19 Readiness Level Frameworks: The Guide to TRL, MRL, SRL, and Beyond

From NASA to NATO, readiness levels shape billions in R&D decisions.

Originally developed to evaluate space tech, the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) scale has inspired dozens of related frameworks: from Manufacturing to Commercial, Integration, Service, and even Policy scores. There are different types of maturity level frameworks, each tailored to specific domains or project needs. Each one helps teams answer a high-stakes question: Is this really ready?

This guide cuts through the noise. You’ll get a complete, structured overview of 19 frameworks, when to use them, how they differ, and how to apply them to real-world technology development, from early research to launching and commercialization.

FAQs and summary on readiness level frameworks

Why maturity scores matter in R&D and product development

Maturity scores offer clarity where ambiguity often stalls the process. In high-stakes R&D environments, teams need a common language to know whether a technology is ready or still in early research.

Without structured assessments, companies rely on subjective opinions. This leads to delays, wasted resources, and misalignment between engineering, manufacturing, and commercialization.

Maturity frameworks also enable systematic analysis of a system's compatibility, architecture, and performance, supporting informed decision-making. By using standardized assessment frameworks, teams can analyse progress objectively, surface challenges early, and put investment where it matters most.

What is a readiness level framework?

A readiness level framework is a structured tool used to measure how far a technology, product, or system has advanced toward implementation. The most widely adopted is the technology readiness level (TRL) scale, originally developed by NASA.

But TRL is not the only option. Depending on your use case (whether manufacturing, integration, or commercialization), you may need a different assessment. These frameworks provide a consistent basis for comparing progress across teams and domains, and they can also be used in combination.

How to use the different maturity scores?

Different maturity scores highlight different aspects of maturity. Each framework is built to assess a specific domain: technical, manufacturing, integration, or demand.

Use TRLs to understand core functionality and technical maturity. Apply MRL when moving toward production. Use SRL and IRL to judge how well components integrate into a system. Leverage CRL or MTRL when preparing for commercialization.

Choose the score that fits your development phase and business context. Apply it consistently to align teams, reduce risk, and guide resource allocation.

Technology and system maturity for core development maturity

Maturity is a structured measure of progress. For technology and systems, maturity levels create a shared language to know what works, what integrates, and what is worth launching.

These tools give R&D teams a way to track functionality, performance, and risk at each stage of development. Whether you’re testing a lab prototype or deploying a mission-ready system, you need clarity on where you stand and what’s next.

This section introduces five essential frameworks used to measure core development maturity, starting from single technologies and extending to full systems.

Technology readiness level (TRL): The foundation of technology readiness assessment

The TRL is the most widely adopted maturity framework in government, industry, and research. It consists of nine stages, from basic principles (TRL 1) to fully functional prototypes and mature technology ready for operational use (TRL 9).

Each technology level on the TRL scale corresponds to a specific stage of development. At TRL 6, a fully functional prototype is tested in relevant conditions. At TRL 8, the technology is flight-qualified and ready for deployment. TRL 9 represents the most mature technology, fully developed and proven in relevant environments.

Each level corresponds to a specific milestone in testing, evaluation, and implementation. TRL 4–6 often centers on prototype demonstration in a relevant environment, while TRL 7–9 requires integration, scalability, and validation under real-world conditions.

Running a technology assessment helps determine where a concept sits today. Its maturity level is determined through formal evaluation methods, based not on potential, but on proven performance. It guides investment, flags dependencies, and helps teams communicate clearly with stakeholders across engineering, manufacturing, and strategy.

TRL helps answer: Do we have demonstrated capabilities? Are they validated in the right environment? What must be done before moving forward?

System readiness level (SRL): Testing full system maturity

TRL centers on components. SRL does an analysis of the maturity of a system as a whole. It captures how individual parts come together to fulfill mission objectives.

SRL combines TRLs of subsystems with assessments of system-level integration, interfaces, and performance. It also accounts for system context, where readiness depends on how technologies interact in a specific operating environment.

This makes SRL essential in aerospace, defense, and other complex domains. It reveals risks that are invisible at the component level and supports consistent comparison across large initiatives.

If TRL asks, “Does it work?” SRL asks, “Does it work together?

Integration readiness level (IRL): Maturity of subsystems coming together

Even if two subsystems are individually mature, they may not function together. That’s where the IRL comes in.

IRL examines the interfaces, data flows, and technical compatibility between components. It’s especially valuable in projects with modular architectures, third-party suppliers, or distributed development teams.

The IRL helps teams surface hidden integration risks early. It is used alongside TRL and SRL to ensure that all parts of the system, hardware, software, and communications, can perform as expected under real-world constraints.

Tracking IRL avoids failure at the final stage. It improves handovers between R&D and engineering, and supports smoother product launches.

Design readiness level (DRL): Linking concept design and manufacturing

The DRL framework is used to examine the maturity of engineering designs, particularly in relation to production feasibility.

Where TRL looks at technical proof and IRL looks at system fit, DRL looks at whether a product is manufacturable and cost-effective to build. It integrates technology requirements, materials, tolerances, and assembly constraints into the assessment process.

DRL is often used in parallel with manufacturing readiness level (MRL) to bridge the gap between concept and production. Together, they help R&D and production teams align on design intent, reduce iteration cycles, and prevent rework late in the process.

Science readiness: Assessing mission science maturity

Used in mission-driven research (space science, healthcare, climate), science maturity explores whether the underlying scientific hypothesis is ready for operational use.

It considers factors like data quality, reproducibility, theoretical maturity, and relevance to mission goals. Even if a system is technically functional, it may not be scientifically valid.

Organizations like the Canadian Space Agency and ESA use science assessments alongside TRL to guide mission planning. It helps ensure that what you build is not just feasible, but scientifically sound.

Manufacturing and commercialization maturity for build and scale maturity

To launch new technologies, R&D teams must prove that a technology can be manufactured, delivered, and adopted.

This stage of the lifecycle involves more variables: cost, quality, supply chains, customers, and operations. It also involves greater risk. Scoring frameworks like MRL, CRL, ORL, MTRL, and the KTH method help teams prioritize these later-stage challenges with structure and consistency.

These frameworks guide investments, improve implementation timelines, and reduce late-stage surprises. Used well, they unlock efficiency and drive smarter portfolio management.

Manufacturing readiness level (MRL): From lab to production line

MRL measures how close a technology is to being manufactured at scale. Even if a prototype works, it may not be easy or economical to build. MRL explores whether materials, tooling, supply chains, and manufacturing processes are in place and repeatable.

The MRL ranges from conceptual process design to fully functional production systems. Mid-level MRL stages center on process capability, testing, and validation under expected production conditions.

MRL is often used alongside TRL and DRL to align engineering with manufacturing from the start. This reduces iteration loops, increases production efficiency, and lowers total program risk.

Commercial readiness level (CRL): Can it compete

A technically sound, manufacturable product still may not be successful. That’s where the CRL comes in.

CRL scores on demand fit, competitive advantage, pricing, regulatory status, and customer validation. A product at high CRL has demonstrated both functionality and real demand traction.

The CRL forces teams to test assumptions early - ideally before large-scale investments. It prompts key questions: Have we identified the right business model? Is the value proposition validated with real customers? Can we scale demand and distribution?

Used well, CRL supports smoother transitions from R&D to commercial teams and improves the overall success rate of product launches.

Operational readiness level (ORL): Are you ready to deploy at scale?

ORL is about the maturity to operate. It assesses whether the processes, infrastructure, and systems needed to deploy a solution are in place.

Originally developed for critical infrastructure, ORL has growing relevance in digital transformation, defense, and complex systems. A solution can be high on TRL and CRL but still fail if operational dependencies (training, support, cyber threats) are not addressed.

ORL helps identify risks in implementation, including dependencies on users, logistics, and the broader environment. It also aids in stakeholder communication and rollout planning.

When a product or system reaches high ORL, you’re ready to run.

Market and technology readiness level (MTRL): Balancing tech and business fit

Many teams concentrate too much on tech and too little on business demand. MTRL combines both into a single framework that balances technology maturity with commercial viability.

It’s especially useful in early-stage evaluations, helping portfolio managers prioritize based on both product risk and customer potential. For public-sector programs or venture evaluations, MTRL ensures funding doesn’t favor either technical novelty or buzz alone.

Each MTRL level reflects the dual progress of both development and commercialization. It prompts teams to advance both tracks in parallel rather than in isolation.

KTH innovation maturity: A practical toolkit for venture development

KTH developed a multi-dimensional model used in academia and early-stage ventures. It maps maturity across several axes (technology, market, team, intellectual property, and funding) rather than using a single axis.

Unlike TRL or MRL, the KTH model doesn’t assume a linear process. It works as a tool for coaching, planning, and decision-making, especially in dynamic and uncertain environments.

The model helps teams identify gaps and track progress across interconnected components of venture building. It’s now used beyond Sweden in university incubators, corporate innovation labs, and public funding programs.

Specialized readiness frameworks (dual-use, data, services, policy)

As innovation expands across domains (e.g., defense, AI, health, and government), the traditional assessment methodologies are not specialized enough.

More context-fitting frameworks help R&D teams, policy experts, and authorities understand what matters in their specific context. The program manager plays a crucial role in overseeing system development, conducting risk assessment, and guiding decision-making processes throughout the project lifecycle to ensure successful technology transition and system maturity.

These methodologies reflect organization, regulation, adoption, and real-world deployment. Each one includes a distinct methodology, a structured model, and clear expectations for advancing an idea from concept to impact.

Dual-use readiness (MIT): Navigating defense and commercial needs

The MIT Dual-Use Readiness Levels offer a structured way to explore technologies with both commercial and defense applications. This is key in domains where innovation happens in parallel across sectors, but call for concepts, funding mechanisms, and risk appetites differ.

The MIT model separates maturity into three tracks: customer, funding, and technology readiness. This triad allows teams to assess whether a concept aligns with mission needs, whether interest exists from defense or commercial buyers, and whether funding models support the required implementation.

It also accounts for transition phases, such as acquisition or shifting between programs, that are often poorly handled in traditional TRL frameworks. For agencies, primes, and dual-use startups, this model provides a more realistic view of what it means to be truly ready.

Data readiness: Is your data mature enough for AI?

AI and advanced analytics require more than raw datasets. They require demonstrated data capabilities. The Data Readiness framework helps teams evaluate whether their data is usable, reliable, and fit for high-stakes decisions.

DRLs typically move from basic availability (e.g., raw, unstructured, inconsistent) to advanced states like labeled, validated, and continuously updated data in production. This is essential in regulated industries where functionality, ethics, and explainability are non-negotiable.

The framework also emphasizes the importance of measurement systems and evaluation processes, such as bias checks and reproducibility. Without high data maturity, even the best AI models underperform. As more organizations move from pilot to deployment, DRL ensures data is treated as a core component, not an afterthought.

Service maturity: Scaling digital health with evidence

In healthcare and public services, you can’t rely on TRLs alone. You need to prove that a service model works under real-world conditions, with real users, and under resource constraints.

The Service Maturity Framework measures whether a digital health tool or service is ready to be used. It focuses on factors like training, workflow integration, outcomes, and evidence-based validation.

This model evaluates both the organization and the end user. It includes components like demonstration projects, stakeholder engagement, and regulatory compliance. These are not always present in traditional product-centric models but are critical to public sector or system-wide adoption.

By adopting SRL, programs can avoid costly failures during rollout, ensure sustained use, and justify ramp-up through proven maturity levels.

Policy readiness: From idea to implementable policy

Ideas are easy. Implementation is not. The PRL framework helps governments and nonprofits evaluate whether a policy proposal is clear, feasible, and aligned with political, social, and operational realities.

PRL evaluates the clarity of the problem statement, the logic of the intervention, and the maturity of systems and stakeholders to act. It functions as a portfolio management tool in public innovation labs, supporting funding decisions across competing proposals.

This model includes steps like breadboard validation for policy pilots, stakeholder alignment, and downstream impacts. It ensures that good ideas are supported by real program architecture and future scalability.

How to select and apply the right readiness framework

Selecting the right assessment method helps a project manager align teams, manage risk, and prioritize resources where they matter most.

Start by identifying the object, particular technology, or service you're determining. Is it a product, a system, or a service? Does it require demonstration in the field, or has it already been flight-proven? The context will guide your choice.

Next, consider the acquisition phase you're in. Early-stage research might benefit from TRL or DRL, while late-stage efforts may require assessments using MRL, CRL, or ORL. If you're working in policy or public services, PRL or SRL could be more relevant.

Look for a framework that fits both your domain and your goals. For example, if you're partnering with a dual-use solution, the MIT framework examines program concepts across funding, customer, and technical tracks.

Ideally, the development from research to commercialization includes different assessment methods and perspectives. That's why it's recommended to combine multiple frameworks along the stage-gate process. Done well, it improves efficiency, supports smarter growth, and ensures developments are implemented at the right time.

Frameworks also help you manage conflicting interests between speed and quality, risk and return, or novelty and maturity. When used across a course of projects, they bring consistency and clarity to your business and your future portfolio.

Make confident R&D decisions. Today, with ITONICS, the best software for R&D and product development teams.

The ITONICS platform equips R&D managers with the tools to oversee all initiatives, align them with organizational goals, and deliver measurable portfolio outcomes.

Optimize budget spent and mitigate risks: Gain a consolidated view of your R&D portfolio. ITONICS helps teams identify overlaps, identify dependencies, and reallocate resources toward initiatives with higher impact. The tool empowers R&D teams to minimize risks and ensure that every team member contributes to defined objectives.

Make confident decisions with transparency: ITONICS supports structured processes like stage-gates, with embedded key decisions and evaluation criteria. Product managers and other key stakeholders gain a single source of truth to determine priorities, monitor return on investment, and enhance stakeholder satisfaction.

Plan and execute with roadmaps: With ITONICS, you can design clear roadmaps that connect projects, programs, and the full portfolio. Roadmaps highlight milestones, dependencies, and required adjustments, helping leaders develop adaptive plans that align with the organization’s strategy. The result: a program office that delivers efficiency today and resilience tomorrow.