🎙️ The Research Culture Uncovered podcast team is thrilled to present our latest episode featuring Vicky Williams, Chief Executive Officer of Emerald Publishing. Join hosts Ged Hall, Head of Researcher Development at the University of Leeds, and Nick Sheppard, Open Research Advisor in the University’s Library, as they delve into the insights and experiences of Vicky in shaping research culture.
🔹 Vicky shares her 25-year journey at Emerald Publishing and how the organisation’s founding values have driven its mission to make research usable in the world outside academia.
🔹 Discover how Emerald Publishing supports equitable access and impact, including their longstanding zero-embargo green open access policy and initiatives like the 'Are you in?' commitments and their free impact services.
🔹 Learn about the challenges faced by the scholarly publishing industry in promoting sustainable open access and meaningful change, and how Emerald Publishing is navigating these complexities to remain true to its values.
🔹 Vicky calls for a collective effort from academia, publishers, and institutions to foster collaboration, inclusivity, and impactful research practices.
Welcome to the Research Culture Uncovered podcast, where in every episode we explore what is research culture and what should it be. You'll hear thoughts and opinions from a range of contributors to help you change research culture into what you want it to be.
Ged Hall:
Welcome to this latest episode of the Research Culture Uncovered podcast. My name is Ged Hall and I'm the Head of Researcher Development at the University of Leeds. In this ES episode, I'm joined by my co-host Nick Sheppard, who is the Open Research Advisor in the University's Library. Do you wanna say hi, Nick?
Nick Sheppard:
Hello, Ged. Uh, nice. Nice to be here.
Ged Hall:
Excellent, and we're both delighted to be talking to Vicky Williams today. Uh, Vicky is the Chief Executive Officer of Emerald Publishing, which is a scholarly publisher headquartered here in Leeds, but has international offices, uh, across the world. Vicky has been CEO for around eight years, but she's actually held various roles with Emerald for over 20 years.
Is it now, Vicky?
Vicky Williams:
25 years. Yeah,
Ged Hall:
25 years. Um, and, and yeah. That's your 25th anniversary in the scholarly publishing, um, industry, isn't it?
Vicky Williams:
It is, yeah.
Ged Hall:
Yes. Now the genesis of this episode started for me when one of my research impact heroes and I do a, um, a series of interviews branded that on, on the podcast with, uh, with.
Dr. Julie Bayley. Now she listed Vicky as one of her research impact heroes. So if you want to find out more, check out that interview with Vicky. It's with, with Julie. It's in the show notes. Now, although I knew about Emerald's work in developing research impact resources with Julie and her longtime collaborator, Dr.
David Phipps in Canada, I really wanted to find out more about Vicky, the person, um, and really why Julie had identified her. And, and I know Nick's been, um. It for quite some time, wanting to discuss Emerald's work in the open research space and knowledge equity space for ages. So Julie's that acknowledgement of Vicky really pushed us into inviting her along today to have a chat.
So Vicky, many thanks for agreeing to join us and, and welcome to the Research Culture Uncovered podcast.
Vicky Williams:
Thanks so much for the invitation. Happy to be here.
Ged Hall:
That's fantastic. Now, um, when I was thinking about some topics for the chat, 'cause obviously, you know. Julie mentioned you and I knew about Emerald, but didn't know about you.
I kind of did some research, you know, that's, uh, a good practice as a, as an interviewer. And I had to listen to your interview on the Midnight at the Casablanca podcast, and I was like, damn, that is such a cooler name than our, was, were you discuss your career in the scholarly publishing industry in it.
Seemed to me from that interview and the fact that you've been with Emerald for, for 25 years or so, that you really must, there really must be a great fit between your motivations and values and Emeralds. So can you describe what they are and how that's been key to your career with them over the years?
Vicky Williams:
Yeah, I think, I think that's really true and it's probably really unusual these days for someone to have stayed at an organisation for so long. Um, and we see that now as different generations kind of join the business and, you know, there's much, much more of a rapid move around. Um. But there has always been a really strong values match for me here at Emerald.
And, and of course I'm now in a position where I can continue to shape the culture and and values of the organisation. Um, when I joined the business 25 years ago, it, it was much smaller. It was probably less than a third of the size it is now. Um, and it, so it felt, felt very agile. It felt very entrepreneurial.
It was also at, at that stage where it was growing rapidly, both at at home and overseas. One of our founders, Dr. Keith Howard, had bought out all of the other founders over time and he'd become the sole owner. So the business also had a real family feel. I think partly because of its size, partly because of the ownership structure.
So kind of both of those things appealed to me in the early stages. The, the culture, the values, the, the family feel, the, the fact that it was small and entrepreneurial, that really appealed to me. Yeah. Also, all of our founders had been academics, so they'd, they'd all been academics who had worked in business environments and they'd all since, since the kind of conception of, of the business, had felt very strongly about bridging the academic practice divide through applied research.
