Faculty Resources

Authorship Guidance

When working with students and other research colleagues it is important to discuss authorship expectations early and clearly to ensure fair credit, have clarity about roles and responsibilities and reduce disputes. Authorship discussions should occur as early as possible and be revisited whenever project scope, personnel, or contributions change. The template below is intended as a resource for AU faculty, staff, and students to use in creating authorship agreements. Modify the document to fit your specific needs.

AU Modifiable Authorship Agreement Template


Things to Consider in Authorship Discussions:

These decisions are often based on the discipline(s) of the researchers and journal guidance. Determining the guidelines that will be used at the beginning of the collaboration will often head off future disagreements, especially if the project team is composed of researchers from diverse disciplines. Different journals and disciplines may define authorship differently. Collaborators should agree in advance on which standard will govern authorship decisions when multiple disciplines are represented. Consideration may need to be given to having an authorship agreement at the manuscript level if author groups are large and/or disciplinary and publisher/journal requirements differ significantly.

Resources:

There are many factors to consider when determining whether someone should be listed as an author or simply acknowledged for a supportive role. Some of these factors include:

  • Designing or conducting experiments
  • Analyzing or interpreting data
  • Drafting or revising the manuscript
  • Reviewing and editing the final version
  • Clarify that authorship reflects intellectual contributions and responsibility, while acknowledgments recognize support roles (e.g., technical help, project management)

Resources:

  • The lead author will coordinate the writing and review process, oversee the submission of the paper, and manage the response to edits.
  • Other responsibilities to be designated to the lead or other authors include data analysis, conceptualization and outlining the manuscript, editing, journal selection, manuscript submission, serving as the corresponding author, and other responsibilities determined by the group.
  • All authors are responsible for reviewing the manuscript and approving the final version prior to submission. Many journals/publishers require a certification at the time of manuscript submission from all authors stating that they accept responsibility for the veracity of the entire manuscript. For example, Elsevier journals use the following set of criteria to determine authorship:
    • Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work.
    • Drafting the work or reviewing it critically for important intellectual content.
    • Final approval of the version to be published
    • Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

 Resources:

This is often decided based on the discipline(s) of the researchers and journal guidance. Potential orders of authorship include:

  • By contribution (type of contribution, level of contribution, other?)
  • Alphabetical
  • Rotating leads if planning multiple papers

Consider documenting how future changes in author order will be handled if contribution levels change during the project.

Resources:

Identify how disputes will be handled – whether through mediation, a designated decision-maker, or a formal process. Potential internal resources to help in dispute resolution include department heads, associate deans for research, and the university ombudsman office.

Resources:

 

Note: 

  • The AU Policy on Research Misconduct clarifies authorship disputes in the definition of plagiarism. Self-plagiarism and authorship disputes do not meet the definition of research misconduct. Although authorship disputes are not considered under the RM policy, remember that good authorship practices are part of the responsible conduct of research. 
    • Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit. (a) Plagiarism includes the unattributed verbatim or nearly verbatim copying of sentences or paragraphs from another's work that materially misleads the reader regarding the contributions of the author. It does not include the limited use of identical or nearly identical phrases that describe a commonly used methodology. (b) Plagiarism does not include self-plagiarism or authorship or credit disputes, including disputes among former collaborators who participated jointly in the development or conduct of a research project.

  • Agree on how long co-authors will have to review drafts (e.g., 1-2 weeks) and when final approval is required.
  • Collaborators may also want to determine how information and drafts will be shared (e.g., via email, shared Box folder, Teams, or similar).
  • Have a plan for what happens if an author fails to respond within agreed review timelines, particularly if publication deadlines are approaching.

