Grant writing takes time
Rapport from the think tank DEA show an increase in time spent on grant writing
Dear staff
I hope that everyone had a good Easter, enjoyed the sunshine and the many signs of spring time.
Unfortunately, we are in the midst of a difficult economic situation, and there are many concerns about the budgets at the faculty. This week the prevention phase expires - and next week we must therefore look even deeper into the budgets to assess whether it will be necessary to find reductions in the salary budget.
A lot has been done throughout the faculty to balance the budgets. It is therefore my opinion that we are not far from the goal. There will be ongoing information in the coming weeks about the financial situation. Herewith an invitation to follow up on emails and newsletters.
Just before Easter, the report External research funding came out with the subtitle An effective remedy – with side effects? from the think tank DEA, which produces knowledge, debate and networks about e.g. higher education as well as research and innovation.
The report is based on a series of interviews and a questionnaire survey with the participation of approx. 4100 researchers and university leaders at the Danish universities. It documents many of the well-known issues surrounding external funding, including the hourglass challenge, where associate professors find it difficult to find enough research funds to cover their research ambitions.
The report also documents that 90% of the research funding goes to 20% of the researchers, which is a major challenge in terms of talent development and the retention of young researchers.
I was particularly interested in the analysis of the time consumption when receiving external funds. Success rates are generally low at 10-15%, which means that many applications must be written before success.
In other words, there is a large amount of time spent when bringing in external funds. The study shows that the time spent writing applications increases from 9% for assistant professors to 12% for professors. There is thus quite a considerable amount of time spent to get the funds home.
Other tasks also take time. Time for guidance and teaching increases from 23% for assistant professors to 43% for associate professors.
This means that there are approx. 30% time for research for associate professors and professors, while the assistant professors have 55% of the time for research. These are interesting figures and show that time could be freed up for research if the processes surrounding applications were simpler.
Finally, the report concludes that the high external funding limits the universities' financial leeway (e.g. via co-financing) and thus the possibility of prioritizing independent areas.
It is also a challenge for our faculty and one of the reasons why we have to be very careful to use the basic grant for research sensibly and at the same time try to cover the extra costs associated with bringing in external funds via project funds.
Only in this way, we can maintain a certain independence in the form of a smaller adjustment pool at the faculty, as well as support the departments in the event of unforeseen costs.
If you would like to read the Danish report, there is a link to it here.
Marianne Holmer, dean