ScholarStack
Research paper management for academics who need to organize, annotate, and track papers in one place.
Tagline
Track papers like a real pipeline
The research operating system for publishing teams
Stop tracking papers in spreadsheets
Turn your bibliography into a publication pipeline
The research operating system for teams that publish, not just collect PDFs.
The dashboard, authors, status tracking, and category breakdown suggest this is more than a reference manager; it's a workflow layer around a research pipeline.
The alternative to spreadsheet-based paper tracking for labs and internal research teams.
The visible UI is centered on counts, statuses, and ownership, which maps directly to the mess people currently manage in Sheets, Notion, or Airtable.
Turn your bibliography into a managed publication pipeline.
Because the product shows draft/published/in-review states plus authors and categories, the strongest pain-killer message is about moving from passive storage to active throughput.
Primary user
Academic research leads or lab managers coordinating a shared paper database
ICP #1
Research operations manager at a university lab with 5-20 active contributors
Pain
They are juggling papers across draft, review, and published states, while also trying to keep author ownership, categories, and citations straight in spreadsheets or scattered docs.
Why this solves
ScholarStack gives them a shared dashboard with paper counts, status, authors, and categories in one system, which is exactly the coordination layer spreadsheets fail at.
ICP #2
Internal research lead at a consulting or strategy team publishing client-facing reports
Pain
They need visibility into which reports are in review, who owns them, and how the research portfolio is distributed across themes like FinOps or AI.
Why this solves
The app already exposes publication state, author attribution, and topic breakdowns, making it a lightweight control center for a research publishing pipeline.
ICP #3
PhD student or postdoc managing a growing bibliographic database across multiple projects
Pain
They lose time searching old papers, remembering which draft is current, and keeping notes or annotations tied to the right reference.
Why this solves
A library plus add-paper workflow and per-paper records give them a central place to store and retrieve research artifacts instead of relying on Zotero alone for team workflow.
Strengths
- +The homepage immediately communicates the product is a working internal system, not a vague concept.
- +The dashboard surfaces useful operational metrics like total papers, citations, and active authors right away.
- +The recent papers section makes the product feel real by showing concrete research titles, authors, dates, and statuses.
Weaknesses
- −The page reads like an app shell, not a landing page; there is almost no value proposition beyond the metadata description.
- −There is no explanation of who this is for, why it is better than Zotero/Notion/Airtable, or what specific workflow pain it removes.
- −The presence of lorem-style institutional labels like "ARM" and "Internal Database" creates confusion about whether this is a product, an internal tool, or a demo.
- −"Agent Studio" is mentioned but not explained, which risks sounding gimmicky or irrelevant to the core use case.
- −The content focuses on counts and labels, but does not show annotation, search, import, export, collaboration, or citation management details that buyers would care about.
Fix these
- Rewrite the hero to state the core promise in plain English: manage research papers, authors, and publication status in one workspace.
- Add a competitor comparison section that explicitly positions ScholarStack against Zotero, Mendeley, Notion, and Airtable.
- Show the missing workflow moments: importing papers, annotating records, tagging, filtering, and changing status.
- Clarify the role of Agent Studio with one concrete example of what it does for researchers, or remove it from the primary message.
- Replace the current dashboard-first presentation with a buyer-first narrative: problem, workflow, proof, then product screenshots.
Drop-in replacement copy
Headline
Manage research papers in one place
Track authors, status, and citations without spreadsheets or scattered docs.
See your entire paper pipeline
Know what is draft, in review, and published at a glance. The dashboard shows counts, citations, and active authors so research leads can spot bottlenecks fast.
Keep authors and ownership clear
Assign contributors to each paper and keep the ownership visible to the whole team. No more digging through Slack to figure out who owns the latest revision.
Organize by topic, not chaos
Group papers by research areas like FinOps, AI & Automation, Workforce, and Forecasting. That makes it easier to review the portfolio and find related work quickly.
Use a shared library your team can trust
Add papers, browse the research library, and keep records in one system instead of splitting metadata across Notion, Sheets, and email. Everyone sees the same source of truth.
FAQ
Is this a replacement for Zotero?
Not exactly. Zotero is great for reference collection; ScholarStack is built for team workflow, status tracking, and coordination around papers.
Who is this best for?
