librarians, publishers, and vendors: looking for mr. goodbuy

Library Acquisitions: Practice & Theory, Vol. I I, pp. 125-131, 1987 036-I-6408/87 53.00 + .OO

Printed in the USA. XII rights reserved. Copyright 2 1987 Pergamon Journals Ltd.

ISSUES IN BOOK AND SERIAL ACQUISITIONS: EXTERNAL INFLUENCES ON ACQUISITIONS AND COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT

LIBRARIANS, PUBLISHERS, AND VENDORS: LOOKING FOR MR. GOODBUY

WANDA V. DOLE

Head Librarian

Pennsylvania State University

Ogontz Campus Library

Abington, PA 19001

Abstract - Librarians, as consumers of information, deal with publishers (producers or packagers of information) and vendors (wholesalers of information). Librarians, publishers, and vendors are part of separate but intersecting systems. Each system has its own goals, motivations, and perceptions which may at times conflict with those of the other two systems. This paper examines the three systems, the conflicts, and possible methods of avoiding conflict.’ All examples are hypothetical.

INTRODUCTION

When Katina Strauch asked me to speak on the topic, “Is the customer always right, or wait a minute don’t you want my business? Publishing policies and their impact on markets,” I welcomed the opportunity to pull together my experiences in libraries, bookselling, and publishing. Since my publishing experience is limited to a brief stint as an editor with the el-hi division of a textbook publisher, I will not presume to speak with authority on publishing. I will instead address the topic from the point of view of both a librarian and vendor and try to play devil’s advocate to both sides. For the most part, I will confine my discussion to American book publishing, American vendors, and academic libraries since these are the areas in which I have first-hand knowledge.

The answers to Katina’s questions are: “No, the customer is not always right” and “No, sometimes we don’t want your business.” The reasons for these answers lie in the fact that libraries, publishing, and vending are intersecting, but separate and very distinct systems. Each system has its own goals, motivations, perceptions, and expectations which at times may be

125

126 U’. V. DOLE

in sync with those of the other two systems and which may at other times conflict with them. When the systems conflict, misunderstandings such as “Don’t you want my business” occur.

Basically, two of the systems are for-profit and one is not. Publishers produce a commodity: information in such formats as books, journals, videos, and compact discs. Libraries purchase the commodity. Vendors form a link between the producers and consumers by act- ing as a wholesaler. What should be a simple producer/distributor/consumer relationship becomes complicated and emotion-charged because of the complex, and often chaotic nature of the publishing industry and mythology surrounding books and libraries. The mythology maintains that books and knowledge are sacred and all those who deal with them are members of a priestly order. All parts of the chain- librarians, publishers, and vendors-are responsible for perpetuating this mythology.

When strung together, the statements about books, publishing, and libraries resemble a Sunday School text. Let us examine three statements as examples of the mythology.

The social scientists Lewis A. Coser, Charles Kadushin, and Walter W. Powell, in a 1982 study of the publishing industry, write that:

Books are carriers and disseminators of ideas. More than any other means of communication, they

are the most permanent, reasoned, and extensive repository of the thoughts of civilized man. Although

the publishing industry may hold a more mundane view of itself, the book trade is, in fact, both the

guardian and constant creator of our written culture. [1]

Coser, Kadushin, and Powell identify publishers with heroes of golden age legends.

Publishers seem to have had much in common with the ancient Greeks: they, too, look back to a golden

age in the past when heroes and gods laid foundations for our current derivative and decadent cul-

ture. There probably was a community of “gentle bookman” (sic) in the past-just as there was a real

Troy. [2]

Archibald MacLeish, poet and former Librarian of Congress, shifts the mythology from the realm of secular humanism to that of Christianity.

For the existence of a library, the fact of its existence is, in itself and of itself, an assertion-a propo-

sition nailed like Luther’s to the door of time. By standing where it does at the center of our intellec-

tual lives-with its books in a certain order on its shelves and its cards in a certain structure in their

cases, the true library asserts that there is indeed a “mystery of things.” [3]

It has become commonplace to refer to the library/publisher/vendor relationship as symbiotic and to elevate it above the world of commerce because books or information are involved. Librarians have a tendency to sanctify both vending and publishing because these industries are involved in what librarians often view as their sacred mission of acquiring and preserving knowledge [4].

