1. Professor Phyllis Tharenou Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences
Strategies to Improve Success: Writing ROPE (Research Opportunities and Performance Evidence)
Professor Phyllis Tharenou
Executive Dean
Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences
18 February 2010

2. FINE TUNING YOUR ARC GRANT APPLICATION
Mike Bull
Member of ARC College of Experts

3. Strategies to Improve Success: A B C
A. Write to the % weighting give to each selection criterion including by text length
Described in Funding Rules on ARC Website
Need to understand each selection criterion – have changed

4. What Do the Selection Criteria Mean?
1. INVESTIGATOR
ROPE + the capacity to undertake the research (as in 2009)
2. PROJECT QUALITY
Content described in Instructions to Applicants (ARC website).
(a) Address a significant problem; Innovative and original conceptual/theoretical framework; Aims, concepts, methods and results that advance knowledge (same as old S&I);
(b) Appropriate project design & methods (old Approach);
(c) Economic, environmental, &/or social benefit to Australia (same as old Nat Benefit)
Written mostly under header RESEARCH PROJECT: 3-4 pps.
Also a heading called AIMS AND BACKGROUND which asks for very little content (do a page).

5. What Do the Selection Criteria Mean?
3. RESEARCH ENVIRONMENT/INSTITUTIONAL COMMITMENT (new)
(a) Existing or developing, supportive and high quality research environment for this project;
(b) Strategic research plan of institution or other strategic developments;
(c) Available necessary facilities to complete the project;
(d) Adequate strategies to encourage dissemination, commercialization and promotion of research outcomes.
Written under header RESEARCH ENVIRONMENT/ STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENT/ COLLABORATION
Content described in Instructions to Applicants given on ARC website.
for each Scheme

6. Strategies to Improve Success: A B C
B. Get the right assessors and panel/college of experts
Select correct Field of Research codes (6- & 4-digit), keywords and write 100 word summary so as to get assessors who are experts on your proposal
FoR codes:
2-digit: 17 Psychology
4-digit: 1701 Psychology
6-digit: Industrial and Organisational Psychology

7. Strategies to Improve Success: A B C
B. Get the right panel
Best not to write a multi-panel proposal (give FoRs for a single panel) or get transferred to another panel
DECRA will have possibly 5 panels
Biological Sciences and Biotechnology (BSB)
Engineering, Mathematics and Informatics (EMI)
Physics, Chemistry and Earth Sciences (PCE)
Humanities and Creative Arts (HCA)
Social, Behavioural and Economic Sciences (SBE)

8. Strategies to Improve Success: A B C C. ROPE: Five Questions
ROPE Described in Instructions to Applicants on ARC website
Q1. Details on career and research opportunities in last 5 years
(to help ECRs, women)
Q2. Recent significant publications in last 5 years
Q3. Ten career-best publications (no time limit)
Q4. Further evidence for research impact and contributions to the field over the last 10 years
(benchmark yourself against others or accepted standards)
Q5. Most significant contributions to Proposal’s research field

9. INVESTIGATOR TRACK RECORD (ROPE) 40%
Baverstock: A significant number of applications had “errors of strategy”
that weakened the overall track record score.
Overall track record score for an application is averaged for all named investigators.

10. HOW TO IMPRESS REVIEWERS.
ROPE %
I read this first.
Am I considering an application by someone who
can produce the goods.

11. C. ROPE: Q1 – to Help ECRs/women
Q1. Career & research opportunities in last 5 years–500 words:
No. of years graduated with highest educ. qualification
Research opportunities and component in employment situation (eg ECR); Any part-time or un-employment?
Role: Research-only, teaching & research, teaching-only, teaching & administration, research & administration, or administration-only, and other roles—% of time in the roles
Career interruptions for childbirth, carer’s responsibility, misadventure, or debilitating illness
Research mentoring and facilities available to you
Any other aspects of career or research opportunities relevant to assessment and not detailed elsewhere eg slowed down your research

