Beyond the Audit: Diagnosing AI Project Risk: A Socio-Technical Analysis of the Compliance-Resistance Gap

Published in Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management (ECAM). Despite the technical maturity of Nearly Zero Energy Building (NZEB) solutions, policy debates frequently stall due to deep institutional polarization between market-oriented and state-oriented priorities. Standard multi-criteria decision-making frameworks often force a "contested average" consensus that conceals these underlying structural conflicts. In this study, we introduce the Conflict-Aware Diagnostic Framework (CADF), shifting the governance focus from consensus-forcing to conflict diagnosis. By integrating Delphi (n=60), Social Network Analysis (n=30), and AHP—rigorously cross-validated against DEMATEL, BWM, SMAA-2, and ANP (Spearman's rs = 1.000)—the model maps policy polarization and identifies "bridge policies" that align competing institutional logics into actionable, sequenced governance pathways. Key Contributions: • Diagnoses why technical NZEB consensus fails in practice due to a clash between market-oriented incentives (preferred by builders) and regulatory mandates (emphasized by policymakers). • Replaces artificial consensus with a 4-stage diagnostic framework to evaluate policy friction. • Pinpoints strategic "bridge policies" that mediate between economic efficiency and public accountability to build realistic decarbonization roadmaps. Co-author: Dr. Mehmet Nurettin Uğural Publisher: Emerald Publishing