GNS Science How to improve quality and quantity of proposal submissions through customized bidding strategies Chris Kroger, Deputy Director, Research GNS.

GNS Science

How to improve quality and quantity of proposal submissions through customized bidding strategies

Chris Kroger, Deputy Director, Research

GNS Science, Lower Hutt, New Zealand

Co-convener NZ&P chapter, ARMS

GNS Science

Contents

1. Why to improve quality and quantity?– From an individual’s perspective– From a research manager’s / institute’s perspective– From a country’s perspective

2. How to improve quantity– How to know when little is more– How to know the target audience / bidders– Research managers as (quiet) leaders

2

GNS Science

Contents, continued

3. How to improve quality– Targeted: Team approach– Targeted: Individual approach

4. Outcomes– From an individual’s perspective– From a research manager’s perspective– From an institute’s perspective

3

GNS Science

Why to improve quality and quantity?

Individual perspective• Kudos, job satisfaction, job justification, a job! • Collaborations, research expansion,

Research manager / institute perspective• Reputation, attraction of quality staff, funding• Kudos, job satisfaction, job justification, a job!• Subtle pressure on government to release

funding

Country perspective• Small country at bottom of world wants to be

among the leading science providers

4

GNS Science

New Zealand at the top of the world (nearly)

5

GNS Science

New Zealand research funding environment

6

GNS Science

New Zealand research funding environment

• Frequently only one proposal per research question (program) funded, forcing teams to come together

• Decisions made by ministry-appointed panel, rarely including peers

• Emphasize on outcome- benefit to NZ Data by Ministry of Business,

Innovation, and Employment 2013

7

GNS Science

New Zealand research funding environment, continued

• Research infers that number of bids decreases when success rates go below 15-18%

• However, Health and Marsden Fund (see figure) now consis-

tently below

10%!

(<50% NIH rate)

2009 2010 2011 2012 20130

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

0.0%

4.0%

8.0%

12.0%

16.0%

20.0%

Marsden Fund Success Rate

# received # granted Success rate

Num

ber

prop

osal

s

8

GNS Science

Funding OpportunitiesMinistry issued Calls for Proposals(Ministry)

Royal Society issued CfP(Marsden)

Narrowly focused (limiting the number of potential proposals)

Broad focus, but 10 assessment panels (e.g., social science)

Best New Zealand team Small, but best international team

Outcome-led, measurable benefit Science-led, quality publications

Research outcomes implemented by research users (industry, government)

Public, non-targeted results

Infrequent opportunities Annual call

2-6 year programmes (Up to) 3 year programmes

Call aligned to government determined needs for New Zealand

Merit based on science quality

Requires user input (e.g., co-funding) Fully funded

Funding-decision made by user dominated (paid) panel

Funding-decision made by volunteering scientist panel

~4 times overbid ~11 times overbid

9

GNS Science

Sir Ernest Marsden

The Marsden Fund takes its name from physicist Sir Ernest Marsden (1889-1970) who made a remarkable contribution to science both in New Zealand and overseas. As undergraduate he worked with Ernest Rutherford.

His skills as a lobbyist and forward thinker ensured the establishment of a department which could support all aspects of farming, New Zealand’s mainIndustry, thus ensuring science uptake by users.

10

GNS Science

‘Ministry’ proposals

Benefits to New Zealand Risk Management or Success Factors

1. Outcome Benefits to New Zealand

Key Question: Assuming this project is successful, what is the potential contribution it will make to the achievement of target outcomes?

2. Implementation Pathway

Key Question: What is the likelihood the team will successfully have the research implemented by research users, and what is the plan to achieve this?

3. Research, science and technology benefits to New Zealand

Key question: Will the research be of high science quality and utilise capabilities of importance for New Zealand?

4. Ability to deliver research, science and technology results (outputs)

Key question: What is the likelihood the team will achieve their proposed research outputs? Demonstrate this with reference to track record.

11

GNS Science

How to improve quantity

But why – aren’t there enough proposals swamping the system already?

