Service 03 — Sample Analysis

Before the Roadmap Ends Up in a Drawer
Real Outputs, Representative Data.

The portfolio balance analysis, technology axes, competency map, and feasibility sprint outputs below are real outputs from our Roadmap engagements. The data comes from a representative heavy machinery R&D portfolio based on scenarios we frequently encounter in Turkish manufacturing.

This is not a process narrative. This is a sample of the analysis you receive when we apply it to your portfolio.

120+
Projects Managed
€35.5M+
Incentives Defended
11
Ministry Audits
Zero
Loss
21 Years
R&D Experience

Sample Portfolio Profile

This profile represents a typical client structure operating in the heavy machinery sector with a need for R&D direction-setting.

Sector Heavy Machinery / Construction Equipment
Scale 820 employees, 68 R&D engineers
R&D Budget €5.8M / year
Active Projects 14 projects
Idea Pipeline 9 topics — not yet prioritized
Typical Problem All resources locked into incremental work

What's in This Portfolio?

"We know where we're headed, we just need to put it on paper" — we've heard this many times. What it usually means: there are 9 topics in the idea pipeline, each championed by someone, each supported with reasonable justifications. But how much money and people go to which idea hasn't been clarified. A roadmap without strategy ends up in a drawer — a document prepared without prioritization convinces no one in the first budget discussion.

What's Required?

A few weeks. Your existing portfolio assessment or our Diagnostic Sprint findings serve as the starting point — either works.

Current Portfolio Data

Active projects, budget allocation, FTE assignment — if Diagnostic Sprint was done, findings are used directly.

Idea Pipeline & Technology Candidates

All technology ideas and investment proposals from the internal team — unfiltered.

R&D Team Competency Profile

Current engineering disciplines, specialization areas, and team structure.

Market & Competitive Intelligence

Target markets, competitive landscape, customer demand trends — internal reports if available.

Strategic Direction

Direction and priorities the board or senior management expects from R&D.

Interviews with Project Leaders & Management

Structured interviews — for both technical and strategic perspective.

The remaining analysis is conducted entirely by Luminairo. At the end of a few weeks, you receive the following outputs.

Starting Point — Portfolio Diagnostic

Every Roadmap engagement is fed by a diagnostic that reveals the portfolio's current state — whether your existing internal assessment or our Diagnostic Sprint findings. In this sample, the diagnostic revealed these structural issues:

Portfolio Balance
58% of resources in incremental
Platform 12%, transformational 5%. Near-zero investment in the future.
Time Horizon
55% locked into short-term
3+ year investment only 10%. Competitive position at risk within 3 years.
Idea Pipeline
9 topics, Zero prioritization
Everyone champions their own proposal. None wins in the budget discussion.
Strength
Strong mechanical design competency
Hydraulics, chassis, powertrain — core engineering strong. Digital competency lacking.
For portfolio diagnostic details: Sample Analysis →

Output — Global Technology Policy Map

Regulations, standards, and policy shifts shaping the sector. The question: where is the world heading, and is your portfolio looking in that direction?

Policy / Regulation Scope Effective Portfolio Impact Urgency
EU NRMM CO₂ & Zero-Emission Standards (Expected) CO₂ emissions from off-road machinery are currently unregulated at EU level. Policy proposal expected by 2027–2028, with implementation likely by 2030 Expected 2028–2030 Diesel-only platform strategy faces growing regulatory risk — electrification/hybrid readiness becomes a competitive necessity High
EU Machinery Regulation 2023/1230 Autonomous and semi-autonomous machinery safety, cybersecurity, AI integration January 2027 Autonomous operation axis must be designed compliant with this standard High
Turkey Green Deal Action Plan Industrial decarbonization targets, CBAM compliance 2026–2030 Carbon footprint reporting mandatory for exporting companies Medium
ISO 15143 Telematics Standards Data exchange standards for construction equipment Update 2026 Telematics axis must be designed to this standard Medium
IEC 61508 / ISO 13849 Functional Safety Safety levels in autonomous systems Current Autonomous project must be designed to SIL-2 target Foundational

+3 more regulations — sector-specific full map included in engagement

Book a Call →

What Does This Table Say?

CO₂ emissions from off-road machinery are currently unregulated at EU level — but that window is closing. Policy proposals are expected by 2027–2028, and the direction is clear: diesel-only platforms face mounting regulatory risk. EU Machinery Regulation governs autonomous machinery safety from January 2027 — retrofitting compliance on this axis will be expensive. These two pressures alone challenge the incremental weight in the portfolio: with 58% of resources in incremental while the platform landscape shifts by end of decade. Preparation window: 18–24 months.

Output — Competency Gap Map

The company's current technical competencies, required level for each technology axis, and the gap between them.

