Idea Management : The repository/library should provide support in the publishing process

The repository/library should provide support in the publishing process

Posted by c.rusbridge 07/14/2008 07:00 AM GMT+00:00

Another from the Research repository System (RRS) blog posts:

Publisher liaison is maybe controversial. But why shouldn’t the RRS staff (or your library) support you in dealing with publishers? The RRS wants your articles and your data, and should help you negotiate and reserve the rights so that they can get them. So publisher liaison would include rights negotiation, submission to the publisher on your behalf of a specific version, support through the editorial revision process, and recovery of metadata from the published version for the RRS records and your own bibliography, web page and CV. Naturally, deposit in the repository would be integrated in this workflow; you only have to authorise opening to the public, or perhaps a more restricted audience.

Idea # 20Category/Tags : Repository functions (10) (9)

Comments

o.stephens

07/17/2008

OK - going to bang on about terminology again.

This needs restating from a user perspective:
"I wish there was an easy way of sending my documents to the publisher and doing all that irritating back and forth that I currently do by email"

Then the institutional question:
"How can the institutiion help, while also doing some stuff that saves the researcher time, the institution money and realises institutional goals?"

Once the needs are understood, hopefully the requirements of any IT (or other) system will become clearer - some of the stuff listed in the last sentence above. Then we look at what interfaces are needed, and the best systems to implement with. It is possible/likely that software that knows about storing digital objects, with associated metadata - something we might call a repository if I hadn't just declared a ban on the term ;) - will be part of the solution

o.stephens

07/17/2008

c.rusbridge

07/18/2008

Owen, I think I'm more for the second of your phrasings than the first. Getting manuscripts to the publisher is easy, email (unless they have one of those web-managed deposit systems); it's the whole editorial process that is a pain. But I was trying to be a bit blue sky here. What would REALLY make your researchers more productive AND suck them into your repository? Librarians want the researchers content. Librarians know about (c) and licences and OA. Librarians deal with publishers (well, a bit). Librarians are moving from dealing with objects to dealing with information. Meanwhile researchers are getting more stretched, with more accountability and publishing demands, with ever larger teams, with ever wider projects, with ever more authors. So if you can help the researcher/authors manage their content during the writing process (mostly through a smart SourceForge-like system associated with the repository), AND provide them with some simple help through the publishing process, then maybe we could get to the sort of researcher support systems that might make an institution more productive.

o.stephens

07/18/2008

OK - two things:

Firstly, I see the point about the benefits, but if we are solving problems our end users don't feel need solving then we have a much more difficult job on our hands (and perhaps not substantially different from our current problems with getting researchers to put things into our repository.

Secondly, again the 'repository' word - I think what you suggest in terms of a system to help streamline the editorial/publication process is fine (if we can persuade academics to use it), but I'm not sure I'd start by building it on the repository - maybe you could, but there are other approaches as well. If we actual get to the point where we are managing the publication process then making the final author copy available in an Open Access environment would be trivial I would hope.

Post New Comment

Files/Attachments

Repositories - communicating the idea

Categories