I think graphics are very underutilized in grantwriting. I think this stems from the fact that most proposal authors hesitate to put in a graphic because there are already so many formatting constraints and/or page limits that they do not want to risk losing the precious space that they do have.
During my study one of the things we encountered was that one of the authors had placed a graphic in his proposal and the graphic was very important to the overall proposal, in fact, most of it hinged upon his graphic. The problem was that the graphic was in color but the proposal was printed in black and white, a minor detail excluded from the RFP, but something that made a huge difference. I think if you're going to make the choice to use a graphic, do so in such a way that if those "minor" details are not included your proposal will not be affected.
As powerful as images can be, in a proposal, under such staunt restrictions, you need to make the graphic count and be worthwile. If it will help illustrate or enhance your message in any way, by all means use it, but I don't see the point in using a pie chart when it says so little. I think Tufte's theory of chart junk should be heeded carefully in this regard. Do not put more on the page than is needed to convey the information.
Monday, June 16, 2008
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Week 4, Post 4: Chapter 10`
All of the proposals I have worked with have been federally funded grants and they do not care too much for design quality. So long as you read the RFP, abide by the general requirements, and format exactly like they say too, you can be assured that your abstract will at least be read.
I appreciate well designed documents. One's that are particuarly asethetically pleasing do make the information easier to read and in some cases, enjoyable. But I think in the long run, the actual design should not be the main concern. Proposals are a particular kind of genre and they do have their conventions. You do not want to produce an aesthetically pleasing document that is completely unrecognizable as a proposal either.
Of the different design theories, I do like the grid. It's clean, it's simple, and it does leave an open canvas upon which you can create balance. If a design is adopted a style guide is definitely needed to create consistency and identity. Consider using design aspects, but more importantly, just follow the RFP to a "T."
I appreciate well designed documents. One's that are particuarly asethetically pleasing do make the information easier to read and in some cases, enjoyable. But I think in the long run, the actual design should not be the main concern. Proposals are a particular kind of genre and they do have their conventions. You do not want to produce an aesthetically pleasing document that is completely unrecognizable as a proposal either.
Of the different design theories, I do like the grid. It's clean, it's simple, and it does leave an open canvas upon which you can create balance. If a design is adopted a style guide is definitely needed to create consistency and identity. Consider using design aspects, but more importantly, just follow the RFP to a "T."
Week 4: Post 3, Progress Report 3
Date: 05-June 2008
To: Dr. Jan Holmevick
From: Katie Goergen
Introduction
A usability test of the Office of Sponsored Programs website and the Limited Submission Program will be conducted in order better understand how users use these tools. This study will reveal usability flaws and provide recommendations forboth of these interfaces which will in effect improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the pre-award submission phase at Clemson University.
Work Completed
At this point, I at least have a full draft of my proposal. I am currently waiting for comments from Jin and Jan to see how I can improve upon it. I feel most comfortable with the introduction and conclusion and I'm hoping those are preceived as strong. My methodology is perhaps a little weak. I have looked at it several times and I feel as though it needs a little more, I'm just not certain as to what that is as of yet. The literature review also needs some fine tuning. I don't know, for a projct I'm having a difficulty writing because it's not as though I'm helping contribute to any particular field or expanding the research in a particular field, I'm just helping a client produce a better product. So, the literature review is still a bit of a worry for me.
At this point I am still waiting to hear back from Drs. Gallichio and Prizrembel regarding the possibility of a usability test for the OSP website. I'm thinking it will get approved, but there is nothing written in stone as of yet, so on that front, I'm stalled.
Next Steps
I am continuing to look at my proposal and working it to make it better. I have started working on the instrumentation for the study. I feel as though if I at least have something I will have something to work from, which is better than nothing at all. I will also be focusing on my presentation. I think in order for my presentation to have an impact, I need to convey the current situation and show how my project aims to contribute to a possible solution. I'm discovering my project is not about overhauling the entire OSP website as there is not enough time to tackle that, but I can assess the needs of the faculty and staff that could open the door to new possibilities and directions for the kinds of resources Clemson provides for its faculty and staff in the way of proposal writing.
By next week I will have a comprehensive storyboard completed so that I can begin making the actual presentation.
Conclusion
Amazing that this class is almost over. It is kind of a relief knowing that I will be walking away with something that is going to be used to move me on to the next step. I'm looking forward to making the presentation, I think it has potential to be a good persuasive piece. By next week I should have a more refined version of my proposal and a very clear idea about how I plan to construct my presentation.
