Sportex Time-saving resources for physical & manual therapists

Our content is different - here's why

Last Updated: 26/10/2016

Without exception all our content is heavily focused on achieving the following:

  • Translating research into practical application
  • Providing hands-on advice and practical demonstrations wherever possible
  • Building and developing learning tools and communities

In a nutshell it's got to be new, true and readily applied.

We are not (and neither do we seek to be) a research journal. We're written for hands-on practitioners, those of you who are doing the real jobs on the ground, be it on the court or pitch side, in the clinic or even in your home. If you're one of those then look no further, you've found probably the most practical physical and manual therapy resource in the world!

If you're interested in how we seek to achieve this then read on

We incentivise our contributors to create content that's:

  • Going to be popular to read
  • Is packed with practical tools and resources
  • Is constantly improving

We do this through a number of different ways but most importantly instead of paying authors a fixed fee to write an article (which is the cheaper option for us), we have taken the decision to pay 25% of all sales of content back to the authors and commissioning editors for the entire time that it remains live on the site (ie. clinically up to date). This is fundamental. We believe not only is this the right and fair way to do business but at the same time, it should mean that our writers are totally focused on creating content that is going to be popular to read and it incentivises them to keep it up to date and continually enhance it. Then it's what comes next that's the clever bit...

Dividing up the content pot

The first thing is that we've created a credit system. Every item that's included within an article (including the article itself) is assigned credits based on its quality and impact factor. So for example an article of 3,000 words would earn around 50 credits. Images and photos would earn 2 credits each, tables (5 credits), flow charts (8 credits), a custom-produced video of 10 minutes in total (30 credits), multiple choice quizzes (20-40 credits depending on question-type variation) and other things we have credits for include animations, PowerPoint presentations and a number of other 'assets'. This means that a piece of content has a credit value that is the total of all these parts. We use this to calculate the price of the individual article if purchased as a standalone item - the higher the credit value, the higher the number and value of the assets attached to that piece of content. We also use it within the author royalty equation. If their article has more credits, it will get a bigger share of the pot.

However…we also use some other elements within the royalty equation (it's part of the magic sauce or maybe we should spell it 'source'). In addition to the relative credit contribution, we also use a number of 'engagement' aspects such as social media shares of an article, user views and discussion participation to name the main ones.

We put all this together and that's what determines who gets how much out of the royalty split. So the authors should always be incentivised to both submit the best article possible with the most 'assets' but also update it and enhance it to encourage further purchasing. Authors are able to edit their articles at any time, at which point the linked commissioning editor will review changes, submit for further peer review if they deem it necessary and then give the OK to be updated.

The other great thing is that if someone contributes an 'asset' (whatever that might be) and we feel it would be useful as an addition to other articles or learning units, we can link it to new or existing content and pay the asset creator royalties on sales of these items as well.

So while it may all seem very simple on the surface, there's a LOT going on behind the scenes!

One other cool little feature

We can divide royalty shares by any percentage and as many times as you want against any 'asset' (which includes articles and all types of media). So if you submit an article and there were three authors and you want one author to get 40 percent and the other two to get 30% each - we can do it. The same goes for all the media. So for example say you know another colleague who has a great presentation or video that could accompany the content you are submitting (and will add credits to your own submission), you can include this and just tell us how to split the royalties for that particular asset (again we can split it among as many people as you like). The computer then calculates everything accordingly when creating the royalty report! As you can tell, I'm really quite excited about all this (but then I am unashamedly a geek!).

Do you have resources you'd like to contribute?

If you have resources of any kind such as videos, animations, slideshows/presentations from lectures or conferences that you feel could work as either standalone resource or as additions to existing articles - we'd love to include these (following appropriate peer-review) with our new community and include you in our royalty shares if this is something you'd be interested in. Just drop me an email tor@sportex.net with more details and I really look forward to changing the world of business to business publishing with you.

As always ALL feedback welcome - just email me!