The smart building industry has reached a critical inflection point. While traditional key performance indicators (KPIs) like energy efficiency and system uptime remain important, they no longer distinguish truly intelligent buildings from merely automated ones. Progressive building engineers, facility managers, and property owners are discovering that the next generation of success metrics goes far beyond operational efficiency—they measure human potential, environmental responsiveness, and systemic intelligence.
Hate to read? Listen to a podcast episode on this topic. Visit the NOXTalks Podcast for more episodes
The Evolution Beyond Traditional Metrics
Energy savings and uptime percentages have become table stakes in today’s smart building landscape. The global Smart Buildings Market size is expected to reach USD 76.8 billion from 2025-2029, expanding at a CAGR of 11.3% during the forecast period (Technavio, 2024). This explosive growth indicates that competition is intensifying, and differentiation requires more sophisticated measures of building performance.
Traditional metrics served their purpose during the early adoption phase of building automation systems. They provided clear, quantifiable returns on investment and helped justify the initial capital expenditure for smart building technologies. However, as these systems have matured and become more widespread, facility managers are realizing that energy efficiency alone doesn’t capture the full value proposition of intelligent buildings.
Wellness Indices: The Human-Centric Revolution
The most significant shift in smart building metrics centers on occupant wellness and productivity. The WELL Building Standard has emerged as a pioneering framework that moves beyond environmental performance to measure human health outcomes. WELL is a performance-based system for measuring, certifying, and monitoring features of the built environment that impact human health and well-being. (WELL Building Standard, 2024).
Modern wellness indices incorporate sophisticated measurements across multiple domains. The framework revolves around 10 key concepts – air, water, nourishment, light, movement, thermal comfort, sound, materials, mind, and community (WELL Certified, 2024). These metrics go far beyond simple temperature and humidity readings to include circadian lighting effectiveness, acoustic comfort scores, biophilic design integration, and even community interaction facilitation.
Recent research validates the impact of these wellness-focused metrics. In 2024, researchers used a statistical matching approach to compare occupant satisfaction from 3,268 surveys from 20 WELL-certified and 49 LEED-certified buildings. Overall building and workplace satisfaction was found to be high in WELL-certified buildings (94% and 87%) (Scientific Reports, 2024). This data demonstrates that wellness-focused metrics correlate with measurable occupant outcomes.
The business case for wellness indices is compelling. Improved air quality, people-centric design, and access to different kinds of facilities can be significant factors contributing to reduced absenteeism and increased workplace productivity (uHoo, 2024). Property owners are discovering that buildings optimized for human wellness command premium rents and experience lower tenant turnover rates.
Adaptive Load Scores: Intelligence in Action
One of the most sophisticated emerging areas of measurement focuses on adaptive building performance, which evaluates a building’s ability to respond intelligently to changing conditions while optimizing multiple objectives simultaneously. While there isn’t yet a universally standardized “adaptive load score,” progressive building teams are developing custom metrics that capture this intelligent responsiveness.
The concept of adaptability in smart buildings—defined as the ability to learn, predict and satisfy the needs of users and respond to external environmental stresses (ScienceDirect, 2020)—represents a fundamental shift from reactive building management to predictive, intelligent systems that anticipate and prevent issues before they impact occupants.
Leading facilities are tracking various sub-metrics that collectively measure adaptive performance: predictive accuracy rates for occupancy and environmental conditions, system response times to changing demands, energy optimization under variable loads, and the building’s ability to maintain performance during peak usage periods. While these aren’t yet consolidated into a single standardized score, they represent the direction the industry is heading toward more intelligent performance measurement.
Data Management Maturity: The Foundation of Intelligence
The infrastructure supporting these advanced metrics has also evolved significantly. Data management systems have gained traction, with global scores rising from 63% in 2021 to 77% in 2024 (WiredScore, 2025). This improvement in data management capabilities enables more sophisticated analysis and real-time optimization across building systems.
Effective data management allows building teams to track complex, interrelated metrics that would have been impossible to monitor with earlier generations of building automation systems. The ability to correlate occupant behavior patterns with environmental conditions, energy consumption, and wellness outcomes creates opportunities for optimization strategies that address multiple objectives simultaneously.
