribution of Systems to

Sustainability

Method 1 Method 2
Category N Mean Std. N Mean Std.
Energy & Atmosphere(EA) 18 2.56 1.06 19 3.54 1.50
Materials & Resources (M&R) 19 2.14 0.93 14 2.78 1.24
Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) 15 2.18 0.84 20 2.45 1.26

On average, method 2 teams developed and recommended systems with

relatively better contribution to EA credit (M = 3.54, SD = 1.50), MR credit (M =
2.78, SD = 1.24), and IEQ credit (M = 2.45, SD = 1.26) compared to method 1.
Deductively, VE method 2 could be better than method 1.

Analysis of Variance and t-test of the Ratings

Table 3 shows statistical significance for EA credit, [F (1, 35) = 38.42, p
<.0001].

Table 3. Summary of ANOVA Results

Source Df Error Corrected Sum of Squares Mean Square F-value Sig.

Total Error Error
EA 1 35 36 40.89 1.03 38.42 < .0001
M&R 1 31 32 38.62 1.29 3.36 0.163
IEQ 1 33 34 34.78 1.32 0.78 0.421

© ASCE

Construction Research Congress 2018

 Construction Research Congress 2018 787

The statistical significance of the EA credit in Table 3 implied that the

systems had better contribution to energy efficiency than other building systems. In
determining the contribution of each VE method to energy efficiency, EA credit was
further assessed using Duncan’s Multiple Range Test as summarized in Table 4.

Table 4. Duncan’s Multiple Range Test for the EA Credit Category

Downloaded from [Link] by Swinburne University of Technology on 03/30/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Duncan Grouping Mean Sample size (N) VE Methods

A 3.54 19 2
B 2.56 18 1

Different letter grouping in Table 4 has the implication that method 2 was
significantly different from method 1 in achieving improved sustainable or green
building construction outcomes and so it tended to be a better method. The
statistically significant difference result was further investigated using pooled t-test
statistics. The results was still statistically significant at p = 0.05, [t (35) = -6.20, p <
.0001].

DISCUSSION
Integrating VE in green building design and construction must focus on
providing the maximum value to the project owner. This requires using a well-
structured VE methodology with a creativity approach that provides the needed value
at the highest performance/quality level and the lowest/optimum cost. The goal could
only be arrived at when a well thought out creativity approach is included in the VE
process especially when sustainability goal with high cost implication is required.
Creativity involves dynamic team communication and cohesion, and so it is
imperative that a robust creativity method be chosen to deal with uncertainties and
diverse qualitative data that are characteristic of green building construction. The
creativity method must aim at helping the team arrive at a better outcome by
controlling team members’ state of mind when working towards the goal while
maintaining a level of rapport with each other. This rapport need to be characterized
by being a happy and joyous team that experiences more fulfillment in the exercise.
NLP approach could improve creativity when used in VE to meet sustainable
construction goals. The brainstorming method in the conventional VE method is
stand-alone and does not provide any prescriptive approach to address team dynamics
or improve team cohesion; it does not seem to improve creativity process and thus
NLP method was proposed to enhance the VE process towards achieving better
sustainability or green building construction goals. Specifically, this research focused
on assessing the use of NLP method in creativity phase of VE methodology compared
to the current (conventional) VE methods in achieving better sustainable building
outcomes.
VE course students prepared VE reports where they recommended building
systems such as curtain walls, HVAC, plumbing, lighting, windows, flooring, and
ceiling systems that had contribution to the LEED categories of E&A, IEQ and M&R.
The systems could bring savings in water and energy as well as positively influence
indoor environmental conditions through better material choices and air quality
control.

© ASCE

Construction Research Congress 2018

 Construction Research Congress 2018 788

Faculty with expertise in sustainable construction assessed the developed and

recommended systems where it was discovered that the systems developed had
greater contribution to E&A credits than the other two categories assessed (M = 3.54,
SD = 1.50). Considering this, NLP could be a better contributor in the creativity phase
than the conventional VE creativity process especially when the effort is to achieve
better green building construction outcomes. The ANOVA results in Table 3 was
statistically significant for the E&A credit, [F (1, 35) = 38.42, p <.0001], implying
Downloaded from [Link] by Swinburne University of Technology on 03/30/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

