Abstract

This article summarizes the outcomes and outputs of a workshop at the 2024 Researcher to Reader Conference that explored the perspectives of both publishers and early-career researchers (ECRs) on existing ECR–publisher initiatives. The workshop identified several challenges of current initiatives, including those from technical, engagement, financial, and evaluation perspectives. A large part of the workshop was dedicated to cocreating possible solutions, and this article uses both the identified challenges and solutions to offer recommendations to guide current and future ECR–publisher initiatives.

Introduction

Both commercial and nonprofit publishers increasingly recognize the significance of engaging with ECRs to attract new authors and reviewers, build loyalty, and gain fresh perspectives that can inform new policies from publishers. But what is in it for the ECRs? Working together with a publisher can boost the profiles of the ECRs involved and help them advance their careers, as well as help them to develop skills that are, or will be, important to them as academics. However, to ensure that ECR initiatives within the publishing industry are mutually beneficial, it is crucial to set the right goals; identify, anticipate, and address the main challenges; and learn from past initiatives—what did and did not work well.

A workshop held at the 2024 Researcher to Reader Conference in London (https://r2rconf.com/) explored various (current) ECR-championing and training initiatives (here referred to as ECR–publisher initiatives). For the purposes of the workshop, we defined ECR as postgraduate student up to researcher within 10 years of their PhD award date. Also, in the context of our discussions, “publishers” include commercial, not-for-profit, and society publishers, as well as university presses. At this workshop, the participants—made up of approximately one-third ECRs, one-third publishers, and one-third consultants and technology providers—were encouraged to share their experiences, discuss issues and hurdles, come up with solutions, and formulate a list of recommendations for current and future initiatives. We note that all academic and publisher participants came from STEM fields; our discussion was therefore based on experience and examples from within this area, though we hope it is widely applicable.  

ECR–Publisher Initiatives: What Already Exists and Why They Matter 

To gain an overview of ECR–publisher interactions within the current publishing ecosystem, we described the key features of existing ECR–publisher initiatives and discussed some examples (Table 1). We subdivided the initiatives into 4 categories: schemes in which ECRs act as editors, reviewers, ambassadors, or authors. For clarity, “ambassador” is defined as an individual who promotes the publisher authentically, regularly, and for an extended period of time—but without necessarily engaging in editorial activities. We were aware that some initiatives cover multiple categories, or none, and we did not attempt to cover all relevant initiatives. Notably, there were few ambassador initiatives, perhaps reflecting the less tangible nature of such schemes, and/or a lower attractiveness for ECRs to assume this role (Table S1). 

Table 1. Types of early-career researcher (ECR)–publisher initiatives and their key features and examples.

We then turned to very basic, yet crucial, questions: why should publishers engage with ECRs, and what is in it for the ECRs, themselves? We asked workshop participants to generate a list of reasons to get involved with these initiatives—first from the perspective of the publisher and then from the ECRs’ point of view.

Publisher’s perspective:

• Increases the dialogue between publishers and ECRs to better connect with sectors of the research community that are otherwise less accessible.
• Provides a chance to hear about new techniques and tools that allow publishers to adapt to new trends and enhance their publishing processes.
• Broadens the outlook on research fields helping publishers to diversify the scope of content they publish.
• Builds loyalty with the aim of encouraging ECRs to submit to, or review for, the publisher’s journals over the longer term.
• Demonstrates the value and mission of the company by showcasing, for example, commitment to advancing science and support for the next generation of scientists.
• Speeds up the peer review process by introducing particularly motivated reviewers to the reviewer pool.
• Enhances the overall publishing experience by obtaining feedback and insights that can, for example, improve existing workflows.

ECR’s perspective:

• Allows career advancement, including the opportunity to build professional networks and enhance their publication track record.
• Opens the “Black Box,” which is publishing for many ECRs by providing insights into manuscript evaluation, peer review, and editorial decision-making, for example.
• Allows ECRs to help advance their research field(s) by encouraging the discussion and dissemination of innovative studies. 
• Raises the profile of the involved ECRs through greater visibility within the academic community, which potentially establishes them as emerging experts in their field.
• Builds self-confidence usually derived from, for example, improved skills, knowledge, and decision-making abilities. 
• Provides different perspectives on scholarly communication, peer review, and editorial practices, and broadens their understanding of the research ecosystem.

What was clear was that all workshop participants agreed that ECR–publisher initiatives are important for both ECRs and publishers. During the workshop, the reasons for setting up these initiatives were also ranked in order of perceived importance, the results of which are in Figure 1.

