The Sheridan Press 1 Introduction Strategic business planning has come a long way from its origins as a largely intellectual exercise for the elites of corporate culture. Gone are the days when a small cadre of top officers and MBA consultants would meet in private and, after a week of number-crunching and scenario-spinning, emerge from on high to present their vision for the future. Such plans tended to be long on business philosophy and jargon but not well connected to the day-to-day operations of the organization. The impracticality of such plans and the lack of buy-in from employees often led to failure and reinforced perceptions that strategic planning was an unproductive use of time. The purpose of strategic planning, even in those early days, was always valid: to help an organization identify, respond to, and influence changes in its environment. But today the process of developing the strategic plan has become a much better vehicle for achieving these critical goals. No longer a top-down set of edicts from upper management, the strategic plan now integrates knowledge from all levels of the enterprise in a cohesive manner. Instead of just churning out data and information, the planning process identifies opportunities at the customer level. It answers questions with real practical significance, such as “What is it that our customers need? What don’t they want? What is happening in the world?” (Stein, 2004) The current scholarly publishing environment—characterized by chaos, complexity, and change—demands a sound strategic plan. And more than ever before, the planning process needs to be dynamic and requires insight about the present and foresight about the future. “It is a search for information and options, which will ensure an ongoing competitive advantage for the [organization] given its core skills, strengths, and experience…and an opportunity to abandon those programs, policies, and strategies that are outdated or ineffective in the present context.” (Sanders, 1998) The objective of this paper is twofold: 1) To describe and defend the importance of the strategic planning process in the midst of present complexities and 2) To identify and impart information about specific publishing tools that have proved instrumental in helping publications staff to manage journals and achieve strategic objectives. Because some organizations have operated successfully without benefit of a formal strategic plan, it is only natural that they may question the value and relevance of such a document. As Bill Breichner, Journal Publisher at Johns Hopkins University Press, commented: “It is amazing what you can accomplish before you know what you need.” (Breichner, 2004) Still, there is great value to be found in tools that can produce a positive impact on a journal’s performance, direction, and goals. Special emphasis will be given in the paper to so-called dashboard reports—those reports that you can view while driving, so to speak, those reports that are “directional at a moment’s notice.” (Collins, 2004) Strategic planning Strategic orientation The first step toward meeting strategic planning objectives is to adopt a “strategic orientation”—simply to begin talking about strategy. According to one industry consultant, 85% of management teams spend less than one hour per month discussing strategy (Kaplan, 2000). If managers cannot find the time to
Transcript
The Sheridan Press 1
Introduction
Strategic business planning has come a longway from its origins as a largely intellectualexercise for the elites of corporate culture.Gone are the days when a small cadre of topofficers and MBA consultants would meet inprivate and, after a week of number-crunchingand scenario-spinning, emerge from on high topresent their vision for the future. Such planstended to be long on business philosophy andjargon but not well connected to the day-to-dayoperations of the organization. Theimpracticality of such plans and the lack ofbuy-in from employees often led to failure andreinforced perceptions that strategic planningwas an unproductive use of time.
The purpose of strategic planning, even inthose early days, was always valid: to help anorganization identify, respond to, and influencechanges in its environment. But today theprocess of developing the strategic plan hasbecome a much better vehicle for achievingthese critical goals.
No longer a top-down set of edicts from uppermanagement, the strategic plan now integratesknowledge from all levels of the enterprise in acohesive manner. Instead of just churning outdata and information, the planning processidentifies opportunities at the customer level. Itanswers questions with real practicalsignificance, such as “What is it that ourcustomers need? What don’t they want? Whatis happening in the world?” (Stein, 2004)
The current scholarly publishingenvironment—characterized by chaos,complexity, and change—demands a soundstrategic plan. And more than ever before, theplanning process needs to be dynamic andrequires insight about the present and foresightabout the future. “It is a search for informationand options, which will ensure an ongoingcompetitive advantage for the [organization]
given its core skills, strengths, andexperience…and an opportunity to abandonthose programs, policies, and strategies that areoutdated or ineffective in the present context.”(Sanders, 1998)
The objective of this paper is twofold:
1) To describe and defend the importance ofthe strategic planning process in the midst ofpresent complexities and
2) To identify and impart information aboutspecific publishing tools that have provedinstrumental in helping publications staff tomanage journals and achieve strategicobjectives.
Because some organizations have operatedsuccessfully without benefit of a formalstrategic plan, it is only natural that they mayquestion the value and relevance of such adocument. As Bill Breichner, Journal Publisherat Johns Hopkins University Press, commented:“It is amazing what you can accomplish beforeyou know what you need.” (Breichner, 2004)Still, there is great value to be found in toolsthat can produce a positive impact on ajournal’s performance, direction, and goals.
Special emphasis will be given in the paper toso-called dashboard reports—those reports thatyou can view while driving, so to speak, thosereports that are “directional at a moment’snotice.” (Collins, 2004)
Strategic planning
Strategic orientationThe first step toward meeting strategic planningobjectives is to adopt a “strategicorientation”—simply to begin talking aboutstrategy. According to one industry consultant,85% of management teams spend less than onehour per month discussing strategy (Kaplan,2000). If managers cannot find the time to
2 Critical Business Planning
Supplier power(society, publisher,
authors, editors,printers, online
hosts)
Threat of substitutes(“big deals,” specialty
collections, open accesspublications)
Customer power(librarians,members,
advertisers)
Barriers to entry(brand identity, customer
loyalty, proprietary learningcurve)
Competitive rivalry(industry consolidation,
industry growth rate)
move beyond the day-to-day operational andtactical issues to talk about strategy, then itshould not come as a surprise when strategydoes not become an organizational priority. Theorganization is likely to remain in fire-fightingmode indefinitely.
Strategic planOnce an organization adopts a strategicorientation, it is important to formalize theconversation in a strategic plan. Whether theplanning is for the entire organization or justfor a single department, the concepts are thesame. Only the scale is different. There aremany schools of thought as to how a strategicplan should be structured; typically plans startwith an assessment of the broader market,identify objectives to be attained, and movetoward increasingly specific tasks to beimplemented. The following are basic headingsunder which this information can bepresented; another popular format for thestrategic plan, the “OGSM” Model, isdiscussed on pages 5-6.
External analysisA strategic plan usually begins with an analysisof the external environment as it is relevant tothe organization. Since competition is aprimary external consideration of any business(publishing or otherwise), it may be valuable inthis section to draw from the ideas of well-known competitive strategist Michael Porter.
In his seminal book, Competitive Strategies,Porter (1980) identified five universal forcesthat shape the character of every industry andmarket, determining how profitable the sectorcan be, how many competitors it can sustain,and what business strategies are likely to provesuccessful. The savvy publisher can use theFive Forces Model to better understand thecontext in which they are operating anddevelop a competitive edge over their rivals.The main elements of Porter’s model areillustrated and supplemented with examplesfrom scholarly publishing in Figure 1 below.
Figure 1. Five Forces Model
The Sheridan Press 3
Internal analysisNext, the strategic plan should include aninternal analysis, which can be defined as ashared view of the internal state of thecompany. As with the external analysis,publishers may find it useful to use an existingframework—in this case the 7-S Model (Figure2)—as the basis for their work in this section.
Figure 2: McKinsey 7-S Model
Developed by business consultants Tom Petersand Robert Waterman (1988), the 7-S Modelreflects extensive research regarding whichcharacteristics contribute to corporateexcellence. It was described in detail in theirbook, In Search of Excellence, and was lateradopted by the global business consultinggroup McKinsey & Company as a basic toolfor analysis of client business strategy. Becauseof this association with McKinsey, theframework is sometimes referred to as theMcKinsey 7-S Model.
