Search on our site

In the evolving landscape of building performance and sustainability, commissioning (Cx) has emerged as a cornerstone of quality assurance. As the draft international standard ISO/DIS 24359-1 continues to shape the future of building commissioning, one of its most insightful contributions is the structured approach to defining the level of commissioning based on project risk. Why Risk-Based Commissioning Matters Every construction project carries a unique risk profile—shaped by factors such as complexity, intended use, stakeholder expectations, and regulatory requirements. A one-size-fits-all commissioning approach can lead to inefficiencies, either by overcommitting resources or by underestimating critical performance risks. ISO/DIS 24359-1 introduces a risk-informed framework that helps project teams align the depth and scope of commissioning activities with the actual needs of the project. This ensures that commissioning efforts are proportionate, purposeful, and performance-driven. A Practical Tool for Risk Evaluation To support the practical application of this framework, I developed an Excel spreadsheet tool that calculates project risk based on the criteria outlined in ISO/DIS 24359-1. This tool allows users to input project-specific data and receive a recommended commissioning level: basic, intermediate, or advanced - based on a transparent and repeatable scoring system. The spreadsheet is designed to be: User-friendly: Simple inputs with clear guidance. Customizable: Adaptable to different project types and organizational needs. Aligned with ISO/DIS 24359-1: Reflecting the structure and intent of the draft standard. This tool empowers project teams to make informed decisions early in the planning phase, ensuring that commissioning resources are allocated effectively and proportionately. Understanding the Levels of Commissioning The draft standard outlines a tiered approach to commissioning, where the level of Cx is determined by a combination of: Project complexity System criticality Occupant impact Regulatory and sustainability goals Innovation or novel technologies This allows stakeholders to select from basic, intermediate, or advanced levels of commissioning, each with clearly defined deliverables and expectations. Level 1 - Basic Cx (Low Risk Projects) Score between 15-19 points Ideal for small-scale or low-complexity buildings, this level focuses on verifying that systems are installed and functioning as intended. Documentation is streamlined, and functional testing is limited to essential systems. The commissioning provider shall be acting independent of the design and construction teams and shall report directly to the owner. Level 2 - Intermediate Cx (Moderate Risk Projects) Score between 20-31 points This level introduces more rigorous planning, documentation, and testing. It is suitable for projects with moderate complexity or where occupant comfort and energy performance are key concerns. The commissioning provider shall be acting independent of the design teams, shall report directly to the owner, and shall be independent of construction team. The commissioning provider shall not be employed by the contractor(s). Level 3 - Comprehensive Cx (High Risk or Mission-Critical Projects) Score between 32-45 point For hospitals, data centers, or buildings with high sustainability targets, advanced commissioning includes early involvement in design, detailed functional performance testing, and post-occupancy evaluation. This level ensures that all systems interact seamlessly and meet long-term performance goals. The commissioning provider shall be independent of the design and construction team and shall be contracted directly to or designated by the owner. The commissioning provider shall report directly to the owner. The commissioning provider shall not be employed by neither the design firm(s) nor the contractor(s). Benefits of a Risk-Based Approach Optimized Resource Allocation: Focus efforts where they matter most. Improved Stakeholder Confidence: Clear alignment between project goals and commissioning scope. Enhanced Building Performance: Systems are more likely to meet design intent and operational needs. Scalability and Flexibility: The framework adapts to projects of all sizes and types. Looking Ahead As ISO/DIS 24359-1 moves toward finalization, its emphasis on planning, transparency, and proportionality in commissioning is a welcome evolution. By defining the level of Cx based on project risk—and supporting it with practical tools like the Excel risk calculator—we can take a strategic step toward smarter, more sustainable buildings. Source ISO/DIS 24359-1 – Building Commissioning Process Planning – Part 1: New Buildings (Draft)

Commissioning time is minimal and lacks standardization One of the biggest challenges at the start of a construction project is allocating enough time for testing and verification at the end. This is crucial to ensure the project achieves the right quality, on time, and within budget. Scheduling during the programming phase is necessary. If not, it becomes almost impossible to have sufficient time for testing later. As a former project manager for electrical systems, I wonder why testing time is minimal and lacks standardization. Throughout my career, I have been involved in various stages of projects and taken part in multiple interest groups to integrate and optimize interdisciplinary processes. This experience has made me wiser, and I wish to share my insights with you. “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results” Albert Einstein In the initial stages of a project, the builder has a vision for the building. They know its intended use and the requirements it must meet. During the conceptual phase, funding is typically based on parallels with comparable projects. Next comes the programming phase, typically led by an architect to identify the needs of the owner and users. Workshops help define room types and their proximities. Each technical system specifies quality, capacity, and functionality. During the schematic design phase, the building's layout begins to