Since June 2017 Alison has been Chief Executive Officer of the Public Library of Science (PLOS), an organization on a mission to drive open science forward with measurable, meaningful change in research publishing, policy, and practice. Prior to PLOS, Alison served as Director of the University of California Press and as Executive Vice President at Sage. Alison serves on the MIT Libraries Visiting Committee and the American Chemical Society’s Governing Board for Publishing. She is a regular speaker at industry meetings and contributing “chef” to the Scholarly Kitchen blog. Her more than 35 years in the publishing industry also include leadership positions at Taylor & Francis and Blackwell Publishers.
In the past, Alison has also served on the board of the Society for Scholarly Publishing, the Board of the Center for Open Science, the Scientific Publications Committee and the Open Science Committee of the American Heart Association, the Authors’ Alliance, NISO, and the Executive Council of the PSP Division of the American Association of Publishers, and as Co-Chair of the Dean’s Leadership Council at California State University, Channel Islands.
Today, Alison Mudditt reflects on a Charleston Conference session that asked: what would it take to make the scholarly communication system truly equitable, impactful, and future-ready?
Antitrust litigation has been filed against six major scholarly publishers. We reached out to the community for their thoughts.
Transitional agreements are proving to be neither transitional nor transformative. How should libraries and publishers reassess and chart a different course?
Robert Harington and Alison Mudditt, CEO of PLOS, in conversation in this series of perspectives from some of Publishing’s leaders across the non-profit and profit sectors of our industry.
eLife’s recent announcement that it will reinvent itself as a “service that reviews preprints” has generated much discussion over recent weeks. But what are the primary drivers and goals, and what might we all learn from this bold experiment?
Is there an entrenched stasis in scholarly communication in which the core elements of the system have not been much moved by the revolutions happening around us?
Everyone has an opinion about the OSTP Policy memo! Come over and hear what the Chefs have to say and share your opinions with us. Part 1 of a 2 part post.
We ask the 2022 Society for Scholarly Publishing Fellows to offer their thoughts on this year’s Annual Meeting.
Today we ask the Scholarly Kitchen Chefs how they’re feeling about in-person conferences in general, and the 2022 SSP Annual Meeting in particular.
The beginning of the holiday season means it’s time for our annual list of our favorite books read during the year (and more!). Today we offer Part 2 of our suggestions.
Open peer review has been growing steadily but its implementations take many different forms. Alison Mudditt and Véronique Kiermer take a deep dive into the question of whether reviewers should be openly identified.
Revisiting Alison Mudditt’s 2018 post on sexual harassment in our community. What has changed in the last three years, and what can we continue to do to eradicate this behavior for the next generation of women.
Lots of things are wrong with paying for peer review, according to Tim Vines and Alison Mudditt in the recent R2R conference debate
The pandemic has normalized remote work, but happens as it wanes? Will we go to the office again – and, if so, how often? What impact will a ‘hybrid’ way of working have on how we communicate, connect and create? Will work-from-home be the great leveller in terms of gender equality and diversity? And what will work mean if our offices are virtual and we lose those day-to-day social interactions?
The beginning of the holiday season means it’s time for our annual list of our favorite books read during the year (and more!) . Part 2.