In the diagram, the 7 S’s stand for:1. Strategy: what is the agreed on vision and
direction for the organization?2. Structure: are the current policies and
procedures right for the organization?3. Systems: are the proper decision-making,
4. Skills: does the organization benefit fromindividuals with the right editorial,
production, marketing, and businessmanagement skills?
5. Staff: is the organization staffed with theright people, who are well-trained, talented,and assigned to right jobs?
6. Style: does the organization share commonthinking and behavior? Is the staff workingtogether or at cross-purposes?
7. Shared values: Do the journal staff,society/publisher, and customer groupsshare the same guiding principles?
According to Peters and Waterman, managersneed to consider all seven of these internalfactors to assure successful implementation oftheir business strategy. The factors areindependent but connected, they say, andfailure to manage any one of them can lead to achain reaction breakdown in each of the others.
Whether it is included in the discussion ofinternal and external factors or broken outseparately, a SWOT (strengths/weaknesses andopportunities/threats) analysis should beincluded in every strategic plan.
This exercise helps the manager to focusactivities into areas where the organization isstrong and where the greatest opportunities lie.It also can help shore up weaknesses thatcompetitors may be exploiting. A typicalSWOT analysis involves responding to thequestions (or similar ones) shown in Table 1:
SWOT AnalysisStrengths
What advantages dowe possess?
What do other peoplesee as our strongpoints?
Weaknesses What do we do
poorly? What areas of our
business have weneglected?
Opportunities Are there trends in the
market that favor us? Can we take
advantage of acompetitor weakness?
Threats Are there trends in the
market that workagainst us?
Are competitorscapitalizing on ourweakness?
Table 1. SWOT Analysis
4 Critical Business Planning
Vision
Some form of vision or mission statement isrequired to describe the organization’s idealfuture state. A vision is an overriding idea ofwhat the organization should be. This idealfuture state should recognize both the internaland external analysis, drawing on thecompany’s strengths to take advantage ofopportunities.
An organization’s vision could be, for example,to become the most reliable source ofprofessional information in their field. Theorganization’s publications division could haveany of the supporting mission statements: topublish “the number one journal in terms ofeditorial quality,” “the most widely readpublication in the field,” or “included amongthe ‘must-buy’ journals by universitylibrarians.”
A vision must be sufficiently clear and concisethat everyone in the organization understands itand can buy into it with conviction. The visionor mission statement should be supported byspecific strategic goals.
Goals
Having formulated a vision of the future,specific initiatives must be planned to achievethese goals. The strategy is one or more plansthat will be used to achieve the vision. Thestrategic plan should be a high-level planreflecting the achievement of specific strategicgoals—a sort of “project of projects.”
If the vision is to be the publisher of “thenumber one journal in terms of editorialquality,” the publisher must decide whichstrategies will work best to bring this vision tofruition. Is it better to take a more active role inrecruiting top research papers? To add moreeditorial commentary to original researcharticles in order to improve readercomprehension? To publish more reviewarticles as a way of increasing the number of
citations? Or perhaps a combination of allthree?
Each publisher’s particular strategy should lookinward at the organization but also should lookoutward at the competition and at thepublishing industry climate.
The popular “OGSM” method for strategicplanning was developed in Japan and has sincebeen adopted and refined at many top globalcorporations. (Hastings, 2002) It follows thesame general progression as the planningprocess described in this paper but offers aslightly different way to organize the thinking.
It involves four basic steps, each of whichflows into the next (Figure 3).
Organizing a Plan with “OGSM”
The popular “OGSM” method pioneered by Procter& Gamble follows the same general progression asthe planning process described in this paper, butoffers a slightly different way to organize thethinking. It involves four basic steps, each of whichflows into the next:
1. Objectives: Identify simple, broad objectives tobe accomplished over the longer term. (Example:Produce the most-read journal in the field.)
2. Goals: List specific actionable results needed tosupport this objective. (Example: Expandmembership by 30%.)
3. Strategies: Initiatives that will lead toachievement of your goals, often taking the form ofprojects or programs. (Example: Utilize effectivemarketing techniques.)
Strategic communicationOnce the strategic plan is drafted, the entirestrategic plan should be communicated widely
The Sheridan Press 5
to all the stakeholders: anyone who has aninterest in seeing the organization succeed—orfail. “Outcome stakeholders” have an interestin seeing that the organization’s objectives areachieved, while “process stakeholders” have aninterest in the way in which the plan isimplemented.
Correctly identifying all of the stakeholders isthe first and most important step toward the“project of projects” success. The next step isto understand why stakeholders want to see theproject succeed or fail. What do they stand togain if the project succeeds or fails? What dothey stand to lose?
It is equally if not more crucial to understandnot just the tangible aspects important tostakeholders but also to understandstakeholders’ emotional response to the project.
Once this understanding is established, it isusually very helpful to allocate time and effortfor stakeholder management. Unfortunately,stakeholder issues do not just fade away as thestrategic plan is implemented; instead theyusually become more significant anddisruptive. After having negotiated a waythrough stakeholder issues, managers candescribe the strategic objectives in a way thatincorporates the different expectations andconcerns of all stakeholders—not just theproject sponsor or top management.Stakeholders who do not feel their voices havebeen heard may, consciously or sub-consciously, sabotage the strategic plan.
People are capable of achieving amazing featstogether: the hard part usually is not theachieving but is more likely thetogetherness. Appropriate management ofstakeholders will maximize the chances ofmeeting the strategic goals laid out in the plan.
Following is a clever way to remember thesteps needed to unlock organizations fromstrategic gridlock (Figure 4):
U–Understand the full challengeN–Negotiate buy-in of keystakeholdersL–Locate cultural advancers andblockersO–Organize priorities, goals, andactionsC–Communicate crediblyK – Keep adjusting
Figure 4. UNLOCK, Harper 2002
Strategic measurementOnce an organization has analyzed its mission,identified all its stakeholders, and defined itsgoals, it needs a way to measure progresstoward those goals. In general, this can bemeasured along two dimensions:
Input measuresIs the organization doing what they set out todo in the plan? Can most of the employeessummarize the strategic plan without referringto the document itself? Are most of theorganization’s projects or initiatives directlyaligned with or indicated by the strategic plan?
Output measuresIs what your organization set out to do in theplan having the expected effect? Is it happeningin the anticipated timeframe? How can theorganization be sure?
Key Performance Indicators (KPI)—alsoknown as Critical Key Success Indicators(CKSI)—help an organization define andmeasure progress toward strategic goals.(Goodstein et al., 1993)
KPIs are quantifiable measurements, agreed tobeforehand, that reflect the critical successfactors of an organization. They differdepending on the organization.
A basic research journal may have as one of itsKPIs the percentage renewal rate amonginstitutions. A clinical medicine journal may
6 Critical Business Planning
focus a KPI on market penetration of high-prescribing physicians. An academic socialscience journal may measure the readershiprates among graduate students. Editorial andproduction departments may share a KPI toreduce the average time it takes for manuscriptto move from submission through peer reviewto publication. A society customer servicedepartment may have as one of its KPIs thepercentage of member calls answered in thefirst minute.
Whatever Key Performance Indicators areselected, they must reflect the organization’sstrategic goals, they must be fundamental to itssuccess, and they must be measurable. KPIsusually are long-term considerations. Thedefinition of what they are and how they aremeasured does not change often. The goals fora particular KPI may change as theorganization’s strategic goals change, or as itgets closer to achieving a goal, but the KPIitself rarely changes.
