Today in Economic Psychology class we had to analyze a case in order to practice what we learned about conflicts. This particular conflict occurred between two CEOs from different imprints of the same publishing house. The cause?
An author [of a book, I suspect not a well-known one] had spoken to the CEO of the whole house [I will call him Big Boss] about signing with them. The Big Boss redirects the author to CEO1, but the CEO is not present and CEO2 happened to spot the author and from ''Hi, what are you doing here at CEO1's office?'' went to CEO2 signing the author. The conflict arose, when CEO1 learned about this heinous act against him...
So, while I did the task [which was to resolve the conflict between the CEOs], I couldn't stop thinking how insane this is. I know it is a hypothetical situation and this case is ancient and from the archives, so maybe in the earlier years things may have been done a bit differently, I am still kinda stunned this is how people [or this person in particular; who wrote it] perceive publishing.
You write a book, slap it in front of someone and it gets instantly recognized as something that would win big money.
If this is how people see publishing, then it is no wonder that so many people want it and that so many people swamp agents and editors with manuscripts [and usually with no regard to the submission guidelines]. Scary, is it not?