Decision-making for residential building renovation

Use Case Definition

Aim and scope


By providing the stakeholders with a structured procedure to characterize the project goals, capture their perspectives, analyze multiple renovation options, and obtain a final ranking the aim of this use case is to improve the quality, availability, accessibility of information by the different stakeholders involved; it also supports the involvement of end-users such as tenants and owners. Having a structure approach to analyze renovation alternatives and involve the different stakeholders at different stages also contributes to reduce the time compared to the conventional practices.


The use case supports the stakeholders through the process to select a suitable renovation solution.

  1. Multi-criteria definition: In the first stage of the framework, specific objectives for the renovation project are defined. The stakeholders select the specific objectives they intend to achieve within the renovation, from a predefined set of economic, environmental, and social objectives proposed by the framework. Once these objectives are defined, a suggested criteria tree for the specific project will be presented, including only criteria related to the specific objectives selected by the stakeholders. For instance, if one of the specific objectives is to maximize indoor comfortable conditions, the criteria Indoor air quality, Acoustic comfort, Visual comfort, and Thermal comfort are included in the tree.
  2. Criteria and preferences quantification: Once the stakeholders agree on the objectives and criteria that would be included in the criteria tree, it is necessary to capture the preferences of the diverse stakeholders over those criteria. To do this, a weighting method is implemented. The aim is to allow the stakeholders to identify and represent their preferences in an easy and transparent way. Then, for each alternative, the value of each criterion is quantified.
  3. Decision analysis: The weights and results for the criteria from the second stage will be aggregated to obtain a final ranking of the renovation alternatives showing their performance regarding the criteria. This will support the decision-makers to analyse the set of alternatives available and select, in a transparent and inclusive way, the one that should be implemented, taking into account the preferences of the different stakeholders. The overall process section describes each stage in detail.


  • To engage different stakeholders in the decision-making process in renovation projects;
  • To implement a sustainable assessment approach considering environmental, social, and economic aspects;
  • To capture the preferences of different stakeholders’ groups considering their roles in the decision-making process;
  • To identify which renovation alternatives are more suitable according to the objectives and preferences of the different stakeholders, in a transparent way;
  • To gather and present the results from different analysis such as energy simulations, cost analysis, comfort studies, performed during the assessment of design alternatives.

Decision-making approaches are intended to provide stakeholders with a structured framework to address the process of making decisions, especially when multiple and conflicting objectives and criteria can appear. As presented below, the approach proposed by BIM-SPEED provides clear steps to conduct the decision-making process. Having the structure procedure to make the decision can reduce the time to select the final renovation solution. Since the stakeholders involved in the project are requested to perform specific actions at different stages, they can engage in the renovation, facilitating the process. Capturing the stakeholders’ perspectives through the weighting method and integrating them with the alternatives’ performances enable a transparent way to make the decision. The general decision tree included in the frameworks comprise social, economic, and environmental elements to encourage stakeholders to establish a more comprehensive evaluation.

Fig: Comparison between common practices and BIM Speed approach in decision making 



  • The tool supporting the use case allow the participation of five stakeholders’ groups, this could be a constraint in cases involving more groups
  • The consistency of the matrixes for the pairwise comparison method can be difficult to reach in some specific cases
  • The number of required comparisons increases according to the number of objectives and criteria included in the decision tree


Project Group

  • Magdalena Dzik-Bogucka
  • Rafał Łukaszewski



The documents reflect the current best practice and do not claim to be complete. They should not to be understood in the sense of a generally valid recommendation or guideline from a legal point of view. The documents are intended to support appointing and appointed parties in the application of the BIM method. The documents must be adapted to the specific project requirements in each case. The examples listed do not claim to be complete. Its information is based on findings from practical experience and is accordingly to be understood as best practice and not universally applicable. Since we are in a phase in which definitions are only emerging, the publisher cannot guarantee the correctness of individual contents.

Logo BIM Speed
  • Document Type : Use Case
  • GUID : A82E2F30-3752-48EA-A2D7-8C6B7F780733
  • Identifier : BIMSpeed_UC8_TUB
  • Life Cycle Stage : ISO 22263
  • Revision : -
  • Project Status : Approved
  • Maturity level : Proven
  • Use Case: Approved
  • Processes: Approved
  • ER: Approved
  • Published on: Nov 3, 2022
  • Last change: Nov 3, 2022
  • Publisher: BIM Speed
  • Author: Pinzon Amorocho, Jerson Alexis

Not registered yet?

Register for the Use Case Management Service for free to access the entire document.

Registered users can use the download area and the comment functions.