Article
0 comment

Indexing as Storytelling

What does the process of indexing consist of?

Is it primarily a process of extracting terms from the text? I’ve noticed, when talking to readers and editors, that this seems to be how many people conceptualize writing an index. It is less writing and more data mining. 

I want to suggest an alternative approach. While identifying and picking up key words is important, I don’t think that that is enough. A excellent index should also contain an element of storytelling. 

I also want to address a mistake that I’ve seen newer indexers make. It is being so focused on the myriad details of the text that they—and the index—lose sight of the larger context. I’ve noticed this especially in subheadings. I don’t think that this is an intentional mistake. Books contain such a tsunami of information that it can be difficult to know where to focus. This is why I prefer to spread the work out over several days, so my mind has time to process and absorb what I’ve read. If you struggle to keep the big picture in mind while indexing, I hope this reflection gives you some pointers.

As a caveat, while writing this I have in mind narrative-driven books. Think histories and biographies. These are books that typically contain a lot of detail while also telling a story. Other sorts of books, such as in the social sciences, how-to guides, or law, are more technical in nature and may not have an overt narrative (though every book should have some sort of structure). But even for more technical books, it is important to keep the larger context in mind. 

Context, Context, Context

In my book, Book Indexing: A Step-by-Step Guide, I discuss what I call the hierarchy of information. At the top is the metatopic, which is what the entire book is about. Below that are the supermain discussions, which are the handful of major arguments or areas of focus that comprise the metatopic. Below the supermain discussions are the regular discussions, which are the sub-discussions which flesh out the supermains. At the very bottom are all the little details, typically names, places, events, etc… All of these layers are nested together and should be reflected in the index.

When I refer to the context or the big picture of a book, I am talking about the metatopic, supermain, and regular discussions. These are the overarching discussions that give meaning to the smaller details. Problems can arise when the indexer fails to link back to the context, leaving readers confused about the meaning or relevance of an array or subheading.

Audience as Context

Before I jump into some examples at the subheading level, which is where I usually see this issue, I also want to mention that the book’s audience is also an important context. Not every detail is indexable. Before starting the index, think about what is important to the readers.

I’ve seen it happen when the indexer is so focused on picking up the details that they forget to assess whether the details are relevant. For example (and this is a made-up example, as I don’t want to embarrass anyone), say the book is a memoir on hiking Mount Everest. The author also briefly discusses, over a few paragraphs, a previous trip hiking Mount Kilimanjaro. Since it is discussed, Mount Kilimanjaro should have a main entry, but because the overall focus of the book—and presumably of readers—is on Mount Everest, the indexer does not need to pick up specific details about people and places associated with Mount Kilimanjaro. Those details are not relevant and will bloat the index. Instead, focus the index on Mount Everest. 

Using Subheadings to Tell a Story

Now let’s discuss subheadings.

Subheadings are crucial for breaking down large arrays into searchable chunks, but they are only effective if they are clearly written. Subheadings which are too granular and disconnected from their context are not helpful.

Consider this example. This is also made-up and is similar to real arrays that I have seen.  

Obama, Barack: communications with; congressional leaders and; economy and; Iraq and; oil and; as president; Senate and

How much do you understand about Obama from these subheadings? Do you have a clear sense of what you will find if you let these subheadings direct you?

To start, who is Obama communicating with? About what? It could be about anything. The subheadings “congressional leaders and’ and “Senate and” are a little more specific. If the text itself is vague or if these subheadings cover multiple interactions, then this level of vagueness may be appropriate. But what if we learn that these three subheadings are all referring to negotiations over the Affordable Care Act? Now we have context.

“As president” is also an unhelpful subheading, since most readers should know that Obama was president. Does it help to learn that the context is being elected during the 2008 presidential election? The other subheadings, for the economy, Iraq, and oil, may be clear enough, though it again depends on what the text is actually about. 

While all of these subheadings are technically correct—Obama is indeed communicating with someone, he is president, and he is doing something in regards to the economy—these subheadings also feel disconnected from anything concrete, at least to me. If we revise these subheadings to more accurately reflect the larger discussions, we get the following array. Which seems more connected to his presidency? Which is more helpful to readers?

Obama, Barack: 2008 presidential election; Affordable Care Act; economic policies; Keystone XL pipeline; withdrawal from Iraq

Let’s look at another example. Sometimes subheadings within an array are treated as a list, as in a list of names. 

Microsoft: Allen; Ballmer; Gates; Nadella; Wallace

These are all key players in Microsoft’s history. They are important and should all have main entries, but is listing them as subheadings really the best use of the Microsoft array? It doesn’t tell us much except that these people all have links to Microsoft. Why not use the subheadings to instead tell Microsoft’s story? Gates, Ballmer, and the others can still be in the index; just not the focus here. 

Rewriting the Book in the Index?

At this point, I can imagine a couple of objections. Is storytelling really appropriate within an index?

A common rule of thumb is to not rewrite the book in the index. I understand the point, that the index is supposed to direct readers to where the discussion actually is. But the index can only direct if the entries are clearly written. One of the best ways to be clear, in my opinion, is to connect to the larger context. I enjoy stories, and so I like to think of this as storytelling. If it helps, think of this as being clear and specific. What will resonate with the reader? Use that to hook the reader and send them in the right direction. 

It is also important to select the level of specificity that matches the discussion in the text. Returning to the Obama example, the Affordable Care Act is much more specific, and therefore more meaningful, than a generic subheading for healthcare policies. But if the discussion in the book is more like a broad overview, as in an overview of various economic policies, then a subheading at a broader level, like “economic policies,” would be the better choice.

Storytelling vs. Lists

I am also not saying that you should never make a list. Using subheadings to gather information into a list is also a valid approach. The two approaches can even be used in the same index. For example, for a book about Margaret Atwood, the main array for Atwood could tell the story of her life and career while a separate array—perhaps appended using the em-dash-modified format—could list all mentions of her novels and other writings. Books that are more technical in nature, rather than narrative-driven, may also favor lists over storytelling. The trick is knowing when each strategy is appropriate.

I also think that storytelling—making sure that the big picture is adequately represented in the index—can be more difficult to do, or at least more difficult to remember. It is summarizing and pointing towards the narrative and structure that exists within the book. Gathering together a list is often easier. 

When indexing, remember that you have options for how to present entries and information to the reader, and that your goal is to clearly communicate what the book is about.

Taking a Step Back

So how do you see the big picture? How do you channel that wave of information that is threatening to overwhelm you?

