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 (29 June 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

Molecular and Cellular Biology (MCB) have published a preprint describing their program to screen images of accepted papers prior to publication which identified 12 manuscripts out of 83 with image concerns in two months. The screening and correction of papers before publication required an average of 30 min of staff time per problematic paper but  6 hours of journal staff time to resolve after publication. (H/T Phil Davis’s Tweet ) Continue reading “What we read this week (29 June 2018)”

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

Up ↑