Issue 4 - Status Check: An Examination of the Trends and Influential Factors Contributing to Subscription Renewal and Cancellation
Trends in Journal Subscription Renewals and Cancellations: 2003-2004
Joshua Clarke Research Analyst 617-395-4054This report provides a detailed example of trends effecting journal subscription cancellation and renewal for scholarly publishers as identified by Publishers Communication Group, Inc. during 2003 and 2004. Publishers can use this information and the strategic suggestions provided as a starting point for considering the impact of such research on their strategy.
Methodology
From July 2003 through June 2004, Publishers Communication Group, Inc. completed 39 Non-Renewal Campaigns for publishers of scholarly content. The purpose of these calls was to encourage libraries to renew their subscription. Callers determined if a subscription was renewed, cancelled or pending and to gain insight into the reasons that led up to this decision. If a subscription was renewed, payment information, such as date of payment, amount, invoice and/or check number and the name of the subscription agency used when available, is collected. If a subscription was cancelled, callers probed further to determine why it was cancelled. If a subscription decision was pending, callers took the opportunity to encourage a renewal.
The geographical scope of the campaigns included calls to subscribers in North America, South America, Europe, Australia, Southern Africa, and the Middle East and included both public and private universities and colleges, corporations and not-for-profit institutions, government agencies, hospitals, and individual subscribers. For the purposes of data collection, analysis and presentation, Publishers Communication Group, Inc. included only those calls that were successfully completed, as defined as when appropriate and authoritative information has been gathered from the subscriber or a representative of the subscribing institution. All data presented represents individual journal.
Sample Data Analyzed
The sample data presented here represent results for 6,000 subscriptions. This data is provided as an example and there is no suggestion, implied or otherwise, that it will predict the results of any given campaign.
Results
For the data set of 6,000 subscriptions examined, the following results were reported:
- 2,868 subscriptions were renewed
- 2,051 subscriptions were cancelled
- Decisions are pending regarding 1,081 subscriptions
Renewed
In the case of 48% of subscriptions, the subscription was renewed. In many of these cases, the institution contacted changed subscription agencies, resulting in confusion about their current subscription status. In other cases, the librarian contacted indicated that the failure to renew was an error or oversight and the institution has once again renewed their subscription.
Pending
Renewal decisions regarding 18% of subscriptions presented in this sample are pending. In these cases, librarians are currently assessing their needs to determine if they will be renewing their subscription. Many librarians contacted reported that they were not aware that their subscription had lapsed and were grateful for the call bringing this issue to their attention. In a number of cases, the renewal decision is made in conjunction with faculty members, entire academic departments, and multidisciplinary committees. Publishers Communication Group, Inc. has observed that typically half of all pending subscriptions eventually turn into renewals for our clients.
Cancelled
Many factors influence an institution's decision to cancel a subscription. Shrinking library budgets created a situation that called for a reduction in the library's collection at a substantial number of institutions contacted. While budget problems are the sole reason that a number of subscriptions were cancelled, Publishers Communication Group, Inc. believes that it is important to determine why the specific subscription in question was cancelled in lieu of another subscription. When the topic is explored in greater detail, the librarians contacted explained that because of reductions in collection budgets, they were forced to institute a number of cost-cutting exercises including usage studies, faculty surveys and the elimination of duplicate subscriptions. The reasons for cancellation presented in the Tally of Responses clearly demonstrates that these factors contributed significantly to the cancellations identified in this sample.
| Reasons for Cancellation 2003-2004 | % |
| The library's budget prevented a renewal | 14% |
| The journal received low use | 14% |
| The journal's content is available electronically | 14% |
| The reason for cancellation was unknown | 10% |
| The journal's subject matter was no longer relevant | 8% |
| The subscriber is no longer with the organization | 7% |
| The cancellation was based on faculty recommendation | 5% |
| The subscription was a duplicate | 5% |
| The library or institution is closed | 4% |
| There is no current record of having a subscription | 4% |
| The price of the journal is too high | 4% |
| Other miscellaneous responses* | 10% |
Conclusion
The Reasons for Cancellation presented above, point to several significant trends impacting their subscription base. If publishers address these pressing issues in a timely and appropriate manner, they could work to counteract the loss of subscribers they may be experiencing.
Budget Problems
Shrinking or flat library budgets continue to be a leading cause of subscription cancellations, resulting in 15% of cancellations in this sample. In many of these cases, librarians explained that the decision to cancel the subscription in question was solely made as a cost-cutting measure and did not necessarily reflect negatively on the quality of the content in the journal cancelled. Others indicated that there was not an urgent need for the subscribed-to information; in many cases, faculty members have made the decision to order journal articles through document delivery services in order to reduce expenditures despite the fact that this will result in a delay in accessing the information.
It is important to note that in cases where the content was of interest, the potential for a renewal often exists if the funds become available. By contacting these clients directly, publishers can raise librarians' awareness of their journals and can take the first step in securing new subscriptions when and if the financial resources of the libraries increase.
Low Usage
15% of all cancellations in this sample were motivated by low usage. In the majority of these cases, the low usage was not identified earlier because there was not a need to conduct a usage study in the past. The continuing budget problems, coupled with increasing subscription rates resulted in many libraries conducting usage studies and eliminating journals that may not have been eliminated in the past. While low use is occasionally attributed to poor-quality content, librarians more commonly cite instances of faculty members departing the institution resulting in a change in usage levels of certain journals perhaps due to a shift in research and curriculum focus. Also, librarians have indicated that the advanced and specialized nature of certain journals content can lead to low use among certain populations despite the high quality of the research included because the level of specialization limits the potential user population.
By including information about institutions that have reported low usage of their journals, publishers can customize their sales approach and consider alternative methods of increasing usage at specific institutions. Also, publishers may consider the possibility that their journal suffers from an inherent editorial weakness, that should be addressed in order to increase usage.
Electronic Access
Another common reason why a subscription was cancelled was due to electronic availability; 13% of all cancellations reported in this sample were the result of this factor. In these cases, the librarians had no criticism of the content and many indicated that they tend to cancel print subscriptions when the journal is available electronically. Most often, journal content is available electronically through aggregators and databases that the library already has access to, though it is also common for institutions to gain electronic access directly through the publisher. Publishers Communication Group, Inc. has observed this trend throughout the year.
Librarians anticipate that the change in format will result in higher use of the journal as a result of the increased convenience afforded by desktop access. Reflecting on the theme of reduced library budgets, it has also been a common trend for an institution to change to the electronic version of a journal subscription when cost-savings are possible.
This data allows a publisher to clearly understand the rate at which client institutions are moving to electronic access of subscriptions and their reasons for making the format change. Also, this information is invaluable as publishers continue to make strategic decisions related to the format of content delivery.
Non-Renewal Campaigns are an important tool for recapturing lapsed subscriptions and collecting invaluable market research on the purchasing behaviors, trends and preferences of clients. It is only when the information gathered through a Non-Renewal Campaign is integrated into a broader marketing and promotion campaign that publishers can appropriately respond to the changing market dynamics impacting scholarly publishing.
Global Electronic Collection Trends in Academic Libraries
Joshua Clarke Research Analyst 617-395-4054The purchasing decisions made by libraries are crucial to the way publishers choose to make their content available both now and in the future. With the academic library landscape experiencing major changes in recent years and the demand for electronic access to resources continuing to grow, libraries, while working to address the demands of their patrons, are also being faced with many questions that have serious repercussions.
Furthermore, Open Access journals, and the ideologies behind their creation, continue to weigh on librarians' collection decisions. At this time it is vital that librarians understand the significance of these resources in the collections of other academic libraries and they way they have influenced collection decisions. Based on a survey developed by Publishers Communication Group (PCG), the following is an extract from a report that is intended to be the first in an annual series titled Global Electronic Collection Trends in Academic Libraries, seeking to answer such questions as:
- Are library collections more electronic now than they were three years ago?
