# The Smart Buildings Revolution: A Comprehensive Review of the Smart Readiness Indicator Literature
## 4 Results and Discussion
### Dominant Themes in the Smart Readiness Literature
#### 4.1.2 The Subjectivity of SRI Assessments  
The SRI stands apart from traditional rating systems by prioritizing the automation level of building services and their associated impact, with a particular emphasis on the digital readiness of buildings. Unlike conventional frameworks, the SRI aims to assess the technological sophistication and flexibility of buildings in adapting to smart solutions. However, several studies have raised concerns regarding the inherent subjectivity of the SRI due to its reliance on a checklist-based assessment approach [20; 22; 38; 49; 50; 55; 56; 57]. The SRI's checklist-based assessment and the absence of clear guidelines introduce subjectivity into the evaluation process, leading to inconsistent certification. [PERSON] et al. [50] have highlighted shortcomings of the SRI methodology and emphasized the need for a more quantitative approach to effectively assess the performance and advancement of smart technologies for buildings. In addition, the study by [PERSON] et al. [70] emphasized how the revised audit process of the SRI evaluates both energy efficiency and the readiness of buildings to integrate smart technologies. [PERSON] et al. [54] assessed office buildings in Italy with two panels of experts, revealing that the accuracy of evaluations significantly depends on the data source. Their findings highlighted that the intricate characteristics of the building, encompassing diverse equipment, the involvement of multiple stakeholders in the management and design, a wide range of functions, and various technical building systems, led to the lack of a single reference individual for streamlined data collection for the SRI assessment. [PERSON] et al. [32] emphasized the importance of converting measured data into actionable insights and quantifying critical efficiency indicators such as the SRI to facilitate informed decision-making. Some studies have also focused on the qualitative aspects of the current SRI framework [20; 52; 53]. These studies have introduced methods for adding quantitative features to the SRI to improve the transparency of the method. A quantitative and standardized evaluation of smart readiness could facilitate the exchange of smart technologies and best practices across different building types and countries. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [51] investigated the potential for load-shifting and the dynamic interaction between buildings and the grid. The initial attempt to automate the SRI calculation showed promise, achieving a success rate of 73.61%. Likewise, [PERSON] et al. [20] sought to enrich the SRI framework. The integration of these quantitative elements represents a crucial step toward enhancing the effectiveness of the SRI framework. To assess the impact of these enhancements, a theoretical application was examined, and the outcomes were compared against those of the framework. Their findingsreveal a notable increase in the SRI score following the inclusion of quantitative elements, thus underscoring the potential of these enhancements to bolster the framework's utility and reliability. Despite its strengths, the SRI's application to emerging technologies such as electromobility, smart charging, and self-learning systems remains limited. These underexplored areas highlight gaps in the current framework, which could hinder its ability to fully capture the potential of advanced smart technologies [48]. By integrating quantitative elements, such as IoT monitoring and building information modeling (BIM), the SRI can offer a more standardized evaluation that supports informed decision-making, improves building energy efficiency, and facilitates the exchange of smart technologies across different contexts. Automating the SRI assessment process is crucial for efficiently evaluating building readiness [59]. Integrating BIM data with SRI information allows for informed decision-making regarding building energy efficiency enhancements [55,71].