Pondering over staff numbers

It’s one of our industry’s imponderables. Suggest to the editor that he needs to cut costs, and he
immediately responds that his quality will be affected (until he/she is made Publisher then sit back
and watch!) Can one predict what editorial staff numbers should be? Yes. But many editors will
argue that you can’t. I will demonstrate that you can. Here is an analysis based on 20 newspapers
(of different kinds) in seven European countries.

Here are three interesting facts.

Firstly: There is a very strong correlation between advertising revenue and staff numbers. The
graph below shows the relationship between a newspaper’s advertising revenues and the editorial
staffing numbers. You will see how close the markers are to the line.

Secondly: There is a reasonably strong relationship between circulation and editorial staffing. OK
so the points are not so close, but there is still a demonstrable relationship.
In the circulation chart, the difference is most striking among the larger titles. B&K are both
national titles, with weak classified. P&R are more like large regional titles with a strong
classified. Does this justify the extra editorial resources? And what happens when that classified
migrates off to a branded digital vertical?

By combining the two factors, it is possible to measure how close staffing levels are to the
“optimum” as demonstrated in the chart below:

In the circulation chart, the difference is most striking among the larger titles. B&K are both
national titles, with weak classified. P&R are more like large regional titles with a strong
classified. Does this justify the extra editorial resources? And what happens when that
classified migrates off to a branded digital vertical.

By combining the two factors, it is possible to measure how close staffing levels are to the
“optimum” as demonstrated in the chart below:

Here the blue circles show actual staffing levels, and the red circles what the model predicts they
should be. Note how those titles above the line show blue, actual levels larger, while those below
the line show blue, actual levels smaller. In other words this shows that relative to circulation
volumes and advertising revenues, editorial staff numbers can be justified and accounted for
against peers. And the differences, to an extent, can be explained by differences in genre, but
that’s no excuse.

Now to the third factor. There is absolutely no correlation between editorial pages produced, and
staff numbers required. This confirms the argument that quality and quantity are different things…
But…. While one can accept that a newspaper like the FT or FAZ, might justify a higher level of
staffing given research, etc, the truth is that a study I undertook a few years ago showed,
advertising revenues grow exponentially as a newspaper moves up-market, but editorial costs rise
exponentially faster which is why many quality newspapers struggle to be profitable. They
produce too much content, for rich people who have less time to read.

So let’s accept that staffing numbers are quantifiable. Creativity is the most vital element of our
industry. But let’s get facts involved in solving arguments.

© Jim CHISHOLM. January 2010.

Footnote: Some of the titles did not provide data on both advertising and circulation and
therefore are not included in all the charts.