The document discusses a study on UK small and medium enterprises' (SMEs) access to professional and academic information. It finds that journal articles are highly important to SMEs but they experience more difficulties accessing them compared to large companies and universities. Over half of SMEs reported recent difficulties accessing articles, and approximately 10% of the articles they try to read each year pose difficulties to access. The main barrier cited is payment issues with pay-per-view options. SMEs use a wide range of access channels but pay-per-view is problematic and walk-in access to local academic libraries is inconvenient. Potential options to improve access are discussed, such as pay-per-view reforms, online libraries,

1. Access by UK SMEs to
professional and academic
information
Publishing Research Consortium
Mark Ware

2. • Founding partners
• ALPSP
• Publishers Association
• STM
• Corresponding partners
• AAUP
• AAP/PSP

3. Research objectives
• Journal content, but not in isolation
• in the context of other types of information
• Importance of information
• Use made
• How obtained
• SMEs compared to other groups
3

4. Small & Medium Enterprises
• Small < 50 employees
• Medium < 250 employees
• 4.7 million
• 99.9% of UK companies
• 60% of private sector employment
• % science-based/high-tech unknown
4

5. Previously known
• Importance of SMEs to innovation and to
economic growth and job creation
• Importance of basic research to economy and
to innovation
• Publications one of many factors
• but an important one
5

6. Knowledge transfer routes
• Publications
• Informal contacts
• Public conferences and meetings
• Hiring trained scientists and engineers
• Joint research
• Contract research
• Temporary personnel exchanges
6

7. Methodology
• Survey & interviews
• Methodology
• Response rate
• Demographics
7

8. Sectors covered
Pharmaceutical 18 15
Chemicals 11 4
Computing 9 5
Medical & Precision Instruments 7 1
Electricity & Gas Supply 5 4
Machinery & Equipment 5 5
Media, Publishing & Printing 5 4
Oil & Gas 4 12
Telecommunications 4 7
Aerospace 4 11
Construction 4 5
Finance 4 9
Others 21 20
0% 10% 20% 0% 10% 20%
SME Large company
8

9. Success factors
Quality of staff 6.4 6.4
Product quality 6.4 6.4
Leadership 6.0 6.1
Customer loyalty 5.9 5.8
Attracting new customers 5.9 5.8
Attracting quality staff 5.9 6.1
Information 5.7 5.6
Tech./ Software/ Comms 5.4 5.7
Training 5.1 5.7
Quality of equipment 5.1 5.4
Product range 5.1 5.4
Minimal bureaucracy 5.1 5.0
Access to academic expertise 4.3 4.3
Access to commercial expertise 4.0 4.3
0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6 8
SME Large company

10. Importance vs barriers to success: SMEs
0.7
SMEs
Ability to attract new customers
0.6
0.5
Relative barrier to success
0.4
Attracting staff
Minimal bureaucracy
0.3
Information
Leadership
0.2 Product range Technology/ Software/ Comms
Product quality
Staff
Equipment Customer loyalty
0.1 Training
Access to commerical expertise
Access to university expertise
0
3 4 5 6 7
Average importance to success of organisation (rating scale, 1–7)
10

11. Importance vs barriers to success: large companies
0.7
Large companies
0.6
Minimal bureaucracy
0.5
Relative barrier to success
Leadership
0.4 Ability to attract new customers
Attracting staff
0.3
Technology/ Software/ Comms
Product quality
0.2
Product range Staff
Training
0.1 Equipment
Information
Access to university expertise Customer loyalty
Access to commerical expertise
0
3 4 5 6 7
Average importance to success of organisation (rating scale, 1–7)
11

12. Importance of different information types
Original research articles in journals 5.3 5.1 6.8
Review papers in journals 5.2 4.8 6.4
Technical info 5.2 5.6 4.4
Reference works 5.1 5.0 5.5
Professional/Trade pubs 4.8 4.9 4.2
Patent information 4.7 4.5 3.5
Scientific/ tech stds 4.7 5.2 3.9
Legislative /Regulatory info 4.5 5.0 3.3
Technical reports from gov't 4.5 4.7 4.3
Conference proceedings 4.5 4.3 5.1
Market research reports 4.3 4.3 3.0
Vendor white papers 3.8 4.0 3.1
Doctoral theses/ dissertations 3.5 3.3 4.9
Clinical guidelines 3.3 3.2 3.3
CME/Educational content 3.2 3.4 3.7
Patient details 2.4 2.3 3.1
0 2 4 6 0 2 4 6 0 2 4 6 8
SME Large company University/College