Addressing the Challenges in Setting Up and Running ECR–Publisher Initiatives

Despite the unanimous agreement among workshop participants regarding the value of ECR–publisher initiatives, there are numerous challenges associated with setting them up and running them successfully. We delved into these challenges across 4 domains: technical, engagement, financial, and evaluation—noting that these domains are often associated with each other.

Setting up an ECR–publisher initiative often involves the need to navigate various technical hurdles, particularly around optimizing the available technological infrastructure without incurring significant cost. In terms of engagement, we focused, in particular, on the challenge of ensuring inclusivity and diversity. It is crucial to consider potential barriers to accessibility and inclusivity, as well as effective outreach strategies when planning or running ECR–publisher initiatives. There are also the financial constraints that often hinder the establishment and sustainability of ECR–publisher initiatives, which may also have negative impacts on inclusivity and diversity. Some of the specific financial challenges include securing funding, managing budgets, and ensuring equitable resource allocation. Lastly, one needs to consider how to evaluate and measure the impact of an ECR–publisher initiative. This is especially important when trying to draw lessons for the future and requires robust evaluation methodologies. Possible challenges revolve around defining measurable outcomes, collecting relevant data, and interpreting results.

Participants were asked to consider specific challenges for each one of the chosen domains: technical, engagement, financial, and evaluation. First, we pooled these together and asked workshop participants to rank them in order of importance (Figure 2).

Following our exploration of the challenges associated with establishing ECR–publisher initiatives across the 4 dimensions, our workshop participants worked in groups (a mix of ECRs, publishers, other participants) to actively seek and discuss solutions for these challenges. Table 2 shows all the different challenges identified, for each of the 4 domains, and also includes the solutions proposed for each specific issue raised by workshop participants.

Table 2. Early-career researcher (ECR)–publisher challenges and solutions proposed by workshop participants.

Abbreviations: CPD, continued professional development.

Guidelines for Current and Future ECR–Publisher Initiatives

ECRs can play integral roles within the publishing ecosystem, in various capacities—editors, reviewers, ambassadors, authors). When setting up ECR–publisher initiatives, it is crucial to consider the goals, potential pitfalls, and challenges, as well as the evaluation tools. Based on discussions at the workshop, we have put together the following guidelines for current and future ECR–publisher initiatives.

Practical Guidelines

1. Planning.   Conduct thorough research to identify the type of ECR–publisher initiative that—in the given context—will most likely be beneficial for all parties involved. Set clear, measurable goals and priorities for the initiative.
2. Budgeting.   Factor in the costs of running an ECR–publisher initiative and critically review the budget. Ensure that expenses incurred by involved parties (e.g., ECRs, mentors) are funded.
3. Recruitment.   Recruit and train ECRs over a defined period, emphasizing skill development and networking. Ensure the recruitment process is inclusive, with open calls for applicants. Consider setting targets for the representation of different groups.
4. Implementation.   Ensure flexibility throughout the implementation process. Clearly define and communicate the nature of the work performed by all parties involved.
5. Execution.   Organize relevant local, in-person, events, as well as inclusive online events across different time zones. Encourage peer-led initiatives and provide incentives. Put emphasis on strong marketing tools to effectively achieve the goals of the initiative. Use storytelling techniques. Monitor key performance indicators and gather feedback to assess the effectiveness of different initiatives and refine your strategies accordingly.
6. Recognition.   Recognize, certify, and publicly acknowledge the valuable contributions of ECRs, thereby promoting their professional development and standing within the scholarly community. Ensure time spent as part of the initiative is considered part of the ECR’s working week.
7. Evaluation and Follow-Up.   Support ECRs after involvement, offering certificates, references, or career opportunities. Ask all involved parties to evaluate their experience.

Conclusion

The workshop discussions at the 2024 Researcher to Reader Conference shed light on the importance of empowering ECRs within the publishing ecosystem. However, establishing and running effective ECR–publisher initiatives pose numerous challenges. Our workshop discussions make it clear, however, that there are promising solutions for most of these issues. If done right, the collaboration between publishers and ECRs can (continue to) drive positive change and innovation within the publishing ecosystem.18,19 Working with ECRs, publishers, and other stakeholders, we have developed a set of key recommendations for current and future initiatives.

Acknowledgments

First of all, we would like to thank the 2024 Researcher to Reader organizing committee for selecting this workshop and Mark Carden and Jayne Marks, in particular, for their help in realizing it. We would like to thank Sarah Cooper, Laura Feetham-Walker, Bernie Folan, Mithu Lucraft, Sarah McKenna, and Lou Peck who, in addition to the authors of this article, joined the discussions at the workshop, which formed the basis for this article. Lastly, we thank Applied Microbiology International, Atypon, British Geriatrics Society, IOPP, and The Company of Biologists for their financial support, allowing some of the participants to attend the conference and workshop.

