Aries Systems Corporation

As a key pillar to any business’s success, the importance of communication cannot be overstated – especially within the ever-evolving scholarly publishing landscape. With so many different players, priorities, and perspectives, it is critical for publishers and societies to optimize communication across global stakeholders to maximize engagement. Ineffective, non-transparent, or outdated communications (and its channels) can weaken or curtail user engagement by introducing expensive roadblocks to editorial and production workflows. This may include a high influx of time-consuming support queries for Editors, increased anxiety or confusion for Authors and Reviewers, numerous rounds of revision, inconsistencies or potential integrity gaps, and frustrating delays to publication.

As the developer of robust workflow management systems, Aries Systems recognizes the role our platforms play in the facilitation of communication between publishers, societies, researchers, vendors, and other organizations. To get a better grasp on how publishers currently define effective user engagement fueled by communications both inside and outside the system, we consulted with our user community during the Discovery Roundtables session at our annual Editorial Manager User Group (EMUG) meeting in June 2024. An interactive workshop designed to help inform our market research and product strategy, the EMUG 2024 Discovery Roundtables session divided attendees into focus groups dedicated to four key topics led by the Aries team. This digest serves as the first installment in a four-part blog series on insights gained during the workshop.

While user engagement naturally ebbs and flows, it is key to recognize channels in which we can be more proactive. Together with our user community, we analyzed where communication strategies can be refined, discerned if and what other potential types/forms of messaging would be valuable, and explored how Aries can incorporate solutions to better facilitate publisher outreach and boost positive engagement throughout workflows. Leveraging the Rapid Ideation technique, members of the Aries team solicited ideas in lightning-round discussions, grouped like comments into themes, and brainstormed potential solutions in collaboration with attendees. To support the discussion, our teams asked EM/PM users to consider the following:

• How do you define or judge success on “effective engagement” with your journal from Authors, Reviewers, and editorial staff?
• Do you have ways to measure this effectively? If not, what data is missing?
• What methods of communication do you currently leverage in EM/PM, and at which points in the workflow?
• What methods of communication do you currently leverage in and outside the system (and, if not obvious, why are those not done within the system)?
• Publishers need to be in contact with researchers who tend to wear multiple hats, potentially being Authors, Reviewers, and How does engagement vary across the different roles? When do messages intersect based on these different personas?
• Do you have any current challenges with how you communicate with users? What else could be hindering their positive/productive engagement with you?
• When does the order of communication become crucial?
• Is there inherent value in giving preference to specific communication over others when faced with competition for time, attention, and engagement? What would you rate as the most important communications for each persona?
• Are you currently running any outreach programs to boost engagement? If so, how can EM help expand/facilitate that?
• Are there other opportunities to prioritize certain/different types of messaging? What methods or channels would you and your users prefer to receive messaging through in an ideal world? How do you receive communications through other platforms you use today even outside work as a typical consumer, and can they apply here?

Clients raised examples of communication that takes place outside the system, including supporting users in creating or accessing their account, chasing fellow Editors and staff to complete tasks or maintain status updates, and collecting information that EM/PM doesn’t inherently support in the desired way (such as co-Author forms and issue line-up information). Beyond standard and custom letters, communication-related functionality within the system commonly used were identified as discussion forums, automatic EAR reports, the Manuscript Notes field on the Details page, ad hoc emails, Dropbox import and correspondence history, custom status terms and decision phrases, linked resources, and custom instructional text. But how do EM/PM customers determine if this functionality, and how they leverage it to their unique preferences, is effective? Attendees shared both formal and informal ways of measuring successful communication and engagement, including a reduced number of support queries, new user’s ability to create and log into their account without roadblocks, Authors and Reviewers following instructions correctly and completing tasks on time, faster invitation acceptance rates for peer review or solicited content, effective use of deep links, less need for ad hoc emails or manual reminders, tracking if linked resources are clicked and viewed, reduced abandonment of workflow during complex areas, pulling performance reports from EAR, and more.

