Thanks for these interesting and thought provoking comments Lesley. And
before there is a torrent of emails from agents on this perhaps I should
make one or two points of a general nature?
Yes, agents responses may sometimes be slower than librarians would like, on
the other hand as far as e-journals are concerned this is not always down to
the agents inefficiency: agents do not have only themselves to blame. The
reason for this is that some publishers do not supply agents with e-journal
availability, access and price information the moment it is published. Some
even seem surprised and confused when agents even request it. Some
publishers will not permit agents to set up e-access for their clients nor
will they give information to agents to supply to their customers - it
frequently has to be practically fought for. And you are correct in stating
that some publishers demand money from agents before setting up the e-access
whereas if the customer had asked directly they might not. Not very helpful
as far as the agent is concerned.
Obviously agents are just like any other company or institution - they make
mistakes, have their off days and so on. But the situation could be
dramatically improved if publishers would accept that agents need
information on behalf of subscribers because that's what the customers,
their subscribers, require - then much of this mess could be cut out and
your service time vastly improved. Until then your agent will, like all
other ASA Members continue to struggle with these problems on your behalf.
I would also like to stress that there are a great many publishers who do
understand this very well and go out of their way to help agents and
subscribers - and a big thank you to those who do!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lesley Crawshaw" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2002 12:21 PM
Subject: Re: E-Journal admin costs
> Hi,
>
> Subscription agents are absolutely essential to our work. Whilst it is
true
> that in some cases we have ordered journals directly through the publisher
> this is not the case for the majority of our subscriptions. As you say it
> would be a nightmare scenario if we had to deal with the large number of
> publishers whose journals we subscribe to. We are certainly under pressure
> to find the staff time to deal adequately with our existing problems.
>
> However I feel that agents have only themselves to blame for the current
> situation. When we signed up for a license to Nature Publishing Group's
> publications the speed with which we got our access set up was
phenomenal -
> I think it took a couple of hours from us faxing the license to them. That
> speed of response is almost unknown from agents and maybe a contributing
> factor for libraries to consider going direct to certain publishers.
However
> having said that we only do this for certain selected publishers and we
are
> keen not to see this increase any further than it is at the moment.
>
> Our recent experience of ordering new electronic only titles or even
> print/online titles through agents suggests that we have to wait a long
time
> from submitting the order to actually getting our electronic access set up
> (the only exceptions have been some of our NESLI deals), this seems to
> because when agents are involved monies must change hands between agent
and
> publisher before any access is considered. This is not always the case
when
> dealing direct with publishers whereby sometimes the order and signed
> license is enought to get your access turned on. I believe that Christine
> Fyfe at a recent UKSG seminar said that it had taken over 4 months to
> finally get electronic access up and running. We also had to constantly
> chase agents and publishers to find out why we still didn't have
electronic
> access to our subscriptions a month or so after ordering them. This isn't
> good enough. We've also experienced several problems whereby we asked for
> some subscriptions to be converted to eonly, but have since found were not
> converted to eonly. Many of us would wish that agents would updated the
> renewal process, which is almost still as it was in the print only days,
to
> more effectively tell us the options for the next subscription year +
> clarify exactly what subscription type we have at the moment. Last year I
> found that I had better information about options for 2002 subscriptions
> than our agents did, although this did require a large amount of effort to
> find this information.
>
> I think if agents improve their performance in the processing of eonly
> orders (or any kind of subscription with an electronic component) and get
> our access set up quickly and efficiently then we will be happy to use
them
> rather than going direct to publishers which has all the associated
problems
> described in the previous emails.
>
> Cheers
> Lesley
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Lesley Crawshaw, Faculty Information Consultant
> Learning and Information Services,
> University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, AL10 9AB UK
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> e-mail: [log in to unmask]
> phone: 01707 284662 fax: 01707 284666
> web: http://www.herts.ac.uk/lis/subjects/natsci/ejournal/
> list owner: [log in to unmask]
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: An informal open list set up by the UK Serials Group
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Jennings Val (RGZ)
> Sent: 10 July 2002 10:35
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: E-Journal admin costs
>
>
> Come to that, what do subscription agents feel about being by-passed?!!
> Suppose they became non-viable and we all had to deal with individual
> publishers: doesn't bear thinking of. Virtual one man bands in health and
> business sectors would find it nigh impossible to cope.
>
> Val Jennings email:
> [log in to unmask]
> Library Service Manager TN: 020 8302 2504
> Queen Mary's Sidcup NHS Trust Fax: 020 8308 9384
> Frognal Avenue
> Sidcup
> Kent
> DA14 6LT
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shirley Sullivan [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2002 06:26
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: E-Journal admin costs
>
>
> Dear List Members
>
> I have not done a study of the admin costs maintaining ejournals, but know
> that they must be high in our institution as they are taking up
> increasingly large chunks of time. I do know that in the past couple of
> years, since we have involved our agents, the time each title is taking is
> less than it used to be (There are just more e titles now)
>
> What I find particularly tiresome is the increasing tendency of the large
> publishers to deal direct with libraries rather than use agents, This
> increases the admin time spent, especially round renewal time, as we have
> to ensure we receive a renewal invoice and deal with the publisher
> separately. This is expensive in time and especially for our accounts
dept,
> \which needs to raise cheques for a number of publishers rather than write
> one large cheque to an agent.
