Back to Lessons from Tupelo: A Case StudyBy Michal Smith-Mello
From Reclaiming Community, Reckoning with Change
pp. 67-77, published 1995
The forces which inhibit development in rural Kentucky today are not new to us. Instead, they are continuing, self-perpetuating legacies. That poverty, joblessness, and underemployment are still very much with us throughout rural Kentucky, in spite of many well-intended past efforts, is reason enough to dramatically change our approach to development. But the larger forces of globalization, technological advancement, and organizational realignment compel us to change. They have rendered the simple "jobs-equals-development" formula incomplete at best. More—much more—is needed to achieve rural and urban prosperity. Workers, firms, institutions, communities, and government must possess the capacity to seize opportunities.
Across Kentucky, the seeds of change are being broadly cast. In some Kentucky communities, the work of preparing for the future is well underway. In Bowling Green, for example, the Communities of the Future project has established a national capacity building focus, emphasizing technology, citizen networks, leadership development, and consensus democracy. Similarly, Berea-based MACED has launched a Sustainable Communities initiative that will help local communities build from within and plan for an economy that can yield returns over the long term. Statewide projects such as the Education, Arts and Humanities Cabinet’s Cultural Economics Initiative are focused on building the capacity within local communities to capture the full economic potential of their rich cultural resources. Each of these initiatives as well as many more are looking long-term, focusing resources at the local level, and emphasizing the critical importance of broad civic engagement or social capital.
Many Kentuckians also have good ideas about how we must prepare and position the Commonwealth for the future. In recent years, several commissions, task forces and private organizations have produced literally hundreds of recommendations for improving the lives of citizens and the operations of government. In 1991, the Commission on Kentucky's Government issued more than 100 separate recommendations to make the executive branch more efficient and effective. In 1993, the Governor's Commission on Quality and Efficiency endorsed more than 270 recommendations for changing Kentucky's government. This year, committees of the Kentucky Appalachian Task Force presented 75 recommendations and primary concerns in their 1995 report, Communities of Hope. And the Economic Development Cabinet's strategic plan includes five goals, 22 strategies and 76 tactics.
Add to these reports the efforts of Project 21, Inc., the Education, Arts & Humanities Cabinet, the Department for Social Services, Ag. Project 2000, and the Kentucky Tomorrow Commission, and we have years of hard work from hundreds of groups and individuals. Their efforts have produced many new and creative solutions to vexing problems. Yet the sheer volume of recommendations could leave anyone feeling crushed under an avalanche of "things to do."
Rather than add another lengthy list of recommendations to the mix, we instead turn to the already existent body of recommendations, which echo the major themes of this report. They are:
Think and plan for engagement with the world;
Focus resources and effort at the community level; and,
Develop high-performance government.
We conclude with some ideas about building on the work which has already taken place in order to create a comprehensive plan for development.
The impact that national and global trends will have on Kentucky's future can scarcely be overstated. While we could speculate about the immensity of change before us and its possible impact on Kentucky, recent history dramatically illustrates the ways in which international events affect the Commonwealth. In each of the past two decades we find evidence of how profoundly Kentucky's economy can be affected by events in remote corners of the world.
During the 1970s, the world suffered two oil price shocks as a result of the machinations of petroleum-producing nations. The U.S. economy made widespread substitutions for oil, favoring coal. As a result, the mining sector, which contributed just 3 percent of Kentucky's earnings in 1969, accounted for 9 percent of Kentucky's earnings by 1976 (Black, Daniel and Sanders, 1995). In Pike County alone, the 1973 oil embargo drove mining earnings up 80 percent (Black, Daniel and Sanders).
In the middle of the 1980s, Japanese automakers selected sites and constructed assembly plants in the American heartland. This was partly due to a growing movement in the United States to remedy the huge trade imbalance with Japan that had resulted from a strong dollar. Domestic resistance in Japan to a significant increase in imports from the United States compelled automakers to decrease exports by manufacturing their cars abroad. This brought Toyota Motor Manufacturing, USA to Scott County, and created thousands of jobs across Kentucky.
Recognizing the importance of energy prices, exchange rates and countless other factors which affect the way we live and work in Kentucky, the commissions and task forces expound the necessity of thinking and planning for engagement with the world around us. A decade ago, the Kentucky Tomorrow Commission listed the growth of the global economy first among the five major trends affecting Kentucky's future. A few years later, the report from Project 21, Inc., a private-sector initiative focused on preparing Kentucky for the 21st Century, observes in its introduction, "Kentucky cannot live in isolation. We are part of the world community." The focus on global forces has continued unabated in the 1990s. One of the Economic Development Cabinet's five major goals in its strategic plan is to "create a globally competitive business environment." And the Kentucky Appalachian Task Force prefaces its recommendations by declaring that Appalachia risks being left behind "in the new world of technology and global markets."
Thinking and planning for engagement in the world demands that we focus first and foremost on building our fundamental capacity to compete—on strengthening the capabilities of workers, nurturing organizational change and international engagement among existent businesses, constructing timely and flexible institutional responses to a changing context, and empowering local communities to think and plan for themselves.
Because of the profound changes that will come with an expanding world market and a shrinking globe, we are compelled to develop appropriate strategies to prepare for the coming years. Fortunately, Kentuckians are beginning to recognize the benefits of leveraging increased capacity and focusing resources at the local level. In recent years, private sector businesses and non-profit organizations, as well as agencies of state government, have incorporated this strategy into their recommendations and findings. For example, the Kentucky Appalachian Task Force, created by Governor Brereton Jones in 1993, offered, along with its numerous specific recommendations, some guiding principles which "should counsel public policy development and the delivery of government services in Appalachian Kentucky" (1995, 14). While specific to Appalachia, these principles are equally appropriate for other parts of the state. Again, the first four guiding principles are:
Kentucky state and regional planning should derive from community-based planning.
Community-based programs should promote collaboration and coordination among program agencies and should create more effective regional linkages among development agencies and groups, private enterprise, and nonprofit organizations.
Program policy design should create mechanisms at all levels of government that maximize opportunities for citizen involvement in setting development priorities and establishing criteria for determining and evaluating programs and projects.
Strategic program development should assign higher priority to human development needs including a broad definition of infrastructure to support such development (p. 15).
The importance of community-level action is echoed by Project 21, Inc.: "While the state must set the stage in many regards, the economic development story is played out in local communities. Therefore . . . we challenge communities to take action" (1990, 33). The Southern Rural Development Initiative, of which the Kentucky-based Human/Economic Appalachian Development Corporation is a founding member, also emphasizes the importance of using local talents and resources and defines development "as both outcome and process (emphasis in original)" (Southern Rural Development Initiative, n.d., 13).
Clearly, these non-governmental groups recognize the importance of community-based development and the principles it entails. The new orientation in development policy is also evident in some of the activities of state agencies. For example, the strategic plan for the Education, Arts & Humanities Cabinet calls for retention of future leaders through the Governor's Scholars Program, an increase in school-based decision-making, the development and support of school districts' "internal capacity for innovation and change" (1992, 26), and assistance to local districts to "establish the capacity to develop curriculum and improve classroom instruction/assessment" (p. 28).
Sprinkled throughout the Economic Development Cabinet's strategic plan are strategies and tactics which contain some of these new ideas. The plan notes that the Kentucky Economic Expansion Program (KEEP) "addresses a more comprehensive approach to development in that it also provides leadership development and understanding of the fundamentals of community organization" (1994, 21). Elsewhere, the strategic plan calls for the Cabinet to "encourage the establishment of manufacturing networks" (p. 28), reward regional cooperation, and "develop leadership . . . capacity and tools, particularly at the community level" (p. 45).
These recommendations rest on a fundamental truth of organizational change: Those closest to the job are best prepared to do it. In order to strengthen the fundamental capacity of people and places to shape a better future, resources and effort— from technical assistance, to leadership development, to much-needed financial resources—must be focused at the community level.
The task of creating a high-performance government, one which anticipates the impact of important national and international trends and empowers communities to take responsibility for their future, is not an easy one. Yet it is absolutely essential. R. Scott Fosler, who heads the national Committee for Economic Development, observes that the larger global economic context has forced painful changes in the private sector and caused leading states to shape development goals focused on "achieving high levels of productivity and competitiveness that increase income and provide a high standard of living and quality of life for all residents" (Fosler, 1992, 5). The processes of structural realignment and organizational change compel states to develop new capacities, new "relationships, values and methods," and new approaches to both formulating and implementing policy (Fosler). A growing body of literature suggests some of the features needed to achieve optimum government capacity to advance the work of development.
