Data – Copyright Clearance Center http://www.copyright.com Rights Licensing Expert Tue, 17 Jul 2018 07:00:39 +0000 en-US hourly 1 http://www.copyright.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/cropped-ccc-favicon-32x32.png Data – Copyright Clearance Center http://www.copyright.com 32 32 Blockchain for Science: Part One – A Primer http://www.copyright.com/blog/blockchain-for-science-part-one-a-primer/ http://www.copyright.com/blog/blockchain-for-science-part-one-a-primer/#respond Thu, 07 Jun 2018 09:59:56 +0000 http://www.copyright.com/?post_type=blog_post&p=16650 Joris van Rossum, Director of Special Projects at Digital Science, shares his views on the ways blockchain could be a game changer in the ecosystem of scholarly publishing.

The post Blockchain for Science: Part One – A Primer appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
Blockchain, the technology behind Bitcoin, offers a peer-to-peer network for trust that potentially can disintermediate traditional brokering authorities like banks, notaries – and perhaps even publishers. Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) and the International Council for Scientific and Technical Information (ICSTI) hosted a webinar led by industry experts to investigate what opportunities blockchain has to offer in the scholarly publishing world.

Panelist Joris van Rossum, Director of Special Projects at Digital Science, recently authored a research report investigating the new possibilities of blockchain. Below, Joris shares his own views on the ways blockchain could be a game changer in the ecosystem of scholarly publishing.

Scholarly Communications: A Challenging Landscape Ripe for Change

Within the academic publishing ecosystem, there are a number of fundamental challenges with which all stakeholders wrestle in some capacity. The deficient state of research reproducibility impacts publishers, authors, funders, and institutions. Integral to the core values of scholarship and the efficiency of acquiring knowledge, reproducibility is central to rigorous scholarly communication, and yet current practices, methods, and models hinder it significantly.

In a similar way, the community also suffers from poor transparency into the peer review process, along with a lack of recognition for the fundamental and important work done by reviewers. Metrics for evaluating research and researchers, largely directed by the original constraints of print publishing, are also limited and outdated.

In a more macroscopic capacity, the industry as a whole is experiencing a commercial crisis of sorts, having yet to hit upon a business model that is sustainable for all parties well into the future.

A Cryptocurrency for Science

So, what is blockchain and how might it prove useful for scholarly communications? The most well-known application of blockchain is, of course, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin – digital assets designed to work as a medium of exchange that use encryption to secure transactions, to control the creation of additional units, and to verify asset transfer.

What if we were to leverage blockchain to create a digital currency specifically for science? How might we use it? Some new organizations, such as Scienceroot, Pluto, and Einsteinium, envision a future in which the academic publishing ecosystem is driven by a closed token-based economy. Publishers, for example, might choose to grant all contributing peer reviewers digital ‘tokens,’ which researchers could then redeem for services, content, or even funding, bringing value and recognition to an exchange that is vital to scholarly communications yet currently asymmetrical.

From Information to Value

Another key feature of blockchain technology is that it excels at establishing ownership and preventing duplication – functions just as pertinent to banking as to scholarly communications. In the area of data rights management (DRM) for example, blockchain is well positioned to automate rights and permissions management, including the payment of royalties, when combined with smart contracts.

In this same vein, blockchain also opens the way for new business models apart from subscriptions, tokens, and open access, by making direct micropayments between two parties very easy. This new reality might look something like researchers paying small fees directly to publishers for each research article they download.

The Promise of a Single Science Repository

At a more fundamental level, blockchain is about data storage – but a very special variety. Unlike many other mechanisms we have today, blockchain is de-centralized and distributed, meaning that no one particular entity owns or controls it. Instead of a server in your office, or a system maintained in the cloud, data is divided into small pieces and scattered over a vast network. Hacking becomes nearly impossible, because there is no single point of entry. Data held in blockchain is also immutable and transparent while simultaneously remaining pseudonymous – a perfect foundation for a singular scientific data store. A data trail of research, from the point of submission all the way through to subsequent citation in other works, would enable the protection of IP and assignment of credit, the development of more sophisticated research evaluation metrics, and enhance reproducibility.

Taking Action

A handful of players are already hard at work to capture the potential blockchain has for the research process. ARTiFACTS, a new start-up, is tackling this concept of a “ledger of record for research,” that traces all transactions and linkages across all research artifacts, published or pre-published. Similarly, a collaborative effort between Springer Nature, Aries Editorial Manager, Katalysis, and ORCiD, known as the Peer Review Blockchain Initiative, initiative aims to look at practical solutions that leverage the distributed registry and smart contract elements of blockchain technologies. Later phases aim to establish a consortium of organizations committed to working together to solve scholarly communications challenges that center around peer review.

The post Blockchain for Science: Part One – A Primer appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
http://www.copyright.com/blog/blockchain-for-science-part-one-a-primer/feed/ 0
Join CCC in Chicago at SSP’s 40th Annual Meeting http://www.copyright.com/blog/join-ccc-in-chicago-at-ssps-40th-annual-meeting/ http://www.copyright.com/blog/join-ccc-in-chicago-at-ssps-40th-annual-meeting/#respond Thu, 24 May 2018 08:00:15 +0000 http://www.copyright.com/?post_type=blog_post&p=16600 With topics ranging from metadata to OA to computer-assisted mining in scholarly publishing, the CCC team picks their favorite sessions at this year's 40th SSP Meeting in Chicago.

The post Join CCC in Chicago at SSP’s 40th Annual Meeting appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
SSP’s 40th Annual Meeting, one of the premier forums for discussion amongst scholarly publishers, librarians and academics, is right around the corner. This year’s theme, “Scholarly Publishing at the Crossroads: What’s working, what’s holding us back, where do we go from here?” highlights both the uncertain nature of our industry’s future as well as the great opportunities that lie ahead for us.

You can find CCC at Booth #211, and catch our photo booth at the 40th Anniversary Celebration at the Navy Pier. My colleagues and I will be at the show and wanted to share some of our “can’t miss” sessions at this year’s conference:

Jen Goodrich, Director of Product Management

Session 4D – Making Metadata Work for Everyone: A Functional View of Metadata in the Scholarly Supply Chain (Thursday 31 May, 4:45PM)

My first session choice is an expert panel, led by Marianne Calilhanna from Cenveo Publisher Services, about the entire lifecycle of metadata throughout the publishing workflow. This topic couldn’t be more timely or relevant, as it’s becoming increasingly clear that scholarly publishing can only be as good as our data.  I’m looking forward to hearing a detailed analysis how metadata flows—and sometimes gets caught—during the publishing workflow.