To: Dr. Jan Holmevick
From: Katie Goergen
Introduction
A usability test of the Office of Sponsored Programs website and the Limited Submission Program will be conducted in order better understand how users use these tools. This study will reveal usability flaws and provide recommendations forboth of these interfaces which will in effect improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the pre-award submission phase at Clemson University.
Work Completed
At this point, I at least have a full draft of my proposal. I am currently waiting for comments from Jin and Jan to see how I can improve upon it. I feel most comfortable with the introduction and conclusion and I'm hoping those are preceived as strong. My methodology is perhaps a little weak. I have looked at it several times and I feel as though it needs a little more, I'm just not certain as to what that is as of yet. The literature review also needs some fine tuning. I don't know, for a projct I'm having a difficulty writing because it's not as though I'm helping contribute to any particular field or expanding the research in a particular field, I'm just helping a client produce a better product. So, the literature review is still a bit of a worry for me.
At this point I am still waiting to hear back from Drs. Gallichio and Prizrembel regarding the possibility of a usability test for the OSP website. I'm thinking it will get approved, but there is nothing written in stone as of yet, so on that front, I'm stalled.
Next Steps
I am continuing to look at my proposal and working it to make it better. I have started working on the instrumentation for the study. I feel as though if I at least have something I will have something to work from, which is better than nothing at all. I will also be focusing on my presentation. I think in order for my presentation to have an impact, I need to convey the current situation and show how my project aims to contribute to a possible solution. I'm discovering my project is not about overhauling the entire OSP website as there is not enough time to tackle that, but I can assess the needs of the faculty and staff that could open the door to new possibilities and directions for the kinds of resources Clemson provides for its faculty and staff in the way of proposal writing.
By next week I will have a comprehensive storyboard completed so that I can begin making the actual presentation.
Conclusion
Amazing that this class is almost over. It is kind of a relief knowing that I will be walking away with something that is going to be used to move me on to the next step. I'm looking forward to making the presentation, I think it has potential to be a good persuasive piece. By next week I should have a more refined version of my proposal and a very clear idea about how I plan to construct my presentation.
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Week 4, Post 2: Chapter 9
The style is actually an important part, though, sometimes I wonder a) how closely reviewers actually look at it, and b) how much bearing it plays in the entire process. I only say this because the other day while looking at a proposal that was scored within the 1% for NIH (which is unheard of. Meaning they do not come any better) an entire section repeated itself. One of the narratives was in one section of the grant and that same narrative was also located in another section. This was clearly a simple mistake and an oversight, but I wonder if the reviewers even noticed, or if the content was so well structured, so clear, and the idea so thoughtful that they just didn't care.
This is not to say do not focus on the style of your writing when writing a grant. As Johnson-Sheehan points out, how you write is representative of the type of company/organization/individual that you are. It reflects your own attention to detail; how concious you are of the quality of your work; and how much time, effort and thought you put into constructing the overall proposal. It is not to be taken for granted, but I do not think it is one of the most critical pieces.
The book doesn't go too much into the use of metaphors, but I was wondering what you guys thought about the use of metaphors in a proposal. When are they appropriate/not appropriate? Can you be certain that it is common enough your reader will know? (is it worth the risk?) Can you be certain that you've used them in the correct context? I don't know, the use of metaphors seems like a tricky rhetorical device to use. Obviously a proposal is a persuasive piece and rhetorical dynamics are at work, but I was wondering if anyone had any further thoughts on the use of metaphors?
This is not to say do not focus on the style of your writing when writing a grant. As Johnson-Sheehan points out, how you write is representative of the type of company/organization/individual that you are. It reflects your own attention to detail; how concious you are of the quality of your work; and how much time, effort and thought you put into constructing the overall proposal. It is not to be taken for granted, but I do not think it is one of the most critical pieces.
The book doesn't go too much into the use of metaphors, but I was wondering what you guys thought about the use of metaphors in a proposal. When are they appropriate/not appropriate? Can you be certain that it is common enough your reader will know? (is it worth the risk?) Can you be certain that you've used them in the correct context? I don't know, the use of metaphors seems like a tricky rhetorical device to use. Obviously a proposal is a persuasive piece and rhetorical dynamics are at work, but I was wondering if anyone had any further thoughts on the use of metaphors?
