(S7E5) From Idea to Application: Supporting Research Fellowship Applicants with Anna Pilz

Taryn Bell:

Hi, I'm Taryn Bell, researcher development advisor at the University of Leeds. If you listen to our last episode, you'll know that my main area of interest is careers, with a particular focus on fellowships and funding. Today we're kicking off the first of two episodes, focusing on research fellowships and funding applications. Fellowships and funding are one of those areas that are traditionally seen as the preserve of research offices, not researcher developers. But there's a lot that we can all offer in this space to support researchers when they apply for funding. So without further ado, I'm delighted to introduce Dr. Anna Pilz, academic developer and trainer at the University of Edinburgh. Welcome to Research Culture Uncovered, Anna.

Anna Pilz:

Thank you very much for the invitation, Taryn, it's great to be part of these conversations.

Taryn Bell:

Could you tell us briefly about you and your role and why you have an interest in fellowships and funding as well?

Anna Pilz:

So I joined the Institute for Academic Development at Edinburgh about one and a half years ago, so I still feel fairly new in the researcher development community. In my role, I design and deliver training for researchers at all career stages, from doctoral students up to professors. So for about a year now, I offer, for instance, one on one consultations on developing a research profile that can include a research profile in a different kind of discipline, interdisciplinary collaborations, or setting up a research center. And last year I started an initiative under the umbrella of research realities that really seeks to move the focus from research outputs to challenges and opportunities of being a researcher and the processes of doing the research. And this initiative really invites conversations that aim to unveil the hidden curriculum and create more visibility for the incredible variety of researchers lived realities. And it is precisely the researchers lived realities that draw my interest to fellowships and funding. They really bring together the three core strands of so much of what we as researcher developers focus on the development of a career strategy that is attuned to personal circumstances, the development of a research strategy along different project scales for the short, medium and long term, and the development of a funding strategy within an ever changing and highly competitive environment.

Taryn Bell:

And I think as well, you have this lovely blend of experience because not only do you work as a research developer yourself, you've also held a number of fellowships, so you've gone through the actual process of applying. How do you feel that this influences your practice?

Anna Pilz:

Yes, I think it influences my practice quite a lot. And you're right, my list of unsuccessful fellowship and funding applications far outweighs the successful ones, and I have no problem of admitting to that. Up until my current role, my career included a series of postdoctoral fellowships in Ireland, Germany, and the UK, and these ranged from very short term like three month fellowships that didn't come with any salary to two year postdocs that allowed me to pursue my own research ideas, including a Mary Curie Fellowship that brought me to Edinburgh in the first place. Having gone through different application processes myself, I bring that very practical and in depth knowledge of the international funding and fellowship landscape to the role. And with the benefit of hindsight, I would have done a lot of things quite differently. So I have also learned, as a researcher developer to reflect on my own paths and see where have I gone wrong? Where could I have made decisions a little bit differently? But in addition to the practical knowledge, I also have that emotional understanding of pouring the hopes and ambitions into a proposal and what it feels like to get that rejection. I know the feeling and reality of a rejection, meaning that I will be on the dole, that it might mean the potential end to a career, as well as the excitement of charting out new research terrains and collaborating with others. So a whole kind of emotional spectrum there, from despair to excitement and joy.

Anna Pilz:

And I'm very kind of conscious of that wide variety of lift experiences that I can have in the room among researchers when I deliver training on fellowship or funding in general. And when I run these workshops or design these resources. I'm quite deliberately wanting to bring these different lift realities out and address the different feelings that people might bring to the room. So I really hope to give a sense of empowering and creating a sense of ownership for the researchers to give them a sense of owning their narratives, owning their career choices. By sharing my own lessons learned and passing on advice that I have received and benefited from myself. And I really have a love and hate relationship with fellowships and funding applications. On the one hand, I really embrace that they pose a challenge. So I like that idea of them as a puzzle where the scheme kind of gives a sense of this is the frame, and as the applicant, it's my obligation to kind of paint that picture within that frame that really draws the viewer in so that needful telling a compelling story.

