In order to better integrate my blog with my website, better manage comment spam, and reduce my dependence on Google, this blog has moved to In order to avoid broken links I won't be deleting content from here, but no new content will be added, so please update your bookmarks and feeds.

Tuesday, 21 August 2012

Links of interest: pricing, impact factors, marketing, and staplers

Acquisitions and budgets
2012 Study of Subscription Prices for Scholarly Society Journals (pdf) is out from Allen Press. "[T]he average increase in 2012 dropped, more than a full percentage point below the average, to less than 6%." (The Consumer Price Index, according to the same figure, was less than 4%.) Much more detail, analysis and discussion is at the source (pdf).

The Librarian in Black writes I'm breaking up with eBooks (and you can too) on the poor deal that current models of ebook provision are for libraries and, by extension, our customers.

Alison Wallbutton in #brandlibraries ponders what branding is, how libraries are branded, and whether we want to reposition that branding. She argues that libraries are successfully branded - as "books"; it's in the very word. But of course (segue to my own thoughts) we as librarians get twitchy about wanting to make sure that users know we're not just books, so we reject that outright - often without having put any thought into what we're going to replace that branding with. Which leaves us in a position where we can't effectively promote ourselves because we don't have any image to put out there.

Impact factors
Nixon, J.M. (2012). Core Journals in Library and Information Science: Developing a Methodology for Ranking LIS Journals. C&RL. Advance online publication.
--Outlines a methodology and resulting list of three tiers into which they've divided LIS journals according to "influence". Uses a mix of expert opinions, impact factors, circulation rate, and acceptance rate and, unsurprisingly, comes up with a similar list as those derived from expert opinions or from impact factors.

Probably a good measure of influence; it doesn't claim that quality follows. Which is good because Sick of Impact Factors which concludes that "if you use impact factors you are statistically illiterate" and has been so widely retweeted and commented on that the author has posted a followup summarising the long comment thread in sections: useful links; concerns about metrics; alternative metrics; and actions to take.

Just for fun
Library Shenanigans reports on The Stapler Obituaries - a mini-exhibition of dead staplers at an academic library.