IEEE%20Publishing%20Strategy:%20Key%20Issues%20

1
IEEE Publishing Strategy Key Issues Next
Steps An Update For PSPB
February 2005Confidential For IEEE Board and OU
Use Only

Leah Jamieson, Anthony Durniak John Vig, Mary
Ward-Callan
2
PSPB TAB Are Engaged In A Multi-Year Planning
Process

• Feb. 04 Received charge from A. Winston
• Through 2004 Workshops examined the changing
  landscape of publishing, developed scenarios
  strategies
• Nov. 04 Board accepts new 6-point strategy as
  recommended and funds work for 2005
• Through 2005 Act on the new Strategy
• Do research to see how engineers work today
• Develop programs to start implementing the
  strategy
• Hold 2 workshops to socialize the plan

3
Publications Are An Important Part Of How IEEE
Meets Its MissionIts Behind The Top 2 Reasons
For Joining IEEE
Source Excerpt from 2004 IEEE Member
Segmentation Study Q25 Please indicate the
major reasons you originally joined the IEEE.
(Choose all the apply)
4
Publications Represents Half Of IEEEs Revenue
From Operations1
2003 Total Revenue 226 Million
1 Omits Investment Returns on Reserves Source
IEEE Audited Financials
5
And This Important Program Is Subject To Several
Financial Threats

• IEL customers demand usage stats by title in
  Counter assoc. format
• We estimate 15 to 30 of IEL customers dont use
  all titles and will ask to trade down
• Switch to smaller packages may drop IEL revenue
  10 to 15

10 to 15 of IEL Revenue At Risk Due To
Counter Usage Stats
6
And This Important Program Is Subject To Several
Financial Threats

• Open Access gives articles readers for free
• Google Scholar makes it easy to find these free
  copies, so people dont need a subscription
• There are many proposals for new business models,
  but they wont replace subscriptions 100

20 to 50 of Total Revenue At Risk Due To Open
Access and Google Scholar
7
But A Key Issue For IEEE Is The Changing Link
Between Publications and Membership
In print, the only way to get IEEE material and
avoid a trip to the library . . .
. . . was to become an IEEE Society member and
get a personal member subscription conveniently
delivered to your desk.
But with web delivery the library subscription
now gives readers convenient access at their
desks -- at the office or at home
8
Access To IEL Can Impact The Reasons for
Maintaining Society IEEE MembershipSurvey Why
Do You Maintain IEEE Membership?
Access to info Is important to all IEEE Members
But Society members are far more likely to see
Pubs as a reason to stay members
Source 2003 IEEE All Society Research Project Q
26
9
There Are Two Solutions To This 1) Develop Other
Member Benefits and 2) Revise Pubs Strategy
Survey Why Do You Maintain IEEE Membership?
The Conclusion We need to develop other member
benefits or otherwise change the dues/value
equation
Source 2003 IEEE All Society Research Project Q
26
10
Our Goal For 2010 Be A Leader In Technology
Information

• Be the premier source for technical information
  to all technology practitioners
• Lead in creating and organizing a variety of
  technical content and disseminating it to users
  in a personalized, seamless, coherent and
  integrated fashion
• Double the amount of content published
• Provide IEEE members affordable access
• Double the inflation-adjusted net surplus
  generated by information services and products

11
To Accomplish These GoalsRequires A New 6-Point
Strategy
Current Strategy
New Strategy
12
Strategy 1 Expand The Type Of Content We Offer

• Journal and Conference articles still play a role
  
• But, well offer more types of content
• More practical articles -- for example
• Quick study introductions to various topics
• Product design, tips techniques
• More Non-text information For example
• mathematical models, computer-aided design
  templates, etc.
• Interactive online learning modules, etc.
• Leverages knowledge of the Societies and programs
  at their conferences
• Helps IEEE expand into new interdisciplinary
  fields

13
Strategy 2 Allow The Inclusion Of New Content
Processes

• Our journals will retain peer review and editing
  where it provides a competitive advantage
• Well also seek out new ways to create content
• Self-assembling communities of interest
• Community contributed and assembled content (e.g.
  Wiki encyclopedia )
• Author formatted material (e.g. conference
  articles)
• Well also find new ways to evaluate content
• Reader ratings of articles, community evaluation
• Usage-based ratings of material how often read
  or cited
• PSPB will determine policies
• Leverages knowledge of Societies their social
  networks of communities