Competing Interest Statement

RFP is with The Company of Biologists as preLights Community Manager and was funded by The Company of Biologists to organize the workshop and attend the conference. RSP is a Multimorbidity Doctoral Fellow funded by the Wellcome Trust [223499/Z/21/Z] and was funded by the British Geriatrics Society to organize the workshop and attend the conference. OF was funded by Applied Microbiology International to attend the workshop and the conference. AG and CRRZ were funded by IOPP to attend the workshop and the conference. SK was funded by Atypon to attend the workshop and the conference. Atypon was a Silver Sponsor of the 2024 Researcher to Reader (R2R) Conference. In addition, Atypon sponsored the R2R Workshop Programme at the Conference. BDM is a predoctoral fellow at the European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI) funded by the EMBL International PhD Programme and EMBL-EBI core funding. He was funded by the Company of Biologists to attend the workshop and the conference. KB is employed by The Company of Biologists, has managerial responsibility for preLights, and is involved in other ECR initiatives coordinated by the Company. 

References and Links

1.  https://www.bgs.org.uk/age-and-ageing-journal-editorial-fellowship-0
2. https://www.the-microbiologist.com/news/microbiology-journal-recruits-first-intake-of-junior-editors-in-drive-to-nurture-early-careers-talent/1047.article
3. https://faseb.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/hub/journal/15306860/homepage/editorial-boar
4. https://microbiologysociety.org/news/society-news/join-microbial-genomics-early-career-microbiologists-board-of-reviewers.html
5. https://www.the-microbiologist.com/news/letters-in-applied-microbiology-launches-reviewer-training-scheme/1866.article
6. https://ioppublishing.org/researchers/peer-review-excellence-training-and-certification/
7. https://ioppublishing.org/news/iop-publishing-extends-co-review-policy-to-entire-owned-journal-portfolio/
8. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-45269-0
9. https://www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/funding/early-career-researchers/
10. https://www.regionalstudies.org/about/memberships/early-career/
11. https://royalsociety.org/journals/authors/early-career-researchers/
12. https://portal.lancaster.ac.uk/ask/study/library/open-research/open-access/trailblazers-an-open-access-monograph-and-book-initiative-for-ecrs/
13. https://elifesciences.org/inside-elife/9433fc59/2023-elife-community-ambassadors-new-year-new-model
14. https://thenode.biologists.com/the-node-correspondents/#:~:text=At%20the%20beginning%20of%202023,James%20Zwierzynski%20and%20Shreyasi%20Mukherjee.
15. https://prelights.biologists.com/news/introducing-the-prelights-ambassadors/
16. https://focalplane.biologists.com/2024/02/01/announcing-the-2024-focalplane-correspondents/
17. https://microbiologysociety.org/membership/society-champions.html
18. Kent BA, Holman C, Amoako E, Antonietti A, Azam JM, Ballhausen H, Bediako Y, Belasen AM, Carneiro CFD, Chen YC, et al. Recommendations for empowering early career researchers to improve research culture and practice. PLoS Biol. 2022;20:e3001680. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3001680.
19. Kohrs FE, Kazezian V, Bagley R, Boisgontier MP, Brod S, Carneiro CFD, Casas MI, Chakrabarti D, Colbran R, Debat H, et al. Collaborating with early career researchers to enhance the future of scholarly communication: a guide for publishers. OSF Preprints. October 25, 2024. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/pbvfz. 

Reinier F Prosée (https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4821-5978; reinier.prosee@biologists.com), The Company of Biologists Ltd, Cambridge, UK; Rose S Penfold (https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7023-7108; rose.penfold@ed.ac.uk), Advanced Care Research Centre, University of Edinburgh, and British Geriatrics Society, UK; Rasmus Andersen, Science Institutional Licensing, Washington, DC; Omololu Fagunwa (https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6130-8293), Queen’s University Belfast, Institute for Global Food Security, School of Biological Sciences, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK; Amery Gration, Department of Physics, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK; Sofia Kakembo (https://orcid.org/0009-0000-8341-6885), Atypon, Oxford, UK; Benjamin Dominik Maier (https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8442-0536), European Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI), Wellcome Genome Campus, Cambridgeshire, UK; Clare Rees-Zimmerman (https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3948-7162), Department of Chemistry, University of Oxford, UK; Kathryn Spiller, Applied Microbiology International, Cambridge, UK; and Katherine Brown, The Company of Biologists Ltd, Cambridge, UK.

Opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or policies of the Council of Science Editors or the Editorial Board of Science Editor.