Access by UK SMEs to professional and academic

informationPublishing Research Consortium

Mark Ware

• Founding partners

• ALPSP

• Publishers Association

• STM

• Corresponding partners

• AAUP

• AAP/PSP

• Journal content, but not in isolation

• in the context of other types of information

• Importance of information

• Use made

• How obtained

• SMEs compared to other groups

Research objectives

3

• Small < 50 employees

• Medium < 250 employees

• 4.7 million

• 99.9% of UK companies

• 60% of private sector employment

• % science-based/high-tech unknown

Small & Medium Enterprises

4

• Importance of SMEs to innovation and to economic growth and job creation

• Importance of basic research to economy and to innovation

• Publications one of many factors

• but an important one

Previously known

5

Knowledge transfer routes

• Publications

• Informal contacts

• Public conferences and meetings

• Hiring trained scientists and engineers

• Joint research

• Contract research

• Temporary personnel exchanges

6

• Survey & interviews

• Methodology

• Response rate

• Demographics

Methodology

7

Sectors covered18

11

9

7

5

5

5

4

4

4

4

4

21

15

4

5

1

4

5

4

12

7

11

5

9

20

Pharmaceutical

Chemicals

Computing

Medical & Precision Instruments

Electricity & Gas Supply

Machinery & Equipment

Media, Publishing & Printing

Oil & Gas

Telecommunications

Aerospace

Construction

Finance

Others

SME

0% 10% 20%

Large company

0% 10% 20%

8

Success factors6.4

6.4

6.0

5.9

5.9

5.9

5.7

5.4

5.1

5.1

5.1

5.1

4.3

4.0

6.4

6.4

6.1

5.8

5.8

6.1

5.6

5.7

5.7

5.4

5.4

5.0

4.3

4.3

Quality of staff

Product quality

Leadership

Customer loyalty

Attracting new customers

Attracting quality staff

Information

Tech./ Software/ Comms

Training

Quality of equipment

Product range

Minimal bureaucracy

Access to academic expertise

Access to commercial expertise

SME

0 2 4 6 8

Large company

0 2 4 6 8

Leadership

Staff

Minimal bureaucracy

Training

Attracting staff

Equipment

Technology/ Software/ Comms

Ability to attract new customers

Customer loyalty

Product quality

Access to commerical expertise

Product range

Access to university expertise

Information

SMEs

Rela

tive b

arr

ier

to s

uccess

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

Average importance to success of organisation (rating scale, 1–7)

3 4 5 6 7

10

Importance vs barriers to success: SMEs

Leadership

Staff

Minimal bureaucracy

Training

Attracting staff

Technology/ Software/ Comms

Ability to attract new customers

Customer loyalty

Product quality

Product range

Access to commerical expertise

Equipment

Access to university expertise

Information

Large companies

Rela

tive b

arr

ier

to s

uccess

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

Average importance to success of organisation (rating scale, 1–7)

3 4 5 6 7

11

Importance vs barriers to success: large companies

Importance of different information types5.3

5.2

5.2

5.1

4.8

4.7

4.7

4.5

4.5

4.5

4.3

3.8

3.5

3.3

3.2

2.4

5.1

4.8

5.6

5.0

4.9

4.5

5.2

5.0

4.7

4.3

4.3

4.0

3.3

3.2

3.4

2.3

6.8

6.4

4.4

5.5

4.2

3.5

3.9

3.3

4.3

5.1

3.0

3.1

4.9

3.3

3.7

3.1

Original research articles in journals

Review papers in journals

Technical info

Reference works

Professional/Trade pubs

Patent information

Scientific/ tech stds

Legislative /Regulatory info

Technical reports from gov't

Conference proceedings

Market research reports

Vendor white papers

Doctoral theses/ dissertations

Clinical guidelines

CME/Educational content

Patient details

SME

0 2 4 6

Large company

0 2 4 6

University/College

0 2 4 6 8

Journals were SMEs’ most important information source

5.3

5.2

5.2

5.1

4.8

4.7

4.7

4.5

4.5

4.5

4.3

3.8

3.5

3.3

3.2

2.4

5.1

4.8

5.6

5.0

4.9

4.5

5.2

5.0

4.7

4.3

4.3

4.0

3.3

3.2

3.4

2.3

6.8

6.4

4.4

5.5

4.2

3.5

3.9

3.3

4.3

5.1

3.0

3.1

4.9

3.3

3.7

3.1

Original research articles in journals

Review papers in journals

Technical info

Reference works

Professional/Trade pubs

Patent information

Scientific/ tech stds

Legislative /Regulatory info

Technical reports from gov't

Conference proceedings

Market research reports

Vendor white papers

Doctoral theses/ dissertations

Clinical guidelines

CME/Educational content

Patient details

SME

0 2 4 6

Large company

0 2 4 6

University/College

0 2 4 6 8

SME Large company

13

etc.

