Technologyreadiness
A capability score out of 100 across technical, operational and commercial readiness, a risk band, and the productivity gaps the company describes in its own words.
See the gap diagnosis| Dimension and component | Weight | Level | Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| Technical Viability | Weight 40% | 62/100 | |
| Technology Readiness Level | 60% | Level 7 | 70 |
| Integration Level | 20% | Partial Integration | 50 |
| Intellectual Property | 20% | FTO + Trade secret | 50 |
| Operational Capacity | Weight 30% | 50/100 | |
| Team Competency | 60% | Siloed | 50 |
| Regulatory Compliance | 40% | In-Progress | 50 |
| Commercial Viability | Weight 30% | 75/100 | |
| Funding Readiness | 50% | Co-Funding | 60 |
| Unit Economics | 50% | Positive | 90 |
Technology readiness assessment · Computed: 9 Mar 2026
Written for Decision-makers, Credit & risk
Sample company, anonymised. Figures are illustrative; the rules are the product's.
Checked against the product source on 16 October 2026.
How ready is its technology?
It reads
- The company's Technology Readiness Doc, a questionnaire it fills in and uploads
You get
- A composite score out of 100 and a risk band
- Scores for Technical Viability, Operational Capacity and Commercial Viability
- A productivity gap diagnosis in three groups
Think of it like this
Like a factory inspector's checklist with fixed marks for each answer, followed by a short note on what is holding the floor back.
Fixed marks for every answer
The questionnaire follows Malaysia’s ASM-IRL readiness levels alongside an operational and commercial rubric. Every answer carries a fixed mark.
Technical Viability
40%
Score 62/100
- Technology Readiness Level60%
- Integration Level20%
- Intellectual Property20%
Operational Capacity
30%
Score 50/100
- Team Competency60%
- Regulatory Compliance40%
Commercial Viability
30%
Score 75/100
- Funding Readiness50%
- Unit Economics50%
Below 45: High Risk
Early-stage or unvalidated capability across the rubric.
45 to 74: Moderate Risk
Sample Foods Sdn Bhd · 62/100 composite score
75 or more: Low Risk (Commercial)
Proven systems, team handover, and positive unit economics.
What holds it back
The gap diagnosis is the one step written by a model. It reads only the company’s own descriptions in the questionnaire, never its financial figures, and cannot change a score.
Productivity Gap Diagnosis
Derived strictly from questionnaire narratives · scores and risk band remain fixed
Hard Skills & Technology
Filling line not linked to inventory
Batch counts from the automated filling line are keyed into the stock system by hand at the end of each shift.
No sensor data from the cooking vats
Vat temperatures are read off gauges and written on batch sheets, so a deviation is found only at quality check.
Soft Skills & Organization
Process know-how held by two people
Recipe scaling and line settings sit with the production manager and one technician, with no written handover.
Food safety certification still in progress
The compliance work is led by the quality executive alone, alongside daily production duties.
Commercial & Execution
Growth tied to co-funding
The planned second filling line depends on a matching grant that has not yet been approved.
Never scored as zero
An answer the company leaves blank is marked Level unknown, not scored. The dimension renormalises over the remaining answers and surfaces a coverage warning.
Try leaving an answer blank
62/100
Composite Score
Moderate Risk
All 7 components answered: 100% weight covered across all three dimensions.
Technical Viability · 40% of composite
62/100 (100% covered)
-
70/100
Technology Readiness Level
Level: Level 7 · 60% of dimension
-
50/100
Integration Level
Level: Partial Integration · 20% of dimension
-
50/100
Intellectual Property
Level: FTO + Trade secret · 20% of dimension
Operational Capacity · 30% of composite
50/100 (100% covered)
-
50/100
Team Competency
Level: Siloed · 60% of dimension
-
50/100
Regulatory Compliance
Level: In-Progress · 40% of dimension
Commercial Viability · 30% of composite
75/100 (100% covered)
-
60/100
Funding Readiness
Level: Co-Funding · 50% of dimension
-
90/100
Unit Economics
Level: Positive · 50% of dimension
Where it appears
Optional at upload, shared in Section C of the Full SPOT report, and run on demand in your Analysis Modules list.
Sample Foods Sdn Bhd
Full SPOT report · Section C
Shared with both the SME and your bank · rubric scores compute immediately from the document
Analysis Modules list · Technology Readiness
Run on demand by your team to generate the written productivity gap diagnosis
Section C and your module list.
Uploading the optional Technology Readiness Doc adds Section C to the Full SPOT report (visible to both the SME and your bank) and enables the module in your Analysis Modules list.
Scores work even before the model runs.
If the module has not been run yet, the report still computes the exact rubric scores from the document and lists the company’s raw descriptions. Without the document, the card asks for a Technology Readiness Doc.
Self-assessment, not a site audit.
Gives no financing verdict or amount, and does not read the financial statements. It is the company’s own account of itself, scored by the same fixed rubric every time.
A signal beyond the numbers.
Fixed marks for every answer, and a plain account of the gaps the company itself describes.
Continue to Why SPOT exists