Advisor pushing me to publish with Springer. I prefer Routledge

[carlos]

This is a dilemma that is enviable, but at the same time is causing me a lot of sleepless nights. Right after I defended the Ph.D., thinking that I was in for a long season of rejections,  I send my proposal to several publishers. 
To my delight, I got multiple offers to publish my Ph.D. dissertation--Springer, Oxford, and Routledge. As soon as Springer replied I wrote to Routledge saying that I have an offer from Springer, but I would prefer Routledge. I understand it is much more prestigious. They then offered me a contract.I spoke to my advisor. I thought  she would be happy when I said that I had an offer from Routledge, but she was not. She had recommended my dissertation to Springer and now she says her relationship with them will be spoiled if I go with Routledge.
I fear:

1. If I back out from Routledge who have already sent me a contract to sign,  I will be blacklisted by them. 

2. On the other hand, I feel my supervisor will be offended if I refuse to give Springer the contract. I understand that they are using their connections with my supervisor to get her to pressure me.

An enviable dilemma but it is giving me sleepless nights. I don t want to offend my supervisor, but I want to go with Routledge. What should I do now?

[eigen]

It seems like a leap to assume that Spring is trying to "pressure" you by using your supervisor as a connection.

It seems far more reasonable to assume it's exactly as stated: your supervisor used her connections to get you the offer, and are worried it will look bad if you decline it.

I can't imagine that any of the publishers would see one publication as something that's going to sour a long-term relationship, but maybe others in book fields can give more specific feedback there. You have multiple offers, take the one you feel like is best for you and politely decline the others explaining that you took the best offer.

The only wrinkle here that confuses me (and again, I'm not a book field) is that you sent this out to multiple publishers at once. Is that common practice? In my (non-book) field, sending a manuscript multiple places is not recommended.

[Caracal]

This is a dilemma that is enviable, but at the same time is causing me a lot of sleepless nights. Right after I defended the Ph.D., thinking that I was in for a long season of rejections,  I send my proposal to several publishers. 
To my delight, I got multiple offers to publish my Ph.D. dissertation--Springer, Oxford, and Routledge. As soon as Springer replied I wrote to Routledge saying that I have an offer from Springer, but I would prefer Routledge. I understand it is much more prestigious. They then offered me a contract.I spoke to my advisor. I thought  she would be happy when I said that I had an offer from Routledge, but she was not. She had recommended my dissertation to Springer and now she says her relationship with them will be spoiled if I go with Routledge.
I fear:

1. If I back out from Routledge who have already sent me a contract to sign,  I will be blacklisted by them. 

2. On the other hand, I feel my supervisor will be offended if I refuse to give Springer the contract. I understand that they are using their connections with my supervisor to get her to pressure me.

An enviable dilemma but it is giving me sleepless nights. I don t want to offend my supervisor, but I want to go with Routledge. What should I do now?

Perhaps this is field dependent-publishers never publish dissertations in my field-but your advisor seems incredibly out of line. This is your book and your career. Your advisor isn't your advisor anymore. They can give you advice, but that is all it should be. You aren't compelled to follow it in the way you were as a grad student. Even worse, your advisor apparently wants you to base your career decisions on her relationships with publishers. There's a power imbalance here because the implicit threat she is making is that if you don't do what she wants, she might not continue to write you good rec letters or use her connections on your behalf.

That doesn't really help you figure out what to do, but you should know that you're being treated badly here and this isn't your fault at all.

[eigen]

This is a dilemma that is enviable, but at the same time is causing me a lot of sleepless nights. Right after I defended the Ph.D., thinking that I was in for a long season of rejections,  I send my proposal to several publishers. 
To my delight, I got multiple offers to publish my Ph.D. dissertation--Springer, Oxford, and Routledge. As soon as Springer replied I wrote to Routledge saying that I have an offer from Springer, but I would prefer Routledge. I understand it is much more prestigious. They then offered me a contract.I spoke to my advisor. I thought  she would be happy when I said that I had an offer from Routledge, but she was not. She had recommended my dissertation to Springer and now she says her relationship with them will be spoiled if I go with Routledge.
I fear:

1. If I back out from Routledge who have already sent me a contract to sign,  I will be blacklisted by them. 

2. On the other hand, I feel my supervisor will be offended if I refuse to give Springer the contract. I understand that they are using their connections with my supervisor to get her to pressure me.