When publishers or vendors act more business-like than librarian-like (i.e., when they con- form to the accepted behavior of their systems), librarians often feel as if a sacred trust has been betrayed. Publishers and vendors, for good cause, are perplexed by the librarian’s feel- ings of betrayal.

In order to provide some insight into how misunderstandings and conflicts arise, I will examine the nature of libraries, publishing, and vending and give examples of conflicts. I will conclude by offering guidelines to avoid future conflicts.

Looking for Mr. Goodbuy 1'7

THE NATURE OF THE SYSTEMS: LIBRARIES

Academic libraries operate within the academic environment. They are sensitive to such changes as increases or decreases in enrollment and the resulting fluctuations in funding, and shifts in power within the administration and faculty. The goal of an academic library is to identify the present and anticipated instructional and research needs of its students and faculty and to acquire and make accessible the information necessary to satisfy those needs. For the most part, librarians are motivated by what Maslow calls needs for belongingness and self-esteem [S]. Cline and Sinnott suggest that:

Because of increasing degrees of professionalism, academic librarians share a feeling of accountabil-

ity to fellow professional academic librarians in other institutions as well as the official standards and

unofficial norms espoused by professional associations. Library managers can ill afford to be offi-

cially censored or informally panned by their fellow professionals. [6]

Librarians are also motivated by lower level needs such as the need to avoid the displeas- ure of those who hold more power (faculty and administration). If the user’s needs are not satisfied, pressure is brought to bear on the librarians involved in acquisitions or dissemination of information.

Most librarians and faculty perceive of the library as eternal. They think of library collections in the long term: they are building collections not only to meet today’s needs, but also to serve as resources for future generations of scholars. Present and anticipated use is one of the criteria employed in the selection of a specific title. Librarians and faculty think of the informational value of a work, not of its format or the type of publisher who produced it or the method of distribution by which it must be obtained.

PUBLISHERS

Publishers operate in the for-profit environment. Their goal is to produce materials that will sell and make a profit for the company. Profit is their motivation. In contrast to librarians and sometimes vendors who like to ascribe lofty motives to their work, publishers are for the most part refreshingly honest about being motivated by profit.

Gary Facente, formerly the American Library Association’s Associate Executive Director for Publishing, gave a candid overview of publishing at the 1985 ALA preconference on acquisitions:

Let me put one myth about the publishing business to rest. Some people believe, and even some pub-

lishers and people who work in publishing assert that publishing is not a profitable business. We’re

in it, we say, because we love books. It is usually true that many publishing people love books, as it

is true of many librarians. But not in it for the money? Not profitable? Of twenty-seven industry cat-

egories, Fortune 500 companies in publishing ranked first on stockholders equity for 1983 with a 17.8%

return on capital. Publishing ranked second in return on sales, showing a 7.5% median return. . . . [7]

Coser, Kadushin, and Powell expressed surprise at the “mundane view” publishers held of the industry and at the complexity of the industry which is composed of many industries such as trade, text, scholarly, university press, and mass-market [8].

Sales to libraries account for a small percentage of total publishing sales. Facente places libraries at eight per cent of total sales in 1984 [9]. According to Dessauer, in 1982, sales to libraries and schools represented barely over two per cent of the total sales of trade books

128 LV. V. DOLE

[IO]. For scholarly and university press publishin g. academic libraries represent a larger share of total sales. If we look at the industry as a vvhole, however, obviously eight per cent cannot expect to call the shots on production, distribution, and pricing. Distribution (including returns policies) and pricing are the areas where conflict between publishers, librarians, and vendors most often occur because each of the three has vested interests.

