return links at end of file
1. Introduction
77. The University originally established its Press as an instrument for the publication of learned works, and the present Delegates informed us that they 'regard the publication of solid works of learning and research as the primary function of the Press which its other varied activities subserve, with the qualification that the publication of educational books, though less important, also has claims on them'. Turning more generally to the policies in regard to publishing, the Delegates informed us that they
regard themselves as free to publish within wide limits, provided that the books are good of their kind and so deserve the University's imprint and provided that, with the exception of Clarendon Press books where profitability is not a prime consideration, they are not expected to lose money. The use of the imprint clearly excludes certain categories of books, e.g. current fiction and popular biography.
78. The precise distinction of the varying imprints used by the Press on its publications may not be widely understood.
'Oxford, At the Clarendon Press' signifies a learned book published from Oxford and printed in the University's own printing works. (It was also used in the past on a few school books.) This is also used in appropriate cases on journals as well as books, whether published on commission or not.
'Clarendon Press, Oxford' is the imprint given to learned books published from Oxford but printed elsewhere.
'Oxford University Press' is used for educational books from the Oxford office, including college textbooks and books (such as Faculty Monographs) for which the Delegates do not take sole responsibility.
Books from London and the Branches use the imprint 'Oxford University Press, London', 'Oxford University Press, Ibadan', etc., as the case may be. Similarly 'Oxford University Press, New York'.
79. The scope of the publishing activities of the Press and the way in which the business is organized have been described in outline in Chapter 1. In this chapter we go on to consider O.U.P. in its capacity as a publishing house, under the following heads:
(i) the control over publishing decisions;
(ii) publishing 'provinces' and editorial organization;
(iii) the organization and editorial policies of the publishing departments ;
(iv) other aspects, including production; publicity and selling; and royalties and subsidies.
80. It is right that before going on to consider the policies and organization of O.U.P.'s publishing venture we should again emphasize the very high regard in which the Press is clearly held for its general standards. Recognition of the standing of O.U.P. was expressed, often in very generous terms, by many of those who gave evidence to us, whether publishers, authors, booksellers, or members of the general public from within and without the University: it was evident in the testimony of some of those who had critical comments to make as well as in that of others. One author, who has published with several publishing houses, said to us of the Clarendon Press that it 'had its own prestige and, should it ever slip, was judged by its own standards'.
81. Control over the publishing decisions of O.U.P. is a principal responsibility of the delegacy as a whole, and the Delegates stressed their insistence that this was a responsibility they could not share. But while the ultimate responsibility for every book published lies with the Delegacy, the extent to which decisions of detail are taken by the Delegates themselves varies considerably. In principle all Clarendon Press books are ruled on individually. Learned works, including reference works, and proposals for atlases from the Cartographic Department are in fact considered individually by the Delegacy; in the case of Oxford school books, however, individual titles come before the Board only if of particular interest from an academic point of view, if they are intended to start a new series, or if they are likely to involve unusual costs.
82. The control of the London list also calls, in principle, for the approval of individual titles by the Delegacy before any firm engagement to publish is entered into. A list of current proposals is submitted by the Publisher or Chief Editor about twice a term but we were told that these lists are normally considered en bloc rather than discussed item by item. Here again the treatment of books in the teaching field, and of the proposals of the specialist Children's and Music Departments, is different; and where no point of principle is involved advance approval is not required. The overseas branches are accorded a further degree of independence. Branches are free to publish without approval of individual titles, within limits laid down by the Delegacy or the Publisher (see para. 127). The position of the New York Business in relation to the Delegates is the same, although within a much wider field of publishing.
83. If such are the formal procedures of control, account has also to be taken of the work of individual Delegates in advising on proposals and influencing publication policies. We were told by the Delegates that informal contacts between individual Delegates and publishing staff in Oxford and London (and occasionally overseas) are frequent and of great value; and that most Delegates are in regular correspondence or discussion with officers of the Press about the publication of books. These informal contacts, no doubt, help to reinforce substantially the formal means of control and supervision. But the evidence as a whole suggested to us that, as might be expected, they are closer and more effective in the case of the Clarendon Press than in that of the London Business.
84. It must be recognized therefore that the supervision over the publications carrying Oxford's name by those members of the University in whose charge the Press has been put is by no means uniformly close. As might be expected, it is most rigorous at the centre, in Oxford itself, and weakest on the perimeter, where books carrying the imprint of a local branch are published without the prior approval of the Delegates. This may at first sight seem open to question, or even a potentially risky practice, since an unwise publishing venture must inevitably to some extent redound to the discredit of Oxford. The Committee does not believe, however, that to restrict more rigorously the freedom of action of the departments and branches outside Oxford would be the right course. Publishing is to some degree an art, demanding flair and creativity. Some of the smaller publishing departments of O.U.P. in this country - for example the Children's Book Section in London - owe their high reputation to the energy and originality of individuals - energy and originality which an unimaginative system of restriction could easily have frustrated. Again, the knowledge that he will be able to experiment in local publishing within the directives given him is an incentive to a branch officer, and the Committee believes that the opportunities thus offered ensure that O.U.P: attracts a more imaginative type of man than might be found if the local offices were confined merely to selling the products of the Oxford and London businesses. To some extent the Delegates, like any other publisher, have to accept the risk of occasional mistakes. The Committee thinks that this is justifiable, provided that clear general directives are given, and provided also that the control of the Delegates over publication at the highest academic level is fully maintained. It seemed to us, however, that while there is certainly no real evidence of substantive loss of control, the role played by the Delegates as a body is less active than might have been expected.
85. We examined in some detail with the Delegates and their Officers the procedures followed when a manuscript is under consideration for publication as a Clarendon Press book, and we had before us case-histories of a number of books published with the Clarendon Press imprint. We were told that there is regular and close contact between the editorial staff of the Clarendon Press and individual Delegates concerning proposals for books; a Delegate is often asked for an opinion himself concerning a manuscript or a proposal within his own field, or may be requested to suggest a suitable person to advise. When an adviser's report is received, the responsible editor will send it with a note about the book to the Delegate or Delegates concerned; such notes may be sent to all Delegates, although this is not generally done. At the meeting of the Delegacy, the Secretary or an Assistant Secretary will present the case for each title in turn, quoting as necessary from the adviser's report; at this stage any Delegate who has been concerned with a proposal will be invited to comment for the benefit of the Delegacy as a whole. We were told that it is not the practice for the papers for a Delegates' meeting, whether circulated beforehand or laid on the table, to include full reports on the books for consideration at that meeting; and that this is so not for reasons of security, but rather because of the volume of paperwork which would be involved. An individual Delegate therefore will know about a proposal only what is said at the meeting at which a decision is taken about it.
86. We understand that it is the practice of the Cambridge University Press for reports to go out in full to all members of the Syndicate (Delegacy), and we found the same practice usual at the University Presses we visited in the U.S.A. It may be noted also that the list of proposals submitted by the Publisher for publication in London, although it receives less rigorous examination than the Clarendon Press list, does nevertheless provide all the Delegates with half a page or so on every title submitted for approval. The number of Clarendon Press titles considered at meetings appears to vary between about thirty and sixty, so that any change of method would certainly involve an increased burden of paper. On the other hand, the system as it was described to us leaves us in some doubt as to the adequacy of the information upon which a Delegate (other than the Delegates most directly concerned with any particular proposal) is required to discharge his share of the responsibility for publishing decisions. Cases were indeed mentioned to us of what appeared to be books not fully up to the standards generally expected of the Clarendon Press. Some occasional misjudgements are no doubt inevitable, but the process of selection might well be further strengthened if the material for the decision came under the scrutiny of a larger number of the Delegates, even though all could not be expected to have expert knowledge in every field, or to be able to give equal time to all the reports available. We recommend, therefore, that reports in full on all the titles falling for decision at any meeting should be circulated in advance to all the Delegates, so that every Delegate will have the material For an informed judgement on each proposal for a publication with the Clarendon Press imprint.
87. We were further struck by the fact, confirmed by editorial witnesses we heard from within the Press, that the submission of a proposal to the Delegates is made by the Secretary or one of the other officers and that the editor concerned is not heard in defence of his 'child', and is indeed not present. This applies equally, we understand, to individual titles and to so major a project as a new atlas. We gathered that in at least some other Presses it is usual for the editor directly concerned to present his project personally; we wonder whether the regular participation of editors might not assist in the maintenance of editorial morale and also do much to mitigate a certain sense of the distantness from the Delegates which we noticed among those of the O.U.P. staff with whom we talked.
