Showing posts with label Adaptive Innovation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Adaptive Innovation. Show all posts

Friday, July 25, 2014

Durham Could Become Detroit If It Doesn’t Adapt

There is much for Durham, North Carolina, where I live, to celebrate in The New Geography of Jobs.

While the author often jumps from metro areas to multi-metro consolidated statistical areas in search of data without distinguishing, it is clear Berkley economics researcher Dr. Enrico Moretti finds Durham one of a handful of centers of innovation.

But the book is more than that.  It is an excellent primer to remind policy makers what is and isn’t economic development and why.  It also pinpoints how some cities avoid decline while others don’t.

They continually and strategically economically adapt.

Detroit was once like Durham is today, a center for research, technology and innovation but it became complacent and peaked in 1950.  Instead of patting themselves on the back, Durham leaders should be running scared.

The community is where it is today because it has economically adapted at least four different times during its history, five or six if you count transitions by Native Americans here.  That this is an almost temporal part of its personality is no guarantee.

Most communities. such as nearby Raleigh, another emerging innovation center, have been lucky to do it once.

When one examines Durham’s economic transitions, they were both gradual and farsighted but each took root long before its then-current economy peaked.

Durham’s status as a center of innovation today is rooted in a time more than a hundred years ago when it was a bustling center for tobacco and textile manufacturing, fifty years before they would dissipate and nearly ninety years before they would disappear.

Architects for new developments around the historic American Tobacco Complex elected to ignore truly historic elements dating back more than a century and emulate instead a building erected in the 1950s.

Those erected by the City ignored even that, defying its own design guidelines.

American Tobacco’s founders, though, began re-thinking Durham’s economic future a little more than 20 years after the final addition to the Old Bull Building was completed in the 1880s (now a National Landmark, it dates to 1874.)

This strategic foresight began to evolve just before the far more distinctive Neo-Romanesque portion was erected in 1900, also reflected in several other thriving historic districts such as Brightleaf.

These historic buildings and more than a million square feet of others of that vintage or earlier are filled with innovation workers today.  But the foundations of that transition were laid in 1892 when Durham’s tobacco and textile generation facilitated the relocation of Trinity College here.

The school was transitioning to the German university model with an emphasis on research over recitation.  This was less than two decades after Durham’s adaptation from agriculture to manufacturing.  Within a decade, seeds for the next adaptation were already being sown.

In 1907, Republican President Theodore Roosevelt moved to break up the massive Duke trust, one of two forged by Durham natives, one tobacco and the other fertilizer created from tobacco byproducts.

Its fall from grace began because of its complete monopoly of licorice, a flavoring used in tobacco.

Two years earlier his father, Washington Duke, had died just as J.B. Duke was founding The Southern Power Company, an entrepreneurial endeavor to help North Carolina adapt economically.  It’s now known as Duke Energy.

He would fight the breakup of his tobacco trust all the way to the Supreme Court four years later, but I think he had already seen the “writing on the wall” based on breakups of similar trusts.

In spite of their differences with Roosevelt, both father and son were also ardent Republicans, subscribing during its last few years to a wing committed to the downtrodden.

After breaking up his trust on behalf of the government, J.B. Duke walked away from tobacco for good just as the Republican and Democratic parties traded places on the issue of social justice during the election of 1912.

Roosevelt didn’t break up the Republican Party.  In fact he won every presidential primary but one that year.

But the party’s Wall Street wing used backroom tactics to block his nomination anyway, leaving the social justice wing no choice but to follow Teddy to a third party and to finally convert to Democrats.

The Party of Lincoln had become one that would have shunned its first President, just as today’s version would probably shun President Reagan.

J.B. Duke spent his last decade setting up another kind of trust, this one to create and endow Duke University from its Trinity foundations with one of the foremost goals of establishing a research-driven nationally recognized medical school.