Document these decisions in a formal agreement, ensuring that all collaborators review and sign. Revisit the agreement periodically as the collaboration progresses, potentially list specific time periods to review the agreement. If roles/contributions change, discuss any modifications needed to the agreement, document those changes, and have all collaborators indicate on the revised document their support of the changes. Be sure to date the initial agreement and all modifications so the team has a good record and timeline of the process. Also include a process for documenting additions, removals, or reordering of authors. Authorship changes are a common source of disputes and should require communication with all authors. This will most likely have to follow requirements of journals/publishers.

Student Authorship: Students are commonly expected to be listed as first author when manuscripts are generated from student-driven theses, dissertations, and other student led work. Student and mentor should discuss expectations for authorship for these types of papers. Revising a thesis or dissertation for publication can take considerable effort. Student, mentor (and any others on the publication) will benefit from discussing roles and responsibilities. While the student who wrote the thesis or dissertation will likely be the first author on the publication(s), there are circumstances where authorship order may change. For example, when the mentor takes a strong lead in substantially revising the thesis or dissertation for publication and the student is not engaged with these revisions. Discussing and a plan prior to developing the manuscript(s) can prevent subsequent misunderstandings and disagreements.

Unethical Authorship Practices: All collaborators are expected to conduct work by ethical standards, thoroughly review and vet the information contained in the papers, and ensure that nothing is plagiarized. In other words, if your name is on the paper, you are responsible for the contents. Ghost authorship (leaving out names of contributors) and Gift authorship (including names that did little to no work) are two other unethical practices to avoid.

Resources:

  • NIH Guidelines for authorship contributions
    • Note: It is important to always consider sponsor requirements relative to authorship and publication. For example, the USDA-ARS requires completion of the Form 115 process prior to manuscript submission. Authors should ensure adherence to any federal sponsors terms and conditions concerning authorship and publication. Authors should also be aware of terms and conditions they should not agree to. Such as when an industry partner stipulates authorship for someone who does not meet authorship criteria.

Use of Artificial Intelligence: Accurately reflect the use of artificial intelligence in all aspects including writing the publication, conducting the experiments, data collection and analysis. If manuscripts are the result of Federal funding, authors need to be mindful of specific terms & conditions concerning authorship and AI.

Resources:

Data Use Agreement: Who has access to the data during and following the collaboration? Are there any limitations to how the data may be used and by whom? A Data Use Agreement regulates the sharing and use of research data, ensuring compliance with privacy laws and institutional policies. It defines the scope of data use, safeguards data confidentiality, and clarifies publication and disposal requirements.

Resources:

Paying for Publishing: Publishing costs continue to rise, and potential federal limits on using grant funds for publication expenses may make this issue increasingly important. Discussing publication costs early in the process may reduce the likelihood of encountering unexpected challenges later.

Additional sample agreements:

Student Learning Experiences (SLE)

The Student Learning Experience (SLE) Form is a way for faculty mentors to formalize voluntary student assistance in their programs. The primary emphasis should be student learning experiences where the student is learning competencies or skills by working with you. The student will not receive pay or credit for this voluntary service and it should not take the place of paid employment by other student workers. Mentors should complete the SLE form that will be signed by both the mentor and student; students should also complete the Volunteer Agreement form which should be kept on file in the department.

 

The faculty mentor should be prepared to fill out the following information:

  • Student name
  • Student Auburn User ID
  • Student classification
  • Student’s college
  • Faculty mentor name
  • Faculty mentor’s college
  • Locations of activity
  • Expected beginning and ending dates
  • Brief description of the opportunity
  • Description of planned activities
  • Expected student benefits and learning outcomes
  • Required training
  • Access needs & other required approvals
  • Additional training required

Faculty mentor will access the form through the link below. They will complete the form and click the submit button which starts the automation process. The completed form will be emailed to the faculty mentor for review and signature. Once they have signed, it will then be automatically routed to the student for review and signature. After the student has completed and signed the form, copies will be sent to each party. Should any changes occur to the agreed form, a new SLE form should be completed.

