ASEE Proposal Mahmassani

7/27/2019 ASEE Proposal Mahmassani

1/33

HOW TO WRITE A

SUCCESSFUL RESEARCHPROPOSAL

Hani S. MahmassaniThe University of Texas at Austin

ASEE SEMINARFebruary 18, 2002


2/33

HOW TO WRITE

SUCCESSFUL RESEARCHPROPOSAL S




3/33

HOW TO DEVELOP

SUCCESSFUL RESEARCHPROPOSAL S




4/33

HOW TO DEVELOP

SUCCESSFUL RESEARCHIDEAS and PROPOSAL S




5/33

HOW TO DEVELOP

A SUCCESSFUL RESEARCHPROGRAM




6/33

HOW TO CONDUCT SUCCESSFUL RESEARCH




7/33

HOW TO BE A SUCCESSFUL RESEARCH ER




8/33

OUTLINE

1. What? The Research Idea2. Where? The Research Sponsor 3. Proposal Elements4. Your Secret Weapon5. DOs and DONTs (mostly DONTs) 6. Speaking of Budget 7. Reviewing Proposals8. Q&A


9/33

TWO MAIN TYPES OF FUNDED RESEARCH

1. Research you really want to do:

Find sponsor!

2. Topics some sponsor wants to see done:

Respond to RFP


10/33

Research you really want to do:Find sponsor!

Agencies that fund scientific research:NSFOffice of Naval Research.

Mission agencies with research programs in your area

of specialty (EPA, DOT, DOD) Foundations (Sloan, Energy Foundation) Companies that offer external R&D funding

(must relate to program objectives;caution: ability to publish! )

Government agencies for applied topics(if one is able to do desired work within specificapplication)


11/33

Topic sponsor wants done:Respond to RFP!

Mission or government agency with specific needs Federal, state or local; possibly international

organization (e.g. EU research) Private company with specific R&D needs though not

likely to advertise publicly ( caution: intellectual propertyrights ) Varying degrees of research content: from basic to

consulting-like Determine ability to do interesting publishable research

as part of contract Determine if expectations and schedule of deliverablescan be met by starting faculty

For consultants: determine if resources available (incontract, and at agency) sufficient to do first-rate job,

and dont be greedy (foot -in-the-door principle!)


12/33

Four main types of research proposals:

1. Broad career and topic programs (e.g. NSFCareer Awards)

2. Targeted topical program initiatives (e.g.NSF Exploratory Research in Information Technology

Applications to Transportation)

3. Specific topic RFPs

4. Unsolicited ideas/opportunities


13/33

Several dimensions for classifyingresearch proposals:

1. Content: Basic vs. applied2. Time Frame: Short-term vs. long-term3. Scope: Program vs. project

4. Teaming: Single PI vs. multiple investigators5. Selection: Competitive vs. sole source6. Solicitation: RFP vs. unsolicited7. Client: Scientific vs. mission agency 8. Other: Exploratory, Seed, Renewal..

All of the above affect emphasis of the proposal, and what itneeds to convey.


14/33

What should the proposal accomplish?

1. FOR SCIENTIFIC AGENCIES:Need to convince reviewers of scientific merit, and of your qualifications and ability to successfully make animportant contribution to the state-of-the-art.

2. FOR SPECIFIC TOPIC RFPs: Need to convince sponsoring agency that youunderstand the problem, that you have a realisticapproach that is likely to succeed, that could beimplemented, and that you will deliver results that willmake them look good.


15/33

PROPOSAL ELEMENTS: Problem Definition and Significance Define the problem specifically. Clearly explain why it is important:

(1) intrinsically, within the discipline, for its

scientific or technical significance (e.g. you wantto provide empirical validation of a principle or assumption that has provided the basis for awhole theory or approach, and yet lacks formal

validation); and(2) from a broader standpoint, to society or ineconomic terms.


16/33

Problem Definition and Significance (ctd.)

Clearly explain what the specific contribution of your work will be a new result, new data toconfirm a known but still questioned result, anew theory, a new methodology to solve a

certain problem, a new process for fabrication of microchips that will produce higher performanceat lower cost, a new algorithm that finds asolution faster than previous approaches...

