dr. Zsuzsanna SERESS

I. Introduction

The 1990s have brought about enormous changes in book publishing and book trade, first of all in their internal organization: The former book trade with a "large and unified" market, privileged places and profiles, directed by planning normatives, without real business relationships has dissolved; the organizational system has been completely transformed.

The financial data of book trade, however, prove that in this chaotic situation several new-type organizations have evolved, and the turnover of book trade has increased approximately 1.5-fold in 1994 as compared to 1993. Book making as business brings money. The conditions have changed substantially. This field is full of blank spots in legislation; the same trend of Balcanization is experienced here as in other fields; "giant sharks" have appeared who will sooner or later swallow the "small fish" if those are not tricky enough and do not attain by struggle special profiles for themselves. Still, some thousand firms, smaller or bigger ventures make a living in Hungary from publishing books.

The profession is actually full of conflicts, interest fights aimed at large sums of money, while at the same time new rules are being formed. In this process of change the roles of and relationships between the players have changed. Especially significant are the changes in the role of the state, the presence of foreign capital and the operation of personal relationships.

It will help to judge this process of change if we compare the experience of an earlier and recent research project.

In the course of the recent investigation by interviews I was struck by the words used to describe the state of the profession: CHAOS, FAILURE, CRISIS, DEVALUATION (the bastions of culture have been lost, as money can be produced only by books of less value; financial maffia will sooner or later entirely dominate the book trade because of their financial power; in addition, modern technology has considerably changed the conditions of production).

What new rules are governing book trade, and what is its actual state like? Is its glory fading? Or is it a goldmine where the maffia is "pulling the strings", and billions are at stake?

In the field of book trade publishers and booksellers are arranged in concentric circles. In the middle of the circle you find the capital, the financial resource, and the players become more dense around the centre according to their share in the capital and their role in production.

The public, however, whitnesses but a medium-strong interest fight. The debate concerns not the actual directions of activities but the difficulties that stand in the way of these activities.

The basic problems come partly from the lagging of privatization (actually from its fact), and partly from ceasing the traditional structures, partly from the significant decrease of the role of the state. The players have become lonely, and got into rather "wild capitalistic" circumstances.

They had no time to get accustomed to these wolfish rules in the earlier times. What is more, they were accustomed to quite other things: to that the state "created opportunities", gave money, infrastructure (building, telephone lines, staff) and directions, and a security in which no attention had to be paid to real demand. This involved the existence security of players, the quiet of smaller fights, with the disquiet of principal debates. The appearance of private capital, the increase in the role of individual risk-taking, the rationalization and speeding up of publishing organization resulted in perfect uncertainty. This is experienced by the players as chaos, failure, crisis.

From the organizational point of view book trade shows a very versatile picture. The some thousand publishers registered by the firm court are in fact but 300-400 publishers at the most. The subsidiaries of large publishers have mushroomed, frequently aiming to appear with a new profile, or just to establish a new type of business.

II. A problem map of book trade

The problems characterizing the book trade of our days can be systematized on a problem map (the order does not mean an order by magnitude; the formulations mostly follow the formulation of the players.).

1. Book trade got into a failure, there is a chaos.
2. The professional safeguarding of interests does not work adequately.
3. There are blank spots in legislation which make it possible to act illegally.
4. Volumes have decreased.
5. There are some shifts in the subjects with the book titles published.
6. The profession is in a state of transition.
7. The profession got into a phase of shrinking.
8. The profession has entirely dissolved, unknown publishers appear by the hundreds.
9. The prices of books do not keep up with the rising costs.
10. Readers cannot pay the rising prices.
11. Book trade applies a too high price margin with books.
12. Publishers are surrendered to booksellers.
13. The wholesale trade of books has practically ceased.
14. An unconctrolled private wholesale trade of books has evolved.
15. Two thirds of bookshops have been closed.
16. Book trade has been forced to camping tables.
17. The choice of books is not easy to survey for a lack of information.
18. The system of state support is mistaken.
19. The role of the state is unadvised, except for concrete support several legal regulations are not elaborated, the tax policy does not favour the publishing of books.
20. In the system of funding through the Hungarian Book Foundation there are too many subjective elements. 21. The Attila József Foundation operates based on subjective principles as well.
22. The foundation form does not serve the interest of publishers.
23. The state does not consider booksellers.
24. Legislation is not prepared for punishing pirate publishing.
25. There are unequal chances in favour of old state publishers.
26. There are unequal chances in favour of new small publishers.
27. There are unequal chances with the appearance of foreign capital: the danger that it will swallow small Hungarian publishers is increasing.
28. There are unequal chances among publishers and booksellers as regards the speed and security of raising money.
29. A situation of pitfall has developed because of the lack of finances and mutual debts among booksellers and publishers.
30. From the book as a cultural medium too a part of the profit is deducted through VAT.
31. The state tries to deduct the capital from the profession at many levels.
32. The sums gained from privatization were not left entirely in the field of culture.
33. No information system is operating, the system of legal deposit is not elaborated.
34. The system that has developed between booksellers and publishers is very bad: all the publishers are in contact with all shops.
35. Some shops are entirely the interest fields of certain publishers, and no other publishers can appear there.
36. All trust "the small", and thus it is not very likely that a stronger cooperation will evolve among the players.
37. Instead of booktrade distributors, mediators and money collectors dominate the book market.
38. The institution system of copyright protection did not provide for a guarantee of copyright with its new decrees.
39. The situation of publishers in the county is much worse than that of those in the capital.
40. Monopolies have developed and are developing at many levels, and smaller organizations cannot defend themselves really effectively against this process.

