Leapfrog Strategies in Economic Development

I have been plagued by this question for some time: "Should we be using leapfrogging strategies in economic development?"

What is leapfrogging? Most of us think of "leapfrog" as a game that children play, where one child hops like a frog over another child. Businesses obviously took this little game quite seriously, or at least took the game as an instructive metaphor for competitive strategy. Businesses have used technological innovation, mergers and acquisitions, and many other "blockbuster" strategies to "leap over" their competitors for many years. For example, Bank of America has decided to leap over its competition by buying its way to the top.

Can communities, regions, and states, using the right strategies, leap over their economic development competition? I think it is an interesting question because it forces us out of the "classic incrementalism box" that most ED organizations have grown accustomed to.

Some observers would say that is exactly what has happened to many regional economies in India, China, and other rapidly developing nations. Some would say that is exactly what happened in fast growth economic regions in the U.S. South, Southwest, and West. Others would argue that these places have been on growth paths (or trajectories) for some time and the "leap" that we observe is simply the most visible step (that catches our attention) in a longer term process. Maybe we just were not paying attention to what was going on, or we were paying attention to the wrong things.

What does leapfrogging imply for economic development? Does it suggest that places can miss a step (or a series of steps) in growing their economies? I know more than one EDO CEO who would "jump" at the chance to leap over their competitors. Many of these ED leaders are looking for high-performance strategies that will allow them to get to the head of the line.

I think we need to remember that growth paths vary across communities, regions, and states. Cleveland and Phoenix, for example, followed very different growth paths. On the other hand, Cleveland and Pittsburgh followed somewhat similar growth paths. I think the larger regional context (multi-state regional context) helps to shape the growth environment for places and also the "strategy set" they choose to follow. This suggests that "leapfrogging" needs to be related to a place's market position, available opportunities, values, and also its asset base, including its strategic relationships and networks.

I put the idea out there for discussion. I, for one, think places can move ahead faster (maybe leapfrog other places) if they: 1) work together locally and globally; 2) innovate with powerful new ideas and strategies; 3) define emerging opportunities for which the place has a sustainable competitive advantage; and 4) are willing to be a "change-maker" in the global economic development marketplace.

What do you think?