Internal Review Sub-Committee (IRS) Tom Conte, VP of Pubs Alicia Stickley Senior Manager, Periodical Products & Production Oct. 2013

11-Oct-10 IRS - Committee The internal review sub-committee was officially formed at the Feb Pubs Board meeting Members include: Tom Conte (VP of Pubs), Paolo Montuschi (MOC Chair), David Bader (TOC Chair), Frank Ferrante (DLOC Chair), Computer EIC Ron Vetter, and TC EIC Albert Zomaya –Support staff include Alicia Stickley and Robin Baldwin Footer text 2

11-Oct-10 IRS Committee - Goals The goal of the subcommittee is to: –Help "at risk" publications in advance of any TAB PRAC (periodical review) –Ensure we remain fully informed of every periodical’s performance –Offer support and suggestions to EICs in need  An extreme (and hopefully rare) outcome would be to sunset a title provided all parties involved, including the EIC, etc., see the "wisdom" of that action Footer text 3

11-Oct-10 IRS - Activities We initially undertook a review of our Transactions portfolio in 2012 Results indicated that we also need to include our magazines in a portfolio review The sub-committee held several telecons between Feb. and June The team met in June in Seattle to review progress thus far Footer text 4

11-Oct-10 IRS - Activities After reviewing data in Feb. that included: –Financials –Peer review health –JCR stats –Subscription trends We decided to add data review from: –Google Scholar –MS Research –Gartner’s Hype Cycle data Footer text 5

11-Oct-10 IRS - Activities In addition to review of data, the sub- committee wanted to hear from the volunteers Several EICs were asked to submit a short self-assessment report and present to the sub-committee at the June meeting –We received responses from the EICs of MM, CAL, TSC, TDSC, and ToH.  There was no acknowledgment or response from TAC (cosponsored). Footer text 6

11-Oct-10 IRS - Activities Activity around periodical portfolio review continues Though there are guidelines in the PPM as to which metrics to review, there are softer points of consideration such as the periodical’s place in its community, how data ranks relative to other data points, etc. –For example, some publications may not have many individual subscribers but the download rate is strong and growing Footer text 7

11-Oct-10 IRS - Activities We plan to continue this work on periodical health assessment Next steps include: –Defining benchmarks to assist in identifying periodical health –Continued volunteer outreach Questions? Footer text 8

Appendix – Transactions Portfolio Review Alicia Stickley Senior Manager, Periodical Products & Production From June 2012

11-Oct-10 How are CS Transactions doing? The CS Portfolio has a strong array of topic areas in its Transactions and Letters titles Unfortunately, our publications are seeing the impact on many levels of changes to the economy, etc. Usage in digital libraries continues to climb while individual subscriptions dwindle Footer text 10

11-Oct Subscription Info. Footer text 11

11-Oct-10 Individual Subscriber Trends Footer text Transacti on Member Subscripti ons Title2011 Apr2012 Apr% Change TC % TSE % TPAMI % TKDE % TPDS % TVCG % Annals % TMC % TDSC % TCBB % CAL % TH % TLT % TSC % TAC 01

11-Oct Actual vs. Budget by Title Footer text 13 *cosponsored pubs not included

11-Oct-10 CSDL Usage 2007-July 2012 Footer text 14

11-Oct-10 Xplore Usage Footer text 15

11-Oct-10 Xplore Usage by Title Footer text 16

11-Oct-10 Challenges Page budget increases (and costs) are often outpacing revenue Main revenue source, institutional subscriptions, is meeting its own financial challenges OA is changing the publishing landscape Do we have the right coverage areas in our portfolio? Footer text 17

11-Oct-10 Page Budget vs. Revenue - examples Footer text 18 *all journals are in analysis workbook

11-Oct-10 Portfolio Analysis A healthy publication portfolio contributes to the overall vitality of the Compute Society Further analysis of the data by the Pubs Board is needed Have we leveraged all possible opportunities to gain subscribers? Options include merging more niche titles with those with broader scopes or sunsetting titles Footer text 19

11-Oct-10 Assessment The data indicates that some of our pubs may be heading in the wrong direction In order to better assess the subjective and objective data and create a path of recovery options for troubled titles, we must create a watch list Titles will be on the watch list for one year (minimum) to allow the EIC and volunteer community the opportunity to respond to concerns Footer text 20

11-Oct-10 Watch List Criteria Should include all current metrics: –Sub-to-pub –Queue (backlog? Not enough available?) –Financial trends –Impact factor –DL usage An internal, CS-PRAC will give EICs the opportunity to address concerns and offer the way forward Footer text 21

11-Oct-10 Next Steps Approve the watch list criteria Approve the internal CS-PRAC approach Determine which Transactions might need to be on the watch list Create deadlines for EIC responses and thresholds for acceptable levels of improvement Be open to the fact that we may need to merge or sunset struggling titles Footer text 22