The Student Learning Experience (SLE) Form can be accessed by clicking the link below:

Access the SLE Form

Students volunteering their time through a Student Learning Experience (SLE) are considered agents of the university while performing duties and are expected to abide by university policies and external regulations that govern their actions, including but not limited to those of ethical behavior, confidentiality, financial responsibility, etc. It would also be expected that they always be under the direct supervision and control of an AU employee. As a volunteer under these parameters AU would afford them the same general liability coverage as an employee except for OJI. 

Students should fill out the Volunteer Agreement form and return a signed copy to their faculty mentor. Faculty mentors should seek guidance from their department heads regarding the departmental procedure for maintaining copies of the signed Volunteer Agreement Forms.


Volunteer Agreement Form

Mentoring Plan Guide

Helpful information has been gathered specifically for Auburn University faculty members who are preparing to mentor students or postdoctoral researchers.

Access the guide

Training

Grantsmanship and Pivot Funding Database Training

PSFS offers both grantsmanship training and Pivot Funding Database training for large and small groups. If interested in scheduling either presentation targeted for your group, please contact Christine Cline (334-844-5929).

If interested in scheduling an individual appointment for Pivot training, contact Laura Cauthen (334-844-7910).

COMPASS Training Program for Research Administrators

COMPASS equips research administrators with the knowledge and skills to better support researchers and navigate the complexities of research administration.

COMPASS

Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative (CITI)

We offer two CITI Program courses for graduate students, postdocs, faculty, and professionals. To ensure your completion is recorded in Auburn’s system, access CITI through the Auburn SSO link or “Log in through my organization.”

Essentials of Grant Proposal Development

Understanding grants and proposal development is essential but often not formally taught. Essentials of Grant Proposal Development demystifies the process with step-by-step instruction, videos, exercises, resources and examples.

Essentials of Research Administration

This course covers key concepts of research administration, including sponsored programs structures, award processes (pre-award, negotiation, post-award), and career development resources. Designed for research administrators, PIs, project directors and those exploring the field, it also helps assess if a career in research administration is a good fit.

Access CITI

Additional Training Resources

Federal Funder Grant Training Resources

Hanover Research Webinars

Re-Imagining Broader Impacts in Grant Writing​ - March 2026

This session presents strategies for designing and communicating broader impacts that align with current federal priorities, including practical ways to demonstrate project relevance and impact for a wide audience.

Engaging Non-Specialist Audiences in Grant Writing – October 2025

Grant proposals are often sophisticated, scientifically rich documents. However, review panels frequently include non specialists. This session will dive into how best to engage non-specialist audiences in grant proposals, allowing researchers to communicate the importance of the work without alienating non-subject matter experts.

Advanced Strategies for Enhancing Your Proposal Narrative – August 2025

This webinar explores advanced strategies for developing a strong grant narrative, including how to imagine the reviewer while writing a proposal, how to identify the early elements of the proposal that are most important, and how to create a meta-narrative to help reviewers identify key points in the proposal.

Storytelling in Grantwriting, Part II: The Plot Thickens – July 2025

Back by popular demand, this sequel  dives deeper into the art of storytelling as it relates to the grant writing process, providing targeted strategies for enhancing your proposals by leveraging narrative frameworks and storytelling concepts to capture the imagination of your grant’s reviewers.

Creative Grant Seeking in a Challenging Landscape – April 2025

In today's funding environment, many grant seekers cannot afford to invest all their effort towards one or two federal programs. Using examples based in real experience, this webinar illustrates how a combination of creative design and resourceful grant seeking -- such as exploring foundations or clearly articulating impact -- can give PIs promising pathways to pursue even amidst a changing landscape. 

Artificial Intelligence Policies Among Federal Grantmakers – March 2025 

The utilization of artificial intelligence in grant proposals has shaken up the federal grant-seeking landscape. Many federal funders have issued policies to encourage the appropriate use of AI or limit its usage in federal proposals. This session  covers those major federal policies, enabling faculty to ensure compliance with new guidance on the use of AI.

