Re: another library/press merger

[Joseph Esposito <espositoj@gmail.com>]

Definitely a trend.

It's useful in thinking about these matters to analyze the 
activities functionally rather than organizationally--on the 
principle that forms follows function, or it should.  So, for 
example, if presses and libraries are working together in some 
fashion, how are such things as cash flow accounted for, and by 
whom?  Where does the responsibility for analyzing Web metrics 
(number of visitors, increase/decrease in number of visitors, 
frequency of visits, clicks on site, rate of conversion to sales, 
etc.) lie?  And who is responsible for interpreting those metrics 
and working to improve them?  If one entity provides digitization 
or other IT services to the other, are those services contracted 
for in an open market in a competitive bid process, or is one 
party "locked in" to the services provided by the other?

The list of questions goes on and on.  It would be interesting to 
learn if any institution that has actually embarked on such an 
administrative consolidation has actually worked through these 
questions beforehand and whether these plans, with the 
accompanying due diligence from experienced individuals, is going 
to be posted for the benefit of the broader community, in a 
spirit of openness.

Joe Esposito

On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 6:05 AM, Sandy Thatcher <sgt3@psu.edu> 
wrote:
> The Ithaka Report from a few years back provided a good explanation of the
> synergies between libraries and presses that make this a sensible strategy,
> but the Report also noted that there is no "one size fits all" solution for
> every university. Some presses, like California, work closely with their
> libraries without being administratively joined; others are administratively
> joined, but collaborate very little. Collaboration is probably more
> important than administrative merger.
>
> Sandy Thatcher
> Penn State University Press