After identifying what our clients consider “wins” in user engagement, Aries discussion leads pivoted the conversation to determine where improvements can be made. Attendees reported several challenges they currently face in communicating and engaging with both internal and external stakeholders. The lack of insights and control over email performance, deliverability, and segmentation (for batch emails), was a key pain point raised in all groups. Similarly, registration and login hiccups are common due to confusion between journal sites and the different roles available under a single account. Some commented that the number of emails received and the depth of content within the emails themselves can be daunting or overwhelming to Authors and Reviewers, especially if also being contacted by competitor journals. It was noted that educational institutions may render deep links unusable, and Authors/co-Authors and Reviewers occasionally falsely assume that deep links are suspicious and opt not to respond out of caution. Also, Authors and Reviewers often reply directly to emails sent from EM/PM rather than addressing it to the journal or sending an ad hoc email from the system. Additionally, a few audience members commented on the manual processes and confusion around importing external communication into the system. Custom instructions are often overlooked by Authors and Reviewers – no matter how well written or formatted – which leads to incorrect completion of tasks and delays in the workflow, and the red text warnings produced by the system may not be enough to flag or explain the error(s). Lastly, clients described disconnects that occur between their editorial teams. Management of Editor chains, use of discussion forums, and organization of folders in the system can be confusing, leading some clients to track tasks or submissions through a spreadsheet.

To organize all the input from attendees in the rapid-fire discussion stage, Aries staff sorted the feedback into categories that have similar overarching themes. These revealed a unanimous desire for additional transparency or visibility in the system, better prioritization of Author and Reviewer interaction with the system/the journal/each other, reduced need to work outside the system or better connect outside work to the system, and refined email and reinventing communication. Equipped with these themes, groups were then invited to propose potential solutions that both journals and Aries can consider introducing to help improve communication and user engagement.

To address gaps in visibility, attendees suggested more organized, comprehensive, flexible dashboards to reduce time spent shifting through folders. The ability to compile Reviewer feedback in one place was also suggested as an enhancement to centralize data. Another raised the possibility of a Main Menu that links to all open assignments across all roles the user has associated with their account, and clicking on an assignment will automatically shift to that role in the system. Others requested more transparency between Editor chains, with a dashboard that displays assignments, timelines, and roadblocks of other editorial staff – which would also help reduce time spent pursuing Editors for updates outside of EM/PM. Along that vein, a more intuitive and automatic method of importing external communications and data into the system was requested to easily preserve a proper paper trail. Finding ways to lessen external communication, such as adding the ability to add screenshots in custom instructions to guide new users or making ad hoc emails to the Editor more prominent, would help reduce confusion and keep messaging in application.

While email functionality in EM/PM is robust, our clients had many suggestions to help take it to the next level! Adding the ability to make emails look/appear more personal and less like an automated message was noted by a few attendees to help boost responses and engagement. Creating standard support-specific letter templates that include merge fields for handy screenshots/tutorials was flagged as a potential opportunity to collaborate with publishers on best practices. Most notably, clients expressed interest in having access to email performance metrics and statistics to measure opens, clicks, bounces, and more to clean up inactive/invalid users and inform strategic outreach efforts. When prompted to consider the possibilities of communication outside of traditional email, ideas for a live messenger-link chat for Editors only, text message support systems, and mobile push notifications for all roles were suggested by groups in the workshop.

But the brainstorming didn’t stop there! Pivoting the conversation to focus specifically on the Author and Reviewer user perspective, attendees had several ideas to enhance their experience and drive engagement. One attendee suggested that Authors with matching classifications be notified of open calls for papers from the journal via a pop-up message when they log in. Many clients appreciated some of the Reviewer recognition services already integrated within EM, but wanted to explore additional opportunities for acknowledgement. This can include collaborating with journals on Reviewer certificates, creating mentorship programs and functionality to support partnered peer review, and introducing a means of recognizing other researchers who may have informally supported the primary Reviewer with their assignment. Some clients expressed challenges related to co-Author engagement or verification, but were unsure of how best to solve for it. Other potential solutions put forth during the session for Aries to consider included AI options for communication and privacy, enhancing discussion forums to include attachments and report on interactions held within the forum, and better communication/guidance for greener Editors by creating more intuitive instructions or setting auto-system limitations (such as preventing them from inviting 30 Reviewers at a time, or at least adding a system warning to indicate any consequences).

“As my role has grown at Aries, my responsibilities are more managerial with less direct interaction with our customers than I had previously,” said Victoria Beaulac, US Client Services Manager. “That’s what makes our annual user group meetings so great – providing an opportunity to connect with both new and super-users on a more intimate level. Leading discussions in this year’s Discovery Roundtables workshop allowed me to not only engage with our users, but also ask them about how they – in turn – engage with their users and explore avenues in which we can support them.”

Check out our high-level recap of the recent user group meeting and catch upcoming posts in the four-part 2024 Discovery Digest blog series in the weeks to come!