Distribution to libraries through specialized v-cndors is a unique kind of vvholesaling. Leonard Shatzkin points out that in most industries the wholesaler is the middleman between the producer and the retailer, but in book publishing, the wholesaler sells to both bookstores and institutions, such as libraries [I I]. Shatzkin laments the development of this method of distribution to libraries as a shift from the earlier method, still presently in place but changing at a rapid rate in England, Holland, and Germany. where the retailers (bookstores) were the source of supply to libraries. He does, however, admit that:

From the publishers’ point of view, although it does ;ost more in discount, distribution through

wholesalers passes the crucial test: It works. No doubt some of the larger publishers could multiply

their business with libraries by being more aggressive ic selling directly, but this makes no sense for

the vast majority of publishers and cannot ever be the industry pattern. [I21

Shatzkin wrote this in 1982 pre-Bowker decision days. Bill Schenck, Collection Development Librarian at the University of Oregon, offered a sim-

ple, but often ignored and unknown by librarians, explanation of pricing. He observed:

Libraries are nor bookstores . . . Publishers usually ha:e two discount schedules . . Publishers sell

to bookstores at a discount so bookstores can resell the book at a higher price. The difference between

the price paid to the publisher and the price paid by th- . .- iustomer is the store’s gross profit; without

that discount, bookstores could not stay in business. . To suggest that publishers should ignore this

difference and sell books to stores and libraries at th e same price tlies in the face of logic. [I31

VENDORS

Vendors form a link between publishers (producers of information) and librarians (buyers of information). Like publishers, vendors exist in a for-profit environment. Unlike publishers, in most cases they do not produce goods or a durable commodity. Like librarians, vendors perceive themselves as providers of services. Douglas Duchin of Yankee Book Peddler has said that “Vending is a service profession and most of us are in it for the challenge and because we are service oriented” [14].

In fact vendors ascribe librarian-like characteristics to themselves because identification with librarians is a good selling tool or perhaps because they are as unsure of their own identi- ties as librarians [15]. Gabriel Austin, the President of Wittenborn Art Books, quoted art librarian Gerd Muehsam’s statement that “. . . no one can be more helpful in the development of a good collection than a good bookseller” [16]. Duchin has also said that “Book job- bers probably form the largest acquisitions department in the world . . .” [17]. An amusing example of this identification with librarians occurred at the June 1984 meeting of the Ameri- can Librarian Association’s Ethics Committee. After librarians and vendors assailed each other for unrealistic expectations and faulty perception, one vendor (Donald Satisky, Black- well North America) tried to bring peace by emphasizing the close ties between librarians and vendors. Pointing out that the customer-salesman relationship often leads to real friendships, Satisky said:

Looking for Mr. Goodbuy 129

Vendor hospirality suites rarely involve business discussions, and the vendors frequently don’t even know many of the people who show up. He said chat with rhe increasing number of librarians on vendor

staffs, many are havin_e more difficulty decidin_n whether they are for “them” or “us”. [IS]

Adding to the identification crisis, Jennifer Cargill revealed that Melvil Dewey tried his hand at vending in the 1870s and 1880s and ended up $22,000 in debt. “Trying to be both vendor and a librarian,” Cargiil points out, “was a bad financial combination for Dewey” [ 191.

There is a wide variety of vendors differentiated by size, type of publisher and publications covered, services offered, subject orientation, and geographical scope. Types of publications include monographs, serials, periodicals, and non-print materials. These types may be fur- ther divided into current and out-of-print materials. Publishers covered run the gamut of trade, university press, scholarly, professional, scientific and technical, medical, textual, societal/institutional/departmental, small press, reprint, museum and government agency. Some vendors, notably those specializing in art, medical, or legal materials, limit themselves to certain subjects. In her presentation “Utilizing Library Bookseller Services” at the American Library Association, Resources and Technical Services Division, July 5, 1985, Business of Acquisitions Pre-conference, Marion Reed identified twenty-eight book-related services, thir- teen subscription agent services, and ten additional services performed by vendors [20].

Vendors are in business to make money; to sell books and other services at a profit. They are motivated by the desire to make money, not by a wish to preserve the knowledge of West- ern civilization. They exist in the for-profit environment. They are sensitive to changes in the environment such as fluctuations in interest rates, the need to keep operating costs down by standardizing operations, and pressure from ownership to increase sales and profits. Since birth rates are down and no new universities or colleges are being established and the bud- gets of existing universities and colleges tend to be static or declining, vendors are trading shares or competing for portions of an ever-decreasing pie.

