The greatest threat to a funding proposal is rarely a lack of expertise; it is the "Curse of Knowledge." When you have spent years immersed in a specific sub-field, your brain automatically fills in logical gaps that an outsider simply cannot see. You assume the reviewer shares your context. Often, they don't.
The intelligent outsider
My value lies in my lack of prior knowledge. Because I am not an expert in your niche, I am immune to your assumptions. I act as the "Intelligent Outsider"—the proxy for the fatigued, interdisciplinary reviewer who needs to understand the significance of your work in the first paragraph, not the fifth.
I don't just proofread your text; I stress-test your logic to ensure that what is obvious to you becomes inescapable to them.
Provocative by design
Some clients call my feedback "provocative." I take that as a compliment.
Standard editors politely polish texts. My approach is to interrogate them. I ask the uncomfortable questions that peers might be too polite (or too close to the work) to ask:
-
Why does this matter right now?
-
What is the significance of this outcome?
-
If I remove this paragraph, does the argument fall apart?
This process can be rigorous, but it serves one purpose: to anticipate and resolve the reviewer's objections before they ever see the manuscript or proposal.
Work that aligns with my strengths
Deep text work—known as developmental editing—has been a cornerstone of my job for 15 years. Immersing myself in researchers' manuscripts and proposals is the basis of all the work that I do, which started after a postdoc at the University of Cologne asked for help getting a manuscript out of a difficult revise-and-resubmit cycle.
Since then, I have progressively moved from isolated text work to where my true strength lies: engaged personal conversations and interactions with researchers in the early-to-middle stages of their text work to ensure that their papers and proposals are built on a solid foundation.
These early interventions—generating ideas, testing strategies 1-on-1, and providing real-time feedback—shape a project before the writing even begins or during its formative stages. Not only does this approach lead to the best outcomes, but I also prefer it over rushed, deadline-driven requests for last-minute polishing or fixes. especially when I see fundamental flaws that an author likely won't have time to fix before submission.
That's why I now primarily work with researchers in individual coaching and strategy sessions, and why I lead workshops that scale my experience and the support I can provide.
I'm excited about a new direction for my work, particularly because a collaborative, partnership approach is one that benefits researchers and leverages my expertise and strengths.
Together with early-career researchers (ECRs) and research support experts, I am co-founding a nonprofit organization (an e. V.), with the aim of supporting researchers' communication needs. This new nonprofit will be a researcher-driven organization to respond to ECRs' specific communication needs. I'm excited to combine the talents and expertise of researchers and experienced research-support professionals so that we can develop new mechanisms of support for researchers and scale our collective efforts.
We plan to be operational in the first quarter of 2026. I'll have much more to say about ResearchCommunication/ForschungsKommunkation a little later this year. Stay tuned!
