| |
|
Learning from Cleveland and Mumbai
Sunday, March 04, 2007 Consider the slow pace of economic development in Cleveland:
Meanwhile, globally competitive cities are accelerating their pace of transformation. In Mumbai, India they are implementing plans to be a world class city. My brother Hunter and I just returned from a week of briefings and consultation. In one presentation, leaders demonstrated to us their practice of rapid piloting of infrastructure projects — their idea: “building infrastructure at the speed of thought”. In May, the primary coordinator on Mumbai workforce initiatives will be coming to Purdue to learn what we are doing to accelerate workforce innovation. In today’s globally competitive economy, velocity is your friend. Mumbai’s leadership is figuring this out. Cleveland’s business leadership is simply not set up to compete on these terms. Sad, but true.(Another important metric: per capita income growth. Cleveland began falling behind Pittsburgh in the early 1990’s.) Slow decisions are the consequences of following a model of economic development management that does not work particularly well. Last week, I saw the new network dynamic working in Mumbai. An outside economist developed a thoughtful critique of how the government was handling design standards for the redevelopment of Dharavi, Asia’s largest slum. Within a day, he was making his presentation in front of senior officials suggesting that there might be a better way. This agility — built on networks and trust relationships — is very healthy. The complexity of regional economic development requires us to adopt a flexible approaches that emphasize fast learning. In Valdis Krebs’ terms, the network quickly absorbed new learning from its periphery. In Cleveland, we have alternatives to managing economic devleopment that are more transparent, agile, and fast. Mumbai can provide us insights. It is an older industrial city facing a major transition due to the loss of its textile industry. (Until recently, Mumbai was significantly underperforming. India's booming outsourcing is concentrated in other market areas. Mumbai’s IT sector is small and struggling against competitive cities, notably Bangalore.) The issues that connect Mumbai to Cleveland are many. Indeed, the connection was first made by McKinsey in their report for Mumbai, where they cited Cleveland as a city that Mumbai should follow. Now, Mumbai, like Cleveland, needs to re-imagine itself. Another salient connection is this issue: How do you conduct complex transformation in a democratic context? Mumbai does not have the advantages of Shanghai, where transformations can take place virtually overnight. Economic development in China (where I have worked more extensively) is completely different than in India, where democratic norms and institutions prevail. In China, whole neighborhoods can be moved quickly. In India, government must negotiate with all the stakeholders. The folks in Mumbai have learned that in the democratic context transparency is strategic. Transparency is not a web site, or a forum, or even (excuse me, Chris) a professional position. These steps are all helpful, but they are tools or tactics. Transparency is a strategic decision by civic leadership that must be baked into the DNA of the process. The folks in Mumbai have figured this out (as have people in Research Triangle, Austin, and places as obscure as Evansville, IN.) There are no text books for regional economic development. As the McKinsey Mumbai report makes clear, cities should establish a few simple benchmarks, drawn from leading cities, to guide their strategies. So, it is very important to learn from others, set high expectations, ask compelling questions. For example, what would Northeast Ohio look like as a global leader in creative industries? To answer that question, we would need to look at what others are doing in London, Toronto, Copenhagen, Vienna. All these cities are deeply involved in developing their creative industries. (In the home of The Cleveland Orchestra is it not odd that we are not comparing ourselves to these cities routinely?) Los Angeles is also exploring this opportunity in creative industries. You can download their report, issued last week, here. The potential of creative industries is not lost on others. Here’s a quote from a report on the Mumbai economy released last month: “The gaming and animation market has huge growth potential.” It is projected to grow world-wide from $25 billion in 2005 to $35 billion in 2009. CIA is poised to lead the development of this cluster in our region. But, thusfar, I detect little support from Cleveland’s business community for Future, CIA’s Center for Design and Technology Transfer. Or, for defrag, the highly successful statewide creative industries forum launched at CIA. (In the light of this opportunity, can you understand my amazement that the GCP decided to commit any resources at all to pursuing gambling, a twenty year old low wage jobs strategy that is more appropriate for Tunica, Mississippi; Shreveport, Lousiana; or Rising Sun, Indiana?) Planning regular site visits to leading cities — a common practice elsewhere — would help Cleveland’s business and foundation leadership keep focused on what matters, learn from others, and set high expectations. Some months ago, I encouraged the FFEF leadership to start this practice of learning from other cities and regions through regular site visits by a regional leadership delegation. These delegations typically range from 30 to 40 on the low end to 150 on the high end. Nothing much happened beyond a few e-mail exchanges. Why are we so slow in Cleveland? The word "plan" is both a noun and a verb. If you focus your efforts on the noun, you will be disappointed. Practical plans are never perfect and perfect plans are never practical. In a sense, in Northeast Ohio, our foundation and business leaders have been stuck on plan as noun. Plan as verb gives you another perspective. There is never a finished action plan or strategy in regional economic development. Good strategies are always a “work in process”. The activity is the end product. The civic habits of “strategic doing”, derived from David Cooperrider’s work in appreciative inquiry, work well to focus civic activity and translate ideas into action quickly. Strategic doing provides simple rules to guide a complex process. This point is made well in a recent book, The Starfish and The Spider: The Unstoppable Power of Leaderless Organizations, which cites David’s work. In old industrial models, civic engagement appears as one step in a long process. (Think of an administrative process with a “public comment” period.) In this rapidly disappearing world of rigid command and control hierarchies, leaders think in terms of “top-down” or “bottom-up”. Leaders fear that opening the process up too fast from the bottom will lead to chaos and confusion. In new network based models of economic development, civic engagement is not a step in a process. It is the process. Top down or bottom up is a false choice, because there is no top or bottom to a network. Ambiguity is inherent in these network models. Clarity comes in following a dictum of open source software development: Release early and often. What we need are simple rules to manage the civic process and accelerate learning. We also need fast design/build cycles for new ideas. We need simple, low cost and replicable civic processes that balance open participation and leadership direction. (For example, Midtown Brews, BFD, Meet the Bloggers, Tuesdays@Future or defrag.) That’s what strategic doing provides. At Purdue, we are adapting David Cooperrider’s concepts of appreciative inquiry and building the tools we need to guide strategic doing. We are applying these tools to workforce and economic development innovations. In the old industrial world, conversations were a distraction, an idle activity that detracted from productivity. In the networked world, guided conversations are an accelerant, a way to build relationships and align resources. Major innovations are taking place in civic transformation and regional economic development. Whether Cleveland's business and foundation leadership choose to learn about them is another matter. posted by Ed Morrison |
Comments:
Post a Comment
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
 |
|||||||
|
||||||||
