In this panel discussion / question and answer session, Katherine Gray, Alzheimer's Society Head of Research chairs a discussion with Professor Heather Mortiboys, Professor Nathan Davies, Dr Jeffrey Davies, Professor Andrey Abramov and John Major.
Panellists provide tips and insights into the grant application process, providing their perspectives as grant reviewers and funding board members. They also provide advice on how to approach grant application writing. The panellists, who are leading researchers and volunteers on grant advisory boards, discuss the key components of a successful grant application, common mistakes, and how to demonstrate the potential impact of research. They also provide advice on resubmitting applications after initial rejection and how to effectively manage career breaks. Together they emphasise the importance of clear hypotheses, realistic expectations, proper costing, and team science. They also highlight the need for perseverance and flexibility in the application process.
Top Tips from the session:
- Craft a Clear Hypothesis and Plan: Ensure your hypothesis and aims are clearly defined and that your research plan directly addresses the question you're proposing to answer. A focused and well-structured approach is essential.
- Engage Lay Audiences Effectively: Take the lay summary seriously; it’s not just for lay reviewers but all panel members. Avoid leaving it to the last minute, and ensure it communicates the significance and impact of your research clearly and concisely.
- Be Realistic and Honest: Avoid overestimating what you can achieve within the timeframe and resources of the grant. Underestimating costs or overpromising outputs can hurt your chances. Realistic, feasible objectives are more compelling.
- Build Collaborative Teams: Funders appreciate team science. If you lack expertise in a specific area, involve collaborators to strengthen your application. Highlighting teamwork demonstrates a comprehensive and feasible approach to your research.
- Learn from Rejections: If you’re resubmitting, carefully address feedback and demonstrate how your revised proposal aligns with reviewers’ suggestions. If feedback indicates the project doesn’t fit the funder’s priorities, consider adapting it for a better-suited funding body.
Recorded at the Alzheimer's Society ECR Retreat on the 19th June 2024.
A transcript of this show, links and show notes and profile on all our guests are available on our website at https://www.dementiaresearcher.nihr.ac.uk.
If you prefer to watch rather than listen, you will find a video version of this podcast on YouTube, on our website, and in selected podcast platforms.
Follow us on social media:
Download and Register with our Community App:
https://www.onelink.to/dementiaresearcher
We gratefully acknowledge the support of our funders: Alzheimer’s Association, Race Against Dementia, Alzheimer’s Research UK, Alzheimer’s Society, and the National Institute for Health and Care Research.
The views and opinions expressed by guests in this podcast are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of the producers, funders, or sponsors.
Subscribe to our sister show 'Dementia Researcher The Blogs':
https://podfollow.com/dementia-researcher-blogs
