Acting as if it was 2005, not 2010
The symposium has the potential to showcase the region's ideas and innovators, bring together collaborators, and contribute to the Triad's recovery, but it can't as long as it's passed from city to city each year, without permanent management. Getting local governments to work together and pushing regionalism is hard; getting artists, creatives and technologists together should be easy. Well, should be. Five years ago the economy was in better shape and talk that we could innovate our way into a better future was just starting. Now the region is caught in a lengthy downturn that cries for creative solutions from higher ed, business and local government. There's an element of urgency felt throughout the country, but not here. It's time the principals decide what DATS is for.
Working with friends is easy
“Collaboration” is a word that everyone loves to use, alongside ”partnership”. These buzz words suggest that merely getting interesting people into the same room generates “synergy”, “vision”, agreement and cooperation. This occasionally happens. But collaboration is a process and stakeholders have different aims and ambitions that need to aired and respected. Other buzz words like “coopetition” recognize the friction that results in any multilateral enterprise. But the real bottom line is recognition that collaboration is hard work and not a solution by itself. Stakeholders are equal participants, not hired help. Convincing friends and natural allies to come to the table is the easy part of collaboration. The hard part— the one that surprises those already on board— is crossing cultures, going over to the "other side" and convincing opponents and disinterested parties to come to the table, confident they'll be won over once they hear the facts, see proven results, and know there’s respect for and interest in contrary views and hard questions.
No progress without a feedback loop
One piece of DATS 2010 that worked well was the broadcast of live events and blog coverage. It took a lot of the internalization of the event out of organizers’ control and put it into the hands of many outsiders, creating documented feedback. If there's a DATS 2011, its planners will need to be able to weigh and measure the success of the ticket price of DATS 2010, number of days of the event, dollars raised and spent, advanced publicity, and the merits of individual sessions. Feedback and a proper post-mortem should guide 2011 organizers, not generalized impressions and slanted memories.
Regionalism has to be explained
Among the pleasant connections made at DATS 2010 was between food activists in Winston-Salem and Greensboro. Food people represent a savvy, creative, and educated slice of the population, yet the regionalism message advocated by Piedmont Triad Partnership and other agencies was new to them. While it had the money, PTP pushed this idea on Triad and Piedmont leaders but it seems to have made little impression on artists, designers, and other creatives and their supporters. DATS is a great forum to expand on and push the regionalism message through concrete examples like food.
Everyone is looking for value
The Piedmont tradition has been whoever had the gold ruled the agenda. When PTP exhausted its pot of Department of Labor money, it saw its influence drop, too, and a leadership change followed. The idea of social capital remains vaguely understood in the Piedmont, but it is alive among food activists who regularly build upon reputation and expertise through a network of like-minded associates. Some in the food movement recognize the unrealized potential of the thousands of refugee farmers who've come to the area, and are interested in pursuing dozens of truly innovative projects. If traditional Piedmont money sources can be convinced of the value of these, like urban agriculture and local food, then we'll see a welcome change in priorities, from city-focused to regional-focused thinking, from bottom-up rather than top-down control.
DATS can continue in a few forms: 1) It can return to the campus, where it can resist expectations of turning a profit or participating in regional economic revival, 2) It can push itself as a job/professional fair for area businesses in art, design, and technology, or 3) It can showcase itself as a forum for creative ideas that matter to residents in the region. The first two don't require hard decision-making or tough collaboration and by their limited scope, call into question the worth of participation by many of the 2010 stakeholders. If the Piedmont wants to be in the idea economy, that leaves the last option.
