Middle – Why would they believe you?
A good presentation answers the panel members’ questions just before they originate in their minds. The introduction of the conflict at the end of the exposition, leads to the question: Yes, but what are you going to do? This is what you explain in the middle. We often use this order of things:
- Out of all the other options you chose to approach the problem from this angle, perspective, with this multidisciplinary framework. Start with the why before you arrive at this approach (what).
- Research design. Now it is clear what you are going to do, explain how you are going to do it. Provide the overall structure of the project, and explain the work packages (or groups of work packages).
- CV and network. Inspired by what is needed to complete the project, present your experiences and skills. Think about technical (e.g. experimentation, field work, modelling) and transferable (e.g. leadership, and management) skills. Also present the unique aspects of the host and partners helping you to deliver. In shorter presentations, this section is often deleted to save time. Then you could insert your previous work leading to this idea in the approach part.
Inspiration for the middle can be found the ‘Why like this?’, ‘Why you?’, and ‘Why here?’ questions of Step 4. Also the biggest strength and biggest weakness discussed in Step 3 should be dealt with in this section.
Text frame: insert mini stories
A good way to prevent a boring list of facts in the middle is to use the why-what-how-bridge formula. This works well for explaining your approach and work packages. You start with a sentence that provides why and what: ‘Because data are already available, but distributed in isolated datasets, WP1 aims to create a unified dataset.’ Then you dive deeper into the how: ‘First I am going to map available datasets by … Then, I will collect data in a dataset in this way… Finish with a bridge to the next work package: ‘The dataset produced in WP1 will be used in WP2 to answer question x (why) by looking at z (what).
Thus, you divide the middle in mini stories with their own problem-solution structures. With the same structure you can transform the CV and network section form of a boring list into an origin story. E.g.: ‘for me connecting theory with experiments (or whatever is the key challenge in your proposal) has always been my focus. When I was an undergrad … then I realized … it became my mission to… it lead to this… and that.. and with this grant I can take the next step.’
End – Why would they care?
In the middle part you showed what you want to do with the grant. Now it is time to bring it home by sketching the world made possible by the project. We advise to zoom out. Start with the concrete deliverables of the project and the impact on your field. Continue with the broader academic impact through the adoption of the knowledge and methods produced by the project. Mention the impact on society. End with a last sentence that demonstrates your vision.
For this section you can go back to the ‘Why this?’ and ‘Why now?’ questions of Step 4.
Text frame: Ethos, pathos, logos
In academia we have a strong focus on convincing others through giving them the right facts and figures. Are they not convinced yet? Then throw more data at hem. However, the ancient philosophers allready knew that this rational way of convincing with arguments is just one of three main rhetorical devices: logos. Especially in the context of an oral presentation it is the character of the presenter (ethos) that makes people listen and accept. And, the emotions (pathos) the story triggers have the power to move the audience. A strong presentation uses these three devices. It makes the panel members not only understand, but also feel the importance of the proposed research and trust you as the person who makes it wor. After all, emotions play a pivotal role in human decision-making.