The persistent effectiveness of online feedback and controls for sustainability in the workplace

Abstract

Office workers tend to waste energy at work due to little motivation for saving energy. This study investigates the effectiveness of online feedback (e.g., self-monitoring, advice, comparison) and control strategies (e.g., online remote control, scheduled control) that can promote voluntary energy conservation in the workplace. Eighty office workers were divided into four groups, and feedback and control interventions were field-tested for 9 months. Baseline data was collected for 14 weeks; different interventions were given to the four groups for 13 weeks and then removed from the groups for 11 weeks. During and after the interventions occurred, the groups that had online controls achieved more energy savings than the groups that had no online controls. While there were no statistical energy savings with computer usage before and after the intervention, the monitor, light, and phone devices showed significant savings as a result. Surveys and interviews were also conducted after the experiment to learn the participants’ behavior and intentions. The findings discussed are based on their responses.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. 1E PC Energy Report. (2009). PC Energy Report 2009 United States, United Kingdom, Germany, online at https://www.1e.com/EnergyCampaign/downloads/PC_EnergyReport2009-UK.pdf

  2. Abrahamse, W., & Steg, L. (2013). Social influence approaches to encourage resource conservation: a meta-analysis. Global Environmental Change, 23(6), 1773–1785.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Abrahamse, W., Steg, L., Vlek, C., & Rothengatter, T. (2005). A review of intervention studies aimed at household energy conservation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25(3), 273–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Adomavicius, G., & Tuzhilin, A. (2011). Context-aware recommender systems. In F. Ricci, L. Rokach, B. Shapira, & P. B. Kantor (Eds.), Recommender Systems Handbook (pp. 217–253). US: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bedwell, B., Leygue, C., Goulden, M., McAuley, D., Colley, J., Ferguson, E., Banks, N., & Spence, A. (2014). Apportioning energy consumption in the workplace: a review of issues in using metering data to motivate staff to save energy. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 26(10), 1196–1211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bown, N. J., & Abrams, D. (2003). Despicability in the workplace: effects of behavioral deviance and unlikeability on the evaluation of in-group and out-group members. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33(11), 2413–2426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Burger, J. M., Messian, N., Patel, S., del Prado, A., & Anderson, C. (2004). What a coincidence! The effects of incidental similarity on compliance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(1), 35–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Carrico, A. R., & Riemer, M. (2011). Motivating energy conservation in the workplace: an evaluation of the use of group-level feedback and peer education. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 31(1), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. DOE. (2010). 2010 Building Energy Data Book. Washington, DC: US Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy online at http://buildingsdatabook.eere.energy.gov/.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ehrhardt-Martinez, K et al. J.A.S.: Advanced metering initiatives and residential feedback programs: a meta-review for household electricity-saving opportunities. Washington, D.C. (2010)

  11. EIA,U. (2011). Annual energy review. Energy Information Administration, US Department of Energy: Washington, DC, online at www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer.

  12. Elgaaied, L. (2012). Exploring the role of anticipated guilt on pro-environmental behavior—a suggested typology of residents in France based on their recycling patterns. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 29(5), 369–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ellway, B. P. (2013). Making it personal in a call centre: electronic peer surveillance. New Technology, Work and Employment, 28(1), 37–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Fischer, C. (2008). Feedback on household electricity consumption: a tool for saving energy? Energy Efficiency, 1(1), 79–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Fogg, B. J. (2002). Persuasive technology: using computers to change what we think and do. Ubiquity, 2002(December). doi:10.1145/763955.763957.

  16. Fogg, B. J. (2009, April). A behavior model for persuasive design. In Proceedings of the 4th international Conference on Persuasive Technology (p. 40). ACM.

  17. Foster, D., Lawson, S., Wardman, J., Blythe, M., & Linehan, C. (2012). “Watts in it for me?”: design implications for implementing effective energy interventions in organisations. CHI ’12 (pp. 2357–2366). ACM.

  18. Ghatikar, G. (2014). Miscellaneous and electronic loads energy efficiency opportunities for commercial buildings: a collaborative study by the United States and India. Retrieved Mar 10, 2016 from http://escholarship.org/uc/item/80b1c401

  19. Goldstein, N. J., Cialdini, R. B., & Griskevicius, V. (2008). A room with a viewpoint: using social norms to motivate environmental conservation in hotels. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(3), 472–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Granderson, J., Piette, M. A., & Ghatikar, G. (2011). Building energy information systems: user case studies. Energy Efficiency, 4(1), 17–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Harrigan, M. (1994). Can we transform the market without transforming the customer? Home Energy, 11(1).

