Publisher's Review: Getting ready to publish
AUTHOR NAME
TITLE
DATE OF REVIEW
The Publisher's Review of an Advanced Manuscript looks at various aspects of the project. The background and purpose of the project. The business context and ongoing marketing strategy (if appropriate). The quality of the manuscript in both style and content. The effectiveness of the manuscript in reaching the stated goals of the project. Then recommendations for any future refinement to the manuscript are made and options for publication with mPowr are described.
The categories below are primarily focused upon non-fiction titles. A slightly different process is followed for fiction titles.
Clarity of purpose for the reader
The success of a book for both author and business (where relevant) flows from the value the reader experiences when reading the book. It is the critical measure used when understanding whether or not a book is ready for publication. The background information provided by yourself via the online form provides the information on which the first three sections are based.
RED
There is either little detail or very generic, broad reasons are given as to why a reader should purchase or read the book. The book is described in terms of its purpose for the business/author clearly but little mention is made of the value it offers to the reader.
AMBER
There is some clarity around why a reader should buy the book. However, these are generally similar to other titles in the space or are highly generic.There is a focus on the information presented as an end it itself.
GREEN
It is clear what makes this book distinctive and valuable for specific kinds of readers. The information presented sits within a broader agenda of creating results for readers. The book is clearly for the reader’s needs first, not the author’s.
It is challenging to get detailed clarity in this zone when a title is designed to be thought provoking or inspirational as there is an inherent vagueness in this agenda.
Clarity of purpose for author
What is the core purpose of the book for the author (personal achievement, business development, product growth, etc.)? How clear is this purpose?
RED
Little sense of the reason the author has written the book OR its role for the future.
AMBER
A general sense of what the author is aiming for with the book. Lacks specificity or long-term clarity.
GREEN
A clear sense of what the author’s own agenda for the book is and where it sits for the long term.
Leveraging the book to support the development of the author’s UK speaking and ***** engagements makes sense.
Clarity of purpose for the author's business
Is the book being used as a marketing/business development tool? Is it to accompany talks, workshops, training? Is it part of a broader product business/strategy? Is it something to be used to support corporate work, etc? Is there an ongoing marketing strategy for the business that the book can be integrated into? Is this a short-term project (perhaps linked to specific circumstances) or something that has a long-term function?
RED
There is either no sense of the role of the book in the broader business or it is very vague.
AMBER
There is some sense of the role of the book in the broader business context but this is vague or the integration with other elements of the business is not detailed.
GREEN
There is a clear picture of the function of the book within the broader business. There is an accompanying sense of how the book plays its part in either the immediate future (for a time-limited project) or for the long term. There is a sense of how the book can be integrated into the overall marketing strategy of the business.
As described above, the intent to use the book to drive interest in and opportunities for the author to storytell, speak, etc. makes sense. A more robust approach to audience building, community building, partner building and sales building around the overall business (I know it might not be the most fitting word in this context BUT it highlights the need for powerful strategies at the base of everything) would allow the author to make the most of the opportunities the book presents.
Rapid review of manuscript: structure and flow
This is a meta level review of the entire text
RED
The text is unstructured in chapters with little discernable overall organisation. Or the text is bitesize-structured with multiple discrete information chunks lacking a sense of cohesion. Contradictory or confusing elements derail the effectiveness of the manuscript. Little sense of the logical or emotional progression from beginning to end of the book. Diversions, obstacles and potholes frequently derail the reader’s progress.
AMBER
The text displays elements of a structure which supports the reader’s engagement and understanding of the material. Generally confusing or contradictory elements are not prominent, though they are still present. Structuring the book for the benefit of the reader’s journey has been achieved.reasonably well. There are occasional potholes or diversions, but in general the reader’s progression is smooth.
GREEN
The structure of the book, whether conventional in format or specific to the project, serves the reader’s journey effectively. Attention to emotional, informational and implementation elements is clear in the text. These are are presented at appropriate points.
Each section chapter, paragraph and sentence is sculpted within the context of the reader’s overall journey and allows the most effective integration of the book’s material.
