Introduction
In the intricate world of grant funding, particularly within the European Innovation Council’s (EIC) Accelerator program, the shift from a numerical ranking system to a binary GO/NOGO approach has significant implications for applicants. This article delves into how this method, while increasing success rates in the early stages, may lead to lower success rates during the interview phase, discussing the dynamics and consequences for startups and Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs) seeking substantial funding.
Understanding the GO/NOGO Approach
The GO/NOGO approach is a binary evaluation system used in the initial phases of grant applications to quickly identify promising projects. Unlike the numerical ranking system, which provides a nuanced view of each application’s relative strength, the GO/NOGO method categorizes applications as either fit (GO) or unfit (NOGO) for funding based on a set threshold. This system aims to streamline the early stages of the evaluation process, allowing programs like the EIC Accelerator to efficiently manage the high volume of applications.
Increased Early Stage Success Rates
By simplifying the evaluation criteria, the GO/NOGO approach often results in higher success rates in the early application stages. Applicants who meet the basic criteria are more likely to proceed to the subsequent stages, fostering a sense of progress and motivation. This increase in early-stage approvals can encourage more startups and SMEs to apply, broadening the pool of innovations and potentially raising the overall quality of submissions.
The Challenge of Lower Interview Success Rates
However, the binary nature of the GO/NOGO approach can lead to a bottleneck effect during the interview phase. With more applicants progressing from the initial stages, the competition intensifies significantly during the interviews. The lack of nuanced evaluation from earlier phases means that the interview stage becomes the critical juncture where the real differentiation happens, often resulting in lower success rates as the evaluators must make more discerning and difficult decisions.
Balancing Efficiency with Effectiveness
The transition to a GO/NOGO approach reflects an attempt to balance efficiency with effectiveness in the grant application process. While it allows funding bodies to manage large volumes of applications more efficiently, it also places a greater emphasis on the interview stage, demanding more from both applicants and evaluators. This shift requires applicants to not only prepare a solid written application but also to excel in personal communication and persuasion during the interview, underscoring the importance of comprehensive preparation and possibly increasing reliance on expert consultants.
The Need for a Holistic Strategy
For startups and SMEs navigating this landscape, a holistic strategy is crucial. Understanding the nuances of both the written application and the interview process is key to success. This includes recognizing the importance of early stage milestones while also preparing rigorously for the critical interview phase. Engaging with professional consultants, practicing pitch delivery, and thoroughly understanding the innovation’s market potential and societal impact are all essential components of this strategy.
Conclusion
The adoption of a GO/NOGO approach in grant applications has notable implications for the success rates of applicants, particularly in programs like the EIC Accelerator. While it may increase early-stage approvals, the real challenge often lies in the interview phase, where the depth and quality of each project are rigorously scrutinized. For startups and SMEs, navigating this balance requires a comprehensive understanding of the process, strategic preparation, and sometimes the guidance of experienced consultants. As the grant funding landscape continues to evolve, so too must the strategies of applicants, adapting to new evaluation methods and continuously striving for excellence at every stage of the application.
About
The articles found on Rasph.com reflect the opinions of Rasph or its respective authors and in no way reflect opinions held by the European Commission (EC) or the European Innovation Council (EIC). The provided information aims to share perspectives that are valuable and can potentially inform applicants regarding grant funding schemes such as the EIC Accelerator, EIC Pathfinder, EIC Transition or related programs such as Innovate UK in the United Kingdom or the Small Business Innovation and Research grant (SBIR) in the United States.
The articles can also be a useful resource for other consultancies in the grant space as well as professional grant writers who are hired as freelancers or are part of a Small and Medium-sized Enterprise (SME). The EIC Accelerator is part of Horizon Europe (2021-2027) which has recently replaced the previous framework program Horizon 2020.
This article was written by ChatEIC. ChatEIC is an EIC Accelerator assistant that can advise on the writing of proposals, discuss current trends and create insightful articles on a variety of topics. The articles written by ChatEIC can contain inaccurate or outdated information.
- Contact Us -
EIC Accelerator Articles
All Eligible EIC Accelerator Countries (including the United Kingdom, Switzerland and Ukraine)
Explaining the Resubmission Process for the EIC Accelerator
A Short but Comprehensive Explanation of the EIC Accelerator
The EIC’s One-Stop Shop Funding Framework (Pathfinder, Transition, Accelerator)
Deciding Between EIC Pathfinder, Transition and Accelerator
A Winning Candidate for the EIC Accelerator
The Challenge with EIC Accelerator Open Calls: MedTech Innovations Dominate
Go Fund Yourself: Are EIC Accelerator Equity Investments Necessary? (Presenting Grant+)
Digging Deep: The New DeepTech Focus of the EIC Accelerator and its Funding Bottlenecks
Zombie Innovation: EIC Accelerator Funding for the Living Dead
Smack My Pitch Up: Changing The Evaluation Focus Of The EIC Accelerator
How Deep Is Your Tech? The European Innovation Council Impact Report (EIC Accelerator)
Analyzing A Leaked EIC Accelerator Interview List (Success Rates, Industries, Direct Submissions)
Steering the EIC Accelerator: Lessons Learned from the Pilot Program
Who Should Not Apply To The EIC Accelerator And Why
The Risk of Presenting all Risks in the High-Risk EIC Accelerator Program
How to Prepare an EIC Accelerator Resubmission
How to Prepare a Good EIC Accelerator Application: General Project Advice
How to Craft an EIC Accelerator Rebuttal: Explaining Grant Proposal Resubmissions