If a Key Performance Indicator is going to beof any value, there must be a way to accuratelydefine and measure it. “Add new institutionalsubscribers” is useless as a KPI without someway to distinguish between new and repeatsubscribers. It is also important to define theKey Performance Indicators and stay with thesame definition from year to year. For a KPI of“increase readership,” it will be necessary toaddress considerations such as whether tomeasure by physical units sold as with papersubscriptions, number of article downloads, orself-reports of pass-along distribution orvolume of material read.
Organizations also need to set targets for eachKey Performance Indicator. A strategic goal toincrease readership might include a KPI of“journal Web site use.” After the KPI has beendefined as “the number of article downloadsper month” and a way to measure it has beendetermined—by tracking monthly page viewdata from the electronic use statisticspackage—the target has to be established.
“Increase the average number of monthlyarticle downloads by 50% a year” is a cleartarget that everyone will understand and be ableto take specific action to accomplish.
Many things are measurable. That does notmake them key to the organization’s success.In selecting Key Performance Indicators, it iscritical to limit them to those factors that areessential to the organization reaching itsstrategic goals. It is also important to keep thenumber of Key Performance Indicators smallso that everyone’s attention stays focused onachieving the same KPIs. That is not to say,for instance, that an organization will have onlythree or four total KPIs. Rather there will bethree or four Key Performance Indicators forthe organization and all the units within it willhave three, four, or five KPIs that support theorganization’s overall goals and can be “rolledup” into them.
Publishing reportsReporting is the process of accessing data,formatting it, and delivering it as informationinside and outside the organization. Reportsprovide the intelligence behind anorganization’s strategy by providing the most-needed pieces of information reliably. Inbusiness, reports are used to measure thecompany’s success in meeting the target set foreach of its Key Performance Indicators.Similarly, scholarly publishers create andanalyze reports to track their progress towardachieving their strategic goals.
At Johns Hopkins University Press, forinstance, the journal’s division has hired areport writer to set up reports using one of theleading report-writing software packages,Crystal Eclipse. Crystal Eclipse software isdesigned to help managers access data from avariety of internal sources, format it, anddeliver it as information inside and outside theorganization (Figure 5).
Report-writing software packages, like CrystalEclipse, Cognos ReportNet, MicroStrategy 7i,and Microsoft Business Solutions for Analyticsare all reporting toolkits whose aim it is to helpprofessionals design flexible, feature-richreports by extracting data from a wide varietyof sources. Formatting options are included tomake it easy to create complex specializedreports or graphical summary reports. Manypublishers are familiar with the graphical reportcapabilities of Microsoft Excel. Thesepackages work along the same lines but aremore sophisticated and integrative.
Given the value of establishing KeyPerformance Indicators on an organizationaland departmental level, both reports thatmeasure the organization’s progress on a macrolevel as well as reports that measure aparticular department’s success are important.This section will discuss reports from all areasof the publisher’s operations, including:
Financial and business management Marketing—circulation and advertising Production—paper and electronic Editorial
The reports highlighted in this White Paper arethose that have been found most importantbased on the experience of the authors and ofseveral other publishing experts interviewed.(A complete list of contributors is included atthe end of this White Paper.)
Interviewees were asked:• To do your job well, what reports or
information would you absolutely not wantto be without?
• Would you tell us about the reports that youuse which contribute most to the success ofyour organization?
• Which do you use regularly?• Why are they useful?• What makes a report good?• Are there any reports that you wish you had
but do not?And finally,• May we reprint a copy of the report
template in our White Paper?”
FinancialCertainly it is the experience of the authors thatfinancial reports often provide the context inwhich to view all operational results.Publishing managers who contributed to thisWhite Paper indicated that financial reportsprovided the most helpful information tosupport the attainment of their strategicobjectives.
Bill Breichner, Journals Manager for JohnsHopkins University Press, shared severalinteresting comments about the important roleplayed by financial reports within hisorganization:
“Couldn’t forecast without monthly financial reports;they enable you to create a process…like a textbook for a class—they create structure.Then your syllabus can be built around thetextbook…allows your decisions to be based onfacts. If you’re just discussing something, it doesn’tmatter; but I’m a big proponent—if we need to makea decision, let’s use a report.” (Breichner)
8 Critical Business Planning
What is meant by “financial reports?”
In scholarly publishing, these financial reportsseem to be the two used most often:
1) Annual Budget2) Profit and Loss Statement
Annual budgetFor many organizations, the budget cycleseems to be the same—maybe a little more orless onerous, formal, or confrontationaldepending on the organization, but roughly thesame:
1. Receive the preliminary materials fromfinance with the necessary forms tocomplete and submit.
2. Complain that the forms really do not fit thedepartment well, but the forms arecompleted and submitted, usually on time.
3. Wait while finance does some magic andthe budget comes back with a note fromabove to cut it by some unreasonablenumber.
4. Trim out the “padding” initially put in andthen identify other items that can be cut.
5. Resubmit the budget.6. Sometimes repeat the cycle.7. Finally receive a note from finance with the
approved budget for next year, even if italready is next year.
8. Look at what remains in the budget andwonder how the targets can possibly bereached with such limited investment.
9. Promise to give the budget more attentionnext year. (Reh, 2004)
It goes without saying that this is not an idealprocess for managers personally or for theorganization as a whole. But can anything bedone to improve it? While it is unlikely that anyone individual can effect much of a change tothe budget process—at least not quickly—thereare ways to make the budget less of amechanized time-spend and more of a roadmapfor reaching strategic goals.
In addition, it is important to build a stronglinkage between budget costs and expectationsof work to be performed. For instance, thefinancial impact of a new hire in marketingshould be reflected not just on the expense sideof the ledger, but also in improved licensingrevenues by year 2, for example.
If upper management requires a 15% reductionin the customer service budget, they should beinformed that this will require shortening thebusiness day for live-answering of phone callsby 1 hour. Alternately, a 15% reduction couldbe proposed in an area that will have less of animpact on the business as a whole. The budgetshould remain linked to the services on which itwill be spent.
Many societies establish budgets for theirorganization as a whole but do not establishdistinct budgets for their journals. When anindustry is stable and prosperous, like thescholarly publishing industry was in the 1980’s,it may not be as critical to know budget detailsdown to the journal level.
In today’s more chaotic and complexenvironment, however, many society publishersare looking for answers to questions that ajournal budget would help clarify: What is thelargest revenue stream for the organization?How do online costs compare with print costs?What percentage of subscription revenue is themarketing budget? Treating each publication asif it were a separate business is an excellentway to optimize revenue opportunities andminimize costs.
A journal budget is a financial report thatidentifies and breaks out major sales and costline items and important statistics. Theminimum revenue and cost items to include injournal budget are found in Table 2.
The Sheridan Press 9
Table 2. Journals Budget Adapted from Page, Campbell,and Meadows, 1997, and supplemented usingprofessional experience of Kaufman-Wills Group.
Although many publishers may be comfortablereading a budget, many others are not. Budgetline items are relatively easy to understandonce the elements that go into them areelucidated. The following paragraphs describeeach of these line items.
Often called the top line, sales revenuesrepresents the amount the organization has soldduring the period. One of the things that makejournals financially attractive as a type ofpublication is that they typically have morethan one revenue stream. For future decisionmaking, it is useful to provide detail as towhich products or services are major revenueproducers.