An enviable dilemma but it is giving me sleepless nights. I don t want to offend my supervisor, but I want to go with Routledge. What should I do now?

Perhaps this is field dependent-publishers never publish dissertations in my field-but your advisor seems incredibly out of line. This is your book and your career. Your advisor isn't your advisor anymore. They can give you advice, but that is all it should be. You aren't compelled to follow it in the way you were as a grad student. Even worse, your advisor apparently wants you to base your career decisions on her relationships with publishers. There's a power imbalance here because the implicit threat she is making is that if you don't do what she wants, she might not continue to write you good rec letters or use her connections on your behalf.

That doesn't really help you figure out what to do, but you should know that you're being treated badly here and this isn't your fault at all.

I feel like this reads a lot into the post that was not stated.

From the OP, the advisor was merely "not happy for them" and said her relationship / future recommendations of students work might be soured.

Explaining to the OP the impact their decisions will make is not "implicitly pressuring" them. Much of this depends on the content of earlier conversations. Did the advisor know there were multiple parallel submissions at the time? If they thought it was a single submission and wrote a letter to that effect, they may very well feel like the OP used / misled them, especially since the OP used the offer from Springer as leverage for another company. I know if I went to bat for my student for a position and used my connections to get it for them and it turned out to only be something they were using as leverage for a different position, I would be at least mildly upset, since they would be hurting future students of mine who might not get a position due to their choices.

[carlos]

Thank you for all the replies.
My advisor was the one who recommended that I send the manuscript to different publishers. She told me that the most important thing was to get published as soon as possible. She knew that I had sent the manuscript to Routledge, and it was she who said that she d recommend me to Springer. I think she too was surprised that Routledge accepted my work at the first try. I gather it is rather difficult to get published with Routledge.
It was rather unexpected. However, Springer was the first to make me an offer.

[mamselle]

What I don't get is, why not wait for Oxford?

In the fields I know of, neither Springer nor Routledge are nearly as well-regarded as OUP.

Or has it been long enough you're fairly sure of not hearing from Oxford?

It's also field-dependent, I'm sure, but in the (humanities/arts/languages/history) fields I'm familiar with, you don't send a manuscript to more than one publisher at a time.

You might send a query (or is that what you are calling a proposal?) to more than one, but even that seems odd to me (transparency: I've worked on/edited other folks' books, am just now working on my own, so what I know or think I know should be taken with some caution).

Obviously, people need to know a bit more about your field (just as specifically as you feel safe in revealing it), but that's an important element in any case.

And, yeah, it also seems odd to me that your advisor would be trying to micromanage things at this point.

M.

[Parasaurolophus]

The only wrinkle here that confuses me (and again, I'm not a book field) is that you sent this out to multiple publishers at once. Is that common practice? In my (non-book) field, sending a manuscript multiple places is not recommended.

It's common in the fields I know about to send a book proposal to multiple publishers, although once you've secured the contract, that's it. For early-career folks, it's common to send the whole manuscript as part of the proposal. (Multiple submission of articles, on the other hand, is not usually allowed.)

(I think this is consistent with what mamselle's saying.)

[pigou]

I'm not in a book field, but echo the sentiment that you need to go with the publisher that is best for your career. Springer is a major publisher and will get over not getting your book contract. In fact, they'll probably stop caring about this 30 seconds after getting your email.

Your adviser is exaggerating, probably in their own mind too, the effect this will have on their relationship with the publisher. "I can get you a deal with a publisher" is a lot more like self-aggrandization than a realistic assessment of what happened. You got a better outcome on your own, so congratulations! (And if OUP is even better, email them and see if they'll bite.)

[Hegemony]

You've actually gotten an offer to publish with Oxford? That's what "To my delight, I got multiple offers to publish my Ph.D. dissertation--Springer, Oxford, and Routledge" sounds like. You're choosing Springer or Routledge above Oxford?  Is this for real?  Or are you some sly kind of troll?

Why ever would you not choose Oxford, which outranks both Springer and Routledge astronomically?

There are some other misapprehensions in your statements.

