Hot Places for Entrepreneurs
Inc Magazine is out with their 2007 list of Boomtowns. Texas leads the pack, due in part to in-migration, escalating energy prices and a tech sector that has regained its footing. The telling indicator is job growth (the best measure of economic vitality, in their expert opinion). The Top 10 boomtowns for 2007 are:
1. St. George, UT
2. Yuma, AZ
3. Prescott, AZ
4. Fort Meyers, FL
5. McAllen, TX
6. Naples, FL
7. Las Vegas, NV
8. Sarasota, FL
9. Morgantown, WV
10. Bend, OR
Where’s Idaho you ask?
Coeur d’Alene ranked 16th, Idaho Falls 32nd, Boise City-Nampa (their naming, not mine) 48th and Pocatello 76th.
We’ve seen the press releases and announcements on Idaho’s low and stable unemployment rates. While that is great news, where’s the job creation activity? Coeur d’Alene fell 11 spots from a ranking of 5 in 2006. Idaho Falls dropped 22 places from 10th in 2006. Boise City-Nampa actually jumped 11 spots from a ranking of 48th in 2006. Pocatello dropped from 66 in 2006 (a drop of 10 spots).
I don’t necessarily agree that ‘jobs’ is the best measure for an economy’s success. I do however think that its a telling measure - to attract and retain talent, there must be other like-minded/similar jobs for people to move between. Employees need to have options in employers. Such options lead to diversification of an economy and further create wealth.
I agree that “jobs” shouldn’t be the only measure of an economy’s success, but unfortunately unemployment percentages are the only numbers that get all the press.
Also, and this has sort of been touched on in the MSNBC post, but what is “tech” anyways? This might be a separate topic all together, but it annoys me when the state or the local press labels a call center job a “tech job”. Didn’t they do that when HP opened their Shop@HP call center a couple years ago?
What all this tells me is that a serious discussion needs to be conducted on what is “tech” and what is not. It also tells me that the source data needs to be looked at and re-evaluated. Correct me if I’m wrong, but the economic data used to calculate unemployment on a national scale doesn’t factor in self-employment. That’s people in start ups or independent consultants! Within the last 10-20 years that has grown significantly.
The folks on this board and the local tech community should be the ones defining who we are, not the state or the press.
Justin- check the MSNBC thread for more discussion re definitions. I don’t call what the media labels a job as long as it pays well. If the pay is dreadful…
And if you want to see statistics, I’ll post something about that soon (after I do what Tac wants, LOL)
Anyway, Justin, some stats include self-employment UNemployment data & EMployment data often don’t coincide, LOL) However, to stay on-thread, I would argue that UNDER-employment is the bigger issue here. (Disclosure: Feeling more than a bit underemployed myself! LOL)
This is also potentially a great opportunity - the talent pool may be deeper & richer than the state or the media may realize… To Krissa’s excellent point, how do we tap into that?
If you don’t like jobs or local wealth/GDP as a metric, one excellent predictor of both is the rate of productivity growth. And under-employment is a great predictor of *slowing* productivity growth.
Productivity growth is (duh) outputs growing faster than inputs - if you double wages but triple sales, that’s a 50% increase in productivity. But where do you find the talent and the support to help you raise Idaho’s productivity? Isn’t that where Idaho should be investing heavily?
Part of our message?
Tech industries tend to be associated with above-average productivity growth. Whether new products/services or new ways to enable productivity growth elsewhere (GPS -> precision farming?)… that’s the value this community brings to Idaho.
Heya, Justin!
We seem to be running in to each other more and more frequently. I’d have to suggest you start showing better judgment in the acquaintances you make!
I brought the same question up, i.e. what is and isn’t tech, in a different thread on this forum. We blended some ideas, I think…I agree with ya. Issues that are not tightly defined don’t seem to get tightly wrapped up.
About the state and the press defining things, I completely sympathize. They have the bullhorn.
So…do you have any input on classification of “tech?” Not to harp on it, if Norris will allow…
For comparative reasons, it is nice to use a definition that others do - be it a state or an agency, etc.