Competency Area Current Level Required Level Gap
Power Electronics & Battery Systems
Current
Required
Kritik Gap
Autonomous Navigation & Sensor Fusion
Current
Required
Kritik Gap
Hydraulics & Mechanical Design
Current
Required
Sufficient
Functional Safety (SIL / ISO 13849)
Current
Required
Orta Gap
IoT & Embedded Software
Current
Required
Orta Gap
Data Analytics & Machine Learning
Current
Required
Kritik Gap

+4 more competency areas — company-specific full analysis included in engagement

Book a Call →

Even the first two areas tell the story: Both critical gaps require digital competency — power electronics and autonomous navigation. The company is strong in mechanical design, but all technology axes demand digital transformation competency. The full competency map, with hiring priorities, university partnerships, and supplier collaboration recommendations, is delivered within the engagement scope.

Output — Technology Axes & Roadmap

When portfolio diagnostic, policy map, and competency gaps come together, technology axes emerge. In this sample, 3 main axes were identified:

Technology Axes — Heavy Machinery Portfolio

Axis 1 — Platform
Electrification & Hybrid Power System

Transition from current diesel platform to hybrid. 3-year investment. High regulatory pressure.

Axis 2 — Transformational
Autonomous Operation Capability

Autonomous movement in machines. 5-year vision. Feasibility sprint required.

Axis 3 — Incremental
Telemetry & Predictive Maintenance

IoT sensor integration, data analytics. 12-18 month implementation. Fast revenue impact.

Axis 1: Electrification
Short Term (0-12 mo) Power electronics feasibility. Supplier evaluation. Gate 1: motor selection decision.
Medium Term (1-3 yr) Hybrid prototype development. Field tests. Gate 2: homologation preparation.
Long Term (3-5 yr) Full-electric platform. Mass production preparation.
Axis 2: Autonomous Operation
Short Term (0-12 mo) Feasibility sprint. Sensor architecture PoC. Gate 1: go/no-go decision.
Medium Term (1-3 yr) Semi-autonomous pilot. University partnership. TÜBİTAK 1501 application.
Long Term (3-5 yr) Full autonomous operation. Customer pilot. Certification.
Eksen 3: Telemetry & Predictive Maintenance
Short Term (0-12 mo) IoT sensor integration. Data collection infrastructure. First customer pilot.
Medium Term (1-3 yr) Predictive maintenance algorithms. SaaS model revenue stream.
Long Term (3-5 yr) Digital twin integration. Fleet management platform.

Output — Decision Gates

For each axis, what evidence level triggers a continue, descope, defer, or stop decision is defined in advance. Major investment decisions are tied to measurable evidence.

Why is this critical? A roadmap without gate logic often turns into long-running activities that produce no decisions. The full gate matrix — which metric at which threshold triggers which decision — is designed company-specific within the engagement scope.

Output — Feasibility Sprint Decisions

High-potential but high-uncertainty ideas are tested in short sprints before major budget commitment. The goal is not to write a detailed technical report, but to validate or falsify the investment thesis early.

Electrification — Hybrid Power System

✓ GO — Added to Roadmap

Sprint question: Can this topic move forward on the current platform with a reasonable investment thesis?

Result: Technical and commercial signals were found strong enough; project was added to the roadmap and moved to controlled investment phase.

Hydrogen Fuel Cell Integration

✗ NO-GO — Deferred

Sprint question: Is this technology a commercially defensible investment in the near term?

Result: Market readiness, cost structure, and external dependencies made the investment indefensible at this stage. Without the sprint, a €2.8M investment decision could have been made without this information.

A "no-go" decision is not failure. One of the most valuable outputs is clarifying early which topic should not receive investment right now.

What Do You Receive?

The roadmap engagement is completed in a few weeks; feasibility sprints run in parallel if needed.

Technology Roadmap

Management-level visual roadmap showing prioritized technology axes and timing logic.

External Impact Summary

Simplified view of regulations, standards, and sector pressures affecting the portfolio.

Competency Gap View

Summary showing critical technical areas the company needs to strengthen and priority levels.

Investment & Sprint Decisions

Clear decision set on which topics to accelerate, test, or defer.

Resource Requirements Summary

Decision note summarizing human resource, budget, and partnership needs in management language.

Executive Presentation

Presentation combining the roadmap, sprint results, and investment thesis in one package.

In This Sample 14-project representative heavy machinery portfolio results:
3 Axes Scheduled technology roadmap
1 Go / 1 No-Go Evidence-based sprint decisions
€2.8M Identified misallocated investment risk

Does Your Portfolio Show These Symptoms?

How many of these apply to your portfolio?

More than 50% of R&D budget goes to incremental product improvements.
Multiple technology candidates in the idea pipeline but none has been clarified.
The last roadmap prepared ended up in a drawer.
Upcoming regulations haven't been reflected in the portfolio yet.
Internal competency gaps in new technology areas haven't been mapped.

Where Should You Invest in the Next 3–5 Years?

The portfolio balance analysis, roadmap axes, and sprint decisions above are real engagement outputs. We used representative data because we can't share client data yet. But the tools and process are the same.

A roadmap's most valuable output is not what gets a "yes" — it's what gets a "no." In a free 20-minute call, let's discuss the balance and opportunities in your portfolio.

Request a Free Call