Most Innovative Cities….The Winners Are…

Innovation analysts at 2thinknow released a list of the most innovative cities in the world. They evaluated 289 cities based on three factors: cultural assets, human infrastructure, and networked markets.

Cities were ranked on a one to ten scale in each category for a total possible index score of 30. Once index numbers were determined, cities were given the label of “node,” “nexus,” or “hub.”

Christopher Hire, executive director of 2thinknow, explains the process:

“Cities that have a high index score are nexus cities, followed by hub then node cities. A node city is a globally “competitive” score, so all cities should aim to be node cities. Node means they are hooked into global networks and connected to the backbone of the global innovation economy.

“Nexus and hub cities are the critical junctures of the innovation economy across multiple segments. We divide the urban economy into a pie, and assess the slices. A nexus city scores well in multiple segments of the urban innovation economy.”

How does your city rank? Did Seattle make the list???

Read more

Seattle Top City for Young Entrepreneurs, How Does Snohomish County Capitalize on This Strength?

Recently, Under30CEO ran a poll to find out what the top cities for young entrepreneurs were in the United States. Voters were asked to think about resources, schools, events, climate, and the social scene that a young entrepreneur looks for. The results are in.  Seattle was rated #10.

How does Snohomish County capitalize on this surrounding regional advantage and step up young entrepreneurship?

Read more

Seattle Tops Cybercrime List

Cybercrime, a threat that affects one in five online shoppers and cost Americans $560 million in 2009 due to online fraud, may hit closer to home than many realize. Norton from Symantec teamed up with independent research firm Sperling’s BestPlaces to find and expose the nation’s top 10 cities most vulnerable to cybercrime.

The following are ranked the Norton Top 10 Riskiest Online Cities:

1. Seattle
2. Boston
3. Washington, D.C.
4. San Francisco
5. Raleigh, N.C.
6. Atlanta
7. Minneapolis
8. Denver
9. Austin, Texas
10. Portland, Ore.

Read more here.

Venture Capital Firms Struggling to Raise Funds to Invest

Here is another sign of  our less than robust economic recovery. Entrepreneurs aren’t the only ones struggling to find capital in these choppy economic times. The venture capitalists who write the checks are encountering their own hard realities on the fundraising trail. A report out today from Thomson Reutuers and the National Venture Capital Association indicates that dollar commitments to VC funds dropped by 49 percent during the first quarter as just 38 funds raised $1.9 billion. That marks the lowest dollar total since the third quarter of 2003.

That could spell trouble for many Seattle area firms which will need to go out in the coming year or two in order to. As I’ve pointed out before, positive M&A and IPO exits for venture capital firms in the state have been few and far between. Already, one Seattle area firm — Frazier Technology Ventures —decided to pull the plug on its financing efforts last fall. Will others be forced to follow suit?

Source: TechFlash

Are Innovation Startups Weakening in the Seattle Area?

According to Tech Flash, “The Seattle area is supposed to be one of the country’s hotbeds of innovation. After all, this region has spawned Amazon.com and Microsoft, two of the biggest tech juggernauts on the planet, as well as successful companies such as Immunex and aQuantive. But if you’re to believe some of the recent rankings, Seattle’s innovation economy is simply striking out.” Implications for Snohomish County?

Life Sciences: Perceived Successful Organizational Strategies

Who is perceived to have the best organizational strategies for developing the life science sector or cluster? Click here to read a benchmarking study done for Detroit area leaders. By the way, Seattle is seen as one of the best! But Seattle and Washington State have two significant weaknesses according to the study:

The first is a perceived lack of commitment, financial and otherwise, on the part of the state government. The state ranked relatively low in per capita spending on R&D. Historically, this made it difficult for research institutions pursuing federal funding that required a “hard match” of state dollars as a prerequisite for federal funding. One of the consequences of this limited funding was that it made it more difficult for the state to attract the greatest research talent. Experience suggests that research talent flows to where the greatest research opportunities exist.

A second issue identified as a weakness was the lack of an organized public-private partnership. Without this infrastructure, the state has not been able to develop a coherent strategy or provide sufficient communication to relevant stakeholders. This shortcoming prevents Washington State from taking full advantage of the many innovative assets at its disposal. This also has prevented the state from fully capitalizing on the commercial potential of its available assets. As in other locations, many stakeholders feel that commercialization of life sciences has not been commensurate with the amount of research capacity.

Sustainable funding stream! Strategic collaboration! Sound familiar? These are two key issues for the stakeholders in Project Concentrus. There are lessons to be learned here.

Kiplinger Picks Seattle as One of Best Cities

Good news for Seattle and Snohomish County! Read the article.

Virtual Public Meetings

Virtual public meetings in Seattle: http://buildingconnections.seattle.gov/2009/08/05/virtual-meeting-how-is-your-neighborhood-doing/ (By the way, this is not a substitute for in-person contact and interaction)

How can we follow Seattle’s lead in this regard to help make Project Concentrus successful?