===== Results and Discussion =====

==== Analysis of IoT Systems Efficiency ====

The primary value of IoT lies not in connectivity itself, but in data analytics. While traditional systems operate according to rigid schedules, IoT enables both reactivity and proactivity. The collected data allows managers to dynamically reconfigure spaces. Grieves and Vickers rightly point out that a fundamental assumption of modern digital systems is treating information as a substitute for wasted physical resources—time, energy, and materials. "However, the fundamental assumption of the Digital Twin model is that information replaces wasted physical resources, i.e., time, energy, and materials." (( Grieves Michael, Vickers John, Digital Twin: Mitigating Unpredictable, Undesirable Emergent Behavior in Complex Systems, New York 2017, p. 101. ))

Based on the conducted literature review and market data analysis, the implementation of IoT systems in Building Management Systems (BMS) brings measurable benefits across three main areas: energy, operational, and social.

<WRAP group>
<WRAP half column>
  * **Energy Efficiency:** Buildings utilizing advanced occupancy sensors and predictive algorithms show a decrease in electricity consumption by 15–30% annually. This results from eliminating "ghost loads" in HVAC and lighting systems in unoccupied zones.
  * **Maintenance Cost Optimization:** Transitioning to a Predictive Maintenance model allows for extending the lifecycle of technical equipment by approximately 20% and reducing the costs of emergency failures by nearly 40%.
  * **Impact on Productivity:** Analysis of IEQ (Indoor Environmental Quality) parameters indicates that precise control of CO2 concentration and lighting intensity translates into a 3–5% increase in office work efficiency, which, for large corporations, represents a gain exceeding energy savings.
</WRAP>

<WRAP half column>
<gchart pie 300x300 "Share of Savings via IoT" center>
Energy Efficiency = 30
Maintenance Costs = 40
Productivity and IEQ = 20
Other = 10
</gchart>
</WRAP>
</WRAP>

==== Discussion on Implementation Barriers ====

Despite numerous advantages, scholarly discussion highlights two critical issues: cybersecurity and standard fragmentation. Most IoT devices in buildings have limited computing power, which prevents the use of strong encryption. This makes a smart building a potential entry point for Ransomware attacks on the corporate network. Furthermore, the lack of full interoperability between manufacturers (e.g., the difficulty of connecting sensors from Company X to a control unit from Company Y) still forces investors into vendor lock-in. Moreover, Al-Fuqaha notes that in such heterogeneous networks, the secure distribution of cryptographic keys among billions of devices from different manufacturers remains an open research problem that has not yet been fully standardized. "One of the open problems in IoT security that has not been addressed in standards is the distribution of keys among devices." (( Al-Fuqaha Ala, Guizani Mohsen, Mohammadi Mehdi, Aledhari Mohammed, Ayyash Moussa, Internet of Things: A Survey on Enabling Technologies, Protocols, and Applications, New York 2015, p. 2364. ))

<WRAP center 60%>
^ Strengths (S) ^ Weaknesses (W) ^
| OPEX reduction by 15-30% | High initial cost (CAPEX) |
| Predictive maintenance | Low computing power of devices |
^ Opportunities (O) ^ Threats (T) ^
| Digital Twin technology | Cyberattacks and Ransomware |
| Productivity increase by 3-5% | Lack of standardization (Vendor lock-in) |
</WRAP>