The new Contribution to Science section of the new NIH biosketch format is what seems to be exercising researchers the most. While comments in response to the initial announcement about these changes on Dr. Sally Rockey’s blog cover a wide range of anxieties pertaining to this change, the angst seems to boil down in many (but not all) cases to questions about length and motivation. Length is what it is, but regarding motivation: How do position yourself and phrase your descriptions if you don’t understand the motivation of the audience to which you are writing? In this post, I discuss the likely motivation behind this change and strategies for writing an effective, competitive Contribution to Science section.
Yesterday’s post discussed how the new NIH biosketch format is raising the anxiety levels of many researchers. I stick with my assertion that the change is likely inevitable, so the strategic researcher will channel that energy currently fueling the anxiety into developing a new, strategic, biosketch in the new format. Yesterday I reviewed some basic strategic concepts behind the biosketch in general, and today I will discuss some strategies specific to the new format of the NIH biosketch.
Continue reading “Strategies for the New NIH Biosketch Format (Part 2)”
Strategic Grantsmanship 