realisedevelopment.net

Just another WordPress site

It’s NOT all about the economy, STUPID!

by

So the coalition has major plans to re-balance the economy.

It seems that as far as the UK is concerned this re-balancing means shifting from being paid to move money around (financial services) to the production of wealth through the creation of value by manufacturing and value adding services.  It also seems to imply shifting the economic engine away from the South East…getting the rest of us to pull our weight.

Local Economic Partnerships and a £500bn regional growth fund (a fraction of the budgets available to the Regional Development Agencies when they led this work) are being set up to make it happen.

This sort of re-structuring of the quangos in pursuit of the holy grail of economic growth has been going on for decades.  And I am sceptical about what it achieves.

It configures largely the same people, sitting around largely the same tables having largely the same conversations (skill needs, infrastructure development, investment readiness etc), pulling on the same ‘economic’ levers (vocational training schemes, growth investment funds, business support, enterprise zones, ever diluted ‘apprenticeships’ in pursuit over more skilled jobs) and getting pretty much the same, generally disappointing, results – just under a different brand.

The majority of people are not engaged, leadership is weak and one dimensional (economic growth is king) and the whole shooting match leaves most of us as passive recipients of whatever the private sector led quangos decide to do.  Perhaps invest in the waterfront, build an Arena, a new relief road, or a large mixed use development, you know, flats and shops and workspaces and all….

Why?

Well I believe at the root of the problem is the misguided believe that it is all about the economy.  That the economy is a puzzle to be solved that is disconnected from other aspects of how we choose to live.  If we can just get the economy right – then the rest will surely fall into place.  I think that even if we did ‘just get the economy right’ we would be in no danger of approaching utopia any time soon.    A growing economy seems at least as much progress trap as progress.   Even if we could run ‘the economy’ in a way that delivered ‘no more boom and bust’ I really don’t believe that it alone help us to achieve the ‘better’ communities that we crave.  We have been throwing cash at our most deprived communities for decades and progress remains slow.

When we treat the economy as a closed system, as some kind of sacred cow two inter-related problems occur.

Firstly we start to treat human beings as ‘factors of production’ that we can manipulate and influence for the good of the economy.  The anointed can encourage us onto our bikes, into big society, or to look at ‘opportunities’ in construction, retail, call centres etc, all in the name of ‘the economy’.  Volition, aspiration and enterprise are dulled at the service of the economy.  Just keep your heads down, do as your told, and we will deliver stable economic growth is the message.  Hardly the recipe for an enterprise culture.

The second thing that happens by treating ‘the economy’ as a sacred cow is that the creative tension that lies at the heart of truly inspiring innovation is lost.  The one-dimensional focus on GVA stops us from pondering the really big questions such as:

  • How do we create sustainable economic growth and build communities in which we are proud to live?
  • How do we design work so that it is productive and promotes well-being and happiness?
  • How do we create wealth and manage the transition to a sustainable steady state economy?
  • How do we build an economy that includes all of those who want to find meaningful work?

Instead by making the economy the holy grail we get a society that on the one hand pursues economic growth (anyone for Going Up a League) while on the other hand provides crumbs from the table to ameliorate the negative social impacts that presumably are seen as just the price that we have to pay for a great economy (How about we Narrow the Gap too).  Cultural and creative activities are judged merely by their impact on the economy rather than the soul.

One of the real pleasures, and lessons I learned, from working with Danone at their social innovation lab was the way that they knew that it was these creative tensions that held the key to breakthrough innovation.  By choosing to split out the economy from wider questions of community, sustainability and well-being I believe we trap ourselves in the same old sterile debates amongst the same old business voices.

It is not just Local Enterprise Partnerships and their various fore-runners that do this.  Councils do it too (Leeds Council is based on four directorates, Adult Social Services, Children’s Services, City Development and Neighbourhoods and Environment).

The Leeds MPs, who I am delighted to see have pledged to overcome party differences to advocate for the benefit of the City in their Team Leeds endeavours, have agreed that each MP will have an individual policy portfolio.  This is sure once again to separate ‘the economy’ from other aspects of community development.  In the competition for resources that is bound to ensue I am sure it will be the ‘all about the economy’ mantra that will carry the day.  No surprise too that  Leeds Chamber of Commerce played a key part in the Team Leeds initiative.

Now of course we have to organise somehow.

Specialisation and the division of labour make sense.  But let’s make sure that the way to choose to slice things up does not ignore vital interconnections and does not allow us to consistently put the cart before the horse.  To allow one part of the whole system to dominate the conversation and allow the benefits of development to accrue to the few.  For the business interests to accrue too much power.