So that was there from the off and that that meant. We've never played very strongly in the metric space. So we've always wanted the research that we published to be usable in the real world. Um, so that was the other key appeal for me. It always felt like we were trying to tread a slightly different path than some other publishers.
Um, one I have to say, which isn't always popular. Um, but, but one which I could, I could personally really get behind. Um. We're, we're also headquartered, as she said, in the north of England. Um, which be being a Northerner myself was another key, key selling point. Um, and that again, is really unusual in scholarly publishing.
Um, un unusual in publishing in general. Um. So I think as I've transitioned into leadership positions at Emerald and more recently as, as CEO, I've been able to take those founding elements, which really appealed to me those founding principles and amplify them. Um, so we've modernised, we've evolved, we've, we've obviously continued to grow, but our roots, uh, are still what really informs our culture, values and practice today.
Um, and I think that's really authentic. Authentic to us, and authentic to me.
Ged Hall:
Absolutely. I mean, being, being that kind of almost disruptor, yeah, it can be. Um, it can feel awkward at times, but yeah, usually very much values driven in that, in that space. So yeah. And one that I certainly buy into, I mean, I know when I first started doing this job in research impact, um, when I.
In open rooms that I, that's what I thought the purpose of higher education was. You know, when I first started doing this job, the sharp intake of breath
Vicky Williams:
Yeah.
Ged Hall:
Was, was quite alarming. You know, it was almost feeling like I was in the, um, in, uh, hurricane Melissa.
Vicky Williams:
Yeah. Yeah. And when, when you layer on a global lens to that as well, it's even more complex.
So, you know, it's, there are different. Different kind of structures and approaches to research assessment globally. Um, which. It can be more or less progressive, depending on where you are. So yeah, it, it's, as I say, it's not always popular.
Ged Hall:
Yeah, absolutely. And after, after the interview with Julie, I connected with you on LinkedIn and then I know, you know, obviously I started noticing the things that you were, you were posting about and it, you know, there's a wide range of things that really aren't, are connected to the publishing industry mm-hmm.
But um, but actually aren't about. Your business, that turnover, the profit, all of those sorts of things. And there was one about, um, a brainstorming session that you'd had around literacy levels in, uh, in local communities around, around where you're headquartered and and beyond, uh, and what could be done about that.
So can you tell us a bit more about that kind of, almost broader, uh, pieces of work that you get involved with, um, through your position with Emerald?
Vicky Williams:
Yeah, absolutely. And ag, again, this really stems from, from Keith's vision, I think, in terms of what he wanted a business to be in, in the community in which it sits.
So he, when he was alive, he set up, um, a foundation. Um, and always did a lot of community work, particularly in, in West Yorkshire. Um, so again, those kind of values have always been within the business and, and we've always been able to kind of pursue, pursue causes. I think that a, a kind of dear to our heart, but where we think we can also make a, make a difference, um.
So we work with business in the community, um, in, in the Yorkshire region. And they approached me to chair a literacy task force because, essentially because there, there really is a literacy crisis in, in the UK and, and when you look at that through the lens of some of the, the most deprived areas of Yorkshire, you know, the statistics are really quite shocking.
Um, I think it's one in three children reach secondary school in certain areas of Bradford and Leeds. Unable to read it at the required levels, which, you know, is really startling and there are so many factors that affect that statistic. Um, so. We, you know, I do, I do a lot of work on this personally, but again, we've connected that back to the business.
So literacy charities are the charities that we support as a business. Um, we do. We do work with the Book Trust, which is a national UK and US charity. Um, and we do some work with, uh, an organisation called Chapter One, which basically matches businesses with, with schools, um, to, to look at early stage intervention around, around reading and literacy skills.
Um, but yeah, personally I kind of thought this is. This is something that I feel I can really get behind as an individual and, you know, can use the privileged position I've got and the networks I've got to try to make a small difference. Um, and I'm working on something at the moment with a, a, a few other business leaders in Yorkshire, um, around how we can go back to the roots of community to actually club together to make a real tangible difference to our community.
Um. And that's really in, in its infancy, but I think this is, this is where I think. You know, CSR (Corporate Social Responsibilty) can move from being performative to actually being actionable and I impactful.
Ged Hall:
Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely. And, um, just kind of moving more kind of into our, uh, mine and Nick's kind of topic areas.
Vicky Williams:
Mm-hmm.
Ged Hall:
Earlier this year I interviewed Simon Kerridge, so he was, um, he was edit, co-editor. Of a rather large book about, uh, research management and administration. Um, and, uh, you know, I was kind of stunned when I first saw the book. I was kind of stunned that you could read all 77 chapters mm-hmm. Completely online for free.