14
Strategy 3 Build Web Services To Help Members
Users Manage Info

• IEEE Resource Center web service
• Contextual Workspace finds, organizes, and
  links info in relationship to how it is used
• Buy single articles manage subscriptions with
  easy web commerce
• Can have versions like RealPlayer or Acrobat
• Basic version free to registered users
• Advanced version for members
• Can be tailored to needs of various communities
• Restores the link between membership and access
  to information

15
Strategy 4 Sell Content Separately Strategy 5
Focus On End-Users

• Benefits users lets them buy what they want
• Single articles, bundles of articles,
  subscriptions
• Benefits to IEEE Overcomes IEL Dilemma
• Sales by article grows revenue as content grows

• We still acknowledge librarians as important
  customers
• But well add emphasis on selling to the
  end-user, especially members

16
Strategies 3, 4 5 IEEE Potentially Could
Provide Several Access Options
All readers sign up for their choice of IEEE
Resource Finder
Reader has choices to buy content Single
articles or Bundles of articles for themselves
or the institution
Registered Users Get Basic set of services
IEEE ARTICLE ------------- ------------ ---------
------------------------------
IEEE MemberGet Full set of services
Article Bundles Enterprise, MDL, ASPP, CSDL,
IEL, etc.
17
Strategy 6 Encourage Partners

• Well collaborate with other professional
  societies to develop info collections
• A small number of partners critical mass
• IEE already participates in IEL
• First partners needed are AIP, APS, IOP, ACM
• Once started can add others ASME, AIChE, etc.
• Well selectively partner with companies on
  technology services
• Benefits of collaboration
• Pools resources for development and operation of
  increasingly expensive web content services

18
Guiding The Implementation Are Core Principles

• Maintain build on strengths while we explore
  new sources for increasing revenue membership
• Develop small, fast experiments to test concepts,
  then scale up winners
• Coordinate our projects to minimize duplication
  of effort
• Find projects that change how were perceived,
  especially by younger researchers, practitioners,
  IT workers

19
Some Starting Points for Implementing the Strategy

• Improve functionality of current content
• Improve timeliness
• Make references in conferences linkable
• Develop IEEEs own metadata of index terms
• Experiment with community generated, unreviewed
  content e.g. Wiki or blogs
• Leverage our social network
• Develop ability in Xplore to generate usage-based
  recommendations like amazon.com
• Develop an experts database that users can search
  to find a colleague in the same field
• Coordinate with myieee.org web site

20
Action Plan For 2005

• Planning Meeting 31 Jan./1 Feb.
• Workshop with Panel of Editors 10 Apr.
• Second Workshop in Early Summer
• Gaining insights from industry players
• M. Buschman, Microsoft R. Kenny Marone, Yale
  N. Gulley, MathWorks A. Acharya, Google R.
  Crow, SPARC S. Gass, MIT H. Flecker, Harvard
  C. Tenopir, Univ. of Tenn. C. Richard, Outsell

21
Successful Strategic Planning Means Avoiding The
Innovators Dilemma

• Prof. Clayton Christensen observes that most
  companies with a successful product listen to
  their customers invest in their current
  technology to meet the needs of their current
  customers
• But they miss disruptive technologies that are
  attractive to new customers

22
Example of disruptive technology in IEEEs history
23
Example of disruptive technology in IEEEs history
24
IEEEs Publishing Strategy Message Is Plan Before
There Is A Crisis

• Yes, our current products are selling well
• But, there are disruptive issues and technologies
  on the horizon
• The important thing is that we not be complacent
• The good news is that we envision new products
  and services that can keep us successful

25
The Future Is Up To Us

• IEEEs Publishing activities and its Societies
  are at a critical juncture
• The link between membership and pubs is broken
• Our existing business models are being attacked
  by open access Google scholar
• The new 6-point plan is an attractive alternate
  scenario
• Opportunities to build our pubs strengths
• Opportunities to build our society strengths
• If we act, we can plan for a future of growth
• If we dont, the future will definitely hurt us

26
The End
27
Governance in IEEE TAB

• Report from Mimi Galiana
• SPARC Ad-hoc Committee on Governance
• June 2005 TAB Series

28
The Committee

• IEEE staff
• Jayne Cerone
• Paula Dunne
• Gigi Kenna
• Mary Ward-Callan

• Volunteers
• Roberto DeMarca (Div. III Director)
• Celia Desmond (TAB Vice Chair)
• Jerry Engel (CompS)
• John Estey (Div. VII Director)
• Toshi Fukuda (NTC)
• Robert Hebner (DEIS)
• Gene Hoffnagle (Div. V Director)
• Leah Jamieson (VP, PSPB)
• George Karady (PES)
• Yongmin Kim (EMBS)
• Russell Lefevre (AES)
• Fred Mintzer (SPS)
• Bob Rassa (IMS)
• John Vig (TAB Chair)
• Brian Wadell (IMS)

29
The Mandate -2005

• Provide Recommendations on S/C Division
  allocation for DD elections
• Assist attempts to improve IEEE image to the
  public on the web (Ed Clark report to SPARC)
• Examine issues of governance in
• TAB governance (voting body)
• Creation of new S/Cs in TAB
• Facilitate inter-society and cross-division
  collaborations (Clint Andrews report to SPARC)
• Can some measures improve all in parallel?