take shape, and spaces are allocated for technical rooms and main pathways. Up to this point, projects are quite similar, with no specific assumptions made for technical systems. All disciplines are creating detailed drawings during the construction design phase to show system components. Often, this is when we start defining the setup of systems, as specialists like automation, access control, fire alarms, electrical, and HVAC are involved. By now, the project's initial stages may have stretched over time without adjusting the final deadline. The responsibility for testing time allocation shifts from the builder to the main contractor. Each discipline begins designing their technical system, forming a structure based on known or cost-effective products. Time is tight, and resources work hard to balance schedules. The focus is on quick design to start construction, with little thought for a testing phase—planning for it can wait. As you might guess, this is becoming Albert Einsteins definitions of Insanity. Is it not the same we did in the last project? “We tend to avoid tasks and systems when we don’t understand the how and why” Ove Kjærgård Yes, I did quote myself. I really do believe that the reason very highly competent people do not do parts of their work is because they do not understand how to make this plan or why they need to do it this early. I will share with you my thoughts, which I keep in mind when you plan for technical systems. Handover First, to make clear, does the owner require the building(s) to be handed over at the same time? It is also necessary to inquire about the sections and floors of the building. This outlines the main milestones of our pull plan. Resources Even though the owner only has one handover date, it can still be beneficial to divide, due to the amount of available key resources within each discipline and we already know that there are less resources for programming building automation systems than the electrician can provide to connect the components. System buildup How you divide the systems within the buildings, floors, and sections will impact your plan. For a 6-story building with one air handling unit, all construction work by different disciplines needs to be completed and the building cleaned before balancing the air distribution system. This can significantly influence the building's timeline. Alternatively, if there is one unit on each floor, then each floor can plan independently. Do you put all your automation gear for room and light control on the same switch panel board as the power outlets? Then the requirement will in different countries require you to complete the verification of the installation connected to this switchboard before power goes on. This way the project must wait unnecessary for the electrician. If you build a separate switchboard for room control and light control, the electrician can prioritize this first and the power outlets next. In this way programming and testing of room and light control can start earlier. All technical risers must have dampers, valves, heat exchangers, bus gateways, switchboard on each floor for example to do this work. Certain technical systems allow for programming to be completed prior to field deployment, whereas others require connection and calibration in the field before programming can commence. For critical systems and government building owners it is also widespread practice to make functional performance testing at the factory before shipping to the site. How you build up your systems affects various aspects of how soon you can start with the testing. Sample testing Certain owners mandate that all discipline formally commission their delivery of technical systems. While other owners simply stipulate that everything must function properly upon completion, entrusting the contractor with responsibility. And there is a thing in between, called sample testing. All components in a 10% sample group must meet the acceptance criteria. If any fails, a new 10% sample excluding the first group of components must be assessed by the contractor. If the second sample fails, all components within the system must be evaluated. As you understand, verifying 100% takes more time than verifying 10%. Only requiring 10% might reduce time but I also include a risk for quality and handover date. Order of tasks 1. Technical rooms and boundary connections to district supply. Program and verify components before connecting to the first floor. 2. Routings between technical rooms. Must be in place before each technical room has requirements for supply. This includes the riser for heating to be ready with water to connect one floor by the other. 3. Technical distributions to the overall areas on each floor. Prioritize the elements that need programing over passive components. Doing this in a different order will result in less time for testing or delayed handover. Milestones Without strong motivation and consequences, milestones will not be achieved on time. All dates but handovers will slide, the time left for testing will almost disappear. Time, quality, and cost will be equal only at the start of the project. Later than this you will always have to choose. If you choose time, it costs more and reduces quality. Standardization impossible? We should allocate ample time for testing early in the project. Although estimating the exact time needed can be challenging, making bold estimates during the programming phase can be based on similar projects. A Commissioning Provider, also known as ITB in Norway, can provide invaluable insights. Decisions made throughout the project will continually adjust this time allocation, considering new solutions or budget constraints. Management will face a critical decision: invest more in system construction or accept an extra month with increased risk to save money. Standardizing time is impossible if we don't standardize system buildup. I would love to hear your thoughts on this. How do you estimate testing time early in your projects? What are the biggest challenges you face? Share your comments below and let's start a great discussion!