It's not sufficient to have a college-educated work force, alone. Mahmud Awan, president/CEO of the Regional Technology Corporation, based in Springfield, Mass. — an alliance partner of the Economic Development Council of Western Massachusetts -- argues that bioscience firms need "scientists at the top" with advanced degrees in basic sciences like chemistry, biology and physics. Companies will also require mid-level engineers and low-level technicians, he adds.
      Awan believes having a top research institution nearby is a "sine qua non," or essential factor, for any advanced biotechnology enterprise.
      "They need scientists and an interdisciplinary team that includes computer scientists with advanced engineering skills, along with a work force versed not just in today's science, but in tomorrow's science," he says.
      Moreover, he advises site selectors to look for "a continuous stream of people available as the biotech sector grows. You don't want to see companies locate and expand operations, only to find out they face relocation costs to workers form another state or country.
      That can be avoided if your location is close to the producers of manpower — universities and technical community colleges," he says.
      "Skilled talent is paramount," agrees Robert Grace, vice president of economics and research at Leading Edge, a not-for-profit marketing, branding and investment agency working with the government to promote technology sectors in Vancouver, British Columbia. Make sure the educational institutions in a given region "know what the industry is demanding and can train for industry needs."
      Besides university training, he advocates a region provide business management expertise, as well.

How One Consultant Winnows the Choices Tammy Propst, president of the Tax Advantage Group in Greenville, S.C., mainly does financial work on site selection decisions for corporations interested in expanding to start a new facility. She believes that "at the end of the day it comes down to the cost of the locations you're considering. But before you can get there, you need to see if the area even works."      Here are some of the steps Propst takes to winnow the choices: Look beyond the top locales — what she calls the "originators" — Los Angeles, Boston, San Diego and Silicon Valley. The clusters are there, but the cost of living is high. Secondary locales with "stellar academic resources" include Raleigh-Durham, N.C., Denver, Colo., Madison, Wis., and parts of the state of Washington. For lesser-known locales such as those listed in the main article, she looks for proximity to a research university, the ability to recruit talent, presence of cultural activities, low crime, easy commuting, being within an hour of a major air hub, and other quality-of-life features. Assess the cost of doing business relative to the region's business climate. Are these business-friendly locales? "When it comes down to four or five places that all can work, then cost comes into play. You'll be far better off in western Massachusetts or North Carolina, then in Boston or LA, which are off-the-charts [cost-wise]."

      "VCs [venture capitalists] will look for managers who have taken a life sciences company from clinical trials to FDA [U.S. Federal Drug Administration] trials and turned the startup into a revenue-generating company," according to Grace.
      And it's critical that a community be a "net exporter" of labor, adds John Lewis, vice president of Omeris, the state of Ohio's bioscience membership and business development arm based in Columbus.
      "It's more costly for a biotech firm if a community is a net importer of labor."

      Whether the university is Stanford, MIT, the University of Massachusetts (UMass), the University of Arizona (UofA) or the University of British Columbia, all experts interviewed for this article agree that biotech firms thrive when located close to major research universities with well-developed tech transfer programs. Tech transfer facilities matter because they connect biotech firms with basic research taking place in their midst. They also tend to exist in regions with vibrant research and development activities.
      The university, says Awan, "facilitates research that many biotech companies can't afford to do themselves. That creates a synergy between basic research and the neighboring biotech industry."
      Lewis points out that in a global economy biotech firms can certainly find technology to license elsewhere. But a tech transfer office that's integrated into the community and understands the region is a huge plus because it allows regional companies far easier access to new technologies. Conversely, tech transfer offices that make the effort to know their regional business base can act efficiently to bring technology to market, he says.
      Adds Matt McCollister, director of economic development for the Columbus, Ohio, Chamber of Commerce, the presence of a locally based tech transfer office provides "a better chance of success if you give the first shot of licensing to a known regional company than taking the technology out and starting outside from scratch." Moreover, the proximity allows a relationship "to develop beyond one transaction."
      In fact, university tech transfer programs can be so solid an enticement to biotech firms that both UMass and UofA have either created tech transfer programs in recent years or beefed up their existing programs to serve as liaisons between their research scientists and the private sector. Todd Bankofier, president/CEO of the Arizona Tech Council, says the recent creation of tech transfer programs at both the UofA and Arizona State University represent "a marked change from the past. Tech transfer revenue is up over 100 percent from over two years ago," he explains.
      The University of British Columbia has spun off 55 companies in recent years, 49 percent of which stay in the province, says Grace. Along with the presence of tech transfer programs, he advises site selectors to look for environments that are "cost-competitive" for R&D. "You want to see a university very interested in collaborative research (with industry), not just basic research. You also want to see local companies funding R&D and governments that encourage research through tax credits."
      Byrnes asserts in his article that proximity to pharmaceutical companies is a big plus for a biosciences firm and Awan agrees that this "does help attract manpower and resources," but he adds a caveat. Pharmaceutical companies may be seeking specific, drug-related research and there's no guarantee that university-based researchers in any locale will want to work on behalf of a pharmaceutical firm.