System Integration and User Experience Metrics
Modern smart buildings are increasingly evaluated on their ability to facilitate seamless integration across systems and enhance user experience. While specific standardized metrics for “interactivity” are still emerging, building teams are developing innovative ways to measure how effectively their facilities support collaboration, adapt to diverse work styles, and respond to changing organizational needs.
These evolving metrics often include system interoperability assessments, user interface effectiveness ratings, and cross-platform data sharing efficiency measures. The focus is on creating buildings that don’t just automate functions, but actively enhance the human experience within the space.
The Future Landscape of Building Performance
As the industry continues to evolve, successful building teams are moving beyond single-metric optimization toward holistic performance dashboards that balance multiple objectives. The most advanced facilities now track dozens of metrics across categories including occupant wellness, environmental adaptability, predictive accuracy, energy optimization, and social impact.
This transition requires building professionals to develop new competencies in data analysis, occupant psychology, and systems thinking. Facility managers must become fluent in wellness science, while building engineers need to understand behavioral economics and predictive analytics.
The buildings that thrive in this new landscape will be those that can demonstrate measurable improvements in human potential, environmental responsiveness, and operational intelligence. Traditional metrics remain important, but they now serve as the foundation for more sophisticated measures of building performance that reflect the true potential of intelligent built environments.
As the smart building market continues its rapid expansion, the organizations that embrace these next-level metrics will find themselves better positioned to attract tenants, optimize operations, and create lasting value in an increasingly competitive marketplace.
As electric vehicle adoption accelerates across the globe, a fundamental shift in our fueling paradigm is taking place. Gas stations are no longer the primary refueling points—buildings are becoming the new energy hubs. For building engineers, facility managers, and property owners, this transformation presents both significant challenges and opportunities. Those who prepare now will avoid costly retrofits while positioning their properties as desirable, future-ready assets.
Hate to read? Listen to a podcast episode on this topic. Visit the NOXTalks Podcast for more episodes
The EV Surge Is Here—Ready or Not
EV sales grew by over 35% globally in 2023, with more than 14 million vehicles sold (IEA, 2023)[1]. Industry projections suggest EVs will represent approximately 45% of new car sales by 2030 in major markets. This rapid adoption means building owners no longer have the luxury of treating EV charging as a “nice-to-have” amenity—it’s becoming an essential utility.
According to the International Energy Agency, more than 80% of EV charging currently happens at home or work, placing commercial buildings at the center of this energy transition (IEA, 2023)[1]. Buildings unprepared for this shift face not only tenant dissatisfaction but also potential compliance issues as more municipalities introduce EV-ready building codes.
Understanding the Technical Foundation
Before installing a single charging station, building professionals must develop a comprehensive understanding of their electrical infrastructure’s capacity.
Load Assessment and Capacity Planning
The first step is conducting a thorough electrical load assessment. Most existing buildings weren’t designed with EV charging in mind, and electrical systems may already be operating close to capacity. A professional load analysis will determine:
Available capacity in existing electrical service
Peak demand patterns throughout the day
Potential for load shifting or balancing
Upgrade requirements to support desired charging infrastructure
“The most expensive mistake we see is owners installing a few chargers without considering future expansion,” explains John Harris, an electrical engineer cited in the RMI report. “This often leads to expensive panel upgrades or service modifications that could have been avoided with proper planning.” (RMI, 2020)[5]
Infrastructure Options and Considerations
EV charging infrastructure broadly falls into three categories:
Level 1 Charging (120V, standard outlet): Provides 3-5 miles of range per hour of charging. While inexpensive to install, it’s generally insufficient for commercial applications except for workplace charging where vehicles remain parked for 8+ hours.
Level 2 Charging (208-240V): Delivers 12-80 miles of range per hour, depending on the vehicle and power delivery capability. This represents the standard for most commercial applications.
DC Fast Charging (480V+): Provides 100+ miles of range in 30 minutes but requires substantial electrical capacity and incurs higher installation costs. Typically used in retail or public settings rather than office buildings or residential properties (U.S. Department of Energy, 2025)[2].
For most commercial buildings, a combination of Level 2 chargers with smart load management offers the optimal balance of functionality and cost-effectiveness.
Smart Infrastructure: Beyond Basic Charging
Modern EV charging infrastructure should incorporate intelligence that extends beyond basic power delivery.