Um. And in that interview I kind of asked him about that and he said that Emerald were, were really about the only publisher that, that they'd approached who were really serious about that kind of open access. Um, and what it really meant in, uh, in publishing. And, and, you know, therefore the, the open access processing charge was actually.
Doable for them in that space so that they could make it available to people. So can you take us through your, you know, maybe your business rationale for that, your approach to open access with, with books like that and, and why that's important to Emerald?
Vicky Williams:
Yeah, and it's quite simple, really. Uh, I think, I mean with, with any book or with any journal proposal, um, you know, we'll, we'll first of all look at fit with our programme.
And this particular one ticked many boxes because it aligned really well with the wider impact work we've been doing for some time. Um, as well as giving us the opportunity, I think to support a CA community we really greatly admire. In, in research management and administration, as you well know, you, you know, you, you work with these people.
This is a community that really embodies the notion of co-creation. Um, and, and it's been a real pleasure to work with, with the community over the years. Um, great reaction to the book, which showed us we'd, we'd done the right thing. Um, and obviously it's, it's. Probably the most comprehensive, you know, seven, seven chapters, the most comprehensive global account of RMAs available at anywhere.
So, you know, from a, from a programme point of view, from a publishing programme point of view, it, it absolutely ticked all of the boxes. And from a community point of view, it ticked all of the boxes. So then we just go from there and say, okay, what. What is the business model that we can support? And, and obviously Simon his co-editors.
They wanted, they wanted this to be fully open access, which we, we got fully on board with. I don't think we created any special conditions around the publication of this book. Um, so they had it secured some external funding that made it possible to publish the whole volume on under, um, Creative Commons, uh, CCBY.
Attribution licence, and then obviously that provides the platform to make the book have, you know, have the widest possible impact, which is, is what we're all here for. So, yeah, I don't think there was anything special we would approach, we would approach every project in that way, um, because we, we have a philosophy that we have an open route for everybody that wants it.
Um, and that's not always possible and it's not always desirable, but we do have a route for everybody that wants it. And, and I think with this one, for both parties really, the project worked really well and, and we, you know, we were really honoured to be the chosen publisher for, for this book because I think it, you know, it's a fantastic volume.
Um, a real labour of love, I think.
Ged Hall:
Yeah. 1, 1, 1 thing you never know with, uh, almost you don't get an impression of, is almost the scale. I mean, you know, the, you know, the scale Yeah. In terms of how many authors, how many editors, the regional editors and, and things like that, that, that Simon took me through.
But you don't know how, how thick it is if you were to print it out. I know exactly. I'd love to be able to see a hard copy of that book. Just to see if it's really, really thick.
Vicky Williams:
It must be, it must be a proper door stop.
Ged Hall:
Yeah. Brilliant. I'll, I'll hand over to Nick now 'cause I know he wants to explore a bit more in this space.
Nick Sheppard:
Yeah, no tha thanks um, Ged, and it's really, um, fascinating to hear your. Values, your personal values and as a business, um, in the context of publishing and open access publishing, because I think perhaps sometimes working in the library in open access, there can be a little bit of a sense of us and them with mm-hmm.
Yeah. The publishing industry at large. Yeah. Um, you'll be aware, um, our colleagues listening may be aware that there's, uh, an ongoing negotiation at the moment with the Big Five, as we call them. Yeah, yeah. Which I won't name now, but, uh, that, you know, the big five publishers, um, who tend to dominate the market in publishing and have done for, for many years.
And it's expensive. You know, it's usually expensive and there's various business models that we explore, you know, whether that's diamond open access, and there's nonprofits, there's businesses, and the values that you have. So again, I suppose just to, I'm not at the sharp end of open access as much as I was in the past, you know?
And, but certainly, you know, maybe 10, 15 years ago, I was more involved in that side of things that you always had, for example. I dunno if you still do, I'm guessing you still do a zero embargo policy on
Vicky Williams:
Yeah, we do. Yeah.
Nick Sheppard:
On green, green open access. So, I dunno if you could say a little bit about your perspective working in the industry around your values again, you know, and how that relates to open access and, and your perspective on the, the industry at large, perhaps.
Vicky Williams:
Mm-hmm.
Nick Sheppard:
If that makes sense.
Vicky Williams:
Yeah. I mean, the first thing I should say for, for listeners is that Emerald is a publisher in the social sciences space. Um. So we predominantly publish in business and management, broader social sciences. We've got a bit of STEM, but not a lot, you know, in, in, we've got an engineering portfolio, but it, it's not, it's not a big part of our portfolio.
