Library Acquisitions: Pmctice & Theory, Vol. 17, pp. 61-69, 1993 0364~64OW93 36.00 + .OO Printed in the USA. All rights reserved. Copyright 0 1993 Pergamon Press Ltd.

FEATHER RIVER INSTITUTE

A BRIEF HISTORY OF LIBRARY-VENDOR RELATIONS SINCE 1950

WILLIAM FISHER

Division of Library & Information Science

San Jose State University

San Jose, CA 951924029

Abstract - This paper traces the developments of the past 40 years that have im- pacted the way publishers, vendors, and libraries operate and interact among them- selves. Five areas of current concern are noted.

INTRODUCTION

The history of library-vendor relations has been interesting to say the least. In reviewing the literature on this topic, a number of articles stand out, and these will be cited later. What is interesting to note at this point is that more than a few of these articles drew analogies between library-vendor relationships and marriages. They can be good, harmonious, and peaceful or bad, acrimonious, and a constant battle. Yet in both cases the relationship is maintained; maintained in part because each party really needs the other party regardless of whether the relationship is good or bad and maintained in part for the benefit of some third party- we are staying married because of the children, or in this case, we continue to do business because of our end-users or readers. It was also interesting to note how both parties described them- selves as being user/service oriented. And even if the parties separate and eventually divorce, another marriage usually results because both parties truly need each other to function.

While this marriage analogy holds up for a while, there are a couple of unique factors in the world of library-vendor relations that need to be considered. First, virtually any library carries on a number of vendor relationships simultaneously. At any given time, a library might be dealing with a book vendor, a subscription vendor, a furniture/supplies vendor, an auto- mation vendor, and others. Larger libraries would even have multiple vendors in each of these categories. Second, when we discuss library-vendor relations, especially book vendors, which will be the focus of this article, we are really looking at a three-way relationship among librar- ies, vendors, and publishers. And it gets confusing because all three will tell you that they ex- ist to serve the purpose of providing information to readers everywhere.

61

62 W. FISHER

While the focus of this report will be on causes of problems and confrontations, we should not forget that all three parties have had and continue to have much in common. This was the very point of an article in Library Journal by Theodore Waller of the American Book Pub- lishers Council, where he enumerated a series of problems confronting all those who try to encourage reading. Waller noted that reading is not keeping pace with the advancing educa- tional level; that books must increasingly compete with the newer mass media; that library budgets are not keeping up with inflation, while at the same time there is increased demand for library service; that publishers are depending more and more on subsidiary income such as book club rights, reprint royalties, and media rights; that more bookstores have gone out of business than new ones opening; and finally that “the writing, publishing, and selling of books is increasingly restricted by a new and militant orthodoxy which denies the fundamen- tal concept of intellectual freedom” [ 11.

While this litany reads as though it was written yesterday, this article actually appeared in LJ in January 1952. Yet these issues are still areas of concern for publishers, vendors, and li- braries today. The point of all this is to remind us of the bond that links all the principal play- ers in the process of “getting the right book to the right person at the right time.”

With this as an introduction to show some of the complexities of the topic, let us now re- view the last 40 years or so of library-vendor relations. Let us begin in 1950 as an arbitrary starting point and look at some of the major issues and events that have transpired since then and their impact. In the years following the second World War, it is reasonably safe to char- acterize both librarianship and publishing as rather narrow professions that attracted genteel men and women who loved good literature. The third part of our equation at this time came under the rubric of booksellers. These included small book shop owners, the large book stores usually found in major cities, as well as the book jobber or wholesaler. At the time, librar- ies bought as many book through local book stores as they did through jobbers. It is fair to say that at the time jobbers “specialized” in providing general trade books primarily to the public library market and in providing textbooks to the schools.