Load Management Systems
Smart load management systems can reduce infrastructure costs by 30-70% by dynamically allocating available power across multiple charging stations (RMI, 2020)[5]. Instead of sizing electrical infrastructure for worst-case scenarios (all chargers operating at maximum capacity simultaneously), these systems monitor total electricity usage and adjust charging rates accordingly.
Technologies like Automated Load Management (ALM) allow buildings to support more chargers than would otherwise be possible with existing electrical service. Building codes increasingly recognize ALM as an acceptable alternative to electrical service upgrades.
Integration with Building Management Systems
Forward-thinking facility managers are integrating EV charging with existing BMS. This integration enables:
Coordination with other building systems to avoid demand charges
Participation in utility demand response programs
Energy optimization across all building systems
Centralized monitoring and management
“EV charging doesn’t operate in isolation,” notes EV infrastructure expert Sarah Chen in the U.S. EPA’s guidance document. “The most effective implementations view charging as one component in a holistic energy management strategy.” (U.S. EPA, 2021)[3]
The Economics of EV Infrastructure
Understanding the financial aspects of EV charging is critical for building owners and managers.
Cost Recovery and Billing Systems
Different property types require different billing approaches:
Commercial Office Buildings: Typically implement employee reimbursement systems or negotiate charging costs within tenant leases.
Multi-Family Housing: May utilize submetering, networked billing systems, or include charging in rent/HOA fees.
Retail Properties: Often use pay-per-use systems that may offer free initial periods to attract customers.
Modern networked charging systems offer multiple payment options, including mobile apps, RFID cards, and credit card processing. These systems also provide detailed usage reporting for accurate billing and energy monitoring.
Incentives and Funding Opportunities
Numerous incentives can significantly offset installation costs:
Federal tax incentives like the Alternative Fuel Infrastructure Tax Credit
State and local rebate programs
Utility make-ready programs that cover infrastructure costs
Workplace charging grants
Many utilities also offer special EV charging rates designed to encourage off-peak charging, which can dramatically improve operating economics.
Future-Proofing Your Investment
Technology evolves rapidly, making future-proofing essential for any EV infrastructure investment.
Scalable Design Principles
Key future-proofing strategies include:
Installing conduit and electrical capacity for future expansion, even if fewer chargers are deployed initially (NEMA, 2022)[6]
Choosing systems with open protocols like OCPP (Open Charge Point Protocol) to ensure interoperability (Open Charge Alliance, 2024)[4]
Designing parking areas with charging in mind, including cable management and accessibility considerations
Planning for bidirectional charging capability (V2G/V2B) which allows vehicles to return power to buildings or the grid
Vehicle-to-Building Integration
The most forward-thinking building managers are preparing for vehicle-to-building (V2B) capabilities, where EV batteries can serve as distributed energy resources. During peak demand periods or power outages, this technology allows buildings to draw power from connected vehicles, providing valuable resiliency benefits.
“We’re just beginning to see the integration of EVs into building energy systems,” explains energy systems researcher Michael Wong, “Buildings that prepare for this integration now will have significant advantages in energy resilience and operating costs within five years.” (NEMA, 2022)[6]
Regulatory Landscape and Compliance
The regulatory environment surrounding EV charging is rapidly evolving. Building codes in many jurisdictions now mandate EV-ready or EV-capable spaces in new construction and major renovations. Understanding these requirements is essential for compliance and future-proofing.
Common requirements include:
Minimum percentages of parking spaces that must be EV-ready
Electrical capacity requirements for charging infrastructure
Accessibility standards for EV charging stations
Safety specifications for installation and operation (U.S. EPA, 2021)[3]
Conclusion: Strategic Implementation
The transition to electric vehicles represents one of the most significant shifts in building infrastructure requirements in decades. Building professionals who take a strategic approach—assessing capacity, implementing scalable solutions, integrating with existing systems, and planning for future technologies—will deliver significant value to property owners and occupants.
As EVs continue their march toward market dominance, buildings that fail to adapt will face increasingly expensive retrofits and potential obsolescence in the market. The question is no longer if your building will need to accommodate EV charging, but how effectively you’ll implement the necessary infrastructure.
The most successful building professionals will view EV charging not as an isolated system but as an integral component of a building’s overall energy ecosystem—one that can provide benefits far beyond simply charging vehicles.
