Technology Readiness Levels: The Hidden Language of Innovation

Part 1 of the Bridge Connect Series: “From Lab to Leadership”

Executive Summary

In a world where innovation cycles are accelerating and technological risk is the new strategic currency, organisations need a common language to navigate uncertainty. The concept of Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) provides precisely that: a structured framework to measure, compare, and communicate how mature a given technology really is - from initial concept to operational deployment.

Originally conceived by NASA to manage aerospace risk, TRLs have evolved into a global reference tool spanning telecommunications, defence, energy, and critical infrastructure. Yet their use is still misunderstood outside the engineering world.

For boards, investors, and policymakers, TRLs represent not just a technical checklist - but a way to align strategy, funding, and governance with innovation reality.

1. The Origins of a Universal Scale

The TRL framework was first developed in the 1970s at NASA to bring order to a problem that every innovator faces: how to quantify the maturity of a technology before committing to full-scale production or mission deployment.

Space programmes faced catastrophic consequences if new technologies were not sufficiently proven. NASA’s nine-level scale — from Basic principles observed (TRL 1) to Flight-proven through successful mission operations (TRL 9) — provided a shared vocabulary across engineers, managers, and funders.

By the early 2000s, this model had been adopted far beyond aerospace. The European Commission, the U.S. Department of Defense, and UK agencies such as Innovate UK and the Department for Transport now apply TRLs to everything from satellite constellations to hydrogen fuels. The reason is simple: TRLs make innovation measurable, comparable, and auditable.

2. TRL as a Common Language Across Industries

Today, TRLs underpin innovation governance across the critical sectors Bridge Connect advises — telecoms, transport, energy, and defence.

• Telecommunications and FRMCS:Future Railway Mobile Communication System (FRMCS), the successor to GSM-R, is a prime example. In its early R&D phase, FRMCS prototypes were assessed at TRL 4–5 (component validation in lab). As cross-border pilots and field trials progress, the system moves toward TRL 7–8 (system prototype demonstrated in operational environment). Full certification and deployment mark TRL 9.For investors, understanding this trajectory reveals not only technical maturity but also the degree of regulatory and commercial risk still attached.

• Quantum and Cybersecurity:Post-quantum encryption standards, under development at ETSI and NIST, are mostly in TRL 4–6 territory — proven in controlled environments but not yet integrated into telco or critical infrastructure stacks. A board that treats them as “ready to roll” misunderstands the gap between lab validation and field-grade reliability.

• Energy and Utilities:In hydrogen and nuclear fusion R&D, TRLs guide investment prioritisation by showing which technologies are near-commercial (TRL 8–9) versus speculative (TRL 1–3).This helps avoid the “valley of death” where promising prototypes fail due to lack of industrial readiness.

3. Understanding the TRL Scale (1–9)

Here’s how the standard TRL progression works, simplified and translated into language accessible to non-technical decision-makers:

TRL	Description	Business/Board Interpretation
1	Basic principles observed	Conceptual, unproven science; high uncertainty
2	Technology concept formulated	Early research idea; potential identified but no prototype
3	Experimental proof of concept	Demonstrated feasibility; may attract seed or grant funding
4	Component validation in lab	Core functionality proven; engineering prototypes begin
5	Component validation in relevant environment	Subsystems tested; integration challenges surface
6	System/subsystem model or prototype demonstrated in relevant environment	Pilot-ready stage; potential for strategic partnership
7	System prototype in operational environment	Pre-commercial; credible demonstration under real conditions
8	Actual system completed and qualified	Product or service ready for operational deployment
9	System proven in operational environment	Fully deployed; performance validated and supportable

At each level, risk shifts from technical to commercial to operational. Boards that confuse these risk domains often make poor capital allocation decisions — funding unready technologies as if they were proven, or ignoring high-potential innovations because their TRL score looks low without context.

4. Why TRLs Matter for Boards and Investors

Executives often rely on project status reports filled with technical jargon that obscure the true readiness of an innovation. TRLs simplify this.

For boards, TRLs provide a governance lens:

• Strategic alignment: Do the technologies being pursued match the organisation’s risk appetite and strategic horizon?

• Capital discipline: Are we funding TRL 4-level prototypes with TRL 8-level expectations?

• Accountability: Can project teams clearly explain the evidence behind their stated TRL?

For investors, TRLs serve as a due-diligence filter:

• Early-stage (TRL 1–4): speculative, but with asymmetric upside if the science holds.

• Mid-stage (TRL 5–7): transitional; often the “valley of death” between R&D and market entry.

• Late-stage (TRL 8–9): lower risk but lower return; suited to infrastructure or deployment-scale investors.

Bridge Connect’s advisory work often sits precisely at this junction — helping clients and boards translate TRL maturity into strategic timing, partnership models, and investment pacing.