While the 1950s seemed relatively “quiet” in terms of what was appearing in the profes- sional press about jobbers, booksellers, publishers, and libraries, there were areas of coop- eration among these groups, as well as areas of confrontation. The areas of cooperation were those enumerated earlier by Waller, including literacy and the promotion of reading; intellec- tual freedom and access to information (especially after Senator McCarthy started his anti- Communism campaign); and, along a more practical line, a campaign to keep the “book rate” on parcel post, the most popular way to ship books in the days before UPS. The areas of con- cern, at least from the librarian’s perspective, included unannounced visits by sales people; discounts, discounts, and discounts; and timeliness of delivery, or as a public library friend of mine said when I told him I was doing this paper, “Why do the book stores always get their books first?”

As the 1950s drew to a close, however, things began to change and change quickly. Our now famous information age got its start in the post-Sputnik flow of federal, state, and local funds to encourage education and technological development. This era of “information euphoria” would last some 15 years or so until the purse strings grew tighter by the mid-1970s. However, the combination of an increasing output of information with new ways to create, reproduce, store, retrieve, and disseminate this information had a profound impact on everyone involved with the “information chain.” There is little doubt that the way all publishers, vendors, and libraries conduct their business has dramatically changed over the last 20-30 years. While some of these changes have been beneficial and fostered a sense of cooperation among publishers, vendors, and libraries, other developments have only served to heighten the tension among the three.

Library-Vendor Relations Since 1950 63

IMPACT ON PUBLISHING

As the information age began, publishers who already existed had a field day. Books could not be written or manufactured fast enough to keep up with the demand, especially in the ar- eas of textbooks and professional books. With greater emphasis on reading, general trade books also sold well. Furthermore, the threat of competition from television and motion pic- tures did not materialize as feared. If anything, seeing characters come to life on a television or movie screen actually encouraged some people to read more rather than less, and gave us a new cliche, “Yes, I saw the movie, but the book was better.”

Publishing became a profitable business and, as a result, two things happened. First, pub- lishing houses became takeover targets for other firms and the term “acquisition” took on a whole new meaning in the book world. Publishers were acquired by other publishers, by com- panies in the communication industry, by companies in the financial services industry, and by companies in the railroad industry. Second, people realized that starting a publishing com- pany was not that expensive a proposition. Since the printing, binding, and other machinery- intensive functions were jobbed out, all you really needed was enough capital and cash flow to get your first titles to market, office space (and once the world realized that all books do not have to come out of New York City, rent became less expensive), and labor (now where could you find a few unemployed English majors?). By the mid-1970s it seemed as though ev- ery cause, sect, and sexual preference had its own press. And the new technology has only made it easier to become a publisher. Desktop publishing systems have given almost any group the capability to publish their own material, or at least speed up the production process when dealing with an established publisher. Soon, anyone with a PC connected to the Internet can call him/herself a publisher.

The upshot of all this on the publishing industry was competition: competition to “sign” a particular author with a major following, or an individual whose autobiography or personal account of some event is sure to sell; competition to be the first out with a work on a con- troversial topic; competition to get a textbook adopted by a school district, a county, or even an entire state. The “gentleman’s” profession of the Knopfs, the Scribners, and the Harpers came face-to-face with the world that has brought us junk bonds, the BCCI, and the S&L scandal.

IMPACT ON LIBRARIES

At the same time, libraries were undergoing dramatic change. First, new libraries were cre- ated like never before. As the population expanded and began to relocate to the “Sun Belt” and western states, branches were added to existing public library systems; new communities and community libraries were begun; and existing libraries were remodeled or rebuilt, ex- panding to respond to this growth. With the beginning of our space program a new interest in education developed, especially in higher education and especially in the sciences and en- gineering. As a college education became a necessity for the many rather than a privilege for the few, new campuses were created with libraries that needed to collect both contemporary and retrospective material. And as tremendous as the growth was for public and academic li- braries, the growth in special libraries was even greater. As information has become more vi- tal to the functioning of business and become more valuable as a commodity, corporate, technical, and R&D libraries have taken on a whole new importance.

