1. There must be documentation proving achievement transformation.
2. Advanced and innovative.
3. There should be obvious differentiation.
Let’s take an example to analyze it
For example, Company A is a company that has been in business for more than three years, and its main product is drone products. Their company now has 6 patents, which just meet the basic requirements for high-level applications, namely "UAV nozzle device", "UAV spray boom device", "Six-rotor UAV", "UAV with video function" "Man-machine", "landing gear device" and "a pesticide for UAV plant protection".
The analysis is as follows:
First of all, these six R&D projects are distinctive, advanced, and innovative, so they can be directly named R&D projects, and the names can be similar to the names of patents.
So, from the company's R&D perspective, the R&D projects we want to do must be related to the company's high-tech product revenue. This is the best choice. Therefore, we need to dig deeper into the products of plant protection drones and know which functions or components can be used in R&D projects.
In reality, companies do not count all R&D as achievements, nor do they spend every money on a certain R&D project, but usually invest in a certain product. What we need to do is to go back to the time point of the original R&D design, redesign the R&D project, and re-calculate and plan product functions, R&D, and transformation results.
Finally, we need to consider which technologies to choose, such as "flight control system design", but there are currently no patents. You can choose to declare "a certain model of flight control system V1.0" in the near future, or ask the novelty checking department to make a novelty checking report, or ask a third party to issue a test report. If it is a product, such as a battery, you can directly provide battery samples or sales contracts.
The most important thing is
No matter what method is used to make up for these missing links in R&D, it must grasp the main line and not repeatedly draw up highly similar R&D projects. This will not only bring great inconvenience to the writing of the project application, but also bring similar R&D project names, which will make experts doubt the quality of the R&D project and may reject your R&D project.