A Culture of Performance. Government must become an agent which produces returns on citizen investment. In order to do so, it must bring institutional focus to bear on the central and critically important work of development and nurture "a culture of performance" (Fosler, 1992). Many of the same tenets of organizational change which enabled business and industry to adapt to a dramatically changed marketplace can bring alignment and focus to the complex, multi-faceted work of development and improve government performance. Flexible, change-oriented organizations defined by clearly delineated goals; empowered, highly-trained employees; flat management structures; and cross-functional teams offer a proven path to higher levels of performance.
Customer-First Orientation. Fundamental to government’s ability to enhance performance, to achieve the goals of development, is a customer-first orientation. The private sector shift from a focus on quantity or production, to a customer or quality orientation has been central to its adaptation to the global economy. Just as the marketplace demands high-quality, affordable products, citizens are expressing impatience with inefficient, costly, bureaucratic programs that do not achieve the purpose for which they were designed. In order for government to become more responsive to citizen/customer needs, the Corporation for Enterprise Development (CED) recommends:
customer-specific service—tailor service to citizen/customer needs, an effort that can often be achieved by "wholesaling services through local or regional entities," those closest to needs and problems;
market feedback—seek citizen/customer evaluations of the quality of service;
competitive selection processes—select private or non-profit providers or services based on performance and cost of delivery;
accountability—establish benchmarks, measures of outcomes, to determine how effectively programs solve problems; and,
performance-based management—tie public funding to performance (CED, 1993).
Institutional Intelligence. In an era in which information and ideas are fast becoming the market’s most valued products, government’s ability to leverage optimum outcomes for the citizens it serves depends upon the flow of what Fosler terms "institutional intelligence" (Fosler, 1992). Through "a learning system that encourages a constant flow of useful and useable information" (Fosler, 10) government can enhance its own performance and that of the vast network of individuals, organizations and enterprises with which it interacts. From electronic access to economic intelligence, best practice models, technical assistance, and routine communication with peers, vital social capital and local capacity can be dramatically enhanced. Just as community assessment helps identify local needs and opportunities, a comprehensive analysis of the state’s economy and key industries and firms in specific regions could help focus our development strategies, target programmatic action, ensure the best utilization of public funds, and more effectively address problems and needs.
Leveraging Capacity. Impact, CED notes, is achieved when sufficient resources are mobilized or leveraged to fit the scale of the problem, a perennial challenge for rural communities. CED recommends that public, private, and non-profit entities, a wider system of actors accustomed to working toward the same goals but within different spheres, be routinely engaged in the pursuit of consensus goals for rural communities (CED, 1993). By constructing systems, which focus on collaborative responses rather than direct service delivery (CED), governments are more likely to achieve success. Such systems transcend the traditional internal boundaries of programs, departments, and agencies and expand capabilities through collaboration. They maximize impact and create more efficient delivery systems. Cultivating leadership or social capital and emphasizing multi-community or regional approaches to problem-solving also serve to leverage expanded capacity to solve problems and meet needs.
The non-profit or third sector offers significant opportunity for government to broaden the base of resources dedicated to meeting shared goals. Seed and supporting grants, contractual agreements, and cooperative initiatives with third sector entities can, for example, help leverage an expanded capacity for leadership, community, and enterprise development and support. Every opportunity to successfully combine the resources of state government with those of private and non-profit organizations in the interest of realizing long-term, shared goals should be seized.
Creating a new government agency or office to perform a role already being met by private or non-profit groups may be an inefficient and wasteful use of public resources. The time required to develop institutional capabilities that are broadly beneficial may result in significant lost opportunity. If collaborative initiatives offer a cost efficient and effective alternative to meeting public need, they offer potential savings and a faster return on public investment.
In order to cultivate more collaborative opportunities, the use of state funds and the conduct of agencies will have to become more flexible and more performance oriented. Rigid parameters for spending, such as those which presently restrict coal severance development funds, must be replaced with more flexible policies that recognize the expanding role of entrepreneurialism in today’s economy. Organizations that develop, support, and nurture small businesses and micro-enterprises, for example, may yield far greater benefits to communities than investment in industrial parks.
High-Performance Government in Kentucky. Kentuckians recognize the necessity of establishing a culture of performance, a customer-first orientation, institutional intelligence, and the ability to leverage capacity in our government. The Commission on Kentucky's Government aimed to increase the efficacy and efficiency of the executive branch, while the Governor's Commission on Quality and Efficiency adopted a broader focus, looking at all aspects of state government. The conclusions of the latter were particularly adamant, "[W]e must change the way we manage our government" (1991, p. 1). To do so, the commission identified four "major fronts" for state government:
Empower employees;
Think and plan for results;
Connect government to customers; and,
Invest in our future (p. 18).
The notion of changing the way we manage our government is hardly a new one. The Kentucky Tomorrow Commission concluded that the structure of state government was so antiquated that only a new constitution could bring needed reforms. The other major change advocated by the Commission was the development of a comprehensive, long-range state plan. "Kentucky is on a journey to the 21st Century with no clear long-term vision of where it is headed" (Kentucky Tomorrow Commission, 1986, p. 25). The Commission envisioned a plan which would "establish policies which guide decisions at all levels of government" (p. 26).
Part of the process of developing a comprehensive plan that will help advance high-performance government is establishing a long-term vision for the Commonwealth of Kentucky, goals that will move us toward the realization of that vision, and benchmarks by which to measure our progress. Today, this visioning process is well underway in Kentucky. In the fall of 1994, a series of public meeting around the state gave hundreds of citizens the opportunity to offer ideas and input which resulted in a draft vision statement for Kentucky. Further citizen input into a draft vision, goals, and benchmarks was gathered at an October 1995 conference held by the Kentucky Long-Term Policy Research Center. A report on the effort, which is supported by the executive and legislative branches, will be issued this year.
Globalization, technological advances, and organizational change are upon us. These trends will require new ways of doing things in the next century. They challenge us to realize that the walls which insulated much of rural Kentucky from the outside world are crumbling; they challenge us to change some traditions which have become outdated; they challenge businesses to work with one another as never before; they challenge communities to seek their own solutions to problems, and at the same time to combine their resources in regional efforts; they challenge educational institutions to more closely align their activities with the needs and the abilities of the communities they serve; and they challenge government to empower its institutions, its employees, as well as the citizens it serves.
The task may not be as difficult as it first appears. We see in the many insightful and sincere recommendations from the Kentucky Appalachian Task Force, the Governor's Commission on Quality and Efficiency, Project 21, Inc., Ag. Project 2000, the Department for Social Services, the Education, Arts & Humanities Cabinet, the Human/Economic Appalachian Development Corporation and the Economic Development Cabinet, to name a few, that Kentuckians recognize the need for fundamental change. Moreover, they are willing to make it happen. They are up to the challenge.
Many Kentuckians are singing from the same song book. We suggest that it is now time to get everyone on the same sheet of music with a statewide, comprehensive plan for development. Much of the foundation for such an effort is already in place. Kentucky will soon have a vision statement, goals, and benchmarks to guide planning efforts. And it has a number of groups and individuals who are thinking about the world beyond our immediate borders, focusing resources and efforts at the community level, and calling for fundamental change in our government.
What Kentucky does not have is a plan which explicitly outlines for each state agency, not just the Economic Development Cabinet, its role in the development process, the goals it is expected to realize in the interest of citizens of this state, and strategies for achieving them. Such a plan would necessarily place heavy emphasis on process, on how we conduct the work of development, as well as the products or outcomes we hope to achieve. In every facet, the plan would emphasize the importance of looking to the world for opportunity, focusing energies and efforts at the local level—where development happens—and cultivating performance-oriented government that gets results.
The critical groundwork—vision, goals and benchmarks—for a comprehensive, long-term plan for Kentucky’s future has been laid. We believe it could ultimately unite state and local governments, as well as private and non-profit groups, together in purpose, bring much-needed focus to their work, and enhance outcomes. With a long-term plan in place, we can begin to meet the challenge of building a more prosperous future for the people of Kentucky, no matter where they live.
To view a list of all chapters in this book, click here. To read the chapters in sequential order, please follow the arrows below.