Sponsored Session: Diversity & Inclusion (Wednesday, May 30, 1:30PM)

My second pick is a sponsored session, moderated by my wonderful colleague, Rebecca Mcleod. She’ll be leading a very important discussion about the culture of the scholarly publishing community—specifically around efforts to create a more diverse and inclusive environment that welcomes people of all backgrounds. I’m really looking forward to this meaningful discussion and to hearing the panel’s thoughts on ways we can improve and grow together as a community.

Kurt Heisler, Sales Director

Plenary: Previews Session (Friday 1 June, 11:00AM)

The Previews Session is a roundup of the industry’s newest and most noteworthy products, platforms and content. I’m really looking forward to this one and think it’ll be a great synopsis of the most important recent developments in scholarly publishing; a definite “must-attend” on my calendar.

Session 2A – How Do We Move the Goal of Open Access from Concept to Reality? (Thursday 31 May, 2:00PM)

Moderated by ALPSP’s Audrey McCulloch, this session promises to be an informed and pragmatic analysis of the state of OA, including a rundown of some of the biggest challenges stakeholders are facing today. As the scholarly publishing industry begins to search for and uncover ways we can streamline the research workflow, I’m really looking forward to hearing the speakers offer their takes on ways we can improve.

Chuck Hemenway, Sales Director

Virtual Meeting Session 5A: Funders as Publishers—What does this mean for traditional publishers and the scholarly publishing industry as a whole…? (Friday 1 June, 11:00AM)

My first session pick, moderated by Sheridan PubFactory’s Tom Beyer, will take a look at the rise of publisher-funders like, Wellcome Trust. These firsts-of-their-kind are still finding their place within the market so I’m keen to hear the industry experts on this ticket offer their perspectives on how publisher-funders might find their place within—or perhaps disrupt—the scholarly publishing market.

Virtual Meeting Session 1D: The Gift That Keeps on Giving: Metadata & Persistent Identifiers Through the Research & Publication Cycle (Thursday 31 May, 10:30AM)

My second pick—and the session I’m most excited to attend—is this panel, lead by Ringgold’s Christine Orr, about metadata throughout the scholarly lifecycle. It’s becoming increasingly clear that we’re simply not doing enough with our metadata and that we’re missing opportunities to collect valuable information that would make the research workflow more seamless for everyone. I’m really looking forward to hearing what these industry heavyweights have to say about our current state and how we, as a community, can improve.

Darren Gillgrass, Business Development Director

Session 3F: (Don’t) Rage Against The Machine

My first session pick promises to be a forward-thinking discussion about why—and how—we should better incorporate computer-assisted mining activities into the scholarly, academic and research library communities. Moderated by DMedia’s David Myers, the panel’s experts are well-equipped to make the case for utilizing technology to better facilitate scientific progress. Looking forward to hearing their perspectives on how we can ensure the scholarly publishing community keeps pace with technology and benefits from its advances.

Session 2D: Unlimited Data Plans? Data Publication Charges (DPCs), DPC Sponsors, Data Availability Statements, and Licensing Options (Thursday 31 May, 2:00PM)

My next pick is a session about lesser-known article fees: data publication charges—or DPCs. Moderated by Anna Jester from eJournal Press, this session features four organizations which currently either require authors to deposit data or support authors in complying with data mandates. These data experts will explore what DPCs mean to scholarly publishing, from operational realities, to licensing, and beyond.

Which sessions are you looking forward to attending? Tell us in the comments section!

We hope to see you in Chicago. Follow along on social media with #SSP2018.

The post Join CCC in Chicago at SSP’s 40th Annual Meeting appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
http://www.copyright.com/blog/join-ccc-in-chicago-at-ssps-40th-annual-meeting/feed/ 0
Handle with Care: Metadata in Scholarly Publishing http://www.copyright.com/blog/handle-with-care-metadata-in-scholarly-publishing/ http://www.copyright.com/blog/handle-with-care-metadata-in-scholarly-publishing/#respond Thu, 17 May 2018 08:00:41 +0000 http://www.copyright.com/?post_type=blog_post&p=16543 Industry experts discuss the need for improved handling of crucial metadata throughout the scholarly workflow.

The post Handle with Care: Metadata in Scholarly Publishing appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
It’s readily apparent that metadata is an essential part of scholarly publishing. So why do we let so much of this treasured commodity slip through our fingers over the course of the publication process?

Each portion of the publication lifecycle requires important metadata, but not all of this information is carried all the way through the workflow. Instead, much of it remains in the isolated silos in which it’s collected. Inera’s CEO Bruce Rosenblum notes, “There’s just form after form after form of metadata collected [in submission systems] and it’s amazing how little of that makes it through to the final XML or beyond.”

For example, did you know that ORCID IDs (i.e. author IDs) often don’t make it out of the submission system? And that when publishers produce XML from manuscripts, Ringgold IDs collected at submission for author affiliations are often lost, effectively expunging hugely important data from publisher records?

But the lack of synchronization across publication phases—and the subsequent loss of this important metadata—persists. Ringgold’s North American Sales Director, Christine Orr, comments, “It negatively impacts all kinds of things downstream, and results in a lack of discoverability, lack of inoperability between other systems, and the inability to really, truly analyze your author base.” And it makes the publication workflow rife with inaccuracies. Bruce Rosenblum notes, “If it’s not automatically integrated into the workflow, then it’s a much more manual process, and hence a potentially inaccurate process.”

This information matters to both publishers and funders. Having unbridled access to the complete set of metadata collected throughout the publication lifecycle would mean infinitely better information about not only authors but also grant appropriation. It would enable better business analysis by publishers and funders alike, and would help all stakeholders identify trends in areas like open access, measure the impact of funding and make more informed decisions. Rosenblum notes, “Publishers need to understand there’s a huge value in integrated metadata. And by integrated, I mean that its shareable across systems.”

