MC: Christina Schütte, you have been advising many researchers and laboratories in their search for funding over the past 7 years. You have also participated in the evaluation of grant applications for various funding agencies. What do you think makes a successful grant application?
CS: The first thing that comes to mind is clear aims. There is no such thing as a successful scientific project that does not know where it is going. Every project must have a clear topic and a detailed plan for its execution. The topic should be very specific and clearly limited. One cannot solve all questions using every available method in one project. The execution of the project should be clearly stated and planned. Mentioning what could go wrong and how problems will be addressed is also a plus. Accessibility is also extremely important. Careful attention should be paid to the fact that reviewers are possibly not absolute specialists. Too specific scientific jargon should be avoided and the project should be well integrated in the current socio-economic context.
A large part of your activity also consists of training researchers in grant writing. Could you reveal to us a couple of your tips? Do you have specific guidelines while writing a grant application?
It is important to understand the process of grant application and evaluation as a whole. My first advice is always to start by reading the guidelines for applicants and those given to the reviewers, if they are provided. It is important to imagine what one would expect as a reviewer of the project. The next step is to clearly define your aims and make an outline. Then comes the hard work: writing. Finally, it is always advisable to have others read your work, ideally someone who is not directly from your field: a colleague from the department or a fellow student is always a good person to ask.
Christina Schütte obtained a PhD in Biochemistry at the University of Bonn in 1999. She followed this up with a postdoctoral training in the Department of Neurobiology at the Max Plank Institute for Biophysical chemistry in Göttingen from 2000 to 2003. In 2004, she founded ProSciencia with her associate Hans-Wilhelm Berghoff in order to help individuals, laboratories and companies in getting funds and managing projects.
What are the major pitfalls when writing a grant application?
I can see two major caveats often found in many applications: On the one hand, we have projects that are too vague, that try to tackle big questions but fail to define a clear plan. This type of mistake is often found in projects written by early career applicants. Another pitfall is to get too technical, use jargon and fail to capture the attention of the reader with an easily understandable problem. The lack of structure in the text is also clearly a killer for any application. There is nothing more difficult to read than long blocks of text over pages of technical descriptions.
Applicants often neglect skills they sometimes do not even realize they have. Some funding programs encourage applicants to provide details about themselves, like describing their leadership qualities. Applicants, in particular at the early stage of their career, often disregard this step. This is a mistake.
Do you know what applicants tend to find difficult while writing their application?
Writing is hard work and is often underestimated. What I can see in my classes is that first-time applicants in particular have a hard time clearly writing down their plans. Lots of them also tend to underestimate the time required to write their applications and achieve certain goals.
Prosciencia is a consulting company providing communication services to companies, scientists, researchers and start-ups of the technological sector. Today, about half of their activity is centred on training workshops. For instance, Prosciencia provides four highly attended two-days training sessions at Humboldt Graduate School per year. Contact information can be found at http://www.prosciencia.eu
What are the odds for a PhD student or a postdoc to find their own funding solution in Germany?
I could not answer this question precisely, but information is generally available on funding agencies website. I know for example that the DFG's standard "Sachbeihilfe" has been known to fund up to 50 % of applicants. After the recent crisis, Germany has been betting on research and funding for basic research has increased. This situation has made Germany a very attractive country, as the situation in neighbouring countries tends to be much harder.
The research policy in Germany can nowadays be considered a bottom-up approach. It is relatively easy to start a project on any topic, provided one is able to propose a clear plan.
In addition to this bottom-up approach you mentioned, do general science policies decide on what type of research and which science field is funded?
Of course, like in most countries, research policies are decided by politics. These decisions are taken through very long processes whereby expert researchers are regularly consulted about the "hot topics" in their field. Ministries and foundations are always listening to the experts (i.e. researchers) and make calls for projects in particularly promising fields. Researchers can actively participate in these processes by signing up to news services, for example, at the Community Research and Development Information Service (CORDIS) or at the national contact points (NCP) for EU funding. (mc)
More information:
"Sachbeihilfe": http://www.dfg.de/foerderung/programme/einzelfoerderung/sachbeihilfe/index.html
CORDIS: http://cordis.europa.eu/news/home_en.html
Interview by Maximilien Chaumon,
This article originally appeared 2011 in CNS Volume 4, Issue 4, Funding in Science
No comments:
Post a Comment