12. Q2: Last 5 Years’ Publications
Q2 Recent significant publications in the past five years
4 categories: (asterisk when relevant to proposal)
(1) Scholarly books (good/top book publishers)
(2) Scholarly book chapters (good /topbook publishers)
(3) Refereed journal articles (A*/A, high Web of Science impact factors), and
(4) Refereed conference papers published in full in the proceedings (top conference, high reject rate, awarded prize)
(5) Other eg major exhibitions, compositions of performances
Numbered continuously  1, 2, end
Not conference abstracts, conference presentations, reports, workshops, seminars, other invites
Give ARC grants awarded in last 10 years where you are a CI
**Next to each ARC grant, give the numbers of the publications from Q2 that arose from or were in part supported by it

13. ROPE F14.1
Clearly explain what years you have had reduced opportunities
for research.
Allows for research-only vs teaching and research; job changes;
child rearing, etc. Levelling the playing field

14. Q2: Last 5 Years’ Publications
Include publicly obtainable, brief measures of quality if can:
ERA journal ranks (eg A*, A, B, C)
Web of Science Ranks of Impact Factors (e.g. 4/69), IFs (eg 2.4)
No. citations (Scopus, Web of Science, ??Google Scholar eg 30)
Any benchmarking
Type on same line as publication as not allowed separate space for above text. eg:
Gere, R How to get a good research assessment. Journal of Academic Assessment, 15, ERA rank A*; WoS Impact factor (IF) 3.6, IF rank in Management discipline 10/77; No. of cites Googlescholar 56, Scopus 32, WoS 24. Average WoS cites for Management discipline=2.
Benchmark if can.

15. Refereed journal publications in last 5 years
Quality and Quantity
Relevance
Opportunity
Help reviewer: number your publications
give journal impact factors (and average IF for the field)
give journal ERA banding (A*, A, B, C)
With multiple CI/PIs ensure same format for each

16. RO
12 papers
50% A
Score 78
BUT if
3 years of research
opportunity
= 20 papers in 5y
Still assume 50%A
Score 83

17. Source of Data for Publications
ERA ranks:
Impact factors & their ranks: Web of Science in library databases:

18. C. Q3: Career-Best 10 Pubs Select if you can:
Quality journal articles and books as justified by:
Published indices eg:
ERA ranks, Web of Science impact factors and their ranks, citations [scopus, web of science], benchmarks
Top book publishers; for example, for Social Behavioural and Economic Sciences top presses are:
Cambridge University Press, Oxford University Press, Academic Press, Chicago University Press, Columbia University Press, Cornell University Press, Harvard University Press, MIT Press, Princeton University Press, Routledge, Sage
In IT & some parts of engineering, conference proceedings may be top publications (in ERA, WoS)

19. C. Q3: Justification of Best 10 Pubs
Q3. 30 words giving impact or significance of each pub’n
Give both 1. & 2.:
Objective, public evidence of impact eg
No. of citations (eg Scopus, Web of Science), awards/prizes, ERA Journal ranks, WoS impact factor ranks
Typed straight on at end of publication to not use the 30 words
A substantive argument
Why content of publication is recognized by others as having advanced knowledge in the field
Any other qualitative public evidence eg:
Reference for published book review (eg Gere, 2010, JAP, 5, 1-2)
Awards/prizes (eg name of Association, year, name of prize)
WoS now includes citations for conference proceedings and will include citations for books from now on.
Benchmarking

20. Q3: Avoid Selecting in Best 10 Publications
Textbooks
Working papers
Reports
Government publications
Conference presentations or papers (esp. when abstracts)
Books in lesser presses (need to know quality of presses)
Book chapters, unless can show objective high quality
Chapters in own edited book
Lowly ranked journals by ERA or Impact Factor rank
Australian journals (unless A*/A and ERA rank inserted)
Publications “in press” or “forthcoming” no matter how good journal or book press – not evaluated by others yet

21. Ten best publications.
DO NOT choose your own favourites!
DO NOT choose “grey literature” unrefereed products
Use those that others have cited most, or the ones that are in
highest ranked journals.
DO NOT go too far back in history (but use the opportunity
to cite some papers not listed in last 5 years)
Ten best papers give citation rates with years since publication if relevant.
if multi-authored “Science” paper, indicate your role.