So what are we—the scholarly publishing community—waiting for? We need to begin by handling our existing metadata with care. And we need to invest in building out metadata-handling processes—holistically and systematically— within our own organizations to prepare for additional standards on the horizon. Finally, we need commitment from stakeholders across the scholarly publishing industry to use these standard identifiers that are being lost most often; namely grant IDs, funder names and author and co-author affiliation IDs.

Let’s continue the conversation at this year’s SSP Meeting in Chicago. Join me and fellow industry experts (listed below) as we analyze the research workflow, identify gaps, and discuss pragmatic ways we can work together to make the publication workflow more seamless and beneficial for all stakeholders.

Hope to see you in Chicago.

SSP Session Information:

Session 1D
The Gift That Keeps on Giving: Metadata & Persistent Identifiers Through the Research and Publication Cycle

Thursday, May 31 at 10:30AM
Virtual Session

Christine Orr, Ringgold
Bruce Rosenblum, Inera
Sarah Whalen, AAAS
Mary Seligy, Canadian Science Publishing
Howard Ratner, Chorus
Jennifer Goodrich, Copyright Clearance Center

The post Handle with Care: Metadata in Scholarly Publishing appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
http://www.copyright.com/blog/handle-with-care-metadata-in-scholarly-publishing/feed/ 0
Metadata 2020 Update: Project Groups Underway http://www.copyright.com/blog/metadata-2020-update-project-groups-underway/ http://www.copyright.com/blog/metadata-2020-update-project-groups-underway/#respond Thu, 10 May 2018 08:00:39 +0000 http://www.copyright.com/?post_type=blog_post&p=16492 This year, Metadata 2020 is focused on gathering information and use cases that will inform the final recommendations. CCC team members share updates on the progress so far.

The post Metadata 2020 Update: Project Groups Underway appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
Increasingly, we are asking metadata to do more than ever before. In the digital age, there is a growing view that content which cannot be discovered, linked or acquired electronically may as well not exist. Demands are increasing for content to become more interoperable, discoverable and machine readable and we have a parallel challenge to manage all aspects of the underlying metadata across content creators, aggregators and consumers.

Metadata 2020 is a collaboration that advocates richer, connected, and reusable, open metadata for all research outputs, which will advance scholarly pursuits for the benefit of society.

The Metadata 2020 initiative kicked off in 2017 as a set of industry communities discussing common challenges, and while its name implies that it’s a three-year project, the outcome of its efforts won’t stop there. Working towards a shared vocabulary, set of best practices and awareness for the greater good, this multifaceted effort is designed to facilitate communication between disparate communities. Because our scope is broad, the findings of Metadata 2020 are less about being prescriptive, and more about bridging gaps in understanding, technology and workflows that impede research, publishing or re-using content.

Last year’s community groups identified six key challenges to focus on. The 2018 project groups span the lifecycle of metadata: research, metadata elements and their definitions, understanding incentives for improving metadata, and best practices each group can follow to support the larger ecosystem. Overall, each project team shares a common overarching goal: educating people on why it’s important to care about and invest in rich metadata.

CCC’s services exist at the crossroads of numerous metadata uses including content management, discovery, rights licensing, text and data mining, open access and content delivery. This broad experience allows us to bring a unique viewpoint to the Metadata 2020 initiative and we have several staff members are participating in Metadata 2020’s project groups during 2018.

Each project group varies in size from a few people to two dozen and includes volunteers from across the industry with varying backgrounds, expertise and motivations.

Highlights from CCC’s involvement in Metadata 2020’s project groups include:

Group 3: Defining the Terms We Use About Metadata

Elizabeth Wolf, Manager, Data Quality, Data Operations

I have always been interested in the intersection between perspectives. In the past, I’ve been involved in integrated projects where one team uses a term and another team assumes a completely different meaning, causing misaligned features or requirements, missed hand-offs, and delays. The more we work in the wide world of cross-functional teams and release trains, supporting a range of customers across many disciplines, the more critical it is that we recognize and address these challenges.

While the Defining the Terms group is closely aligned with others, our mission is to come up with clarifying terminology so that we can have more meaningful global discussions. To understand what should be delivered and why anyone should care, we need a common vocabulary. We are looking to facilitate communication about metadata within and between communities. Our 16 group members represent Service Providers/Platform & Tools, Publishers, Librarians, and Researchers.

At this point, we are surveying different user groups to assess what people talk about when they talk about metadata. We think our contribution is to disambiguate and illustrate what terms mean, independent of implementation. Our anticipated outcome is a glossary, which will be released along with Group 2’s mapping project.

Group 4: Incentives for Improving Metadata Quality

 John Brucker, Metadata Librarian, Data Operations

As a metadata librarian, this project appealed because I think it can help address some of those inconsistency issues by helping the community understand the importance of metadata quality. I believe the community needs to commit resources towards creating and maintaining good metadata.

The mission of our group is to highlight downstream applications and the value of metadata for all parts of the community by telling real stories as evidence of how better metadata will support their goals.

Through my role at CCC, I can see that the quality of metadata we receive from our publishers can vary greatly. This is especially true for publication types other than books or journals, such as reports, websites, and standards.

The way I see it, this group will impact the industry by educating the industry about why they should care about metadata. Examples of this would be use cases where high-quality metadata positively impacts revenue, discoverability, and user experience.

Group 6: Metadata Evaluation and Guidance

Stephen Howe, Product Manager, Platform Services, Product

I was immediately drawn to this project because it aligns directly to what CCC is doing today and what I am doing at CCC. We just implemented a new works management system to help us improve the quality of our data. One of our biggest challenges is understanding exactly how to measure the quality of works’ metadata and to help our data source partners understand and measure the quality of the data that they send us.

The stated mission for this project is, “To identify and compare existing metadata evaluation tools and mechanisms for connecting the results of those evaluations to clear, cross-community guidance.” To state that in my own words, the point of this group is to define a common approach or toolset in which anyone can measure and report on the quality of metadata. Quality here is defined as completeness, accuracy, and consistency.

If we are successful, we will have better industry understanding on how to evaluate the quality of metadata and perhaps even a shared methodology / toolset with which to measure it.

 

Check back in November 2018 for the next update from CCC’s members of the Metadata 2020 team, reporting on the completion of the project groups.

