{"title":"Successful proposal preparation","authors":"M. Crow","doi":"10.1109/PESW.2001.916987","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"One of the biggest mistakes that an investigator can make is to be vague about their proposed contribution. The project objectives are the single, most important part of the proposal. Many investigators fail to state the project objectives clearly. This forces the reviewers to infer from the overall project description what the contributions of the project will be. This is not a good approach. The reviewer may infer incorrectly what the intended contributions will be, or may give the various aspects of the project different merit weighings than the investigator intends. Both of these may potentially lead to lower ratings. Many reviewers will subconsciously make a determination about their funding recommendation within reading the first couple of pages of the proposal. They will then use the remainder of the proposal to build their argument to support their recommendation. Therefore it is critical to be clear and concise about the intended obj ectives of the project.","PeriodicalId":253534,"journal":{"name":"2001 IEEE Power Engineering Society Winter Meeting. Conference Proceedings (Cat. No.01CH37194)","volume":"149 1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2001 IEEE Power Engineering Society Winter Meeting. Conference Proceedings (Cat. No.01CH37194)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/PESW.2001.916987","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
One of the biggest mistakes that an investigator can make is to be vague about their proposed contribution. The project objectives are the single, most important part of the proposal. Many investigators fail to state the project objectives clearly. This forces the reviewers to infer from the overall project description what the contributions of the project will be. This is not a good approach. The reviewer may infer incorrectly what the intended contributions will be, or may give the various aspects of the project different merit weighings than the investigator intends. Both of these may potentially lead to lower ratings. Many reviewers will subconsciously make a determination about their funding recommendation within reading the first couple of pages of the proposal. They will then use the remainder of the proposal to build their argument to support their recommendation. Therefore it is critical to be clear and concise about the intended obj ectives of the project.