Anna Pilz:

And I just wanted to quote the wonderful Noreen Masud, the literary critic and author of A Flat Place, who once said that it's the applicant's job to make the project interesting. And I think this also applies to the narrative around the career. It's the applicant's job to make their career narrative compelling and interesting and building a case. So applying has to be embraced then as a process. And it is a process that I think is beneficial for developing skills and project development, honing your skills and articulating why your research matters and developing a deeper understanding of the wider funding and research environment that is such a vital competency for researchers.

Taryn Bell:

I find it really interesting what you say about thinking about the lived reality and the kind of emotional element of it, because that's not something I think we talk about so much. And some of this conversation, I think will come in our next episode where we talk about how we cope with unsuccessful fellowship or funding applications. But I just think it's really something important to acknowledge that this is an emotional process people are going through, not just a practical one as well. This actually leads me on to sort of my next question. I mentioned at the beginning that support for research fellowships and funding often sits within a university's research office, with research development managers, kind of research support officers. But when there's already that support there, what is the added value that researcher developers or maybe PIs or other forms of support can bring to the table?

Anna Pilz:

Yeah, and I think that's really a question that gets us thinking about where we sit within the overarching university structure. We kind of need to unpack a little bit what the different kind of support services do and who they're aimed at and what their kind of purpose is, and thinking a little bit about the pre award and the post award support, for instance. And in terms of pre award support, when we're thinking of a university's kind of research office, they often target researchers who are obviously applying through that institution as the host. So their support and resources is kind of vital for a self selected group of internal as well as external applicants, whereas we as researcher developers support individuals based at the institution, but regardless of where they want to go. So we're not kind of trying to necessarily convince them to stay or to apply via the institution where we're based. So we're having a kind of wider canvas to sketch out in terms of career trajectories and getting them to think and reflect on where they want to be or where they want to go with their research careers.

Taryn Bell:

It feels like in that perspective, then we're coming at it less from a funding perspective and more from a professional development perspective. So even before you put that application in, seeing it as an opportunity for development, an opportunity to think about where you want to go.

Anna Pilz:

Absolutely. So I think for us, as professional developers, the person that's at the very heart of what we're looking at, whether in very crude terms, research offices are there to increase the revenue of the institution. So there is a different sort of focus, I suppose, and that kind of channels the support in different directions.

Taryn Bell:

I mean, I find myself, both in my previous role as Fellowship Coordinator at York and here at Leeds, is that I spend a lot of time thinking about that person element. The classic thing that everyone always talks about is the three P's of fellowships: Person, Project and Place. I spend more time than any other thinking about that person element, whether it's narrative CVs or career development plans. Do you spend more time thinking about that person element?

Anna Pilz:

Yes, absolutely. And I think I very much frame training around that. So any workshops that have to do with fellowship applications, I put that kind of ownership of thinking about where are you now? Where do you want to go? What kind of skills experiences development have you already undergone? Where are you finding yourself in your career trajectory to think? Is it about developing a new set of skills or kind of widening your horizons? Are you wanting to step into new disciplinary areas? And that kind of determines then also which scheme you're actually choosing to apply for, whether as a researcher you want to be working very practice based, or is it something where your work has a policy relevancy? So are you looking at parliamentary academic fellowship schemes? So the remit is kind of quite broad, and once you open it out, attendees kind of realize the white canvas of what a fellowship can look like, and that it's very much connected to their reflection on what type of a career they want, what type of a researcher they want to be, what the next step within their kind of journey is. Then you can kind of give them back that ownership rather than or everybody else around me seems to be doing a postdoc, and that's the expected thing. So it's really inviting that really personal element to come to the fore.

Taryn Bell:

I think there's also an element there in helping them to see beyond the fellowship. I think particularly when you're at an early stage in your career, it's very tempting to see the fellowship as the be all and end all. I'll get a fellowship and then that'll allow me to get a lectureship or to go into industry or whatever, what we're there to do. I don't know what your thoughts on this, but I see it as my role to open their eyes to areas that they might not think about otherwise. Things like professional development, how do you support team? What kind of leader do you want to be, what your duty of care is as a PI and all of that kind of thing. I kind of see that's where our real power lies.