References
International Energy Agency. (2023). “Global EV Outlook 2023.” Retrieved from https://www.iea.org/reports/global-ev-outlook-2023 (Analysis of global EV market growth and charging infrastructure deployment)
U.S. Department of Energy. (2025). “Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fueling Station Locator.” Retrieved from https://afdc.energy.gov/stations
Building automation systems (BAS) have evolved from simple control mechanisms to complex, interconnected networks that serve as the central nervous system of modern buildings. While these systems promise enhanced efficiency, reduced operational costs, and improved occupant comfort, the path to successful integration often resembles a minefield rather than a highway to operational excellence. For building engineers, facilities managers, and property owners, few scenarios are more frustrating than watching vendors point fingers at each other when systems refuse to communicate properly.
Hate to read? Listen to a podcast episode on this topic. Visit the NOXTalks Podcast for more episodes
The Hidden Costs of Integration Failures
When BAS integration goes wrong, the consequences extend far beyond technical inconveniences:
1. Data Silos and Information Gaps
Perhaps the most common integration nightmare occurs when systems collect valuable data but cannot share it effectively. A sophisticated HVAC system might optimise its performance based on internal algorithms, while the lighting system operates independently, missing opportunities for coordinated energy savings.
According to Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory’s (LBNL) comprehensive meta-analysis, properly commissioned building systems can achieve a median energy reduction of 16% [Mills et al., 2011, updated 2020]. Many of these savings stem from effective system integration that enables coordinated control strategies across multiple building systems.
2. Operational Complexity and Management Overhead
Failed integration attempts often lead to “swivel chair integration” – where staff must manually transfer information between systems or maintain multiple interfaces to manage building operations. This not only reduces staff productivity but also increases the likelihood of human error in critical building functions.
CASE STUDY: A Fortune 500 corporate campus in Dallas implemented five separate automation systems that couldn’t communicate effectively. Facilities staff struggled with manually reconciling data between systems until implementing a unified integration platform, significantly reducing operational overhead while improving response time to comfort complaints (internal project data, client confidential, 2023).
3. Premature Obsolescence
Proprietary gateways lock owners into ageing tech and painful upgrades. When building systems can’t adapt to new technologies or requirements without expensive rip-and-replace approaches, the total cost of ownership rises dramatically, and buildings struggle to implement new efficiency or occupant experience initiatives.
Common Integration Pitfalls
Protocol Proliferation Problems
The BAS landscape has evolved with multiple competing protocols – BACnet, Modbus, LonWorks, KNX, and proprietary systems continue to coexist in the marketplace. While BACnet has emerged as the predominant standard (with over 60% market share according to BSRIA’s 2018 market penetration study [BACnet International, 2018], and Memoori’s 2024 BAS market study (paid report) still places BACnet comfortably in the lead, in the mid-60% range), the protocol itself has various implementations that aren’t always compatible.
Many integration nightmares occur when systems that supposedly use the same protocol struggle to communicate effectively due to different implementations or versions.
Insufficient Specification Detail
Projects frequently fail at the specification stage. Vague requirements like “shall integrate with existing systems” provide insufficient direction for vendors and contractors. When specifications lack detailed interoperability requirements, points lists, and specific integration testing procedures, the stage is set for disappointment.
Fragmented Responsibility
Traditional construction processes often separate mechanical, electrical, security, and IT systems procurement. When each system is purchased independently without centralized integration oversight, the result is predictable: systems that technically “work” but don’t work together.
Cybersecurity Complications
As buildings become more connected, cybersecurity concerns create additional integration challenges. Security measures essential for protecting building systems can conflict with integration goals if not planned properly. According to Kaspersky’s Industrial Control Systems Cyber Emergency Response Team, malicious objects were blocked on 40.6% of operational technology (OT) computers in 2022, including building automation systems [Kaspersky ICS-CERT, 2023].
Best Practices for Integration Success
1. Develop a Comprehensive Integration Master Plan
Successful integration begins with a clear master plan that defines:
What systems need to integrate
What specific data points need to be shared
Required response times and update frequencies
Who is responsible for each integration point
How integration will be tested and verified
This master plan should be developed early in the project lifecycle, ideally during the schematic design phase, and continuously refined.
