Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
SlideShare a Scribd company logo

Read & Publish – What It Takes to Implement a Seamless Model?

•
•
NASIG
NASIG

PANELISTS Adam Chesler Director of Global Sales AIP Publishing Sara Rotjan Assistant Marketing Director, AIP Publishing Keith Webster Dean of Libraries and Director of Emerging and Integrative Media Initiatives Carnegie Mellon University Andre Anders Director, Leibniz Institute of Surface Engineering (IOM) Editor in Chief of Journal of Applied Physics Professor of Applied Physics, Leipzig University “Read & Publish” agreements continue to gain global attention. What’s rarely discussed when these new access and article processing models are introduced is the paperwork, back-end technology and overall management required to implement the new program that works for all involved. This panel, comprised of a librarian, publisher, and researcher, will focus on the complexities of developing, implementing and using the infrastructures of different Read & Publish models and the challenges of developing a seamless experience for everyone. From article submission to publication to final reporting, the panel will discuss the “hidden” impact that new workflows will have on stakeholders in scholarly communications. Time will be allotted for Q&A and attendee participation is encouraged.

1 of 31
Download to read offline
NASIG 35th ANNUAL CONFERENCE | JUNE 9-11, 2020 #NASIG2020
Many thanks to our sponsors for making the NASIG 35th Annual Conference possible!
Read & Publish What Does It Takes to Implement a Seamless Model? Collaborative panel discussion brought to you by AIP Publishing
Panelists Adam Chesler Director of Global Sales AIP Publishing Keith Webster Dean of Libraries and Director of Emerging and Integrative Media Initiatives Carnegie Mellon University Andre Anders Director, Leibniz Institute of Surface Engineering (IOM) Editor in Chief of Journal of Applied Physics Professor of Applied Physics, Leipzig University
About the Panelist André Anders • Plasma Physicist, a former Senior Scientist with Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California • Director, Leibniz Institute of Surface Engineering, Leipzig, Germany • Professor of Applied Physics, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany • Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Applied Physics, AIP Publishing, Melville, NY I may report from different perspectives; here primarily as a researcher (author) and director of an independent institute
Impact of changes, seen as a researcher As a researcher, I welcome Read & Publish deals because it helps on both fronts: having access to published work and also being able to publish in (Gold) Open Access (OA) journals I prefer publishing OA because it helps to make my work more accessible to all interested, and perhaps increases citations, which is every researcher’s desire 0 W425°C research results publication citing literature
The cost of OA is usually not covered by the project’s funding agency but by combing funding from funding agency (project grants) and from in the institute’s based funding Selection of suitable journal to submit is primarily based on matching of my topic to journal’s cope the journal’s reputation impact factor, publication cost. the default, as of 2019, is still to publish in subscription-only or hybrid journals due to insufficient funds for all-OA by grants or institution. Impact of changes, seen as a researcher funding agency insitute's base funding
Impact of changes, seen as an institute leader strive to address funding agencies’ mandates for OA by providing avenues of compliances: Green OA and/or Gold OA, by providing funding, full or in-part, from the institute’s base funding As director, I signed DEAL, a Read & Publish agreement between publishers and a consortium of institutions to gain access to the publisher’s journals and have preferred conditions for OA publishing currently applicable to Wiley and Springer/Nature
Project DEAL • “Projekt DEAL” - commissioned by the Alliance of Science Organizations in Germany, represented by the German Rectors’ Conference, the HRK. • Objective: to conclude transformative publish and read agreements for the entire range of electronic journals offered by the major academic publishers. •  significant change to the status quo in relation to negotiations, content and pricing in the process. • current status: signed with and
Impact of changes, seen as an institute leader a need to train the librarian and to convey the changes and opportunities to all researchers (department heads, group leaders, staff and grad students) – this is done by me, the librarian, and/or the institute’s Scientific Council, and central figures of DEAL occasionally, e.g. in high level meetings, I stress in meetings with funding agencies that the desired switch to full accessibly must be underpinned with adequate financial backing of those who publish, researchers and their institutions
Impact of changes, seen as an institute leader Decision process on how to publish (status as of mid 2020 – and this may change!): 1. Authors check their funding situation and consult with Department Head on availability of institutional funds to pay for publishing cost if not covered by project funds 2. Department head usually requires the setting of publishing priorities by authors, i.e. only selected manuscript will be sponsored (for my institute, for example, about 20% is published Gold OA). 3. There are occasional seminars or time slots in all-hands institute meetings to explain publication workflow, incl. rules for funding publications to researchers. Guidelines are provided on the institute’s intranet. + + or
Impact of changes, seen as an institute leader As of 2020, funding agencies set a project’s limits for annual publication cost and year, usually much lower than even one OA would cost  there is need for significant institutional supplements, which need to be planned and budgeted at the institute level.  there must be awareness and funding at funding agencies, to including funds for OA publications even/especially when Read & Publish agreements are in place.