Sales costs are what it costs the organization togenerate the sales shown in total sales revenueabove. Compare the total costs to the totalrevenue, but also look at the cost of each line ofproduct or service versus its revenue. In someorganizations, sales costs also are known asCost of Goods Sold (CGS). Editorial,production, postage, and distribution-relatedcosts all are part of sales costs for journals.
Marketing expenses can be included undersales costs or in their own category. Marketingexpenses are not directly related to producingthe product or service to be sold. While
certainly necessary, marketing costs should bemonitored and compared frequently to similarnumbers from other organizations in the sameindustry with products in the same point in thelife cycle.
Gross margin is the difference between salesrevenues and sales costs. If the difference ispositive, it is referred to as a surplus in thenonprofit arena and as gross profit in thecommercial sector. A negative difference is aloss and is shown in parentheses.
Overhead expenses for journals usually aredivided into two segments:
1) Journal management2) General and administrative
Journal management costs are those costs suchas dedicated and partially dedicated staffsalaries and benefits. General & administrativecosts are associated with running theorganization in general terms, such aselectricity, leasing space, etc. To maximize ajournal’s surplus, these costs should bemonitored closely and kept as low as possible.
Net surplus (deficit) is what remains whentotal costs are subtracted from total revenues.
Creating a budget and understanding the lineitems within should not just be based on historybut also should reflect the strategic vision. Ifresources are not allocated to what theorganization wishes to achieve, reaching thosegoals will be unlikely.
Profit & Loss Statement
Once a journals budget is set, managers turn tomonthly Profit and Loss (P&L) statementsthroughout the year to measure how actualperformance stacks up against the budget.Following is a sample monthly P&L for ascholarly journal including line items similar tothose supplied by Lippincott Williams &Wilkins to their society publishing partners(Pippin, 2004):
JOURNALS BUDGETSales revenues Sales costs
Subscriptions EditorialSingle copy ProductionAdvertising PostageReprints Sales and marketingLicensing Total sales costsAuthor fees Gross marginTotal sales revenues Overhead expenses
Journal managementGeneral and administrative
Total overheadsTotal costsNet surplus/deficit
10 Critical Business Planning
Table 3. Sample Journal P&L
Journal P&L
Actu
al
Bu
dg
et
Last
year
Actu
al
Bu
dg
et
Last
year
SALES COSTS
Subscription Edl, prod, and mfg
Member Editorial allowance
Nonmember Manuscript mgmt system
Online-only Copyediting
Sponsored Data conversion, tagging
Total subscription Composition
Business-to-business Printing
Display Online start-up
Classified Online maintenance
Commercial reprints Total edl, prod, and mfg
Supplements, other Subscription promotion
Total B-to-B B-to-B promo
Author charges B-to-B commission
Author reprints Customer service
Color charges Product mgmt overheads
Page/submission charges General & administrative overheads
Total author charges TOTAL COSTS
Rights and permissions SURPLUS/DEFICIT
Translations SOCIETY SHARE
Other PUBLISHER SHARE
Total rights/permissions STATISTICSOther sales B-TO-B
TOTAL SALES Display advertising pages
Classified advertising pages
Total advertising pages
Supplement pages
ED’L, PROD, MFG
Number of issues
Print page budget
Online page budget
Cost/printed pageCost/online page
OVERHEADS
% sales
The Sheridan Press 11
Different organizations find different elements of the P&L more useful than others. The American Psychiatric Association says that it is more important to them to focus efforts on understanding and impacting revenues—“given
Table 4. Manufacturing Cost Tracker (Breichner) the challenge of protecting and managing so many revenue streams.” (Stein) Luckily, the association’s expenses are coming in on budget. To track revenues, 2-page variance reports are used, which identify at-a- glance those areas requiring greater attention. Smaller publishers may find that while P&Ls are important to review, other reports are even more critical to their day-to-day operations. Such publishers may have little need to monitor accounts receivable, but are likely to rely heavily on cash flow reports as compared with the previous year. Thinking about the reason behind the variations can be very useful in identifying the next best steps to take. (Collins) When there are particular areas of a journal that need attention because of potential opportunities or challenges, it is often helpful for organizations to hone in on those areas. For many publishers, licensing revenue is growing faster than any other revenue stream. It is useful therefore to understand which licensors are providing the greatest share of the total licensing revenues. Once these licensors have been identified, publishers work to increase revenues further with those licensors. It may be possible to negotiate a higher royalty, to license other titles, or change licensing rates in some way to optimize sales. If the demand is there, it may be profitable to license a collection of titles. (Richman, 2004)
On the cost side, manufacturing costs typically represent a large percentage of total costs. Cost savings can often be identified by tracking manufacturing costs. Johns Hopkins University Press monitors the items illustrated in Table 4.
Other societies find that growing editorial costs require them to set up and monitor editorial office expenses. Even with a fixed editorial allowance, editorial staffs often require help to manage their offices more cost-effectively. An editorial office budget template (Table 5).
Table 5. Editorial Office Budget, Ekman and Quandt, 1999
Manufacturing cost tracker Journal Volume Issue
# Print Pgs
# Copies D
ate
of in
voic
e
Prin
ting
$
Vend
or
Pape
r $
Prin
ting
Tota
l
Mfg
Tot
al
# C
omp
Pgs
Com
p in
voic
e da
te
Com
p $
Vend
or
Mai
ling
$
Post
age
Dis
tro
Cos
t/ Pg
12 Critical Business Planning
Table 6. Paper/Online v Online Only Cost Comparison Template
In addition to tracking print manufacturingcosts, many publishers are wondering how adecline in print subscriptions may impact theireditorial and production costs. Above (Table6) is a spreadsheet template comparing thecosts of producing both the print and onlineedition versus producing the electronic editiononly.
While this analysis does not take into accountthe impact of different scenarios on revenue, itdoes provide publishers with information onwhich costs are fixed whether or not apublisher produces a print version.
MarketingMarketers rely heavily on report data toevaluate their success, make decisions aboutnext steps, and identify trends. Marketers usecirculation reports, new business reports,renewal reports, and online usage reports.
Circulation report
Historically, the circulation report has been thecrown jewel of all journal publishing reports.After all, no matter their direct interest in the
journal, everyone cares about circulation—editorial, production, marketing, and finance.Circulation reports can be enormouslyinformative. For instance, if a journal’snonmember individual circulation is decliningbut the publications staff does not know why,the circulation report may provide importantclues. The circulation report may show that themembership department has been successfullyadding in members by converting nonmemberindividuals to members.
Tracking the number of graced subscribers onthe membership rolls each month will providean advance glimpse of the success of renewalefforts and offer valuable intelligence fordecision-making. If the number of gracedsubscribers has increased substantially from theprevious year at the same time, it could beworthwhile to implement extra renewal efforts,perhaps faxing or emailing to augment effortsto date. (Collins)
There are many appropriate ways to format acirculation report; following is one example(Table 7):
Paper/Online v online only cost comparison template Paper + Online Online only
Costs Per pg % Total Per pg % Total Diff % DiffEditorial
Conventional business wisdom suggests that itis far less expensive to keep existing customersthan it is to find new ones. Even so, manyorganizations devote more time and effort togaining new customers than to answering theneeds of current customers. Similarly, manypublishers neither maximize the return on theirrenewal efforts nor accurately measure theirrenewal rate.
The first step in maintaining the currentcustomer base is to establish a cost-effectiverenewals strategy. A renewals schedule is oftenthe basis of a strong renewals strategy. Therenewals schedule lays out the number ofefforts the organization will put forth.
