The Workplace of the Future

Been reading a lot lately about changing workplaces. It seems a lot of urban pundits, especially the BS artist whose last name is also a coastal state, have just woken up to the world those of us in the tech industry have been living in since 1995. Actually funny to read all the stories about "results-oriented work environments", working from coffee shops, and casual dress. When I see these, I feel like I should be able to click on the Top Stories link, and get the latest breaking news on the President's affair with Monica Lewinski.

While urban pundits only have something to write about if things are changing, one thing that's not changing is simple economics. And one of the most fundamental economic principles for cities, employers, and employees, is that you're usually better off owning a scarce resource than an abundant one. And there is no shortage of nonsense being published today about 1990s-style work arrangements that aging pundits have just picked up on. And as I've written many times, Jennifer Granholm and many in the econ development industry are very impressed, and are preparing their cities and states for the economy we had in 1997.

The workplace of the future is still a place, not an Internet connection. Because for every new T-1 that gets installed, face-to-face becomes an even scarcer commodity, especially where that human interaction does not depend on any sort of connection to the Internet. Nurses, part of an incredibly fast growing profession, aren't meeting their clients at Starbucks, 3rd grade teachers are not turning their classroom into "ROWEs" where students only have to show up if they have a meeting with another kid. And health care and education are now a quarter of the economy and growing.

The workplace of the future exists today, and anyone who's smart isn't moving to Portland or some other slacker city urban pundits can't stop fawning over, but is looking for a job where they will have to interact physically with the people paying the bills, whether they're clients, patients, or students. Face-to-face is only going to become scarcer, not unlike Javascript skills were in 1998, except it's not going to be outsourced to Bangalore, unless you decide to visit India. So smart people today are not planning a tech startup, but rather thinking about how they will build on the scarce resource of face-to-face contact.

Not all face-to-face jobs will pay well, but at least working face-to-face can prepare you for future jobs that require that skill. Sitting in Starbucks writing a blog won't.

The workplace of the future doesn't look that exciting from a let's-hype-some-trend perspective. Restaurants, hospitals, and schools are far too mundane for the chattering class to start talking about. But the foosball playing, cappuccino machine-in-the-office companies we read about now are just implementing the workplaces of today. Trying to recruit such companies does little to prepare a city for the future.

Why City Branding Fails

The National League of Cities put up an interesting post recently about city branding campaigns. These have been tried for years, but they often don't work, mostly because few cities are willing to be known for something, and would rather be known for everything.

The all-things-to-all-people craze right now is tied to biotech and greentech, in the late 90s, it was just “tech”. But whatever the flavor of the month is in economic development, developing distinctive messages is not an industry strength. The NLC article mentions Milwaukee's “Freshwater Hub of the World” slogan, which is an unusually focused message, and also promotes the idea that the city is a place for trade. This is the sort of point that does not come across well when you try to sell yourself as a “Cool City” and your governor holds a “Creating Cool” conference.

Connecticut is also promoting a trade corridor around Bradley Airport, with tax incentives for companies that can prove they need to ship goods out of the airport. What's smart about this is the defining trait of successful regions right now is not how many Bachelor's degrees citizens have, or how much money their state's forked over to high priced speakers and consultants, but their presence in industries where America is a net exporter.

As I pointed out a few weeks ago in the Seattle vs. Portland post, Seattle's done much better in the recession than its neighbor to the south, largely because it has two large exporting industries based locally. Portland, on the other hand, has won more praise from urban pundits than just about anyplace in the country, yet has above average unemployment. It has plenty of overeducated slackers who are the envy of Jennifer Granholm, and according to Richard Florida, attracting such people should be the focus of economic development, even if they spend all day pouring coffee and skateboarding.

I'm curious to see what the NLC comes up with next in their discussion, because it would be a major advancement in economic development if cities and states started talking up the products they can export, and stopped pandering to people they're trying to import.

Can a Bus Driver Work in a ROWE? What about a Cleaning Person?

Reading Dan Pink's new book, Drive. For the most part, it's a great read, and has a lot of excellent insights on worker motivation.

However, one aspect of his analysis that bothers me is the same thing I see in many urban planning books - the tendency to focus on jobs and activities done by people with advanced educations and money. In particular, he talks up the benefits of a ROWE, or Results Oriented Worker Environment, where workers just need to get their tasks done, but show up whenever they want. He uses a lot of examples from the software and high-tech industries, where ROWEs are common, and does a good job analyzing the productivity gains from ROWEs.

