With so many technologies on the market, how do you evaluate what is genuinely valuable? The latest instalment from Maritime CEO’s guide to shipping in the Year of the Fire Horse. The maritime industry is undergoing a digital journey, but it is a renaissance shadowed by an overwhelming influx of options. From AI-driven voyage optimisation to sensor-heavy machinery monitoring, the sheer volume of “transformational” technology can be paralysing. For shipowners and managers, the challenge is no longer finding new technology – it is determining which of those technologies will survive the harsh realities of sea life and which are merely marketing noise. The cultural litmus test Shipping has always been a high-stakes, conservative industry. As Henrik Hyldahn, group CEO of Marcura, aptly puts it, “Shipping is cautious, and rightly so. High stakes, significant money, real consequences. 90% reliability won’t cut it. Neither will 95%. The bar is higher here than in most industries.” This high bar is exactly where many entrants fail. “That’s why you see a lot of startups struggling,” Hyldahn observes. “You have to build the market and the product simultaneously. That requires domain expertise, persistence, and longer runways than most can sustain.” For those evaluating tech, Hyldahn offers a clear benchmark: “If they’re selling intelligence, or AI, are they building on structured maritime data, and do they have the governance in place to keep data secure? Do they understand that shipping has edge cases that technology alone can’t handle? And critically: have they earned trust through years of operational proof?” This skepticism is a necessary defence mechanism. Captain Kuba Szymanski, secretary-general at InterManager, reinforces the need for this guarded approach. “Trust and intelligence are paramount,” he says. “The industry is awash with hype, exaggerated claims, and misinformation. That makes rigorous evaluation essential and reinforces the importance of supporting strong in-house people expertise gained through experience when selecting technology partners.” The industry is awash with hype, exaggerated claims, and misinformation The evidence-based framework Once the filter of domain expertise is applied, the evaluation must turn to the hard data. Alex Karydis, a director at German shipowner Hanse Bereederung, distills the selection process into a rigorous three-part diagnostic test: Verifiability: Can performance be proven?; Operability: Does it work in real trading conditions?Commercial applicability: Does it matter to charterers, financiers, and insurers? “Technology that fails any one of these tests,” Karydis notes, “rarely delivers lasting value.” To apply these tests, organisations need a structured process. Arthur English, CEO of G2 Ocean, emphasises a disciplined requirements-gathering phase. “In order to ensure that we select the right technology partner, we first spend time understanding the need we have for any technology or system’s functionality,” English explains. “We agree on the minimal requirements for functionality, data processing, integrations and usability standpoint, and differentiate between must-have and nice to have.” This leads to a trial-by-fire approach: “We prefer to do a proper proof of concept or trial period to prove the value of a system or technology before we commit to it.” Hakki Deval, managing partner at Turkish owner Devbulk, agrees, advocating for a “data first, practicality second, marketing last” philo