®


QUESTION 2 What would you have done differently?


This question was met with a variety of responses. Some spoke of the fact education publishing as a whole moves extremely slowly (even by publishing standards), emphasising that it is “difficult to go too far wrong”, whilst others said that they should have moved much earlier than they did as they would have gained a better foothold in the marketplace.


The desire to have avoided the sort of fragmentation that initially followed the emergence of tablets as widely used e-reading devices was also mentioned, and this was underscored by a general sentiment that the development of internal publishing solutions to meet these new challenges was, for some, a waste of time and resources. Internal departmental fragmentation also proved problematic, and there was a sense among some of the larger publishers that they’d regretted not developing ideas together; instead they created separate strategies per department. This type of alignment would naturally come more easily to smaller publishers.


The publishers we spoke to almost unanimously referred to the role of their sales and marketing teams in taking new digital projects to market. There was a general belief that colleagues in sales and marketing should have been included earlier on in the process, making this a more integral part of product development. By developing marketing plans early on, projects they’d worked on would have had a greater chance of success.


Page 3. “


Nearly all spoke of the past and continuing need to simplify the workflow of publishing content as much as possible.


“


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8