Strategic Reinvestments of Journal Packages at the Pennsylvania State University
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Purdue University Purdue e-Pubs Charleston Library Conference Strategic Reinvestments of Journal Packages at the Pennsylvania State University Mihoko Hosoi The Pennsylvania State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/charleston Part of the Collection Development and Management Commons An indexed, print copy of the Proceedings is also available for purchase at: http://www.thepress.purdue.edu/series/charleston. You may also be interested in the new series, Charleston Insights in Library, Archival, and Information Sciences. Find out more at: http://www.thepress.purdue.edu/series/charleston-insights-library-archival- and-information-sciences. Mihoko Hosoi, "Strategic Reinvestments of Journal Packages at the Pennsylvania State University" (2019). Proceedings of the Charleston Library Conference. http://dx.doi.org/10.5703/1288284317155 This document has been made available through Purdue e-Pubs, a service of the Purdue University Libraries. Please contact [email protected] for additional information. Strategic Reinvestments of Journal Packages at Pennsylvania State University Mihoko Hosoi, Associate Dean for Collectons, Research, and Scholarly Communicatons, Pennsylvania State University, [email protected] Abstract In the face of budget challenges, organizatonal strategy changes, and the new open access (OA) policy, the Pennsylvania State University Libraries (PSUL) are reevaluatng negotatons and collectons of Big Deal journal packages. While a growing number of libraries are considering cancelling subscriptons to Big Deals, PSUL has been taking a careful approach in containing costs and making sure that faculty and students have access to resources that they need. Current eforts include renegotatng Big Deals; cancelling low‐ value ttles in ttle‐ by‐ ttle agree- ments; obtaining single agreements for the entre Penn State system; promotng green OA for future subscripton negotaton purposes; and renegotatng OA‐ related licensing terms. To achieve greater efciency of acquisitons workfows and increase university‐ wide purchasing power, reallocaton of the collecton budget will be discussed in the near future. Auto deposit of accepted manuscripts from any Penn State author into ScholarSphere, Penn State’s insttutonal repository, as well as exploraton of other OA models are also under consideraton. Why Reevaluate Journal Investment? Penn State Environment There are a few reasons for PSUL to reevaluate With $968 million in annual research expenditures, their journal acquisitons practce. First, the “One Penn State ranks among the top 25 U.S. research Penn State 2025” vision, announced in September universites (Pennsylvania State University, 2019c). 2018, promotes collaboraton and coordinaton It ofers more than 275 baccalaureate degree across the university. Its goals are to achieve greater programs across 24 campus locatons—including a insttutonal efciency to address afordability for medical college, two law schools, and a school of a high‐ quality educaton; direct resources for Penn graduate professional studies, plus an online World State to become more integrated, fexible, and Campus (Pennsylvania State University, 2019d). Penn responsive as an insttuton; and provide students State librarians hold faculty status and go through with seamless 24/7 online access to services and a rigorous promoton and tenure review process. resources across all 24 Penn State campuses (Penn- This environment guides our collecton development sylvania State University, 2018). Penn State Libraries’ decisions. collectons budgets are currently fragmented with over 70 subject and local campus funds, making it Penn State has both ttle‐ by‐ ttle and package difcult for the libraries to make university‐ wide agreements with major publishers. Some contracts purchases of electronic resources and support the are handled through consorta, such as the Big Ten new “One Penn State” vision. Second, the new OA Academic Alliance (BTAA) and the Pennsylvania policy, which requires that Penn State research- Ac ademic Library Consortum, Inc. (PALCI). Penn ers, including faculty, students, and staf, deposit State has not made any commitment on trans- accepted manuscripts of any scholarly artcle into an formatve agreements due to fnancial and other open repository such as ScholarSphere, Penn State’s concerns. insttutonal repository, will become efectve January 1, 2020 (Pennsylvania State University, 2019b). Penn Changes Being Made at the Penn State librarians will actvely publicize this new policy State Libraries and promote OA mostly through various green OA initatves, which will impact journal negotaton PSUL has reached a point where the existng model strategies as OA