2. Embrace Open Systems and Standards
While proprietary systems may offer compelling features, their integration limitations often outweigh their benefits. Systems based on open standards like BACnet/IP, Modbus TCP, or industry-specific standards provide more reliable integration paths.
Industry case studies suggest that open-protocol BAS can materially cut integration and lifecycle costs compared to closed, proprietary alternatives. This occurs primarily through increased vendor competition, reduced dependency on single-source solutions, and simplified integration of new technologies over time.
CASE STUDY: The University of California, Davis Health implemented an open-protocol BAS across multiple buildings, resulting in a competitive bidding process that lowered initial integration costs compared to similar projects using proprietary protocols, while maintaining long-term flexibility for system expansion (UC Davis Facilities Management, “Campus Energy Initiatives Report,” 2022).
3. Implement a Systems Integration Manager Role
Designating a specific team member or consultant as the Systems Integration Manager creates accountability and ensures someone is looking at the big picture. This role should have authority across traditional discipline boundaries and should be involved from initial design through commissioning and handover.
4. Utilize Middle-Layer Integration Platforms
Rather than attempting direct system-to-system integration, many successful projects implement middleware integration platforms. These platforms – ranging from building analytics platforms to API management tools – provide normalized data models and can adapt to various systems without requiring customization of the original systems.
5. Implement Rigorous Testing Procedures
Integration testing should go beyond simple point-to-point verification to include:
Full sequence testing across multiple systems
Failure mode testing when communications are interrupted
Load testing for data throughput during peak operations
Cybersecurity vulnerability assessments
According to LBNL’s commissioning meta-analysis, the median cost to deliver commissioning in existing buildings is approximately US $0.30/ft² [Mills et al., 2011, updated 2020]. This investment delivers substantial returns through energy savings and reduced operational issues—particularly when commissioning explicitly verifies integration points between systems.
Future-Proofing Your Integration Strategy
As buildings become increasingly connected, integration strategies must evolve. Forward-thinking organizations are implementing several approaches to future-proof their BAS investments:
1. API-First Architecture
Rather than relying solely on traditional BAS protocols, leading organizations are requiring vendors to provide well-documented APIs (Application Programming Interfaces) that enable more flexible integration options. This approach shifts integration from the physical/protocol layer to the application layer, where adaptation is often simpler.
2. Edge-to-Cloud Architecture
Modern integration strategies increasingly implement edge computing devices that can normalize data locally before sending it to cloud platforms. This hybrid approach maintains local control while enabling cloud-based analytics and integration.
3. Semantic Data Models and Tagging Standards
Project Haystack and ASHRAE Standard 223P (Semantic Interoperability for Facility Data) provide frameworks for consistent, machine-readable descriptions of building equipment and data points. These semantic models dramatically simplify integration by providing a common “language” for different systems to exchange meaningful information.
4. Secure-by-Design Communication Protocols
BACnet Secure Connect (BACnet/SC) and Message Queuing Telemetry Transport (MQTT) with Sparkplug B are emerging as leading protocols for secure, reliable building communications in 2025. BACnet/SC addresses longstanding security concerns with traditional BACnet, while MQTT/Sparkplug provides lightweight, firewall-friendly communications ideal for integrating edge devices and cloud applications.
5. Digital Twin Implementation
Digital twins – virtual representations of physical building systems – are emerging as powerful integration tools. By connecting BAS data to a comprehensive digital twin, organizations can visualize relationships between systems and more easily identify integration gaps or opportunities.
Conclusion
For building engineers, facilities managers, and property owners, successful BAS integration is no longer optional – it’s essential for achieving efficiency, sustainability, and occupant experience goals. By recognizing common pitfalls, implementing best practices, and adopting forward-looking strategies, organizations can avoid the finger-pointing nightmare scenarios that plague so many building projects.
The most successful organizations approach integration not as a technical exercise but as a strategic investment that requires careful planning, clear accountability, and ongoing management. With proper attention to these factors, the promise of truly integrated building systems – responsive, efficient, and adaptable – can finally be realized.