13. Journals were SMEs’ most
important information source
Original research articles in journals 5.3 5.1
Review papers in journals 5.2 4.8
Technical info 5.2 5.6
Reference works 5.1 5.0
Professional/Trade pubs 4.8 4.9
Patent information 4.7 4.5
Scientific/ tech stds 4.7 5.2
Legislative /Regulatory info 4.5 5.0
SME Large company
Technical reports from gov't 4.5 4.7
etc.
Conference proceedings 4.5 4.3
13

14. Level of access to
journal articles
Base: those describing access to journal articles as important
% saying access is Easy or Very Easy
100%
94%
75% 82%
71%
50%
25%
0%
SME Large company University/College
14

15. Access easier than 5 years ago
Lot more difficult Little more difficult About the same
Little easier Lot easier
Harder Same Easier
20% SME 7% 13% 20% 29% 31% 60%
20% Large co. 6% 14% 19% 24% 38% 62%
10% Univ/Coll 2% 8% 16% 24% 50% 74%
0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
15

16. SMEs read 112 journal articles a year
Large University/
Frequency SMEs
companies college
Several times
43% 30% 72%
per week
Weekly to
43% 57% 27%
Monthly
Less often 14% 13% 1%
Articles read
112 101 169
per year
16

17. Access to journals literature/2
Very poor Poor Varies Good Excellent
SMEs 14% 56% 26% 2%
Large companies 13% 37% 39% 7%
University/ College 4% 22% 55% 17%
0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
17

18. Difficulties accessing articles
SME Large co. Univ
Recent
55% 34% 24%
difficulty
Difficulties
11 6.4 12.4
per year
Articles read
112 101 169
per year
% articles w/
10% 6% 7%
difficulty
18

19. Difficulties encountered
Unsure how to find Searched but could not find
Forgot details Not in library
No access from home Found but had to pay
Found but technical payment diffs
13% 4% 9% 8%
10%
3% 13%
4%
2%
6%
8%
50%
6%
64%
SME Large Company
19

20. Wide range of access channels used
Prof/soc membership 81 87 83
Institute/ company subscription 77 86 96
Open access journal 71 68 85
Gov't database 68 78 69
Personal subscription 66 77 62
Author's own web page 66 68 84
Elec database subs by company 63 78 79
Online Pay Per View 63 43 35
In-house info service 56 90 74
Approach author directly 52 56 89
Local academic library 51 50 57
Colleagues' personal subscription 48 50 45
Institutional rep/ online preprint 42 53 61
Inter-lib loan via local lib 42 47 72
Local public library 38 35 41
0% 50% 100% 0% 50% 100% 0% 50% 100%
SME Large company University/College

21. Pay Per View
• only 5% of SME reported channel uses
• 1/3 used at least once per month
• Lots of issues
• high prices
• inhibits browsing
• uninformative/misleading abstracts
• non-corporate payment mechanism
21

22. Local academic libraries
• Rarely used: ~1% of channel uses
• Issues
• level of library interest?
• perceived problems with publisher licences
• requirement for walk-in access
22

23. Professional associations
• Physical libraries => virtual
• Cost effective
• Highly targeted
• Issues
• small library budgets
• licence constraints
23

24. National licence?
• Who would mediate/administer?
• JISC/HEIs?
• British Library?
• PLS?
• Size of the access gap
• Benefits
• Self-sustaining?
24

25. (With thanks to Geoff Bilder)
25

26. iTunes model (“iPub”)
• single portal, comprehensive aggregation
• intuitive user interface
• low price
• meaningful previews
• one-click purchase (w/corporate options)
• integration with reference management
software
• recommendation engines
• multiple media types
26

27. 27

28. Summary
• High value of information to SMEs
• Journals highly used
• Mixed picture on access, but SMEs worse than large
companies (& universities)
• 55% experienced recent difficulty
• ~ 10% of articles read per year
• payment barrier the main difficulty cited
• Wide range of access channels
• PPV problematic, walk-in access inconvenient
• Options: PPV; online libraries; national licence?
28

29. Further information
• Full report on PRC website
• http://is.gd/32TM3
• Companion report (additional information)
• http://is.gd/32TO1
• These slides
• http://www.slideshare.net/mrkwr
• Mark Ware
• www.markwareconsulting.com
29