Cadmore media player playing video The Future of Journals
Video Player
Accessibility
Using forms mode, you can utilize keyboard shortcuts to make usability more efficient.
Space bar will play and pause the video. Pressing escape will close all displays and pressing it again will jump to the end of the player.
You can press A to open the Keyboard Shortcut Dialog which also provides an audio description of the player and all of its features.
Language
1x
Play Speed
Adjust Volume
Transcript
Search
Result Count
of
Click to jump to result
Search
Re-center
Segments
Result Count
of
Click to jump to result
Search
Name:
The Future of Journals
Description:
The Future of Journals
Thumbnail URL:
https://cadmoremediastorage.blob.core.windows.net/21644758-8542-4a22-9212-7aeeded84982/videoscrubberimages/Scrubber_1.jpg
Duration:
T00H29M16S
Embed URL:
https://stream.cadmore.media/player/21644758-8542-4a22-9212-7aeeded84982
Content URL:
https://cadmoreoriginalmedia.blob.core.windows.net/21644758-8542-4a22-9212-7aeeded84982/industry_breakout__morressier_2024-05-29 (1080p).mp4?sv=2019-02-02&sr=c&sig=If7omzGhL58iswd0eYw1H5geYIXtY%2FJDrHcjvLmzj%2Fs%3D&st=2025-04-29T21%3A00%3A30Z&se=2025-04-29T23%3A05%3A30Z&sp=r
Upload Date:
2024-12-03T00:00:00.0000000
Transcript:
Language: EN.
Segment:0 .
All right, everyone, Thank you so much for joining here. I'm very happy that you all found your way here to the last to the last room. But I promise you, it's going to be exciting. Or at least I hope they will. So Thank you for joining today. I'm Sami benchekroun. I'm one of the co-founders at Malaysia and the CEO, and I'm really excited to share what we believe is the next generation of in publishing in terms of technology.
So we have a lot of things that we would love to uncover and I'm really excited to share everything with you. But before we start, I really want to share that scholarly publishing or the way we are looking at it is really at a pivotal point. And I would like to start right there with a few observation. And there are three trends that I feel that everybody of US has heard, has seen, has already felt even in the day to day practice and we believe that we need to really understand all of those trends before diving into what we believe is the next is the next generation in publishing.
So let's kick things off. The first megatrend is the number of published articles has just absolutely skyrocketed over the last couple of years. And that highlights the need for scalable and efficient solutions. What has been true over the last 10, even five years is no longer true today. So when we look at technology and when we look at how our infrastructure is built, the truth from 10 years ago or 15 years ago are no longer true today.
The second megatrend or the second big, big element that we're seeing on a day to day basis is the idea that science seems to be under attack. And we only see incremental changes in the way we're dealing with integrity issues, with the concept of trust in science. And there's many data points to look at these. So there's rising retractions and there's by the numbers, declining trust in science and quite frankly, worldwide.
And the new statistics that seem to be quite present is the top highly cited retracted papers, which is just gives a glimpse into the networked idea of our industry where if one article is fraudulent or is isn't published on the highest integrity, the effect that it has is quite significant. And then obviously, there are stats about the ever declining trust in science that you see also here with geopolitical impact.
The third element, and I think there is no session, most probably in that industry breakout concept that will not touch the element of AI or some sort of large language model. And AI has so many facets and is I believe not only in our industry, the number one topic, but really worldwide. The topic that we talk about on a day to day basis and specifically in our industry, it's not just about how do we adapt business models for the future, but it's also on how do we and if we accept AI in, for example, the articles that we publish or the peer review that we do over those articles.
So the question really is, are we ready yet. And maybe even further for what are we ready when it comes to AI. So we're really facing what I believe is a multi-million or even multi-billion dollar challenge that all stakeholders in the entire industry are feeling in their day to day lives. And what I really want to focus on in these slides, in this session is on three distinct perspectives.
One is the publisher perspective, one is the editor perspective. And the third one is the author perspective. So all the insights that I would love to share in terms of bringing a new journal management and manuscript submission system to life is from these three elements. So let's start with the first one. The publishing world has many, many challenges.
And specifically publishers have the challenge of coordinating with authors, with reviewers, but many other stakeholders in that entire ecosystem and that leads to delays, leads to misunderstandings and leads also to an increased workloads that we see. And that requires a solution that basically streamlines all the communication, but also collaboration to really work closely together as a system. And where the problem of margins who are really under pressure that we see that on a day to day basis can be mitigated through New systems in place.
The second group is the editors and the editor is a central piece. And in all our conversations that we're having the editor always plays a little bit of a tricky, tricky role. But they need to have increasing sophistication when it comes to identifying, for example, bad actors that are challenging the integrity of the work that editors want to publish. And that necessitates in robust mechanisms, a robust infrastructure for early detection and managing to maintaining all of these aspects when it comes to trust, when it comes to credibility, to maintaining the utmost, highest level in there.
And the third group and I think I mean, we're very much focused on that is the author group and the author group. We have had so many interviews throughout our path of building new systems that were absolutely challenged by the current infrastructure that you can see in the scholarly ecosystem. And they have cumbersome and outdated platforms that hinder their own efficiency and their own productivity.
So instead of really focusing on the science, they're very much desperate in uploading, for example, a manuscript and running that through an entire system. And that highlights really the need for a user friendly and intuitive system that simplifies the entire process. And that immediately speaks to the customer satisfaction, which in our conversations with many different publishers, say that is the key metric, the key KPI basically that people are looking at.
So we strongly believe, and I think history has shown that with many different examples, is that the best and most successful and impactful organizations are the one that basically maintain their core business, the core that has always been working very, very well while being incredibly responsive to a dynamic marketplace. And if we look around, I mean, there are so many things happening on a day to day basis.
And I believe that right now is the time where publishers need to stay ahead of that curve and really need to stay ahead of that dynamic environment. And when I talk about dynamic environment. And when I talk about what it means is we really want to take publishers from a much more static world where there's very clear rules, where there's a very clear complexity as well, and that is much more manageable than the diverse set of problems and challenges that we see right now to a system that showcases daily changes throughout the process.
So really from the idea of a much more static system in a sense of a static environment to a very dynamic scholarly enterprise and the static platforms, they're struggling enormously. I mean, if you look at technology right now, they're struggling in a dynamic environment. So creating a piece of technology that is not adaptable for many different dynamics that are changing also on a day to day basis is a huge challenge.
And the main challenges that we've identified is one is growth caps. And what we mean with growth caps is we've seen the first trend. There's so many more articles and manuscripts that are hitting all those systems, managing those and managing the sheer complexity of all the different data inputs is something that just doesn't work right now or poses a lot of different challenges.
The second is evidently the integrity risk, where we feel that it stems also from archaic infrastructure that doesn't allow for adding new technologies that identify integrity risks throughout the entire system. And the third one is our unit costs. So in our interviews we've spoken a lot about. High unit costs that publishers are facing. And when I speak about unit costs, I mean the cost for the entire operation of one article.
So really what it costs to process an article from end to end. And that creates a massive pressure on publishing margin. But where do we really want to go. So we've showcased the space of that static world and where do we want to go. We want to go to a World with a system that really strives in this dynamic environment, the system that adapts to all those new challenges and that strives in that complexity.
And that is ready and born basically in a world that is complex, a world that is not as simple as or as structured, at least as it has been, and a system that enables four main things that we've heard ongoingly. The one is how can we process much higher volume without decreasing the quality. So how can we balance that out. How can we decrease the cost per article.
And again, I'm not talking I'm specifically talking about the operational cost to process an article. And how can publisher be equipped with a set of tools that allows for new business models to test new business model, to really have an environment to understand what can be done within the system and what can be tested out in connection with other systems. And I think one of the biggest pieces and that also comes from all our conversation is I'm always asking the question, tell me, your main KPIs, what are the main metrics that you're looking at.
And interestingly enough, often I don't get these very precise answers to say Yeah, I know exactly what it is. And I know exactly where to find the data. And all my data is perfectly synced and they're synced across all the systems. So I hope that was for that. So, so and the data piece really gathering the data from all systems is something that we want to double down on.
All right. Now, I talked about what we observe, what we challenge. So what's next. I want to say Hello to journal manager today, which is designed to help dynamic publishers to really adapt seamlessly to an ever changing environment. And that means to ensure to publish with confidence. And I'm absolutely proud to introduce journal manager and to walk you through the first screens of a system that will be launched later this year.
And I really want to give you an insight on how we believe scholarly publishing should look and feel like and what it should focus on. So starting with the stakeholder of a publisher, we believe that journal manager needs to provide a very rich and strategic operational overview with very comprehensive tracking that you can see on the right side of the screen that gives actionable insights at every point and the ability to really drill down into all the metrics, into all the operations through one simple interface.
The idea of the beautification of B2B software or software that are being built to do work, we really mean that. And we believe that it needs to be a pleasure to use a system on a day to day basis and that it doesn't create friction. And we believe that this is exactly the direction that it goes. And it needs to be very, very data driven at every step of the way.
The platform offers also from publisher perspective, very secure and easy data integration through user friendly APIs. And that allows those critical publishing data to any key business applications. So if you have a finance system or if you have a marketing system, the idea that all of these systems speak natively with one another is something that other industries know since Destiny's already, maybe not Destiny's, but at least 10 years.
So if we have systems like Salesforce or HubSpot, the integration into other business relevant systems is something that is just taken for granted. And we really want that. It's also taken for granted for publishers around the world. Now, if we look at the world of editors, I mean, they need to assess submissions in a very efficient and effective way. And with journal manager, we believe that they can do that.
It helps identify issues within the content and authorship, and they can collect feedback throughout the process. They can see how to track changes and loop in New people and other stakeholders in the process when needed. So one beautiful overview to actually give a clear understanding over all the insights of a dedicated article now changing to the reviewer perspective or the editor together in combination with the reviewer, assigning those reviewers based on expertise, based on availability and reliability, while avoiding, for example, conflicts of interests and automating invites and reminders to have those operational seamless experiences maximizes just the efficiency and just the ease of use for editors, but also reviewers.
And we know all that the pressure on reviewers and the amount of reviewers is not infinitive and infinite. Sorry, and to really deal with that is highly important. Now looking at the author experience, because again, as we've discussed in the beginning, the customer satisfaction score is something that people and publishers look at very, very carefully. And authors can submit scientific contributions much, much faster and much, much easier by importing manuscripts like you see here on the screenshot.
And you can collaborate with the co-authors natively in the platform and satisfying journal requirements within the system, not just having a website where it says those are my journal requirements, but actually integrating requirements and giving notifications to the authors while doing the work on what the requirements are is what we believe absolutely necessary to have a good customer satisfaction.
And talking about integrity and checks just generally. We strongly believe that the world of pre-flight checks need to be also integrated in the author experience, and that needs to focus on the quality. We don't only want to allow to process much more, but also at a much better quality. And the completeness guides authors to the right publishing options. So really giving a perfect view to all to the authors that are in the system.
So I want to stay here for a little while and motivate you to say we want really the publishers to be in the driver's seat. We want that the technology works for the publisher and not against them. We really want to create a tool that speaks to the needs of the publishing community. And we want you to be, quite frankly, in the driver's seat, in the driver's seat, and want you to be this dynamic, dynamic publisher.
But the proof is in the pudding, right. I mean, I can talk forever now about beautiful screens and beautiful elements, but I really want us to drive certain metrics together so we as Moshe, hold ourselves accountable to clear metrics that we not only show to our publishing clients, but that we as product team, as engineers, as designers hold ourselves accountable, too. So let's talk about how much of the strategic potential that you might have is unrealized.
And throughout our workshops with many, many different stakeholders and our initial testing phase, we have identified many exciting KPIs to focus on. And the main ones are the ones focusing on the key roles that we have been focusing on. So on the left side, you see the publishers that are finding the system 10x faster, so 10 times faster, for example, in setting up system and changing configurations, being highly adaptable to change.
So really that element of being dynamic and being always at the edge of New technologies for the editors, they are going to increase their efficiency in their day to day work with authors, with reviewers, but also other stakeholders and authors will have a much higher customer satisfaction. I've shown you a couple of screens why we strongly believe that there is that integrated nature that they need and not to switching from system to system and not to changing different credential constantly.
So a far greater experience for all stakeholders involved. And I really want to share maybe one more thing and how deeply we believe in those metrics. We feel so confident and dedicated that we're actually including some of those metrics in our contracts and in our SLAs with our clients. So really holding ourselves accountable because they perfectly align with our internal team metrics, our product teams, our engineers, our designers, they're all held accountable to the same metrics.
And we strongly believe that is the path of an ever optimized, optimized system. So what's next. I don't only want to share with you what we believe is the future of scholarly workflows. We also want to invite you to something. We want to invite you to be also part of that structure. We want you to also shape together with us the future of scholarly, scholarly publishing.
And we have created a partner program that we call Moshe design partner to gain early inputs into the system, really understanding why we have built the things that we have built and getting access to everything and adopting to help refine and optimize the platform also based on the community's needs, not only just based on needs of a smaller circle of publishers, but really based on the community's needs.
We want to invite you to become a design partner and preserve the independence in the scholarly ecosystem, which is something that is more and more under pressure. And I want to give you a little bit of a case study. An IOP, Institute of Physics publishing was one of our first design partners, and together we have started working on a big series of workshops. We've identified many editors, many reviewers, many authors.
We have interviewed management to really understand what is the core issue. And what I really want to say is don't trust us or me here in saying what I'm saying here. From Miriam mouse herself, who says in collaboration with Mercier, we can define a modern, truly interoperable system which has the needs of the researcher built in and takes full advantage of available technologies. Hence, we invite not only IOP, but we invite you to join next to IOP and others on our journey to change from that static system, these static platform that we're seeing into a dynamic publishing ecosystem, into a dynamic publishing engine, how we call it, that will change the way we collect.
We manage, but also we share scholarly output together. So really join that, join that design partner community. And we do a series of activities with our design partners. You'll benefit from a current submission system audit. So we're really diving deep in what is happening now. We are looking at the data, we're looking at the KPIs that are present right now. We'll do a gap analysis workshop. We're taking the data, we're combining that with some qualitative interviews and we're showcasing where we see the challenges and mapping on how that can work for the future.
We will provide you with a blueprint to successfully merge three to five journals with our migration toolkit. So we've created a specific migration toolkit that will allow you to change much, much quicker the systems for small set of journals and but most excitingly be together with our engineers, with our product folks, with our designers, really in the engine room that are working on the journal manager day in, day out for pre-release roadmap inputs that will shape all the years to come when it comes to journal manager.
And with that, I really want to Thank you for joining me today. And I invite you to speak with some of our colleagues who are in the room. Sarah is in the room here. We have a booth at the exhibition floor. And we also have time to discuss right now. So I'm very excited to hear the questions. And we have a microphone, I think, around. So first of all, Thank you very much for being here and Thank you for much for your attention.
There's a question. If you have a loud voice, you can also scream it out loud. Thank you to Adam Hyde from Coco. We develop similar systems just on the design point of view. You have a constituency of publishers with very broad needs, but you also have a philosophical position for the software.
One of those is that you see the future in collaboration around the article interface, for example. So I'm just wanting to understand a little bit your approach going forward as pressure gets applied to take the system in different directions, how you manage that process. Yeah so let me maybe rephrase just said really the question you say on how do we prioritize the development over time with all those different sort of holes that you see in the market.
Is that broadly speaking. No, it's more about a system can't be everything to everyone. You have a position on how a system should be, and yet you'll have folks coming with very different positions. And so how do you maintain a philosophy of system against that pressure. Yeah Yeah. Very, very good question. So we don't expect to ourselves to rebuild everything from scratch, to rebuild the entire system from end to end.
We believe that there is pieces in the industry. And I think that the world of integrity checks, for example, has given us a nice glimpse into what's possible on the technology that there are best in class tools out there. There are best in class, tech snippets that need to be able to be integrated. So the way we're looking at things is like big CRM systems like Salesforce or HubSpot, who are facing the same challenges.
You can just pull it into all different directions. So what we want to offer is a solid infrastructure that is based out of these three components, which is the collection of data and documents, the management and the sharing. And those three elements will always stay the same no matter how we're looking at things. But the idea should be that you can configure as much as you can.
And we want to standardize things because right now. We also see that there is just too many different kinds of nuances Everybody wants to have a red color here or a blue color there, and we don't believe that is scalable. And we've seen a great examples with enterprise solutions where you have a good infrastructure and small tools that can be built on top that work through APIs and that are just much more modular.
And that's of broadly speaking, our philosophy. That answers the question. I'm Ali manieri. I am a publisher with Wolters Kluwer. I attend a lot of editorial boards for societies and some of our proprietary journals. But one of the biggest pain points that always comes up is reviewer acceptance.
So I just wanted to see if you could expand more on your editor metric of a 25% increase in reviewer acceptance rates. Yeah, absolutely. So what we see in. And I think when it comes to the reviewer, the way we're treating the reviewer is we have our pool of reviewers that we're pulling in constantly from the same pool, but without really engaging with the reviewer on an ongoing basis.
So the way that typically, not only with reviewer but also with authors is sort of a one way street. There is a interaction that happens for one single purpose uploading manuscript, reviewing a document, and that stops at the end. So there is no constant relationship that systems in that case, allow you to have with dedicated stakeholders. So the way we're looking at it, and I think IOP is a very good example, is to really start creating relationships in the same platform with the reviewer, not so that they create thousands of different access points.
So there are systems where you need for every journal, a new sign up where everything is sort of completely disconnected but really connect things much, much better. And while doing so, it increases the relationship that the reviewer have with the publisher and therefore also increases the probability of accepting and being more engaged in that ecosystem. And we've seen already bits and pieces where that goes exactly in that direction.
So it's really about keeping the people on one platform and engaging the relationship Thank you for the question.
Segment:0 .
All right, everyone, Thank you so much for joining here. I'm very happy that you all found your way here to the last to the last room. But I promise you, it's going to be exciting. Or at least I hope they will. So Thank you for joining today. I'm Sami benchekroun. I'm one of the co-founders at Malaysia and the CEO, and I'm really excited to share what we believe is the next generation of in publishing in terms of technology.
So we have a lot of things that we would love to uncover and I'm really excited to share everything with you. But before we start, I really want to share that scholarly publishing or the way we are looking at it is really at a pivotal point. And I would like to start right there with a few observation. And there are three trends that I feel that everybody of US has heard, has seen, has already felt even in the day to day practice and we believe that we need to really understand all of those trends before diving into what we believe is the next is the next generation in publishing.
So let's kick things off. The first megatrend is the number of published articles has just absolutely skyrocketed over the last couple of years. And that highlights the need for scalable and efficient solutions. What has been true over the last 10, even five years is no longer true today. So when we look at technology and when we look at how our infrastructure is built, the truth from 10 years ago or 15 years ago are no longer true today.
The second megatrend or the second big, big element that we're seeing on a day to day basis is the idea that science seems to be under attack. And we only see incremental changes in the way we're dealing with integrity issues, with the concept of trust in science. And there's many data points to look at these. So there's rising retractions and there's by the numbers, declining trust in science and quite frankly, worldwide.
And the new statistics that seem to be quite present is the top highly cited retracted papers, which is just gives a glimpse into the networked idea of our industry where if one article is fraudulent or is isn't published on the highest integrity, the effect that it has is quite significant. And then obviously, there are stats about the ever declining trust in science that you see also here with geopolitical impact.
The third element, and I think there is no session, most probably in that industry breakout concept that will not touch the element of AI or some sort of large language model. And AI has so many facets and is I believe not only in our industry, the number one topic, but really worldwide. The topic that we talk about on a day to day basis and specifically in our industry, it's not just about how do we adapt business models for the future, but it's also on how do we and if we accept AI in, for example, the articles that we publish or the peer review that we do over those articles.
So the question really is, are we ready yet. And maybe even further for what are we ready when it comes to AI. So we're really facing what I believe is a multi-million or even multi-billion dollar challenge that all stakeholders in the entire industry are feeling in their day to day lives. And what I really want to focus on in these slides, in this session is on three distinct perspectives.
One is the publisher perspective, one is the editor perspective. And the third one is the author perspective. So all the insights that I would love to share in terms of bringing a new journal management and manuscript submission system to life is from these three elements. So let's start with the first one. The publishing world has many, many challenges.
And specifically publishers have the challenge of coordinating with authors, with reviewers, but many other stakeholders in that entire ecosystem and that leads to delays, leads to misunderstandings and leads also to an increased workloads that we see. And that requires a solution that basically streamlines all the communication, but also collaboration to really work closely together as a system. And where the problem of margins who are really under pressure that we see that on a day to day basis can be mitigated through New systems in place.
The second group is the editors and the editor is a central piece. And in all our conversations that we're having the editor always plays a little bit of a tricky, tricky role. But they need to have increasing sophistication when it comes to identifying, for example, bad actors that are challenging the integrity of the work that editors want to publish. And that necessitates in robust mechanisms, a robust infrastructure for early detection and managing to maintaining all of these aspects when it comes to trust, when it comes to credibility, to maintaining the utmost, highest level in there.
And the third group and I think I mean, we're very much focused on that is the author group and the author group. We have had so many interviews throughout our path of building new systems that were absolutely challenged by the current infrastructure that you can see in the scholarly ecosystem. And they have cumbersome and outdated platforms that hinder their own efficiency and their own productivity.
So instead of really focusing on the science, they're very much desperate in uploading, for example, a manuscript and running that through an entire system. And that highlights really the need for a user friendly and intuitive system that simplifies the entire process. And that immediately speaks to the customer satisfaction, which in our conversations with many different publishers, say that is the key metric, the key KPI basically that people are looking at.
So we strongly believe, and I think history has shown that with many different examples, is that the best and most successful and impactful organizations are the one that basically maintain their core business, the core that has always been working very, very well while being incredibly responsive to a dynamic marketplace. And if we look around, I mean, there are so many things happening on a day to day basis.
And I believe that right now is the time where publishers need to stay ahead of that curve and really need to stay ahead of that dynamic environment. And when I talk about dynamic environment. And when I talk about what it means is we really want to take publishers from a much more static world where there's very clear rules, where there's a very clear complexity as well, and that is much more manageable than the diverse set of problems and challenges that we see right now to a system that showcases daily changes throughout the process.
So really from the idea of a much more static system in a sense of a static environment to a very dynamic scholarly enterprise and the static platforms, they're struggling enormously. I mean, if you look at technology right now, they're struggling in a dynamic environment. So creating a piece of technology that is not adaptable for many different dynamics that are changing also on a day to day basis is a huge challenge.
And the main challenges that we've identified is one is growth caps. And what we mean with growth caps is we've seen the first trend. There's so many more articles and manuscripts that are hitting all those systems, managing those and managing the sheer complexity of all the different data inputs is something that just doesn't work right now or poses a lot of different challenges.
The second is evidently the integrity risk, where we feel that it stems also from archaic infrastructure that doesn't allow for adding new technologies that identify integrity risks throughout the entire system. And the third one is our unit costs. So in our interviews we've spoken a lot about. High unit costs that publishers are facing. And when I speak about unit costs, I mean the cost for the entire operation of one article.
So really what it costs to process an article from end to end. And that creates a massive pressure on publishing margin. But where do we really want to go. So we've showcased the space of that static world and where do we want to go. We want to go to a World with a system that really strives in this dynamic environment, the system that adapts to all those new challenges and that strives in that complexity.
And that is ready and born basically in a world that is complex, a world that is not as simple as or as structured, at least as it has been, and a system that enables four main things that we've heard ongoingly. The one is how can we process much higher volume without decreasing the quality. So how can we balance that out. How can we decrease the cost per article.
And again, I'm not talking I'm specifically talking about the operational cost to process an article. And how can publisher be equipped with a set of tools that allows for new business models to test new business model, to really have an environment to understand what can be done within the system and what can be tested out in connection with other systems. And I think one of the biggest pieces and that also comes from all our conversation is I'm always asking the question, tell me, your main KPIs, what are the main metrics that you're looking at.
And interestingly enough, often I don't get these very precise answers to say Yeah, I know exactly what it is. And I know exactly where to find the data. And all my data is perfectly synced and they're synced across all the systems. So I hope that was for that. So, so and the data piece really gathering the data from all systems is something that we want to double down on.
All right. Now, I talked about what we observe, what we challenge. So what's next. I want to say Hello to journal manager today, which is designed to help dynamic publishers to really adapt seamlessly to an ever changing environment. And that means to ensure to publish with confidence. And I'm absolutely proud to introduce journal manager and to walk you through the first screens of a system that will be launched later this year.
And I really want to give you an insight on how we believe scholarly publishing should look and feel like and what it should focus on. So starting with the stakeholder of a publisher, we believe that journal manager needs to provide a very rich and strategic operational overview with very comprehensive tracking that you can see on the right side of the screen that gives actionable insights at every point and the ability to really drill down into all the metrics, into all the operations through one simple interface.
The idea of the beautification of B2B software or software that are being built to do work, we really mean that. And we believe that it needs to be a pleasure to use a system on a day to day basis and that it doesn't create friction. And we believe that this is exactly the direction that it goes. And it needs to be very, very data driven at every step of the way.
The platform offers also from publisher perspective, very secure and easy data integration through user friendly APIs. And that allows those critical publishing data to any key business applications. So if you have a finance system or if you have a marketing system, the idea that all of these systems speak natively with one another is something that other industries know since Destiny's already, maybe not Destiny's, but at least 10 years.
So if we have systems like Salesforce or HubSpot, the integration into other business relevant systems is something that is just taken for granted. And we really want that. It's also taken for granted for publishers around the world. Now, if we look at the world of editors, I mean, they need to assess submissions in a very efficient and effective way. And with journal manager, we believe that they can do that.
It helps identify issues within the content and authorship, and they can collect feedback throughout the process. They can see how to track changes and loop in New people and other stakeholders in the process when needed. So one beautiful overview to actually give a clear understanding over all the insights of a dedicated article now changing to the reviewer perspective or the editor together in combination with the reviewer, assigning those reviewers based on expertise, based on availability and reliability, while avoiding, for example, conflicts of interests and automating invites and reminders to have those operational seamless experiences maximizes just the efficiency and just the ease of use for editors, but also reviewers.
And we know all that the pressure on reviewers and the amount of reviewers is not infinitive and infinite. Sorry, and to really deal with that is highly important. Now looking at the author experience, because again, as we've discussed in the beginning, the customer satisfaction score is something that people and publishers look at very, very carefully. And authors can submit scientific contributions much, much faster and much, much easier by importing manuscripts like you see here on the screenshot.
And you can collaborate with the co-authors natively in the platform and satisfying journal requirements within the system, not just having a website where it says those are my journal requirements, but actually integrating requirements and giving notifications to the authors while doing the work on what the requirements are is what we believe absolutely necessary to have a good customer satisfaction.
And talking about integrity and checks just generally. We strongly believe that the world of pre-flight checks need to be also integrated in the author experience, and that needs to focus on the quality. We don't only want to allow to process much more, but also at a much better quality. And the completeness guides authors to the right publishing options. So really giving a perfect view to all to the authors that are in the system.