I find it helps to pause and take a step back. I especially do this if I feel like I’ve lost sight of the author’s argument or point. Or if there are a lot of names and other details and so it is easier to make two passes over that section, once for the details and a second time to see the full picture. I ask myself, “What is this discussion about, anyway?” Once I’ve identified the overarching discussion, I may need to go back and create entries for the context that I’ve missed.

If you struggle to see the big picture or the hierarchy of information, try to develop a habit of pausing and reflecting. Read until you hit a transition. Pause. How would you summarize the discussion you just read? How does the discussion fit into the larger structure or narrative of the book? Try completing the following sentence: “This section is about…” Be clear, specific, and meaningful. Once you have your answer, put it in the index.

Article
0 comment

Finding Your Indexing Niche

Last month was very busy for me, culminating in the Indexing Society of Canada’s virtual conference, where I co-presented with Enid Zafran on the current state and future of embedded indexing. I may write more later about embedded indexing, but in the meantime, our findings reminded me of how segmented publishing is.

Publishing houses range from small regional or literary presses that only publish ten or twenty books per year to the giant behemoths, such as HarperCollins or Penguin Random House, with their dozens of imprints. Or, from a small university press that specializes in a handful of subjects and, again, maybe only publishes ten books per year, to the massive scholarly presses like Oxford UP or Palgrave MacMillan. There is also now the distinction between traditional publishers, who buy book rights, and hybrid publishers, who give authors both more responsibility and more control. Self-publishing is also an increasingly viable option.

Some publishers manage production in-house and want to be in direct communication with their freelancers while other publishers prefer to make indexing the author’s responsibility and/or work through third-party production companies. Some publishers prefer embedded indexes while others want a separate back-of-the-book index. Some publishers care about the quality of their books and are willing to pay their freelancers a fair price while other publishers only seem to care about volume and spending as little as they can. 

Then, of course, there are the countless subjects that books are published in. Some publishers are very specialized, while others—especially large publishers—publish across a wide range of subjects.

What this means for you, as a freelance indexer (or editor, or designer, or project manager), is that the type of work you get, the type of clients you work with, and possibly even your income, can vary considerably depending on how you position yourself within these submarkets. 

Do you want to exclusively write embedded indexes? You can do that, and probably receive more offers for work than you can accept. Do you want to specialize in science and engineering texts? You can do that too. Work only with authors? Or only with publishers? You can market yourself to get those results. 

Being a freelancer within an industry as vast as publishing is both an advantage and a challenge.

The advantage is that you can’t possibly work for everyone. This gives you the freedom to pick and choose. Be competitive by choosing a segment or two that is interesting to you and that other indexers are maybe less active in. Only market towards the clients you want to work with and ignore the rest. Find a way to differentiate yourself.

The challenge is that it can be difficult to break into a niche. It takes time to build a reputation and for your name to be passed around word-of-mouth. It can be difficult to identity and contact the gatekeepers who hire or refer freelancers. I am currently trying to shift towards indexing more Asian studies and religious studies books, and even I am finding that to be a slow process. It can also be a challenge to know which niches to pursue.

But even if you experiment with a few niches to see which sticks (which is certainly fair to do as you get started), I still encourage you to try and narrow your focus. It is easier to build expertise in a subset of subjects or with a subset of clients than to be an expert at everything. And while it takes time to break in, once established I think you will find that you have more than enough work.

As you think about which niches to pursue and how to differentiate yourself, consider some of these questions:

  • What subjects do you enjoy? What subjects do you already have some expertise in?
  • Do you have a preference for trade books or scholarly books? What about other areas, such as journals, databases, and websites?
  • Do you enjoy embedded indexing? Are you willing to learn?
  • Do you prefer working with authors or publishers?
  • How much do you want to earn? Which clients are more likely to pay what you want?
  • How many projects do you want per month or per year?

Many indexers, including myself, work within a few niches. Having variety is both an insurance policy against one niche or client disappearing, and switching back and forth between different subjects or types of projects can also be more enjoyable. But I think most long-time indexers would also agree that they don’t try to serve everyone. That is simply too much to ask for one person.

Have a focus, or two or three. Become a recognized expert in those areas. That will serve you better in the long run. To be different is to be competitive. 

Article
0 comment

Indexing Yellowstone’s Wolves

It is not too often that I have the privilege of indexing an entire series. It is also not every index in which structure plays such a prominent role. I mean, structure—deciding which entries and arrays to create, where to place them within the index, and how they relate to each other—is always important, but for some indexes structure can play a heightened role.

I recently indexed the fifth volume in the Alpha Wolves of Yellowstone series, written by Rick McIntyre and published by Greystone Books. Rick has been observing and studying the wolves at Yellowstone National Park for about 25 years. His books are an intimate portrayal of the lives of the wolves, beginning with the first generation that was reintroduced into Yellowstone and continuing up to the present day. Each book typically focuses on one or two key individuals, and from there explores the dynamics within packs, between packs, and the role that wolves play within the Yellowstone ecosystem. I indexed the first volume, The Rise of Wolf 8, in 2019, and the latest volume, Thinking Like a Wolf, will be released later this year.

I highly recommend the series if you are interested in wolves, Yellowstone, or animal conservation. My Grandpa even enjoyed the first couple of volumes, when he was still able to read. I remember visiting and discovering the books in his home. He was pleasantly surprised to learn that I had indexed them, though to be honest, I don’t know if Grandpa ever fully understood what it is I do.

Indexing Wolves

From an indexing standpoint, the books present an interesting puzzle. The focus is squarely on the lives of the wolves, though with a few dozen wolves discussed and mentioned in each book, it can be difficult to remember which is which. Most of the wolves are radio collared and assigned a number (wolf 8, wolf 480, wolf 996, etc…). While the numbers make it easier to differentiate, they can also be difficult to remember. There are also a few wolves without radio collars who are referred to by nicknames, such as Big Blaze, Medium Gray, and Slant.

Another challenge is that while the author does an excellent job of weaving a narrative, there are also a lot of elements in the lives of the wolves that are repetitive. The wolves grow up, they find mates, they raise pups, they hunt, and the next year, if they survive, they do it all over again. They also frequently interact with other packs and other animals, such as bison. Each book typically spans several years, following the lives of the featured wolves. How best to index all of that without making the index too repetitive?

Both of these challenges have to do with structuring the index, which proved to be the biggest challenge. The structure should be meaningful to the subject matter and easy to use. Though once I figured out my approach, I used the same approach across all volumes. For a series, it helps to have the same indexer throughout to maintain consistency, so that readers know what to expect in each subsequent volume. 

