Division 20 is the technology intelligence, comparative evaluation and technology-selection division of the AGL Innovation Framework. Division 19 asks whether an innovation works in a real environment; Division 20 asks how it compares with available alternatives, existing AGL technology and global best practice — and which technology should be selected. It establishes a structured, evidence-based technology comparison system covering products, manufacturers, performance, reliability, cost, energy, maintainability, lifecycle value and technology maturity.
The question this division answers — How does this technology compare with available alternatives, existing AGL technology and global best practice — and which technology should we select?
Division 20 is the technology intelligence and decision-support bridge between the Innovation Strategy, the Prototype Laboratory, the 100+ PoC programme, the AGL Product Encyclopedia and eventual technology deployment. It does not build or trial technology itself — it evaluates, compares, benchmarks and scores what Divisions 18 and 19 have already built and tested, and feeds the resulting decision back into the pipeline.
Systematically review existing and emerging technologies relevant to AGL, so decisions rest on a structured technical picture rather than isolated impressions.
Compare technologies against one another using a standardized evaluation methodology rather than subjective opinions.
Compared against predefined criteria — not preference.
Establish a reference point against which AGL technologies can be measured.
Rather than simply stating "Fixture A is better," the benchmark should establish:
Product benchmarking should connect strongly with the AGL Product Encyclopedia / Component Library.
Product ID → Manufacturer → Model → Product category → Technical specifications → Applicable standards → Performance → Reliability → Energy → Maintenance → Warranty → Lifecycle information → Technology maturity → Known limitations → Benchmark score.
Compare technology capability and product-support capability — not simply company size or reputation.
Manufacturer benchmarking should remain evidence-based and product-specific. A manufacturer may be strong in one AGL technology and less competitive in another.
Understand how AGL technology is evolving internationally.
This allows the Innovation Strategy team to identify where AGL technology currently stands and where it is moving.
TRL should provide a common language for technology maturity across the division.
| TRL | Definition |
|---|---|
| 1 — Basic Principle | Technology principle identified. |
| 2 — Technology Concept | Potential application formulated. |
| 3 — Proof of Concept | Experimental demonstration. |
| 4 — Laboratory Validation | Technology demonstrated in controlled conditions. |
| 5 — Relevant Environment | Technology demonstrated under representative conditions. |
| 6 — Field Demonstration | Prototype demonstrated in realistic operational conditions. |
| 7 — Pilot System | System demonstrated in an operational environment. |
| 8 — Qualified Technology | Technology completed and qualified through the applicable process. |
| 9 — Proven Operational Technology | Technology successfully operating in the intended operational environment. |
The exact TRL criteria should be adapted to the particular AGL technology and its applicable qualification requirements.
A technology may be technically mature but commercially immature — TRL should therefore be one input among several.
Compare measurable performance across technologies and products.
Where manufacturer claims are used, they should be clearly identified as manufacturer-provided information and distinguished from independently measured results.
Evaluate cost beyond purchase price.
Compare how reliably different technologies perform.
Two fixtures may have similar purchase prices, but one may require significantly fewer maintenance interventions — that difference should appear in the reliability benchmark.
Particularly important for the Sustainable AGL & Green Airports programme.
A technically excellent product can still be poor overall if it is difficult to maintain.
This should be one of the most important elements of Division 20 — evaluating technologies over their complete lifecycle.
Identify the difference between current capability and required / future capability.
| Capability | Current | Required | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Remote monitoring | Partial | Real-time | High |
| Predictive maintenance | Limited | Automated | High |
| Photometry | Manual | Automated | High |
| Asset data | Fragmented | Integrated | High |
| Energy monitoring | Limited | Real-time | Medium |
The actual values should come from measured organizational/project data rather than assumptions.
Technology selection is the final decision-making function of Division 20.
A standardized scorecard whose weighting is defined according to the particular technology and application.
A useful internal scoring system. The score should always be accompanied by evidence and test data.
Does not meet requirement.
Partially meets requirement.
Meets basic requirement.