publishing.aip.org Proprietary & Confidential (AIP Publishing) The Mechanics of Read & Publish: The Publisher Perspective Adam Chesler Director, Global Sales
publishing.aip.org Proprietary & Confidential (AIP Publishing) Background • Authors want their work distributed as widely as possible • Funders expect the results of their contributions focused on research, and to be broadly available • Researchers seek unrestricted access to more content • Academic institutions support scholarship, and get the most value possible for their money • Publishers want to provide ongoing, reliable service to scholarly community
publishing.aip.org Proprietary & Confidential (AIP Publishing) Challenges • Continue to serve a global constituency of authors, readers, and customers • For learned societies, publishing revenues support many academic activities • Entrenched business, production, and management systems are built around long-established models • Developing and maintaining sustainable business models • Not every author / institution / region / funder wants to shift models • Change is hard • Change is really hard
publishing.aip.org Proprietary & Confidential (AIP Publishing) Who’s involved? • Publishing • Accounting • Customer Service • Sales • Marketing • IT • … in other words, pretty much everyone in the organization
publishing.aip.org Proprietary & Confidential (AIP Publishing) Questions • Who are our customers? • Identifying authors by institution • Defining sites • Which institutions are participating (in which consortia)? • What are our customers doing with us? • Input / output • Subscriptions / Accessible titles • What do customers want? What do authors want? • Regional interests / differences • Status quo vs change (radical? measured?) • Unique requirements / mandates
publishing.aip.org Proprietary & Confidential (AIP Publishing) Building Blocks • Data • Author affiliations • Revenue breakdowns • Sustainability • Pricing models • For current customers • For prospects • Systems • Accounting • Production • Sales management • Legal • Licenses / Contracts • Workflows • Production • Sales • Invoicing • Buy-in • Senior management • Board • Parent (organization) • Publishing partners
publishing.aip.org Proprietary & Confidential (AIP Publishing) Outreach • Customers • Interest / requirements aren’t monolithic • Appetite for cost re-allocations • Net producers of content vs low- or non-contributors • Authors / Editors / Publishing Partners • Subscription / Sales agents, staff training • Testing • Pilot program • Roll-out • Negotiations • Training • Panic Don’t panic
publishing.aip.org Proprietary & Confidential (AIP Publishing) Questions / Comments / Funny Stories Adam Chesler AIP Publishing achesler@aip.org (516) 576-2628
Read and Publish The impact on libraries @cmkeithw Keith Webster Dean of University Libraries and Director of Emerging and Integrative Media Initiatives J U NE 2 0 2 0
Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) Background Private research university - main campus in Pittsburgh, PA, campuses in NYC and Silicon Valley, and in Africa, Australia, Qatar Almost 15,000 students (majority graduate), 1,500 faculty Strengths in computer science, AI, robotics, engineering, business, performing arts, neuroscience Ranked in top 25 universities (Times Higher world rankings; US News)
Our OA agreements Jan. 2020 Elsevier - single agreement covering readership and OA publication Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) - part of ACM Open July 2020 PLoS - institutional package
Establishing our approach First agreement (Elsevier) involved discussions with university faculty (via Faculty Senate and Library Advisory Committee), leadership (via University Leadership Council) and Trustees - led by Dean Agreed that CMU endorses sustainable open access as a means of sharing knowledge and accelerating scientific progress
Read vs Publish Essentially different parts of same supply chain How do we value these? How do publishers' price these? Important implications for consortial negotiations
Finances Costs of readership borne by institution centrally Costs of OA authorship largely derived from authors, grants, small APC funds Regarding OA as an incremental source of revenue for publishers is unsustainable - we need a transitional model Burden of costs likely to shift to research-intensive institutions. Free-rider problem? Loss of corporate revenues (subscriptions, reprints, advertising)?
Negotiation Points  No longer about readership metrics/usage  Need strong information on faculty authorship, disciplines, grants, etc.  Need strong understanding of mandates and other OA policy environments  Need to understand publication (and title?) metrics/FWCI
Workflows What are the effective dates of an agreement with respect to article eligibility? Does the agreement cover articles submitted after, accepted after, or published after the agreement date? Do libraries expect direct deposit of copies of OA articles deposited in their institutional repository. How does this happen? How do publishers verify whether the corresponding author is properly affiliated with the subscribing institution? Individual article validation time consuming (and which part of library is best set up to do this?) How and when do authors choose open access vs closed license? Do they receive choice of OA license? How do publisher and institution monitor ‘compliance’
Success How is success defined? And tracked? Changes in author behavior (compared to belief in value of journal brands) Article level outcomes (actual vs expected citation rates) Changes (if any) in readership levels Financial trends for institution Financial trends globally
kgw@cmu.edu cmkeithw Keith Webster cmkeithw
Thank you! Questions can be directed to: Adam Chesler AIP Publishing Email: achesler@aip.org Keith Webster Carnegie Mellon University Email: kwebster@andrew.cmu.edu Andre Anders Leibniz Institute of Surface Engineering (IOM) Email: JAP-aanders@aip.org

More Related Content

Read & Publish – What It Takes to Implement a Seamless Model?

