A New Building Is Not Finished When Each System Passes Its Test
Opening day is supposed to be the payoff after months of design, construction, inspections, and coordination. The ribbon is cut, tenants move in, and the project team can finally declare success.
But what happens when the building’s systems work individually and fail collectively?
That is the commissioning gap: the difference between verifying that each building system operates on its own and verifying that the systems respond correctly when they interact as one environment. A fire alarm may pass its test. The HVAC system may pass its test. Access control, building automation, power, and networking may all pass their own tests. Yet the building can still behave unpredictably during a fire alarm, power dip, emergency drill, or tenant event.
In an episode of Built, Wired & Secured, host Alex Morgan explores this issue with James Rogers, a facilities engineering leader, and Michael Harrington, a commercial property manager. Their discussion makes one point clear: commissioning is not simply a construction closeout task. It is a practical safeguard for life safety, business continuity, tenant confidence, and the long-term value of the property.
The Difference Between Component Testing and Integrated Testing
Standalone testing answers a narrow question: does this system perform its intended function when tested by itself? Integrated testing asks a more important operational question: does this system respond correctly when another system sends it a real signal during an actual building event?
James describes a building automation sequence in which outside air dampers were supposed to close when the fire alarm became active. During the test, the team simulated the fire alarm signal and confirmed that the damper closed. The result appeared successful.
The problem surfaced when the installed fire alarm panel sent a different voltage than the BAS had been programmed to expect. During a real alarm, the dampers stayed open. The issue was not a failure of the damper, the BAS, or the fire alarm panel in isolation. It was a failure at the point where those systems had to communicate.
This distinction matters because building performance depends on sequences, not isolated components. A system can be installed correctly and still produce the wrong result when it receives an unexpected signal, uses different programming assumptions, or has not been tested under the same conditions present in the operating building.
Life-Safety Failures Become Operational Failures
The consequences of an integration problem can be serious. If dampers remain open during an alarm, the building may not respond as intended to smoke conditions. If access control locks doors during a fire drill, occupants and emergency responders may face an unnecessary barrier.
Michael recounts a building where access control doors locked during a fire drill because the system had been programmed to lock on a general alarm. From the perspective of the individual contractors, each piece of the configuration may have appeared reasonable. From the perspective of the fire department and the tenants outside in the cold, the building was not functioning correctly.
These events also affect the property manager’s credibility. Tenants generally do not care which contractor supplied the signal, wrote the sequence, or interpreted the specification. They want to know whether the building is safe, reliable, and ready to support their business. When the answer is unclear, trust begins to erode.
The Business Cost of Skipping Commissioning
Commissioning is often cut because it is viewed as an extra cost or because the construction schedule leaves no room for additional testing. Both pressures are understandable. Owners want to control budgets, and project teams want to open on time.
However, the short-term savings can create much larger costs after occupancy. Emergency troubleshooting is more expensive than planned verification. Contractors may be difficult to coordinate after demobilization. Tenants may experience downtime or disruption. Property managers may have to explain failures that should have been discovered before opening.
The episode also connects commissioning to business continuity. Michael describes a data center tenant that lost connectivity when a backup generator did not start correctly during a test. It was not a total failure, but it was enough to make the tenant nervous. That reaction is understandable: a tenant evaluating operational risk may view a small test failure as evidence of a larger reliability problem.
The financial impact can include emergency repairs, lost productivity, tenant complaints, delayed operations, and damage to the owner’s reputation. For an owner, commissioning is better understood as an investment in predictable building performance and tenant confidence.
How Owners Can Close the Gap
The solution begins before construction starts. James recommends demanding a commissioning plan as part of the contract rather than allowing it to become an afterthought during closeout. The plan should explicitly include integrated testing. It should define which systems will interact, what event will trigger the sequence, what response is expected, and who will observe and document the result.
Owners should also make sure their representative is present during integration tests. Reading that a test passed is not the same as seeing the building respond. The owner’s team should witness critical sequences, including whether a fire alarm shuts down HVAC equipment, whether doors unlock when they should, and whether backup power supports the systems that tenants depend on.
Finally, commissioning must be funded from the beginning. If it is treated as a reserve item, it becomes vulnerable when the project encounters cost overruns or schedule pressure. A protected commissioning budget signals that the owner cares about how the building operates after the contractors leave.
Three Practical Takeaways
- Require integrated testing. Do not accept component testing as proof that the building is ready. The plan must verify interactions between systems.
- Be present for the tests. Owners and their representatives need to observe the actual responses rather than relying only on reports.
- Budget for commissioning from day one. Treat it as an operational insurance policy that helps prevent downtime, tenant dissatisfaction, and emergency repairs.
Build for the Building’s Real Life
A building is not a collection of independent systems. It is a connected environment where life safety, HVAC, access control, power, networking, and automation influence one another. The commissioning gap appears when the project team proves that each piece works but never proves that the whole building works together.
Closing that gap requires planning, coordination, and the willingness to test beyond the minimum. If you are preparing for a new construction project or managing a building nearing turnover, this episode offers a useful framework for the questions to ask and the risks to avoid.
Listen to the full episode of Built, Wired & Secured for the conversation with James Rogers and Michael Harrington, and use the commissioning recommendations to guide your next project closeout. For a commissioning checklist, visit gdschechnology.com.