Writing a successful narrative CV

Question:

I need to develop a narrative CV for an upcoming Tri-Agency grant application, and I’m baffled by this way of presenting my work. It feels incongruous with who we are in economics. Could you please breakdown what I ought to be doing in each of the three sections of the narrative CV? 

– Anonymous, Economics

Dr. Editor’s answer:

Your concern is completely understandable, dear letter-writer. Economists have long prized clean methodologies, robust data, and clear causal identification — qualities that may seem a poor fit with this new CV format. Here’s a reframe for you to consider: think of the narrative CV as an opportunity to contextualize your rigorous work within broader conversations in academia as well as among policymakers, industry leaders and the general public. You’re not being asked to compromise your disciplinary identity here: instead, Tri-Agency is asking you to change how you communicate the quality, value and influence of your work.  

Because of the novelty and complexity of narrative CVs, this month’s column is on the long side. Consider printing it out and keeping it beside you for reference as you prepare for the arrival of the narrative CV in the coming months (or years). 

For those not yet aware: CIHR, NSERC, and SSHRC are currently phasing in a new narrative-format CV, which will at some point in the future replace the dreaded CCV (see Glauser, 2019; Witteman et al., 2019; Witteman et al., 2020). They’ve opted to call this new narrative CV the Tri-Agency CV or, colloquially, “TCV,” because what grant applicants need are more acronyms to parse.  

Last December, before any Tri-Agency guidelines were published, I shared some early guidance on the narrative CV; now that we have some Tri-Agency resources (I like this NSERC resource in particular), I’m happy to share this new, free narrative CV template with Canadian researchers who find themselves wrestling with this unfamiliar format.  

Earlier this year, I received substantial feedback on this template from dozens of researchers and research support staff on my email list, The Shortlist. I am deeply appreciative of those contributions, which have helped me to think through the complexity of a template that makes sense for as many researchers as possible. 

We now know that the new Tri-Agency narrative CV will have a five-page limit for applicants writing in English, and six pages for applicants writing in French. Within those limits, you’ll write about your experience and expertise within three overarching sections. Here’s what I recommend for each section:  

1. Personal Statement 

Your personal statement will likely occupy less than one page and should function as your elevator pitch to your peer reviewers, who, remember, are necessarily not in your exact subfield. Start with your institutional affiliation and experience, then pivot to the big picture. What unifying question drives your research program? Are you examining market failures in healthcare? Investigating behavioral responses to policy interventions? Analyzing labour market dynamics in developing economies? Furthering scholarly understandings of the 1637 crash of the Dutch tulip bulb market?  

The personal statement isn’t the place for providing details; instead, it’s where you delineate your unique position within your disciplinary landscape. 

This section requires translating technical concepts into clear language without sacrificing precision. Instead of writing, for instance, “I use instrumental variables to address endogeneity concerns in estimating treatment effects,” try “I develop, test and mobilize novel methods that can isolate the impacts of economic policies on individuals and communities.” When possible, use concrete rather than abstract language. 

For some applicants, your methodological expertise will be relevant because it’s distinctive — perhaps you’ve pioneered applications of machine learning to specific types of data, or you’ve developed new approaches for textual analysis. If, however, novel methods aren’t a part of your work, that’s fine too: you can focus on empirical or theoretical contributions instead.  

If relevant, consider introducing some in-line subheadings within this section. Examples you might want to feature include “intellectual trajectory,” “recognitions and awards,” “collaborations,” “public scholarship,” “publication record,” “external funding,” “interdisciplinary context,” “institutional context,” “works in progress,” “positionality,” or, if relevant, “professional background” or “clinical background.”  

End this section with either your most prestigious accomplishment, or the one of which you are most proud: a fellowship you won, an award you received, or a policy you shaped. Economists often underestimate the broader impact of their work, but if your research has influenced government policy, been cited in policy documents, or generated significant media attention, highlight that here. 

2. Most Significant Contributions and Experiences 

This section will constitute the majority of your narrative CV; it also represents the biggest departure from traditional academic CVs. Instead of listing every publication chronologically, organize your work thematically around big ideas, accomplishments, topics or areas in which you’ve published.  

Economics lends itself well to this approach. Your themes might include “labour market policy analysis,” “health economics and behavioral interventions,” and “development economics and financial inclusion,” for example. While some researchers prefer to structure this section by individual contributions — treating each journal article, policy brief, white paper, dataset or op-ed as a separate entry — I recommend grouping your work within thematic categories, especially if you’re a mid-career or senior researcher. This thematic approach allows you to showcase the coherence and impact of your research program while highlighting both the traditional academic outputs and the non-traditional works that demonstrate public, industry or community engagement.  

Within each theme or category, dedicate roughly half your word count to describing your research approach and findings, and half to providing evidence of the impact of your work. 

The impact portion is where researchers often struggle. Your field measures success through journal rankings and citation counts, but the narrative CV demands broader evidence of influence. Document how your work has shaped important conversations:  

• Are your methodological innovations being adopted by other researchers? Even ones outside your direct subfield?  

• Has your work sparked policy debates or influenced legislative discussions? Are you cited in Hansard at the federal, provincial or territorial level? 

