Table of Contents
- Introduction
- Submission and Editorial Management: More Than Just a Manuscript
- Production: Choosing Between XML-First and PDF-First
- Metadata: Your Content’s Passport to the World
- Dissemination and Preservation: Go Wide, Think Long
- Post-Publication Enhancements: The Workflow Doesn’t End at “Published”
- Building a Sustainable, Scalable Workflow
- Conclusion: Your Workflow Is Your Publishing Strategy
Introduction
In today’s academic publishing landscape, workflows aren’t just about producing books or journals—they’re about creating structured, discoverable, and durable digital content. For decades, many presses relied on linear, manual processes that were editorially sound but digitally fragile. That model doesn’t cut it anymore. An efficient publishing workflow must now support digital interoperability, rich metadata, rapid turnaround, and sustainability across formats.
This article walks you through a modern academic publishing workflow, from manuscript submission to metadata-driven dissemination. Whether you work for a university press, research society, or independent academic publisher, this comprehensive guide can help you audit and enhance your production pipeline.
Submission and Editorial Management: More Than Just a Manuscript
It all starts with a manuscript, but how you handle that initial intake says a lot about your editorial maturity. In the past, email inboxes and Word document attachments were standard fare. Today, robust submission management systems like ScholarOne, Editorial Manager, and OJS streamline peer review, version control, and communication. Even for books, digital submission forms with structured metadata fields can reduce the headache of back-and-forth clarifications later.
Capturing metadata early in the workflow is key. At this stage, ask for ORCID IDs, suggested keywords, abstracts, contributor bios, and institutional affiliations. This isn’t busywork—it’s the foundation for discoverability downstream. The earlier you embed clean, structured metadata into your workflow, the easier your job becomes during production and distribution.
Editorial workflows also benefit from tools that support annotation, versioning, and collaborative editing. Google Docs, Overleaf (especially for STEM content), and Manuscripts.io are increasingly popular. These platforms aren’t just conveniences—they support transparency, traceability, and better documentation, especially when reviewers and authors exchange information extensively.
Production: Choosing Between XML-First and PDF-First
Production is where your publishing DNA really shows. Do you lead with design and layout, or do you lead with structure and flexibility? In short, are you PDF-first or XML-first?
In a PDF-first workflow, the manuscript goes through copyediting and typesetting directly in tools like Adobe InDesign. The final output is beautiful but not always structurally rich, which limits one’s ability to produce multiple formats or reuse content efficiently.
XML-first workflows, by contrast, prioritize structured content from the start. Using platforms like Typefi, Arbortext, or even custom pipelines built around JATS (Journal Article Tag Suite), publishers can produce multiple output formats—HTML, EPUB, PDF, and DAISY—from a single XML source. This is increasingly critical for accessibility compliance, digital preservation, and future-proofing your content.
Academic publishers still debate this, but the trend is clear: XML-first workflows are the future, particularly for journal publishers and digital-first books. Smaller presses might start with a hybrid approach: copyedit in Word, typeset in InDesign, and export structured XML or metadata for downstream use.
Metadata: Your Content’s Passport to the World
Metadata is no longer an optional appendix—it’s the backbone of discoverability. Once production wraps, metadata packaging begins. This includes descriptive metadata (title, abstract, keywords), administrative metadata (rights, licensing, embargoes), and technical metadata (file formats, checksums, identifiers).
ONIX (for books) and JATS XML (for journal articles) are two major standards you’ll need to understand. They’re more than formats; they’re industry-wide languages that ensure your content gets indexed, archived, cited, and discovered globally.
Assigning DOIs (Digital Object Identifiers) via Crossref or DataCite should be baked into your workflow and not added as an afterthought. DOIs are essential for citation tracking, usage metrics, and integration with research databases. Similarly, ORCID iDs should be collected early and pushed through your metadata feeds to ensure author disambiguation.
Clean metadata also supports marketing. Distributors, libraries, and aggregators depend on well-formed ONIX files to ingest your content into catalogues. If your ONIX is messy, missing, or misaligned, your book might as well not exist on those platforms.
Dissemination and Preservation: Go Wide, Think Long
Distribution is no longer just about shipping copies to bookstores. Today, dissemination is digital, multi-platform, and global. A modern workflow ensures content is export-ready for:
- Institutional repositories (via OAI-PMH or custom APIs)
- Commercial aggregators (e.g., JSTOR, Project MUSE, ProQuest)
- Open access platforms (including DOAJ and PKP PN)
- Your own press website or subject portals
This means your content—and its metadata—needs to be formatted and structured in multiple ways: an EPUB for ebook readers, a responsive HTML version for open-access readers, and a high-resolution PDF for archiving. Automated file conversion and metadata mapping tools can reduce manual labor here, especially when exporting to various platforms.
Digital preservation is often overlooked. CLOCKSS, LOCKSS, and Portico offer long-term archiving, ensuring your digital publications survive hardware failures, funding cuts, and institutional shutdowns. Deposit workflows should be integrated into your regular publishing schedule, not left to chance or year-end cleanups.
Post-Publication Enhancements: The Workflow Doesn’t End at “Published”
The publishing workflow doesn’t really end at publication. Smart academic publishers are increasingly engaging in post-publication strategies that extend visibility and impact.
Start with indexing. Submit your content to directories like Scopus, Web of Science, DOAJ (for OA content), or ERIC (for education-related materials). Ensure your metadata includes subject classifications like LCC or BISAC to improve library discoverability.
Next, consider adding enhancement layers. Article-level metrics (via Altmetric or PlumX), citation tracking, and usage stats help authors and funders see the value of their work. You might also enable annotations or post-publication peer review via platforms like hypothes.is or PubPub.
Finally, monitor and update metadata regularly. If an author’s ORCID profile changes or a DOI needs correction, a responsive metadata maintenance policy ensures your records remain accurate over time. Broken links or outdated metadata can undermine a publisher’s reputation faster than you’d think.
Building a Sustainable, Scalable Workflow
A modern academic publishing workflow must balance speed, structure, and scale. That’s no small task. But the good news is you don’t need to go all in at once. Start with small process improvements. Automate what you can. Standardize what you can’t automate. Document every part of your workflow clearly—not just for staff training, but also to comply with open science and data transparency requirements.
Invest in training your team. Many publishers focus on upgrading tools but forget the human factor. Workshops on metadata standards, XML editing, or even digital rights management can dramatically improve internal confidence and performance. Where possible, build cross-functional teams—regularly bring editorial, production, IT, and marketing into the same room. This helps uncover inefficiencies and align goals.
Finally, consider the power of feedback loops. Track where delays happen, where authors get confused, or where aggregators reject your files. Every rejection is a clue. Every bottleneck is a chance to streamline. The most successful academic publishers aren’t the ones with the flashiest software—they’re the ones who listen, adapt, and evolve.
Conclusion: Your Workflow Is Your Publishing Strategy
It’s tempting to treat publishing workflows as back-office mechanics. But in reality, your workflow is your publishing strategy. It defines how fast you can respond to authors, how discoverable your content is, how credible your press becomes, and how long your outputs will last.
In the age of open science, global research dissemination, and digital scholarship, academic publishers must think of themselves not just as producers of content but as stewards of information infrastructure. A modern workflow supports not just publication but longevity, access, and impact.
So if you’re still stuck emailing Word documents and scrambling for DOIs at the last minute, it might be time to evolve. Start with metadata. Build toward automation. Think long-term. And remember: every workflow improvement is a step toward relevance and resilience.