Customer Feedback Survey: Presentation: Open Access Management mit dem Forschungsinformationssystem Pure ( Dr. Johannes Ferber, Elsevier)

Question Title

* 1. Personal Information

Name (First Name, Last Name)

Institution/Organisation/Company

Job Title

Email Address

Question Title

* 2. Please indicate the main purpose(s) for attending the presentation:

Learn more about Elsevier’s Strategy

Learn more about Product Updates

Network with colleagues

Network with Elsevier representatives

Other (please specify)

Question Title

* 3. How did you hear about the presentation?

By email

From a colleague

On a website

On twitter

Other (please specify)

Question Title

* 4. How would you rate the presentation overall?

Excellent

Very good

Good

Satisfactory

Not very good

Poor

Question Title

* 5. Please rate the presentations below

	Very informative	Informative	Less informative	Not at all informative	N/A (did not attend)
Open Access Management mit dem Forschungsinformationsystem Pure	Open Access Management mit dem Forschungsinformationsystem Pure Very informative	Open Access Management mit dem Forschungsinformationsystem Pure Informative	Open Access Management mit dem Forschungsinformationsystem Pure Less informative	Open Access Management mit dem Forschungsinformationsystem Pure Not at all informative	Open Access Management mit dem Forschungsinformationsystem Pure N/A (did not attend)

Question Title

* 6. To what extent do you agree with the following:

	Strongly agree	Agree	Slightly agree	Slightly disagree	Disagree	Strongly disagree
The Elsevier staff/ presenters had a good understanding of my institution’s needs	The Elsevier staff/ presenters had a good understanding of my institution’s needs Strongly agree	The Elsevier staff/ presenters had a good understanding of my institution’s needs Agree	The Elsevier staff/ presenters had a good understanding of my institution’s needs Slightly agree	The Elsevier staff/ presenters had a good understanding of my institution’s needs Slightly disagree	The Elsevier staff/ presenters had a good understanding of my institution’s needs Disagree	The Elsevier staff/ presenters had a good understanding of my institution’s needs Strongly disagree
The information shared was relevant and useful to me in my job	The information shared was relevant and useful to me in my job Strongly agree	The information shared was relevant and useful to me in my job Agree	The information shared was relevant and useful to me in my job Slightly agree	The information shared was relevant and useful to me in my job Slightly disagree	The information shared was relevant and useful to me in my job Disagree	The information shared was relevant and useful to me in my job Strongly disagree

Question Title

* 7. Please give us your opinion on the following:

	More time needed	About right	Less time needed
Length of the presentation	Length of the presentation More time needed	Length of the presentation About right	Length of the presentation Less time needed
Amount of time for Q&A	Amount of time for Q&A More time needed	Amount of time for Q&A About right	Amount of time for Q&A Less time needed

Question Title

* 8. Did you miss information about the product?

Yes

If Yes, please specify:

Question Title

* 9. Did the presentation enhance your interest in the topic?

Yes

If Yes, please specify which products or topics:

Question Title

* 10. Which topic(s) would you like to hear more about?

Open Science

Open Access

Innovation in Publishing

Research data

Research Evaluation and Funding

Library Tools and Technology

Role of a Librarian

Other (please specify)

Question Title

* 11. How likely are you to attend our next event/ presentation on Pure and Research Management?

Definitely will attend

Probably will not attend

Question Title

* 12. What do you think about Elsevier based on this event?

Elsevier is doing better than other vendors

Elsevier is as good as other vendors

Elsevier is doing worse than other vendors

Question Title

* 13. Based on the following attributes, how is your impression of Elsevier?

	Improved greatly	Improved slightly	No difference	Worsened slightly	Worsened greatly
Elsevier empowers knowledge	Elsevier empowers knowledge Improved greatly	Elsevier empowers knowledge Improved slightly	Elsevier empowers knowledge No difference	Elsevier empowers knowledge Worsened slightly	Elsevier empowers knowledge Worsened greatly
Elsevier is innovative	Elsevier is innovative Improved greatly	Elsevier is innovative Improved slightly	Elsevier is innovative No difference	Elsevier is innovative Worsened slightly	Elsevier is innovative Worsened greatly
Elsevier is trustworthy	Elsevier is trustworthy Improved greatly	Elsevier is trustworthy Improved slightly	Elsevier is trustworthy No difference	Elsevier is trustworthy Worsened slightly	Elsevier is trustworthy Worsened greatly
Elsevier understands my needs	Elsevier understands my needs Improved greatly	Elsevier understands my needs Improved slightly	Elsevier understands my needs No difference	Elsevier understands my needs Worsened slightly	Elsevier understands my needs Worsened greatly
Elsevier is a partner to the science community	Elsevier is a partner to the science community Improved greatly	Elsevier is a partner to the science community Improved slightly	Elsevier is a partner to the science community No difference	Elsevier is a partner to the science community Worsened slightly	Elsevier is a partner to the science community Worsened greatly

Question Title

* 14. Would you like to be contacted after the Wisskom2016 regarding the following products:

	Yes	No
Science Direct	Science Direct Yes	Science Direct No
Scopus	Scopus Yes	Scopus No
E-books	E-books Yes	E-books No
Mendeley	Mendeley Yes	Mendeley No
SciVal	SciVal Yes	SciVal No
Pure	Pure Yes	Pure No

Other (please specify)

Question Title

* 15. Suggestions and comments for future events

Thank you for your feedback, this will help us improve future events and presentations.