From: | Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@cpeo.org> |
Date: | 28 Apr 2005 23:56:38 -0000 |
Reply: | cpeo-irf |
Subject: | Re: [CPEO-IRF] Closure and the high-tech workforce |
Pentagon planners, used to ordering the regular relocation of uniformed personnel, don't fully understand that high-technology civilian employees rarely respond with the same "Yes Sir!" when asked to move. For years, I studied the formation of high-tech industrial clusters, with a focus on Silicon Valley. I remember Robert Noyce, one of the inventors of the integrated circuit, jesting that Silicon Valley ended up where it is because the mother of William Shockley, one of the inventors of the transistor, lived in Palo Alto, California. After Shockley invented the transistor at Bell Labs, he moved back to Palo Alto and took a position at Stanford University. Though his firm, Shockley Transistor, never made money, his top employees, including Noyce, formed the businesses that made semiconductors a global commodity and Silicon Valley the world's leading high-tech cluster. But Silicon Valley grew up around Palo Alto, not because of Shockley, but because the high-tech cluster was already established. In comparison, Gordon Teal of Texas Instruments - another inventor of the integrated circuit - successfully built up that firm, but no Texas region ever accumulated the technical leadership found in Silicon Valley. The father of Silicon Valley was neither Shockley nor Noyce, but Frederick Emmons Terman, Jr., Dean of Engineering and later Provost of Stanford University. Terman consciously built a "community of technical scholars," blending the area's educational resources and quality of life to make it a key center for innovation in aerospace, then semiconductors, and finally software. Once the technical community was established, the mix of small, innovative firms and established employers built upon itself. Industries which draw their comparative advantage from brainpower - as opposed to access to raw materials or transportation convenience - locate in areas where high-tech professionals, many of whom can choose to work anywhere in the world, want to live. If their employers try to move, they are likely to stay where they enjoy the quality of life, particularly if a wide range of other high-tech businesses is already established. This is as true for the aerospace industry cluster in Los Angeles County's South Bay as in the San Francisco Area's South Bay. Unless the Air Force moves the Space and Missile Systems Center to a place where high-tech professionals want to live, shuttering the Los Angeles Air Force Station will be a false economy. The same applies to other military bases where the prime resource is brainpower. *** On the other hand, closing the LA base may not be as devastating for either the local economy or its employees as its defenders assert. I'm not saying that there will be no re-adjustment pain, but civilian high-tech industry - particularly telecommunications - is on a long-term growth curve. Civilian high-tech firms are likely to expand in the LA/El Segundo area to absorb the brainpower surplused by the military if its closes the base. But there is a challenge, unless times have changed from the 1980s, when Silicon Valley's civilian sectors overtook the aerospace industry. Professional workers in the Defense sector have the technical skills necessary to succeed in the civilian marketplace, but they must re-acculturate. That's what many of my friends did in the 80s. This may be an overgeneralization, but businesses and bureaucracies make money in the Defense sector by getting their work done late and over budget. Hence the pejorative term for high-tech featherbedding: "government work." In commercial businesses, the pace is faster, deadlines are deadly, and efficiency is essential. For workers at high-tech Defense facilities like the LA Air Force base and its supporting contractors to convert to commercial work, they'll need to learn a whole new way of doing business. If they do, the impact of potential closure may even be positive in the long run. It clearly doesn't need to be as devastating for the community as it is likely to be for the Air Force. Lenny Siegel -- Lenny Siegel Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight c/o PSC, 278-A Hope St., Mountain View, CA 94041 Voice: 650/961-8918 or 650/969-1545 Fax: 650/961-8918 <lsiegel@cpeo.org> http://www.cpeo.org _______________________________________________ Installation_Reuse_Forum mailing list Installation_Reuse_Forum@list.cpeo.org http://www.cpeo.org/mailman/listinfo/installation_reuse_forum | |
References
| |
Prev by Date: [CPEO-IRF] Closure and the high-tech workforce Next by Date: [CPEO-IRF] Northeast-Midwest - "The Nation's Unguarded Region" | |
Prev by Thread: [CPEO-IRF] Closure and the high-tech workforce Next by Thread: [CPEO-IRF] Northeast-Midwest - "The Nation's Unguarded Region" |