Related Reading: 

The post Metadata 2020 Update: Project Groups Underway appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
http://www.copyright.com/blog/metadata-2020-update-project-groups-underway/feed/ 0
Join CCC at the STM U.S. Conference 2018 http://www.copyright.com/blog/join-ccc-stm-u-s-conference-2018/ http://www.copyright.com/blog/join-ccc-stm-u-s-conference-2018/#respond Thu, 05 Apr 2018 20:49:07 +0000 http://www.copyright.com/?post_type=blog_post&p=16280 Join CCC and Ixxus in Philadelphia for the STM U.S. Conference 2018 from April 24-26, where publishers and other stakeholders gather to collaboratively answer the question, “What can we do better, together?”

The post Join CCC at the STM U.S. Conference 2018 appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
Join CCC and Ixxus in Philadelphia for the STM U.S. Conference 2018 from April 24-26, where publishers and other stakeholders gather to collaboratively answer the question, “What can we do better, together?”

Catch us at the following sessions:

The future of access, part 1: The platform play and seamless content syndication

April 25, 2018 at 3:15    
Moderated by Roger Schonfeld‪ (Ithaka S+R)‪
Participants: Gaby Appleton (Mendeley); Yann Mahé (MyScienceWork); Rob McGrath (Readcube); Roy Kaufman (Copyright Clearance Center)

The fate of the music business looms over STM publishers like darkening storm clouds. Content providers wonder who will be our Spotify? Where will users go to get a legal, seamless aggregated search and discovery experience and what sort of sustainable business models will emerge?

Mendeley and Readcube propose syndicating content and brokering institutional access directly in their researcher productivity tools and reporting usage back to publishers in support of existing business models (Distributed Usage Logging).   Search engines like Google Scholar & Dimensions are serving up content directly now, expanding on their traditional role of referring traffic to publishers – and using new services like MyScienceWork to fulfill a user’s requested article with legal, freely available versions online – even if the user doesn’t have access to the version of record.  What is the future of the publisher’s own platform in this scenario? How will these new efforts to create seamless access impact traditional aggregators like EBSCO, ProQuest, and the document delivery market (CCC)? And most importantly, how will libraries be brought along in all of this?

 

Round Table: How will STM Tech Trends 2022 affect YOUR business?

April 26, 2018 at 9:30
Moderated by Chris Kenneally, Copyright Clearance Center
Participants: IJsbrand Jan Aalbersberg (Elsevier); Gerry Grenier (IEEE); Phill Jones (Digital Science); Stacy Malyil (Wolters Kluwer)

In a round table discussion moderated by Chris Kenneally (CCC), 4 members of STM’s Future Lab Forum will express their views on how the Tech Trends of 2022 will start impacting our publishing business now. Come and listen to be prepared for the future.

 

More “must attend” session picks:

Interactive forum discussion: digital ethics and data literacy

April 26, 2018 at 11:00
Moderated by Kent Anderson (Redlink)
Participants: Susan E McGrego (Columbia Journalism School); Patrick Vinck (Harvard University)

Are algorithms and social media outsmarting us, surveilling us, feeding us fake facts and alternative news, defining our views and opinions? Kent Anderson (Redlink) will engage in an interactive discussion on stage with thought leaders in digital integrity on topics such as ethics of algorithms, data literacy, user interface design, technology deployments, and current practice and policies. A very interactive session – so we expect you and the rest of the audience to chip in.

The Future of Access, part 2: RA21, Resource access in the 21st century

April 26, 2018 at 3:45
Chaired by Julia Wallace (RA21) and Heather Flanagan (RA21)

RA21 is a joint project by STM and NISO to drastically improve access to content, especially for mobile and off campus use. Access to scholarly and academic content should be as easy as logging in on Facebook and Google (but with stronger support for user privacy).

In its first year, the RA21 project, in which over 50 organisations collaborate, gained enormous traction among libraries, vendors, federation operators, ID management organisations and of course publishers. The three co-chairs of the project, Chris Shillum (Elsevier), Ralph Youngen (ACS) and Meltem Dincer (Wiley) will update you on the initial results of the pilots in academic and corporate environments and discuss possibilities for applying this information to your services. This session includes an interactive panel on frequently asked questions.

The post Join CCC at the STM U.S. Conference 2018 appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
http://www.copyright.com/blog/join-ccc-stm-u-s-conference-2018/feed/ 0
Using Data Analytics to Drive Strategy for Corporate Customers http://www.copyright.com/blog/using-data-analytics-drive-strategy-corporate-customers/ http://www.copyright.com/blog/using-data-analytics-drive-strategy-corporate-customers/#respond Thu, 13 Jul 2017 08:00:07 +0000 http://www.copyright.com/?post_type=blog_post&p=13638 Publishers have a vague sense that there’s opportunity in the corporate market, if only they could identify how to reach it.

The post Using Data Analytics to Drive Strategy for Corporate Customers appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
Let’s explore the question of how publishers might use analytics to better understand possibly the most mysterious customer group of them all: corporate customers. Publishers often suffer from a vague sense that there’s a land of opportunity in the corporate market, if only they could identify where it is and how to reach it. Meanwhile, their own direct sales to corporate customers, particularly Big Pharma, keep getting smaller and smaller as the industry consolidates, research budgets shrink, and corporate librarian roles are eliminated, replaced by purchasing departments that don’t really understand the value of a journal subscription in contrast to a carton of paper towels. Outside of the pharmaceutical industry, publishers don’t even know to whom they should be speaking. The anonymous, faceless individuals working on secretive projects in corporate R&D must need our content…right? Might analytics help us pull back the veil?

The anonymous, faceless individuals working on secretive projects in corporate R&D must need our content…right? Might analytics help us pull back the veil?

It’s common for corporate buyers, whether researchers or librarians or purchasing departments, to note that they can only justify paying for exactly what they need. It’s potentially easier for them to spend $10,000 on article-level purchases for only must-have articles than it is to spend $5,000 on a journal subscription where only a small percentage of the articles ever get downloaded. Think of it as micro ROI. For this reason, the traditional publisher license deal and title-level subscription models, both designed to meet the needs of academic libraries, just aren’t going to work for corporate customers much of the time. Don’t try to change that. Just figure out how your organization might do a better job providing the content corporate customers need in the format they need it and via a sales model that’s going to work for them.