It’s best for lab managers, research ops leads, and internal research teams with multiple contributors who need to track ownership and publication state.
Can I use this for draft and review workflows?
Yes. ScholarStack is built to track paper status like Draft, In Review, and Published so the team always knows where each paper stands.
Does it support collaboration across multiple authors?
Yes. Papers can be tied to active authors and managed as a shared team database, which makes handoffs and accountability much clearer.
What makes this different from Notion or Airtable?
Notion and Airtable can be adapted, but ScholarStack starts with the research workflow already in mind: papers, authors, status, citations, and categories.
ScholarStack is for research teams that need one place for papers, authors, statuses, and citations. Not another reference dump. A working research database. Built for labs, internal research teams, and PhDs who publish.
If your paper tracker lives in Sheets, Notion, or someone’s inbox, you already know the pain. ScholarStack keeps draft, review, and published papers in one shared system. Less hunting. More publishing.
I kept seeing the same workflow everywhere: - papers in Zotero - status in Sheets - ownership in Slack - notes in random docs ScholarStack combines the parts teams actually need: papers, authors, categories, and status.
Most tools help you collect papers. Very few help you answer: Who owns this? What stage is it in? What topic does it belong to? That’s the gap ScholarStack is built for.
If your research workflow is: Airtable for metadata Notion for notes Slack for approvals Sheets for status You don’t have a system. You have friction with better branding. ScholarStack replaces the mess.
The worst part of research isn’t reading papers. It’s finding the current draft, remembering who owns it, and checking whether it’s still in review. ScholarStack keeps that state visible for the whole team.
ScholarStack dashboard shows total papers, published count, in-review items, citations, and active authors. Then you drill into the library, add a paper, assign authors, and track status. That’s the workflow.
A lot of research tools are great at capture. ScholarStack is built for coordination. Library view. Add paper flow. Authors. Status tracking. Topic buckets. It’s the control panel for a team that publishes.
The moment a lab has more than a few contributors, paper tracking gets ugly. ScholarStack is built for that exact moment: shared ownership, visible status, clear categories, and a dashboard everyone can read in 5 seconds.
Built for research leads, lab managers, and internal teams who publish regularly. If your team needs to know what’s draft, what’s in review, and who’s on it, ScholarStack is the missing layer.
Angle: replace spreadsheets with a real workflow
A lot of research teams are still managing papers like this: • citations in one tool • status in a spreadsheet • authors in Slack • notes in random docs That works until the team grows past 3 people. Then nobody knows which draft is current, who owns the next revision, or which papers are still in review. ScholarStack was built for that mess. It gives research teams one shared workspace for papers, authors, categories, and publication status. The goal is simple: stop treating bibliography management like storage. Treat it like a pipeline. That means: - visible paper status - shared author ownership - topic-based organization - a library your whole team can actually use If you run a lab, research ops, or an internal research team, this is probably familiar. And if it is, the problem is not finding more tools. It’s replacing the spreadsheet with something built for publishing.
Angle: positioning against Zotero/Notion/Airtable
Zotero is good for collecting references. Notion is good for writing docs. Airtable is good for building tables. But research teams publishing actual papers need something else: coordination. Who owns the draft? What stage is it in? Which topic does it belong to? How many papers are in review right now? That’s the gap ScholarStack is designed to fill. It’s not trying to replace every tool in your stack. It’s the layer that makes your research portfolio visible and manageable. The product centers on a few things that matter in real teams: - total papers and publication status - authors and ownership - categories like FinOps, AI & Automation, Workforce, Forecasting - recent submissions and paper history In other words: a research operating system, not another place to dump PDFs. That framing matters because the buyer is not looking for “more storage.” They’re looking for fewer coordination mistakes.
Angle: why we built it and what to test
I kept seeing the same failure mode in research teams: The work existed. The references existed. The drafts existed. But nobody had a clean view of the system. So updates lived in Slack threads, status lived in Sheets, and the actual paper library became a graveyard of half-maintained records. ScholarStack is my attempt to fix that with one simple idea: make research work visible. That means a dashboard that shows what matters immediately: - papers in draft, review, and published states - active authors - citations - recent submissions - topic breakdowns If you’re running a lab or internal research team, I’d love feedback on one question: what’s the one workflow you still do manually today that should be a button? That answer will shape the next version of the product.
