In the article “Smart Buildings: “What ‘smart' really means”, Lecomte (2019)addressed the lack of rubrics and certification that caters to both the public and private real estate industry which makes smart buildings more susceptible to cyber threats. The lack of consent from the different group of stakeholders has delayed the drafting of the skeleton of the rubrics. The public and private sectors set rubrics to their advantage. The private sector created the rubrics based on their products which neglected pre-design considerations. The public sector created rubrics based on the engineering aspects but fail to spot the opportunity of integrating the building into its environment. Both sectors failed to grasp the opportunity of integrating the buildings into the city. Lecomte believes that one crucial component to be included in the standardized rubrics would be cyber risk management. Lecomte suggested involving stakeholders from both sectors to discuss a common rubrics and certification to promote credibility and reliability among the general public.
Lecomte, P. (2019, January 29). Smart Buildings: What 'smart' really means. Retrieved September 2019, from The Business Times: https://www.businesstimes.com.sg/opinion/smart-buildings-what-smart-really-means
(162 words)
Edited 24/09/2019
Commented by Joel, Boon Kiat and Jun Heng:
ReplyDelete1. First sentence citation is clear. (Sophisticated)
2. Key areas cited appropriately. (Sophisticated)
3. Thesis presented well. (Sophisticated)
4. Key points paraphrased well. (Sophisticated)
5. No direct quotes lifted from article.