Why Custom Support Matters

In academic publishing, no two journals are exactly alike. From editorial focus to funding model or from review rigor to production standards, every journal is shaped by the community it serves. Yet, when it comes to infrastructure, many journal management platforms treat them as if they were interchangeable. This forces diverse workflows into a single mold.

This disconnect is more than a nuisance, it can hinder growth, delay publication, and burn out already-over-extended editorial teams. As editors are increasingly asked to do more with less, the systems supporting them should adapt to their needs, not the other way around.

Rigid Platforms, Real Frustrations

Many of the dominant systems in the market are designed for scale. But not necessarily for nuance. These one-size-fits-all workflows may work well for large commercial publishers with standardized processes, but they can be limiting or even unworkable for smaller, society-led, or emerging journals. In such contexts, editorial teams often find themselves creating awkward workarounds, hiring developers for integrations, or giving up on certain features altogether.

This is why JAMS was built. Developed not just for editors, but with them, JAMS recognizes that editorial excellence comes in many forms—and the tools supporting it must be equally flexible.

Editorial Diversity Requires Tailored Infrastructure

Consider the needs of a clinical journal managing complex multi-stage peer reviews or a new humanities journal aiming for first-time indexing. One may need strict protocol enforcement, and the other, strategic guidance on discoverability. Some editorial boards want full autonomy while others appreciate hands-on consulting. And many journals operate in languages other than English, or using unique funding ecosystems that require sensitive, localized support.

JAMS embraces this complexity. Its modular design means publishers can activate only the features they need. Nothing more, nothing less. Add to that optional editorial consulting, a support team with hands-on publishing experience, and scalable services for submission, production, and hosting, and you have a system that respects the identity of each journal it serves.

Tailored Support: A Sustainability Strategy

Custom support is not a luxury, it’s a path to resilience. Journals that rely on rigid platforms often outgrow them or abandon them mid-stream, incurring avoidable costs. But when infrastructure is designed to evolve with the journal, transitions like editorial board changes or increases in submission volume become smoother and less disruptive.

JAMS’ pricing model was developed with this in mind. Whether you’re a diamond open access journal in the Global South or a scholarly society in Europe, JAMS offers pricing tiers and support levels that align with your scale and mission. The goal is to ensure that sustainability doesn’t come at the cost of quality or identity.

Questions Editors Should Be Asking

Before selecting a platform, publishers should ask themselves:

• Does this system reflect the way we work, or will we have to change to fit it?
• Is support provided by people who understand publishing – or is it limited to generic software tools or automated bots?
• Can this platform grow with our journal, or will we eventually outgrow it?
• Are the costs transparent and appropriate to our publishing model?

These aren’t just technical questions, they’re also editorial ones. Choosing the right infrastructure is an editorial decision that impacts quality, timelines, and reputation.

A Platform Built from Experience

JAMS (https://jams.pub/) is more than just a platform—it’s a publishing partner. Backed by over two decades of MDPI’s experience in open access publishing and trusted by publishers ranging from university presses to niche journals, JAMS was created to empower—not replace—the editorial teams behind scholarly publishing. At the heart of every journal are human decisions: what to publish, how to review, who to reach. A journal management system should amplify those decisions, not get in the way.