A beginner, not a predator.
I have not read all the posts, but I recognize some of the frustration that I saw in some other participants during my first Omics Conference experience as an authorizing organizer and speaker. I am participating in a second conference as an organizer next year; and I have published 3 papers in Omics journals. So, my comments should be weighed based on these disclosures.
The blogger’s statement, “I strongly recommend, in the strongest terms possible, that all scholars from all countries avoid doing business in any way with the OMICS Group,” is so extreme that it warrants scrutiny itself regarding its motivation and integrity, too. And for criticism that is so damning, supporting it with anonymous statements, which are either false or from cowards, is not acceptable. Surely, given their “testimony” such masked persons are not worried about being retaliated against by Omics.
I have enjoyed working with the OMICs Group staffers. The review of my papers has been as adequate as any other peer-reviewed journal in which I have published, though perhaps less capricious. Since it is an open access journal, I was never misled about publication costs. If anything, they have been aggressive about selling memberships, but I have not spent a penny more than I was told I would or expected to spend.
Omics Group is not good at organizing meetings, yet, but I expect that this is just growing pains and perhaps focusing too much on the number of meetings instead of the overall quality of them. But listen, everyone, scientific meetings as a for-profit business is now old news. I have participated in several other for-profit conferences over the years. Some, which started out with bad reviews and skepticism like Omics, are now highly rated and very popular scientific forums. Scientists who used to turn-up their noses at these conferences are now gracious headliners. Unlike non-profit meetings, the conference staff organizes the scientific program instead of selected (often self-selected) scientific organizing committees. Non-profit meetings draw their participants from their preeminent reputations and scientific society associations. For-profit meetings draw their participants based on the reputations of noted scientists who they invite and ask to recommend other speakers in their fields. Sometimes with their expenses covered, but not always. Whether for-profit or non-profit, invited speakers are some times asked to cover a part of or all of their expenses. So, most of what is being condemned about Omics is not unique to the growing pains of learning how to develop numerous quality scientific conferences across diverse research disciplines.
Now, the one thing I do hear consistently underplaying in even critical posts is that Omics is succeeding in one of its stated missions: Increasing dissemination of scientific research and increasing opportunities for the training and development of young scientists. Many comments say that Omics was not responsible for the learning, scientific exchange, experience, and new collaborations that occurred at their meeting. This pronouncement is quite unfair. Of course Omics must be given some share of the credit for these important positive attributes. I took advantage of the opportunity Omics offered me to bring together scientists who, in some cases, might never share the same scientific forum though working in the same field. What a great opportunity! The rooming accommodations were excellent, the conference venue was very good, and although I had some new minor roles requested of me at the meeting [growing pains again], the science that came together was quite remarkable. And that is what every scientific conference should count for success.
I can’t wait to see the growth that I expect to have occurred by my next meeting.
James L. Sherley, M.D., Ph.D.
Invited Omics Conference Organizer
Cell Science 2014
Valencia, Spain
