Key takeaways
- The Smart Readiness Indicator (SRI) is a European assessment system that measures the smartness and energy efficiency of building installations.
- The SRI looks at what installations can do, but not at the underlying IT infrastructure that makes this possible.
- A building can look smart on paper while its digital foundation remains unknown, creating a blind spot in the assessment.
- The IT-label makes the digital quality of a building insightful and thereby fills a gap that the SRI leaves open.
- The measurability of digital infrastructure becomes more relevant as policy, energy, and usage increasingly rely on data.
The Smart Readiness Indicator, or SRI for short, is a European policy instrument that attempts to capture the smartness of buildings in a single score. In the Netherlands, the instrument is supported by the Netherlands Enterprise Agency. The idea is appealing: give buildings an indicator that shows how well installations work together, respond to users, and contribute to energy efficiency.
The SRI assesses what a building can do. Can the heating adjust to occupancy? Does the sun shading respond to the weather? Do installations communicate with each other and with the user? These are sensible questions, and they fit a real estate market that increasingly relies on data.
Still, something stands out. All those smart functions run on a foundation that the SRI itself does not measure: the building's IT infrastructure. The cabling, the connectivity, the network layer, and the place where equipment can be safely housed. Without that foundation, smartness is a promise on paper. This raises the question of whether it is not time to make that foundation measurable as well.
What the SRI does and does not capture
The strength of the SRI lies in the idea that a building is more than bricks and an energy label. A building that can adapt to usage and to the energy grid performs differently than a static property. The indicator tries to make that dynamic visible, and that is a step forward.
The limitation lies in the perspective. The SRI looks at the functions of smart technology, not at the digital readiness beneath it. We described that distinction earlier in the article on the blind spot between SRI and digital readiness. An installation may be called smart, but whether the connection it depends on is reliable and future-proof falls outside the measurement framework.
This creates a risk. A building can score well on the indicator because the intentions and installations are in order, while the underlying layer remains unknown. For a user who wants to run data-heavy work tomorrow, that layer is precisely what matters most.
Smartness starts with a connection
A smart thermostat system, a presence sensor, or a building management system have one thing in common: they communicate. If the connection drops, the smartness drops with it. This makes network redundancy and the quality of connectivity anything but a side issue. They are the condition on which every other function rests.
Calling a building smart without measuring the digital foundation is like inspecting a car's navigation system while skipping the engine.
The blind spot in the measurement framework
For energy, we have developed a language. The energy label is by now familiar to almost everyone and influences decisions in purchase, rental, and financing. For the smartness of installations, the SRI is working on such a language. For digital infrastructure, that language is still largely missing.
This is notable, because the digital layer increasingly determines how usable a building really is. We previously wrote about the question of why almost no one measures the IT infrastructure of real estate. While energy, comfort, and usage all depend on data, connectivity itself remains out of sight in most assessments.
The IT-label was established to fill precisely that gap. It is not a mark with legal status and not a judgment on whether a building is good or bad. It is a classification methodology that makes the digital quality of a building insightful, so owners, tenants, and advisors know where they stand.
SRI and IT-label: not competitors, but complementary
It is tempting to see the SRI and the IT-label as rivals. They are not. They measure different things and actually reinforce each other. The SRI describes what a building can do with smart technology. The IT-label describes whether the digital foundation is present that makes this possible. Reading both gives a more complete picture.
To keep that distinction clear, it helps to place the measurement objects side by side.
| Aspect | SRI | IT-label |
|---|---|---|
| Focus | Smartness of installations | Digital infrastructure |
| Core question | What can the building do? | What is ready underneath? |
| Outcome | Smartness score | Classification of digital quality |
| Status | European policy instrument | Independent methodology |
The table shows that the two do not overlap. They highlight different layers of the same building. A building assessed on both fronts shows the market that it does not just want to be smart, but also has its foundation in order. We elaborated on that connection further in the piece on the question SRI or IT-label and the difference between them.
Curious about your building's IT-label?
Discover how your property scores on digital infrastructure.
Request IT-labelWhy measurability is becoming more urgent
The reason to make the digital foundation measurable becomes clearer every year. Work is becoming more data-heavy, installations depend on continuous connectivity, and the energy transition requires buildings that can communicate with the grid. All of this stands or falls with the layer the SRI does not measure.
There is another argument. What is not measured is difficult to compare and therefore difficult to value. As long as digital infrastructure remains invisible, a buyer or tenant cannot attach a price to it, and an owner cannot receive recognition for it. The classification system from PREMIUM to SHELL makes those differences discussable, from an IT1+ PREMIUM building that is fully equipped to an IT5 SHELL where the digital layer is deliberately still absent.
Mandatory or not?
Whether measurability should also become mandatory is a question for legislators. The IT-label takes no position on that. What the knowledge collective can do is have the methodology ready so measurement is possible the moment the market or policy calls for it. Experience with the energy label shows that a voluntary standard often runs ahead of mandatory rules, and that transparency alone already adds value.
Next step: bring the digital layer into view
If you are an owner, advisor, or tenant looking at a building with an SRI score, you now know which layer beneath it remains unmeasured. The logical next step is to make that layer visible, so the picture becomes complete and the smartness actually has a foundation.
Start with the page on how the IT-label works to see how a classification comes about and what it means for your building. This way, you place the digital foundation alongside the smartness, resulting in an assessment that covers the reality of modern real estate.
