From: Sandy Thatcher <[log in to unmask]> Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 08:08:43 -0500 Undoubtedly, Anthony, many learned societies operate in a similar way. However, there is no formal requirement for them to do so in order to be a member of, say, the American Council of Learned Societies, which would be the organizational counterpart to the AAUP. I was not implying, either, that commercial publishers do not exercise "quality control." Indeed, I work part-time for one now, Lynne Rienner Publishers, and can assure everyone that the peer-review procedures used are quite as rigorous as any I have experienced in university press publishing. The difference is that no outsider really knows how "quality control" is managed by a commercial publisher, or a learned society for that matter, whereas the requirement for AAUP membership is a public guarantee that a high level or quality control is exercised by any AAUP member press. I would also note that the dynamic of decisionmaking when a faculty editorial board is involved is significantly different from what it is without such a board. This makes the process more complex but also richer in some ways. I have explored this dynamic in my essay on "The 'Value Added' in Editorial Acquisitions" in the Journal of Scholarly Publishing (1999): http://www.psupress.org/news/pdf/THEVAL~1.PDF. Sandy Thatcher > From: Anthony Watkinson <[log in to unmask]> > Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2012 18:18:33 +0100 > > Sandy > > I think you will find that most learned society publishers have a > similar publications committee which of course reflects the community > they serve rather than a single university. The majority of learned > societies that publish (I think I am right in saying) do so in > partnership with a larger publisher often a commercial publisher. That > commercial publisher is responsible as a publisher for books and > journals that have the same level of quality control. Of course as > someone who has worked much of my life for a commercial publisher I > would argue that the quality controls I used and which were demanded > of me by a commercial organisation working through an editorial > committee or some such were just as rigorous as those which involved > my getting agreement from the Delegates of OUP. In both cases I > usually had control over the referees/reviewers I went to. I certainly > would not give any special preference for any reviewers from a > particular university or society and was thus able to get an > international view and avoid blackballs resulting from academic > rivalries or preferences of distinguished people for their colleagues > or former students. > > Anthony > > ***************** > From: Sandy Thatcher <[log in to unmask]> > Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2012 10:37:08 -0500 > > No commercial publisher has a faculty editorial board that is given > the responsibility of reviewing readers' reports and approving > publication of every book proposed by the publishing staff. That is > what I meant by "quality control," Rick, and it is indeed unique to > university presses and is a requirement of their membership in the > AAUP. > > Sandy Thatcher > > > At 2:48 AM -0400 7/4/12, LIBLICENSE wrote: > > From: Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]> > Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 15:46:32 +0000 > > All > university presses are mandated to have quality control procedures in > place for their operations. That is what makes them university > presses. > > Er, no. What makes them university presses is the fact that they're owned > and run by universities and call themselves university presses. If having > "quality control procedures in place for their operations" made a > publisher a university press, then by that definition most (if not all) > trade publishers would be university presses. > > -- > Rick Anderson > Acting Dean, J. Willard Marriott Library > University of Utah > [log in to unmask]