By Kim Hawkey
We recently received the results of the reader survey we conducted earlier this year in order to see how we could further improve the journal.
The results of the survey are extremely informative and provide us with valuable information about our readers: Who they are, their reading habits and preferences, and what they would like to see in their journal.
Readers also shared their views on De Rebus Digital and whether they would be prepared to pay for this version and/or for the hard copy of the journal, if necessary in the future.
Importantly, readers told us what else they would like to see in De Rebus, and provided suggestions for improving the journal.
Below is a summary of the survey findings.
Our readers
Nearly 75% of respondents indicated that they were practising attorneys, 9% were candidate attorneys and 16,3% were in law-related occupations; for example as legal advisers, law students, legal consultants or in academic, management or financial positions. Overall, 39,7% of respondents were 34 years or younger, 44,5% were aged between 35 and 54 and 15,7% were older than 54. More males (57,7%) than females (42,3%) participated in the survey.
The results indicate that De Rebus is read by a variety of people besides attorneys and candidate attorneys, such as law and other students; legal advisers; non-practising lawyers; advocates; law consultants and practitioners; journalists; academics; financial and human resource professionals; executive managers and legal administrators. Readers come from all economic sectors, have different focus areas in terms of the law and are employed in different organisations and practices.
Quality
Over 93% of respondents rated the journal as excellent or good, and 93% were of the opinion that De Rebus is well written, researched and presented. Younger readers rated the journal more positively than older readers.
Preferences
As the graph below indicates, readers rated the feature articles, news articles, practice and case notes, as well as the Law Reports and New Legislation columns, among the most valuable sections of the journal, in terms of regular reading and relevancy.
Digital versus print
One third (33,6%) of respondents preferred De Rebus in digital format, compared to the 66,4% who preferred the hard copy format. The percentage of respondents per age group who preferred the journal in digital format decreased with age, while the percentage of respondents per age group who preferred the journal in print format increased with age.
Some readers suggested that the journal should be in digital format only and should be distributed by e-mail. This, according to them, would ensure that De Rebus contained up-to-date information, would make the journal cheaper due to the absence of printing costs and would make referencing easier. Some suggested that the journal should be made available in both formats, with the hard copy available at a price and the digital version free.
Paying for De Rebus
As set out in the graph on the next page, nearly half of the respondents (42,3%) indicated that they would not be prepared to pay for De Rebus should it no longer be free in future. Further, 41,1% of respondents would be prepared to pay R 500 or less for an annual subscription, while 16,5% would be willing to pay more than R 500 for an annual subscription.
Improvements
Respondents were asked to give suggestions on how the editorial team of De Rebus could improve the journal. Various suggestions were received on the journal’s format and content, which illustrated the diversity in readership of the journal and thus differences in opinion on what the content should entail and on what should be covered in the journal.
Of the respondents, almost 20% said there was no need for any improvements, while others provided suggestions on how to better De Rebus.
These are discussed under the headings below.
Electronic version
A number of readers requested smartphone and tablet applications, while others felt the online version needed to be more user-friendly. Those who wanted to access the journal from their mobile phones or tablets said that the online version should be specifically configured for such viewing. Some also expressed the view that, although they were in favour of the electronic version, they did not know ‘how to use it properly’.
Many readers suggested indexes for previous copies; some suggested that these could be in electronic format, with an expanded search facility to assist with research.
Layout and design
Some readers described the layout and design of the journal as ‘outdated’ and in need of a new, more professional and modern ‘look’. This came as a bit of a surprise to the editorial team as the journal underwent a major transformation in March 2012 in order to give it a modern, fresh look and feel. At the time we received a tremendous amount of support from our readers for the redesign. We would, therefore, encourage readers to provide us with their views on this aspect of the survey.
Journal content
Readers expressed their desire for an increase in content focusing on day-to-day practice and their preference for articles with a practical, rather than an academic, approach.
In particular, many respondents suggested publishing regular articles in question-and-answer and step-by-step formats.
These could, for example, be used to guide inexperienced practitioners through legal processes, such as how to do an application, how to apply for liquidation, and how to evict someone from a property.
Similarly, readers asked for more practice management information, such as guidance on how to start a practice and run it successfully.
There were also requests for more content aimed at candidate attorneys and prospective candidate attorneys in particular, such as information on job hunting and aimed at preparing them for practice.
Respondents also asked for more interaction with their colleagues through the journal, to enable them to air their views; to ask for, or to give, advice; and to share experiences. This could, for example, take the format of a column where readers could voice their suggestions and/or complaints.
The survey results reflected diverse views on the information mix that should appear in the journal; for example, while some want more ‘social’ content, others are strongly against this.
Many readers also suggested a ‘lighter’ section in De Rebus to include jokes about lawyers, funny anecdotes from court and/or a law-related comic strip.
Other suggestions included:
Going forward
The survey has provided valuable information on our readers’ preferences and on how the journal can be further improved. The De Rebus Editorial Committee and editorial team are currently considering which of these suggestions to implement in order to make the journal the best it can be.
Tell us: Do you have any comments on the reader survey results? If so, send an e-mail to derebus@derebus.org.za .
Kim Hawkey, kim.hawkey@derebus.org.za
This article was first published in De Rebus in 2013 (July) DR 6.