that the systems would rate higher for E&A credit than the other credits. The result
would improve green building design and construction outcomes since E&A accounts
for 33 of the total 110 points in the LEED v4 for New Construction. In addition, it
showed the development of more energy efficient systems that contributed more to
greening. This result aligns with the desire for net zero or low energy consuming
buildings. Building systems developed using VE method 2 (NLP) contributed
relatively better across the LEED categories as shown in the tables. Noteworthy is
that the statistically significant test using Duncan’s Multiple Range test and pooled t-
test showed NLP method showing relatively higher in E&A credit. This means that
the teams developed systems that were energy efficient thus contributing to the higher
E&A scores. It is logical to deduce from the results that using NLP method during
creativity would be better than conventional VE approaches in achieving superior
green building construction outcomes.
The result will show NLP having the potential to improve creativity in VE
process by enhancing understanding, developing new ideas, and for effective VE
team communication. In essence, it is a method of representing mental processes of
excellence and how they translate into observable results. The method utilizes five
creativity elements, namely, fluency, flexibility, originality, awareness, and drive to
develop positive results. In a typical VE study, this could improve the team leader’s
and member’s interactions. Ideally, ideas are best created when they are not judged at
first. When ideas are allowed to flow out easily without being immediately judged for
a longer period and then judged later on, the result is a large volume of ideas
available for use that may provide greater value towards the final goal. This creativity
revolves around better communication and improved thinking process. In VE,
creativity shows in value thinking rather than cost cutting, thinking about meeting a
function rather than action, and thinking about creativity approaches rather than
judgments. The NLP strategy in the VE team can create rapport. That is, mutual trust
between leader and team, and to gain access to maximum team creative abilities,
thereby realizing better outcomes. Specifically, the process can provide powerful
ways to stimulate freethinking and greater creativity by turning problems into signals
and signals into language and communication of the target creation as reported by
Elder & Elder (1998). NLP states that the way people communicate with others will
determine the kind of response they receive. Therefore, creativity in VE is at its best
when communication is clear and effective and with appropriate feedback.
An effective VE team leader needs to possess excellent communication skills
in addition to good understanding of how language may affect human behavior. The
team leader should maintain interpersonal flexibility and an open mind when dealing
with VE team members. Additionally, the team leader should create good rapport
with team members. Building rapport comes from respecting each other’s points of

© ASCE

Construction Research Congress 2018

 Construction Research Congress 2018 789

view while still being true to the main objectives. Rapport is effective when VE study
flows smoothly and characterized by interpersonal enthusiasm and well-being.
Learning the new strategy of communication using NLP can improve language skills,
build team rapport, and improve the idea creation in VE thus better VE outcomes.

CONCLUSION
This research investigated the VE creativity method that could be integrated in
Downloaded from [Link] by Swinburne University of Technology on 03/30/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

a new value analysis/engineering methodology to improve green building design and

construction outcomes. Specifically, it assessed the NLP method in the creativity
phase of the VE job plan as compared to the conventional VE creativity method in a
typical VE process using a case study sustainable building construction project.
Students and selected faculty were involved in the research. It was concluded from
the faculty ratings that NLP method could be better in achieving green building
construction goals. Thus, the research hypothesis was supported. The NLP idea could
be an invaluable inclusion in the VE methodology as it aids in generating better
alternatives for evaluation and providing superior outcomes of the project. This
research outcome adds in the knowledge bank regarding value improvement methods
for sustainable construction.

REFERENCES
ASTM E1699-14 (2014). The standard practice for performing value engineering
(VE)/ value analysis (VA) of projects, products and processes.
Elder, K., and Elder, B. (1998). “Accessing creativity in value engineering studies
through Neuro-Linguistic programming.” Proc., SAVE International.
EPA: Environmental Protection Agency (2017). “EPA’s Report on the Environment.”
<[Link] (Nov. 14, 2017).
Karunasena, G., and Ruthnayake, R. (2016). “Integrating sustainability concepts and
value planning for sustainable construction.” Built Environment Project and
Asset Management, 6(2), 125-138.
Miles, L. (1947). The cost problem and the value engineering approach.
Rachwan, R., Abotaleb, I., and Elgazouli, M. (2016). “The influence of value
engineering and sustainability considerations on the project value.” Procedia
Environmental Sciences, 34, 431-438.
SAVE International: “Value methodology standard (2015).”<[Link]
[Link]/pdf_docs/monographs/[Link]>(Nov. 12, 2017).
Smith, A. (2008). “The NLP SCORE model (Part 1: The basics). Coaching Leaders.”
<[Link]
1-the-basics/ > (Nov. 12, 2017).
Sturt, J., Ali, S., Robertson, W., Metcalfe, D. Grove, M., Bourne, C., and Bridle, C.
(2012). “Neuro-linguistic programming: a system review of the effects on
health outcomes.” British Journal of General Practice, 11, 757-764.
Wao, J.O. (2017). “Value engineering evaluation method for sustainable
construction.” Architecture Engineering Institute (AEI) Conference
Proceedings, American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), Oklahoma City,
Oklahoma, April 11-13, 2017.< [Link] >
(Aug. 28, 2017).

© ASCE

Construction Research Congress 2018

 Construction Research Congress 2018 790

Wao, J., Ries, R., Flood, I., and Kibert, C. (2016). “Refocusing value engineering for
sustainable construction.” 52nd ASC Annual International Conference
Proceedings, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, April 13-16, 2016.
<[Link] (Sept.29, 2017).
Wao, J. (2015). “A review of the value engineering methodology: Limitations and
solutions for sustainable construction.” 55th SAVE International Annual
Conference: SAVE Value Summit, San Diego, CA, USA, June 7-9, 2015.
Downloaded from [Link] by Swinburne University of Technology on 03/30/18. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

<[Link] > (Oct. 28, 2017).

Wao, J.O. (2014). “Value engineering methodology to improve building
sustainability outcomes.” <[Link]
>Aug. 29, 2017).

© ASCE

Construction Research Congress 2018