Um, and we have always published a completely global author base. And you might think that sounds like a strange thing to say because all publishers do that, but, um. I think close to 50% of our authorship comes from the Asia Pacific.
Nick Sheppard:
Mm-hmm.
Vicky Williams:
So we, you know, we had expanded into emerging markets quite early and, and we've always wanted to support a, a really equitable approach to authorship.
Um, so it's worth having those two things in mind because a, you know, there isn't an equitable global position on open access and there isn't an equitable. Discipline position on open access. Um, so social sciences tend to be much less well funded, as do certain parts of the world. So we had to really take a step back from that position as well as understanding where our customers were on, on that journey.
And every customer is at a different stage. So what we've done is we've always tried to develop models and approaches that, that work for our communities. Um, as I said, obviously in the social sciences, not necessarily funding rich. We also wanted to ensure that we sustained equity in the system wherever we could.
Um, so our, our green open access policy has suited many institutions and many authors thus far because it is zero embargo. Um, and it was seen as very progressive at the time in which we, we kind of launched it. You've got journals, models, really dominating the discourse, I think. Um, and it has become unfortunately a volume and scale game.
Hmm. Um, so the smaller publishers, I would say, where medium size and then there's, then there's a whole RA range of publishers who are much smaller than Emerald, you know, that might publish in a very niche area. Transformative agreement models don't necessarily suit kind of publishers or customers when you, when you are operating at that, at that scale, because your publishing outputs won't necessarily be huge, but you'll still want read access to all of, all of the content, um, that is, that is published equally, as I said, that is not.
A smooth picture globally. Um, and actually in some parts of the world, open access is still not taken very seriously. It's seen as vanity, it's seen as predatory. Um, so you've got a really complex picture there that you're trying to deal with. Um, and as I said, journals dominate the discourse when you start thinking about books.
And books play a really significant role for our communities in social sciences, particularly monographs. Um. The principles should be the same, but you know, I'm sure we'll come back to this time and time again. It's the incentive structure really that prevents progress often. So as I said, as I said to Ged, we, we say we have an open route for.
Everyone depending on need, depending on funding. Um, we'll have that conversation often at the outset of the process. Particularly with books, we can control that from the start. We can have that conversation. With journals, it's a bit more difficult. Um, we can be really flexible. We can look at options for article or chapter level.
Obviously we can look at full volume, open, open access, but I think. You know, the challenges are far more systemic for me, um, in terms of that complete flip to an open world because not everybody is moving at the same, same pace. Not everybody is, is ideologically in the same place either. So you end up with a halfway house, which I think is pretty much where we've ended up at the moment.
With certain parts of the world, much more progressed on the open access journey, other parts of the world, much less so. Um, and then you end up recreating, I think, conditions that we had many, many years ago where the Western discourse dominates your publication outlets and, and that just doesn't sit comfortably for me.
So. Whilst it, it's very messy behind the scenes to operate many different business models and many different kind of author and editor needs and community needs. The shift hasn't been wholesale for a reason. Yeah. And I think we need as a sector to work together to look differently at this because I think the current models are not getting us to where we want to get to.
Nick Sheppard:
Mm-hmm.
Vicky Williams:
I'm not sure if that really answers your question.
Nick Sheppard:
No, it, well, it did. I mean, it's, you know, I'm just, as you're speaking, you know, it, it is kind of there, different sort of things pinging off in my head around this. You know, it is hugely complex and I'm not that familiar with your business models.
As I say, approach would've been, um, uh, 10 or 15 years ago, and, uh. Evolving, presumably, and I don't know if you do operate diamond models or We do.
Vicky Williams:
Yeah. We, we do.
Nick Sheppard:
Is it, is it hybrid and pure gold? I mean, do you have a range of
Vicky Williams:
We've got the whole gamut. So as I say, we've got a path for anybody that wants, if someone just wants to essentially, you know.
Put their work into their institutional repository immediately after publication. That, that route is probably what the majority of our authors want to do. But we have, we do have some transformative agreements. We have a diamond programme. We've got a, a programme of, of a number of journals. Again, I would say mostly from the Asia Pacific.
And the Middle East, so not necessarily, that's not necessarily been a demand coming through from the UK, the US um, you know, people can publish in open access in, in our, our hybrid journals as well. So there is an option for anybody Yeah. That wants that option. Um, it's just the, I think what we find is that if this is happening at, at researcher level.
All of the systems don't often join up, so. They don't often know where to get the funding from, or they don't know if they've been mandated. Um, we don't know who to bill. You know, it, it's kind of, it's not as simple as it on the face of it, it sounds. Um, which is why transformative agreements, I think, have taken hold because in theory you've got, you've got a mechanism there to actually say, here's your threshold of open access publishing, or it's unlimited so you don't even have to worry about it.
