technology‑review.com

Method 06 · Assess

Maturity Assessment (TRL)

Technology Readiness Levels place a technology on a scale from 1 (basic principle observed) to 9 (proven in operation) and thereby create a shared language for "how far along is this, actually" across disciplines. The scale comes from spaceflight and is today standard in funding programmes, industry and procurement. Its strength is comparability; its danger is the illusion that a single number describes the maturity of an entire field — which is why we assess sub-technologies individually and state the confidence of each rating alongside it.

123456789 RESEARCHDEVELOPMENT · DEMODEPLOYMENT TRL 5 · confidence: medium The number alone deceives — the band shows how sure we are.
Nine levels — and a confidence band for every rating. At "TRL 5, confidence medium" the honest answer runs from 4 to 6.

Procedure

  1. Narrow down the sub-technology. TRL applies to a concrete system in a concrete environment, not to "quantum computing".
  2. Collect evidence. What has been demonstrated — in the lab, under real conditions, in operation? Only what is evidenced counts.
  3. Assign the level. 1–3 research, 4–6 development and demonstration, 7–9 deployment readiness. When in doubt, the lower level.
  4. State confidence. How robust is the rating — clear evidence, or manufacturer claims, or estimate?
  5. Add adoption. TRL says nothing about diffusion; a technology can be TRL 9 and still stuck in niches.

Strengths

  • Standardised and widely understood — from funding applications to board papers.
  • Forces the question of evidence over promises.
  • Combines well with roadmaps and ADL classification.

Limits

  • One number for an entire field is always wrong — only sub-technologies can be rated.
  • Says nothing about cost, scalability or market acceptance.
  • Invites false precision if confidence is not stated alongside.

How we use it in our roadmaps

Block 4 of every roadmap is a TRL table per sub-technology of the bundle — with a second column we consider as important as the first: the confidence of the rating. Where the roadmap is uncertain, it says so. Academic honesty is product quality here: a reader who knows where we are guessing can use our assessment better than one to whom we feign certainty everywhere.

TRL plus adoption together form the absolute axis of our roadmaps — the axis on which the industry-relative ADL classification (method 04) is hung.

References