In this index profile, I am going to outline how I approached the structure, using examples from the third volume in the series, The Redemption of Wolf 302, which was published in 2021. 

Placing Wolves in Context

As I mentioned, it can be difficult to remember which wolf is which. It can also be difficult to remember which wolf is part of which pack. So, I decided to use the em-dash-modified format to place all of the wolves together within their respective packs.

The value of this approach is that it keeps each pack together. Readers only need to look in one place to see all of the details about that pack. The downside is that this can lead to large arrays. One of the largest in The Redemption of Wolf 302 is for the Slough Creek pack, with 36 subheadings under the main heading and 16 members listed using em dashes.

To give a shorter example, here is the main heading and 4 of the 11 wolves listed under the Agate Creek pack:

Agate Creek wolf pack: background, xxii; Blacktail pack formation and, 200, 201–2; breeding, 108, 160, 207–8; confrontation with Druid Peak pack, 20–22; confrontations with Slough Creek pack, 35, 96; grizzly encounter, 135; humans encounter, 136–37; injured pup, 158, 165; membership changes, 214; pup rearing, 136; size, 23, 206–7; Slough Creek pack’s territory and, 139; visits between related females from other packs, 218; wolf 302’s interest in females, 162

—Big Blaze (alpha male), 197, 201, 206, 208, 209, 214

—wolf 06: introduction, 85, 92, 141; Blacktail pack and, 200–201, 208–11; future of, 245; hunting abilities, 211; independent living, 214, 220; interest in wolf 302, 163; photographs, plate 7, plate 8; relationship with sister, 136; return to Agate pack, 207–8

—wolf 471. See under Lava Creek wolf pack

—wolf 472 (alpha female): avoidance of Slough Creek pack, 35; breeding, 108, 160, 207–8; confrontation with Druid Peak pack, 21; disturbance from humans, 137; pregnancies and pups, 85, 92–93, 135, 214; relationship with wolf 113, 106–7

Individuals vs. Packs

Using this structure, I also differentiate between discussions about the pack as a whole and discussions about the individual members within that pack. In the example above, the initial set of subheadings under the “Agate Creek wolf pack” main heading are about the pack as a whole. Those discussions generally involve multiple members of the pack or, in the case of the injured pup, an unnamed member. Those subheadings also provide an overview of the pack’s activities.

Specific discussions and mentions about each member are found under each specific wolf. There is some overlap between the pack-level subheadings and the specific members. For example, under the alpha female wolf 472, the subheadings for “breeding” and “confrontation with Druid Peak pack” are also under “Agate Creek wolf pack.” This reflects the fact that pack-level activities involve specific wolves, which are often mentioned, and so double-posting is necessary. Though I also try to honor this distinction between pack and individuals, and not everything needs to be double-posted. 

Directing Readers

With so many wolves, and with the wolves indexed under their respective packs, it is also important to clearly direct readers to where the wolves can be found. I’ve done this in two ways.

One, all of the wolves are listed (not double-posted) as a main entry with a cross-reference to their respective pack. With 45 numbered wolves in this volume, this makes for a very long list of cross-references in the W section of the index. While it looks awkward, I think it is the clearest way to direct readers. For example,

Big Blaze. See under Agate Creek wolf pack

wolf 21. See under Druid Peak wolf pack

wolf 629. See under Slough Creek wolf pack

Two, some of the wolves leave their birth packs and either join a different pack or help establish a new pack. Some wolves move multiple times. For these wolves, I also include cross-references from their former packs to their new pack. For example,

Agate Creek wolf pack

—wolf 590. See under Slough Creek wolf pack

—wolf 642. See under Blacktail wolf pack

I chose not to double-post the wolves because I think the wolves make the most sense within the contexts of their packs. I want readers to be able to see the full picture. With so many wolves, I think it also helps readers if the wolves are handled consistently, so readers come to expect that the wolves will always be in a certain place. Also, with such a long list of wolves in the W section, I think that list is easier to scan if they are all cross-references, instead of cross-references mixed with page numbers.

Labeling the Alphas

To further differentiate the wolves, especially the leaders, I also decided to use glosses to label the alpha males and females. These wolves tend to be discussed more, and I thought a gloss would help readers identify them more easily. For example, under the Blacktail pack:

Blacktail wolf pack

—Big Brown (alpha male): as beta male, 207; Blacktail pack formation and, 206, 215; breeding, 203, 208, 209; mention, 218; name, 201; as new alpha male, 241; pup rearing, 228

—wolf 693 (alpha female): introduction, 92; aggression against sister, 136, 200, 211; Blacktail pack formation and, 201, 215; breeding, 203, 207, 208–9, 212; denning, 218; photograph, plate 8; pup rearing, 219, 222, 224, 225, 227; in Quadrant pack’s territory, 235, 236, 238, 241; relationship with wolf 302, 214, 237; unpopularity, 216

Indexing Repetitive Elements

As I also mentioned, one of the challenges of indexing these books is that wolves tend to do the same sorts of things throughout their lives. If all goes well, the wolves will breed and raise a new litter of pups every year. The wolves also hunt, encounter other animals, and interact, sometimes aggressively, with other packs.

I decided that it did not make sense to organize the arrays chronologically, as in a new subheading for each litter of pups. That would greatly lengthen the index and make it more difficult to read. Instead, I decided to gather like happenings together, regardless of year or the number of times it happened. For example, under Agate Creek’s wolf 472, above, I include all references to her pregnancies and pups into one subheading. 

I also use similar wording for subheadings throughout the arrays. As seen for the Agate Creek pack, above, I have subheadings for “confrontation with Druid Peak pack” and “confrontation with Slough Creek pack,” as well as “grizzly encounter” and “humans encounter.” This helps to signal to readers that something similar is happening in each subheading, and it helps to keep double-posts, such as under the Druid Peak and Slough Creek packs, consistent throughout the index. 

To give another example, elk are among wolves’ preferred prey, with the book describing multiple hunts. In the array for elk, I differentiate the hunts by pack and by wolves, which are also double-posted under those packs and wolves.

elk: breeding season and, 65; calves, 222; conflict between packs over, 22, 98, 202; hunting by Druid Peak pack, 38, 88, 112, 141, 142, 143–44, 149, 151, 163–64, 176–77, 179–80, 185–86, 222, plate 4; hunting by Slough Creek pack, 16–17, 45, 53, 57, 120–21, 127–28, 165, 176–77, 191, 195; hunting by wolf 06, 211; hunting success rate, 185; injuries from, 180–84; near den sites, 41, 187–88; scabies, 149–50; shortage of, 217; wolf 302’s fear of carcasses, 112–13

 

When structuring an index, every entry has its place. 