However, the whole discussion reminds me of the 2007 Onion article "Manny Ramirez Asks Red Sox If He Can Work From Home". Most people have to be at work to do their work. The software developers in the offices Dan describes might be able to show up whenever they want, but I doubt the people cleaning their offices can. Nor can the road maintenance crews taking care of the streets that get these ROWE workers to their offices, or the security guards watching the building when the ROWE workers aren't there, and are out enjoying their autonomy.

This ROWE discussion reminded me of all the urban planning books that fawn over the 100,000 rider-a-day Portland light rail system, but never mention the 1,000,000 rider-a-day Los Angeles bus system. Moreover, the fastest growing professions in this country, from nursing to athletic training to skin care specialists (#8 according to the Dept of Labor) are defined by the now scarce resource of face-to-face contact.

So the cleaning people, bus drivers, and retail workers can't work in a ROWE, and there's more people doing these jobs than there are working at Silicon Valley software companies. Would be nice to see people writing urban planning, economic development, and business books spending a little less time covering the work "cool" people do, and focusing instead on the work most people do.

Where the Jobs Are – DC's Maryland Suburbs and Portland

Going to try and make this a regular feature. Part of the problem with economic development hype about biotech, greentech, whatever tech is that it obscures reality. So what I'll do here is run some indeed.com searches, and report back what employers are actually hiring for, not what's being promoted in economic development brochures.

First stop, the 20814 zip code in Bethesda, MD, home to NIH, which is the leading funder of medical research in the country, investing about $15 billion annually in research grants.

Expect a big biotech showing here? Within 10 miles, 3,322 jobs mentioning “SQL Server”, 165 mentioning “biotech”. So in NIH's backyard, back office database skills are in greater demand than biotech by a 20:1 ratio.

10 miles within 20814, "Nurse" gets you 2,949 job listings, or about 18x biotech. 587 listings for “Social Worker” in that same search, or about 3.5x biotech.

Let's move it up a few miles to Gaithersburg, MD 20878 – MedImmune headquarters, do a 10 mile radius, and see what we get.

SQL Server drops to 420, but biotech's still just 143. “Nurse” gets you 390, or about 2.5x biotech – in MedImmune's hometown.

Head across the country to Portland, 97201. They claim to be the leader in green technologies, so let's do a job search within 10 miles of the downtown zip code for “green”. 198 results. Take it out 25 miles, and you get 375. “Solar” at 25 miles gets you 164, “wind” 111. In the same geography, “Nurse” produces 1,678 listings. So in the alleged center for green employment, employers ask for a nurse 5x more frequently than they mention the word green, and 10x more frequently than they mention solar.

The Difference Between Seattle and Portland

Portland has recently launched a campaign to attract jobs, so that all the highly educated coffee shop workers in the Pearl District might have a chance of using their degrees sometime soon.

While urban planners have not stopped fawning over its light rail system since the first spike went in the ground, Metro Portland currently has 10.5% unemployment, while regional rival Seattle is at 8.2%. One reason Seattle is doing better economically is because it's home to industries that run trade surpluses - particularly business software and aerospace, neither of which has a big presence in Portland.

One of the biggest sources of job losses for many regions isn't a glossy marketing brochure from a competing state's Econ Dev Authority, but foreign competition. Rubber, steel, autos are sectors where we run big trade deficits, and the result is clear in many parts of the eastern Great Lakes.

Buffalo has turned a corner in economic development, not by telling everyone it's "cool" or "creative", but by taking advantage of its border with Canada. They got Labatt Brewing to move from Norwalk, Connecticut for this reason. They've also got a big food exporter with Rich Products, and an unemployment rate below the national average.

As I've mentioned in previous posts, exports like soybeans, animal feed, frozen foods, and wheat aren't going to reach the "I need to write about a big idea" threshold many urban pundits require to keep their academic chattering at a high level. But there are two major drains on any region's job growth - automation and foreign competition. You can't do much about the former, but you can do a lot about the latter, as long as you recruit industries where America runs trade surpluses - no matter how boring they might sound to the people who write "Top 20 Cities for ...." magazine lists.

Nine Days to Seattle Light Rail

Seattle light rail opens in 9 days, with an initial line connecting downtown to Tukwila. An additional extension to Sea-Tac airport is scheduled to open in December, ahead of the 2010 winter Olympics just to the north in BC.

Great that Seattle's finally getting a train, but it's already created Queen Anne, Ballard, West Seattle, Capitol Hill, U-District, and Fremont - all lively, walkable neighborhoods filled with local merchants - without any type of rail transit. Moreover, these places are authentic, not the P.F. Changs and Whole Foods-filled "Transit Oriented Developments" that have popped up here in the DC area as well as in Portland.

Seattle will become more convenient as its light rail line gets built out, but I doubt it will get any more interesting as a city.