For this genre, the overall inspirational and reflective purpose works well with this bite-sized approach.
Rapid review of manuscript: spelling
This looks at spelling inconsistencies, incorrect spellings or confusions (to, two, too / practise, practice / affect, effect, etc.)
RED
Frequent spelling errors or typos.
AMBER
Occasional spelling errors or typos.
GREEN
Low incidence of spelling errors or typos.
A pleasure not to be spotting too many challenges here—a couple of minor things that we do in mPowr House Style that we can explore (ise rather than ize, etc.) but easy to decide on best strategy at next stage. Some inconsistency around spacing between words (one or two spaces) and use of numbers/writing out numbers in full, easily sorted in proofreading.
Rapid review of manuscript: grammar
mPowr are not grammar purists. We simply want the text to be easily understood and grappled with by the reader. If the flow of a phrase or sentence or paragraph can benefit from a little departure from the strict grammarians’ rules we tend to go for this instead of slavishly adhering to ancient practices.
RED
Grammatical inconsistencies or errors are frequent..
AMBER
Occasional grammatical inconsistencies or errors.
GREEN
Low incidence of grammatical inconsistencies or errors.
As I’ll mention in the quirks section below, there are a few unusual turns of phrase, that don’t quite work smoothly BUT which aren’t too off-putting—in some ways it reminds the reader that this is coming from a mindset of someone not steeped in the soup of UK culture but from another space.
Rapid review of manuscript: tone/style
Formal-informal — Professional-academic — Colloquial-slang – Conversational — didactic, etc.
RED
Inconsistent tone throughout the text or the chosen style doesn’t serve the purpose of the book for the reader.
AMBER
Generally, the style meets the reader’s needs. Occasional places where the tone varies without apparent reason or doesn’t serve the purpose.
GREEN
The text is carefully curated to ensure the tone and style of the text allows the reader to easily engage with the material and reflect upon it. Changes of voice, tone or style are clearly intended to create different effects in the reader. Only a few areas may need attention.
The textual style meets the need of the genre and the reader’s reason for reading.
Rapid review of manuscript: stylistic quirks
If the text has any unusual stylistic quirks these will be noted here. Some can enhance the reader’s experience, however, most tend to irritate or distract readers. The challenge is that, very often, the author is unaware of their quirkiness and it is unconscious rather than deliberate.
RED
Distracting or actively work against the reader’s engagement with the text.
AMBER
Generally not too noticeable or serve the agenda for the reader.
GREEN
Any unusual choices work to enhance the effectiveness of the text for the reader.
Most quirks tend to stem from the fact this is a translated book. The translator has done a sterling job and it could be published as it is (with a little consistency work and typo corrections during the proofreading phase). Only one I’d recommend definitely thinking about is the use of ***** when referring to yourself. (See notes on the intro section in the scanned doc emailed to you.)
Rapid review of manuscript: potholes
In this area we are looking at content challenges which can undermine the author’s authority or the reader’s smooth journey through the text. For example, on page 35 the author encourages readers NEVER to use the phone in bed. Then on page 64 they recount how they were inspired by an Oprah quote on their phone late at night in bed…
RED
Frequent frustration/confusion for the reader.
AMBER
Occasional or relatively minor instances.
GREEN
Generally a smooth journey for the reader.
Nothing jumped out particularly here, except my hypersensitivity to *****…
OVERALL REVIEW
What does the publisher recommend as the next step?
RED
Multiple challenges with the manuscript can damage the author’s brand due to poor reception by readers. Recommend a thorough reworking of the manuscript with close attention paid to the reader’s experience.
AMBER
Manuscript is in good shape. Author may wish to make minor revisions. An editorial line-edit, then proofreading should be sufficient to make the manuscript publication-process ready.
GREEN
The manuscript is in excellent shape. If the author does not wish to make any final revisions, it can move into proofreading and the publication process.
As the manuscript is generally in really good shape we’re happy to do a little bit of extra work in the proofreading phase rather than put the manuscript through a full line-edit process.