What Deadline?! Keeping yourself & Others On-Track in Grant Development – October 2024 

Nobody enjoys the last-minute scramble to complete a project, and while not all funders give grant-seekers the benefit of time to develop their proposals, forward planning and savvy management can lead to much stronger grant applications. This session covers best practices for managing the different phases of grant development, including ways to keep yourself and your team working towards important project milestones.

Introduction to Grantseeking for Administrators – August 2024 

How can Research Administrators best support their colleagues in the pursuit and management of grant funding? Administrators play a pivotal role at their institution in facilitating proposal development, grant submission, and project management. This session provides a primer on the Grants world through the lens of these professionals, looking at how they can best support their colleagues in the pursuit and management of grant funding.

Storytelling in Grantwriting – July 2024 

The heart of any successful grant proposal is a compelling and convincing narrative. Dive into the art of storytelling as it relates to the grant writing process and explore how principal investigators can bring their proposals to life by applying storytelling principles and practices to their writing.

Writing Your Data Management Plan – February 2024

Key components to a strong Data Management Plan demonstrates how you will manage data generated over the course of your research project. 

Persuasive Strategies in Research Writing – October 2023

Preparing to write your Narrative. Designing your narrative. Writing your narrative.

Developing Great Proposal Aims & Objectives – July 2023

Framing a competitive research question. Components of a testable hypothesis. Generate project aims/objectives.

Developing Budgets & Budget Narratives – October 2022

Grant budget basics. Questions to ask before building the grant budget.

Artificial Intelligence in Grant Prospecting and Development - August 2026

AI is rapidly changing the way organizations identify and pursue grant funding, offering tools that can save time and enhance your strategy if used thoughtfully. Understanding how to apply these tools can give you a significant edge in today’s competitive landscape. This session provides an overview of key areas where AI can be leveraged in the grant prospecting and proposal development process.

Grant Seeking for Teaching-Centered Institutions - July 2026

This session focuses on leveraging the unique strengths of teaching institutions. It discusses how to  connect with funders who value education-focused environments to craft competitive proposals.

Roundtable: Sustaining Research Growth in Today’s Funding Environment - June 2026

Amid rapid changes in the federal funding landscape, institutions of higher education are confronting a host of new challenges as they strive to sustain and grow their grant portfolios. In this roundtable discussion,  grants strategists discuss how they are deploying to keep their organizations on course. Topics include efforts to diversify funding sources, respond to shifting priorities, strengthen institutional research capacity, and explore emerging opportunities in uncharted areas.

Deciphering Feedback from Grant Reviewers - December 2025 

Resubmitting is a large part of the grantseeking process, and interpreting and strategizing feedback from grant reviewers is a critical component to resubmission success. This session examines the common elements of the feedback process with federal reviewers, including how to weigh the feedback, how to respond, and when to decide if a resubmission is the right choice.

 Cultivating Relationships with Foundations – September 2025

Unlike most federal grantmakers, foundations can be mysterious and opaque, from the guidelines they publish to the decision-making process. For these reasons, cultivating relationships and nurturing those relationships with foundation funders is paramount. This session covers strategies and engagement practices to successfully develop partnerships with foundation funders.

Keys to a Competitive NSF CAREER Proposal  – February 2025

The National Science Foundation's CAREER program remains a key opportunity for early career scientists. This webinar identifies the core elements of a strong NSF CAREER proposal, diving into when to apply, how to frame intellectual merit and broader impacts, and common missteps faculty make that decrease the chances of funding.

Major Changes for NIH Grantseekers – January 2025

In early 2025, NIH will implement multiple review process changes. This session covers the key considerations for faculty planning to submit to NIH after January 2025, including the simplified review process for most research project grants, changes to the fellowship application, and more.

