Feedback from the June 2021 cut-off

Based on a survey of 23 of its members, the European Association of Innovation Consultants (EAIC) has released a position paper, which summarises the return of experience from the first batch of applicants about the design and usage of the submission tool.
 
To improve the robustness of the evaluation process, the EIC made significant changes to the EIC Accelerator submission process in 2021: a new 3-step submission process, a novel AI-based diagnostic tool, a new online application form, and a fully redesigned evaluation system. 

The new format proved to be successful in filtering out proposals that are not a good fit for the EIC Accelerator through Step 0 (diagnostic) and Step 1 (short proposal). This consequently improved the quality level of Step 2 applications, while unsuccessful applicants were recommended programs that may suit their proposals better instead of attempting to resubmit their application many times over.
 
The new format also generated certain criticisms mainly because it might lead the EIC to miss out some real innovation champions due to technical evaluation errors. In order to cope with the issue of “false negatives” and to improve the selection process further, the EAIC has put forward a series of recommendations, some of which are already being implemented already by the EIC:

•    Add simple control questions to the evaluation form to ensure proper understanding of the selection criteria, and implement a specific quality control process for cases awarded 8 “GOs” out of 9;

•    Add a “print to pdf” function for online form, as well as an improved table of content with hyperlinks in order to get a more comprehensive view, including hidden or collapsible fields, and improve the navigation throughout the document itself;

•    Make sure the evaluators’ background is relevant to the topic and their workload is within reasonable limits.

The data from the survey also demonstrated that, while the application workload is now 2.5x what it was in 2020, our members were able to achieve a success rate 3x above the average.

The EIC Accelerator has undergone a true revolution, with positive and negative consequences, but we are convinced that the minor improvements recommended in this paper can go a long way in reducing the risk of missing out real innovation champions for technical evaluation reasons.