''I'm a talent-attraction expert,'' said Cortright. ''I know that the quality of life in a city is very important in [the ability] to anchor talent to that city.'' ...... ''It's not enough to educate your young people; you also have to pay attention to talent,'' Cortright said. ''You must build a community that makes them want to stay. That's a big challenge in the region because the most mobile tend to be the most entrepreneurial.''Cortright said ''close-in neighborhoods are the key to keeping young talent. Young people are much more likely to choose to live in close-in neighborhoods.''Dr. Luis Proenza, president of the University of Akron, said he is proud of the region's ability to keep UA's products.''We have 28,000 students each year at the University of Akron,'' he said, ''and 85 percent will stay in the region after they graduate.''We realize with the young, educated people that location matters. So long as they stay in the region, because it's the region that defines our economy and will define the long-term economic vitality for us all.''
Cortright thinks that Akron has a talent retention problem. He's wrong, as Dr. Proenza makes clear. Cortright is peddling more of the same brain drain nonsense. Akron has seen this act before from Next Generation Consulting. I'd expect much more from a self-professed talent attraction expert.
This misunderstanding stems from the sloppy analysis of net migration data. Once again, negative numbers are communicated as out-migration, an exodus of talent. Name one US city that has posted gains among the college educated thanks to improved retention. Makes me wonder why Cortright didn't have any recommendations for Akron talent attraction. For a possible answer, see yesterday's post.