Second, libraries (as well as other organizations) have been transformed through automa- tion. For some, that transformation feels as though it happened over night. Libraries went

64 W. FISHER

from not even having an electric typewriter in the building to implementing a fully integrated automated library system, accessing external databases, and using CD-ROM workstations. The way in which we do our jobs has changed dramatically and, as with any change, this has been well received by some and avoided by others. This area of change by the way is some- thing that all three of our principal parties have confronted. Libraries, publishers, and ven- dors have all had to deal with this change, sometimes because they wanted to, sometimes because they simply had to in order to remain competitive.

This technology has also had two other effects on libraries that changed their relationship with publishers and vendors. First, we have seen the creation of a whole new brand of ven- dor, the automation vendor. Second, as funding leveled off or even decreased for libraries, much of this technology had to be acquired at the sacrifice of book/journal funds. The ques- tion is quickly becoming one of allocating funds by type of information format (print, CD, online) regardless of the product, by type of product (book, journal, map) regardless of the format, or some other method. Publishers will not only have to compete with their print coun- terparts, but they will also need to be aware of what is happening electronically and how that is impacting their market share. Vendors will have to “carry” more lines and have personnel that can help their customers select the right format for their clientele.

The third area of concern for libraries has been, and continues to be, money. From what we have seen during the time period under consideration, it has been a case of either feast or famine. (If famine is too strong a concept, then it has at least been malnutrition). Librar- ies’ fiscal ups and downs have had a direct impact on both publishers and vendors. Since the feast did not last long, let us look at that period first. I do not know that we could ever char- acterize libraries as having too much money to spend, however, there was a time, primarily during the 196Os, when by and large they did not lack for too much. As noted before, the be- ginning of our information age was rather liberally greased by federal, state, and local funds. As budgets and demand for library material began to increase, so did publishing output. Whole new markets developed in response to the need for new editions of older works, as well as in response to the development of new fields and subfields of knowledge and the need for information in those fields. Reprint publishing became profitable, original publications in pa- perback blossomed, and translations became more important as information became inter- nationalized. In effect, information became market driven like never before. As information producers and publishers of all types saw that markets existed, especially library markets, they rushed to get their products to those markets.

Toward the end of the 1960s and certainly by the mid-1970s, the feast was all but over. The problem was that neither the demand nor the supply diminished when the funds did. With- out dwelling too long on the details, which are all too familiar to most of us, what we saw was this: the number of publishers continued to rise; not surprisingly so did the number of titles produced (both monographs and journals); the price of acquiring these titles increased while the exchange rate for acquiring materials from other countries began to erode; and to top it all off there are now a number of different formats in which we can acquire these titles. So, even if acquisitions budgets at some libraries have been increasing (at least on paper), the amount of material actually acquired is remaining stable at best, and in many cases it is ac- tually decreasing. What many libraries, primarily academic libraries, have seen is a continual erosion of the balance between money for monographs and serials. The concept of a 50-50 ratio, once touted in the literature as the ideal, is now just a part of our professional history. For some libraries the situation has gotten to the point where a new serial title can be ordered only if a current serial title is cancelled, the ultimate in zero-sum games. From the library’s point of view this is the only way to cope with the fiscal situation. However, we are all aware

Library-Vendor Relations Since 1950 65

of the result of this tactic; as subscriptions drop, the publisher is forced to raise the price to keep the journal going, which results in further cancellations, which results in further price increases, and so on.

