One of the tasks that research staff must do quite often is write project proposals to get funding for their research. This activity can be both very exciting and intense. It requires time for reflection beforehand as well as many hours of solitude and concentration so that the ideas under consideration are written in a draft that will be reviewed again and again until the author is satisfied with the future programme that is proposed for each research project.
The most recent data show that 45% of project applications submitted to IQS are resolved favourably, and we would like to recognize the effort and dedication of all of our research teams.
Drafting the proposal for a research project allows us to express our ideas on a document and define the map starting from where we are now to where we want to go. In the initial proposal we describe what the overall objective of the scientific or technical project is, the objectives we intend to achieve, specify which societal challenge we wish to contribute to with the solutions we define, how we intend to do it, what tests or experiments we will carry out, what we will need, who will be part of the research team, with whom we will collaborate, how much time we estimate it will take, when we expect to have results, to whom we will explain it and how, and more.
What we write up to this point is an internal document, written by and for us. It contains what we consider essential from our viewpoint.
Then, when calls for research grants are published, whether from public bodies or private foundations, we spend time reading the rules and requirements. We reflect on how we can fit our research project proposal into the requirements established in each call, we look at the deadline for submitting applications, and we get to work. There’s always much work to be done, and there’s always more to do! Forms must be completed on web applications that are not always clear, questions must be answered about issues we had not even thought about, additional documents must be provided, and many other complexities must be taken into account. Moreover, if it entails a call for consortium projects, everything becomes more complicated and requires more time to establish agreements and ways of working.
At this time, the draft should be different. It is no longer an internal document and we must consider another look at the wording of the proposal. We must put ourselves in the place of the evaluators and think about what and how they will analyse our request. We want to draw their attention to achieve the maximum score for each of the established criteria. We must explain how we intend to address and respond to the focus of each call and the challenges it poses. We must make our research project approach shine above the others. We will spend more time on it, review it again and again, and when we finally decide that our proposal is ready to be submitted we send it off and cross our fingers!
And we wait for the decision. Often, this waiting time is quite long, but we don’t stop working. There will be another call for grants and we will submit everything again, adapting to the new grounds that are defined. Then we finally receive a response to the submitted application, with three possible options: grant awarded, application on the waiting list, or project rejected.
At this point, it is always important to read the evaluators’ reports. There will be answers that we do not agree with at all, others that will tell us that we have not been sufficiently specific in explaining a certain point, and others that will make us think that the evaluator is absolutely right and that we will take note of for future applications. In any case, the evaluators’ opinions must always be taken into account to reflect on and draw conclusions.
At IQS we see that there are researchers who have intense activity in applying for projects. They have experience and apply to many calls. Others are more selective and only submit proposals to certain calls based on personal strategies they have already defined. In both cases, the effort and dedication of all these research teams must be recognized.
The most recent data from IQS show that 45% of applications submitted are resolved favourably.
Núria Vallmitjana i Palau
Director of IQS Tech Transfer