Related Reading: Using Data Analytics to Drive Strategy in the Research Space

Again, let’s start by considering some of the decisions your organization may need to make in order to add more value for corporate customers and to drive sales:

  • What segments of the corporate market should you prioritize?
  • Should you attempt to increase direct sales to corporate customers, or is it better to work through intermediaries?
  • If you can sell directly to some segments, what should your sales model be? Do you need to hire additional sales people who specialize in those market segments?
  • Should you increase your publishing volume in certain areas of applied science in order to improve your value to corporate customers?
  • If so, are there key researchers in corporate R&D who should be involved, or with whom you should at least consult?
  • Are there other products or services you might provide to corporate R&D that are not traditional journals or books?

These are all big decisions, and analytics can help you answer many, but certainly not all, of the questions you’ll need to answer to make these decisions. Thinking broadly, you’ll need to determine:

  • What is the estimated overall market size and growth rate, not just for your organization but across the industry?
  • In what market segments are you strong, in terms of subscription sales, article sales, usage, and denials? Where are you weak?
  • Are there specific geographic areas where your sales and usage are particularly strong?
  • What are the top corporations using your content, what market segment are they in, and what other corporations in that segment are you not reaching?
  • What type of content is being utilized most frequently by corporate customers, and how should that knowledge impact your editorial decision-making?
  • How are corporate researchers discovering your content, and what does that tell us about how you might reach more of them?

When exploring markets that are less familiar, analytics can help you move beyond your initial state of ignorance and get you to a place where you’ve at least crossed some options off the list and made others a top priority. But your research shouldn’t stop there. With your numbers at your side, it’s essential that you get out there and talk to some of the key stakeholders at the corporations of interest. As much as the numbers might tell you, the people behind the numbers can illuminate even more.

About the Series

Analytics–everybody wants some, everybody agrees they’re incredibly important, but many STM publishing organizations just aren’t sure how to use them to positive effect. Looking backwards to see what happened in the past can be really interesting (or really boring!), but what does that tell us about what we should do right now, or what we should plan to do in a year? This is the first in a series of blog posts to attempt to provide STM publishers with some guidance on how best to use analytics–not simply to report on what happened, but to guide decision-making and drive impactful actions to achieve commercial and strategic advantage. To do that, we’ll put the focus exactly where it always should be: on our customers. Specifically, we’ll explore how to use analytics to better meet the needs of librarians, researchers, and corporate customers.

The post Using Data Analytics to Drive Strategy for Corporate Customers appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
http://www.copyright.com/blog/using-data-analytics-drive-strategy-corporate-customers/feed/ 0
Using Data Analytics to Drive Strategy in the Research Space http://www.copyright.com/blog/using-data-analytics-to-drive-strategy-in-the-research-space/ http://www.copyright.com/blog/using-data-analytics-to-drive-strategy-in-the-research-space/#respond Thu, 06 Jul 2017 08:00:12 +0000 http://www.copyright.com/?post_type=blog_post&p=13605 Researchers are valuable customers as decision makers, and the content they produce is the lifeblood of scholarly publishing.

The post Using Data Analytics to Drive Strategy in the Research Space appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
Researchers, of course, are not only the end users of scholarly content and publisher platforms. They’re also editors-in-chief, editorial board members, peer reviewers and, at least as importantly, authors of journal articles and/or books. The fact that researchers typically receive no compensation for most of these important contributions means that publishers should feel a particular obligation to understand their needs and motivations via analytics, not only because it’s the right thing to do but also because those publishers that treat these important customers better will almost certainly enjoy a larger share of the best content than they would otherwise.

Analytics are critical not only to editorial decision-making, but also to decisions informing overall organizational strategy and policies, marketing strategy and tactics, and technology development.

What do we know about researcher motivations, and what does that tell us about the types of decisions a publisher may need to make and, therefore, the analytical approaches that can inform that decision-making? Most researchers care very much about making a significant contribution to their field of study. In doing so, they want to be recognized by their community, not only for their research but also for their efforts as editors, peer reviewers and other roles that contribute to the research ecosystem. Finally, most researchers have the basic need to advance professionally, whether that means getting a promotion, achieving tenure, or receiving some other kind of compensation for their work.

Related Reading: Using Data Analytics to Drive Strategy in the Academic STM Librarian Space

Analytics are critical not only to editorial decision-making, but also to decisions informing overall organizational strategy and policies, marketing strategy and tactics, and technology development. As always, before determining the questions you want to answer via analytics, you should first articulate the decisions, both strategic and tactical, that your publishing organization needs to make. These might include:

  • Does a given journal need a new editor-in-chief?
  • What high-growth markets should you prioritize, and what actions can you take to expand your author base there?
  • Should you start a new gold Open Access journal?
  • Whom should you approach to sit on the editorial board of a new journal?
  • Should you adjust your OA APC’s?
  • What actions can you take to increase your share of the best submissions that might otherwise go to a competing journal?

If you focus on the decision around actions to take to increase your share of the best submissions, some questions you might answer with analytics are:

  • Who are the most “valuable” authors in the given field? (Value here would be determined by your organization’s strategy and priorities. It could mean driving usage or driving citations, and it could even mean driving social media attention and altmetrics.)
  • How should you segment your potential author base?
  • What are the specific priorities and pain points of the key author segments?
  • What marketing approach, in terms of both medium and message, has the greatest impact with the key author segments?
  • Would improvements to your submission and editorial management systems increase the volume of quality submissions?
  • If you were to take x% of rejected manuscripts from your top-tier journal and entice the authors to publish them in a lower-tier Gold OA journal, how might that affect submissions, OA revenue, and Impact Factor? Do authors the field have a demonstrated openness to this?

The potential data sources for such analytical questions are numerous. You might need any combination of:

  1. Internal, proprietary data, such as usage data, submission data or OA sales data
  2. Third-party datasets, such as the Web of Science, Scopus, Altmetric.com, etc., or data provided by an intermediary partner or vendor
  3. Data produced by primary market research that your organization or a vendor undertakes

As mentioned in our post on academic librarians, many analyses can be handled in-house using a basic tool like Excel. The bigger challenge might be getting your hands on all of the data you need and ensuring that data is clean. The increasingly widespread adoption of ORCID certainly helps increase the likelihood that researcher data from one source can be matched with researcher data from another source, but expect to invest significant time in data cleansing of one sort or another.