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

SME Large company University/College

94%82%

71%

% s

ayin

g ac

cess

is E

asy

or V

ery

Easy

Level of access to journal articlesBase: those describing access to journal articles as important

14

Access easier than 5 years ago

SME

Large co.

Univ/Coll

0% 25% 50% 75% 100%

50%

38%

31%

24%

24%

29%

16%

19%

20%

8%

14%

13%

2%

6%

7%

Lot more difficult Little more difficult About the sameLittle easier Lot easier

EasierSameHarder

15

60%

62%

74%

20%

10%

20%

SMEs read 112 journal articles a year

Frequency SMEsLarge

companiesUniversity/

college

Several times per week

43% 30% 72%

Weekly to Monthly

43% 57% 27%

Less often 14% 13% 1%

Articles read per year

112 101 16916

Access to journals literature/2

SMEs

Large companies

University/ College

0% 25% 50% 75% 100%

17%

7%

2%

55%

39%

26%

22%

37%

56%

4%

13%

14%

Very poor Poor Varies Good Excellent

17

Difficulties accessing articles

SME Large co. Univ

Recent difficulty

55% 34% 24%

Difficulties per year

11 6.4 12.4

Articles read per year

112 101 169

% articles w/ difficulty

10% 6% 7%

18

Difficulties encountered

13%

64%

2%4%

3%

10%4%

Unsure how to find Searched but could not findForgot details Not in libraryNo access from home Found but had to payFound but technical payment diffs

9%

50%6%

8%

6%

13%

8%

SME Large Company19

Wide range of access channels used81

77

71

68

66

66

63

63

56

52

51

48

42

42

38

87

86

68

78

77

68

78

43

90

56

50

50

53

47

35

83

96

85

69

62

84

79

35

74

89

57

45

61

72

41

Prof/soc membership

Institute/ company subscription

Open access journal

Gov't database

Personal subscription

Author's own web page

Elec database subs by company

Online Pay Per View

In-house info service

Approach author directly

Local academic library

Colleagues' personal subscription

Institutional rep/ online preprint

Inter-lib loan via local lib

Local public library

SME

0% 50% 100%

Large company

0% 50% 100%

University/College

0% 50% 100%

Pay Per View

• only 5% of SME reported channel uses

• 1/3 used at least once per month

• Lots of issues

• high prices

• inhibits browsing

• uninformative/misleading abstracts

• non-corporate payment mechanism

21

Local academic libraries

• Rarely used: ~1% of channel uses

• Issues

• level of library interest?

• perceived problems with publisher licences

• requirement for walk-in access

22

Professional associations

• Physical libraries => virtual

• Cost effective

• Highly targeted

• Issues

• small library budgets

• licence constraints

23

National licence?

• Who would mediate/administer?

• JISC/HEIs?

• British Library?

• PLS?

• Size of the access gap

• Benefits

• Self-sustaining?

24

Wednesday, 1 July 2009

25(With thanks to Geoff Bilder)

iTunes model (“iPub”)• single portal, comprehensive aggregation

• intuitive user interface

• low price

• meaningful previews

• one-click purchase (w/corporate options)

• integration with reference management software

• recommendation engines

• multiple media types26

27

Summary• High value of information to SMEs

• Journals highly used

• Mixed picture on access, but SMEs worse than large companies (& universities)

• 55% experienced recent difficulty

• ~ 10% of articles read per year

• payment barrier the main difficulty cited

• Wide range of access channels

• PPV problematic, walk-in access inconvenient

• Options: PPV; online libraries; national licence?

28

Further information• Full report on PRC website

• http://is.gd/32TM3

• Companion report (additional information)

• http://is.gd/32TO1

• These slides

• http://www.slideshare.net/mrkwr

• Mark Ware

• www.markwareconsulting.com

29