"So Bad It is Good" -- A Salute to AALL Incompetence: On AALL's Reminder to Take the AALL Price Index Review Task Force Survey

Based on listserv message chains and private e-mails, it appears that I was not the only one thinking that the Price Index survey was, ah, slanted toward either its outright elimination or a substantial reduction in the provision of useful, verifiable information. See for example, Lyn Warmath's list message (republished on 3 Geeks). Having taken the survey, I'm thinking AALL wants to get out of the Price Index business because it is "too much work" or AALL wants to reduce the "workload" to the point of being uninformative. So now comes an official reminder posted on AALL lists:

REMINDER: AALL Price Index Review Task Force Survey

Just a reminder – the deadline for the AALL Price Index for the AALL Price Index Review Task Force survey is Friday, April 22.  Thanks to all who have completed the survey. 
 
AALL President Joyce Manna Janto charged the Price Index Review Task Force with investigating the current Price Index and determining if it continues to be responsive to our members’ needs. Your comments and suggestions have been taken to heart and the Task force is working to assure that you are delivered a product that best meets current and future needs.
 
We ask that you take a few minutes to answer a short, 7-question survey.  To begin the survey click here.  The deadline is Friday, April 22.

(Emphasis added.)

The Current Price Index? Really? In case anyone has forgotten the value of the "current" Price Index is nil because AALL did not explicitly ask for print continuation pricing. Hence, our major vendors did not supply that information and we have no right to blame them for not doing so. Some members of this so-called "task force" were responsible for this fiasco. Apparently, screwing up this badly doesn't disqualify one from serving on an AALL "task force." Just how disingenuous can AALL officialdom get?

disingenuous:  lacking in candor; also : giving a false appearance of simple frankness : calculating.

First, our professional association doesn't pay attention to business and produces an utterly useless Price Index. Then it produces a survey referring that [explative deleted] which is slanted toward not having to pay attention to business again. Ah, I still have my now 30-plus year old textbook on how to conduct surveys from library school and this one "flunks."

Before the survey, an AALL's Price Index Task Force was announced, In The Saga of the AALL Price Index Continues: Task Force appointed to investigate if the Price Index is needed and is a value to AALL members, I wrote:

So remember the Price Index. In the future when there are no print supplementation costs because print has been priced out of existence the Price Index may be as antiquated as the above Union League Club image {see post for image]. Then, as if not already, a Price Index of eLegal resources -- online search and eBooks -- will be needed. Does anyone even think that is going to be on the agenda of either the Price Index Task Force or the Vendor Colloquium? Oh, my bad, those terms cannot be disclosed under current licensing agreements and god knows "we" cannot interfere with how our vendors conduct their anti-competitive business practices.

The Price Index is not a relic from the past, at least not yet. It still has value to members. It can provide a useful objective standard if our association remembers to ask for the right data.

Oops, Then There Is Cutting Corners. Of course, that also assumes that the market basket of titles and their pricing data is listed -- one of the survey questions asks if title-specific pricing data and title identification is needed to provide a baseline for users. Ah, yes it is. A properly executed AALL's Price Index is one standard all law librarians can point to justify their budget requests so long as they know what was indexed and how relevant the indexed titles are.

A Relevant Market Basket for a Price Index. What is most telling in this survey is no real request was made for membership input on what adjustments should be made in the selection of titles. The oh-so 20th century market basket is by and large dominated by a large number of print titles that have been cancelled by many if not most of the folks we represent, namely our employers, institutional buyers.

In utterly dogmatic fashion:

1. AALL's Price Index is relevant if (a) we ask for the right data next time -- print continuation prices -- (b) vendors supply that data which is (c) fact-checked for accuracy. We pay HQ staff salaries who can do this work.

2. The law librarians who volunteer their time and effort to data analysis are actually informed of the survey questions asked.

3. The market basket of print "goods" must be sufficently relevant in this Shed West Era for all institutional buyers.

4. The composition of this so-called "task force" should not have been dominated by academic law librarians when the market sector which drives the marketplace is the private sector.

5. Our professional association must not stack the deck by way of a slanted survey.

Before Our Annual Meeting. I'm thinking I better buy the two-disc set, The Ed Wood Collection - A Salute to Incompetence (1959), before attending Philly: Cream Cheese, Cheesesteak or Karaoke. At 270 minutes, I just might be able to maintain my sanity during the sessions I don't walk out of without prescription medication.

From the product description:

Edward D. Wood Jr. (1924-1978) remains one of the best-remembered, most talked-about directors in the history of cinema. He is a certifiable legend (well, he was "certifiable" anyway). This fun and fascinating collection throws a spotlight on the man whose work personifies the phrase "so bad it’s good."

[JH]