This is especially true for the books in the Alpha Wolves of Yellowstone series. Containing a lot of wolves, and a lot of details about wolves being wolves, the index entries needed to be structured in a way that made sense for the subject matter and was easy for readers to navigate. 

I hope I have accomplished that with my approach. While every index has a structure, I needed to think more deeply and be more creative in my approach for this series. I also hope that these examples give you some ideas for what is possible and for how to approach a book with unusual needs.

Article
0 comment

The Future of Indexing Software

From my perspective as a relatively younger indexer, it feels like indexing is in the midst of a generational turnover, both in terms of long-time indexers nearing retirement and in regards to software. A lot of programs developed in the 1980s and 1990s are still vital to our work, but what happens when their developers either retire or die? The indexing community has been struggling with this question over the last few years. Dave Ream died unexpectedly in 2017, leaving his programs orphaned. Margaret Berson died in 2022, leaving behind her macros. MACREX is now available for free, after its co-developer, Drusilla Calvert, and longtime North American support person, Gale Roades, both died. The latest program to undergo a change in status is Cindex, though thankfully everyone involved is still alive and well.

If you are part of some of the indexing email lists, then today’s reflection may not be news to you. However, I think Cindex’s latest news could be of real value if you don’t yet use dedicated indexing software. I think it is also worth reflecting on what the future of indexing software may look like. 

Cindex

The software I use, Cindex, is officially open source as of April 1, 2024. (No, that’s not an April Fools joke.)

This was a huge surprise to the Cindex community. Cindex was originally developed by Frances Lennie, the owner of Indexing Research, in the mid-1980s, and has become one of the top indexing programs, especially for those of us on a Mac. As part of legacy planning, Cindex was sold to Scribendi, a larger editorial company, in 2022. I don’t think anyone anticipated that Scribendi would change their mind so quickly and seek to offload Cindex, though Scribendi was itself acquired by another company in 2023, so perhaps the new owners had different priorities.

Fortunately, the transition to open source has gone smoothly. A number of indexers have stepped up and have created free installers for both Mac and Windows, as well as have already made a few updates to the software. (I installed the latest version yesterday, which is working great.) Support also remains in place, with the Cindex email group continuing on. Maria Sullivan, an indexer who  has provided support for decades, is also making plans for how to effectively provide support in this new era. More details about all of that, including links to download the software, at the new Cindex website, here.

I have to admit I was apprehensive about this change. I have no technical skills in regards to software development and was concerned that Cindex would stagnate and eventually become obsolete. I am very thankful and relieved that others do have the necessary skills to keep Cindex going, and are willing to step in and make that happen. 

I have used Cindex since 2013. I find it intuitive and easy to use. The value for me to two-fold. Cindex handles all of the formatting, such as alphabetical sorting and punctuation, as well as easily flipping back and forth between run-in and indented formats, which is a huge timesaver, as well as ensuring I don’t accidentally introduce errors. Cindex also makes it easier to input entries, and to manipulate and edit the index. Cindex allows me to focus on the fun stuff—reading the book and crafting the index—by taking care of the fiddly technical details.  

If you’ve been considering using indexing software but haven’t yet made the jump, this is a fantastic opportunity to acquire professional software for free. I highly recommend Cindex. Again, you can find the download links and installation instructions here.

Picardy

I also want to mention another program. Picardy is freeware (not open source) and is currently available for Windows and Linux, with a beta version available for Mac.

I have not used Picardy. When I was writing my book, Book Indexing, Picardy was just starting to be developed and tested. At that time, I decided not to mention it because I didn’t know if it would work out and stick around. I’ve since heard of at least one professional indexer who has stated that they are happy with it. So, if you are looking for another free option, considering giving Picardy a try. You can find more details here.

The Future of Indexing Software?

One of the enduring problems that indexing faces is that it is so niche. Though integral to publishing, the number of indexers worldwide is small. I suspect this is why indexing software tends to be home-grown, initially developed by working indexers for their own use, as there is not enough of a market for larger software companies to be interested. This model of indexers developing their own software works fine so long as these indexer-developers remain active and willing to support their creations, but as I mentioned above, the indexing community seems to be in a time of transition.

I don’t think we can count on larger companies taking on these programs, as Scribendi was supposed to do for Cindex. Another possibility may be for indexer-developers to sell their software to a younger indexer who is willing and able to take over responsibility. I fully support software developers being compensated for their work. Michelle Guiliano, on this episode from her podcast, Freelance Indexer Exchange, suggests better compensation as a way to help keep these programs alive. Or, maybe the best long-term solution is to make these programs open source.

Open source does feel like a risk. What if the user base is too small and no one is willing or able to step in and volunteer to keep the software going? Some programs may fade away, which may also reflect that technology changes and that better options are now available. But the experience of Cindex gives me hope. Giving the software to the community can open up new opportunities and allow users to take the initiative to keep their favorite programs going. As indexer-developers think about retirement, maybe open source is the best way to ensure their legacy. 

What do you think? Do you have concerns about the future of indexing software? How would you go about making sure that these programs have a future? Feel free to let me know in the comments.

Article
0 comment

But Am I Really Qualified to Index That?

One of the challenges of being a freelance indexer is knowing where to draw the line on projects that are a good fit. Do you stick to subjects that you are comfortable with and for which you have prior professional or academic expertise? Or does indexing know-how mean that you can index anything?

I think it is a bit of both.

I consider myself a generalist, with some caveats. I am comfortable with most trade books, written for a general audience, since I consider myself part of that readership. I am comfortable with most scholarly books within the humanities and social sciences, though I have also learned that I have limits. While I can index philosophy, for example, I often struggle to wrap my mind around such abstract concepts. I index better and faster if I stick to subjects like history or political science that are typically more concrete. Then there are subjects like law, medicine, and engineering, which I have no background in and tend to avoid.

Except, when it depends. 

I recently indexed a law book for the first time and it turned out okay. (At least I think so and the author is pleased.)

It all started when the production manager got in touch. Carra Simpson, a phenomenal independent project manager who remembered me from a previous job, asked if I would be interested in indexing Coppock on Tennessee Adoption Law, 8th Edition, by Dawn Coppock, (Good Law, 2024). I initially resisted. I explained that I do not have a law background, that I am not confident that I will recognize important concepts, nor do I know what legal professionals will be searching for in an index. Carra patiently countered my objections, sent me the proofs for the 7th edition so I would have a better idea of what to expect, and offered to put me in touch with Dawn, the author. 