Exceeds requirement.
Significantly exceeds requirement / leading capability.
For stronger engineering governance, evidence can be classified so a marketing statement is never treated as equivalent to independently measured performance.
| Level | Definition |
|---|---|
| A — Independently Verified | Independent laboratory or field data. |
| B — Controlled Test Data | Data from defined laboratory/engineering testing. |
| C — Field Data | Actual operational performance data. |
| D — Manufacturer Data | Published manufacturer technical information. |
| E — Engineering Assessment | Expert evaluation where direct data is unavailable. |
| F — Conceptual | Early-stage technology assumption or future concept. |
Division 20 should create a central AGL Technology Benchmark Database. Each record could contain the following fields.
A very useful innovation tool, connecting directly to Division 19 — PoC & Pilot Projects.
Technology is mature and suitable for current deployment.
Technology is promising and requires further assessment.
Technology should be demonstrated through PoC/pilot projects.
Emerging technology with future potential but insufficient maturity.
The typical decision flow from a technology requirement through to final selection.
TECHNOLOGY REQUIREMENT
│
▼
TECHNOLOGY IDENTIFICATION
│
▼
INITIAL SCREENING
│
▼
TECHNICAL EVALUATION
│
▼
BENCHMARKING
│
┌────────────────┼────────────────┐
│ │ │
Technical Economic Lifecycle
│ │ │
└────────────────┼────────────────┘
│
▼
RISK ASSESSMENT
│
▼
MATURITY / TRL
│
▼
TECHNOLOGY SCORE
│
┌──────────┼──────────┐
│ │ │
ADOPT PILOT WATCH
│ │ │
│ ▼ │
│ PoC │
│ │ │
└──────────┼──────────┘
▼
FINAL SELECTION
Every major technology evaluation should generate a formal report using this recommended structure.
Technology, application, alternatives, key finding, recommendation.
Operating principle, architecture, application.
Performance, compatibility, reliability.
Product comparison, manufacturer comparison, global comparison.
CAPEX, OPEX, lifecycle cost.
Energy, materials, lifecycle impact.
TRL, product maturity, manufacturing maturity.
Current capability, required capability, gap.
Technical, operational, supply, lifecycle.
Adopt / Pilot / Evaluate Further / Watch / Reject.
The review interval should be determined by technology rate of change, operational criticality and procurement relevance.
To make Division 20 operational rather than theoretical, these registers should be maintained and kept current.
Twenty KPIs across four categories, used to track how far AGL technology decisions have moved toward being evidence-based.
Division 20 closes the loop between prototyping, piloting and technology decision-making — and every completed PoC should improve the technology benchmark database.
and after the PoC:
The recommended core architecture for Division 20 — from the global technology landscape through to continuous reassessment.
GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY LANDSCAPE
│
▼
TECHNOLOGY IDENTIFICATION
│
▼
TECHNOLOGY REVIEW
│
▼
TECHNOLOGY COMPARISON
│
┌──────────────┼──────────────┐
│ │ │
Product Manufacturer Global
Benchmarking Benchmarking Benchmarking
│ │ │
└──────────────┼──────────────┘
│
▼
PERFORMANCE DATA
│
┌──────────────────┼──────────────────┐
│ │ │
Reliability Energy Maintainability
│ │ │
└──────────────────┼──────────────────┘
│
▼
LIFECYCLE VALUE
│
▼
TECHNOLOGY GAP
│
▼
TRL / MATURITY
│
▼
TECHNOLOGY SCORING
│
▼
TECHNOLOGY DECISION
│
┌────────────────┼────────────────┐
│ │ │
ADOPT PILOT WATCH
│ │ │
│ ▼ │
│ DIV. 19 │
│ │ │
└────────────────┼────────────────┘
▼
BENCHMARK DATABASE
│
▼
CONTINUOUS REASSESSMENT
Division 20 is the technology intelligence and decision-support bridge across the Innovation Hub.
AI for AGL → AI systems are a reviewed and benchmarked technology category in their own right.