Nick Sheppard:
But of course that's problematic as well at the moment. Yeah. And that hence the negotiations. And as, as I suppose it's really interesting, you know, to, to have this type of dialogue with, um, with you and, and, and Emerald, um, in the context of, of, of open access publishing. You know, again, just to return to that sort of us and them mm-hmm.
Um, uh, discourse that can dominate a little bit, I think. So you'll be aware of. I think the rights retention initiative. Yeah.
Vicky Williams:
Yeah.
Nick Sheppard:
That, uh, leads and the N8 (the eight research intensive universities in the north of England) and many other universities in the UK are pushing with some pushback from Yeah. Um, some of the big publishers and international
Vicky Williams:
mm-hmm.
Nick Sheppard:
Publishers. Um, so again, that sort of reinforces this sense of, of us on them when actually, you know, that sort of values based approach of yours. Is much more fertile ground for, for dis discourse. And just to, you know, to follow up on, I suppose the equity question again, presumably, you know, we could talk about the, really interested to, to dig into this perhaps, um, another time, but.
Do you, presumably you operate things like waivers for the global south, perhaps?
Vicky Williams:
We do. We do. Yeah.
Nick Sheppard:
Um, you know, and there's all sorts of different ways that are, you know, as you, as you've touched, don't necessarily work. But I was al always also really interested, I think. Um, the first I was in touch with your colleague, Tony Roche.
Yes. A little while ago. Um, uh, in the context of we here at Leeds are co-founders of something called the Knowledge Equity Network. Mm. Um, and again, yeah, values based, put my personal values and I think, you know, Library and institutional values are towards sort of knowledge equity. A lot of the work that we do is around that.
Um, so we did actually have a chat with Tony around your, "Are you in?" commitments? Mm
Vicky Williams:
mm.
Nick Sheppard:
Um, which. So perhaps you could tell us a little bit about those and mm-hmm. What the sort of rationale and the progress is. I, I think some of them are still pending, aren't they? Just looking at them.
Vicky Williams:
Yes, they're not. Yes they are.
Although I think, I think there's probably a bit of updating we need to do on the website to be fair. So, um, so yeah, I can give you an update on, on some of this as well as the background. So. I think this was really born from our desire to move from philosophy and intent, to tangible action. Um, hopefully encouraging some community effort as a result too.
So I. Our position on equity is really deeply held within the organisation. Um, it's really extremely important to us. It's very, very important to me and in, in terms of how we run the organisation itself. It, it's really a, a key tenet of, of our culture and our values. Um. So we wanted to ensure that our organisational makeup was reflected in our products, our services, our business models, um, and our ways of working with our customers and, and wider communities.
our Real Impact Manifesto in:
So we were trying to kind of provoke, a bit. As well. Um, we started with what we felt were six tangible ways the wider sector could challenge conventional practice and, and where we could challenge it specifically. So firstly, championing alternatives to tra traditional metrics and rewards. Um, so this meant seeing things like the impact factor in context.
Uh, it meant recognising alternative research outputs. Something that we'd actually been doing for a while, but which needed, and, and I think really still needs much wider adoption. Um, and that was probably, you know, one of the bravest things we've done, and, and again, that might sound, that might sound strange to, to you guys, but we.
Uh,:
That metric still really dominates. Um, so I'm sure that it has affected our authorship over time, you know, because people are being pushed pub to publish in certain venues. Um, and, and. Publish with certain publishers that, that really follow that metric, uh, quite doggedly. Um, we decided given our, given our history, given our roots, that that wasn't a metric that suited us and actually we didn't really believe in it.
So although our journals will get impact factors, we don't kind of aggressively move, move in a direction which would kind of support those impact factors moving upwards. Um, so that was the first big piece, um, which we continue to this day. Then, then there were commit commitments around disseminating research to a wider audience through new forms of content.
Um, really at the moment, only academia engaged with traditional academic outputs. So research communication through different vehicles became really key here. Um. But again, this links to incentives and reward because it's really difficult to find frameworks in which these alternative outputs count. Um, so you know, very much work in progress.
Um. Developing equitable accessible ways to publish was another commitment. So looking at things such as representation across our editor and editorial board networks as well as our authorship. And more recently we've been doing a lot of work on neuro, neuro inclusive publishing pathways, so looking at neurodiversity in academia and how we can support that through the publishing process more, more clearly.
Um. We also wanted to highlight and reward examples of research that's driving real change, which we do through our, uh, annual Real Impact Awards. Um, so these recognise areas such as research, which is mobilised into action, into interdisciplinary research, research which drives the impact agenda forward.
Um. And then finally kind of co-designing services, which helped develop healthy impact practices, which was really focused around our impact services offer, which was developed with, with Julie, um, and David as you've, as you've already highlighted. So these in essence, were all commitments we could make and we could action, and they were commit.
