Regional Industry Cluster

Analysis and Innovation

Networking

Project funding support

provided by Rural Business Tax
Credits from the Kansas
Department of Commerce
through NCKCN, an affiliate of
North Central Regional Planning
Commission.
Project Partners

The North Central Region of the

Sunflower State includes the counties of
Chase, Clay, Cloud, Dickinson,
Ellsworth, Geary, Jewell, Lincoln, Lyon,
Marshall, Mitchell, Morris, Ottawa,
Pottawatomie, Republic, Riley, Saline,
Wabaunsee and Washington.

North Central Regional Planning Commission

Advanced Manufacturing Institute
Economic Development Administration
CONTENTS
PROJECT INTRODUCTION
Project Objectives
Methodology
SECTION A: OVERVIEW OF THE REGION
Region Profile
SECTION B: INDUSTRY ANALYSIS
Industry Totals for the North Central Region
Jobs and Average Wages by Industry
Key Industries
Shift Share Analysis
Clusters in the North Central Region
SECTION C: REGION AS DESCRIBED BY THE COMMUNITY
SECTION CI – Regional Environment
Definition of the Region
Regional Business Environment
Section C2 - Innovation Networks
Section C3 – Regional Norms and Attitudes
Section C4 – Social Networks
Section C5 - Demographics
Economic Development Community
Business Community
Banks
SECTION D – SOCIAL NETWORK MAPPING
Network Maps
Measure 1: Degree
Measure 2: Closeness
Measure 3: Betweenness
SECTION E – QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS
Major Challenges Faced by Rural Regions
Infrastructure Barriers Faced as a Region
Thought Leader Barriers Faced as a Region
Connection Barriers Faced as a Region
People Barriers as a Region
Unique Assets of the Region
APPENDICES
Appendix A – Questionnaires and Interview Schedule
Appendix – B
Industry at a Glance Executive Summary
Highest Growth Rates Beginning in 2007
• Advertising Agencies
as a component of According to 2007 population
the Advanced estimates, the region had a population of
• Business Support Services
Manufacturing 302,969 a decline of 0.09% from 2000.
• Business Service Centers
• Activities related to Real Institute’s (AMI)
Estate United States
• Individual and Family Economic Development Administration (US EDA) University
Services Center program, AMI collaborated with North Central Regional
Wages above Nation Planning Commission (NCRPC) to pilot a regional industry
cluster analysis. The geographic area for the project includes 19
• Third Party Administration
counties in north central Kansas. The project region includes
of Insurance and Pension
Funds the twelve core counties of the NCRPC’s district and seven
• Education Support Services additional
• Flight Training counties. The
• Support Activities for Road counties in this From 1990 to 2007 the region
Transportation region are – experienced
• Diet and Weight Reducing Chase, Clay, • Employment growth of 24.02%
Centers Cloud, Dickinson, • Average pay increased by
Highest Location Quotient Ellsworth, Geary, 11.41%
Jewell, Lincoln, • Total establishments increased
• Residential Electric Lighting
Lyon, Marshall, by 7.44%
Fixture Manufacturing
• Storage Battery Mitchell, Morris,
Manufacturing Ottawa,
• Court Reporting and Pottawatomie, Republic, Riley, Saline, Wabaunsee and
Stenotype Services Washington.
• Frozen Specialty Food
Manufacturing
• Dog and Cat Food
Manufacturing

Highest Local Share in Shift

Share Analysis

• Offices of Physicians
• Nursing Care Facilities
• Temporary Help Services
• Electronic Shopping
• Hotels (except Casino Hotels)
and Motels
In the North Central Kansas region, industry employment in the region increased by 24.02% from 1990
to 2007. Average pay (after adjusting for inflation) has grown by 11.41%, and establishments in the
same period increased by 7.44%. Management of Companies and Enterprises is the highest paying
sector in the region with average annual wages of $62,863. Other high paying sectors are Utilities
(annual average wages of $48,233) and Transportation and Warehousing (annual average wages of
$37,708). In terms of employment, Manufacturing is the largest sector with 18,459 employees. Other
large employers are the Retail Trade (16,454 employees) and Health Care & Social Assistance (12,239
employees) sectors. Retail Trade, with 1,269 establishments, is the largest sector in the North Central
Region in terms of number of establishments, followed by Construction (1,056 establishments) and
Health Care & Social Assistance (845 establishments).
Three set criteria was used to identify key industries in the region - location quotient (LQ) of at least
1.25, average wages greater than national wages and a growth rate of 5% or more for employment.
Three sectors in North Central Kansas met all the three criteria - Motor Vehicle Towing (NAICS
488410), Fertilizer (Mixing Only) Manufacturing (NAICS 325314) and Motor Vehicle Body
Manufacturing (NAICS 336211).
The highest growth rate of all businesses is in Advertising Agencies (85.02%) and Business Support
Services (81.71%). The Residential Electric Lighting Fixture
Manufacturing sector (NAICS 335121) has the highest LQ
in the North Central Region (LQ of 62.38). This sector is Highest Paying Sector – Management of
part of the Electrical Equipment and Appliance and Companies and Enterprises
Component Manufacturing cluster. The sector with the Largest Employer Sector – Manufacturing
second highest LQ in the region, Storage Battery
Sector with Maximum Establishments –
Manufacturing (NAICS 335911), is also part of the same Retail Trade
cluster.
There are four other industries with LQs in the top ten that
are part of the Agribusiness, Food Processing and Technology cluster. The industries are:
Frozen Specialty Food Manufacturing (NAICS 311412)
Dog and Cat Food Manufacturing (NAICS 311111),
Confectionery Manufacturing from Purchased Chocolate (NAICS 311330)
Grain and Field Bean Merchant Wholesalers (NAICS 424510).
Offices of Physicians have the highest local share of growth in the region. Nursing Care Facilities is
another sector with a high local share of employment growth.
The Agribusiness, Food Processing and Technology cluster
has an LQ of 3.99 in the region. The Electrical Equipment,
Appliance and Component Manufacturing cluster has an Highest Paying Sector – Management of
LQ of 4.91. Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing has an Companies and Enterprises
LQ of 1.54. Glass and Ceramics has an LQ of 1.25 and the Largest Employer Sector – Manufacturing
Machinery Manufacturing cluster has an LQ of 2.5.
Sector with Maximum Establishments –
The North Central Kansas Region has high LQs for two Retail Trade
local clusters – Local Community & Civic Organizations
and Local Financial Services. The Local Education & Training, Local Health Services and Local
Household Goods & Services clusters have growth rates of more than 5%. The only local cluster with
wages higher than the national average is the Local Industrial Products & Services cluster.

Clusters in the region

Traded Clusters Traded Clusters Local Clusters Local Clusters Local Clusters
with Location with growth with Location with growth with wages
Quotient higher rates more than Quotient higher rates more than higher than
than 1.25 5% than 1.25 5% national wages

Agribusiness, Education and Local Local Education Local Industrial

Food Processing Knowledge Community and and Training Products and
and Technology Cluster Civic Services
Local Health
Organizations
Electrical Fabricated Metal Services
Equipment, Product Local Financial
Local
Appliance and Manufacturing Services
Household
Component
Glass and Goods and
Manufacturing
Ceramics Services
Fabricated Metal
Machinery
Product
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Primary Metal
Glass and
Manufacturing
Ceramics
Regional Characterization
To understand the regional characteristics in more detail a
regional innovation assessment survey was conducted in the
region. The survey consisted of four sections. Section I
The survey was sent out to three
described the regional environment of the study area,
different groups – the economic
section II described the innovation networks present in the
development agents, businesses
region, section III described the regional norms and
and regional banks.
attitudes, section IV briefly described the role of social
networks in the region and the last section (V) outlined a
demographic profile of the respondents.
The respondents were asked what they considered to be their region in terms of products or services
being provided. The contrast in the responses of the three groups was surprising. The economic
development community considered county lines as a
boundary for their services with 50% of the respondents in
this group reporting county lines as the cut-off point of the Most Helpful Regional Assets According to
different groups are as follows
region they serve. This was in sharp contrast to only 3% of
the businesses considering county lines as border. On the Business Owners

contrary, businesses considered their region to be broader, Banks

with 24% reporting multiple states, 23% nation and another Regional Customers

23% reporting multiple counties as their region. A majority Economic Development Community
of the regional banks (59%) reported multiple counties as Business Assistance Centers
their service region. Banks
Other Business in Region
Regional Environment
Banks
The regional environment of a region plays an important Professional Service Firms
role in the economic growth of the region. This section Banks
looks at the cost of living in the region, cost of doing
business in the region, quality of life, quality of educational
institutes, availability of trained workforce, availability of capital, and the state and local government
policies. All of the respondents expressed positive views about the overall environment of the region.

Innovation Networks
The interaction of the business with each of the regional institutions affects the business’s capacity to
innovate. Generally, the respondents had a positive view about the role of various institutes, entities
and support organizations in helping the region to innovate.
Most positive factors in the regional environment
Business Owners - Region’s overall quality of life and
overall quality of higher education institutes.
Economic Development Community – Region’s
overall quality of life and quality of technical
assistance offered by regional colleges and
universities to businesses.
Banks – Overall quality of higher institutes and
quality of technical assistance offered by regional
colleges and universities to businesses.
Most negative factors in the regional environment
Business Owners – Level of taxation affecting
businesses and region’s cost of living for employees.
Economic Development Community – Availability of
required number of workers and availability of
workers in the region with the skills required.
Banks – Level of taxation affecting business, State and
local governmental regulations and permitted
procedures affecting businesses.

Regional Norms and Attitudes

Regional norms and attitudes are important determining factors for the innovation readiness and
capability of a region. Openness to diversity and cultural awareness are also important factors affecting
regional innovation. According to the majority of economic development agents and banks, new
residents can easily integrate into the regional business
community.
Presence of some kind of
Social Networks social networks reported by
The majority of the respondents reported the presence of social 85% of Businesses, 91% banks
networks in the region. Most of the social networks in the region and 100% economic
are organized networks, according to the respondents. 82% of the development community.
businesses and 82% of the economic development agents reported
the social network groups to be organized compared to 62% of the banks.
The formal social network group members meet at different places, from an office of a member to the
office of a government organization to formal conventions and conferences. Formal social network
groups have regular meetings according to majority of the respondents in each group. About 58% of
the business and bank respondents and 70% of economic development agents reported that the formal
social network groups have regular meetings in their region. Another 38% of the business respondents,
32% of the bank respondents and 25% of the economic development agents reported that the formal
social network groups meet only for special circumstances.
Several respondents reported that the formal social network
groups have helped the region to develop. 38% of the business
Formal Social network group
members meet at these
respondents, 50% of the economic development agents and
locations 45% of the banking respondents reported that the formal social
network groups have helped the region somewhat to develop.
• Office of government
organizations Social Network Mapping
• Formal conventions and
One of the objectives of the project was to map the social
conferences
• Chamber offices networks that exist in the North Central region within the
• Technical college campus economic development community. The objective of this
• Social Clubs project element is to understand who is connected to whom
• Coffee shops and and how. A social network map provides an image of the
restaurants
connections at a point in time, but since these networks are dynamic, they change over time. These
maps can be used to strengthen the network by providing possible connections within the community.
Everyone cannot be directly connected to everybody else. However, by using this map they can find a
way to reach someone by going through their existing, available connections.
Most Positive in region
Business Owners - People from Economic Development Banks - Leaders in the region are
different industry and economic Community - The region responsive to the needs of all the
sectors frequently interact in the celebrates the growth of regional residents, irrespective of
region companies, not just the absolute ethnicity, cultural heritage, gender,
size of companies and lifestyle

Figure 1 Partial Agent Social Network

Major Challenges Faced by Rural

Regions
- Out-Migration and Aging
- Lower Education Attainment
- Lower Labor Productivity
- Low Levels of Public Service
- Entrepreneurship Defined in
Local Context
This map gives an overview of the locations that are part of
the social network map for North Central Region of Kansas.
The map shows interaction between nodes on quarterly,
monthly, weekly and daily bases. This map shows where the
hubs and spokes of information lie within the region.
Learning

- Shortsightedness This last part of the report briefly describes the major
learning’s from the quantitative part of the project. A total of
- Recruitment, Retention or
nineteen interviews were conducted for this project. The
Outsourcing
sections highlight the main findings from the discussions
- Infrastructure Barrier-Housing
with the interviewees.
Thought Leaders Barriers Faced
According to the Organization for Economic Co-operation
by a Region
and Development (OECD), among the OECD member
-Co-operation Awareness but No
counties, rural regions face a number of common challenges
Initiative
that contribute to weaker economic performance. These
- Difference in the way economic include: 1) out-migration and aging, 2) lower educational
development agents, businesses
attainment, 3) lower average labor productivity, and 4)
and banks approach economic
overall low levels of public service (OECD, 2006). Rural
development in region.
Kansas shares these concerns with nearly any other rural
region. There are no direct incentives to create partnerships with businesses in neighboring counties.
Shortsightedness from agents and local leaders when making policies for the region is another major
issue, as it greatly affects the ability of the business to predictably expand, grow or even start in a
region. Business recruitment strategies fail to generate the expected success, as a company that is
attracted with economic incentives will tend to move out the moment they find a better, cheaper place
and second, attracting a large employer in a small community increases its dependence on one single
employer.
Appropriate housing is a big issue faced by the communities. Some of the communities have seen
recruitment opportunities fail because they could not find housing for business employees.
The various economic development organizations in the region do understand the importance of co-
operating with each other but also express a reluctance to lead the collaborative activities. A strong
sense of regionalism is not evident and few ties exist between a county and its communities. An
economic development agents’ task is to create a positive
community for businesses that could help them grow and
Connectedness Barriers
thrive. But more often than not, the decisions and policies of the
agents are limited by their view of the community, which People Barriers
essentially has a cut off point at the county line. -Lack of succession planning
Connectedness is highly fragmented in rural regions due to Assets of the Region
factors of geography, economics, political boundaries, culture -Banks are important players
and history. People and agents may know each other but they
-Learning new ways to promote
rarely collaborate with each other or work together in the
region
region. Lack of trust, lack of understanding of the benefit and
value of networks, cultural norms, and ways of doing things -Realizing need of networking
are some of the reasons for this disconnect. -Realizing complexity of
problem
One common problem faced by all the counties in the North
Central region is the increase in out-migration, resulting in a -Youth interested in moving
back to the region
dearth of young people in the region. This makes succession
planning for retiring
businesses in the region
Other Learning’s difficult.
-A region as defined is not a Banks are very important players in rural communities. They
region are the first starting point for a new business who wants to
-Regions can no longer compete locate in the region.
being cheap
Some communities are learning new ways to bring people into
-Clusters need to be redefined the region and to attract new people to the region.
-Social networking can reveal
Any region should value the importance of networking and
deeper connections in region
collaborating with one another and understanding the
-Rural development qualifies as connections and resources that can be accessed through
a wicked problem
networking. In using these resources, regions can bring in new opportunities.
The challenge in defining the problem is nearly as big as the problem itself. Regions realize the
complexity of the problem and realizing this is important in defining the issue and working on finding
a solution for the issue.
Many former residents who left the region to go to school or work are now willing to return to their
community because they either want to raise their families in a familiar environment or they have older
parents in need of care. This can be a big opportunity for the region if it is capitalized on in a timely
manner and addressed in the right way.
Most of the time a region is defined by geographical or political boundary lines that mark it. The
combination of a city, county, and state creates an administrative region but not an economic region.
Economic regions are defined by the way transactions and money flow takes place within a region. A
region is not a standalone entity that can survive on its own.
The regions can no longer compete based on cost of living and attracting new companies into the
region by offering them tax incentives, tax breaks, existing property and other facilities.
There may be other ways to cluster rural businesses instead of categorizing by the output going out the
door (traditional NAICS code approach) or through the skill sets of those employed (Occupational
Clusters). Other characteristics such as the business life stage, local vs. traded commerce, behaviors,
etc., are more meaningful in rural regions where the shared experiences and issues are the critical mass
rather than the specific economic activity in the region.
The social maps of a region can identify the relationships within the region including those between
organizations. Social maps can also pinpoint the holes that exist. Smaller communities are typically
marked by closely tied social networks because issues of trust and information usage arise when small
communities are asked for direct names of social contacts.
The issues raised in the following study attest that rural development issues can be complex,
incomplete, contradictory, and have changing requirements. Solutions to these issues are often difficult
to recognize because of complex social and technical interdependencies. Policy development, with
respect to distressed communities and/or rural communities, clearly qualifies as a “wicked problem”.
Many of the underpinnings that most rural communities were founded on have fundamentally
changed. These foundations will not be retrievable no matter how hard a community works to bring
back a simpler, more prosaic time
Project Introduction
Many Kansas businesses have not fully realized the flatness of the global economy and are ill prepared
to contend with global competitors. Professor Hargadon [1] states that successful innovators are not
necessarily any smarter, more courageous, tenacious or rebellious than the rest of us…they are simply
better connected. Unfortunately, many Kansas manufacturers, particularly those in rural communities,
are isolated from networks of collaborators and consultants and often unable to attract innovation talent
to their community that could help them compete for business in a global marketplace.
A 2004 study entitled, “Strategies for Sustainable Entrepreneurship [2],” cited investment in innovation
as one of its key policy recommendations. This study suggests most organizations and individuals are
deeply embedded in their own small worlds where the people, ideas, and objects with which they
interact are tightly connected. While these small worlds provide structure and stability, they also have
great gravitational pull in terms of tradition, market pressure and “not invented here” perspectives that
prevent inhabitants from gaining sufficient altitude to see new horizons. This limited world-view is an
innovation barrier.
The Progressive Policy Institute’s Report, 2002 State New Economy Index, found that Kansas’
innovation capacity was ranked in the bottom quartile of all states [3]. Some of this dismal national
innovation ranking is due to lack of in-house technical expertise. Though Kansas ranks third in the
nation in BS degrees granted/1,000 individuals, it only ranks 31st in the number of high-technology
establishments in the state [Kansas Inc.]. Consequently, many young Kansas engineers and scientists must
leave the state to seek employment.