By the end of WWII, Durham and Duke leaders were at the forefront of pushing a proposal by a UNC-Chapel Hill professor to forge a university park out of southeast Durham pinelands.

It would be solely dedicated to research and development. It’s known today as Research Triangle Park, “triangle” emblematic of the first three of now four universities involved, half of them also based in Durham.

The Park’s tenants are corporations, but employees have always spun off to launch another economic transformation, this time smaller innovation concerns.

By 1987 when time American Tobacco abandoned its plant in Durham for good two years before I would arrive to jumpstart the community’s first destination marketing agency, innovators were already beginning to gravitate to downtown to live and work alongside artists in converted lofts.

Even the city center district of Downtown Durham was receiving positive reviews for sense of place and authenticity long before it began trying to earn them.

Moretti cites research in his book for why innovators like to congregate in Durham besides the fact they like authenticity in their surroundings.  “Geography matters for the spread of knowledge, and knowledge quickly dies with distance.”

He cites research that the transference and synergy important for innovative ideas falls off dramatically between zero and 25 miles.  In fact Harvard researchers have correlated it to being less than a kilometer away or just over a half mile.

RTP is four miles from downtown Durham and Duke ranges from being adjacent to two miles from downtown.

Similarly, he notes that it is equally important to venture capitalists to be in very close proximity to their investments.

Clearly Raleigh developers and realtors who beginning in 1960 hoodwinked so many newcomers into commuting to Durham by disguising the location of RTP, undermined more than the housing market and philanthropy here.

In his book, Dr. Moretti also explains another reason innovation centers are very geographically compact.  Innovation concerns not only locate in clusters for the exchange of ideas, but like Facebook has recently admitted, they also buy other concerns and close them down.

This isn’t to eliminate competition but because the true objective of the transactions was to secure more talent.

Durham leaders, especially those responsible for economic development would do well if they haven’t really read and re-read The New Geography of Jobs, not to reinforce self-perceptions of exceptionalism but to see and understand broader influences.

For example, it may take decades before we know whether downtown revitalized because of shifts in macro-psychographics nationwide including whether it would have happened even without massive subsidies.

But far more important is that Durham learn from its adaptive past and also the past of great cities now in decline.

Other than accredited community destination marketing organizations, economic developers are not known for strategic thinking, especially on the supply-side.  Often this is because governing boards and stakeholders limit them to just “shoveling more coal on the fire.”

But for continuing and never-ending economic adaptation to perpetuate, strategic thinking is imperative, especially among elected officials.

It isn’t enough to celebrate today’s accolades, really a credit to preceding generations of Durham leaders.  But we can learn from their example and be inspired by their witness.

Judging by how far ahead past economic transformations took root in Durham, today’s leaders need to be focus on 2050 and beyond or risk Durham becoming another Detroit one day.

Tuesday, February 01, 2011

Chesterfield Seizes An Opportunity That West Village and American Tobacco Didn’t

The folks developing that latest remnant of Durham’s tobacco past are brilliant to build on the “brand” associated with the building, “Chesterfield,” rather than the name of the company that formerly owned it.Capture

They didn’t miss much but I agree with the many who are disappointed that the otherwise very successful American Tobacco Campus missed the boat when it wasn’t named “Old Bull” or “Lucky Strike,” the famous brands associated with those old factories.

To their credit and at great expense, a water tower and the 180’ chimney with their famous “Lucky Strike” logos were retained, so to give the benefit of the doubt, there may have been other issues involved with adopting that brand as the name for the complex.

However, “Old Bull” should have been easy to use, it was the historic name of one of the buildings.

So even more disappointing was the successful lobby, without much public input, that subsequently steamrolled objections by the few who knew it was happening and switched the the name of that entire district of Downtown Durham from the “Old Bull District” to “American Tobacco.”

American Tobacco is the name of a now defunct company that departed Durham in 1987, opening the way for developers to emulate the Historic Brightleaf Square, which was by then already an acclaimed adaptive-reuse of old tobacco warehouses into shops, restaurants and offices.