88. On the other hand, we do not consider that there would be any real diminution of the Delegates' present control of publishing decisions if the presentation of the 'London list' of general books were to be made a matter of report only, as is already the case with specialist books and with the publications of the New York Business and the overseas branches. If this suggestion is adopted we think there would be a case for reforming and revitalizing the present 'London Committee' of the Delegates. We were told that this Committee now consists of three Delegates appointed annually ad hoc, and that its activities are confined to one visit to the London Business during the year (and even this is apparently not made every year). We recommend that a committee should be set up consisting of a small number of Delegates whose business it should be to familiarize themselves with the policies and activities of the London publishing business, to be in a position to inform the Delegates as required about the proposals which are reported to them, and in general to act as points of contact for the London staff. Besides adding to the store of information available within the Delegacy concerning the publishing activities of the Press as a whole, the existence of this committee - whose members, we suggest, would need to visit London with greater frequency - would help to remove from the staff in London a certain sense of isolation which it seemed to us is sometimes felt in Ely House.
89. A similar committee could, we suggest, be appointed to act as a panel particularly concerned with the publications of the New York Business, which are already a matter of report only. Clearly the same closeness of contact between the committee and the editorial staff could not be maintained with New York as with London, but if certain Delegates are known to be particularly interested in the publishing activities of the New York Business, more information could be provided especially for them of proposals being considered and ideas being canvassed, and they could at least make a point of spending some time with any representatives of the New York Business visiting England (as we are happy to learn is likely to be more frequent in the future). Indeed, we believe that there may be additional advantage in making this 'North American Committee' rather than a specifically 'New York' one, bringing within its compass, that is to say, the activities of the Canadian branch in Toronto. The scale of operations and the difficulties involved in the two markets are certainly different, but their geographical contiguity may make this extension of the Committee's responsibility advantageous, particularly if, as we hope, Delegates find time to visit these branches more frequently than in the past (we touch upon this again in Chapter 4, para. 186).
90. These proposals are aimed at ensuring that the Delegacy as a whole should be as fully informed as possible of all proposals for publication with the Clarendon Press imprint at the stage at which definite decisions must be taken. The Delegacy would also have among its members a sufficient number familiar with the activities and the plans of London and New York, while the publishing staffs of those businesses would be left with the degree of freedom and responsibility which we believe they need.
91. The proposals in the preceding section are based on the present divisions between publishing provinces, and these may not be so easy to distinguish in future as they have been in the past. The present division of responsibility between Oxford, London, and the overseas branches in their areas of publishing activity has been briefly set out in Chapter 1. The Committee was left in no doubt that the Delegates had always clearly recognized the primary importance of the learned publishing carried out in Oxford in the name of the University, and that they have jealously guarded the frontiers of the publishing provinces of the Clarendon Press, even to the extent of perhaps inhibiting desirable local initiatives. It was equally plain to us that, while they might at times chafe at the restrictions placed upon them, members of the staff outside Oxford fully recognize the primacy of the learned publishing in Oxford. In our view the Delegates have been right in generally restricting the publishing of learned books and textbooks at the University level to the Clarendon Press. At the same time we found, however, evidence of flexibility in these matters where special factors called for it. In particular it seemed to us that the division between the activities of London and Oxford had required reconsideration from time to time. It is here, of course, that the dangers of overlap are greatest, and changing conditions have demanded new policies.
92. The organization of their U.K. publishing departments is a matter which has engaged the attention of the Delegates over a considerable period. It was clear to us that in recent years there has been a decided though gradual shift away from the position which formerly obtained whereby the London Business enjoyed a very considerable measure of independence, and that the Delegates are moving towards a greater concentration of their non-specialist publishing in Oxford. The background to this policy includes the fact that an increasing part of the output of the London Business now falls under the head of educational publishing and that the likelihood of overlap between the Oxford and London lists is therefore becoming greater than in the past. Behind this again lies a certain change in the composition and the demands of the book-buying public. The considerable expansion of higher education has produced a demand for books at what may perhaps be termed a 'popular learned' level (and of this college textbooks form a particular genre), while at the same time the rewards of 'general trade publishing' may be declining. In the past the London Publisher could aim consciously at a particular kind of 'generally cultivated reader', who could be presumed to have a wide if perhaps somewhat amateurish knowledge of, and interest in, many subjects. It seems that such readers are becoming rarer, and the buyer of books today is likely to be at once more professional in his attitude to what he reads -often in the sense that he is or has been a student of the subject at degree level - and at the same time to lack the kind of general cultural background which could formerly be taken for granted. Many 'general trade books' are taking on a more academic, if not pedagogic, tinge. Books originally intended for the general reader may often now be found in use as textbooks, and may in consequence require to be provided with a kind of scholarly commentary which they were previously not thought to need. Conversely, books first published for the highest level of academic audience may come to be prescribed for study in universities and schools, and must therefore be provided in large numbers and cheap format; this is perhaps particularly likely to be the case with scientific publications. In the long run, then, the distinction between 'learned' and 'general' books may become very blurred or even disappear altogether, and at the same time it may become desirable that editors experienced in handling scholarly works at the highest level should be engaged also with books of greater popular appeal.
93. These changes may make it appropriate to treat as one the 'Oxford and London' publishing lists, and may in turn imply some adjustments in the editorial staffs of the two businesses. Since it would be neither possible nor desirable to move the Clarendon Press editors to London, this would in fact involve the transfer of some of the London editorial staff to Oxford. It was emphasized to us that this will be a gradual operation, and that the details are as yet far from certain; the Delegates, we were told, 'were clear that some move towards a greater unification of the publishing enterprise for Oxford and London would be beneficial and ought to do away with a certain measure of wasteful duplication, but they had not reached a firm decision on the further course they would take'. We were told that it was likely that in any event a considerable volume of publishing would still be left to the London office: specialist publishing (for example, Music) would in all probability remain there, as would the publishing of English Language Teaching and Tutorial Books. The functions of the London office as the co-ordinator of overseas publishing by all branches would also remain, probably in the shape of the proposed new 'Branches Division' (see para. 98 below).
94. The Secretary, while making every reservation about the uncertainties of the position, outlined for us the kind of organization which he thought might eventually emerge. He envisaged an Oxford Publishing Department divided into three sections: Science and Technology; Arts and Social Sciences at the highest level; Educational, including college textbooks and school books. The recent move of the London technology list to Oxford was, he told us, a step towards the building up of the first section. The second section might eventually take over all or most of the present London general list. The third section might, he thought, also come to take over children's books from London. The Secretary emphasized again to us that the pace of these changes would be slow, being governed both by considerations of the personnel available and the rate at which accommodation could be provided for editorial staff at Oxford.
95. This in our view is a matter of the highest importance to the future of the Press, and one which raises complex and delicate issues. The scheme sketched for us by the Secretary has obvious organizational merits, while the concentration of O.U.P.'s non-specialist publishing in Oxford is logical in principle. On the other hand, there are a number of possible drawbacks to the scheme. The first is the danger inherent in still further separating the editorial from the sales and promotion department. It is a maxim in publishing that the editor of a book needs to be involved both early and continuously in its promotion; and it therefore follows that if the sales and promotion staff are to remain in London, as they probably must, it will be vital to ensure close and constant contact between London and Oxford. The second drawback is the loss in the general publishing field of the stimulating contacts and competition with rival publishing firms which are inevitably encountered in London. This deep involvement of the London office in the world of general publishing in London has, we think, been a very real source of strength to O.U.P. We therefore believe that if responsibility for general publishing were to pass entirely from London to Oxford, material prejudice might result to O.U.P. A third and, we think, even greater drawback is that something vital might be lost to O.U.P. if the opportunity for individual initiative in general publishing were removed from those in the London Office. It is undeniable that the present position of O.U.P. as a great international publishing house is in part due to the energy and enterprise of successive London Publishers. There is accordingly a risk that if London were to be left without its own initiative in general publishing, the Press might be deprived of a stimulus and enterprise which have meant much to it in the past. Finally, we feel concern that, at any rate in the short term, some damage may be done to the morale of the London Business, the staff and organization of which we found impressive; and that some losses of key staff might occur.
96. Clearly, in whatever decisions are ultimately arrived at, a number of separate considerations have to be taken into account and a balance struck between them. The problems are particularly difficult and delicate, since it is a question of weighing the tangible advantages of organizational convenience against the intangible advantages of preserving within O.U.P. a vital spirit of initiative which has characterized the London Business and without which the Press would scarcely have achieved its present position as a worldwide international publishing business. We do not think that these are matters on which we can properly make recommendations, especially since we are informed that so much is still tentative; nor do we wish to suggest that the Delegates themselves are unaware of the problems involved. Indeed, they informed us that it was largely with these problems in mind that they had decided to form a Publishing Businesses Management Committee to provide a forum for the examination of common or general problems by the senior staff of Oxford and London. Nevertheless, we feel bound to underline our concern at some of the possible implications of the transfer of general publishing from London to Oxford. We also wish to record our view that, when deciding these matters, the Delegates should have full regard to the fact that the continuing success of a business and its ability to attract succeeding generations of staff of high quality depends as much on its spirit of initiative and enterprise as on the structure of its organization.
