Execute the Research Application Prioritisation Framework
Score and rank candidate research applications using a weighted multi-criteria decision matrix balancing market size, regulatory friction, technical risk, and time-to-revenue. Select the definitive primary and secondary applications to pursue and document the explicit rationale for rejected pathways.
Executing this action produces a definitive, scored ranking of research applications backed by an explicit selection decision. It delivers a clear, defensible roadmap that directs subsequent product development, customer discovery, and resource allocation.
The founder must deliver a completed Research Application Prioritisation Matrix with documented scores, weighted criteria rationale, and a formal Decision Record. The artefact must explicitly state the single lead application to commercialise alongside a secondary fallback application.
Five questions an expert would ask when reviewing your output
Use these to challenge assumptions, pressure-test your logic, and check the quality of this action's output in the context of the parent task and wider venture development.
- 1
Why does the winning research application outweigh others when evaluated strictly on risk-adjusted return on capital?
- 2
How sensitive is your top ranking to changes in regulatory approval timelines or technology readiness levels?
- 3
What explicit trade-offs were made in rejecting the secondary applications, and what would trigger a re-evaluation of those decisions?
- 4
How did you ensure that academic bias towards technical complexity did not skew the scoring against simpler, higher-margin applications?
- 5
What specific commercial consensus was reached between the founding team, university inventors, and commercial advisors regarding this choice?