Welcoming a New Chef into the Kitchen: Roger Schonfeld
Meet Roger Schonfeld, our newest Chef in The Kitchen.
Meet Roger Schonfeld, our newest Chef in The Kitchen.
The project manager has become a critical part of success in a publishing world with more complex systems, processes, and vendor relationships. But finding a good one is still a challenge.
An odd find from earlier this week — the video CNN plans to play at the end of the world.
We’re off for the holidays, and offer this look back at 2014 in lieu of new posts. See you in 2015.
Digital Science’s Phill Jones officially joins the Scholarly Kitchen as a regular blogger.
Publishers often slap labels on activities that are complex, expensive, and high-value. Worse, we often accept people calling these activities “value-add” when they are core functions of how scientific information shared.
The annual update to the list adds some important items overlooked on prior versions, including design, enforcement of editorial policies, and Board interactions.
More and more studies are emerging showing how misdirecting and expanding citations can lead to long-term misconceptions and mistaken belief systems in the sciences.
Long “Instructions to Authors” filled with ancillary policies and undifferentiated requirements don’t help authors, staff, or editors. As the graveyard for unmade decisions, they’ve only gotten longer and more opaque. Maybe it’s time to clean yours up!
Please welcome our newest Chef, Jill O’Neill from the NFAIS.
How much of the book usage in a research library collection involves books from university presses? Findings from this case study suggests that the answers are complex and, to some degree, suprising.
The Scholarly Kitchen reaches a numerical milestone.
It’s been a crazy busy Spring for all at The Scholarly Kitchen and we’re taking a much needed week off.
Serving as President of SSP for a year let me see how uniquely beneficial this organization is for scholarly publishing.
At a time when more research articles are more readily available to more readers globally than ever before, it’s crucial we are confident that those papers meet the highest standards and, that on those occasions where they don’t, there is a sound system in place to revise or retract them. So what can we do to make the publishing process more sound?