Smart Homes

<html><body>
Over the past decade smart home technology including the likes of Alexa has been on the rise. However, even before we started adding AI assistants via external devices, a number of blue-ribbon houses and apartments were incorporating in-built assistance.

For example, automated climate control, entertainment devices and appliances. As well as automatic monitoring and adjusting devices to save energy.

Now hitting its stride in terms of cost efficiency and effectiveness, smart home technology is the latest and greatest way to optimise your home to match your living habits and to potentially save you money.

Bensons Property Group's Liberty One is the latest development to feature smart home technology at the fore.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=709]

The Footscray development comprises 350 one and two-bedroom apartments starting from an affordable $396,000.

Designed by CHT Architects, the functional design boasts floor-to-ceiling windows, open-plan living space and private balconies, as well as amenities including a residents’ lounge, gym and outdoor cinema.

Also featuring car parking across four basement levels, the development supported by 10 retail tenancies at ground level.

Cutting edge smart home features include a fully integrated system allowing for seamless control over your appliances through your phone or tablet as well as keyless entry. 

Also included is an integrated intercom to smartphone app. Surveillance and security for your home has never been easier.

<a href="https://www.urban.com.au/new-apartments/liberty-one-1-warde-street-footscray" target="_blank"><img alt="" src="https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/liberty_one_outside.jpg"></a>

Located in the heart of Footscray's rapidly-evolving Joseph Road Precinct at 1 Warde Street, the building rises 24-storeys.

Before the end of March first home buyers can save upwards of $23,000 on a home in Liberty One

<h2>Other Developments Featuring Smart Home Technology:</h2>

[smartcode_project:default project_id=2929]

[smartcode_project:default project_id=3459]
</body></html>

Bensons Property Group's Liberty One is the latest development paving the way with premium smart home technology

