NOTE: As you can gleen from the contents below, there is no one set way to approach an editor because each editor has their own preferences. Nonetheless, sending a proposal with a short email seems to be the best approach.

Greg Britton (Editorial Director, Johns Hopkins University Press)

I always think it is best to reach out with a short email to introduce yourself and to ask an editor if they are interested. I probably get five of those a day. If they are easy to write back and say thanks but no thanks or tell me more, that's an invitation to have you send me a book proposal, or maybe a slightly longer email that explains the question I have.

If you have a proposal, it is fine to include it. What I don't want is for you to go to the trouble of creating this proposal and customizing it to Johns Hopkins University Press and including the comparable books that you think I'll be interested in. I do not want you go to that trouble unnecessarily. I always feel bad when someone has done this and they prepared this enormous package for me, and it's not something, I wish they would have asked first. Set yourself a little bit of time and just send off a note. Other editors may have a different answer to that question but that's mine.

Gita Manaktala (Executive Editor, MIT Press)

I want to talk now a little bit about how to approach us. We have a list of our acquisitions editors on the MIT Press website just as many other university presses have. So you can find everybody's names and subject areas on the website along with the short profile of what they're interested in. I really would encourage you to look that up and get a sense of what we cover and who the editors are and then feel free to reach out with a short description of your book. Contact one editor and tell them what you're working on, ask if it would be of interest, and ask them to let you know soon whether you should approach someone else at the MIT Press or just move on to the next publisher on your list.

What we're looking for? We are looking for works that advance knowledge in a meaningful way or usefully synthesize it for general readers or for students. We're looking for books that are original and that show a strong scholarship. We want books that are addressing consequential and compelling topics. We want books that derive their arguments from good evidence. We want books that have a point of view that are written by expert authors including authors who are bringing less represented perspectives. By that I mean international authors, I mean women, I mean people who have not been published as much historically and currently who are underrepresented within their fields perhaps. We want books that are well written for the widest possible readership because we do see books as a vehicle for reaching a wider audience. Unlike scholarly journals, books really can travel very far beyond the author's own field. So why not take advantage of the large infrastructure that supports book publication and book dissemination to reach those readers?

Finally, we want books that pass the infamous so what test and we can talk more about that if you're interested. But your research matters a lot to you and to those in your field but when you're writing a book, it's useful to think about who else it might matter to and why.

When you're approaching an editor at the MIT Press or another university press, you want to tell us concisely what your book is about. You want to tell us what audience you're writing for or what several audiences if there's more than one. Tell us what your book is uniquely contributing and adding to the literature on your topic. Tell us about your argument and your evidence and tell us why you're the right person to write on this topic and why the MIT Press is the right publisher for your work? What's the community of books that you see your book fitting into? Tell us what the best books available on the topic are and what your book is going to add to this literature? How does it differ from what's already been written?

Anne Savarese (Editor, Princeton University Press)

I'd like to just emphasize the importance of the proposal because at the very early stage of a book's life, the proposal is sort of the first step not only to help the editor understand what your book is and what it's about, and the rationale, and your background, but it's also our way to share information about this book with our colleagues. Because when we first have a discussion about a book, if I have a book that I'm interested in pursuing, I will have to take it to at our press it's called a project review meeting. It's a weekly meeting where we discuss new submissions, new ideas for books. We often we have to write up a short summary of the book, and we share the proposal. My colleagues, especially those who are not acquiring the discipline that I acquire in, as well as people in our sales and marketing department, and other staff that will potentially be involved in helping to publish this book will be looking at the proposal as well. So a proposal helps to give everyone the basic information about the book at an early stage.

Sometimes we get submissions where someone just attaches a manuscript. That's not as helpful as having a proposal first because the proposal breaks down how is the book organized, why are you writing this book, who is it for? What are some competing books? All of this information it's not just an exercise. It's helpful to us. It's also I think helpful to the author because it allows you to really crystalize what it is that you hope to accomplish with this book and who you look to reach.

I think there's not a really easy answer because part of it depends each person's or editor's preference. But I think if it's a first book, I think if you're sending out a proposal, I mean there's been discussions this week about whether you should just send a brief query first and say are you interested in my proposal? I prefer to just get the proposal because then there's a two-paragraph description, I can say, that it's an area we absolutely don't publish in, or there's some other reason to say no just right off the bat. But usually, I'll say, well, maybe. If you have the proposal, just send it.

It is the content of the proposal not the format that matters. You don't have to actually follow the template of a specific publisher but the key points must be addressed- the rationale of the book, the short description and the longer description, and an outline of the structure of the book and so on. Some people get too tripped up on the detail of a template when really they could be spending more time on creating a very clear rationale and describing the book.

Another thing is that, for first books, we often get proposals that are too technical; it is almost like the author is making a proposal for their dissertation committee. Some academic press editors have advanced degrees and some do not. Some have more publishing expertise than academic expertise. We all know a fair amount and we all are doing our job by knowing basically what's going on in our field but we are not academics. We're publishers. Don't assume that we know more than you do about your subject. We often know far less. And so, if you are pitching your proposal to someone who is an expert or your superior in your field that's not effective. I often say think about talking to maybe one of your students like an advanced undergraduate student. Tell us in plain language what it is that your book is about and what you're trying to do. Don't try to impress us with a lot of technical language because it is likely that we will be lost, not only on the editor but on the various colleagues that the editor might share the proposal with.