1. business and industrial
2. business operations
3. management
4. project management

HOW TO WRITE A WINNING
FWO PROJECT?
16 December 2011
2/03/12 | pag. 1
A. E. Woodward
Einstein + Shakespeare = FWO Sucess
2/03/12 | pag. 2
The major financer of
fundamental social science
research
Fonds voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek –
Vlaanderen” (FWO) or Research Foundation
Flanders.
The FWO became a separate Public Utility Foundation by Royal Decree of
20-1-2006. Funded by Flemish Community (73%), federal government and
some private sources
– Member of ESF (now Science Europe) and
other European scientific networks
What’s in it for us?
•  Individual researchers (Mandates 42% of
budget) Deadline February 1
–  Doctoral fellowships (856) (aspirantschaps approved at
about 210 a year in all fields)
–  Post docs (850) sabbaticals, prizes
–  Mobility- study visits, congresses
•  Research projects (52% of budget)
Deadline April 1
–  Credits for equipment and research costs
–  Projects
(Figures Jaarboek 2010)
Source: FWO Jaarboek 2010
Some application numbers
• 
Mandaat
Apps 2009
Applications
2010-2011
Aspirant
826
997 (+20,7%)
Aspirant
hernieuwing
205
197 (-3,90%)
Bijzondere
doctoraatsbeurs
5
6 (+20%)
Klinische
doctoraatsbeurs
9
10 (+11,11%)
Postdoctoraal
onderzoeker
600
736 (+22,67%)
Postdoc
onderzoeker - 1ste
en 2de hern.
128
136 (+6,25%)
Fundamenteel
klinische
mandaten
22
26 (+18,18%)
Fundamenteel
klinische
mandaten hern.
4
17 (+325%)
Source: FWO Jaarboek 2010
Know your judges: Before
2010
2/03/12 | pag. 8
Know your judges after 2010:
Culture!
2/03/12 | pag. 9
Decision making in 29
Commissions (Expert Panels)
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
2 meetings annually May and September
Open recruitment to panels
International – English language
9 non-Flemish, 7 Flemish
Targets (2/3, Disciplines)
2 Reporters per project
AANVRAAG FWO MANDAAT - Aspirant
Verslaggever - Reporter :
WOODWARD Expertpanel – Expert Panel : G&M4
applicant :
Beoordeling Individu - Assessment of the applicant
Naam kandidaat – Name of the
Studie results
Wetenschappelijke zelfstandigheid Scientific Independence
Onderzoeksbekwaamheid en- potentieel
Research potential
Referenten /References
Publicaties /Publications
Buitenlandse verblijven (meer dan 2
weken)/ Stays abroad
Commentaar
Comment
Beoordeling Project - Assessment of the project
Originaliteit
Originality
Haalbaarheid
Feasibility
Doelgerichtheid
Focus of the project
Methodologie
Methodology
Omkadering en begeleiding
Quality of supervision and
guidance
Commentaar
Comment
Rangschikking - Ranking :
A+ A
A-
B+
B
B-
C
D Niet gerangschikt - Not classified
Different scores are used to facilitate the ranking of the applicants compared with each other
A: Good quality of the applicant and the project
B: Good quality of the applicant and the project, but with minor remarks
C: Good quality of the applicant and the project, with major remarks
Einstein: Elements in good
applications
•  The candidate researcher
–  Track record
–  Publications with impact factor
•  The project
–  Good structure, well-written
–  State of the art
–  Feasible
•  The recommendations: Top
•  For individuals: personal qualities of excellence
Pre-Docs (Aspiranten)
•  5 years after Masters (10 years after first master) - 2 chances
Criteria
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
research capability and potential (including course results)
research skills and methodology
scientific independence
originality and innovative nature of the project
feasibility of the project
purposefulness of the project
quality of coaching and assistance
•  THINK ABOUT THESE WHEN WRITING PERSONAL
MOTIVATION!
•  ANY EVIDENCE OF PUBLICATIONS OR WRITING IS USEFUL
• 
Post-Doc Researchers
• 
6 years after doctorate- (pregnancy counts for a year break)-only 2
chances
Criteria
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
research capability and potential (including course results)
research skills and methodology
scientific background (and production) of the candidate
scientific independence (beyond the doctorate!)
originality and innovative nature of the project
mobility of the applicant
feasibility of the project
purposefulness of the project
10 referees—not affiliated with Belgium, more than three years since you
worked together
Personal motivation statement
Projects
•  Normal budget: 240-280.000 Euro over 4
years
•  (1 full time researcher or 2 (slightly less)
student fellowships
•  Maximally 2 projects can be submitted as
(co-) promoter
•  Absolutely crucial is publication record of
promoter and participants: Report
publications formally using FWO format
including impact factor, no artificial inflation
•  Good referee reports
Shakespeare:
Communication Tips
•  Great title!
•  Strong abstract and attention grabbing first paragraph
including key question
•  State of the art: short, essentials
•  Research questions clear and situated, implications of
research for wider questions
•  Method: What will you do, why and when? Hyperdetailed discussion of what will be done- schematic time
plan is useful- stages which should be realistic
•  Use good layout and sub-titles, a readable font
•  Emphasize fundamental science rather than practical
use
GOOD LUCK!
2/03/12 | pag. 17