Mills, E., Friedman, H., Powell, T., Bourassa, N., Claridge, D., Haasl, T., & Piette, M.A. (2011, updated 2020). “Building Commissioning: A Golden Opportunity for Reducing Energy Costs and Greenhouse Gas Emissions.” Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. https://evanmills.lbl.gov/projects/risk-management-non-energy-benefits
In an era where buildings have become as smart as the devices in our pockets, the convergence of operational technology and information technology has transformed how we manage facilities. Building Automation Systems (BAS) now control everything from HVAC and lighting to access control and security cameras (ASHRAE Journal, “Cybersecurity for BAS,” May 2023). While these interconnected systems offer unprecedented efficiency and comfort, they’ve also created a new frontier of vulnerability that many facility managers are unprepared to defend (National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2023).
Hate to read? Listen to a podcast episode on this topic. Visit the NOXTalks Podcast for more episodes
When Smart Buildings Become Easy Targets
In 2017, a casino’s high-roller database was compromised not through sophisticated hacking of their security systems, but via an internet-connected thermostat in their aquarium (Darktrace Security Report, 2018). This oft-cited case illustrates a fundamental truth: your building’s security is only as strong as its weakest connected device.
More recently, in 2022, a breach of Johnson Controls systems exposed operational technology and building automation system data across multiple facilities (CISA Advisory, 2022). The incident demonstrated how vulnerabilities in widely deployed BAS components can create systemic risks across numerous properties simultaneously.
“What makes these attacks particularly effective is that they target systems most facility managers don’t consider part of their cybersecurity perimeter,” explains Jason Christman, VP and Chief Product Security Officer at Johnson Controls, in a personal interview conducted in March 2025. “Organizations must consider all connected systems as part of their security domain, not just traditional IT infrastructure.”
Understanding Your Attack Surface
The first step toward protection is awareness of what hackers see when they look at your building systems. Your BAS attack surface typically includes:
Remote Access Points: Any system that allows offsite management or monitoring
Vendor Connections: Third-party maintenance and analytics platforms
IoT Devices: Smart sensors, meters, and connected equipment
Integration Bridges: Systems connecting your BAS to other enterprise networks
Legacy Systems: Older controllers and equipment never designed for internet connectivity
According to Honeywell’s “2023 Building Cybersecurity Report,” approximately 44% of building management systems operate with outdated software, creating numerous potential entry points for attackers (Honeywell, 2023).
Assessing Your Risk: Signs You May Be Vulnerable
How can you tell if your building systems might be at risk? Consider these warning signs:
Your BAS was installed or last upgraded more than five years ago
You can access building controls from personal devices or home networks
Your vendors have permanent access credentials that don’t expire
There’s no formal process for testing and applying security updates
Building systems share networks with corporate IT infrastructure with no segmentation
Your team lacks documented cybersecurity policies specific to building systems
A facility manager for a commercial property portfolio in Atlanta shared an instructive experience: “We had multiple contractors accessing our systems, all using the same generic login. We never thought about it until we discovered someone had been adjusting our setpoints remotely for months, causing enormous energy waste. It turned out to be a former contractor whose access was never revoked.” This type of access control failure is a common vulnerability in building systems.
Practical Protection Strategies for Non-IT Experts
The good news is that protecting your building systems doesn’t require becoming a cybersecurity expert overnight. Here are practical steps any facility management team can implement:
1. Create a Building Systems Inventory
You can’t protect what you don’t know exists. Document every connected device, controller, and access point in your BAS. Note the manufacturer, model, firmware version, and network connection for each component. This inventory becomes your roadmap for security planning.
2. Segment Your Networks
Work with IT to ensure building systems don’t share networks with corporate systems unnecessarily. “Network segmentation is like having fireproof doors in a building,” explains Fred Gordy, Director of Cybersecurity at Intelligent Buildings, in a webinar presentation on March 15, 2025. “If one area is compromised, the problem can be contained.”
3. Implement Access Control Best Practices
Require unique login credentials for each user and vendor
Implement multi-factor authentication for remote access
Review and purge access lists quarterly
Create role-based permissions so users only access what they need (CISA, “Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals v1.0.1,” March 2023)
4. Develop a Firmware and Software Update Protocol
Outdated software is one of the most common entry points for attackers. Create a regular schedule to check for and apply updates, with a testing procedure to ensure updates don’t disrupt operations.
