What is the strategy for Indy?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Nicki Laycoax on April 10, 2009 at 10:04pm

Sounds like my 3 words post... :)

Strengths-The growing cultural community, and growth in general

Weaknesses-I think we need some type of festival every weekend to draw crowds regularly, also better public transportation from the suburbs to the city

Opportunities-Great real estate at affordable rates which allow for new business opportunities in and around the city

Threats-??

I think Indy's is right on track... I like where we're going.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jon D. Speer on April 10, 2009 at 10:24pm

Except that I want more than 3 words. :)
I understand your comments, but so what? What is Indy's strategy? Grow the cultural community? Growth in general? To me, it seems like "we" are shot-gunning it. Shooting without aiming. Throwing stuff against the wall to see what sticks. Is Indy a racing town? Amateur sports capital? Web2.0 community? Cultural center of the Midwest? Naptown?
Maybe I'm being cynical, but there is no vision, no strategy, no 10-year plan, no defined objectives and goals, etc. I hope I'm wrong and this is just a well-kept secret.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Tom Butler on April 10, 2009 at 11:46pm

Absolutely awesome at fleecing the state at both ends for it's own benefit.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jon D. Speer on April 10, 2009 at 11:49pm

Tom,
Care to expand on your comment?
Thanks,
j

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Lynnell Nixon-Knight on April 11, 2009 at 11:29am

One strategy for several years has been to become a sports capital - the tracks, the domes, the NCAA HQ, etc. Whether people like sports or not, it's definitely stimulated the city's economy and brought in a lot of tourist and convention cash, evidenced by the number of hotels and restaurants downtown.
It's also centrally located, and becoming quite the inland shipping hub.
It's got an amazing (and self-sustaining) symphony. World class downtown trails. Professional dance companies, theater, decent shopping. Film festivals. Some corporate world HQs. Aggressive pursuit of the biomedical market. -Relatively- low unemployment. Crime is there, but not off the charts.
I've been to a lot of mid-size cities like Indy and their downtowns are dead. I think we have a vibrant city and am not unhappy with its progress and direction. It needs continual vigilance, but what doesn't?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jon D. Speer on April 11, 2009 at 12:14pm

Lynnell,
I couldn't agree with you more. Becoming the amateur sports capital of the world was a most definitely a strategic decision that started to take shape in the 1980s. The results have been impressive. Definitely shows what can happen with a well-defined strategy, plan, and execution.
The other items you mentioned are great assets. No doubt. What is Indy doing for the next 10 years? 20 years? I've been told that the Japanese do 100 year strategic plans. In America, it's usually a matter of a couple years--enough to attempt to get re-elected.
Thanks,
j

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Aaron M. Renn on April 11, 2009 at 3:33pm

Great topic - which I know we both enjoy discussing.

I think Indy has had strategies in a number of areas that have paid off. Amateur sports, which basically evolved into the events business that big for the city. The MusicCrossroads strategy is a really good one too. Carmel I think has a strategy driven approach that is awesome. The Speedway folks have been pursuing their vision/strategy for open wheeled racing for some time. The IMA is really turning it on. I think the downtown development strategy for the Wholesale District, which involved concentrating many diverse uses into that area, has been a really big winner. No other city Indy's size did it right. So plenty of good examples.

The city also has great and unique assets (the Lilly Endowment, its geographic positioning, the Indy 500 race branding given the city international name recognition). It is an outperformer demographically and economically. And something I don't think is fully appreciated, but Indy has great "execution" capabilities. Generally, when the city decides to do a project, it gets done. When Indy is in a competitive econ dev decision (e.g., Medco), it usually wins.

But does the city have a civic strategy as a whole? No, it does not. That's true for the region as well as the city proper. There are various point strategies in selected areas, but many of them are reactive and me-too. Not all, but some. That's not all bad. It would be hard to differentiate yourself on greenways, for example. And why reinvent the wheel on fire protection? However, the city really hasn't figured out what its aspirations are, what its target market is, and differentiated set of capabilities to serve it. Rather, it's driven project by project, deal by deal opportunistically or when a particular leader mobilizes support for something.

Let's not be too harsh. Few places can be said to have done this. One notable place that has is Portland. They adopted a civic strategy based on quality of life in a traditional urban context juxtaposed with the natural landscape of the Northwest. They believed that if they did this, then highly talented people would move there, and that would drive their economic growth. So they implemented an urban growth boundary, invested heavily in transit, focused development in urban areas, built first class bike, pedestrian, and park spaces, etc. And it paid off for them demographically (i.e., healthy population and income growth), economically, and reputationally.

I don't think Indy should copy Portland's ideas. I'm just saying Portland is a great example of a city that had a strategy and executed it.

