One of the questions I get asked most, in boardrooms, conferences, or even in the pub, is: “What’s next for smart buildings?”
It used to be a fun question. I’d launch into some enthusiasm about self-healing systems, walls that would talk back to you, or what was real about AI in mobile apps. These days, I pause. Not because I’ve lost interest. But because I think we might have lost the right to ask what’s next.
Because here’s the awkward truth: the market isn’t behaving like it wants anything “next” at all.
The price of clever
In the early days, being a smart building was a differentiator. Now, it’s much more common place and therefore, something that easy to trim, negotiate away, and strip back until what’s left is barely worthy of the name. Pricing has become so commoditised that smart tech is no longer about bold transformation; it’s about hitting the lowest possible cost per square foot.
In procurement meetings, I see innovation choked by value engineering. We pitch solutions built for performance and integration, only to watch them disassembled into their cheapest components. The RfPs read like tech wishlists but get awarded to whomever can tick the most boxes for the least money – never mind if the thing actually works or if their team even has experience or availability.
We are buying Ferraris and then budgeting for bicycle maintenance.
Risk? Rejected. Try again next year.
Meanwhile, we’re all navigating a time of economic wobble. Investment committees have turned cautious, CFOs twitch at the sight of “experimental,” and even the boldest clients are favouring the safe, the proven, the spreadsheet-friendly.
Innovation now has to masquerade as cost efficiency to get in the door. Pitches about occupant wellbeing or generative building insights get converted into energy savings models just to pass Go.
There’s no appetite for the new unless it comes with a payback period shorter than a summer internship. The unfortunate result is that we’re solving the same problems over and over again, slightly differently each time, and calling it progress.
Collaboration theatre
Then there’s the cultural shift I wasn’t prepared for: the loss of openness.
The early smart building crowd (whatever their wonderful quirks) shared knowledge freely. We were collectively building an industry. Now? I see more NDAs than ideas. People wrap their processes in proprietary wrappers and hoard data like it’s bitcoin. Even online, the LinkedIn comment sections are full of low-level sniping and semantic one-upmanship.
Rather than working together to define what smart should become, many are fiercely guarding what they’ve already built – even if it’s a house of cards.
This protectionism isn’t just tedious, it’s unproductive. It tells me we’re more interested in defending our patch than growing the field.
So… what now?
Maybe this is just the awkward adolescence of the smart building industry. We’ve matured beyond ‘innovation’ but haven’t yet found our adult identity.
But here’s what I do know: the next phase won’t be defined by more dashboards, more sensors, or more acronyms. It’ll be about finding new courage. Clients willing to fund experimentation again. Leaders who reward long-term thinking. Practitioners who collaborate because the goal is bigger than their ego.
So the next time someone asks me what’s next for smart buildings, maybe I’ll answer:
“That depends. Do you actually want it to be better, or just cheaper than last time?”
Until then, I’ll be here – slightly disillusioned, mildly sarcastic, but still stupidly hopeful.
In Dr Marson’s monthly column, he’ll be chronicling his thoughts and opinions on the latest developments, trends, and challenges in the Smart Buildings industry and the wider world of construction. Whether you’re a seasoned pro or just starting out, you’re sure to find something of interest here.
Something to share? Contact the author: column@matthewmarson.com
About the author:
Matthew Marson is an experienced leader, working at the intersection of technology, sustainability, and the built environment. He was recognised by the Royal Academy of Engineering as Young Engineer of the Year for his contributions to the global Smart Buildings industry. Having worked on some of the world’s leading smart buildings and cities projects, Matthew is a keynote speaker at international industry events related to emerging technology, net zero design and lessons from projects. He is author of The Smart Building Advantage and is published in a variety of journals, earning a doctorate in Smart Buildings.
available to read at: https://smartbuildingsmagazine.com/features/whats-next-for-smart-im-not-so-sure-anymore