Grant reviewer archetypes

The fate of your grant application strongly depends on who is going to read it. Although you don't know what your reviewers will be like in advance, there are certain recurring types. Here, four of them are presented:

The non-expert reviewer

He is from a related field, but does not know your field in all details. Most of all, a non-expert depends on a clearly structured application and a text written understandably. To make the work of a non-expert reviewer easy, point out the key points of your application, even if they are obvious to you. What is new in the proposal? What is unknown in the field? The non-expert will like to see such basics laid out in plain language.

The expert reviewer

He knows your field well, perhaps better than you. An expert will get interested in your application easily. Then, he will read it very carefully. Citing an expert helps - of course you don't know who will be your reviewer, but you should know who are the demi-gods in your field. To convince the expert reviewer, support your key points with details that show that you really know what you propose.

The sceptical reviewer

He likes scrutiny and will be looking for logical holes and problems in your application. Since applications are about projects not done yet, there are always difficulties one can imagine. To convince the sceptical reviewer, show him that you have thought about potential problems and risks already. Mention them in the first place and explain what you are going to do about them. In some calls, a risk analysis is a required part of the application (also called a contingency plan).

The hostile reviewer

He does not like your application before having read it. Maybe he is a direct competitor, maybe he just has a bad day. Most probably the review will come out negative and there is not much you can do about it. The best is to run away. If you suspect that your review was strongly biased, you may request a different reviewer. But you need to make your cause carefully. When confronted with this type of reviewer, better ask an experienced scientist for advice.

Conclusion

With the exception of the hostile reviewer, you can prepare your application to cover the needs of the three remaining characters. Going an extra mile for your reviewers may help them to recognize the value of your work when they write their report.

The four reviewer archetypes are inspired by *E. Potworowski.