Innovation Fuels the Global Economy

Business leaders clearly recognize that innovation is the fuel of the new global economy. According to a
2004 survey of almost 200 CEOs of international companies, almost 50% of their current sales are
accounted for by products that are less than three years old [4]. A similar 2005 survey [5] reported that of
the 940 international executives surveyed, 90% stated that generating organic growth through innovation
has become essential for success in their industry.
Even without the influence of global pressures, Cooper [6] cites mounting evidence that an inordinate
number of companies have 1) inadequate innovation/new venture/product planning abilities that
prevents sound investments in early-stage technology opportunities, and 2) a greater than expected
number of product failures that reduces future market opportunities, stunts corporate growth or worse,
results in premature corporate death.
Kansas communities must create businesses that can compete in the world based on innovative ideas and
technologies, rather than low-wage service labor if they want their citizens to have stable, competitive,
high-wage jobs. Mark Drabenstott [7], Director of the Federal Reserve’s Center for the Study of Rural
America, makes this point by stating that a new rural economy should be built in which entrepreneurship
is encouraged and higher education is engaged. Furthermore, the U.S. Department of Commerce report,
Strengthening America’s Communities [8], finds that higher education assets are key to developing the
innovative capacity of regions. Unfortunately, few Kansas academic institutions or ED agencies have
the expertise or resources needed to transform discoveries and inventions into market-ready products.

Lack of Available and Networked Resources to Support Technology Entrepreneurs

Rural innovation may require as much effort to develop innovative ways of overcoming the obstacles
created by geography and distance in accessing resources and markets as it takes to drive the
technology-based innovations themselves. Without access to all the components of technology
incubation and commercialization (technology, workforce, capital, infrastructure, and expertise), rural
entrepreneurs and businesses are severely disadvantaged compared to their urban counterparts. In
reality, most rural communities are missing some of these essential components and find it difficult to
build and sustain technology-based businesses that can compete in an innovation driven economy. Rural
communities need access to networked innovation resources to level the playing field for budding
technology entrepreneurs. It is this phenomenon that drives the proposed plan.
In the 2004 EDA-supported study entitled, “Competitiveness in U.S. Rural Regions: Learning and
Research Agenda” [9], Michael Porter confirms the importance of regional clusters and explores the idea
that communities can combine resources to produce the “clusters of innovation” that small businesses
need to thrive where size and remoteness impede access to markets. Such networks can move rural
communities beyond a “one water tower ED strategy.”
The majority of “clustering” or networking discussions to date have been limited to what is readily
available in a given region or to redrawing the circle a little wider in an effort to build local
infrastructure critical mass. Less effort has been focused on the viability of bringing the missing
components of innovation, including expertise and even the core technology, into the region from
outside and incubating the venture with community support. AMI collaborated with NCRPC to pilot a
regional Industry Cluster Analysis with regional economic data analysis and perform a regional
innovation assessment study.
References
Hargadon, Andrew, How Breakthroughs Happen, Harvard Business School Press, 2003
Strategies for Sustainable Entrepreneurship, a study prepared for the Central Appalachian
Network and sponsored by the W.K Kellogg Foundation 2004.
2002 State New Economy Index, Progressive Policy Institute Report
Harnessing Innovation: R&D in a Global Growth Economy, an Economic Intelligence Unit
white paper sponsored by Agilent Technologies, May 2004
Innovation 2005, The Boston Consulting Group, www.bcg.com
Cooper, Robert G., Winning at New Products, Accelerating the Process from Idea to Launch,
2001, Third Edition, Perseus Publishing, Cambridge, MA.
Drabenstott, Mark, “New Troubles at Rural Factories: New Implications for Rural
Development”, The Main Street Economist, March 2003, Center for the Study of Rural America,
Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City.
Strengthening America’s Communities, a report of the Strengthening America’s Communities
Advisory Committee, 2005
 Porter, Michael “Competitiveness in U.S. Rural Regions: Learning and Research Agenda”,
Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness, Harvard Business School, February 2004

Project Objectives
Identify and build on regional assets (asset-based entrepreneurship)
Identify unmet needs and gaps; develop strategies that will address those needs
Network businesses into clusters to provide highly targeted infrastructure
Identify actionable steps for network brokers and regional catalysts
Generate local and regional support for a regional economic development approach
Establish a culture of innovation within North Central Kansas
Weave a regional innovation (entrepreneurship) network that leverages:
Local successful business owners
Identified industry clusters
Potential entrepreneurs with new ventures
Local economic development leaders
Government representatives
Local innovators
Local workforce development leaders
Service providers (inside and outside the region)
Financing community (debt and equity)
Research institutions/universities/technical colleges
Draw innovation and expertise into the region, increase information flow, expand access to
resources, encourage collaboration, and stimulate investment
Create a greater sense of “place” in North Central Kansas through competitive advantage

Methodology
This section provides a brief description of the methodology followed to complete this project.
Geographic area covered
The geographic area for this project included the following nineteen counties in the region of North
Central Kansas. The area includes twelve core counties that are a part of the North Central Regional
Planning Commission and seven additional counties.
Core Counties Additional Counties
Clay Chase
Cloud Geary
Dickinson Lyon
Ellsworth Morris
Jewell Pottawatomie
Lincoln Riley
Marshall Wabaunsee
Mitchell
Ottawa
Republic
Saline
Washington

Data used
The data used for industry analysis is the QCEW data (previously ES202) obtained from the US
Department of Labor Statistics. In many of the counties, the US BLS was unable to provide complete
data due to privacy regulations. To offset the non-disclosure of data at the highest level, ES202 dataset
from IMPLAN MIG group was used for 2003 and 2006. The IMPLAN MIG group data contain the
number of establishments, employment and wages for the NAICS codes.
To support the regional innovation assessment, a questionnaire was used to collect information from
community and business leaders in the region. Based on a methodology described by the US Council
on Competitiveness, the questionnaire contained four sections – regional business environment,
innovation networks, regional norms and attitudes, and social networks. The final part of the
questionnaire contained questions to collect demographic information from the respondents.
Social network mapping was conducted using the combination of a template that listed key members
of the network and requests for more names of other potentially important people. This questionnaire
provided information about the communication patterns among economic development professionals
in the region. In addition, in-depth interviews were also conducted with the economic development
agents in the region. An open schedule was used to facilitate the interview process.
Data collection tools can be found in the Appendix.
Section A: Overview of the region
Region Profile
The North Central Kansas region includes 19 of the 105 counties in the state. The counties in this region
are: Chase, Clay, Cloud, Dickinson, Ellsworth, Geary, Jewell, Lincoln, Lyon, Marshall, Mitchell, Morris,
Ottawa, Pottawatomie, Republic, Riley, Saline, Wabaunsee and Washington. In 2007 the population of
this region was 302,969. According to 2000 estimates, the 14,169 square miles in the region have a
population density of 21.4 people per square mile. The average household size was 2.4 persons in 2000
(US Census Bureau).

Population Estimates
The North Central Region has a population of 302,969 as of July 1, 2007 (US Census Bureau). The
population decreased by 0.09% from the year 2000 to 2007. Per the 2000 census survey, population of
the region was 303,256. In 2000, 20% of the North Central Regions’ population was under the age of 15
years, 31.5% in the age group 15 to 34 years, 30.5% in the age group 35 to 59 years, and about 18% of the
population above 60 years of age.

Table 1: Population Estimates for North Central Region

Population
Year Ending North Central Kansas Kansas
Estimates
July 1,2007 302,969 2,775,997
July 1,2006 302,167 2,755,817
July 1,2005 300,874 2,741,665
July 1,2004 300,207 2,730,828
July 1,2003 301,214 2,721,824
July 1,2002 300,387 2,712,383
July 1,2001 101,721 2,700,979
July 1,2000 303,224 2,692,890
Census 2000 April 1,2000 303,256 2,688,418
2000 to 2007 % change -0.09% 3.26%
1990 to 2000 % change -0.7% 8.5%
Source US Census Bureau
Figure 2: Population Change

Population Change in the Last Century

Kansas 19 County Region

1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

Source US Census Bureau

Table 2: Sex and Age of Population

Count Percentage
Sex and Age
152,274 50.21%
Male
150,982 49.79%
Female
19,306 6.37%
Under 5 years
19,827 6.54%
5 to 9 years
21,505 7.09%
10 to 14 years
26,778 8.83%
15 to 19 years
31,559 10.41%
20 to 24 years
37,186 12.26%
25 to 34 years
43,022 14.19%
35 to 44 years
36,426 12.01%
45 to 54 years
13,079 4.31%
55 to 59 years
11,069 3.65%
60 to 64 years
20,807 6.86%
65 to 74 years
15,612 5.15%
75 to 84 years
7,080 2.33%
85 years and over
Source: 2000 US Census
Household Income
Median household income for various counties in the North Central Region is as given in the table
below. The state median household income for 2005 is $42,861 and it has declined by 9.9% since 2000.

Table 3, Median Household Income in North Central Region

2005 Median
Median Income Median Income Median Income
County Income as Percent of
(1999) (1999) Adjusted* (2005)
Kansas
Kansas $40,624 $47,622 $42,861 100%
Chase $32,656 $38,282 $34,634 80.81%
Clay $33,965 $39,816 $37,732 88.03%
Cloud $31,758 $37,229 $33,874 79.03%
Dickinson $35,975 $42,172 $41,061 95.80%
Ellsworth $35,772 $41,934 $38,996 90.98%
Geary $31,917 $37,415 $37,758 (G) 88.09%
Jewell $30,538 $35,799 $32,500 75.83%
Lincoln $30,893 $36,215 $32,322 75.41%
Lyon $32,819 $38,473 $36,455 85.05%
Marshall $32,098 $37,627 $38,111 (G) 88.92%
Mitchell $33,385 $39,136 $36,738 85.71%
Morris $32,163 $37,704 $36,618 85.43%
Ottawa $38,009 $44,557 $41,571 96.99%
Pottawatomie $40,176 $47,097 $46,271 (H) 107.96%
Republic $30,494 $35,747 $31,364 73.18%
Riley $32,042 $37,562 $35,071 81.82%
Saline $37,308 $43,735 $40,268 93.95%
Wabaunsee $41,710 (H) $48,895 (H) $47,231 (H) 110.20%
Washington $29,363 $34,421 $31,770 74.12%
Source: US Census Bureau (Downloaded from www.stats.indiana.edu)
*Adjusted for inflation, G- Median income increased from 1999 to 2005, H – Median income higher than
state median income
Wabaunsee County stands out as the only county with median income higher than the state average in
both 1999 and 2005. In 2005, median income of Wabaunsee County was about 110% of the state median
income. In 2005, Pottawatomie County’s median income was also higher than the state median income.
Figure 3: Median Income

Median Income for Various Counties in North Central Region

$60,000

$48,895
$47,622

$47,231
$47,097
$46,271
$44,557

$43,735
$50,000
$42,861

$42,172

$41,934

$41,571
$41,061

$40,268
$39,816

$39,136
$38,996

$38,473
$38,282

$38,111
$37,758
$37,732

$37,704
$37,627

$37,562
$37,415
$37,229

$36,738

$36,618
$36,455
$36,215
$35,799

$35,747

$35,071
$34,634

$34,421
$33,874
$40,000

$32,500

$32,322

$31,770
$31,364
$30,000

$20,000

$10,000

$0

Median Income (1999) Adjusted* Median Income (2005)

Source: US Census Bureau (Downloaded from www.stats.indiana.edu)

Geary and Marshall are the two counties where the median income has increased from 1999(adjusted)
to 2005. The median income for Geary County increased from $37,415 to $37,758 in 2005. Similarly, for
Marshall County, median household income increased from $37,627 to $38,111.

Table 4 Poverty Estimates for the North Central Region (2005)

County Poverty Rate Compared to Kansas

Kansas 11.7 -
Chase 11 -0.7
Clay 10.8 -0.9
Cloud 12.6 0.9
Dickinson 8.8 -2.9
Ellsworth 9.4 -2.3
Geary 13.4 1.7
Jewell 13.2 1.5
Lincoln 11.9 0.2
Lyon 16.6 4.9
Marshall 10.4 -1.3
Mitchell 11 -0.7
Morris 10.8 -0.9
Ottawa 8.4 -3.3
Pottawatomie 9.6 -2.1
Republic 10.4 -1.3
 Riley 20.2 8.5
Saline 11.5 -0.2
Wabaunsee 8 -3.7
Washington 11.3 -0.4
*Adjusted for inflation Poverty Rates Source: US Census Bureau (Downloaded from www.stats.indiana.edu)

The current poverty rate for various counties in the North Central Region is as shown in the table
above. The poverty rate for Kansas is 11.7%. In the region only six counties have poverty rates greater
than the state rate. The other thirteen counties have poverty rates below the statewide poverty rate.
Wabaunsee County has the lowest poverty rate of 8% followed by Ottawa County with poverty rate of
8.4%. Riley County has the maximum poverty rate of 20.2 % in the region.

Labor Force
The North Central Region’s current unemployment rate is 3.5% which is less than the state rate of 4.1%.
The total labor force for the region increased by 5.7% in the last five years and by 5.9% in the last ten
years; the employed labor force increased by 6.4% in the last five years, and the unemployed labor
force declined by 11.1% in the region.

Table 5 Labor Force Annual Averages for North Central Region

Labor Force Annual Averages in 2007 North Central Region Kansas

Total Labor Force 163,532 1,478,781

5-year % change 5.7% 3.8%
10-year % change 5.9% 6.9%
Employed 157,839 1,418,666
5-year % change 6.4% 5.0%
10-year % change 5.8% 6.7%
Unemployed 5,693 60,115
5-year % change -11.1% -17.8%
10-year % change -9.1% 12.0%
Unemployment Rate 3.5 4.1
5-year % change -14.6% -19.6%
10-year % change -12.5% 5.1%
Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics (Downloaded from www.stats.indiana.edu)
Figure 4: Labor Force

Employed & Unemployed Percent of Total Labor Force in the

Region (2007)
Unemployed
3%

Employed
97%

Educational Attainment
About 87% of the population above the age of 25 has obtained at least a high school degree. 25.68% of
the population above the age of 25 has had some college education, and 27.42% are college graduates.

Table 6 Educational Attainment – North Central Region

North Central Percent of Percent of
Educational Attainment: Census 2000 Kansas
Region Population 25+ Population 25+
Total Population 25 and Older 183,968 100.0% 1,701,207 100.0%
Less Than 9th Grade 8,937 4.86% 88,124 5.2%
9th to 12th, No Diploma 14,533 7.90% 149,675 8.8%
High School Graduate (incl. equiv.) 62,813 34.14% 507,612 29.8%
Some College, No Degree 47,243 25.68% 417,722 24.6%
Associate Degree 9,963 5.42% 99,096 5.8%
Bachelor's Degree 25,552 13.89% 290,271 17.1%
Graduate or Professional Degree 14,927 8.11% 148,707 8.7%
Source: US Census Bureau
Figure 5: Educational attainment for the 19 County Region

100%     Graduate or Professional Degree

8.11% 8.70%
90%
13.89% 17.10%     Bachelor's Degree
80%
5.42%
70% 5.80%
    Associate Degree
60% 25.68%
24.60%
50%     Some College, No Degree
40%
30%     High School Graduate (incl.
34.14% 29.80%
equiv.)
20%
    9th to 12th, No Diploma
10% 7.90% 8.80%
0% 4.86% 5.20%
    Less Than 9th Grade
North Central Region Kansas

Workers Commuting to Work to other counties

The table below shows the number of workers commuting to work from each county. In all the
counties, the majority of workers are employed in the county itself, except for Wabaunsee County
where 36.79% of workers commute to Shawnee County for work compared to 35.57% who work in the
county itself.
Table 7: Workers Commuting from North Central Region for Work*
Percent of Total Commuting Workers
Residence County Work County Count
of Residence County
Chase Co. KS Lyon Co. KS 468 30.81%
Clay Co. KS Geary Co. KS 249 5.80%
Clay Co. KS Riley Co. KS 398 9.27%
Dickinson Co. KS Saline Co. KS 1,214 12.59%
Dickinson Co. KS Geary Co. KS 691 7.17%
Dickinson Co. KS Riley Co. KS 573 5.94%
Ellsworth Co. KS Saline Co. KS 254 8.63%
Geary Co. KS Riley Co. KS 4,238 31.59%
Jewell Co. KS Mitchell Co. KS 187 10.48%
Jewell Co. KS Nuckolls Co. NE 93 5.21%
Lincoln Co. KS Ellsworth Co. KS 98 5.41%
Lincoln Co. KS Saline Co. KS 176 9.71%
Morris Co. KS Geary Co. KS 173 5.84%
Morris Co. KS Riley Co. KS 230 7.76%
Ottawa Co. KS Saline Co. KS 1,290 42.18%
Pottawatomie Co. KS Riley Co. KS 2,694 29.88%
Pottawatomie Co. KS Shawnee Co. KS 751 8.33%
Republic Co. KS Cloud Co. KS 203 7.34%
Riley Co. KS Geary Co. KS 2,013 5.82%
Riley Co. KS Pottawatomie Co. KS 1,821 5.26%
Wabaunsee Co. KS Shawnee Co. KS 1,267 36.79%
Wabaunsee Co. KS Pottawatomie Co. KS 342 9.93%
Wabaunsee Co. KS Riley Co. KS 328 9.52%
Washington Co. KS Marshall Co. KS 286 9.05%
Source: US Census Bureau (Includes only workers over 16 years old)
*Shown are the counties where more than 5% of population commutes to a particular location for work.
Figure 6: Worker Commute from the North Central Region
The accompanying table shows the number of workers commuting for work to each county. The
maximum flow of workers in the North Central Region is from Geary County to Riley County. Around
4,238 workers commute from Geary to Riley County in the North Central Region for work.

Table 8 Workers Commuting to North Central Region for Work*

Residence County Work County Count

Chase Co. KS Lyon Co. KS 468

Clay Co. KS Riley Co. KS 398
Clay Co. KS Geary Co. KS 249
Coffey Co. KS Lyon Co. KS 420
Dickinson Co. KS Saline Co. KS 1,214
Dickinson Co. KS Geary Co. KS 691
Dickinson Co. KS Riley Co. KS 573
Ellsworth Co. KS Saline Co. KS 254
Geary Co. KS Riley Co. KS 4,238
Greenwood Co. KS Lyon Co. KS 318
Jewell Co. KS Mitchell Co. KS 187
Lincoln Co. KS Saline Co. KS 176
Lincoln Co. KS Ellsworth Co. KS 98
McPherson Co. KS Saline Co. KS 688
Morris Co. KS Riley Co. KS 230
Morris Co. KS Geary Co. KS 173
Ottawa Co. KS Saline Co. KS 1,290
Pottawatomie Co. KS Riley Co. KS 2,694
Republic Co. KS Cloud Co. KS 203
Riley Co. KS Geary Co. KS 2,013
Riley Co. KS Pottawatomie Co. KS 1,821
Wabaunsee Co. KS Pottawatomie Co. KS 342
Wabaunsee Co. KS Riley Co. KS 328
Washington Co. KS Marshall Co. KS 286
Source: US Census Bureau (Includes only workers over 16 years old)
*Shown are the counties where more than 5% of population commutes to a particular location for work.
Figure 7: Workers Commuting to the North Central Region for Work
Section B: Industry Analysis
Industry Totals for the North Central Region
Industry employment grew at a rate of 24.02% from 1990 to 2007 in North Central Kansas. Average pay
(after adjusting for inflation) has grown at a rate of 11.41%, and establishments in the same period
increased at rate of 7.44%. This is a good indicator of growing industry in the region.