Answer: Target the right Call for

Proposals, find the right quantity for it

Research managers need to take the

lead in identifying opportunities.

Your life doesn’t get better by chance, It gets better by

CHANGE.

12

GNS Science

Improving Quantity: Ministry Proposals

1. Analyse Call and it compare with in-house expertise to identify opportunities

2. Approach teams and line managers, bring together relevant researchers to raise awareness and interest

3. Identify most suitable team and PI Reject some ideas if necessary

4. Support team to collaborate with external teams and industry / users

13

GNS Science

Improving Quantity: Ministry Proposals

5. Reiterate the need of the proposal to match the Call, reiterate again

6. Depending on need, write or contract writer; but provide researchers with proposal writing training opportunities independently

7. Project manage process

8. Facilitate and mediate if required

9. Encourage to maintain relationships if bid fails

14

GNS Science

Improving Quantity: Ministry Proposals

Identify suitable idea(s)

and team

Training

Intelligence

Proposal writing

Team assembly

Users

Manage and guide

Timeline

CallStart writing Submission

2-3 months 1-2 months

15

GNS Science

Improving Quantity: Marsden

Marsden Fund: Relatively straight forward for small team projects rewarding science merit

1. Train, encourage, develop a culture of bidding

2. Provide exemplars

3. Celebrate success

4. Mentor early career scientists

5. Educate on low success rate: despite it, it is not a lottery (only once quality is ensured )

6. Establish a Marsden in-house panel for early and informal feedback on idea

16

GNS Science

Improving Quality

PROACTIVE, STRATEGIC,

HANDS-ON APPROACH

1. Training +

2. Encouragement +

3. Writing support (early, targeted, frequently) +

4. Understanding the Call of Proposals +

5. Inclusion of line management +

6. Project / time management +

7. Mentoring and guidance =

17

GNS Science

Improving Quality: Priority is Understanding the target audience

Different audiences for Ministry and Marsden Calls (and for journal papers!)

Understand what they want to get what you want

18

GNS Science

Improving Quality: Team approach (Ministry Call)

• More complex proposals, alignment with Call paramount

• Once team is assembled, assign

lead writer• Possibly write certain (non-

science) sections• More time needed to develop

general proposal than writing it

19

GNS Science

Improving Quality: Individual Approach(Marsden Call)

• Provide mentor and / or sounding board for idea• Encourage to reach out to top international

scientists to collaborate in project • Provide long-term support to help researchers

develop their track record, and present it effectively

• Encourage people to work on science panels, and do so yourself as research manager

• Provide writing training and direct support for proposal

• Teach to ‘pitch’ your idea

20

GNS Science

Improving Quality: Pitching the idea

SELLING THE PROPOSAL

• Emphasize the outcome, not the method• Explain the ‘opportunity loss’ if not

funded• Who will benefit from research?• ‘Sell’ the PI’s track record and the specific skill

relevant to the proposal • Women may need some

encouragement to be more

assertive in their capability claims

21

GNS Science

Improving Quality: Writing

Verbosity is the leading cause of poor writing.

• Verbosity is most commonly caused by the wrong assumption that it impresses the reader

• Test whether a sentence (paragraph, document)

can be written with less

words (sentences, paragraphs)

Brevity is the soul of wit.

unknown

22

GNS Science

Outcomes

For individual: • Better research and PI opportunities, control of

outcomes, collaborations

For research manager:• Less deadline stress, better rapport with

researchers

For institute: • Increased funding, enhanced reputation, good

place to work

23

GNS Science

Outcomes: Relative Funding Increase vs Inflation

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 20150%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

Funding Change CPI Change

24

GNS Science

Summary

RESEARCH MANAGERS AS LEADERS

OF A STRONG BIDDING CULTURE

1. Analyse each call and target potential PIs

2. Guide, mentor, lead the process from beginning to end

3. Provide training throughout the year

4. Support track record development

5. Develop a strong bidding culture with lots of support from RO and others

25

GNS Science

Never allow someone to be your priority while you're just their option.

unknown

26

www.inorms2016.org

11th -15th September 2016