ERC Advanced Grant 2025: How to Prepare a Competitive Proposal Without Losing Scientific Ambition 

An ERC Advanced Grant always starts with a strong scientific track record and an ambitious idea. In highly competitive calls such as this one, the challenge also lies in presenting that excellence with the clarity, structure and impact needed for the panel to quickly understand the researcher’s vision, the project’s potential and its contribution to advancing knowledge. 

In the ERC Advanced Grant 2025 call, Professor Alessandro Lenci, from the University of Pisa (UNIPI), secured funding for CLIMB, a project positioned in one of today’s most dynamic research areas: the relationship between language, artificial intelligence and computational models. 

His project addresses one of the major current debates in linguistics, cognitive science and artificial intelligence: what language models can tell us about the nature, acquisition and processing of human language. Rather than considering these models as theories of language in themselves, CLIMB proposes using them as scientific tools to investigate and validate hypotheses about how we learn, understand and process language. 

At Kveloce, we spoke with him about the process of preparing his proposal, the main challenges he faced and the role that specialised support can play in an ERC application—from strategic review and narrative structure to visual design and interview preparation. 

A Scientific Idea at the Right Time 

For Alessandro, applying for an ERC had long been an ambition. The decision came when he realised that he had an idea with real potential and that the timing was particularly favourable for his field of research. “It had always been a kind of dream of getting an ERC,” he explains. 

His proposal was closely aligned with a rapidly evolving field at the intersection of language, artificial intelligence and computational models. Precisely because of the speed of developments in this area, Alessandro felt it was important to submit the project at that particular moment. Waiting for a later call could have meant having to substantially redesign the proposal in a field where scientific and technological advances happen at an extraordinary pace. 

The opportunity also came through the University of Pisa, which internally selected a number of proposals to receive external specialised support. His project was chosen, and this marked the beginning of a process of strategic review, refinement and proposal development. 

From Scientific Language to ERC Language 

One of the most important lessons Alessandro learned is that an ERC proposal cannot simply transfer an excellent scientific idea onto paper. It must do so using a format, structure and narrative specifically designed for an ERC evaluation panel. 

As Alessandro explains, his first draft contained a strong scientific idea, but it was written according to the conventions of academic communication—a way of presenting results, arguments and details intended for fellow specialists. “I realised that the way I structured the first draft of the proposal was very much oriented to the way, as a scientist, I used to talk to other scientists. But it was not ready yet in order to be presented to an ERC panel.” 

This shift in perspective is crucial. An ERC proposal must be rigorous, but it must also be clear, strategic and convincing. It needs to demonstrate why the project is ambitious, timely and necessary; what the Principal Investigator’s vision is; and how it will advance the state of the art. Alessandro summarises this perfectly: “ERC is not only a topic, it’s a style of presenting it.” 

At Kveloce, this is precisely where we focus our support: helping researchers present scientific excellence in a clear, competitive way that is aligned with the expectations of the European Research Council, without compromising scientific depth or ambition. 

B1: Condensing Vision, Ambition and Leadership 

In an ERC proposal, the B1 section plays a decisive role. It is where the panel must quickly understand the project’s idea, originality, transformative potential and the Principal Investigator’s ability to lead it. 

For Alessandro, the support he received was especially valuable in reshaping this part of the proposal, identifying its strengths and recognising aspects that could weaken the overall message. 

“Maite was really excellent in giving advice on how to highlight the strengths. She identified some weak points,” he recalls. 

Strategic review is not simply about correcting a document. It involves analysing how the idea is presented, deciding which message should come first, identifying what should be emphasised, anticipating possible concerns from the panel and making the proposal clearer without oversimplifying the science. 

Alessandro also emphasises that the support was not limited to a single review session but became an ongoing process of discussion and improvement. “It was not only feedback, but it really guided me in how to change the proposal accordingly.” 

This type of work is particularly important in ERC proposals because every page matters. It is not enough to include all the relevant information; it is essential to decide how to organise it, how to prioritise it and how to build a narrative that allows the panel to quickly understand why the proposal deserves funding. 

An ERC proposal does not evaluate only the project itself. It also assesses the Principal Investigator’s ability to carry it out. This is why the way researchers present their scientific track record, leadership and research vision is an essential part of the application. 

Alessandro highlights that one of the most valuable aspects of the support he received was the guidance on how to present his CV in a more compelling and competitive way. “You have the right content. But again, it’s important that somebody teaches you how to present it in the most competitive way.” 

