The Rise of Innovation Readiness

For decades, universities, investors and policymakers have looked to technology as the primary measure of innovation progress. Increasingly, however, attention is shifting toward a different question. A technology may work exactly as intended, but is anyone actually ready to adopt it?

In the world of research commercialization, few concepts have achieved the level of influence enjoyed by Technology Readiness Levels.

Originally developed to assess technological maturity, the framework provides a common language for discussing whether a technology remains theoretical, has been validated in a laboratory environment, or is approaching deployment in real-world settings. Over time, the model has become deeply embedded in funding programmes, research projects and innovation strategies across Europe and beyond.

Its appeal is easy to understand. Complex technologies are difficult to compare. Technology Readiness Levels provide a structure that helps researchers, investors and policymakers determine how far an innovation has progressed along its development journey.

Yet a growing number of commercialization professionals have become increasingly aware of a limitation.

A technology can be technically ready while remaining commercially invisible. It can demonstrate impressive performance in the laboratory, attract academic recognition, and generate intellectual property, while still lacking any realistic pathway toward market adoption.

Indeed, some of the most technically sophisticated innovations struggle not because they fail scientifically, but because they fail to answer a more fundamental question: Who will use this, and why?

When Readiness Means Different Things

The distinction may appear subtle, but it has profound implications for innovation ecosystems.

Consider two hypothetical technologies. The first technology has completed years of development. Researchers have demonstrated its functionality, published their findings, secured patent protection and successfully validated performance through technical testing.

The second technology is technically less mature but already has industrial partners involved, a clear understanding of customer needs, and a well-defined route toward implementation.

Traditional technology assessments might favour the first. Commercial outcomes may favour the second.

The difference lies in the nature of readiness itself. Technical readiness measures whether a solution works. Commercial readiness measures whether someone is waiting for it. The two are related, but they are not the same thing.

For many years, innovation systems tended to assume they would naturally align. Experience has shown that they often do not.

Europe's Commercialization Challenge

The growing interest in innovation readiness reflects broader questions emerging across European innovation policy.

The European Commission, in setting out the rationale for the forthcoming European Innovation Act, has highlighted persistent challenges surrounding research commercialization, intellectual property exploitation and the movement of innovations from laboratories into markets. Many of the barriers identified are not scientific barriers. They are organizational, commercial and institutional barriers. [1]

Similarly, debates surrounding European competitiveness increasingly focus on Europe's ability to translate research excellence into economic leadership. Europe continues to produce world-class science. It continues to generate intellectual property. It continues to invest heavily in research infrastructure.

Yet the transition from research output to market impact remains uneven. [1]

This raises an important possibility. Perhaps the challenge is not simply helping technologies become more advanced. Perhaps it is helping innovations become more adoptable.

Learning From the Innovation Readiness Movement

Few institutions have done more to explore this question than KTH Royal Institute of Technology.

Over time, KTH's Innovation Readiness Level framework emerged from a recognition that technological maturity alone provides an incomplete picture of innovation potential. The framework expanded the discussion beyond technology itself and introduced additional dimensions including customer readiness, market readiness, business readiness and implementation readiness.

The significance of this shift should not be underestimated. Traditional technology assessments are inherently inward-looking. They focus on the development of the innovation itself.

Innovation readiness introduces an outward-looking perspective. It asks whether the surrounding conditions necessary for adoption are beginning to emerge.

Does the market exist? Is the customer clearly defined? Are implementation barriers understood? Is there a viable route to creating value?

These questions are often far more difficult to answer than technical questions. They also tend to determine whether an innovation ultimately succeeds.

Why Research Commercialization Is Changing

Historically, many universities approached commercialization as a downstream activity. Research occurred first. Commercial considerations emerged later. Only after a technology reached a certain level of maturity did discussions begin regarding licensing, company formation or industrial collaboration.

That approach reflected the realities of the time. Technologies often needed years of development before meaningful commercialization discussions could occur.

Today's innovation landscape is different. Markets move faster. Investors seek earlier engagement. Industry partnerships increasingly emerge during the research process rather than after it. At the same time, universities face growing expectations to demonstrate societal impact alongside scientific achievement.

These developments place greater importance on understanding commercialization factors much earlier in the innovation journey.

Innovation readiness frameworks emerged in part as a response to this reality. Their purpose is not to replace scientific excellence. Their purpose is to ensure scientific excellence has a pathway toward impact.

The Cost of Waiting Too Long

One of the most expensive assumptions in commercialization is that market readiness can be addressed later.

In theory, this appears sensible. Researchers should focus on research. Commercialization can follow once the technology has matured.

In practice, however, delayed engagement often creates problems. Potential customers may have been misunderstood. Implementation challenges may only become visible after years of development. Regulatory requirements may prove more demanding than expected. Competitive solutions may emerge in the meantime.

By the time these issues are discovered, substantial resources have often already been committed.

This is not merely a technology transfer challenge. It is an efficiency challenge.

The Redstone University Index highlights how dramatically entrepreneurial outcomes can vary across institutions with similar resources. While many factors contribute to these differences, the findings suggest that commercialization capability is not simply the result of scientific strength. Processes, culture, networks and strategic choices all appear to influence outcomes. [2], [3], [4]

Innovation readiness represents an attempt to engage with those factors earlier.

Beyond Assessment

Perhaps the most important contribution of innovation readiness is not measurement itself. It is mindset.

The framework encourages a different way of thinking about research impact. Instead of asking whether an innovation is finished, it asks what obstacles remain between the innovation and the people who could benefit from it.

The distinction matters. Technologies rarely fail because they are insufficiently innovative. More often, they fail because pathways to adoption remain unclear.

Universities, companies and investors increasingly recognise this reality. The conversation is gradually shifting from technical achievement alone toward a broader understanding of innovation systems.

What ecosystem is required? Which partnerships are necessary? What evidence will customers demand? What risks must be reduced before adoption becomes possible?

These questions sit at the heart of innovation readiness.

A Necessary Evolution

As expectations around research impact continue to grow, frameworks such as Innovation Readiness Levels are likely to become more influential.

Not because technology readiness is becoming less important. On the contrary, technical excellence remains the foundation of innovation. But technical excellence alone rarely creates economic value. Value emerges when technologies are adopted, implemented and scaled.

The future of commercialization therefore depends on understanding two distinct forms of progress simultaneously. The first asks whether the technology is ready. The second asks whether the world is ready for the technology.

For much of modern innovation policy, the first question dominated the conversation. Increasingly, the second may prove just as important.

Sources

1. DigitalEurope. (2025, October 3). A European Innovation Act to boost commercialisation and enable growth. https://cdn.digitaleurope.org/uploads/2025/10/DIGITALEUROPE-European-Innovation-Act-to-boost-commercialisation-and-enable-growth-03102025.pdf
2. European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. (2025, December 4). Commission concludes public consultation on the European Innovation Act. https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/news/all-research-and-innovation-news/commission-concludes-public-consultation-european-innovation-act-2025-12-04_en
3. European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. (n.d.). European Innovation Act. Retrieved August 7, 2026, from https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/strategy/support-policy-making/shaping-eu-research-and-innovation-policy/european-innovation-act_en
4. European Parliament. (n.d.). European Innovation Act. Legislative Train Schedule. Retrieved August 7, 2026, from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-train/theme-a-new-plan-for-europe-s-sustainable-prosperity-and-competitiveness/file-european-innovation-act