- Are academic libraries collecting electronic resources directly through the publisher, or are they instead turning to subscription agencies, third party suppliers or consortia?
- How many academic libraries cancel print subscriptions when the content is available electronically?
- Key findings include: 84% of respondents reported that their institution had cancelled print subscriptions when the content was available electronically.
- The leading factor influencing the collection of electronic resources is library policy, followed closely by the preference of faculty members and of students.
- The majority of respondents (67%) indicated that their institution catalogs or indexes peer-reviewed Open Access journals.
- Only 9% of respondents' institutions have cancelled a subscription when comparable content was available through an Open Access publication.
Demographics
Between February and May 2004, PCG talked to 155 electronic resource and collection librarians and administrators at libraries throughout the world. Their aim - to develop a clear picture of the factors that influence the collection of electronic resources and the impact of Open Access publications.
Results: A Snapshot
Electronic Resource Collection Trends: Quantity
Overwhelmingly, librarians reported that the quantity of electronic resources in their collection had increased during the past three years; 91% experienced an increase in electronic resources in the library collection. Furthermore, 7% have experienced no change in the quantity of electronic resources while only 1% reported that they are actually collecting fewer electronic resources than they were three years ago.
Driving Forces Behind Implementation of Electronic Resource Collection
Many factors influence resource collection decisions in academic libraries regardless of geography. Librarians were asked to identify which factors had influenced their decisions regarding collecting electronic resources, specifically, what factors resulted in the libraries collecting more, less or the same quantity of electronic resources during the past three years. It is important to note that the influence of faculty members and students was roughly equivalent on the question of electronic resource collection, with 21% of librarians reporting that their electronic resource collection decisions were influenced by faculty suggestions or preferences and 20% reporting that students suggestions or preferences played a similar role. Interestingly, 23% of those contacted indicated that the electronic resource collection decisions were driven by library objectives/policy.
Collection Method Preference
Librarians were asked about their library's preferred method of collecting electronic journals and content.
While there was no indication of a standard method of collecting electronic journals and content at the libraries surveyed, a slight majority indicated that the institution preferred to obtain electronic resources exclusively through contracts orchestrated by subscription agencies. The majority of respondents indicated that their library does not follow a strict policy for acquiring new electronic resources but instead makes purchase decisions that are driven by the content instead of the process. In such instances, the library may take a number of factors into consideration when deciding which collection approach makes the most sense for their circumstances.
Duplication of Print and Electronic Formats of Content
The issue of content duplication continues to be an issue of serious concern for both library staff and publishers alike. When asked if their library had cancelled print subscriptions to journals whose content was already available to the library electronically, 84% of those surveyed indicated that they had eliminated the print subscription, considering it to be a duplicate subscription to the same content.
Impact of Open Access Journals: Cataloguing and Indexing Open Access Journals
It is perhaps no surprise that Open Access publications were a hot topic for many librarians contacted with 66% indicating that their institution catalogues or indexes peer-reviewed Open Access journals on a regular basis. In many cases, Open Access journals are managed just as traditional subscriptions are handled, entered directly into the library catalogue. Others explained that they add peer-reviewed Open Access titles to their A-Z list of journals available electronically. 9% of those responding to this question reported that some Open Access publications are catalogued or indexed, but there is not a policy of including all peer-reviewed OA publications. Surprisingly, only 25% of those responding indicated that their library did not actively catalogue or index Open Access publications for patron use.
Influence of Open Access Journals on Collection Habits
Librarians were asked if the availability of peer-reviewed Open Access journals influenced the decision process for the acquisition of subscription journals and paid electronic content. 57% of those who responded reported that the availability of Open Access journals did not influence collection habits.
Although the majority of those responding to questions about Open Access journals reported that they have not had a significant impact on the collection habits of the library, many also indicated that some changes had been made to recognize their availability. Specifically, 9% explained that they have replaced subscriptions to journals with a peer-reviewed Open Access journal of equal quality when available. However, the majority of respondents (60%) preferred to supplement their collection with links to peer-reviewed Open Access journals. 24% explained that their institution has made no changes in light of the availability of Open Access publications while 6% indicated that they have made other changes in response to the availability of Open Access journals.