Finally, it’s particularly important to consider whether your organization needs a KPI, or at least some operational metrics, related to researchers. Researchers and the content they produce are the lifeblood of any scholarly publisher. On any given day, there are probably more decisions being made by people in editorial roles than in any other part of the organization. Might embedding analytics into the day-to-day processes of editorial colleagues help to drive the kinds of actions that will support the successful achievement of your strategy?

About the Series

Analytics–everybody wants some, everybody agrees they’re incredibly important, but many STM publishing organizations just aren’t sure how to use them to positive effect. Looking backwards to see what happened in the past can be really interesting (or really boring!), but what does that tell us about what we should do right now, or what we should plan to do in a year? This is the first in a series of blog posts to attempt to provide STM publishers with some guidance on how best to use analytics–not simply to report on what happened, but to guide decision-making and drive impactful actions to achieve commercial and strategic advantage. To do that, we’ll put the focus exactly where it always should be: on our customers. Specifically, we’ll explore how to use analytics to better meet the needs of librarians, researchers, and corporate customers.

The post Using Data Analytics to Drive Strategy in the Research Space appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
http://www.copyright.com/blog/using-data-analytics-to-drive-strategy-in-the-research-space/feed/ 0
Using Data Analytics to Drive Strategy in the Academic STM Library Space http://www.copyright.com/blog/using-data-analytics-drive-strategy-academic-stm-library-space/ http://www.copyright.com/blog/using-data-analytics-drive-strategy-academic-stm-library-space/#comments Thu, 29 Jun 2017 14:51:51 +0000 http://www.copyright.com/?post_type=blog_post&p=13549 Publishers depend on librarians for revenue and end users depend on librarians for access to content.

The post Using Data Analytics to Drive Strategy in the Academic STM Library Space appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
Librarians are the customer group end users depend upon for access to content, and they’re the customer group most publishers depend upon for most of their revenue. So, what does the librarian as customer care most about? They, of course, care about making their patrons happy; but since budgets are finite, they also need to ensure they’re getting the best possible return on investment for all of their expenditures. You probably don’t need this blog post to tell you how librarians measure ROI for expenditures on digital products. You know that usage data and cost per access are at the top of the list.

Yes, yes, your content is of the utmost quality and is truly must-have. Congratulations! Now please go ask some librarians how they measure ROI and how they make cancellation decisions. Most of what you’ll hear from academic librarians will focus on usage data. Occasionally librarians may say something about “quality.” Ask them how they measure quality, and be prepared to hear about usage. Librarians don’t care about quality metrics like Impact Factor in the same way researchers and authors do. Those articles are usually available via pay-per-view or interlibrary loan if it makes more economic sense.

We could, of course, have an entire blog series devoted to KPI’s, but since we know librarians are important, and since we know that usage is really important to librarians, I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest that your publishing organization needs some kind of KPI that gets everyone in the organization, even the finance guy, focused on the importance of driving usage.

Now that you’ve determined what matters to your customer, the librarian, you need to determine what matters to your publishing organization. What are your objectives in the academic library market segment, and what’s your strategy to achieve them? (Notice we haven’t even dived into analytics yet?) Then, as with any research, spend a lot of time trying to articulate as precisely as possible the decisions your organization will need to make in order to articulate that strategy. Most people jump right to the list of questions they want to answer, but you’re smarter than that, so you’ll invest a good amount of time talking to people in different parts of your organization about the decisions the analytics will inform. This will help to ensure that your analytical efforts result in something actionable, rather than just something interesting (or boring). The process you use to define the focus of your analysis is at least as important as the analysis itself.

Related Reading: Using Data Analytics to Drive Strategy for Corporate Customers

Here are some examples of the types of pending decisions a librarian-focused publishing organization may have:

  • Should you publish more journal articles to generate the usage you need to remain competitive? If so, how many additional articles?
  • Which of your many fine journals should receive additional investment?
  • Do you need to change your pricing model for digital books?
  • Do you need to focus on driving usage in a particular geographic region?
  • Do you need to change platform providers?
  • Do you need to call your friends at Google Scholar to understand how to improve your SEO?
  • Do you need to send out dozens of additional emails to your end users to drive usage artificially? (You don’t need analytics for this one…the answer is NO.)

Now that you’ve figured out what decision(s) you need to make, you can focus on articulating the questions that need to be answered via analytics to factor into those decisions. Don’t try to answer every conceivable question, otherwise you’ll spend all of your time analyzing and not enough time deciding and acting. To answer the question about which of your many fine journals should receive additional investment in order to drive usage and make your librarian customers deliriously happy, some questions you may need to answer are:

  • Which of your journals are in disciplines and subject areas that are growing, as indicated by funding data and article output data?
  • Which journals tend to drive more usage per article published according to your historical usage data?
  • Which journals are aligned with the disciplines of focus at high-priority institutions, as indicated by article output data and/or funding data and/or usage data?

After you’ve done all of the hard work of talking to people inside and outside of your organization and narrowed the focus of your analysis, you’re ready to do your number crunching, assured of the fact that you won’t be wasting time crunching numbers that won’t inform an action. At this stage, you may begin struggling over big, existential questions like, “Which advanced statistical methodology is appropriate for this analysis? And should I use R or Python?!” Just take a deep breath, and rest assured that for the vast majority of useful analytics, our good old friend Excel will do just fine. If a vendor or partner has been kind enough to set up a user-friendly visual analytics dashboard for you, even better. There are certainly situations that warrant the application of advanced statistical methodologies and tools, but see if you can make your decision by keeping it simple first. If you don’t have one in-house, you can always hire the services of an advanced statistician/data scientist-type later.

So you’ve crunched your numbers, your organization has made an important decision based upon the insights you’ve illuminated, and you’ve received a well-deserved promotion and raise. Now what? Your academic librarian customers still care about usage, so your organization had better keep caring, too, even after that big decision has been made. This is where your key performance indicators (KPI) come in. We could, of course, have an entire blog series devoted to KPI’s, but since we know librarians are important, and since we know that usage is really important to librarians, I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest that your publishing organization needs some kind of KPI that gets everyone in the organization, even the finance guy, focused on the importance of driving usage. Remember that KPI’s aren’t just for analysts and executives. For KPI’s to have their full impact, they need to be part of the day-to-day work lives of everyone who takes actions that influence the given KPI.

