{"id":220,"date":"2008-11-25T09:03:05","date_gmt":"2008-11-25T09:03:05","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/occamstypewriter.org\/trading-knowledge\/2008\/11\/25\/giving_them_what_they_want\/"},"modified":"2008-11-25T09:03:05","modified_gmt":"2008-11-25T09:03:05","slug":"giving_them_what_they_want","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/occamstypewriter.org\/trading-knowledge\/2008\/11\/25\/giving_them_what_they_want\/","title":{"rendered":"Giving them what they want"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>As a service manager, my first impulse is always to give people what they want. My primary objective is to keep the customer happy (yes, I&#8217;m afraid even in Libraries these days we have started to call our users <em>\u00adcustomers<\/em>). To keep information-hungry researchers happy is simple: just provide access to everything, everywhere. The only snag is that I also have to stay within a budget, so I have to make choices about what access to purchase. Most of my budget is spent purchasing journals, so journal selection is always a major concern. I try to keep to a steady state, maintaining the same range of journals with only small tweaks (individual additions and deletions), but there are periodic hiccups (cancellations at times of budget crisis).<br \/>\nI was interested to see in a recent <a href=\"http:\/\/www.researchinformation.info\/news\/news_story.php?news_id=402\">report<\/a> that &#8220;Publishing companies, especially the large and commercial ones, are launching journals at a higher rate than in 2005&#8221;.  New journals are the best way for a publisher  to attract new subscriptions, so it&#8217;s not surprising that new launches are increasing.  The report, from the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers (ALPSP), also found that publishers are closing more titles.<br \/>\nRequests from library users for new journals are a mixed blessing. On the one hand, it&#8217;s very useful to know what people want to read. On the other hand, I can&#8217;t satisfy all requests as the budget will not stretch that far. How do I decide when a subscription is justified?  I look at the brand (Nature Publishing and Cell Press titles usually go to the top of the list), and at the topic of the journal (not interested in <em>Nature Geoscience<\/em> here but translational medicine is a hot topic).   If the journal is not completely new then I do some data analysis (counting up how many times NIMR authors have published in it, cited it, asked the Library for articles from it).  Finally I look at who is asking for it (a lone postdoc voice or a group of PIs?).<br \/>\n<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/stke.sciencemag.org\/content\/vol1\/issue46\/cover_expansion.gif\" alt=\"\" width=\"250\" height=\"300\" \/><br \/>\nWhen <em>Science STKE<\/em> changed to <a href=\"http:\/\/stke.sciencemag.org\/\"><em>Science Signalling<\/em><\/a> and started to publish primary research articles, then I got messages from three heads of division plus another two PIs telling me they must have access, and I knew that I must add the title to our deal with the publishers, AAAS.<br \/>\nWhen another senior scientist forwarded an email from the editor of two journals he was connected with, I took less notice.  The email begged him to recommend his librarian to start subscriptions to the two titles, but he later sheepishly admitted &#8220;I am not quite sure why I agreed to be on the editorial board &#8211; but so far this is the first thing they have asked me to do&#8221;.  My analysis showed there had been no previous interest in the titles and I decided to do nothing further.<br \/>\nA couple of lone voices asked for two other titles. Both were in core subject areas for NIMR, but had not been heavily requested or cited by NIMR authors. I put them in the category of &#8220;nice to have, not essential&#8221;, so the result is no action. One of the titles may be part of a &#8220;big deal&#8221; later on, which is the other complicating factor in choosing whether to subscribe.<br \/>\n<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/dmm.biologists.org\/content\/1\/4-5.cover.gif\" alt=\"\" width=\"117\" height=\"150\" \/><br \/>\nOccasionally I will take the initiative myself. When the Company of Biologists (CoB) announced their new journal <a href=\"http:\/\/dmm.biologists.org\/\"><em>Disease Models &amp; Mechanisms<\/em><\/a> I knew the topic was one we had to be interested in.  Translational research is being pushed by the government and all biomedical research funders so this title, aiming to publish &#8220;across the entire spectrum of disease research, including basic, translational, and clinical research&#8221; looks unmissable.  The range of topics in the first two issues seemed a good match for NIMR interests and CoB have a good track record in producing high-quality journals.  (As an aside, I see fellow blogger Heather has just <a href=\"http:\/\/network.nature.com\/people\/etchevers\/blog\/2008\/11\/23\/small-successes\">published<\/a> there). After a bit of consultation I agreed to try a subscription for a year or two. However, just like buses, two translational journals have come along at the same time.<br \/>\n<img decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/www.embo.org\/images\/mol_med_wordmark.jpg\" alt=\"\" \/><br \/>\nWe also have <a href=\"http:\/\/www.embo.org\/about_embo\/press\/mol_med.html\">EMBO Molecular Medicine<\/a> due to start in 2009, with a very similar set of aims and impressive-looking editorial board.  The good news is that they are offering free access to all content for the first two years of publication, so I can delay making the decision to part with any money just yet.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>As a service manager, my first impulse is always to give people what they want. My primary objective is to keep the customer happy (yes, I&#8217;m afraid even in Libraries these days we have started to call our users \u00adcustomers). &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/occamstypewriter.org\/trading-knowledge\/2008\/11\/25\/giving_them_what_they_want\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":17,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-220","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/occamstypewriter.org\/trading-knowledge\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/220","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/occamstypewriter.org\/trading-knowledge\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/occamstypewriter.org\/trading-knowledge\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/occamstypewriter.org\/trading-knowledge\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/17"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/occamstypewriter.org\/trading-knowledge\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=220"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/occamstypewriter.org\/trading-knowledge\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/220\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/occamstypewriter.org\/trading-knowledge\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=220"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/occamstypewriter.org\/trading-knowledge\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=220"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/occamstypewriter.org\/trading-knowledge\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=220"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}