Method 04 · Assess
Technology Lifecycle & ADL Classification
Technologies pass through a lifecycle, and their strategic significance shifts along the way: from the emerging technology (unclear whether it will ever matter) via the pacing technology (beginning to change competition) to the key technology (deciding competitive advantage today) and on to the base technology (everyone has it, nobody wins with it any more). This classification after Arthur D. Little is one of the most useful tools of technology management — and one of the most sloppily applied. Because it is strictly relative to an industry: what is a key technology for an automotive supplier is irrelevant for a bank and long since base for a software house.
Procedure
- Name the frame of reference. For which industry, which market, which company is the classification made? Without a reference, every rating is worthless.
- Break down into sub-technologies. A bundle like "robotics" is too coarse; gripping, machine vision, motion planning, foundation models for motor control are separate entries.
- Judge competitive relevance. Per sub-technology and frame: does it differentiate today? Will it? Did it once?
- Classify. Emerging · pacing · key · base — with one sentence of justification.
- Repeat. The classification moves; pacing becomes key becomes base. Review annually.
Strengths
- Connects maturity with strategic significance — not just "how far" but "how important, for whom".
- Clear consequences: buy base, master key, build pacing, watch emerging.
- Established and readily understood in companies.
Limits
- Often applied absolutely instead of relative to an industry — then it misleads.
- The boundaries between stages are a matter of judgement.
- Does not capture interactions between technologies.
How we use it in our roadmaps
Here our roadmaps solve a problem on which generic roadmaps fail: a roadmap for "everyone" cannot classify absolutely, because the classification depends on the reader. That is why the absolute axis in our roadmaps is maturity (TRL plus adoption), and the ADL classification is reported as a matrix for three to four reference industries — for instance: "pacing for manufacturing, already key for software companies, emerging for financial services."
That is more honest than a seemingly objective rating, and more useful for the reader: they find their industry and see immediately whether they must watch, build or master. Block 3 of every roadmap.
References
- Arthur D. Little (1981): The Strategic Management of Technology. Cambridge, MA.
- Sommerlatte, T. & Deschamps, J.-P. (1985): Der strategische Einsatz von Technologien. In: Arthur D. Little (ed.): Management im Zeitalter der strategischen Führung. Gabler, Wiesbaden, 39–76.
- Gerpott, T. J. (2005): Strategisches Technologie- und Innovationsmanagement. 2nd ed., Schäffer-Poeschel, Stuttgart.