CONFLICTS

Conflicts arise when the goals and motivations of the three systems (libraries, publishing, and vending) clash. Each system perceives conflicts within its own frame of reference. In spite of differences in perception, the systems ascribe similar causes to conflicts. These causes include:

1. Lack of knowledge of the nature of the other systems. 2. Lack of knowledge of one’s own system. 3. Poor communication. 4. Unrealistic expectations. 5. Unethical or unprofessional behavior.

LACK OF KNOWLEDGE OF OTHER SYSTEMS

Librarians, publishers, and vendors all maintain that they are misunderstood. Librarians and vendors criticize publishers for churning out catalogs and flyers which do not contain the information needed for selection and acquisition. Regina Minudri suggested that catalogs “should not only include accurate bibliographic information but also should be anno-

130 vv. V. DOLE

tated as to whether a book is a reissue, a reprint, or an original” [21]. The specific items of information (i.e., specific bibliographic data needed by librarians) are clearly stated by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) in standard 239.13-1979, American Nurional Standard for Describing Books in Advertisemenrs, Catalogs, Promorional Materials, and Book Jackets. The standards include author-title information, price information, content (including unusual size, significant graphic features, indexes, pagination, number of volumes), publication history, cataloging information, standard book or serials numbers, and date of catalog. An unpublished study by Edward J. O’Hara examined seasonal, subject, and annual genera1 catalogs from a full spectrum of publishers and discovered that “not a single catalog, not even A.L.A.?, included all relevant information” [22].

Librarians complain that vendors do not understand the impact of their actions on library operations. If the acquisitions librarian of a large library is promised a book shipment on a specific day of the week, he or she arranges the work flow of the acquisitions department accordingly. If the vendor does not keep that promise and the shipment arrives late or several weeks’ shipments arrive together, the work flow of the acquisitions department is disturbed. Acquisitions staff members either sit around with nothing to do or ha\-e to do several days’ work in one day.

Both librarians and vendors have said that Bowker’s recent decision to sell directly to libraries rather than through vendors shows the publisher’s ignorance of library acquisition procedures and the service played by standing order vendors.

Vendors fault librarians with not understanding the cost of special procedures which require handling outside the normal flow of operations. The same librarians who request special procedures are often those who also want high discounts (the by-product of standardization and economy of scale). Librarians cannot have both low packing and shipping charges and books individually wrapped rather than packed in Styrofoam peanuts (which, they complain, cling to books, shelves, and people).

All parties seem to be faulted regarding return policies. Some librarians think that vendors should allow them to return any and all books with impunity, even those ordered by mistake. Vendors think that librarians abuse return privileges and are ignorant of or choose to ignore the monetary and labor costs that the vendor incurs because of returns. Publishers think both vendors and librarians abuse return privileges.

Vendors maintain that librarians are ignorant of vending in general and of the special strengths of specific vendors. They cite examples of librarians asking a Dutch vendor to set up an approval plan for French books or of expecting a U.S. vendor to supply Canadian publications on firm order as extensively as a Canadian vendor. Another example is that of librarians who send rush orders for books they need the next day to a vendor, although the books are not the type of publications in which the vendor specializes or current titles. In this case, as Doug Duchin has said, “You will probably lose time going through a vendor. You mail an order to him, he mails it to the publisher, the publisher mails the book and the vendor passes it on to you” [23].