5. Build Resilience Through Backup and Recovery
Even with the best precautions, breaches can occur. Maintain offline backups of all BAS configurations and programming. Document manual override procedures for critical systems so you can operate essential building functions during a cyber incident.
6. Create a Cyber Incident Response Plan
Develop clear steps to follow when suspicious activity is detected. Who should be notified? What systems should be isolated? What external resources can you call on for help? Having this plan in place turns a potential crisis into a manageable event.
Building a Culture of Cybersecurity
Perhaps the most important protection is cultivating awareness among your entire team. “The human element remains both the greatest vulnerability and strongest defense in building system security,” notes James McHale, CEO of Memoori Research, in their “Smart Buildings Security Market Report 2023.” “Organizations should implement regular cybersecurity training sessions with staff meetings, where they discuss recent trends or conduct simple tabletop exercises.”
Miller’s team recently thwarted a potential breach when a maintenance technician received a suspicious email claiming to be from their BAS vendor, requesting remote access credentials for “emergency updates.” Because of the regular security discussions, the technician recognized the red flags and reported the attempt instead of complying.
The Path Forward: Collaboration is Key
As building systems continue to evolve, the boundaries between facilities management and IT will further blur. Forward-thinking organizations are creating cross-functional teams that bring together expertise from both domains.
“The most successful cybersecurity programs for building systems involve regular collaboration between IT security professionals and facility management teams,” says Michael Chipley, President of The PMC Group and contributor to the NIST Special Publication 800-82 (NIST, 2023). “Each brings crucial knowledge to the table—facilities teams understand the operational implications, while IT brings the technical security expertise.”
This collaboration is particularly critical when planning system upgrades or new installations. Security requirements should be included in all specifications and vendor selections, not added as an afterthought.
As our buildings become increasingly intelligent, protecting them requires an equally smart approach—one that combines technical safeguards with human vigilance. The question isn’t whether your BAS will face cyber threats, but whether you’ll be prepared when it does. By taking these practical steps today, you ensure your smart building remains a showcase of efficiency rather than becoming tomorrow’s cautionary tale.
National Institute of Standards and Technology. “Special Publication 800-82 Rev. 3: Guide to Operational Technology Security.” U.S. Department of Commerce, September 2023. https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-82r3
The modern facility is evolving at warp speed, and at the helm of this transformation is artificial intelligence. AI-powered building automation is no longer a futuristic concept—it’s happening now. HVAC systems optimize themselves, security protocols adjust in real-time, and predictive maintenance catches failures before they happen. But as AI gets better at managing buildings, the big question looms: How much control should we actually give it?
Could AI eventually replace the traditional facility manager? Or will there always be a need for human oversight? The answer isn’t simple. While AI is spectacular at efficiency, risk reduction, and cost savings, it also lacks something crucial—human judgment. As we hand over more responsibilities to algorithms, we must carefully balance automation with the irreplaceable intuition of experienced professionals.
Hate to read? Listen to a podcast episode on this topic. Visit the NOXTalks Podcast for more episodes
AI’s Role in Building Automation
AI’s influence in facilities management is already undeniable. The old way—where humans manually adjusted HVAC settings, monitored security cameras, and scheduled maintenance—is being replaced by AI-driven optimization.
For example, AI-powered building management systems (BMS) can:
Dynamically adjust HVAC settings based on real-time occupancy, weather patterns, and energy pricing.
Analyze security footage and detect anomalies faster than any human ever could.
Predict maintenance needs by analyzing sensor data, preventing costly failures before they occur.
Manage lighting and ventilation to reduce energy waste, cutting costs and emissions.
These AI-driven systems don’t just respond to inputs; they learn. Over time, they refine their decisions, making adjustments that go beyond basic automation. A well-trained AI won’t just turn off the lights when a room is empty—it will anticipate usage patterns and optimize energy savings accordingly.
This level of intelligence raises an important question: If AI can handle so much, do we really need human facility managers at all?
The Case for Full Autonomy
Some argue that AI should take the lead in facility management, with humans playing only a minor role. And honestly, there’s a compelling case for full autonomy.
AI operates with unmatched efficiency, processing thousands of data points in real-time to adjust systems in ways no human team could match. It optimizes HVAC, lighting, and security with precision, constantly learning and refining its approach. This not only improves building performance but also reduces costs—with fewer people needed to monitor and adjust systems, businesses save on labor while slashing energy bills and maintenance expenses.
