The Mitten: One Size Fits Most?

by
Ruth Terry
Monday, December 14, 2009
The "Michigan by Choice" group on Facebook

The "Michigan by Choice" group on Facebook

The Generation Y Michigan series on Michigan Radio and the overly optimistic pro-Michigan sentiments it’s inspiring are starting to annoy me.

Oversimplified arguments for pledging allegiance to Michigan willfully ignore infrastructure-dependent jobs, the near impossibility of raising capital for start-ups, and the time it will take most people to turn a profit.

In fact, the very notion of “profit” seems anathema to these folks. Instead, they imply that highly-educated, underemployed Mitteneers should take the path of most resistance, forgoing things like meaningful paid work and health insurance indefinitely.

Forbes.com recently named Michigan as one of “the perennial losers, the sad sacks of our economy,” home to one of the four Worst Cities for Jobs. In light of that fact, Michigan By Choice’s rallying cry, “Not enough ___? Start your own ___!” might work for people who make tangible products, but it’s irrelevant for those of us whose livelihoods depend on existing infrastructure.

It’s easy to start a band or even a nonprofit, but would you tell my good friend K* — a poet, scholar and educator with two master’s degrees and a doctorate — “Hey, why not just start your own university so you can teach?”

What would Lauren Silverman, Gen Y Michigan’s reporter, do if, like my friend J* — a U of M grad with a bachelor’s in biophysics, masters in genetics, numerous volunteer experiences and Spanish fluency – found that the only local jobs in her field were washing test tubes? Oh wait, she’d probably move to Washington, D.C.

And what about people who try to start something but can’t find the capital to get it off the ground? People like D: After a series of lay-offs and jobs outside the food industry, decided to start a dinner club, and a restaurant, in Grand Rapids. D finally moved to Los Angeles because neither project attracted sufficient investment to even set up shop, much less turn a profit. In L.A., he found two jobs within a few weeks, at restaurants that value his culinary artistry. He also met Robert Downey, Jr.

In order to become a scalable and sustainable employer, start-ups need capital and infrastructure. These are things Grand Rapids — the only part of Michigan I can really speak to — does not currently offer. The city is a great place to start new projects, just not to get paid for them.

Ann Arbor is actually the only Michigan city to make CNN’s 100 Best Places to Live and Launch a new business, and there were 41 other places ahead of the college town.

Michigan idealists have also neglected to mention the consequences that an influx of new products or firms could have on local economies.

Take arts production, the entrepreneurial industry of choice. An increase in supply without a corresponding increase in demand is just going to make prices for artwork go down. Not good for local artists who are already struggling in the current market.

Without the introduction of other variables (mainstream critical engagement, increased competition, anything that will create the perception of scarcity), the general and slightly apathetic public is unlikely to respond to increased supply with renewed demand for what are often perceived as luxury items.

A potential consequence of “Just start your own!” for the nonprofit sector is service duplication, a major nonprofit no-no that reduces everyone’s chance for funding. I don’t need to reinvent the wheel and start a new arts nonprofit. I need the ones that already exist to start hiring or offer paid opportunities for collaboration.

There’s also a certain irony in the fact that Generation Y and Michigan by Choice are brought to you by people employed in their chosen fields at vibrant, innovative firms that had preexisting infrastructures and/or start-up capital.

I would never, ever try to minimize the millions of hours George Wietor has put into the Division Avenue Arts Collective, www.g-rad.org, and countless other local projects. But the fact remains that none of these homegrown efforts are paying his bills. Kevin Buist, another sensational guy, has benefited professionally from the injection of DeVos funding into the local arts sector, most recently through ArtPrize.

Had Buist and Wietor not been able to plug into the functional part of Grand Rapids’ cultural infrastructure, would they have had to move too? And how successful would Lauren Silverman be if she had to write, fund, and produce Generation Y without the support of Michigan Radio?

And yet they all seem to advocate the path of most resistance as intrinsically virtuous, a veritable badge of honor. To me, this misses the point. Shouldn’t the goal be to leverage the talents we’ve cultivated into the greatest impact for the largest number of people anyway? If so, then people should go to locations with high need, where they can most quickly and efficiently start filling the gaps.

Another irony here is the fact that all this talk of homegrown entrepreneurialism undermines arguments for why young college grads from other states should stay here. Why should Michigan transplants feel any particular commitment to improving Michigan over their own home states? And if they don’t return home, why should they consider Michigan over another state, where they believe they can have greater positive impact?

This is especially true when you consider the time it will inevitably take to turn the city and the state, around.

A recent report by the Pew Charitable Trust reveals that a mono-industry economy combined with state government’s inability to take swift, decisive action has jeopardized Michigan and other states’, competitiveness. Systemic failures like this didn’t happen overnight, and they won’t be resolved quickly either.

People with the education and experience to found successful new enterprises are most likely saddled with student loans, credit card debt, and car payments. In West Michigan, many couples in their 20s are already married, some with children. They just don’t have the luxury of risking time and resources into start-ups that may take years to pay off.

*Both J and K are employed, but they are in fields tangential to their academic backgrounds and, by their own admission, making less than they would in other areas.

This essay was originally published in slightly different form on the Rapidian on 11/19/09. For further context, we recommend reading the comments there and on Nathan Bashaw’s guest essay, published here on 12/3/09.

Ruth Terry is a freelance writer living in the East Hills neighborhood of Grand Rapids, Michigan. She is a regular contributor to Rapid Growth Media and The Rapidian, and she also serves as development director and grant writer for an international nonprofit organization. Ruth enjoys cheese, dark chocolate, hot pink, and Star Trek the Next Generation.

Similar Posts:

Share
1,191 views
Recommend Recommend (0)
Loading ... Loading ...
Email This Post Email This Post
| Share More

  • Name Withheld
    As someone who employees a lot of creative people in Grand Rapids (the good, high paying kind), the issue that amazes me the most is not the number of candidates applying, it is the lack of applicants that apply. And when they do apply, most Gen Y'ers seem ill equipped. I consider this a failure of education.

    I know that the job market is rough out there, but to everyone that complains about a lack of jobs in Grand Rapids, I'd like to ask, where are you? Do you not use the latest social media tools? Do you use your network, or even easier, a network you build on Linked In to connect yourself with me, the person hiring?

    Sitting on the other side of the table, I find the quality of job candidates to be very frustrating. Not only do most lack the basic skills to find the job openings, they lack quality resume's, portfolio's etc. and real world experience to get the job. And when you ask these same candidates what their salary requirements are, it makes me laugh. Somebody, somewhere along the way (whether it is their parents or their college adviser) led them astray and sold them a bill of goods. Most candidates, good and bad, expect too much, too soon, and work with a sense of entitlement.

    I am not alone in this assessment, and discuss this with colleagues who are also hiring, in well placed companies, with good salaries and benefits right here in "beleaguered" West Michigan.

    So my advice to all of you. Dig deeper, try harder. Get your foot in the door and excel. A career is a marathon, not a sprint, and when you treat it that way the people on "this" side of the table can usually sense it. Good luck!
  • Michael
    Name Withheld: The job market is rough, I work as a Mechanical Engineer, have 8 years experience and I have an MBA. I feel that I have a solid resume and great experience but I have to admit if I was looking work I am not sure it would be an easy task. That being said, I do have to agree with you somewhat, it seems that more younger people feel entitled and don't want to work hard. I can see a little bit of that sense of entitlement because school is so crazy expensive now, four years in and tns of thousands of dollars down, I can see how you "expect" a payoff. I prefer to think that this is a result of traditional management vs. newer management models. People are motivated differently now, supposedly.
  • @ "Name Withheld"

    Thank you so much for commenting! This is really helpful.

    Can you tell us more specifically...

    What does a quality resume include?
    What social networking tools do you recommend for finding jobs?
    What's the best way to gain real world experience, and how much (in years) do you like to see?

    My personal experience is that I just can't find out about new nonprofit arts jobs. Potentially it's a different story in the for-profit arena. NPOs don't seem to be hiring, and yet there are suddenly new people in specific positions. I'm gainfully employed now, and am better connected via social networking than I was when looking for jobs in that market, though.

    Anyways...

  • Michigander
    There isn't zero capital in Grand Rapids. The Grand Angels have funded a number of start-ups: http://www.grandangels.org/profiles.asp

    As for starting a new restaurant in this economy, it's probably best that the money was not wasted.
  • Thanks for posting this!!!
  • nbashaw
    I'm not sure what the point of this is. Optimism is bad? Starting new companies and projects is hard, and not everyone can do it? So what? We shouldn't try? We shouldn't get excited about the challenge?

    Not everyone can start things. A lot of people will fail. But the institutions, companies, and projects that get started now are what will define Michigan's next 100 years. We better get our brightest excited for this challenge.

    For the past century, we've been building things around assumptions that no longer hold. You aren't entitled to a good union job anymore. The manufacturing industry is maturing, and it's no longer a source of growth.

    We need to build new institutions around these new rules. Circumstances will prohibit many from building new things, and I understand that. It's not democratic, but it is our current reality. No one is criticizing anyone for not starting a company. But it doesn't make the necessity of building new companies and organizations any less pressing.

    This isn't idealism. This is stone sober realism.
  • Hmm... that was a really long comment I just left you. I think we're in agreement about the Ends, just not the Means. Also, you're probably a more positive personality, whereas I tend to be cranky, critical, and pessimistic as a general rule :)
  • nbashaw
    Oh! I understand even more precisely where we disagree now. Also, thanks for replying - I just realized my tone wasn't the best in my other comment, and I'm sorry for that. I think you summed up your stance well when you said that "The Michigasm seems to promote shotgunism". (I think those made up words are awesome - btw). You call for "serious long term strategizing".

    Here's where I become the skeptic - I don't think we're smart enough to make the right plan. Things change too much. I think if we encourage everyone to be a "team player" all we do is close off potential routes out of this mess. I don't think we have the tools to accurately predict ahead of time what the best thing to do is.

    So lets grow a forest instead of a farm. We'll quickly see what will work. Even better, we'll create an environment of innovation, which is what the economy *really* runs on these days. For a similar point of view you might want to read one of David Brooks' most excellent columns http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/06/opinion/06brooks.html.

    At bottom, we're in tension about how things succeed. Implicit in your worldview is the assumption that "resources lead to success", and implicit in mine is the assumption that "things that work attract resources". Both are probably true to a greater or lesser extent.
  • Hi Nbashaw,

    Thanks a bunch for reading and commenting. Please see my comment above for more about the point of my essay, and for my thoughts on good, sustainable solutions to some of Michigan's challenges. (Disclaimer: This is all from the perspective of a Grand Rapidian. I’m starting to suspect the climate may be different in cities like Ann Arbor and Detroit.)

    The main reason I wrote this essay – beyond simply wanting to rant publicly – was to highlight the many capable, passionate, young professionals who simply can't be effective in their disciplines without well-developed infrastructure(s), and, for whatever reason, aren’t currently able to participate in infrastructure redefinition.

    I agree with you that this could be an exciting time--one of unparalleled innovation and – though I'm totally over this phrase - paradigm shifting. Yet, when the Real Talk about how to coordinate government, nonprofit, private, and individual efforts into a cohesive strategy, the conversation always seems to fall flat.

    Other thing: My response to "...not everyone can do it.. So what? We shouldn't try?" is a "Eh. Probably not." With caveats. I just don't think people should be encouraged to start things for the sake of starting them. They *should* be encouraged to find their niche is a systemic, sustainable plan for growth and development. It’s the difference between a shotgun approach – everyone starts something new, and only one or two awesome things make it – and a viable, coordinated plan for action – where people are educated and empowered to develop their ideas in a way that the majority of new initiatives have a real shot.

    The Michigasm seems to promote shotgunism. (Yes, I like to make up words.) I don’t see it getting people excited about something sustainable, or connecting people to tools they need to create viable new enterprises. I think we have enough motivated, talented people – at least in GR – that we’re beyond pumping ourselves up with positive creative class PR, and should be moving on to serious long term strategizing.
  • Michael
    Ruth: I couldn't agree with you more. A lot of what is written on this page about Generation Y and the opportunities here in Michigan is overly sunny and a misrepresentation of what the reality is in Michigan. I am not in the generation Y group, I am 31 but I do have a MBA and a BSME and I moved not to long after I graduated because jobs were so few here. People can say you should stick around and work to improve your home state but my education wasn't free, my bills were real and like most I wanted to start working and getting rid of debt as soon as possible. That was in 2004 when the economy was somewhat strong here, forward now with an unemployment rate of 15% and I do not believe there is any way it is easier for people to get jobs. I have two strong degrees and very few employers in Michigan wanted to utilize me meanwhile I could move to northern California and live in better weather and work in a more youthful dynamic environment. The question: Why would I stay?

