R&D Portfolio Analysis
6 weeks · 0 milestones
Produce an analysis of a real or documented R&D portfolio using a structured portfolio management framework — stage-gate review, Technology Readiness Level (TRL) assessment, or a risk-return portfolio analysis. The analysis must include: an inventory of the portfolio projects with their current status, objectives, and resource consumption, a TRL assessment for each project (using NASA, EU Horizon, or DoD TRL definitions — all publicly documented) with documented rationale for each TRL assignment, a portfolio balance assessment evaluating the distribution of risk (short-term vs long-term projects, incremental vs breakthrough technology), identification of at least 2 projects where resource reallocation is recommended — with documented rationale — and the expected portfolio impact, and a portfolio governance recommendation covering the decision criteria that should trigger project continuation, escalation, or termination. Preferred proof: an analysis of a real R&D portfolio in an organisation you work in or have access to. Accessible alternative: portfolio analysis of publicly documented R&D programmes — annual reports, government R&D programme documentation (e.g. ARPA-E project portfolios, Innovate UK funded projects, DARPA programmes — all publicly documented) provide sufficient project data for a structured portfolio analysis. TRL definitions are freely available from NASA, ESA, and the European Commission. Proof artifacts: the TRL assessment and portfolio balance analysis (analysis artifact) and the portfolio analysis report with governance recommendations (documentation artifact). Verification: an R&D manager or CTO challenges the resource reallocation recommendation — 'you recommend stopping project X to fund project Y; what is the organisational cost of killing project X beyond the direct resource saving?' — requiring reasoning about real portfolio management trade-offs.
Milestone map
Milestone map
3 milestones
Select or design an R&D portfolio — a set of ≥6 projects spanning multiple stages (concept, development, testing, scale-up) and risk levels. Document each project's technology readiness level (TRL), estimated cost to completion, expected revenue or strategic value, probability of technical success, and time to market. Classify projects using the three-bucket model: incremental (low risk, near-term), platform (medium risk, mid-term), and breakthrough (high risk, long-term). A portfolio with no breakthrough projects lacks growth optionality; one with no incremental projects lacks near-term revenue.
Proof required
Submit your portfolio map: a table of ≥6 projects with TRL, cost to completion, expected value, probability of technical success, time to market, and three-bucket classification, plus a short rationale (≥100 words) for each project's classification.
What gets checked
- Portfolio contains ≥6 projects spanning all three buckets — not all incremental or all breakthrough
- Each project has quantitative estimates for cost to completion, expected value, and probability of technical success
- Three-bucket rationale for each project explains the classification — not just labelled without justification