  • Anyone for a whole systems perspective?
  • Understanding the city as a complex adaptive system rather than as a reducible puzzle to be solved?
  • Time for innovation?

A Radical Idea for a LEP…

by

First of all reject the temptation to be entirely strategic.

Don’t try to analyse the economy like it is a game of monopoly where you can understand the roll of the dice, seeing and preparing for an uncertain future.  Don’t pretend that people and their aspirations count for nothing as you ponder the balance between investing in ports, ring-roads, runways or fibre.

Instead learn to compliment strategic development with a responsive approach.  One that engages residents in their hopes and aspirations for a better life and gives them the power and the responsibility to pursue them.  Put your faith and confidence in people.  Provide them with hope, leadership and support.

Dare to be relevant to people and not just ‘the business community’.

A city region of around 3m people like Leeds would require a network of around 75 coaches to provide access to person centred coaching support for everyone that really wanted it.

  • It would engage about 45 000 people in the process of providing direct hands on assistance to their peers.
  • It would provide direct assistance to about 16500 beneficiaries a year, the vast majority of whom would make significant progress in their personal journeys as a result of benefiting from a coaching rather than a coercive approach.
  • I would anticipate at least 750 sustainable business starts from this cohort every year.  I would envisage business survival rates around the 90% rate after 3 years.
  • It would make a very real difference to the perceptions of some 20 000 people a year about the extent to which they feel that they ‘belong to’ and ‘feel supported’ in their community.
  • In addition to traditional ‘enterprise’ outputs I would expect substantial impacts on health and well-being as well as increases in volunteering, cultural productivity, mental health, fitness and so forth.
  • It would help to integrate the dual priorities of economy and community rather than treating them as separate and often incompatible determinants.
  • Within 3-7 years I would expect it to have made a sustained and measurable difference to the enterprise culture in the city region.

And it would cost about £3.75 million a year.

The price of a very rich wo/man’s house.

NB this piece was prompted by reading ‘The Economic Opportunities and Challenges for the emerging Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) in Yorkshire and Humber – Briefing Paper‘.

As far as it goes this is an ok piece of work. Unremittingly strategic, focussing on communications, infrastructure development and targeting support at key industries – all tried, tested and largely at best partially successful ideas for economic development.  One of the ideas challenges it identified is to develop sufficient ‘low skill jobs’ for our low skill economies.   It talks about the structures required to ensure integration of LEP structures across the region.  One can almost here the creaking of bureaucracy…

The Regeneration Game – Builders, architects and developers

by

Yesterday I asked the twitterverse:

Why does nearly all regeneration work in Leeds have at its heart buildings, architects and developers?

It produces some interesting, and necessarily brief responses:

Because Leeds is full of banks, and banks only sell money and property guarantees money. making bankers feel safe!

@councilhousekid

Buildings provide a container for loads of good activity, somebody has to make sure they perform effectively?

@lexmarksmith

People associate regeneration with the fabric of the city, not with people, even when it’s supposedly about making lives better…or maybe it’s because we need a tangible output from the investment rather than seeing regeneration as a process.

@LouiseEbrey

Your wrong! Nearly all regeneration work full stop is about buildings and architects – what else could politicians open?

@EnterpriseIain

Because that’s where regen grants are targeted? In infrastructure rather than people?

@gedrobinson

Didn’t you get the memo? Regeneration is a synonym for new building project 😉

@amcewen

because that’s where the cash is?

@philkirby

Definition of regeneration http://tiny.cc/sonul I really like the moral revival or rebirth definition. Real social change…

@BatleyGreen

Your thoughts?

Comments?

Leeds Loves Shopping…

by

This is the brand for a 10 day ‘fashion lover’s festival’ to be held in the city in October.

Just think about that as a brand.  Something to be known for.  A perception to be planted in heads around the world….

‘Leeds?’

‘Oh yes, that’s the place that loves shopping‘

‘Sounds interesting! Why don’t we go there and spend some of our hard earned….’

The fact is that many of us don’t love it.  Hate is probably a more accurate description of our relationship to ‘shopping’.

Some for the mind numbing tedium that it induces.

Others because of its role in driving consumption, environmental degradation and sexualisation of society.

Still more because of debt.

So for a large chunk of Leeds residents this brand leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

It is just not true.

‘We’ are telling a little white lie to help drive our retail economy.

I wonder what else we will tell little white lies about if it delivers the holy grail of economic growth?

And who are the ‘we’ in this case?