IoT & Connected AGL → IoT monitoring and sensor technologies feed the global technology comparison.
Digital Engineering → digital twins and digital platforms are tracked on the global technology map.
Prototype Development → supplies the built and validated technology that Division 20 benchmarks.
PoC & Pilot Projects → supplies real-environment field evidence that upgrades the benchmark evidence level.
Innovation Database & Project Intelligence → preserves the technology benchmark database and decision history.
Division 20 should establish an evidence-based AGL technology intelligence system so that future technology decisions are not based only on supplier presentations, product brochures, individual experience, or purchase price.
Instead, decisions should be based on:
The ultimate output is "Right Technology — Right Application — Right Maturity — Right Time." This makes Division 20 the technology intelligence and decision-support bridge between the Innovation Strategy, Prototype Laboratory, 100+ PoC programme, AGL Product Encyclopedia and eventual technology deployment.
Quick answers about Technology Evaluation & Benchmarking in the AGL Innovation Hub.
Division 20 is the technology intelligence, comparative evaluation and technology-selection division of the AGL Innovation Framework. Division 19 asks whether an innovation works in a real environment; Division 20 asks how it compares with available alternatives, existing AGL technology and global best practice — and which technology should be selected. It covers 16 topics (TB-01 to TB-16).
How does this technology compare with available alternatives, existing AGL technology and global best practice — and which technology should we select?
The 16 topics are Technology Review, Technology Comparison, Technology Benchmarking, Product Benchmarking, Manufacturer Benchmarking, Global Technology Comparison, Technology Readiness Level, Technology Maturity Assessment, Performance Benchmarking, Cost Benchmarking, Reliability Benchmarking, Energy Benchmarking, Maintainability Benchmarking, Lifecycle Benchmarking, Technology-Gap Analysis and Technology Selection.
Division 20 is the technology intelligence and decision-support bridge between the Innovation Strategy, the Prototype Laboratory, the 100+ PoC programme, the AGL Product Encyclopedia and eventual technology deployment. It does not build or trial technology itself — it evaluates, compares, benchmarks and scores what Divisions 18 and 19 have already built and tested, and feeds the resulting decision back into the pipeline.
A standardized scorecard whose weighting is defined according to the particular technology and application. It includes Technical Performance — Requirement compliance, Safety — Safety performance, Reliability — Reliability evidence, Energy — Energy performance, Maintainability — Maintenance burden, Lifecycle — Total lifecycle value, Technology Maturity — TRL / maturity, Integration — Existing-system compatibility, Sustainability — Environmental performance, Scalability — Deployment potential, Manufacturer Support — Technical/service capability and Innovation Potential — Future development potential.
A useful internal scoring system. The score should always be accompanied by evidence and test data. 1 — Poor: Does not meet requirement; 2 — Weak: Partially meets requirement; 3 — Acceptable: Meets basic requirement; 4 — Strong: Exceeds requirement; 5 — Leading: Significantly exceeds requirement / leading capability.
For stronger engineering governance, evidence can be classified so a marketing statement is never treated as equivalent to independently measured performance. Level — Definition; A — Independently Verified — Independent laboratory or field data; B — Controlled Test Data — Data from defined laboratory/engineering testing; C — Field Data — Actual operational performance data; D — Manufacturer Data — Published manufacturer technical information; E — Engineering Assessment — Expert evaluation where direct data is unavailable; F — Conceptual — Early-stage technology assumption or future concept.
Division 20 should create a central AGL Technology Benchmark Database. Each record could contain the following fields. It includes Technology ID, Technology category, Technology name, Manufacturer, Product/model, Application, Technology generation, TRL, Technical performance, Reliability, Energy, Maintainability, Lifecycle cost, Environmental performance, Test evidence and Field evidence.
A very useful innovation tool, connecting directly to Division 19 — PoC & Pilot Projects. ADOPT; Technology is mature and suitable for current deployment; EVALUATE; Technology is promising and requires further assessment; PILOT; Technology should be demonstrated through PoC/pilot projects; WATCH; Emerging technology with future potential but insufficient maturity.
