Technology Readiness Levels 101

I have heard about Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) since starting my academic career. We have used the scale to apply for EU grants and formalize communication with government entities. When I began managing projects in a young SME Biotech company, I didn't use the TRLs framework directly. I also managed my product development projects using similar concepts (for example, I used the term POC (Proof Of Concept) instead of TRL3-4). However, when discussing with external stakeholders, the mention of TRLs as a common language for project status became increasingly more frequent.

As my role evolved into Program Management, I began to appreciate the strategic value of assessing technology readiness. It became clear that this approach could significantly enhance our organization's ability to balance its R&D portfolio. Reflecting on these experiences and the growing adoption of TRLs, I am convinced that every technology professional, particularly those working with physical technologies, should be inspired to understand and apply this framework.

In this article, you will find a simplified explanation of TRLs with practical examples, use cases, assessment techniques, the concept of the valley of death, and my perspective and tips on using TRLs.

What are TRLs? A simplified explanation

Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) are a framework used to evaluate a technology's readiness and maturity. Each technology project undergoes an assessment and is assigned a level from TRL 1 (just an idea/concept) to TRL 9 (system operational and proven to work in its target environment).

Initially, TRLs were developed by NASA for aerospace technologies, but later, the scale was adapted and standardized for use in any technology sector. The European Union (EU) adopted the scale and generalized its use for European research projects. The 9-level system you find online mostly comes from the EU definition 2).

The nine levels are usually grouped into three practical phases: Research, Development, and Deployment.

Research: The technology goes from a basic idea or theoretical paper to a first experimental Proof of concept (POC).

Development: The technology enters the applied research phase and continues to be developed until the prototype system is built and demonstrated in a relevant environment (temperature, mechanical constraints… etc.). An example could be a new battery tested in a laboratory environment with high fidelity (as close as possible to its operating conditions).

Deployment: We shift from "technology" to "system," from a "relevant" to "real" environment, from a "prototype" to a finalized "system." We demonstrate how the "whole" works in its intended operational environment (e.g., a new material performing as intended in space, a new engine installed in an industrial car, and proven to work as intended on public roads).

Below a cited excellent step-by-step example on each Level (excerpt from DefenseBridge article (ref)):

• TRL 1: The discovery of a new material with potential use in energy storage.
• TRL 2: The development of a prototype battery using the new material.
• TRL 3: The demonstration of the battery prototype in a laboratory setting.
• TRL 4: The validation of the battery prototype in a controlled environment.
• TRL 5: Demonstrating the battery prototype in a realistic operational environment, such as a test vehicle.
• TRL 6: Integrating the battery prototype into a complete vehicle system.
• TRL 7 demonstrates the complete vehicle system in a realistic operational environment.
• TRL 8: The final testing and validation of the complete vehicle system.
• TRL 9: The deployment of the vehicle system for commercial or operational use.

Any technology that reaches TRL9 is deemed "ready" for commercialization or "mature".

Finally, there is some critical information to keep in mind when discussing or using TRLs:

• A TRL9 product doesn't necessarily mean that it's ready to manufacture. Similarly to technology maturity (TRLs), there is a manufacturing readiness level framework.
• A technology-ready product doesn't imply that there is a product market fit. In reality, market fit is considered before entering the Development phase (TRL 3-4) or as it is passed down to the private sector (TRL 6), and a much larger budget/resource is allocated.
• For some technologies or sectors, some steps can be completed in parallel (TRL 3 and 4, 5 and 6, 7 and 8)
• The transition from TRL 1 to 9 can take 6 months or 30 years, depending on technical complexity, funding, and other factors, such as market need.
• Although an adapted scale exists for all sectors, the generalized TRLs scale is most suitable for physical industries and technologies.
• Only a few projects make it to TRL9 (see the Valley of Death explanation below).

The valley of death from research ⇒ application:

As shown in the figure above, once the technology reaches TRL 4, it usually shifts from a POC in academic research labs to prototype testing in a relevant environment. Once the technology achieves TRL 6, the project is usually resumed by the private sector, and the risk/reward ratio justifies taking the investment risk. A mix of bad indicators prevents technologies from moving up the maturity gap (TRL 5 & 6): high investment need, unproven commercial viability, and remaining technology risk. As tackling these challenges and finding the right projects to continue requires an interdisciplinary approach, most projects are halted and do not move up the scale (TRL 5 & 6). This gap in execution and dramatic increase in discontinued projects is called the valley of death. Overcoming the 'valley of death' is a complex task, but it's not insurmountable. The success rate can be improved through better collaboration between industry and academia and a focus on Key Enabling Technologies (ref 5).

Technology Readiness Assessment (TRA):

Assessing a technology's readiness level through an evidence-based process leads to enhanced TRA outcomes for leadership (risk, schedule, cost). The output of this assessment provides insights into the technology's status and helps key stakeholders decide whether to continue or not the work. Once the key technological risks (or immaturity) are identified, a maturation plan can be developed to address them effectively (ref).

