Hey politicians – growth is what matters – Chicago, Illinois

I was born in 1957.  That year, a 3 bedroom track home in Wichita, KS sold for the same price as that very same track home in Palo Alto, CA – about $10,000.  Of course, things have changed hugely since then.  Agriculture value had declined markedly, and automation has allowed for dramatic productivity improvements, robbing the heartland states of hundreds of thousands of agricultural jobs.  Without people on the farms, the need for agricultural cities supporting the farms declined.  No growth, and values decline.  Today that home in Wichita is worth something like $50,000. 

The land where the track home once sat in Palo Alto is worth $500,000.  Because the explosion of technology jobs in Silicon Valley made demand for housing much greater, and as the value of technology soared those employed in the industry saw their incomes rise, allowing for higher home values.

It all comes down to growth.  Geographic areas are like businesses in that growth leads to all kinds of good things – including higher home values.  People go where the jobs are.  Especially good paying jobs.  And that comes from investing in innovation, and the companies that develop new solutions aligned with market needs.

According to Forbes magazine in "Houston: Model City" Illinois has lost 260,000 jobs in the last decade.  No wonder home values in Chicago never soared like San Jose.  But it's also no mystery why the 15-20% decline in Chicago real estate seems never to be improving.  When a city stops growing – well – look at Detroit.

Today Crain's Chicago Business reported "Chicago Economy Sees Signs of Life, But Rocky Recovery is Forecast."  Why?  Little has been done to improve job growth.  Once an agricultural center (the famous stockyards of The Jungle fame) Chicago became a powerhouse manufacturing center.  But over the last 15 years the city and state have done almost nothing to drive more jobs related to information or the coming biological growth wave.

Few realize that the University of Illinois is ranked as the 4th best engineering school in the world.  Yet, most graduates end up "going coastal" in order to find high paying jobs.  Worse, innovators who want seed money or venture capital find none from the state, as it continues struggling to support the costs of jobs and pensions related to the now-gone manufacturing economy!  Spending money trying to Defend & Extend the old manufacturing base.  And there is almost no angel or venture private financing, which has grown considerably on both coasts, because that is targeted largely in non-manufacturing industries.  And the large companies in Chicago – from Kraft to Sara Lee to Motorola to Lucent – to even Boeing – invest nearly nothing in spin-off companies and innovators in their own back yard.  Many start-ups report they have to move either west or east in order to obtain financing for their ideas and rapid growth.

For cities and states, growth is the key.  It is OK that once all the cowboys ended their cattle drives in Wichita.  And that the world's largest grain elevator is just southeast of town.  When agriculture was the center of the universe that was a good thing.  But because the leaders did not transition toward new job growth as the economy shifted, Wichita is now a backwater.  It is so hard to recruit talent to Wichita that Pepsi moved the headquarters of Pizza Hut to Dallas, and most of the decisions for Beech aircraft are made at Raytheon Headquarters in suburban Boston.  Face it, do you want to live in Wichita?

How quickly will people say the same thing about Chicago?  Already, nobody wants to live in Detroit.  If Chicago city leaders, and Illinois state leaders, can't get out of old Lock-ins to manufacturing mind sets we all may be surprised how quickly Chicago follows its sister cities into unattractive outcomes.  For politicians, and corporate leaders, a focus on growth is extremely important if they want to keep their city vibrant.

For residents of Chicago, there is ample reason to be worried about the future of their infrastructure and home values.

Avoiding a crash – Boeing, Embraer, Bombardier

Boeing is the world's largest aircraft manufacturer.  But the Crain's headline "Boeing Loses $1.6B, slashes 2009 profit estimate" should get your attention.  Revenues in 2008 dropped some 10% – which the company blamed on a strike.  Of course, management always has some bogeyman to blame for poor performance.  But revenues have not yet recovered to 2007 levels.  Much, much worse is the fact that its newest product launch, the 787 Dreamliner, is some 2 years behind schedule, leaving industry experts skeptical of when it will get out the door.

The reason to really be wary of Boeing isn't just this one plane.  Instead, look at the market shift happening in all transportation – including aircraft.  It's unclear that the marketplace has much interest in the Dreamliner.  Boeing's Success Formula has long been to develop really big projects, billions in investment, and make bigger and bigger aircraft.  And the Dreamliner is the latest in Defending & Extending this Success Formula.  Even though the product is way over budget, really late and will be a big aircraft when it's unclear that's what people want.

From cars to buses to planes, we're seeing people change to smaller and more efficient products.  The last time you flew, were you on a big aircraft?  Or did you find yourself on a small plane from Bombardier (of Canada) or Embraer (of Brazil)?  Airlines need to keep planes fairly full if they have any hope of making a profit.  Couple that with customer desires for convenience – meaning several flights to a city daily, and you can quickly see why smaller airplanes make sense.  As a result, the leader (Embraer) in small commercial planes is growing at over 20%/year!