    I think most of the conversations on this topic are overly optimistic and at times it seems as though it is more of a cheering section than critically assessing the problems Michigan has in order to develop solutions for the sustained growth in the future.
  • Hi Joe and Michael,

    Thanks for commenting. You're right, Joe, this essay does not provide solutions, it's mostly a rant. When the essay was originally published on The Rapidian, I received similar feedback from Kevin Buist, who challenged me to present my solutions. Below is my comment back to him. I think it will shed some light on the "why" behind the piece, and shows my own thinking on the direction we need to be headed in...

    "Hi Kevin. I want to respond in greater detail to your comment, but for now I'll just explain my intent for this article and focus on what I think people should be doing.

    This essay is a virtual tantrum for all those who wanted desperately to make a difference in the community, but have not yet found an outlet to do so. Yes, I'm childish like this sometimes. It's just heartbreaking to spend years pursuing a specific career path, only to find yourself drifting further and further away from your initial passion. I don't think that story is being told enough.

    1. We need to accentuate the negative, and get some Real Talk going about people's frustrations and negative experiences here. All this positive Creative Class self-talk can be really demotivating for people who feel they've given all they can, and still come up short of their goals. Also, if people who aren't as motivated as you and George (e.g. me) start to believe Grand Rapids is sooo vibrant and energetic, we're not going to strive for something better. Stop preaching to the choir, and start reaching out to people who have been burned. And don't underestimate people's complacency.

    2. Local organizations, esp. NPOs, need to be held to a higher standard of transparency, equity, and fairness. There are a lot of people who have been "grandfathered" into positions that in a larger market would demand credentials they simply don't have. There is a culture of fear that keeps founders from mentoring and cultivating emerging leaders. Non-competitive hiring processes, nepotism, and - ahem - "alternative" budgeting all need to stop if these groups are going to truly add long term value to the city. Employees, investors and constituents need to push harder for this. Also, individuals need to challenge themselves to produce excellent work, even in the absence of external competition. I know I do.

    3. Colleges and universities need to turn out entrepreneurs, not grad school applicants and entry-level workers in search of mentors. Job-seekers need to teach themselves now how to envision and strategize for the career they want.

    4. We need a better system to connect highly-motivated individuals to resources. Nonprofits should follow the example of groups like the Common Language Project, who publicly invite people to submit ideas for mutually beneficial projects. CLP extends its 501(c)(3) status to selected individuals, which allows them to secure grant funding, and potentially a salary, for their project. What if we had a web-based platform like Volunteer Match or 99designs where entrepreneurs could connect with investors?

    5. We need to reimagine what Grand Rapids can realistically aspire to. Let's stop frontin' like we'll ever be The Place for young people to settle down, or the next Chicago. We are already a city that incubates young professionals, who go on to use their talents in a larger market. Our colleges and universities already attract students from all over the world. Why are we trying to Jedi Mind Trick people into staying, when we could rebrand transience as an asset, and position ourselves as the country's best talent incubator.

    Hmm... now that I've written all that I'm not sure it's even relevant to your comment. Oh well, hit me back and we'll keep the dialogue going. Thanks, Ruth"


  • Wow. No real suggestions here. I acknowledge some of her points about capital are valid, but what's the alternative? To give up? Essays like this don't contribute, they only criticize. We need educated people to contribute good ideas, not rain on those who try to celebrate the good things going on.
  • Michael
    Joe: you do realize that part of change is recognizing the problems that exist. I think the point that Ruth is trying to make is that many people aren't properly recognizing the issues that Michigan faces, they are painting a rosy picture of the environment and misrepresenting a the difficulties that we face. Young people have been leaving Michigan for some time now and for good reason, with the current state of the economy it has only made things grow exponentially. Ruth is also trying to point out that the solutions that are offered by others are not as easy as some like you to think, she is telling us that we need to start looking at the big picture and be realistic with our assessments.
blog comments powered by Disqus