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.
Dealing with grant rejection: the hard way or the easy way
Previous post: Women and science careers
Next post: Only female scientists need housekeepers…?
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
The thing I often point out to researchers who are unsuccessful in a grant competition is that the level of competition is a bit like the Olympics. Everyone who applies is an excellent researcher with a really good idea.
Yes, you can always make your proposal clearer and you make an excellent point about taking responsibility for that.
But sometimes you are still going to be unsuccessful. Because almost all funding agencies haven’t got enough money to fund all the great research out there.
Like the top finishing Canadian in the 50 km cross-country ski race at the end of the Olympics — he finished 1 second behind the gold medalist. He came 5th. I bet he felt awful. But he’s doing all the right things and just needs to keep on skiing as fast as he can.
many private foundations are highly political and yes, most apps. are highly qualified, etc..HOWEVER, at the end the reviewers are looking for political ties, who’s due, who know who, etc…. it is a rigged game in the private foundations.
with all the billionaires and billion dollar companies there SHOULD money out there. However, this is not due to american greed. so what you have a hundreds, thousands of beetles crawling on top of each other for crumbs, and the majority get rejected and those with right last names, schools, ties, etc…get funded from these private foundations and even federal grants too.
the system is rigged.