From: Michael Zeoli <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 13:19:26 +0000

I was very disappointed that the surveyors published findings without
checking facts and contacting important sources.  YBP Library Services
(aka Yankee Book Peddler) was mentioned more than once as a reason
some university presses are reluctant to publish dissertations.  YBP
was also cited as a source for (incorrect) information on university
library collecting habits in regard to dissertations.  In their
conclusion, the surveyors write: "It is unclear if these comments [by
university press directors regarding YBP] represent a minority view or
are shared by a larger group.  This is an area for future study."
None of the researchers contacted YBP Library Services.  I wonder how
many collection development and acquisitions librarians were
contected?

I cannot comment on university press policy towards ETDs, but I can
clarify the role of YBP in the distribution of content and the
relative success of ETD-based monographs in the academic library
market.  It is substantially different from what has been portrayed in
the CRL article.

The topic of academic library purchasing of dissertations has been
debated at length on LibLicense.  Academic librarians and publishers
have weighed in, but the whole truth lies beyond what has been
expressed there.  A misunderstanding developed from the loose throwing
around of the term 'dissertation' and then attaching the term
inexactly to Approval Plans.  Approval Plans are used in one form or
another by most academic libraries in North America and many other
parts of the world.  Approval Plans underpin much collection
development work for books.  These plans involve a department of
highly skilled and experienced selectors who 'profile' in-hand each
academic book.  Mechanical means are also used to capture standard
bibliographic information.  The Approval Plan selectors answer
thousands of specific questions each week generated as part of library
Approval Plan profiles.  The taxonomy and questions have come from
libraries over many decades (they were not dreamt up in a back room at
YBP).  Among the more than 120 pages of taxonomy YBP uses in building
library Approval Plan profiles are the terms:

.         Revised Dissertation
.         Unrevised Dissertation

There is no stand-alone term "dissertation".  This is an important
distinction.  Too many discussions on dissertations overlook this
distinction.  It is a critical one in library collection development.
Most libraries will not purchase an *unrevised dissertation*.  There
have been a few exceptions (the University of the West Indies Press
used to publish many *unrevised dissertations* on topics related to
the Caribbean which were unique sources of information; libraries
would make an exception for these unrevised dissertations on Approval
Plans).

There is another important distinction.  Libraries recognize that part
of the mission of the university press is to support scholarship that
might not find support among commercial presses.  The UPs routinely
publish *revised dissertations* and libraries collect them fairly
strongly.  The presses provide much editorial direction and by the
time the*revised dissertation* appears, it may in fact bear little
resemblance to the original dissertation.

Let me offer some facts:

In 2010, among publishers handled by YBP, university presses published
720 Revised Dissertations.  On average YBP sold 86 copies.  That same
year these presses published 10,021 books total; on average, YBP sold
89 copies.  There also appeared 13 Unrevised Dissertations - YBP sold
just 21 copies on average.

During the same year, commercial presses published 1,153 Revised
Dissertations.  YBP sold just 39 copies on average.  They published 89
Unrevised Dissertations and YBP sold just 9 copies on average.  This
is persuasive evidence that University Press publications are valued -
and valued above commercial press titles - by academic libraries
(keeping in mind that most STM content is not published by UPs).

As a specific example, in 2010 Penn State University Press published
77 new titles.  58% of YBP sales were made on auto-ship Approval
Plans, i.e. no specific order was placed by libraries.  There were 8
Revised Dissertations (no Unrevised Dissertations).  52% of the sales
of these titles were made on auto-ship Approval Plans.

I've traced the publishing and sales rates of Revised Dissertations
back to 2004.  Each year since then more Revised Dissertations have
been published and the average number of copies sold has remained
stable.  Having written many Approval Plans over 15 years, I know that
libraries do not punish this category of books anymore than others, at
least not when published by university presses.  Libraries apply
various Approval Plan filters to all titles.  Hundreds of other
elements weigh in the balance that will ultimately decrease or
increase sales.  A Choice review or New York Review of Books review or
an award will boost sales.  Autobiographies, Personal Narratives,
Reprints and Journal Monographs are just a few of the factors that
guarantee much lower sales.  Many factors weigh in the relative
success of a title based on a dissertation.

Academic libraries as well as academic book vendors are getting tarred
unfairly in this discussion.  Books based on dissertations may sell
less well than other types of monographs outside of the academic
library market, which typically represents 20-25% of university press
sales.

Incomplete reporting on sources of information in studies like the one
in CRL perpetuate untruths and further damages the publishing
environment for young scholars.  These untruths are then perpetuated
anecdotally in other publications, e.g. Ry Rivard's piece in Inside
Higher Ed last week.  It would have been easy to pick up the phone to
contact YBP.  We would glad have provided numbers in support of this
survey.  The old Josh Billings line comes to mind: "It ain't what you
don't know that gets you in trouble.  It's what you think you know for
sure, but just ain't so."

Michael

PS. I agree with the problem Rick Anderson indicated of mixing
journals and monographs.  I also agreed with his observations on this
topic in The Scholarly Kitchen last week.

**************************************
Michael Zeoli
VP, Strategic eContent Development & Partner Relations
YBP Library Services
999 Maple Street
Contoocook, New Hampshire  03229
http://www.ybp.com

[log in to unmask]