[A version of this article first appeared in Funding Insight in January 2023 and is reproduced with kind permission of Research Professional͘. For more articles like this, visit https://www.researchprofessionalnews.com ]
Tips on overcoming modesty to present your achievements in the best light
Talking ourselves up or self-promoting is difficult for most people. But there are ways to make it a little bit easier and do it a little bit better without nearly cringing to death. Some involve writing techniques (of which more later) but others involve ways of thinking that may give you permission to write about yourself.
Talking about her successful bid to the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council Discovery Fellowship in Funding Insight (£, probably) last year, Amanda Warr, who is based at the University of Edinburgh, advises future applicants to “remember that the people you work with know what you can do, but the people who read the application know nothing about you”.
This is a great point. If you’re writing for people who know nothing about you, it’s your responsibility to them to tell them what they need to know. We’re rarely called upon to give a full account of our career and accomplishments to a stranger, which is partly why it feels odd when we are. Modesty in front of people you know is all well and good—they will often already be aware of the broad outline of your story—but strangers do not.
Leaving aside the cringe factor, it’s often difficult for us to identify our own strengths. That’s because we’re prone to taking our own strengths and achievements for granted and not properly recognising them. This is what’s at the heart of imposter condition (sometimes called imposter syndrome). We undervalue or discount what we can do, wrongly thinking that everyone has those skills. We then focus on the skills we don’t have—again, wrongly assuming that everyone else has them. There’s an excellent diagram by US software consultant David Whittaker that explains this.
It’s also worth knowing about the Johari window—a psychological model developed by Joseph Luft and Harrington Ingham in 1955. For current purposes, it’s sufficient to note that there’s a subsection of things about me which are not known to me (or at least aren’t obvious) but which are known and more obvious to others. Which is why you should always ask people who know you well for feedback on fellowship or job applications. I want to know what they know about me that I don’t, or that I’ve overlooked or taken for granted.
Cultural cringe
Modesty and understatement are highly valued in several cultures, including, I’d argue, in the UK and other places in Europe. In the UK, this cultural preoccupation can lead to a false or (better) performative modesty. Perhaps it’s partly a result of a puritanical Christian tradition that values humility among its subjects, and partly something about academia. But there’s a taboo about being seen to be boastful or engaging in self-promotion that can extend even to talking about one’s own achievements at all.
To take things back to pre-Christian philosophy, Aristotle didn’t regard modesty or humility as virtues. More than that, he argued that they were vices. Claiming that your worth and value and achievements are less than they are is an offence against sincerity and truth, he argued. Of course, so is boasting and over-claiming, with the treasured ‘golden mean’ being a full and honest account of your achievements and abilities.
So, when you come to write a job application, fellowship application, or a resume for researchers, you should do so knowing that if you’re giving a full and honest account of your achievements and abilities, you’ll have the spirit of Aristotle in your corner, cheering you on, urging you towards virtue.
Show and tell
I could tell you that I’m an experienced, effective research development professional with outstanding communication skills and a network and profile beyond my own institution.
Or… I could tell you that I’ve got over seventeen years’ experience in research development. That I’m a former UK Association of Research Managers and Administrators research development special interest group co-chair, and that I co-developed a new ‘advanced’ research development peer-learning training course. That I’m an occasional Research Professional columnist.
The first paragraph is telling. The second is showing. Even in the restricted space above, the latter is more effective than the former. But, because of a lack of space, I haven’t even marshalled the ‘showing’ properly by ‘telling’ the reader why I’m citing these examples, what they demonstrate and why that matters.
I’ve written before about the cut and paste error in grant writing, which is when there’s text so generic that it could be cut and pasted into any other applicants’ proposal with a minimum of editing. Such generic text doesn’t help your case unless it’s supplemented by specifics—by evidence and examples. Not only is this more effective, but it’s also easier to write because you’re just stating facts.
I can’t leave this topic without mentioning what we might call Trumping: telling but not showing, assertion without evidence. Matt Crawford wrote this exquisite parody of the kind of academic paper that Donald might have Trumped out. Read it and let it be a warning to you.
Lawyer up
One writing technique I’ve experimented with involves channelling your inner barrister. Your inner barrister is a paid advocate whose role is to make the strongest possible case for their client, which is you. As a responsible legal professional, they are not allowed to lie or argue in bad faith. However, they are allowed to assemble the best possible case and put the best possible spin on your skills and achievements. Not only are they allowed, they are professionally obliged to do so. It’s literally their (imaginary) job.
If your mind works in such a way that it can accommodate this slightly odd construction, then try it. Try channelling your inner barrister and let them take over the writing. Just as a game, as an exercise. Don’t censor, don’t try to reassert control. Just let them write and see what comes out.
And even if this conceit doesn’t work for you, there’s something to be said for just allowing yourself to write without trying to edit as you go. Tough out the cringe and keep writing. You can always edit later, but at least you’ll have material to edit.