ANN ARBOR ? MichBio Executive Director Stephen Rapundalo said
Michigan has created a buzz out there ? the Upper Hand ads in tandem with the state-supported 21st Century Jobs Fund, are generating a lot of interest among the nation’s biotech community.
Rapundalo, in his remarks during the MichBio annual meeting Tuesday night in Ann Arbor, said he heard the buzz while attending the BIO Fly-In in Washington, D.C.a week ago – the annual gathering of all state bioscience affiliate organizations on Capitol Hill to lobby our congressional delegations on issues important to the industry. I was approached by no less than 8 of my counterparts from across the nation all with the same quip ? ?What?s with those TV ads?? What they were referring to of course, were the marketing ads featuring Michigan?s own Jeff Daniels touting the business benefits of locating in our Great Lakes State to out-of-state entrepreneurs, including those in the life sciences ? like this one for instance.
Simply put, Michigan has created a buzz out there ? the Upper Hand ads in tandem with the state-supported 21st Century Jobs Fund. Certainly, today?s news that MPI Research will be expanding significantly into downtown Kalamazoo in former Pfizer facilities and create many new jobs, would support the perceived notion that the life sciences industry in Michigan is alive, and indeed thriving.
The issue of whether the state is behind the life sciences was the topic of discussion at a Western Michigan Business Review Leaders? Speak panel session last month.
Mike Jandernoa, former CEO of Perrigo, and a member of the SEIC Board and MEDC Advisory Board, was Keynote Speaker at the event ? his commentary almost seemed like a preacher at a revival gathering, and he concluded not surprisingly that yes, Michigan is definitely behind life sciences with a strong state infrastructure, and many examples of business growth and success.
I?ve listed just a few indicators of positive support and outcomes in the state?s life sciences industry. I believe they?re pretty self-explanatory and we should be proud of those successes.
However, discussion at the Governor?s Roundtable on Commercialization & Innovation in the Life Sciences last fall, took a little more sobering view, and that included comments by Mike Jandernoa. Similarly, my own travels around the state and in talking with numerous small to large businesses have highlighted a number of areas of similar concern.
The fact is that many in the industry indicate that rhetoric and promotions don?t necessarily equate with the reality of growing and sustaining the new life science companies established in Michigan during the last 5 years. While various support programs exist and intent has been good, implementation has been inconsistent at best, and even poor at times. Entrepreneurs bemoan the poor capacity for capital attraction, and the perception of an unfriendly business environment. Tax incentives or policies meant to improve companies? bottom lines have instead shown preliminary signs of doing the opposite.
Life science professionals wonder if our elected officials have the patience to see through strategic initiatives that require maturation periods longer than their terms limits. Some question whether the state is truly committed to the life sciences for the long-term? ?Economy-du-jour? was an often-mentioned term. Most concerns were over leadership ? namely, who in the state was charting the course for life sciences, bringing together various stakeholder groups in dialog and action, integrating resources that are easily accessible and centralized, to insure measurable outcomes and success.
Taking all that in consideration, I would have to give Michigan only a better than passing grade, or a ?B-?. There?s much room for improvement. The challenge is there ? but it is surmountable and it is in our own collective interests to insure that the state?s life sciences industry continues to grow and takes its rightful place among the other leading biotech states.
So what does all this mean for MichBio? What should MichBio?s role be in impacting the future of life sciences growth in Michigan?
Rest assured that we?ve heard the many comments?such as ?MichBio should be taking the lead on this?, ?where?s MichBio on that??, or ?MichBio should be the one to bring it all together?. In essence, how do we live up to our mission statement?
The best way to respond is to describe the strategic planning process that the organization and the Board of Directors have engaged in over the last 6 months. To begin with, we?ve better defined the vision for MichBio?one that calls for MichBio to assume a more significant leadership role at the forefront of the state?s life sciences community.
In so doing, MichBio will direct its energies towards several key strategic priorities. Most importantly is education, where we hope to expand resources and programming ? both in regards to growing the stable of networking events like BioArbor, Kalamazoo BioTuesday, and developing professional development programs on topics relevant to life science businesses. Our focus on training means expanding the BioConnections to provide greater support for both the current and future workforce ? the job bank, internship program, student chapters, and career fairs.
Research is a new area for us, but one where we feel that MichBio must take a principal role ? this would involve coordinating the collection of vital statistics about the life sciences industry in Michigan, but more importantly we must pick up the mantle of leadership towards developing a roadmap for our industry?s future. All three of these areas ? education, training and research ? will be developed under the auspices of the MichBio Institute, a soon-to-be 501(c)(3) organization that was just incorporated yesterday, and will allow us to seek grant funding and charitable donations heretofore unavailable to MichBio due to our 501(c)(6) status as a trade association.
MichBio, the parent organization, will continue to focus in two primary areas. The first is advocacy where we hope to intensify our efforts both in Lansing, in conjunction with the Biotechnology Legislative Caucus, and in Washington, primarily through our affiliation with BIO. A key driver for developing a grass-roots advocacy infrastructure and set of policy positions, will rest with MichBio?s Public Policy Committee, due to be formed in the coming weeks. Our plan is to more regularly update the life sciences community about pending legislation and the potential impacts any new rules will have on your businesses. Ideally, we want our members be current on the issues and directly engage them with their elected representatives when the need arises.
Next, let me speak to the #1 priority of insuring that MichBio is the most valued life sciences membership organization in Michigan. This is where staff and Board of Directors is placing the most focus and energy these days, and our efforts tie directly to my comments a year ago regarding the need to develop a better portfolio of services, products and resources for members.
At an operational level, staff has been working to bring on board a new association management system to be integrated with a new and more manageable website, as well as planning to develop a more robust database of life science enterprises, services, and resources.
We?ve begun to enhance organizational capacity through the commitment and support of members who have volunteered to serve on MichBio committees.
For instance, the Membership Committee has been reengaged recently with new participants, and its first task is to develop an aggressive strategy to increase life science company membership.
We?ve been looking closely too at how to enhance the Preferred Provider pr