97. The Publishing Businesses Management Committee (now known as the 'Joint Management Committee') first met in April 1968, and comprises the Secretary, Deputy Secretary, Assistant Secretary, and Group Accountant from Oxford, and the Publisher and Deputy Publisher and three other senior members of the London staff. (These last five make up the London Business 'Management Committee' - see para. 169 below.) More recently it has been agreed that the New York Business should arrange for one of its senior staff to attend whenever possible. The Committee meets once a month, in Oxford and London alternately, under the chairmanship of the Secretary, and deals with a wide range of management problems which affect the publishing businesses. Matters on its agenda might include, for example, accounting and financial relationships, the allocation of overheads between Businesses, the deployment of capital, and profit forecasting; sales conferences and advertising; and publishing proposals which might be thought to belong in more than one publishing province. These and similar matters have, we were told, come before the Committee in its first months of existence and the Delegates believe its usefulness will increase. The American Business has been represented at about one-third of its meetings. From what we have been told it is clear that the Management Committee has already proved a success. We hope, however, that from being a body which deals mainly with important matters to do with the administration and detailed organization of the Press it will also concern itself with questions of Group policy, such as the relative position of the Press in those areas of publishing in which it is in the lead or is lagging behind its principal competitors, and formulate recommendations to the Finance Committee about the priorities to be attached to the future employment of its resources, both of finance and manpower.
98. Another proposal which has as its objective an improvement of the co-ordination between different areas of the Press's activity is that for the establishment of a 'Branches Division' in London. This would, under the Publisher, be a medium for the exchange of views between the branches and for the pooling of their experience. A Branch Manager who sees a potential local demand for a particular type of textbook, for example, could learn what has been found practical elsewhere and might even be able to adapt to his own needs a book originally designed for a quite different area of the world. This would not only result in a conservation of effort (and money) but would also help to avoid the possibility that O.U.P.'s list might contain two or more books virtually on the same subject produced for different Branches. The Branches Division may further facilitate the sale of a book produced by one branch in all or most of the other branches, and also assist in the production of textbooks or courses designed for sale in several different geographical areas. The Branches Division could also arrange for printing for the branches to be done wherever the cheapest rate can be found; an example of this is the initiation by London of the Asian Reprint Series designed to produce in the cheapest available market reprints from the Oxford and London lists for sale in the branch areas generally. Perhaps the most important of its duties, however, would be to consolidate knowledge about the financial problems and needs of the different branches and to make this available. At the moment there is a Branches Office in London which is performing some of these functions, but the proposal is that it should be considerably enlarged and strengthened (see also Chapter 4, para. 175). If this development is successful, the Press will have a valuable organ for the dissemination of ideas originating in different sections of the business in this country, and for ensuring that Branch Managers are kept up to date with the policies of the Delegates. It is conceivable that in due course the Delegates might wish to set up a Branches Sub-Committee, parallel to the London and North American Sub-Committees adumbrated above.
99. The recent trend towards much bigger publishing businesses raises new problems for O U.P., as for other publishers. Traditionally the business of publishing has tended to be a comparatively small-scale enterprise in commercial terms, limited by what could reasonably be compassed by one man's mind, the view being taken that one could not publish effectively in an area where one could achieve no rapport with an author and his subject. The recent developments in this field pose particular problems in regard to the editorial organization within a publishing firm. The Delegates were reluctant to indicate an optimum size for a publishing unit, but assured us there was no present intention to depart from the tradition of small editorial groups within the Press as a whole. The London Publisher argued that, in present-day publishing, size was vital in all spheres except the editorial: here 'separate editorial units were of great importance, the ideal being small editorial teams each dealing with not more than fifty books a year.' He believed it was possible both to retain able editorial staff and to ensure initiative and growth in the business if publishing decisions were decentralized within a strictly centralized finance and policy control. We accept this view and feel also that it is not impossible to combine greater editorial independence with greater knowledge among the Delegates of what is planned, so giving the opportunity for closer contacts and more guidance. This would meet the further requirement which is special to a University Press, the reflection of the University interest, in varying degree, in all its output.
100. To achieve a somewhat greater degree of decentralization of responsibility - especially necessary if more of its editorial work is concentrated in Oxford - it will be necessary to increase the editorial strength of the Press. We adduce elsewhere in our report reasons why this is desirable on other grounds.
101. We have already referred to the several facets of the Secretary's post and to the fact that the Delegates have now recognized a need to separate his office from that of head of the Learned Publishing Department. But our strong impression is that a measure of under-staffing has been apparent at various levels on both the editorial and other sides of the business. The present Deputy Secretary - who also has considerable general and administrative functions - told us that he was editorially responsible for some sixty-five of the Clarendon Press titles currently in all stages of production and pointed out the difficulty of finding time to train additional editorial staff if these were available. Again a staff of two (and one field editor) to cover the whole field of science publishing (the level of staffing at the start of our Inquiry - see para. 113 below) must have imposed an impossible task on those concerned, quite apart from the question (treated below, see para. 111) of the adequacy of the O.U.P. effort in this area of knowledge. We believe that the pressure on the small editorial staff of the Clarendon Press must have contributed to the tenuousness of communication with the Oxford faculties and have been partly responsible for the falling off in editorial standards which some witnesses claimed to have detected in recent years. We were also told that the burden of detailed work in the preparation of copy was constantly being moved back from the printer's staff on to the editor and author, and this too increases the pressure on the editorial staff.
102. In this connection, the Committee feels bound to emphasize that publishing is not a repetitive process, that each new book presents a fresh problem of production and promotion, and that each author is an individual, forgetful sometimes that he is one of many engaging the mind of his publisher at any one time. This truism needs constantly to be balanced against the need for greater efficiency in the repetitive operations of dispatch, stock-holding, accountancy, and international marketing which have demanded larger rather than smaller publishing businesses. The Press, having both in Oxford and in London a very large volume of publication, is subject to the attendant dangers; and the Committee had its attention called to several instances in which an author had justifiably complained that he felt lost in a large organization, that his suggestions and requests had not received proper consideration, and that, in short, he was left to feel unquestioningly content just to be published by Oxford. Publishing is a business which can least of any afford to lose the personal touch, and if this is to be maintained it is vital that editors, who deal with authors at all stages of a book's progress, should not be overburdened with work.
103. We were informed that in recent years it had not been easy for the Clarendon Press to recruit editorial staff of the required calibre, but that the situation was now less difficult. We were also told that a major limiting factor had been the very constricted accommodation available to the publishing offices at Walton Street but that the completion of the current extensions to the Printing Works would free more space for editorial staff. We realize that there cannot be said to be any absolute optimum number of books which an editor can reasonably handle: this must depend on personal factors, on the way subordinate staff and service functions are organized, and on the subjects he covers. (We were informed that school books need closer editing than science books, which are themselves more demanding of time than arts subjects.) We are, however, clear, as we have said, that the Clarendon Press has been operating on too small a staff. We consider that it would be an entirely proper way for O.U.P. to contribute to the advancement of learning if it were decided that the Clarendon Press at least should be staffed on a more generous basis than might be adopted on purely commercial grounds. While the immediate effect would be to increase the initial expense of publishing learned works we feel sure that in the long term an increase in the staff, giving a wider range of subjects, would prove profitable.
104. The editorial staff of the Clarendon Press, including sub-editors, has risen in the last five years from forty-nine to sixty-nine. The Secretary to the Delegates expressed the view that this increase, with the change in the senior management arrangements of the Clarendon Press and the move into the new offices in space vacated by the Printer, would take a little time to absorb and any further increase at present would not be easy to digest. The fact remains that a large number of the editorial staff are in the Education and - particularly - the Dictionary and Reference Book Departments. Those in the 'Editorial Department' - responsible for the essential core of the Clarendon Press output - number fewer than twenty all told. We therefore recommend that the Delegates should further increase the staff of the Editorial Department of the Clarendon Press as soon as conditions permit.
(a) The Clarendon Press
1O5. The editorial organization of the Oxford Publishing Department is shown in Figure 2 on page 52 (below). Table I below indicates the composition of the 'Clarendon Press' and 'Oxford' lists.
TABLE I
Composition
of the 'Clarendon Press' and 'Oxford' lists
| Classification | Total titles in print 1969 | New titles published 1967/8 (y.e. 31/3) | New titles published 1968/9 (y.e. 31/3) |
| 'Academic' (excluding Science) | 900 | 160 | 161 |
| Science | 373 | 24 | 38 |
| Reference | 83 | 2 | 6 |
| Cartographic | 71 | 1 | 0 |
| School books | 984 | 72 | 67 |
| Paperback and College textbooks | 232 | 6 | 40 |
| Other (including University publishing) | 144 | 17 | 14 |
| TOTALS | 2,787 | 282 | 326 |
106. The pre-eminence of the learned publishing wiil make it still of particular concern to the Secretary even though the Deputy Secretary has now been appointed as Oxford Publisher and head of the Clarendon Press. The present Assistant Secretary is the head of the Education Department. The editorial staff, who have responsibility for the publication of books in their respective fields, and who deal directly with authors, numbered twelve (including the three senior officers) at the start of our inquiry and now number sixteen, excluding such specialists as lexicographers and cartographers. Of these sixteen, seven are concerned with the arts, three with science, and six in the Education Department; in short, they cover the general run of the learned books of the Press. In addition, there are now three 'field editors', two for science and one for arts, whose function is to make visits to the Universities in the United Kingdom and to keep the 'office' editors informed of interesting projects and potential authors.