Bright Leaf is the name of the curing process for the tobacco leaves that Yankee cavalry who were bivouacked here during the negotiations in Durham that effectively ended the Civil War, found so flavorful that they mailed to order more when they got home.

As steeped as the name American Tobacco is in Durham history, the brands manufactured in the old factories owned by the company are far more catchy, popular and better known than the name of the company. “Lucky Strike” and “Old Bull,” short for the original Bull Durham brand, resonate as Americana.

The people at the former American Tobacco Company were genius pioneers in brand marketing and they would have been proud that the fame of the “brand” names far outlive the name of the company or its products.

Even though the timing of the downturn is taking a toll, the name West Village appears here to stay. It is better than naming that complex of old tobacco factories after one of the former corporations that owned it, but the folks now developing the so-called “New Cigarette Factory” portion (constructed in 1948,) are very smart to use the brand name manufactured there, “Chesterfield.”

Company names and the products they produce rarely have the staying power in the consciousness of Americans that the brand names they produced have, unless they are the same.

That’s why Ford and Chevy are indelible in the minds of Americans compared to General Motors. John Deere is stronger than International Harvester and the brand “Jeep” transcends the litany of manufactures over the years such as Willys, AMC or Chrysler/Fiat?

Best wishes to the Chesterfield folks. Who knows, maybe it will become the namesake for the now non-descript “Warehouse District.”

Wednesday, November 24, 2010

The Secret To Durham’s Image Turn-Around

Twenty years ago Durham clearly had an image problem.    New in town, I asked around to learn 1) the source and 2) who was in charge of remedying it.  The answers I got were 1) no one knows, maybe its “us” and 2) it is your job to address it,  welcome to Durham!

I had just been appointed the CEO of Durham’s newly-minted community or destination marketing organization, a position from which I’ve now been retired nearly a year.  Prior to coming to Durham, I had produced a Clio-winning “pride” campaign for another community where I’d worked previously but really I didn’t have a clue about community image.  Turns out no one else did either.new-top-secret

So for inspiration we rolled up our sleeves and started to examine and learn from some other models taking any lessons that could be applied to unwrapping, benchmarking and ultimately improving community image.  Finding no relevant texts or primers or white papers on the subject,  we zeroed in on two movements for inspiration: political campaigns and civil rights. No claims of clairvoyance or strokes of brilliance, just adaptive innovation.

However, before I summarize what we learned, I must admit that I received a ton of unsolicited advice from a handful of people down in Raleigh, some with Durham interests, just not Durham’s best interests.

On several occasions the advisories were directed to me via news quotes and editorials published there.  I was even amused on several occasions to be called out during public remarks at events at which I happened to be present.  Can you say awkward?  Sadly, no matter how hard I tried, it wasn’t possible to engage these folks about their concerns in face to face dialogue let alone secure their support.

Here are four groupings of this Raleigh-sourced advice about how to turn Durham’s image around:

  • White Flag Advice – “Surrender and turn Durham marketing over to Raleigh or better yet, pretend Durham doesn’t exist and get on Raleigh’s bandwagon; we’ll even refer to it as the Triangle, on occasion. You know like the airport.” I may be from Idaho but I didn’t just fall off a spud truck and I know hegemony when I smell it…

 

  • Bobby McFarrin Advice – “Don’t worry, be happy!”  “Pretend there isn’t an image issue, sweep it under the rug,  smile incessantly, don’t step on Raleigh’s toes and watch a lot of Pollyanna reruns.”  Maybe I didn’t know much about image issues at the time but I knew that negative information trumps positive information by several times squared and you can’t just outrun it.

 

  • Be Like Mike Advice – “Just go along to get along.  Slick up a bit, be less funky, ignore slights.  Durham’s always been a black town, be more white (they actually used those words) and when they shake out Raleigh’s table cloth, some crumbs will always fall Durham’s way.”  That’s when I realized it may not all be about racism but racism is alive and well.