As it turned out, Dawn had a smaller budget, though still reasonable, and was comfortable with a simpler index, though at 700 indexable pages, there was still a lot to pick up. I focused on the main concepts and discussions, taking cues from the book’s structures and headings, which was clearly organized. I also tried to not get bogged down in minor details, though I still read the whole book. Creating a solid structure for the index proved important, one that was easy to navigate and which didn’t bury entries, as there was a lot of information to include (about 115 pages alone covering grounds for termination of parental rights, for example). We also decided to not pick up individual cases, which saved a lot of time. I also had an informative chat with Dawn over Zoom, which helped me better understand some of the terminology and how readers would search. Lastly, I appreciated that Dawn had written the book to be accessible to everyone involved, from judges and lawyers to adoptive and birth parents, which meant I felt like I could understand it too.

I also leaned heavily into my indexing expertise. Even when I don’t fully understand the subject matter, I’ve learned how to read as an indexer and I know what a good index looks like. 

This contrasts with my very first freelance index, for The Anthology of Social Studies: Issues and Strategies for Elementary Teachers, Updated Edition, edited by Roland Case and Penny Clark (Pacific Educational Press, 2013). The production editor suggested that I update the original index, which I foolishly agreed to do. What I discovered were chapters that had been added, removed, and rearranged, which made deconstructing and updating the index an extremely painstaking and mind-bending process. I should have insisted on rewriting the index from scratch. Except, I don’t have a background in education either. I think I would be fine now with indexing the book, but at that time, with neither subject-matter expertise nor enough indexing expertise, I was sinking fast. As painful as it was to update the original index, at least the original index showed me what the index should be like and helped pull me through.

Reflecting on these two experiences, my point isn’t to brag about how far my indexing skills have come. Rather, I want to encourage you to focus on building your own indexing skills. Indexing expertise counts for a lot when facing a difficult project or unfamiliar subject. It certainly helps to also understand the subject, and if you are out of your depth, I recommend talking to the author and maybe also doing some research to learn the basics. But it is also important to remember that the value we bring as indexers is our knowledge of indexing. It is knowing how to identify indexable material. It is formulating clear and concise headings and subheadings. It is being adept at creating a structure that is easy to navigate and highlights the main points of the book. If you can develop your indexing chops, it becomes way easier to stretch beyond your comfort zone. 

As you practice, whether on practice indexes or freelance projects, I suggest sticking to topics and subjects that are relatively easy. Focus first on building your skills, and then apply those skills to more difficult books. I began indexing when working in-house for Harbour Publishing, a trade publisher. While unplanned, that proved a good starting point because the books were fairly easy to understand and I could focus on crafting the index. Later, when I began indexing scholarly books, I had a small foundation of experience to build upon, which made scholarly books—at least in subjects I was familiar with—easier to tackle.

Ten years ago, I probably would have struggled to index Coppock on Tennessee Adoption Law. Now, I’m still no lawyer, but it turns out I can crack the index.

Article
2 comments

Setting Freelance Rates, Best Book for

A few months ago I wrote about financial practices for freelancers that I find helpful in my own business. I’ve been wanting to write about money again, specifically about setting rates. Rates are a constant and ongoing issue, of how to set rates, and when to raise rates, and whether or not rates are appropriate. But the truth is, I don’t think I have any good advice. I do set prices for my indexing work and I have raised rates, but it so often feels like trial and error that I don’t know what I could say that would be practical and useful.

What I do know is that I don’t like thinking about rates as primarily an exchange of time for money. While figuring out an hourly rate is an easy and effective way to calculate prices and to gauge whether you are earning enough to pay the bills, there is a hard limit on how many hours I can work. I learned this the hard way during the first COVID lockdown. Bored, I accepted too many projects and quickly found myself indexing every single day for two months to keep up with all of the deadlines. Did I earn a lot of money? Yes. Was I burned out by the time I finally felt like I could allow myself a day off? Yes. Simply working harder is not a sustainable growth strategy.

An alternative is to lean into value-based pricing. While still having a minimum income target to keep finances in the black, value-based pricing is much more dynamic. Value-based pricing considers, what is the value of my expertise and experience? What is the value from the client’s perspective? How can I use pricing to position myself for the clients I want to attract?

That said, while I like the concept of value-based pricing, it is still difficult to know how to put it into action. It also raises a host of emotions. Is my work actually good enough to charge X? If I charge more, will I offend or scare away my clients? Am I a bad person for wanting to earn more?

I’ve been wanting to raise rates again this year, but also facing the questions of by how much and on what basis should I determine the increase. Thankfully, I discovered a new book that teaches just that.

If you also struggle with setting rates, I highly recommend Free Money: Nine Counterintuitive Moves for Life-Changing Freelance Income, by Austin L. Church. I’ve bought a copy and have found it extremely practical and insightful. 

In the first part of the book, Austin walks you through a series of exercises to help you determine how much you need to charge in order to not just earn the bare minimum to pay the bills, but to also generate sustainable financial margin. In the second part of the book, Austin explores the wider context of pricing and why it is we earn money, including beliefs and mindset about money, navigating common scenarios, and advice for how to raise prices with clients. 

I wish I read this book when I first began freelancing. I wish I read this book again when my business started to take off. This feels like the type of book that grows with you, as your business matures and changes, and as your financial needs grow and change. Even if you are an experienced freelancer, Free Money provides a lot to consider. I found the exercises well-worth completing, and I now have a much clearer sense for what my new rates should be. More importantly, I understand why, and I have a better sense of my pricing strategy going forward.

If you are interested, Free Money is available either through Austin’s website or through Amazon. And, to be clear, this is not an affiliate link. I am not earning anything by recommending this book. I am just that impressed and think that every freelancer should read it.

While on the subject of finance books, I also highly recommend Profit First: Transform Your Business from a Cash-Eating Monster to a Money-Making Machine, by Mike Michalowicz (which I see that Austin also recommends). I discovered Profit First three or four years ago. Its value, for me, was learning how to properly manage cash flow so that I consistently have enough on hand for taxes, expenses, and to pay myself a regular salary. Following the Profit First system has made my monthly cash flow much more predictable and stress-free.

So there you have it. If you are struggling with your finances as a freelancer, or feeling guilty about wanting to charge more, read Free Money, by Austin L. Church, and Profit First, by Mike Michalowicz. Your bank account and nerves will thank you. 