Meanwhile, people are getting less and less excited about flying commercial airlines every year.  TSA hassles, flight delays, extra charges for bags, there's a long list of reasons business people are looking for alternatives.  And that's where the Jet Taxi business comes in.  Whether you buy a fractional interest in an aircraft, or simply rent a plane for a single trip, businesses are figuring out that small aircraft from Beechcraft, Cessna, Lear Jets and even the new Honda jet are providing a very affordable option to commercial flying when even a few people are traveling – and with a lot more convenience.  The largest manager of this option is NetJets owned by Berkshire Hathaway – who's lead investor is Warren Buffet.

Add on top of this webinars and video conferencing.  Increasingly, people are using digital technologies to communicate without flying at all.  Again, with hassles up – and terrorism threats more real than 10 years ago – people are turning to really low cost, and ultra convenient, alternatives to traveling at all. 

So are you really optimistic about the future demand for big jet aircraft that take more than a decade to develop and get approved?  And built by a company that competes with a government subsidized player supported as a matter of national defense in Europe (Airbus)?  It's really hard to be optimistic about the future for Boeing – and the Dreamliner delays seem to just be the early warning signs of a Success Formula very long in the tooth.  Boeing is definitely stuck in the Swamp, and it's unclear the company has any effort underway to develop new options.

The problem with Hedgehogs – Dassault & Cessna vs. Tata

Two sides of a page, two sides of strategy.  Two different approaches, two very different sets of results.

That's what struck me when I was waiting for a meeting recently.  I picked up a print edition of Businessweek laying in the reception area.  On page 13 was "Public Flac Grounds Private Jets."  A soft economy has teamed up with bad impressions of executive perks to create a huge drop in orders for private jets.  French manufacturer Dassault had 27 more cancellations than orders in the first quarter.  U.S. based Cessna had 92 cancellations, and was bracing for 150 more by today (7/1/09).  In the meantime, the company has laid off 42% of its workforce and discountinued development of its newest jet aircraft.  And the market for used aircraft is flooded, boding poorly for future sales as the used inventory seeks buyers.

Here are two companies that definitely have their "hedgehog concept" as recommended by Jim Collins.  They set out to be leaders in private aircraft manufacturing, focusing on two different continents.  And they are leaders.  They know how to do be product leaders, and they do it well.  But look what happened when the market shifted.  In dramatic fashion, they go from record profits in 2007 to barely viable.  Being really good at making planes doesn't matter when nobody wants them.

Turn the page (literally), and on page 14 was "Now, the Nano Home."  In this short article we hear about how Tata Group, which has launched the Nano automobile for under $2,000, is entering the housing development market.  While builders in the USA are failing due to the real estate crash, Tata is creating entire apartment developments.  But not U.S. style.  These apartments sell for as little as $7,800 and come as small as 218 square feet!  (There are larger and more expensive units – up to $40,000).  While this may seem crazy to Americans, it fits the market where you're trying to convince someone to leave a squatters tenement and buy something legal to live in.  It's a market I've never heard of a single American company trying to develop, yet the opportunity is huge!

So here's Tata Group, the company that started as a trading company in the 1860s, that went on to become an industrial powerhouse making chemicals, steel and industrial products.  One of, if not the, largest IT services companies on the planet.  An auto manufacturer for India that expands into the global market with an entirely new product.  Now the company enters homebuildling, but not like other companies.  Instead uniquely doing what will fit market needs.  There is no hedgehog concept to Tata Group.  Just a company that keeps looking for market needs, then develops unique products to fulfill those needs.  And builds a 150 year history of growth in the process.

Anytime you have a narrow business, focused on a single market or product line, you are at risk of market shifts that can kill you.  These shifts can come from new technologies, or different production processes, or different attributes offered by competitors.  But the fact is, markets shift.  The better you are at focusing on your hedgehog concept, the more likely it is you will eventually fail.  Just look at the companies Mr. Collins claimed were the big winners in Good to Great – Circuit City and Fannie make are good examples.  You can be really, really good at something and you end up reaching the pinnacle of expertise only to be clobbered by a market shift that sends you toppling into failure.

Think like Tata Group.  Keep your eyes open for market needs.  Then figure out new ways to fulfill them.  Especially ways that competitors won't attack.  Forget about "focus."  No American car company is even trying to make a $2,000 car – despite the fact that the only big growth markets today are China, India and other emerging markets where a cheap auto makes the most sense.  And all those big U.S. real estate developers that are declaring bankruptcy, after building billion dollar malls, U.S. condominium projects, and office parks aren't even considering building and selling $8,000 apartments to the fastest growing middle class on the globeThey know their hedgehog concept.  But they don't know how to grow.  You'll do better to focus on growth and leave that hedgehog in his hole.

For more on how following its hedgehog concept led to the bankruptcy of GM download the free ebook "The Fall of GM".  Learn how to avoid the hedgehog mistake and keep your business growing.