For those of you who are currently in the midst of your site selection process, you’re probably up to your eyeballs in those cute little quality of life photos that most communities use to dress up their marketing material and Web sites.
Personally, they drive me nuts. One picture is usually more than enough to give an outsider a feel for what the place looks like, but most communities abide by the old Army adage, “If it’s worth doing, it’s worth overdoing.” They bombard you with dozens of photos of mostly uninteresting scenes that make an evening of Aunt Edna’s slides of her vacation to North Dakota seem like a slice of heaven.
In fact, after about the 20th picture of children and dogs playing together in the local park [or by the lake or whatever the No. 1 scenic backdrop for that community happens to be], your eyes have totally glazed over and you completely cross off the topic of quality of life as a legitimate site selection factor.
You shouldn’t.
Quality of life is a matter of perspective and how you evaluate it depends upon whose life you’re talking about. Here are four different perspectives.
In our sixth annual Quality of Life Quotient™, we look at quality of life from the typical employee’s perspective (see page 65). Everyone wants to tap into the American Dream of home ownership, good schools, low crime and enough disposable income to be able to enjoy whatever leisure time they have.
An employee who is able to afford to live a comfortable middle class lifestyle will be a happy and loyal employee, which is a good thing, unless you’re in an industry — telemarketing, for example — where a high turnover rate is part of the business.
As an employer, how much it will cost you in salary and benefits to provide that middle class lifestyle will vary from city to city. That’s what is important about quality of life from the rank-and-file employee’s perspective.
The second perspective is easy for all of us to comprehend. If you and/or any of your senior executives plan to relocate to the new facility, then quality of life becomes very personal.
In this case, quality of life is defined by whatever is important to you. If you don’t like to ski or fish, then breathtaking mountains and pristine lakes aren’t all that important.
The third perspective is if you are in an industry that competes nationally, or even internationally, for talent. This is especially true for knowledge-based companies.
In this case, quality of life is defined by that 22-year-old wunderkind [or middle-aged senior executive, or whatever] you are trying to persuade to take a job with your company in that particular location.
If you’re located in a place that is perceived by the outside world as being a dump — even if you think it’s heaven on earth — then your company is at a severe disadvantage that can usually only be overcome by paying that individual a much higher salary or benefits package than you would had you been located in a place the rest of the world thinks is “cool.”
A fourth perspective is that of your customers, both current and future. If part of your sell involves getting a potential customer to visit your plant, being in a place where other people wouldn’t mind spending a day or two is a distinct advantage.
There you have it. Four perspectives, although I’m sure there are probably more. So next time you’re tempted to discount quality of life as a site selection factor, think twice [or should I say four times], even if it means having to endure a couple of minutes of Aunt Edna’s slides.
Means the article is accessible only to our magazine subscribers.