Explain why the reviewer and/or the sponsor should care about the problem, and about your contribution. Be specific and explicit.


17/33

PROPOSAL ELEMENTS: OBJECTIVES Typically comes after problem definition,

motivation and significance. Should be a natural conclusion of the problem

definition Start with overall objective (or aim of theresearch), and then state two to four specificobjectives

May be incorporated within problemdefinition/significance, or form a separatesection (follow guidelines)


18/33

PROPOSAL ELEMENTS: BACKGROUND REVIEW Extent and depth varies by target audience (sponsor)

and type of proposal, and by page limits Should be concise, and convey the major relevant

classes of previous approaches to problem addressed.Highlight their features, and limitations (as a way of motivating proposed approach)

Classification of previous approaches, and of relevantbody of work is essential more so than detaileddescription of any one approach

Should demonstrate:(1) your knowledge (mastery) of relevant prior work;(2) your ability to see the forest from the trees

May be incorporated within problemdefinition/significance, though generally must formseparate section for NSF-type scientific researchproposals (follow guidelines)


19/33

PROPOSAL ELEMENTS: Research Approach Give a sense of both the challenging aspects of

the problem ( why it is difficult , and the specificreasons or issues that make it difficult), and whyyou have a good chance of succeeding whenothers may have failed.

Describe the general aspects and features of the

approach first. Do not bog down in detail initially.There must be a clear statement, understandableby a non-specialist.


20/33

Research Approach (ctd.) After stating key features/assumptions of your

approach, describe the principal steps of themethodology again, this is not yet the detailedwork plan.It is a description of whether you intend to rely on analytical derivation or use numerical methods to solve a set of equations, whether you intend tocarry physical experiments, or obtain measurements through fieldinvestigation or survey methods, or whether you intend to use Monte Carlosimulation methods to investigate the performance of your system under awide variety of experimental conditions.

Remember: you have not done the research yet, and notevery detail needs to be specified, especially for proposals to scientific organizations.


21/33

PROPOSAL ELEMENTS: WORK PLAN List and description of tasks to be followed in conducting

the research, to meet stated objectives. Degree of specificity and level of detail vary greatly by

type of research, and target audience (sponsoring agencyand program)

Often less important than general approach, though insome instances critical in conveying realism of proposedapproach, and justifying resources required (budget).Particularly important are tasks that involve datacollection, field work and/or experimental procedures,where the success of the work depends on ability tocomplete measurement tasks in a timely manner

Very important in multi-PI and multi-institution proposals


22/33

PROPOSAL ELEMENTS: QUALIFICATIONS, etc Follow guidelines Boiler plate material about institution, etc for

first time proposals, customize and do not re-use

standard university material, especially wherespecial equipment is involved.

Need anywhere from one paragraph to one pageabout PI and qualifications: Customize to targetaudience/topic what do you bring to this topic?


23/33

Special Considerations for NSFCareer Award Proposals Concern with ability to envision sustained

longer-term effort (four to six years out) Balance between vision and ability to produce

specific tangible research in two-year time frame Important to articulate significance of topic area

to the field in general, and to broader engineering/scientific cross-disciplinarydevelopments [since you intend to stake

career/tenure on it] Importance of Teaching component need toshow how teaching elements are integrated withthe research plan


24/33

Response to Specific Topic RFPs

Problem definition and motivation should state in your own words your understanding of the sponsors problem ;may be an opportunity to enlarge the scope or definitionof the problem

Motivation and significance should confirm and reinforcesponsors sense of need and importance of topic ;preferably identify even more reasons to fund

Include cogent discussion on the key issues andchallenges in addressing the topic/solving the problem preferably leading to how your approach can thenresolve these issues

Describe approach, why it is unique , why your team isuniquely qualified (previous work, availability of expensive equipment at your institution, terrificcombination of skills and expertise, matching funds)


25/33

Response to Specific Topic RFPs (ctd.)

