What happened when five EU-funded research projects trained by META pitched their results at the EU Sustainable Energy Week?

This is the latest in a series of posts by META staff on improving the exploitation of EC-financed research projects. Subscribe to get the next ones, our downloadables and more.

What makes a successful Horizon2020 research project? The idea, the knowledge, the partners … they are certainly all essential, but without a first-rate exploitation route for the research results there will be no impact. Without a well-planned transition from laboratory to market, in other words, what’s the point?

As explained in previous posts (listed below), a good exploitation plan is crucial to achieving project Impact … and project Impact is what the EC is looking for when it finances research and innovation.

Without a well-planned transition from laboratory to market, what’s the point?

So what makes good Exploitation Plan? A session at last month’s EU Sustainable Energy Week (EUSEW) provided some clues.

From Lean Canvas to Draft Pitch

The EUSEW workshop featured nine pitches to a jury of experts and a wider audience of European stakeholders. Eight of the nine were research projects, of which five had been trained by SSERR - a META "Research Helicopter" service designed to help EC energy research participants better exploit their project’s results.

Through SSERR, I’ve had the good fortune to work closely with both our expert trainers and the project participants in designing and delivering the “how to pitch” training. Watching ‘our’ five projects on stage was therefore a real opportunity to contrast and compare what they got from the training.

The first step in their training was to use our guidelines to fill out the ‘lean canvas’, a business tool developed by the US’ lean startup movement which we’ve adapted to EC research project exploitation.

The Lean Canvas plays two important roles:

mapping the key fields to communicate when delivering a pitch

forcing the researcher to provide a straightforward picture of the product or service, and the business model foreseen for its exploitation, thus providing the input the trainer needs to review and give feedback in the next step.

Having implemented more than 400 services for research projects, the three top issues which the lean canvas exercise generally highlights are:

You always start from the problem. Every problem has a solution, but not every solution solves a problem. Too many research projects develop solutions in search of a problem. They’re unlikely to find one, which means they won’t find customers, and won’t have any Impact.

unclear identification of early adopters, and how they will be reached

complicated, misleading information when describing the solution proposed.

Refining the Pitch

Our senior experts (Andrea Di Anselmo and Alessia Melasecche Germini) then analysed the draft canvas. This is followed with a one on one Skype call with each participant, to review the canvas and walk the researchers through a pitch template, along with a second set of guidelines.

The participants then prepare the first version of their pitch, during which they generally discover that Pitching a research result is not so easy as it sounds. The participants’ 3-minute pitch must take into consideration the type of audience, the key information they should pitch, the call to action, the presenter’s own body language, overall clarity of message and much more.

We therefore help participants prepare their pitch using a structured process, including practicing it in front of their peers and reviewing it according to the feedback. The day before the EUSEW workshop we therefore held a final dedicated training session to help them fine-tune their pitches.

All the principal challenges which participants generally face were apparent:

respecting the time limit : researchers put their lives and souls into their research projects, so it can be so hard for them to focus only on its most critical, market-relevant aspects

: researchers put their lives and souls into their research projects, so it can be so hard for them to focus only on its most critical, market-relevant aspects covering all key components of a pitch : conversely, a pitch has to cover a lot of ground, whereas researchers tend to dwell on the science and technology

: conversely, a pitch has to cover a lot of ground, whereas researchers tend to dwell on the science and technology using plain language to communicate their message: always a challenge for scientists!

Project vs Idea: four key rules

The most common mistake researchers make when pitching, however, is that they focus on the project, not the business idea. For this we have formulated the following rules:

Communicate your solution, not a project deliverable Focus on the core team dealing with the development of the solution. Don’t present the whole consortium or organisations - just the people actively involved in the solution. Don’t use complex terminologies when presenting your solution. Not everyone in the audience have your background. Being able to communicate your message shows how much you understand your solution, and hence your customers’ needs Don’t forget the call to action. If you are not seeking for money or clients, you still might be seeking for partners or raising public awareness.

Cinderella need not apply

After the final training session and a lot of practice in their hotel rooms, our participants put themselves to the test, giving their best shot to a jury of experts at the EUSEW event. How did they do?

First place went to Energy Elephant, a mature business with no (visible) link to EC research. Their excellent pitch was made by an entrepreneur who arrived with a pitch deck he and his colleagues have been perfecting since they launched their company over three years ago.

Our five projects took 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 7th place, with Energiaki Kykladon EPE and the Sifnos Island Cooperative actually scoring highest in terms of solution presented.

Naturally, the entrepreneur won – if he doesn’t pitch well he’s out of business! SSERR and other Research Helicopter programmes are not Fairy Godmothers, able to transform Cinderella researchers into Princesses of Business. Sometimes we do meet researchers who want to be entrepreneurs, of course, but they’re the exception, not the rule.

“they will apply these new skills not just to their present project, but to every research project they do for the rest of their lives”

What we can do is help researchers think more like that entrepreneur, and give them the skills to ensure that the research they do has a better chance of making an Impact. Crucially, they will apply these new skills not just to their present project, but to every research project they do for the rest of their lives.

Because that is where the real Impact of SSERR et al lies: building the capacity of Europe’s researchers to orient their work better towards the market. Based on the above results, I think we’re on the right track.

META combines venture capital fund management, entrepreneurial mentoring and innovation consultancy into an integrated Platform for transforming knowledge into growth. We invest in startups and innovators across Europe, and help governments, Institutions, regions and cities around the world foster more of them.

SSEERR is one of our 'Research Helicopter' services, which help EU research projects become more entrepreneurial and better exploit their research results.

Connect with us here on LinkedIn and over there on Twitter, and Subscribe to stay up to date with our posts, reading recommendations and downloadables – for example:











