“Open Knowledge Foundation, under a new direction, is seeking to innovate in technology services and products to advance its mission. For that purpose, it is seeking external guidance to determine its current weakness and strengths and guide the team, in coordination with the CEO, to define its innovation roadmap towards 2025.
Who is our ideal candidate?
A tech visionary with experience in the public and non-profit sectors.
With a big picture view of data and their intended users: from journalists to scientists, etc. to explore new projects.
Experienced in interacting with tech teams, receptive to new ideas.
Ability to explore and suggest market and sustainability solutions for current and future products.
Familiarity with new technologies.
Knowledge about data protection, cybersecurity and encryption is a plus. …”
“Before I start, I want to emphasise I do not have an issue with working with publishers. I actually think there should be *more* interaction between publishers, academics and library workers. For example, I am currently a member of the Emerald Open Science Advisory Board. But this request rankled me. Enough for me to write this blog.
Since returning to Australia from the UK in April 2019 I have worked as a consultant. I have worked with four universities and the Australian Academy of Science and am currently working for a commercial organisation. While this work is itself fulfilling and well paid, the gigs are sporadic, and I have to manage my own taxes, finances, insurance, superannuation, legal documentation, technology etc….
it is immensely frustrating to be approached by an extraordinarily profitable organisation to be asked to give my knowledge and expertise to them for free. Far be it for me to explain to a commercial organisation how commerce works, but if you want something of value, you need to pay for it. Profitable commercial publishers already benefit from the advice and knowledge of the landscape provided for free by academic librarians. That has its own issues, but when it comes to consultants and self-employed people, they need to compensate them properly.
So, my answer to that publisher request is: I’d be delighted to talk. Here’s my consultancy rate….”
“We help publishers and stakeholders in the scholarly communications space to understand their business better and sustainably improve performance. We are experts in strategic analysis and operational analytics, specialising in Open Access publishing and workflow systems. We turn raw data into insight, fast, accurately, and with clarity….
Assess the performance of your portfolio, and capture weak areas and trends….
Forecast accurately the future performance of your portfolio….
Track performance across various dimensions for day-to-day reporting and for executive-level reporting….
Devise a long-term strategy in line with a complex and shifting landscape in scholarly communications….”
“Exeley Inc. a New York based company established in 2015 that focuses on offering innovative publishing services to Open Access publications worldwide.
The company is run by Dawid Cecula, an experienced manager in the publishing industry. In the last decade, Dawid has built one of the world’s largest collections of Open Access journals. He gained his experience from working for leading international publishers and delivering professional publishing and consulting services to universities, research centers and societies based in Europe, America and Asia.
Exeley Inc. offers journal owners a well-designed and technologically advanced publishing platform that integrates publications with online content, social media, databases and libraries. Users benefit from such solutions as: allocation of DOI numbers and live reference links via cooperation with Crossref; articles enhanced by graphical abstracts and extra supplementary files (including videos, sound files and power point presentations); advanced article metrics powered by PlumX, and responsive web design….”
“We have reached peak subscription (Jan Velterop coined the term during an SSP panel I moderated a few years ago). I subsequently wrote a piece in the Scholarly Kitchen on this topic. What I mean by this is that library budgets are stagnant and there are no new markets left—publishers have already sold into all the major research institutes in China, India, South American, Eastern Europe, and the Middle East. The Big Deal is a mature product. This means that publishers must come up with new sources of revenue. Open access (OA) is part of this equation, but the OA market has not grown as fast as many predicted. This would ordinarily lead to a spate of acquisitions, but there are not many independent publishers left other than societies, and they are not selling their publications (though they are increasingly licensing them)….”
“We have assembled an interactive, expertly curated, and regularly updated suite of information focused on Open Access.
How confident are you in your Open Access knowledge and strategy?
How confident would you like to be?…
Whether or not you publish open access, OA is part of the scholarly ecosystem. Do you have your finger on the pulse of changing OA market conditions?
Are you keeping track of launches of new OA journals, services, policies, and mandates?
Delta Think’s Open Access Data & Analytics helps you stay current! …”