  • 1. NASIG 35th ANNUAL CONFERENCE | JUNE 9-11, 2020 #NASIG2020
  • 2. Many thanks to our sponsors for making the NASIG 35th Annual Conference possible!
  • 3. Read & Publish What Does It Takes to Implement a Seamless Model? Collaborative panel discussion brought to you by AIP Publishing
  • 4. Panelists Adam Chesler Director of Global Sales AIP Publishing Keith Webster Dean of Libraries and Director of Emerging and Integrative Media Initiatives Carnegie Mellon University Andre Anders Director, Leibniz Institute of Surface Engineering (IOM) Editor in Chief of Journal of Applied Physics Professor of Applied Physics, Leipzig University
  • 5. About the Panelist André Anders • Plasma Physicist, a former Senior Scientist with Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California • Director, Leibniz Institute of Surface Engineering, Leipzig, Germany • Professor of Applied Physics, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany • Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Applied Physics, AIP Publishing, Melville, NY I may report from different perspectives; here primarily as a researcher (author) and director of an independent institute
  • 6. Impact of changes, seen as a researcher As a researcher, I welcome Read & Publish deals because it helps on both fronts: having access to published work and also being able to publish in (Gold) Open Access (OA) journals I prefer publishing OA because it helps to make my work more accessible to all interested, and perhaps increases citations, which is every researcher’s desire 0 W425°C research results publication citing literature
  • 7. The cost of OA is usually not covered by the project’s funding agency but by combing funding from funding agency (project grants) and from in the institute’s based funding Selection of suitable journal to submit is primarily based on matching of my topic to journal’s cope the journal’s reputation impact factor, publication cost. the default, as of 2019, is still to publish in subscription-only or hybrid journals due to insufficient funds for all-OA by grants or institution. Impact of changes, seen as a researcher funding agency insitute's base funding
  • 8. Impact of changes, seen as an institute leader strive to address funding agencies’ mandates for OA by providing avenues of compliances: Green OA and/or Gold OA, by providing funding, full or in-part, from the institute’s base funding As director, I signed DEAL, a Read & Publish agreement between publishers and a consortium of institutions to gain access to the publisher’s journals and have preferred conditions for OA publishing currently applicable to Wiley and Springer/Nature
  • 9. Project DEAL • “Projekt DEAL” - commissioned by the Alliance of Science Organizations in Germany, represented by the German Rectors’ Conference, the HRK. • Objective: to conclude transformative publish and read agreements for the entire range of electronic journals offered by the major academic publishers. •  significant change to the status quo in relation to negotiations, content and pricing in the process. • current status: signed with and
  • 10. Impact of changes, seen as an institute leader a need to train the librarian and to convey the changes and opportunities to all researchers (department heads, group leaders, staff and grad students) – this is done by me, the librarian, and/or the institute’s Scientific Council, and central figures of DEAL occasionally, e.g. in high level meetings, I stress in meetings with funding agencies that the desired switch to full accessibly must be underpinned with adequate financial backing of those who publish, researchers and their institutions
  • 11. Impact of changes, seen as an institute leader Decision process on how to publish (status as of mid 2020 – and this may change!): 1. Authors check their funding situation and consult with Department Head on availability of institutional funds to pay for publishing cost if not covered by project funds 2. Department head usually requires the setting of publishing priorities by authors, i.e. only selected manuscript will be sponsored (for my institute, for example, about 20% is published Gold OA). 3. There are occasional seminars or time slots in all-hands institute meetings to explain publication workflow, incl. rules for funding publications to researchers. Guidelines are provided on the institute’s intranet. + + or
  • 12. Impact of changes, seen as an institute leader As of 2020, funding agencies set a project’s limits for annual publication cost and year, usually much lower than even one OA would cost  there is need for significant institutional supplements, which need to be planned and budgeted at the institute level.  there must be awareness and funding at funding agencies, to including funds for OA publications even/especially when Read & Publish agreements are in place.
  • 13. publishing.aip.org Proprietary & Confidential (AIP Publishing) The Mechanics of Read & Publish: The Publisher Perspective Adam Chesler Director, Global Sales
  • 14. publishing.aip.org Proprietary & Confidential (AIP Publishing) Background • Authors want their work distributed as widely as possible • Funders expect the results of their contributions focused on research, and to be broadly available • Researchers seek unrestricted access to more content • Academic institutions support scholarship, and get the most value possible for their money • Publishers want to provide ongoing, reliable service to scholarly community
