The credit language says "Agree to develop a plan for corrective action if the survey results indicate that more than 20% of occupants are dissatisfied", while the LEEDuser's viewpoint says "Develop a plan for corrective action in case more than 20% of respondents report dissatisfaction". These could be two very different numbers. Let's say a building has 1,000 occupants, but only 100 people responded to the survey. Do we need corrective action if 200+ people are dissatisfied, or 20+ people are dissatisfied? It could be assumed that people who are comfortable are less likely to respond, so even if all 100 people who responded are uncomfortable, we really don't have 20% of people dissatisfied. Also, in this same scenario, if the responses are are equally too hot and too cold in the same parts of the building (fighting over the thermostat), what would you suggest for corrective action? Thanks.
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
Nadav Malin
CEOBuildingGreen, Inc.
LEEDuser Moderator
844 thumbs up
March 4, 2018 - 8:03 am
Hi Cindy,
Yes, maybe we took a liberty in assuming that 20% of occupants = 20% of respondents here, but I don't see how would make sense otherwise. You have to work with the numbers as if your respondents are a representative sample, I believe (even though we know they're not, really).
For your second question, there are lots of possible solutions (not necessarily easy to implement, however). A few that come to mind are allowing people more freedom about where they sit (so they can find a space that works for them thermally), or providing more occupant control, or installing sophisticated app-based control systems like Comfy that are designed specifically to address the variability in human comfort needs.