What we read this week (25 October)

Welcome to Things we read this week, a weekly post featuring articles from around the internet recommended by BMJ Labs.

Publishing

Innovation

  • Steve Blank on why Companies Do “Innovation Theater” Instead of Actual Innovation. Those who view STM publishers as not being innovative will find much to support their view here: “If the company is large enough it will become a “rent-seeker” and look to the government and regulators as their first line of defense against innovative competition. They’ll use government regulation and lawsuits to keep out new entrants with more innovative business models. The result of monopolist behavior is that innovation in that sector dies — until technology/consumer behavior passes them by. By then the company has lost the ability to compete as an innovator.”
  • This graphic from The Passion Economy and the Future of Work caught my attention. It’s awkward to think about academics as “knowledge influencers” but once you do the potential value of services like Kudos become much more obvious.

What we read this week (9 August)

Welcome to Things we read this week, a weekly post featuring articles from around the internet recommended by BMJ Labs.

Publishing

Data management

Product Management

  • The Mom TestRob Fitzpatrick has produced an awesome (and short!) book on how to talk to customers & learn if your business is a good idea. There’s also a free email course to help audit your customer conversations and spot the big mistakes.  “The belief that any question is a good question and any data is good data is called the feedback fallacy. It’s simply not true. And if you’re collecting bad data, then 100% of the time you’ve spent on customer learning is worthless. Fortunately, the problem is easily fixed. By asking good questions and running a good process, you can avoid the bad data, collect the good data, and also save a ton of time. “

Future thinking

  • Amy Webb on How to Do Strategic Planning Like a Futurist. “Deep uncertainty merits deep questions, and the answers aren’t necessarily tied to a fixed date in the future. Where do you want to have impact? What it will take to achieve success? How will the organization evolve to meet challenges on the horizon? These are the kinds of deep, foundational questions that are best addressed with long-term planning.”

Innovation

And finally…

An awesome ‘edible abstract’ from Michele Melchior….

What we read this week (2 August)

Welcome to Things we read this week, a weekly post featuring articles from around the internet recommended by BMJ Labs.

Publishing

Health Technology

  • KQ Labs, an intensive accelerator programme offered to high growth potential startup teams in the area of data-driven biomedical science, has opened up applications. Apply by 15 September.

User experience

 

Innovation

And finally…

A new approach to copyright – copying allowed providing you only write it out in green crayon :-):

What we read this week (8 February)

Welcome to Things we read this week, a weekly post featuring articles from around the internet recommended by BMJ Labs.

Publishing

  • First up are two articles about commenting. The Ringer has a piece about ‘how the New York Times Cooking became the best comments section on the Internet‘ by calling the section Notes. ““The call to action was to leave a note on the recipe that helps make it better. That’s very different from ‘Leave a comment on a recipe.’”  PLOS, on the other hand, are struggling to attract comments. A new study in the Journal of Information Science found “that publishers are yet to encourage significant numbers of readers to leave comments, with implications for the effectiveness of commenting as a means of collecting and communicating community perceptions of an article’s importance.” (H/T: InfoDocket). Perhaps a tweak to the wording asking for notes rather than comments might help?

Innovation

 

 

What we read this week (20 July 2018)

Welcome to Things we read this week, a weekly post featuring articles from around the internet recommended by BMJ’s Digital Group members.

Publishing

First up are two pieces about Crossref. Christine Cormack Wood’s post on the SciELO blog summarises why Crossref exists and persists and Enago Academy,  as part of their interview series on Connecting Scholarly Publishing Experts and Researchers, ask Crossref team how they add value to research outputs and explains the important work Crossref does. Continue reading “What we read this week (20 July 2018)”

Proudly powered by WordPress | Theme: Baskerville 2 by Anders Noren.

Up ↑