In this comprehensive exploration of the EIC Accelerator program, a pivotal initiative by the European Commission (EC) and the European Innovation Council (EIC), we delve into the remarkable opportunities it presents for startups and Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs) across the European Union (EU). This program is a beacon of hope for innovative businesses, offering blended financing options, including up to €2.5 million in grant funding and up to €15 million in equity financing, culminating in a potential total financing of €17.5 million. The EIC Accelerator stands out not only for its financial support but also for its commitment to elevating the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of pioneering projects.
It is overseen by the European Innovation Council and SMEs Executive Agency (EISMEA), ensuring a streamlined and efficient application process. Prospective applicants can benefit from the guidance of professional writers, freelancers, and consultants, utilizing the official proposal template to craft compelling proposals. Additionally, the EIC Accelerator Video and Pitch deck components provide innovative platforms for applicants to showcase their projects. A successful application culminates in an interview, a critical step towards securing an EIC Grant or EIC Equity, marking a significant milestone in the journey of any ambitious enterprise seeking to make a mark within the EU and beyond.
Technology Readiness Levels (TRL)
In this article, we embark on a journey to tailor the traditional Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) for different types of business models, ranging from Software as a Service (SaaS) companies to those involved in developing new industrial processes and hardware products. Recognizing that the original TRL framework, primarily designed for hardware technologies, does not seamlessly apply to the varied landscapes of today’s business ventures, we adapted these stages to better align with the specific needs and characteristics of each business model. Whether it’s a SaaS company operating in a B2C environment, an enterprise developing an innovative industrial process, or a firm creating a new hardware product, each scenario demands a unique approach to the TRL stages. This adaptation not only demonstrates the versatility of the TRL framework but also underscores the importance of customizing developmental benchmarks to suit the specific nature of a business’s products, services, and market environments.
The TRL’s in 2024 are:
- basic principles observed
- technology concept formulated
- experimental proof of concept
- technology validated in lab
- technology validated in relevant environment
- technology demonstrated in relevant environment
- system prototype demonstration in operational environment
- system complete and qualified
- actual system proven in operational environment
Adapting Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) for a SaaS Company with a B2B Model
Navigating the Adapted Technology Readiness Levels for SaaS B2B Companies
Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) are a method for estimating the maturity of technologies during the acquisition phase of a program. Originally developed for hardware technologies, these stages require adaptation for Software as a Service (SaaS) companies, especially those operating in a B2B model. The traditional TRL stages, which begin in a laboratory setting and progress through to full-scale operation, need modification to suit the unique development path of SaaS products. This article outlines the adapted TRL stages for a SaaS B2B company and explains the rationale behind these changes.
1. Concept and Application Defined (Adapted TRL 1)
- Original TRL 1: Basic principles observed.
- Adapted for SaaS: The initial concept of the SaaS product is formulated. This includes identifying potential applications and the primary corporate customer base.
- Reason for Change: SaaS development starts with a conceptual phase focusing on market needs and potential applications, rather than basic scientific research.
2. Technology Concept Formulated (Adapted TRL 2)
- Original TRL 2: Technology concept formulated.
- Adapted for SaaS: A more detailed outline of the SaaS solution is developed, including preliminary software architecture and potential user interfaces.
- Reason for Change: The focus is on planning the software architecture and user experience early in the process.
3. Proof of Concept Developed (Adapted TRL 3)
- Original TRL 3: Experimental proof of concept.
- Adapted for SaaS: Initial software prototypes are developed. These may be limited in functionality but demonstrate the core concept.
- Reason for Change: For SaaS, proof of concept often involves creating a minimal viable product rather than laboratory experiments.
4. Beta Version Developed (Adapted TRL 4)
- Original TRL 4: Technology validated in lab.
- Adapted for SaaS: Development of a beta version of the software, which is tested in a simulated or limited operational environment with beta users.
- Reason for Change: Unlike hardware, SaaS enters the operational environment earlier with beta versions tested by real users.
5. Beta Testing with Initial Users (Adapted TRL 5)
- Original TRL 5: Technology validated in relevant environment.
- Adapted for SaaS: Beta testing is expanded with a broader group of users. Feedback is collected to refine and optimize the software.
- Reason for Change: Direct user feedback is crucial for SaaS development, and the software is often tested in the context of its intended market early on.