jordan_55689

The rise of smart home technology in new Melbourne apartments

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
We have access to plenty of technology that can serve us by automating more of our daily lives, doing everything from <a href="https://www.safety.com/thermostats/" target="_blank">adjusting the temperature</a> of our homes to (eventually) <a href="https://money.cnn.com/2017/09/22/technology/future/walmart-home-delivery-groceries/index" target="_blank">putting groceries in our fridges</a>.
But do we want these advancements? And – importantly – do we trust them?
Our research, published earlier this year in the <a href="https://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/EJM-10-2017-0759" target="_blank" title="Rules of (household) engagement: technology as manager, assistant and intern">European Journal of Marketing</a>, looked at the roles technology plays in Australian homes. We found three main ways people assign control to, and trust in, their technology.
Most people still want some level of control. That’s an important message to developers if they want to keep increasing the uptake of smart home technology, <a href="https://www.statista.com/outlook/279/100/smart-home/worldwide" target="_blank">yet to reach 25%</a> penetration in Australia.
How smart do we want a home?
<a href="https://research.qut.edu.au/servicesocialmarketing/tools-techniques/smart-home-technologies/" target="_blank">Smart homes</a> are modern homes that have appliances or electronic devices that can be controlled remotely by the owner. Examples include lights controlled via apps, smart locks and security systems, and even smart coffee machines that remember your brew of choice and waking time.
But we still don’t understand consumer interactions with these technologies, and to speed up their adoption we need to know they type of value they can offer.
We conducted a set of studies in conjunction with <a href="https://www.citysmart.com.au/" target="_blank">CitySmart</a> and a group of distributors, and we asked people about their smart technology preferences in the context of electricity management (managing appliances and utility plans).
We conducted 45 household interviews involving 116 people across Queensland, New South Wales, Western Australia, and Tasmania. Then we surveyed 1,345 Australian households. The interviews uncovered and explored the social roles assigned to technologies, while the survey allowed us to collect additional information and find out how the broader Australian population felt about these technology types.
We found households attribute social roles and rules to smart home technologies. This makes sense: the study of anthropomorphism tells us <a href="https://static1.squarespace.com/static/51e3f4ede4b053e5f0062efd/t/51f7e1c7e4b06892daa73fe5/1375199687213/making-sense-by-making-sentient.pdf" target="_blank">we tend to humanise things we want to understand</a>. We humanise in order to trust (remember <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/22/18276923/microsoft-clippy-microsoft-teams-stickers-removal" target="_blank">Clippy</a>, the Microsoft paperclip with whom we all had a <a href="https://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/design/microsofts-clippy-was-one-of-the-most-hated-features-ever-but-distance-makes-the-heart-grow-fonder/news-story/772605472436e0f6860fd04e4cf1b6dd" target="_blank">love-hate relationship</a>?).
These social roles and rules determine whether (or how) households will adopt the technologies.
Tech plays three roles
Most people want technology to serve them (95.6% of interviewees, about 19 out of 20). Those who didn’t want any technology were classified as “resisters” and made up less than 5% of the respondents.
We found the role that technology can play in households tended to fall into one of three categories, the intern, the assistant and the manager:
<ul>
<li>
the intern (passive technology) Technology exists to bring me information, but shouldn’t be making any decisions on its own. Real-life example: <a href="https://www.switchyourthinking.com/our-projects/energy-efficiency-tips/" target="_blank">Switch your Thinking</a> provides an SMS-based tip service. This mode of use was preferred in 22-35% of households.
</li>
<li>
the assistant (interactive technology) Technology should not only bring me information, but add value by helping me make decisions or interact. Real-life example: <a href="https://www.ergon.com.au/retail/residential/account-options/homesmart" target="_blank">Homesmart from Ergon</a> provides useful data to support consumers in their decisions; including remotely controlling appliances or monitoring electricity budget. This mode of use was preferred in 41-51% of households.
</li>
<li>
the manager (proactive technology) Technology should analyse information and make decisions itself, in order to make my life more efficient. Real-life example: <a href="https://international.tibber.com/?dialog=smart-analyses" target="_blank">Tibber</a>, which learns your home’s electricity-usage pattern and helps you make adjustments. This mode of use was preferred in 22-24% of households.
</li>
</ul>
Who’s the boss?
According to our study, while smart technology roles can change, the customer always remains the CEO. As CEO, they determine whether full control is retained or delegated to the technology.
For example, while two consumers might install a set of smart lights, one may engage by directly controlling lights via the app, while the other delegates this to the app – allowing it to choose based on sunset times when lights should be on.
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/267222/original/file-20190402-177167-1su1agi.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
Roles for consumer and smart technology - the consumer always remains the CEO, but technology can be viewed as an intern, assistant, or manager. Natalie Sketcher, Visual Designer
Notably, <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/life/are-we-really-that-busy-time-poor/10231066">time pressure</a> was evident as justification for each of the three options. Passive technology saved time by not wasting it on fiddling with smart tech. Interactive technology gave information and controlled interactions for busy families. Proactive technology relieved overwhelmed households from managing their own electricity.
All households had clear motivation for their choices.
Households that chose passive technology were motivated by simplicity, cost-effectiveness and privacy concerns. One study participant in this group said: "Less hassle. Don’t like tech controlling my life."
Households prioritising interactive technology were looking for a balance of convenience and control, technology that provides: "A good support but allows me to maintain overall control and decision-making."
Households keen on proactive technology wanted set and forget abilities to allow the household to focus on the more important things in life. They sought: "Having the process looked after and managed for us as we don’t have the time to do it ourselves."
This raises the question: why did we see such differences in household preference?
Trust in tech
According to our research, this comes down to the relationship between trust, risk, and the <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-319-47437-3_95" target="_blank" title="Let the User Decide! User Preferences Regarding Functions, Apps, and Interfaces of a Smart Home and a Service Robot">need for control</a>. It’s just that these motivations that are expressed differently in different households.
While one household sees delegating their choices as a safe bet (that is, trusting the technology to save them from the risk of electricity over-spend), another would see retaining all choices as the true expression of being in control (that is, believing humans should be trusted with decisions, with technology providing input only when asked).
This is not unusual, nor is this the first study to find the importance of <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1094670512474841" target="_blank" title="The Impact of Endogenous Motivations on Adoption of IT-Enabled Services: The Case of Transformative Services in the Energy Sector">our sense of trust and risk</a> in making technology decisions.
It’s not that consumers don’t want advancements to serve them - they do - but this working relationship requires clear roles and ground rules. Only then can there be trust.
For smart home technology developers, the message is clear: households will continue to expect control and customisation features so that the technology serves them – either as an intern, an assistant, or a manager – while they remain the CEO.
If you’re interested to discover your working relationship with technology, complete this three-question <a href="https://www.onlineassessmenttool.com/what-s-your-relationship-with-technology/assessment-80899" target="_blank">online quiz</a>.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/114510/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
Kate Letheren, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Queensland University of Technology
Rebekah Russell-Bennett, Social Marketing Professor, School of Advertising, Marketing and Public Relations, Queensland University of Technology
Rory Mulcahy, Lecturer of Marketing, University of the Sunshine Coast
Ryan McAndrew, Social Marketer &amp; Market Researcher, Queensland University of Technology
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/control-cost-and-convenience-determine-how-australians-use-the-technology-in-their-homes-114510" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Control, cost and convenience determine how Australians use the technology in their homes