So I want to stay here for a little while and motivate you to say we want really the publishers to be in the driver's seat. We want that the technology works for the publisher and not against them. We really want to create a tool that speaks to the needs of the publishing community. And we want you to be, quite frankly, in the driver's seat, in the driver's seat, and want you to be this dynamic, dynamic publisher.
But the proof is in the pudding, right. I mean, I can talk forever now about beautiful screens and beautiful elements, but I really want us to drive certain metrics together so we as Moshe, hold ourselves accountable to clear metrics that we not only show to our publishing clients, but that we as product team, as engineers, as designers hold ourselves accountable, too. So let's talk about how much of the strategic potential that you might have is unrealized.
And throughout our workshops with many, many different stakeholders and our initial testing phase, we have identified many exciting KPIs to focus on. And the main ones are the ones focusing on the key roles that we have been focusing on. So on the left side, you see the publishers that are finding the system 10x faster, so 10 times faster, for example, in setting up system and changing configurations, being highly adaptable to change.
So really that element of being dynamic and being always at the edge of New technologies for the editors, they are going to increase their efficiency in their day to day work with authors, with reviewers, but also other stakeholders and authors will have a much higher customer satisfaction. I've shown you a couple of screens why we strongly believe that there is that integrated nature that they need and not to switching from system to system and not to changing different credential constantly.
So a far greater experience for all stakeholders involved. And I really want to share maybe one more thing and how deeply we believe in those metrics. We feel so confident and dedicated that we're actually including some of those metrics in our contracts and in our SLAs with our clients. So really holding ourselves accountable because they perfectly align with our internal team metrics, our product teams, our engineers, our designers, they're all held accountable to the same metrics.
And we strongly believe that is the path of an ever optimized, optimized system. So what's next. I don't only want to share with you what we believe is the future of scholarly workflows. We also want to invite you to something. We want to invite you to be also part of that structure. We want you to also shape together with us the future of scholarly, scholarly publishing.
And we have created a partner program that we call Moshe design partner to gain early inputs into the system, really understanding why we have built the things that we have built and getting access to everything and adopting to help refine and optimize the platform also based on the community's needs, not only just based on needs of a smaller circle of publishers, but really based on the community's needs.
We want to invite you to become a design partner and preserve the independence in the scholarly ecosystem, which is something that is more and more under pressure. And I want to give you a little bit of a case study. An IOP, Institute of Physics publishing was one of our first design partners, and together we have started working on a big series of workshops. We've identified many editors, many reviewers, many authors.
We have interviewed management to really understand what is the core issue. And what I really want to say is don't trust us or me here in saying what I'm saying here. From Miriam mouse herself, who says in collaboration with Mercier, we can define a modern, truly interoperable system which has the needs of the researcher built in and takes full advantage of available technologies. Hence, we invite not only IOP, but we invite you to join next to IOP and others on our journey to change from that static system, these static platform that we're seeing into a dynamic publishing ecosystem, into a dynamic publishing engine, how we call it, that will change the way we collect.
We manage, but also we share scholarly output together. So really join that, join that design partner community. And we do a series of activities with our design partners. You'll benefit from a current submission system audit. So we're really diving deep in what is happening now. We are looking at the data, we're looking at the KPIs that are present right now. We'll do a gap analysis workshop. We're taking the data, we're combining that with some qualitative interviews and we're showcasing where we see the challenges and mapping on how that can work for the future.
We will provide you with a blueprint to successfully merge three to five journals with our migration toolkit. So we've created a specific migration toolkit that will allow you to change much, much quicker the systems for small set of journals and but most excitingly be together with our engineers, with our product folks, with our designers, really in the engine room that are working on the journal manager day in, day out for pre-release roadmap inputs that will shape all the years to come when it comes to journal manager.
And with that, I really want to Thank you for joining me today. And I invite you to speak with some of our colleagues who are in the room. Sarah is in the room here. We have a booth at the exhibition floor. And we also have time to discuss right now. So I'm very excited to hear the questions. And we have a microphone, I think, around. So first of all, Thank you very much for being here and Thank you for much for your attention.
There's a question. If you have a loud voice, you can also scream it out loud. Thank you to Adam Hyde from Coco. We develop similar systems just on the design point of view. You have a constituency of publishers with very broad needs, but you also have a philosophical position for the software.
One of those is that you see the future in collaboration around the article interface, for example. So I'm just wanting to understand a little bit your approach going forward as pressure gets applied to take the system in different directions, how you manage that process. Yeah so let me maybe rephrase just said really the question you say on how do we prioritize the development over time with all those different sort of holes that you see in the market.
Is that broadly speaking. No, it's more about a system can't be everything to everyone. You have a position on how a system should be, and yet you'll have folks coming with very different positions. And so how do you maintain a philosophy of system against that pressure. Yeah Yeah. Very, very good question. So we don't expect to ourselves to rebuild everything from scratch, to rebuild the entire system from end to end.