>
> We have already had times when we have lost access to titles because the
> publisher did not send a renewal invoice.
>
> I have expressed my dissatisfaction to the publishers concerned but have
> got nowhere. Is this customer service????? Why can't libraries co\hoose
> whether to go direct or use an agent?Why should we be forced to go direct
> if it does not suit us?
>
> What do others think about this policy?
>
> regards
> Shirley Sullivan
> At 11:00 AM 7/8/02 +0100, Rollo Turner wrote:
> >Counting the cost of e-journal admin
> >Has anyone out there stopped to measure the costs of administering
> >e-journals? By this I mean the cost of subscription management and access
> >provision. It seems to me that as the process of acquiring journals
changes
> >a great deal of simplicity is being lost with consequent and often quite
> >substantial impacts on cost.
> >
> >As a result the ASA is interested in how we can ease this process, and
> would
> >welcome feedback on the following (and will be happy to share any results
> >with the list):
> >
> >1. Have your costs for e-Journal admin risen over the last year & roughly
> by
> >how much?
> >2. Do you see this increasing/decreasing over the next year?
> >3. In which areas does your agent help most/least currently?
> >4. If there were additional resources available from your agent where
these
> >would be best targeted?
> >
> >The background on this is that libraries now buy their electronic
journals
> >in a number of different ways - from the normal subscription process
> through
> >an agent to consortium deals no two of which ever seem to be similar let
> >alone the same! In some cases however the journals publishers request
that
> >the journals must be ordered directly - even when the library may have
> >preferred to use an agent. Others are acquired through consortia but may
be
> >paid for by the individual members through an agent, directly or through
> the
> >consortium. The so-called Big Deal with deep discount prices has also
> >greatly increased the administrative complexity for everyone concerned,
> they
> >tie in funds for lengthy periods of time and may, if budgets are suddenly
> >reduced, force libraries to cancel titles from smaller and high quality
> >society publishers to keep some of these Big Deals going.
> >
> >These different means of acquiring content mean that each individual
> library
> >has had to assume more control over the management and reporting on the
> >electronic journals taken. This is a role that is generally performed by
> >subscription agents who have the necessary infrastructure available to
> >provide value-added services such as special billing arrangements,
> >interfacing to library ILS services and management reporting. Instead if
> >each library is now doing more not less subscription administration the
> >overall costs are likely to rise in terms of staff time and resources
> >especially if libraries have to set up their own systems.
> >
> >Agents costs will also rise if more and more electronic titles are
handled
> >direct at the insistence of the publishers (generally the larger
> publishers)
> >leaving agents to handle the specialist, more varied and widely scattered
> >smaller publishers. According to the UK Competition Commission, the big
six
> >publishers account for about 66% of all expenditure on STM journals for
UK
> >libraries. If their titles are removed from the agency list, the average
> >cost per subscription will increase very significantly and, obviously,
> >additional costs will eventually be reflected in their bills to
libraries.
> >
> >
> >With this trend and pricing models requiring a variety of different means
> of
> >handling electronic journals, the complexity and cost of handling
> >subscriptions may well be increasing much faster than we currently know.
> >Agents of course were put on this earth to help reduce the libraries
costs
> >and administration enabling them to reduce the amount of unproductive
> >administration performed by skilled individuals. It seems this sensible
> >approach has gone into reverse!
> >
> >Isn't it time we thought about simplifying the system, so that once again
> it
> >can be handled by properly qualified intermediaries to the benefit of
all?
> >This may require agents having to learn new and sometimes costly skills,
> >publishers agreeing to work with them on electronic journals as they do
> with
> >paper, and agents and consortia agreeing to cooperate more closely in the
> >future.
> >
> >If the customers want this to happen, the suppliers will eventually
provide
> >it. And it would be good for publishers since it would make it simpler
for
> >them to sell their journals individually or in packages to their clients
in
> >a well managed supply chain, thus reducing their administration costs
also
> >(publishers subscription management costs may also have increased by
> between
> >5 and 15% according to Sally Morris). In short, such a move would be
worth
> >it financially to everyone.
> >
> >Rollo Turner
> >Secretary General
> >Association of Subscription Agents and Intermediaries
> >
> >PS apologies for cross posting
>
>
>
> Shirley Sullivan
> Electronic Information Coordinator
> Information Division
> University of Melbourne
> Victoria
> Australia 3010
> email [log in to unmask]
> phone + 61 3 8344 5363
> fax + 61 3 8344 5221
>
> Mailing address:
> first floor, Baillieu Library
> University of Melbourne
> Victoria
> Australia 3010
|
