Writing Proposals - Chapter 12

We’ve reached the end of the book, and there’s still so much to be done. This last chapter addresses the final touches to the proposal, mainly the front and back matter. We might consider the presentation as part of our main concerns as well, since it supplements the core of the package: the proposal itself.

The front matter can include a letter of transmittal, cover page, executive summary and table of contents, but when considering including these components, I wonder how many times we need to repeat ourselves. If we include an introduction, do we need an executive summary too? Would an abstract be the academic equivalent, or is that something we save for the thesis itself? Do we need a letter of transmittal? If we are sending a digital copy, could we substitute an email of transmittal? I think it might be a nice touch, particularly to include contact information. Also, the book specifies that a table of contents is not necessary for a proposal of less than 10 pages, but it certainly couldn’t hurt to display the structure up front. Again, I have to wonder whether adding a page is justified though.

In addition, the title page, letter of transmittal, and table of contents, as front matter, set the tone for the proposal. We can use the letter to establish a relationship with our readers, and the title page and table of contents can signal our professionalism and attention to detail. However, having written mostly academic essays, I find it difficult to invent a cover design that still fits within my conventional notions of research papers, and has enough differences to make my proposal unique and attractive.

I also want to examine my use of terminology and citations as I consider the inclusion of back matter, though for a 10 page proposal, extensive back matter again seems to add more weight than it is worth. Instead, I will consider the inclusion of definitions as sidebars, thus enhancing the creative design of the proposal. By looking at the proposal as the sum of its parts as we learned in the visual communication chapter, I can consider these final additions within the overall design and purpose of the proposal, and rethink any areas that creep outside my mission or stray too far from the conventions.

Writing Proposals - Chapter 9

While this chapter points out several important guidelines for improving style in our proposals, I wonder how much of it comes naturally as we write, particularly concerning the distinction between plain and persuasive sentences and tone. If we know when we want to pour on the persuasion, such as the introduction and conclusion, and when we need to stick to a plain style to define and explain our topic such as the current situation section, we might write in these styles from the beginning of the process. Though we can surely revise these sections to improve the tone, I think we might begin with distinct tones as we draft proposals.

However, perhaps some people need some rules or guidelines for writing with style, and some of the rules remind me of a favorite TV show, What Not to Wear. In this reality show, two hosts pick an unsuspecting fashion novice to make-over during a week’s time. They critique and trash the person’s current wardrobe, give them rules for buying new pieces, and send them on a mission in New York City to transform themselves through style. I think it would be hard to admit if you need such a make-over, but at that point, a strong critique and strict rules would be helpful. Therefore, I can see the usefulness of these style guidelines, such as finding your subject and placing it early in the sentence and choosing strong verbs rather than nominalizations. If I come across a confusing sentence in my writing, I will try to evaluate it and revise it using these guidelines.

On the other hand, I want to question a few rules from the chapter, such as the rule of thumb that we should use similes and analogies more often for inexperienced readers. I think similes and analogies can be helpful for any reader, regardless of experience with a subject, since they make our writing more interesting to read. I would also agree and disagree with the book’s advice to use familiar metaphors. Sure, they can be helpful in instantly connecting with readers, and a powerful tool at a subconscious level (a very Burkean idea, I believe), but they can also become cliché, and I wonder if proposal reviewers tire of reading the same metaphors. I might favor the persuasive power of new metaphors since they convey new ideas in a new perspective. However, I don’t think we should consider such strategy as being manipulative, since that implies a negative connotation toward rhetoric. Instead, persuasion is a natural part of the proposal process, and style might be the area where we can pinpoint our attempts at persuasion.