We should put the questions: If so many people who are good professionals can formulate the problems why do the problems remain unsolved? Why cannot these problems be treated in a proper way? Is the reason just a lack of money, of adequate organization, of adequate legal regulation? Or is there a change going on not perceived by the players?

It is worth throwing a glance, as a comparison, at an investigation of book publishing carried out in 1986-1989.

III. The past: the state of book trade in the late 1980s, as seen by the editors of publishing houses

The research dealt with the situation of publishing houses, the internal organization of publishers, the special features of editorial work. Large publishers have been coping with visible operation troubles, with problems in the fields of publishing policy, finances, staff, organization and relationships. It could be felt that there are serious conflicts in the entire system of booktrade (printing houses - publishers - booksellers). New, alternative organizations have already appeared.

The research has fixed just the moment when all publishers felt that a change will happen. The question was just whether they will be proactive - i.e. able to elaborate a long-term strategy - or they will await and endure the changes, having no role in starting and influencing them. This "already - still" moment was the most exciting aspect of the entire research.

The research not only registered the problems and the conflict sources, but also the responses of organizations and their staff to the challenges inherent in the changes.

The investigation dealt with four large prominent publishers, covering a professional field each, based on questionnaires and in-depth interviews (Móra, Gondolat, Tankönyvkiadó and Műszaki Kiadó). Based on the questionnaires their internal "fine" structure could be revealed. The questionnaire covered also the classical variables:

1.) Distribution by sex

65% of the editors interviewed were women. This ratio was, however, different in management positions (men made up 65%).

2.) Distribution by age

The majority of staff was between 30 and 55 years of age.

3.) Distribution by educational attainment

Most of the editors graduated in philology or pedagogy; lawyers, economists and engineers were very infrequently to be found.

4.) Family background, territorial background

The majority of the interviewees were born in Budapest or in large towns. The majority of publishing houses are located in Budapest, and the book profession is organized by "estates". Most of the interviewees (56%) originated from a family of intellectuals or skilled workers. 59% of the spouses are also intellectuals.

The family background and the preliminary knowledge was important for being admitted into a publishing house..

5.) Career within a publishing house

The older large publishers have been organized according to a rather rigid structure with many separate sections, editorial offices, reader's departments.As regards hierarchical positions, they were rather flat "pyramids". There was a relatively small possibility for upward career mobility.

21% of the interviewees spent 6-10 years, 40% (!) of them 10-30 years (6 % even a longer time!) in the same publishing house.

The interviewees had not shown strong organizational career efforts, editors attributed ranks to each other not for posts, but for the quality and standard of the books they have edited.

6.) Getting into a publishing house, previous workplaces

Among the last workplaces prior to getting into a publishing house the ratio of schools, cultural institutions (libraries) was dominating. For most of the editors publishing houses were the first or second workplace. Editors got into the publishing houses mostly by acquaintance.

In 39% of the editors' families there were persons having worked in the book trade field; this indicates again that the organization of the profession has got a certain "estate" character.

7.) The prestige of editorial work

Editors ranked themselves to the 8th place on a 12-point scale where physicians and lawyers got the most scores and librarians the least.

8.) The peculiarities of editorial work

From the responses of editors a list of 57 abilities was compiled. Their statements were classified into two categories: the first category referring to professionalism, the contents of work, while the second one to communication abilities, and insight into human nature.