6. System Model Demonstrated in Operational Environment (Adapted TRL 6)
- Original TRL 6: Technology demonstrated in relevant environment.
- Adapted for SaaS: A fully functional version of the software is tested in the actual operational environment with selected corporate clients.
- Reason for Change: SaaS products typically reach operational testing quicker, with emphasis on real-world application in the target market.
7. System Prototype Operational (Adapted TRL 7)
- Original TRL 7: System prototype demonstration in an operational environment.
- Adapted for SaaS: The software is refined based on extensive testing and feedback. It operates under real-world conditions and demonstrates its value to business users.
- Reason for Change: Emphasis on refining user experience and functionality based on in-depth operational feedback.
8. System Completed and Qualified (Adapted TRL 8)
- Original TRL 8: System complete and qualified.
- Adapted for SaaS: Full-scale deployment of the SaaS product. The software is now reliable, fully functional, and integrated into the business processes of the end-users.
- Reason for Change: Full-scale deployment is a critical stage, demonstrating the software’s capability to integrate seamlessly into corporate workflows.
9. Actual System Proven in Operational Environment (Adapted TRL 9)
- Original TRL 9: Actual system proven in operational environment.
- Adapted for SaaS: Ongoing operation and maintenance. The software is regularly updated based on user feedback and evolving business needs.
- Reason for Change: Continuous improvement is a hallmark of SaaS products, requiring ongoing adaptation and enhancement based on user
Adapting Technology Readiness Levels for SaaS B2C Companies: A Focus on User-Centric Development
Customizing TRL Stages for B2C SaaS: Embracing Beta Testing and Freemium Models
The concept of Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) is pivotal in assessing the maturity of technology during its developmental phase. However, when it comes to Software as a Service (SaaS) companies operating in a B2C (business-to-consumer) model, traditional TRL stages, originally designed for hardware technologies, need significant adaptation. The unique characteristics of SaaS development, such as the absence of a traditional lab setting, early engagement with the operational environment through beta tests, and the predominance of freemium models, necessitate a tailored approach to TRLs. Here, we redefine the TRL stages for a SaaS company with a B2C model, focusing on these specific dynamics.
1. Idea Conceptualization (Adapted TRL 1)
- Original TRL 1: Basic principles observed.
- Adapted for SaaS B2C: Initial idea and potential consumer applications identified, focusing on user needs and market gaps.
- Why the Change: SaaS B2C begins with market-focused ideas rather than basic scientific research.
2. Technology Concept Outlined (Adapted TRL 2)
- Original TRL 2: Technology concept formulated.
- Adapted for SaaS B2C: Conceptual design of the software, including preliminary user experience (UX) considerations and interface ideas.
- Why the Change: Early stages in SaaS involve conceptualizing the user interface and experience, which is central to B2C models.
3. Proof of Concept via Prototype (Adapted TRL 3)
- Original TRL 3: Experimental proof of concept.
- Adapted for SaaS B2C: Development of a basic prototype or Minimum Viable Product (MVP) to demonstrate core functionality.
- Why the Change: Proof of concept in SaaS is more about functional prototypes than lab-based experiments.
4. Early Beta Testing (Adapted TRL 4)
- Original TRL 4: Technology validated in lab.
- Adapted for SaaS B2C: Early beta version of the software is released to a limited user group for initial testing and feedback.
- Why the Change: SaaS products often enter beta testing early, gathering user feedback in real-world scenarios.
5. Expanded Beta Testing (Adapted TRL 5)
- Original TRL 5: Technology validated in relevant environment.
- Adapted for SaaS B2C: Beta testing is broadened, incorporating more users to refine usability and functionality based on diverse feedback.
- Why the Change: In a B2C model, extensive user testing is crucial for refining the product to meet diverse consumer needs.
6. Operational Environment Testing (Adapted TRL 6)
- Original TRL 6: Technology demonstrated in relevant environment.
- Adapted for SaaS B2C: Software tested in a fully operational environment, simulating real-world consumer use cases.
- Why the Change: For SaaS B2C, it’s vital to test the product in environments that closely resemble where consumers will use it.
7. Full-Scale Product Deployment (Adapted TRL 7)
- Original TRL 7: System prototype demonstration in an operational environment.