It’s very important to remain cognizant of the fact that analytics can’t possibly tell you everything you need to know. You’ll need to do some qualitative research, too, and you’ll need to spend time with your customers. My final recommendation is to regularly spend time with librarians. They’re not only very important, but they also tend to be very nice people.

About the Series

Analytics–everybody wants some, everybody agrees they’re incredibly important, but many STM publishing organizations just aren’t sure how to use them to positive effect. Looking backwards to see what happened in the past can be really interesting (or really boring!), but what does that tell us about what we should do right now, or what we should plan to do in a year? This is the first in a series of blog posts to attempt to provide STM publishers with some guidance on how best to use analytics–not simply to report on what happened, but to guide decision-making and drive impactful actions to achieve commercial and strategic advantage. To do that, we’ll put the focus exactly where it always should be: on our customers. Specifically, we’ll explore how to use analytics to better meet the needs of librarians, researchers, and corporate customers.

The post Using Data Analytics to Drive Strategy in the Academic STM Library Space appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
http://www.copyright.com/blog/using-data-analytics-drive-strategy-academic-stm-library-space/feed/ 1
Not Your Teenager’s Social Network http://www.copyright.com/blog/not-teenagers-social-network/ http://www.copyright.com/blog/not-teenagers-social-network/#respond Thu, 08 Jun 2017 19:10:49 +0000 http://www.copyright.com/?post_type=blog_post&p=13209 What academic societies can learn from Facebook about making money—and making members happy.

The post Not Your Teenager’s Social Network appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
Social networking a la Facebook and Twitter may seem to be a product of the Internet age, but it is actually nothing new. If you think about it, learned societies – which aim to bring together people in a given field or area of professional interest – are actually built on the original idea of a social network, to wit: a network of social interactions and personal relationships, as Webster’s defines it.

Fewer than half (48%) of all millennials belong to a society compared with 83% of baby boomer researchers, according to Wiley’s recent survey of nearly 14,000 research professionals.

Yet today’s academic societies, charged with connecting individuals who share professional interests and providing a forum for communication and collaboration, continuing education, and career opportunities, are facing declines in membership, particularly among people under age 30. Fewer than half (48%) of all millennials belong to a society compared with 83% of baby boomer researchers, according to Wiley’s recent survey of nearly 14,000 research professionals.

Facebook and Twitter (and more researcher-focused sites such as Mendeley) have something to do with that age discrepancy; they are favorites for early-career researchers who want to actively network in both their professional and personal life. With so many online opportunities for making contacts and interacting, societies are tasked with finding new ways to provide meaningful benefits that will attract and retain members, as well as keep their revenues growing.

Perhaps scholarly and professional societies can learn something from Facebook, too. Just as that online social network continues to expand (and gobble up money) by using member data in ever more ingenious ways (linking all those Likes, learning from them, and tailoring content to members accordingly), so societies can use technology to better serve their members and become more relevant and profitable in the process.

From disconnected data to smart data

Fully leveraging data they already have is an often-overlooked way for societies to grow their membership and keep current members engaged enough to renew year after year. Take the example of researchers who submit an article to a society journal. It is a good bet that the article will contain the names and contact information of multiple coauthors. Wouldn’t it make sense if, instead of isolating those names within the editorial system, societies could use them to their advantage, connecting them with other data points throughout the organization?

That process could start at article submission by determining the needs of corresponding authors and co-authors, simply by asking questions like the following:

  • Are the authors already members of the society?
  • If yes, are their memberships up for renewal?
  • If no, will a special offering (such as an APC discount or free author reprints) entice them to join?
  • If they have an .edu address, are they taking advantage of institutional arrangements for payment of open access fees?
  • Are they registered to attend the next society conference?
  • Do they need continuing education credits?
  • Do they even know about these benefits?

Chances are, members and would-be members don’t know all the benefits of membership. In the Wiley survey, 15% of respondents said they’d never been invited to join an academic society; 12% said they didn’t know what offerings were available, and another 12% said that joining had never occurred to them. As the folks at Wiley put it, “This means that 37% of non-members are either waiting to be asked to join, or might be persuaded to join…With so many non-members just waiting to be asked, societies may find they are often pushing at an open door.”

But societies are not yet pushing on that door. One reason is that in many learned societies, different departments, and the data they house, are “siloed,” cut off from one another and not communicating effectively. “When a member interacts with an organization, they’re interacting with education, or a group that does grants,” says Ann Michael, DeltaThink CEO and former president of the Society for Scholarly Publishing, who moderated a recent webinar on society membership by the Copyright Clearance Center. Silos, says Michael, make it difficult for members to see the organization as a whole, which makes it hard for organizations to serve members’ needs effectively.

In the same webinar, Alex Taylor, head of communities and events at the Institution for Engineering and Technology, admitted that for a long time, the IET was “lost in a labyrinth of our own making .…We offer so many different things, [there are] so many different teams and departments…that there’s most definitely a [silo] culture, a lack of joined-up collaborative thinking.”

The key, then, is for members and societies to come together, to increase satisfaction and engagement on one side and revenues on the other. That starts with knowing what members and potential members want and need.  For example, in Wiley’s survey findings, 26% of respondents said their strongest reason for joining a society was to take advantage of opportunities for continuing education. But the continuing education platforms seldom, if ever, talk with the editorial ones.

The bottom line: If the membership, continuing education, and conference departments are not connected with each other or linked up with the editorial department, opportunities for generating new members and retaining existing ones will be missed. Think about the benefits to all involved if these systems talked to one another. In that scenario, it would be easy to notify an individual who recently submitted an article on a particular topic about an upcoming workshop on the same subject. Or, having just published that article, to let the author know that his society membership renewal comes with the benefit of 25 free article reprints.

What all of this requires is a smart network of links among databases that enables societies to target their marketing to specific individuals with personalized messages and offerings, at opportune times (when you already have their attention, for example, at article acceptance or other key points in the editorial workflow). That is the difference between blasting members with renewal notices three days after they’ve renewed and instead telling them something they truly want to know (i.e. that they are due for CME credits). Rather than putting off members and would-be members with more junk mail, suddenly, you are providing them with a higher level of service.