There were commitments which would stretch us. Um, but I think we, we remain really conscious that we can't operate in a vacuum. And actually we're quite a small player in the industry. Um, so to create change, this needs community driven action. Um, and a publisher can't take the wheels on that. It's got to be the sector that takes the wheels on that.
Um. So our call was really, this is what we're doing, this is why we're doing it. Are you in, um, we've currently got just over 500 signatories across the globe, which isn't a huge amount really. Um, so we've been talking about how, how to ramp this up again going forwards. Um, but I would say there is, you know, some level of passivity.
Um, in, in terms of how the sector responds to some of these things, um, particularly I think when it's coming from a publisher, which as you say has been, has been an adversarial relationship at times. Um, and I think probably all publishers are lumped into one bucket as well, when we're all quite different and diverse as well.
Nick Sheppard:
No. Yeah, and I mean, I'll, I'll, I've been exploring them and we'll continue to do so. Uh, just before I hand back to, to Ged though, just to pick up on, um, you know, the, the, we used talking about impact factors. I mean that's a tension in the university in a Russell Group University as well. You know, we are signatories to do the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment.
I'm guessing Emerald will.
Vicky Williams:
We are, yeah.
Nick Sheppard:
What about CoARA (Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment) ? Um, we haven't yet, I don't think committed.
Vicky Williams:
No, I don't think we have either yet. But,
Nick Sheppard:
um. But, but again, you know that there's a tension there, um, within the university as well. Yeah. Um, you know, need to pro promote some of these, um, uh, metrics as well.
Vicky Williams:
Mm-hmm.
Nick Sheppard:
Um, and just finally before I do hand back to, to Ged, so, so there's 500 signatures. Are they organisations or individuals? Both, or
Vicky Williams:
it's mainly individuals. Um, there are, there are a few organisations on there, I think.
Nick Sheppard:
So it is posed as a question, are you in, I'm in, you know, what can I do? Or, you know, as a, as a, as an individual, um, and as a member of an organisation, I suppose is a, yeah, is there a sort of.
Vicky Williams:
So I think that, you know, that is the question we're, we're asking people to think about. I think there are, you know, in terms of our commitments, I think there are things that individuals can do to support. So there is the impact factor question. You know, can you challenge that within your institution?
Can you, can you influence. The way that research is assessed, uh, looking at at different frameworks and how they are evolving, um, as you say, kind of signatories to, to DORA and other things that, that kind of support that dialogue. Um, can you think about supporting different research outputs when you are thinking about collection development, for example?
Um, as well as, as well as ensuring that they are recognised and evaluated and rewarded in a, in a similar way to, to traditional outputs. Um, can you take advantage of the free resources that we've got on, on impact literacy? We've got a plethora of, of free resources there, which have been co-created with, with.
The absolute experts in the world, you know, Julie and David couldn't be more famed for what, for what they do in the community. Um, and those resources are, as I say, they, they're mostly free. They, they help universities and researchers to think about research, practice and, and, and impact practice. Um, so it doesn't have to be.
Big strides. It can be small, incremental steps, but I think unless we're challenging the way things are done, we're always gonna get what we've got because, you know, the, the structures are not changing to support ultimate change.
Nick Sheppard:
Yeah. No, that's great. Thanks. and back to you Ged, I think.
Ged Hall:
Thanks a lot Nick.
Yeah. I mean, all of the things you've been saying kind of really demonstrate just how important research impact is and that kind of almost founding principle from your, from your founders in terms of we're not just about pushing out a. Uh, research stories. Mm-hmm. But actually making, you know, those research stories, making an effect somewhere.
Um, so, you know, just can you take us back to why they were really, um. That was really important for them. You said they, they were in the business and management field. Um, you know, there's, there's tensions often in the, in with colleagues in that space in terms of, I really want to head in the kind of theory direction because that's, that might be chasing the metrics.
Whereas, um, whereas, you know, theory is. Uh, is difficult to immediately apply. Mm-hmm. So is it makes it quite hard in an impact sense. So can you, can you give us, uh, a sense of that and how you kind of. You know, you, you've given loads of examples about how you are, um, keeping that baton and, and, and, and going forward with it, with the impact awards signing the publishers Sustainable Development Goals, Compact and all the other things that, that you've just mentioned.
But, you know, right at that values level and, and you know, how, how that gets communicated to authors when they're, when they're approaching you.
Vicky Williams:
Yeah, I mean, going, going back to our roots. So we, we were founded by, as I said, a, a group of academics. They were all at the University of Bradford. Um, this was back in the sixties.