Responding to NSF Dear Colleague Letters – April 2024

The National Science Foundation (NSF) regularly issues Dear Colleague Letters to encourage applicants for existing grant programs to emphasize areas of special interest to the agency. This webinar provides an overview of this practice and discuss how grant-seekers can ensure they are responsive to these interests while developing competitive grant proposals.

Funding Landscape for AI & Machine Learning – January 2024

Trends for grant-seekers in response to rapid advances in AI & Machine Learning

The Non-Federal Research Funding Landscape – April 2023

The Non-Federal Research Funding Landscape.  Approaching Non-Federal Landscape.

NSF Career Education Activities and Broader Impacts – February 2023

NSF Strategic Plan 2022-2026/What makes an NSF Great Idea? The need to develop a compelling education plan. Broader Impacts. What it means to be competitive.

Finding your R-Series Grant – January 2023

Introduction to R-series. Review of Five Popular R-Activity Codes: R01, R21, R03, R15, R16.

Breaking into Mission-Driven Funders – December 2022

DoD, DoE, NASA.  Others may include Ag, Commerce, Homeland Security, etc.

Fact or Fiction NSF CAREER – April 2022

Understanding NSF CAREER Proposal – Facts v Fiction.

Funding Landscape for Arts & Humanities – March 2022

Funding opportunities from Government Agencies, Foundations & Associations.

Pathways for Effective Research Translation - April 2026
This webinar explores pathways for grant seekers aiming to extend their research discoveries from academic settings into real-world applications. Attendees learn strategies for translating complex findings into accessible formats for practitioners, policymakers, and industry, increasing the impact and grant-readiness of their work. The session highlights ways to bridge the gap between research and application, and discusses how feedback from users can inform future projects and proposals.​

Engaging with Industry Partners  - January 2026
This webinar offers practical strategies for building successful partnerships with industry, emphasizing the importance of understanding cultural differences and aligning goals for mutual benefit. Attendees will learn how to communicate effectively, initiate collaborations, and leverage a wide range of engagement opportunities.​
Facilitating Stakerholder Engagement in Grant Development - November 2025
For many large-scale grants, funders are aiming to foster cross-sector and community engagement to maximize the impact of their awards and solve complex challenges.This webinar reviews key considerations and best practices for engaging partners and stakeholders in the grant development process to ensure that impact is realized.
Strategies for Successful Interdisciplinary Collaborations - May 2025
Contributions from partners, stakeholders, and collaborators are often central to the success of a grant application because they can provide the vital expertise, buy-in, and resources needed to effectively execute your project. This session reviews profiles of key collaborators in the grant development process, looking at what they bring to the table and how you can best draw them into your orbit.
Communicating the Impacts of Your Research - December 2024
Helping researchers articulate the significance and broader implications of their work, including an overview of research impacts, the importance of dissemination, and methods for communicating impact. Specifically, Hanover covers how publications, presentations, stakeholder engagement, and broad public dissemination should factor into your plans.

Integrating Theoretical Frameworks into Grant Proposals - November 2024
The integration of theoretical frameworks into a grant narrative can strengthen the rationale and impact of your project. In this session, dive into the importance of theoretical frameworks, the selection of the appropriate framework for your proposal, and the art of seamlessly weaving your framework into a proposal narrative.

Grant Academy Roundtable: Launching Competitive Grantseekers - June 2024
The Hanover Grant Academy team collaborates with and reviews major insights and best practices that institutions can consider in creating faculty development programs focused on grant writing.
Engaging Collaborators to Enhance your Proposal  - May 2024
Review profiles of different key collaborators in the grant development process, what they bring to the table, and how you can best draw them into your orbit.
Managing Large Research Proposals - September 2023
Overview of Large-Scale Projects. Research v Programmatic Grants. Best practices.
Preparing to Lead Center-Level Proposals - September 2022
Identifying collaborators & and establishing a team. Assessing strategy & competitiveness. Determining vision and theme. Developing a plan.
Building Strong Grant Collaborations - August 2022
Why collaborate? How to find a collaborator? Tips for effective collaboration.
Engaging Undergraduate Students - June 2022
Why engage undergrads in research? How to fund undergrad research.
Transitioning from Single-Multi Investigator Grants - May 2022
Identifying and establishing collaborative research relationships. Building groundwork for strong multi-investigator projects. Key strategies, considerations, & and challenges for multi-investigator proposals.