Article
0 comment

Making a Plan Before Starting an Index, How to

I found myself thinking last week about the value of making a plan before starting an index. It is something I do as part of my indexing practice. But what do I mean by making a plan? While I discuss elements of making a plan in my book (especially in the “Get Ready” section, though the whole book, really, is to help you make a plan to tackle your index), I don’t think I’ve previously pulled together what it is I mean when I am beginning an index.

So, assuming you understand the basic elements and process for writing an index, and you have received the page proofs from the client and are getting ready to start the index, how can you go about making a plan? 

For me, making a plan can be broken down into answering the following six questions.

  1. What is the book about? This question is about determining the focus and scope of the book. I read the book’s description on the publisher’s website, if available. I also read the table of contents, and maybe skim the introduction and a couple of chapters. I want to get a feel for the main topics and headings that I will be picking up. With this broad sense of the book in mind, I may also begin thinking about how to translate that into the index’s structure.
  2. Who is the audience? Beyond what the book is about, each index should be tailored to its audience. Will readers prefer a detailed index or a lighter index? Are readers picking up this book to answer a specific question or for entertainment? What does the audience already know about this topic, and what will they expect to find? Similar to determining what the book is about, considering the audience is also about focus and scope. Which details are relevant, and which irrelevant? Depending on the audience, not all details need to be picked up.
  3. How much space is available for the index? This is a question to confirm with the client. If I can have all the space that I want, then space isn’t a factor in my decision-making. If there is a strict page or line limit, then I may need to make decisions about structure or which entries to include or exclude in order to fit. Planning ahead, I may consider using fewer subheadings, for example, or to outright exclude certain categories of details to ensure that the priority entries make the cut.
  4. Does the book contain any specific indexing challenges? For example, are there a lot of illustrations? Are there legal cases that require special formatting? Are there terms from another language that contain diacritics or other special characters? Are there a host of family members that may need differentiating? It is not always possible to anticipate challenges, but if you can, now is a good time to consider your approach so you don’t get hung up partway through the index.
  5. What is the publisher’s preferred style? If you are not familiar with the publisher’s style guide, now is a good time to review. I find it helpful to get the format right from the start, such as alphabetization and locator abbreviations, so I don’t have to think about it later.
  6. What is my schedule? This is partly a question of the deadline to submit the index to the client, as well as a question of my own plan. Which days am I going to work on the index? How much am I aiming to complete each day? When do I want to finish the rough draft and when do I want to finish the final edit? 

All of these plans are, of course, contingent. It may take me longer than I expect to write the rough draft. I may discover an unexpected challenge. I may need to rethink my approach in order to keep the index short enough. Continuing to revise and refine the plan is, for better or worse, part of my indexing process.

But I find there are still benefits to thinking through all of these questions before starting. Knowing what the book is about and who the audience is helps to shape the entries I create and cuts down on irrelevant ones. The rough draft is usually a little cleaner and easier to edit. Indexing to the space available helps to avoid needing to make deep and painful cuts late in the process. Identifying challenges early means indexing correctly from the start, rather than going back to fix. Creating a schedule helps to keep me on track.

How much time should you spend making a plan? That is up to you. For many books, I only need about five or ten minutes to assess and make a plan. I may jot down a couple of notes and otherwise will keep my thoughts in my head. I’ve so far indexed around 500 books and many books are similar enough in terms of structure and genre conventions that I quickly know what to expect. Though I also work on some books that are more complicated or unique, and for those I do spend time digging into what it is I am unsure about. I am also aware of some indexers who use a checklist or form to help them prepare for each index. Find a system that works for you.

Writing an index is a constant process of decision-making. Making a plan can help streamline some of that decision-making, and provide confidence that you are setting out on the right path.

Article
0 comment

When to Walk Away

A month ago I wrote about my ideal working relationship with publishers, as a valued member of the team. But not every publisher or client is going to be ideal, and sometimes you need to know when to walk away.

Walking away from a project or client is scary. Especially early in my career, I was loath to pass up an opportunity. I needed the paycheck and would say yes to books that I either had no interest in subject-wise, or were beyond my skill level in either subject matter expertise or indexing know-how. Which isn’t always bad. Sometimes being pushed out of my comfort zone shows me where I need to improve or shows me that I am capable of more than I realize. Though sometimes it means that I need to set better boundaries.

Sometimes you need to walk away from a project because of the client, not the actual work. Or at least be willing to walk away.

I faced this situation with two different clients last year, both academic authors. The experiences caused me to reflect on what it is I need from clients in order to make this working relationship worthwhile. Are all of the terms dictated by the client, or do I have some agency too? Though to be fair to both authors, I found them both (or in the one case, the author’s assistant) pleasant and easy to work with. The problem actually lay with their respective universities.

Often when I am hired by an academic author, payment for the index comes from their university, in the form of funding that the author can tap into. This usually means that I need to register with the university as a vendor, which almost always means paperwork. In these two cases, both universities had requirements that I was unable to fulfill. In one case, the university wanted a tax number that I did not have (as a Canadian citizen and resident, with the university in another country, it was a foreign tax number I ordinarily do not need). In the other case, for a university in yet another country, their requirements seemed more suited to a larger company than my one-person freelance outfit. After initial inquiries, neither university seemed to want to budge.

What do I do? Do I invest time and money trying to meet their requirements, which could potentially take months trying to acquire that which I do not have? Or do I walk away? I don’t really want to walk away, because the issue isn’t with the book or with the author. But if being paid is going to be a drain on my time and resources, the project is no longer so appealing. How much red tape is $1000, or even $2000, worth?

In both cases I decided to be honest with the authors. It also helped that they had started the vendor registration process early, before the proofs were ready for indexing, so there was still time to find another indexer if necessary. I explained why I was unable to meet all of the vendor registration requirements. I asked if the university would be willing to waive the problematic requirements. I politely stated that if the requirements were not waived, then I would regretfully need to withdraw from the project and they would need to find another indexer who would be a better fit.

I felt anxious threatening to pull out of a project I had previously agreed to do. I didn’t know how the author or the university would react. I also felt okay at the prospect of losing the client and project. There was still time for another project to come along to fill that time slot in my schedule and it felt good to protect and value my own time and business.

Thankfully, both universities decided, after all, that they could waive the troublesome requirements. I don’t fully know what happened on their end, but the authors decided to advocate to keep me as their indexer and the university administrators found a way to make it happen. A happy outcome for everyone, at least from my perspective.