107. The section dealing with Dictionaries and Reference Books is unusual in a publishing business in that many of those engaged in compiling or writing the books are in the full employment of the Press as, for example, are all the staffs of the Oxford English and Latin Dictionaries. Dictionaries and reference books form such an important and specialized part of Clarendon Press publishing that, with one or two exceptions, they have for some years been the responsibility of the Deputy Secretary.
108. The Delegates' general publishing policy in the learned field is to consider favourably any proposal for a work of true academic merit. They make exception, however, of source material, holding that there is virtually no limit to the amount of well-edited material which might be offered them in this area, with a very great potential call on the resources available for learned publishing. With rare exceptions, therefore, they consider this type of material is best left to specialist learned societies. The aim of the Delegates was described to us by the Deputy Secretary as being the application of Oxford standards on a world-wide basis. They did not regard themselves as being bound by any limits in the scope of Oxford scholarship but were nevertheless influenced in their learned publishing by Oxford's traditional strengths. They recognize, however, a responsibility to meet the specific publishing needs of the faculties in regard both to the provision of reprints of certain works and to keeping in print specific texts. The absence of any formal liaison arrangements - see Chapter 5, Sect. 6 - may have led to misunderstandings in this connection.
109. The Delegates emphasized to us that they regarded themselves as learned publishers to the world at large. They agreed that the Royal Commission of 1922 had recommended that
before making any contribution to the general funds of the two Universities, the Delegates and Syndics of the two University Presses should provide specially for the publication of works by members of the University which are of literary or scientific value;
but they considered their first duty to be to the world of learning as a whole and they told us that 'books by members of the University are given no special preference in the sense that the Delegates would not think it right to accept a lower standard from senior members than from authors not working in Oxford.' (The justification for including 'Oxford' in the title of a book or a series 'is either that it represents to an unusual degree an "Oxford" standard or that the work in question may be expected to have lasting if not permanent value'.) As for the recruitment of authors within Oxford, the Delegates have established in collaboration with the faculties concerned a number of Oxford Monograph Series comprising works which are based almost solely on Oxford theses recommended to the Delegates by the editorial board of each series. lnitially these were financed in part by the Committee for Advanced Studies, but in 1965 the Oxford Historical Monographs was replaced by the Oxford Historical Series, a recognition of the fact that in some subjects at least it was no longer true that these could not be published on normal commercial terms. We further understand that the Delegates have very recently agreed to take over full responsibility for the various Faculty Monograph Series with an increase in the permitted length; and now that the Press will be financing the series a royalty will be paid wherever a book is thought likely to sell enough copies to warrant this.
110. We heard of an impression among some scholars - which we were satisfied is quite unfounded - that it 'is easier for a non-Oxford man to pass through the eye of a needle than to get past the secretary to the Secretary to the Delegates'. On the other hand, it was represented to us that the Press made too little use of the work of academic Oxford, and we had the impression that the officers had sometimes been over-scrupulous in avoiding any suggestion of badgering potential authors in Oxford to produce books for them. The Secretary told us, as a matter of fact, that almost half the members of the History Faculty had published, were due to publish, or were negotiating to publish with O.U.P. Nevertheless, we consider that officers of the Press may have been a little diffident about seeking to recruit authors in Oxford -as instanced by the prohibition (very recently rescinded) on the employment of field editors in the University. On the more general plane also, there has been some failure of public relations. The representatives of the General Board felt strongly that there was a need for a clear statement to members of Congregation setting out Clarendon Press policy regarding learned publishing, and the Delegates agreed that something of this nature would be useful. The booklet Authors and the Oxford University Press first circulated in 1967 to new members of Congregation and to other prospective authors, though excellently produced, falls short of what is required as a policy statement and is not, in our view, sufficiently detailed or direct as an invitation to potential authors.
111. Science Publishing. The science publishing of O.U.P. is a major issue. We received much evidence expressing concern over this and were several times told that O.U.P. gave the impression of not regarding this field of learning as of serious importance. At the start of our inquiry the editorial staff available to cover the biological sciences, natural science, and mathematics, comprised one editor (by training a geologist), an assistant editor (a biochemist), and one field editor; a strength, as is obvious, utterly inadequate to provide even the minimum editorial contacts and coverage in the whole field of 'science'. Again, it is striking that the sales value of all O.U.P. science books in 1967 amounted to barely half that of the sales of children's books. It is not therefore surprising that the 'flavour' of the Clarendon Press (as reflected, for example, in The Periodical) is that of a classical and literary publishing house: and this fails to reflect at all correctly the image of the present-day University. With the worldwide influence of the Press this situation is directly damaging to Oxford science, which - in one of its many forms - occupies the energies of two out of every five members of the academic staff of the University.
112. Scientific books have a very rapidly expanding world market. There is a great demand for good ones and the various branches of science are expanding so quickly that there is a continuing discovery of new material for new books. Because of the swiftly moving nature of these subjects, books may have a relatively short life, so that speed of publication is of great importance. Moreover, if a science book is successful an entirely revised edition may well be called for within a few years so that the traditional maintenance of a strong 'back-list' of older works retained in print - one of O.U.P.'s great strengths in the arts - can be a positive disincentive to an author. There is ample room in the fields of monographs and textbooks at the growth-points of science for the faster, non-traditional methods of book production. Finally, it is clear that successful science publishing is profitable. If, therefore, O.U.P. is to compete with its rivals in this field for the best work of scientists in Oxford and elsewhere a new and more aggressive approach will be called for.
113. The Delegates informed us that they 'have already taken a number of steps to strengthen their scientific publishing and it is their policy to encourage this in the expectation that present turnover can be doubled'. We welcome this, and it was indeed clear to us that great efforts are now being made by the still very limited editorial staff. O.U.P. has, of course, been responsible for the publication of some very distinguished science books; but a considerably greater effort will have to be devoted to solving the special problems of science publishing if O.U.P. is to make up lost ground. We suggest that the Delegates should, first, make public their firm intention to gain a place in the forefront of science publishing. In view of the enormous scope of these subjects, an initial concentration on certain limited areas - equally publicly avowed - may be necessary to produce a significant impact. (And without that impact the best authors and the influential series editors will go elsewhere.) Secondly, we believe that the technical problems peculiar to science publishing offer no special difficulty on two basic conditions: the existence of a fully adequate editorial staff with sufficient standing and backing from the Delegates; and speed of production. (Since the Committee's appointment the science staff has been augmented and now comprises the Science Editor, two Assistant Editors, and one full-time and one part-time Field Editor.) The expansion we would wish to see may involve a considerable outlay; and we appreciate that it will not be achieved all at once.
114. We recommend, accordingly, that the Delegates should publicly state their intention to expand Clarendon Press science publishing and should give a large measure of priority to the steps necessary to build this up to a level commensurate both with O.U.P.'s own standing as a publisher, and with Oxford's standing in the world of science.
115. Textbooks. The Delegates have been directly involved in the publication of school books for over 100 years. They described their policy as having been to issue
books which are scholarly in their approach and which promote the development of sound methods in education... Where adequate textbooks already exist it is not the Delegates' policy to add to their number merely in order to secure part of the market; equally the publication of certain types of material - revision notes, test-papers, books geared narrowly to a particular examination paper, would clearly be inconsistent with their policy. Because University standards and methods had, and still have, most relevance to the upper Grammar School, much of the Press publishing in this field has been for the upper forms of schools: but, as some of the most important and potentially profitable developments have taken place recently in publishing for younger children, the department is now publishing for all levels.
More recently, with the growth of Universities there has been a corresponding growth in demand for course books at University level. This development has been at its strongest in America and O.U.P.'s initial move into the college textbook field was made through the New York Business. The Delegates felt that it would be illogical to leave a gap between their school books and other more advanced textbooks and academic publications and in recent years a number of college textbooks have been published in the Oxford Paperbacks series. Other books, particularly in the sciences, are published simultaneously in hardback and paperback editions to meet the college textbook market. At Oxford this new direction of O.U.P. activity comes under a recently established College Textbook Editor. (Similarly in a number of territories overseas the Branches are finding it necessary to aim their publishing at later stages of education, as the national governments enter the field of primary school publishing.) We would record that in our view both the older-established school book and the newer college textbook publishing fall within what we believe to be an entirely proper province of a University Press - that is, the general field of education at every level.