IMPACT ON VENDORS

The third major party is, of course, the vendor group. Vendors were a rather difficult group to get a handle on for a number of reasons. For example, it is hard to get a definitive num- ber for just how many library vendors there are. The most recent Bowler Annual (1991) puts the number at 1,250, but this includes general book vendors, paperback vendors, serial ven- dors, newsstand vendors, those that just cater to the book store market, and the like [2]. While the overall number of vendors has increased since 1950, including those that market primar- ily to libraries, this latter group is still somewhat difficult to pin down. One reason is that most of the library vendors are fairly “young” companies, so there is not a great deal of historical material available. In a search of the 1992 Literary Market Place’s listing of book wholesal- ers, we find that only four major firms got started before 1959: Baker & Taylor in 1828; Ma- jors in 1909; Ingram in 1933, and Brodart in 1939 [3]. Another reason why it is hard to get information about vendors is that they are usually privately held companies or subsidiaries of much larger organizations, so they rarely make information available or even appear in many of the standard business reference works. If you want information about vendors, you need to go directly to the source. However, a lot of vendors are reluctant to provide a lot of information, and rightly so- the competition is tough, the profit margin is thin, and in the end the vendors are really at the mercy of the publishers’ discounting system. Think of it, you basically have a situation where the publisher sits in one room, down the hall in another room sits the acquisition librarian, and out in the hallway is the vendor. Now, the vendor’s job is to go into the first room and buy a book from the publisher, who wants to sell that book for as much as possible. Then, the vendor goes down the hall and sells that book to the acquisi- tion librarian, who wants to pay as little as possible. Now if that is not a thankless task, I do not know what is. This is not to say that vendors do not do this very well. The reason why material gets from publishers to libraries so efficiently is mainly because vendors do not have any time, money, or effort to spare. Thi,nk_of.every item you acquire by approval plan or blan- ket order, and consider having to identify and order each item individually.

As the people out in the hallway, vendors have to one degree or another been impacted by everything that has happened to both publishers and libraries, both positive and negative, and most have scars to prove it. The development of modern approval plans is a good example of this. When these approval plans were first introduced in 1966, the academic libraries that used the plans were delighted to have the convenience of having the actual book to examine before making a purchase decision [4]. This was as close to a publisher’s return policy as a library would ever get. Other advantages of the plans were also touted by those that used them. Over the years, however, some librarians have come to resent approval plans, seeing them as a form of losing control over their own collections [5]. On the other hand, nowhere in the literature were there complaints about vendors enhancing approval plans by process- ing and cataloging ordered material. For the most part, however, the major areas of conten- tion, from the library’s perspective, come down to discounts, fulfillment rates, and response time. While some aspects of the new technology will help vendors keep better inventory con- trol the simple truth is they cannot ship it if they do not have it, which shoots fulfillment rate and response time all at once. The publishers still maintain a great deal of control over the

66 W. FISHER

entire situation. The fact of the matter is we expect perfection in an imperfect world. And the WE here are both vendors and librarians. Vendors expect that payment will be received in a timely fashion, that approval items will be kept, that a profit can be made on every order, and that the ordering library has done an adequate job of bibliographic searching so that the pro- cess will not need to be repeated. Meanwhile, libraries expect to receive their orders quickly and completely, to receive similar discounts to those offered directly from the publishers, to receive customized invoicing according to their local institutional requirements, and to receive regular claiming, follow-up, and reporting on unfulfilled items.

THE CURRENT SITUATION

Since this is not a perfect world, where does this leave us? In 1987, Wanda Dole articulated five areas of conflict among publishers, vendors, and libraries. Those areas are: (1) lack of knowledge of one’s own system; (2) lack of knowledge of the nature of the other systems; (3) unrealistic expectations; (4) poor communication; and (5) unethical or unprofessional behav- ior [6]. This is quite a damning list in more ways than one, and unfortunately it is a list that is still valid in many respects, so let us take a look at these five areas.