Table 9: Annual Covered Employment & Wages over Time (NAICS) – North Central Region
Average Pay in Terms of
Year Establishments Employment Average Annual Pay
20071 Dollars (adj*)
1990 8,414 108,970 $16,419 $26,047
1991 8,549 109,627 $16,981 $25,851
1992 8,531 113,268 $17,555 $25,944
1993 8,415 115,002 $17,943 $25,746
1994 8,411 117,989 $18,542 $25,942
1995 8,475 120,649 $18,995 $25,843
1996 8,549 123,304 $19,797 $26,162
1997 8,676 126,100 $20,316 $26,245
1998 8,845 128,112 $21,088 $26,825
1999 8,774 128,809 $21,839 $27,180
2000 8,723 130,826 $23,125 $27,844
2001 8,687 129,990 $23,787 $27,849
2002 8,740 128,927 $24,423 $28,148
2003 8,665 128,482 $24,994 $28,165
2004 8,627 130,431 $25,815 $28,335
2005 8,672 130,576 $26,636 $28,278
2006 8,774 132,912 $27,800 $28,592
2007 9,040 135,144 $29,020 $29,020
Change from 1990 626 26,174 12,601 2,973
to 2007

Percent change from 7.44% 24.02% 76.75% 11.41%

1990 to 2007
Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) *adj = Adjusted for Inflation.

1
Average wages in 2007 dollars term calculated using CPI inflation calculator available at Bureau of Labor Statistics website
http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl. The CPI inflation calculator uses the average Consumer Price Index for a given calendar year. This
data represents changes in prices of all goods and services purchased for consumption by urban households. This index value has been
calculated every year since 1913. For the current year, the latest monthly index value is used (www.bls.gov).
 Employment

135,144
132,912
130,826

130,576
130,431
129,990

128,927
128,809

128,482
128,112
160,000

126,100
123,304
120,649
117,989
115,002
113,268
109,627
108,970
140,000
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
Establishments

9,040
9,200

8,845
9,000

8,774

8,774
8,740
8,723

8,687
8,676

8,672
8,665

8,627
8,800
8,549

8,549
8,531

8,475
8,415
8,414

8,411

8,600
8,400
8,200
8,000

Average Annual Pay (in terms of 2007 $)

$29,020
$28,592
$30,000

$28,335

$28,278
$28,165
$28,148
$27,849
$27,844

$29,000
$27,180
$26,825

$28,000
$26,245
$26,162
$26,047

$25,944

$25,942
$25,851

$25,843
$25,746

$27,000
$26,000
$25,000
$24,000
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Figure 8: Changes in Establishments, Employment and Average Annual Wages in the Region

Jobs and Average Wages by Industry

Management of Companies and Enterprises is the highest paying sector in the region with average
annual wages of $62,863. Other high paying sectors are Utilities (annual average wages of $48,233) and
Transportation and Warehousing (annual average wages of $37,708).
Table 10 Industry Based Distribution of Establishments, Jobs, and Average Wages (2007) – North Central
Region
2002
NAICS Sector Establishments Jobs Annual Average Wage
Code
Total Covered Employment and Wages 9,040 135,144 $29,020
Private 8,065 101,507 $27,453
11 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting 154 350 $27,043
21 Mining 32 49 $36,650
22 Utilities 59 84 $48,233
23 Construction 1,056 6,601 $33,806
31-33 Manufacturing 336 18,459 $35,742
42 Wholesale Trade 458 3,501 $33,804
44-45 Retail Trade 1,269 16,454 $19,298
48-49 Transportation and Warehousing 446 2,736 $37,708
51 Information 199 2,807 $34,211
52 Finance and Insurance 573 3,656 $35,465
53 Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 314 1,153 $21,500
54 Professional, Scientific, and Technical 631 2,544 $35,973
Services
55 Management of Companies and Enterprises 35 264 $62,863
56 Administrative and Support and Waste 394 5,743 $24,240
Management and Remediation Services
61 Educational Services 150 4,488 $25,402
62 Health Care and Social Assistance 845 12,239 $30,240
71 Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 135 1,047 $12,531
72 Accommodation and Food Services 653 10,267 $10,306
81 Other Services (except Public 817 4,275 $22,873
Administration)
91 Public Administration 510 10,170 $33,755
Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) N – Non-disclosed, NA- Not Applicable

In terms of employment, Manufacturing is the largest sector with 18,459 employees. Other large
employers are the Retail Trade (16,454 employees) and Health Care & Social Assistance sectors (12,239
employees). Retail Trade is also the largest sector in the North Central Region in terms of number of
establishments with 1,269 establishments, followed by Construction (1,056 establishments) and Health
Care & Social Assistance (845 establishments).
Figure 9: Establishments and Jobs in Various Industry Sectors in the Region

Establishments Jobs

Agriculture Mining
Utilities Construction
Manufacturing Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade Transportation & Warehousing
Information Finance & Insurance
Real Estate Professional, Scientific,& Technical Services
Management of Companies Waste Management &Remediation Services
Educational Services Health Care & Social Assistance
Arts, Entertainment, & Recreation Accommodation & Food Services

Figure 10: Average Wage in Various Industries in the Region

Annual Average Wage Agriculture

$62,863

Mining
$70,000 Utilities
Construction

$60,000 Manufacturing
$48,233

Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
$50,000 Transportation & Warehousing
$37,708
$36,650

$35,973
$35,742

$35,465
$34,211

Information
$33,806

$33,804

$33,755

$40,000
$30,240

Finance & Insurance

$27,043

Real Estate
$25,402
$24,240

$22,873

Professional, Scientific,& Technical Services

$21,500

$30,000
$19,298

Management of Companies
Waste Management &Remediation Services
$12,531

$20,000
$10,306

Educational Services
Health Care & Social Assistance
Arts, Entertainment, & Recreation
$10,000
Accommodation & Food Services
Other Services (except Public Administration)

$0 Public Administration

Key Industries
The North Central Region is home to some well performing industries. These industries may be a part
of existing or emerging clusters. For identifying key industries and clusters, three criteria were used:
 Location Quotient – Location quotients (LQ) for industries at 6-digit NAICS level calculated
with the US industry employment as a base. The cutoff for LQ was set at 1.25 (Cortright 2003).
Average Wages – Average wages at 6-digit NAICS codes compared to US average wages. Any
industry with average wages 10% above the US average is considered to be a good performing
industry.
Growth Rate – Growth rates for employment were calculated over a three year period from
2003 to 2006 2; growth rates above 5% are considered to be an indicator of good industry
performance.
Any industry that satisfies one of these three conditions is either a good performing industry or an
industry with good potential for growth. There may or may not be a cluster existing in a region for
every good performing industry, but if there are good performing industries, a cluster may emerge in
the near future.
Three industries in North Central Kansas satisfy all three of the above stated criteria – Motor Vehicle
Towing (NAICS 488410), Fertilizer (Mixing Only) Manufacturing (NAICS 325314) and Motor Vehicle
Body Manufacturing (NAICS 336211).

Table 11: 6-Digit NAICS Codes with High Wages, Location Quotients and Growth Rates
Higher
Average Wages Location
NAICS NAICS Definition Establishments Employment Growth Rate
Wages Than Quotient
Nation
488410 Motor Vehicle Towing 10 85 $33,050 112.79% 15.62% 1.98
325314 Fertilizer (Mixing Only) 1 30 $53,990 130.18% 210.72% 4.22
Manufacturing
336211 Motor Vehicle Body 2 377 $54,317 124.98% 18.60% 6.34
Source: ES202 2006 data, IMPLAN MIG Group

Growth Rate
The industries with high growth rates are both local and traded 3 industries in the North Central
Region. The highest growth rate is for the Advertising Agencies (85.02%) and Business Support
Services (81.71%).

2
There were two reasons for selecting a 2003 base year. 1) The numbers were more likely to be free from 9/11 impacts as compared to
2001 or 2002 numbers. 2) NAICS definitions changed in 2002, so it was very difficult to bridge between 2002 & 1997 codes for some
industries.
3
Traded industries are defined as the ones exporting their goods and/or services outside their region. Local industries are the ones with all
local (within the region) dealings (Porter 2003).
Table 12: Top 10 Industries (6-digit NAICS) with Highest Growth Rates
Employm Average Growth
NAICS NAICS Definition Establishments Cluster
ent Wages Rate
541810 Advertising Agencies 5 19 $31,919 85.02% Business and Financial
Services
561499 All Other Business Support 1 36 $10,105 81.71% Local Commercial
Services Services
561439 Other Business Service 7 46 $12,514 79.15% Local Commercial
Centers (including Copy Services
Shops)
531390 Other Activities Related to 3.6 11 $18,745 76.52% Business and Financial
Real Estate Services
624190 Other Individual and 17 516 $19,543 75.78% Local Health Services
Family Services
451212 News Dealers and 2 38 $17,569 75.75% Local Entertainment &
Newsstands Media
424590 Other Farm Product Raw 1 42 $13,585 73.80% Agribusiness, Food
Material Merchant Processing &
Wholesalers Technology
561210 Facilities Support Services 6 298 $33,716 72.56% Local Commercial
Services
333511 Industrial Mold 2 15 $27,941 71.00% Machinery
Manufacturing manufacturing
561740 Carpet and Upholstery 7 29 $17,827 69.08% Local Personal
Cleaning Services Services (Non-
Medical)
Source: ES202 2006 data, IMPLAN MIG Group
NA – No cluster assigned to NAICS

Location Quotient
The Residential Electric Lighting Fixture Manufacturing sector (NAICS 335121) has the highest LQ in
the North Central Region of 62.38. This sector is part of the Electrical Equipment, Appliance and
Component Manufacturing cluster. The sector with the second highest LQ in the region, Storage
Battery Manufacturing (NAICS 335911), is also part of the same cluster. There are four other industries
with LQs in the top ten that are part of the Agribusiness, Food Processing and Technology cluster. The
sectors are: Frozen Specialty Food Manufacturing (NAICS 311412), Dog and Cat Food Manufacturing
(NAICS 311111), Confectionery Manufacturing from Purchased Chocolate (NAICS 311330), and Grain
and Field Bean Merchant Wholesalers (NAICS 424510). This is a good indicator of higher LQs for the
Electrical Equipment, Appliance and Component Manufacturing cluster and the Agribusiness, Food
Processing and Technology cluster in the North Central Region.
Table 13: Top 10 Industries (6-digit NAICS) with Highest Location Quotients
Average Location
NAICS NAICS Definition Establishments Employment Cluster
Wages Quotient
335121 Residential Electric 1 706 $53,577 62.38 Electrical Equipment,
Lighting Fixture Appliance and
Manufacturing Component
Manufacturing
335911 Storage Battery 1 706 $44,419 52.33 Electrical Equipment,
Manufacturing Appliance and
Component
Manufacturing
561492 Court Reporting and 2 482 $17,342 43.48 Local Commercial
Stenotype Services Services
311412 Frozen Specialty Food 1 2010 $30,101 40.76 Agribusiness, Food
Manufacturing Processing and
Technology
311111 Dog and Cat Food 2 539 $44,418 32.70 Agribusiness, Food
Manufacturing Processing and
Technology
326191 Plastics Plumbing 2 663 $31,718 31.19 Chemicals and Chemical-
Fixture Manufacturing based Products
332439 Other Metal Container 3 459 $27,534 23.43 Fabricated Metal Product
Manufacturing Manufacturing
327125 Non-Clay Refractory 2 129 $31,330 23.20 Glass and Ceramics
Manufacturing
311330 Confectionery 1 653 $26,544 20.70 Agribusiness, Food
Manufacturing from Processing and
Purchased Chocolate Technology
424510 Grain and Field Bean 72 701 $41,345 18.56 Agribusiness, Food
Merchant Wholesalers Processing and
Technology
Source: ES202 2006 data, IMPLAN MIG Group

Wages Compared to National Average Wages

The counties’ Third Party Administration of Insurance and Pension Funds sector (NAICS-524292) has
average wages around 188% of the national averages. This is a very small sector with only 2 employees
and a LQ of only 0.02.
Table 14: Top 10 Industries (6-digit NAICS) with Wages above National Averages
Wages
Average
NAICS NAICS Definition Establishments Employment Compared Cluster
Wages
to Nation4
524292 Third Party 2.3 2 $99,780 188.50% Business and
Administration of Financial Services
Insurance and
Pension Funds
611710 Educational Support 4 15 $59,678 163.85% Education and
Services Knowledge Creation
611512 Flight Training 2 8 $70,240 155.72% Education and
Knowledge Creation
488490 Other Support 2 3 $44,386 149.88% Transportation and
Activities for Road Logistics
Transportation
812191 Diet and Weight 1 1 $22,926 143.71% Local Personal
Reducing Centers Services (Non-
Medical)
488991 Packing and Crating 1 1 $41,381 141.03% Transportation and
Logistics
519190 All Other 1 3 $60,744 140.69% Printing and
Information Services Publishing
447190 Other Gasoline 48 618 $28,737 137.79% Energy (Fossil and
Stations Renewable)
335121 Residential Electric 1 706 $53,577 137.47% Electrical Equipment,
Lighting Fixture Appliance and
Manufacturing Component
Manufacturing
423830 Industrial Machinery 10 123 $77,669 133.87% Local Industrial
and Equipment Products & Services
Merchant
Wholesalers
Source: ES202 2006 data, IMPLAN MIG Group

Shift Share Analysis

Shift share analysis breaks down changes in employment (growth or decline) over a period of time into
three components: national growth share, industry mix share and local share. This analysis is used to
account for the competitiveness of a region’s industries and to analyze the local economic base 5.
National Growth Share
This is the share of growth (or decline) in local employment that can be attributed to growth (or
decline) in employment at the national level:

4 Wages compared to nation –county wages for a particular industry as a percentage of the national average.
5 Pennstate (2003) Using Employment data to better understand your local economy.
National growth share = Employment in base year * National employment growth rate
Industry Mix Share
This is the growth (or decline) in employment in the region that can be attributed to the growth (or
decline) in that particular industry at the national level:
Industry mix share = Employment in base year *(Industry’s national growth rate – National
employment growth rate)
Local Share
This is the share of growth (decline) in employment in a region that can be attributed to the
competitiveness of a region:
Local share = Employment in base year *(Region’s industry growth rate – National industry growth
rate)
Offices of Physicians have the highest local share of growth in the region. This sector had a net growth
of 931 jobs, out of which 867 jobs were attributed to local factors. Nursing Care Facilities is another
sector with a high local share of employment growth. This sector had net growth of 866 jobs, out of
which 854 were attributed to local factors. Moreover, the industry mix share in this sector had a
negative growth effect (-102 jobs). Since the local share has a high growth rate, it means there was a
national decline in employment in the nursing sector, and the region had certain competitiveness
factors(e.g. new nursing homes opened, more nursing graduates entered the profession or could be
result of increase in aged population) that attributed to a high positive growth in the nursing sector.
Table 15: Industries with Highest Local Share of Growth – Shift Share Analysis North Central Region
Net National Industry Mix Local
NAICS NAICS Definition
Growth Growth Share Share Share

621111 Offices of Physicians (except Mental Health 931 48.05 15.75 867.20
Specialists)
623110 Nursing Care Facilities 866 114.54 -102.40 853.86
561320 Temporary Help Services 772 12.73 37.48 721.79
454111 Electronic Shopping 564 0.26 1.73 562.01
721110 Hotels (except Casino Hotels) and Motels 571 36.38 -11.05 545.66
561492 Court Reporting and Stenotype Services 465 0.90 -0.64 464.74
332439 Other Metal Container Manufacturing 448 0.58 -1.16 448.58
621420 Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse 432 2.27 2.17 427.56
Centers
624190 Other Individual and Family Services 421 5.02 4.29 411.69
336214 Travel Trailer and Camper Manufacturing 445 12.57 40.73 391.70
611310 Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools 314 0.90 0.29 312.81
551114 Corporate, Subsidiary, and Regional Managing 321 23.18 11.40 286.42
Offices
813990 Other Similar Organizations (except Business, 286 0.42 0.32 285.26
Professional, Labor, and Political Organizations)
561422 Telemarketing Bureaus 258 4.86 5.58 247.56
311111 Dog and Cat Food Manufacturing 245 15.52 -5.52 235.00
561210 Facilities Support Services 240 3.06 6.51 230.43
332999 All Other Miscellaneous Fabricated Metal Product 220 0.21 -0.04 219.83
Manufacturing
624310 Vocational Rehabilitation Services 215 5.60 -4.36 213.76
443112 Radio, Television, and Other Electronics Stores 240 7.82 26.12 206.07
492110 Couriers 207 16.00 -7.85 198.85
447110 Gasoline Stations with Convenience Stores 181 65.90 -73.70 188.80
624410 Child Day Care Services 201 15.58 2.20 183.22
621492 Kidney Dialysis Centers 187 5.91 6.27 174.82
333922 Conveyor and Conveying Equipment 148 17.48 -17.21 147.73
Manufacturing
722410 Drinking Places (Alcoholic Beverages) 121 22.34 -44.34 143.00
Data Source: ES202 data, IMPLAN MIG group

Clusters in the North Central Region

Traded Clusters
The table below shows various clusters in the region. Five clusters in North Central Kansas have
location quotients higher than 1.25:
Agribusiness, Food Processing and Technology
Electrical Equipment, Appliance and Component Manufacturing
Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing
Glass and Ceramics
Machinery Manufacturing
The Agribusiness, Food Processing and Technology cluster has an LQ of 3.99 in the region. However,
the cluster has shown a decline of 1.16% in the last three years, and the average wages are 9.73% less
than the national average for the cluster. The Electrical Equipment, Appliance and Component
Manufacturing cluster has an LQ of 4.91. It has declined by 3.13% and has wages 8.59% less than the
cluster national average. Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing has an LQ of 1.54, and along with
that it has a high growth rate of 14.38%. Average wages, though, are about 26% less than cluster
averages at the national level. Glass and Ceramics has an LQ of 1.25, a growth rate of 12.68% and wages
less than average. Similarly, the Machinery Manufacturing cluster has an LQ of 2.5, growth of 7.62%,
but very low wages that are about 43% less than cluster national average. Investments into these sectors
should be considered to make them more competitive and attract labor.

