We can measure it. But does the market still understand it?

Europe wants buildings to become more sustainable, smarter, and better able to respond to users and the energy system. That is a logical ambition. To make this smartness measurable, the Smart Readiness Indicator (SRI) was developed: a method that shows to what extent a building and its installations can respond to comfort, energy, and the electricity grid.

The goal is valuable. Yet a question arises that is often skipped. If we can measure more and more, does the real estate market still understand what we are measuring? A score only means something once the person basing a decision on it understands what it means for daily use.

This article is not an attack on the SRI. It is a plea for the translation that is needed afterward. Because technology is allowed to be complicated. The outcome for the tenant, landlord, agent, and investor does not have to be.

The SRI serves a good purpose

The SRI assesses a building across several technical domains, such as heating, cooling, ventilation, lighting, and electricity. For each domain, the assessment looks at the services present, their level of functionality, and their impact on aspects such as energy, comfort, and flexibility toward the grid. That assessment ultimately produces a score that expresses smart readiness.

On its own, that is a worthwhile exercise. It shows that a building is more than bricks, and that installations increasingly work together with each other and with users. This connects to the broader movement in which smart buildings play a serious role.

The criticism does not lie in what the SRI measures, but in the question of who can actually read the outcome. An assessment that combines dozens of technical services, multiple impact criteria, and different functionality levels requires specialist interpretation. And that interpretation is often exactly what is missing at the moment it matters most: during a lease, a purchase, or an investment decision.

Can a tenant understand this?

Apply the simple test: will an average business owner truly be able to understand what an SRI score means for their organization? Can an agent explain it without opening a technical file? If the answer is hesitant, the measurement method misses the mark exactly where it counts. Not because the technology is wrong, but because the technology has been given more weight than understandability for the person actually using the building.

The real estate sector has no shortage of data

Real estate now has an impressive amount of information at its disposal: certificates, standards, scores, audits, ESG data, energy measurements, and technical reports. And SMART data will soon be added to that list. Volume is not the problem.

More data, however, does not automatically mean more transparency. In fact, information without translation can increase confusion. A technical consultant understands a technical report. A network engineer understands network architecture. But an agent needs to be able to explain it, a landlord needs to be able to offer it, an investor needs to be able to assess it, and a tenant needs to be able to base a decision on it.

Transparency, then, does not emerge simply because information is available. Transparency emerges when information becomes understandable. That distinction is the entire point.

The more complex our buildings become, the simpler we need to be able to explain their functionality.

Look at the energy label

The energy label shows how powerful simplicity can be. The underlying energy performance calculation is technically complex, but the user ultimately sees a recognizable classification. That allows an agent to mention it, a tenant to understand it, an investor to compare buildings, and an owner to make targeted improvements.

The strength does not lie in simple technology. The strength lies in technology that is translated simply. That raises a logical question: why would we not apply the same principle to digital building quality? The parallel between the two worlds is discussed in more detail in the article on the road from energy label to IT-Label.

That is the philosophy behind the IT-Label

An audit for an IT-Label can be technically extensive. It can look at fiber and connectivity, redundancy, provider choice, internal data cabling, wifi, patch and server rooms, physical IT security, digital continuity, smart building facilities, monitoring, relevant cybersecurity provisions, expandability, and the demarcation between tenant and landlord.

Behind the scenes, that can be complex. But the real estate professional does not need to become an IT specialist. The final translation needs to answer four questions: what is present, what does the user get, what does the user still need to arrange themselves, and what can this building handle digitally? The methodology behind this can be found in the classification from PREMIUM to SHELL.

From technology to real estate language

This is where the core of the matter lies. The IT-Label aims to create a shared language between worlds that do not always understand each other today. The IT specialist talks about capacity, redundancy, switches, VLANs, and access points. The owner thinks in terms of CAPEX, lettability, and future readiness. The agent thinks in terms of delivery level and distinctive appeal. And the tenant thinks about just one thing: can my company simply work well here?

Bringing these worlds together does not mean everyone needs to learn IT. It means IT gets translated into real estate language. That is the same reasoning explored in the article on the many IT languages in real estate.

A label should be explainable in thirty seconds

A useful design principle is the thirty-second rule. If an agent needs half an hour to explain what a classification means, the translation has failed. A user should understand within roughly thirty seconds what the digital delivery level is, what is present, and what they still need to arrange as a tenant. The technical audit behind it may contain hundreds of checkpoints, but the complexity belongs behind the label, not in front of it.

SRI and IT-Label: who are we measuring for?

The SRI and the IT-Label have different scopes and should not be compared as the same product. Still, the SRI helps make a larger point. The interesting question is not only what we measure, but above all: who are we measuring it for?

The second step, what does it mean for me, needs to take center stage. Take an agent standing with a business owner in an empty office, being asked: how is the IT arranged here? An extensive explanation of protocols, providers, and network architecture will not help the business owner. An answer like: this building has IT1 HIGH PERFORMANCE, this is present, this is provided by the landlord, and this is what you still need to arrange yourself, will. That is the ambition.

From label to demarcation

Simplicity does not mean that responsibilities are oversimplified. Precisely with IT, the boundary between building and user matters. What does the landlord provide, what belongs to the leased space, what does the tenant install themselves, who maintains it, and who is liable in case of an outage?

That is why digital transparency needs to include a clear demarcation. The label communicates the level, the audit substantiates it, and the demarcation clarifies the responsibilities. Together they form the formula: label plus audit plus demarcation equals digital transparency. How this division works out in practice is described in the article on who arranges the IT in rented property.

The tenant does not need to become an IT professional

We also do not expect a tenant to produce their own energy performance calculation. So why do we implicitly expect a business owner to figure out on their own which fiber is available, what redundancy means, how the server room is set up, and which infrastructure belongs to the landlord? A business owner wants to run a business. The building needs to facilitate that, and the user needs to be able to receive expert advice without becoming a specialist themselves.

That urgency is only increasing. Business IT use is not getting any simpler because of AI, cloud, IoT, real-time data, and growing cybersecurity requirements. That is the paradox: the more complex the technology, the greater the need for a simple commercial translation.

Perhaps that is what true smart readiness really is

A building is not smart because it contains the most technology. A building is smart when technology demonstrably contributes to use, comfort, continuity, safety, efficiency, and future readiness, and when the user understands what they get out of it. Smart technology without translation to the user remains simply technology. Only once the user understands what that technology means for them does functional value emerge.

The IT-Label does not need to replace the SRI. The SRI can provide valuable insight into the smart readiness of building installations. The IT-Label answers a broader user question: what do I get delivered digitally and what can I do with it? The chain does not just need measurement, but the full movement from measuring to understanding, comparing, improving, and using.

Get started with the digital foundation of your building

We do not have a shortage of technology, data, or reports in real estate, and soon probably not of SMART data either. What we do need is one shared language: a language the IT specialist can substantiate, the owner understands, the agent communicates, and the tenant uses to make better decisions.

Want to know where your building stands digitally and how that outcome can be made understandable for every party in the chain? Explore how the IT-Label works and get a clear picture of the digital foundation of your property. Measuring is technology. Translating is transparency. And understanding is ultimately what creates value.