Institutional subscription and content licensing models

1. Institutional subscriptionand content licensingmodels Society for Scholarly Publishing Thursday, 4:00-5:30 pm, 3 June 2004 Cara S. Kaufman, presenting

2. Which model is right for you? • What are your alternatives? • Who’s using which model? • How can you evaluate your alternatives? • Tips for a successful transition • “Make or buy?” • Publisher direct • Via third party licensors Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

3. To bundle or unbundle? • Bundled print and online subscription—still most prevalent • Online only option • Additional print • Unbundled online and print—common among commercial publishers • Archive • Bundled with subscription • Unbundled from subscription • One-time perpetual access • Annual access or maintenance fee • No subscription required Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

4. Examples • Bundled print and online • Unbundled • Bundled, with online only option • Bundled archive • Unbundled archive Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

5. Bundled Pros Raise print price to cover online Maintains print Simple product pricing Cons Unresponsive to institutional demand Does not recognize divergent content Unbundled Pros Institutional demand Favor print or online Opens door for tiered pricing Cons More complex Unintended consequences Transition issues Pros and cons Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

6. Transition • Bundled  online only option • Renew bundle • Promote online only option • Discount online or print? • Bundled  unbundled • Price to meet objectives • Push online? • Maintain print? • Develop plan for renewals Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

7. Single institutional rate No matter the number of users No matter the type or size of the institution Typically small journals not on platform with numbers of other journals Tiered pricing Concurrent users Workstations FTEs, relevant FTEs Type of institution Usage-based “One size fits all” or tiered pricing Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

8. One or more users accessing journal at any single point in time Example May or may not reflect usage Can keep library’s costs down Restricts access Need platform support Difficult to administer, fulfill Concurrent users Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

9. Number of IP addresses Physically located in library One concurrent user Lower cost option to site license Allows decentralized department access Limits use How to limit? Workstation Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

10. FTE, example • Single-site online and one print copy <2,999 • 3,000 - 11,999 • 12,000 - 25,000 • >25,000 • Total full-time faculty and students Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

11. FTE • Pros • Attempts to equate to usage • Revenues offset decline in personal and institutional subscriptions • Cons • FTEs v relevant FTEs argument (many librarians dislike) • Difficult to determine tier Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

12. Type of institution, example • Tier 1 • Primary/secondary school or Head Start program (on site access only) • Tier 2 • Community hospital or clinic • Community, technical, Associates, Baccalaureate, or Masters level college/university (non PhD granting) • Nursing school or allied health training program • Tier 3 • Doctorate-granting research university • Major teaching or research hospital • Medical or pharmacy school • Private, non-profit research institute • Tier 4 • State-wide academic institution—not a consortium or shared digital library but a single organization with separate campuses • Private, non-profit research organization or healthcare network (single institution with regional campuses) • Tier 5 • Consortia of academic libraries, hospitals Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

13. Type of institution • Pros • Easier to identify than FTEs • Carnegie Classifications, Am Hospital Assoc (# beds) • Offset loss of revenue from drop in individual, institutional circulation due to site-wide institutional access • Cons • Can be difficult to select tier • Hard to figure for institutions outside of familiar territory Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

14. Early days Tiered pricing Measuring use to assign equivalent rate Am Physical Soc, BMJ Collection development tool Big Deal—access increases use but identifies low use journals Focus groups—PDF downloads Marketing use Linking Subscription activation! COUNTER Code of Practice, Release 1, January 2005 Counting Online Usage of NeTworked Electronic Resources (www.projectcounter.org) Journals Full text article requests Turnaways by month and by journal Successful item requests and turnaways by month, journal, and page type Total searches and sessions by service Databases Total searches and sessions by database Turnaways by month and by database Site use Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