Tagline
Paper tracking for real research teams
Description
ScholarStack keeps papers, authors, categories, and publication status in one workspace for labs and research teams. Stop juggling spreadsheets, Slack, and scattered docs just to know what’s draft, in review, or published.
Maker's first comment
I built ScholarStack because I kept watching research teams do the same thing over and over: track paper status in a spreadsheet, ownership in Slack, notes in docs, and citations somewhere else entirely. The result is always the same - nobody knows what’s current, who owns what, or how the research portfolio is actually moving. ScholarStack is my attempt to make that workflow visible. It’s a shared research database with paper records, author management, topic categories, and publication status in one place. The goal is not to replace every tool researchers use; it’s to replace the coordination layer that keeps breaking as soon as a team grows. I’m launching this because I want to learn what research teams actually need most: better importing, better annotation, better filters/search, or cleaner collaboration around draft and review workflows. If you run a lab or manage a research pipeline, I’d love your feedback on what’s missing.
Pinned maker comment
Would love feedback on the core workflow: importing papers, assigning authors, tracking review status, and finding the right paper fast. If you manage a research team, what would make this immediately useful?
Meta
Still tracking papers in spreadsheets?
Target: academic labs, research ops managers, and internal research teams with 5-20 contributors. Hypothesis: teams publishing multiple papers will switch from Sheets/Notion to a dedicated paper pipeline if it shows ownership, status, and categories in one place. ScholarStack keeps draft, in-review, and published papers organized without the spreadsheet chaos.
Google Search
research paper management software
Target: people actively searching for Zotero alternatives, paper tracking tools, or research database software. Hypothesis: searchers who need more than reference storage will convert when they see a shared workspace for papers, authors, and publication status. Manage your research pipeline in one place.
Reddit Promoted
Built for teams that publish papers
Target: researchers and indie builders reading subreddits where people complain about Notion/Airtable/Sheets workflows. Hypothesis: posts that show the coordination problem - not the product pitch - will drive signups from people already feeling the pain. ScholarStack centralizes papers, authors, and status for research teams.
Subreddits
r/academia
Show the workflow pain of managing drafts, authors, and publication status across a growing research team
Rules: No blatant self-promo; lead with a genuine problem, include lessons learned, and keep it useful for academics
r/research
Share a before/after of spreadsheet-based paper tracking vs a shared research database
Rules: Be educational first; avoid spammy launch language and focus on the process
r/SideProject
Build-in-public post about making a research ops tool for labs and internal teams
Rules: Show screenshots, explain the build, and respond to comments; no low-effort marketing
r/indiehackers
How to validate a niche SaaS for research teams and what features mattered most
Rules: Share numbers, lessons, and progress; self-promo is tolerated only when wrapped in a real story
r/Mendeley
Position as a collaboration and status layer for teams that outgrow reference managers
Rules: Stay respectful of existing tools, avoid trashing competitors, and focus on workflow gaps
Communities
Post a build log and ask for feedback on positioning, then reply to every comment with specifics about the research workflow
Share launch assets early, ask for copy feedback, and swap support with other makers without turning it into a promo dump
Launch with a process-oriented story about research tooling and avoid hype; answer technical and product questions directly
Cold outreach template
{firstName} - saw that you’re working on {context}. We built ScholarStack for teams juggling papers, authors, and review status in spreadsheets/docs. If you’re open, I’d love to show you a 2-minute demo and hear what would make it useful for your workflow.
Product Hunt timing
Launch on Tuesday at 12:01am PT. That gives you a full weekday window for academic and US-based research teams to see it, and it avoids weekend dead zones when labs and internal teams are less active.
Indie Hackers post ideas
- 01I built a research paper tracker because spreadsheets broke
- 02What academics actually need from a Zotero alternative
- 03How to price niche SaaS for research teams with 5-20 contributors
Competitor alternatives
Current tone of voice
Technical and internal-ops oriented, with a clean research-dashboard feel; for example, the page uses phrases like "Internal Database," "Research Hub," and "Awaiting approval" rather than consumer-friendly marketing language.
Your kit is ready. Sign up free to unlock, takes 10 seconds.
7 more X posts · 2 LinkedIn · Product Hunt copy · ad hooks · 100-user playbook · landing critique