An example of a 5-effort renewals schedule fora bimonthly journal follows (Table 8):
Table 8. Renewals Schedule
The schedule also can be augmented withinformation on the types of renewals employed:direct mail, email, journal cover wrap, phone.Detailed information on renewals is provided inother Sheridan White Papers such as“Marketing Scholarly Journals” (2001), “Howto Market Print and Electronic Journals toLibraries” (2003), and “Member Recruitment”(2003) found at www.sheridanpress.com.
While a renewals schedule provides a goodfoundation for an organization’s renewalsstrategy, knowing whether the strategy hasbeen successful requires a solid renewal ratereport. Below is an example of a renewalreport adapted from a report generated byQuickFill, a PC-based subscription fulfillmentpackage (Table 9).
The foregoing report allows publishing staff tocheck on the renewal rates of subscriptionsfrom different sources. Renewal reports can begenerated in many different versions depending
Circulation reportCurrent
yearPrevious
year/sUS
Member Personal
nonmember
Institutional Total US
Non USMember Personal nonmember
Institutional Total Non USTOTAL CIRCULATION
Total US Total non US Total member
Total nonmemberpersonal
Total institutional Total site license Total personal
online-only
Total institutionalonline-only
Renewal report
Expire group
Effort 1
Effort2
Effort3
Effort 4
Effort5+
< 2004 Aug Oct Jan Mar Check %
Nov/Dec Aug Oct Jan Mar Check %
Jan/Feb Sep Nov Mar Jun Check %
Mar/Apr Nov Jan May Aug Check %
May/Jun Jan Mar Jul Oct Check %
Jul/Aug Mar Jun Sep Dec Check %
Sep/Oct May Aug Nov Feb Check %
14 Critical Business Planning
on the information desired: for example, by publication, list, package, plan, and tracking code. For journal publishers, ensuring a high renewal rate along with securing new subscribers are the two elements needed to increase the absolute number of subscribers.
New business marketing reports Expanding its customer base is crucial to the continued viability of any organization and often is a key component of the strategic plan. Table 10 is a new business report like the one publishers often use to track the success of their direct marketing efforts (reprinted from Kaufman-Wills Group, “Member Recruitment,” The Sheridan Group, 2003).
Online usage reports The use of online information resources is growing exponentially. Both the producers and purchasers of information believe that the use of these resources should be measured in a way that is useful. Librarians want to understand better how the information they buy from a variety of sources is being used, and publishers want to know how the information products they disseminate are being accessed. Editors want to know which articles are being downloaded. Marketers want to cite the most popular Web features. More than ever, business managers are required to run their online business like their offline business—by the numbers. WebTrends is an example of one tool to which many businesses turn in order to measure these key performance indicators:
Analyze visitor traffic patterns. This can
improve how well the site leads visitors to the desired location by identifying which paths they follow and whether the route is helping to meet the organization’s business goals.
Measure content effectiveness. This helps
identify which content, pages, and sections of the site are most interesting and engaging.
Following are two sample web trend “dashboard” reports (Figure 6):
A 5,000 4/20 Standard 4-piece letter 40 .8% $4,500 $4,000 $.89
B 7,500 4/25 Discount Self-mailer 95 1.27% $7,500 $9,500 $1.26
C 10,000 4/30 Premium Letter w/ teaser copy 175 1.75% $15,000 $17,500 $1.16
1. The cost per piece is $.90 for mailing A, $1 for mailing B, and $1.50 for mailing C. 2. Assumes an annual membership fee of $100.
Table 10. Sample Promotion Tracking Grid (reprinted from Kaufman-Wills Group, “Member Recruitment,” The Sheridan Group, 2003).
The Sheridan Press 15
Many online service providers provide alternate reporting systems to which WebTrends can be added as an adjunct. For instance, Science Magazine is hosted online by HighWire Press but also relies on WebTrends reports to track progress toward its electronic publishing objectives. Launched in March 2002, COUNTER (Counting Online Usage of Networked Electronic Resources) is an international Code of Practice governing the recording and exchange of online usage data. COUNTER is supported by librarians and publishers around the globe, as well as their professional organizations, including: AAP, Association of American Publishers ALPSP, The Association of Learned &
Professional Society Publishers ARL, Association of Research Libraries ASA, Association of Subscription Agents
and Intermediaries JISC, Joint Information Systems Committee NCLIS, National Commission on Libraries
and Information Science NISO, National Information Standards
Organization STM, International Association of
Scientific, Technical & Medical Publishers
purchasing decisions; and plan infrastructure more effectively. Publishers and intermediaries will be able to provide data to customers in a format they expect and desire; compare the relative usage of different delivery channels; aggregate data for a customer that is using multiple delivery channels, and learn more about genuine usage patterns. To comply with Release 1 of the COUNTER Code of Practice, vendors will have to provide to customers the set of basic usage reports. Samples follow (Figures 7-8): Journal Report 1: Number of Successful Full -Text Article Requests by Month and Journal
Figure 7. Full Text Article Requests, reprinted with permission, www.projectCounter.org
Journal Report 2: Turnaways by Month and Journal (This report is applicable only where the user access model is based on a maximum number of concurrent users, such as Ovid Technologies, Inc.)
Figure 8. User Turnaways, reprinted with permission, www.projectCounter.org All major scholarly publishers and online service providers have agreed to make their full text web sites COUNTER-compliant by 2005. Once the COUNTER reports become prevalent, publishers will have a whole new set of Key Performance Indicators. Many publishing
Print ISSN
Online ISSN
Jan 01
Feb 01
Mar 01
Calendar YTD
Total full-text turnaways for all Journals
453 233 318 4765
Journal A 1212-3131 3225-3123 23 40 12 342 Journal B 9821-3361 2312-8751 18 20 16 287
Print ISSN
Online ISSN
Jan 01
Feb 01
Mar 01
Calendar YTD
Total for all journals 6637 8732 7550 45897
Journal A 1212-3131 3225-3123 456 521 665 4532 Journal B 9821-3361 2312-8751 203 251 275 3465 Journal C 2464-2121 0154-1521 0 0 0 0 Journal D 5355-5444 0165-5542 203 251 275 2978
COUNTER initially is concentrating its efforts on journals and databases, as these types of content are not only the major items in most library material budgets but also have been available online for some time and have a core of well-accepted definitions and content structures. This is not the case, for example, with e-books; these and other types of content will be covered later. COUNTER promises to bring these benefits to librarians, publishers and intermediaries (as paraphrased from www.counter.org): Librarians will be able to compare usage statistics from different publishers and online service providers; make better-informed
16 Critical Business Planning
“futurists” believe that these types of online usage data may usurp the significance of even the journal circulation report and change the notion of a subscription from that of a volume to an article-by-article proposition. Elsevier, the largest publisher of scholarly journals, recently announced its financial records for 2003 and forecast for 2004 and after. Two slides bear reprinting in this section of the White Paper. Elsevier has been counting the number of articles downloaded on its aggregated journal service, Science Direct. The data collected appears in Figure 9:
Figure 9. Article downloads. http://193.131.222.28/docs/29 ScienceDirect hosts some 1,700 journals. Since 1999, article downloads have increased from 16 million to 175 million per year. At the same time, Elsevier reports that it has reduced and held constant its subscription attrition rate to 4%, which is lower than the 8%-10% or more that many other journal publishers are facing. In Table 11, Elsevier discloses these data: Elsevier 2001-2003
Usage - article downloads +86% Reduction in cost/article download >50%
Table 11. Article Usage Not only is the information revealed in these slides interesting in its own right but also it demonstrates how usage data can be used with other data to help achieve various strategic objectives, such as “Provide increased value to shareholders.” In this example, Elsevier is able
to use the Key Performance Indicators of article downloads, renewal rate, and cost-per-article to try to show the positive results of their investment in online services with the purpose of reassuring and enthusing the shareholders.