15. Select type of tiered pricing Segment institutional file Establish price per tier Introductory year/s Increments between tiers Project circulation, revenue by tier Ensure pricing is aligned with overall objectives Realize that established pricing will not work for all markets, groups of institutions Stakeholder buy in Institutions, agents Marketing, customer service Ready systems Subscription fulfillment Online ordering Policies and procedures, licenses Communicate rates and rationale Announce early, often, in right places Include institutions, agents, licensors Renew at new rates Single institutional rate  tiered pricing Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

16. Further expand access and revenue • “Make or buy” • Distribute content directly to institutions • Critical mass • In-house sales and marketing • Contract sales arrangement • Subscription agents • Independent representation • Distribute content to institutions through third parties • Commercial publishers • Third-party aggregators Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

17. Types of licensors • Abstracting and indexing services • Marketing gateways • Online hosts • Content aggregators Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

18. Gateway to content Increase awareness Search based Aids in access Where users start Examples PubMed Specialty databases CINAHL PsychInfo Chemical Abstracts GOOGLE Model Some selective Publisher submits metadata, crawling Service provider sells content, ads No revenue share with publisher Sometime links to full text (eg., LinkOut, GOOGLE) Abstracting and indexing services Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

19. One-stop shopping Conduits to content Examples SwetsWise Online Content Informatics’ J-Gate Kinokuniya’s K-Port Library-centric solutions Linksolver Marketing gateways Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

20. Where full text is housed Primary platform Publisher paid Hosting, maintenance End-user features Administrative access Cross-search branded at title level or service level Member and institutional Little direct sales assistance Examples HighWire Ingenta EBSCO’s MetaPress AIP Online hosts Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

21. Sales force Closed or open collection Selective Proprietary to publisher Platform specific Subject collections Waived data conversion costs Royalty to publisher Discounting, cannibalization Examples ALPSP Learned Journals Collection BioOne SpringerLINK Ovid ScienceDirect HW Open Collection ProQuest Content aggregators Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

22. Evaluate potential licensors • Be where your users are! • Cost-effective sales force • Concentric circles of users • Identify costs, royalty projections • Negotiate agreements for value • Check references Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

23. Open Access • Not subscription based—no cost to users • Original research free to all site visitors immediately • Variations on a theme • Delayed access • New content restricted, older content open • 175 HW journals • Publisher-driven • Eg., free original research, subscription required for review material (BMJ?) • Author-driven • Eg., author-selected research, experiments • PNAS, Am Physiological Society Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

24. Sources of funding • Membership dues allocation • Author fees • Manuscript submission • Publication • Institutional “memberships” • Grants Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

25. Pros It’s the economy stupid! Library budget crisis Taxpayers already paid for once, why pay again? Over supply of articles, lowers prices Pro-researcher May attract more papers, improve competitiveness Lower barriers to entry; survival for others Cons Unproven financial viability Unknown impact Number and quality of submissions Peer review Copyediting Branding, selectivity Non original research content Accessibility through cross-searching, linking Author hardship, field and region differences Open access Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

26. Subscriber paid  author paid • Ability and willingness of authors to fund publication or ability to attract long-term subsidies, or both • Determine necessary author fees • Total costs divided by number of articles published = author fees, subsidies • Determine which costs are ongoing, which are transitional • Offset editorial and peer-review costs • Offset production (print, online) • Subsidize other society programs, publication of non-original research (clinical, perspectives, news) • Author promotion plan, tools • Systematize author payments • Transition plan Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC

27. Cara S. Kaufman, Partner Alma J. Wills, Partner Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC 24 Aintree Road Baltimore, MD 21286 410 821 8035 (office) 410 821 5460 (mobile) 443 269 0283 (fax) ckaufman@verizon.net www.kaufmanwills.com Selected clients AAAS/Science Am Acad Ped Am Assoc Immunologists Am Coll Cardiology Am Coll Radiology American Psychiatric Assoc Am Soc Clin Oncology ASPET Rockefeller University Press Intl Anesthesia Res Soc NEJM Proj Hope/Hlth Affairs Alma: former President, Periodicals Div, Williams & Wilkins Cara: former Publisher, Am Heart Assoc journals, The Lancet Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC