GSA Technology Council

by Russ Davis

For some, Sales is an accidental vocation and they often enter it unprepared. There is no other position in the business world where people find themselves with so much responsibility and so little preparation. Often the IT professional, engineer, lawyer, accountant or business owner find themselves completely qualified to provide services or products but are at a loss when it comes to getting in front of prospects. This stands to reason. In school we are usually taught a skill, but were never told that we would have to sell it to someone before using it.

In what other field do we expect results from untrained and inexperienced people? I can’t think of one. The expectation seems to be that a salesperson has some natural instinct that allows him or her to close deals. Rarely is thought put into what makes a good salesperson. Like being good at anything, being a good sales person means refining a particular skill set through practice and dedication.

What makes a great salesperson? We start with the basics. They must have basic fundamental strengths. They must have the desire to succeed. They must have the commitment necessary to do whatever it takes to reach their goals. They must have the courage to fail. They have to accept the responsibility that business conditions, the economy, or other hurdles are not valid excuses to keep them from reaching their goals. We are looking for the budding Tiger Woods of sales. Tiger didn’t walk on to a golf course and hit the ball 300 plus yards. It was years of dedication and hard work that refined him into a great player. Sales is no different, we need dedicated people that will work hard at getting better. Natural charisma and tenacity can go a long way in sales, but if we want true greatness, there has to be a dedication to learn and refine the craft.

Natural ability is only step one. Steps two, three and four include working to make ourselves better at our jobs, developing confidence and self esteem, and providing the resources to grow our businesses. As business people we must hold ourselves accountable. As managers we must look for these qualities in people and help them refine their skills. Don’t throw someone into sales and see if they sink or swim. As long as they have strong arms and legs, help them develop into a great swimmer. If we leave sales as a sink or swim profession we’ll often find ourselves treading water but not reaching our potential.

Russ Davis is a business development and sales training coach whose clients include corporations as well as many small to medium sized private companies. He will be conducting our May 21st workshop on no pressure business development.

Guest Column By Virginia Simpson, CEO, Simpson & Partners

In the rush to greenness no sector of the business world is moving faster than finance. Financial institutions of every stripe and size are positioning themselves as eco-friendly.

Preferred interest rates are offered to those who buy hybrid cars or add solar panels to their homes. The toaster to welcome a new account is replaced by the promise of trees planted to offset the customer’s carbon footprint. And the old becomes newly green.

We understand mortgages and car loans, CDs and savings accounts, so these variations on familiar themes are met with enthusiasm. But the big news is carbon credits, unfamiliar and in serious need of explanation.

So, exactly what is a carbon credit and why is it so controversial? A carbon credit is the representation and monetization of the removal of one tonne of CO2 or its equivalent from the atmosphere.

CO2 is the most prevalent of the six greenhouse gases believed to be a cause of global climate change. A by-product of almost every activity in the industrialized world, giving it a monetary value creates the basis for a cap-and-trade system which provides economic incentives for removing harmful emissions from the environment wherever and whenever possible.

Good intentions notwithstanding, it is not always possible to stop emissions at their source. Stopping emissions at an alternative site is just as environmentally beneficial. It is, after all, a global problem, not a neighborhood or regional one.

Balancing emissions in this way means that entities with low emissions are given credits for their clean development which can be sold to high-emitting entities who use the purchase to offset their emissions. This trade-off provides a short term, immediate response to the issue.

Carbon credits are by no means a free pass for higher emitting groups to keep on polluting. Rather, they are a means of buying time while ways of reducing actual emissions are explored.

This is where some of the confusion seems to arise — at least for those who do not examine the differences between the voluntary system here in the US and the mandatory system in countries which are signatories to the Kyoto Accord.

Under Kyoto, industrialized nations have emissions limits arbitrarily set for them, while developing nations have no limits and are able to use any diminution in emissions to gain credits which they can then sell to industrialized signatories.

An example of this is China saying it will not build a new dirty coal powered energy facility and, for its commitment to clean development, being awarded carbon credits which can then be sold to, say, Canada, whose Kyoto assigned limits are so severe that functioning within them is virtually impossible.

Building a power plant de novo with clean technologies is by far the better choice, so carbon credits for pledging not to build in old, technologically inferior, dirty ways could smack of blackmail and a punishment of highly industrialized nations — a thought to consider if there is any question in your mind as to why the US did not sign the Kyoto Accord.

Although built like Kyoto around carbon credits, the US system is voluntary and is shaped by free market forces and an entrepreneurial spirit. It holds great promise not only for vibrant high-profit trading but also for underpinning the development of real solutions to the challenges of 1)global climate change and 2)American dependence on foreign fossil fuels.

In the US, carbon credits are traded on the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX), a voluntary bourse like the New York Stock Exchange. CCX members sign legally binding contracts to cut their emissions by at least 6% by 2010 vs. a baseline period of 1998-2001, to develop plans for clean on-going operations, and to offset what they cannot mitigate. CCX began in 2003 with 14 members and today boasts almost 300.

Americans are pursuing every avenue to develop new technologies and to apply hitherto underutilized practices in environmental management. New fuels, waste-to-energy technologies, advanced forestation, genetically improved crops of all sorts — some being supported by venture capitalist who are factoring in the potential of carbon credits in deciding venture valuations. Carbon credits based on innovation are the desirable outcome of free market forces, and the likeliest route to environmental stability.

According to Ed Heslop, CEO of industry leader Environmental Credit Corp, those who trade carbon credits are “sponsoring immediate, significant reductions in GHG emissions using the best current technologies while continuing to work on their own internal improvements and underwriting the technologies of the future. The commitment is to capture, reduce, avoid or offset — and carbon credits are the all-important offset piece of the picture.” Each time we venture into new territory it takes some time to get it right — and probably from the days of wampum, new financial instruments have been looked at warily. But consider this: not so long ago “acid rain” was the rallying cry of the environmental doomsayers. Sulfur credits (a carbon credit ancestor) were so effective in addressing the problem that we no longer even hear the term.

There are ideological purists who decry any system that allows us to continue living as we normally would. For them, riding our bicycles on I-85 is better for “the cause” than carbon credits. But for those of us who love the accoutrements of the 21st century, carbon credits provide an excellent, if not perfect, new currency for financing the fight against global climate change.

Legislation that reflects more Kyoto-like thinking may be coming — and sooner than we’d like. But for now, carbon credits still come in two ways: the mandatory “big stick” approach of Kyoto, and the voluntary “juicy carrot” of the US. If you get with the program now, your efforts may well be shining examples for our lawmakers to incorporate as they move into legislating mode.

Virginia Simpson is CEO of Simpson & Partners (www.simpsonandpartners.net), a multi-disciplinary consulting consortium established in 1980 with expertise in strategic planning/marketing, technology fulfillment, environmental sustainability and stewardship and corporate entrepreneurship. She has lectured at Cornell University, Dartmouth College, Fairfield University, Harvard Business School, Clemson University, Furman University and presented to the US Department of Agriculture.

Guest Column by Natalia Muska

Document management technology may not sound exciting or all that interesting, but when you consider the speed at which businesses need to operate to stay competitive, document management technology is a great place to look for ways to handle your business better.

Automation is not a new concept. Technology has been replacing menial labor for decades and these sorts of technologies have been advancing at a rapid pace. This has been happening for good reason, as was covered at the most recent GSA Technology Council lunch presented by Terry Weaver, founder of Delta Resource Group, and present owner of a national CEO membership organization. Based on the views shared in Revolutionary Wealth, by Alvin and Heidi Toffler, there has been an evolution of the global business landscape. Overtime, we have progressed away from agricultural and industrial driven economies toward a knowledge based economy, with knowledge being our most valuable resource. Technology continuously gives us ways to improve the way we do things.

How are you using your resources? If your employees are your resources, how are they benefiting your organization? Consider how many people you have physically handling documents. You could automate your entire mailroom, accounts receivable and accounts payable departments giving you more accurate reporting and timelier processing. You wouldn’t just gain the added benefit of less overhead. You would actually have access to information in seconds as apposed to hours. You can then reallocate your resources to fill more vital roles and functions within your organization.

How many of you use couriers to deliver documents? With automation technology you can instantly send those documents to your recipient without having to pay currier costs. You would be communicating faster and it would cost you far less.

Weaver used the example of how ATM machines have changed the way banks do business to illustrate how fewer people are needed to do tasks. With technology advancements we no longer need people at every touch point in a business processes. KeyMark’s document management technology gives you the tools and the knowledge to create automated workflows that eliminate similar touch points within your business. Instead of having someone receive, review and key in information, you can have these tasks completely automated.

To stay ahead in this knowledge economy you need to run your business smarter, faster, and cheaper than your competitors. Document management technology should be one of your knowledge resources to keep you ahead of your competition.

Learn more about how document management technology can benefit your organization at the Document Management Seminar hosted by the GSATC and KeyMark Inc on March 26th at the Crowne Plaza in Greenville from 10 to 1.

Guest Column by Virginia Simpson

When I hear of an emerging market, I’m at least mildly interested. But an emerging $3 trillion market catapults me way past mildly interested into the fully engaged category. Any number with a full dozen zeros neatly lined up behind is a real attention grabber.

This emerging green market is defined as “goods, services, and technologies which address the challenges created by increased awareness of global climate change”. In other words, almost anything that is, or can be positioned as, beneficial to the environment in a world filled with anxiety over potential environmental disaster can enter the new market place.

And it doesn’t matter much whether the benefits are substantive or “feel good”, simply offering comfort to replace the sense that things just might be spinning out of control here on Planet Earth.

The possibilities are exciting, ranging from downright ordinary to dauntingly avant garde. As you consider the role you want your company to pursue, it might be a good idea for you to look at some of the ideas that are already taking hold in each of the broad categories.

PRODUCTS. Virtually everybody in the US has already been involved in some conversation about hybrid cars. Toyota’s Prius is beloved by environmentalists, even though, depending on how and where it is driven, many of its benefits are more the “feel good” variety.

But you don’t have to spend big bucks to go green. At the grocery store, items from cereal to milk to mops lay claim to being environmentally kinder than their shelfmates, and a halo effect has folks seeing organic, natural, free range, fair trade, no preservatives, et al, as part of the same eco-friendly effort.

In clothing stores, much is made of the nature of the fibers, with hang tags telling the tales of the materials used in detail. A television commercial uses made up fabric names to conjure the horrors that will befall the foolish buyer who chooses “itchyscratchalotta” over pure cotton.

The building industry offers the usual solar panels but hastens to remind us that (for not so very much more) rainwater can be recycled or oh-so-sustainable bamboo can deliver stunningly elegant floors. Did you notice the counter where you bought your breakfast pastry was a lovely mosaic of recycled glass shards? And the coffee to go with had a provenance worthy of a museum painting, authenticating it as having been grown and harvested with all due environmental concern.

Where once we thought it adequate to recycle our grocery sacks, today we need not answer to “paper or plastic?” We carry our own canvas bags, supplied perhaps by the California entrepreneur whose endeavor is approaching $1 million in sales just as it comes up on its second birthday. Of course, she sells only on the Internet.

Gone are the days of packaging overkill, and I, for one, am pleased to do no further battle with unyielding plastic before I can listen to my new cd. A new era in package design has dawned as part of the great green market.

Wonderful gadgets are worth your attention. My own personal fav is a nifty battery-free flashlight which comes to life brightly with a few shakes of the wrist. No more nasty batteries going off to landfill.

The world of health and beauty aids is being reshaped by products made of pure minerals or found in the rainforests. Old brands are scrambling to reformulate in order to compete with boutique products, some of which launched on line with only a few thousand dollars invested.

New board games instill environmental precepts just as Monopoly made us lust after rental real estate in good locations.

There are restaurants whose menus are constantly changing to reflect their ties to nature and even a new vodka which lays claim to “a green state of mind”.

With so many possibilities, it’s a bit of a maze, and the pitfalls are everywhere. Even as Toyota’s Prius thrives, Honda has announced that it is stopping production of its hybrid Accord, a glaring failure with consumers. You must proceed with caution and use the best resources available to plan your strategy.

But if you can deliver something to either consumers or other businesses that folks want to eat, drive, sleep on, wear, live in, take therapeutically, play with, look at, exercise on, or even argue about, you have as good a shot as anyone else at making a go of it in the environmental agora.

SERVICES. The elephant in the room here is financial institutions of every sort, with Bank of America setting up a new $20 billion pool for eco-friendly projects, the Chicago Climate Exchange creating a trading floor for environmental credits and new insurance products proliferating like bunnies. Some fifty organizations including our own ACES Program provide retail carbon credits to consumers.

In fact, environmental financing is such a big elephant that it demands another column all to itself. So for businesses in the service sector, let’s focus elsewhere.

Whether it is housepainting with organic paints, chemicals free pest control or heirloom gardening, the businesses which help to maintain properties have gone green with a vengeance.

Laundries and dry cleaners are seeking fresh methods, and the newspaper boy is offering pick-up and recycling services.

Designers and decorators are telling us to embrace nature and charging 20% more for giving us harmonious lives through feng shui.

Classes abound. Can you teach the homely arts? Cooking — local produce, of course —is among the environmentally praiseworthy efforts. Needlework, too, is seen as part of the stewardship effort. Or if you prefer, there are students on college campuses learning the ins-and-outs of sustainability, seeking out research grants and planning careers as environmental entrepreneurs.

One fine service will save trees and help to control landfill by culling your name from all junk mail lists. Their modest fee even covers planting some new trees in your name to atone for past junk mail pollution.

Supply chain management and logistics services minimize transportation woes and inventory losses. Recycled supplies, sustainable materials sourcing and more can help turn any business into a paradigm of environmental virtue.

Car sharing and transportation co-ops are taking hold in some of our big cities, as folks see that public transportation serves them and the environment equally well most of the time. Day to day survival without a car is not only possible but quite pleasant — as long as there is a good green service to fill in the blanks when you need them.

Use your imagination. There is no end to the services we Americans are willing to try. If we like the service, we move it pretty quickly to an entitlement — and your business just might be the one we just can’t live without.

TECHNOLOGIES. While this sector is probably the most difficult for individual entry, there are still great opportunities for all sorts of players, even the smallest.

Consider this: students at a local university collect used cooking oils from the cafeterias and recycle the yucky stuff to provide fuel for on-campus vehicles like lawn mowers and tractors.

Even a relatively small farm can gain some operating economies and explore new product potential by using proper waste management technologies.

Major scale desalination projects can claim ocean water for clear sweetwater uses. But some very small scale water purification technologies can fit in the back of a pick-up truck and deliver potable water to drought besieged areas, saving lives and restoring ecological balance.

Joint ventures abound. Academia and utility companies work together to pursue alternative energy sources.

Companies like BMW and Milliken are leading the way in waste-to-energy, with a portion of their power secured by technologies which turn landfills into power sources, simultaneously cleaning one form of environmental pollutant while avoiding dependence on foreign fossil fuels,

A leading edge genetic engineering firm has created trees which are faster growing, more disease resistant, and able to sequester carbon more efficiently than trees born of unmanaged pollination. This means that forest products industries can be managed for greater sustainability, that carbon sequestration programs can be enhanced, and that environmental disasters such as forest fires can be mitigated through rapid reclamation.

Pretty heady stuff this. And it’s all happening here and now.

From any perspective this is a market worth considering. If you can imagine it, you may be able to achieve it on this new $3 trillion playground. It will take focus, savvy, incredibly hard work, wise use of available resources and luck. But it will be an adventure worth your best efforts, as you build not just a business but a legacy in environmental stewardship.

Virginia Simpson is CEO of Simpson & Partners (www.simpsonandpartners.net), a multi-disciplinary consulting consortium established in 1980 with expertise in strategic planning/marketing, technology fulfillment, environmental sustainability and stewardship and corporate entrepreneurship. She has lectured at Cornell University, Dartmouth College, Fairfield University, Harvard Business School, Clemson University, Furman University and presented to the US Department of Agriculture.

Guest Column by Virginia Simpson

A little more than a decade ago a discussion about global warming involved some scientists, three tree-huggers and a spotted owl. Then came the KYOTO ACCORD and the topic was thrust on the world stage, to be a topic of debate for years. Fast forward to the present and the phrase GLOBAL WARMING is on the nightly news, the cover of Time Magazine, the Discovery channel, the Weather channel and the PTA newsletters — and 9 out of 10 Americans say they are aware or concerned about the issue! And, yes, except for a few holdouts who just seem to love to argue, the debate is over.

Even BIG OIL, devoted as it is to fossil fuel and huge profits,is GOING GREEN. Shell’s president, John Hofmeister, said recently “It’s a waste of time to debate it. Policymakers have a responsibility to address it. We’ll adjust.” Chevron is working with forestry giant Weyerhaeuser to develop new BIOFUELS. Conoco has given a grant of $22.5MM to Iowa State to fund research in alternative fuels.

Clearly, American business is ready to end the debate and focus on something much more important : the emerging market which the World Bank estimate will grow to $3 trillion for goods, services, and technologies to address the concerns and challenges raised by climate changes and extremes. And nobody cares about whether the documentation is pristine science, purely anecdotal or some mix of the two.

This, then, is a new era for business — one which some venture capitalists have already started describing as bigger than anything ever seen and taking in earlier “hot properties” like telecom, biotech, and genetic engineering. Companies like GE, DuPont, WalMart, Home Depot, Citicorp, Ford, Bank of America were already gearing up to be major players in this new environmental market long before the Oxford Dictionary tagged CARBON NEUTRAL the 2006 “word of the year.

So the big question today, whether you are a mom’n'pop grocery store or a multi- national powerhouse, is this : what’s the bottom line on global climate change and what do you need to know to get your company into the game?

Here is a starter list to help you get your business headed in the right direction:

1) GLOBAL WARMING is a misnomer. All the different climate changes and weather extremes which are occurring throughout the world are lumped together under this one phrase. Forget the hype, ignore the scare tactics, dismiss the inaccuracies — and focus on the opportunities.

2) Get involved now! The market is wide open and crying for innovation. The US did not sign the Kyoto Accord, and that means that — for now — market-based responses are shaping the game. But at every level — federal, state, and local — regulation is coming, and you need to have your strategy in place if you are going to flourish. There are options and opportunities for every type and size of business; doing nothing is the worst option of all. 3) Environmental stewardship is simply good business — the wise use of natural resources. Continuing to argue over the who and why of global warming is simply bad business.

4) Not only are there opportunities for all businesses to flourish by going green, but there are also powerful new tools (like carbon credits about which we’ll talk later) to help you develop these opportunities.

5) Simply doing things like changing light bulbs from incandescent to CFR, turning of your computer for the night, improving insulation, planting trees around your establishment — the common sense bits and pieces of your grandma’s injunction to “waste not – want not” — can save your business 10% or more in operating expenses. And if you go beyond the basic savings and enter new lines of business, create new kinds of joint ventures, exploit new technologies — the sky’s the limit. Companies like GE and DuPont claim they will save 15% by becoming operationally “lean and green” but their new revenue streams are in the “knock your socks off” category with DuPont projecting an added $2-3 billion in revenues by 2010 and GE expecting in excess of $10 billion by 2012.

True — that’s stunning. But would you really be unhappy at a similar percentage of growth in your own business, no matter what its size today?

The message, in brief: the opportunities created by global climate change are varied, numerous, exciting — and accessible to all. What will you do to seize them?

Virginia Simpson is CEO of Simpson & Partners (www.simpsonandpartners.net), a multi-disciplinary consulting consortium established in 1980 with expertise in strategic planning/marketing, technology fulfillment, environmental sustainability and stewardship and corporate entrepreneurship. She has lectured at Cornell University, Dartmouth College, Fairfield University, Harvard Business School, Clemson University, Furman University and presented to the US Department of Agriculture.

Guest Column by Jason Calacanis

For over ten years I’ve been in the unique position of being both a CEO and a journalist in the technology space. My first company produced Silicon Alley Reporter magazine, where I held the dual titles of CEO and Editor. At my second company, Weblogs Inc., I was a blogger and CEO. Today I’m the CEO of Mahalo, and the editor of an email newsletter (Jason’s List, ed: Sign up online.).

Additionally, for over 10 years I’ve been the subject of many stories, including features in the New Yorker and WIRED (twice!), as well as on television programs including Charlie Rose, 60 Minutes, Nightline, CNN, Fox News, Bloomberg and countless others. I’ve gotten more press than any entrepreneur could dream of–certainly more than I deserve–and I’ve never had a public relations firm working for me.

As both subject and writer it feels like I’ve learned a lot about how the PR and the press works–especially in the technology business.

My philosophy of PR is summed up in six words: be amazing, be everywhere, be real.

You don’t need a PR firm, you don’t need an in-house PR person and you don’t need to spend ANY money to get amazing PR. You don’t need to be connected, and you don’t need to be a “name brand.” Today, many bloggers lament how much press folks like Kevin Rose and Robert Scoble get. They say that they get too much attention and that they got this attention too quickly and without earning it.

What’s funny about this is that “A-list” ceWebrities like Scoble and Kevin Rose are overnight successes 10 years in the making. Scoble and Rose have been everywhere for a decade. Me? I’ve been everywhere in this business since 1994 when I was 23 years old in New York City trying to get any meeting I could (for those of you who wouldn’t meet with me back then I totally understand–chances are I wouldn’t have met with me back then).

Things that look like an “overnight success” typically are not.

Now, I could tell you to “be amazing, be everywhere, be real,” drop some buzz words and call it a day. However, that’s not why you’ve invited me into your e-mail box. Nope, based on the feedback you guys have given me since we started this e-mail experiment, I’ve learned that what you really want is honest talk and clear tactics so you can fight the good fight.

Here are my first ten tips on how to do PR for your startup.

1. Be the brand
As the founder of your company you must be in love with your brand and inspired by your brand’s mission if you have any hope of getting press for your product. If you don’t *really* believe in your product on a deep, intrinsic level, it’s going to come across *immediately* to the bloggers and press you’re pitching.

When I started Silicon Alley Reporter in New York City, I had stacks of the magazine with me at ALL TIMES. If you saw me at a party I had 25 copies in my backpack, or 200 on a broken-down luggage cart, and you had one shoved in your face within a minute of meeting me.

My excitement level about the magazine was so great that at a Knicks game I climbed down from my seat in the 300s to hand a copy to John Kennedy Jr. who was sitting courtside. From the corner of my eye I could see security making a beeline for me, so I acted quickly: “John, I’m a magazine publisher just like you! Here’s my magazine… it’s about the internet.” He looked at it, said thank you and–I’ll never forget–”I think it’s gonna be big.” At that moment I felt security on my shoulder and I left with a huge smile on my face thinking “Wow, JFK Jr. thinks my magazine is going to be big!”

After telling the story a couple of times people pointed out that he was referring to the Internet being big, not my magazine–but they don’t know the look he gave me. I’m 100% sure he was talking about the magazine.

Additionally, if you met me in the last 90s, chances are I was wearing a tight black Silicon Alley Reporter shirt. Stacks of them littered my loft on 26th street, and I would toss them only if they started to fade on the edges. I had no problem wearing them seven days a week–I was on a mission. So proud of my little brand was I, that if people didn’t like my marketing I never noticed. People called me P.T. Barnum behind my back and I called myself P.T. Barnum when I looked in the mirror.

All I cared about was that you had heard the name Silicon Alley Reporter.

If you look at any of the successful brands out there, chances are their leader is banging the drum: Mark Cuban lives for the Mavs, Kevin Rose lives for Digg, and you can’t get Loic to shut up about Seesmic. That’s how it should be. If you don’t love your brand why should anyone else?

2. Be everywhere
If you and your team have committed to being the brand, the next step is being committed to being everywhere. When I was running Silicon Alley Reporter I was essentially a beat reporter. Every single night I would go out and meet folks in the Internet industry. While other folks went home to their families–and there is nothing wrong with that–I went out and made a family. In this case, the family became known as “Silicon Alley,” and the members of the family were the folks in and around the startup companies.

This is why Silicon Alley Reporter grew to 5-10x the size of our competitors in terms of reach and revenue: we were the community. Other folks reported on the companies, but we were one of the companies. This is why Mike Arrington has taken such a huge place in the Web 2.0 marketplace: TechCrunch is a startup company–warts and all–just like their subjects.

When we launched Weblogs, Inc. I told my partner Brian Alvey–who did have a family and was a homebody–that his job was to hold the fort and my job was to go out and spread the gospel. During the Weblogs Inc. years I attended every possible event I could. At these events I acted as a speaker AND as a blogger covering the event. This meant we were getting and giving press–which is a virtuous thing to do.

At these events folks would see an Engadget, HackADay, Joystiq or Weblogs, Inc. sticker on my laptop, or me wearing a T-shirt, and say “hey, how’s it going?” I’d give the stump speech about a) what we’ve accomplished, b) what’s working, c) what’s NOT working, and d) how exciting it all was.

Your job is to transfer the enthusiasm you feel for your brand to everyone you meet.

3. Always pick up the check–always.
At the industry events I mention above I always set a goal of creating deep relationships with a small number of folks as opposed to running around trying to trade cards with as many folks as possible. You can trade cards on LinkedIn, but you can’t break bread there. In the real world break bread, don’t trade contact information.

Typically, I would make dinner reservations for six to ten people at two or three different restaurants at two different times when I got to a conference. Then I would try and round up a couple of folks and cancel the reservations I didn’t need. This is how I developed friendships with almost everyone I know today, including Robert Scoble, Evan Williams, Mike Arrington, Steve Gillmor, Chris Andersen, Steven Levy, John Markoff, and Esther Dyson. If you’re not a social person, learn to be, because it’s your job if you’re at a startup
company.

This technique of setting up dinners and being inclusive I learned from Yossi Vardi, Linda Stone and John Brockman. These three always seemed to be hosting a dinner at the conferences I was attending, including TED, PC Forum, and The WSJ D conference. Every time I went to these conferences I attended their dinners–and I took notes.

Yossi, Linda and Brockman are the most connected people I know, and following their lead I’ve probably hosted over 100 dinner parties at conferences. These parties have an average price of $1,000 each. That’s $100,000 in dinners–probably around $10,000 a year–and it’s the best money I’ve ever spent. That’s how I built my network and now that it is built I’m giving one of my best secrets to you. That’s why you subscribe to the newsletter right?

PR firms cost $5-15,000 a month. Buying dinner at a conference ten times a year will cost you about one month’s worth of PR.

Now, as a tip, don’t be over aggressive when you invite folks to dinner and don’t feel the need to try to get the most important folks in the industy there. Just find a person or two you’re friendly with and set up dinner for the three of you. Then, as you meet folks give them your number and let them know you’re having dinner. E-mail them the details and if you invite five folks two will come, and they will bring one or two people each.

Everyone remembers who picked up the check. My dad picked up every check he could knowing that the folks he hosted would at some point come back to his bar, and some percentage of them might become regulars. This reciprication effect is a natural part of our existence, and there is nothing wrong with it. Just this week someone who attended a tech meetup at Mahalo met me in a bar and bought me and my father a drink. We talked for 30 minutes, and now for the cost of $15 in drinks I would take that guy’s call any time. How could I not–it would be rude!

Now, before you say “oh you’re blown out, you can afford to buy dinner for everyone,” let me state clearly that I did this when I was brokeas well. My secret then would be to find a family style restaurant that was affordable like a Mexican or Italian restaurant. I would then proceed to order a ton of appetizers and side orders for the table. Folks would get so filled that they wouldn’t want a main course later on. This was the best “poor man” hack I ever came up with: order for the table and let folks start networking. It’s cheaper, it’s more fun and it saves a lot of time.

4. Be a human being
The best way to get PR is not to sell someone on your company or product–it’s by being a human being. Journalists hate PR people and they hate being pitched. They do. It’s just a fact. Journalists and bloggers despise PR people, and if they say otherwise they are lying, placating you or just being diplomatic.

It’s a much better strategy to just be yourself and develop relationships with people in the industry slowly and organically. If you’re a good human being who is capable of both listening to people and engaging them in a dialogue then the “pitch” will just happen. In fact, it won’t be a pitch. It will happen when you’re walking back from the restaurant and the journalist or blogger asks “How’s it going at Mahalo?” It will happen when you’re sitting outside during a break at the conference having a cup of joe and a blogger will walk up andsay “What are you up to?”

Rule number one of interacting with a journalist: you NEVER have to bring up what you’re doing, you just have to be a normal person and wait. It is the job of journalists and bloggers to ask questions and they will. They don’t need to be pitched.

5. How to bond with a journalist
It’s important for CEOs/founders to realize that journalists and bloggers are, in fact, humans. They long to be heard, to be admired and to belong–just like you do. When I was a journalist I was always amazed by the number of unfocused pitches I would receive. For example, when I was covering the internet I would frequently get pitches like “You have to check out this new nanotechnology company” or “we’re launching a new technology to make shipping more efficient!” Ummm… great, but I’ve never covered the nanotech or shipping industries–why would I start now?!

You must realize that journalists are constantly getting banged by lazy, clueless PR folks who fire first and don’t understand what the word “aim” even means.

This inefficiency leads to an opportunity: you can cut to the front of the line by spending just 30 minutes researching the journalist you’re pitching. Before meeting with a journalist it’s your job–the job of the CEO–to read their last five stories in full. It helps if you take notes on these stories, read the comments under them and look for
reactions to the story around the web. This should take no more than five or ten minutes per story. You should also look at their LinkedIn account and do a Google search to see where else they have worked. If you know that Om Malik was at Red Herring, Business 2.0 and then started his own company, you can bring that up when you meet him. He will appreciate this in light of the fact that half the folks who e-mail him don’t even know what beat he covers or how to pronounce his name!

I’ve gotten so obsessive about this that my liaison Tyler, whom anyone who’s met with me in the last year knows, keeps tabs on our journalist and blogger contacts. He not only reads their work, he always stays in contact with them. This means we are in constant research and dialogue with the folks who are covering us. This means when we meet about a story we know as much about the journalist as they know about us–sometimes more! Tyler will hand me a stack of stories and background information on the people we’re meeting with on the flight to another country so I can play catch up.

This is, from my point of view, a simple matter of courtesy and good manners. If you want a journalist to be interested in you, take some interest in them. At the very least you’ll have something to talk with the journalist about.

6. How a CEO should e-mail a journalist
When I was a journalist I would not speak to PR people about my stories, and I would hold a hard line with them: if you want me to cover your company have your CEO e-mail me at jason at calacanis dotcom. They would reply, “ok, let’s do a call about your story and i can put you in touch with the right person over there…” and all I heard
was “blah blah blah.” The CEOs and founders of the companies who had direct relationships with me got more direct coverage of their company, as well as more quotes in stories about other companies and issues.

Journalists and bloggers are very busy and PR people are, by and large, considered an inefficiency in the system by them.

The best thing for a CEO to do is to stay in regular communication with journalists and bloggers in their own, authentic voice via email. I frequently email journalists I know and give them unsolicited comments on stories that have nothing to do with me. Sometimes these comments are positive, sometimes they are not. I’ve emailed New York Times journalists to let them know when they missed the real issue and what trees they may want to shake.

I recently e-mailed Dan Lyons of Fake Steve Jobs fame to tell him what a low-rent slug he was being for attacking Steve Jobs over his health. You can be sure that after ten years of unsolicited e-mails most journalists know who I am and how to get in touch with me. Some may not agree with me, but they tend to respect my opinion. That’s really the best thing you can do: be respected for your views on the industry.

Your job as the CEO/founder is to create direct, honest and personal relationships with journalists. The truth is that PR people are selling you a share of their relationships with journalists, and their relationships are typically on shaky ground. You’re much better off building a personal relationship by sending a personal email like this:

Saul,

Nice piece on Facebook’s valuation. One insight I had: if the value of the company BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH than should Microsoft be thinking BLAH
BLAH BLAH? Thoughts?

best regards,

Jason Calacanis
CEO, Mahalo.com

If you do that once every other day for a year or so you’ll develop relationships with 50 to 100 important folks. Of course, you have to have something of substance to say, so don’t waste their time and don’t write five page e-mails or you’ll look deranged. Short, to the point and intelligent. If you’re not smart enough to send something insightful, well, than I can’t really help you and you might want go work for someone smart for a couple of years.

7. How a CEO should speak to a journalist
If you have a phone or in-person interview with a journalist there are some basic things you should know and do. First, you should always ask the journalist “are you taping this call, or should I talk slowly so you can take notes?” at the start of the call. 80% of the time they are taping the call, and 90% of the time they will not offer that up to you. If they are taping the call that’s a good thing–you’re gonna be quoted correctly. If they are NOT taping the call that can suck, because they are going to paraphrase you. I conduct 95% of my
interviews over e-mail because I know I’m going to get misquoted, so I tell folks in my email “don’t worry… I’ll give you nice blunt, honest responses that don’t look like PR speak in the email. ”

This increases the probability that the journalist will a) quote you correctly and b) that they will accept an e-mail interview.

There are a handful of journalists I will speak to on the phone or in person because I know they are not going to spin me. Also, if I know there is a chance that I will be spun I am very, very clear to state that. For example, when launching and running Mahalo, everyone wants me to say we’re a Google killer. When that question comes up I immediately say “let me be very, very clear–and please don’t misrepresent me in your story–that Google is a partner and we don’t see ourselves as a replacement for Google but rather a complement for
the following reasons.” You have to take control of your message when speaking to the press and know that many of them are looking for a little conflict in their piece. If you want to pick a fight than go ahead–it’s not a bad strategy–but if you don’t want to mix it up, be really clear about that. It’s your job to make sure your points get across, not the journalists.

Many new CEOs/founders tell me they were spun in a story, saying things like “I spoke for 20 minutes about how we’re not replacing Google and only mentioned why we might replace them for two minutes and they made that the title of the story!!!” Let me be clear about something, journalists are like lawyers in a deposition: their job is to keep you talking. The more you talk, the more is revealed. I would teach my journalists at Silicon Alley Reporter to ask short questions and to act confused specfically to get folks to reveal more information. This is an age-old strategy.

Columbo is the best model for a journalist: “oh, one more thing fella… I’m a little confused, you said your revenue model was e-commerce, but I don’t see anything for sale on the site…. my wife, she says I’m a little slow… any chance you could explain that to me?”

Your job as a suspect/subject is to say things concisely and with few words: “Google is our partner in five areas already: search advertising, analytics, YouTube, open social and custom search. They also send us half our traffic–they are NOT our competition, they are our partner.” Silence. More silence. If the journalist is good they will say something like, “but certainly on some level you compete?” and you respond “No, we don’t.”

If the journalist is really good they will point out an example: “But you’re human powered search and they are machine search… if you reach scale some users will choose right? If human-powered search is that much better like you say folks will switch right?!?” Now they’ve got you… what do you do? Sometimes you can just say “hmmm… that’s an interesting point,” then enjoy the silence. Another method might be to just say “I’ve never really considered that. They really are our partner and that’s how we treat them.”

Bottom line: assume that the worst sentence in your hour-long conversation is the lead sentence of the article or blog post. If you do this you’ll make your worst sentence pretty darn good! Also, don’t feel the need to fill the dead air.

8. Invite people to “swing by” your office
Since I’ve started my companies I’ve always taken the position that anyone can swing by our office for coffee any time. When I meet folks I always tell them “if you’re ever in Santa Monica swing by.” When folks are in Los Angeles they actually do! Journalists and bloggers LOVE to visit a location because it helps them tell your story. Your location should be interesting–fascinating, in fact. This really helps tell your story.

Silicon Alley Reporter had a dirty old loft that looked like a sloppy newsroom. It was charming in a scrappy startup way. No one who does a story on TechCrunch can help but mention that Arrington is running the most influential technology blog in the world out of a house with a dozen folks sprawled out across halls and extra bedrooms. The fact that he sleeps six feet from the news pit speaks to his dedication.

Gawker Media has a well designed, open-office plan that looks like something out of Design Hotels. In fact, a design hotel would be good to knock it off (as would Starbucks). Denton knows this and he has an open door policy for his office.

This all goes back to my core belief that you have to live your brand and be everywhere. Part of being everywhere is having folks visit you.

9. Attach your brand to a movement
Silicon Alley was a movement to showcase the amazing technology companies in New York City. My magazine had the name Silicon Alley in it, but I never tried to limit the use of the name. Lots of loser types rushed in and created Silicon Alley SOMETHING and “Alleycat” type brands that drafted off my brand. However, my brand was the best and was the most out there–all their drafting did was secure our slot as the leader of the pack.

With Weblogs, Inc. we were one of two companies trying to make blogs into a business. We were, in fact, the lead example of blogs as a business for a couple of years–and still to this day. Sure enough folks knocked off our idea all around the world. Some even used the exact name, like Weblogs SL in Spain. Now, Julio, who ran Weblogs SL, was always nice enough to say he was inspired by Weblogs, Inc. which I found very classy. Others just stole the concept and ran with it.

At the end of the day what all these knock-off blog networks did was lift the leaders: Gawker Media and Weblogs, Inc. Most of the smaller networks crashed and burned, or worse–just went sideways. Welcome your competitors to the race, because no one is going to tune into a one-horse race.

Look at it this way, one boat coasting across a large ocean appears lost and adrift, but ten boats trying to catch the lead boat makes it look like a race. If you’re the leader, at least these copycats will make it look like you know where you’re going–even if you don’t.

Today, we watched with delight as companies knock off the concept for Mahalo’s human-powered search left and right. Many of these companies release press releases saying they are the “Mahalo of INSERT VERTICAL HERE.” The press then refers to our brand every time they do a story on this company.

One company that did a “Mahalo of” for a specific vertical actually stole our content, code and entire business process. As we launch features or editorial standards they copy them *exactly* from our site. When their CEO goes to speaking gigs–and I sat in the audience for one of them–he actually lifts my lines about the value of humans in search! Like word for word!

We laugh about this company because we know two things: 1. They will never catch up to us and 2. All they are doing by stealing from us is pushing us up the ladder as the lead company.

When I meet with VCs, if they know this company I show them the examples of them stealing from us. The VCs ask why we don’t sue them.I respond that it would be like Michael Jordan complaining about playing against a sixth grade basketball team. The VCs get a huge laugh out of this, and I get the satisfaction of knowing a) the thieves are looked at as the dogs they are and b) their dog-like behavior just reinforces our leadership position.

10. Embrace small media outlets
Getting someone at The New York Times, WIRED or The Wall Street Journal to pay attention to you can take years. Small publications, however, don’t get their calls responded to by the big companies. This creates two big wins for you:

a) Small publications have more time for you
b) Big publications troll the small publications for stories

In fact, you might not want to waste too much time getting to Walt Mossberg or John Markoff–those guys are jammed up big time. Great guys, and they know a great story when they see it, but the amount of incoming traffic they have is insane. Your best bet might be to find a vertical blog or podcast and talk to those folks. After you speak with them you can send the link to Mossberg or Markoff–or they might find it themselves.

To this day I say yes to almost any small podcast or blog interview request I can. As a nanopublisher for many years I know how hard it is to get a “brand name,” and now that I’ve got a modest brand name I like to help those folks leverage it. It’s good for karma, and it’s good for keeping your ear to the street. These smaller, veritcal publications sometimes have great information they can share with you.

Summary of part one:
PR is, by definition, a reflection of what you’ve done. All the PR in the world will not make a bad business great, and some bad press really kill a great company. Getting press is a great way to accelerate the adoption of your brand, but truth be told, your brand is going to rise and fall based on how valuable it is to your customers.

That being said, your ability to hire people, get meetings, raise money and form partnerships will be tied to your “PR footprint.” Everyone wants to be involved with MySpace, Facebook, digg and Apple. Folks will do business deals with these companies that lose money because of the halo effect the association brings.

When a startup hits it’s not one thing that does it, it’s typically many things working in concert. Getting your PR right is important in the way the decor of a restaurant is important: folks like a nice-looking restaurant, but they are only going to go to it once if the food sucks. What you put on the plate–your product–is the most important.

John Brockman summed this up to me: always measure your press by the pound.

Jason Calacanis is founder and CEO of Mahalo, and founded and ran both Weblogs Inc. and the Silicon Alley Reporter. This post was originally distributed via Jason’s email list; subscription information available here.

via: Jason Calacanis

BY DARLA MOORE
CHAIRMAN, PALMETTO INSTITUTE

In reflecting on the subject of this piece, I wanted to find a contemporary example to help crystallize my thoughts about “competitiveness,” and how I want to approach and present the concept. I want to get across the idea that “competitiveness,” in theory and in practice, only truly exists as the sum of many important parts. To that end, I was reminded of a piece that appeared in the New York Times, almost a year ago now, about a Harvard Economist named Edward Glaeser. Professor Glaeser is regarded by a number of Nobel rank economists as a bright new light on the economic dynamics of urban centers and the various factors that make certain cities vibrant and successful and others stagnant and lackluster. The following passage, taken directly from the article, is a great way to kick off this discussion:

His desire to provide a persuasive, data-driven explanation for elevated home prices fits into a decade of research that he says he hopes will ultimately provide a broad and ambitious framework to explain the function and evolution of America’s cities. His view is that the life of the city cannot (and should not) be separated from its real-estate market. “They mutually cause each other,” he says. “Housing supply determines to a certain extent what goes on with the economic life of the city; and the economic life of the city is intimately related to the demand for housing. And you cannot possibly understand that if you’re going to try and treat them as being separate.” Put another way, we shape cities; cities shape real estate; real estate shapes cities. And, cities shape us too.

I agree with Professor Glaeser’s postulate in general and more specifically as it relates to the topic of this paper. In my words, success ["competitiveness"] depends on a virtuous cycle that begins with a supply of the essential components of competitiveness and ends with true, robust economic competitiveness [which creates a new supply of essential components of competitiveness and so on…]. If we can fully understand this and put it into practice, we will fully comprehend what being competitive really means.

Many voices, both in the public and private sectors, speak in terms of the need for South Carolina to be competitive. If nothing else, the Palmetto Institute and the Council on Competitiveness, now known as New Carolina, have helped to focus the conversation about the economic wellbeing of South Carolina on “competitiveness in the global economy,” “raising the per capita income,” and “developing industry clusters to support more innovative and efficient ways to build our economy.” We now have a competitiveness agenda for the business community; the Governor and the Legislature discuss issues in terms of being more competitive as well as using a variety of metrics we have offered to gauge improvement. All of this is encouraging, but I still wonder whether or not we really understand what it takes to be competitive. To borrow from and paraphrase the Glaeser article, Do we have a complete understanding of the elements and broad framework of a holistically competitive state?

The challenge in evaluating South Carolina’s competitiveness is to be certain that we are measuring the key components of the whole and that we understand what the measurements mean. It is certainly important to record the number of new jobs created and large capital investment in South Carolina, but what does this measurement tell us? Are the jobs high skill positions? Do they help answer or further confound our state’s health insurance situation? Will they attract other high skill labor or encourage training or retraining for other high skill, high wage opportunities? Will we have sufficiently educated and trained individuals to sustain the new jobs? In other words, how do events that create new jobs and spur capital expansion mesh with the critical elements of competitiveness? The measurements of our competitiveness must include average wages, wage growth, unemployment, and gross state product. In order to get a true and clear picture, metrics must also include innovation indicators such as patents, patent growth, venture capital investments, and the formation of fast growth companies. In fact, when you compare these numbers in the above-referenced categories to the national averages and the statistics of our neighboring states, you realize the simple truth. The road to competitiveness for South Carolina is a long, challenging one, and we are just beginning our journey.

So then, what does it take to be competitive?

While I don’t have all the answers, I can commend many of the excellent points made just last December in a report of the Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce, a special arm of the National Center on Education and the Economy. In that report entitled Tough Choices or Tough Times, two trends were highlighted in an effort to focus us more accurately on the challenges America now faces. First, new technology has made the world so much smaller. Because of the computer and the volume of work we do that ends up in a digitized form, it is easy to transmit instantly over the internet to any place in the world work involving engineering or architectural drawings, x-rays, and a whole list of other work-related activities. What that means is employers right here in South Carolina have access to a worldwide workforce of people who do not have to live and work in our state.

The second trend relates to how companies now operate. According to the report, a century ago the United States led the world in the process of “vertical integration” where corporations did all of the work from mining the raw materials to the final retail sale to the consumer. Today, the United States leads the world in the break-up of the vertically integrated corporation. Corporate analysts determine who can best do each step in the process not only at the lowest cost but also at the level of quality demanded. The corporation then contracts with the best providers of each of these steps in the process and keeps only those functions it can do best. It is what we have come to call “outsourcing.” Unfortunately, corporations that do not take this approach will not be competitive and eventually will be put out of business. Moreover, it is not just workers in other countries – as technologies continue to develop, more and more computer-driven equipment and robots are being developed to take over even more jobs.

