The most decisive decisions about future technology are made early in the development process, when the problem to be addressed is known but the solution is still open. At this stage, there is rarely sufficient information to make perfect decisions. Clear use cases are missing, markets have yet to take shape, and there is no shared understanding of what is actually going to be built to serve which markets. Research is precise, but innovation is the widest part of the funnel that leads to the selection of transformative technologies that drive market adoption.
It is precisely at this point that technical architectures are formed, interfaces are defined and the ground rules for future innovation are set. This is not about guesswork, but about making decisions on incomplete information, with the awareness that their consequences may only become apparent much later.
This is the ever-evolving context in which David Boswarthick works. As Director of Strategy and Innovation at ETSI, he operates at the intersection of research, industry and standardisation, where decisions must be taken without a blueprint, but never without impact. In his work, he sees how choices perceived as preliminary often have far-reaching implications: who can participate, how technology can be scaled, and which options remain open – or are closed off – further down the line.
A recurring challenge is that these decisions are often taken within limited circles. Not out of ill will or lack of competence, but due to time pressure, uncertainty and the absence of shared forums. Choosing to move forward or wait then becomes an active decision in itself. Even when common frameworks are missing, direction is still set – and by the time the technology has to operate within larger ecosystems, it often becomes clear that fundamental assumptions are already locked in.
For David, this lies at the heart of the innovation challenge. Not how quickly new technology can be developed, but how early decisions can be organised so that the future is not unnecessarily constrained. And why standardisation, used in this way, is one of the few tools that can genuinely influence development while the fundamental concepts are still malleable.
When innovation locks itself in
In many innovation processes, a shift occurs at a very early stage. The focus quickly moves towards feasibility, delivery and speed. Architectures are often chosen to address a concrete, immediate need, rather than to accommodate unknown requirements that arise when the technology is applied in multiple contexts. The result is solutions that are effective within their original setting but difficult to integrate, further develop or reuse.
In practice, this often manifests as a recurring pattern that Boswarthick encounters across different contexts, regardless of technology area or organisational form.
David Boswarthick, Director of Strategy and Innovation, ETSI
In many cases, development begins with strong momentum. A small group of researchers and industry partners co-develop an approach that works well within its own context. The results are promising, collaboration is efficient and progress is rapid. Under time pressure, internal decisions may be prioritised over broader coordination and wider considerations. Assumptions are rarely documented, and interfaces are defined according to local needs.
Decisions made in small groups, often to keep complexity under control, therefore acquire a normative effect. By the time the technology matures, and more actors need to become involved, the available room for manoeuvre is already limited.
As the technology is taken up by others, friction emerges. Parallel solutions have been developed with similar objectives but different starting points. What worked locally proves difficult to integrate. Choices once regarded as temporary have become fixed, and the ability to adjust them is constrained. Innovation has not stopped – but the room for manoeuvre has narrowed – focus, timeliness and consultation are now essential to forward movement.
Innovation before market – using clearly defined structure
Within ETSI’s work, many technologies are still far from reaching the market. Here, innovation is not about finished products, but about creating shared conditions that allow ideas to become applicable. Boswarthick describes innovation as something that may need to start in a narrow setting, but that must be exposed early on to a wider range of perspectives.
A recurring problem is that research and development are often carried out in isolation from the environment in which the technology will eventually operate (from lab to market). When results are ready to be scaled, links to existing systems, regulatory frameworks and business models need to be integrated. As a result, promising ideas risk remaining at laboratory level – not because they lack quality, but because they lack context.
Standardisation as early infrastructure
At this point, standardisation plays a different role from the one it is often associated with. It is not about freezing solutions or producing ready-made answers, but about establishing shared reference points. For Boswarthick, early standardisation is a way of making assumptions visible, creating transparency and inviting more actors in while the technology can still be influenced.
There are, however, situations where early coordination has been used specifically to manage uncertainty, rather than to eliminate it.
When the initial work on GSM began to take shape, there was neither an established market nor finished products to build upon. Different national systems existed side by side, and it was unclear which usage patterns would prevail. In this context, standardisation did not function as an answer to what the technology should look like, but as a way of creating shared direction in the face of uncertainty.
Rather than locking down details early, the actors involved agreed on fundamental frameworks. This made it possible to continue working in parallel, with a degree of predictability but without detailed blueprints. The standards defined what needed to work together, not how each solution should be built. This allowed room for variation, while ensuring that the conditions for interoperability were in place before the market took shape.
Read also: ETSI’s role in the development of standardisation – from GSM to global impact
For Boswarthick, this is not merely a historical experience, but a working logic that continues to shape how the ETSI approach may be used to enable early coordination on complex technologies today.
”In many cases, technology needs to mature in a smaller, more open environment before it is brought into formal standardisation. Within ETSI, this often happens through Industry Specification Groups, ISGs, which are designed precisely for this phase,” he says and continues: “They are not about setting the final solution, but about bringing actors together early, testing assumptions and building shared understanding while alternatives are still open.”
From isolated breakthroughs to shared direction
One key lesson from ETSI’s work is that innovation rarely fails due to a lack of ideas. It fails when structures that connect research, industry and application are missing. When those connections are introduced too late, standardisation becomes reactive, an attempt to correct decisions that have already been made.
According to Boswarthick, future innovation efforts must shift their focus from isolated breakthroughs towards shared direction. This requires forums where uncertainty is accepted, where technical choices can be discussed before they are cemented, and where more voices can influence the shape of what later becomes infrastructure.
Making decisions without a blueprint – but together
Early stages of development will always be characterised by incomplete information. Uncertainty cannot be eliminated. But it is possible to create structures for how decisions are made when conditions are unclear. For Boswarthick, this is crucial in determining how much room for manoeuvre remains further down the line.
Used in this way, standardisation does not become a final step, but a tool at the beginning of the innovation process. A way of addressing uncertainty collectively and thereby ensuring that future technology is not shaped by temporary assumptions, but by deliberate decisions, taken at the right time.
Therefore, standardisation that enables interoperability becomes a driver of innovation and a tool to grow digital global markets to the benefit of all stakeholders, including consumers.