5. TRLs in Policy, Regulation, and Procurement

Governments and regulators increasingly embed TRL assessments into funding calls and public procurement.

• EU Horizon Europe classifies projects by TRL starting point and target TRL for completion.

• UK Innovate and DfT apply TRLs to determine grant eligibility and technology transfer readiness.

• Defence and Space Agencies (NATO, ESA) require TRL documentation for new systems integration.

In telecoms, this is becoming relevant as public-private partnerships (PPPs) expand into areas like satellite connectivity, 6G research, and resilient terrestrial navigation.

Contracting authorities must judge whether a bidder’s technology is truly “ready,” or merely a promising prototype dressed up for funding.

The TRL framework provides the objective scaffolding to make those calls.

6. The Pitfalls: What TRLs Do Not Tell You

While TRLs are invaluable, they have limits.A TRL 8 technology may be technically ready but commercially or operationally immature.

TRLs measure technical maturity, not:

• Market readiness — customer adoption, pricing, ecosystem integration

• Manufacturing readiness — supply chain and quality control

• Regulatory readiness — compliance, certification, spectrum or safety approval

• Integration readiness — compatibility with legacy systems and standards

To mitigate these blind spots, many organisations complement TRLs with adjacent frameworks such as MRL (Manufacturing Readiness Level), IRL (Integration Readiness Level), and CRL (Commercial Readiness Level). These extensions will be explored in Part 3 of this series.

7. TRLs and the Innovation “Valley of Death”

Between TRL 4 and 7 lies the danger zone: the valley of death.Here, technologies move from controlled lab environments to real-world conditions — often requiring capital investment without guaranteed results.

Typical challenges include:

• Prototype reliability issues under operational stress

• Lack of interoperability with existing infrastructure

• Absence of a clear regulatory path

• Funding gaps between research grants and commercial finance

Bridge Connect often encounters clients at this precise stage - where technical promise meets strategic uncertainty. Independent TRL assessments, coupled with stakeholder mapping and partnership structuring, can help bridge the gap to scalable deployment.

8. Applying TRLs to Telecoms and Critical Infrastructure

Let’s contextualise TRLs through two real-world technology journeys.

Example 1: Non-Terrestrial Networks (NTN) Integration

In 2019, satellite-to-mobile trials were effectively at TRL 5 - proven in lab and limited field pilots.

By 2024, SpaceX and AST SpaceMobile reached TRL 7–8, demonstrating continuous direct-to-device calls on live operator spectrum.

Yet despite the headlines, full TRL 9 integration (scalable, resilient, regulatory-approved) remains elusive. Spectrum coexistence, antenna optimisation, and latency mitigation all remain under validation. For investors, understanding this TRL context avoids premature exuberance.

Example 2: FRMCS and the Future of Rail Connectivity

GSM-R, the legacy system, sits comfortably at TRL 9. FRMCS, still under multi-country trials, is between TRL 6–8.Its success depends not just on technology maturity but on spectrum harmonisation, cybersecurity assurance, and interoperability testing — factors not captured by TRL alone.Boards that recognise this nuance can plan migrations with realistic timeframes and budgets.

9. TRLs as a Bridge Between Engineers and Executives

Perhaps the greatest value of TRLs lies not in the numbers, but in the dialogue they create.Engineers can articulate risk and progress in a format boards understand.Boards, in turn, can ask the right questions:

• What evidence supports our TRL assessment?

• What remains to be demonstrated in the intended environment?

• How does this readiness align with funding milestones?

• Are we comparing apples with apples across different projects?

Used properly, TRLs elevate the quality of strategic conversation — shifting from opinion to evidence, and from enthusiasm to accountability.

10. The Strategic Takeaway for Bridge Connect Clients

For Bridge Connect’s ecosystem of telecom, infrastructure, and investor clients, understanding TRLs is no longer optional.It is central to risk governance, capital efficiency, and technology portfolio strategy.

Executives who master TRL literacy can:

• De-risk R&D pipelines and procurement processes

• Benchmark technologies objectively across vendors

• Time market entry to align with real-world readiness

• Improve investor communication and confidence

As technology lifecycles compress and hybrid systems (AI, quantum, NTN) emerge, TRLs become the organising principle behind strategic innovation management.

Conclusion

Technology Readiness Levels are far more than an engineering metric.They are a strategic tool for leadership — one that bridges technical detail with board-level accountability.

In the next article, Bridge Connect explores how TRLs can be operationalised within major programmes — linking technical maturity to investment gates, procurement stages, and innovation governance.

Every innovation journey needs a compass. Technology Readiness Levels provide one - a shared language bridging engineers, investors, and policymakers.