I tend to have one of two reactions to reading a proposal: Sometimes, the opening paragraph grabs my attention and what follows pulls me in and sustains my interest. The authors tell me at the beginning where we are headed and take me along for the journey. They bring up worries I may have before they are fully formed in my mind and calm me with well-reasoned explanations. But way too often, I am not sure where the journey is going. I’m having a hard time following the authors’ train of thought and soon I start feel like I am working harder than I should. 

Scientists and engineers spend a significant part of their training mastering a style that makes it hard for readers to get excited. Mastery of the language of science and engineering is a marker of their professional group and can be a great shorthand among peers. The style contains multiple, carefully defined technical terms and is often dominated by passive voice to imply a sense of impartiality: “The test procedures were completed and all requirements were within specification. Test resources were maintained within given bounds.” Most writers are unaware, until someone points it out to them, that passive voice fails to identify the actor in the sentence. Who performed the test? Who was responsible for it? What was he or she required to do? How well did the test perform beyond meeting the requirements, which is the bare minimum? There is an easy solution to this, but most proposal writers reject it out of hand.

Professional writers recommend that proposals are written in first-person, active voice, present tense. Instead of: “A test of the power subsystem will be conducted.” Write: “We test the power subsystem.” While I was at it, I snuck in another revolutionary change. I used “we” instead of “The BreakThough project,” or slightly better, “the team.” Within a proposal there is rarely room for confusion on who the we is. If there is, it is best to identify the individual either by role, or by name. “The subsystem engineer is responsible for testing.” This takes care of the actor, but what about the tense?

You too may balk at the idea of describing activities that you hope to perform in the future using the present tense. You may be tempted to write: “If the proposal was to be funded, the power subsystem would be tested to confirm that the subsystem performs within specifications.” Are you too getting tired? Yes, we know this is a proposal and it all depends on your team getting funded. How about we relax a bit and use the extra space for more information: “We test the peak power output of 200W over the expected operation temperature range from -10 to +30 degrees Celsius.”  This sentence is easier to read and much richer in data than the first version. It is always worth to check if your paragraph answers the “Five Ws” of journalism: Who? What? Where? When? Why? 

Did I get you interested in learning how to write proposal that hold the readers attention? Check out Michael Alley’s book “The Craft of Scientific Writing.” The book is tremendously readable, practical, and lists many more examples that will help you develop your own style that keeps your reviewers reading. While there is no direct correlation between your ability to write a compelling proposal and your ability to perform a break through science experiment, an easy to read writing style will present your ideas in the best light.