22. ROPE: Q4
Q4. Further evidence in relation to research impact and contributions to the field over last 10 years words.
(a) Research outputs other than publications eg
Consultancies, patents and policy advice, competitive grants & other research support, major exhibitions, compositions or performances, other professional activities
(b) Evidence for quality/impact of all your research outputs relative to opportunity and in context of discipline expectations using a wide range of evaluations eg
Number of citations, H factors - WoS, Scopus, Publish or Perish- Benchmark yourself if you can
Evaluation of publ. quality eg book publisher, reviews of books or book chapters, other public evidence or recognition eg use by policy makers (eg give websites), exhibitions, performances

23. Q4 (b) (Cont’d) Evidence for quality of all research outputs within discipline expectations eg
Invitations, Honours and awards/prizes, and other esteem measures eg
Keynote addresses especially at international conferences
Evidence for quality of conference presentations (eg rejection rate, top international conference, prize/award)
Editorial roles & reviewer (also ranking of the journals)
Fellowships in learned societies or elected to prestigious bodies
External competitive grants
International research collaborations
Number of PhD completions & where employed now
Other measures eg other invitations, prizes/awards

24. Further evidence in relation to research impact and
contributions to the field in last 10 years
Tally of all publications ( with last 10 years specifically mentioned)
Web of Science overall citations
H index
Supervisions of PhD and Honours
PhD examining
“professional roles” reviewing, organising conferences, society committees
Invited conference presentations
Prizes and awards
Mentoring activities

25. Benchmarking Yourself
Compare your average cites/paper to a worldwide average Average no. of cites per journal article for a discipline or a journal eg worldwide Web of Science 2007
Management journal articles have 2 cites/paper
Psychology has 3 cites/paper
Compare your H factor with discipline benchmarks
Obtain H Factor from ISI Thomson “citation report and Scopus “citation overview”
Harzing’s Publish or Perish has benchmarking information.
Or any other form of benchmarking of yourself that shows your comparability or superiority

26. C. ROPE: Q5
Q5. Most significant contributions to this research field of this Proposal
Link your specific past research and achievements to this specific field and topic of this proposal to show your (a) expertise to carry it out and to advance this field & and (b) performance level in this field
Give specific, publicly obtainable measures of quality for these achievements to show you have advanced knowledge, have done it well and can thus do it again
Put first the specific achievements you are most well known for and for which specific objective evidence can be given, especially where you show top performance

27. F 14.5 A statement on your most significant contributions to this
research field of this Proposal.
Use this to establish you are a significant player in this research area
and not just someone who is tagging along.

28. What Harms Your ROPE Score?
Not giving ranks of journals eg ERA ranks or Impact factor rank
Choosing weak publications for Best 10
Journals or books of low rank or reputation
Conference proceedings or book chapters unless this is the norm for publishing the top papers in your field
Too few publications over last 5 years subject to opportunity
Wrong balance: Few journal articles & no scholarly books and more textbooks, conference presentations/abstracts, reports, seminars/workshops, urls, and book chapters.
Omitted or wrong information for any publication eg
Missing page numbers or volume nos
Authors’ names not given in order they appear on publication.

29. How to Make Answers in RMS Readable
No white space or indents emerge despite your typing them
Assessors may only read answers to Qs 2 (“last 5 years” publications) and Q3 (“Best 10”) – rest is unreadable
To make readable:
Be brief. Do not write a story.
Split answer to each of Qs 1, 4 & 5 into (A), (B), (C), (D) etc into themes/categories, give each a CAPITALISED heading
Give specific information for answers to Qs 4 and 5 and not broad or general statements eg
Always give years and names of associations eg for prizes
Give specific information for publications or grants
For “forthcoming” books, give full information

30. The End