Thursday, September 3, 2009
A question of money
The past weeks of working for Quartet Press have seen me immersed in a number of tasks that need to be done like…now, but one of the most important things has been setting up the editorial hiring process and getting qualified content and copy editors on board to read submissions, acquire manuscripts and fill our schedule with fabulous books.
My hiring process for the positions has three main steps: a letter of introduction to the position’s duties and pay, an edit of a short partial manuscript along with a critical analysis (for content editors) and an edit of a completed short along with a revision letter (again for content editors). When I first started doing the hiring at my previous position, I didn’t include the first step–the letter of introduction to the position’s duties and pay. I quickly came to realize this letter was a crucial part of the process, because many people aren’t familiar with the business model of digital publishing or with the method of payment generally employed by digital publishers to pay their editors, and many applicants were expecting either an hourly wage, a salary or a high per word pay.
Every digital publisher does pay somewhat differently, but most pay editors via book royalties in some way. Some publishers pay editors only in book royalties, some pay a small fee per book plus royalties, or other variations of these ways. At Quartet, we pay content editors per word edited, payable immediately upon delivery of a completed manuscript, plus a percentage of the book’s royalties, payable quarterly. This allows the editor to be paid promptly for their work, but to also share in the book’s success.
There are pros and cons for both the editor and the publisher to payment in this manner. In the “con” column, it can make it difficult for publisher to attract experienced editors to the position. On the other hand, it makes it an attractive position to new applicants, eager to learn the trade and enthusiastic about helping build the publisher and the author. For the editor who works under this pay structure, especially those who work on a royalty-only basis, with no flat fee or per-word fee, working for royalty-only can be both risky and discouraging for several reasons, including having to wait months to get paid for work performed and little to no pay for publishers/books that have low sales.
On the plus side, the editor enters into a kind of partnership with the publisher and author, invested in acquiring the best manuscripts possible, polishing them to the highest quality, and enthusiastically promoting them. For the editor, this payment arrangement can mean escalating paychecks and a share of each book’s success. Editors who work with successful publishers and authors come to appreciate this arrangement and see the benefit of it.
Publisher who enter into this type of arrangement with their editors do not do so lightly, and reputable publishers revisit the policy periodically as the company grows, to ensure editors continue to be compensated fairly for the time, effort and loyalty shown to the company, and to ensure the payment structure continues to be the best choice for the publisher, editors and authors. At Quartet, one of our goals as a publisher is to grow not just our company, but our editors and authors as well, and that includes re-evaluating and innovating processes as needed.
We realize that this type of payment arrangement is new to many in publishing, though authors, readers and editors familiar with digital publishing will probably have seen this discussed before. We’d like to hear comments from both sides, those who are familiar with this pay structure and those who are new to it. What are your thoughts?
This is an interesting way to handle payment for content editors, and I’ll be checking back to see how well it works. I didn’t know that was how it worked for a lot of digital presses–I have much more knowledge of print publishing.
As someone who does contract editing, I appreciate that you are splitting the payments so that the editor will be paid, no matter how quickly or well the book sells. It shows a healthy level of respect for the work a good editor does. That–combined with the reputation you, Angela, and the rest of the folks involved with Quartet–will help you attract and retain a stable of satisfied editors who will work with you and your authors to ensure that you put out only the best books.
And, because everyone needs a good editor, I’ll mention that I meant to say “…the reputation you, Angela, and the rest of the folks involved with Quartet HAVE…”
Hi Angela,
I was initially surprised to see a royalty dimension listed as part of the content editor’s compensation in your call for applications. Why? Mostly because I’d never given it any thought. I’m new to the publishing industry and haven’t come across the details so openly shared as you guys do on this blog.
Yet, upon reflection, I think I can see some merit in this approach. Books that are exceptionally written, carefully edited, beautifully packaged and prominently marketed will yield greater long term sales. Not only due to initial push of a new release, but of repurchase from consumers who learn the Quartet brand equates a quality publication.
In the long term, this seems like it could be a strong compensation model for good content editors, however I imagine it’s a labor of love (and lower compensation expectations) while the backlist and brand is building momentum.
As always, I learn fascinating details of the publishing industry by following the Quartet evolution.
Melissa
I think one benefit to the arrangement is that Quartet’s editors are going to be working hard to see it succeed.
It sounds like the perfect arrangement for someone planning to be in the business for the long haul.
I guess my concern with this model would be the amount of unpaid work an editor might do with reading, evaluating and ultimately rejecting submissions. It seems to me that some sort of base salary would provide motivation to take more time and care with those aspects of the job. Also, this model makes the editor even more dependent on the quality of submissions received; the more you would have to reject, the more work you’d be doing for essentially no pay.
One factor that would make a big difference would be whether royalties are paid on all sales or only net sales, and if the latter, on what the net threshold was.