This is the environment we face and, unfortunately, we face it at a time when the quality of our workforce is being challenged. Again, according to the report Tough Choices or Tough Times, while the United States could previously claim having the best educated workforce in the world, this is not true today. Over the last 30 years, country after country has surpassed us in the percentage of individuals entering the workforce with the equivalent of a high school diploma. Even more disturbing, thirty years ago 30% of the world’s population of college students was in the United States. Today, only 14% are in the U.S. and the number continues to decline.

The bottom-line is not only are we being challenged by foreign workers making lower wages, but we are also being challenged with workers equally, if not better, qualified. If you were an employer in the digital world we live in, would you hire an American engineer at $45,000 a year or an Indian or Chinese engineer at $7,500 a year if they were equally qualified?

This environment changes the dynamics of being competitive. It is not enough just to provide for a higher educated and skilled workforce. Today, we are competing for jobs with countries that are offering large numbers of highly educated workers willing to work for low wages. Even if jobs are not outsourced, we are still faced with technology driven systems replacing large segments of our workforce.

Our challenge is to create an economy not only supported by a skilled workforce but one that is driven by innovative, creative companies adding value to products and services in order to capture a premium in the world market. That is why in addition to the economic performance indicators, we must also track innovation output indicators.

This new economy is difficult to grasp, especially in a state that has developed its workforce to produce specific products for companies in the most efficient, cost-effective method possible. And, with the strong work ethic of our citizens and a technical education system with an excellent ability to train specific workers for specific jobs, we have been very successful. Unfortunately, as the world becomes more competitive, competitors in foreign countries with lower labor costs will copy any jobs described as routine or repetitive. No longer will just producing a shirt, regardless of how inexpensively or efficiently, be enough. We now must find ways, for example, to produce the same shirt with fabrics that protect or medicate us. We have to find ways to produce agriculture products not just as commodities but also for new usages in energy and medicine. The list goes on and on from high technology to basic jobs.

That is why the Palmetto Institute along with other organizations commissioned Professor Michael Porter’s group to develop for South Carolina a long-term economic strategy based upon the global economy. That is why New Carolina is working so hard to build industry clusters that help South Carolina recruit, expand, and create more innovative businesses. That is why the Palmetto Institute has worked with the South Carolina Commerce Department to help improve the state’s approach to workforce training. That is why the research universities have been asked to take a greater role in creating new entrepreneurial opportunities for businesses. That is why the technical education colleges are committing to programs to help them improve individual student achievements and the overall workforce quality. That is why the Education and Economic Development Act was passed to help guide and encourage students to expand their opportunities for better jobs and careers. And, that is why there is a competitive agenda today to recommend legislative initiatives to give South Carolina the tools necessary to become more competitive. This isn’t about being popular! These changes are absolutely necessary to be more competitive, and if we cannot become more competitive, we cannot offer a more prosperous life for ourselves and, more important, for our children. It is that simple. To bring you full circle, success depends on a virtuous cycle which begins with supply – supply of a highly skilled and ready work force, supply of cutting-edge innovations, supply of worthy opportunities for venture capital investment, and the environment to patent new creations and seed fast growth companies.

Therefore, the next time an issue arises regarding whether or not we need to continue working toward changes to be more competitive, think about the worker in China making a dollar an hour wanting desperately to take a South Carolina worker’s job away so he or she can work extra hours. This example will help us all remember what being competitive really means and why we have to continue to work toward that goal.

By M. EDWARD SELLERS AND GEORGE W. FLETCHER – Guest columnists

Annexation affects more than just our individual neighborhoods and communities. It involves more than turf battles among cities, counties and special-purpose districts. It’s about more than preserving green space over building more affordable homes.

South Carolina’s outdated annexation laws present yet another challenge to our state when we look at how we compete regionally, nationally and internationally in the new economy. We see ourselves compared daily in the media to our neighbors in the southeast, especially Georgia and North Carolina. Both of these states have annexation laws that better reflect today’s growth patterns and allow cities to grow and expand as their population on the urban fringe grows.

South Carolina’s annexation laws give us just another reason to fall behind in our ability to attract businesses and workers of the new economy, because our cities are constrained by artificial boundaries that can’t keep up with the pace of our neighboring states. Not that any of our cities aspire to be a New York or Atlanta, but we do need to give our cities increased flexibility to take in new residents when it makes good sense.

New Carolina is in the business of increasing the state’s competitiveness through changing the way we think about ourselves and our economy. Through strong partnerships with organizations around the state, we are working toward a new and better South Carolina — one that encourages its cities and towns to become bustling metropolitan areas through planned growth. The fact that our state’s annexation laws can literally choke the positive growth in the hubs of regional economic growth — our cities and towns — is one of the major, yet often overlooked, challenges we face.

At New Carolina, we believe that developing clusters will help build our state’s economy. Clusters are groups of businesses that traditionally might be competing with one another but now work together to build on their common interests. Strong cities are anchors for successful clusters. By supporting the development of clusters and regional collaborations, cities and towns become the foundation of the bridge we must cross to make ourselves able to compete regionally, nationally and internationally.

A progressive and proactive approach to reforming annexation laws is needed by our General Assembly. Fortunately, several members of our Legislature see this need for our cities and towns to propel our state to economic superiority and competitiveness. While annexation reform legislation isn’t new — the state’s Municipal Association has been supporting this for years — there seems to be some broad legislative interest in pushing it this session.

Sen. Jim Ritchie from Spartanburg introduced three bills last year that address the three major annexation problems — filling “doughnut holes” of unincorporated areas completely surrounded by a municipality, expanding cities based on the population and degree of urban development, and reducing the number of property owners who must agree to an annexation.

Rep. Ben Hagood of Charleston is working on a comprehensive annexation reform package in conjunction with several unusual bedfellows including the state’s municipalities and conservation interests. Both of these legislators understand that better annexation laws are the key to smart, planned growth in our state.

When we allow cities to grow to their natural boundaries where the population is growing, they are better able to show realistic evidence of local population numbers and growth patterns to potential investors in their city.

Certainly there are many issues to consider when updating these laws that no longer reflect today’s growth patterns — density, services and taxes are just a few. But just the fact that this very important economic competitiveness issue is being discussed in our Legislature in a very good sign.

Mr. Sellers is chairman of New Carolina — South Carolina’s Council on Competitiveness, and of BlueCross and BlueShield of South Carolina. Mr. Fletcher is executive director of New Carolina.

Column Provided by: