1. Open Disruptive Innovation- SMEs Instrument NCP training CONNECT F2

3. 8 cut- offs /year Easy to plan Ph1 results in 1M Rapid High threshold Competitiv

4. SME Instrument – ICT 2016-17 Relevant topics (739 M€ overall ) Open Disruptive Innovation Scheme (126 M€) Accelerating the uptake of nanotechnologies advanced materials or advanced manufacturing and processing technologies by SMEs (67 M€) Accelerating market introduction of ICT solutions for Health, Well- Being and Ageing Well (30,5 M€) Stimulating the innovation potential of SMEs for a low carbon and efficient energy system (96 M€) Small business innovation research for Transport and Smart Cities Mobility (119 M€) New business models for inclusive, innovative and reflective societies (22 M€) Engaging SMEs in security research and development (30 M€) 4

5. Call planning – 2016 (2/2) Call planning – 2016 SME instrument Phase 1: 24 Feb, 3 May, 7 Sept, 9 Nov Phase 2: 3 Feb, 14 April, 15 June, 13 Oct

6. The dual dimension of Disruption By Clayton M. Christensen The Innovator's solution Low-end disruption Focus on less profitable less technology demanding customers New-Market disruption Focus on non-consumers Create new-value networks 6 Open Disruptive Innovation

7.  Open Disruptive Innovation, is the most popular topic within the SME instrument, attracting more than 1/3 of applications almost double the share of ICT budget (18%) with this pattern being maintained throughout all cut-off-dates  ICT component is very high in other other SMEs instrument topics (e.g. transports, health, energy, space)  Aanalysis on the first 30 ODI phase1 successful proposals indicates a rather balanced distribution amongst different ICT areas ODIMain Findings

8. The Scheme Very attractive for SMEs and start-ups (the importance of single company based proposal) Highly selective distil the most innovative ideas (w/funding rate = 3% of total ODI submissions with very small scoring differences amongst above thresholds) Operationally sound (it works well despite last minute submission floods) The Constituency Relatively young companies (2-5 years trading = 30%) Mainly High-tech/R&D and/or spin-offs from academia and R&D bodies turning into commercial companies Some member state (ES, IT, UK) are overly represented while some other are underrepresented (RO, BG,FI...) The Proposals Higher quality wrt past FP/CIP experience Multidisciplinary (across different ICT & other R&I domains) Disruptive dimension striving to highlight business opportunities wrt technology improvements SMEs InstrumentLessons learned

9. Submission outcomes: Similar patterns in all CoDs so far, in terms of level of submission, topic & country coverage The general evolution of submissions is promising, although with a slightly lower submission rate to the benefit of better quality proposals and better understanding of the instrument Unsuccessful Proposals: Still much focus on technology rather than business opportunity Not enough info on USP (Unique Selling Proposition) Missing market analysis to assess competition Innovation dimension still rather incremental improvement Not enough emphasis on commercialisation

10. SME Instrument