  • 15. publishing.aip.org Proprietary & Confidential (AIP Publishing) Challenges • Continue to serve a global constituency of authors, readers, and customers • For learned societies, publishing revenues support many academic activities • Entrenched business, production, and management systems are built around long-established models • Developing and maintaining sustainable business models • Not every author / institution / region / funder wants to shift models • Change is hard • Change is really hard
  • 16. publishing.aip.org Proprietary & Confidential (AIP Publishing) Who’s involved? • Publishing • Accounting • Customer Service • Sales • Marketing • IT • … in other words, pretty much everyone in the organization
  • 17. publishing.aip.org Proprietary & Confidential (AIP Publishing) Questions • Who are our customers? • Identifying authors by institution • Defining sites • Which institutions are participating (in which consortia)? • What are our customers doing with us? • Input / output • Subscriptions / Accessible titles • What do customers want? What do authors want? • Regional interests / differences • Status quo vs change (radical? measured?) • Unique requirements / mandates
  • 18. publishing.aip.org Proprietary & Confidential (AIP Publishing) Building Blocks • Data • Author affiliations • Revenue breakdowns • Sustainability • Pricing models • For current customers • For prospects • Systems • Accounting • Production • Sales management • Legal • Licenses / Contracts • Workflows • Production • Sales • Invoicing • Buy-in • Senior management • Board • Parent (organization) • Publishing partners
  • 19. publishing.aip.org Proprietary & Confidential (AIP Publishing) Outreach • Customers • Interest / requirements aren’t monolithic • Appetite for cost re-allocations • Net producers of content vs low- or non-contributors • Authors / Editors / Publishing Partners • Subscription / Sales agents, staff training • Testing • Pilot program • Roll-out • Negotiations • Training • Panic Don’t panic
  • 20. publishing.aip.org Proprietary & Confidential (AIP Publishing) Questions / Comments / Funny Stories Adam Chesler AIP Publishing achesler@aip.org (516) 576-2628
  • 21. Read and Publish The impact on libraries @cmkeithw Keith Webster Dean of University Libraries and Director of Emerging and Integrative Media Initiatives J U NE 2 0 2 0
  • 22. Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) Background Private research university - main campus in Pittsburgh, PA, campuses in NYC and Silicon Valley, and in Africa, Australia, Qatar Almost 15,000 students (majority graduate), 1,500 faculty Strengths in computer science, AI, robotics, engineering, business, performing arts, neuroscience Ranked in top 25 universities (Times Higher world rankings; US News)
  • 23. Our OA agreements Jan. 2020 Elsevier - single agreement covering readership and OA publication Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) - part of ACM Open July 2020 PLoS - institutional package
  • 24. Establishing our approach First agreement (Elsevier) involved discussions with university faculty (via Faculty Senate and Library Advisory Committee), leadership (via University Leadership Council) and Trustees - led by Dean Agreed that CMU endorses sustainable open access as a means of sharing knowledge and accelerating scientific progress
  • 25. Read vs Publish Essentially different parts of same supply chain How do we value these? How do publishers' price these? Important implications for consortial negotiations
  • 26. Finances Costs of readership borne by institution centrally Costs of OA authorship largely derived from authors, grants, small APC funds Regarding OA as an incremental source of revenue for publishers is unsustainable - we need a transitional model Burden of costs likely to shift to research-intensive institutions. Free-rider problem? Loss of corporate revenues (subscriptions, reprints, advertising)?
  • 27. Negotiation Points  No longer about readership metrics/usage  Need strong information on faculty authorship, disciplines, grants, etc.  Need strong understanding of mandates and other OA policy environments  Need to understand publication (and title?) metrics/FWCI
  • 28. Workflows What are the effective dates of an agreement with respect to article eligibility? Does the agreement cover articles submitted after, accepted after, or published after the agreement date? Do libraries expect direct deposit of copies of OA articles deposited in their institutional repository. How does this happen? How do publishers verify whether the corresponding author is properly affiliated with the subscribing institution? Individual article validation time consuming (and which part of library is best set up to do this?) How and when do authors choose open access vs closed license? Do they receive choice of OA license? How do publisher and institution monitor ‘compliance’
  • 29. Success How is success defined? And tracked? Changes in author behavior (compared to belief in value of journal brands) Article level outcomes (actual vs expected citation rates) Changes (if any) in readership levels Financial trends for institution Financial trends globally
  • 31. Thank you! Questions can be directed to: Adam Chesler AIP Publishing Email: achesler@aip.org Keith Webster Carnegie Mellon University Email: kwebster@andrew.cmu.edu Andre Anders Leibniz Institute of Surface Engineering (IOM) Email: JAP-aanders@aip.org