Start with the operational problem
Start with the operational problem
Start with the operational problem
The assessment should begin with the effect, constraint or failure mode the user is trying to address — not with a list of product features. A credible use case names the user, the environment, the trigger for action, the decision to be made and the effect required. Only then should the technology be mapped against the problem.
The assessment should begin with the effect, constraint or failure mode the user is trying to address — not with a list of product features. A credible use case names the user, the environment, the trigger for action, the decision to be made and the effect required. Only then should the technology be mapped against the problem.
The assessment should begin with the effect, constraint or failure mode the user is trying to address — not with a list of product features. A credible use case names the user, the environment, the trigger for action, the decision to be made and the effect required. Only then should the technology be mapped against the problem.
Test the whole employment chain
Test the whole employment chain
Test the whole employment chain
Relevance depends on more than the sensor, platform or algorithm. Examine deployment, power, communications, data handling, command and control, operator workload, training, support, security, safety and legal constraints. The question is whether the technology can live inside an operational system, not whether it performs in isolation.
Relevance depends on more than the sensor, platform or algorithm. Examine deployment, power, communications, data handling, command and control, operator workload, training, support, security, safety and legal constraints. The question is whether the technology can live inside an operational system, not whether it performs in isolation.
Relevance depends on more than the sensor, platform or algorithm. Examine deployment, power, communications, data handling, command and control, operator workload, training, support, security, safety and legal constraints. The question is whether the technology can live inside an operational system, not whether it performs in isolation.
Separate evidence from assumptions
Separate evidence from assumptions
Separate evidence from assumptions
Every claim should be labelled as proven, observed, inferred or untested. That discipline matters because early-stage companies often convert technical possibility into operational certainty too quickly. A useful assessment records limitations and evidence gaps explicitly, then recommends the smallest next test that could reduce uncertainty.
Every claim should be labelled as proven, observed, inferred or untested. That discipline matters because early-stage companies often convert technical possibility into operational certainty too quickly. A useful assessment records limitations and evidence gaps explicitly, then recommends the smallest next test that could reduce uncertainty.
Every claim should be labelled as proven, observed, inferred or untested. That discipline matters because early-stage companies often convert technical possibility into operational certainty too quickly. A useful assessment records limitations and evidence gaps explicitly, then recommends the smallest next test that could reduce uncertainty.
Define what the assessment cannot prove
Define what the assessment cannot prove
Define what the assessment cannot prove
A relevance assessment cannot guarantee procurement, funding, certification, interoperability or institutional endorsement. It also cannot substitute for formal test and evaluation, security accreditation or user trials. Its value is narrower and more useful: it helps decide whether deeper investment in validation is justified and what that validation should measure.
A relevance assessment cannot guarantee procurement, funding, certification, interoperability or institutional endorsement. It also cannot substitute for formal test and evaluation, security accreditation or user trials. Its value is narrower and more useful: it helps decide whether deeper investment in validation is justified and what that validation should measure.
A relevance assessment cannot guarantee procurement, funding, certification, interoperability or institutional endorsement. It also cannot substitute for formal test and evaluation, security accreditation or user trials. Its value is narrower and more useful: it helps decide whether deeper investment in validation is justified and what that validation should measure.
Turn relevance into a validation plan
Turn relevance into a validation plan
Turn relevance into a validation plan
The output should connect use cases, requirements, gaps and evidence needs to a bounded next step. That may be a lab test, field trial, operator workshop, integration sprint or red-team review. The best result is not a positive verdict; it is a decision-ready statement of where the technology fits, what remains uncertain and what to do next.
The output should connect use cases, requirements, gaps and evidence needs to a bounded next step. That may be a lab test, field trial, operator workshop, integration sprint or red-team review. The best result is not a positive verdict; it is a decision-ready statement of where the technology fits, what remains uncertain and what to do next.
The output should connect use cases, requirements, gaps and evidence needs to a bounded next step. That may be a lab test, field trial, operator workshop, integration sprint or red-team review. The best result is not a positive verdict; it is a decision-ready statement of where the technology fits, what remains uncertain and what to do next.