Organizational Fields and the Book Industry

peter brantley internet archive san francisco ca

concept of an “organizational field” (defined) often complex groups or sets of actors involved.

stable industry indicates stable network for both organizations and people

Disruption in core aspects: production, means, distribution of goods/services – creates conflicts

good example: digital rights for backlist titles rights to the latent rents were never arbitrated

confusing enough issue to be a major component of GBS proposal (“Author-Publisher Procedures”)

authors X agents X publishers roles suddenly become vague, technology makes apparent buried conflicts in contracts

outcome: rosetta, wylie v. random house well what is interesting ... ? books enter digital market.

the present condition of the book industry: a new threshold, for industry-wide no dominant paradigm for product

the automotive industry: imagine planes vs. cars (what if planes offered personal commuting alternative – wow!) ebook characterization is happening in shadow of historical print pattern

the efforts to build a new market stasis- determine the primary “axis of competition”: product | pricing | services

deep technology shifts usually remove the ability to focus on a single axis

digital (creation, distribution) have {many} {new} implications for ubiquity and control of products, services

fields that have become disrupted are naturally subject to the formation of new emergent biases in conduct. (there is no existing practice)

any newly introduced stresses produce unexpected outcomes evolving by positive feedbacks, counters are weak.

such as a tendency for progressive furthering of emerging monopolies

international rights will force new emergent practices uncertainties are easily introduced for digital books vs. print products

National historical book price fixing laws subject to stress from international firms because digital stresses different vectors

tensions exacerbated by complexities international vs national legal regime – changes in law difficult to negotiate something could emerge in EU or GATT / WTO context

strikingly uncertain right now in an international context: who will sell what to whom for what

this does not even touch on definition of redistribution or secondary markets national or international in context!

e.g. consider digital first sale! an issue common to software (shrink wrap licensing) less an issue for music, movies in the past (although might change)

or LENDING ... not as straightforward as buying a digital copy and putting it on shelf

digital lending requires a new coordinated technology infrastructure with access-based accounting systems quite different than traditional lending

and ... publisher recalcitrance to provide lending inventory to libraries due to perceived loss of a new revenue opportunity

might force establishment of new large library consortia acting as their own platform services providers – many outcomes might emerge.

“Hold Hands”, wickenden, Flickr

in organizational fields like publishing that have had a long period of stability implicit rules formed to govern action

typically bluffs are not called and brinksmanship is avoided (consider wylie v random house– agent and publisher work it out)

one can see this in technology: patents are usually cross licensed - not worth divisive shoot_foot_self

lawsuits typically signal a breakdown in normative practices within an organizational field

the core publishing industry dependencies established a rich set of interactions: author / agent / publisher / selling-agent

as historical patterns erode the early stage survivors of market disruption to rebuild using existing networks (e.g., R_Nash’s Cursor Books)

author / agent / publisher / selling-agent increasingly subject not to redefinition but re-articulation Not “what is a publisher” Now “what is publishing”

as industry, publishing is lucky it has laid claim to an obvious higher-goal: disseminating information

this reference point acts to reduce friction, mitigating damage from rent seeking

networks alter dramatically when powerful new entrants impact a disrupted organizational field – 1) technologies have changed, and 2) new domains have entered field

that would be Silicon Valley:  Apple  Google  Amazon

New entrants are not bound by any extant dependencies. Network “damage” occurs when new org field actors first interact.

Odds of engendering wholly unexpected consequences is dramatically multiplied. New actors predominately occupy distinct organizational networks, in different fields

It is this “asteroid from outer space” characteristic that makes the industry raw and exposed for the first time in decades

out of field (technology) disruption demands engagement with different industrial sectors, for radical change.

transmedia and web based delivery are examples where new entrants better able to produce, distribute

trying to mold oneself like plastic sheet wrap around disrupting agents (Absorb the Mongols!) is not a strategy for long term survival

Google's entrance into vending books (as opposed to mining them for data) is only part of a larger product portfolio to convenience its existing partners and to place pressure on valley competitors.

on the bright side ... we have stunning new range of opportunities to build new services

peter brantley co-founder, open books alliance director, bookserver project internet archive the presidio, san francisco, ca @naypinya (twitter) peter@archive.org

http://www.digitalbookworld.com	329
http://www.jeremyrossmedia.com	217
http://paper.li	7
http://feeds.feedburner.com	1

Organizational Fields and the Book Industry

by Peter Brantley

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Usage Rights

4 Embeds 554

Statistics