Technical Due Diligence & R&D Strategy

When this comes up

• A technology, licence or acquisition is being evaluated and the technical claims need independent testing.
• A supplier or start-up is presenting a breakthrough, and nobody in the room can assess it.
• Two or three development paths are competing for the same budget.
• A decision is pending on whether to build capability in-house, partner, or buy it.
• The company is entering a materials area it has no history in.

Technology assessment

The scientific, patent and trade literature in any active materials area grows faster than a technical team with a day job can read it. A technology assessment does three things: identifies what actually matters in that volume of information, converts it into reliable and specific recommendations, and presents the findings in writing and in person to the people making the decision.

These assessments are most valuable early — at the point of entry into a new technology area, when the output is still able to shape the strategy rather than justify one already chosen.

Diligence on a technical claim

• Is the underlying science sound, and is the claimed mechanism the one actually operating?
• Does the prior art already cover it, and is the IP position defensible?
• What has been demonstrated, at what scale, and what remains unproven between there and production?
• What are the known failure modes of this class of material or process, and have they been addressed or simply not yet encountered?
• What would it take to manufacture at volume, and who can currently supply it?

R&D strategy

The strategic question is usually not which projects are interesting but which ones the organisation should be doing itself. Industries stay competitive by remaining focused on their own core competencies and strengths while still moving quickly on innovation — which means being deliberate about what is developed internally, what is partnered, and what is bought.

One of the most valuable pieces of this is identifying university-based research groups, national government laboratories and other external resources that can be used to form productive, cost-efficient partnerships. Problems that sit at the boundaries between established disciplines — which is where most materials problems now sit — are frequently solved faster this way than by expanding an internal team.

What you receive

• A written assessment with the recommendation stated plainly and the reasoning behind it available.
• A technology roadmap for the area under consideration.
• The technical risks, separated into those that are resolvable and those that are inherent.
• Where relevant, a shortlist of university, national-laboratory or industry partners and what each would contribute.
• A briefing delivered to the decision-makers directly, in language that does not require a materials background.