This is particularly relevant for researchers with well-established careers. In an ERC Advanced Grant, it is not simply a matter of listing achievements, publications or results. The challenge is to explain the journey behind the proposal, why the researcher is uniquely positioned to deliver it, and how their previous experience underpins the project’s ambition. 

Graphic Design as a Communication Tool 

Another aspect that Alessandro particularly appreciated was the graphical support. In highly competitive proposals, where space is limited and readability is essential, figures are not merely decorative elements. They are powerful tools for synthesising complex ideas, organising information and helping the panel quickly understand the project’s overall logic. 

“The graphical part was excellent,” he says. “I think it was also an important contribution to the project.” 

His reflection highlights a common challenge in scientific writing: the tendency to rely too heavily on text while underestimating the value of clear visual communication. “Sometimes we follow a scientific approach, we are more verbose and we forget the power of the synoptic images.” 

In an ERC proposal, a well-designed figure can illustrate the project’s architecture, explain relationships between concepts, present a methodology or summarise a complex vision within a limited space. When thoughtfully integrated, visual design makes the proposal clearer, more professional and far more memorable. 

The Interview: Preparing to Defend a Vision 

After successfully passing the first stage, Alessandro decided to continue working with Kveloce to prepare for the interview. This time, it was entirely his own decision, convinced by the value that the support had already brought during the proposal preparation process. 

One of the aspects he values most is the realism of the mock interview. The simulation recreated an atmosphere very similar to the real interview, with demanding, precise questions designed to uncover potential weaknesses in the project. 

“When I went to the real interview, it was for me just as if I was already in the right mood and I knew what to expect,” he explains. 

He even recalls that the mock interview was more challenging than the real one: 

“It was tougher than the real interview.” 

Preparing for an ERC interview involves much more than rehearsing answers. It also means learning how to manage time effectively, respond with precision, keep the panel engaged and project confidence. During the interview, researchers must demonstrate not only that they master their project but also that they have a clear vision and the leadership to deliver it. 

For Alessandro, one of the most valuable recommendations was learning to provide answers that were both comprehensive and concise: 

“The best recommendation was exactly to try to provide exhaustive but concise answers. Not to be too verbose and to be straight to the point.” 

He also highlights another particularly important lesson: taking ownership of the proposal in the first person. 

“They taught me to be very first-person oriented. It’s my project, it’s my vision.” 

In an ERC interview, this personal dimension is fundamental. The panel is not simply evaluating a work plan; it is also assessing the Principal Investigator’s conviction, maturity and ability to lead an ambitious research programme. 

An ERC to Advance Research and Support the Next Generation 

The funding will allow Alessandro to consolidate and expand the work of his research group at the University of Pisa. As a full professor, he explains that the ERC is a crucial opportunity to make an important scientific contribution while supporting the young researchers working with him. 

“It will give me the possibility to run my group and to improve my research, and hopefully make a good contribution in my area, supporting also young people.” 

This is one of the most significant impacts of an ERC grant. The funding not only advances the Principal Investigator’s research but also strengthens research teams, opens up new scientific directions and creates opportunities for the next generation of researchers. 

What Universities and Researchers Can Learn from This Experience 

Alessandro Lenci’s experience shows that preparing a successful ERC proposal requires a combination of scientific excellence, strategic thinking and highly effective communication. 

Specialised support does not replace the research itself or the quality of the scientific idea. On the contrary, it helps ensure that this quality reaches the evaluation panel with greater clarity, coherence and impact. It provides an external perspective to identify potential weaknesses, strengthen the narrative, improve the visual presentation and prepare researchers to confidently defend their proposal under challenging questioning. 

For universities, research offices and researchers, this type of support can add value throughout the process: from idea selection and maturation, strategic proposal review and PI narrative development to graphic design, interview preparation and institutional learning for future ERC applications. 

As Alessandro summarises: 

“You could have the best idea in the world, but if they don’t teach you how to present it in the proper way, you are hopeless.” 

His words do not diminish the importance of scientific excellence. On the contrary, they remind us that even the best ideas need to be communicated in a way that allows the panel to fully appreciate their ambition, relevance and transformative potential. 

At Kveloce, we celebrate Alessandro Lenci’s ERC Advanced Grant 2025 and sincerely thank him for the trust he placed in us throughout this process. His experience reinforces the importance of supporting researchers not only in writing competitive proposals, but also in developing a strong strategic narrative, a clear visual presentation and a confident, convincing defence before the evaluation panel. 

Because in an ERC, scientific excellence is only the starting point. Preparing it well means ensuring that this excellence is clearly understood, remembered and defended with confidence.