content grows. Third, Penn State for collecton development and allocatng the collec- recently announced an across‐ the‐ board reducton tons budget needs to adapt to enable the library to of 1% from unit budgets university‐ wide so that respond to the changing landscape of scholarly pub- Pennsylvania resident tuiton is kept at last year’s lishing. In moving toward that goal, PSUL has made levels (Pennsylvania State University, 2019a). This some changes to achieve cost savings, promote OA cut impacts the collecton budget as well, and the through the new OA policy, and increase efciency to libraries will need to search for cost savings. support the One Penn State vision. Copyright of this contributon remains in the name of the author(s) Charleston Conference Proceedings 2019 191 htps://doi.org/10.5703/1288284317155 First, some of the ttle‐ by‐ ttle journal purchasing authorship and citaton, and were high in cost per models established earlier turned out to be more use. The project leader communicated with relevant expensive than journal package Big Deals, and Penn selectors frequently and reported the outcome with State Libraries have renegotated with those publish- justfcatons. The process was perceived to be fair ers to sign a Big Deal when appropriate. Although and reasonable, and led to successful cost savings there are risks associated with Big Deals such as lack (about $60K) within the contractual allowance with- of fexibility in terms of ttle selecton, longer‐ term out major disruptons. commitment, and larger fnancial commitment, there are also benefts such as the following if nego- The “One Penn State” vision was incorporated in tated successfully: reduced cost per ttle, decreased the libraries’ acquisitons workfows as a strategic processing tme, expansion of content, predictability priority. For example, when there are opportunites for budgetng purposes through negotated annual to revisit license terms during renewals, Acquisitons price increase caps, cancellaton allowance, and librarians and others negotate new licensing terms more comprehensive licensing terms. Big Deals pro- that ensure access for all Penn State faculty and stu- vide a guaranteed revenue stream for the publisher, dents regardless of their geographical locatons. This usually at a high overall dollar value, and libraries are university‐ wide approach involves reviewing existng likely to be able to renegotate licensing terms when license terms, assessing needs across the univer- they sign up for such deals. At the same tme, Big sity, reviewing alternatves, and renegotatng with Deal purchases involve careful collecton analysis to publishers, vendors, and sometmes consorta. In one make sure that the deal delivers the value that the case where a vendor did not agree with the “One library expects. A recent example of such an analysis Penn State” approach and insisted on a multsite examined PSUL’s ttle‐ by‐ ttle arrangement with one format resultng in a higher fee, the contract was not publisher and compared the historical spend and signed. Although this meant that Penn State was not cost per ttle with a proposed Big Deal. The analysis able to purchase the subscripton that a consortum showed that the proposed Big Deal would save PSUL had ofered, Penn State’s integrity and consistency money over the three‐ year contract period while it in applying the new vision of the university was expanded its desired collecton. preserved. In the end, Penn State was able to obtain access to the same resource by dealing directly with For ttle‐ by‐ ttle agreements, low‐ value ttles have the producer of the licensed product, without com- been evaluated and cancelled annually to achieve promising its organizatonal values. additonal cost savings. For one partcular publisher this year, Penn State librarians took a collabora- Promotng green OA is another area that Penn State tve approach in achieving this goal, with a science has focused on to beter negotate subscripton pric- librarian as the lead. This leader initally presented ing in the future. The Scholarly Communicatons & the Penn State authorship and citaton data to all Copyright Ofce, as well as subject libraries, Collec- selectors and followed up with usage and pricing tons Strategies, and Acquisitons, report to the asso- data provided by the Acquisitons team. Many ciate dean for Collectons, Research, and Scholarly librarians contributed to the process; for example, Communicatons at Penn State Libraries. This orga- a single fle was created incorporatng all data nizatonal structure facilitates coordinaton among points to facilitate the review process. Based on collecton development, acquisitons, and OA inita- the comprehensive data analysis, subject librari- tves. Librarians at the Scholarly Communicatons & ans provided cancellaton recommendatons with Copyright