Abstract
PurposeThe purpose of this article is to introduce a theoretical framework and approach for studying the evaluation and decision-making practices through which academic librarians attempt to reduce the cost of electronic journal subscriptions – an organizational practice known as the unbundling of big deal journal packages.Design/methodology/approachThe article presents a literature-based conceptual analysis of several fields to delineate the elements of the practice of unbundling of big deal journal packages. Beyond analysing the prior literature, the discussion is supported by empirical findings from a pilot study on the topic conducted by two of the article's authors.FindingsThe main finding of the article is that the unbundling of big deal packages is a case of what sociologist refers to as decision-making in a social context. By reviewing previous studies, the article identifies the social and material elements constitutive of this practice. This, in turn, allows to develop questions and concepts for future research on the topic and to position it as an area of inquiry within the field of information behaviour/practices.Originality/valueThe article is the first attempt to conceptualize the unbundling of big deal journal packages by highlighting its phenomenological status as a type of information practice. In addition, the article proposes a research approach for studying this type of information practice by drawing on insights from the information behaviour/practice literature and enriching them through practice theory contributions in organizational studies and sociology.
Highlights
Access to electronic journals is ubiquitous within institutions of higher education and a prerequisite for the growth of knowledge
As described in the previous section, the practices of unbundling big deal packages have been directed by EvidenceBased Library and Information Practice (EBLIP) principles and approaches, which prioritize the use of quantitative data as evidence for decision-making
While making decisions based on data and statistics is supposed to simplify the cancellation process by grounding it in objective evidence, efforts of breaking apart big deal packages have been met with varying success
Summary
Access to electronic journals is ubiquitous within institutions of higher education and a prerequisite for the growth of knowledge. In 1973, not-for-profit scholarly societies and university presses published close to 80% of all journals. In 2013, five for-profit publishing conglomerates accounted for over 50% of all journal publications in the natural, medical, and social sciences as well as the humanities More recently, the systematic cuts to library budgets brought about by the 2007-2008 financial crisis have reduced libraries' ability to cover the ever-growing cost of academic journal subscriptions, deepening the crisis (Hahn, 2009; ICOLC, 2009)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
