What we read this week (5 April)

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


On the theme of publishers switching to workflow businesses:

  • Lindsay Ellis writes about how Elsevier’s Presence on Campuses Spans More Than Journals and that this has some scholars worried.
    “It just got me thinking,” [Colleen Lyon] said. Elsevier had it all: Institutional repositories, preprints of journal articles, and analytics. “Elsevier, Elsevier, Elsevier, Elsevier, Elsevier.”
  • On a similar theme SPARC’s (the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition) new report on the transition of some publishers from  moving from content-provision to data analytics and what this might mean for the future of academic publishing:
    “We are at a critical juncture where there is a pressing need for the academic
    community – individually and collectively – to make thoughtful and deliberate
    decisions about what and whom to support – and under what terms and conditions.
    These decisions will determine who ultimately controls the research and education
    process; and whether we meaningfully address inequities created by legacy players
    or simply recreate them in new ways. These decisions will shape libraries’ role in the
    scholarly enterprise, now and for the future.”
  • Whilst the tone and questions might be a little inflammatory Richard Poynder’s questions for eLife raise some interesting questions about the future of open scholarly infrastructure, how it will be funded, and how it will compete against the larger players such as Elsevier.

The robots are definitely coming…

Product management

  • Bar for the ironic start, see tweet below, Adobe’s Experience Festival contained some really good talks on a wide range of digital marketing related topics. Recorded sessions can be found here.

And finally….

Liz Fosslien and Mollie West-Duffy  have spent the last three years studying the science of emotions on the job for our new book, No Hard Feelings. We particularly liked their hierarchy of remote work needs:

More in this MIT Sloan Review article.

What we read this week (22 March)

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


Open Science and Open data


  • David Caswell from BBC News Labs on Editorial innovation in news and the dangers of assuming that the future of news will be inevitably technical.
  • Harold DeMonaco et al. look at medical innovation by patients arguing a richer set of available medical innovation options will benefit patients, commercial medical caregivers, producers, and society at large.
  • Nesta’s Compendium of Innovation Methods includes information and inspiration about Accelerator programmes, Anticipatory regulation, Challenge prizes, Crowdfunding, Experimentation, Futures, Impact investment, Innovation mapping, People Powered Results: the 100 day challenge, Prototyping, Public and social innovation labs, Scaling grants for social innovations, Standards of Evidence

Other links

What we read this week (15 October)

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



Health Tech


And finally…

  • 11 Scoops or 12? Coffee Wars Come to the Office  contains some great coffee war stories. “Victor Olausson, an IT consultant in Gothenburg, Sweden, said coffee arguments break out daily in his office. In one recent skirmish two colleagues faced off over whether to use 11 or 12 scoops of coffee in the office machine. They argued for 20 minutes about this,” Mr. Olausson recalls. Victory went to the employee holding the scoop.”





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

Up ↑