Advertising In addition to subscription revenue, product and/or classified advertising is a very important revenue stream to many journals. Many publishers have strategic goals to increase their share of advertising market dollars and, thus, establish Key Performance Indicators to measure their progress toward meeting those goals. In advertising, these two factors are most typically tracked: 1) Market share—that is, ad dollars and ad pages against journals in the market; 2) Advertising exposure trends, which are dependent on circulation and readership. FOCUS and MediaChek/APEX are two syndicated reports that measure journal reach and exposure potential in the healthcare market. (http://www.perq-hci.com/Products/index.html) Every six months, FOCUS provides a means of evaluating medical journal average issue readers and average issue advertising exposures, giving performance information important to planning campaigns or attracting new advertisers. Media-Chek® is an audit that measures readership and exposure potential of medical journals. The audit provides measures of the number of high, medium, and total readers for more than 300 medical publications, and relates these to various audience characteristics, including physician specialty and type of practice. If a publisher thinks that their journal would benefit from being included in the study, and the journal is distributed to at least 25% of market, the publisher can ask to be included (Tauber, 2004). Access to the data then is available for purchase by the publisher.
7
Strong Demand
Acceleration in articleAcceleration in articledownloads (m)downloads (m)
For tracking healthcare journal advertising spending and campaign strategy, there are the Journal Ad Review (JAR) and JARScan reports. Journal Ad Review™ (JAR) provides a monthly audit of spending that helps users understand where advertisers are spending and why. JARScan™ is an online complement to JAR that enables access to ads placed in pharmaceutical publications. JARScan customers can sort, view, and print 4-color ad images to perform trending and competitive analysis, and add impact to new business presentations.
Production Following is a two-part graphic that can be used to illustrate a publisher’s goal to dramatically cut their time to publication—a number one goal for many publishers today (Figure 10). The first graphic illustrates the goal by comparing the average number of weeks a manuscript takes to move from submission to publication with the optimal number of weeks. The second graphic illustrates what might be done to accomplish the goal; that is, how much time needs to be cut out of each stage of production.
Sample production schedule Text Manuscript in Manuscript to Conversion Manuscript to Ms Editing Manuscript to Composition Proof to Author/Editor/Production Mgr Corrected proof to Production Late news to Ms Editing Late news to Composition Final TOC to Ms Editing Corrected proof to Composition Revised proof to Ms Editing (incl news) Breakdown to Production Revised proof to Composition Confirmation proof to Production Mgr Final approval to printer Postscript files to printer PDF files to int’l printers Late Editorials Advertising Ad closing date New ad material due Ad dummy in Press Released for planning Text and conversion materials to litho Mail material in Press planned Labels FTPd to int’l printers Blues out Blues in Inserts in Press date Advance copies mail Mailing complete Online release date Embargo date and time Online Activity Release of text, graphics, PDFs to online vendor Table 12. Sample Production Schedule
Blue = optimum Black = current
optimum current
Figure 10. Current v Desired Time to Publication
18 Critical Business Planning
To achieve these objectives, journal productionstaff needs to establish and follow a productionschedule that reflects the desired reduction intime intervals. Table 12 (on the previous page)is a sample production schedule fromsubmission of manuscripts to publication inprint and online. A production schedule shouldidentify major production tasks and typicaltime-to-completion. Johns Hopkins UniversityPress completes the worksheet below (Table13) to help them track the speed with whichissues move through production.
EditorialGiven that “content is king,” no paper onstrategic planning would be complete without adiscussion of the critical role that editorialplays. The next few paragraphs discuss themyriad ways in which goal-setting andmeasurement of editor performance and thepeer-review process can help in fulfilling thestrategic mission.
Editorial performance criteria
What are the Key Performance Indicators foreditorial performance established by peer-reviewed scientific journals? There appears tobe significant commonality in the factors thatscientific scholarly societies view as importantin evaluating an editor’s performance. Thesefactors include:
Quality, balance of editorial content Scientific impact Quality of peer-review Number of manuscripts submitted Time to publication, backlog Adherence to page budget Board composition Adherence to editorial budget Online use, circulation
Production time intervals
Table 13. Number of days in each stage of production(Breichner)
Societies generally do not set specificrequirements for each factor as much as theymonitor an editor’s adherence to broadobjectives and watch for positive trends.
A publications director of a major basic sciencejournal responded to our query on this subjectwith the following comments, whichcharacterize many scholarly journals:
“I’ve worked with mostly self-motivated editors whodemanded perfection from themselves and others. In my experience, time to first decision, backlog,adherence to page budget and even circulation andfinancial matters fall on the shoulders of themanaging editor or director of pubs.
“I have never seen formal performancerequirements for an editor. I have seenPublications Committee’s call into questionovershooting page budgets, overspending withinthe Editor’s office, and diminishing quality of thejournal. Typically, editors (have) strongpersonalities and so the Publications’ Committeecasually points out a problem, grumbles behind theEditor’s back for the next few years, and then justwaits out the term of the editor.”
In our experience, it is rare for societies toemploy an actual carrot-and-stick approach toeditor management, but it is not unheard of. Inour experience, there is only one society thatemploys an actual carrot-and-stick approach,albeit using subjective criteria. One societyrewards editors who have performed well in theeyes of the Publications Committee by payingfor additional pages. However, failure to liveup to expectations results in a loweredperformance bonus—a third component of theeditorial allowance (the other componentsbeing a flat honorarium and cost of livingincrease).
Issue
Date:
Comp.VendorcodeDate:
Tocomp.
Date:
Toprinter
Date:
Totalcomp.
Date:
Toprinter
Date:
Advance
Date:
Print
Date:
Prodcoord.
Date:
Mailcopyrec’dDate:
The Sheridan Press 19
Some publishers have their editors prepare aneditorial development plan which can berevisited later to compare and contrast actualachievement with the plan. It has been ourexperience that it is very uncommon forscholarly publishers to terminate an editor.There has been just one medical specialtyjournal publisher that has fired an editor due tofailure to follow the editor’s own editorial plan.Other societies do take, if not specificmeasurements, at least a more structuredapproach toward monitoring an editor’sperformance. Some societies’ editor-hiringdecisions are based on intangibles such asprofessional reputation, networking abilities,and administrative proficiency.
For some of its journals, the University ofChicago Press (UCP) has a process wherebyeditors are subjected to “peer review.” Beforerenewing an editor’s term, UCP identifies fourto five lead scientists in the journal’s area andasks for an evaluation of the journal. Statisticsand highlights about the journal are provided tothe reviewer as background (Shirrell, 2004).
Another way editors and content are evaluatedis by regular reader surveys. Sometimes editorsare responsible for rating reviewers. Editorsrate reviews as they come in: continues to usegood reviewers, stops sending manuscripts topoor reviewers. At another journal, editorperformance is being measured against onlineusage. Which articles are being viewed? Isusage increasing? How does online usagecompare against competitors? (see earlierdiscussion about COUNTER).
It is typical at editorial board meetings todiscuss strategies for improving the journal.These discussions usually cover impactfactor—both in terms of rank and the year-on-year trend. One journal’s Board has set a goalto improve their impact factor by publishingreview articles on hot topics early in year.
