2020 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2020)

[PetetheCat]

does anybody know having a famous supervisor or a highly ranked host university can affect the result?

I'm sure about this.

Yes, but remember that this also means that you can get a reviewer who dislikes your well-known supervisor. Mostly it is good, but it can cut two ways.

[Chemista]

does anybody know having a famous supervisor or a highly ranked host university can affect the result?

I'm sure about this.

Yes, but remember that this also means that you can get a reviewer who dislikes your well-known supervisor. Mostly it is good, but it can cut two ways.

well, my friend last year (with excellent CV) applied together with an important professor from Cambridge University. He failed in the dissemination part and did not get it. A well written proposal is super important!

[Giadina_1988]

It was the case for me last year. I had a relatively young supervisor, but excellent in his qualifications. He had an excellent truck of successful supervisions, great track of publications, the host which already has MSCA fellow... Nothing bad on paper! In the reviewers' comments we could totally see they had something against the supervisor (who in fairness, has a bit the reputation of being a 'challenger' in his field). They questioned his qualifications, even stating he was of a too young age to supervise a MSCA. Results: 30 points LESS than the previous year (when the supervisor was exactly the same and not questioned at all!).

does anybody know having a famous supervisor or a highly ranked host university can affect the result?

I'm sure about this.

Yes, but remember that this also means that you can get a reviewer who dislikes your well-known supervisor. Mostly it is good, but it can cut two ways.

[saynomore]

its my second time around, but I could never shake the though that, in the end, its almost a lottery.

It was the case for me last year. I had a relatively young supervisor, but excellent in his qualifications. He had an excellent truck of successful supervisions, great track of publications, the host which already has MSCA fellow... Nothing bad on paper! In the reviewers' comments we could totally see they had something against the supervisor (who in fairness, has a bit the reputation of being a 'challenger' in his field). They questioned his qualifications, even stating he was of a too young age to supervise a MSCA. Results: 30 points LESS than the previous year (when the supervisor was exactly the same and not questioned at all!).

I'm sure about this.

Yes, but remember that this also means that you can get a reviewer who dislikes your well-known supervisor. Mostly it is good, but it can cut two ways.

[Diatosystem]

Also, could the "awareness" of the reviewers about the topic influence the results?

[lifmc2020]

does anybody know having a famous supervisor or a highly ranked host university can affect the result?

Of course it affects it. Some institutes boast an acceptance rate of like 23% of their applicants which is much higher compared to the overall acceptance rate. but still 77% of applicants DON'T get it, so its no guarantee.

[Amar]

I did task 1.1 , 1.2 etc. why?

Because
1. I had no place for the table with tasks
2. I put a big table with deliverables per each WP
3. I put a table with milestones and connected them to the deliverables because I received a comment on this.
4. I saw the winning proposal without tasks at all
But now I am not sure at all

I put tasks, deliverables, milestones, etc. But I think this is one that depends on the framing of your reviewer to the proposal. If they like it and it is detailed, you’re fine. If they don’t like your proposal, they can pick at whatever you put to lower your score.

Thank you for your answer.

[lifmc2020]

Also, could the "awareness" of the reviewers about the topic influence the results?

Of course. If they are an expert on a topic and your state of the art doesn't include something they feel is critical.... could be very bad. Conversely, if they are an expert on your topic and think your proposal is great they will be more likely to push for it. Or maybe they are your boss's friend/ or rival this could definitely reduce objectivity.

and of course if the reviewer is not familiar with your topic they may miss the merits of your proposal.

that's why its a total lottery.

[GuyFromSpace]

does anybody know having a famous supervisor or a highly ranked host university can affect the result?

In my opinion, yes for sure. But i think it depends on the famous supervisor, because they generally apply more than one applicant. Highly ranked host institute also, but in the end again, they have lot of applicants. I heard that it's better to apply with a supervisor who has ERC. I don't know the logic behind and not my case, but I know a lot of people who won with an ERC holder PI..

As always, remember the main objective of MSCA IF: training, training, training. You don't get brownie points just for being supervised by a renowned researcher, but if you explain in the proposal how the supervisor's renown will allow you to grow into a better researcher (better mentoring, better networking opportunities, etc), then for sure you will have a stronger proposal.

[PetetheCat]

does anybody know having a famous supervisor or a highly ranked host university can affect the result?

In my opinion, yes for sure. But i think it depends on the famous supervisor, because they generally apply more than one applicant. Highly ranked host institute also, but in the end again, they have lot of applicants. I heard that it's better to apply with a supervisor who has ERC. I don't know the logic behind and not my case, but I know a lot of people who won with an ERC holder PI..

As always, remember the main objective of MSCA IF: training, training, training. You don't get brownie points just for being supervised by a renowned researcher, but if you explain in the proposal how the supervisor's renown will allow you to grow into a better researcher (better mentoring, better networking opportunities, etc), then for sure you will have a stronger proposal.

Absolutely, and if your reviewer thinks that the institution is a known entity in your field with good connections, this is helpful. But, as others elaborated on above, you can get a reviewer who sees all these wonderful training opportunities with a well-known supervisor and good plans for integration in the research group. And if that reviewer dislikes the work that the proposed supervisor does, they can just find fault.

A well-written proposal is very important. But the reviewers are subjective and you can have a beautiful proposal and then get stupid comments to justify the evaluation. There are some of us here this year, and I know there have been others in the past, who submitted rewritten and improved proposals with the core ideas the same, but other sections improved, and found our scores went down.

All the points on how to improve are very important, because you need to show that you are using this as the correct form of training fellowship. But they do not guarantee an unbiased review.