Main Article Content
Traditional building production process is a multi-phased and multi-stakeholder process which is fragmented too much in many aspects. Naturally, the process of production which has already difficulties due to reasons such as disconnections among the organizations which is included in the process during transitions between phases and which undertake various responsibilities in each phase, missing project documentation, conflicts of interests of the stakeholders and similar reasons becomes even more complicated and the output of this process is also often problematic. While the clients, who makes the basic decisions, forms the product and the process to maximize their profit, the end user especially in underdeveloped countries is victimized due to the inadequacy of legal regulations, lack of information on the standard performance values which the product has to provide, weakness of the mechanisms to protect the interests of the community in design and construction processes to overcome these deficiencies in addition to reluctance to meet the cost of individually needed expert support and what’s more, losses occur at national and global scales, resources are wasted and problems as to sustainable development arise. The traditional construction process which while trying to minimize the first investment cost, causes increasing life cycle cost to high levels stands out as a structure for which particularly developing countries have to rethink of and develop alternative models. At this point, Performance-Based Building phenomena seems to draw more attention as a solution. This study aims to discuss the above stated approach as well as structure and tools which support this approach with all of its dimensions at conceptual levels and define the architecture of the model required to transfer them to practice at conceptual and practical dimensions.
Authors wishing to include figures, tables, or text passages that have already been published elsewhere are required to obtain permission from the copyright owner(s) for both the print and online format and to include evidence that such permission has been granted when submitting their papers. Any material received without such evidence will be assumed to originate from the authors.
 Minchin, R.E., and Smith, G.R., (2005). “Quality-Based Contractor Rating Model for Qualification and Bidding Purposes”, Journal of Management in Engineering, Vol. 21, No. 1, 38-43.
 Elyamany, A., Basha, I., and Zayed, T., (2007). “Performance Evaluating Model for Construction Companies: Egyptian Case Study”, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 133, No.8, 574-581.
 Oyedele, L.O., and Tham K.W., (2007). “Client’s Assessment of Architects’ Performance in Building Delivery Process: Evidence from Nigeria”, Building and Environment, Vol. 42, 2090-2099.
 Doolen, T, Traxler, M., and McBride, K., (2006). “Using Scorecards for Supplier Performance Improvement: Case Application in a Lean Manufacturing Organization”, Engineering Management Journal, Vol. 18, No. 2, 26-34.
 Babineaux, F. M., (2002). Measuring Supplier Performance: How to Get What You Measure and Other Unintentional Consequences, Institute for Supply Managements 87th Annual International Supply Management Conference and Educational Exhibit.
 Kashiwagi, D., (1999). The construction delivery system of the information age, Automation in Construction, Vol.8, p. 417–425.
 Kanoglu, A., and Arditi, D., (2004). “An Integrated Automation System for Design/Build Organizations”, International Journal of Computer Applications in Technology, Indersience Publishers, Vol. 20, No. 1-3, 3-14.
 Alptekin, G.O., and Kanoglu, A., (2003).“A Computer-Based Feedback Model for Design/Build Organizations”, ISEC02 - 2nd International Structural Engineering and Construction Conference, Organized by University of Rome, Italy, 23-26 September, 2221-26.
 Ercoskun, K., and Kanoglu, A., (2003).“Client Relationships Management in AEC Sector”, 20th International Conference on Information Technology for Construction, Organized by CIB W78 Auckland, New Zealand, 17-19 April, 129-136.
 Kaplan, R.S., and Norton, D.P., (1996). Balanced Scorecard as Strategic Management System, Harward Business Review, Vol. 74, No. 1, pp. 75-85.
 Lefkowith, D., (2001). What Gets Measured Gets Done: Turning Strategic Plans into Real World Results, Management Quarterly, Vol.42, No.2 p. 20–24.
 Brooks, W.K., and Coleman, G.D., (2003). Evaluating Key Performance Indicators Used to Drive Contractor Behavior at AEDC, Engineering Management Journal, Vol.15, No.4, pp 29-39.
 Youngblood, A.D., and Terry, R.J., (2003). Addressing Balanced Trade-off Issues between Performance Metrics Using Multi-Attribute Utility Theory, Engineering Management Journal, Vol.15, No.1, pp11-17.
 Kanoglu, A., Arslan., S., Altındağ, M., Yazicioglu, D.A., Özçevik, Ö., Ercoskun, K., (2010) Increasing the Global Competitiveness & Interoperability of Turkish Construction Industry by Adopting Sustainable Development Policies in Industry 4.0 Era, Master Research Project, https://www.researchgate.net/project/Increasing-the-Global-Competitiveness-Interoperability-of-Turkish-Construction-Industry-by-Adopting-Sustainable-Development-Policies-in-Industry-40-Era.