[The 9-HI™ Basics] What 9-HI™ Scores Mean

General Scoring Guidelines

9-HI™ is named for its 9 all-encompassing Fundamental Prime Metrics (FPMs). The 9 FPMs are organized into three Tier 1 Lanes. You can see the organization below that we have three (3) Tier 2 FPMs for each of the three (3) Tier 1 Lanes, or 9 Fundamental Prime Metrics (FPM).

These 9 FPMs guide the 9 major critical scoring areas. Essentially, FPMs help to further define the Product Technology, Team & Stakeholders, and Market Application powersets.

Click on any term in the figure above to see its definition.

The 9 FPMs organized as a 2-Tier Powerset allow collaborating Subject Matter Expert (SME) teams to calculate scores for each Project Topic to show where weaknesses and Risks reside for any given option being Evaluated.

No single FPM is more important than any other. Any significant weaknesses of a Project that can result in Project failure are represented in 9-HI as Risks. These Risks may be present in any of the 9 FPM elements, so no one FPM can be ignored. It's also important to note that the Lowest of the 9 FPM scores represents the current TRL of that Project.

The 9-HI™ FPM Scores can be used to:

  • Evaluate different investment options
  • Find Risks and weaknesses that need to be overcome during a development program
  • Evaluate multiple opportunities by comparing scores of competing options and deciding which path forward to take through investment, development, or deployment
  • Even more advanced uses of 9-HI™ are available with a variety of benefits
Scores help to remove subjectivity and quickly point out areas that need attention.

The nine (9) FPMs are calculated the same way for every Project that is evaluated. But the SFs used in the calculation will always be tailored to the specific Topic. The collaborating SME Team selects and refines unique Success Factors (SFs) for every project FPM. Recommendations are made by five (5) different AI Agents. SMEs can also research applicable SFs by searching through the Success Factor Library and by requesting help from the SF AI Agent "Casseopeia" or "Cassy" for short. When selecting SFs from the library or from Cassy, SFs should always be refined and tailored for every unique application. Together, Team SMEs collaborate with each other through discussion within the project Collaboration Tool. At this stage, the SMEs use the project Collaboration Tool to collaborate together and further discuss Risks, SFs, etc. The team needs to assess which SFs are best and how their wording needs to be refined given the current Project characteristics and objectives.

It is paramount to ensure that the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) indicated for the chosen Topic is identified so that responses meet the development needs of the Host and so development efforts have the right starting and finishing TRLs. TRLs essentially identify the maturity of the technology being developed. The range starts at TRL 1 with just concepts and ideas for technologies and progressively extends to TRL 9 where technologies are fundamentally much better understood and prepared for production environments. The scale below has been created by NASA and the U.S. Air Force to explain the 9 TRL Levels.

In some cases, where medium to low TRL technologies are sought for a project (refer to blue and black bars below), a low score in two of the Product Technology FPMs is actually essential. A low TRL technology is one that is not “fully baked” and represents higher Risk but potentially higher reward. Thus, the Value and Reliability of LOW TRL technologies must have LOW Scores and High Risks. If Value and Reliability are well understood, they will have HIGH Scores and Low Risks, so that technology is essentially a higher (7-9) TRL.

Click on the graphic above to get an interactive explanation.

SMEs also collaborate to assign a Weighting to each SF to signify its importance. Weighting is based on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the most important. After selection and weighting of SFs, proposal requests and evaluations can begin. The amount of confirmed Success Evidence that is presented within a Response or generated in a Development Project supports the score of each SF, the more evidence, the higher the score. When evaluating a response to an Request for Information (RFI), Request for White Paper (RWP), Request for Proposal (RFP), or Pitch Event, the Host SME Team validates the SF Scores proposed by the Responder in their self-evaluation section of the proposal. Low amounts of applicable confirmed evidence result in lower SF scores. Lower SF scores represent a higher Risk or lower TRL that needs a development plan to yield more evidence so that a TRL can progress towards 9 and deployment of the solution.

Did this answer your question? Thanks for the feedback There was a problem submitting your feedback. Please try again later.