Writing Proposals - Chapter 6

This chapter reinforces the importance of knowing your audience, but it also describes ways to know yourself in the proposal writing process. When writing the qualification section of a proposal, we should think of our audience to determine whether the section is needed at all. We would want to introduce ourselves to a client unfamiliar with our credentials, as would be the case with a organization to funding source; we might want to tell more about ourselves to a source familiar to us but not to our previous work in a team to management situation; and we might want to write more of a recommendation to include outside agencies. However, in the unique case of the MAPC thesis proposal, where the committee members are probably familiar with us already, we might prefer omitting the qualification section as a separate component of the proposal. For the 10 page limit, a qualification section would only take up space, so I’m curious to learn how I might weave in this information in other parts of my proposal, particularly in response to the project plan’s why question.

This chapter also has several other superfluous suggestions, which may not be necessary in every proposal writing situation. In fact, some of the suggestions stray into the category of want to tell information. For instance, the chapter discusses the dreaded organizational chart, calling it a requisite for the proposal. But if the theme of the chapter is to know your audience and to know yourself, including your strengths and weakness, then the organizational chart could be deceptive, since rarely does the organizational chart depict actual relationships in an organization. It may be the formal map of the organizational hierarchy, but communication does not necessarily follow the chain of command. Displaying such a graphic may provide reassurance for the funding agency, but I doubt it depicts actual relationships. As the book states, the image eventually needs to measure up to reality.

I prefer the suggestion to describe specific people leading or working on the projects, though again for the MAPC proposal, this description may not be necessary. However, the advice to develop a persona using a theme and key words may be adapted to our proposals. Certainly, as we revise we can think how we refer to ourselves in relationship to the research we are proposing. Do we use passive or active voice? Do we take responsibility for our work? Are we engaged in the subject? Later in the revision process, I hope to consider this aspect of my writing in relation to my persona, particularly as I reconsider the details of my audiences.