When “Game Changers” Don’t Change the Game: The Local Law 97 Lesson

“Game changer.” It’s one of the most overused phrases in corporate real estate and proptech.

Every new platform, every new feature, every new strategy seems to carry the label. And yet, very few of these supposed “game changers” actually change anything.

Why? Because they seldom get adopted.

The Rulebook Analogy

Think about professional sports. Any rule change has the potential to alter the game completely, but only if it is adopted by the league and enforced by team owners.

Players might have preferences, but the real shift happens when the league says: “This is the new rule. Break it, and there are consequences.”

That is the moment when strategy changes, playbooks evolve, and the game itself transforms.

Corporate real estate works the same way.

A Case Study: Local Law 97

Local Law 97 in New York City had all the makings of a true game changer. It set emissions caps for buildings over 25,000 square feet, with steep fines for non-compliance starting in 2024 and even tougher limits set for 2030.

For a city whose buildings account for nearly 70% of greenhouse gas emissions, this was huge. For once, the scoreboard was clear: comply, or pay.

And yet, as deadlines approached, the city softened its stance.

• “Good faith” pathways were introduced, allowing owners to defer penalties if they demonstrated progress.

• Decarbonization Plans provided a way to push compliance further down the road, as long as milestones were filed.

• Reporting deadlines were extended, with optional grace periods stretching into late 2025.

And while the New York Court of Appeals upheld the law in May 2025, giving it legal certainty, the momentum had already shifted. What began as a high-stakes forcing function that would have driven the adoption of new technology and ways to managing our buildings was suddenly easier to defer.

Why This Matters for Corporate Real Estate

This is where so many “game changers” collapse in our industry. It is not the idea. It is not the technology. It is not even the initial excitement.

It is the follow-through.

Corporate real estate is notoriously slow to change, held back by:

• Long-term financial forecasts made to investors

• A culture of expense control and risk avoidance

• Complex stakeholder ecosystems where no one wants to be the first mover

So even when something could change the game, whether it is a law, a new technology, or a bold workplace strategy, often does not. Not because it lacks potential, but because adoption stalls.

The Real Difference Between “Could” and “Will”

Here is the lesson: There is a big difference between something that could change the game and something that will.

And that difference is adoption.

In sports, the league enforces the rule. In corporate real estate, it is leadership, investors, and governing bodies who decide if the “new rule” becomes real, even if it's just inside your portfolio.

Until then, our so-called game changers are just clever taglines, or great technologies, sitting on the sidelines.

A Call for Action

Many of you reading this are in positions to decide, or at the very least to advocate to those who can. That means you have influence over whether “game changers” stay on the sidelines or actually enter play.

If we want progress — for the industry, for sustainability, for the people who will inherit and operate the buildings we are designing today — then we need a bias toward action.

That means:

• Supporting bold initiatives even when they stretch budgets

• Pushing adoption when inertia is the easy option

• Advocating for policies, technologies, and practices that make real change, not just announcements

And let’s recognize something important: those of you who go first, who take on the challenge of adopting something new before the rest of the industry, play a crucial role.

Your successes, and yes, your struggles too, carve out a path that others can follow. You make it easier for the next company, the next portfolio manager, the next city to say, “Yes, we can do this too.”

If we want change, we cannot keep admiring ideas on the sidelines. We have to adopt them, enforce them, and live with them.

That is the only way a “game changer” actually changes the game.