Library Publishing Services: Strategies for SuccessElectronic Resources & Libraries

April 3, 2012

About the Research Project

• Aim: To advance the professionalism of library-based publishing by identifying successful library publishing strategies and services, highlighting best practices, and recommending priorities for building capacity.

• Supported by a Collaborative Planning Grant from IMLS, with additional support from Berkeley Electronic Press, Microsoft Research, and SPARC.

• Purdue University, Georgia Institute of Technology, and University of Utah libraries.

Four Strategies (Oct 2010 – Sept 2011)

1. Survey of 223 library deans and directors (ARL, Oberlin Group, University Libraries Group)

2. Three sustainability case studies of publishing programs at Purdue (e-journals), Georgia Tech (conference proceedings), Utah (monographs)

3. Three consultative/community-building workshops at Georgia Tech (May 4-6), Utah (May 11-13) and Purdue (May 18-20, 2011)

4. Bibliographic research.

The State of Library Publishing Services

• Approximately half (55%) of all respondents to the survey indicated having or developing library publishing services. Interest in such services varied by institution size, with over three-quarters of ARLs being interested, compared to 30% of Oberlin Group institutions. Most libraries with existing programs anticipated increasing the program’s scale or scope in the next year.

• About three-quarters of the programs publish between one and six journals, the majority of which are only distributed electronically and are less than three-years old. About half of the programs publish conference proceedings, technical reports, or monographs; most often electronically, but with some print-on-demand distribution.

Areas of Focus / Recommendations

• Technological Infrastructure• Policies and Processes• Skills and Training• Sustainability Best Practices• Organization and Collaboration

Technological Infrastructure

Library Publishing Services

The Technology

Survey Results Software Used by Libraries for Publishing

http://pkp.sfu.ca/

http://www.bepress.com/

Workshop Feedback

• Increased flexibility/customization• Ecommerce/subscription support• Linking to data/supplemental material• Ability to publish monographs and multiple

journals• Richer analytics as a measure of publication and

program success• Support for peer review processes.

Recommendations

• Develop meaningful impact metrics for library publishing services to demonstrate the effectiveness and value of library-based publishing programs and inform resource allocations.

• Develop centrally hosted software solutions for publishing platforms to facilitate cost sharing and support robust system functionality and capacity.

Skills and Training

Data sources revealed much about skills and training

Survey ResultsThree Main Skills Required

Workshop Feedback“It’s Complicated”

 

Bibliographic ReviewSkills may be lacking; partnerships are key

Complete list of 50 core resources:

http://wp.sparc.arl.org/lps/appendix-4/

Recommendations • Create formal and informal training venues

• Articulate the particular value delivered by library publishing programs

• Establish dedicated library publishing positions

Policies and Processes

Workshop FeedbackService Level Agreements Important

• Defines roles and responsibilities (e.g., peer review practices, editorial deadlines).

• A test of commitment to sustainability.

Survey ResultsNeed for Shared Tools and Templates

Recommendations

• Establish editorial quality and performance criteria to increase the value and longevity of the publications that library programs support.

• Create a shared repository of policies, tools, and templates to improve and accelerate adherence to best practices and encourage community sharing and participation.

Sustainability Best PracticesOrganization and Collaboration

Sustainability is an Issue• The vast majority of library publishing programs (almost 90%) were launched in

order to contribute to change in the scholarly publishing system, supplemented by a variety of other mission-related motivations.

• The prevalence of mission-driven rationale aligns with the funding sources reported for library publishing programs, including library budget reallocations (97%), temporary funding from the institution (67%), and grant support (57%).

• However, many respondents expect a greater percentage of future publishing program funding to come from service fees, product revenue, charge-backs, royalties, and other program-generated income.

• The perceived relevance of publishing services to the library’s mission, and the integration of such services into the library’s budget, helps explain the relative lack of emphasis on sustainability planning. Few institutions (15%) have a documented sustainability plan for their publishing services, and only a fifth have evaluated the value or effectiveness of their publishing services.

Sustainability Best PracticesE.g., P&L Statements for OA Publications

docs.lib.purdue/ijpbl

Service Models / Revenue ApproachesE.g., Tiered Pricing Model at CDRS

http://cdrs.columbia.edu

Return-on-Investment Justifications

http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/

Collaborations and Partnerships“Is the library partnering with other units on campus in support of library

publishing services?”

http://wp.sparc.arl.org/lps/appendix-1/organization-and-collaboration/

Recommendations• Promote sustainability best practices to improve the long-term

strength and stability of library publishing programs.

• Share service models and revenue approaches to increase library publishing program funding options and facilitate the efficient implementation of successful programs.

• Develop return-on-investment justifications for funding library publishing programs to support increased library budget allocations in support of such programs.

• Promote collaborations and partnerships to leverage resources within campuses, across institutions, and between university presses, scholarly societies, and other partners.

http://wp.sparc.arl.org/lps/Comments Please!