Summer is starting to wind down, and researchers are starting to look to the fall, which for many brings teaching and running their labs. It is also a good time to consider your annual research development plan. Now, creating this sort of annual plan assumes that you do have a 5-10 year research plan that outlines your goals and benchmarks, including when and where you need to apply for funding, produce publications, and continue your research work.
To develop your annual plan, you want to assess your previous academic year and summer. What did you achieve? What didn't go the way you expected? Do you need to update/revise your 5-10 year plan? What are the goals and benchmarks you hope to reach in the upcoming academic year?
At ORDE, we suggest that researchers plan along three threads: publications, project development, and funding. Certainly these three threads are intertwined and support each other, but each deserves focused and intentional planning.
Publications:
Certainly, as researchers and scholars, your publications are crucial, but they are also crucial to the development of your research plan. To be competitive for many grants, reviewers expect to see a solid list of publications related to the direction in which you're headed. They look for evidence of expertise and independence in these publications, so if your mentor is first author on all your publications, you may need to start thinking about how you can take the lead on the next publication.
Project Development:
You may be in the throes of completing your last funded research project, or perhaps you're focused on developing new courses or preparing for a fall teaching load. But, don't make the mistake of only looking at what's right in front of you. You don't want to wait until these things are complete before starting to think about developing your next research project, or you will likely find yourself playing the waiting game (for funding) later on. The most productive researchers have a constant stream of next projects in the works, so that they can submit their grants and hopefully have their next grant ready to go as they're finishing the last.
Funding:
As I mentioned, if you wait to develop a project and apply for funding right when you want to get going, you'll find yourself in a lull. Many agencies can take six months to a year to review your grant, make a funding decision and get you the funding you need to get started. Thus, most researchers can't afford to wait to start grant writing when they have a little more time. Certainly, in ORDE, our mantra might as well be "The time is now for grant writing!"
But, all kidding aside, we do realize that our faculty researchers have a huge load on their plates, and although we don't want to add any additional stress to your lives, we do know that this sort of planning and consistent focus on research and research development is something successful faculty researchers have in common.
But, we're here to help! If you're a faculty researcher at the University of Colorado Denver | Anschutz Medical Campuses or one of our affiliates and you haven't had a fund search conducted in awhile, please contact us to set up a meeting so that you start off the year aware of what funding opportunities are upcoming.
Resources:
ORDE Fund Search
Friday, July 31, 2015
Friday, July 17, 2015
The research development process
Laypeople don't tend to understand what the research development process entails. Even researchers can be a little murky on the research development process, so this week I offer clarification on how we at ORDE define this important process.
I start with the following chart and offer some clarification on each stage of the process. You see that this diagram is cyclical and that's intentional. Whether you are working on a resubmission or continuing to develop your research agenda, you should be constantly working in some part of this cycle, and often in multiple parts, depending on how many research projects you have in the works.
Search literature & funding landscape: Around the time you are combing the literature to identify gaps that your research can address, you should also be getting a lay of the funding landscape. Faculty at CU Denver and the Anschutz Medical Campus can contact ORDE to have us conduct a comprehensive fund search.
Develop project & research sponsor: As you begin to develop your research idea and have identified which sponsors might be a good fit to fund your research, you should do background research on the sponsors to which you're considering applying. It's important to understand the ideology, approach, as well as preferred topics funded by the sponsor.
Develop concept paper: A concept paper is a one-two page document that gives an overview of your project and why it's important. This can be used to shop your idea around to get feedback and generate interest around your research amongst funders, collaborators, and/or mentors.
Review program announcement: This may seem obvious, but in our experience, some PIs miss this vital step and can end up with their grant rejected when they have not followed the instructions in the program announcement.
Work with Program Officers: POs serve as the liaison between a sponsor and an applicant. POs often have influence over the review process and even some funding decisions. It's a good idea to reach out to a PO to get their thoughts on your research project before you apply.
Draft grant proposal: Based on the feedback you get on your concept paper, and considering what you've learned from your sponsor research and the program announcement, you can begin to draft your grant application.
Seek feedback: Once you have a working draft of your grant, you should vet it with colleagues, mentors, and even laypeople to make sure that your case is clear and compelling and accessible by different audiences.
Revise and Resubmit: We find ourselves in a competitive grant-funding climate where getting a grant rejected is a reality for many researchers. The biggest difference between those investigators who ultimately are funded and those who don't is whether or not they keep submitting grants.
Resources:
Learn How to Develop a Grant Proposal Writing Process - Joanne Fritz
Five Scenarios that Derail the Grant Development Process - Hanover
I start with the following chart and offer some clarification on each stage of the process. You see that this diagram is cyclical and that's intentional. Whether you are working on a resubmission or continuing to develop your research agenda, you should be constantly working in some part of this cycle, and often in multiple parts, depending on how many research projects you have in the works.
Search literature & funding landscape: Around the time you are combing the literature to identify gaps that your research can address, you should also be getting a lay of the funding landscape. Faculty at CU Denver and the Anschutz Medical Campus can contact ORDE to have us conduct a comprehensive fund search.
Develop project & research sponsor: As you begin to develop your research idea and have identified which sponsors might be a good fit to fund your research, you should do background research on the sponsors to which you're considering applying. It's important to understand the ideology, approach, as well as preferred topics funded by the sponsor.
Develop concept paper: A concept paper is a one-two page document that gives an overview of your project and why it's important. This can be used to shop your idea around to get feedback and generate interest around your research amongst funders, collaborators, and/or mentors.