The American Heart Association has quite aformal editorial performance framework. Eacheditor is expected to provide the ScientificPublications Committee (SPC) with data on
manuscript review times, page budget usage(including backlog of accepted manuscripts),acceptance rate, reviewer performance,submissions, budgetary expenditures, andoffice management issues. The editors and SPCreview and discuss regularly these data,reinforcing expectations, identifying potentialimbalances, and developing new standards andobjectives appropriate for each journal. Thegoals and performance objectives set by theSPC are outlined below: (Prudhomme, 2004).
1. To improve the quality of published science inAHA journals, the SPC has mandated anacceptance rate of no more than 25%.
2. A new review category for manuscripts of“inappropriate” is being instituted. While theAHA wishes to encourage quality science,many manuscripts submitted to the journal maybe inappropriate for reasons of quality, subjectmatter, presentation, or other reasons.
3. A manuscript should be considered a newsubmission after 120 days have passed sincethe decision to reject has been communicatedto the author by the Editor. This interval can beshortened at the Editor’s discretion as a part ofthe initiative to shorten the review process.
4. The AHA has established a goal of no morethan 6 weeks for review time from submissionof a manuscript by an author to the Editor’s firstdecision regarding the manuscript.
5. A backlog of articles is not permitted toaccumulate. A backlog is defined as articleswith a publication interval of more than 12-14weeks from the date of acceptance to the dateof publication.
6. Annually, the AHA may survey authors, editors,reviewers and staff to assess service andperformance levels the editorial offices.
7. Annually, the AHA may solicit the opinion ofexternal expert reviewers to assess the qualityand impact of the journal’s content.
20 Critical Business Planning
Table 14 below outlines the performance indicators and reporting schedule for editors:
12/yr 4/yr 2/yr 1/yrCriteria
Im pact factor X
Review tim es Subm ission to 1st decision (<6 weeks) X Receipt to acceptance X Acceptance to publication (8 weeks) X
Page budget Monthly quota XBacklog of accepted m anuscripts X Manuscripts in review X Subm issions year-to-date X
Acceptance rate Acceptance rate <25% X Editorial review: inappropriate X
Reviewer perform ance Acceptance to first decision X Q uality of review X Num ber of reviews X
Production deadlines Print m aterials X O nline only m aterials X
Editorial office "Custom er service," author satisfaction X Effective com m unication w/ Board, reviewers, staff X Staffing issues X O ffice efficiency X Budget under/overruns X Editorial Board Frequency and effectiveness of m eetings X Balance and expertise X Solicitation of new, key work X
Perform ance assessm ent for journalsReview Schedule
Table 14. Editorial Assessment Criteria, reprinted with permission, American Heart Association, 2004. Peer-review reports There are two main (and inter-related) editorial objectives front-and-center in the minds of journal publishers today: 1) Shorten time to publication; 2) Automate the peer-review process. Some of the tools that publishers use to monitor their progress toward the goal of shortening time to publication have already been discussed (see Production section). Making use of software available today to automate the peer-review process is another way that publishers can achieve not only the goal of hastening time to publication but also reducing tedious data entry among editorial staff, identifying the best and fastest reviewers,
measuring the proportion of manuscripts received by subject area, and virtually eliminating manuscript delivery expenses. There are several available systems on the market today of which publishers can avail themselves. Three of the most common include Scholar One, Editorial Manager, and Bench>Press®. The latter system is used by The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics. The sample reports (using mock data) below (Figure 11) show how data can be extracted from the system to monitor publication speed throughout of the peer-review process:
Turnaround for 20XX Submitted to First Decision
Revisions Avg. Days From First Decision Until Revision
Arrives 60
Avg. Days for AE to Take Action 3
Percent of Manuscripts Rereviewed 30%
Avg. # of Revision Reviewers 1
Avg. Days for Rereview 10
Avg. Days to Render Revision Decision 2
Avg. Days from Revision Receipt to Revision Decision 30
Accepted Papers
Avg. # Days from First Submission to Acceptance 72
Table 15. Manuscript Flow For several reasons, managing editors often find it useful to track the number of manuscripts received by month as compared with the previous year and by content type (Table 15). That way, they can more easily stay on their page budget and adjust acceptance rates depending on the number of articles being submitted (Spraycar, 2004).
Closing This White Paper was designed as a scholarly publisher’s toolkit—a resource on which organizations can draw to meet their publishing program’s critical strategic planning objectives. One final tool wraps up this paper: a worksheet to help organizations organize their strategic plans. (Exhibit). For downloadable copies of some of the templates featured in this paper, please visit www.sheridanpress.com, under “Library.”
About the Authors Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC is a scholarly publishing and communications company offering a full range of professional and publishing solutions. Our approach to business is simple: we use our hard-won knowledge and nearly 50 years of hands-on managerial experience to help clients grow sales, reduce costs, and deliver increased value to their customers. Our clients range from small through large non-profit societies to multi-national commercial concerns. Together, we have tackled projects in a wide variety of exciting areas, including new business development, electronic publishing strategy, employee recruitment, marketing services, and editorial and production process improvement. For more information on Kaufman-Wills, we invite you to visit www.kaufmanwills.com. Cara S. Kaufman Alma J. Wills Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC Kaufman-Wills Group, LLC Ph: 410 821 8035 Ph: 410 477 2329 [email protected][email protected]
Contributors We wish to express our gratitude to the following individuals who contributed to this paper: William Breichner Journals Publisher Johns Hopkins University Press
Nancy Collins Publisher, The Journal of Medical Practice Management President, Greenbranch Publishing LLC
Month Articles Letters Fast Track Guidelines Total
2003
2004
$ Change
% Change
2003
2004
$ Change
%Change
2003
2004
$ Change
%Change
2003
2004
$ Change
% Change
2003
2004
$ Change
% Change
January February etc. TOTALS
22 Critical Business Planning
Richard DodenhoffJournals Director, American Society ofPharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
Stephen PrudhommeDirector, Scientific PublishingAmerican Heart Association
Carol RichmanDirector, Licensing and Electronic PublishingSage Publications, Inc.
Marjory SpraycarManaging EditorJournal of Occupational and EnvironmentalMedicine
Robert ShirrellJournals ManagerUniversity of Chicago Press
Kathy SteinDirector, Financial and Business OperationsAmerican Psychiatric Press, Inc.
Stephen TauberVice President, Walchli-Tauber Group, Inc.Medical advertising sales specialists
ReferencesAbel, Richard and Lyman W. Newlin, eds.,Scholarly Publishing: Books Journals,Publishers, and Libraries in the TwentiethCentury (2002), New York: John Wiley &Sons, Inc.
Ekman, Richard and Richard E. Quandt,Technology and Scholarly Communication(1999), Berkeley and Los Angeles: Universityof California Press.
Harper, Pamela S., Preventing StrategicGridlock (2002), Hilton Head Island, SC:Cameo Publications, LLC.
Harvard Business Review, Harvard BusinessReview on Knowledge Management (1998),Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Hastings, H. (2002). Chief Marketing OfficerTo-Do’s for 2002. Reveries. Retrieved May 6,2004, fromhttp://www.reveries.com/reverb/essays/cmomemo/hastings2.html
Kaplan, Robert, industry consultant, CEO,Usernomics, http://www.usernomics.com,2000.
McDonald, John, “Electronic Use Statistics,”Against the Grain: Linking Publishers, Vendorsand Librarians, 15(6) (2004), pp 1, 18, 20.
Page, Gillian, Robert Campbell, and JackMeadows, Journal Publishing (1997),Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Peters, Thomas J. and Robert H. Waterman, InSearch of Excellence (1988), New York:Warner Books.
Porter, Michael E., Competitive Strategy(1980), New York: The Free Press, Division ofSimon & Schuster, Inc.