Table 16: Clusters in the North Central Region

Average Wages
Establish- Employ- Average Growth
Cluster Compared to LQ
ments ment Wages Rate
National Average
Advanced Materials 104.3 3026 $34,714 56.60% -0.18% 0.63
Agribusiness, Food Processing 384.2 11,401 $30,715 90.27% -1.16% 3.99
and Technology
Apparel and Textiles 30 119 $27,429 70.34% -8.24% 0.11
Arts, Entertainment, Recreation 239.9 2,824 $13,306 40.58% 1.92% 0.67
and Visitor Industries
Biomedical/Biotechnical (Life 374.3 9,674 $25,230 60.20% -0.90% 0.94
Sciences)
Business and Financial Services 972 5,174 $35,759 47.00% -0.79% 0.50
Chemicals and Chemical-Based 87.3 2,238 $31,903 57.54% 3.53% 1.05
Products
Computer and Electronic Product 6 49 $41,439 50.53% -30.51% 0.04
Manufacturing
Defense and Security 134.6 1,184 $29,218 44.46% 4.86% 0.33
Education and Knowledge 90.6 1,486 $24,097 54.99% 8.02% 0.74
Cluster
Electrical Equipment, Appliance 7.3 1,879 $45,565 91.41% -3.13% 4.91
and Component Manufacturing
Energy (Fossil and Renewable) 653.2 7,266 $32,994 55.21% -0.50% 1.08
Fabricated Metal Product 49.6 2,047 $32,379 73.70% 14.38% 1.54
Manufacturing
Forest and Wood Products 123.6 1,020 $27,510 68.90% 0.03% 0.44
Glass and Ceramics 10.3 362 $32,103 75.28% 12.68% 1.25
Information Technology and 250.5 2,813 $39,767 52.56% -5.74% 0.52
Telecommunications
Machinery Manufacturing 61 2,607 $39,075 72.06% 8.03% 2.50
Mining 30.3 163 $37,393 67.77% -3.61% 0.92
Primary Metal Manufacturing 3 91 $31,239 56.99% 7.62% 0.23
Printing and Publishing 126.3 1,808 $28,306 54.36% 1.00% 0.84
Transportation and Logistics 362.6 3,601 $33,422 79.35% -12.31% 0.85
Transportation Equipment 21 1,393 $42,813 70.50% 4.84% 0.89
Manufacturing
Total All Industries 7,905 99,908 $26,274 61.96% 1.07% 1.00
Data Source: ES202 data, IMPLAN MIG group
Highlighted cell represent values higher than specified criteria values
Figure 11: Location Quotient for Various Traded Clusters

LQ
Printing and Transportation and Transportation Equip
Publishing, 0.84 Logistics, 0.85 Mfg, 0.89

Primary Metal Mfg,

0.23 Advanced Materials,
Mining, 0.92
0.63

Machinery Mfg, 2.5 Agribusiness, 3.99

IT & Telecom, 0.52 Apparel and Textiles,

0.11

Glass and Ceramics,

1.25
Arts & Entertainment,
Forest and Wood
0.67
Products, 0.44
Biomedical, 0.94
Fabricated Metal Prod
Mfg, 1.54
Business & Financial
Services, 0.5
Energy , 1.08
Chemicals , 1.05

Computer and
Electrical Equip & Electronic Product
Component Mfg, 4.91 Manufacturing , 0.04

Education &
Knowledge Cluster, Defense and Security,
0.74 0.33
Figure 12: Traded Clusters in the North Central Region

How to read the chart

Location of bubble
X-axis shows percent change in employment
Y-axis shows Location Quotient
Position of the bubble shows if the cluster is growing or declining
Size of the bubble
Shows total employment in a particular cluster i.e. how big the cluster is
Figure 13: Traded Clusters in Various Counties and their LQ

How to read the figure: each wedge corresponds to a traded cluster, the size indicating the LQ, wedges that extend beyond the faint circle
equate to a LQ greater than 1

Local Clusters
The North Central Kansas Region has high location quotients for two local clusters – Local Community
& Civic Organizations and Local Financial Services. The Local Education & Training, Local Health
Services and Local Household Goods & Services clusters have growth rates of more than 5%. The only
local cluster with wages higher than the national average is the Local Industrial Products & Services
cluster.
Table 17: Local Clusters in the North Central Region
Average
Wages
Establish Employm Average Compare Growth
Cluster LQ
ments ent Wages d to Rate
National
Average
Local Commercial Services 46 412 $18,946 68.60% -3.68% 0.77
Local Community & Civic 145 1584 $22,009 72.06% -1.25% 1.36
Organizations
Local Education & Training 5 172 $20,742 66.83% 15.03% 0.32
Local Entertainment & Media 75 698 $14,255 72.11% -8.69% 1.01
Local Financial Services 191 2653 $32,530 63.52% -1.36% 1.51
Local Food and Beverages 216 3593 $17,074 62.92% -1.55% 1.06
Processing & Distribution
Local Health Services 519.3 5100 $33,857 70.51% 6.20% 1.08
Local Hospitality 609.6 9716 $8,963 65.29% 1.81% 1.22
Local Household Goods & Services 383.3 3624 $24,993 64.77% 5.28% 1.01
Local Industrial Products & 19 172 $69,417 123.59% -9.10% 0.45
Services
Local Logistical Services 20 206 $15,015 53.24% -4.96% 0.43
Local Motor Vehicle Products & 419 3164 $29,522 80.21% 0.00% 1.19
Services
Local Personal Services (Non- 171.3 1083 $14,489 73.97% 4.21% 0.85
Medical)
Local Real Estate, Construction & 451.3 2571 $32,300 63.24% 3.62% 1.03
Development
Local Retail Clothing & Accessories 172.6 4313 $14,921 76.36% 0.76% 1.09
Local Utilities 17 72 $27,228 66.04% -22.55% 0.61
Data Source: ES202 data, IMPLAN MIG group
Highlighted cell represent values higher than specified criteria values
Figure 14: Local Clusters in the North Central Region

How to read the chart

Location of bubble
X-axis shows percent change in employment
Y-axis shows Location Quotient
Position of the bubble shows if the cluster is growing or declining
Size of the bubble
Shows total employment in a particular cluster i.e. how big the cluster is
Section C: region as described by the community
Introduction
This section describes the results of the survey conducted in the region. The survey was sent out to
three different groups – the economic development agents, businesses and regional banks.
The survey was conducted in three stages. First, the economic development agents and the community
leaders were sent the survey based on the list provided by the NCRPC office. The economic
development agents were contacted again to remind them about the survey and also to schedule a face
to face interview. The community development officials in each county were contacted and a request
was made to forward the survey link to all business in their region. A copy of the survey is attached in
the Appendix.
Based on the responses to the survey and the interviews, the banks emerged as an important regional
link and it was decided to enlist the banks to get the survey completed. The representatives of the area
banks were contacted via email and where email was not available, surveys were mailed. A total of 22
complete responses were received from the economic development agents, 115 business owners
responded and 22 complete responses were received from the regional banks.
Three different surveys were used for the three groups. The basic content was the same, with a few
changes made according to the target audience.
This section summarizes the results from the survey. The survey had four different sections. Section I
describes the regional environment of the study area, section II describes the innovation networks
present in the region, section III describes briefly the role of social networks in the region and the last
section outlines a demographic profile of the respondents.
SECTION CI – Regional Environment
This section briefly describes the regional environment of the study area. The regional environment
plays an important role in the economic growth of the region and vice versa. This section looks at the
cost of living in the region, cost of doing business in the region, quality of life, quality of educational
institutes, availability of trained workforce, availability of capital and the state and local government
policies.

Definition of the Region

This section briefly describes the region as defined by various groups.
The respondents were asked what they consider to be their region in terms of products or services
being provided. The contrast in the responses of the three groups was surprising. The economic
development community considered county lines as a boundary for their services with 50% of the
respondents in this group reporting county lines as the cut-off point of the region they serve in sharp
contrast to only 3% of the businesses considering county lines as the cut-off point. On the contrary, the
business considered their business region to be broader with 24% reporting multiple states, 23% nation
and another 23% reporting multiple counties as their region. Majority of the regional banks (59%)
reported multiple counties as their service region.
Definition of the region as perceived by different groups

ED Community Business Banks

Community
Nation 5% 23% 0%
Multiple States 5% 24% 14%
State 0% 12% 9%
Multi-city across… 5% 14% 14%
Multi-city within… 5% 1% 5%
Multiple Counties 20% 23% 59%
County Limits 50% 3% 0%

City Limits 10% 0% 0%

0% 20% 40% 60% 0% 10% 20% 30% 0% 50% 100%

Regional Business Environment

Regional business environment plays an important role in the strength of the area’s innovation
network. The region as a place to live and do business is a driving factor for many business,
enterprises, and entrepreneurs. The first section of the survey intended to record the impressions of the
regional business environment. The following graph depicts the differences in the opinions of the three
groups regarding the regional environment. All the questions were based on a five point Likert scale.
Cost of Doing Business in the Region
with 54% of the respondents reporting the cost
The community economic development agents
to be beneficial in their region, 23% being
for the most part view the region as having
neutral and 23% reported the cost to be
favorable doing business costs, with 64% of the
harmful.
respondents reporting that the cost of doing
business in their region is beneficial. Business
59%

70%
54%

owners split on this but still generally agreed 60%

40%
39%

50%
the cost of doing business in the region is 40% Negative
23%

23%
23%

favorable. Approximately 40% of the business

19%

18%

30%
Neutral
respondents stated the cost of doing business in 20%
10% Positive
the region is neither beneficial nor harmful and 0%
another 39% reported the cost to be beneficial. Business ED Banks
Community
The banking community also had a favorable
view of the cost of doing business in the region
Cost of Living for the Employees
development agents had the most positive

68%
80%

59%
70%
views. About 68% of the economic
60%
development agents thought the region had a
40%
50%
34%

40% Negative
very favorable cost of living for the employees

23%
21%

18%

18%
30% Neutral

14%
20% Positive of local businesses. The business owners were
10% again split on the issue with almost the same
0%
Business ED Banks number on both side of the scale. 40% of the
Community
business owners consider cost of living to be
The three different respondent groups held beneficial, 34% harmful and 21% had neutral
different views on the cost of living for views. More than 59% of the banks consider
employees in the region. The economic cost of living to be beneficial for the region.

Region’s Overall Quality of Life

All three respondent groups agreed the quality

81%
100%

79%

77%
of life to be beneficial for the region. 79% of the 80%
businesses, 81% of the economic development 60% Negative
community and 77% of the banks reported the

23%
40% Neutral

14%

14%
quality of life to be beneficial for the region. 20%

5%

5%
Positive

0%
0%
Business ED Banks
Community

120%

96%
Overall Quality of Educational Institutes
83%

100%
The majority of the respondents in each group 80% 76%
Negative
agreed that the region’s educational institutes 60%
Neutral
benefit the community. 83% of the business 40%
19%
14%

Positive
respondents, 76% of the economic development 20%
5%
2%

0%
0%

agents and 96% of the banks reported that the 0%

Business ED Community Banks
quality of educational institutes in the region is
beneficial to the region.

Quality of Technical Assistance Offered by Regional Colleges and Universities to

Businesses
About 61% of the business respondents
82%

100%
77%

reported that quality of technical assistance

61%

80%
60% Negative
offered by regional colleges and universities to
33%

40% businesses is beneficial to the region. Another

18%

18%

Neutral
20% 33% were neutral responses and just 3%
5%
3%

Positive
0%

0% reported that the quality of technical assistance

Business ED Banks
in harmful. 77% of the economic development
Community
community respondents also reported the
quality of technical assistance to be beneficial to the region as did the 82% of the banks.

Availability of Workers in the Region with the Skills Businesses Require

In regards to the availability of skilled workers availability of workers is beneficial, 41%
(relative to each business/industry) in the neutral, and only 18% reported that it is
region, 40% of the businesses reported that harmful to the region.
skilled workers were readily available, 29% had

55%
60%
a neutral response and 27% reported that the

41%
41%
40%
50%
lack of availability of skilled workers is harmful

32%
29%
40%

27%
to the region. Additionally, a majority of the Negative
30%

18%
14%
economic development agents (55%) also 20% Neutral
10% Positive
reported that the lack of availability of skilled
0%
workers in the region is harmful. Bankers had a Business ED Banks
mixed response: 41% reported that the Community

Availability of Required Number of Workers

A majority of the economic development agents banks reported the availability of the workers
reported insufficient availability of workers in as a benefit and 24% reported it to be harmful
the region. 64% of the economic development to the region.
agents reported that the availability of required

64%
70%
workers in the region is harmful, 18% were

48%
60%
neutral and 19% reported that worker
37%
50%
32%

29%
27%
40%

24%
availability is beneficial to the region. Negative

19%
18%
30%
Businesses had more varied responses: 32% 20% Neutral
10% Positive
reported that availability of workers is harmful 0%
to the region, 27% gave neutral responses and Business ED Banks
Community
another 37% reported that availability of
workers is beneficial to the region. 48% of the

Availability of Capital in the Region

agents had more varied responses regarding
64%

70%
49%

60% this issue. 37% reported that availability of the

37%

50%
capital is beneficial to the region, 32% had a
33%

32%
32%

27%

40% Negative
30% neutral response and another 32% reported that
Neutral
11%

20%
9%

capital availability is harmful, as there is not

10% Positive
0% enough available. Almost half of the businesses
Business ED Banks (49%) reported that capital availability is
Community
beneficial to the region, 33% had a neutral
Majority of the bankers in the region (64% of response and another 11% reported that
the respondents) reported that capital is availability of capital is harmful to the region.
available in the region. Economic development

Availability of Specialized Facilities and Laboratories

About a quarter of the respondents reported

41%
50%

35%
that the availability of specialized facilities and

33%
32%
40%

28%
24%

24%
laboratories in the region, for testing products, 30%

19%
Negative
is beneficial. 24% of the business community,

13%
20% Neutral
28% of the economic development agents and 10% Positive
24% of the banks reported that availability of 0%
specialized facilities and laboratories is Business Ed Banks
Community
beneficial to the region.

The Quality of the Region’s Specialized Suppliers

region’s specialized suppliers. 26% of the
43%

50%
35%

business respondents reported benefits and

33%

32%

40%
27%

27%
26%

30% 18% reported the quality of the region’s

19%
18%

Negative
20% specialized suppliers to be harmful. 43% of the
Neutral
10% economic development community and 27% of
Positive
0% the banks reported the quality of the region’s
Business Ed Banks
Community
suppliers to be beneficial.

The majority of the businesses in the region had

a neutral response regarding the quality of the

The regional availability of demanding customers

41% of the businesses reported the regional

55%

50%
60%
41%
41%

availability of demanding customers to be 50%

32%
beneficial to them. Another 41% of businesses 40%
23%

Negative
30%
18%
had a neutral response. The majority of the
14%

14%
20% Neutral
economic development community (55%) and 10% Positive
banks (50%) had a neutral response for this 0%
item. Business Ed Banks
Community

State and Local Governmental Regulations and Permitted Procedures Affecting

Businesses
regulations and permitted procedures affecting
44%

41%

50%
37%

36%

businesses. About 26% reported the state and

32%
32%

40%
27%

26%

local governmental regulations to have a

23%

30% Negative
20% positive effect on the regional businesses, while
Neutral
10% another 27% reported them to be harmful to the
Positive
0% businesses. 37% of the economic development
Business Ed Banks agents and 23% of the banks also reported the
Community
state and local governmental regulations and
A majority of the businesses had a neutral view permitted procedures to be beneficial to
regarding the state and local governmental businesses.
 The Level of Taxation Affecting Business
35% of the business respondents, 19% of the

57%
60%

45%

41%
41%
economic development agents and 41% of the 50%

35%
banks reported the level of taxation to be 40%

24%
Negative

19%
30%

18%
harmful to business. However, in general, the

16%
20% Neutral
majority of the respondents were neutral in 10% Positive
their response on this issue: 45% of businesses, 0%
57% of economic development agents and 41% Business Ed Banks
Community
of banks were neutral when asked about the
level of taxation affecting businesses. Another
16% of the businesses, 24% of the economic
development agents and 18% of the banks
considered the level of taxation to be beneficial
for the businesses in the region.

The Effectiveness of Government- Sponsored Growth Incentives

50%

50%
50% of the economic development community 60%

41%
50%
reported that government sponsored-growth

36%
40%

27%
25%
incentives are beneficial to the businesses in the
23%

23%
Negative
30%
region, but only 25% of the businesses reported 20% Neutral

9%
that they are beneficial and 23% reported that 10% Positive
0%
these programs are harmful while 50% of the
Business Ed Banks
banks had a neutral response to this item. Community

The Quality of Promotional and Marketing Campaigns Featuring the Region

70% campaigns featuring the region is beneficial to
59%

60%
46%

businesses in the region. Another 40% were

40%

50%
36%
36%

36%

indifferent (neutral) and only 10% reported that

28%

40% Negative
30% they were harmful to businesses. 28% of the
Neutral
10%

20%
economic development community and 36% of
5%

10% Positive
0% the banks also reported that these campaigns
Business Ed Banks were beneficial to the region.
Community

According to 46% of the business respondents,

the quality of promotional and marketing
Region as a Place for Business to Succeed
The majority of respondents for all three groups consider the region to be a good place to do business.
46% of business owners reported that the region is a good place to do business, 26% reported the region
to be a very good place to do business and 10% reported the region to be an excellent place to do
business. The majority of economic development agents also reported the region to be a good place to
do business, 24% reporting it is a very good location and 5% reported the region to be an excellent
place to do business. Similarly, 32% of bankers reported the region to be a very good location to do
business, 27% reported it to be a good location and 14% consider the region to be an excellent location
to do business.
Quality of Region in Coming Five Years as a Place for Business to Succeed
According to the majority of the respondents in the business and banking community, the quality of
the region in the coming five years will improve as a place for businesses to succeed. The majority of
the economic development community thinks the quality of the region will stay the same in the coming
five years as a place for business to succeed. Though some respondents reported the region’s quality
will decline in the coming five years, the majority of the respondents have a positive view about change
in quality of region.