Work plan (specific tasks): if already included in RFP,then provide detailed discussion of issues, and specificsteps to be performed. If not included in RFP, try to notdeviate too much from what might be suggested in text

Include in work plan specific opportunities for consultation with the sponsor (e.g. to select testlocations)

Deliverables : describe in specific terms what theresearch will produce for the use of the sponsor, andtimeline for deliverables

Include interim deliverables as a way of keeping sponsor informed and avoid future surprises


26/33

YOUR SECRET WEAPON

What is it that you have that will allow youto succeed where others may have failed,or to make a unique contribution thatothers could not attain within the sametime frame?

Key to a successful and distinguishedresearch career!


27/33

YOUR SECRET WEAPON??

Special equipment, better measurement Experience with new approaches, from other

disciplines

Software, already implemented and optimizedparticular algorithms Building on prior success, no need to start

from scratch, already up on learning curve

A problem definition that reflects uniquestrengths and insights (different frommainstream)


28/33

DOs and DONTs 1. Be constructive (diplomatic) in reviewing others work;

dont blast all previous work, dont be dismissive anddefinitely dont single out anyone with scorn. Chancesare they are reviewing your proposal.

BAD: All previous studies are worthless because they failed to recognize theeffect of X on Y. Chen and Smith (1998) tried but their approach wassimply wrong. Ours is the first study to address this question correctly.

BETTER: Previous studies have made important contributions to thischallenging problem, however none of the published studies appear tohave completely accounted for the effect of X on Y. A pioneering effort inthis direction is described by Chen and Smith (1998), highlighting theneed for additional investigation of the system properties when the full setof interacting factors are incorporated in the model.


29/33

DOs and DONTs (ctd.)

2. Avoid vacuous generalities (and clichs). Use specificlanguage to the extent possible. Ask yourself: Is anymeaning lost if this sentence/paragraph is removed?Read critically, play devils advocate.

BAD: Transportation is a very important need for human society, and traffic congestion is very big problem everywhere, especially in recent times.

BETTER: Transportation expenditures account for over 5% of domestic GDP,according to an estimate prepared by the General Accounting Office(1997). Delays associated with peak-period traffic congestion in theHouston area account for.


30/33

DOs and DONTs (ctd.) 3. Do not assume that your reader/reviewer knows the problem you

are addressing as well as you do, or that they are equally familiar with your perspective or methodology. Do not take a shared viewof the problem and its challenges for granted.

4. Try not to be flippant or arrogantDO NOT use language like:It is well known , it is obvious or it is trivial to show .It is like telling the reviewer Anyone with half a brain could tellyou that If it is that obvious then you may not need to dwell onit, and if it is not (more likely), then just state and explain.

BETTER: It is generally accepted in the literature Most standard textbooks (e.g. Topak and Srinivasan, 1975)include a proof of


31/33

Speaking of Budget Most agencies/programs will have general guidelines/magnitudes of

projects they are willing to fund

In some cases, especially where special experimental work isenvisioned, cost may be higher: clear it with sponsor ahead of time

Be reasonable, especially in early stages: do not include non-standarditems that would get flagged by reviewer

Typical items: 1 to 3 months of PI time; 1 or 2 GRAs, tuition and fees

for GRAs; travel to attend one or two national conferences; travelfor research if required (data collection); copying, materials,telecoms; preferable not to include equipment costs (Univ.expected to provide)


32/33

Reviewing ProposalsBest way to learn about good proposal writing is to see what others are

doing, and to participate in review panels (e.g. NSF)

A proposal is not a journal article!! Do not be overly harsh! Respond tothe review criteria of the agency (intrinsic merit, extrinsic merit,impact on science and engineering in US)

Remember: the work is not done yet! Look for the authors awarenessof previous and related work, understanding of the difficulties,significance of the problem, and likelihood of success

Thoughtful and constructive reviews promote scholarly behavior allaround. Nastiness begets nastiness (also program directorsinitially evaluate you through the reviews you do). What goesaround comes around. Or better yet: Do unto others


33/33

THANK YOU!

Q & A

Documents

ASEE Proposal Mahmassani