View Single Post
  #6  
Old Posted Nov 20, 2019, 9:34 AM
Shawn Shawn is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Tokyo
Posts: 5,935
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd3189 View Post
Does it have to be this way for efficiency? For example, finance has always been centralized in New York and Chicago but there has been cities that also rose with and obtained their own famous institutions like San Francisco, Omaha, Charlotte, Atlanta, Miami, Dallas, etc. Media, whether it is television, movies, etc, is centralized in New York and Los Angeles, but still has visibility in Chicago, Atlanta, Jacksonville ( at one point) and probably a few others I don't know about.


The major centers of course can still be important, but it's beautiful when other cities are able to have sizable piece of the pie too. It would solve congestion problems and give people more options.
For some of the shiny trophy industries cities and states chase, yes, proximity does matter for efficiency. You will never see a major digital media agency pop up outside of a few usual suspects. This is for two reasons: agencies go where clients are based to maximize face time with key client decision makers, and talent goes to where agencies cluster because it gives them the most opportunities. I can jump from one agency to another, from media to client, from client to media, from media to publisher, etc etc, each time negotiating a raise or better terms. This isn’t possible in smaller metros.

I’m sure we will see a diffusion of back ops talent or development talent who can just use Slack or Teams remotely. But don’t expect to see all that much diffusion with the front end, client-facing roles. This goes for Finance, definitely goes for Life Sciences and biochem, fin-tech, ad-tech, etc.
Reply With Quote