What Indiana Lacks and Needs

11 Comments

Comment by Scott Abel on April 20, 2008 at 9:35am

All I can say is ... thank you for saying what I've been unable to communicate effectively through commenting on blog posts here on Smaller Indiana. You hit the nail(s) -- there are several of them -- right on their heads. Smaller Indiana is a great first step toward helping connect some previously disconnected Hoosiers who come from a wide variety of backgrounds, who may have many differences, but share a common goal to improve Indiana in the ways you describe. Smaller Indiana has provided us with a way to meet folks who share things in common with us without allowing all of our differences to get in the way. That is a good first step, but certainly not the kind of drastic change we need. Thanks for jotting your thoughts down and sharing them with us.

Comment by Nicki Laycoax on April 20, 2008 at 10:26am

Raymond,

Will you kindly put this event on your calendar? It is May 10th, and is a start of change in Morgan County. It would be great if you could be my guest!

Thanks!

Comment by Chris Flener on April 20, 2008 at 7:48pm

I like your message, but I'll comment about what I feel is most notable about the whole thing.

The number one problem of networks such as Smaller Indiana is they are talkers and not doers!

It's the old saying, "Talk is Cheap". Anyone can talk about change, and "blog" about it. Go out and do it. Smaller Indiana seems to be very big on talking about topics (mostly unrelated to changing the economy or any other part of Indiana), but I don't see a huge group of doers. Sure, some of them have done things in the past or might be doing something currently, but they aren't going to be doing things in the future, they are stuck in what they are currently doing (or just aren't doers at all...which is a very, very high percentage on SI).

I do disagree a bit with why people choose other locations, but it doesn't really matter...without doers, it doesn't make a difference. I also disagree that startups aren't happening in Indiana. They are, but they are small business startups, not big time startups that seek angel investors and such.

All in all, I agree with most of what you have said here. I lived in Bloomington for 5 years during my undergraduate work, and I was happy to get out when I did. I love IU, but would never go there to start a business or live again.

I also don't think that your advice to blog and join twitter is on point. Again, there is a big disconnect between talkers and doers (or bloggers and doers in this case). I think that those doers who need to network can utilize these as sources of information, but to make it seem as though it's the first and most important place to network and be a part of is off track.

I have 3 companies, and working on my 4th, and I've never had a need for twitter or any blog. All of my companies are Indiana startups, and are all either regional in nature (multi-state) or national.

Indiana has a long way to go, but this is only addressing one of many, many issues in getting to where it needs to be.

Comment by Nicki Laycoax on April 20, 2008 at 8:00pm

Chris,

I think it would be great for you to be my guest at the Martinsville Community Day.

I am amongst a group of doers that are taking action, starting in the county we live in. Hope to see you there!

Comment by Raymond Angel on April 21, 2008 at 10:37am

The Twitter bit is a pit off point but let me point to something that might seem dumb... but is a true story.

I was speaking a VERY prominent VC this week over lunch. He told me if someone comes in to present an idea and they don't have twitter he won't fund them.

I agree that seems pretty dumb but that is what we are up against now.

Agreed Chris that without doers none of it matters.

I think the best way to determine why startups chose the locations I listed is to ask them. I've asked three so far and was shocked to hear culture.

I think you are right about small business startups as well. Maybe Indiana can do those best?

I guess I'm thinking more along the lines of bigger companies. What ever we can do though to get newer, cleaner, better paying jobs in this state would be nice though ;)

P.S

Who is with me on forming some sort of task-force to start investigating and researching what we can do and doing something about it?

Comment by Chris Flener on April 21, 2008 at 10:52am

I would be interested in it, but right now my plate is pretty full with my latest business project.

The VC you spoke with was an idiot if that was a serious statement. If that is a requirment he is missing the boat on good opportunities.

Small businesses work best for multiple reasons here in Indiana. First, the tax code is not set up to bring in large corporations. Why do the largest percentage of businesses incorporate in only a couple of states? Tax advantages. Indiana government is to blame for a large portion of why big businesses overlook Indiana. The people of Indiana are right behind that. It doesn't have to do with Culture, but rather lack of knowledge. They tend to listen to the wrong people rather than educating themselves.

The 3 companies you talked with who answere Culture is the reason they choose their location are probably in the minority. Companies in general locate for 3 main reasons, tax set up, employment potential, and availability of resources they need. For instance, tax laws in certain states don't help large companies, and therefore they get no large companies. Big companies that need manual labor will set up in areas that have high unemployment so they get hire cheaper labor. Resources for the company are also needed...there aren't many logging companies in a state like Texas, but there are in Washington. The rest of the reasons are generally secondary (for bigger businesses).

For small businesses, it's all about location and familiarity. Small businesses are generally started near a hometown or familiar area. You don't pick up and move to a new city and start a small business where you know absolutely noone, that makes no since.

None of these situations have anything to do with using twitter or blogging. Very few businesses require them, and contrary to what the tech savvy people on here think, they are not mainstream.

Comment by Raymond Angel on April 21, 2008 at 11:18am

I agree 100% twitter isn't mainstream. When my mom starts talking about it... it'll be mainstream.

Tax laws in Indiana and incentives have a LOT to do with why companies aren't coming here.