Building Grantseeking Capacity & Culture​ - May 2026
This webinar explores comprehensive best practices and key considerations for developing capacity -  whether you are in the early stages of establishing a grants function or looking for proven strategies to strengthen and expand your existing efforts. Participants will gain actionable insights to help position their organizations for long-term success in a competitive funding environment.
This webinar offers insights into updating your approach in seeking external funding, including strategies for tracking trends, revising proposal narratives, and exploring new opportunities. Participants will learn how to respond to shifts in the funding environment and position their projects for success.
Federal Funding Priorities in FY 2026 – June 2025
The shift in presidential administrations has resulted in widespread changes for grant seekers at the federal level. Hanover reviews key insights from our analysis of the FY 2026 budget request, providing information on major federal agency priorities along with details of individual grant programs or funding areas that may be impacted by the proposed changes.

Scaling Up Your Research - September 2024
Many researchers who have experienced initial funding success are faced with the same question - where do I go from here? The session  focuses on grant-seekers who are aiming to expand the scale of their research, whether it's broadening the scope of their work, adapting to target larger-scale grant opportunities, or exploring collaborations across disciplinary lines

Navigating the Grant Review Processes (and Becoming a Reviewer) -June 2024
What happens to your proposal after you hit submit? This webinar covers the process that funders use to review, evaluate, and select grant awards.

Grant Seekers Guide to Fellowships - December 2023
Overview of fellowships. Navigating the landscape & identifying opportunities. Writing competitive fellowship applications.

Grant Seeking for Clinical Faculty -  June 2023
Funding for Clinical Research. Human Subjects. Clinical Trials Inclusion.

Grant Seeking for Mid-Career Faculty - March 2023
Pros & cons of being a mid-career grant seeker.

Funding Landscape for Early Career Research - November 2022
Understand the context of grant seeking. Maximize success in identifying opportunities. Major themes & trends among Early Career Faculty Grant Programs.

PDF of 2026 Webinars

Navigating the Foundation Funding Landscape - Sept. 24, 2026, 11:00am, CT
Seeking support from private foundations is a necessity for organizations looking to diversify
their funding portfolios and sustain strategic initiatives. This session will provide a primer on the wide ranging grant makers that comprise foundation funding landscape, how to identify potential private grant opportunities, and the conventions of pursuing grants from these funders as compared to public sources.

Collaborating with Community Partners in Grant Seeking - October 29, 2026, 11:00am CT
Community partnerships can strengthen proposals, expand resources, and make your work more compelling to funders. Building these relationships requires trust, shared goals, and clear communication. This session will show you how to identify the right partners, structure collaborations that benefit all parties, and craft proposals that demonstrate collective impact.

Assessing Alignment & Competitiveness in Grant Prospecting - Nov. 19, 2026, 11:00am CT While many grant seekers have access to a wealth of information about funding opportunities, finding the right fit can still be a challenge. This session focuses on the art of grant prospecting beyond the initial identification of potential targets—helping you to achieve meaningful alignment with funder priorities by spotting key indicators and red flags in your evaluation process.

Roundtable: Building Interdisciplinary Collaboration - Dec. 17, 2026, 11:00pm CT
As research challenges become more complex, institutions are prioritizing interdisciplinary collaboration as a key component of their long-term research strategies. In this roundtable discussion, we will hear from research leaders about their efforts to foster collaboration across disciplines, from initiating convergent research concepts to supporting collaborative grant proposals.