Who this is for: Businesses developing a product or validating a technical solution before production in Italy.
A prototype can help assess appearance, check an assembly or investigate a technical uncertainty. These are different purposes. A useful funding discussion starts by explaining the question being addressed and the activities needed to answer it.
A physical model, CAD drawing or product that is new to the company does not, by itself, establish that the work qualifies as research and development. Describe the actual activity before deciding how it should be assessed under a possible support scheme.
Write the technical question before building the part
Clarify what is not yet known and why it matters to the product. It might concern behaviour, an interaction between components or the ability to achieve a result under specified conditions. If the purpose is simply checking an already defined envelope, describe it accurately rather than adding artificial experimental complexity.
Gather the starting information: specifications, previous solutions, constraints, observations and technical documents. This separates existing knowledge, design choices and questions needing investigation. Calling a product innovative does not replace the explanation, and cannot show what the proposed tests are intended to establish.
Connect every test to a decision
A useful test programme states what will be observed and which choice depends on the result. It does not need to promise that every experiment will succeed. Define conditions, interpretation criteria and records that will explain why development moves in a particular direction after the test.
Scroll horizontally to see every column.
| Question | Activity | Evidence | Next decision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Can the assembly be completed? | Check a model | Observations and interferences | Revise the geometry |
| Does the expected behaviour occur? | Test under defined conditions | Measurements and configuration | Confirm or revise the hypothesis |
| Does a variant address the limitation? | Compare versions | Comparable results | Choose the version to develop |
Assess the activity rather than the project's label
Separate routine engineering, prototype construction, any experimental work and preparation for production. MIMIT's R&D credit page points to distinct technical criteria for activities. A sound assessment compares the actual work with those references rather than treating every new product project as one category.
The assessment should explain why a stage was included or excluded, what information was reviewed and which questions remain open. Avoid assigning a single label when the project contains materially different activities. An accurate description remains valuable even when a component does not fall within the instrument being considered.
References: MIMIT — Credito d’imposta ricerca, sviluppo, innovazione e design
Organise people, supplies and iterations
For each stage, identify who performs the work, what is purchased and which output is expected. Distinguish internal activity, external services and test materials, then review each category under the selected measure. A total of hours and purchases without links to specific activities gives little basis for understanding the investment.
When a prototype version changes, record the reason, modified components and tests to repeat. Use consistent identifiers across drawings, reports and quotations. Reconstructing iterations helps explain the technical progression and prevents an expense from being associated with the wrong version or an activity that was never performed.
Coordinate commencement with the funding assessment
Reconstruct commitments already made before scheduling new work. The Accordi per l’innovazione FAQ specifies project-start rules. Do not automatically transfer them to other instruments; check the relevant scheme before placing an order or starting an activity that may affect the assessment.
Studio Dinamico connects design, prototyping and funding review. The discussion starts with a concrete technical question and identifies activities, tests and resources to examine. It keeps what is already demonstrated separate from what the project still needs to establish, giving both technical and administrative contacts a clearer basis for the next decision.
References: MIMIT — Accordi per l’innovazione 2025, FAQ
Evidence to gather for a project review
- The technical question and why it remains unresolved.
- Specifications, existing knowledge and initial constraints.
- Planned tests, conditions and decisions connected to their results.
- Prototype versions and reasons for changes.
- Activities, people, supplies and dates of commitments already made.
Common questions
Does building a prototype automatically qualify for R&D support?
No. A prototype is a project tool, not a tax or administrative classification. Purpose, activities, technical criteria and the conditions of the relevant scheme all need assessment.
Is a test that fails to confirm the hypothesis worth recording?
Yes. Its result may explain a decision or iteration when conditions and evidence are traceable. Any treatment for funding purposes still needs to be assessed under the applicable scheme's rules.
Sources and further reading
Apply this to your project.
What question should your prototype answer? Tell us, and we can define the activities, tests and funding checks relevant to the project.
Discuss your prototype