Skip to Content

Writing styles for proposals differ from scientific papers (evaluate examples)

BLUF: Reformulate your proposal so the important things are up front, i.e. BLUF = Bottom line up front.

Did you see what I did there?  I put the message at the top, and now I'm about to explain why.

As context, many academics are quite familiar with the typical order in a scientific paper, i.e. Introduction/context (problem definition), methods, results, analysis of results, conclusions.  

Similarly, many academics are used to teaching with:  derivation, derivation, example, box around my answer. 

However, a proposal is NOT a scientific paper and it is NOT [typically] a derivation.  There is much more of a 'sell' involved.  Many reviewers will skim proposals, looking for the key points.  I've known reviewers that "crammed" in the proposal evaluation, often a day or two before the proposal.  Historically, these are volunteers, and we expect them to read and evaluation a lot of proposals.  

You will have more success catching your busy reviewer's attention with BLUF [bottom line up front].  

As a second tip, try formatting your proposals as "Assertion-Evidence".  Assertion (a.k.a.) evidence has been used above.  

As another ample: 

If successful this proposal will create a new fuel cell membrane with twice the flux of the state-of-the-art membrane, this will increase the efficiency of the fuel cell by 20% and increase energy efficiency by 50%.. Preliminary data shows... My research plan to ... will further increase the performance by ..., as shown by [preliminary calculations/theory].

*N.B. These numbers are made up, for the sake of illustration.

As a third tip, outline specific and achievable metrics, outline where you are relative to the metrics, and outline a plan to get there.  Provide a contingency plan.

Bad:  The DOE target is 10%
Good: the DOE target is 10%, my preliminary data shows I have advance state-of-the-art (5%) to 8%, and the proposed research plan will achieve 11% through additional material optimization. Theoretical calculations using xyz theory support this assertion that 11% is achievable.  After resting and validation, should 11% not be achieved, the team will...


Commenting is not enabled on this course.