Summary of “Smart Buildings: What 'smart' really means” Draft #1
In the article 'Smart Buildings: What 'smart
really means', Lecomte (2019) states that a standardized metric is required for
smart buildings to wholly emerge in the 'built environment'. Currently, private
and public sectors use their own standards to assess smart buildings, but their
rubrics vary from one another. Private sector standards are biased to their
sponsors, while public sectors' Key Performance Indicators (KPI) are exclusive
to engineering features. Efforts to standardize rubrics are unsuccessful thus
far as different parties involved could not agree on a standard rubric. Lecomte
also emphasized the importance of including the assessment of cyber-risks in
the rubric. There was an incident where hackers managed to steal millions of
dollars (USD) from a corporation. Such risks increase exponentially along with
more advanced and integrated technology. All in all, holistic and reliable
'smart building certifications and rubrics' will be the foundation of a
'functioning market for smart real estate'.
Hello once more Kang Le, we are here to review.
ReplyDelete- Sophisticated citation information
- Key points are clearly mentioned
- Main idea is portrayed clearly
- Good paraphrasing but can still work on it
- The quote by the author hints that proper certification is needed to reduce risks (especially cyber-risks). It would be good to also include that in the summary at the part about cyber-risks.
Reviewed by: Tiara, Sangara and Sammy
I will take all the points stated into consideration. Thank you for taking the time to review the summary.
Delete