- Adapted for SaaS B2C: Release of the fully functional product, integrated into an efficient sales funnel, often under a freemium model.
- Why the Change: B2C SaaS models emphasize accessible product launch strategies, like freemium models, to attract a broad user base.
8. Market Validation and Scaling (Adapted TRL 8)
- Original TRL 8: System complete and qualified.
- Adapted for SaaS B2C: Widespread market acceptance, with ongoing user feedback leading to incremental improvements and scaling.
- Why the Change: Market validation is crucial in B2C SaaS, focusing on user satisfaction, retention, and scaling based on demand.
9. Matured and Evolving Product (Adapted TRL 9)
- Original TRL 9: Actual system proven in operational environment.
- Adapted for SaaS B2C: Continuous product evolution based on user feedback, market trends, and technological advancements.
- Why the Change: SaaS B2C products must continuously evolve to stay relevant and meet changing consumer expectations.
In conclusion, adapting the TRL stages for SaaS B2C companies involves a shift from traditional laboratory-based development to a user-centric, market-driven approach. This adaptation reflects the unique dynamics of software development and the crucial role of user engagement and feedback in creating successful B2C SaaS products.
Adapting Technology Readiness Levels for Companies Developing New Industrial Processes
Tailoring TRL Stages for Industrial Process Innovation: A Guide for Recycling and Treatment Technologies
In the realm of industrial processes such as recycling, processing, coating, enhancing, or treating, the conventional Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) used primarily for hardware and software technologies require significant adaptation. This is especially true considering the diverse business models employed in this sector, such as selling processing hardware, licensing technology, usage fee models, or in-house service provision. Additionally, the distinction between operational and relevant environments is often blurred in these sectors, as the processes are typically used in-house and are not integrated into external systems. Below, the TRL stages are adapted to reflect the unique aspects of companies developing new industrial processes.
1. Basic Principle Observed (Adapted TRL 1)
- Original TRL 1: Basic principles observed.
- Adapted for Industrial Processes: Identification and initial observation of a basic principle or concept that could lead to a new industrial process.
- Why the Change: The emphasis shifts to recognizing potential in basic principles that could be applied to industrial processes.
2. Technology Concept Formulation (Adapted TRL 2)
- Original TRL 2: Technology concept formulated.
- Adapted for Industrial Processes: Conceptualization of how the basic principle can be developed into a viable industrial process.
- Why the Change: Focus is on envisioning practical applications of the basic principle in an industrial setting.
3. Experimental Proof of Concept (Adapted TRL 3)
- Original TRL 3: Experimental proof of concept.
- Adapted for Industrial Processes: Initial experimental setup or laboratory-scale demonstration to validate the concept.
- Why the Change: Early-stage experimentation is crucial to establish the feasibility of the process.
4. Laboratory Scale Validation (Adapted TRL 4)
- Original TRL 4: Technology validated in lab.
- Adapted for Industrial Processes: Development and testing of the process at a small scale in a controlled laboratory environment.
- Why the Change: Laboratory validation is a critical step in understanding the technical viability and potential challenges of the process.
5. Scaled-up Prototype Development (Adapted TRL 5)
- Original TRL 5: Technology validated in relevant environment.
- Adapted for Industrial Processes: Scaling up the process to a prototype that can operate in a more realistic industrial environment.
- Why the Change: Scaling is essential to demonstrate the process under conditions that more closely mimic real-world industrial settings.
6. Prototype Demonstration in Industrial Environment (Adapted TRL 6)
- Original TRL 6: Technology demonstrated in relevant environment.
- Adapted for Industrial Processes: The prototype is tested in an actual industrial environment, either in-house or in a relevant external setting.
- Why the Change: Testing in an industrial environment provides critical data on the process’s effectiveness and feasibility in real-world conditions.
7. Process Optimization and Pre-Commercial Testing (Adapted TRL 7)
- Original TRL 7: System prototype demonstration in an operational environment.
- Adapted for Industrial Processes: Refinement and optimization of the process based on feedback and results from initial industrial testing, moving towards a pre-commercial stage.
- Why the Change: Focus shifts to fine-tuning the process for efficiency, reliability, and scalability, preparing for commercialization.
