[Skip to content](https://academy.innguma.com/en/analysis-foresight-and-anticipation/technologies-and-innovation-activity-telling-interest-capability-and-adoption-apart/#contenido) Lesson 5.2 · Learning path 05 # Technologies and innovation activity: telling interest, capability and adoption apart Which indications let you estimate how a technology is evolving without confusing publications, patents and real deployment? **You take away** a technology radar with an uncertainty map and update criteria. ≈ 40 min · Advanced [Do the practice](https://academy.innguma.com/en/analysis-foresight-and-anticipation/technologies-and-innovation-activity-telling-interest-capability-and-adoption-apart/#hazlo-tu-radar-tecnologico-en-30-minutos)[Exercise](https://academy.innguma.com/en/analysis-foresight-and-anticipation/technologies-and-innovation-activity-telling-interest-capability-and-adoption-apart/#compruebalo)[Read the lesson](https://academy.innguma.com/en/analysis-foresight-and-anticipation/technologies-and-innovation-activity-telling-interest-capability-and-adoption-apart/#tecnologia-no-equivale-a-producto) In 1 minute Technology is not the same as product. ## Technology is not the same as product In technology watch it is usual to observe scientific publications, patent families, prototypes, demonstrations, standards, funding, pilot tests and first installations. These are different kinds of evidence. A publication may indicate exploration; a patent, protection of an invention; a pilot, learning under specific conditions. **None of them automatically amounts to technical scalability or commercial viability.** Assessing a technology requires several questions at once: what problem does it solve? Under what conditions was it tested? What performance was measured? What limitations do the authors acknowledge? What resources and supply chains does it require? What alternatives compete with it? Who has the industrial capacity to adopt it? ## A radar with separate dimensions I would not reduce the radar to a single «maturity» score. I would use at least five dimensions, with explicit indicators and sources: - **Technical performance:** reproducible tests, conditions, results and comparators. - **Industrial maturity:** operation in real conditions: pilots with data, availability, maintenance and scale-up. - **Adoption:** pilots, purchases, operating installations and observable recurrence. - **Ecosystem and supply:** players, alliances, suppliers, and supply and scale-up capacity. - **Strategic fit:** connection with the organisation’s problems, capabilities and decisions. In addition, a cross-cutting field, **environment, regulation and constraints** (standards, norms, infrastructure and restrictions that affect all dimensions), records conditions that are not scored as a dimension but can change the reading of all of them. It is the same model as the R12 template and the L07 Lab tool. Equivalences with other common formulations: «technical evidence» or «performance» correspond to technical performance; «industrial operation», to industrial maturity; «supply chain», to ecosystem and supply; «suitability» or «Company A fit», to strategic fit. Each dimension is rated on a qualitative scale: **solid / partial / insufficient / not assessable** (when there are no data), not with a false objective score. TRL scales can be useful in certain contexts, but they require a definition and evidence appropriate to the use; they do not replace commercial assessment. Five dimensions, the same as in R12 and L07, with a qualitative rating; environment, regulation and constraints are recorded as a cross-cutting field. Interactive · Radar ### Your technology radar Rate each dimension on the qualitative scale. Try the Company A example and notice how a dimension without data is represented. Five-dimension technology radar with a scale of solid, partial, insufficient or not assessable. ## What patents can and cannot tell you Patents help explore lines of development, applicants, jurisdictions, families and claims. However, **the publication date differs from the filing date**; protection depends on legal status and jurisdiction; a search result is not in itself a freedom-to-operate analysis. Nor does the absence of a patent you found mean a technology is free of rights. Industrial property decisions call for specialist assessment. Nor should «more patents» be equated with «better technology»: patenting behaviour varies between sectors, organisations and countries. Comparison requires normalising scope, periods, families and search strategy. Interactive · Decide ### What can a patent let you conclude? Decide whether each statement is defensible on the basis of patent information. Activity: decide whether each statement about patents is justified. Company A case · simulation Fictional case ## Company A case: three different pieces of evidence A fictional publication presents promising results on a test bench; another source describes a pilot installation; a player files a patent application. All three facts point to activity, but **they do not answer the same question**. The team separates experimental performance, capacity to operate in an industrial environment and industrial property. It then asks what evidence is missing to assess total cost, maintenance and integration constraints. Educational simulation: fictional information and organisations. Do it yourself ## Do it yourself · A technology radar in 30 minutes Select a technology. Create five rows corresponding to the dimensions above. For each one note an observation, source, date, limit, degree of support and next evidence needed. Write a reversible recommendation: keep observing, investigate further or run a bounded trial; justify the option without asserting predictions. **Deliverable:** a technology radar with an uncertainty map and update criteria. **Common mistakes:** extrapolating laboratory results to a plant; confusing growth in publications with market growth; citing patents without checking scope or status; not recording failed searches; assigning exact maturity figures without rules. R12 · Intelligence product ### Technology