Monday, June 9, 2008
Week 4: Post 1: Chapter 8
The budget is really one of the most essential parts of the proposal if you are involved in a project that is going to cost upwards of thousands of dollars. I think it should be the second thing that you do after you have a good handle of the methodology. In many respects, the methodology and budget will reveal if you are capable of carrying out the project. It will show you if you have the proper equipment, enough man-power to follow through, and have decided to use the funds properly.
The issue of indirect costs can be confusing. That is something that I am just beginning to get a handle on, even though I'm not even sure I understand it fully (yay Virginia's spreadsheets! =) The few times I have done budgets I have been fortunate enough to have templates in spreadsheets from which to work that automatically calculate the costs. It is amazing how many details you have to consider when you sit down to do a budget. If you do not think of it before you submit the proposal, you've missed your opportunity, so it is important to think long and hard before finalizing a budget.
Finally, not really discussed, is that some proposals may last a couple of years and you have to consider inflation rates in order to make sure that you budget enough. If you're not familiar with constructing budgets, I highly recommend you consult someone who is your first few attempts. They can be tricky and they are a very critical piece to the proposal.
The issue of indirect costs can be confusing. That is something that I am just beginning to get a handle on, even though I'm not even sure I understand it fully (yay Virginia's spreadsheets! =) The few times I have done budgets I have been fortunate enough to have templates in spreadsheets from which to work that automatically calculate the costs. It is amazing how many details you have to consider when you sit down to do a budget. If you do not think of it before you submit the proposal, you've missed your opportunity, so it is important to think long and hard before finalizing a budget.
Finally, not really discussed, is that some proposals may last a couple of years and you have to consider inflation rates in order to make sure that you budget enough. If you're not familiar with constructing budgets, I highly recommend you consult someone who is your first few attempts. They can be tricky and they are a very critical piece to the proposal.
Thursday, June 5, 2008
Bio
Because my blog insists on being fussy for the moment, I'm temporarily going to put my bio here until it decides to behave and allow me to put it in the "About Me" section.
Katie Goergen
B.A., English, Clemson University
M.A., Professional Communication, Clemson University, Candidate
Katie Goergen
B.A., English, Clemson University
M.A., Professional Communication, Clemson University, Candidate
In the course of my studies I have focused most of my attention on proposal writing. I have conducted a usability test that examines this process as a birth-to-death cycle beginning with the creation of the Request For Proposal (RFP) to the eventual acceptance/rejection of the proposal itself. I have worked with a number of different faculty and grant officers within the university to continue building upon this knowledge to better understand the components necessary to write a winning proposal.
Along with this vested interest in proposal writing, I also have experience creating websites and creating and implementing university programs. While at Clemson, I have participated in a number of faculty’s funded research programs such as the Freshman Alcohol Awareness program, and the Community Coalition research program in which Clemson is working to assist and collaborate with local community coalitions to work towards a healthier community. I assisted in creating and conducting the Research Training Program which is coordinated through Clemson and Voorhees College. In regards to websites, I helped design and currently maintain the department of Public Health Sciences website.
Week 3: Post 8, Progress Report 2
Date: 05-June 2008
To: Dr. Jan Holmevick
From: Katie Goergen
Introduction
A usability test of the Office of Sponsored Programs website and the Limited Submission Program will be conducted in order better understand how users use these tools. This study will reveal usability flaws and provide recommendations forboth of these interfaces which will in effect improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the pre-award submission phase at Clemson University.
Work Completed
Thus far I have the majority of my proposal drafted as the introduction, current situation, and project plan are currently constructed. I spoke with Karen (POC) yesterday and there has been a slight change due to budetary issues. I am now vieing for an assistantship in the Office of Sponsored Programs for the fall semester. What I am battling is the $6000 requested for equipment to complete the study. This $6000 would cover the software program Morae, a laptop on which to install it, a web camera, and a license for Adobe Premiere. Well, risk losing the chance for an assistantship, as much as I would like to use Morae, I'm thinking I can benefit more from the work experience than a program I can read up on and view tutorials online. Besides, Morae is really not the wave of the future in the field of eye-tracking. It's the TOBE eye-tracking system that is currently possible and which is still very expensive (approx. $25,000) and still has technical problems that need to be worked out. So, risk losing the opportunity for an assistantship through the Office of Sponsored Programs, I opted to nix equipment that is not necessary to complete the study. This will not effect my study in anyway as proof from the last study in which I did not use any of that equipment and it still yielded valid and reliable data. But, I am getting closer to getting approval to conduct the usability test. Should have an answer within the next week or two.