The typical decision flow from a technology requirement through to final selection. TECHNOLOGY REQUIREMENT │ ▼ TECHNOLOGY IDENTIFICATION │ ▼ INITIAL SCREENING │ ▼ TECHNICAL EVALUATION │ ▼ BENCHMARKING │ ┌────────────────┼────────────────┐ │ │ │ Technical Economic Lifecycle │ │ │ └────────────────┼────────────────┘ │ ▼ RISK ASSESSMENT │ ▼ MATURITY / TRL │ ▼ TECHNOLOGY SCORE │ ┌──────────┼──────────┐ │ │ │ ADOPT PILOT WATCH │ │ │ │ ▼ │ │ PoC │ │ │ │ └──────────┼──────────┘ ▼ FINAL SELECTION.
Every major technology evaluation should generate a formal report using this recommended structure. SECTION 1; Executive Summary; Technology, application, alternatives, key finding, recommendation; SECTION 2; Technology Description; Operating principle, architecture, application; SECTION 3; Technical Assessment; Performance, compatibility, reliability; SECTION 4; Benchmarking; Product comparison, manufacturer comparison, global comparison; SECTION 5; Economic Assessment; CAPEX, OPEX, lifecycle cost; SECTION 6; Sustainability; Energy, materials, lifecycle impact; SECTION 7; Maturity; TRL, product maturity, manufacturing maturity; SECTION 8; Technology Gap; Current capability, required capability, gap; SECTION 9; Risk; Technical, operational, supply, lifecycle; SECTION 10; Recommendation; Adopt / Pilot / Evaluate Further / Watch / Reject.
The review interval should be determined by technology rate of change, operational criticality and procurement relevance. FAST-MOVING; Review More Frequently: AI, IoT, Robotics, Communications, Computing, Digital platforms; MEDIUM-SPEED; Standard Cycle: LED fixtures, Smart CCRs, Monitoring systems, Photometric technologies; LONG-LIFE; Extended Cycle: Transformers, Cables, Connectors, Structural components.
To make Division 20 operational rather than theoretical, these registers should be maintained and kept current. It includes Technology Master Register, Technology Review Register, Technology Comparison Register, Technology Benchmark Register, Product Benchmark Register, Manufacturer Benchmark Register, Global Technology Register, TRL Assessment Register, Technology Maturity Register, Performance Benchmark Register, Cost Benchmark Register, Reliability Benchmark Register, Energy Benchmark Register, Maintainability Benchmark Register, Lifecycle Benchmark Register and Technology Gap Register.
Twenty KPIs across four categories, used to track how far AGL technology decisions have moved toward being evidence-based. It includes Technologies reviewed, New technologies identified, Technologies benchmarked, Global technologies tracked, Technology reviews completed, Products benchmarked, Manufacturers benchmarked, Performance benchmarks completed, Reliability benchmarks completed, Lifecycle benchmarks completed, Technologies assessed for TRL, Technologies by maturity level, Emerging technologies identified, Technologies moved from WATCH to EVALUATE, Technologies moved from EVALUATE to PILOT and Technology selections completed.
Division 20 closes the loop between prototyping, piloting and technology decision-making — and every completed PoC should improve the technology benchmark database. The steps or layers are: Division 18 — Prototype Development · "Can we build and validate it?"; Division 19 — PoC & Pilot Projects · "Does it work in the real environment?"; Division 20 — Technology Evaluation & Benchmarking · "How does it compare with alternatives and global technology?"; Technology Decision — Adopt / Pilot / Improve / Watch / Reject.
Technology evaluation and benchmarking start with understanding comparative testing, scoring frameworks, performance criteria and structured decision-making. The next step is building the technical knowledge required to evaluate, develop and apply these methods with confidence.
Develop structured knowledge across:
Understand how engineering problems become opportunities, technologies, concepts, validation activities and measurable improvements.
Understand today's AGL. Build tomorrow's capability.
Please read before relying on any content on this page or on any record downloaded from it.