An Interview with Karen Schmidt of the University of Illinois Urbana-Champgain
Background
Karen Schmidt (KS):I am in charge of library collections, which includes paper, electronic, video and audio materials; if it is acquired for the University's library collection then, in general, I have oversight of that as well as all preservation and conservation activities. I don't have a fleet of people reporting to me - my job involves coordinating what subject specialists in different areas buy and strategizing about how we can make the best use of our collection dollars. I work very closely with Library Acquisitions, which works directly with the vendors and publishers in terms of actually acquiring the resources.
Joshua Clarke (JC): Your institution has specific guidelines for canceling unique serials. In general, how do selectors identify specific journals for consideration? What are the factors that influence journal cancellation decisions?
KS:It varies by discipline, but in the sciences, faculty members are more accepting of electronic access and as a result, Science librarians are able to look at on-line use and know how important different titles are in their disciplines. We may also have a print subscription because of the need for archiving when we don't trust the digital archive. In general, Science librarians rely on use data, especially for electronic journals. The other determining factor is cost. This is becoming more the case in social sciences, though it has traditionally been a problem in that field when there are budget cuts because per title, they don't cost as much and significantly more titles need to be eliminated to come up with money they need. Even in these cases though, they continue to monitor use and examine how specific titles fit into the curriculum. In the humanities, these issues are also important, but in some ways to a lesser extent because they are still so focused on monographs.
JC: During campaigns PCG has conducted during the past year, we have found that in addition to use and budget issues, the other most common reason for a cancellation is that the institution decided to cancel the print subscription for electronic access (14% of all cancellations). What has been your institutions experience with this factor?
KS:We are on the more conservative side of that point. We feel that we have a stewardship role to play in the state of Illinois and also nationally. We have engaged in several conversations with counterparts in other large research libraries thinking about how we as libraries can manage the transition from knowing that resources will be there in print to not being sure if it will be available electronically. We have some concerns about some publishers who are aggressively attempting to push us towards electronic-only access but who don't share our same values for archiving and future access. We have had experiences with some large publishers where an article can be pulled from an electronic dataset and if we did not have the print archive, that article would be lost to our users. We also don't see very many publishers who are technologically advanced enough to back up claims that they have a trusted repository - I'm not sure that anyone really knows what that means yet.
So, we are really taking a long-term view. One thing we have done with out two sister institutions, the University of Illinois-Chicago and the University of Illinois-Springfield, is to start working together in a new way. When dealing with big packages, we are looking at holding one print copy between us with each library having full access to the print resource if necessary. We are now looking at doing that within the Big 10 libraries with two or three large publishers and their large packages. I don't think that this is something that we will have to deal with 10 years from now, but at this time we are being more conservative. I know that many of my colleagues in other larger research libraries are moving past print resources but we are being cautious.
JC: Your library's Electronic Collection Plan discusses the stress on the budget caused by maintaining multiple format subscriptions. Given your commitment to maintaining the print archive, how are you addressing this issue on a journal-by-journal basis?
KS: We are looking at partnering outside of the U-I library and it is slowly trickling down to individual journals. A journal title came across my email earlier this week from UI-Chicago asking if we were interested in a particular journal that they were considering canceling. We are working with that publisher to determine if they are amenable to us maintaining one print copy and them treating us as one library.
JC: Your library has a policy that states that online access via a journal aggregator should not be considered a substitute for either print or online subscriptions through the publisher. This seems like a position that would be difficult to maintain - can you explain the rationale behind this policy?
KS: A lot of that is our own experience, or lack of experience. When we first started getting some aggregated packages, we were not using them as best as we could. I think that we are over that learning curve now but the other issues that sit out there for us are the search strategies that users must employ to use a product, the similarities with other aggregated packages that we have, the platform it sits on, how intuitive is it for new faculty and students. So, on one hand we have an internal technology issue - how well are we using a product, and the other is an external technology issue - how well can our users use a product.
