RE: query about the Big Deal

[T Scott Plutchak <tscott@uab.edu>]

We wouldn't consider making these sorts of decisions without a 
lot of faculty involvement.  A couple of years ago, we stepped 
out of the state-wide Science Direct deal when it was up for 
renewal.  It was just too pricey for us (we made other cuts as 
well).  We used a blog, our newsletter, and lots of personal 
contacts to make sure that the news about what we were doing and 
why was spread as widely among the faculty and administration as 
possible.  We've also used short surveys and focus groups as a 
way of communicating with faculty about these issues.

The result was that while there was considerable concern among 
the faculty about the impacts, they understood what we were doing 
and worked with us in a very collegial and professional manner to 
help us make good decisions and balance the very difficult 
choices that we had to make.  I received exactly one angry email 
from a faculty member castigating me for what we were doing. 
All of the rest of the communication, via email, phone or in 
person, even when it was from people who were very upset, was 
very professional and, in the long run, very helpful.

They were also very helpful in providing information that enabled 
me to make a compelling case to the Provost and President about 
the impact of the cuts.  Part of the result has been that while 
the state budget situation continues to be pretty tough, the 
library budgets here are doing better.

There is, unfortunately I think, a feeling among some librarians 
that the "backlash" of making journal cuts will be so severe that 
it is better not to "open up the can of worms" as Claudia says. 
My experience has been exactly the opposite.  The greater degree 
of engagement one has with the faculty and the more they are 
involved with the process, the more understanding and helpful 
they can be when those difficult decisions have to be made.

Scott

T. Scott Plutchak
Director, Lister Hill Library of the Health Sciences
University of Alabama at Birmingham
tscott@uab.edu


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
[mailto:owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of claudia holland
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2011 10:10 PM
To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Subject: Re: query about the Big Deal

Thank you for sharing this information, David.

I would like to know what experience others have had with
including faculty, who would be affected by journal
cancellations, in the decision-making process. Granted this may
open a can of worms better left sealed, but wouldn't this open
approach inform faculty of the fact that their library is
experiencing cutbacks or a flat budget and cannot continue to
provide access to content they may, in fact, rely on for research
purposes (let's ignore the infrequently used aspect). Should
faculty be part of this process? Would/does this approach
minimize the potential backlash to journal cancellations on the
library or would it simply bog down the inevitable?

Claudia Holland


On 6/27/11 10:22 PM, David Prosser wrote:
> My paper is available for free from this page:
>
> http://www.rluk.ac.uk/content/article-serials-david-prosser-reassessing-value-proposition-first-steps-towards-fairer-price
>
> but I don't think it will provide the evidence that Joe is
> looking for.  There is, however, some itemising of big deal
> cancellations in the 2010 subscription prices study from Allen
> Press:
>
> http://allenpress.com/system/files/pdfs/library/ap_journal_pricing_study_2010.pdf
>
> It is certainly true that libraries are reacting to the
> increased sophistication of usage statistics and budgetary
> pressures to re-evaluate their commitment to journal big deals.
> British libraries are looking carefully at usage and pricing
> and have realised that traditional 'reasonable' year-on-year
> increases of 5% for big deals are simply unsustainable in a
> period of flat (at best) budgets.
>
> There will naturally be an under-reporting of big-deal
> cancellations as not all libraries will want to boast of a
> reduction in journal access.  Some will cancel and hope that if
> they have made their selections carefully readers will not
> particularly notice that they no longer have access to rarely
> used titles.  I've heard anecdotal evidence that well-managed
> retreats from big deals are accompanied by few murmurings from
> researchers.
>
> David C Prosser PhD
> Executive Director, RLUK
>
>
> On 23 Jun 2011, at 02:33, Laval Hunsucker wrote:
>
>> Joe,
>>
>> You might do well to have a look at the article by Maria Collins,
>> "Serials literature review 2008-9: embracing a culture of
>> openness", in _Library Resources&  Technical Services_ 55.2
>> (April 2011), p.60-80 -- especially the sections "The Economic
>> Crisis and Sustainable Collections" (p.61-63) and "The Future of
>> the Big Deal" (p.63-65). She also cites quite a bit of the
>> relevant literature.
>>
>> Also perhaps: David C. Prosser, "Reassessing the value
>> proposition: first steps towards a fair(er) price for scholarly
>> journals", in _Serials: The Journal for the Serials Community_
>> 24.1 (March 2011), p.60-63; as well as Allen Powell, "Times of
>> crisis accelerate inevitable change", in _Journal of Library
>> Administration_ 51.1 (January 2011), p.105-129.
>>
>> They are all available online -- but unfortunately not for free.
>>
>> Laval Hunsucker
>> Breukelen, Nederland
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>
>>> From: Joseph Esposito<espositoj@gmail.com>
>>> To: "Liblicense-L@Lists.Yale.Edu"<liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 1:27 AM
>>> Subject: query about the Big Deal
>>>
>>> I have been in a number of conversations the past few months
>>> about Big Deals, in which I have been told such things as "The
>>> Big Deal is over," "Everyone is cancelling the Big Deal," and
>>> "Unless the prices come down, we will withdraw from the Big
>>> Deals."  Has anyone documented what is actually going on?  I
>>> would be very interested to hear of specific actions, whether
>>> on-list or off.
>>>
>>> I suppose that this query runs into the question of definitions:
>>> What exactly is a Big Deal anyway?  Does the term apply to all
>>> aggregations or only those of a specific character?
>>>
>>> This query is made without judging the actions or the Big Deals
>>> themselves.  I simply want to understand the phenomenon and to
>>> determine if there is a gap between rhetoric and reality.
>>>
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>> Joe Esposito