Tips for conveying methods in your grant

Writing clearly and compellingly about your research in a grant proposal is always a challenge. Nowhere is it more challenging than in your methods section. When I am reviewing grant proposals for our faculty, the methods section is commonly the part where the proposal goes off the rails. PIs who have made a brilliant case for their research project slip back into shop-talk in their methods section. All of the avoidance of jargon and acronyms carefully navigated in the project overview are ignored when it comes to their offering methodological details. This is understandable. After all, methods are the most technical aspect of your proposal.

Conversely, some PIs, in trying to convey their methods to a broader audience, end up offering a vague and confusing account of how they will conduct their research, perhaps not wanting to bore their reviewers with the nitty gritty of their work. Yet, going too far down this broadening path can often leave your readers in an utter state of confusion and annoyance. Obviously, being overly technical and being too vague are both fatal flaws to grant proposals, so where's the middle ground?

The methods portion of your proposal serves as the bridge between the vision of your research and the business plan. Whereas your project overview, research objectives, and impact statement serve as your venue for communicating vision, your timeline and budget serve as your business plan, showing the reviewers that you will be an effective project manager. The methods portion links these two elements. It takes your brilliant vision for your research and demonstrates that it is rooted in reality. Below are some tips to make sure you take full advantage of your methods bridge.

Give context: Oftentimes there are a variety of methods that could be applied to answer a particular research question, but the methods you're planning to use are the best. So, why is that? Explain to your reviewers the history of your methods and the options available. How has similar research been done in the past? Are you using the same methods or how have you adapted those methods?

Justify your choices: As you give context for your methods, you'll find that you are quite naturally justifying the methods you've chosen for your study. But, be explicit. Answer the questions of why are these the best methods? How did you choose these methods? Why should reviewers be confident that they are the best fit? Why are you?

Show your methodological expertise: Even if you have the best project and the best methods nailed down, if you can't instill confidence in your reviewers that you and your team are perfectly suited to carry them out, your grant will be dead in the water. So instead, offer evidence of your expertise. Summarize your past research and experience using these methods to nip any element of doubt in the bud.

Put your methods write-up through internal review: To assist you in walking that fine line between too technical and too broad, be sure to have others review your proposal. Have a colleague in your field review your methods. Have another colleague slightly askew of your field review them. Then, have a layperson review your methods. If all three of these people can understand what you're going to do and why it's the best way to do it, you'll be in good shape when it comes to your external reviewers.

Resources:
How to write the methods section of your proposal - Joanne Fritz
Writing proposals with strong methodology - Kusum Singh and Gavin W. Fulmer