Review program announcement: This may seem obvious, but in our experience, some PIs miss this vital step and can end up with their grant rejected when they have not followed the instructions in the program announcement.
Work with Program Officers: POs serve as the liaison between a sponsor and an applicant. POs often have influence over the review process and even some funding decisions. It's a good idea to reach out to a PO to get their thoughts on your research project before you apply.
Draft grant proposal: Based on the feedback you get on your concept paper, and considering what you've learned from your sponsor research and the program announcement, you can begin to draft your grant application.
Seek feedback: Once you have a working draft of your grant, you should vet it with colleagues, mentors, and even laypeople to make sure that your case is clear and compelling and accessible by different audiences.
Revise and Resubmit: We find ourselves in a competitive grant-funding climate where getting a grant rejected is a reality for many researchers. The biggest difference between those investigators who ultimately are funded and those who don't is whether or not they keep submitting grants.
Resources:
Learn How to Develop a Grant Proposal Writing Process - Joanne Fritz
Five Scenarios that Derail the Grant Development Process - Hanover
Thursday, July 9, 2015
Got a Research Idea - Sell It!
I sat in on a webinar by Morgan Giddings last week where she offered some different ways of thinking about grant development that I thought were valuable. One important point Giddings made was that most investigators are uncomfortable with the idea of "selling." This rang true; many faculty I encounter are slow to honk their own horn much less really sell their ideas.
Yet, as Giddings observed, many investigators have the wrong idea about what selling should be. Years ago, I found myself responsible for selling customized educational programs to universities and colleges. As the Director responsible for developing this new branch of programs for my organization, I was not excited about this task. I was not a salesperson after all. Yet, I was also responsible for conducting the needs assessments and designing the programs that we offered, so I knew them inside and out. Thus, when I found myself in a conversation with a Provost or VP, I could clearly describe what we were offering and answer the questions they had.
To get past my nerves around selling or even having conversations with top leaders in higher education, I reminded myself that I wasn't trying to trick an institution into bringing a customized workshop to their campus. I just wanted them to understand what the workshops were, what their value was, and then for them to make the decision that was best for their institution. I knew that if any institution was cajoled into bringing a workshop, we might make a bit more money in the short-term, but it would cost us far more in reputation in the long run.
So, in applying my experience, along with that of Giddings and Daniel Pink, below I identify what good selling should and should not include.
Selling should not trick anyone
As you're writing a grant or a concept paper, your goal isn't necessarily to persuade an agency to give you money, but more so to give them a clear sense of your idea and the value or importance of that idea. If it's right for them, they will be persuaded without you having to persuade them.
Selling should focus on listening to the "buyer's" needs
Daniel Pink cites researcher, Adam Grant, saying the best sellers are "ambiverts." They are not too introverted to talk to folks about whatever they're selling, but they're also not too extroverted to listen to what the buyer is saying they need. In grant development, it's essential to know what an agency is looking to fund before you decide whether or not to submit or before you start talking with a Program Officer.
Selling should clearly articulate your value
When you have a great research idea or project, your goal should be to clearly communicate it to possible funders. As mentioned, you're not trying to trick anyone into funding you. You're trying to help them understand your project, why it's important, and why it's a good fit for them.
Hopefully, as you start to rethink what selling can be, you can begin to be more intentional in selling your research idea.
Resources
Morgan Giddings Blog
Daniel Pink on Selling
Yet, as Giddings observed, many investigators have the wrong idea about what selling should be. Years ago, I found myself responsible for selling customized educational programs to universities and colleges. As the Director responsible for developing this new branch of programs for my organization, I was not excited about this task. I was not a salesperson after all. Yet, I was also responsible for conducting the needs assessments and designing the programs that we offered, so I knew them inside and out. Thus, when I found myself in a conversation with a Provost or VP, I could clearly describe what we were offering and answer the questions they had.
To get past my nerves around selling or even having conversations with top leaders in higher education, I reminded myself that I wasn't trying to trick an institution into bringing a customized workshop to their campus. I just wanted them to understand what the workshops were, what their value was, and then for them to make the decision that was best for their institution. I knew that if any institution was cajoled into bringing a workshop, we might make a bit more money in the short-term, but it would cost us far more in reputation in the long run.
So, in applying my experience, along with that of Giddings and Daniel Pink, below I identify what good selling should and should not include.
Selling should not trick anyone
As you're writing a grant or a concept paper, your goal isn't necessarily to persuade an agency to give you money, but more so to give them a clear sense of your idea and the value or importance of that idea. If it's right for them, they will be persuaded without you having to persuade them.
Selling should focus on listening to the "buyer's" needs
Daniel Pink cites researcher, Adam Grant, saying the best sellers are "ambiverts." They are not too introverted to talk to folks about whatever they're selling, but they're also not too extroverted to listen to what the buyer is saying they need. In grant development, it's essential to know what an agency is looking to fund before you decide whether or not to submit or before you start talking with a Program Officer.
Selling should clearly articulate your value
When you have a great research idea or project, your goal should be to clearly communicate it to possible funders. As mentioned, you're not trying to trick anyone into funding you. You're trying to help them understand your project, why it's important, and why it's a good fit for them.
Hopefully, as you start to rethink what selling can be, you can begin to be more intentional in selling your research idea.
Resources
Morgan Giddings Blog
Daniel Pink on Selling
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)