 

  • Bless Your Heart Advice – “This image thing is all in your head.  Individuals, communities and institutions aren’t trashing Durham, you’re just paranoid. Take a happy pill.  Take a chill pill.” That’s when I knew that condescension rests at the heart of an image issue.

One may still hear echoes of these advisories from time to time as though they are new, often issued by someone trying to imply or take credit for any progress and, as we have experienced once or twice, while trying to surreptitiously undermine or impede legitimate efforts.

While I poke a little fun with the groupings above, I’ve always preferred to believe that these advisories while seeming self-serving, were and are generally sincere if not a  bit odd and misguided.  I also must credit several people in Raleigh, such as Harvey Schmitt, for always being supportive of the efforts needed to turn Durham’s image around and helping me to see through obstacles.

Before I summarize the sources upon which Durham’s image turn-around was modeled, it may be helpful to  understand that research documented from the beginning that Durham never had a “self-image” problem or lack of community pride, quite the opposite.  Durham’s off the chart in these areas, especially compared to other communities.

Durham’s image problem turned out to be centered in nearby communities.   The job isn’t finished by any means but it is in excellent hands.  With focused consistency, it is to Durham’s credit that in less than two decades it has reversed a (minus) –53% negative image in nearby communities to a (plus) + 70 positive image today.  In positive to negative terms, that’s a swing from  4 to 1 negative about Durham  to an almost 9 to 1 positive.

For comparison only, Raleigh, which doesn’t acknowledge or address any image issues of its own, has a just under a +3 favorability rating statewide with nearly a third uncertain, compared to Durham’s now + 64 favorability statewide with only 12% uncertain.   Every community can benefit from acknowledging, monitoring and addressing community image.

Along the way, the improved Durham image contributed significantly to the feasibility for some huge brick and mortar projects and improvements which in turn must have also had some impact.  I know because one of my roles was to help inform those studies along the way and to overcome concerns that were typically a result of the image issue.

However, even though Durham draws significant visitation from the other counties and metro areas where the community’s image has improved, these visitors, many of them repeat, still represent a fairly small proportion of those populations overall.  Measures of “personal experience” among those that do visit here suggest that personal experience is driven more by broad factors such as signage than by isolated developments or enclaves, regardless of how spectacular they may be.  With the perceptual image issue increasingly at bay, improving personal experience remains a significant challenge.

Now, let me summarize what we successfully adapted from political campaign and civil rights models and translated into strategies to  turn Durham’s image problem around.

What we learned from political campaigns:

  1. Use scientific polls to isolate sources of negativity, benchmark progress and mine other data to put things in perspective.
  2. Reinforce Durham’s brand at every touch point, e.g. datelines, airport references, signage, postal addresses etc.
  3. Vehemently stand up for Durham whenever the community is wrongfully dissed or wronged but never over-reach.
  4. Be true to Durham’s genuine and authentic personality, never give up, reach out to critics.
  5. Build “both/and” alliances and partnerships, eschew either/or people, organizations and communities.
  6. Favorability is not about the people who know you but the people who form impressions second and third hand.

What we learned from the civil rights movement:

  1. Be assertive but never be zero sum or fight fire with fire.
  2. Be win/win, not either/or.  Don’t expect everyone to show courage.
  3. Keep the faith, be persistent and always be resilient.
  4. Isolate the negativists, convert those who are uncertain to positivists.
  5. Don’t sell out for isolated monuments, focus on wide-spread curb appeal. Cathedrals come after image improves.
  6. Be yourself and celebrate diversity – discrimination and persecution are perception not reality-based.

For any success I had before retiring and the continuing and remarkable success of those that succeeded me, we’ll be forever indebted to those who pioneered these two areas from which we were able to adapt strategies that have truly turned Durham’s image problem around.