We now have an electronic resource registry and we are getting to the point where we can identify overlap. Examining that overlap will be our next big endeavor and at that point we will be speaking with our bibliographic instruction teachers and information literacy instructors about which platforms users prefer.
There is no preference or bias towards or against any one player, whether the publisher or an aggregator. The factors that would help us decide between the two would be if we were able to tailor the aggregated package, and sometimes we can't, to avoid getting content that we just don't want. This also gets into the overall cost of the subscription which goes beyond the annual rate and includes whether or not there are moving walls, embargo's on the content as it comes in, etc. Sometimes those issues are much more clear with the publisher than they are with an aggregator.
I would also offer my personal observation that publishers have been more aggressive in working with our consortia than aggregators to help us get better prices.
JC: In a recent study conducted by PCG, 67% of librarians contacted indicated that their institution catalogs or indexes Open Access journals. Does your library have any experience with this type of activity?
KS: We catalog OA journals, though we don't have that many at this point. We have been conservative about OA because we have found that some sources which claim to be Open Access and are free to our users, but the library ends up with some sort of fee. Also confusing the matter is the fact that the term "Open Access" means different things to different people, which makes it difficult for us to cut through all of the chatter.
JC: In the same study, librarians reported that the availability of Open Access journals do not influence their collection decisions at 57% of the institutions. Do Open Access journals have any bearing on journal collection or cancellation decisions at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign?
KS: I agree with that. There are a number of other factors beyond the cost that come into play. Sometimes they have to do with the faculty on campus and who serves on the editorial board, which might pressure the library to buy certain journals. Promotion and tenure issues also have an important role - are junior faculty members actually publishing in Open Access journals? We do have those pressures influencing the decisions about collections.
JC: There has been a shift in focus of the debate on Open Access from Open Access journals and publications towards the idea of Open Access articles through repositories or other means. What has been your exposure to this type of Open Access resource?
KS: I have not had direct experience with that type of situation. Some of the subject librarians working directly with the users, particularly in Engineering, Physics, Biotechnology, Chemistry, I think that is more common. My impression is that this is not a significant part of our landscape at this point.
I also have some reservations about this type of Open Access repository. We are already dealing with a generation of new users, kids who are just now coming into college, who rely on Google and don't understand the need to be able to filter out what is valuable and not valuable. I have some concerns that the traditional publishing process, which serves an important vetting purpose that might be difficult to replicate otherwise. Users need some way of discerning between what is good research and what is bad research, between what has been reviewed and what hasn't.
JC: PCG has consistently found that faculty recommendations or endorsement have a very significant impact on the collections of university libraries. What approach is employed when considering new journals for acquisition?
KS: We continue to rely on faculty feedback in our decision-making process and twice a year it is common here for subject specialists to assemble a list of journals to cancel and add and collect feedback on those suggestions from faculty members. On our website, we also have a "Suggest for Purchase" form that can be emailed in to my attention and I know that the subject specialists try very hard to respond to those requests. When we can't, we do a lot of outreach talking about interlibrary loan and using it to educate faculty members when we can't afford a journal.
JC: In addition to price, are there any other factors that are regularly considered when making new acquisition decisions?
KS: We are very aware of the "Big Boys" in publishing and when someone takes on a new journal, we try to be aware of those publishers' track records with pricing and continuity. We would also consider who is on the editorial board and of course the content would be a major factor. Also, our collection habits are very strongly influenced by new developments or changes in research focus on campus. As an example, there is a renewed interest in obesity research, so we might go out looking for journals in obesity research - maybe something we've cancelled or something new that has come up. I would also add that a lot of this comes from federal grant money coming in to the university. As more resources are funneled into the university we feel the pressure to expand the collection in that area as well.
PCG's Market Research Services
PCG has designed its Market Research Services to deliver valuable insight for publishers and content vendors to understand the constantly changing dynamics of the library market and to leverage this knowledge into a competitive advantage.
If you would like to discuss how PCG can customize a Market Research project to address your distinct need for information, contact us today.