Lack of Knowledge of One’s Own System As far as I am concerned, ignorance of one’s own system is equivalent to the last item-

unprofessional behavior. Certainly for the librarian lack of knowledge about anything is no excuse for not being able to find some information about the subject. I know that many will blame this lack on the individual’s library school education, but whether that issue is discussed or not is irrelevant, I feel. If you accept a job that involves duties or responsibilities that you are not familiar with, then it is your first duty and responsibility to learn about them. If a li- brary hires someone to do something he/she is not completely prepared to do, then it is the library’s duty and responsibility to teach him/her. As for the vendors and publishers, the same thing applies. People going into these fields should “learn the business,” and at the same time the business should be prepared to teach them, especially since there are few undergraduate or graduate programs that prepare people to go into publishing or book wholesaling, per se. So, first and foremost, we need to know what we are all about.

Lack of Knowledge of the Nature of the Other Systems Ignorance of other systems may not be unprofessional behavior, however, it is just plain

dumb. From the librarians’ perspective, if we exerted just a small percentage of the time and effort we spend on analyzing our communities and try to learn something about the people who are there to assist us in our endeavors, this would not be a problem. For a profession that champions community analysis to provide better service to our clientele, we do not seem to be able to apply this same concept to other groups of people we do business with every day, like vendors and publishers. It would seem that if someone’s ability to do his/her job depends on how well others are doing their job, then he/she would want to know something about what the others do and how they do it. Again, library schools get the blame for not impart- ing this knowledge to their MLS students. And again, I maintain that it is also the individ- ual’s responsibility to learn about publishing and vending if he/she is involved with the acquisition process. As players in the for-profit sector, we would expect publishers and ven-

Library-Vendor Relations Since 1950 67

dors to know something about their markets to remain competitive and profitable. What we have seen recently, however, is publishers paying a great deal of attention to the library mar- ket as though they just discovered it. What they discovered, I think, was a recent Book In- dustry Study Group report that estimated annual library materials sales at over four billion dollars as of 1989 [7].

Vendors make regular service calls; vendors and publishers exhibit at conferences; and we are all aware of the receptions at conferences sponsored by vendors and publishers. We should all take advantage of these opportunities. Tom Leonhardt has encouraged librarians to become more informed consumers and this certainly must happen [8]. Don Satisky of Blackwell North America remarked a number of years ago that much of what gets discussed in vendor hospi- tality suites is not business, however, this is not necessarily a good thing [9]. Librarians should be discussing business, at least to some extent, at receptions and other types of social func- tions. We owe it to the vendor or publisher not to waste their time and money, as well as not have our time and money wasted either. There are ample opportunities to learn from each other.

Unrealistic Expectations We have already seen what form unrealistic expectations can take. I feel that if we could

do something with items one and two, then there would be considerably fewer unrealistic ex- pectations. (I think it would be an unrealistic expectation to believe we could totally do away with unrealistic expectations!) Mutual understanding of the factors that influence libraries, publishers, and vendors can go a long way to improve relations among all three. For this to happen, however, we need to work on the fourth item.

Poor Communication Communication is the key to the entire enterprise. The temptation is to say simply that good

communication is obviously crucial to success and let it go at that; however, every thing I read preparing for this presentation said the same thing-over 40 years of literature. Librarians have said it, publishers have said it, booksellers have said it, and vendors have said it, not once but many times. Either we are all very behind in our reading or something is not getting through. I fear it may be the latter and it may well be the case that we do not trust each other. When a librarian sees something written by a publisher or a vendor, it either does not get read at all or gets read with such a great deal of skepticism that the reader will put his/her trust only in those statements that are already known -so much for getting something new out of the literature. And I am sure it works the same way with publishers and vendors also. It seems we have all been confusing talking and writing about the situation with communicating about it. Communication is based upon insuring some sense of understanding on the part of the re- ceiver of the communication. I think much of what has passed for communication was done to make the sender rather than the receiver of the message believe what was being said. This is no way to develop trust. Without trust, we can “communicate” for another 40 years and the situation will not be much different from today.

