The gap in most stage-gates
Stage-gate reviews rely on market size, technical risk, and financial projections. They rarely include a rigorous view of the IP landscape — who owns adjacent claims, where the freedom-to-operate risk sits, and where white-space is concentrating. That gap causes late-stage surprises.
A governance loop that works
At stage 2 (feasibility), commission a targeted landscape and FTO. At stage 3 (development), refresh the landscape and file provisionals on the differentiated claims. At stage 4 (pilot), commission a competitive intelligence brief and a licensing readiness assessment. The cost is modest; the compounding effect over a portfolio is large.