Decline Stay the same Improve

Banks
-14% 36% 50%

Decline Stay the same Improve

Community
-14% 48% 38%

Decline Stay the same Improve

Business
-13% 38% 49%
Most Critical Issues Related to State and Local Government Programs and Policies that
Should be Addressed to Improve Business's Prospects for Success
Business Owners

How to read the figure: The larger the word appears the more often the word was recorded in the responses.
The responses from business owners cover a broad range of topics from education and healthcare, to
marketing, taxation and government regulation. It appears that the overarching issue for business
owners is the state and local tax rate allowing for financial growth, and ultimately job creation. Several
business owners also commented on their desire to see increases in educational funding, better health
care provisions, economic development opportunities driven by tax incentives (especially for locally
owned businesses) and continued investment in infrastructure projects. Small business owners would
also like to cooperate with business development agencies and other non-profits during the economic
downturn to find more and better methods to market their products or services. In general, more
business owners appear to be relatively satisfied with the existing programs and policies but appear to
be more concerned about attracting quality employees to existing businesses, in addition to increased
investment in technology to entice new businesses to their region
Community Leaders

Not surprisingly, community leaders in North Central Kansas have many of the same ideas and
concerns as business owners within the region with variations in the degree of the concern. The general
consensus is that although tax credits and tax breaks are helpful, ultimately they do not spur much
economic development, job creation or innovation. They insist, rather, that tax incentives need to be
accompanied by real start-up capital in the form of grants or loans. In this sense, community leaders
appear to be much more aware of the national lending freeze that has occurred over the past year or so.
Community leaders and business owners both agree that rural areas are in the greatest need for
increased investment in technology and infrastructure. Both groups also share the opinion that a well-
trained workforce and affordable housing are crucial to financial success anywhere within the region.
Banks
The regional bankers also highlight similar themes as business owners and community leaders. In
general they emphasize reduced taxes, specifically real estate and property taxes. They would also like
to see taxation levels remain reasonable to attract businesses to relocate to the region in conjunction
with limited government involvement or “business friendly” government. Continued investment in
education is also highlighted as a key to producing and maintaining a well-trained, quality workforce.
Perhaps the most insightful response suggests that communities and businesses might benefit most
without any real change in policy, but rather a better method for state and local agencies to publicize
available funding, programs, incentives, etc.

Most Critical Issues with Regard to Regional Universities and Technical Colleges that
Should be Addressed to Improve Business’s Prospects for Success
Business Owners

Since Kansas State University is conveniently located in the region, employers tend to have their choice
of qualified individuals in varying disciplines. There are also several community and technical colleges
in the area that provide skilled labor and technical expertise. The underlying common interest among
all business owners is keeping tuition costs affordable for everyone at all local institutions of higher
learning. Everyone understands that these schools (especially Kansas State) are a huge asset not only
because they attract faculty and students who will spend their money locally and regionally, but also
because they are responsible for training the next generation’s workforce. First and foremost, business
owners would like to see more programs designed to teach practical, applicable skills in computer
science, management and technical consulting. They would also like to see more courses for non-
traditional students, potentially offered online. Some also said they would like to see stronger ties and
connections between the educational institutions and businesses, potentially in the form of programs
encouraging business innovation. Lastly, some business owners want colleges and universities in the
region to promote educated young people to live and work in the more rural areas of the region.
Community Leaders

Community leaders appear to be most interested in seeing collaboration and networking at the regional
and state level between industry and colleges/universities. Along this same line of thought,
community leaders are very concerned about losing young talent to other states and regions because of
a lack of coordination between public and private entities. They would especially like to see the
development of interdisciplinary programs designed to provide students with opportunities to gain
hands on experience and connections with possible local employers. In regards to training and
education in the region, community leaders would prefer if more students were trained in the areas of
technology, computer science and manufacturing. Some suggest that the best way to train individuals
in these areas is to promote private investment in technical college programs and non-traditional
programs. Their main concern is that Kansas State receives such a large portion of state funding for
higher education that technical colleges and community colleges might be left in the dust if the proper
initiatives aren’t created.
Banks

Regional bankers seem to agree with the suggestions from business owners and community leaders.
However, their emphasis is primarily on promoting useful, applicable programs through increased
funding of community colleges and technical institutions. Bankers typically agree that the areas where
the most training is needed are technical and computer skills, entry level management and other skilled
labor such as welding. They also agree that collaboration between local and regional business and
higher education is essential, but believe that the public and private sector are already working fairly
well together. Bankers are also concerned about losing talent in rural areas to other regions or urban
centers due to a lack of excitement or culture that many young people today weigh heavily in their job
selection.
Section C2 - Innovation Networks
The interaction of the business with each of the regional institutions affects the business’s capacity to
innovate. The chart above shows the importance of different kinds of ties in helping business innovate
by developing and commercializing new products as well as making improvements to existing
products, services or business processes.

Educational Institutes
Educational institutes play an important role in
building the innovative capacity of businesses.
Many of the businesses (47%) reported that the
educational institutes in the region help their
(55% respondents) reported they believe
regional educational institutes have a positive
impact on business innovation.
55%

60%
47%

business foster innovation and 26% reported

45%

50%
that they did not help in innovation, while
32%

32%

40% Negative
26%
24%

another 24% had a neutral response. The 30%

18%

14%

Neutral
economic development agents had a similar 20%
10%
view with 45% reporting positive impact of Positive
0%
educational institutes on business innovation, Business ED Banks
32% had a neutral view and 18% reporting a Community

negative impact. The majority of regional banks

Professional Service Firms

 service firms had a favorable impact on

64%
70%

55%
60% innovation for local businesses. The majority of

46%
50%
banks (64% of the respondents), 55% of the
32%

27%

27%
40% Negative
economic development agents and 46% of the
18%
30%

14%
Neutral
20%

9%
business community reported that professional
10% Positive
0% service firms have a positive impact on
Business ED Banks innovation in the region. 32% of the businesses
Community
had a neutral response and 18% reported no
More than half of the respondents in all the positive impact of professional service firms on
three groups reported that regional professional innovation in the region.

Regional Customers
Demanding regional customers are also a

57%

54%
60%

45%
source of innovation according to a majority of 50%

32%

32%
40%

26%
the respondents in the three groups. 57% of the Negative

18%
30%

15%
businesses, 45% of the economic development Neutral

10%
20%
agents and 54% of the regional banks reported 10% Positive
0%
that the regional customers have a positive Business ED Banks
impact on the innovation. Community

Regional Suppliers
Regional suppliers also have a positive impact

45%
41%
50% 37%

37%

36%
on the innovation capacity of the businesses 40%
30%
27%

according to 37% of business respondents, 30% 18%

Negative

14%
while the majority of the economic 20% Neutral
development agents and banks were neutral on 10% Positive
the issue as were 30% of the businesses. 0%
Business ED Banks
Community

Other Businesses in the Region

Business to business relations are also a source
59%

70%
55%

of innovation. According to the majority of 60%

43%

respondents, other businesses in the region also 50%

36%

40%
27%

Negative
have a positive impact on innovation capacity
23%
18%

30%
17%

of all businesses in the region. Neutral

20%
9%

10% Positive
0%
Business ED Banks
Community

Banks
 Banks play an important role by providing the

59%

59%

64%
70%
60% required resources to undertake innovative
50%
activities. According to 59% of the businesses,

27%
40% Negative
21% 59% of the economic development agents and

18%
18%
30%
16%

Neutral
20%
64% of the banks, regional banks help

5%
10% Positive
0% innovation in the region by providing funds for
Business ED Banks it.
Community

Venture Capital Firms

There are not many venture capital firms in the venture capital firms because there are not
North Central region of Kansas; hence the many venture capital firms in the region.
question received mixed responses from the

45%
41%
50%
respondents. Almost the same number of

32%
40%

28%
28%
respondents said the venture capital firms have

27%
25%

23%
30% Negative

18%
a positive, neutral and negative impact on
20% Neutral
innovation for businesses. And while, 41% of
10% Positive
economic development agents reported a
0%
positive value, the majority of the bank Business ED Banks
respondents (45%) reported a negative value of Community

Angel Investors
There was a varied response on whether or not 60%

48%

43%
angel investors provide a network for 50%
36%

29%

29%
innovation in the region. 36% of businesses 40%
25%

24%
Negative
19%

30%
reported a negative value of angel investors
16%

20% Neutral
along with 43% of banks. 48% of economic 10% Positive
development agents reported a positive value 0%
for such networks. Business ED Banks
Community

Government Agencies
region. Businesses were more dispersed on
45%

50%
37%
35%

both the positive and negative side, with 35%

34%

32%

40%
28%

28%

27%

respondents reporting positive, 28% neutral

23%

30% Negative
20% and 34% positive value of such institutions for
Neutral
10% the innovation networks. Only 28% of the
Positive
0% economic development agents and 23% of the
Business ED Banks banks reported a positive value for such
Community
institutions for the innovation networks.
The respondents were again varied on their
responses about the role of government
agencies in the innovation networks of the
Industry or Cluster Association
Industry and/or cluster associations can be an

41%
50%

39%
38%
important part of the innovation network as

34%

32%
40%

28%
27%
they foster innovation by exchange of

23%
30%

19%
Negative
information and ideas. 34% of the businesses, 20% Neutral
39% of the economic development agents and 10% Positive
32% of the banks reported that these 0%
associations have a positive role in the Business ED Banks
Community
innovation networks.

Non- Professional Associations

Most respondents reported that non-

64%
70%
professional associations don’t play an 60%

45%
50%
important role in the innovation networks,

33%
32%

28%
27%
40% Negative

23%
most likely because of the lack of presence of

18%
30%

14%
Neutral
20%
such associations.
10% Positive
0%
Business ED Banks
Community

Entrepreneurial Networks
Entrepreneurial networks are an important part

45%

41%
50%
40%

of innovation networks according to the 40%

28%
28%

27%
27%
24%

majority of the respondents in the business and 30% 23% Negative

economic development community. 20% Neutral
Entrepreneurial networks can provide for a 10% Positive
great source of ideas and information 0%
exchanges that help foster innovation. Business ED Banks
Community

Business Assistance Centers

The economic development agents in the region
63%

70%
60% reported that the business assistance centers in
45%

50%
36%

the region are an important component of the

32%
32%

40%
26%

Negative
innovation networks in the region. 36% of the
19%
18%

30%
14%

Neutral
20%
businesses and 45% of the banks also reported
10% Positive
0% that the business assistance centers in the
Business ED Banks region play an important role in the innovation
Community
networks in the region.
Most Valuable Institutions to Innovation for Business Innovation
Business owners

Community Leaders

Banks
Section C3 – Regional Norms and Attitudes
Regional norms and attitudes are important determining factors for the innovation readiness and
capability of a region. Openness to diversity and cultural awareness are also important factors affecting
regional innovation. According to the majority of economic development agents and banks, new
residents can easily integrate into the regional business community. About 41% of the businesses
reported that new residents can easily integrate into the business community whereas an additional
34% of the businesses were neutral on the issue.
About 62% percent of the banks and half the businesses (50%) reported that the region is a welcoming,
tolerant and attractive place for people of diverse backgrounds. On the other hand, half of the economic
development agents (50%) had a neutral view on the issue.
A vast majority of the banks (81%) reported that the leaders in the region are responsive to the needs of
all regional residents, irrespective of ethnicity, cultural heritage, gender or lifestyle. The businesses and
economic development agents were more distributed in their views. About 41% of the businesses and
41% of the economic development agents reported that leaders are responsive, while 23% of the
businesses and 32 % of the economic development agents were neutral, and another 22% of the
businesses and 18% of the economic development agents found that leaders were largely unresponsive
to the needs of all regional residents.
A majority of the banking community reported that the business culture in the region understands
failure as part of the learning and innovation process. On the other hand, majority of the businesses
and economic development agents had a neutral position on this issue.
Majority of the respondents across all groups generally agreed that people from different industry and
economic sectors frequently interact in the region and also celebrate the growth of companies. The
majority of businesses also reported that local artists frequently interact with businesses in the region.
The economic development agents and the banks had a more distributed view; a majority of the
economic development agents (55%) reported that local government institutions eagerly partner with
the private sector to promote new business development, while the majority of banks had a neutral
position on this topic.
Economic development agents and banks reported that the business leaders in the region treat
entrepreneurs, startups and new companies as full partners in all aspects of industry cooperation,
while most of the businesses had a neutral position on this item.
Regarding the sharing of information and resources by the business leaders, a majority of the banks
reported that they share the resources and information. The majority of the economic development
agents and businesses, on the other hand, had a neutral position on this.
Majority of the businesses and banks report that residents actively participate in community
development organizations and projects, while the majority of the economic development agents had a
neutral position on this issue. The majority of respondents in all three groups reported that the
successful business people in the region actively invest in economic development projects and startup
ventures.

Most Important Regional Issue(s) that Should be Addressed to Improve the Prospects of
Success of Businesses in Region
Business Owners

The most important regional issues, according to the business community, that need to be addressed
for business success are limited government involvement, reduced taxes, investment in education and
infrastructure, programs or incentives to retain talent in rural areas, and availability of initial capital to
finance innovation or expand existing businesses.
Community Leaders

Community leaders – more so than business owners or bankers – almost unanimously agree that the
most important regional issue facing business success is maintaining a good infrastructure in the
community, adequate housing, availability of trained manpower to attract new business, and also to
retain existing businesses in the community.
Banks

Regional bankers also agree that creating more jobs and a more consistent revenue stream for the
region is important. The other important issues are adequate housing, a qualified and motivated
workforce, lower development costs, availability of better technology in rural areas and increased
incentives for developing or converting to green energy sources.
Section C4 – Social Networks
This section describes the social networks present in the region. While Section D deals with social
network mapping, the current section focuses on the type of networks present, meeting place,
frequency of interaction, and role of these networks in the region.

Presence of Social Networks

The majority of the respondents reported the presence of social networks in the region. 85% of the
businesses, 91% of the banks and all of the economic development agents reported the presence of
some kind of social networks in the region.

Social Networks Formally Organized

Most of the social networks in the region are organized networks according to the respondents. 82% of
the businesses and 82% of the economic development agents reported the social network groups to be
organized compared to 62% of the banks.

Most Common Meeting Place for Formal Social Networks

Formal social network group members meet at different places, from the office of a member to the
office of a government organization to formal conventions and conferences. Apart from these places,
respondents also reported that these formal social network groups also meet at chamber offices,
technical college campuses, social clubs, coffee shops and restaurants.

Frequency of Interaction of Formal Social Networks

The formal social network groups have regular meetings according to majority of the respondents in
each group. About 58% of the business and bank respondents and 70% of economic development
agents reported that the formal social network groups have regular meetings in their region. In
contrast, 38% of the business respondents, 32% of the bank respondents and 25% of the economic
development agents reported that the formal social network groups meet only for special
circumstances.

Most Common Meeting Place for Informal Social Networks

The most common meeting place for the informal social network groups is the coffee shop, according
to the majority of the respondents, while local clubs are the next most popular locale.
How to read the figure: The questions in this section are treed; the first answers are indicated on the innermost
ring with subsequent responses indicated in the radiating zones.

Role of Social Networks

Several respondents reported that the formal social network groups have helped the region to develop.
38% of the business respondents, 50% of the economic development agents and 45% of the banking
respondents reported that the formal social network groups have helped the region to somewhat
develop.
As far as the benefits businesses reap from formal social network groups, the majority of the
respondents in all the three categories reported that they help to some extent, but about 11% of the
business respondents also reported that they have seen no evidence that social network groups have
helped the businesses in the region.
collaborative groups
helped the region to

Business Very much Somewhat A little bit Not at all

Have these

develop?

Community Very much Somewhat A little bit Not at all

Banks Very much Somewhat A little bitNot at all

collaborative groups
helped you in doing

Business Very much Somewhat A little bit Not at all

Have these

business?

Community Very much Somewhat A little bit Not at all

Banks Very much Somewhat A little bit Not at all

Benefits of Social Networks
Shared knowledge is the biggest benefit of social networks according to the respondents in all the
groups. Joint activities for promoting business in the region (according to the economic development
agents and banks) and information about markets (according to the businesses) were considered to be
secondary benefits.

90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
Community

Community

Community

Community

Community

Community
40%
Business

Business

Business

Business

Business

Business
30%
Banks

Banks

Banks

Banks

Banks

Banks
20%
10%
0%
Workforce Training Information Joint Joint activities Sharing of
training workshops for about markets procurement of for promoting knowledge
owners/key raw material business in
employees region
Section C5 - Demographics
The following section briefly describes the demographic profile of the respondents in each group.

Opinion Regarding the Way Industry Will Change in Coming Five Years
Majority of the respondents in all three groups reported that they think the industry will grow slowly
in the coming five years with 68% of the banks, 67% of the economic development agents and 66% of
the businesses sharing this view. Along with that 18% of the businesses said they think the industry
will grow rapidly in the coming five years.

