AI and technology strategy for real estate
An AI and technology strategy for real estate defines which artificial intelligence and technology use cases are worth pursuing across a building or portfolio, in what order, and what the underlying systems must support for each to work.
Where does AI actually pay here, and in what order?
What we do
01 / 05Everyone has a list of use cases. Almost nobody has an order.
We define the use cases worth pursuing, sequenced by value and by what the layers underneath can genuinely support. A use case that the data layer cannot feed is not a plan, it is a wish.
The sequence matters more than the list. Some use cases unlock three others. Some are dead ends that consume a year of budget. The work is establishing which is which before anything is committed.
It includes governance, the data ownership position, and the investment case, because none of it moves without those three.
- Prioritised use case portfolio, scored on value and on readiness
- Technology roadmap, sequenced and costed
- Investment case, in the language your board already uses
- Governance and data ownership model
Workplace and real estate leaders, asset owners, and developers at concept stage.
How it works
02 / 05- Weeks 1 to 2
Position
Where the organisation actually is. Commercial objectives, operating model, and what the assessment established the systems can support.
- Weeks 2 to 4
Use case portfolio
Every candidate use case, scored on value and on readiness. Workshopped with the people who will own the outcome, not presented to them.
- Weeks 4 to 5
Sequence
The order. What unblocks what, what has to wait, and what should be cut. This is the part that saves the most money.
- Weeks 5 to 7
Case and governance
Investment case, data ownership position, and the governance model that keeps the roadmap alive after we leave.
Durations are indicative and depend on the size of the estate and how quickly we get access.
Questions we get asked
03 / 05How is this different from a roadmap our integrator would write?
An integrator's roadmap is bounded by what an integrator sells. That is not dishonesty, it is scope. Ours is bounded by what the asset needs, which sometimes means recommending you buy nothing this year.
We have not run an assessment. Can we start at strategy?
You can, and some clients do, particularly at concept stage where there is no building to assess yet. On an existing asset we would push back. A strategy written on assumed system capability is a strategy that gets rewritten at the first integration workshop.
Who owns the data in the model you recommend?
You do, and we write it down. The data ownership position is a named deliverable because it is the single term most often lost in a technology contract. If a platform will not agree to it, that is a selection criterion, not a detail.
How far ahead should a technology strategy look?
Three to five years for the roadmap, with the first twelve months specified in detail and the rest held as direction. Anything more precise than that at year four is fiction, because the market moves faster than the plan.
Will you recommend specific products?
At strategy stage, no. We define the requirement and the capability. Product selection happens at specification, after the market has responded to a document written on your terms. Reversing that order is how organisations end up owning something they did not choose.
Ready to press start?
05 / 05Tell us about the space, the asset, or the problem.
We will tell you honestly whether we are the right people for it.