Archive for February, 2004

The Use of Technology in Economic Development

Saturday, February 28th, 2004

By Dean Whittaker

As an “early adopter” of new technology I am addicted to the latest gadget or gizmo that promises to make me more productive or efficient or just plain “cool”.  When the piles of “techno-trash” (last year’s model, etc.) begin to pile up around my den and office I begin to ponder three questions.

The first question is the most critical. I ask, what problem does this technology solve? How does information technology make me more productive or effective or create all that “leisure-time”?  Take for example, email. What problem does this technology help me solve? Well, it enables me to work “24×7”. When I awake in the early morning hours, I can communicate with my clients, colleagues, and friends. I can send documents, files, images and other content long distances rapidly to multiple recipients. So, basically, email allows me to communicate with more people faster. It shifts time and location so that the person with whom I am communicating is doesn’t need to be available to receive my message.  So, what is the problem I am trying to solve?  Is it figuring out more ways to communicate with more people? Is it shifting time and space? Is it

The second question I ask myself is, “Whose problem is it”? Using the email analogy, whose problem is it? Email has rapidly become the communication mode of choice. Is communication my problem to solve? Well, yes, it probable is. So it passes this test.

Lastly, I ask myself, “What other problems does it create”?  Well, let’s see. There is the issue of unwanted messages – spam.  Also, email creates the expectation of a rapid response necessitating devices like the Blackberry, a hand held always connected gadget that has a high geek factor and enables distracting “urgent” messages to be received anytime and anywhere include the rest room, class room and board room.  And now my PDA (personal data assistant) has been bred with my cell phone to create “the smart phone” enabling email message to be received and sent on it. High speed internet access in my hotel rooms becomes a differentiating factor in hotel selection.  My laptop begins to be part of my travel gear when on “vacation” so I don’t have to deal with ten days worth of email when I return.

Whatever happened to time to think or just be? Can you remember the last time you received a personal hand written letter or note? Want to stand out these days? Buy a fountain pen, stationary, some stamps and take the time to compose and send a letter or note.  

In summary, technology can be a great servant but it comes at a cost. I need to carefully select the technology I employ based up its ability to solve real issues that are mine and that create the fewest side effects. When contemplating my next gadget or gizmo I need to ask my self these three questions. What’s the problem, whose is it and what other problems will this solution create?  Take the three-way technology test on your next purchase.

Best Marketing Practices – Preliminary Survey & Leadership Presentation

Saturday, February 28th, 2004

By Pete Julius

In conjunction with IEDC, on January 8, 2003 we sent out a preliminary survey for a project that we are jointly working on to identify the best marketing practices within economic development.  A few weeks ago at the IEDC Leadership Conference in St. Petersburg Dean Whittaker and I presented the results of the survey.  For those not familiar with this project, the purpose of our project is to identify the best practices within economic development marketing that can be used as benchmarks for evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of individual marketing programs.  It is a research project that will involve many steps.  The survey and presentation completed in January is just the beginning.  This article will provide you with an overview of the results and discuss the next steps in this project.

In order to resolve the purpose of this project, this project will involve engaging economic developers to participate in this project and share their knowledge and experiences.  The objective of this preliminary survey was designed to ask a series of questions that would help to generate awareness, initiate collaboration, spark interest and engage practitioners.  The questions asked in the survey are as follows.

  1.  What is the population served by your organization?
  2. What is the size of your marketing budget?
  3. What percentage of your marketing resources does your organization allocate to the following tactics?
  4. What marketing tactics have provided you with the greatest and worst results?
  5. What aspects of your marketing strategy have been your strengths and what have been weaknesses?
  6. How do you measure the results of your marketing efforts?
  7. In your area, what would you estimate the cost to be to generate a qualified lead (a company that is looking to relocate and/or expand in the near future)?
  8. What marketing tactics do you plan to implement in the future?
  9. Do you have any comments or additional thoughts on economic development marketing?

These questions were derived through collaboration with several economic development practitioners, including a discussion group that was held at the 2003 IEDC Annual Conference in Cincinnati.  Based upon our conversations, these were the questions that were more frequently discussed.  We viewed it as a place to start.  The results of the survey and the PowerPoint slides used in the Leadership Conference presentation can be viewed by clicking on the survey results link at the bottom of the page.

Our next steps will involve holding a series of focus groups over the next several months.  If you wish to participate, then please contact Pete Julius at pete.julius@whittakerassociates.com or call 616-396-4500.  We will then prepare another survey that will be distributed at the end of May/early June of this year.  Those results will then be revealed at the 2004 Annual Conference in St. Louis.  Your participation is strongly encouraged.

Creative Farming

Saturday, February 28th, 2004

By Leigh Howe

If you haven’t looked closely at the farming industry lately you might be surprised.  Creativity is not only for the big city.  Creative farming is probably better known to many as value added agriculture.  According to Michigan State University, value added agriculture is a process of increasing the economic value and consumer appeal of an agricultural commodity.  It is an alternative production and marketing strategy that requires a better understanding of the rapidly changing food industry and food safety issues, consumer preferences, business savvy, and team work.  Adding features to a raw agricultural, marine, aqua cultural, or forestry material used to make a product is an example of a value added activity.