First, "If I back out from Routledge who have already sent me a contract to sign,  I will be blacklisted by them." That's crazy. It's signing the contract that means you should not go back on the deal. If you don't sign the contract, the specific editor will be momentarily annoyed. Then she will roll her eyes, and by next month she will have forgotten about it. You just say something like, "Due to other considerations, I've decided to go in a different direction. Thanks for your time."

Second, Routledge is a solid press, but it does not outweigh all kinds of other presses in heft and prestige. It is a mid-ranking press. Don't do anything because of the supposed stratospheric prestige of Routledge. It is fine, but it does not have stratospheric prestige that puts all other presses in the shade.

But. Normally you do not get an offer unless a press has read your entire manuscript. And you are only supposed to send your entire manuscript out to one press at a a time. How did three presses read your entire manuscript, all at once?  That's where the editors may get a little shirty. They have presumably each paid multiple reviewers to read your manuscript. So you are indeed violating the rules if this is the situation. So you will irritate two of the three publishers. That said, irritate the two lowest-ranking, which are Springer and Routledge.

[carlos]

Oxford was third. They have not accepted it completely. I will have to make major revisions to the manuscript, but, in principle, I have conditional acceptance. That s all. It can go either way. The field is political science.  However,  my advisor says that I need to publish as soon as possible.

[jerseyjay]

I sense this is very field specific. In history (my field) you would never just send your dissertation to be published--it would usually take at least a year or two to revise it. Also, Oxford is considered top of the line, Routledge is generally considered mediocre (although it depends on the subfields) and, to be honest, I cannot remember ever seeing a history book published by Springer. That said, I remember all the mathematicians carrying around a lot of  yellow Springer books.

In history, you also would not send your entire manuscript out to several publishers, but you could send the proposal out to several publishers. But again, none would publish it without major revisions (because, well, its a dissertation and nobody likes to read those). What type of revisions does OUP require? Will they make the manuscript better? Remember, this book will have your name on it for a long time, and while you want to publish it quickly, you also want it to be good. (Of course, again, some fields have much shorter half lives.)

Also, I get the sense that in some fields the advisor is much more important after the defense than in history. I mean, one might (or might not) ask one's history advisor what is a better publisher, but in the end, one would do what one thinks best.

All that said, keep in mind that "publishers" don't really have "relationships." I mean, OUP has been around since around 1586, and I doubt their memory goes back that long. However, individual editors do have connections and relationships. Sometimes editors stick around a long time. Sometimes they don't. But so long as you treat the editors well, they will understand that good authors have multiple opportunities.

[Hegemony]

The time necessary to make the revisions for Oxford will be amply rewarded in the increased prestige. If Oxford wants more revisions than Springer or Routledge, it means their standards are higher — which is good.  And 3-6 months' extra time before publication is not going to make any appreciable difference. If it makes your advisor mad, your advisor is ill-informed.  Really, it would be insane to choose Springer or Routledge over Oxford. Get going on those revisions.

[Caracal]

If possible, I would try to run this by someone in your field. It still sounds to me like your advisor is behaving strangely, but maybe I'm missing something about the norms of publishing in your field, or maybe there's some kind of misunderstanding about sending it to multiple presses or some other issue that would explain things.

[Vkw10]

Springer is weak in social sciences. They bought Palgrave a few years ago, in an attempt to broaden their reach. Palgrave was solid, but not great. Springer's strong point is math and computer science.

Routledge is a solid social science publisher, but their books are expensive. That means fewer sales, which means fewer readers.

Oxford is a top press for social sciences. Their books are reasonably priced and widely distributed. Long-term, taking the time to revise for Oxford is best.

Your advisor is urging you to publish quickly. Having publications will improve your chances of getting interviews for academic positions, if that's your goal. For on-academic positions, I gather that publication is less important. Do you have several solid journal articles? If you do, you can take the time to revise for Oxford.

[Cheerful]

The time necessary to make the revisions for Oxford will be amply rewarded in the increased prestige. If Oxford wants more revisions than Springer or Routledge, it means their standards are higher — which is good.  And 3-6 months' extra time before publication is not going to make any appreciable difference. If it makes your advisor mad, your advisor is ill-informed.  Really, it would be insane to choose Springer or Routledge over Oxford. Get going on those revisions.

+1  Oxford -- if it's understood that after you make their requested revisions they will, indeed, publish.