Presentation on theme: "Benchmarking for the Small Publisher Society for Scholarly Publishing June 7, 2006."— Presentation transcript:
Benchmarking for the Small Publisher Society for Scholarly Publishing June 7, 2006
The Panelists Moderator – Alma Wills, The Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC Editorial Benchmarking – Jane Rea & Jayne Sutton, Editorial Experts Production Benchmarking – Jim Donahue, Am Institute of Physics Marketing Benchmarking – Patricia Hudson, Oxford University Press
Benchmarking: What is it? A point of reference A standard Best performance Best practices Benchmarking is the systematic measurement of business performance against an outside group. Through benchmarking, a company uncovers gaps in its performance -- areas to target for improvement Benchmarking is a practical tool for continuous improvement. It disturbs companies into action, uncovers new ways of improving business processes and activities, and provides external examples for success.
Why benchmark? Evidence of a problem The environment is changing New goals New competition New opportunities Ongoing effort
Why benchmark? Continue to support your mission – Educate members and your non-member community – Support quality publishing efforts of authors – Return revenue to support Society programs
Why benchmark? continued Find ways to increase influence – Through market share of high impact papers – Through large direct circulation/usage and licensing venues – Through capturing advertising market share
Why benchmark? continued Ensure that your publication is responding appropriately to market changes – Publishing industry changes – Disciplinary changes – Needs of the readership, membership, advertisers
Why benchmark? continued Position your journal to counter threats from new and existing competitors – How do your authors perceive your journal? Are other journals publishing papers that you wished you had published? Why? – How does your readership rank your journal relative to your competitors? – What does industry think about your reach and frequency?
Why benchmark? continued Improve quality – Original and solicited content – Author services, review process, production process – Electronic publishing features and functionality – Circulation management and customer service – Advertising promotion and sales – Business and financial management
Types of benchmarking Internal – Comparing similar functions in different business units of your organization External – Comparing similar functions in other organizations Functional – Comparing similar processes within an industry (unlikely direct comp w/ cooperate but could get similar) Generic – Comparing operations between unrelated industries (focuses on processes) Collaborative – Group of organizations collaborate
Steps 1. Decide which functions to benchmark 2. Identify the key performance variables to measure (must be quantified) 3. Identify the best-in-class companies 4. Measure BIC companies 5. Measure your performance 6. Identify ways to close the gap 7. Set goals!!! 8. Implement 9. Monitor results
How to identify best practices organizations Authors Suppliers and distributors Trade associations Employees Customers Librarians
Where to find info Published information Web sites Surveys User groups Online discussion groups Ex-employees Consultants In-house competitive information system
Publishing Benchmarks Internal – Dept vs dept – Change over time External – Vs other publishers – Vs other industries Editorial Production Marketing Sales – Subscriptions – Advertising – Ancillary products Finance – ROS – ROI
What’s important/what’s not? Key Performance Indicators are those factors that are essential to your organization’s success Just because it’s measurable doesn’t mean it’s critical Keep the number of indicators to a manageable number
Editorial Is your journal… – Attracting high-quality content? – Supporting the publishing efforts of authors? – Competitive in its manuscript processing? – Efficient? – Reaching and read by your target audience? – Trending upward in terms of its influence?
Editorial metrics Number of manuscripts received Number of manuscripts published Accept/rejection rates Submit to 1 st decision Review cycle Revision cycle Accept to publish Submit to publish Impact Factor Manuscript backlogs Issue size Article length Geographic/topical mix Costs of editorial office Term limits Author satisfaction Reader satisfaction Reviewer satisfaction Editorial Board organization/composition/per formance
Ask authors Journals: Randomly select a few authors from each issue Books: Post publication follow-up Identify authors who have published with you and other publishers. Ask them to compare experiences. Measure change over time
Content mix Types of articles Editorial features Online functionality Subject coverage e-only – Articles – Features – Supplemental data Express publication
Case study Problem – Number 1 read journal in field but not number 1 journal in scientific impact – Competitors gaining ground in growing scientific impact – Journal’s impact factor dipped while two main competitors’ impact factors continued upward trend Objective – Improve scientific impact Method – Publications Committee and publishing consultant to determine strategy to meet objective
Impact Factor Surgery Journals20032002200120001999 Ann Surg15.93716.07316.67415.98715.647 Am J Transplant25.67824.9401390.000 Am J Surg Pathol34.53534.12243.69124.26933.916 Liver Transplant44.24253.78683.030182.130 Brit J Surg53.77273.44453.46472.935112.732 Transplantation63.60883.26534.18434.03543.463 Ann Surg Oncol73.57443.82463.308122.799142.427 J Vasc Surg83.50763.46773.14553.11463.009 J Thorac Cardiov Sur93.319112.842102.81863.05772.986 Endoscopy103.227371.700421.459291.817281.726
Case study continued Strategy More active recruiting of high-impact articles – Associate Editors to help recruit not just review articles Document distinctive competencies, reasons to publish in journal Identify ongoing research and set acquisition goals Greater international representation – 50% of papers submitted outside the US, but none of senior editors and only fifth of editorial board from outside the US – Competitor A has 4 Associate Editors and competitor B has almost half its board outside the US Solicit particular types of articles – Reviews, guidelines, for example tend to increase citations – Examine ISI data presenting top cuts of most cited authors, papers, institutions, countries, journals – Rush publication of articles pre-scientific meetings (PR)
Case study continued Reduce acceptance rate improve impact factor and ranking Journal A accepts 10% now, 20% 15 years ago impact up Journal B accepts now 15%-18%, 25% 10 years ago impact up Journal C papers in last 10 years declined 30% impact up Prepare statistics to monitor trends – Submission to reviews (measures speed of reviewers) – Submission to first decision (measures speed of associate editors) – Submission to acceptance (measures revision cycle) – Acceptance to issue assignment (measures backlog) – Issue assignment to publication (measures time in production)