30
Common Issues

• Continued Decline in Membership
• Tensions between small and large societies
• New directions that spawn new societies rather
  than mutual collaborations
• Poor dissemination of novel S/C technical
  activities between units and the public

31
Current Memberships (04)
32
Current Memberships (04)
Practically all the numbers are down, and this is
not recent!
33
1. Division Structure

• Report to achieve democratic balance in DD
  voting base
• Evaluate the balance of member representation in
  current divisions
• Address the preferences of S/Cs given through
  feedback
• Propose changes with minimal perturbations on
  election process of DDs

34
1.a Division Member

• From the IEEE study in Nov 2004 (05 reg)

Div. High-grade Total
I 36,357 40,702
II 18,036 19,158
III (ComS) 29,204 34,840
IV 28,029 30,847
V (.5 CS) 25,144 37,596
VI 12,006 13,001
VII (PES) 18,042 19,032
VIII (.5 CS) 25,144 37,597
IX 24,481 27,495
X 28,279 33,421
Total 293,689/10 29,370
35
Conclusion on membership balance

• Most well-balanced with respect to desirable mean
  
• Div I is much larger than the mean
• Div II, VI and VII are much smaller than mean
• ? Room for improvement for fair DD
  representation

36
1.b Inter-Society Feedback
37
1.b Inter-Society Feedback
38
1.b Inter-Society Feedback

• More than half (15/26) approve division
  realignment (when needed) by affinity
• Of 43 units, only 26 responded to 04/05 surveys
  some apathy to the issue
• Many can live with current assignments, but 10
  S/C indicated specific requests

All data is taken into account in the following
scenario
39
Recommendations on Divisions

• Current

• New Proposal

ICAS,CPMT,ED, LEO,SSC,SC,NC VI ED,EM,PC, R,PSE,SIT
II DEI, IA, IM, PEL VII PE
III Comm Soc VIII Comp
IV AP,BT,CE, EMC,Mag,MTT, NPS,SCC IX AES,GRS, OE,SP,UFFC,VT
V Comp X CS,EMB,IE, IT,CI,RA,ITS SMC,ITSC
I CAS, ED, SSC, NC VI ED,EM,PC, R,PSE,SIT
II DEI,IA,IM, LEO, CPMT, UFFC, SC VII PE,PEL,IE
III Comm Soc VIII Comp
IV AP,BT,CE, EMC,Mag,MTT, NPS,SCC IX AES,GRS, OE,SP,VT, IT
V Comp X CS,EMB,CI, ITS, RA,SMC, ITSC
Why are Councils listed in Divisions at all?
GREEN for moved societies others unchanged
40
Proposed New Divisions

• From the IEEE study in Nov 2004 (05 reg)

Div. High-grade Total
I 28,384 31,553
II 23,351 25,350
III (ComS) 29,204 34,840
IV 28,029 30,847
V (.5 CS) 25,144 37,596
VI 12,006 13,001
VII (PE) 25,321 27,037
VIII (.5 CS) 25,144 37,597
IX 25,616 28,917
X 23,184 27,686
Total 293,689/10 29,370
41
New Divisions

• Proposal balances well the memberships in
  divisions
• Only changes requested by S/Cs have been
  included, which also improve affinity
• Division Directors can finish their terms as
  planned
• Normal schedule of elections can proceed
• Division Names can remain or be dropped

42
Motion New Divisions

• Motion 1 from SPARC Governance Com
• That TAB endorse the modified division
  allocations for implementation in the next
  elections Fall 2006, without regard to division
  names. (slide 13)
• Financial cost to TAB minimal simple change to
  ballot mailing lists for DD elections

43
2. Technical Themes

• The problem
• The breadth of technical interests in IEEE,
  beyond classical electro-engineering, is poorly
  advertised, even to the public
• S/Cs within IEEE often unaware of interests of
  their peers in non-eng. areas
• The result Decline in new-young membership
  poorly founded requests for new S/Cs

