Leaving the “Big Deal” … Five Years Later

Nabe, Jonathan; Fowler, David C.

doi:10.1080/0361526x.2015.1048037

Cited by 15 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 1 publication

(1 reference statement)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Subsequently published literature has suggested that the ratio is likely to be considerably lower. Nabe and Fowler (2015) estimate the ratio at 10:1 and according to Scott (2016) it might be as low as 17:1. The shortest embargo available in our aggregator products Estimated Cost of Document Delivery Our institution uses $30 as an estimate of the cost to process a single document delivery request Anticipated volume of current-year document delivery requests (JR5) X (0.25) Anticipated Document Delivery Burden [(JR5 Average) X (0.25) X ($30)] -cost (If this was greater than zero for journals available with a 12-month embargo there was a risk that the cost of anticipated document delivery requests would exceed the cost of subscription)…”

Section: Journal Metricsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using Data to Break Apart Journal Packages

Ambi

Morgan

Alcock

et al. 2016

EBLIP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Journal Metricsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using Data to Break Apart Journal Packages

Ambi

Morgan

Alcock

et al. 2016

EBLIP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Years later, Nabe and Fowler (2015) found that their institutions continued to benefit from the measures taken between 2008 and 2010. Both universities stated that the impact on ILL requests was limited and that they were satisfied with the budget savings achieved.…”

Section: The Need To Evaluate Big Dealsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The evolution and revision of big deals: a review from the perspective of libraries

Bravo

Fernández-Ramos

González

et al. 2021

EPI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We study the phenomenon of the big deal, a subscription model for scientific journals that emerged at the turn of the millennium aimed especially at library consortia, which were offered the opportunity to exponentially increase their access to scientific information, thus breaking the previous trend of continuous cuts to the collections of the periodicals available in libraries. Its strengths, the expansion of the availability of content, and its impact on the diversification of use and the productivity of researchers are presented herein. Likewise, its weaknesses are highlighted, such as the constant increase in prices and the finding of the concentration of use in a limited set of content. These disadvantages have led to questioning and resulted in the evaluation of big deals, a search for alternatives, and cancellations in times of crisis. In recent years, the latter have been linked to the perception that the cost–benefit balance of big deals has been altered by the proliferation of open-access content. Finally, we address the revision of the traditional big deal through transformative agreements where subscription costs are offset by publication costs, which are intended to be a mechanism to accelerate the transition to open access.

show abstract

“…What librarians have been finding out when attempting to renegotiate the scope, size, and price of big deal bundles, however, is that subscribing to an entire big deal (of a few thousand journals) is often cheaper than subscribing individually to a few hundred highly-read journals. There is continuous research on developing better models for big deals' evaluation, as well as frequently reported success stories in breaking-up big deals into smaller, more affordable bundles (c.f., Wolfe et al, 2009;Jones and Marshall, 2013;Nabe and Fowler, 2015). But overall, how such projects unfold as an organizational practice situated in the context of academic libraries has not been extensively studied.…”

Section: Research Focusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agenda for Studying of Big Deal Cancellation Projects as Information Practice

Ivanov

Cassady²,

Johnson³

2020

CAIS/ACSI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article introduces a conceptual framework and approach for studying the information and decision-making practices of academic librarians involved in big deal cancellation projects—a type of collection malmanagement projects that are today prevalent across academic libraries in North America. We describe the nature and dynamics of big deal cancellation projects and conceptualize the quantitative and qualitative evaluations they entail. Predicated on this account, we present a theoretical and methodological agenda for empirical research. This conceptual paper goal, thus, is to describe and conceptualize big deal cancellation projects as an object of empirical research and to offer a perspective on how they can be studied as a type of information practice. Cet article présente un cadre conceptuel et une approche pour étudier les pratiques d'information et de prise de décision des bibliothécaires universitaires impliqués dans d'importants projets d'annulation d'abonnements—un type de projets de mauvaise gestion de collections aujourd'hui répandu dans les bibliothèques universitaires en Amérique du Nord. Nous décrivons la nature et la dynamique des grands projets d'annulation et conceptualisons les évaluations quantitatives et qualitatives qu'ils impliquent. En s'appuyant sur ces observations, nous présentons un agenda théorique et méthodologique pour la recherche empirique. L'objectif de cet article conceptuel est donc de décrire et de conceptualiser les grands projets d'annulation comme un objet de recherche empirique et d'offrir une perspective sur la façon dont ils peuvent être étudiés en tant que type de pratique informationnelle.

show abstract

Leaving the “Big Deal” … Five Years Later

Cited by 15 publications

References 1 publication

Using Data to Break Apart Journal Packages

Using Data to Break Apart Journal Packages

The evolution and revision of big deals: a review from the perspective of libraries

Agenda for Studying of Big Deal Cancellation Projects as Information Practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About