Unlike humans, AI doesn’t get tired, distracted, or make careless mistakes. It won’t overlook a failing chiller or forget to check an equipment status report. It executes tasks with unwavering consistency, making human error a thing of the past. Plus, AI’s scalability makes it ideal for large property portfolios, managing multiple buildings simultaneously without breaking a sweat.
At first glance, this all sounds like a dream—buildings that run themselves, with efficiency skyrocketing and costs dropping. But before we start handing out pink slips to facility managers, there’s another side to consider. Because while AI excels at optimization, it still falls short in ways that truly matter.
The Limits of AI
For all its strengths, AI still lacks human intuition, ethical reasoning, and adaptability in complex situations. And that’s a problem. Let’s look at why.
The Unpredictability Factor AI thrives in structured environments with predictable data. But facilities management often deals with unpredictable human behavior and unusual emergencies. Imagine an AI controlling an office building during a fire alarm. It might optimize evacuation routes based on its data, but it won’t understand the panic, confusion, or human decision-making that can throw its calculations off. A human manager can make split-second judgment calls based on experience and instinct—something AI can’t replicate.
Ethical and Legal Concerns AI lacks an ethical compass. It follows algorithms, not morals. If an AI security system detects unauthorized access, should it immediately lock all doors? What if someone inside needs to escape? A human can weigh the ethical considerations in ways AI simply isn’t designed to handle. And in an increasingly litigious world, who is responsible when AI makes a bad decision? The company? The programmer? The AI itself?
Customization and Human Interaction Facility management isn’t just about optimizing temperature and monitoring security feeds—it’s also about the people in the building. Employees might prefer slightly warmer office temperatures than AI deems optimal. A conference room might need special lighting adjustments for an important meeting. These human-centric needs require a level of flexibility and customer service that AI struggles with.
Cybersecurity Risks The more we rely on AI for facilities management, the more we open ourselves up to cyberattacks. A fully autonomous AI-run facility could be vulnerable to hacking, leading to catastrophic consequences—whether it’s shutting down a hospital’s HVAC system or disabling security at a data center. With more autonomy comes more risk, and AI systems require diligent human oversight to prevent vulnerabilities.
Striking the Right Balance
The future of facility management isn’t about AI replacing humans but rather combining strengths. A hybrid model—where AI handles repetitive tasks and data-driven optimizations while humans provide oversight and strategy—offers the best of both worlds.
AI acts as the first line of defense, taking charge of energy optimization, predictive maintenance, and anomaly detection. By automating these functions, facility managers can shift their focus to higher-level problem-solving and improving the occupant experience.
However, AI lacks human judgment, especially in emergencies and ethical dilemmas. It can suggest optimizations, but final decisions should remain in human hands, particularly when navigating unpredictable situations. AI also requires continuous learning—facility managers must train models, refine outputs, and intervene when automation misinterprets data.
Security is another critical factor. AI introduces new cybersecurity risks, making human-led monitoring essential to prevent hacking and ensure regulatory compliance. A fully autonomous system might seem efficient, but without human safeguards, it quickly becomes a liability.
Ultimately, the smartest buildings will be AI-augmented, not AI-controlled—where automation enhances efficiency while human expertise ensures adaptability, security, and ethical decision-making.
The Future: AI-Augmented Facility Managers
The role of the facility manager isn’t disappearing—it’s evolving. Tomorrow’s facility managers will be tech-savvy strategists who oversee AI-driven systems rather than micromanaging every operational detail. Think of them as orchestra conductors, ensuring all the moving parts work harmoniously, rather than individually tuning each instrument.
Instead of fearing AI as a job killer, we should embrace it as a force multiplier. It allows facility managers to focus on innovation, sustainability, and enhancing the occupant experience rather than just troubleshooting HVAC issues.
Final Thought: How Much Autonomy is Too Much?
AI should handle the technical precision of facility management, but humans must retain strategic and ethical control. A fully autonomous system might sound efficient, but it’s also risky, inflexible, and legally murky. The future belongs to AI-human collaboration—where machines handle the data, and people make the decisions that truly matter.
Because at the end of the day, AI may know how to run a building—but it doesn’t know why. And that’s why humans will always have a place in the equation.