Reh, John F., About Management, retrievedMay 6, 2004, fromhttp://management.about.com
Sanders, T. Irene, Strategic Thinking and theNew Science: Planning in the Midst of Chaos,Complexity, and Change (1998), New York:The Free Press.
Weaknesses (list areas of business performing poorly or neglected)
Action plan
Goals (list specific actionable results to support objectives)
Strategies (describe initiatives that will be used to achieve goals)
Measures (provide examples of objective methods for measuring success (relevant data, reports, timeline)
As a service to the publishing industry, The Sheridan Press commissioned a series of white papers that providesubstantial information on topics of importance.
NEW RELEASE
Critical Business Planning for JournalsJuly 2004
Strategic business planning is the key to success in any industry. This paper offers a variety of time-proven reports uti-lized by a number of scholarly publishers for not only building a sound strategy, but effectively tracking progress againstgoals.
THE SHERIDAN PRESS WHITE PAPERS
Marketing Scholarly Journals May 2001
This white paper covers the key Journal marketing issues andoffers major resources available on the topic. The goal is to helpscholarly publishers become more aware of the variety of activi-ties that can support and maintain their customer focus, whetheroffline or online.
Digital Archiving in the New MillenniumNovember 2000
This paper discusses the status of key infrastructure components,technologies, best practices and a culture of digital stewardship.It also considers what publishers can do to get involved in shap-ing this infrastructure.
Improving Journal Quality with Process Improvement Methods
May 2000Process improvement methods can decrease costs and cycle times,improve quality and empower employees to drive change. Thispaper offers process improvement basics and an overview of com-mon methods as they apply to journal publishing.
Digital Workflow: Managing the Process Electronically
March 2000This paper reviews technological advances and includes brieftechnical explanations of 12 electronic processes. It also con-siders the economic and sociological factors involved in imple-menting a digital workflow.
The Future of the Print JournalFebruary 1999
Will electronic publishing eliminate the need for print journals?Research suggests a multi-format future in which readers use elec-tronic journals for some purposes and print journals for others.
Outsourcing: Planning for Strategic Partnerships June 1998
Outsourcing has become an important strategic managementtool, particularly in publishing. The paper describes the carefulplanning, agreements, and systematic evaluations essential todeveloping strategic partnerships.
How to Market Print and Electronic Journalsto Libraries
September 2003In the face of tightened library spending, and the growing presenceof online journals, publishers must become more aggressive in pro-moting their journals (both print and electronic) to libraries. Thispaper provides breakthrough ideas for making your institutionalmarketing program a success.
Metadata DemystifiedJuly 2003
As metadata conventions emerge and standards begin to form, thispaper offers not only an overview of current conventions, but clearly defines the uses and benefits of metadata, specific to journalpublishers.
Member RecruitmentApril 2003
Member recruitment is a constant challenge for publishers, especially in light of new technologies, evolving demographics, andnot least of all, the economy. This paper provides helpful suggestionsfrom industry peers to revisit and rejuvenate membership goals.
Digital ArtMay 2002
As publisher workflows evolve and change with technology, sub-mission requirements for art are also changing. Publishers musteducate themselves and their authors in order to submit digital art tonewly established specifications. This paper offers guidance andperspective on both the current state and the future of digital art.
Implementing Information Technology Systems
January 2002New information technologies offer publishers increased productionefficiency and significant enhancements for contributors and readers.Yet, the selection and implementation of these systems involves risk.This paper offers an in-depth overview and guidelines for selectingan appropriate system.
Marketing Reprints October 2001
An update of “How to Make the Most of Reprints,” this whitepaper provides additional ideas on marketing your reprints, assess-ing a reprint management service for outsourcing, and increasingyour publication program’s profits through the sale of reprints.
SWOT ANALYSIS
Strengths What advantages do we possess? What do other people see as our strong points?
Weaknesses What do we do poorly? What areas of our business have we
neglected?
Opportunities Are there trends in the market that favor us? Can we take advantage of a competitor
weakness?
Threats Are there trends in the market that work against
us? Are competitors capitalizing on our weakness?
Journal P&L
Actual
Budget
Last year
Actual
Budget
Last year
SALES COSTS Subscription Edl, prod, and mfg Member Editorial allowance Nonmember Manuscript mgmt system Online-only Copyediting Sponsored Data conversion, tagging Total subscription Composition Business-to-business Printing Display Online start-up Classified Online maintenance Commercial reprints Total edl, prod, and mfg Supplements, other Subscription promotion Total B-to-B B-to-B promo Author charges B-to-B commission Author reprints Customer service Color charges Product mgmt overheads Page/submission charges General & administrative overheads Total author charges TOTAL COSTS Rights and permissions SURPLUS/DEFICIT Translations SOCIETY SHARE Other PUBLISHER SHARE Total rights/permissions STATISTICS Other sales B-TO-B TOTAL SALES Display advertising pages Classified advertising pages Total advertising pages Supplement pages ED'L, PROD, MFG Number of issues Print page budget Online page budget Cost/printed page Cost/online page OVERHEADS % sales
Institutional Total US Non US Member Personal nonmember Institutional Total Non US TOTAL CIRCULATION
Total US Total non US Total member Total nonmember
personal
Total institutional Total site license Total personal
online-only
Total institutional online-only
Renewal report
Expire group
Effort 1
Effort 2
Effort 3
Effort 4
Effort 5+
< 2004 Check %
Nov/Dec Check %
Jan/Feb Check %
Mar/Apr Check %
May/Jun Check %
Jul/Aug Check %
Sep/Oct Check %
Renewal rate report R
enewed
and paid
Renew
ed
Canceled
Expired
No action
Source list
Effort
Total subscribers
# % # % # % # % # %A B
Total
Sample promotion tracking grid List Quantity Mailed Offer Package #
Response %
Response Cost1 Income2 Inc:cost
A
B
C
1.
Sample production schedule Text Manuscript in Manuscript to Conversion Manuscript to Ms Editing Manuscript to Composition Proof to Au/Ed/Production Mgr Corrected proof to Production Late news to Ms Editing Late news to Composition Final TOC to Ms Editing Corrected proof to Composition Revised proof to Ms Editing (incl news) Breakdown to Production Revised proof to Composition Confirmation proof to Production Mgr Final approval to printer Postscript files to printer PDF files to int'l printers Late Editorials Advertising Ad closing date New ad material due Ad dummy in Press Released for planning Text and conversion materials to litho Mail material in Press planned Labels FTPd to int'l printers Blues out Blues in Inserts in Press date Advance copies mail Mailing complete Online release date Embargo date and time Online Activity Release of text, graphics, PDFs to online vendor
Issue Date:
Comp. Vendor code Date:
To comp. Date:
To printer Date:
Total comp. Date:
To printer Date:
Advance Date:
Print Date:
Prod coord. Date:
Mail copy rec'd Date:
12/yr 4/yr 2/yr 1/yrCriteria
Im pact factor
Review tim es Subm ission to 1st decision (<6 weeks) Receipt to acceptance Acceptance to publication (8 weeks)
Page budget Monthly quota Backlog of accepted m anuscripts Manuscripts in review Subm issions year-to-date
Reviewer perform ance Acceptance to first decision Quality of review Num ber of reviews
Production deadlines Print m aterials Online only m aterials
Editorial office "Custom er service," author satisfaction Effective com m unication w/ Board, reviewers, staff Staffing issues O ffice efficiency Budget under/overruns Editorial Board Frequency and effectiveness of m eetings Balance and expertise Solicitation of new, key work
Performance assessment for journalsReview Schedule