Independently from the assessment methods you'll use, you need first to define the success criteria and deliverables of each TRL and then perform the assessment. These outputs can be the same for all sectors or be highly specific, like the medical device sector (pre-clinical trials… etc.). Below are three resources that helped me understand the topic of TRLs assessment in more detail.

• If you need a simple, straightforward tool to assess your project's TRL, I recommend this assessment tool (link) from Industry, Science, and Economic Development Canada (ref 6).
• TRA Best Practices Guide by NASA (Link): This is a short but very informative guide that helps you quickly grasp and assess your technology's TRL through practical examples. Its use should be tailored to your specific technology and sector (ref 7).
• The Technology Readiness Assessment Guidebook from the US Department of Defense (link). It is a more comprehensive guide on the TRLs and TRA, its key concepts, assessment methodology, and its use in program management (ref 8).

TRL use cases:

Here is a list of use cases where TRLs might be a valuable metric and framework:

• Make an informed investment decision into a technology project
• Manage and coordinate technology development efforts within a program or organization. You can balance your portfolio based on key metrics like TRL, risk, economic potential, cost and schedule.
• Apply for funding (private or public sector). Example: EU grants use TRLs as a KPI.
• Evaluate the progress of your project and use TRLs as a phase gate milestone (Go or No-go).
• Identify key technological risks based on TRL assessment outcome. An objective assessment makes maturation effort more effective.

TRL limitations:

The TRLs are not a perfect framework that fits all technology usage. When you use TRLs, keep in mind the limitations below.

Non-linearity of the process: Even if metrics are well defined and robust assessment methods are used, a project might need to go back to a previous TRL if key aspects (like an unforseen technological risk or new acceptance criteria) appear during the process. The TRL level does not encompass these iterations, and its duration is highly variable.

Limited applicability (ref 3): TRLs do not capture the full range of factors that can impact a technology's success, such as market demand and regulatory barriers. For specific sectors like the medical device field, an adapted scale needs to be used (ref). The more "physical" the technology is, the more suitable TRLs are for it.

Subjectivity of TRL assessments (ref): TRL assessments can be subjective, as different evaluators may have different criteria for determining technology readiness and maturity. This can lead to variability in TRL assessments across various groups.

Personal insights and guidelines:

From what I have seen, TRLs are most often used by large structures (whether governmental or industry-related) to assess, monitor, and decide on a program level which projects remain and which to discontinue. In the context of smaller structures (like SMEs), most technology projects are involved in incremental innovations, and going through the TRL scale is straightforward as the effort to reach each level is understood from previous experience. The rigorous use of TRLs in these cases might not be needed.

When managing technology projects and programs in SME companies, you need to act fast and with limited resources while achieving a level of innovation to keep a competitive edge. Usually, the use of TRLs becomes simplified or as just a reference that indirectly affects the way you manage your projects.

However, I believe that using TRLs as an objective metric can help you monitor and improve your technology maturation effectiveness. Below are some key guidelines and recommendations for using TRLs.

• Allow your team some free time for TRL 1 to TRL 3. This is what Google did when they famously created the 20% bandwidth rule where each employee can work on any project 20% of his time.
• Keep in mind that a business's first goal is to make money. For that, focusing on the problem is more effective than the solution (tech push). TRLs is a technology-focused framework. While you work on developing your technology product, use other stakeholders' feedback to get market insights (industry leaders, sales, market research, etc.).
• Remember to prepare for manufacturing. Your technology might be mature, but manufacturing it might be much more costly than expected. When you exit the prototyping stage (TRL5), start thinking about manufacturing.
• Even if you don't have the luxury to go through rigorous assessments, use the quick assessment checklist or evaluate using the definition. It will still give you an objective insight into the current risk level, remaining work, and cost spent.
• TRL can be used as a stage gate milestone. For example, when you attain a POC stage, you can have a steering committee meeting and decide if the project moves forward, needs more resources or is discontinued.
• For your program, have a mix of projects based on their TRLs, risk, potential, and cost. Avoid low-reward projects as they have high opportunity costs.

References:

1. Ricardo Vargas explanation of TRLs and their applicability to Project Management (link)
2. Horizon 2020 (EU research grants) TRLs definition (link)
3. Understanding the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) Scale by DefenseBridge (link)
4. Using building simulation for moving innovations across the “Valley of Death”(link)
5. From NASA to EU: the evolution of the TRL scale in Public Sector Innovation (link)
6. Gov of Canada Technology Readiness Level (TRL) Assessment Tool (link)
7. TRA Best Practices Guide by NASA (Link)
8. The Technology Readiness Assessment Guidebook from the US Department of Defense (Link)