Helping You Get Recognized For The Great Science That You Do
Last night I gave a webinar on grant writing, where I told a story of a grant. It was a story of both failure and successes, showing what things worked and what things didn’t. It was meant to be an instructional story, as many good stories are. In fact, the older I get, the more I realize that people learn far better through story than through pedantic spewing of facts.
So. A lot of people wrote to me afterwards ...(read more)
{ 0 comments }
This stressed out dude will not bring clarity or focus to writing his grant. Don’t be like him, it does not lead to success.
To take the stress out of writing, develop a good writing habitThrough my work with academics in grant writing, one of the most common concerns I hear is how to find the time to actually sit down and write. The days of an academic scientist (and most people, nowadays) are chock-full of an endless series ...(read more)
{ 0 comments }
When we get our grant rejected, it is easy to point the blame at the reviewers. “Those stupid reviewers, they didn’t get it.” While that approach may be emotionally satisfying and ego-stroking, it doesn’t solve the problem. Your reviewer didn’t understand your proposal, and there is only one person to blame for that.
{ 2 comments }
There are two distinct mindsets among many scientists about grant writing. One approach is to write many grants, to “play the odds”. Necessarily, when quantity goes up, quality goes down. Another approach is to write less grants but of higher quality. These take more time, but may have better odds of getting funded. Which way do you think Morgan advocates for? ...(read more)
{ 2 comments }
