@adamhsparks @johannes_lehmann The problem with this type of issues is that you can't change things while keeping the status quo. Things need to change in academia. Number (as opposed to quality) of publications and impact factor are terrible ways of assessing whether someone should be promoted. There is so much more that should be assessed!
Quality of research, teaching, supervision of students, grants, engagement with the academic community/citizenship, engagement with the public and other research stakeholders, *real* commitment to open and reproducible research, and probably more!

This obviously requires people with power (e.g. those on promotion boards or funders) to change their mindset, but it also requires everyone to showcase, be proud and put effort towards their good practices, so that others start seeing the value in them and adopt them until they're widespread.
Things are slowly changing, but there is a lot of resistance, even in places that should be more "enlightened". The stark reality is that currently universities are run as businesses, and that is bad (I was recently asked if some research I'm doing is business critical. I don't know how I kept my cool.)