I'm (finally) going to continue my series on book publishing by examining contracts. As with other parts of the book publishing process, there is a lot of stuff to think about that one may be unfamiliar with (I sure was!).
Receiving a contract-offer (or, better yet, multiple offers) is really exciting. But there are also a lot of things to think about. First and foremost, you need to decide whether you should accept the offer (and, if you have multiple offers, which one!). What should go into your decision? To some extent, this depends on your aims and academic position. If you are at an R1 (research) school or elite college--or have your sights on getting a job in one--I've heard you should really try to publish with a "top-ranked" press (for one of the only rankings of presses I've come across, see here). On the other hand, I've been told explicitly by people in positions of power (e.g. department chairs and administrators) that a book with any legitimate academic press is looked upon favorably (towards jobs and tenure) in other types of institutions...provided, presumably, the book is decent (though, for my part, I don't know how a book's reception by reviewers is looked at by tenure committees. Anyone know?).
In any case, a second thing worth thinking about before signing a contract is whether the book is likely to get read. Of course, whether a book gets read depends on a lot of things: your reputation as an author, the quality of reviews the book receives once it comes out, and so on. But still, some presses market better than others, and price points vary greatly (with many major presses selling books at well over $100). As far as I can tell, the best thing to do here is to simply ask around--particularly mentors. I had a great mentor at a research institution (who has published books with good presses) who gave me great advice, and I also asked around with people who had published with different presses...and just about all of the information and advice I received was incredibly helpful.
One thing to be careful about is "dissertation mills." Although some dissertations can be revised into good books (I know one person who recently published a revised dissertation, to very positive reviews), some presses are--or so I hear--glorified dissertation mills that are basically willing to publish anything (often, with poor editing and production values). Of course, you can always take your chances with such a press, but, before you sign a contract, it is a very good idea to find out whether the press offering the contract is one of this sort, and to ask around about whether people (in the discipline, your institution, etc.) consider it a good or bad idea to publish with the press in question.
Another thing to (possibly) consider is using one contract-offer to leverage another. Although you cannot do this if you have agreed to a right of first refusal (for more, see my discussion here), if you haven't given a right of first refusal, you can--or so I've been told--tell other presses that have your manuscript that you have an offer on the table...and see if they'd like to make an offer yourself (note: as explained in my previous post, this is only ethical if the presses that are reviewing your manuscript know and have agreed to allow you to send your manuscript to other presses simultaneously!).
One further thing to think about--something that really played a role in my own decision--is your relationship with the acquisitions editor(s) at different presses. If you have offers from two comparable presses, but one editor is really enthusiastic, engaged, and seems to care about the project, then (provided you have otherwise heard good things from others about the press), that may be a good reason to go with one press over another (I don't know about you, but I'd prefer to publish with people who take a personal interest and believe in my project!).
Finally, and perhaps most obviously (though, as academics, many of us are not too accustomed to think about these things), it's important to actually read, evaluate, and (if necessary) negotiate the terms of your contract. Although there's typically not a lot of money (i.e. royalties) to be found in standard academic book contract, it's a good idea to check with others who have published books to make sure that you are receiving a decent deal. More importantly, to my eyes, are two things:
- The time-frame for submitting the final manuscript
- Other details of the contract (can you submit related work to journals?, will there be a "clearance" review?, etc.)
Let me discuss (1) first: it's really important to ensure that you have enough time to finish your book, and finish it well--and this means giving yourself more time than you think you'll need. When I first received the contract offer I ultimately accepted, I was presented with a complete-by date a couple of months later. I told them I could have it done by then, but could really use several more months--and, although I thought I asked for too much time, I'm really glad I did: I needed every second they gave me. As I will explain in my next post ("after the contract"), for a variety of reasons, the process of finishing up a book takes far longer than you'll expect. And, of course, because it's a book (and will be reviewed by people!), you're really going to want to get it right (or, at least, as right as you can get it). So, really push for time--more time than you think you'll need.
Finally, on (2): it is important to realize that book contracts also often have provisions stating that you cannot publish "competing" material. In order to understand what counts as "competing" work (e.g. can you publish any material from the book as a journal article first?), you need to ask. This is critical, because you don't want to make the mistake of thinking you can send out work related to the book (i.e. on the same topic) when the publisher might take it to be a violation of the contract. As throughout the book process (proposals, manuscript review, etc.), remember the following maxim: when in doubt, ask first! Further, it's important to realize that many--though not all--book contracts stipulate that the book will go through a final "clearance review" prior to being accepted for publication. This means...you guessed it, that your final manuscript must head out to a reviewer for final approval (which, as I will explain in a later post, is no sure thing!).
Anyway, although contracts are kind of a dry issue, thinking about them--and how to decide who to sign with--was one of the parts of the book publishing process that I felt the most ill-prepared for. There's a lot to think about, and I hope this post gives those of you thinking about publishing a book some helpful points of reference!
Comments