The library administrative council decided to cancel their "big deal" journal packages from Wiley and Springer to save $500,000 for their flat budget in 2012. They analyzed usage statistics from 2008-2011 to develop options for cancelling titles with under 100 downloads per year from each package. This would cancel over 2,800 journals but save approximately $400,000. There was significant negative feedback from faculty and librarians about the loss of access. The library is now meeting with departments to discuss swapping subscriptions and alternative access options.

1. Big Deal Deconstruction
Presented by
Mary Ann Jones
Assistant Professor/Coordinator of Electronic Resources
Derek Marshall
Assistant Professor/Serials Librarian

2. Purpose
• 2012 = Flat journal budget
• Already reduced our individual titles with
cancellations over the past 4 years
• Needed to find $500,000 to cancel
• Big packages were the only remaining
possibilities for cost savings

3. History of Packages
• MSU journal packages
– ScienceDirect Freedom package
– Wiley
– Springer
– Sage
– Emerald
• Only 2 packages up for renewal in 2012: Wiley
and Springer

4. History . . . Wiley
• Wiley
– Entered into the Wiley package in 2002
• ESIG consortia package(EPSCoR Science Information
Group)
• Shared title list with 7 other ESIG libraries
• Original spend = $200,000

5. History . . . Blackwell
• Blackwell
– Entered Blackwell package in 2007
• ESIG consortia package(EPSCoR Science Information
Group)
• Full collection
• Original spend = $165,000

6. History . . . Wiley/Blackwell
• Wiley/Blackwell merger
– Remained in both packages
• 2010 – separate addendum’s for each package
– Each package still paid for separately
• 2011 – combined the Wiley and Blackwell packages
– Paid as one package
– 2011 combined spend = $400,000

7. History . . . Springer
• Springer
– Entered into package in 2007
• ESIG consortia package(EPSCoR Science Information
Group)
• Shared title list with 31 other ESIG libraries
• Original spend = $350,000

8. Methodology
• Needed a methodology to determine new
subscription list
• Decided that usage statistics would be our
metric
– Determine the most highly used titles

9. Timeline
• Original evaluation was done in 2010 in
preparation for 2011 renewals.
– Started in September of 2010
– Prepared 4 options for cancelling either Wiley or
Springer packages

10. Data Gathering
• Criteria
– Usage Statistics
• 2008, 2009, Jan.-Jun. 2010
• Separated into 4 options based on statistics from 2009
– Price
• Price for journal actually subscribed to
• Price for journal NOT subscribed to (consortia titles)
– Gathered 2010 price and added 6% to determine
approximate 2011 cost

11. Groundwork
Springer Analysis for 2011

12. Outcome
The Library Administrative Council
Decided NOT to pursue “Big Deal”
cancellations for 2011.

13. FY 2012
Late 2011 – updated the 2010 evaluation with
information from 2011 usage
• Definite cancellations
– Goal: $500,000

14. Groundwork
• Compared usage statistics
– Determined 200+ and 300+ were too few titles to
retain
– Compared options of 50+ and 100+

15. Data Gathering, 2012
• Usage Statistics
– Gathered current data as well as date from the
previous 3 years
• 2011- 6 months of data (Jan. – Jun.)
• Projected total 2011 statistics
• Price
– Previous year’s price
– Projected price for upcoming year
• Added 5% (contractual)

16. Compilation of Data

17. Options
• Determined savings if we retained journals
with
– 50+ downloads per title
– 100+ downloads per title
• Considered multiple years in determining
criteria for number of downloads

18. Option Comparison

19. Option 1
• Retain journals with 50 or more downloads
– Springer
• 190 titles
• Savings of ~$20,000
– Wiley
• 230 titles
• Spend an extra ~$60,000

20. Option 2
• Retain journals with 100 or more downloads
– Springer
• 75 titles
• Savings of ~$225,000
– Wiley
• 120 titles
• Savings of ~$180,000

21. Springer Comparison
2012 Projected Package Total: $480,000
Option 1 Option 2
Cost: Cost:
$460,000 $255,000
Savings: Savings:
$20,000 $225,000

22. Wiley Comparison
2012 Projected Package Total: $570,000
Option 1 Option 2
$700,000 $450,000
$600,000 $400,000
$350,000
$500,000
$300,000
$400,000 Cost: $250,000 Cost:
$300,000 $630,000 $200,000 $390,000
Savings: $150,000
$200,000 Savings:
-$60,000 $100,000
$100,000 $180,000
$50,000
$0 $-
-$100,000

23. Decisions
• Determined 50+ would not supply enough
savings, but actually cost more
• Examined information based on 100+
downloads for 2012 cancellations
– Reported this data to the Library Administrative
Council for approval

24. Results
• Determined cancellations based on 100 or
more downloads would be the most cost
effective
– Cancelled overall license agreements for the “Big”
packages
• Retained approximately 200 titles
• Saved approximately $400,000

25. Consequences
• Lost current access to over 2,800 journals
• Many disciplines lost all of their titles from
these publishers
• Perpetual access only to paid subscriptions
(and some consortia titles)

26. Lessons Learned
• Time permitting . . .
– Use more than just usage statistics to determine
final title list
– Involve faculty in the discussions
• Let them help choose titles to keep/cancel
• Include the library liaisons in the decision
making process (or evaluation method)

27. Lessons Learned, cont.
• Watch out for title changes
• Look for usage from previous publishers

28. Feedback
• From librarians . . .
– Mostly understanding, but disheartened about
the impact to users
– Wanted more information about the process of
elimination of titles
• From faculty . . .
– Mostly negative reactions
– Currently meeting with each department to offer
options for swapping subscriptions

30. Department meetings
• Options for swapping
– Individual title list, including Wiley and Springer
titles (if any)
• List of titles by subject via ScienceDirect and
Sage
• List of subject specific databases
• Reiterating ILL access (24-hour turn around)

31. • In short:
– Learn from our mistakes…

32. Questions?
Mary Ann Jones
mjones@library.msstate.edu
Derek Marshall
dmarshall@library.msstate.edu