LACK OF KNOWLEDGE OF ONE’S OWN SYSTEM

Both librarians and vendors maintain that the other doesn’t know how to run his own business. In an interview with Technicalities, the late Jim Cameron said:

My feeling has been that library schools have not done a creditable job in preparing people for the

acquisitions function. . . . they haven’t taught even the rudiments of acquisitions. In many cases the

Looking for Mr. Goodbuy 131

new librarians don’t know what a vendor is. I’m sure some of them heard of fund accounting for the

first time only after they got a call from the finance office. I’ve answered a tremendous number of

questions and tried to do so in a way not to embarrass myself or the individual who asked the ques-

tion. [23]

Librarians fault vendors for making errors and mistakes that go uncorrected in spite of repeated calls and letters. One glaring example concerns incorrect billing/shipment instruc- tions which were never corrected in a vendor’s file. The head of a branch library, located in a separate building from the main library of the large system to which it was attached, initiated a form or selection slip plan with a vendor. The forms were to be sent directly to the branch library for the librarian’s consideration. The books ordered from the forms were to be shipped directly to the main library where all technical processing for the system took place. The addresses and instruction for shipping the forms and books were discussed before the plan was initiated. When the plan began, the vendor shipped the forms and the books to the branch library. The librarian repeatedly called the vendor’s customer service department and asked that the shipping address for the books be changed. Each time she was assured that the change had been made in the vendor’s customer files. After six months and numerous calls, the books were still being shipped to the branch library. The librarian can- celled the plan.

Librarians also complain that vendors change or automate operations without consider- ing the impact on service. One example is the plethora of strange and meaningless reports sent to libraries. Librarians have reported submitting a vendor’s own announcement forms or selection slips as firm orders and having the vendor return the slips marked “we do not handle this publisher.” Jennifer Cargill comments:

the reports and services that have resulted from the early trial-and-error attempts toward automation

no(v provide valuable assistance in the day-to-day operations of many books and serials acquisitions

departments, as we!! as supplying data for cost projects for the future. However, sometimes the birth-

pains associated with the development of these automated systems together with the many by-products

that have been generated have created a unique set of marketing problems for the vendors. Librar-

ians have frequently become bitter enemies of companies as a result of having been innocently caught

up in a sometimes messy ill-conceived conversion to automation. [2S]

Vendors complain of “sloppy order fulfillment and shipping” [26] from publishers and of publishers’ customer service representatives “who don’t know the difference between a second and third edition and may not care” [27]. Bob Schatz of Academic Book Center summed up the frustration the vendor feels as middleman:

It is easy to gather evidence of publishers’ warehouses filled with titles which are being reported as

“Not Yet Published.” or of wholesalers’ back orders which have been “lost by the computer.” A major

portion of what wholesalers do is clean up the messes made by publishers. That is why libraries use

wholesalers. . . . when the publishers foul up an order, it is the wholesaler who gets blamed, because

it is the wholesaler who ultimately is late with the shipment. [28]

POOR COMMUNICATION

Each system faults the others with not communicating its desires and policies clearly. Speaking of drawing up approval plan profiles, Doug Duchin has said, “I find the biggest problem is the exchange of information. If the library does not convey to me its hopes and wants and fears, we are going to have a poor plan” [29]. Librarians complain of vendors

132 W. V. DOLE

speaking in generalities about discounts, shipping costs, and return policies. Vendors are accused of using vague terms such as “competitive discounts” rather than actually naming percentages.

Vendors complain that librarians have unrealistic expectations about what an approval plan can and cannot do. As Doug Duchin has said, “If you notice that your library has missed ten titles out of 3000 and you see this as a major gap in a plan, then you should probably not have an acquisitions program with a vendor” [30]. Blaming an approval vendor for not sending more books in a subject area than are actually published is also unrealistic. Publishing statistics by subject area are available from approval vendors and are published in the literature. The anthropology bibliographer who expects an approval vendor to supply 3000 U.S. titles on anthropology a year has unrealistic expectations.

Librarians have the right to expect reasonably frequent visits and responsive follow-up on service problems by vendors’ representatives. The frequency of visits depends on the size and complexity of the account. Although, at times of crises and special problems, a library may require monthly visits, it is not reasonable to expect such frequent visits on a regular basis. Sometimes libraries try to pull a vendor’s strings by demanding unreasonably frequent visits or demanding visits at a moment’s notice.