Aside from doing an independent, 3rd party study, using a universally accepted definition tends to be the easiest and most efficient way to determine impact. It also gives an indication of what we need to do to have greater impact and in what areas. If you are the only one defining something in a certain way, what is the relevance?
Is it the best? No, but its all we have (at the moment).
Good Morning, Krissa!
From: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/high-tech:
“…the term describes industries and firms that use or produce advanced technology, especially in electronics.”
From: http://mw1.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/high-tech
“A style of interior design featuring industrial products, materials, or designs.”
“A descriptive term for industry heavily dependent on recent laboratory discoveries.
From: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/high+tech
“High Technology.”
A style of interior decoration…”
A look through http://www.glossarist.com/gsearch.asp on “high-tech” shows rankings heavily favoring computer science and no definitions.
From: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/high-technology-high-tech.html
“Today’s cutting-edge technology. May be outdated tomorrow.
From: http://www.investopedia.com/search/results.aspx?q=high-tech
Nuthin’.
From: http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?searched=high+tech&type=3&submit1.x=78&submit1.y=12&submit1=Look+up
Nuthin’.
…and so it goes. Sorta’ reminds me of the phrase, “In the beginning…a formless void…”
I take it you, Norris, Tac…are all on the academic side? Do you have a reference for us? I haven’t been in a text book for over a decade…
I think the peril is in the possible connotations. I consider high tech to be in disciplines such as genetics and propulsion, but also in classics like chemistry. Chemistry is everywhere anymore, from lawn food to toothpaste to processing food/drink to vehicle fuels & lubricants to printer inks. Common things that most folks (more reasonable folks?) wouldn’t think of as “high-tech.”
Interesting. I agree with your last statement - common/reasonable folks and their definition of high tech.
I stay away from ‘high tech’, as it alienates people. Even science and technology is too limiting (in my opinion). To bring everyone to the same playing field, I have the conversation around innovation and adding value - this encompasses more industries. In Idaho, when the words ‘high tech’ are used, people think computers and chips. There are ‘high tech’ elements/aspects to agriculture, timber and mining too.
I do teach for University of Phoenix (economics), but I wouldn’t classify myself as an academic. I take much more of an applied approach. The issue with the policy dicussion occurring over the past several years is that it sometimes misses the application, but it sounds really good on paper.
I think that’s where the private sector needs to step in and help frame the discussion. What is needed for the tech sector to flourish? How do we make that happen? The market needs to, and must, drive the decisions.
With that end goal in mind, I think a more general definition of tech is needed. We need people who can tell their story and how x, y, z will help them increase their revenue or grow their product line, etc.
I will find the BEA report that we use at TechConnect and post a link to it.
Leo, I’m straddling the worlds as best I can. I’m a defrocked academic, now a budding social entrepreneur (helping the disabled). I still keep my hand in on cutting-edge research, but always looking to apply. I’m known for being a top research mind but even more for designing entrepreneurship courses & programs.
My expertise is how we learn to see opportunities - but I’m really interested in how that translates to the classroom and to a community. That translate-ability is what I love about all this. And that now we already know a lot about how to nurture an entrepreneurial community! Cheers, Leo!
This is the article that defines tech that the state uses:
http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2005/07/art6full.pdf
It comes from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) not BEA as I said earlier.
Excellent! Many thanks!
Tech, High tech, science and technology are all words that mean different things to different people which results in endless debate about whose ox is being (or will be)gored. The debate should be about how we (all of the business sectors)remain competitive globally. It really does not matter what industry you pick. They all need to be more efficient and productive (translated-continue to be profitable). How does that happen?? Through innovation. It may or may not involve technology although increasingly it does. The entire of process of turning a tree into a piece of furniture has changed significantly in just the last ten years. And, oh by the way,these changes eliminated lots of jobs along the way. It also created some new jobs (fewer in number)that did not exist 10 years ago. How did this happen??? Innovation. Almost every industry has had the same experience. Those that continued to do things the way they did 10 years ago are either gone or soon will be. We should all expect this to happen again and again and the next time it won’t take 10 years. Best current example is flat panel displays - less than three years. Are you hanging on???
Heard a great quote:
“If you don’t like change [innovation], you’re going to like irrelevance even less!”
-General Shinseki (via Tom Peters)