radar Assess maturity from different dimensions. [See the template →](https://academy.innguma.com/en/library/technology-radar/) R06 · Evidence ### Log of signals and evidence Distinguish observation, source and interpretation. [See the template →](https://academy.innguma.com/en/library/log-of-signals-and-evidence/) Check it · self-assessment ## Check your radar This part needs professional judgement: there is no automatic marking. Complete your work in the practice, rate it with the lesson's rubric and compare it with the indicative solution. What your answer should include - Five separate dimensions, each with source, date and limit. - You use solid / partial / insufficient, and «not assessable» when evidence is missing, instead of a precise zero. - You do not interpret a patent as commercial exploitation or as freedom to operate. - The recommendation is reversible: observe, investigate or a bounded trial. Self-assessment rubric (0–2 per criterion) An answer that asserts unsupported facts cannot reach the maximum score. It is not a professional certification. Traceable evidence Alternative interpretations Proportionate decision Review and limits **Indicative solution** 72-hour results prove only bounded conditions; an announced pilot is not evidence of availability; a search with no contracts tells you about the coverage of the search; a supply statement is self-interested. Recommend a limited exploration with trials and costs, not a commercial deployment. **Mistake to avoid:** Interpreting a patent as commercial exploitation or as freedom to operate. Illustrative solution for a fictional case: reasoned alternatives are valid. **Optional extension Going deeper · A radar that does not invent a single maturity** Consider a fictional thermal storage system assessed by Company A. A prototype can operate successfully on a bench and fail under industrial maintenance. A first subsidised pilot can show a one-off integration, but not repeatable demand. The radar must prevent a single eye-catching signal from dominating five dimensions. ### Company A matrix of evidence and gaps — simulated figures and cases | Dimension | Observation | What it means | What is missing before investing | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Technical performance | A 72-hour trial with partially described conditions | Limited results have been reported | Independent trial, long cycle, comparator | | Industrial maturity | One announced pilot, no availability report | There is an intention to test | Actual hours, incidents, maintenance | | Adoption | No verified contract in the exercise corpus | The search found no contracts | Search sources and markets not covered | | Ecosystem and supply | A manufacturer states it can supply | A supplier statement exists | Demonstrable capacity and cost at scale | | Strategic fit | The technical team identifies a possible application | It may deserve exploration | Total cost, compatibility and risk | **Important:** «no contract found» does not mean «no contract exists». It must be accompanied by the scope of the search, dates, languages and sources. An area without data is marked «not assessable», not «zero». ### Patents: four different checks 1. Is it an **application or a grant**, and what is its priority/publication date? 2. What is the **family** and in which jurisdictions does it appear? 3. Which claims could relate to the specific application, without interpreting freedom to operate on your own? 4. What **legal status** is recorded and when was it consulted? A technical sheet can document public database queries, but an infringement or freedom-to-operate analysis requires a specialist. Nor can technological superiority be inferred from a patent rate: the denominator, the classification, coverage by country and sector behaviour change its meaning. ### Conditional recommendation With the matrix above, Company A should not state «mature technology». It could approve a **four-week exploration** to obtain operating data, with a bounded budget, an owner, a stopping criterion and an explicit next decision. If after four weeks no cross-checkable technical source is obtained, the recommendation can still be to observe, not to abandon on the strength of certain failure. **Optional extension (40 min):** complete R12 with the five dimensions; add for each dimension a source, a gap, a test and a «we cannot conclude». Then explain why a TRL indicator, even if used correctly, would not by itself solve the problem of commercial adoption. **Acceptance:** traceability, differentiated uncertainties and a reversible recommendation. ## References and limits - European Commission · Decision C(2014)4995. *Horizon 2020 · General Annexes, G. Technology readiness levels (TRL)* (2014). [Document](https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/wp/2014_2015/annexes/h2020-wp1415-annex-g-trl_en.pdf) TRL describes technological maturity; it does not measure commercial adoption or freedom to operate. Reference verified on 2026-10-18. - Company A is a fictional case: its data, companies and figures do not describe real markets or organisations. - The analyses do not assign probabilities or scores without an explicit rule. Scenarios are plausible worlds, not forecasts. - TRL describes technological maturity according to the European Commission's definition; it does not measure commercial adoption. A patent search is not a freedom-to-operate analysis. Intelligence Lab · L07 ## Technology radar Ready to apply it? Open the Technology radar in the Lab and examine a technology from several justified dimensions. Output: technology radar. Works in the browser, no server, no account and no connected AI. The result may need reviewing and adapting to your case. - [Open the tool](https://academy.innguma.com/en/lab/technology-radar/) - [Back to the learning path](https://academy.innguma.com/en/analysis-foresight-and-anticipation/) **Download** - [R12 · Technology radar](https://academy.innguma.com/en/library/technology-radar/) - [R06 · Log of signals and evidence](https://academy.innguma.com/en/library/log-of-signals-and-evidence/) Open reading, no registration.