These experiences taught me a few lessons:

  • Know my boundaries. As an indexer, I am here to serve my clients, which involves dealing with payment and paperwork. Some paperwork is reasonable. But I also want to enjoy my work, and I only have a finite amount of time. To keep my business sustainable and enjoyable, I need to know and enforce my boundaries, which may mean saying no or goodbye to certain books or clients. I know I can’t serve everyone, so I may as well focus on the books and clients that are the best fit.
  • Always ask. Administrative requirements may not be set in stone. While the answer may not always be what I want to hear, it is worth asking if changes can be made (and letting the client know what I am willing and not willing to do) before making a final decision about a client or project.  
  • Learn to say no. I wish I was better at saying no, and that I was better at it earlier in my career. Turning down projects is tough, especially when offers are scarce. But if you are a newer freelancer, practice saying no, and maybe actually say it sometimes. This circles back to boundaries. Know what kind of work is too far out of your comfort zone. Know what level of red tape you are willing to deal with. It may be difficult in the moment to turn down a project or client, but your future self will thank you. 

Have you ever walked away from a project? What was that experience like? What did you do to make the situation better? Please feel free to reply below in the comments. I am curious to hear your experience.

Article
0 comment

Indigenous Terms and Names, Indexing

Living in Canada and regularly working with a number of Canadian presses, I’ve had the privilege, since I’ve begun freelancing, to index several books relating to the Indigenous Peoples of Canada. There seems to be a growing trend in Canada to publish books by and about Indigenous Peoples. I’ve also noticed what seems to be a further trend in the books I index, which is the preference for using Indigenous terms and names over their English translations. Often to the point where the reader needs to have or quickly develop a good working knowledge of these terms in order to read the book (or at least to have the glossary bookmarked for easy reference), because once the English translation is provided in the first instance, it is often not provided again.

This observation of mine is purely anecdotal. I don’t have access to the decision-making that lies behind these books, and I can only speak to the books I have personally worked on. However, it has happened enough times that it seems more than coincidence, and I think it is worth highlighting and celebrating.

I most often see Indigenous terms and names used for personal and place names, as well as for significant concepts, objects, and traditional practices. This often happens in books by and about specific Indigenous nations. For example, last year I indexed Tiná7 Cht Ti Temíxw—We Come from This Land: A Walk through the History of the Squamish People, by the Squamish Nation (Page Two, 2023) and Lhù’ààn Mân Keyí Dań Kwánje Nààtsat—Kluane Lake Country People Speak Strong, by the Kluane First Nation (Figure 1 Publishing, 2023). I also sometimes see a lot of Indigenous terms in books written from an Indigenous perspective, when the author wants to discuss Indigenous concepts in an Indigenous manner. The most striking example that I’ve indexed so far is Our Hearts Are as One Fire: An Ojibway-Anishinabe Vision for the Future, by Jerry Fontaine (UBC Press, 2020), which uses terms from the Ojibwaymowin language for all major concepts. My sincere thanks to Jerry Fontaine for answering all of my language-related questions.

As a white settler who does not speak an Indigenous language, needing to quickly become familiar with these terms and names is an additional challenge when indexing. And, I think it is a challenge that is worth the effort. So much of culture, identity, and knowledge is bound up in language. While these are Indigenous terms used in an English context, rather than books written entirely in an Indigenous language, incorporating and using these terms is still an important step towards revitalizing these languages, as well as reminding settlers—or realizing for the first time—that there is a richness already here that is worth attending to.

Let’s jump into a few examples.

Indigenous people can have both an Indigenous and an English name. Both may be given in the book. This was especially true for the book by the Squamish Nation, with people primarily referred to by their Squamish (or Sḵwx̱wú7mesh Sníchim (Squamish Language)) name. The English name was usually given in the first instance to help with identification and sometimes repeated later in the book. For example, Chief August Jack Khatsahlano, a well-known figure in Vancouver history, is most often referred to as X̱ats’alánexw Siy̓ám̓, which is how I indexed him. 

For some Indigenous Peoples, names, or titles, are hereditary, and two or more people in the book may share the same name. I encountered this recently when indexing Indigenous Legalities, Pipeline Viscosities: Colonial Extractivism and Wet’suwet’en Resistance, by Tyler McCreary (University of Alberta Press, 2024). I am thankful for the author’s guidance on differentiating between the types of hereditary names, and for how best to index. The key is to be mindful that I am not familiar with these naming conventions and to consult the author, as well as look for clues in the text, to make sure I properly identify and index everyone.

Place names are also often discussed using their Indigenous names, as part of marking traditional territory. The Kluane First Nation book includes locations such as K’ùà Mân (Kloo Lake) and Lhù’ààn Mân Jälí (Headwaters of the Kluane River). The Squamish Nation book also uses Sḵwx̱wú7mesh Sníchim names for several locations in and around Vancouver., such as Iy̓ál̓mexw (Jericho Beach) and T’aḵ’t’aḵ’muy̓ín̓ tl’a in̓inyáx̱a7n (Black Tusk).

Concepts, objects, and traditional stories and knowledge may also be discussed using Indigenous terms. From the Squamish Nation book, this includes sts’úḵw’i7 (salmon) and the X̱aays (Transformer brothers). For Our Hearts Are as One Fire, the index was in part built around concepts such as i-nah-ko-ni-gay-win (sovereignty) and o-gi-ma-win (governance). (In Our Hearts Are as One Fire, the book also inverts the common practice of placing non-English terms in italics, which I thought was a brilliant reversal of expectations and foregrounds the importance of Ojibwaymowin.)

All of these terms and names need to appear in the index and they impact how I index. I’ve developed the following best practices for myself.

  • Since the authors and publishers are making an effort to highlight and privilege these Indigenous languages, I think it is important that the index does so as well. However, I don’t know if readers will be familiar with these terms, or whether they will first search in English or the Indigenous language, and so the index needs to be searchable in both. I achieve this by double-posting everything. If an array uses subheadings, I make the Indigenous term or name the preferred main heading and include a cross-reference from the English. The index will be substantially longer than a similar, monolingual book, with so many double-posts and cross-references, but I think it is worthwhile to ensure that the Indigenous names and terms are included.
  • Similarly, in subheadings, I try to use Indigenous terms when appropriate, along with the English translation in parentheses. While also making for longer subheadings and larger arrays, I think it is still worthwhile to consistently use and emphasize the Indigenous terms throughout the index.
  • Diacritics and special characters are used in many of these languages, as in Sḵwx̱wú7mesh Sníchim and Dań K’è (Southern Tutchone). The publisher is likely using a special font. Make sure that you are using the correct characters, either through copying-and-pasting from the proofs or style guide, or otherwise coordinating with the press. For Sḵwx̱wú7mesh Sníchim terms, I was also asked to factor in pops/glottal stops (‘ and 7) when alphabetizing, which took a little bit of work to figure out how to properly force-sort.
  • I’ve also learned that it is often important to include “Chief” in the main heading, for the appropriate individuals. This is something I now regularly query, to make sure I am on the same page with what the author and nation expects. For example, in Sḵwx̱wú7mesh Sníchim, siyám means highly respected person, and siyám is often incorporated into the name, as in X̱ats’alánexw Siy̓ám̓.  “Chief” is used in English, and should be included in the name and main heading, as in “Khatsahlano, Chief August Jack.”

