Richmond media and bloggers have been experiencing paroxysms of wonkishness this month following the release of “Putting the Future Together,” by Jim Crupi, a Dallas-based strategic leadership consultant. Some like his work, some don’t. But Crupi’s trenchant observations will assuredly set off a round of soul-searching, just as he did 15 years ago when he laid out the good, the bad and the ugly of Richmond for all to see. (John Sarvay provides a wrap-up of the coverage to date.)
While the Richmond region has made great strides in the past 15 years, Crupi says, it still has a lot of work to do. Race is the 800-pound gorilla in the room that nobody dares talk about. While race relations have demonstrably improved, they would benefit from a candid and open dialogue. But Crupi saved his most trenchant criticism for Richmond’s political, civic and business leaders. While regional leaders excel at tactical excution, he observes, they fail at strategy. The region has no vision for the future that people can rally around.
I totally agree. Unfortunately, I don’t think Crupi has the answers. He certainly generated a lot of ideas for his report — high-speed rail to Northern Virginia, a presidential museum, a new airport, a deep-water report, just to name a few — but he provided no strategic vision. Worse, he didn’t even articulate the criteria for establishing a long-term vision.
But the Richmond establishment seems all geared up to use “Putting the Future Together” as the starting point for a round of discussions. Among other recommendations, Crupi calls for creating a 2015 Metro Future Task Force to get the ball rolling.
While Crupi makes some valid points and advances some intriguing ideas, I take issue with a key presupposition. “By all rights,” he writes, “Richmond should be booming like Atlanta, Charlotte and other metro areas that have experienced growth over the last couple of decades. And yet — it isn’t.” Apparently, that’s a bad thing. The premise underlying the entire report is that Richmond should look like Atlanta and Charlotte, and here’s what it takes to get there.
Needless to say, if I wanted to live in a place like Charlotte or Atlanta, I would move to Charlotte or Atlanta. I like Richmond because it’s not Charlotte or Atlanta. I have huge problems with the philosophy of “growth for growth’s sake.” In my latest e-zine column, “Vision Impaired,” I offer an alternative framework for developing a regional vision. Applying the logic of my “Economy 4.0″ series, I contend that the ultimate goal should be to build a region that is prosperous, livable and sustainable” — none of which requires “bigness.” The region’s four strategic priorities should be:
- Transforming human settlement patterns so that they can be more efficiently served by transportation, utilities and public services
- Transforming government institutions, squeezing out administrative costs and delivering services in more creative ways
- Building human capital (by improving schools, building knowledge-creating institutions, recruiting the creative class, and shaping communities that make smart people want to stay here)
The Richmond region does not need to squander scarce resources on building a tourism industry or in futile pursuit of becoming the capital of the military-industrial complex. We can’t create a prosperous, livable and sustainable region with a handful of “transformational” projects that a few power brokers can agree upon and undwrite. We need to build on our existing strengths, and we need to build from the ground up, creating economic opportunity at all levels of society.
Update: Jon Baliles at River City Rapids offers his suggestions on how to improve the outcome of the visioning process: Listen to the kids!