Anna Pilz:

Absolutely. And we're really there to facilitate that reflection more than anything else, I think on career, on research strategies that can support them in shaping, on the one hand, their narrative cvs, the cases or examples that they want to showcase, if they're working on their contribution to knowledge or how they have worked with others, how they're supporting and developing the next generation of researchers. But I also find that sometimes that idea of placing that fellowship within a kind of long term narrative and looking beyond that and having that vision can sometimes be quite a big ask as well for many in the room who are kind of worrying about, well, I just need a job at the end of this. Don't ask me about what kind of research center I want to lead in ten years time, because that seems a very intangible goal at the moment. So it's kind of leveraging that ambition and getting them to reflect on that vision, but also taking account of the kind of realities that shape that vision.

Taryn Bell:

Absolutely. One of the things that I've got experience of at York, and we're developing it now at Leeds, is a program for postdocs who want to apply for a fellowship. And for me, in designing the program, one of the things that I'm doing is trying to use that program as an opportunity for personal and professional development, so that even if their application is not successful, there's not that sense that they've wasted their time, so to speak. Not that I think there's such a thing, but I think that's a very common narrative. When people aren't successful, they feel like they've wasted their time.

Anna Pilz:

Absolutely. I hear that a lot as well, whether in one on one consultations or in workshops. That's that element of why bother if the success rate is so small? And I'm really also trying to get them to think of the application writing process as one of active research time, of active developmental time, where they have the opportunity to reflect, and whether that is to do with where they want to work by way of what host institution, what country or what sector, with whom they want to work. Is it a particular group or research cluster, particular individuals who become collaborators or partners, or indeed act as mentors on fellowship applications, and how they want to work by way of how big is the team? Is there a kind of practice based element. So all these kind of questions that are important to project development kind of are not done in vain. They can lead to other sorts of invitations, to other sorts of collaborations and other sets of projects. And it's elements that go into funding applications and fellowship applications. Writing a literature review, for instance, often I suggest to them, think about it as can you turn that into a position paper? Can you write a kind of wider review paper? So it's work that you would need to do anyway in order to develop that project.

Anna Pilz:

So why not also see it as developing your publication profile by a creating visibility for your ideas, setting the agenda for a particular field, and then in the application saying, as I've already highlighted in X, Y and Z publication. So there is great opportunity to really kind of leverage all that work that goes into applications, into relevant parts of developing your cv, really.

Taryn Bell:

And something that we were kind of discussing a little bit before this episode as well, is this notion as well of having a role in myth busting as well, because there are a lot of myths.

Anna Pilz:

What I often hear, especially in one on one consultations, is the question of what should I be doing? What should I be focusing on, and do I need to move, and do I need to be on social media, and do I need to set up my own web page? And I always try to kind of bring it back to what purpose does it have? What is it that you want to do? Because almost for every element there will be an example of someone who has done that. So it's that element or the narrative of the mobility, say that idea of you have to kind of keep moving countries or institutions, but there are also instances where people stay at the same institution and manage to quite successfully attract funding, busting myths that way, and also finding examples of people who had career breaks and who enter academia again, who return to research and to look at those kind of nonlinear narratives as well, to get a sense of what is possible.

Taryn Bell:

So could you tell us a little bit more about what you're doing right now at Edinburgh to support fellowships and funding?

Anna Pilz:

So one of the very first workshops I designed was on how to write your first fellowship application, and I wrote an accompanying comprehensive guide to fellowship applications. And they really came out of my own experiences where I thought this is a knowledge base that I bring to this role and that I can very quickly turn into resources and into a workshop. And I ran similar workshops in the past for peers. I've spoken about the Marie Curie application process at Alison Garden's ECR Day, a very successful event in the academic calendar that contributes to the myth busting. And it is a very introductory sort of workshop of 3 hours in length that facilitates reflection signposts to resources because often we hear that researchers aren't actually that familiar with the variety of resources, whether that is a database of successful applications or who their funding specialist is, what the difference between local research offices and central university research offices is. So a lot of signposting happening, but also prompts that seek to encourage participants to reflect on their career stage and where they want to be and how the fellowship will enable them to get there where they want to work, in other words, why a particular host? And it also talks through application essentials with examples from various successful applications from across disciplines to give an indication of how you can communicate information via infographics or tables, for instance. And I round up with a note on evaluation criteria, feedback and handling rejections. And then I thought fellowships are only one way really of building a profile.

Anna Pilz:

And for some it might be more appropriate to go for a research award or a grant. And I then developed a workshop on developing a funding profile, which very much encourages participants to bring a project idea to the workshop via an abstract. And then I give them a range of prompts to think through the building blocks of that project. So really thinking about what would be the objectives of the kind of large scale project, what would be the kind of the phases or the work packages, if you want, and if you dive into tasks. So to get them to break a bigger project into its smaller kind of building blocks in order to identify fundable activities. And then I bring this back to really the realities of where they are in their current stage, what contract length they're on, and where they wish to take their research career in terms of, again, geography, discipline or sector. And the challenge there really is to have a variety of suggestions and opportunities to hand so that those on fixed term contracts or with only six months left on their contract can still get valuable ideas as to how can they make the most of that remaining time. Because often I find that the challenge really is of the sorts of advice one tends to give to 60% sometimes can be unapplicable to those attending, because they are either not eligible, they don't have the time to develop, that, they don't have the time available on their current contract or in their role together with the Edinburgh research office.

Anna Pilz:

I'm also collaborating currently on a workshop for Marie Curie applicants to the University of Edinburgh. So this seems to be the key really to bring that funding, practical knowledge together with the professional development element. Because the scheme has training as its core and as a past successful applicant, I can bring my own kind of knowledge of going through that. And we're developing a one day workshop where we also invite successful applicants who are currently based at Edinburgh to talk about their experience, but also invite mentors to speak what it's like for know to support a postdoc on that scheme and how involved they become in the application process.

Taryn Bell:

And I can attest from my own experience that that comprehensive guide to fellowship applications is absolutely brilliant. So we will put a link to it in the show notes and we will absolutely make sure to put a link to some of Leeds' open access guidance as well. There is a lot out there now, we've talked a lot about practical support with funding applications, but thinking about what we've already alluded to a little bit about the emotional elements and thinking towards our next episode as well, there's no way of getting around it, really. Applying for funding is a tiring and even emotional process, particularly for researchers who have the end of their contract coming up or who just have that pressure of I have to find funding. I know this is something that you're really keen to talk about as well, particularly with the researcher realities series. So how do we deal with this more emotional element as researcher developers, and can we build this into our support for researchers?

Anna Pilz:

Yeah, that's the million pound question, Taryn, isn't there are no easy answers and there's no quick fix. I feel, and it really strikes me as a question that at its heart is about precarity, and brushing the reality of precarity under the carpet won't do. To a large extent, as researcher developers and institutions, we don't yet have a full grasp of what precarity means as a lived experience. We know it's there, we know that it's quite endemic. We know that it's detrimental to quality of research, that it affects mental health. But we don't really understand yet fully how the behaviors, expectations and norms of our research cultures relate to precarity. There is a lot, really, to unpack there, I feel. I have recently read an article by Sarah Burton and Benjamin Bowman on precarity and its kind of definition, and I really found it quite helpful how they frame it as a more holistic concept or reality in which it not only centers on, as they say, quote, employment practices, institutional decisions and career progress, but also on the structures which reproduce inequalities as well as the pervasive and dominating culture or atmosphere.

Anna Pilz:

So I think it's quite a wide ranging impact that precarity has there and that links to the emotions that come up of being either very anxious, being quite distraught, the need for that job having to be lined up. So when we're talking about fellowships and writing those applications at a workshop this week, when I asked what's your motivation for writing your fellowship application, quite a few in the room say, well, I need a job. And that doesn't make the argument that's not the career narrative, that's the reality. And then the emotional labor and energy that has to go in from that necessity to creating a narrative of vision and of looking forward. We're demanding kind of quite a lot and I think in that space we have to hold that emotion and acknowledge it also and acknowledge the difficulty that comes with that and point to different opportunities perhaps on how to tackle that.

