Summary of 2026 Member Survey Responses
Thank you to all those who responded to the Northwest Editors Guild 2026 Member Survey. We had a response rate of nearly 27%, with 118 of the Guild’s 440 members completing the survey.
We hope that you will find this summary of survey responses informative, and we look forward to incorporating your feedback into future Guild programming. (Please note that percentages are rounded for simplicity, and the response rate for some questions was less than 27%, indicating fewer than 118 responses.)
Who we are and how we work: Ties to the PNW and book editing remain strong.
Our 2026 survey reveals a membership that is largely female (84%), white (87%), 45 or older (70%), and based in the Pacific Northwest (54% from Washington and 23% from Oregon), despite the Guild’s membership being open to any editor in the US. Twenty-two percent of respondents identify as LBGTQIA+. Forty-nine percent of respondents report working with a chronic illness, a disability, or neurodivergence.
Our community is a mix of new and longtime members. Twenty-three percent of survey respondents joined the Guild within the last four years, while 55% have been with the Guild for 10 years or more.
The majority of members are freelance editors who primarily edit books, including nonfiction (62%), fiction (51%), and academic (30%). Following these, members work on other academic material (papers and journal articles); websites, blogs, and social media; and business and corporate communications. When asked what types of projects members would like to learn most about, responses were highest for books (divided almost evenly between fiction and nonfiction), followed by nonprofit communications, grants, games, children’s literature, and scripts.
Most members use a laptop PC to do their work, and most prefer to use Microsoft Word (about 70% each). For editing guidance, the Chicago Manual of Style (CMOS) remains the industry standard among Guild members (74%). Still, 26% of respondents indicated that they would like to learn more about CMOS, followed by the Associated Press Stylebook (22%), and the Council of Science Editors (CSE) style guide (14%).
Members primarily perform the classic trio of editorial work: copyediting, proofreading, and line/substantive editing. Respondents indicate that they continue to develop and hone their skills through continuing education, taking classes from the University of Washington’s Editing Certificate Program (49%), the Editorial Freelancers Association (EFA) (47%), and ACES: The Society for Editing (35%). The EFA and ACES rank as the top editing organizations to which Guild members also belong.
Why we value our membership: Legitimacy and community.
Professional legitimacy (64%) and community (62%) are the top items valued by current members, and are rated by respondents as “highly important,” ahead of both referrals from other Guild members (55%), member meetings (44%), and the online job board (39%).
Despite high overall satisfaction rates—84% of respondents feel their membership is worth the cost—direct employment referrals remain low. Sixty-four percent of survey respondents said that they did not receive any job referrals from other Guild members in the last year, and 73% indicated receiving no job leads from the online directory.
Job board engagement also registered low among respondents—25% rarely or never checking the site—with some members citing access issues or lack of awareness. Sixty-eight percent of respondents have never secured work through the job board, whereas 13% secured one or more jobs in the past year. (The Board is currently discussing and seeking ways to expand job advertisements for Guild members.)
When and how we participate: Responses convey high satisfaction with the Red Pencil Conference and low barriers to engagement.
Seventy percent of respondents attended the 2025 Red Pencil Conference and nearly half reported that they were “very satisfied.” Overall, 69% of respondents have attended at least one Red Pencil conference, with 30% attending between 1 and 5 conferences. For those who have not attended the Red Pencil conference, location was cited as the primary reason (36%), followed by cost (31%), and timing (25%). Looking ahead to future Red Pencil conferences, 48% of respondents said that “access to notes from the conference” would be desirable, followed by “more ‘advanced’ sessions” (40%), and “more networking opportunities” (36%).
Apart from Red Pencil, 53% of respondents said they attend some bimonthly online member meetings hosted by the Guild, while 44% have never attended. Of those not attending, 60% indicated that they do not have time or the times of the meetings conflict with their schedule. Forty-two percent of respondents are “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with the topics covered in online meetings, while others are neutral or would prefer more formal agendas rather than informal discussions. Only 35% of respondents said they sometimes watch recordings of Guild member meetings. (For those who do not attend meetings due to time constraints, please remember that past member meeting videos are available for everyone for two months, but also remain available to Guild members after that period.)
Accessibility does not seem to have a large effect on online attendance: 78% of respondents indicated that no additional features are needed to make access easier, while 8% noted that transcripts of meetings would be helpful.
In-person meetings are infrequently attended, with 62% of respondents indicating that they have never attended an in-person meetup hosted by the Guild, and 30% attending between 1 and 5 meetups. However, some members expressing fatigue with Zoom meetings are in favor of more in-person meetups.
(We strongly encourage members to set up local in-person meetups wherever they are! Members can submit an event for inclusion in our calendar, and our administrator is happy to help with organization and setup.)
Where there are barriers to participation
Nearly 75% of survey respondents feel “fully welcome and respected.” Fifty-nine percent of respondents did not report any access barriers to Guild programming, but 30% reported money, resources, and time as impediments. Thirty-three percent of respondents were aware of DEI efforts in the last year, 38% were unaware, and 28% were unsure. Of those that were aware of DEI programming, 11% indicated that such programming was effective, and 50% were unsure.
What Guild members would like to see in the future: More continuing education and outreach to writing groups, publishers, and corporate clients.
Survey respondents indicate a desire to grow and expand their skills in three primary areas: editing, technology, and business.
For editing, responses are almost even between line/substantive editing and developmental editing (44% and 45%). These items are followed by editorial project/team management (34%), acquisitions (27%), and copyediting and technical editing (26% each).
For technology, responses indicate an interest in e-book formatting (47%), while members also seek training on using Adobe software, including Adobe Acrobat Pro or Reader, Adobe InDesign, and Adobe InCopy.
For business, respondents are interested in learning more about “self-employment and how to run a small business” (58%) and “networking and community building” (37%).
Finally, respondents indicated that what they would like to see most from the Guild in the future are “more continuing education opportunities” (46%) and “more outreach to writing groups and organizations” (45%), “publishers” (39%), and “business and corporate clients” (23%). (In response to this, we are happy to report that our outreach committee is ramping up outreach to writing organizations this year, and that we hope to continue that expansion in the near future. The board is also actively discussing ways to expand outreach to publishers and businesses.)
