Since 1995, the arrival date of the current editor and publisher, there have been many changes at Choice.  In that time, Choice has gone online, begun reviewing electronic resources, built a Publishing System (that we will shortly be replacing), partnered with Bowker to launch Resources for College Libraries, relocated from Riverview Center to LEED-certified space at Liberty Square, launched a Facebook site, launched half a dozen electronic newsletters, and generally spent a great deal of time thinking about and implementing new technology.  As of this writing, for example, we are wrapping up development of the new version of RCL and are well along on the development of Choice Reviews Online 3.0, which we hope to launch this fall.

So the plate is full, and it looks to be full for as long as Choice is around, which I trust will be a very long time.  But what does all this activity add up to?  What progress, for example, are we making on any of the perennial requests that come up regularly whenever we talk to or survey Choice users?

One of these requests, arguably the most important, is typically expressed as follows: “Please publish your reviews faster.  They often arrive too late for our purposes.”  This is not a new request.  It’s been on the table for at least as long as I’ve been at Choice, and probably longer.  The only difference between now and 1995 is that today we hear it more often and typically with a greater sense of urgency.  Trust me, dear reader, we hear you.  And in truth, we have made some, although not enough, progress on this issue in recent years.  More importantly, we are committed to making additional progress, but there are limits to what is possible and challenges to be overcome.

The most obvious limit is that reviews can only be written after a work becomes available, a problem for which we have no solution.  No work, no review.  (This does not, of course, preclude fantasizing about a world in which Choice reviews titles not only before they are published, but before they are written, thus forever altering the publishing landscape.)

Given this, our challenge is to review a work as soon as possible once it becomes available. Here are the key steps in the process:

• The publisher ships or otherwise makes available a copy of the title to Choice.
• Choice receives and processes the title.
• The title is shipped or otherwise made available to the reviewer.
• The reviewer writes and submits the review.
• Choice edits and fact-checks the review.
• The review is laid out for publication.
• The review is published.

From start to finish, this cycle currently consumes an average of five to seven months.  A best case scenario is three to four months. The worst case scenario is nine to twelve months.

This is the way things currently are.  What can be done to move things along faster, and what are some of the conundrums and trade-offs involved?  That’s an interesting discussion, and we’ll continue it next month.—IER