44
2. Technical Themes- goals

• To flag modern breadth of activities beyond TAB
• (since this is poorly done by Divisions and is
  a moving target)
• Advertise cross-division basis of many S/C
  collaborations interdisciplinary highlights
• Inform public and S/C units on current
  activities, before asking for new S/Cs
• Could become basis for Special Interest Groups
  with elected coordinator from member societies

45
2. Technical Themes

• Procedure
• S/C Presidents and DDs propose technical themes
  for broad and novel IEEE activities
• S/Cs declare affiliation/interest with as many
  themes as they deem fit
• Post these themes on the improved IEEE web
  pages, including links to denoted affiliated S/Cs
  and hot-news items

46
2. Technical Themes (2)

• Possibilities for consideration
• Smart Devices and Systems Earth Space
  Sciences
• Life Sciences Bio-Engineering New Energy
  Systems
• Environmental Issues in Eng. Design
  Automation
• Intelligent Transportation Novel propulsion
  systems
• Informatics in Biology Learning Machines
• Man-Machine interfaces World Communication
• Please provide comments and theme alternatives
  before August 2005
• Firm proposal to be provided to TAB at Nov 2005
  series

47
3. Alternate TAB Structure

• The problem in TAB representation
• There is an imbalance in the member
  representation weight of most TAB votes
• This causes tensions and destructive inertia
  between small and large S/Cs.
• (information item)

48
3. Alternate TAB Structure
The result

• TAB votes often reflect territorial interests
  (silo vision)
• whereas the actual legal mandate of all TAB
  voters (like DDs) is to vote for the well-being
  of all IEEE technical interests!

49
3. Alternate TAB Structure
The solution

• Define a TAB representation elected by peers from
  the existing S/C Presidents and DDs, based on
  equitable membership base
• Selection could be on a division allocation
  basis, or freely decided by S/C alliances
  (examples only)
• The elected representative would vote according
  to the consensus of his/her base, encouraging
  collaborative stances

50
Alternate TAB Structure
Building on background work of R. Sudbury and R.
De Marca -

• Two Tier Structure
• New TAB
• Operational in Focus
• Restricted Size
• Voting Members with balanced representation
• New Presidents Council
• Oversight and Policy
• All Societies and Councils Represented

51
Alternate TAB Structure
Current TAB (S/C Ps DDs) 60
New elected TAB reps (from S/C Ps
DDs) Balanced vote base e.g. 1 rep/10K div
members gt 32
Presidents Council (all S/C Ps 42)
52
Towards a bicameral system for TAB

• Please provide feedback as soon as possible on
  your views for pros/cons
• We will probe the issues with e-mails over Summer
  05
• Thank you,
• Mimi Galiana
• Chair, ad-hoc Governance Committee

53
Alternate TAB Structure

• Composition of voting members in New TAB, Chaired
  by TAB VP
• All sitting Division Directors
• Representative(s) from each Division, number
  determined by size of division
• Elected by Soc. Presidents in a division to a
  two year term from sitting presidents at time of
  election and/or DEs or PEs if needed
• Staggered terms of elected S/C Presidents (1/2)
  by Division not matching term of Division
  Director
• One Council representative
• Elected by sitting Council Presidents from
• their peers for a two year term
• For example if based on 10,000 member
  increments, TAB could be fairly representative
  with a body of only 32 votes (instead of
  currently gt45)

54
Functions of New TAB

• Carry out all administrative and operational
  functions of current TAB except those reserved to
  the Presidents Council. These include but not
  limited to
• Budget approval
• Allocation of income and expenses
• Publications
• Products
• Meetings conferences
• New technology initiatives
• Report on actions taken to the Presidents
  Council
• Actions with financial implications subject to
  review by Presidents Council
• Other operational decisions subject to
  Presidents Council oversight but not review

55
Structure of Presidents Council

• Composed of all sitting Presidents of IEEE
  Societies and Councils or their designated
  representative
• Chaired by TAB VP

56
Functions of Presidents Council

• To hear report of actions taken by TAB
• To take for review and action any TAB action with
  financial implications for Societies and Councils
  by majority vote
• Rejection of TAB action requiring a 2/3 vote of
  those present
• To hear report of TAB Treasurer
• To hear and act on report of SPC (old SPARC)
• To debate and set policy on the technical
  activities of Societies and Councils within the
  purview of the Presidents Council and TAB

57
2005 SPARC PLANS

• Continue to develop/refine goals from the 2005
  issue list during the July 2005 meeting.
• Develop process for Division Titles and
  Organization Review - Assigned to SPARC by TAB
  in November 2004.
• Feedback from DDs and Presidents will be brought
  back to SPARC for review when developing process.