International Journal Course Asia

A solid understanding of scholarly communication is the foundation on which every other skill in academic publishing rests. In this module, we walk participants all aspects of a journal – from commissioning and submission through peer review, production, publication, and post-publication evaluation. The aim is not simply to list the steps, but to help participants see how they connect, what are its mechanisms, and why certain practices have evolved the way they have.

Academic publishing can feel overwhelming: open access policies, platform changes, integrity pressures, and shifting expectations from authors and institutions. Yet underneath this, the system is comparatively stable and surprisingly logical once its mechanics are understood. We look at how editorial, operational, and commercial decisions interact; how journals build identity and relevance; and how publishers can support editors and communities in a way that is both efficient and respectful.

Participants often describe this part of the course as the moment when the industry stops feeling fragmented. Workflows start to make sense in context, challenges that once seemed random become understandable, and people begin to see clearly where they, in their own roles, can have a meaningful impact. It turns a job made up of tasks into a connected system – and that shift in perspective tends to stay with them.

Whether you’re responsible for a single journal or a group of titles, long-term success depends on clear strategy rather than reactive fixes. This module focuses on how journals are positioned, developed, and sustained over time—balancing editorial mission, market realities, and financial constraints while maintaining a strong and credible identity.

We explore how journals evolve, how gaps and overlaps emerge within a subject area or organisation, and what drives decisions to launch, merge, reposition, or close titles. Participants gain practical ways to assess journals by discipline, audience, business model, and strategic importance, and to navigate the tensions that arise when the needs of individual journals compete with broader organisational or society goals.
Moving beyond submissions and impact factors, we focus on the quieter signals of journal health—editorial engagement, reviewer behaviour, author expectations, and competitive dynamics—and how experienced publishers use these insights to guide sustainable journal development and smarter portfolio decisions.

Production workflows are often underestimated because they operate “behind the scenes”, yet they determine how reliably a journal delivers on its promises to authors, readers and editors. In this module we unpack the path from accepted manuscript to published article, looking at handovers, quality checks, vendor relationships, formats, and the increasingly mixed reality of Word, LaTeX and platform-specific tooling.

Rather than treating production as a black box, we explore how design choices in the workflow affect speed, quality, cost and author experience. We discuss different models of working with suppliers, how to manage corrections and late changes, and where automation helps – and where it introduces new risks. We also look at the human side: information flow between editorial and production teams, the way small misunderstandings create systematic delays, and how to build constructive relationships with vendors.

The emphasis throughout is pragmatic. This is not a theoretical tour of best practice, but an honest conversation about what tends to go wrong, what is realistically fixable, and how participants can use their own position in the workflow to make the system more robust and predictable over time.

Peer review and research integrity sit at the heart of scholarly communication, yet for many publishing staff they remain partly opaque. In this module, we look closely at how peer review is supposed to function, how it actually functions in practice, and where the main integrity risks lie. We cover reviewer selection, editorial decision-making, conflicts of interest, and the growing landscape of manipulation, paper mills and image or data fraud.

The focus is not to turn participants into investigators, but to build a grounded understanding of where problems tend to emerge and what a proportionate response looks like. We discuss the respective roles of editors, publishers, institutions and authors; the limits of automated tools; and why a transparent, fair process matters as much as the final decision. Real cases are used to illustrate the tensions and trade-offs involved.

By demystifying both peer review and integrity workflows, the session aims to give participants a more confident, less anxious relationship with this side of publishing. Instead of viewing integrity issues as isolated crises, they learn to see them as part of a wider system of incentives, safeguards and responsibilities in which they themselves have a meaningful role.

Open Access is no longer a side-topic; it is central to how journals are financed, evaluated and governed. This module introduces the main OA business models – APC-funded, transformative agreements, Subscribe-to-Open, diamond OA and hybrid approaches – and looks at the practical consequences each model has for authors, institutions, publishers and societies.

We move beyond slogans in favour of a clear explanation of the economics and trade-offs involved. How does revenue flow under different models? Where do costs sit? How do agreements alter submission patterns or expectations from authors and funders? We also explore the operational implications: changes in workflows, metadata, licensing, reporting and communication with editors and partners who may have mixed views on OA.

The goal is not to promote a single “right” model, but to equip participants with enough understanding to take part in informed internal discussions, answer basic questions from authors, and appreciate why their organisation may be moving in a particular direction – or hesitating to do so.

Bibliometrics influence far more decisions than most early-career professionals realise. In this module we examine the indicators commonly used to judge journal performance – citation-based metrics, usage data, altmetrics and newer measures – and place them in proper context. Rather than treating metrics as either gospel or irrelevant, we show how experienced publishers read them: as signals that need careful interpretation.

We explore what different indicators can and cannot tell you about a journal’s health, including time lags, field differences and the distortion that can arise when a single metric is over-emphasised. We also look at how metrics shape the perceptions of authors, editors, funders and institutions, and the pressures this creates across the system.

A key theme is responsible use: how to work with data in a way that supports thoughtful decision-making rather than driving short-term, metric-chasing behaviour. Participants are encouraged to connect bibliometric signals to what they know about the journal’s actual strategy, community and content.

Scholarly publishing is, at its core, a relationship business. Editors, society officers, reviewers, authors and internal colleagues bring different personalities, incentives and cultural backgrounds to the table. In this module we focus on the interpersonal and cross-cultural skills that make those relationships work over time.

Drawing on established frameworks used in our long-running courses, we explore how different communication styles, expectations of hierarchy, and attitudes to time and conflict can influence day-to-day interactions. We connect this directly to publishing situations: negotiating with an editor-in-chief, handling complaints from authors, managing disagreements within a team, or collaborating across regions.

The aim is not to box people into personality types, but to increase self-awareness and empathy. Participants are invited to reflect on their own preferred ways of working and how these are perceived by others, and to experiment with small adjustments that can make collaborations smoother and more respectful. This edition additionally acknowledges the growing role of China within the scholarly communication landscape, ensuring that participants gain awareness of relevant regional trends while benefiting from the broader Asia-wide perspective.

We look at concrete use cases across the workflow and discuss how organisations are experimenting while trying to preserve integrity, fairness and trust. We also address the anxieties that AI creates – for editors, reviewers, authors and staff – and suggest ways to talk about these tools without either dismissing them or overselling them.

Finally, we zoom out to consider innovation more broadly: how to stay curious about new developments, how to evaluate them critically, and how to participate in change even if you are not in a formal “innovation” role. The emphasis is on informed, responsible adoption rather than chasing the latest buzzword.

The case study is the signature element of the course: a high-intensity team exercise in which participants design a new journal or reposition an existing one and then pitch their proposal to a panel. This module introduces, supports and debriefs that experience.

Working in small groups, participants draw on everything they have learned during the course – from editorial strategy and workflows to business models, metrics and community building. They must define the journal’s purpose and scope, outline a basic business case, think through practicalities such as peer review and production, and prepare a clear, persuasive pitch.

The value lies less in the “correctness” of the proposal and more in the process: negotiating different viewpoints, making decisions under time pressure, defending choices with evidence, and experiencing what it feels like to be accountable for a coherent plan. The debrief then connects the exercise back to participants’ real roles, highlighting what they can transfer into their day-to-day work.