A structural problem is hiding in plain sight across commercial real estate portfolios, according to Bill Douglas, CEO of OpticWise, a commercial real estate digital infrastructure firm. Asset managers are held accountable for net operating income (NOI) performance, insurance renewals, utility spend, and occupancy trends, yet they routinely make decisions with incomplete, delayed, or vendor-controlled data. The operational data that drives those outcomes sits locked inside building systems, siloed within vendor platforms, and inaccessible to the people responsible for portfolio performance.
Douglas has spent more than a decade auditing properties and identifying where this data problem originates. He points to the same uncomfortable pattern: property owners invest in systems, collect the data, then never use it. The standard workflow for most portfolio owners involves a monthly or quarterly summary report generated from the property management system. That report shows leasing data, rent rolls, and basic financial KPIs. What it does not show is the operational data behind the numbers.
Douglas argues the problem goes deeper than missing data. Properties send management what they are asked for – nothing more. Asset managers receive what they requested, but they often do not know what else to ask for. They are measuring outcomes without seeing the inputs that drive them. The property management system tracks leasing and tenant-facing activity. It does not track how the lighting control system is operating, how air conditioning demand is trending, or what access control logs reveal about space utilization. All of those systems generate data. Virtually none of it reaches the asset manager in a form they can use.
Douglas identifies three major expense and revenue drivers that asset managers consistently lack visibility into: utilities, insurance, and occupancy. Each is data-dependent, and each is largely being managed reactively. On utilities, the challenge is understanding the demand curve. If a property manager does not know when large motors are drawing peak power, or what the utility rate structure looks like for surge demand, reducing the utility bill becomes guesswork. On insurance, most owners walk into an annual renewal review without a coherent data package. A property that can demonstrate standard operating procedures around water leak detection, alarm response, and occupancy management – backed by actual system logs – presents a meaningfully different risk profile. On occupancy, the property management system cannot show which areas of the building are underutilized, what gym usage patterns look like, or how parking availability compares to demand. Those are revenue and experience drivers, and they are invisible to decision-makers.
When ownership groups recognize there is a data gap, the response is typically to hand the problem to the IT manager, the property manager, or the asset manager. None of these is a workable solution. IT managers focus on information technology, not operational technology. Property managers are hired to lease space, not manage network architecture. Asset managers are financial analysts; running analysis across a data lake is not their skill set. Douglas is direct: the wrong people are being asked to do the right tasks. The result is that audits never happen, data continues to sit inside vendor systems, and recoverable income keeps flowing away from owners.
The starting point is not a technology purchase but an honest inventory of what data currently exists at a property, where it lives, and who has access to it – what Douglas calls a data and digital infrastructure audit. From there, the process is sequential: which systems generate data nobody is collecting? Which represent the highest-value targets? What would a 90-day implementation look like? A concrete example: one client had a lighting control system installed that had never been activated. When OpticWise turned the system on, that property saved $70,000 in the following 12 months on electricity alone – no new hardware, no significant capital outlay. The same logic applies to dynamic parking pricing, sub-metering by tenant, leak detection, and HVAC demand management. All require data, and in most portfolios, that data is being generated right now – it is just not in anyone’s hands.
The argument for maintaining the status quo is straightforward: the buildings are making money, the systems are running, and change is expensive. But the math shifts when accounting for what is being left on the table. A 400-unit apartment portfolio that could generate an additional $500 per door per year in net operating income is passing on $200,000 annually. An office building with 250,000 rentable square feet that could recover 50 cents per square foot is forgoing $125,000 in income. Commercial real estate owners in 2026 cannot rely on rent increases to drive returns. Most are realistically looking at 1 percent rent growth. The path to value creation runs through optimization, and optimization requires data most portfolios still do not have. Owners who address the data gap now are better positioned to act on cost recovery, renegotiate insurance terms, and improve NOI without waiting on market conditions. Those who do not are, in effect, choosing to leave income on the table year after year.