Next Steps
I need to now sit down and begin refining my draft and constructing a more formal and finalized version. As I do this, I also need to consider the methodology in regards to eliminating the use of Morae. Again, in place of Morae, I will rely on field notes, video-taping, direct-observation, and talk-aloud protocol, so as you see, it is not a detrimental to remove the Morae component. I need to whittle down my current situation so that I do not exceed the page limit, as well as follow Ron's advice and be sure to separate the more "active" components of the current situation and perhaps apply them to the methodology or even conclusion in identifying future steps. So, by Monday, I will have a complete draft of the entire proposal.
In completing this draft I want to first focus on the current situation and get that down to a reasonable page limit, and then I want to focus closely on the methodology. I feel as though I have identified the major steps and maybe start working on those smaller components, such as the instruments (but that may be a little too much, we'll see). Finally, once these parts are written, I think finally, I will have a very clear idea and understanding of what I am trying to accomplish and I will go back and re-write my executive summary to reflect this.
Conclusion
I am starting to get excited over the prospect of this actually coming to fruition. If the short one page proposal I have submitted to Dr. Gallicciho and Dr. Prizrembel is rejected, I need to start from scratch with this. That's OK, it wouldn't be the end of the world, I do have another idea lined up as a back-up, but still, I would really like to see this happen. As of now, I am going to keep working on this proposal and hoping for the best =)
To: Dr. Jan Holmevick
From: Katie Goergen
Introduction
A usability test of the Office of Sponsored Programs website and the Limited Submission Program will be conducted in order better understand how users use these tools. This study will reveal usability flaws and provide recommendations forboth of these interfaces which will in effect improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the pre-award submission phase at Clemson University.
Work Completed
Thus far I have the majority of my proposal drafted as the introduction, current situation, and project plan are currently constructed. I spoke with Karen (POC) yesterday and there has been a slight change due to budetary issues. I am now vieing for an assistantship in the Office of Sponsored Programs for the fall semester. What I am battling is the $6000 requested for equipment to complete the study. This $6000 would cover the software program Morae, a laptop on which to install it, a web camera, and a license for Adobe Premiere. Well, risk losing the chance for an assistantship, as much as I would like to use Morae, I'm thinking I can benefit more from the work experience than a program I can read up on and view tutorials online. Besides, Morae is really not the wave of the future in the field of eye-tracking. It's the TOBE eye-tracking system that is currently possible and which is still very expensive (approx. $25,000) and still has technical problems that need to be worked out. So, risk losing the opportunity for an assistantship through the Office of Sponsored Programs, I opted to nix equipment that is not necessary to complete the study. This will not effect my study in anyway as proof from the last study in which I did not use any of that equipment and it still yielded valid and reliable data. But, I am getting closer to getting approval to conduct the usability test. Should have an answer within the next week or two.
Next Steps
I need to now sit down and begin refining my draft and constructing a more formal and finalized version. As I do this, I also need to consider the methodology in regards to eliminating the use of Morae. Again, in place of Morae, I will rely on field notes, video-taping, direct-observation, and talk-aloud protocol, so as you see, it is not a detrimental to remove the Morae component. I need to whittle down my current situation so that I do not exceed the page limit, as well as follow Ron's advice and be sure to separate the more "active" components of the current situation and perhaps apply them to the methodology or even conclusion in identifying future steps. So, by Monday, I will have a complete draft of the entire proposal.
In completing this draft I want to first focus on the current situation and get that down to a reasonable page limit, and then I want to focus closely on the methodology. I feel as though I have identified the major steps and maybe start working on those smaller components, such as the instruments (but that may be a little too much, we'll see). Finally, once these parts are written, I think finally, I will have a very clear idea and understanding of what I am trying to accomplish and I will go back and re-write my executive summary to reflect this.
Conclusion
I am starting to get excited over the prospect of this actually coming to fruition. If the short one page proposal I have submitted to Dr. Gallicciho and Dr. Prizrembel is rejected, I need to start from scratch with this. That's OK, it wouldn't be the end of the world, I do have another idea lined up as a back-up, but still, I would really like to see this happen. As of now, I am going to keep working on this proposal and hoping for the best =)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)