  22. Harrigan, M. S., & Gregory, J. M. (1994). Do savings from energy education persist?. Alliance to save energy.

  23. Jain, R. K., Taylor, J. E., & Culligan, P. J. (2013). Investigating the impact eco-feedback information representation has on building occupant energy consumption behavior and savings. Energy and Buildings, 64, 408–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Karjalainen, S. (2011). Consumer preferences for feedback on household electricity consumption. Energy and Buildings, 43(2), 458–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Leygue, C., Ferguson, E., Skatova, A., & Spence, A. (2014). Energy sharing and energy feedback: affective and behavioral reactions to communal energy displays. Frontiers in Energy Research, 2, 29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Li, I., Dey, A. K., & Forlizzi, J. (2011, September). Understanding my data, myself: supporting self-reflection with ubicomp technologies. In Proceedings of the 13th international conference on Ubiquitous computing (pp. 405–414). ACM.

  27. Lobato, C., Pless, S., Sheppy, M., & Torcellini, P. (2011, February). Reducing plug and process loads for a large scale, low energy office building: Nrel’s research support facility. In ASHRAE Winter Conference (Vol. 29, pp. 1–2).

  28. Lucid Design (2010a). Elon University strives to meet carbon commitment through behavior change. Retrieved Feb 14, 2016, from http://www.luciddesigngroup.com/download.php?id=20100701.

  29. Lucid Design (2010b). Elon University strives to meet carbon commitment through behavior change. Retrieved Apr 14, 2013, from http://www.luciddesigngroup.com/download.php?id=20100701.

  30. Mathes, E. W., & Kahn, A. (1975). Diffusion of responsibility and extreme behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 881–886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Mercier, C., & Moorefield, L. (2011). Commercial office plug load savings and assessment: final report. Produced by ECOVA and Supported Through the California Energy Commission’s Public Interest Energy Research Program.

  32. Metzger, I., Cutler, D., & Sheppy, M. (2012). Plug-load control and behavioral change research in GSA office buildings. San Francisco, CA: US General Services Administration.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Mosler, H. J., & Gutscher, H. (2004). Promoting energy conserving behaviour by combining instructed self-diffusion with intervention instruments. Umweltpsychologie, 8(1), 50–65.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Nilsson, A., Andersson, K., & Bergstad, C. J. (2015). Energy behaviors at the office: an intervention study on the use of equipment. Applied Energy, 146, 434–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. NREL (2013). Assessing and reducing plug and process loads in office buildings, Golden, CO, online at http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy13osti/54175.pdf

  36. Parasuraman, R., & Riley, V. (1997). Humans and automation: use, misuse, disuse, abuse. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 39(2), 230–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Seligman, C., & Delay, J. M. (1977). Feedback as a means of decreasing residential energy consumption. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62(4), 363–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Siero, F. W., & Bakker, A. B. (1996). Changing organizational energy consumption behaviour through comparative feedback. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 16, 235–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Sustainability in the workplace report (2011) Retrieved Dec 12, 2014, from http://www.sustainabilityatwork.com.au/downloads/research-report.pdf

  40. Wilhite, H., & Ling, R. (1999). A. Hoivik and JG. Olsen (1999): Advances in the use of consumption feedback information in energy billing: the experiences of a Norwegian energy utility. In Proceedings, European Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy.

  41. Winett, R. A., Neale, M. S., & Grier, H. C. (1979). Effects of self-monitoring and feedback on residential electricity consumption. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 12(2), 173–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Wood, G., & Newborough, M. (2007). Energy-use information transfer for intelligent homes: enabling energy conservation with central and local displays. Energy and Buildings, 39(4), 495–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Yun, R., Scupelli, P., Aziz, A., Loftness, V. (2013a). Sustainability in the workplace: nine intervention techniques for behavior change. In Persuasive technology (pp. 253–265). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.

  44. Yun, R., Lasternas, B., Aziz, A., Loftness, V., Scupelli, P., Rowe, A., Kothari, R., Marion, F., & Zhao J. (2013b). Toward the design of a dashboard to promote environmentally sustainable behavior among office workers. In Persuasive technology (pp. 246–252). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.

  45. Yun, R., Aziz, A., Scupelli, P., Lasternas, B., Zhang, C., & Loftness, V. (2015a, April). Beyond eco-feedback: adding online manual and automated controls to promote workplace sustainability. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1989–1992). ACM.

  46. Yun, R. J., Aziz, A., & Lasternas, B. (2015b). Design implications for the presentation of eco-feedback data. Archives of Design Research, 28(4), 95–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the Energy Efficient Buildings Hub Consortium (EEBHub.org, a US DOE Innovation Hub, Subtask 6.4) under the US Department of Energy Award Number EE0004261.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ray Yun.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yun, R., Aziz, A., Lasternas, B. et al. The persistent effectiveness of online feedback and controls for sustainability in the workplace. Energy Efficiency 10, 1143–1153 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-017-9509-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • Online feedback
  • Online control
  • Behavior change
  • Energy dashboard
  • Workplace