The most frequently mentioned abilities are:

- professional knowledge,
- style,
- informed decisions, overviewing,
- quick decision-making,
- negotiating,
- insight into human nature,
- a sense of diplomacy, tactfulness,
- good communication,
- self-reliance, determinedness,
- openness, flexibility,
- concentration skills,
- accuracy,
- ingenuity, inventiveness.

The book and the abilities to treat people are stressed, and the problems of business considerations related to books do not filter in at all. These professional criteria should be complemented by others or the approach remains one-sided; signifying a turning away from real market issues. At that time it was not necessary for the editor e.g. to estimate the production costs of a book, or the market demand, or and the expected benefit of the publisher. The editors had not been prepared for this either. As a consequence, later their number was reduced to one tenth. (Although it is true that they left for smaller publishing houses or work on a contractual basis.)

In the older times editorial taste had an important role in what was issued by a publishing house. Based on the responses interesting "taste categories" could be outlined.

Seven approaches could be distinguished.

T/1. "Receiving" type: even if his/her opinion is different, he/she understands and accepts the opinion of others, i.e. the works of authors reflecting other views.
T/2. "Debating" type: he/she debates with the author, maintains that his/her opinion is the right one, but does not hinder the publishing of the book.
T/3. "Postponing" type: expects that others make the decision, gets others to read the manuscript.
T/4. "Enduring" type: does not debate, lets the book go its own way, but maintains his/her opinion that he/she does not agree.

The above-mentioned four types were met most frequently, further three, the "rejecting, dependent and intervening" types relatively less frequently. These latter three types meant practically a rejection to edit a book.

9.) The way of a book within a publishing house

Owing to basic organizational problems in the 80s manuscripts spent an unjustified long time in editorial offices. The least time mentioned was 3-4 months, but it came up to 1-2 years too.

10.) How far does the formal organization of a publishing house correspond to its work?

It was formulated by many respondents that publishers are organized in a too office-like manner, the departments are too large, and not organized by the work flow.

The most frequently mentioned reasons for this were the following: - the organization does not take account of the economic requirements, - its structure is rigid, and so are the work plans, - the organization is oversize, - the organization is ruled by the technological and book-keeping departments, i.e. they have a too dominant say, - there is no real system of interests, - there are too many individual decisions, concentrated excessively in the hands of the upper management, - the departments do not cooperate adequately, instead they conduct an interest struggle.

The four publishing houses surveyed show by the mid-90s a variagated picture: most have already been privatized, half of them are struggling with serious financial problems, their staff decreased from 100-200 to 20-40. The larger departments were ceased, the editorial work was re-valuated.

With the Gondolat publishing house e.g. today there is only a staff of 27. It was transformed into a Ltd. company. It received two shops in the country (in Pécs and Szeged). 9 staff members out of the 27 belong to these shops. The three editorial offices were reduced to two, they publish 25 books a year. Among their publications there are many second editions.

The Móra publishing house was transformed into a share company, with share holders from banks and from abroad, and to a small degree from the staff. They publish 100 books a year, 65 being reprints. They sold several copyrights. The readers' departments were ceased, the number of editors is very small, but the book-keeping apparatus remained rather large.

In both publishing houses the post of the literary manager was ceased.

The problems formulated in the opinions are more difficult to describe than the changes experienced from the point of organization.

The second part of the survey carried out in the 80s, based on in-depth interviews is more difficult to analyse. From the publishing houses in the survey 14 staff members were willing to take part, while the number of those having told their opinions "as individuals" was higher.

A content analysis was made of the 314 pages of interviews. These contributions are, however, subjective, individual contributions on the reality experienced, and by the analysis the image of a dually built up reality is unfolding.

In the discussions respondents talked the most critical points in their work. The most frequently mentioned subjects were the office-like structure of the organization, the problems of individual work organization, the critical points of management and decision-making, the reasons for the slow process of books within the publishing house, the subjectivity of evaluating individual work, the deficiencies of market analysis and cost planning.

These interviews illustrated well that the ideas relating to the renewal of the organization were not realized, that the process of producing books was split up by non-cooperating organizational units. The division of labour was a question of managerial decisions, and some editors have been more favoured. The organizations are considered oversize, the staff number does not, however, depend on economic efficiency, but on acquaintances, on favours. In almost all of the four publishing houses there were separated interest groups: the contradition between "they" and "we" was formulated everywhere (i.e. differences in assignments, allowances and opportunities).