UNETHICAL OR UNPROFESSIONAL BEHAVIOR

Librarians’ complaints about vendors’ behavior run the gamut from the irritating and innocuous (cold calls and hard-sell tactics) to the unethical. Acquisitions and collection development librarians consider it unethical for a vendor’s representative to go over their heads to ask their superiors to reverse a decision. The librarian has made a decision based on more information and skill in a specialized area of librarianship than that usually possessed by the superior. The librarian is motivated by what is best for the library. The vendor is motivated by what is best for him- i.e., to increase or maintain his sales [31]. The vendor, however, crosses an ethical line when he starts exerting influence within the library’s system and bring- ing to bear pressure which may impact on a librarian’s professional career and his work environment.

Vendors complain of librarians looking for the free lunch-or dinner or drink. Accepting a vendor’s hospitality when you have no intention of doing business with him is unprofessional. Accepting a vendor’s hospitality when you have been and will continue to be openly critical of his firm is less than ethical.

Misrepresentation and covering oneself at the vendor’s expense is also not ethical. One example is that of an acquisitions librarian who requested a cost estimate for an approval plan and insisted that information be broken down into small subject areas. The vendor representative explained that so detailed a profile would take time to write and even more time to run. He offered a rough estimate based on his company’s published statistics factored to resemble the profile requested by the librarian - in fact, he had already worked out the figures and had them in hand. The librarian insisted on the more elaborate program which did, as predicted, take considerable time to run. While the program was being run, the librarian received pressure from her director.

Rather than admit her own lack of knowledge or mishandling of the situation, the librarian blamed the vendor and covered by saying he did not answer her earlier calls, should have visited her sooner than he did, was unresponsive, took too long to supply information, and was generally uninterested in her business. The director decided the firm was unresponsive and went elsewhere for the approval plan.

Looking for Xlr. Goodbuy 133

Kenneth G. Peterson, in his examination of ethics in academic librarianship, mentioned the tendency to shift blame. He wrote that ethical behavior includes the ability “to accept failure with its painful disappointments. . . . A personal injustice is done when an individual sinks into despair because of failure, or denies that failure to someone else, or becomes defen- sive in the face of failure” [32].

Peterson also discussed promises and commitments and urged that “before promises are made, serious consideration needs to be given to the substance of what is being committed, and whether or not the person making the promise has the power or resources to keep it” [33]. If a librarian does not have permission or the power to establish an approval plan, he or she should say so. The librarian should not allow the vendor to profile the plan and start sending books and then tell him that the director will not permit a plan. Another example of unprofessional or unethical behavior is bargaining for a high discount based on a promised volume of sales and not sending that volume to the vendor. The vendor has every right to withdraw the discount.

CONCLUSIONS: GUIDELINES FOR AVOIDING CONFLICTS

Librarians, publishers, and vendors may avoid or mitigate the conflicts outlined above b! recognizing the causes and addressing them.

1. Learn about each other’s systems. Read the literature of librarianship and the book industry. Go to meetings and conferences and ask questions.

2. Make sure you know your own system. If you are a librarian who is new to acquisitions, read the literature, go to meetings, and ask everyone (librarians, publishers, and vendors). If you do not know, admit it, and ask for help and information.

3. Be clear and honest in communication. 4. Be realistic in your expectations. Consider the resources and operating costs of the other

systems. 5. Act professionally and ethically.

Libraries, publishing, and vending are very different systems, but they are dependent on each other. Only by learning about the strengths and weaknesses of the systems and dealing with them constructively, can they form a truly symbiotic relationship.

REFERENCES

1. Coser, Lewis A., Charles Kadushin and Walter W. Powell. Books: 7he C~lrrtre und Commerce ofPublishing. New York: Basic Books, 1982, p. 362.

2. Coser, et al. Books, p. 363. 3. MacLeish, Archibald. “The Premise of IMeaning,” The American Scholar, 41 (Summer 1972). 359. 4. Martell, Charles R. “Myths, Schooling and the Practice of Librarianship,” CoNege and Research Libraries, -I!:2

(September 1984). 374-82. 5. Xlaslow, Abraham H. Mofivarion und Personality. 2nd ed. New York: Harper and Row, 1970. 6. Cline, Hugh F. and Lorraine T. Sinnott. Building Librury Collections. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 1981,

p. 143. 7. Facente, Gary. “An Overview of American Publishing For Librarians,” Library Resources and Technical Ser-

vices, 30:1 (January/March 1986). 59. 8. Coser, et al. Books, p. 364. For overviews of publishing, see Gary Facente. “Overview,” 57-67 and Leonard

Shatzkin. In Cold Type, Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1982. For annual statistics see Pubtithers Weekly and the

134 W. V. DOLE

Bowker Annttul. See also John P. Dessauer. Book In&srr_v Trends. New York: Book Industry Study Group,

1983.