I'd suggest reading this... it was posted after I posted my bit here but is from a VC and should be found interesting.

http://www.techstars.org/2008/04/20/what-we-learned-by-moving-to-boulder/

Comment by Raymond Angel on April 21, 2008 at 11:19am

P.S

We have travel. I mean does it get more central then Indiana for travel? ;)

Comment by Chris Flener on April 21, 2008 at 11:54am

I agree with your twitter assessment! I look at my parents, brothers, and friends to see what is mainstream. None of them are using twitter and none of them blog either! When they do it, i'll consider it mainstream. I had a big discussion about this previously with some tech guys on here trying to tell me it was all mainstream, it was humorous.

We have travel, and Indiana is centrally located, but we don't have anything other than Indianapolis as a viable hub for travel. Sorry, Fort Wayne and Evansville just aren't cutting it. They aren't big enough and don't provide what would be needed to be a major travel hub.

The article was interesting, but again, it was one person's opinion of their move to Boulder, and I don't tend to make that a factual statement. I do understand what they mean by culture now. There are so many ways to define it, and this made it easier to understand what they meant.

I agree that Indianapolis could have some of these same attributes, but they are still missing way too many for us to jump in and make it ready for startups right away! Indiana government needs some changes, and upgrades in numerous other areas would have to be made. Plus, I'm just not a big fan of Indy to live and have my business (maybe it's that culture thing that i'm feeling).

My companies are all started here locally in southern Indiana. One will be moving with me in a year or so as I move, but the others will stay here. They are regional companies working in approximately 5 or 6 states. The national company will go with me. I really think it's a matter of what type of company you look to set up and your reasons for doing so in an area. I always make sure my companies are viable no matter where they are located and are run from. Then it's really a matter of what location works best for me. Currently, my office is only a few blocks away. It works for me.

Every company and situation is different, so it's so difficult to say what will and won't work in general.

Comment by Scott Abel on April 21, 2008 at 12:11pm

I'm thinking the extension of culture to include diversity might be what these corporate leaders were talking about. When a community is viewed as less diverse, many creative types (and highly educated folks) don't flock there. Therefore, it's difficult for recruiters to recruit talent to less diverse areas.

There is a reason that other high tech areas are highly desirable (Silicon Valley, Boston, Austin, the Silicon Forest region, Vancouver, etc.) places to locate business. These places also attract talent.

As a small business person who works via the internet, I can live (and work) anywhere. As I grow my firm, I can attract folks to work remotely. Relocating to where I live (or where the company is headquartered) doesn't matter. But, if you are talking about pharmaceutical, aerospace, defense, and other high paying, high skills jobs, it does matter where the business is located. A study by Brookings, makes this point clear:

"Harvard University economist Edward Glaeser has provided ample empirical evidence that firms gather in particular regions to gain advantages from common labor pools. Nobel prize-winning economist Robert Lucas maintains that the driving force in the growth and development of cities and regions can be found in the productivity gains associated with the clustering of talented people."

The same study also points out the gay factor.

"Perhaps our most striking finding is that a leading indicator of a metropolitan area's high-technology success is a large gay population. Frequently cited as a harbinger of redevelopment and gentrification in distressed urban neighborhoods, the presence of gays in a metro area signals a diverse and progressive environment and provides a barometer for a broad spectrum of amenities attractive to adults, especially those without children. To some extent, the gay and lesbian population represents what might be called the "last frontier" of diversity in our society."

And, they continue:

"Gays predict not only the concentration of high-tech industry, but also its growth, as we found when we compared our gay index with the Milken Institute Tech-Growth Index, which measures growth in output of high-tech industries within metropolitan areas from 1990 to 1998 relative to the national growth rate in output of high-tech industries during the same period. Five of the cities in the top 10 in the Tech-Growth Index also rank in the top 10 for the gay index. What's more, the correlation between the gay index (measured in 1990) and the Milken Tech-Growth Index increases over time, suggesting that the benefits of diversity may actually compound as time goes on by increasing a region's high-tech prosperity."

I find this to be particularly interesting and true (in my experiences). I wrote a letter to Eli Lilly several years ago explaining why I could not work for their firm (despite being a contractor there for nearly two years). The reason was simple. I had better benefits as a consultant (my firm was very aware of the need to attract and RETAIN diverse high tech talent). At the time, Lilly did not offer domestic partner benefits for their employees who were prevented from marrying their same-sex spouses (or choose not to). Married Lilly employees received benefits non-married folks (heterosexual or homosexual) did not. When I brought up the objection to the HR team at Lilly, they offered to compensate me for the benefits they could not provide (insurance, primarily) with an increase in salary. When I asked, "What about everyone else?" the company said it was not prepared to change its benefit package.

Things at Lilly and in the pharma space have improved. They could be better. But, they are starting to realize the importance of diversity in attracting talent.

Some big Hoosier employers have partnered with Indiana Equality to help our state lawmakers understand the importance of attracting diverse talent and how the actions of lawmakers can have significant negative impact on their ability to attract talent.

This is an important discussion we're having and I'm glad that a platform exists for us to all share and learn from one another. Smaller Indiana has lots of folks as members who would like to help our State make the changes it needs to provide prosperity to all its residents. I'm hopeful this community will foster new relationships between folks who share common goals and who are "doers" not just talkers.

• 1
• 2

Add a Comment