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Ever wondered what all the fuss is about when it comes to smart homes? You’re not alone.
While the idea of networked entertainment systems, automated security, mood lights and voice-controlled thermostats is popular, uptake of smart home technologies has been lower than anticipated.
Some researchers say this is because of affordability and installation challenges. Others claim it’s because smart home technologies aren’t that desirable or useful.
New research we’ve released today identifies the benefits and problems smart home adopters actually experience, and compares them to the technological solutions on offer. Our report shows that while living in a smart home is appealing for early adopters, it also throws up some unexpected challenges.
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/XzZgnII0b64?wmode=transparent&amp;start=24" frameborder="0" width="440" height="260"></iframe> 
The 3Ps
The smart home market is growing rapidly, but the industry is still frequently dubbed a “solution in search of a problem”. Interest in smart home technologies can be dismissed as “boys and their toys” because men are more often the instigators for bringing smart home technology into the home and managing their operation.
Current US industry sales figures show consumers of smart home devices are slightly more likely to be male (57%), while “smart home obsessives” (those who customise and fine-tune every aspect of their home automation systems beyond standard off-the-shelf offerings) are typically men. But women – especially those 18-35 – are increasingly interested in smart home technology.
We visited 31 households that were early adopters of smart home technology and interviewed 42 people for between one and 2.5 hours. We found three primary categories of use:
<ul>
<li>security devices to facilitate care and protection</li>
<li>automated or multitasking tools to improve productivity</li>
<li>aesthetic and ambience enhancements that provide pleasure.</li>
</ul>
We refer to these as “the 3Ps”: protection, productivity and pleasure.
Protection
In our study, technology users expressed a desire to care for and protect the home and its occupants. Smart cameras installed in the home allowed adults to monitor dependants – children and, increasingly, pets – while they were away.
These strategies of protection were also used in the homes of people living with disabilities. Smart technology provided safeguards against potential vulnerabilities by, for example, allowing people to remotely unlock doors for visitors, or monitor the room temperature and health of children with special needs.
Productivity
A commonly identified benefit of smart home technologies was their ability to generate “small conveniences” that reduced the physical or mental effort involved in daily tasks. These efficiencies allowed householders to offload the burden of mundane activities.
Automated or voice activated lights, heating, doors or blinds became significant and normal parts of everyday life. Householders doubted whether they could live well without these conveniences once they become accustomed to the benefits.
Smart home technologies also improved productivity through coordination and multitasking. In particular, voice assistants, such as Amazon’s Alexa and Google Home, freed people’s hands to do other tasks, making households feel more productive.
One research participant was living with a disability that made small everyday tasks extremely difficult and exhausting. She described productivity as a way of conserving her energy for other tasks, making smart technologies “absolutely brilliant and invaluable” for people with disabilities.
Pleasure
Living in a smart home and experimenting with new devices also provided considerable amounts of fun and pleasure. Smart lighting and speakers were a major source of this enjoyment, generating sensory experiences to affect ambience and mood. Automated water features also generated sensory pleasure.
We found householders created a relaxing and pleasurable home environment to replicate the experience of going on holiday or living in a resort. Home cinemas, audiovisual systems, pools, and outdoor and indoor entertainment areas were all common pursuits seeking this vacation-style pleasure.
For the predominantly male smart home initiators we interviewed, pleasure also came from implementing and “tinkering” with their smart systems. Further enjoyment ensued when sharing these smart devices and experiences, and showing them off to others.
And the pitfalls
While our research showed the potential benefits of smart home technologies, it also revealed a few pitfalls that are likely to limit market growth.
Those adopting smart home technologies for the care of others are usually confident in their knowledge and skills in setting up new technology, but expressed concern for the security or privacy of other less aware or capable households.
Somewhat ironically, smart home technologies can undermine productivity by creating extra “digital housekeeping” in the home. This included researching and setting up new devices, updating and synchronising software, fixing problems or glitches, or just tidying up the various cables and technologies required to keep it all running. Most of this extra work was being done by men, but it was also viewed as a pleasurable hobby.
The further downside of smart home technology is that potential new and enhanced forms of entertainment and ambience increase household energy consumption. This has a cost to both the householder and planetary resources as a whole.
Finally, householders want to integrate smart technologies into their home to increase its value and desirability to others. While this is easy for homeowners, the ability of renters to make changes to the home are very restricted.
Jenny Kennedy, Postdoctoral research fellow, RMIT University
Larissa Nicholls, Research Fellow, Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University
Paula Arcari, Research Officer, Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University
Yolande Strengers, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University
The authors would like to acknowledge Melissa Gregg, Principal Engineer and Research Director of the Client Computing Group at Intel, for her contributions to this article.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/102837/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/one-reason-people-install-smart-home-tech-is-to-show-off-to-their-friends-102837" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

