Technology Radar Worksheet
Framework for evaluating and categorizing emerging technologies for your organization.
Technology Radar Worksheet
A structured framework for evaluating and categorizing technologies to guide your organization’s technology investments.
What is a Technology Radar?
A technology radar is a visual tool that helps organizations:
- Track technologies they’re evaluating or using
- Communicate technology strategy across teams
- Make consistent technology adoption decisions
- Identify emerging technologies to watch
Popularized by ThoughtWorks, a radar organizes technologies into quadrants and rings to show both category and adoption status.
Radar Structure
Quadrants (Categories)
| Quadrant | Description | Examples |
|---|---|---|
| Techniques | Processes, methodologies, practices | Trunk-based development, Event storming |
| Platforms | Infrastructure, runtime environments | Kubernetes, AWS, Snowflake |
| Tools | Software development tools | VS Code, Terraform, GitHub Actions |
| Languages & Frameworks | Programming languages, major frameworks | TypeScript, React, FastAPI |
Rings (Adoption Status)
| Ring | Meaning | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Adopt | Proven, recommended for use | Use by default for appropriate problems |
| Trial | Worth pursuing, ready for use on projects | Use in production with awareness of novelty |
| Assess | Worth exploring, not ready for production | Invest time in learning and prototyping |
| Hold | Proceed with caution, not recommended | Do not start new projects; migrate existing |
Technology Evaluation Worksheet
Use this template to evaluate technologies before adding them to your radar.
Basic Information
Technology Name: ____________________________________
Category: [ ] Techniques [ ] Platforms [ ] Tools [ ] Languages/Frameworks
Current Ring: [ ] Adopt [ ] Trial [ ] Assess [ ] Hold [ ] New
Proposed Ring: [ ] Adopt [ ] Trial [ ] Assess [ ] Hold [ ] Remove
Evaluator: ____________________________________
Date: ____________________________________Problem Fit
What problem does this technology solve?
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________What alternatives exist?
| Alternative | Our Current Choice | Comparison |
|---|---|---|
Why consider this over alternatives?
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________Evaluation Criteria
Rate each criterion from 1 (Poor) to 5 (Excellent):
Strategic Fit
| Criterion | Score | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Aligns with technology strategy | /5 | |
| Addresses a real need | /5 | |
| Timing is appropriate | /5 |
Maturity & Stability
| Criterion | Score | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Production-ready | /5 | |
| Active development/community | /5 | |
| Clear versioning/compatibility | /5 | |
| Documentation quality | /5 |
Team Readiness
| Criterion | Score | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Team has skills or can acquire | /5 | |
| Learning curve acceptable | /5 | |
| Training resources available | /5 |
Operational Considerations
| Criterion | Score | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Integrates with existing stack | /5 | |
| Monitoring/observability | /5 | |
| Security posture | /5 | |
| Vendor/community support | /5 |
Cost & Risk
| Criterion | Score | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Licensing cost acceptable | /5 | |
| Total cost of ownership | /5 | |
| Risk of technology obsolescence | /5 | |
| Migration path if needed | /5 |
Total Score: ___ / 90
Ring Recommendation Guide
| Score Range | Suggested Ring |
|---|---|
| 75-90 | Adopt |
| 55-74 | Trial |
| 35-54 | Assess |
| < 35 | Hold or Reject |
Evidence & Experience
Internal Experience:
[ ] No experience
[ ] Proof of concept completed
[ ] Used in non-production project
[ ] Used in production (limited)
[ ] Used in production (significant)Reference projects/teams:
_________________________________________________________________Key lessons learned:
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________Recommendation
Proposed ring placement: ____________________
Rationale:
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________Prerequisites or conditions:
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________Approved by: ____________________ Date: ____________
Sample Radar Entries
Adopt: TypeScript
Quadrant: Languages & Frameworks
Rationale: TypeScript has proven its value across our frontend and backend projects. Type safety catches bugs at compile time, improving code quality and developer productivity. The ecosystem is mature with excellent tooling support.
Guidance: Use TypeScript for all new JavaScript-based projects. Migrate existing JavaScript projects opportunistically.
Trial: Deno
Quadrant: Platforms
Rationale: Deno offers compelling features over Node.js including built-in TypeScript support, secure by default, and modern standard library. Ready for production use on appropriate projects.
Guidance: Suitable for new backend services and tooling. Evaluate integration with existing Node.js infrastructure before adopting.
Assess: WebAssembly (Wasm)
Quadrant: Platforms
Rationale: WebAssembly enables high-performance code in browsers and increasingly in server environments. Worth exploring for compute-intensive workloads.
Guidance: Invest time in learning. Build prototypes for appropriate use cases. Not ready for mainstream adoption.
Hold: jQuery
Quadrant: Languages & Frameworks
Rationale: Modern frameworks (React, Vue) provide better patterns for building complex UIs. jQuery increases bundle size and doesn’t offer benefits over vanilla JS for simple DOM manipulation.
Guidance: Do not use in new projects. Migrate existing projects when doing significant updates.
Radar Review Process
Quarterly Review Agenda
-
Review current radar (15 min)
- Any technologies to move rings?
- Any to remove entirely?
-
New technology proposals (30 min)
- Present completed evaluation worksheets
- Discuss and decide placement
-
Experience reports (15 min)
- Teams share experiences with Trial/Assess technologies
- Inform ring movement decisions
-
Update and publish (10 min)
- Update radar visualization
- Communicate changes to organization
Participation
Core team: Architecture, engineering leads, platform team Contributors: Any engineer can propose technologies Approval: Consensus for Assess/Trial, architecture sign-off for Adopt/Hold
Radar Visualization
Create your radar using:
- ThoughtWorks Build Your Own Radar: thoughtworks.com/radar/how-to-byor
- Zalando Tech Radar: Open source tool
- Simple spreadsheet + SVG template: DIY approach
Data Format Example
name,ring,quadrant,isNew,description
TypeScript,adopt,languages-and-frameworks,FALSE,Type-safe JavaScript
Deno,trial,platforms,FALSE,Modern JavaScript runtime
WebAssembly,assess,platforms,TRUE,High-performance portable runtime
jQuery,hold,languages-and-frameworks,FALSE,Legacy DOM manipulationTips for Success
Keep it focused:
- 50-80 items maximum
- Remove stale entries
- Focus on technologies relevant to your context
Make it actionable:
- Clear guidance for each entry
- Link to internal documentation
- Reference internal champions/experts
Drive adoption:
- Socialize widely
- Reference in architecture reviews
- Include in new project checklists
For technology strategy consulting, contact our team.
Need help implementing these practices?
Our team can help you apply these frameworks to your specific context.
