I can’t help but feel that this blog misses a point.
Cities do, in fact, need to market themselves to the best and brightest. To attract and retain the talent that their businesses need, and the engaged citizens that will be their future leaders.
I entirely agree with the author’s stance that artists, creatives, and entrepreneurs are the people who, in many cases, give a city its soul, and make it a cool place to live. What I don’t understand is why he feels the definition of YP necessarily excludes those people. In many cities in which we work, YPOs have as their members incredibly talented and gifted people who are part of the creative economy.
In Saskatoon, some of the most engaged people I’ve met in the community are young entrepreneurs whose future business success depends on the continued vitality of the city.
I also don’t understand why the author sees talent attraction and retention as an ‘either/or’ proposition. No matter what acronym one chooses to use, a city that is attractive to young, talented knowledge workers will also likely be one that is attractive to artists, musicians, and other creatives.
I wonder if it might be more effective in the long run for the author to join in and support his city’s branding and marketing efforts, rather than suggesting from the sidelines that one particular group should be ‘ignored’?