TEA BREAK

ACEING ACADEMIA #12: Avoid an inconsistent writing style

A chemist, a physicist, and an engineer walk into a bar … no, scratch that.

A chemist, a physicist, and an engineer write a grant proposal. They each write about their particular area of expertise, stitch it all together, and hit submit.

Can you see the potential problem?

It doesn’t even have to be multiple subject areas. As soon as you have more than one person writing a grant, there’s the potential to introduce an inconsistent writing style.

In one extreme case, a reviewer told Dan and I that they once received a proposal written in three different fonts: one for each member of the project team.

There is nothing wrong with each researcher writing about their topic. But without taking the time to smooth it over (or unify the font type), it can send the wrong message to the reviewer. Rather than a team who is working together, it indicates that everyone is doing their own thing.

To avoid this error, there are a few things that can help:

1️⃣ DECIDE WHO HAS THE FINAL SAY: One person, most likely the project lead or principal investigator, should be in charge of deciding the overall tone and changing the proposal accordingly. Questions about whether the changes affect the intended meaning can be sent to the co-investigators for clarification but the PI determines how it’s written.

2️⃣ HIRE AN EDITOR OR PROOFREADER: Someone who is approaching the proposal with fresh eyes to ensure it has a uniform tone and sounds like it was written in one voice can make everyone’s life a little easier. They’ll likely catch a few of the other errors I’ve mentioned as well.

3️⃣ GET FEEDBACK: Seriously. This really does apply to all of the common errors in the ACEing Academia series. Do your readers feel like they can see how the proposal has been put together by different people … or is it seamless?

See the other posts in the ACEing Academia series:

♠  Content
♦  Clarity
♣  Structure
♥  Style