As far as I can make out it is a partnership between Leeds City Council’s marketing team and a group of retailers.   I am OK with my relationship with one of these being ‘caveat emptor’….but the other, well, I would quite like to trust them.

Now I suspect we paid a lot for the Leeds Loves… brand and the whole ‘Leeds. Live It. Love It.’ campaign.  But does it give us more than a neat line to attract outsiders to come and throw their money at us?

  • Does it gives a brand that we can rally a diverse community around?
  • Does it open up space for conversation and dialogue?
  • Or does it just provide a set of ready-made assertions that mean we don’t have to work too hard to get our messages out?

Just to be clear, I have no problem with some kind of fashion and retail festival being used to pull in the crowds.  I’d prefer my city to be known for things other than its retail offer, but we are where we are.  Pragmatically, perhaps, it makes sense.

But ‘Leeds Loves Shopping’.  Really?

The Challenge of Leadership in Leeds

by

One of the big challenges of leadership is that, once you assume it, you are there to be shot at.

It is not necessarily that people want to bring you down.  But they do want to know that ‘the leaders’ know their stuff, that they are credible.  That they are worth following on a journey.  That they deserve the commitment of discretionary time and effort too.  That it will all make a positive difference in the end.

In leadership, you have to earn your followers…

The problem is further compounded if:

  • leaders choose to more or less replicate a leadership process that the last time around didn’t pull up any trees
  • there is even a whiff of a suspicion that this is not a genuine attempt at leadership but a bit of a box-ticking exercise undertaken at the behest of ‘head office’
  • there is no clarity about how a vision, once developed will be used to really engage and mobilise the talent, skills and resources of all stakeholders
  • different opinions, instead of being heard, are simply denied and refuted

When some of these conditions are met, then vision based leadership becomes very, very difficult.  Attempts are likely to be met with, at best, ‘passive aggression’.  And I think that this is the situation facing us in Leeds at the moment with the Leeds Vision 2030 process.  It is a situation that faces many leadership teams.

People are giving up time and money to engage in a leadership process that should be a very high stakes game for the city.  Shaping our international profile, providing a platform for a socially just society, rising to an array of carbon and environmental sustainability challenges and delivering an economy that works, are just a few of the opportunities and challenges that the process needs to address.

This is why I think some people, myself included, were disappointed when we first saw the new ‘Leeds Owl‘  and strapline that have been developed to brand the Vision 2030 exercise.  Personally I think that Phil Kirby’s criticisms are justified. So too Lee Hickens.  And I have made some observations about the symbolic meaning of the owl. In what is a multi-cultural and international city we should show some sensitivity and awareness of what our city symbol means in parts of Japanese, Hindu and African history.

There are all sorts of things that the council is now doing that I think show signs of progress.  Setting up facebook pages and twitter feeds for example.  Far more council staff seem to be really engaging, online and off, in some of the stuff that is happening in the city.   But these tools are double edged swords.  Reputations take a long time to build online and can be very quickly lost.  They will certainly surface more and more critical responses (let’s face it few of us find the time to write a response that says ‘Great work, keep it up!’) than more traditional and ‘managed’ consultations

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhmjnYKlVnM]

But it seems there is still astro-turfing going on.  It can be tricky to sort out the authentic voices.  And web2.0 savvy folks will forgive many things – but bad design and perceptions of inauthenticity are not amongst them!

I believe the ‘What If Leeds…’ logo debate is only partly about the aesthetics and meaning of the brand.

It is, for me at least, much more importantly a signifier of a very important question.  Can we work with Leeds City Council and its mechanisms for exercising leadership in the city, or should this be a DIY job?  We just keep on organising and doing what we can to shape life in the city by doing our own stuff.

Is the council a credible and trustworthy partner for local people already running themselves into the ground doing what they can.  Or will it just sap our time, energy and morale?

Will the engagement continue once the Vision is developed, bound and on the shelf?

Personally I am very optimistic that the appointment of Tom Riordan shows a real willingness to engage and partner more effectively.  But there is a lot to learn on both sides if we are to make this work.

At the moment I think Leeds is a more exciting City than it has been for a long time.  Interesting things are happening at the grass-roots in business, culture, community development, marketing and technology.   And, if we can get the engagement with the council right, we might be able to pull off something of real importance for the city.   But we must have confidence in those we engage with and their ability to manage effectively the complex process for strategic change that they have chosen to use.  And we must earn their trust too.  This is a two-way process.

It is not just about ‘us’ going on a journey with ‘them’.  It is about all of us journeying together.  Learning has to be done on all sides.

Or should we just go it alone?