One reason people install smart home tech is to show off to their friends

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/82252/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
“Smart” home control devices promise to do many things, including helping households reduce their energy bills.
Devices such as “connected” lightbulbs and smart plugs let you operate or automate lights and other appliances from your smartphone, and are widely available from major retailers and online. 
They are one of many innovative technologies advocated by the energy sector, and the recent Finkel Review of the energy market, to help consumers manage their energy use.
However, our research published today suggests that these devices are not the “easy” answer to energy management. In our trial, we found that households can use them in ways that increase energy use rather than reduce it, and that many people find them too complicated to get up and running.
<h2>Smart home techs on trial</h2>
In our study, funded by Energy Consumers Australia, we supplied 46 volunteer households in Victoria and South Australia with a couple of market-leading smart control devices to try out. We made sure we included a broad range of households – not just tech-savvy, early adopter types.
The results were surprising. A quarter of the households didn’t even attempt to install the devices; another quarter tried but failed to install them, and a further quarter successfully installed them but then abandoned them because they were considered inconvenient or not useful. 
That left one quarter who were actively using the devices on an ongoing basis.
Unsuccessful installations weren’t just thwarted by the devices themselves or by a lack of persistence or knowledge. Householders who tried but gave up on the devices did so for a range of reasons, including smartphone compatibility issues, unreliable WiFi or Internet access, forgotten passwords, device app problems including recurring error messages, and concern over requests to hand over personal information.
<h2>Who used the devices?</h2>
The people most likely to successfully set up and continue using the devices were technology enthusiasts – and most often male. This is consistent with previous studies which have found that men are more likely to be interested in home automation.
Energy-vulnerable households (those at higher risk of difficulty paying energy bills) were more interested in the devices than “regular” households, possibly because they placed greater value on the promised energy savings, or had more time to persist with the installation process. However, energy-vulnerable households are less likely to have the necessary technology infrastructure to use smart home control devices successfully, such as high-end smartphones and fast, reliable home internet connection.
Older participants in our study (those over 55) rarely used the devices. Households with children were concerned about the entry of more digital technology into their lives. Smart home control can also be inconvenient if some occupants continue to use the manual switches on lights or appliances (such as children without their own smartphones), as this can deactivate smart control for the rest of the household.
<h2>Lifestyle improvements beat energy savings</h2>
The households we interviewed were very interested in the potential for smart home control to improve their lifestyles, through improved security and safety, better comfort, conveniences such as turning lights off from bed, and aesthetic features such as “mood lighting”.
Yet while our study did not measure energy consumption, it was clear from the results that the ways households were using (or wanted to use) their devices could both decrease and increase energy consumption. 
While some households reduced the operating time of lights or small appliances, others used smart control to increase their operating time, for instance by switching their heater on before getting home. 
Pre-heating or pre-cooling homes, or running appliances when not at home to give the house a “lived-in” look intended to deter burglars, can be beneficial for health, comfort or well-being but can also increase energy consumption.
Tellingly, no household in our study used their smart devices to shift the timing of their energy use, even though most said their electricity rates were cheaper at night. When asked if smart plugs could help shift energy use to off-peak periods, many respondents said they did not see these devices as a necessary or convenient way to do it. They were more interested in simple timers and automation functions on the appliances themselves.
<h2>Doing more with smart home control</h2>
Six of the 46 households involved in our trial said they were interested in doing more with smart home control. However, they were mainly interested in lifestyle improvements rather than saving energy. This is consistent with the way these products are being marketed to households by technology companies.
Our findings are also consistent with another recent trial of smart home technologies in the UK. That study found that participants made either limited or no use of similar devices to manage their energy use. Like us, the research team raised concerns about the potential for smart control to generate new forms of energy demand.
These findings call for more caution in how smart home control is promoted by the energy sector. We need to be realistic about how these products are marketed, how the media influences the way the products are used, and how the other benefits of smart home control may affect home energy consumption.
The extent of technical and usability issues also needs to be acknowledged. There is a real risk that householders could spend considerable time and money on devices that don’t deliver energy savings. The devices are not equally accessible for everyone, and older users in particular might need help in using them effectively.
The danger is in assuming that lower power bills can come neatly packaged in a box – the reality, as always, is more complicated.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/yolande-strengers-15350" target="_blank">Yolande Strengers</a> is Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/larissa-nicholls-109087" target="_blank">Larissa Nicholls</a> is Research Fellow, RMIT University.
Both are authors for <a href="https://theconversation.com/au" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

Smart Homes

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Smart Homes

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News