We believe that there is pieces in the industry. And I think that the world of integrity checks, for example, has given us a nice glimpse into what's possible on the technology that there are best in class tools out there. There are best in class, tech snippets that need to be able to be integrated. So the way we're looking at things is like big CRM systems like Salesforce or HubSpot, who are facing the same challenges.
You can just pull it into all different directions. So what we want to offer is a solid infrastructure that is based out of these three components, which is the collection of data and documents, the management and the sharing. And those three elements will always stay the same no matter how we're looking at things. But the idea should be that you can configure as much as you can.
And we want to standardize things because right now. We also see that there is just too many different kinds of nuances Everybody wants to have a red color here or a blue color there, and we don't believe that is scalable. And we've seen a great examples with enterprise solutions where you have a good infrastructure and small tools that can be built on top that work through APIs and that are just much more modular.
And that's of broadly speaking, our philosophy. That answers the question. I'm Ali manieri. I am a publisher with Wolters Kluwer. I attend a lot of editorial boards for societies and some of our proprietary journals. But one of the biggest pain points that always comes up is reviewer acceptance.
So I just wanted to see if you could expand more on your editor metric of a 25% increase in reviewer acceptance rates. Yeah, absolutely. So what we see in. And I think when it comes to the reviewer, the way we're treating the reviewer is we have our pool of reviewers that we're pulling in constantly from the same pool, but without really engaging with the reviewer on an ongoing basis.
So the way that typically, not only with reviewer but also with authors is sort of a one way street. There is a interaction that happens for one single purpose uploading manuscript, reviewing a document, and that stops at the end. So there is no constant relationship that systems in that case, allow you to have with dedicated stakeholders. So the way we're looking at it, and I think IOP is a very good example, is to really start creating relationships in the same platform with the reviewer, not so that they create thousands of different access points.
So there are systems where you need for every journal, a new sign up where everything is sort of completely disconnected but really connect things much, much better. And while doing so, it increases the relationship that the reviewer have with the publisher and therefore also increases the probability of accepting and being more engaged in that ecosystem. And we've seen already bits and pieces where that goes exactly in that direction.
So it's really about keeping the people on one platform and engaging the relationship Thank you for the question.
Form Title Download
Transcript
Form Title Bookmark
Entire Media
Segment(s)
Custom Clip
Start At:
End At:
Form Title Share
Entire Media
Segment(s)
Custom Clip
Start At:
End At:
Form Title Accessibility and Keyboard Shortcuts
The cadmore media player is a professional video and audio player experience designed to deliver media as well as relevant transcript, segmentation, and metadata. On the screen is a traditional html video player with buttons such as play, pause, forward, captioning, language and play speed selection and more. Adjacent to the video player are generally tabs, one of which shows a scrolling transcript of the video and the other shows any segmentation of the media, sometimes referred to as chapters. At the top of the video is a menu bar containing an Explore button and Tools button. The Explore button allows you to dig deeper into the video by opening up an explore dialog which contains tabs for a visual navigation of the video using thumbnails, an about tab which contains rich metadata about the media, a segments tab which contains further information about the video, and a related tab which contains links to other media related to this media. The tools button opens a menu with options for sharing the media on social media, creating bookmarking links, creating embed codes for your website, generating citations, and more.
Keyboard Shortcuts
Keyboard shortcuts only work while you are in forms mode. By entering forms mode, you will be able to quickly access portions of the media player with single key commands.
Spacebar: Play/Pause Toggle
I: Info Menu,
O: Tools Menu
T: Transcript Tab,
S: Segments Tab
F: Forward 15,
R: Rewind 15
L: Languages,
P: Playspeed
M: Mute Toggle,
V: Volume Bar
N: Video Only Toggle,
B: Full Screen Toggle
C: Captions Toggle
Escape: Closes dialogs and menus / Exits Player
Z: Next Transcript Chapter
X: Previous Transcript Chapter
Q: Next Transcript Paragraph
W: Previous Transcript Paragraph
Entire Media
Segment(s)
Custom Clip
Start At:
End At:
Embed Size
-
You Size - Responsive
-
We Size - Responsive
-
Picture Overlay Popup
-
400 x 225
-
512 x 288
-
400 x 700
-
768 x 1024
-
1024 x 512
-
1280 x 608
Form Title Cite
No citation provided.
Info
Segments
Related
Thumbnails
Exit Clip Mode
You have requested to see a portion of the video outside of the clip.
Click OK to switch to the full video or click if you would like to stay inside the clip. You can always go back to the clip with Tools and Clip Mode