If you’re a tech developer or manager, you’ve probably heard of the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) scale. It’s a way of assessing and communicating the maturity and readiness of a technology.
But is it really that useful, or is it just a load of TRL?
What is TRL?
TRL is a method for estimating the maturity of technologies during the acquisition phase of a program, first developed by NASA in the 1970s. It enables consistent, uniform discussions of technical maturity across different types of technology.
Basically, it’s a way of saying “how ready is this tech?”
How does TRL work?
TRL is determined during a technology readiness assessment (TRA) that examines program concepts, technology requirements and demonstrated technology capabilities.
TRLs are based on a scale from 1 to 9, with 9 being the most mature technology.
- TRL 1: Basic principles observed and reported
- TRL 2: Technology concept and/or application formulated
- TRL 3: Analytical and experimental critical function and/or characteristic proof-of-concept
- TRL 4: Component and/or breadboard validation in the laboratory environment
- TRL 5: Component and/or breadboard validation in the relevant environment
- TRL 6: System/subsystem model or prototype demonstration in a relevant environment
- TRL 7: System prototype demonstration in an operational environment
- TRL 8: Actual system completed and qualified through test and demonstration
- TRL 9: Actual system proven through successful mission operations
The Pros of TRLs
So, what are the benefits of using TRLs in technology development? Here are a few:
- Common Language: TRLs provide a common language and framework for describing the status and progress of technology development across different domains and disciplines.
- Risk Assessment: TRLs help to identify gaps and risks in technology development and to plan appropriate actions and resources to address them.
- Collaboration: TRLs facilitate communication and collaboration among technology developers, managers, customers, stakeholders, and investors.
- Objective Criteria: TRLs support the decision-making and prioritization of technology development activities and investments based on objective criteria.
- Comparison: TRLs enable benchmarking and comparison of technology performance and readiness across different projects and programs.
The Cons of TRLs
But of course, there are also some limitations and challenges to consider:
- Feasibility, Viability, and Desirability: TRLs are insufficient to assess the feasibility, viability, or desirability of a technology or solution. Other factors, such as market demand, customer needs, user acceptance, cost-benefit analysis, regulatory compliance, ethical implications, environmental impact, etc., must also be considered.
- Relevance to Different Technologies or Domains: TRLs are not always applicable or relevant to all technologies or domains. Some technologies may have different levels of complexity, uncertainty, or interdependence that require different or additional measures of maturity or readiness.
- Consistency and Comparability: TRLs are not always consistent or comparable across different organizations or sectors. Different definitions, interpretations, or implementations of TRLs may exist depending on each organization or sector’s context, culture, or standards.
- Difficulty in Determining or Verifying: TRL assessment may require subjective judgment, expert opinion, evidence collection, testing, validation, verification, etc., which may be costly, time-consuming, or challenging to perform or document.
To TRL or Not to TRL?
So, are TRLs handy tools for tech development or just a load of TRL?
The answer, as with most things in life, is somewhere in between.
TRLs can be a helpful tool for assessing and communicating the maturity and readiness of a technology. They provide a common language and framework for describing the status and progress of technology development and can help identify gaps and risks in technology development.
However, TRLs are not the be-all and end-all of technology development.
They are insufficient to assess the feasibility, viability, or desirability of a technology or solution, and they may not always be applicable or relevant to all technologies or domains.
Therefore, it’s important to use TRLs in conjunction with other methods and metrics that suit the specific needs and goals of each technology project or program. Regular updates and reviews are also necessary to ensure that TRLs continue to reflect the dynamic nature of technology development.
So, to TRL or not to TRL?
That is the question.
But with the right mindset and approach, TRLs can be a helpful tool for navigating the complex and risky world of technology development.