The obstacles to creating a true civic strategy are:

- Very few people understand what one might look like. Strategic thinking is not common
- It is a new approach to this problem domain and the typical practitioners in the space are not trained in it.
- It is nebulous and people don't see the value. Politicians would rather cut ribbons than invest 2-3 years and lots of money creating a civic strategy that will take two decades to implement. (Chicago did this back in 1909 - and that is one of the many reasons Chicago became the huge success that it did).
- Leaders in many cities (less so in Indy) have little awareness of how their city objectively stands, how it compares to others, and where it can legitimately compete. Frank discussions of shortcomings can be unwelcome or perceived as personal criticism.
- A viable strategy in any Midwestern locale involves change, which is always a hard sell in this part of the country.
- Civic strategies (e.g., Cincy's recent initiative) due to the need to secure buy in from numerous stakeholders, generally devolve into least common denominator visions and "motherhood and apple pie" statements and goals that aren't actionable.
- Again in the Midwest (less so in Indy), there is little out of the box thinking, small ambitions, and no recognition about the importance of "soft" items like changing the culture.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jon D. Speer on April 12, 2009 at 12:19am

I'm not trying to be harsh. The examples you cite demonstrate there are strategic initiatives and implementation throughout Indy. I think we both agree, though, that there is not a holistic city / county strategy. Your views on a civic strategy capture these thoughts very well.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Dan Powell on April 17, 2009 at 11:54am

Portland is probably the best example of city planning in the US. Indy's problem suffers at the county level. When all the surrounding counties are trying to lure people away from Indy, revenue streams get cut off for Indy. The new growth in the surrounding counties is counterproductive to Indy's growth. The abandon houses are up and so is crime. I felt safer when I lived in Africa than I do walking around downtown at night! Nearly 80% of the students in our IPS schools come from single parent families, enrollment has drastically dropped, test scores and dropout rates are horrid. The cost to send one kid through our Indy public school system rivals the cost of private school. Which then begs the question, why not privatize our schools? --- we have 11/12 superintendents in Marion County alone!

As great of a town as Indy is, it definitely has issues that need addressed. More control over the development in the surrounding counties so that more development and tax revenue can make it into Indy for crime and education would be a step in the right direction. A leader with some guts to address the waste in the school system or corruption in the police system - did you know the sheriff gets paid personally on tax warrants - making it more profitable personally to the Sheriff than catching criminals. The government needs to make incentives to stop crime! Another example of needing state support is on a smoking ban. Smoking ban's work great for businesses when there's a level playing field - hence statewide.

I think Indy's planning department is pretty weak but they're also limited by what they can reasonably accomplish when having to compete against the flight to the surrounding counties. The long-term plan needs to be re-written and more collaborative. I'd love to see better transport - rail system from the other counties into our downtown. I think the current direction of Indy meets the status quo. But, I don't think we're doing anything above and beyond to make Indy a truly great place. We definitely have our bright spots which others have outlined on this post already (positive place to headquarter large businesses, arts, Eagle Creek Park). But, ignoring the bad apples may spoil the batch.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Aaron M. Renn on April 17, 2009 at 12:04pm

Dan, I agree and disagree with this. What you say is true, but I maintain that the decline of Indianapolis is principally related to the failure of the city to plan for the future. It is failed in the strategic challenge. It has done almost nothing to create a differentiated environment that you can't get in the suburbs. It's central city was allowed to rot except for downtown. The suburban areas were built out in an older, lower quality style. Even today, development standards are lower in Marion County than in the collar counties.

The key challenge is answering the question "When you are selling an inferior version of the same product as your competitors at a higher price point in terms of taxes, crime, schools, infrastructure, etc, why would anyone buy your product?" The answer is, obviously, they won't. And they aren't. And Indy has no plan to address this. The concept of doing so isn't even on the local radar in most cases.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jack Pincus on April 12, 2009 at 7:50pm

Strengths are depth of experience in manufacturing and logistics, a large legacy pharmaceutical company, and legacy medical device companiies. The major weaknesses are resistance to change, skating where the puck has been - not where it is going, lack of a critical mass in areas that are important for the State's future, and inability to form the types of networks that lead to new enterprises. There are opportunties to improve all of these that are essential to Indiana's future. Threats come from other regions that are more entrepreneurial and have a head start on economic growth.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jeremy Schieler on April 13, 2009 at 7:57am

I would have to agree with a number of things that have already been said. In particular I agree that we tend to follow the puck. It seems to me that there are many people trying to take a swipe at the proverbial puck but there's a serious lack in coordination both with respect to direction, timing, and realistic thinking. There are many things that Indianapolis and the state of Indiana are good at, many of which have already been stated. However, there are things that we aren't good at and we need to be realistic and realize that pretending that we have the necessary expertise to compete with other regions in these areas is a waste of resources and time.

For those reading this post that have spent extensive periods of time outside the state of Indiana, I'm wondering if the same political struggle exists everywhere or is it unique to Indiana/the Midwest? In part, what I mean is that it seems like organic efforts are difficult to make happen here because of conservative thinking. I've heard many good ideas from a number of different individuals around the state. However, unless the good ideas come from the right people it's very difficult to get them off the ground. On the flip side I've heard some ridiculous statements from our "leaders" that probably come from the following. 1) Fake it till you make it, 2) living with your head buried deep in the sand, and/or 3) as already stated a short-sited political agenda.

In summary, I've said nothing new and would like to submit the italicized question above to the post.

▶ Reply to This

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last