The specification of value as a principle to make the editorial process of scientific journals lean from the perspective of the author
This research aimed to identify what scientific papers authors understand as activities of value in the editorial process of journals, —in order to eliminate wastes and to become the workflow simplified and streamlined, from submission to publication. The research was characterized as a survey, as i...
| Autores: | , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2020 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Recursos: | Federação Brasileira de Associações de Bibliotecários, Cientistas da Informação e Instituições (FEBAB) |
| Repositorio: | RBBD. Revista Brasileira de Biblioteconomia e Documentação (Online) |
| Idioma: | portugués |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ojs.rbbd.febab.org.br:article/1397 |
| Acesso em linha: | https://rbbd.febab.org.br/rbbd/article/view/1397 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palavra-chave: | Scientific journals. Editorial process of scientific journals. Value. Lean thinking. Periódicos científicos Processo editorial dos periódicos científicos Valor Pensamento enxuto |
| Resumo: | This research aimed to identify what scientific papers authors understand as activities of value in the editorial process of journals, —in order to eliminate wastes and to become the workflow simplified and streamlined, from submission to publication. The research was characterized as a survey, as it consisted of verifying the value identified in the editorial process by papers authors published in three scientific journals, between 2015 and 2017. Based on its purpose the research was classified as applied, its nature is qualitative and quantitative or mixed. The techniques applied for data collection were survey and the systematic observation of the activities developed in the editorial process of the analyzed journals. The questions analysis method used was the mixed method technique. It was identified what authors consider to be of value in the editorial process: the waiting time reduction for the evaluation and publication process; and the reduction the number of interactions between journal and author, establishing a continuous flow. They also indicated that the evaluations quality is of great importance, as well as communication efficiency in between journal and authors. As opportunities for improvement were pointed out: the reduction of waiting time for publication; the reduction in the amount of interactions between authors and journal; improving the efficiency of communication between journal and authors; and that the original follows the continuous flow without so much time waiting between one process and another. |
|---|