Technology Readiness Levels at 40: a study of state-of-the-art use, challenges, and opportunities
The technology readiness level (TRL) scale was introduced by NASA in the 1970s as a tool for assessing the maturity of technologies during complex system development. TRL data have been used to make multi-million dollar technology management decisions in programs such as NASA's Mars Curiosity R...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | en_US |
| Published: |
SSRN
2015
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/96307 http://ssrn.com/abstract=2588524 |
| _version_ | 1826194873212993536 |
|---|---|
| author | Olechowski, Alison Eppinger, Steven D. Joglekar, Nitin |
| author_facet | Olechowski, Alison Eppinger, Steven D. Joglekar, Nitin |
| author_sort | Olechowski, Alison |
| collection | MIT |
| description | The technology readiness level (TRL) scale was introduced by NASA in the 1970s as a tool for assessing the maturity of technologies during complex system development. TRL data have been used to make multi-million dollar technology management decisions in programs such as NASA's Mars Curiosity Rover. This scale is now a de facto standard used for technology assessment and oversight in many industries, from power systems to consumer electronics. Low TRLs have been associated with significantly reduced timeliness and increased costs across a portfolio of US Department of Defense programs. However, anecdotal evidence raises concerns about many of the practices related to TRLs. We study TRL implementations based on semi-structured interviews with employees from seven different organizations and examine documentation collected from industry standards and organizational guidelines related to technology development and demonstration. Our findings consist of 15 challenges observed in TRL implementations that fall into three different categories: system complexity, planning and review, and validity of assessment. We explore research opportunities for these challenges and posit that addressing these opportunities, either singly or in groups, could improve decision processes and performance outcomes in complex engineering projects. |
| first_indexed | 2024-09-23T10:03:30Z |
| format | Article |
| id | mit-1721.1/96307 |
| institution | Massachusetts Institute of Technology |
| language | en_US |
| last_indexed | 2024-09-23T10:03:30Z |
| publishDate | 2015 |
| publisher | SSRN |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | mit-1721.1/963072019-04-11T07:18:52Z Technology Readiness Levels at 40: a study of state-of-the-art use, challenges, and opportunities Olechowski, Alison Eppinger, Steven D. Joglekar, Nitin Technology assessment Technology readiness Engineering management R&D management Project management Risk management The technology readiness level (TRL) scale was introduced by NASA in the 1970s as a tool for assessing the maturity of technologies during complex system development. TRL data have been used to make multi-million dollar technology management decisions in programs such as NASA's Mars Curiosity Rover. This scale is now a de facto standard used for technology assessment and oversight in many industries, from power systems to consumer electronics. Low TRLs have been associated with significantly reduced timeliness and increased costs across a portfolio of US Department of Defense programs. However, anecdotal evidence raises concerns about many of the practices related to TRLs. We study TRL implementations based on semi-structured interviews with employees from seven different organizations and examine documentation collected from industry standards and organizational guidelines related to technology development and demonstration. Our findings consist of 15 challenges observed in TRL implementations that fall into three different categories: system complexity, planning and review, and validity of assessment. We explore research opportunities for these challenges and posit that addressing these opportunities, either singly or in groups, could improve decision processes and performance outcomes in complex engineering projects. 2015-04-01T16:21:25Z 2015-04-01T16:21:25Z 2015-04-01 Article http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/96307 http://ssrn.com/abstract=2588524 en_US MIT Sloan School of Management Working Paper;5127-15 Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 United States http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/us/ application/pdf SSRN |
| spellingShingle | Technology assessment Technology readiness Engineering management R&D management Project management Risk management Olechowski, Alison Eppinger, Steven D. Joglekar, Nitin Technology Readiness Levels at 40: a study of state-of-the-art use, challenges, and opportunities |
| title | Technology Readiness Levels at 40: a study of state-of-the-art use, challenges, and opportunities |
| title_full | Technology Readiness Levels at 40: a study of state-of-the-art use, challenges, and opportunities |
| title_fullStr | Technology Readiness Levels at 40: a study of state-of-the-art use, challenges, and opportunities |
| title_full_unstemmed | Technology Readiness Levels at 40: a study of state-of-the-art use, challenges, and opportunities |
| title_short | Technology Readiness Levels at 40: a study of state-of-the-art use, challenges, and opportunities |
| title_sort | technology readiness levels at 40 a study of state of the art use challenges and opportunities |
| topic | Technology assessment Technology readiness Engineering management R&D management Project management Risk management |
| url | http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/96307 http://ssrn.com/abstract=2588524 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT olechowskialison technologyreadinesslevelsat40astudyofstateoftheartusechallengesandopportunities AT eppingerstevend technologyreadinesslevelsat40astudyofstateoftheartusechallengesandopportunities AT joglekarnitin technologyreadinesslevelsat40astudyofstateoftheartusechallengesandopportunities |