This note is intended to provide prospective authors with a short overview on planning a written work and issues to be considered in approaching the Trust.
Planning your approach before contacting the Trust offers several advantages:
This note offers suggestions for:
All commercial publishers will begin their assessment of a project by asking questions about the prospective markets for the work. The more able you are to show that issues have been identified and addressed the better your chance of a publishing contract. Outlined below is one possible approach to assessing the market.
As you already have a possible work in mind you should begin by summarising that idea in one or two sentences. Using that summary as a guide consider the "Classes of User".
Make a list of the classes of user who may be interested in the work. Generally you should be able to distinguish between professions (solicitors, barristers, accountants, surveyors, etc.), central and local government, academic and research users. The more specialised the subject you are considering the more focused these classes may need to be. For a litigation text you might wish to separate classes who specialise in plaintiff work from those who have a defendant focus or distinguish those who undertake legally aided work. For a project in the corporate field you might separate in-house lawyers, specialist departments in the larger City practices, etc.
Set out the classes of use you have identified in a list. For each class of user you should consider whether your project will either fill a gap in the information they require for their work or offer a better way of accessing it.
To assist with this it may help to work through the following questions:
The notes you have made provide an overview of the market. The next step is to ascertain which of the identified needs you should aim to meet with your work. Review the results of the User Information Needs exercise and consider the implications for your proposal. Are there similarities in the requirements of the different classes of user? If there are then draw these out into a list and try to prioritise them.
Compare this list with your original idea and consider the extent to which your idea fits with the list and which user needs it can meet. If there are sharply contrasting requirements for different types of user then you should consider whether the proposed work should attempt to meet the differing requirements. It may be preferable to focus on complementary demands. Attempting to meet disparate information needs may reduce the suitability, the coherence and therefore the value of the work for each of the classes of users.
You should now have an outline of the various types of users in the market what their requirements are and a note of both those information needs you can meet and those you would not attempt to meet. This information will help in determining the contents list for your project. Later on, if you are contracted by a publisher, then it may also be of real value in making sure that the promotional activities for the work are built on the most attractive propositions for your intended market.
At this stage you should consider what format is best suited to the needs you have "scoped". For a professional work there are essentially two key factors in determining the format:
You should have particular regard to the frequency with which the information needs are likely to change. In an area which depends on regular appraisal of case law or where there are significant annual legislative provisions it is more likely that a work will need to be responsive. Similarly, the greater the coverage, particularly where primary and/or secondary legislation is being included, the more likely it is that some form of "service" element will be necessary to keep the work up to date.
Format is something which can be discussed in detail with a publisher but it will help in the next section, the preparation of a contents structure, if you have some regard to the two main factors.
Once you have mapped out the market and determined the scope for your work the next stage is to plan and structure the contents.
One way of tackling the coverage for the work is to look at each of the needs you identified as being within the scope of your work and consider what content is necessary to meet that need. If you follow this process you will create a list of "ingredients" which should be contained within any successful work published to meet the needs of the market.
As there are many possible types of content, the more clearly you can describe an item for coverage the better. Also try to separate elements by content "type". It may be that your proposal is a straight-forward narrative but it might also include a mix of the following: specific primary source materials which need to be made available in full or in extract (Acts, statutory instruments, circulars or codes of practice), commentary, precedents and templates, case materials, review and analysis of current law or an assessment of the possible direction of the law in future.
Having set out the content which will be needed, you need to apply a coherent order and structure for the work. Look back at the classes of user and the information requirements. Draw together the available contents and look for relationships and a suitable sequence.
By way of example, in a reference work for a practitioner market you may wish to start with an assessment of the principles. For a procedural work for a practitioner market you may wish to start with the point at which the client approaches the practitioner or with the event which gives rise to an action.
Work with ordering the selected contents until you have a model which best meets the way in which the user will want to have access to the information or the way in which the information can be most easily presented.
By now you have a sequence for the presentation of your work and notes of the information to appear within that sequence. Before you prepare a contents list or a précis of the work you need to consider the hierarchy of contents.
The hierarchy of a work addresses the divisions within the structure. The guiding principles are:
If each discrete area of coverage is set out in a Chapter you may find that the Chapters themselves can be collected into themed Parts. This would be helpful if there are a large number of Chapters or if the Part associations help users either to understand or access the material.
The structure of your contents will also be demonstrated by the headings within a work
The way headings are used determines the accessibility, and sometimes sense, of the text. Publishers will talk in terms of levels of heading. The publishing process will allocate a code to every heading which may determine not only the appearance of a heading but also its relationship to other headings in the work. A clear and consistent heading structure is becoming more important, particularly as the electronic supply of information grows.