• Have you been invited to present findings to policymakers, central banks, international organizations or industry groups? Or to researchers in your field, or in neighbouring fields? 

• Has your work generated media coverage that broadened public understandings of important economic issues? (For instance, your piece in The Conversation Canada —was it one of the most-read of the month in which it was published?) 

• Have your datasets, code or analytical tools been adopted by other researchers or practitioners?  

• Has your research challenged conventional wisdom or shifted the thinking about a particular problem? Do you challenge, nuance, advance or build on theory? 

• Were you invited to deliver keynotes, write review articles, contribute to handbooks or serve on editorial boards based on your prior work?  

• Has your work been incorporated into teaching materials, textbooks or syllabi beyond your own institution? 

For whichever of these questions you choose to answer, your goal will be to point to the evidence that attests to your influence: the reviews of your book, the institutions you’ve spoken at, the policy documents that cite you.  

For each theme, quantify your contributions where possible: number of publications, conference presentations and invited talks. But go beyond mere stats. Articulate the ripple effects of your work; describe how your work has influenced others — how it has resonated within and beyond academic contexts. Maybe your research was on labour market dynamics, but it has been cited by researchers studying monetary policy, international trade, urban development and healthcare financing: that speaks to the broad significance of your work within economics as a field — not just your subfield. (A parallel analogy for the non-economists reading this piece: if your work was on beetles, but it has been cited by researchers of polar bears, sockeye salmon and freshwater crocodiles, then you’ve had a substantial influence on zoology that extends beyond coleopterology.) 

When listing all or some your outputs within each theme, use a conventional citation style, but consider bolding your name among the list of co-authors to highlight your contributions. And, if you’ve been the principal investigator on grants that generated multiple publications, mention your leadership role. 

Of course, because I’m suggesting that you focus on evidence of the impact of your work, I’m also implicitly suggesting that this section of your CV ought not to focus on projects-in-progress or forthcoming publications. I make this suggestion because it’s hard to argue that an output that hasn’t yet been read by others is significant. Your to-be-published article hasn’t yet had any impact for which you can provide evidence. 

If you’re early in your career and you simply can’t answer the kinds of questions I’ve posed above, then I understand that you might have to include in this section some work-in-progress or in-press articles. In that case, dedicate the majority of your description to your approach and findings, but still speak to the impact you anticipate having — for example, you published in The Journal of XYZ because you wanted to reach researchers who can apply your work in studies of X, to theory Y, or with population Z. If possible, state as well how you will measure this anticipated impact.  

3. Supervisory and Mentorship Activities 

This final section should occupy no more than one-and-a-half pages and should address your role in training students, postdoctoral fellows, early-career faculty colleagues and, if relevant, any community-based or on-site research assistants you’ve hired.  

Begin with an overview of your supervisory experience: the total numbers of postdocs, doctoral students, master’s students and undergraduate researchers you’ve mentored. Distinguish between research assistants and students completing capstone projects or theses, and, of course, include non-student trainees if that’s relevant for you. In this section, I suggest that you:  

• Highlight the career outcomes of your trainees. Where do your former students work? Are they employed in academia, government, think tanks or private-sector research roles? Do their positions relate meaningfully to their training? Have any gone on to graduate studies and, if so, in what disciplines or institutions? Have any of them won any awards or fellowships? The outcomes they’ve achieved are considered a proxy for the quality of your supervision and mentorship, even though we all know that your influence on their outcomes isn’t necessarily causal.  

• Quantify your collaborative approach to research. What percentage of your recent journal article publications included trainee co-authors? How often have they co-presented with you at conferences? In most disciplines, co-authorship demonstrates your commitment to developing emerging researchers rather than simply extracting labour from them. 

• Address equity, diversity and inclusion directly. Economics has well-documented problems with diversity, with consistent underrepresentation of women and Indigenous and racialized people (e.g. Amarante et al., 2021; Auriol, 2022; Buckles, 2019; Bayer & Wilcox, 2019). Describe specific actions you take to recruit and retain underrepresented trainees. Do you partner with organizations that support underrepresented students? Have you implemented evidence-based mentoring or support practices that address known barriers in economics (e.g. Mitch, 2024; Antman et al., 2025)? Consider the day-to-day practices that foster belonging: regular research meetings, feedback processes, professional development opportunities and connections to broader professional networks. How do you ensure these day-to-day practices are inclusive? 

In sum: the narrative CV asks you to summarize your contributions and interpret their significance, rather than simply providing lists of names and dates. You’re building a case for the quality of your work, using evidence and logical argumentation — skills that economists possess in abundance. The challenge lies in finding the evidence that shows the true breadth of your influence and impact, either within academia exclusively or both within and beyond its boundaries. 

The best narrative CVs will provide evidence of your intellectual leadership and ability to advance knowledge — and that advancement doesn’t necessarily mean application or use of your findings outside of academia. 

The narrative format isn’t incongruous with economics: it’s an opportunity to showcase how rigorous economic analysis contributes to our understandings of human behaviour, policy effectiveness, social welfare — in short, of understandings of human nature. Embrace this chance to tell the full story of your research impact. You may find my new, free narrative CV template useful as you work on your Tri-Agency CV. ly.