The various departments worked separately, news were not public, the internal, informal news chain, however, operated very strongly.

The way of books was accompanied by files: in certain publishing houses permission processes well reflected inner conditions, and also indicated why some books come out so slowly.

It has been formulated by many that the opportunities of the profession are getting narrower. At the same time responsibility was rejected by everybody, and, as a protection, signatures, permissions were included in the already office-like organization of publishing houses.

Many dealt with the issues of management: mostly politically acceptable persons were admitted to the top of publishers, even if they had nothing in common with books, not even with intellectual work. Managers had full powers. Some respondents even have divided the history of publishing houses according to the managers.

In the statutes of organizations it was formulated unanimously that it is the task of managers to enforce ideological and political considerations. And we are aware what this meant...

To sum up: at the end of the 80s editors have identified a variety of conflict sources. They saw that the old status quo cannot be maintained. It is, however, very likely that they had not even dreamt of what happened in the 90s in the book trade profession. Their viewpoints were, of course, very special. They did not want assist renewal, rather tried to build out protection mechanisms. Thus very good individual responses were born to the challenges. Part of the editors are active in the publishing trade today too, but in a different way, under different conditions than earlier. Organizations have proved entirely inapt for responding, and what remained from them is now struggling for momentary survival. Large publishers are not characterized by renewal, but rather by slow demise. From the four publishing houses analysed only the Műszaki was able to regenerate, to survive in the market environment - just because of its ability to make a long-term plan.

IV. What is characteristic for the present situation, for the publishing world of the 90s?

A process of privatization took place in the book trade field, and partly it is still going on. What will the organizational map be like and what will the chances of the players having different motives be like? The boundary line between publishers and booksellers will be the presence or absence of the own risk.

V. The formulation of problems, the pitfall situations of problem carriers

Several problems have been formulated in the book trade profession and have become common knowledge for most managers of the profession. Where lies the difficulty of the present situation?

1.) The problems are linked with each other as a chain. If one is solved, the situation as a whole is not. (E.g. privatization did not create a unanimous situation on the book market and the state support system will not be able to work upon equal principles.)

The system of copyright protection was transformed, the monopoly of the Copyright Office was ceased for individual contracts. So-called literary agencies were set up to attend to this business. It has not, however, created a system of guarantees for copyright protection in Hungary: it rather led to illegal book production (pirate publications).

2.) As the problems are linked with each other in a chain-like manner, it becomes inextricable where, at what level decisions are made. To be more precise: at what level to intervene with the solution of problems.

Privatization put an end to the maintenance of institutions by the state providing false security to their staff. However, no system of protection has been elaborated by public administration to somehow support valuable, culturally worthy publications. The state withdrew as a maintainer of organizations, and did not remain with its financial and tax-political means as a sponsor of culture either.

Those concerned agree only that the state needs culture, but there is no agreement on the necessary means. During the collapse of the old system it was proposed that the state should not support organizations, operations, but works. This solution raised several new problems. Criticism did not become more objective at all, but the struggle goes on for small amounts of money, and there is a stable race for raising support funds. (The decisions are influenced by the composition of decision-making bodies. In addition to political issues the various fields of knowledge are not equally represented and science is disadvantaged as related to arts. E.g. the Academy of Sciences is not represented in the board of the Book Foundation.)

3.) All try to find individual solutions. These solutions plus the lack of cooperation do not create a system with honest business rules.

Without the state elaborating the legal rules with serious sanctions, no ethical codex will have any weight.

It should be formulated very clearly: what is the role of the state in the field of legislation, what coordination is necessary for elaborating these rules, and what tools the state has got to punish those breaking the rules.

4.) There is too much unsystematized information. This does not help to solve the problems, but further deepens the difficulties. The present state could be characterized by everybody being in contact with everybody, and still, everybody strives to collect individual information.

Practically, with the closing of wholesale trade it is no longer possible to order almost all books from a single firm, and vice versa: it was in the past sufficient to give the books over to one bookseller to sell it in many places. This "everybody with everybody" state was formulated by the players as chaos.

The book trade profession has been entirely transformed, but the following citation, mentioned by Watzlawik in his book on change, characterizes the feeling of embarrassment excellently:

"Now that you have broken over the wall with your head what will you do in the neighbouring cell?"

All depends on what the players are going to begin in this new situation, what new rules are being developed, and how strongly the interest groups are going to influence the book trade profession.