You should plan ahead by deciding in advance how many levels of heading are necessary as you develop your contents. Draw up a heading list showing the order and look of each heading and then number them in sequence; h1, h2, etc. Obviously those who are proficient with word processing applications will be able to manage their proposed heading structure automatically as they write. However, it is still good advice to note down the structure in advance and not to deviate from, or expand, the structure unless it is essential. In a standard monograph 4 or 5 headings, including the heading for a Chapter, should suffice.
For Example:
(h1) PART 1: INTRODUCTION (h1)(h2) A1: PRINCIPLES (h2)(h3) FIRST SUB-HEADING (h3)(h4) (a) Second Sub-heading (h4)(h5) (i) Third Sub-heading (h5)
It is preferable style-wise for the main levels of heading to have relatively short titles which are easy for the user to take in and for the publisher to fit onto one line.
At this point you need to take stock. Look at the time you have already spent simply in setting the foundations for your proposal and when, during the average week, you have been able to set aside that time. If it has been difficult to find the time to reach this stage then you should consider whether the project is achievable and make a reasonable guess at how long it is likely to take. The Trustees will test you on this point should you reach an interview.
Any commercial publisher will want to be sure that the author(s) are able to meet their commitment in relation to the delivery of a manuscript. The publisher will track progress towards delivery and if you are able to set an achievable timetable then the process will go more smoothly than if you find the timetable requires regular review. Remember also that most contracts with publishers will specify a particular date for delivery based on your discussions and you may find yourself in a vulnerable position if that date is not met.
As a result of considering whether the project is achievable or preparing the contents structure it may be that you should consider bringing in co-authors and specialist contributors. The advantages are that the workload can be shared. The disadvantages are that the more contributors become involved the more an "administrative" workload builds up for correspondence, meetings, etc. Also there is the additional task of co-ordinating the various writing efforts to ensure a consistency of approach and a proper fit between contributions.
You may wish to approach publishers before appointing the necessary team. In some cases publishers with a special interest in a market may have contacts of their own who could be brought in to assist.
The first step is to review the market information you have collated. In a professional publishing market you should look for publishers who have a strength or an interest in your area. Ideally the work which you have scoped will complement their existing products and services.
Even if a favoured publisher already has a title which overlaps with your proposal it may be worth investigating further, particularly if you have identified areas in which it is weak or if the title has become noticeably out of date. These may be signs that the publisher would benefit from a new approach or simply new blood to assist with an existing authority.
If you wish to contact a publisher you should enquire by 'phone to obtain the name of the commissioning editor or publisher for the subject or market area in which you are interested. Contact this person by letter with a brief outline of your proposal. You do not need to draw fully on the work you have done at this stage. The objective is to ascertain whether that publisher is interested. If they are then you can arrange a meeting or put together a more comprehensive synopsis based on your planning.
You will already have the necessary information for a synopsis. Begin with a note of the proposed title and a summary (one short paragraph or a couple of sentences) of the project. The synopsis can continue by following the structure of this briefing note; market (classes of user and information needs); project (take in the results of your scoping list where you have set out which information needs the work will meet); contents (set out as an appendix your finished contents structure); timetable (note when you would expect to complete the work and whether any additional authors or contributors are required).
If you are submitting a synopsis or arranging a meeting at the request of the publishers then you should ascertain what process they will follow in making a decision and how long the process is likely to take. At a meeting you should solicit feedback from the publishers on the information you have presented in relation to the market, the project proposal and the contents structure. Remember that it is a contractual relationship that you are seeking and this is also your opportunity to satisfy yourself that a particular publisher is best placed to sell your work to the relevant market.
As a charity, the Trust does not favour projects to be published by any particular publisher. The Trust has strong links with Sweet & Maxwell and that house will look closely at any project which the Trustees have decided to support. So do take your idea to Sweet & Maxwell if you have no reason to select another publisher ahead of them.
Please note: Candidates should be aware that the Trust is assisted by publishing staff at Sweet & Maxwell who review and prepare reports on all proposals for consideration by the Trustees. If candidates do not have publishing arrangements in place, Sweet & Maxwell may contact them for further discussions about publication of their work irrespective of the outcome of the awards process; if candidates do have publishing arrangements in place, Sweet & Maxwell will not use information they have through supporting the Trust for any other purposes. Please contact the Clerk to the Trust if you have any queries about this.
In any event, grants are normally conditional on your publisher agreeing to insert an acknowledgment of the Trust's support (this is done to encourage future applications for funding) and on the Trust receiving two gratis copies of any book published with its support for its archives.
© Copyright Alexander Maxwell Law Scholarship Trust.