Taryn Bell:

I often do think sometimes it's a little bit unfair that in fellowship applications your often asked to explain what is this going to add to your career? What is this going to contribute? What's the added value of it? When actually for a lot of people it's going to allow them to keep doing their job is what it's going to do. But these things often go unsaid. And I think this is why it's good to have conversations like these where we're actually acknowledging it for you. Obviously, acknowledging it is a big part of it and engaging with researchers. Acknowledging this, it's really key. How do we deal with it? Is there any sort of meaningful things that we can do to support researchers?

Anna Pilz:

I think so. First of all, we have to bring that emotional intelligence to any interactions we have to the design of workshops and to the design of resources. At the very, very least, we have to acknowledge that it's a structural kind of issue, that there are inequalities. We have to acknowledge the lift realities and that is an element of depersonalizing it also, because a sense of being unsuccessful then means that especially for fellowships, it can feel kind of very personal. And by highlighting and acknowledging the structural issue, we're kind of trying to depersonalize it. What we can do is also we can know what I want to cautiously call not becoming institutionalized, which sounds a bit od, but I suppose it's thinking about where we sit within our teams, right? So the Institute for Academic Development, say at Edinburgh, sits centrally in the university secretary group and often from researchers I get that sense that they're quite aware that we sit centrally and that is sometimes seen as speaking on behalf of management or being aligned to strategy. And in the current climate, where there is mistrust into management, where there is a lack of engagement, that kind of central situatedness can sometimes be a little bit of a barrier. So I think we need to also be quite aware of that sometimes really keep our eyes open and keep that bilingual language, where on the one hand we understand where our place is within the institution and how we support action plans that in turn support research cultures, but also remaining fluent in the language of the researchers.

Anna Pilz:

And sometimes, to me, it feels like that means speaking two different languages.

Taryn Bell:

There's something about meeting them, not even as researchers, but just as people, which sounds incredibly basic. But for me, often when I work with people long term on a fellowship application, I do regular check ins with them. How are you doing? Fellowship application aside, how are you doing?

Anna Pilz:

We have an obligation to make ourselves feel comfortable and to sit with those kind of emotions as well, and to think about maybe workshops that aren't necessarily geared towards producing the career plan or the research strategy plan, or the fellowship application draft, but rather workshops that tackle those elements. So, for instance, I know that at the University of Graz, they have a workshop on should I go or should I stay? Which I think is brilliant to address that element of I'm coming to a kind of really intense moment here, and I don't know how long I want to hold on for or what I'm holding on for. And other kind of workshop topics might include what to do with unsuccessful grants, addressing issues around luck versus, I don't want to call it labor, but what is it that makes one person successful and another person unsuccessful, defining what success might look like in research, what it looks like for an individual researcher. So those more intangible themes where it's about reflection, but also a sharing that allows the difficult conversations really to kind of come to light. And that's also how we can learn what the research culture is, where the hidden expectations, norms and attitudes sit, how perceived expectations, perceived norms, and the realities of norms and expectations sometimes are intention, and how those things then result in certain sets of behaviors.

Taryn Bell:

Absolutely. You've given me a lot to think about, so I think we'll start to wrap it up. Knowing both of us, we could sit here and talk for hours about this, but this has been a really absolutely fascinating conversation already. So thanks so much for sharing your experiences. If anyone wants to get in touch with you or wants to learn more, how should they contact you, Anna?

Anna Pilz:

They can certainly just drop me an email or find me on LinkedIn. My email is Anna.pilz@ed.ac.uk.

Taryn Bell:

And if you're interested in learning more about support with fellowships and funding, the resources that we've mentioned can be found in the show notes. I wouldn't be doing my job properly if I didn't also mention that at Leeds we've just announced a brand new development program for postdocs called Fellowship Accelerator. And again, the link to find out more is in the show notes. So join us in two weeks time for a second episode on fellowships and funding, where we'll be discussing the much trickier topic of how we can support researchers when their applications are unsuccessful. So until then, thank you so much for listening and we'll see you next time. Bye!

Anna Pilz:

Thanks very much for having me. Taryn.