When people think “value-added agriculture,” genetically modified crops and engineered foods come to mind.  While those may be part of the picture that get the most media coverage, value added activities may be more basic such as new processing techniques and creating greater consumer appeal for commodity products.  Organic growing methods foods are an example of creative agriculture.  But it is nothing new!  It is actually growing food without the help of chemicals or other artificial components – the old fashioned way.  Traditional farms are focusing more on organic growing as the demand for such products is growing at a healthy 20% per year.

Organics are just the tip of the iceberg.  Farmers and food specialists are tasked to reduce trans fatty acid, reduce saturated fats, increase fiber intakes and innovate new flavors, just to name a few.  As the population in the United States becomes wealthier, older, more education, and more ethnically diverse, the demands for foods will continue change.  Consumers are demanding more new food products, new packaging, more convenience, new delivery systems, and safer and more nutritious foods.  These trends will all drive the farming and food industry to meet this needs with creativity in flavors, packaging, and healthy foods.

For further investigation on the subject, check out the following sites:

New & Expanded Announcements

Saturday, February 28th, 2004

By Jeff Vedders

We recently analyzed US new facility and expanded facility activity for 2003.  There were a total of 5,427 announcements in 2003.  This compares with 6,645 announcements in 2002, 9,679 announcements in 2001 and 11,602 announcements in 2000.  That means there was a 22% drop in activity from 2002 to 2003, and there was a 53% drop in activity from 2000 to 2003.  All announcements represent an investment of $1 million, 50 employees, or 20,000 sq. ft.

Source: Whittaker Associates, Inc. and Conway Data Scoreboard

Of the 6,645 announcements reported for 2002, 2,720 were new facility announcements while 2,707 were expanded facility announcements.

2002 Top New Facility Announcements Analysis

As can be seen below, most of the top industries dropped off in activity from 2002 to 2003.  Computer and electronic product manufacturing leads all categories with a drop off of 44%.  Although much of the new activity is down, there are still a few categories that remain active and are increasing in activity.  Interestingly, after a drop-off of 78% between 2001 and 2002, building, developing, & general contracting (spec properties) is up nearly 96% over 2002 levels.  Truck transportation facilities and wholesale trade, nondurable goods are up over 2002 levels.

2003 New Announcements 2002 New Announcements Percentage Change NAICS Code NAICS Description
479 245 95.51% 233 Building, developing, & general contracting
188 272 -30.88% 421 Wholesale trade, durable goods
156 186 -16.13% 541 Professional, scientific & technical services
146 200 -27.00% 336 Transportation equipment manufacturing
123 142 -13.38% 325 Chemical manufacturing
112 97 15.46% 422 Wholesale trade, nondurable goods
97 122 -20.49% 721 Accommodation
92 130 -29.23% 311 Food manufacturing
92 109 -15.60% 326 Plastics & rubber products manufacturing
69 109 -36.70% 333 Machinery manufacturing
68 91 -25.27% 332 Fabricated metal products manufacturing
58 104 -44.23% 334 Computer & electronic product manufacturing
56 69 -18.84% 331 Primary metal manufacturing
55 48 14.58% 561 Administrative & support services
52 23 126.09% 484 Truck transportation

Source: Whittaker Associates, Inc. and Conway Data Scoreboard

2002 Top Expanded Facility Announcements Analysis

As with the new announcements, most of the top industries dropped significantly in activity from 2002 to 2003.  Printing and related support activity, machinery manufacturing, and wholesale trade, durable goods lead all categories with drop offs of 35%, 34% and 34% respectively.  Categories showing a significant increase include building, developing, & general contracting and truck transportation (558% and 100%).

2003 Expanded Announcements 2002 Expanded Announcements Percentage Change NAICS Code NAICS Description
263 364 -27.75% 336 Transportation equipment manufacturing
185 219 -15.53% 311 Food manufacturing
180 207 -13.04% 325 Chemical manufacturing
171 150 14.00% 541 Professional, scientific, & technical services
152 218 -30.28% 326 Plastics & rubber products manufacturing
133 177 -24.86% 332 Fabricated metal product manufacturing
116 176 -34.09% 333 Machinery manufacturing
107 162 -33.95% 421 Wholesale trade, durable goods
89 129 -31.01% 331 Primary metal manufacturing
80 86 -6.98% 422 Wholesale trade, nondurable goods
79 12 558.33% 233 Building, developing, & general contracting
69 98 -29.59% 334 Computer & electronic product manufacturing
66 73 -9.59% 335 Electrical equipment, appliance & component mfg
64 59 8.47% 337 Furniture & related product manufacturing
58 73 -20.55% 321 Wood product manufacturing
53 73 -27.40% 327 Nonmetallic mineral product manufacturing
51 71 -28.17% 339 Miscellaneous manufacturing
50 77 -35.06% 323 Printing & related support activities
50 25 100.00% 484 Truck transportation

Source: Whittaker Associates, Inc. and Conway Data Scoreboard