How does this trust get developed? One response came in 1991 from Bantam Doubleday Dell, who sent some of their executives into libraries to see what their clients did with their products [lo]. Anything that can be done to encourage this kind of exchange of views and ideas should be strongly encouraged. Even on this very limited scale, this is one of the best

68 W. FISHER

ways to communicate with clients and begin to develop the trust that will form the founda- tion for a solid business relationship. This brings us to the last item on the list.

Unethical or Unprofessional Behavior Unethical or unprofessional behavior is one of the best ways to destroy any trust and hon-

est communication among any of our three groups. The idea is to establish a solid working relationship between a library and a vendor or publisher. To bring us back to the marriage analogy used earlier, that relationship should be based on trust and mutual respect from the parties involved. As with marriage, certain behaviors are appropriate and others are not.

A 1987 report on ethics provided responses from both librarians and vendors to a series of questions on that issue. When asked what was the major cause for unethical lapses, two re- sponses were given: (a) greed and (b) lack of concern on the part of library and business lead- ers [ 111. Greedy people have been with us for a long time and will stay with us for a long time as well, I am afraid. In this case, however, greed is the lesser of two evils for two reasons. First, most greedy people do not think of library acquisitions as a four billion dollar business so they are not drawn to librarianship, or publishing and vending, I would imagine, for the money. So, as a whole, the profession is less attractive to greedy people. Second, if someone is realizing some sort of personal gain from business dealings, then the greedier he/she gets, the more likely it is he/she will get caught. So, I am not too concerned about greedy people.

I think the more significant response was the one about a lack of concern on the part of library and business leaders, because if you know something unethical is going on and you do not try to stop it, then you are in effect condoning it. So if the acquisitions librarian plays a little “fast and loose” to get a getter discount or get lower shipping charges and the library director does not stop it, then the acquisitions librarian will feel he/she has a green light to “do whatever it takes” to save the library some money. Or a vendor might “do whatever it takes” to get or keep a large account. It is dealing with this kind of an attitude that will be the biggest challenge for librarians, vendors, and publishers in the years ahead.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, I think the lesson to learn from all this is that we must all conduct ourselves in an ethical manner to maintain the trust among us, so we will continue to communicate, to understand each other and work together to “get the right book to the right person at the right time.”

REFERENCES

1. Waller, Theodore. “Let’s Pull Together !” Library Journal 77 (January 1, 1952): 9-12. 2. Filomena, Simora, ed. Bowker Annual: Library and Book Trade Almanac. 37th ed. New Providence, NJ: R.R.

Bowker, 1991.

3. Literary Market Place. New Providence, NJ: R.R. Bowker, 1992. 4. Newlin, Lyman W. “The Rise and Fall of Richard Abel and Co., Inc.,” Scholurly Publishing 7 (October 1975),

55-61.

5. Hendrickson, Kent. “Library Vendors: How Do They Use Us?” Libmry Acquisitions: Pructice & Theory I3 (1989), 121-123.

Library-Vendor Relations Since 1950 69

6. Dole, Wanda, V. “Librarians, Publishers, and Vendors: Looking for Mr. Goodbuy,” Libraty Acquiririons: Prac- tice & Theory 11 (1987), 125-134.

7. Sexton, Mark. “The Size and Shape of the Library Market,” Pub/&hers Weekly 237 (June 8. 199O):S4+. 8. Leonhardt, Thomas W. “The Acquisitions Librarian as Informed Consmner: ‘Mad as Hell and Not Going to Take

It Any More!“’ Library Acquisitions: Practice & Theory 12 (1988), 149-154. 9. “ALA Ethics Committee Looks at Vendor-Library Relationships,” Library Journal 109 (September 1,

1984):1584+. 10. Berry, John, III. “What Will BDD Learn From Library Work?” Library Journal 116 (February 15. 1991):149. 11. Bullard, Scott, R. “The Ethics of Working With Vendors: A Report on the RSTD RS Acquisitions Librarians/

Vendors of Library Materials Discussion Group,” Library Acquisitions: Practice & Theov I1 (1987):373-379.