Innovation readiness level vs technology readiness level: what is the difference?

TRL tells you if the technology works. IRL tells you if the business model works. MRL tells you if you can produce it at scale.

All three are useful. All three are project-level frameworks. And none of them tell you whether your organization is actually ready to support innovation, which is often the question that determines whether high-scoring projects reach the market or get killed in the organizational machinery.

This article compares the three main readiness level frameworks that matter for industrial companies, explains when to use each, and identifies the question they all leave unanswered.

Technology Readiness Level (TRL): the original

TRL was developed at NASA in the 1970s to standardize how the agency described technology maturity across its programs. The scale runs from 1 (basic principles observed) to 9 (actual system proven in operational environment). Nine levels, one dimension: technology.

The EU adopted TRL as a standard for Horizon Europe and related research programs. The Netherlands followed, and RVO now uses TRL to categorize eligibility for a range of Dutch and European innovation subsidies.

The nine TRL levels:

TRL and Dutch subsidies: Knowing your TRL helps you identify which subsidies apply. A selection of Dutch programs by TRL range:

Most Dutch manufacturers I work with are familiar with TRL from subsidy applications. That familiarity is useful. TRL gives you a standardized vocabulary for describing where your technology stands, and subsidy program managers understand it immediately.

What TRL does not measure: TRL is strictly a technology assessment. It says nothing about customers, business models, team capability, IP, or funding. In the original defense and aerospace context, this was fine: government programs provided funding and defined the customer in advance. In commercial innovation, TRL tells you whether the technology works, not whether anyone will pay for it or whether your team can bring it to market.

Innovation Readiness Level (IRL): the multi-dimensional upgrade

The IRL addresses the most obvious limitation of TRL: it adds non-technical dimensions.

Steve Blank introduced the Investment Readiness Level in 2013, adapting TRL logic for business model validation. Where TRL tracks technology maturity, Blank’s IRL tracks whether the business model is proven, using the Business Model Canvas as the underlying framework and Customer Development as the validation method.

KTH Royal Institute of Technology developed a broader version: six dimensions, each on a nine-level scale. The KTH IRL incorporates TRL as one dimension and adds five others.

For a full guide to IRL origins and how to use it in practice, see [Innovation readiness level: what it is and how to use it](/innovation-readiness-level/).

The KTH six dimensions:

Each dimension runs from 1 to 9 with explicit criteria for each level. The IRL approach identifies which dimension is the weakest link, which is almost always the binding constraint on overall project progress.

Manufacturing Readiness Level (MRL): the production dimension

A third framework matters specifically for industrial companies: the Manufacturing Readiness Level. The U.S. Department of Defense developed MRL to track production readiness, distinct from technology readiness.

MRL runs from 1 to 10 and answers a specific question: can you manufacture this at the required scale, quality, and cost? A product can be at TRL 9 (technology fully proven) while sitting at MRL 4 or 5 (production not yet feasible). This gap is common in industrial innovation and represents a distinct set of challenges: tooling, production processes, supply chain, quality systems, and cost modeling at scale.

For manufacturing companies, MRL addresses a real blind spot in both TRL and IRL. You can have a proven technology and a validated business model, and still face 18 months of production scale-up work before you can deliver to customers. MRL makes that production readiness challenge visible and trackable.

Side-by-side comparison

The frameworks are complementary, not competing. TRL tells you about technology. IRL tells you about multi-dimensional project maturity. MRL tells you about production readiness. Together they give a rich picture of project readiness from lab to market.

Choosing the right framework for your situation

Use TRL when: you’re preparing a Dutch or European subsidy application, you’re describing technology maturity to a technical audience, or you need a quick single-dimension assessment of where your technology development stands.

Use IRL when: you want to understand where an innovation project is across all the dimensions that determine market success, you need to identify which dimension is the bottleneck, or you’re managing a portfolio of projects and need a common language for comparing progress.

Use MRL when: you’re a manufacturing company moving from prototype to production, you’re preparing for a defense or aerospace program, or you want to track production-readiness as a distinct challenge from technology readiness.

Use all three when: you’re managing a complex industrial innovation project from early-stage research through to full production deployment. The overlap is limited: each framework adds something the others don’t cover.

The gap all three leave open

TRL, IRL, and MRL have something important in common: they are all project-level frameworks. They assess the readiness of a specific innovation project. They say nothing about whether the organization supporting that project is ready to see it through.

I see this gap regularly in manufacturing companies. A project reaches TRL 7 or 8, with IRL scores that look solid. The technology works. Customers have validated the need. The team is capable. And then the project gets cancelled when leadership changes, the budget gets reallocated when quarterly numbers disappoint, or the innovation team can’t access production resources because the factory is running at full capacity for existing customer orders.

None of these outcomes show up on a TRL, IRL, or MRL assessment. They’re organizational failures, and they require a different kind of assessment.

The Innovation Readiness Assessment measures nine organizational dimensions: whether leadership supports innovation with strategic commitment, protected resources, and active portfolio governance; whether the organizational design gives innovation legitimacy, access to core capabilities, and appropriate incentives; and whether the innovation practice is built on the right tools, processes, and skills. These are the conditions that determine whether high-scoring projects reach the market or stall in the organizational machinery.

Both types of assessment are useful. A project team needs IRL to track multi-dimensional progress. An organization needs the organizational readiness assessment to identify whether the structural conditions for innovation success are in place. In industrial B2B companies, addressing the organizational conditions first is usually what unlocks the value that project-level frameworks can measure but cannot create.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between TRL and IRL?

TRL (Technology Readiness Level) measures whether your technology is ready, on a nine-level scale from basic research to operational deployment. IRL (Innovation Readiness Level) measures whether your innovation project is ready across multiple dimensions: customer validation, technology, business model, intellectual property, team, and funding. TRL is one dimension within the KTH IRL model. A project can be TRL 8 and IRL 2 on other dimensions simultaneously.

Is TRL required for Dutch innovation subsidies?

Yes, many Dutch and European subsidies use TRL to define eligible development stages. WBSO covers TRL 1-5. Innovatiekrediet covers TRL 3-9. Horizon Europe EIC Accelerator targets TRL 6-9. DEI+ covers TRL 6-8. Knowing your project’s TRL helps identify which subsidies apply and what development evidence is needed for your application.

What is the manufacturing readiness level?

The Manufacturing Readiness Level (MRL) is a framework developed by the U.S. Department of Defense that measures production readiness on a 1-10 scale. It answers the question: can you manufacture this product at the required scale and quality? A product can be at TRL 9 (technology proven) while still being at MRL 4 or 5 (production processes not yet feasible). For industrial companies moving from prototype to production, MRL tracks a distinct set of challenges that TRL and IRL ignore.

Can a company have high TRL but low IRL?

Yes, and this is one of the most common failure modes in engineering-led organizations. A project can reach TRL 7 or 8 while remaining at IRL 2 or 3 on the business model dimension (concept not validated with paying customers) or IRL 1 or 2 on funding (no committed investment). This imbalance means the technology is ready but the project cannot advance because the commercial and financial foundations are missing.

Do TRL and IRL measure organizational readiness?

No. TRL, IRL, and MRL are all project-level frameworks. They assess the readiness of a specific innovation project. None of them measure whether the organization has the leadership support, organizational design, and innovation practice to support innovation in the first place. This is why high-TRL projects get cancelled: not because the technology failed, but because the organizational conditions failed. Organizational innovation readiness is a different assessment that addresses a different set of questions.