The region has had multiple brands within it, each with its own slogan. Some defined a jurisdiction, while others defined the entire region. Many were tourism oriented.  Each entity invested time and money in developing them. Some caught on; some did not. Some were not even intentional but reflected a period in history or media.

For economic development to take hold and be successful going forward, the region needs to determine its brand vision and message and then galvanize around it. The brand should reflect the values and attributes required to intellectually and emotionally connect the region. The brand becomes, in essence, a report card on whether Recommendation #1 – to change the mindset – has taken hold and become assimilated into the region’s fabric.  The shared vision will also be fundamental to the focus of the larger Smarter Region project.

To develop an integrated regional brand vision, the following important questions need to be addressed:

1. What is the region’s current economic development brand? What is it made up of?
2. What elements strengthen the brand? What weakens it?
3. Why have historical rebranding efforts failed to yield stronger industrial diversification, capital investment, and job growth? What steps need to be taken this time to avoid failure?
4. How does the region want to position itself for economic growth and diversification?
5. What steps does the region need to take to redefine its shared economic development brand vision? When should these things happen, and in what order?
6. How will the region engage the public with this new shared economic development brand vision? Using what methods?
7. Who will be accountable for the ultimate shared regional brand vision and the next steps resulting in brand creation and management?
8. How will the shared regional brand vision continue to evolve over time? What governance, including roles and responsibilities, are needed to sustain the regional effort to yield desired results?

The IBMers recommended that the City of Reno, the original IBM grantee, consider “university town” as a meaningful economic identity. However, when the Smarter Cities project expanded into Smarter Region, it became necessary to re-visit the issue of identity and obtain regional buy-in regarding a shared vision among all the entities.  In November 2013, the Smarter Region Management Team requested that the Smarter Region Action Team develop a strategy to accomplish this goal.

The strategy is being headed up by a small team comprised of the former Chair of the Smarter Region Management Team and three members of the Smarter Region Action Team:

-Stephanie Kruse, past Chair of the Board of the Economic Development Authority of Western Nevada (EDAWN) and past chair of the Smarter Region Management Team

-Tina Iftiger, Vice President of Economic Development for the Reno Tahoe Airport Authority

-Stacie Huggins, Economic Development Specialist for the Reno Tahoe Airport Authority

-Maureen McKissick, Strategic Development Administrator for the City of Reno

The team created a survey comprised of 14 questions which were developed to guide facilitated focus groups as well as obtain public input via a web portal. To ensure the survey’s viability, the Team   “beta tested” it with the boards of EDAWN and The Chamber during December 2013 (approximately 55 total participants).  The results were illuminating: the process didn’t work as well with individuals who were not intimately involved with economic development. Based on the results, the team shortened the questionnaire, sharpened the nature of the solicited input, and recommended that outreach be undertaken solely through facilitated focus groups whose members were experienced with economic development. After a thorough discussion with the Management Team, the approved focus groups were:

1. Members of the Board of NAIOP
2. Members of the Board of WIN
3. The Governor’s Office of Economic Development key staff
4. Members of the Board and other major investors of EDAWN

We also incorporated the Rainforest community visioning exercise hosted by EDAWN in March 2014.

The focus groups were conducted during February - April 2014. Each of the groups was asked the following questions:

1. What exists that enables economic development and growth today?

1. Hard & soft infrastructure assets, e.g. fiber, transportation, regulation, FTZ, university
2. Features/attributes, e.g. open space, affordability, culture, workforce, social events
3. Perceptions, both external and internal

2. What is required to enhance economic development and growth by 2015?

1. Hard & soft infrastructure assets, e.g. fiber, transportation, regulation, FTZ, university
2. Features/attributes, e.g. open space, affordability, culture, workforce, social events
3. Perceptions, both external and internal

3. What should the region aspire to be in order ro achieve economic development success and growth by 2025?

At the conclusion of interviewing the four focus groups, consensus emerged around assets to build upon, improvements needed to compete, issues that rose to the top, and a potential brand vision. A summary is provided below.

The region’s assets to build on included:

• Location – proximity to markets, Tahoe, Bay
• Manufacturing start
• Tier 1 University
• Quality of life, outdoors, affordability, balance
• Highway, rail
• Tax structure
• Regulatory structure
• Small, approachable, access to elected officials
• Research institutions
• Unmanned Autonomous Systems/Unmanned Autonomous Vehicles
• Fiber network
• University of Nevada, School of Medicine
• Desert Research Institute
• Workforce, start-ups, entrepreneurs
• Telemedicine
• Airport, air service, cargo
• Logistics, distribution, e-commerce case

Improvements needed to compete included:

• Complete fiber loops
• Continue improvements to highways and air service
• Workforce: create quality and quantity in right sectors
• Improve downtown Reno
• Stop disparaging our community
• Create image/awareness campaign once we identify our identity
• Embrace whatever brand we choose (all entities)
• Continued investment in chosen industry sectors
• Continue investment in entrepreneurial sector
• Build upon sustainability/green/open space
• Stable tax structure
• Import of grow-your-own high quality, tech workforce

What rose to the top: the vision for 2025

• Innovation center
• State-of-the-art center for technology, our way
• National center for Unmanned Autonomous Systems/Unmanned Autonomous Vehicles
• Logistics/e-commerce hub
• Advanced manufacturing center/robotics/Industry 4.0
• Place for entrepreneurs with a life
• Space for maker-builders
• Community for forward-thinking, creative class
• National prominence for telemedicine
• Big data/data analytics center
• Place to get ahead/land of opportunity
• Quality educated workforce in areas we declare
• Great university integrated with community/business
• Great quality of life, diverse, recreation

The information that is gathered through this process will eventually culminate in the development of a new shared regional brand vision.  The new shared regional brand vision should accomplish specific goals. It should state a unique promise, should position against competition, and should drive transaction. A brand vision is not a slogan, a tag line, or a logo. Finally, a brand vision needs to have proofs: it needs to show that it is what it says it is.

A brand vision should reflect what a brand can and wants to become. The brand vision needs focused actions by all parties in order to be achieved: it takes commitment and hard work. Each party to the brand vision must develop “pillars,” attributes or principles which drive the brand down into the party’s operations and behaviors.  A brand vision is aspirational but not so disconnected from what could be reality that no one will accept it.

With the community inputs that have been collected so far, the small team has developed a preliminary draft of what could be the start of a shared regional brand vision.  The team will present some concepts at the Smarter Region Summit for the elected bodies’ consideration and discussion.  With approval, the team recommends including Smarter Region Leadership in the visioning process so that their input can be included in the development of a new shared regional economic development brand vision. Staff recommends the same facilitated approach that has been used to date with the four private-sector groups. The small team will continue the work of refining and developing a shared regional economic development vision and will bring back the results of the entire process for the Smarter Region Leadership’s consideration and review.

I move to approve Staff recommendation to continue the formulation of a shared regional economic development brand vision and will bring back to Smarter Region Leadership the results of this process.