So I think the impact factor wasn't as, as big a thing in those days. Yeah. Um, as I said, they'd all worked in practice. Really Emerald was born out of some frustration that they couldn't get access to, to the management literature that they wanted to read. Um, so they, you know, they acquired one journal, um, which is, is still one of our, you know, oldest and, and, um, you know, most, most kind of high profile journals.
Um. And they grew, they grew the portfolio from there, really based on their own need as practicing academics who all, who all wanted their re their own research to be used by practicing managers, you know, so. That has always been our founding principle, our, the steer that we've had with any kind of new product launch, new journal launch.
ch was back in, yeah, back in:
Um, but what. I think then we did was realise that actually the research we're publishing it is very applied. You know, it's probably never gonna have a really high impact factor, because actually what we're saying is we want this research to be used in the real world and the real world practitioners are not gonna cite that research.
So you, you know, you, you kind of then o okay, we're, we're just, we're not doing what we said we would do, which is create research, which can, which can be used. So we just took a pause and really went back to those roots. Um. And whilst we, as I say, whilst we, you know, all of our products or most of our products will have an impact factor, we look at that in, in a, in a context.
It's in a basket of metrics. Um, and we say to our authors, you know, we are the publisher for you. If you work in these disciplines and you are mission focused, if you are. Wanting to, you know, wanting to reach different audiences with your research. Um, we're not the publisher for you if you are researching in a highly theoretical space.
And I'm not saying there's not a place for that. There's absolutely a place for that. But, but we're not that place. Um, so. You take our roots as that baseline. And then maybe over the past kind of 12, 13 years, we've started to align with what we're seeing happening in various markets, um, as well as seeking to, to kind of push that dialogue as I, as I was saying, to Nick and, and act as a.
Bit of a facilitate facilitator of change in the publishing space. Um, so going back to the research management community, I, I first got to know that community and, and Julie in particular about 12, 13 years ago. So we'd acquired, um, a research communications agency. Uh, I was running that down in Bristol in the UK.
So we started to attend the RMA events globally. And I, I think that's when everything really clicked for me, because here was a community really talking our language. They were talking about championing wider impact. They were talking about embedding inclusion in the system. Um. I started to get really interested in the intersection across RM functions at universities, how they interact with the library, who were, who were traditionally our customer as publishers.
So they're traditionally our purchaser. And the editor of communities, which is our, obviously our key stakeholder. Um, and that's essentially when we, we transitioned our position from research you can use to real impact. Um, and articulating that, I think started to make the follow up actions a bit easier.
So. As I said, the first step was being bold enough as a publisher to say, we're not promoting impact factors anymore, and you may not like that, but that that is who we are and we're we're gonna stay. Stay true and stay fast with that. The second was that collaboration with Julie and David on our impact services platform, which was again, to support.
Wider, the wider community in impact literacy. And then more systemic for us was embedding this in our publishing programme. So you mentioned the SDG publisher Compact. We've, we've really aligned our publishing programme to horizontal mission-based grand challenges rather than subject verticals. Um, so that was, that was a big shift, ensuring our commissioning activity reflected that shift.
Um. And embedding that in every part of our workflow. And it, we're still not there yet. I wouldn't say, you know, if you were accessing our content, it wouldn't necessarily be obvious from a product perspective. But, but that's where we want to move to. Um, so it, it's always been, for me, a really big part of who we are.
When we've lost our way, we've kind of moved back to it every time. Um, I think now we're just articulating it slightly differently. We're listening to our communities, we're co-creating with them, and that, you know, that is the essence of, of who we are, and it's really exciting to work in that way. Um, it might not always be the most commercially successful way to work, but it's very authentic and true.
Ged Hall:
Yeah. That, that's, that's interesting. Um, you know that, that must be real tension sometimes. You know, when you are, um, I dunno whether you call your, your finance person, chief finance officer Yeah. Comes to you and goes, you know, the, the graphs heading downwards or whatever the language they, they're using.
Mm-hmm. Um, you know, it must be interesting in times like that when, uh, when you kind of go, do we hold our nerve, uh, yeah. And hold onto our values, or do we, you know. Do we have to alter course somehow? Yeah. Um, in that space, knowing that survival of the business is, um, is actually crucially important to maintaining the values.
Vicky Williams:
Absolutely. And, and that will always be a tension, I think. And there are some things, you know, a number of things we do that don't have a tangible return on investment, that don't have a tangible payback. Um. That doesn't stop us. I think we're, you know, it's finding that balance, isn't it? And trying to make sure that we're doing the right thing without destroying, destroying the business.
Uh, and I think we've got that balance about right, I think.