9. Facente. “Overview.” 58.

10. Dessauer, Book Indusrr_v Trends, p. 5.

I I. Sharzin. In Cold rvpe, p. 181.

12. Shatzin, In Cold Tvpe, p. 183.

13. Schenck, William Z. “The Resolution on Trade Publishing Discounts: Not Apple Pie and IMom,” Library Acqui-

sirions: Prucrice and Theory, 8:2 (1984). 92. For library discount schedules, see Ung Chon Kim, Policies oJ Pub-

lishers, New York: Scarecrow, 1982.

14. Duchin. Douglas. “The Jobber as a Surrogate Acquisitions Librarian,” Library Acquisirions: Pructice and Theory,

7:l (1983). 20.

15. For librarians’ search for professional identity, see Xlartell, “Myths,” and Cline and Sinnott. Building. pp.

138-140.

16. Austin is quoted in “Collection Development in the 1980’s.” Arl Documenfarion. I:2 (May 19SZ), 50.

17. Duchin. “Jobber as a Surrogate,” 17.

IS. “ALA Ethics Committee looks at vendor-library relationships,” Library Journul (I September 19&t), 1584-86.

19. Cargill. Jennifer. “Vendor Services Supermarket: the New Consumerism,” Wilson Library Bullerin. 57 (Janu-

ary 1983), 394. For another example of librarian turned vendor, see A.L.P. Norrington, Bkuckwell’s 1879-1979:

The Hisrory o!a Fa‘a,ni/y Firm, Oxford: Blackwell, 1983.

20. See Reid, Marion, “Acquisitions,” Library Technical Services, ed. Irene P. Godden. Orlando, FL: Academic

Press, 1984, pp. 93-94. for an earlier, abridged version of this list.

21. Quoted by Stevens, Jana K., “Selling to Your Steadiest Customers: The Library hlarker-the LAPT Report,”

Library Acquisitions: Pracrice and Theory, 6: I (1982). 56.

22. Edward J. O’Hara. “Publishers’ Book Catalogs and Advertising Standards for the Institutional Market” (unpub-

lished paper prepared for Columbia University Modern Book Publishing course, 19S4), p. 9.

23. Duchin. “Jobber as Surrogate,” 19.

24. “A Conversation with Jim Cameron,” Techniculifies, 4:7 (July 1984) 6. 9. See also “Academic Book Center,

Inc.: A Techniculiries Vendor Profile,” Technicaliries, 5:s (August 1985). Il. for similar opinions expressed by

Don Halloran.

25. Cargill, “Vendor Services,” 399.

26. Halloran, Don, “Academic Book Center,” 12.

27. Schatz. Bob. “Don’t Shoot the Messenger,” Library Acquisitions: Practice and Theory 10: I (1986). 86.

28. Schatz, “Don’t Shoot the Messenger,” 86.

29. Duchin, “The Jobber as Surrogate,” IS.

30. Duchin, “The Jobber as Surrogate,” 19.

3 I. See Malinconico, S. Michael. “Vendor Plays,” Library Journul I08 (1 October 1983), 1853. He writes that there

is a clear asymmetry between the instruction a sales representative has received to pursue the most advantageous

terms in a sale and the motivation of someone representing an institutional customer. The former’s performance

is judged primarily on how successful he or she is in concluding the best deal for his or her company.

32. Peterson, Kenneth G. “Ethics in Academic Librarianship: the Need For Values,” Journul of Acudemic Libruri-

unship 9:3 (July 1983) 136.

33. Peterson. “Ethics.” 137.

librarians, publishers, and vendors: looking for mr. goodbuy

Documents