One way to make the data connection easy is with an enterprise content management system that does the sorting and linking of member information automatically. An investment in an ECM system is worth it, because it allows societies to provide a higher level of service.  Knowing what members need and offering it to them when they need it will bring in higher revenues in the form of new and renewing members, who can now avail themselves of services they were previously unaware of. Or, to put it another way, societies will be able to maximize revenue sources already at their disposal, and members will understand the value proposition that comes from joining and engaging with a learned society. Talk about pushing an open door.

Adopt some standards

Besides enterprise content management systems, another crucial step toward connecting data and better serving members is to adopt standards such as ORCID IDs, Ringgold names, IP addresses from Publisher Solutions International, and identifiers from FundRef. Once employed, societies can identify institutional affiliations, funding agencies, geographical locations, and membership status, and then launch relevant messaging.  You might, by ORCID ID, identify an author member as hailing from a particular institution and take it from there, reaching out to let a Harvard-based author know that she’s eligible for an institutional discount on open access charges. Combine these standards with the member data derived from your enterprise content management system, and suddenly, you get to the nirvana of data connection, without having to reinvent the wheel, and without having to bother the author.

Create new businesses to keep members happy

To keep growing, societies also need to consider new sources of revenue. It makes sense that the first thing a membership-driven society should consider when it thinks about growing its bottom line is the needs of its members. For example, the Wiley survey asks members what they value.  Some key services mentioned in the Wiley survey are continuing education (64%), keeping up to date with the latest research (50%) and job openings (32%). Once societies have this information in hand, they should ask: Do I have a business around this? If the answer is no, the next question might be: Should I have a business around this? If learning is a key reason members renew, a society may want to look at whether they have adequate continuing education offerings. If career networking is a top priority, a society might send out alerts when jobs open up in members’ areas of interest. That’s known as data driven messaging, whether a society tells a researcher who has just submitted an article on kidney cancer about an opening in the nephrology department of a major research hospital, or reminds her to register for the upcoming American Society of Nephrology Conference.

Attracting and retaining members – even millennials – is not rocket science, and we can learn from the companies who do it well. It is about figuring out why people join, and asking: Have I done enough here? Because sometimes, by asking relatively simple questions, offering opportunities vis-à-vis the needs of members, and doing some obvious things like adopting standards, it is possible to create the building blocks that raise a society to the next level – and make it go viral.

This post originally appeared on ALPSP.

The post Not Your Teenager’s Social Network appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
http://www.copyright.com/blog/not-teenagers-social-network/feed/ 0
The Definitive Guide to Digital Transformation http://www.copyright.com/blog/definitive-guide-digital-transformation/ http://www.copyright.com/blog/definitive-guide-digital-transformation/#respond Thu, 11 May 2017 18:58:21 +0000 http://www.copyright.com/?post_type=blog_post&p=12937 Digital transformation, defined: content storage, metadata, discoverability, content agility, and automated collaboration.

The post The Definitive Guide to Digital Transformation appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
Digital transformation is a controversial subject, despite the many benefits it conveys for publishers and their customers. When it comes to making systemic changes across their organization, publishers anticipate frustration, expense, and hugely complicated, multi-year implementation plans. Even agreeing on common definitions for the basic steps toward digital transformation can be convoluted, as evidenced by the recent study commissioned by CCC and Ixxus, Industry Leaders’ Perspectives on Digital Transformation.

Even agreeing on common definitions for the basic steps toward digital transformation can be convoluted, as evidenced by the recent study commissioned by CCC and Ixxus, Industry Leaders’ Perspectives on Digital Transformation.

Why Pursue Digital Transformation?

Based on interviews with 25 senior leaders of publishing organizations in the STM, Education, and Trade sectors, publishers today have three common goals which spur the industry toward the modern, large-scale technology adaptations known as digital transformation.

  1. Respond to consumer demand: Customers now expect easy, immediate, inexpensive access to content in many formats and across many channels.
  2. Create new revenue streams: MOOCs, self-publishing, new distribution channels, and digital competitors have significantly eroded book and journal revenue.
  3. Develop new product opportunities: Digitizing the back catalogue makes it easy to export existing content to new formats and markets, and in turn, to generate new revenue.

Digital Transformation, Defined

At CCC and Ixxus, we have identified the five essential steps in the digital transformation sequence: content storage, metadata, discoverability, content agility, and automated collaboration.

Content Storage

Essentially, content storage is the place where your content lives. Although the ideal example would be a single, global, centralized file repository in the cloud, most organizations currently rely on patched together siloes and systems. In any given office, this might include some combination of desktop folders, network drives, an intranet, a wiki, and, perhaps, a cloud system like Google Drive or Outlook 365.

Metadata

Metadata is short-hand for the use of software to apply labels or tags to files in an automated, systematic way. The tags enable quick browsing, making it possible to pull relevant files on demand. The largest barrier in this process is tackling publishers’ massive back catalogues.

Discoverability

There are two sides to discoverability: internal, as in the organization’s ability to locate content for production; and external, as in the end-user’s ability to find content. Machine-powered smart search can pull the materials you want, plus related materials that you didn’t even know were there. Another way to think of discoverability is like a roadmap that provides the most direct route to the content you need – avoiding too many sub-menus and extra clicks along the way.

Content Agility

Content agility results from the successful implementation of content storage, metadata, and discoverability practices. When those factors are in place, publishers can easily respond to external demands by identifying opportunities to reuse and repurpose content. This optimization can offer significant advantages to organizational information and assets, breathing new life into existing content.

Automated Collaboration

Automated collaboration overarches the other four elements of digital transformation. Internally, this can mean live-editing documents, e.g., enabling multiple staff members to work together on a shared spreadsheet. On a larger scale, think of linking content, e.g., changing a master file and prompting the same change to be made on every item derived from that file.

The Future is Now

Tech-savvy consumers are ready for digital transformation. They expect sophisticated searching abilities at their fingertips. They’re hungry for insightful content, regardless of publication date, delivered instantly in PDF, HTML, XML, or whichever file format comes next. They want access to automated collaboration tools for easy manipulation of content. Digital transformation is the means to those ends. It’s more than a trend – it’s a systemic shift in the content industry, and it’s here to stay.

The post The Definitive Guide to Digital Transformation appeared first on Copyright Clearance Center.

]]>
http://www.copyright.com/blog/definitive-guide-digital-transformation/feed/ 0