Ged Hall:
Yeah. Brilliant. Um, I think just the, a final thing from me before we maybe start to, to wrap up and, and, and thank you for coming along, um, was really around that, uh. Kind of, you've mentioned all the, all the different actors in the system. Um, and, and the different almost influences which, which actually, you know, the, the metrics kind of take on a life of their own.
They're only an influence. They only become powerful because of how people choose to use them or, or not use them. And you mentioned reward and recognition and this, that, and the other. So what is. What would your call to us, um, as a different part of the system? Um, you know, specifically me, specifically Nick, specifically our, um, our leaders in, at the University of Leeds.
What would be your call to, to us in the university sector knowing that funders are another part of the system and people who assess, or another part of the system can be depending on where you are in the world. So what would your call to action be for us now? Um, what do you need us to do next?
Vicky Williams:
You know, I think it, it's, it's being brave and bold and it's really holding, holding the line, isn't it?
Um, publishers will, you know, we'll never unlock change on our own. And certainly, you know, one publisher is not gonna unlock change on their own. And as you've said, as you've very, you know, clearly articulated, um. They often have a pretty bad reputation is, is academia. As you know, publishing has profited from lack of change in the system.
Uh, and I think that's, that's the very honest view. Um. And change is really hard. I know that. And when you've got a really big unwieldy system like AC academia, it's even harder. And I know from having friends in the sector, it's a really difficult place to be right now. So lots of restructures. Reduction in staffing, reduction in funding it, it's really hard.
And like many sectors, academia is having to do more with less. And that makes change even. Even harder because you, you know, why do you want to layer on something else that's gonna, you know, mean more hours and, and more disruption? Um, so it, it's, it's probably not really for me to ask our or to advise, but I think the worst thing that you can do in times of change, retrench to old ways.
Because it's easier. Um, I think being bold during times of change is, is really hard, but it can also really create the conditions for key pivot points. Um, personally I think we need to start working together more as a sector to trust each other more. And I know that might sound crazy to some of your listeners, but you know, there.
There are good guys in, in all parts of the system, and there are good guys who really want to create positive change for everybody that's, that's there. Um, so I think working together more, uh, thinking about how we recognise and reward all forms of content, all forms of scholar scholarship, which as Julie would say, those, that those outputs create meaningful change in the real world.
Mm. You know, so that's what we need to be focused on, is that meaningful change in the real world. Um, so that means we need to get comfortable with different outputs. We need inclusive research environments that won't look or feel the same even nationally, nevermind globally. So it, it will be difficult to assess them, like for like, um.
And we probably need to get a bit more comfortable with non-linear career progression as well. Um, we need to be less obsessed with metrics and rankings because who, who are they really serving at the end of the day? Um, you know, and I hope all of those things are not a dream. I, I hope that I see some of that change in, in my lifetime, but it, it does feel slow.
It does feel like you're fighting a tide, I think. Often, um, you've got these pockets of real innovation, real, real kind of change makers, but they are pockets, they're not, it's not systemic and, and it does need to be systemic.
Ged Hall:
Brilliant. Thanks Vicky for that. Uh, yeah, it, it is a big challenge, but, uh, we've all gotta be, try and be positive, optimistic work together.
And that's where we can support each other to maintain that optimism when our different parts of the system are being under, you know, are under pressure or the pressure is increasing in that part of the system. Um, you know. It is mates essentially that, uh, that keep you going, isn't it? You know?
Vicky Williams:
Yeah.
Ged Hall:
People, people who are your good collaborators.
Vicky Williams:
Absolutely.
Ged Hall:
Thank you for, thank you for agreeing to the chat today. It's been lovely to find out about, more about you and Emeral and, uh, Nick, do you want to say thanks as well?
Nick Sheppard:
Yeah, no, it's been fascinating. Um, you know, and we could disclose more questions I'd like to ask you, and perhaps we will, you know, off, off, uh, off air as it were.
Collaborate and, you know, um, it's been, you know, really interesting to hear your perspective and, uh, and yeah, look forward to ongoing conversations.
Vicky Williams:
Yeah, we're just down the road, Nick, so yeah. Anytime. Yeah, that sounds good.
Nick Sheppard:
No, thank you.
Ged Hall:
We'll have to get together for a coffee and, um, Vicky, I'll leave it as it is, coffee time.
Uh, we're recording this kind of in the morning in, in the UK. I'll leave you to say goodbye to our listeners.
Vicky Williams:
Thanks so much for having me, Ged and Nick, and yeah, I hope that was was interesting. I really enjoyed the discussion. Thank you.
Intro:
Thanks for listening to the Research Culture Uncovered podcast.
Please subscribe so you never miss out on our brand new episodes. And if you're enjoying the discussions, give us some love by dropping a five star rating and written review as it helps other research ISTs find us and please share with a friend and show them how to subscribe. Thanks for listening, and here's to you and your research culture.