8. Commercial Model Development (Adapted TRL 8)
- Original TRL 8: System complete and qualified.
- Adapted for Industrial Processes: Development of a business model (such as hardware sales, licensing, usage fee, or in-house service) and preparation for market entry.
- Why the Change: At this stage, the emphasis is on how the process will be commercialized and offered to the market.
9. Full Commercial Deployment (Adapted TRL 9)
- Original TRL 9: Actual system proven in operational environment.
- Adapted for Industrial Processes: Full-scale commercial deployment of the process, with ongoing optimization and adaptation based on market feedback.
- Why the Change: The process is now fully operational and commercially available, with ongoing enhancements based on real-world use and market demands.
Adapting the TRL stages for companies developing new industrial processes acknowledges the unique challenges and opportunities in this sector. These adaptations provide a more relevant framework for assessing the maturity and readiness of innovative industrial processes, from initial concept to full commercial deployment.
Customizing Technology Readiness Levels for Hardware Product Development
Reframing TRL Stages for Hardware Innovations: From Concept to Compliance
Developing a new hardware product, such as a machine, device, or material, requires a tailored approach to the Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) framework. Unlike software or industrial processes, hardware development involves specific considerations like manufacturing complexities, supplier selection, and the necessity for certifications like CE marks or ISO compliance. This article redefines the TRL stages for a company developing a new hardware product, focusing on these aspects.
1. Principle Identification (Adapted TRL 1)
- Original TRL 1: Basic principles observed.
- Adapted for Hardware: Conceptualization of the hardware product based on identified principles or technological needs.
- Why the Change: Focuses on the initial concept and feasibility in the context of hardware development.
2. Technology Concept Formulation (Adapted TRL 2)
- Original TRL 2: Technology concept formulated.
- Adapted for Hardware: Development of initial hardware design and exploration of potential applications.
- Why the Change: Early-stage design and application consideration are critical for hardware development.
3. Proof of Concept Creation (Adapted TRL 3)
- Original TRL 3: Experimental proof of concept.
- Adapted for Hardware: Building a basic prototype to demonstrate the feasibility of the core concept.
- Why the Change: Prototype creation is an essential step in validating the basic concept of hardware products.
4. Prototype Development (Adapted TRL 4)
- Original TRL 4: Technology validated in lab.
- Adapted for Hardware: Developing a more advanced prototype to test specific functionalities in a controlled setting.
- Why the Change: Enhanced prototyping is necessary to refine the hardware’s functional capabilities.
5. Validation in Relevant Environment (Adapted TRL 5)
- Original TRL 5: Technology validated in relevant environment.
- Adapted for Hardware: Testing the prototype in a relevant environment, simulating real-world conditions.
- Why the Change: Real-world testing is crucial to ensure the hardware operates effectively outside the lab.
6. Prototype Optimization (Adapted TRL 6)
- Original TRL 6: Technology demonstrated in relevant environment.
- Adapted for Hardware: Refinement and optimization of the prototype based on testing feedback, focusing on performance and reliability.
- Why the Change: Optimization is key to preparing the hardware for real-world applications and manufacturing.
7. Manufacturing Process Development (Adapted TRL 7)
- Original TRL 7: System prototype demonstration in an operational environment.
- Adapted for Hardware: Development of the manufacturing process, including selecting partners or suppliers.
- Why the Change: Manufacturing is a significant phase in hardware development, requiring careful planning and partner selection.
8. Pre-Commercial Testing and Certification (Adapted TRL 8)
- Original TRL 8: System complete and qualified.
- Adapted for Hardware: Conducting comprehensive tests for certification (e.g., CE mark, regulatory clearance) and ensuring compliance with standards (e.g., ISO).
- Why the Change: Achieving certifications and compliance is critical for the market readiness of hardware products.
9. Commercial Deployment (Adapted TRL 9)
- Original TRL 9: Actual system proven in operational environment.
- Adapted for Hardware: Full-scale manufacturing and commercialization of the hardware product.
- Why the Change: The focus is on the successful manufacturing and market introduction of the finalized hardware product.
Adapting TRL stages for hardware product development acknowledges the unique pathway from concept to commercialization in this field. These stages highlight the crucial steps involved in bringing a hardware product to market, including design, prototyping, manufacturing, and compliance with regulatory standards.
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