116. Reference Books. The dictionaries, companions, and 'Oxford' anthologies are the bedrock of the O.U.P.'s 'learned' list. They are in constant demand and taken together probably make the largest single contribution to the reputation of the O.U.P. and to its current profits. The principal works - the Oxford English Dictionary and the Dictionary of National Biography have been most successful long-term investments. (Unlike O.E.D., the Dictionary of National Biography was not originated by O.U.P. but was given to the University by the family of its founder in 1917. The sixth decennial supplement is now in course of preparation and the Delegates are prepared to proceed with a new edition of the whole if the financial problems can be solved.) Undertaken some eighty years ago they remain standard authoritative works and still yield steady profits. It has, however, been represented to us that, just as even the best mines are eventually worked out, it is now of the first importance to the Press that new major projects of similar authority and excellence should be initiated so that a generation hence the O.U.P. may reap from them in reputation and in profit the benefits it has gained from their predecessors. To plan and carry out such a work is a major task requiring a high degree of expertise and much time and money. To quote two examples we were given: the expenditure, excluding overheads, on the Latin Dictionary and the O.E.D. Supplement together exceeds £200,000 and the production of a new Dictionary of National Biography has been estimated to call for the expenditure of £1 million before any return can be expected from it. The smaller general and specialized dictionaries stem directly from the major ones and produce high-volume sales. They are also an important vehicle For the spread of the 'Oxford' and O.U.P. image and being 'popular' reference books it is important for that image that in their class they too should continue to be regarded as the best available and so be kept up to date.
117. The Cartographic Department publishes not only for the universities and schools but also for the general public and commercial markets; and one of its principal targets is North America, where the demand for sophisticated atlases is the greatest. Most of the production processes, except the actual printing, are carried out in the department, which is in the forefront in the use of new cartographic techniques. The head of the department is responsible directly to the Secretary and commercial projects involving any considerable outlay are undertaken only after consultation with him. The general policy of the Delegates for the Cartographic Department aims at 'the production of maps, map supplements, and atlases distinguished by the introduction of advances in concept, design and technique'. As with the dictionaries, there is scope for much derivative use of the stock of material accumulated in the course of producing a new major atlas and the Department produces approximately one new work a year and has a list of about twenty O.U.P. atlases in print. At the same time useful returns are derived from maps and map supplements produced in quantity for commercial sale, as, for example, those provided to airlines, and from reproduction rights. The technical contributions of O.U.P. through the Department's development work is discussed later (see para. 137 below).
(b) The London Business
118. The organization of the editorial departments of the London Business is shown in Figure 3 (below) and the composition of the London list in Table II on p. 60. These show that the London Business is, by itself, a major publishing house, although its primary function remains that of stocking, promoting, and selling the full O.U.P. list from Oxford, London, and overseas. (Sales and Publicity are discussed in Sect. 6 of this chapter.) Quite apart from its general list the London Business has built up a leading position as a publisher of English Language teaching books, of music and of children's books; and it is at the same time responsible for all the overseas publishing of the Press excepting only that of the New York Business.
119. Since the wide field covered by the London Business lacks the unifying concept of learned publishing which applies in Oxford, its publishing policies need to be described in rather more detail. The general trade publishing, the 'House Books Department', explores all publishing fields except new fiction and prose drama, with the aim of maintaining a competitive general list. All these books are expected to be profitable, and also to maintain a standard of quality not inferior in their field to that set for the Clarendon Press. Works of biography, autobiography, and to a small extent travel and contemporary literary criticism are sought after; the list is particularly strong in international affairs. As with the Oxford publishing department, the reference books published from London - e.g. the Oxford Dictionary of Quotations - are a source of commercial strength.
TABLE II
O.U.P. London - List and Output
Breakdown by Departments; years to 31 March
| Books in list, 1969* | New titles, 1967/8 | New titles, 1968/9 | Notes | |
| General books | ||||
| General List | 920 | 74 | 71 | |
| Classics | 380 | 10 | 7 | |
| Paperbacks | 106 | 32 | 11 | 31 in following 6 months |
| Commission | 867 | 42 | 45 | |
| Specialist books | ||||
| Bibles, Prayers, Hymns, Bindings | 1,185 | 22 | 15 | |
| Service books | 79 | 1 | 1 | |
| Medical | 78 | 4 | 10 | |
| Technical | 10 | 0 | transferred to Oxford | |
| ELT and Tutorial books | 1,046 | 57 | 90 | includes 24 audio-visual items |
| Children's books | 466 | 40 | 41 | |
| Music books** | 101 | 6 | 12 | |
| lmported books | ||||
| O.U.P., New York | 644 | 85 | 134 | |
| O.U.P branches | 1,008 | 146 | 92 | |
| Other publishers | 5,248 | 703 | 595 | |
| TOTALS | 12,128 | 1,232 | 1,124 |
* Where a book is produced in more than one format or binding each is counted separately. A number of books are put out of print each year.
** In addition, 3,450 titles of sheet music are listed (1968:138, 1969:131). A single title may consist of several 'lines' - e.g. separate parts for two or more voices.
120. In more specialized areas, the Publisher recognizes a duty to maintain the best possible list of texts of the Classics in suitable inexpensive formats. The 'World's Classics', 'Oxford Standard Authors', and 'Oxford English Novels' series avoid heavily annotated editions, which remain the province of the Clarendon Press: many of the texts derive from the Clarendon Press 'Oxford English Texts'. 'Oxford Paperbacks' (published from Oxford as well as from London) provide a reprint series for serious titles withdrawn from the general and Music lists (and also the Oxford list), though an increasing number of titles in this series are new work specially commissioned or were first published elsewhere. The shape of the general publishing venture, however, is not static: an attempt to apply the principles of the 'Classics' series to translations from French and Italian proved unprofitable and was abandoned; but the publication of two or three volumes of new poetry each season, initially sanctioned by the Delegates as an experiment, has proved self-supporting and become an established feature of the London list.
121. Medical and Technical. The London Business has developed a substantial list of standard medical textbooks intended to meet the practical needs of medical students and the medical profession. The backbone of the list is a small number of well-established textbooks for students periodically revised and redesigned. This list is occasionally added to and is supplemented by monographs and books for general practitioners and specialists. A high proportion of medical books are exported.
The London Business also began a few years ago to develop a list in the promising field of technology. Despite a certain lack of working capital, it succeeded in building up a list of 80-90 titles, including books at the student and postgraduate level and at the practical level. This list did not include advanced monographs or books of pure science which fall within the Clarendon Press field; and now the whole London technology list has been transferred to Oxford where it comes under the Science Editor.
122. Children's Books. O.U.P.'s original entry into this field was a historical accident (stemming from the acquisition of a 'juvenile' list - along with a list of elementary school books). The whole of the original list has been sold and the present policy represents a complete change from that followed up to 1946. The Department now aims to publish only a few books (about thirty a year) but of as high standard as possible, concentrating on selecting and building up first-class authors and illustrators in this specialized field. In this way there has developed a truly international list from which works have been translated into many languages, and attracting authors and illustrators from many countries. (It is one of the two exceptions to O.U.P.'s general avoidance of publishing current fiction - the second being African literature.) This section of O.U.P.'s many-sided venture may seem the least obviously appropriate to engage the energies of O.U.P.: but it was put to us that the justification was twofold - first, that the work now published from the Children's Book Department was among the very best of its kind, and, secondly, that imaginative books for children had a fundamental place in education. These arguments are valid, but only so long as the present very high standards are maintained.
123. Music. The Music Department is the second largest music publisher in the United Kingdom. The Department is one of the only two firms in this country which publish sheet music, including full performance scores, as well as books; and where appropriate it links the publication of critical text, score, and records or tapes. The Music list includes books of reference, books for children, educational textbooks, criticism, works on techniques for executants, and - as in the multi-volume New Oxford History of Music - certain scholarly works which the Department is particularly well equipped to handle. It is the policy to publish exclusively all the work of certain composers: examples are Vaughan Williams, William Walton, Alan Rawsthorne, and Gordon Crosse; and in such cases the officers of the Music Department provide the full range of services of the composer's agent.
124. Bibles. Through the Bible Department the Press issues a wide range of Bibles, Prayer Books, and Hymn Books. With the Queen's Printer and the Cambridge University Press it shares the exclusive 'privilege' (Oxford derives its right from its Royal Charter of 1636) of printing in England the Authorized Version of the Bible and The Book of Common Prayer. Its sales of Bibles are worldwide and it accepts a duty also to provide for the requirements of the Anglican and Presbyterian Churches throughout the world in Service Books and Hymn Books. The English Hymnal and Songs of Praise, both published by the Press, also form the source of material included in Service Books for use in schools, in which a small separate department of the London Business specializes. The 'privilege' has in the past provided the Press with a considerable endowment and the current publication, jointly with the Cambridge University Press, of The New English Bible may be expected to contribute significant profits. But Bibles and Service Books are sold at very low prices and, contrary to popular supposition the Bible Department is today the least profitable of all the Divisions of the Press.
125. English Language Teaching. One major area of the London Business's publishing operations is that of overseas education. Its organization for publishing educational textbooks for sale in overseas markets was always based on books for the teaching of English as a second language and in 1966 this organization was split into two departments, one of which concentrates solely on English language teaching. This is an area in which the O.U.P. has been active since 1926 and on which London has increasingly concentrated in recent years, especially in the under-developed countries but also latterly to a growing extent in Europe. Where there is no tradition of written language, English may provide the medium for much general instruction and it has thus been the policy to provide books on all subjects of the school curriculum written in simple English. From this has developed a need for specialized dictionaries and the English Language Teaching Department maintains close links with those doing research in linguistics at home and in its overseas markets. In addition, the emergence of English as a world language for many purposes has led to the preparation of specialized courses for adults in developed countries, accompanied by tape-recordings and visual aids. Tribute was paid by one of the Press's principal competitors to the liveliness and extremely high standard of O.U.P.'s work in this field of publishing, and we were left by other authorities in no doubt of the national importance attaching to this. The Department's most successful book, for example, sells a quarter of a million copies a year.
126. Tutorial Books. This Department aims to fill the need for books for secondary and higher education suited to the requirements of overseas countries which do not individually provide a sufficient market for a local edition. While there is scope for development here, the London Business has deliberately concentrated its main effort in the field of overseas education on English language teaching, except where publishing is undertaken by the branches themselves.
127. Overseas Branches. The Branches are now the particular responsibility of the Publisher himself. The branch offices, in twenty-one centres, employ nearly 580 staff of whom over 200 are in the three branches in India. The primary purpose of the overseas branches is the efficient distribution of the books published in Oxford and London, and without the volume of business arising from the London books in particular the branches overseas would not have been commercially viable. But subject to the primacy of this objective, to their being self-supporting, and to their publications not drawing unduly on their resources, local branches are encouraged to publish particularly in the school educational field; and valuable work has been done in many local languages. Local pressures in many areas are, however, forcing O.U.P. branches to concentrate increasingly in the field of secondary education. As to college textbooks, these are usually reserved to the Education Department at Oxford except for books on local topics. Highly sophisticated Oxford English courses for individual branch areas - e.g. Uganda, Ethiopia - and similarly specialized dictionaries have been developed, with expert advice from London and Oxford where required. In African countries also the branches are encouraged to publish scholarly versions of traditional and oral material, although these are likely to fall chiefly in the field of the Clarendon Press. Branches are also free to sell their own publications in other branch areas - an O.U.P. India book on Botany and a Hong Kong English course both selling in Nigeria were instanced to us by the Manager of the Nigerian Branch: but the overseas managers are required to base commercial publishing decisions on an estimate of local sales in their own branch area only. The present cross-selling arranged ad hoc between branches stands to benefit from the closer planning which will be possible with the establishment of a Branches Division.
128. Commission and 'imported' Books. O.U.P. London publishes a considerable list of titles not initiated in its own editorial offices. At home the London Business publishes 'on commission' for the Royal Institute of International Affairs, the Institute of Race Relations, the School of Oriental and African Studies, and the International African Institute. It also handles the publications of the British Academy and books from the Universities of Hull, Durham, and Glasgow. (Some of this work is done on standard royalty terms, though most is fully paid for by the sponsoring body.) These books make up some 6 per cent of the titles in the full O.U.P. list.
129. Table II on page 60 shows the very substantial part of the list made up of 'imported' books. The New York Business and the branches overseas contribute some 23 per cent of the list and books from eight American and six other overseas University Presses account for another 30 per cent. In the Spring list of 1967 new titles from other publishers ran to over a hundred titles and more recently a separate list has been issued. It has for many years been O.U.P. policy to assist other University Presses overseas by stocking and distributing their books in the British market and sometimes in Europe. Many of these are distinguished works but the fact remains that they are in no way subject to the editorial discretion of O.U.P. We appreciate the motives which led the Delegates in the past to provide this service, and we were told by present Delegates that they would be sorry to see any change, but we are nevertheless quite satisfied that their decision not to enter into such arrangements with any further overseas University Presses is a correct one. For rather similar reasons the Delegates have decided to limit commission publishing as far as may be to learned bodies, and this also seems to us to be correct.
(c)The New York Business
130. O.U.P. (New York), more than any other section, exemplifies the paradox of O.U.P.'s publishing. On the one hand, like the smallest of the overseas branches, its declared primary function is the stocking and sale in the United States of books from Oxford and London; while on the other, it ranks in America as a distinguished indigenous publishing house. In view of the experience of the Cambridge University Press we cannot accept that it is always essential to publish indigenously in order to sell effectively in the American (or other overseas) market. However, given the original decision to allow Branches the right to publish on their own account, the present pattern of O.U.P. (N. Y.) is easy enough to understand. The American market is such as to require a major selling undertaking: O.U.P. (N.Y.) has a large annual turnover on English books and the publishing base provided by this undertaking is sufficient to support a varied and valuable list of local publications. Moreover, American book publishing, particularly in the fast-expanding field of education, has been the seed-bed of much new development in recent years and O.U.P. has benefited from having a practising subsidiary at the centre of this activity.
131. Table III below indicates the relative contribution of the various parts of the New York Business and also the distribution between Oxford and London books and local publications. O.U.P.'s first entry into college textbook publishing was made by New York, and, while the bulk of the learned books come from Oxford, sales of college textbooks remain very largely local publications. We were told that differences in the respective educational systems made it difficult to sell one book in both the home and American markets even when adapted. The general publishing of O.U.P. (N.Y.) includes a successful medical list but no longer covers, as it once did, children's books. (O.U.P. (N.Y.) does not even publish the American editions of the children's books from London.)
TABLE IIIA
New York Business List
| Titles in list 1969 | New titles,1967/8 | New titles,1968/9 | |
| Bible Dept. | 303 | - | - |
| General trade | 992 | 81 | 70 |
| Paperback | 372 | 79 | 47 |
| College | 483 | 55 | 62 |
| Medical | 97 | 12 | 17 |
| Religious | 136 | 10 | 10 |
| TOTALS | 2,383 | 237* | 206* |
| Plus O.U.P. Inc. scholarly imports | 4,695 | 348 | 357 |
| GRAND TOTALS | 7,078 | 585 | 563 |
* Of these, 1967/8:141 American, 96 imported; 1968/9: 137 American, 69 imported.
TABLE IIIB
New York Business: Proportion (percentages) of Sales by Editorial Origin (1967/8)
| New York | Local edition of books originated in U.K. | Imports | Total | |
| General trade | 42.7 | 9.1 | 48.2 | 100 |
| Paperback | 49.3 | 41.1 | 9.6 | 100 |
| College | 74.9 | 5.3 | 19.8 | 100 |
| Medical | 43.9 | 0 | 56.1 | 100 |
| Religious | 45.7 | 9.3 | 45.0 | 100 |
| Import Dept. | 0 | 0 | 100.0 | 100 |
| Over-all | 42.6 | 8.9 | 48.5 | 100 |
Note: Bibles and Music excluded. The great bulk of Bible sales arises from books manufactured in the U.S.A. Some three-quarters of music sales represent imports or local editions.
132. The Delegates have recognized the special nature of their New York Business in a series of variations from the restrictions on branch publishing generally. In 1956 it was decided that the New York Business should build up a college textbook department without any restriction to 'local' subject-matter in preference to using its resources on general trade books; in 1961 it was decided that the New York Business should be free to publish learned books in the field of American studies (provided such books could be expected to be reasonably remunerative); and in 1968 the Delegates authorized the New York Business to publish a small number of monographs in science subjects, recognizing that publication at this level may well lead to the subsequent offer of a valuable college textbook from the same author.
133. We understand that the Delegates have recently approved plans for the expansion of O.U.P. (N.Y.)'s efforts in the college textbook market and, in particular, in the field of science textbooks. Already in the two years 1966-8 the strength of college salesmen has substantially increased.
134. In publishing methods, O.U.P. (N.Y.) is necessarily geared to North American patterns and tempos. The Officers have established personal relations with a number of highly distinguished men in the world of books, whose advice is available to the Press. At the same time the Business derives advantages from the Oxford connection and the Oxford imprint, and it is able to offer authors a personal and individual approach. The evidence we received in the U.S.A. was unanimous that the New York Business has a very worthwhile place in American publishing, intermediate between the American University Presses and the larger commercial publishing firms. It does credit to the University and to the Press (to which it is a considerable source of economic strength).
135. The growth of the American Business has been one of the most significant aspects of the recent development of the Press, and there is every reason to believe that it will continue. The diagram on page 68 (Figure 4, below) shows the progress of the New York Business since 1930; it gives the distribution of total sales by value, divided between Bibles, imported books, and books originating from the New York editorial offices; it also indicates the changing proportion of sales of music, learned and general trade books, children's books, paperbacks, and college and medical textbooks.
136. Oxford University Press has an enviably high reputation in two technical fields. First, its books are in general consistently well produced: paper, printing, binding, articulation' - all tend to show the marks of care and of critical standards. Second, we were told that the Press has been in the forefront of many of the technical developments in both printing and book production that have taken place. It is clearly important that this should continue and certain measures appear to be called for if this is to be so. As regards standards of book production an occasional, possibly increasing, occurrence of short-comings is one of the reasons leading us to urge the need for a more generous level of editorial staffing. (Some recent science books in particular have fallen short of the usual standard, particularly in regard to diagrams and formulae.) And if speed of production from delivery of the manuscript can be regarded as a technical question, this also should benefit.
137. Some technical advances will affect printing rather than the publishing side of the business; computers, for example, have potential applications in type-setting. The storage and retrieval of information, however, is of direct concern to the Reference Book and Cartographic Departments. The Press initiated and originally financed a full study of computer-assisted map-production which is now being carried forward, still in collaboration with the Cartographic Department, by the Experimental Cartography Unit of the Royal College of Art. O.U.P. produced film-strips in 1950 to accompany a series of geography books and now issue charts, tapes, discs, and film-strips with a variety of their education and other books. An Assistant Export Sales Manager has very recently been appointed to deal specifically with audio-visual material. It seems to us clear that the speed of development in the various forms of 'non-book' publishing also is likely to increase, as are the non-traditional methods of producing the printed word, and it was put strongly to us that Oxford should seek to keep in the forefront of these developments. Very recently the London Business has made a collaborative arrangement with a school for teachers of English as a second language to produce s and try out audio-visual material for the English Language Teaching Department. We recommend, therefore, that consideration should also be given to the establishment by the Delegates of a Research and Development Department.
138. The primacy of selling the Oxford books among the functions of the London and New York Businesses and the overseas branches has been stressed. Except in branch areas overseas and in the U.S.A., publicity and selling are almost entirely the responsibility of the Promotion Department of the London Business. (The Music and Children's Books Departments are responsible for their own sales, as is the Cartographic Department in respect of maps. The Education department organizes its own promotion and travelling in the U.K. of Oxford school books, but the cost is borne as part of the Promotion Department budget.) The Department is headed by the Sales Manager, who is a member of the London Business Management Committee, and has a total staff of 65 (1958: 38). It is responsible for sales in the United Kingdom, Eire, the West Indies, Latin America, Europe, and the Middle East, as well as in countries in Africa where there is no branch.
139. This Department of the London Business operates through a full-stocking agent in Germany and agents in the West Indies and Latin America. The rest of Europe and the Middle East are covered by three travellers, while three specialist English Language Teaching travellers call on institutions teaching English as a second language. In the United Kingdom, O.U.P. travellers visit booksellers throughout the country but, in contrast to operations abroad, production through university travelling is not undertaken. The separate overseas branches are responsible for promotion and sales in their own areas, but the Promotion Department in London has a general advisory role in this area. An overseas publicity manager has recently been appointed in the Department to concentrate on this. The New York Business does its own selling of its 'branch' publications in South America and also did so, until very recently, in Europe and the Middle East: it is entirely responsible for promotion and sales of all O.U.P. publications in the U.S.A.
140. The performance of the selling side of O.U.P. is of great importance not only from the point of view of profits but more especially in ensuring the maximum distribution of the learned works. Its importance to the author need not be stressed. In the nature of things it was inevitable that complaints should be heard on this score from authors, and also from departments of O.U.P. itself. Other evidence we received, however, made it clear that the Department and its staff were in general highly regarded in the book trade for their efficiency. True, the separate listing of Clarendon Press books and other O.U.P. books in the Oxford Spring and Autumn lists, regardless of overlap of subjects, was regarded as an unnecessary irritation. (The distinction has in fact been abolished from the Autumn List, 1969, to meet this objection.) But its selling to booksellers, despite the enormous size of the General Catalogue with 17,000 titles, was well thought of. The good reputation of O.U.P. selling in the book trade is scarcely surprising since the Department has taken the initiative in several trade developments designed to improve book promotion and distribution as a whole, for example the Charter Booksellers' Scheme and the Book Development Council. Indeed the President of the Publishers' Association expressed to us warm appreciation of O.U.P.'s contribution to the work of the Association: O.U.P. had always been generous in its willingness to share its knowledge with others in the field; the Publisher's services to the Association had been considerable; and O.U.P.'s Sales Manager had been a valued member of its Exports Committee.
141. However, there have been major changes in recent years in the promotion of books - monographs and textbooks - at post-secondary level. The traditional concentration on bookshops in University towns has been supplemented (indeed largely superseded in the sciences at least) by more direct and intensive promoting to members of the academic community. (O.U.P.'s continued faith in the University bookshop as a point of sale is evidenced by the decision to form, in partnership with Messrs. B. H. Blackwell Ltd., a jointly owned subsidiary called 'University Bookshops (Oxford) Ltd.' which aims to provide co-operative assistance to some of the smaller bookshops in University centres. The company has a controlling interest in some half-dozen bookshops.)
That O.U.P. has not been in the forefront of this more 'pushful' approach may be understandable, but it has, in our view, had some unfortunate effects, apart from any direct effect on the level of sales. The Promotion Department travels O.U.P.'s list quite extensively to Universities abroad but has been debarred from doing so in this country and its exclusion from this sector must have affected its efficiency in other educational selling. The impact of the sales effort of the Press has often been weakest in Oxford itself. Several measures have recently been adopted to rectify this situation. Of these, the one to which the Delegates attach the greatest significance is the formation, in which O.U.P. took the lead (in a joint venture with C.U.P., Longmans, and Associated Book Publishers), of University Mailing Services Ltd.' to run a computer-based mailing system circulating individual members of the academic staffs of all post-secondary institutions in the British Isles with information on new books in their declared fields of interest, both academic and private. This move into direct promotion to British Universities has been supplemented by an experiment in allowing one of the field editors to double the roles of field editor and prescription traveller. (The primary duty of a 'field editorı is to keep his firm informed of academic developments in his subjects and to suggest likely authors and potential manuscripts. In the U.S.A. especially, the role is often combined with prescription travelling of college textbooks and sometimes also the 'trade' travelling of monographs and textbooks to University bookshops.) The expansion of O.U.P.'s efforts in science publishing will undoubtedly call for a corresponding expansion of this type of promoting. We were told that the Delegates now attach particular importance to an increase in space advertising in learned journals. From the point of view of the scientist this is paramount in preventing his work from becoming what one is said to have called 'my secret book'. And, while the author may not always be the best judge of selling effectiveness, his impression of the adequacy of publicity clearly has an effect on the recruiting of authors.
142. The Committee formed the opinion that there has been some criticism by scientific authors that the Promotion Department's handling of books in the sciences was less sure than in the Humanities. More highly specialized books may call for particular arrangements if they are to achieve their true sales potential. In the field of textbooks, a more generous use of inspection copies would, we believe, facilitate prescription' selling.
143. The task of selling 1,400 new titles a year and the enormous back-list of books in print is not quite so formidable as it at first appears, because a proportion of these have specialized or limited outlets. Nevertheless, it does create considerable problems. One of the London Business travellers has recently been made responsible separately for the 'imported books'; and the Publisher anticipates a further measure of specialization which, it is hoped, will make the travelling of the General List more manageable. It was also clear to us, from discussion with other publishers, that O.U.P.'s sales force was regarded as rather 'thin on the ground'. The Delegates have already approved an expenditure greater than the size of the present list would justify, for promotion of O.U.P. science books.
144. The changes outlined have inevitably already led to an increase in overhead expenditure on promotion proportionally greater than the increase in sales over the same period, and the Delegates are very conscious of this. We believe, however, that the changes made and proposed are essential if O.U.P. is to keep its share of the market, and can be expected to produce the increased sales necessary to carry the heavier overheads.
145. A small Special Promotion Section is responsible for O.U.P.'s general publicity and for the promotion of new works which are felt to qualify for out-of-the-ordinary publicity, whether for prestige or as potential 'best-sellers' or for some other reason. This is done through various channels but for the non-specialist book good reviews are, we were told, the most important factor in achieving sales. We heard highly complimentary reference to the part by this section in promoting The New English Bible.
146. Whatever the organization of a sales and publicity department and however great its efficiency, the critical factor is the relation between the editorial and promotions sides of the business. The Publisher told us that one of the advantages he had in London was the close proximity and day-to-day contacts of his editorial and sales staff at Ely House. The problems are obviously the greater where there is geographical separation as between the Clarendon Press and London, and this is a matter which the Delegates will no doubt have discussed by the Joint Management Committee as part of the consideration of any move of editorial staff to Oxford. They informed us that arrangements have been made meanwhile for the sales staff to meet with the editorial staff in Oxford once a month; but we would urge the need to build up the same close contact which the London editors have - e.g. by private telephone and telex. As to selling overseas, we stress elsewhere the need for better liaison and more frequent visits in both directions and selling overseas is one of the areas in which benefits should result.
(a) Royalties
147. On the subject of authors' royalties, the Delegates informed us:
The terms offered by the Delegates to authors, where payment is made, as is usual, by royalty, or occasionally by outright fee, are comparable with those offered by commercial publishing houses; were this not so, the Delegates could not compete for a large class of learned books which may be expected to bring in some return.
We were further told that the Delegates will normally offer a royalty even if a book is not expected to show any profit to the Press. The Secretary was in no doubt that the level of payments offered by O.U.P. was competitive and proper; and the head of the London Business told us that he had heard from several literary agents that O.U.P.'s terms compared quite well with those offered elsewhere for similar books. We obtained confirmation of this in discussion with publishers, literary agents, and book-sellers. (The amount paid out in royalties on Clarendon Press books - excluding reference works and atlases - in 1966/7 exceeded 10 per cent of the value of sales.) Yet it is clearly widely felt among authors and other members of the general public that O.U.P.'s terms are less generous than those of other publishers, particularly in regard to export sales. This, we were assured, discouraged authors from offering their work to O.U.P.
148. There is obviously some degree of misunderstanding about O.U.P.'s position in the matter of royalties. The fact that royalties differ quite substantially between one class of book and another can obviously lead to this. On its learned books O.U.P. is reluctant to encourage what may be misleading hopes by offering escalating royalties on higher sales than can be expected. This attitude, however understandable, may give the impression to authors that its terms are, in general, more rigid than those offered by commercial firms; and we had some evidence that it may sometimes in fact lead to a certain sense of rigidity on the part of the O.U.P. editorial staff. Another cause of misunderstanding lies in the method of calculating royalties on export sales. These can be expressed as a percentage on home published price, as a percentage on overseas published price, or as a percentage on the net return to the publisher from overseas sales. This distinction is probably rarely appreciated by authors when making comparisons, though it is taken for granted by publishers and literary agents; a royalty of 7.5 per cent of the U.K. published price - which is that usually offered by O.U.P. for export sales - can be worth more to the author than the 15 per cent calculated on net returns which may be offered by another firm. (Except in the case of paperbacks, the level of royalties in the U.S.A. is traditionally higher than in this country. The New York Business recognizes this fact in its American publishing, and meets the increasing pressure there for the payment of substantial advances, particularly for science books and college textbooks.)
149. We formed the impression that O.U.P.'s royalty terms are perhaps a little more conservative and less flexible than they need be, particularly in regard to home sales; but that is all. The widespread belief that O.U.P.'s terms are seriously out of line therefore calls for urgent steps to correct this impression. We see everything to be gained by a clear public statement of the terms likely to be offered to authors by the Clarendon Press. Since the statement in Authors and the Oxford University Press, 'As a rule, he wiil be offered the royalties standard among publishers', is far too imprecise for the purpose we have in view, we recommend that the Delegates should review their policies in regard to royalties and provide fuller information.
(b) Subsidies
150. The position over subsidizing learned works was put to us by the Delegates in these terms:
The Delegates would claim that, at any rate in recent years, no proposal of indisputable academic merit has been declined by them on financial grounds alone, unless an exception be made for source material, i.e. inscriptions, records and archives of all kinds... It is not the Delegates' policy ever to make publication dependent on a subsidy, though if a subsidy for an expensive and unprofitable book is available from a foundation or learned society it is not declined, and where there is a difference with an author, e.g. on the amount of illustration required, he may be informed that if his wishes are to be met in full some outside help is necessary.
We were informed by the Secretary to the Delegates that, with rising costs, there has been a steady increase in the minimum number of copies which must be printed if a book is to prove remunerative and he put the figure at about 2,000 copies for a new book and 1,500 copies for a reprinting order. (We understand that figures for the U.S.A. might be roughly double these.) Another figure which is significant in this connection is the level of sales below which a commercial publisher would be disinclined to retain a book in his list, very approximately 300 copies a year. In 1966 ninety-nine of the new books produced by the Clarendon Press had an initial printing of 2,000 or less (and as few as 600 in one case) while reprint orders of 1,500 or less (minimum 500) numbered 195; moreover, the)1967 list includes over 900 titles -almost one-third - selling on average less than 100 copies per annum. This, it was argued, is a better measure of the support given by the Delegates to learned publishing than any statement of the number of publishing decisions taken in the expectation of a loss being incurred. Here again, however, there is a strong case for a clear statement of the Delegates' attitude in this connection (see para. 110 above).
151. The account of O.U.P. given in the paragraphs above will have no doubt made it plain that it is a very remarkable, indeed a unique organization. No commercial publishing house in this country - or, one may safely say, in the world - recognizes the same obligations and duties to the world of learning, and no University Press of which we have knowledge, except one, ranks as a large publishing house. The exception, of course, is the Cambridge University Press, but this is still a smaller organization with a less varied output. It could be said - and indeed it would be expected - that the development of the Press has not followed a coherent 'master plan'. Instead growth has been organic. Exploratory moves have been made, and followed up if successful; individual initiative has resulted in unexpected successes; projects undertaken with one aim in view have often proved to have value in other directions. Inspiration and enterprise have been found at different times in different parts of the organization and cannot be said to have been the prerogative of Oxford or London or for that matter of New York and the branches. Nor is it our impression that the Press has in any way ossified; all the evidence suggested to us that it is still growing and changing.
152. The question must arise how far, if at all, growth should continue, and in what directions. Clearly three main courses are open: the Press could be stabilized at its present size; it could retract; or it could continue to expand and diversify. It is the Committee's view that to prevent any further development by the Press - and still more to try to cut it back - would be wrong. This view is in part based on the need which we believe exists for any business enterprise to continue to grow if it is not to stagnate. More particularly the Press must grow in size if it is to maintain its relative position in U.K. publishing at a time when there is a marked tendency for publishing houses to amalgamate into larger units or to become part of big organizations. These are chiefly business considerations, but they have obvious and important repercussions on the Press's academic role. Without a commercial organization which is at once widespread, vital, and soundly based, O.U.P. will no longer be able to offer to its authors the services which it now gives; and if it loses the ability to offer these services it will no longer be able to attract so powerful a list of authors. Any diminution of its commercial effectiveness in fact reduces its academic effectiveness correspondingly.
153. There is another sense, however, in which it is not paradoxical to say that O.U.P. must continue to expand if it is to hold its place in the world of learning, and there are further arguments for believing that it should continue to extend its activities. It is in both Oxford's interests and the country's, for example, that the Press should expand in the European market. This indeed has been rapidly developing in recent years, and we were told that O.U.P. sells more books in Europe than any other U.K. publisher. There seemed to the Committee every advantage in continuing with the effort to improve sales in Europe, not simply because of the possible financial rewards but because of the benefit to the spread of British culture and influence.
154. Another area where continued development may be expected is in North America. As with Europe, this is not only a matter of increasing sales, but of developing further new kinds of educational publishing. Apart from learned works, the demand in Europe may be expected to be for English Language Teaching books, with which O.U.P. has had as much experience as any publisher in the U.K. It appears likely that in America it will be in the area mainly of college textbooks that the greatest expansion will take place, and the Committee believes that the experience gained in the extremely competitive American market should have beneficial results elsewhere in the organization.
155. There is room for a different kind of growth and development in new subjects and means of teaching. The Committee cannot prophesy what may emerge in the coming decades, but it is in no doubt that the Press should be ready to play its part in fostering and following such new developments wherever it can successfully do so. In any event, the general area of science publishing is one in which the Committee, as has already been said, believes that O.U.P. must and can assume a larger role.
156. The Committee does not suggest that O.U.P. should seek to expand indefinitely in every field of publishing. Indeed, it believes that there will always be areas into which O.U.P. should not go, and that in the process of growth and change some existing sectors of the Press's publishing will dwindle as others grow. The major point is that it would be short-sighted of the University to restrict the growth of O.U.P. under the terms of some arbitrary policy decision. Greater control at the centre may be needed, and better co-ordination between different aspects of the Press's activities; some organizational changes have been noted or are recommended in our report which should contribute to these ends. Clear policy decisions will be needed from the Delegates and must be made plain to their staff in all the businesses and branches - perhaps more plain than it seemed to the Committee that the views of the Delegates had always been made in the past. Equally the University must be kept informed of the Delegates' intentions and aims. Nevertheless, the Committee finds itself in no doubt that the Press is full of vitality, and that this vitality should not be restrained.
Click to return to the top of this file.
Click to proceed to Chapter 4: OUP as a business concern.
Click to return to the Waldock Report index.
Click to return to the Waldock Introduction.
Click to return to the Cuttings Library index.
Click to return to the Law Library index.
Click to return to AKME index.
e-mail:
akme@btinternet.com
Please state your postal (rather than e-mail) address if you require a reply.