I do wonder if I am the best person to index these books. As a white settler, I don’t have a grounding in an Indigenous culture or community. Would an Indigenous person have a different approach to writing these indexes? I am curious to know and hope to have that conversation one day. The Indexing Society of Canada/Société canadienne d’indexation is working to support prospective Indigenous indexers, among other underrepresented and marginalized groups, through its Diversity in Canadian Publishing Bursary. I look forward to seeing what comes from that initiative.

In the meantime, I am honored to index these books. I hope that the indexes add value, both for the Indigenous communities discussed and for non-Indigenous readers, and that the indexes help to make these languages more visible.

Do you ever index books with a lot of names and terms from Indigenous languages? Or other non-English languages? What are some tips you have for incorporating and shaping the index? Feel free to leave a comment and let me know.

Article
0 comment

A Member of the Team? Freelance Indexers Within Publishing

Freelancers are ubiquitous within publishing. Most publishers maintain a relatively small number of in-house staff, with much of the actual production work contracted out. What does this mean for the relationship between freelancer and publisher?

Before I dig into this topic, I want to acknowledge that I write from a place of having previously been on the inside, and from also now having been a freelancer for about eleven years. When I first began working in publishing, I worked in-house for two different publishers. I developed a strong sense of publishing as a team effort, with each person, whether in-house or freelance, contributing to the finished book. As a freelancer, I have retained this sense of being part of a team, and in my ideal working relationship with a publisher, we respect each other as team members. That said, I am also aware that many freelance indexers do not have in-house experience, and that publishers can come across as opaque and unapproachable. 

This reflection draws upon my own experience and what I would like to see. Your experiences and ideal working relationship may be different. I am curious to hear what you think, in the comments. If you are a new freelance indexer, I hope this gives you some ideas for what a positive working relationship can be like.

To start, let’s look at a couple of recent experiences I’ve had.

The Editor Who Couldn’t Care Less

Some publishers, or at least certain editors within those publishers, couldn’t seem to care less about the freelancers supporting their work. I encountered this a few months ago when I was hired by an author to index their book, which was being published by an independent academic press. (For the sake of this reflection, I’m keeping authors, editors, and publishers anonymous.)

Indexing guidelines were scant, though it seemed that both run-in and indented formats would be accepted. Working with the author, I submitted the index in run-in format. To our surprise, the editor unilaterally changed the format to indented, on the grounds that indented is easier to read. I actually agree with the editor on the format, but that’s not the point. If the editor felt so strongly about the format, they should have made that clear upfront.

We asked the editor about the change, and the editor confirmed that the press does indeed accept both run-in and indented formats, except, I guess, when the editor decides they know what is best. Reverting to run-in format was not an option. I followed up with some additional concerns, since the structure, as I originally envisioned it in run-in format, no longer worked quite as well. I also asked that in the future the editor provide clearer instructions, to avoid this extra and unnecessary work caused by this unilateral change. In reply, the editor made very clear that they had no interest in communicating with me nor in providing clearer instructions. The editor stated that they primarily work with scholarly authors who apparently get confused by too many instructions, and so the editor is used to taking whatever the author provides and formatting it as they see fit.

The irony is that I had already been hired by a different author to index a second book for the same press (which I submitted in indented format). The editor seemed unaware and uninterested in the fact that at least some of their authors were hiring professional indexers. Even if I am not in direct contact with the editor, I would suggest that we are still on the same team, and that better communication, whether directly or in the form of clearer indexing instructions, would make for a better book and a smoother production process for both of us.

The Editor Who Gets It

That same author who hired me to write the first index later passed my name on to a friend, who turned out to be the manager editor for two small university presses. That editor got in touch and, after a few emails back and forth sorting out the details for how we might work together, wrote, “Welcome to the team!”

Guess which editor I want to work with.

Being Part of a Team

Every publisher and project is going to be different. Some publishers prefer to be hands-off, making the index the author’s responsibility and not wanting to be in direct contact with the freelancer. I understand that the in-house editors are often very busy juggling multiple books. I respect the desire to be hands-off and I let the author take the lead on how communication flows between me, the author, and the press. In other cases, I am hired directly by the press, and so I am in regular contact with the in-house managing or production editor. For complicated projects, I may also be put in contact with the copyeditor, proofreader, or designer—whoever is best placed to answer my questions—which really does feel like I am part of the team. 

As a freelance member of the team, I recognize that I am being hired to perform a service. I realize that I don’t always get the final say, and if the author or publisher insist, I will revise the index as asked, even if I disagree. That said, part of being a team also means having my role and expertise respected. I appreciate at least being consulted on potential changes and to have my opinion taken seriously, even if the author or press ultimately decides otherwise. Respect also involves clear communication, whether direct, through the author, or through the indexing guidelines, so that I can properly do my job and have a way to ask questions. 

Being a freelancer also means recognizing when I am not part of the team. This took me a while to learn, as I was initially used to being part of the in-house team. But as a freelancer, I work with multiple authors and publishers. What is best for my business is not necessarily in line with what the publisher wants. While working together with authors and publishers on specific books, I also need to have boundaries with clients, to be able to say no when a project or publisher is not a good fit or if my schedule is already full.

For me, at least, it doesn’t take much to feel included. I don’t need a small gift or card at Christmas (though it is a lovely surprise when it occasionally happens), nor do I need to be included in company-wide meetings (though again, a nice gesture, especially if the meeting pertains to freelancers and my time is compensated, as did once happen). What matters is feeling appreciated. A word of thanks for the index. A willingness to answer questions. A desire to work together again in the future. Basically, an openness to a positive professional relationship that makes it easy to get the work done. 

What are your thoughts on the freelancer-publisher relationship? Do you feel part of a team? Or do you feel shut out or disrespected? What do you look for in a positive working relationship? Please feel free to reply in the comments and let me know.