Proof of concept: What it is and how to build one

A proof of concept (POC) is a limited demonstration designed to verify whether a theory, technology, or method works under controlled conditions without requiring a fully developed product.

Its purpose is to move from a scientific hypothesis to a verifiable business hypothesis by demonstrating technical feasibility before significant resources are invested in scaling.

From a venture capital perspective, the POC represents the stage researchers should ideally complete before approaching investors. Venture funds rarely finance isolated experiments. 

Instead, they seek teams that have already demonstrated technical viability, generated meaningful data, and established a roadmap toward a Minimum Viable Product (MVP)—or, depending on the nature of the project, already developed one. 

In Spain, the path from laboratory research to a robust proof of concept still requires particular attention to avoid slowing the transition from science to market. 

To address this challenge, public funding programs such as those offered by the Spanish State Research Agency (AEI), alongside specialized support organizations, play an important role. These structures combine scientific rigor, project management, and business strategy from the earliest stages, supporting scientific teams before they require major public or private investment. 

For researchers familiar with Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs), a solid proof of concept typically corresponds to the range between TRL 3 (experimental validation in the laboratory) and TRL 5 (validation in a relevant environment). This framework facilitates communication with both public funding agencies and deep tech investors

A high-impact proof of concept must be built systematically, with measurable objectives and clearly defined milestones. This structured approach enables an idea to progress from laboratory research to real-world validation.

The first step is to establish exactly what the proof of concept is intended to demonstrate SMART objectives—specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound—provide a useful framework for connecting a research hypothesis to future business outcomes.

These goals must be sufficiently clear to allow the POC to be evaluated objectively, both by scientific review committees and venture capital investors.

In deep tech environments, a proof of concept is defined by its critical functionality rather than its visual polish. Whether the solution involves hardware, biotechnology, advanced materials, or software, the focus should remain on validating the core scientific or technical value proposition.

Success often depends on strategic minimalism: prioritizing the technological core while avoiding unnecessary development of interfaces and peripheral features. The goal is to demonstrate that the innovation works and can deliver its intended results in a relevant environment.

Before focusing exclusively on technical performance—the central objective of any deep tech proof of concept—it is useful to begin exploring whether the solution addresses a genuine market need. Two different forms of validation should be distinguished: 

• Technical validation: proving that the technology functions under controlled conditions.
• Need validation: assessing whether the market values the proposed solution.

A common methodology for the second type of validation is the monadic test. In a monadic test, different groups evaluate a single concept independently and in isolation, avoiding comparison bias.

When used alongside a proof of concept, this method can measure factors such as perceived relevance, attractiveness, and intention to use. 

The result is a deeper understanding of whether the solution addresses a meaningful market need while keeping technical feasibility and market desirability as distinct evaluation criteria.

Analyzing a proof of concept requires combining technical metrics —such as model accuracy, latency, and error rates— with qualitative feedback to get a comprehensive view of the solution's feasibility. 

The key performance indicators (KPIs) defined at the beginning of the process become objective criteria for deciding whether to: 

• Scale the concept into a Minimum Viable Product (MVP). 
• Pivot by adjusting the value proposition, technical approach, or market focus. 
• Terminate the project in a controlled manner if the results do not justify further investment. 

Where appropriate, conducting a SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) can provide additional context by evaluating the project's position within the broader competitive landscape.

Above all, a POC must generate actionable learning. Otherwise, it risks becoming a demonstration that never progresses beyond the experimental stage. 

A proof of concept and a Minimum Viable Product are different tools designed to achieve the same fundamental objective: reducing risk before committing substantial resources.

While different, both tools are complementary and form critical stages in the journey from innovation to commercialization. The following table summarizes the key distinctions:

To illustrate how these concepts work in practice, imagine a team developing an artificial intelligence solution for healthcare based on a patented algorithm designed to detect lesions in medical imaging. 

The proof of concept consists of training the model on a limited dataset and evaluating its performance within a controlled clinical environment. 

At the same time, the team develops a name and visual identity for the product and tests these elements with healthcare professionals through surveys and heat-map analysis to assess clarity and credibility. 

The result is a validation package containing three components: 

• Technical validation of the algorithm. 
• Early adoption and acceptance data from healthcare professionals. 
• A recognizable product identity. 

By combining these elements, the proof of concept becomes a compelling asset for deep tech investors assessing not only technology but also market readiness and execution capability. 

Instead of seeing an isolated experiment, investors see validated hypotheses, measurable results, and a clearly communicated opportunity. 

A well-executed proof of concept creates value far beyond technical validation. Its advantages include:

• Resource protection. It helps eliminate unproductive directions before significant time and capital are committed. 

• Technical credibility. A well-documented POC transforms hypotheses into evidence that can be trusted by regulators, partners, and investors. 

• Talent attraction. Highly qualified professionals are more likely to join projects that demonstrate a clear direction and validated potential. 

• Stronger pre-money valuation. Real metrics generated through a proof of concept provide a stronger foundation during valuation and fundraising discussions.

• Shorter time-to-market. Identifying what works early enables teams to eliminate costly iterations and accelerate commercialization. 

For all these reasons, the approach at Bolboreta Investiga, focuses on supporting researchers from the earliest stages of technical validation, because we believe that the strongest ventures are built on evidence. 

Tell us about your project and discover how we can become your strategic partner. We provide agile funding, technological support, and intellectual property management—so you can focus on exploring the next frontier of knowledge while we handle the structure needed to bring your innovation to market.