Banks 0.68
Will face threat from
emerging substitutes
Will decline
Community 0.67
Will grow rapidly

Will grow slowly

Business 0.66

-0.5 0 0.5 1

Economic Development Community

Region Served
Services Offered

Time for Which Respondents have Lived in the Region

Time lived in region

60% 50%
50%
40%
27%
30%
18%
20%
10% 5%
0%
Less than 2 2 to 5 years 5 to 15 years 15+ years
years

Business Community

Percent of Sales within Region

Percent of sales within region

38%
40%
35%
30%
25% 21%
20% 17%
15%
8% 8% 7%
10%
5%
0%
100% 75-99% 50-74% 10-49% Less than Don’t
10 % know
Business Headquarters

In the region
11%
89% Elsewhere in US

Exports

85%
15% Yes No

Industry Sector

Aerospace
Industry Sector Manufacturing
25% Finance/Accounting
23%
Insurance/Real Estate/ Legal
Medical/Dental/Health
20% Telecommunications Services
Transportation/Utilities
Construction/Architecture/Engineering
14% Data Processing Services
15% Wholesale/Resale/Distribution
11% Education
Marketing/Advertising/Entertainment
10% Research/Development Lab
7% 7% 7% Business Service/Consultant
6% 6% Computer/Network Consultant
5%
5% 4% Hospitality/Tourism
3% 3% Food Services
2%
1% 1% Agriculture
0% 0% 0% 0% Other
0%
Gross Revenue in 2006

Gross Revenue
40% 35% 34%
35%
30%
25%
20%
13%
15% 11%
10% 4% 4%
5%
0%
Less than a $ 1-10 $ 11-50 $ 51 – 100 Over 100 Don’t
million million million million million know

Company’s Average Annual Revenue Growth Over the Past Three Years

Average annual revenue growth

35% 32%
30%
24%
25%
20% 16% 16%
15%
10%
10%
5% 1%
0%
0% 1-5% 6-10% 11-20% 20-100% Over 100%

Position of the Respondent in Company

Position in company
50% 47%

40%

30%
21%
20%
12% 12%
8%
10%

0%
Owner/President/CEO Senior Executive or Director / Vice President Manager Other, please specify
Senior Official
Time for which Respondents have Lived in the Region

Time lived in region

70% 66%

60%
50%
40%
30% 21%
20%
10%
10% 3%
0%
Less than 2 years 2 to 5 years 5 to 15 years 15+ years

Banks

Definition of Region

Services Provided to Businesses in Region

Time for which Respondents have Lived in the Region

Time lived in region

100%
82%
80%
60%
40%
20% 14%
0% 5%
0%
Less than 2 2 to 5 years 5 to 15 years 15+ years
years
Section D – Social Network Mapping
One of the objectives of the project was to map the social networks that exist in the North Central
region within the economic development community. A brief social network data collection form was
given to complete and return. The template had a list of key names of people dealing in economic
development in the region. Every respondent was required to pick out their frequency of interaction
with the individual and the quality of information exchanged, if any.
The objective of this project element is to understand who is connected to whom and how. A social
network map provides an image of the connections at a point in time, but since these networks are
dynamic, they change over time. Moreover, a social network map is not just a picture to look at but,
when combined with the social network analysis metrics, provides an insight into how those networks
are formed, how dense the networks are, and in the case where two nodes (individuals) need to be tied
(linked). It is also able to identify shortest path to facilitate the connection as well as who is (are) the
bridge(s) between those two nodes.
The goal of developing these maps is to improve density of connectedness within the region’s business
and economic development community. A name in the center of the graph probably has the most ties
and that’s because they provided their network information to generate the map. These maps are based
on preliminary information collected and are representative of the collected information. This will not
be a complete map of the region, since such information is highly dynamic, but the more of the current
network that can be made visible the more effectively the network members can leverage their
connections and the connections of others to cultivate new economic development opportunities within
their communities and the broader region.
The maps should be used to look at the ties between the organizations rather than individuals. So these
maps will represent a professional network rather than a personal or informal network (e.g. more like
LinkedIn rather than a Facebook network).These maps can be used to strengthen the network by
providing the possible connections to the community. Everybody cannot be directly connected to
everybody else, but using this map they can find a way to reach to someone using the available
connections and their company connections.
Network Maps
Social network maps for the North Central Regional Planning Commission Economic Development
Community are shown in the following sections. The social network maps can be analyzed using a
number of metrics including centrality. Centrality of a social network gives a rough indication of the
social power of a node based on how well they “connect” the network. “Betweenness”, “Closeness”,
and “Degree” are all measures of centrality. Graph layouts are based on frequency of interaction and
quality is the link color with low to high quality ranging from grey to black color of link.

Measure 1: Degree
Degree is the count of the number of ties to other players in the network i.e. the number of direct
connections a node has. Higher degree for a node might show that the node is an active player in the
network or is often a connector or hub in network. Most connected does not mean most powerful
position in network as power is depicted by connections of connections, may be in an advantaged
position in the network, may be less dependent on other individuals and can often be identified as
third parties or deal makers (Group).
Degree Case 1:
Frequency = 1 (i.e. interaction once a year or less)
Quality of interaction = link color with low to high quality ranging from grey to black color of link
Size of the node increases with increasing degree and nodes with higher degree are towards the center
of the map
Degree Case 2:
Frequency = 2 (i.e. interaction is quarterly)
Quality of interaction = link color with low to high quality ranging from grey to black color of link
Degree Case 3:
Frequency = 3 (i.e. interaction is monthly)
Quality of interaction = link color with low to high quality ranging from grey to black color of link
Degree Case 4:
Frequency = 4 (i.e. interaction is weekly)
Quality of interaction = link color with low to high quality ranging from grey to black color of link
Degree Case 5:
Frequency = 5 (i.e. interaction is daily)
Quality of interaction = link color with low to high quality ranging from grey to black color of link
Measure 2: Closeness
Closeness is a measure of centrality that measures how quickly an individual can access more
individuals in a network. It reflects the ability to access information through the “grapevine” of
network members. A node with a high closeness centrality generally has quick access to other nodes in
a network, has a short path to other nodes, is close to other nodes and has a high visibility as to what is
happening in the network (Group).

Closeness Case 1:
Frequency = 1 (i.e. interaction once a year or less)
Quality of interaction = link color with low to high quality ranging from grey to black color of link
Closeness Case 2:
Frequency = 2 (i.e. interaction is quarterly)
Quality of interaction = link color with low to high quality ranging from grey to black color of link
Closeness Case 3:
Frequency = 3 (i.e. interaction is monthly)
Quality of interaction = link color with low to high quality ranging from grey to black color of link
Closeness Case 4:
Frequency = 4 (i.e. interaction is weekly)
Quality of interaction = link color with low to high quality ranging from grey to black color of link
Closeness Case 5:
Frequency = 5 (i.e. interaction is daily)
Quality of interaction = link color with low to high quality ranging from grey to black color of link
Measure 3: Betweenness
Betweenness is the measure of the extent to which a node lies between other nodes in the network. This
measure takes into account the connectivity of the node’s neighbors, giving a higher value for nodes
which bridge clusters. The measure reflects the number of people who a person is connecting indirectly
through their direct links.
Betweenness centrality identifies an individual’s position within a network in terms of its ability to
make connections to other pairs or groups in a network. A node with high betweenness centrality
generally holds a favored or powerful position in the network, represents a single point of failure
(taking the single betweenness spanner out of a network would sever ties between cliques), or has a
greater amount of influence over what happens in a network (Group).

Betweenness Case 1:
Frequency = 1 (i.e. interaction once a year or less)
Quality of interaction = link color with low to high quality ranging from grey to black color of link
Betweenness Case 2:
Frequency = 2 (i.e. interaction is quarterly)
Quality of interaction = link color with low to high quality ranging from grey to black color of link
Betweenness Case 3:
Frequency = 3 (i.e. interaction is monthly)
Quality of interaction = link color with low to high quality ranging from grey to black color of link
Betweenness Case 4:
Frequency = 4 (i.e. interaction is weekly)
Quality of interaction = link color with low to high quality ranging from grey to black color of link
Betweenness Case 5:
Frequency = 5 (i.e. interaction is daily)
Quality of interaction = link color with low to high quality ranging from grey to black color of link
SECTION E – QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS
This section briefly describes the major learnings from the qualitative portion of the project. A total of
nineteen interviews were conducted for this project. The sections below highlight the main findings
from the discussions with the interviewees.
According to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), among the
OECD member countries, rural regions face a number of common challenges that contribute to weaker
economic performance. These include: 1) out-migration and aging, 2) lower educational attainment, 3)
lower average labor productivity, and 4) overall low levels of public services (OECD, 2006). Rural
Kansas shares these concerns with nearly all other rural regions.
The section describes the challenges being faced, the unique strengths of the region and provides
suggestions from literature to overcome the challenges.

Major Challenges Faced by Rural Regions

Out- Migration
A large proportion of rural regions continue to lose population, particularly younger residents, and
tend to have older populations (OECD, 2006). This is a common problem faced by all of the counties in
the North Central region. Population for some of the counties has been continuously declining over the
last decades. Young kids leave to bigger cities for school and move to other places for jobs leading to a
dearth of young people in the region. Fifteen of the nineteen counties in the North Central region
reached maximum population sometime between WWI and WWII.

Education Attainment
Generally in rural regions, another challenge faced is related to education. In most OECD countries the
percentage of the population attending school up to upper secondary education is typically around or
often below the national average in rural regions (OECD, 2006). In North Central Kansas, education is a
strength rather than a challenge, with a higher percentage of the population (above 25 years) being at
least a high school graduate or more educated when compared to state percentages.

Labor Productivity
Lower labor productivity is the major reason for lagging economic performance by most rural regions
(OECD, 2006). Lower labor productivity is usually characterized by lower value added services, less
educated workforce, low percentage of region’s population in workforce, higher unemployment,
higher percentage of older persons, and a high rate of commuters employed in other regions. North
Central Kansas region in general doesn’t face all of these issues. There are more older people in the
region and people commute to neighboring counties for work, but the flow is both ways.
Unemployment is lower compared to state in most of the counties, the workforce is educated, and
although most of people don’t work in agriculture but work more in a services industry or
manufacturing industry, they do add value to the services provided.
Public Services
Most of the rural regions do not have the necessary critical mass of facilities, services and infrastructure
to support established business or entrepreneurs, leading to fewer employment opportunities and
more youth moving out of the region because the demographics cannot support provision of local
public services (OECD, 2006). North Central Kansas also faces the issue of youth moving away and less
opportunities but it does have infrastructure that it can build on and create more jobs, e.g. technical and
community colleges, central location in the nation, highway and rail roads.

Entrepreneurship is defined in Local Context

For our community agent partnerships, made to support businesses in the neighboring counties, they
are seen to have little value since it is outside a particular reporting region. The mindset where
“business success in the neighboring county does not help my region” indicates limited vision and
understanding of the regional dynamics. This mindset is prevalent somewhat in North Central Kansas
also. With region definition derived by county lines, this poses a problem for growth of the region.

Shortsightedness
The shortsightedness of the agents and local leaders while making policies for the region is another
major issue, as it greatly affects the ability of the business to expand, grow or even start in a region. The
short term payback takes a higher priority for the leaders while drafting policies for the region.
Projects, like recruiting a retail firm, takes priority over projects that will help an entrepreneur set up a
business that could add to employment, create a permanent addition to the community, give back to
community, invest in community and would be an asset to the community as it generates revenue.
While there are outstanding exceptions, some agents and leaders in North Central Kansas exhibit
tendencies that reflect policies that restrict growth opportunities of the businesses.

Recruitment, Retention or Outsourcing

Simple business recruitment strategies fail to generate expected success due to two main reasons. First,
a company that is attracted with economic incentives will tend to move out the moment they find a
better (cheaper) place. Second, attracting a large employer in a small community increases its
dependence on one single employer, hence increasing the risks associated with the employer moving
away or failing, and taking away all jobs. In such cases a community’s interest run counters to a
businesses interest in becoming more efficient. Most small towns in North Central Kansas try to sell the
main street space to outside businesses, but at the same time have local businesses run by local people
on the same streets. The main issue faced by the North Central Kansas region is retention of businesses
as older business owners usually don’t find young people to take over ownership and they end up
closing the business.

Infrastructure Barriers Faced as a Region

Housing
Appropriate housing is a big issue faced by the communities. Some of the communities have seen
recruitment opportunities fail because they could not find housing for business employees.
Communities don’t want to invest in housing until the business comes to region and businesses won’t
come to region till they find housing for their employees. This loop needs to be broken.

Thought Leader Barriers Faced as a Region

Cooperation Awareness but no Initiative

The various economic development organizations in the region do understand the importance of co-
operating with each other but are reluctant to take the lead. There is a great variation between what
different economic development agents think, depending on location and age group. The older people,
who have been in the region for a long time especially in the smaller counties, tend to have a more
preset approach to economic development. Most of the people in this group have witnessed out-
migration in their region and an absence of young people to take over the existing businesses; they
have accepted it as a way of life. They acknowledge this trend will hurt them in long-term but see little
advantage in collaborating with neighboring counties to address the issue. They have witnessed things
change over their careers and working alone has become a distinct work pattern. While many
understand the need to cooperate and work with other counties to keep their community alive, there is
a reluctance to take the first initiative. There is a lack of sense of regionalism and inability to see the ties
that exist between the counties; the inability to recognize as to how “community” is part of the region
that is bigger and varied than the county lines.
On the other end are the young agents who are open to the idea of connectivity and cooperation. These
young agents experience resistance by existing factors in the community. This group proactively seeks
partnerships and looks at their community as being a part of the bigger region. They also realize the
importance of working together; not doing so would mean a lost opportunity for them.
Other differences of opinion are visible depending on the size of the community. The bigger
communities consider themselves to be self-sufficient and hence don’t put in much effort to cooperate
with other smaller communities. On the other hand, the smaller communities look up to the bigger
communities for a helping hand but don’t get a favorable response.

Big Difference between the Way the Economic Development Agents, Businesses and the
Banks Think
Many define an economic development agents’ task to create a positive community for the businesses,
helping them grow and thrive. However the decisions and policies of the agents are often limited by
the geographic view of the community which essentially cuts off at the county line, whereas businesses
do not tie their outlook to county or city boundaries. This difference in the definition of the region
results in policies or programs that may not be the best that these agents could offer to the businesses
or may not be as good as what could be offered by a multi-county or region partnerships.

Connection Barriers Faced as a Region

Connectedness is Highly Fragmented in Rural Regions

Connectedness is highly fragmented in rural regions – reasons being geography, economics, political
boundaries, culture and history. The social network of the region is fragmented. The region is not
strongly connected. People/agents know each other but they don’t collaborate with each other or work
together in the region. Lack of trust, lack of understanding of the benefits and value of networks,
cultural norms and way of doing things are some of the reasons for this disconnect.

People Barriers as a Region

Lack of Succession Planning

Another problem in line with out-migration is lack of succession planning for retiring businesses in the
region. Some businesses have not done any succession planning while others have not been able to do
so due to lack of young people in the region who are willing to take over the business. If these retiring
business owners don’t find successors within the younger generation to pass on the business, a
majority of these businesses will close, bringing towns closer to becoming ghost towns.

Unique Assets of the Region

Banks are Important Players in Rural Communities

Banks are very important players in rural communities. They are the first starting point for a new
business who wants to locate in the region. Most of the banks have regional bank board members who
know the local population and most of the times personal relations play a big role in finalizing
transactions.

Learning New Ways to Promote Region

Some of the communities are learning new ways to bring people into the region, e.g. agri-tourism, bed
and breakfast or horse ranch style motels. They are trying to find new ways to attract new people into
the region. Realizing the need for change and acting on it is important for the region and a step in the
right direction.

Realizing Need for Networking

Most economic development agents in the region value the importance of networking and
collaborating with one another. They understand the connections and resources they can access
through networking with others in the region but hesitate to take the first step or in some cases fail to
do so because of the lack of cooperation at the community level.

Realizing Complexity of Problem

When it comes to rural and economic development, the issue in defining the problem is nearly as big as
the problem itself. Stakeholders in the region have different views regarding the issues they face and as
such, they fail to collaborate with one another within their community to resolve the underlying issues.
Realizing the complexity of the issue is important in defining the obstacles associated with the problem
and working to find a solution for this issue.

Youth Interested in Moving to the Region

In North Central Kansas young former residents express a willingness to return to their communities
either because they want to raise their families in a familiar environment, or have older parents in need
of care. The individual or spouse may find jobs in modern occupations sparse or they may find that the
community lacks amenities. Most rural regions provide good quality of life but not the jobs. Regional
communities realize the problem and acknowledge the fact that kids need opportunities to return but
have not been able to make changes in the region to make the community more vibrant and thriving.

Other Learnings
The following are some of the key points we learned during the course of this project.

A Region as Defined is Not a Region

Most of the economic development agents define region by the geographical political boundary lines
that mark them. A city, county, or state is an administrative region but not an economic region. The
economic regions are not defined by the city or county lines but by the way transactions and money
flow take place within a region, the patterns of work flow in the region and the customer base for
businesses in the region. Regions are complex geographies that stretch far and generally are not
bounded by the traditional artificial political boundaries of school district, city, county, or state. Often
regions are defined by geographical features/barriers, cultural heritage, trade/commerce, commuter
patterns, or community gathering locations.
A region is not a stand-alone entity that can survive on its own. The region has to be linked to other
regions, with innovation networks woven in. A region cannot be defined by geographic boundaries
anymore; they have to be integrated well into other regions/communities and act as an inter-
dependent and inter-related entities working in cooperation with one another, supporting each other.

The Region Can No Longer Compete Being Cheap

The regions can no longer compete based on just being cheap and being able to attract new companies
into the region by offering them tax incentives, tax breaks, existing buildings and other facilities. The
cost advantage that brings a company into a region can also influence it to move to the next lowest cost
region. The businesses that are offered too much in a region without making any investment find it
quite easy to move operations elsewhere with a slight cost advantage.

Clusters, Networks and Development

The concept of industry clusters was originally developed as a way to characterize the critical mass of
economic activity within a given geographical area. Since then much good work has been done to
develop industry clusters and to strengthen what is already there. But our work in rural communities
has put more focus on identifying “Key Industries” rather than traditional “Industry Clusters” since
there may be insufficient critical mass around a specific industry to apply the traditional cluster
development methodologies. Likewise, the most recent thinking states there may be other, more
important ways to cluster rural businesses than through the output going through the door (traditional
NAICS code approach) or even the skill sets of those employed (Occupational Clusters). Maybe other
characteristics such as business life stages, local vs. traded commerce, behaviors, etc., are more
meaningful in rural regions where the shared experiences/issues are the critical mass rather than the
specific economic activity in the region.
Need of Different Approach in One Company Based Towns
Large communities can often support focused development that creates and supports existing clusters
to compete on an international scale. In smaller communities, artificial support for output based cluster
analysis creates two problems. The first problem arises from the lack of diversity in the number and
types of clusters in the area. The few preexisting industries already drive a large amount of
employment and activity in the area. Output based definitions reinforce clusters that can be driven by
economic factors from outside the area. The second major concern arises from the limited number of
firms within a cluster in an area where the number of employers involved is small. For the local
economic development offices, the job of supporting a single cluster without appearing to supporting a
single private entity exposes potential conflicts. The office that supports the single, albeit, important
business is now acting on behalf of that single entity that may or may not have the best interest of the
whole community at heart. This becomes painfully clear when a company changes ownership and a
plant is forced to move or close down. To avoid this potential issue many economic development
offices find themselves reverting to the comparatively safe activity of business recruitment over
business retention despite low success rates of such activities.

Social Networks in the Region

The social maps of a region can very well identify the relationships within the region, between
organizations and also the holes that exist in the region. Drawing an accurate sociogram of a region
requires significant input from the regional players. The process of collecting information from the
regional players and more importantly getting them to participate in the process can be a difficult task.
Smaller communities are usually marked by closely tied social networks where issues of trust and
information usage arise when asked for direct names of social contacts.
Secondly, just asking people about who you know and recording the frequency of interaction just
generates a picture of who talks to whom and how frequently for a region. However, in order to
understand the kind of relationship that exists among them, we included another variable, ‘quality of
information exchanged’, in the study. The aim was to understand if frequency of interaction and
quality of interaction are correlated. We have generated different maps for both the variables that
present a comparative picture of ‘how much’ and ‘what’ of the talks.

Wicked Problems and Rural Development

The issues raised in the study attest rural development issues can be complex, incomplete,
contradictory, and have changing requirements. Solutions to them are often difficult to recognize
because of complex social and technical interdependencies. Policy development with respect to
distressed communities and/or rural communities clearly qualify as “wicked problems” in that many
of the underpinnings that most rural communities were founded on have fundamentally changed and
will not be retrievable no matter how hard a community works to bring back a simpler, more prosaic
time. In conducting the qualitative interview process of the project, it was evident that the diversity of
opinion of the issues that rural communities face and the potential solutions that people have to solve
the problem can contradict one another. Unfortunately many people believe they are trying to solve a
one-dimensional problem when in reality they fail to recognize the domino effect that a series of past
and current events are having on the ability to “make things right” again. Regional leaders and
organizations must find ways to unpack these issues and disaggregate them into solvable issues while
better understanding their interrelatedness.
Appendices
Appendix A – Questionnaires and Interview Schedule
Version 1: Questionnaire for Community Leaders
Regional Business Innovation Assessment
(For community leaders)
This study is sponsored by the North Central Regional Planning Commission and seeks to better define
the innovation readiness of the North Central Kansas business community. Its aim is to understand the
impacts of current policy, available resources, and the networks that exist, linking businesses to others
inside and outside the region. Information gleaned from this study will be used to develop strategies
on how North Central Kansas can be improved as a home to business and thereby make it a more high-
performing community.
All responses will be kept anonymous and confidential. While your participation is solely voluntary,
we ask that you take a few minutes and respond; since you are a leader in the region and we need your
insights and opinions. Please use the attached envelope to send back the completed survey.

How far reaching are the geographic limits of the community or region served by your business?

City County Multiple Multi-city Multi-city State Multiple Nation

Limits Limits Counties within the same across counties States
□ □
county
□ □ □ □ □
□

Regional Business Environment (Please check one box in each row)

In this section, we are interested in learning about how each of the following factors affect businesses in the
region. Please rate the region’s current performance (level) on each factor.

Section 1 Very Harmful Neither Beneficial Very Not

Harmful Harmful Beneficial Applicable
nor (N/A)
Beneficial

1. The cost of doing business □ □ □ □ □ □

in your region (specifically,
the cost of real estate, wages
& salaries and utilities)

2. The region’s cost of living □ □ □ □ □ □

for employees
3. The region’s overall □ □ □ □ □ □
quality of life (e.g. climate,
cultural and recreational
opportunities)

4. The overall quality of the □ □ □ □ □ □

higher education institutes

5. The quality of technical □ □ □ □ □ □

assistance offered by
regional colleges and
universities to businesses

6. The availability of workers □ □ □ □ □ □

in the region with the skills
businesses require

7. Availability of required □ □ □ □ □ □
number of workers

8. The availability of capital □ □ □ □ □ □

in the region

9. The availability in the □ □ □ □ □ □

region of specialized
facilities and laboratories for
product testing and
development

10. The quality of the □ □ □ □ □ □

region’s specialized
suppliers

11. The regional availability □ □ □ □ □ □

of demanding customers

12. State and local □ □ □ □ □ □

governmental regulations
and permitted procedures
affecting businesses

13.The level of taxation □ □ □ □ □ □

affecting business (relative to
other regions)
14. The effectiveness of □ □ □ □ □ □
government-sponsored
growth incentives (tax
breaks, seed funding, etc)

15. The quality of □ □ □ □ □ □

promotional and marketing
campaigns featuring the
region

Summary

16. Considering all the factors presented so far, how □ Poor Location
would you currently rate your region overall as a
□ Fair Location
place for a business to succeed?
□ Good Location

□ Very Good Location

□ Excellent Location

17. In five years, do you believe the quality of your □ Decline

region as a place for doing business to succeed will
□ Stay the same
decline, stay the same, or improve?
□ Improve

18. With regard to state and local government programs and policies, please list and explain the most
critical issues that should be addressed to improve the prospects of success of businesses in your
region.
19. With regard to regional universities and technical colleges, please list and explain the most critical
issues that should be addressed to improve the prospects of success of businesses in your region.
II. Innovation Networks (Please check one box in each row)

In this section we are interested in understanding how various regional institutions help businesses to spark
innovation (includes developing and commercializing new products as well as making improvements to
existing products, services or business processes). Overall how valuable is interaction with each of the
following regional institutions to business’s capacity to innovate?

REGIONAL Not at all Somewhat Valuable Quite Extremely Not Applicable

INSTITUTIONS valuable Valuable Valuable Valuable (N/A)

1. Educational □ □ □ □ □ □
Institutes

2. Professional Service □ □ □ □ □ □
Firms
3. Regional Customers □ □ □ □ □ □

4. Regional Suppliers □ □ □ □ □ □

5. Other Businesses in □ □ □ □ □ □
the region

6. Banks □ □ □ □ □ □

7. Venture capital □ □ □ □ □ □
Firms

8. Angel Investors □ □ □ □ □ □

9. Government □ □ □ □ □ □
agencies

10. Industry or Cluster □ □ □ □ □ □

Association

11. Non-professional □ □ □ □ □ □
Associations (alumni
clubs, athletic clubs,
etc.)

12. Entrepreneurial □ □ □ □ □ □
Networks

13. Business Assistance □ □ □ □ □ □

Centers

14. Please list, by name, the most valuable institutions to innovation for the businesses in your region.
III. Regional Norms and Attitudes (Please check one box in each row)

In this section we are interested in learning about the dynamics of the business and civic environment of
your region.

Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

Disagree Agree

1. New residents can easily integrate into the □ □ □ □ □

regional business community

2. The region is a welcoming, tolerant, and □ □ □ □ □

attractive place for people of diverse
backgrounds
3. Leaders in the region are responsive to the □ □ □ □ □
needs of all the regional residents,
irrespective of ethnicity, cultural heritage,
gender, and lifestyle

4. The business culture in the region □ □ □ □ □

understands failure as part of the learning
and innovation process

5. People from different industry and □ □ □ □ □

economic sectors frequently interact in the
region (e.g., bankers and engineers,
manufacturers and tourism providers)

6. The region celebrates the growth of □ □ □ □ □

companies, not just the absolute size of
companies

7. Artists and business-people frequently □ □ □ □ □

interact in region

8. Local government institutions eagerly □ □ □ □ □

partner with the private sector to promote
new business development

9. Business leaders in the region treat □ □ □ □ □

entrepreneurs, startups, and new companies
as full partners in all aspects of industry
cooperation

10. Business leaders proactively share □ □ □ □ □

information and resources when possible

11. Regional residents actively participate in □ □ □ □ □

community development organizations and
projects

12. Successful business people in the region □ □ □ □ □

actively invest in economic development
projects and start-up ventures

13. Considering your entire regional business environment, please list and explain the most important
regional issue(s) that should be addressed to improve the prospects of success of businesses in your
region.
IV. Social Network Analysis (For questions 3,4,5 & 8, please check all that apply)

We are trying to understand how people interact with those around them. These are known as the social
networks of a person. Please tell us a bit about the social networks in your region.

1 Do people in your region ever get together □ Yes □ No

to discuss issues related to your region?
Please go to next section

2 Are these groups, formally organized? □ Yes □ No

Please go to question 5

3 Where do the members of such formal □ Office of a member

groups usually meet?
□ Office of some government organization

□ At formal conventions/conferences

□ Some other place (please specify)

4 How frequently do these groups meet? □ Have regular meetings

□ Meet only in some special circumstances/events

□ Rarely have organized meetings

5 Where do the members of informal groups □ Coffee Shops

usually meet?
□ Clubs

□ Churches

□ Games

□ Some other place (please specify)

6 Have these collaborative groups helped Very Somewhat A little Not at all Don’t
the region to develop? much bit know
□ □
□
□ □

7 Have these collaborative groups helped Very Somewhat A little Not at all Don’t
individual business owners in some way? much bit know
□ □
□
□ □

8 How have these networks helped the □ Workforce training

region?
□ Training workshops for owners/key employees

□ Information about markets

 □ Joint procurement of raw material

□ Joint activities for promoting business in region

□ Sharing of knowledge

□ Other(please specify)

V Demographics (Please check one box in each row)

Please complete this brief background section. All information will be kept confidential.

1. Name

2. Name and address of your organization

3. Your Title/Position

4. Your definition of your region (list counties,

cities, etc.)

5. What kind of services you provide to the

businesses in the region?

6. How long have you lived in the region? □ Less than 2 years

□ 2 to 5 years

□ 5 to 15 years

□ 15+ years

7. In your opinion, how is your region’s □ Will grow rapidly

industry going to change in the coming 5 years
□ Will grow slowly

□ Will be stagnant

□ Will decline

□ Will face threat from emerging substitutes

8. If willing to be contacted about your views, □ Phone

please provide (optional):
□ Email

□ Mailing Address

Thank you for your time!

Version 2: Questionnaire for Business Owners
Regional Business Innovation Assessment
(Business Owners)
This study is sponsored by the North Central Regional Planning Commission and seeks to better define
the innovation readiness of the North Central Kansas business community. Its aim is to understand the
impacts of current policy, available resources, and the networks that exist, linking businesses to others
inside and outside the region. Information gleaned from this study will be used to develop strategies
on how North Central Kansas can be improved as a home to businesses and thereby make it a more
high-performing community.
All responses will be kept anonymous and confidential. While your participation is solely voluntary,
we ask that you take a few minutes and respond; since you are a business owner in the region and we
need your insights and opinions. Please use the attached envelope to send back the completed survey.

How far reaching are the geographic limits of the community or region served by your business? (This may
not be the market for end products, but provides for other business needs like raw materials, workforce,
finance, assistance, etc)

City County Multiple Multi-city within Multi-city State Multiple Nation

Limits Limits Counties the same county across counties States
□ □
□ □ □ □ □ □

Business Environment
(Please check one box in each row)

In this section we are interested in learning about how each of the following factors affects your business.
Please rate the region’s current performance (level) on each factor.

Section 1 Very Harmful Neither Beneficial Very Not

Harmful to your Harmful to your Beneficial Applicable
to your business nor business to your (N/A)
business Beneficial to business
your
business

1. The cost of doing business □ □ □ □ □ □

in your region (specifically,
the cost of real estate, wages
and salaries and utilities)

2. The region’s cost of living □ □ □ □ □ □

for your employees
3. The region’s overall □ □ □ □ □ □
quality of life (e.g. climate,
cultural and recreational
opportunities)

4. The overall quality of the □ □ □ □ □ □

educational institutes

5. The quality of technical □ □ □ □ □ □

assistance offered by
regional colleges and
universities to businesses

6. The availability of workers □ □ □ □ □ □

in the region with the skills
businesses require

7. Availability of required □ □ □ □ □ □
number of workers

8. The availability of capital □ □ □ □ □ □

in the region

9. The availability in the □ □ □ □ □ □

region of specialized
facilities and laboratories for
product testing and
development

10. The quality of the □ □ □ □ □ □

region’s specialized
suppliers

11. The regional availability □ □ □ □ □ □

of demanding customers

12. State and local □ □ □ □ □ □

governmental regulations
and permitted procedures
affecting businesses

13.The level of taxation □ □ □ □ □ □

affecting business (relative to
other regions)
14. The effectiveness of □ □ □ □ □ □
government-sponsored
growth incentives (tax
breaks, seed funding, etc)

15. The quality of

promotional and marketing
campaigns featuring the
region

Summary

16. Considering all the factors presented so far, how □ Poor Location
would you currently rate your region overall as a
□ Fair Location
place for your business to succeed?
□ Good Location

□ Very Good Location

□ Excellent Location

17. In five years, do you believe the quality of your □ Decline

region as a place for your business to succeed will
□ Stay the same
decline, stay the same, or improve?
□ Improve

18. With regard to state and local government programs and policies, please list and explain the most
critical issues that should be addressed to improve your business’s prospects for success.
19. With regard to regional universities and technical colleges, please list and explain the most critical
issues that should be addressed to improve your business’s prospects for success.
Innovation Networks
(Please check one box in each row)

In this section we are interested in understanding how your relationships with other regional institutions
help your business to be innovative (includes developing and commercializing new products as well
making improvements to existing products, services or business processes). Overall how valuable is
interaction with each of the following regional institutions to your business’s capacity to innovate?

REGIONAL Not at all Somewhat Valuable Quite Extremely Not Applicable

INSTITUTIONS Valuable Valuable Valuable Valuable (N/A)

1. Educational □ □ □ □ □ □
Institutes

2. Professional Service □ □ □ □ □ □
Firms
3. Regional Customers □ □ □ □ □ □

4. Regional Suppliers □ □ □ □ □ □

5. Other Businesses in □ □ □ □ □ □
your Industry

6. Banks □ □ □ □ □ □

7. Venture Capital □ □ □ □ □ □
Firms

8. Angel Investors □ □ □ □ □ □

9. Government □ □ □ □ □ □
Agencies

10. Industry or Cluster □ □ □ □ □ □

Association

11. Non-professional □ □ □ □ □ □
Associations (alumni
clubs, athletic clubs,
etc.)

12. Entrepreneurial □ □ □ □ □ □
Networks

13. Business Assistance □ □ □ □ □ □

Centers

14. Please list, by name, the most valuable institutions to your business’s innovation
III. Regional Norms and Attitudes
(Please check one box in each row)

In this section we are interested in learning about the dynamics of the business and civic environment of
your region.

Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

Disagree Agree

1. New residents can easily integrate into the □ □ □ □ □

regional business community
2. The region is a welcoming, tolerant, and □ □ □ □ □
attractive place for people of diverse
backgrounds

3. Leaders in the region are responsive to the □ □ □ □ □

needs of all the regional residents,
irrespective of ethnicity, cultural heritage,
gender or lifestyle

4. The business culture in the region □ □ □ □ □

understands failure as part of the learning
and innovation process

5. People from different industry and □ □ □ □ □

economic sectors frequently interact in the
region (e.g., bankers and engineers,
manufacturers and tourism providers)

6. The region celebrates the growth of □ □ □ □ □

companies, not just the absolute size of
companies

7. Artists and business-people frequently □ □ □ □ □

interact in region

8. Local government institutions eagerly □ □ □ □ □

partner with the private sector to promote
new business development

9. Business leaders in the region treat □ □ □ □ □

entrepreneurs, startups, and new companies
as full partners in all aspects of industry
cooperation

10. Business leaders proactively share □ □ □ □ □

information and resources when possible

11. Regional residents actively participate in □ □ □ □ □

community development organizations and
projects

12. Successful business people in the region □ □ □ □ □

actively invest in economic development
projects and start-up ventures
13. Considering your entire regional business environment, please list and explain the most important
regional issue(s) that should be addressed to improve your business’s prospects for success.
IV. Social Network Analysis (For questions 3, 4, 5 and 8, please check all that apply)

We are trying to understand how people interact with those around them. These are known as social
networks of a person. Please tell us a bit about what your social network does for you.

1 Do people in your region ever get together □ Yes □ No

to discuss issues related to your region?
Please go to next section

2 Are these groups formally organized? □ Yes □ No

Please go to question 5

3 Where do the members of such formal □ Office of a member

groups usually meet?
□ Office of some government organization

□ At formal conventions/conferences

□ Some other place (please specify)

4 How frequently do these groups meet? □ Have regular meetings

□ Meet only in some special circumstances/events

□ Rarely have organized meetings

5 Where do the members of informal groups □ Coffee Shops

usually meet?
□ Clubs

□ Churches

□ Games

□ Some other place (Please specify)

6 Have these collaborative groups helped Very Somewh A little Not Don’t Know
the region to develop? Much at bit at all
□
□
□ □ □

7 Have these collaborative groups helped Very Somewh A little Not Don’t Know
you in doing business? Much at bit at all
□
□
□ □ □
8 How have these groups helped the region? □ Workforce training

□ Training workshops for owners/key employees

□ Information about markets

□ Joint procurement of raw material

□ Joint activities for promoting business in region

□ Sharing of knowledge

□ Other(please specify)

V. Demographics
(Please check one box in each row)

Please complete this brief background section. All information will be kept confidential.

1. What percentage of your company’s sales is □ 100%

to customers within the region?
□ 75-99%

□ 50-74%

□ 10-49%

□ Less than 10 %

□ Don’t know

2. Where is your business headquartered? □ In the region

□ Elsewhere in US

□ Outside US

3. Does your company sell (export) products or □ Yes

services outside the US?
□ No

□ Don’t know
4. Which best describes the primary industry □ Aerospace
focus of your company?
□ Manufacturing
(If your company is involved with more than
□ Finance/Accounting
one focus, check the one that creates the
majority of its revenue) □ Insurance/Real Estate/ Legal

□ Medical/Dental/Health

□ Telecommunications Services

□ Transportation/Utilities

□ Construction/Architecture/Engineering

□ Data Processing Services

□ Wholesale/Resale/Distribution

□ Education

□ Marketing/Advertising/Entertainment

□ Research/Development Lab

□ Business Service/Consultant

□ Computer/Network Consultant

□ Hospitality/Tourism

□ Food Services

□ Agriculture

□ Other

5. What year was your business founded?

6. What year did your business first establish a

presence in this region?

7. Approximate number of people employed by In 12/2004 ________________

your business in the region.
In 12/2006 ________________

Current(2008) ______________

8. 2006 Gross Revenues (approx) □ <$ 1 million

□ $ 1-10 million

□ $ 11-50 million

□ $ 51 – 100 million

□ Over 100 million

□ Don’t know
9. Please estimate your company’s average □ Negative
annual revenue growth over the past three
□ 0%
years.
□ 1-5%

□ 6-10%

□ 11-20%

□ 20-100%

□ Over 100%

10. Which best describes your position in your □ Owner/President/CEO

company?
□ Senior Executive or Senior Official

□ Director / Vice President

□ Manager

□ Other(Please specify) __________________

11. How long have you lived in the region? □ Less than 2 years

□ 2 to 5 years

□ 5 to 15 years

□ 15+ years

12. In your opinion, how is your business’s □ Will grow rapidly

industry going to change in coming 5 years
□ Will grow slowly
(please give your opinion for the US industry
irrespective of your business sector or region) □ Will be stagnant

□ Will decline

□ Will face threat from emerging substitutes

13. If willing to be contacted about your views, □ Name

please provide
□ Phone

□ Email

□ Mailing Address

Thank you for your opinions!

Version 3: Questionnaire for Banks

Regional Business Innovation Assessment
(Banks)
This study is sponsored by the North Central Regional Planning Commission and seeks to better define
the innovation readiness of the North Central Kansas business community. Its aim is to understand the
impacts of current policy, available resources, and the networks that exist, linking businesses to others
inside and outside the region. Information gleaned from this study will be used to develop strategies
on how North Central Kansas can be improved as a home to business and thereby make it a more high-
performing community.
All responses will be kept anonymous and confidential. While your participation is solely voluntary,
we ask that you take a few minutes and respond; since yours is a leading bank in the region and we
need your insights and opinions. Please use the attached envelope to send back the completed survey.

How far reaching are the geographic limits of the community or region served by your bank?

City County Multiple Multi-city within Multi-city across State Multiple Nation
Limits Limits Counties the same county counties States
□ □
□ □ □ □ □ □

Regional Business Environment (Please check one box in each row)

In this section, we are interested in learning about how each of the following factors affect businesses in the
region. Please rate the region’s current performance (level) on each factor.

Section 1 Very Harmful Neither Beneficial Very Not

Harmful Harmful Beneficial Applicable
nor (N/A)
Beneficial

1. The cost of doing business □ □ □ □ □ □

in your region (specifically,
the cost of real estate, wages
& salaries and utilities)

2. The region’s cost of living □ □ □ □ □ □

for employees of a business

3. The region’s overall □ □ □ □ □ □

quality of life (e.g. climate,
cultural and recreational
opportunities)

4. The overall quality of the □ □ □ □ □ □

higher education institutes
5. The quality of technical □ □ □ □ □ □
assistance offered by
regional colleges and
universities to businesses

6. The availability of workers □ □ □ □ □ □

in the region with the skills
businesses require

7. Availability of required □ □ □ □ □ □
number of workers

8. The availability of capital □ □ □ □ □ □

in the region

9. The availability in the □ □ □ □ □ □

region of specialized
facilities and laboratories for
product testing and
development

10. The quality of the □ □ □ □ □ □

region’s specialized
suppliers

11. The regional availability □ □ □ □ □ □

of demanding customers

12. State and local □ □ □ □ □ □

governmental regulations
and permitted procedures
affecting businesses

13.The level of taxation □ □ □ □ □ □

affecting business (relative to
other regions)

14. The effectiveness of □ □ □ □ □ □

government-sponsored
growth incentives (tax
breaks, seed funding, etc)

15. The quality of □ □ □ □ □ □

promotional and marketing
campaigns featuring the
region
Summary

16. Considering all the factors presented so far, □ Poor Location

how would you currently rate your region
□ Fair Location
overall as a place for a business to succeed?
□ Good Location
□ Very Good Location
□ Excellent Location

17. In five years, do you believe the quality of □ Decline

your region as a place for doing business to
□ Stay the same
succeed will decline, stay the same, or improve?
□ Improve

18. With regard to state and local government programs and policies, please list and explain the
most critical issues that should be addressed to improve the prospects of success of businesses in
your region.

19. With regard to regional universities and technical colleges, please list and explain the most
critical issues that should be addressed to improve the prospects of success of businesses in your
region.

II. Innovation Networks (Please check one box in each row)

In this section we are interested in understanding how various regional institutions help businesses to spark
innovation (includes developing and commercializing new products as well as making improvements to
existing products, services or business processes). Overall how valuable is interaction with each of the
following regional institutions to business’s capacity to innovate?

REGIONAL Not at all Somewhat Valuable Quite Extremely Not Applicable

INSTITUTIONS valuable Valuable Valuable Valuable (N/A)

1. Educational □ □ □ □ □ □
Institutes

2. Professional Service □ □ □ □ □ □
Firms

3. Regional Customers □ □ □ □ □ □

4. Regional Suppliers □ □ □ □ □ □

5. Other Businesses in □ □ □ □ □ □
the region
6. Banks □ □ □ □ □ □

7. Venture capital □ □ □ □ □ □
Firms

8. Angel Investors □ □ □ □ □ □

9. Government □ □ □ □ □ □
agencies

10. Industry or Cluster □ □ □ □ □ □

Association

11. Non-professional □ □ □ □ □ □
Associations (alumni
clubs, athletic clubs,
etc.)

12. Entrepreneurial □ □ □ □ □ □
Networks

13. Business Assistance □ □ □ □ □ □

Centers

14. Please list, by name, the most valuable institutions to innovation for the businesses in your region.
III. Regional Norms and Attitudes (Please check one box in each row)

In this section we are interested in learning about the dynamics of the business and civic environment of
your region.

Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

Disagree Agree

1. New residents can easily integrate into the □ □ □ □ □

regional business community

2. The region is a welcoming, tolerant, and □ □ □ □ □

attractive place for people of diverse
backgrounds

3. Leaders in the region are responsive to the □ □ □ □ □

needs of all the regional residents,
irrespective of ethnicity, cultural heritage,
gender, and lifestyle

4. The business culture in the region □ □ □ □ □

understands failure as part of the learning
and innovation process

5. People from different industry and □ □ □ □ □

economic sectors frequently interact in the
region (e.g., bankers and engineers,
manufacturers and tourism providers)

6. The region celebrates the growth of □ □ □ □ □

companies, not just the absolute size of
companies

7. Artists and business-people frequently □ □ □ □ □

interact in region

8. Local government institutions eagerly □ □ □ □ □

partner with the private sector to promote
new business development

9. Business leaders in the region treat □ □ □ □ □

entrepreneurs, startups, and new companies
as full partners in all aspects of industry
cooperation

10. Business leaders proactively share □ □ □ □ □

information and resources when possible

11. Regional residents actively participate in □ □ □ □ □

community development organizations and
projects

12. Successful business people in the region □ □ □ □ □

actively invest in economic development
projects and start-up ventures

13. Considering your entire regional business environment, please list and explain the most important
regional issue(s) that should be addressed to improve the prospects of success of businesses in your
region.
14. How well does your bank fit into the community, in terms of services provided & linkages with
community members?
IV. Social Network Analysis (For questions 3, 4, 5 & 8, please check all that apply)

We are trying to understand how people interact with those around them. These are known as the social
networks of a person. Please tell us a bit about the social networks in your region.
1 Do people in your region ever get together □ Yes □ No
to discuss issues related to your region?
Please go to next section

2 Are these groups, formally organized? □ Yes □ No

Please go to question 5

3 Where do the members of such formal □ Office of a member

groups usually meet?
□ Office of some government organization

□ At formal conventions/conferences

□ Some other place (please specify)

4 How frequently do these groups meet? □ Have regular meetings

□ Meet only in some special circumstances/events

□ Rarely have organized meetings

5 Where do the members of informal groups □ Coffee Shops

usually meet?
□ Clubs

□ Churches

□ Games

□ Some other place (please specify)

6 Have these collaborative groups helped Very Somewh A little Not Don’t know
the region to develop? much at bit at all
□
□
□ □ □

7 Have these collaborative groups helped Very Somewh A little Not Don’t know
individual business owners in some way? much at bit at all
□
□
□ □ □

8 How have these networks helped the □ Workforce training

region?
□ Training workshops for owners/key employees

□ Information about markets

□ Joint procurement of raw material

□ Joint activities for promoting business in region

□ Sharing of knowledge

□ Other(please specify)

V Demographics (Please check one box in each row)

Please complete this brief background section. All information will be kept confidential.

1. Name

2. Name and address of your bank

3. Your Title/Position

4. Your definition of your region (list counties,

cities, etc.)

5. What kind of services you provide to the

businesses in the region?

6. How long have you lived in the region? □ Less than 2 years

□ 2 to 5 years

□ 5 to 15 years

□ 15+ years

7. In your opinion, how is your region’s □ Will grow rapidly

industry going to change in the coming 5 years
□ Will grow slowly

□ Will be stagnant

□ Will decline

□ Will face threat from emerging substitutes

8. If willing to be contacted about your views, □ Phone

please provide (optional):
□ Email

□ Mailing Address

Thank you for your time!

Interview Schedule
Regional Innovation Assessment & Networking Study
Government, Business Associations & Economic Development Organizations
Date: ____________
Name ______________________________________________________________
Organization _________________________________________________________
Contact Information ____________________________________________________
Regional Development
1. How region developed in past
a. Location Advantage
b. Birth place ties
c. Effort to keep money in community
2. Present economic performance
a. Compared to other counties
b. What industries/business doing good. Why?
c. Major factors for success
d. Major assets of community
3. Most important sister communities
a. Trying to partner with which county
b. First choice to form relations
4. Barriers to economic prosperity
a. What does community lack
b. Problems
c. Opportunities / Gaps that can be filled
Network Focus in Development
5. What sorts of networks present
a. Formal
b. Informal
c. Kind of discussion
d. Importance
6. How did they form
 a. When
b. Part of formal effort
7. How have the networks helped
a. Provide ideas
b. Mentoring
c. Finances
d. Training
Innovation Specific Questions
8. What networks help in innovation
a. New ideas come up in informal discussions
b. Tie in with university or private R&D lab
c. Local education institutions
9. Major sources of new ideas and information for innovation
a. Local social networks
b. State or local government networks
c. Educational institutes
d. Private R&D labs
Government
10. Programs/Policies that help
11. How do they affect businesses
a. Help in reducing cost
b. Effort to bring in new suppliers, manufacturers & service
providers
12. State or local government forums present?
a. Effort to bring together industry, government, universities & other
support organizations
New Business Formation
13. New business - Internal or attract new companies from outside the region
a. Encourage local entrepreneurship
b. Attract outside companies to set up a unit in region
c. Mostly high-growth or life style entrepreneurs?
14. Founders – local people or people who have moved to the area to start a business
 15. Role of networks
a. Access to local resources
b. Information about market
c. Help with setting up business
16. Place Investors
Support Institutions – present? What relation you have with each?
17. VCs
18. R & D Community
19. Incubators
20. Technology Licensing Offices
21. Industry Associations
22. Angel Investors
23. Local Technical /community colleges
Appendix – B
Social Networking template
Please help us in understanding your social network by telling us the quality of information received
for each interaction and the frequency of interaction with the listed individuals. Use the tables below to
respond about each individual by selecting the choice from drop down menu. You may add more
names at the end of the list if you wish.

Please type in your name Your Name

Frequency of Interaction Quality of Information

D = Daily H – Highly Important/Critical for your

work

W = Weekly I – Important for your work

M = Monthly R – Routine/Regular

Q = Quarterly N – Not important for your work but good

to know

Y = Once a year or less C – Casual …. Weather Discussions

Name of Organization Contact Person Location Frequency of Quality of

Interaction Information

Economic Development

City of Abilene James Holland Abilene

City of Junction city Rod Barnes Junction city

Clay County Economic Jami Williams Clay Center

Development Group, Inc

CloudCorp Kirk Lowell Concordia

Dickinson County Economic Janelle Abilene

Development Dockendorf

North Central Regional Debra Peters Beloit

Planning Commission Business
Finance

Jewell County Economic Martha Matthews Jewell

Development

Lincoln County Economic Stanley Walker Lincoln

Development Foundation
Manhattan Chamber of Lyle Butler Manhattan
Commerce

Manhattan Chamber of John Pagen Manhattan

Commerce

Marshall County Economic George McCune Marysville

Development

Minneapolis Development Barry Hodges Minneapolis

Corporation

Mitchell County Economic Murray McGee Beloit

Development

North Central Regional Doug McKinney Beloit

Planning Commission

Republic County Economic Belleville

Development

Salina Airport Authority Tim Rogers Salina

Salina Area Chamber of Dennis Lauver Salina

Commerce

Salina Downtown, Inc Phyllis Klima Salina

Smoky Hill Development Rob Fillion Ellsworth

Corporation

Washington County Economic Christine L'Ecuyer Washington

Development

Kansas Department of Commerce

Carole Jordan Topeka

Community Development
Division Christine Topeka
Bohannon

Business Development Lyle Peterson Manhattan

Renee Lippincott Sterling

Office of Rural Opportunity
James Foster Colby
Representative
Corey Mohn Topeka

Sarah Larison Topeka

Rural Development Division Mari Tucker Topeka

Becki Rhoades Topeka

Workforce Services Division Susan Nickerson Topeka

 Bill Thompson Topeka

Support Institutes

Advanced Manufacturing Jeff Tucker Manhattan

Institute (AMI)

Center for Engagement and David E. Procter Manhattan

Community Development
(CECD)

Center for Engagement and Dan Kahl Manhattan

Community Development
(CECD)

Cloud County Community Richard Concordia

College Underbakke

Emporia State University Lisa L. Emporia

KSBDC Brumbaugh

Emporia State University Tom Byler Emporia

KSBDC

Fort Hays State University Ronald Newman Hays

KSBDC

Fort Hays University, Docking Gary Brinker Hays

Institute

Kansas Department of Health & Salina

Environment Jennifer Nichols

Kansas Department of Labor Margo Leonard Topeka

Kansas Farm Bureau Harry Watts Manhattan

Kansas Technology Enterprise Kevin Carr Topeka

Corporation (KTEC)

Mid-America Manufacturing Manhattan

Technology Center (MAMTC) Mark Chalfant

NetWork Kansas Steve Radley Wichita

North Central Kansas Technical Clark Coco Beloit

College

University of Kansas Genna Hurd Lawrence

University of Kansas Xanthippe Wedel Lawrence

University of Kansas Small Will Katz Lawrence

Business Development Center
(KU-KSBDC)
Washburn University Small Rick LeJuerrne Topeka
Business Development Center

Washburn University Small Scott Taddiken Topeka

Business Development Center

Washburn University Small John Addessi Topeka

Business Development Center

Washburn University Small Mary Ann Topeka

Business Development Center Riederer

Wichita State University Center Wichita

for Entrepreneurship Timothy L. Pett

North Central Kansas SBDC Linda Sutton Concordia

State Representative

District 106 Sharon Schwartz Topeka/Washington

District 107 Elaine Bowers Topeka/Concordia

District 108 Don Svaty Topeka/Ellsworth

District 109 Clay Aurand Topeka/Courtland

District 71 Charles Roth Topeka/Salina

State Senator

District 21 Mark Taddiken Clifton

District 24 Pete Brungardt Salina

District 35 Jay Emler Lindsborg

District 36 Janis Lee Kensington

Banks

Alta Vista State Bank John J. Alta Vista

Runnebaum

New Century Bank, N.A. Keith Anderson Belleville

Peoples Exchange Bank James M. Koch Belleville

First National Bank, Beloit David Dubbert Beloit

Guaranty State Bank & Trust Douglas R. Beloit

Company Johnson

State Bank of Blue Rapids John B. Schwartz Blue Rapids

Farmers & Merchants State Larry Conyac Cawker City
Bank, Cawker City

Cottonwood Valley Bank B. J. Linnens Cedar Point

Union State Bank, Clay Center Dwight A. Clay Center

Ferguson

Elk State Bank Patricia Dunkin Clyde

Exchange National Bank Stephan J. Mermis Cottonwood Falls

Farmers & Drovers Bank John H. White Council Grove

Swedish-American State Bank Michael E. Courtland

Johnson

State Bank of Delphos Thomas D. Delphos

McGavran

Farmers State Bank, Dwight Jan R. Oleen Dwight

Citizens State Bank & Trust Co. Machelle M. Ellsworth

Connally

ESB Financial Mike Sikes Emporia

First Community Bank Wes Condron Emporia

Lyon County State Bank Tommy N. Emporia

Thompson

Dickinson County Bank Brent McKeeman Enterprise

Flint Hills Bank of Eskridge Pamela D. Landis Eskridge

First National Bank, Frankfort Jay P. Kennedy Frankfort

The Citizens National Bank Bradley K. Greenleaf

Padgett

Signature Bank KC Julie Huber Haddam

First National Bank, Harveyville Richard H. Harveyville

Mohler

The Bank of Holyrood Gerald Pauley Holyrood

First National Bank, Hope Danny R. Emig Hope

Jamestown State Bank John F. Herbin Jamestown

Central National Bank Rodger Dean Junction City

First National Bank & Trust Kenneth Junction City

Company of Junction City Mortensen

Millennium Bank Rex Matney Junction City

Leonardville State Bank Sharon K. Sando Leonardville

Lorraine State Bank Ted Grubb Lorraine

Community First National Bank Rob Stitt Manhattan

Kansas State Bank of Manhattan Steven K. Burr Manhattan

Landmark National Bank Michael E. Manhattan

Scheopner

The Trust Company of Mark Manhattan

Manhattan Knackendoffel

State Exchange Bank Rick W. Diamond Mankato

Stockgrowers State Bank James Stallbaumer Maple Hill

Citizens State Bank of Kirk Bradford Marysville

Marysville

First Commerce Bank Marc J. Marysville

Degenhardt

United Bank & Trust Timothy L. Allen Marysville

Citizens State Bank Daren Sanders Miltonvale

Olpe State Bank Harold Engle, Jr. Olpe

Union State Bank, Olsburg Dan A. Holt Olsburg

Bank of Palmer Bruce E. Meyer Palmer

Tightwad Bank Donald S. Higdon Reading

The Riley State Bank of Riley Kent W. Doyen Riley

The St. Marys State Bank Brian L. Vaubel St. Marys

BANK VI Alan Eichelberger Salina

The Bennington State Bank Kent M. Berkley Salina

First Bank Kansas Kent Buer Salina

Sunflower Bank, N.A. James E. Salina

VanEmburgh

UMB National Bank of America William C. Salina

Watson

Astra Bank Ronald S. Evert Scandia

TriCentury Bank Ronald P. Simpson

Waldmann

Solomon State Bank Dennis J. Riordan Solomon

The First National Bank of Billie Kay Bodie Summerfield

Summerfield
Thunder Bank Mark Obermueller Sylvan Grove

Bank of Tescott Steven George Tescott

Farmers & Merchants State Phil S. Barber Wakefield

Bank, Wakefield

First National Bank, Wamego Charles R. White Wamego

Kaw Valley State Bank & Trust Lanny L. Bosse Wamego

Co.

First National Bank, Washington Tim Matlack Washington

Farmers State Bank, James E. Moore Westmoreland

Westmoreland

Wilson State Bank Irvin Mitchell Wilson

Citizens State Bank and Trust Jaret Moyer Woodbine

Company

Other Names (Please add names if you want to)