> Tools, languages and technology take their place after a significant share of people have adopted them, not before. Trying to steer industry towards certain t

> Tools, languages and technology take their place after a significant share of people have adopted them, not before. Trying to steer industry towards certain tools and away from others, ignores the irrational choices that belie them, and how resistant we may sometimes be to purported technical fixes. Your perspective is biased to a particular point. The technology adoption bell curve (pioneers, early adopters, early majority, late majority, laggards) is a more instructive prism. Our propensity to assume risk is commensurate with both the size of the problem we're trying to solve and the lack of lower-risk options. Pioneers aren't paying attention to tech radars, because brand-new projects find their earliest users directly, not via tech radars. The audience for tech radars are early adopters and early majority. Both are looking for validation from the rest of the market (i.e. seeking to avoid projects rated as "hold"/avoid), the difference being that early adopters are more risk-friendly (i.e. willing to try "assess") while the early majority is less risk friendly (i.e. looking for the "trial" recommendation). At no point is a tech radar trying to get you to ignore your own evaluation cycle or to push projects ("adopt") that are not right for you. It's just a relatively organic marketing funnel to help projects with minimum proving to expand their audience, and for the wider market to connect to potential solutions, in exchange for the market developing appreciation for ThoughtWorks and thus serving as a potential marketing funnel for ThoughtWorks's primary consulting business.