Please could you tell us a little bit about yourself and your career to date?
I am Professor of Transplantation at Oxford, and clinically I am a plastic, reconstructive and burns surgeon. My route into research was slightly unusual. An early interest in hand and face transplantation led me into immunology, and from there into immune regulatory therapies and how we might use them to improve transplant outcomes. Alongside the science, I have become increasingly interested in the mechanics of research funding and how funding decisions shape both scientific progress and academic careers.
What does your role as Academic Lead for Research Funding involve?
It is a broad role. It includes helping to shape research funding strategy, coordinating major institutional bids, engaging with funders, reviewing fellowships and internal grants, and contributing through the Research and Innovation Committee to wider discussions at Council level. It also involves thinking seriously about equity, opportunity and how we make sure talented people are supported at every stage.
What is currently at the top of your to do list?
The main question is how Oxford stays ahead. Reaching the top is one thing, staying there is another. That means thinking strategically about where future opportunities will come from, where we could do better, particularly in European and PI-level industry funding, and how we coordinate larger bids more effectively. It also means paying close attention to government strategy and understanding what it is likely to mean for research funding over the next 5-10 years.
What do you think are the main challenges in the research funding landscape at the moment?
Competition is as fierce as it has ever been, and there is a real sense that funding is harder to secure. Success rates are low, application volumes are high, and it is not always obvious what reviewers or panels are really looking for. There is still an element of luck. At the same time, the funding landscape is always shifting. The pendulum never stays still, and priorities come and go. My view is that researchers should keep their nerve, focus on the best science, and adapt just enough to keep the work moving without being blown off course by every new trend. It is important to be strategic, but not to become opportunistic. In the long run, people remember the discoveries, not the fashion of the funding call.
What advice would you give to early career researchers who are just starting to apply for funding?
Do not be disheartened. When success rates are in single figures, rejection is normal, not exceptional. It may take many applications before the first success. Small wins matter, so internal grants and smaller awards can be invaluable in building momentum. It is also worth remembering that most principal investigators have a much longer CV of failed applications than successful ones.
Are there any common pitfalls you see in funding proposals, and how can applicants avoid them?
A common mistake is assuming the reviewer already understands the field as well as you do. In reality, you are often the expert, and your job is to explain the idea simply and convincingly. If you cannot explain it clearly, that is usually a warning sign. Do not make reviewers work to find the strengths of your application. Put the case in front of them plainly. One useful trick is to leave the application for a short time, then come back and read it as if it were a grant application from one of your competitors. Ask yourself where the weak points are, and address them before someone else does.
What would you say is the biggest challenge researchers face today when seeking funding, and how does the Division help?
For many researchers, the biggest challenge is finding the time and headspace to do deep work. Academic life is full of urgent but low value tasks, and grant writing is easy to postpone because it is important but rarely immediate. Sometimes the best thing you can do is protect a whole week and focus on nothing else. The Division cannot write grants for people, but it can help create the conditions for success. That includes internal funding, pump priming, salary bridging, translational support, entrepreneurial advice and helping researchers take the next practical step towards external funding.
What skills or experiences do you think early career researchers should prioritise to succeed in today’s research landscape?
Resilience is probably the single most important quality. Experiments fail, papers are rejected, grants do not get funded, and setbacks are part of the job. It is important not to take every disappointment personally. Stay committed, but stay rational. In terms of experience, I think some of the best ideas come from outside your own discipline. If your thinking becomes too narrow, your work can become incremental. It also helps enormously to engage with patients and the public. They often see priorities differently, and if you can explain your science clearly to them, you will usually write a better grant.
What have been some of the most important lessons you have learned during your career so far?
Probably two things. First, resilience matters more than almost anything else. Second, clarity matters. Whether you are leading a team, writing a paper or applying for funding, being able to explain what you are doing and why it matters is essential.
Who or what inspires you?
I am most inspired by scientists who are generous with their time, ideas and support, and who achieve success with humility and kindness. In the long run, the people who make the greatest impression are not those who climb fastest, but those who help others climb with them. That, to me, is a much more meaningful measure of success.
Given a chance, who would you like to be for a day?
I would be very curious to spend a day in government at the point where research strategy is shaped, perhaps in a role like Patrick Vallance’s. As academics, we usually see the final priorities rather than the discussions behind them. I would be fascinated to understand how those decisions are made, what evidence is used, and how competing priorities are balanced.
What do you like to do to relax when you are not working?
Life is busy, especially with children and their sport filling most evenings and weekends, but I genuinely enjoy watching them play. There is something refreshing about it, and at times they move the ball better than Chelsea.
What is one thing you could not live without?
Probably my noise cancelling headphones, especially when travelling. Although a dishwasher runs close.