On Oct. 3, John had the opportunity to chat with JGA's Angela White about translating nonprofit jargon. To listen to a replay of the webinar on the JGA site, go to http://www.jgacounsel.com/reso... (Of course, you can also listen to many other great webinars on the same site). 

This article originally appeared in the Oct. 12, 2018, Indianapolis Business Journal. To read the article on the IBJ website, go to https://www.ibj.com/articles/7... 

By Michael Foit

CEO, Apex Energy Solutions 

We hear a lot about the increasing need for college degrees. We’re told that, because so many of today’s jobs require a college education, young people who want good careers must go to college.

Generally, that seems like good advice, but it overlooks two realities: One, our economy relies on high numbers of skilled workers without degrees; and, two, not every young person today wants or needs to go to college.

It’s time to change this “everyone should go to college” mindset, along with the attitude that those who do not go to college are limited to low-income jobs (and, by inference, unhappiness).

I don’t suggest that this is a challenge we must face for the future. It is a challenge we must face today. Across America, building projects, manufacturing lines and more are lagging because employers can’t find enough skilled workers. Nationally, estimates suggest that more than 243,000 jobs await workers in the construction industry alone.

At the same time, we see negative repercussions from our efforts to push everyone into college. For one, record numbers of people drop out. Recent studies show that barely more than half of all students who start college will finish within six years.

But the problem isn’t just that these people might have wasted a couple of years or might have suffered unnecessary stress. The problem is that many of those dropouts are leaving school with considerable student loan debt. In 2015 and 2016, 3.9 million students dropped out of school with student debts, with many owing thousands of dollars. In other words, they were worse off than when they started school.

Now consider the alternative: If those same people had entered a skilled-trade training program, they would have earned money while they learned a trade. They would not have student debt hanging over their heads, and they could earn as much as many people coming out of college.

Today, skilled tradespeople earn an average of $60,000 or more a year, and some earn six figures. When people tout the long-term earning potential of people with college degrees, they overlook the cost of degrees and the value of the skilled worker’s extra time in the workforce. One recent article suggested that “a dentist will not catch up to a plumber’s total net earnings until they are both well into their 30s.”

I am not disparaging the value or benefit of a college degree. However, I am suggesting that, in our effort to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to attend college, we have pushed the pendulum so far that we now suggest that everyone must go to college. By doing that, I think we have pushed into college some people who would be happier—and better off—if they learned a skill and entered the workforce.

How do we overcome this problem? For one, we acknowledge that college should be open for everyone but isn’t the answer for everyone. Second, we should embrace the value and benefit of skilled trades. Employers who rely on skilled trades should collaborate to make their case to the parents, counselors, educators and others who guide young people to let them know that there is an alternative to college—an alternative that, for the right people, leads to happiness, financial security and long-term fulfillment.

America needs skilled tradespeople, and many Americans need skilled trades. Let’s put those needs together for the benefit of people on both sides of that equation.•

Browning and 16 Tech Community Corporation announced today the anchor building for the 16 Tech Innovation District, a 120,000-square-foot, $30 million research and office facility, is fully leased.

The building will be the headquarters for the Indiana Biosciences Research Institute (IBRI) in addition to the headquarters for the Central Indiana Corporate Partnership (CICP), including its talent and industry initiatives, and Indiana University School of Medicine researchers focused on industry collaborations and commercialization.

16 Tech, a 60-acre innovation district on the near west side of Indianapolis, is purposefully designed to ignite collaboration among innovators and entrepreneurs in life sciences, tech, advanced manufacturing and engineering in an urban live-work-play-learn environment. Construction on the anchor facility is expected to begin in late 2018 and will be followed by Browning’s rehabilitation of the former Citizens Energy Group building with high-bay garage, construction of a second innovation building, and construction of apartments.

“The first 16 Tech tenants are true pioneers for the innovation district,” said Bob Coy, president and CEO of 16 Tech Community Corporation, the nonprofit operating entity of the 16 Tech Innovation District. “Building One will be home to researchers, entrepreneurs and advanced industry leaders in tech, life sciences, advanced manufacturing, renewable energy, ag-bioscience and talent development. These tenants represent the ideal cross-section of industry expertise and entrepreneurial energy that will drive innovation in Indiana’s economy.”

Building One will house the IBRI in 67,699 square feet of space on the first three floors and include office, lab and open work spaces. The IBRI is a leading independent, industry-inspired applied research institute focused on the discovery and development of innovative solutions to improve health, targeting diabetes, metabolic disease and poor nutrition.

“We look forward to not only continuing and expanding our current research and translational activities to help improve the health of Hoosiers and millions suffering around the world from chronic diseases, such as diabetes, but our anchor space in the new building in 16 Tech enables the IBRI to serve as the facilitator and accelerator for life sciences startups,” said Dr. Rainer Fischer, the IBRI’s chief executive officer and chief scientific and innovation officer. “With more than triple our current space, we’ll be able to expedite our growth and better retain and attract new talent for the IBRI and for our existing and new industry and academic partners.”

CICP and its affiliate organizations – BioCrossroads, Conexus Indiana, TechPoint, Energy Systems Network, AgriNovus Indiana and Ascend Indiana – will move its headquarters and approximately 80 employees to 30,446 square feet on the top two floors of the five-story building.

“At 16 Tech, CICP has a unique opportunity to be a part of, and sit in the middle of, our talent and innovation district– putting our initiatives and employees near companies that we already collaborate with, ones that we hope to engage with in the future, and others that are yet to be created,” said David Johnson, president and CEO of CICP.

Indiana University School of Medicine will occupy approximately 12,000 square feet, where it will house part of its newly established Indiana Center for Regenerative Medicine; a molecular therapeutics program that is part of the IU Precision Health Initiative; and a technology incubator that is a partnership with IU Health and will support faculty entrepreneurs working on the development of drugs, devices and health-related information technology with the goal of bringing their discoveries to market.

Building One will have a café and community space open to the public.  

Browning’s plans for additional construction include: Renovation of office and high-bay garage once occupied by Citizens Energy Group; anew Class A office building including food, beverage and retail space; and a new multi-family apartment complex with approximately 250 units.

Browning’s investment in these first four buildings tops $120 million.

“16 Tech offers a dense, vibrant mixed-use environment that drives collaboration,” said Browning CEO John Hirschman. “The buildings that Browning is developing allow us to apply the experience and expertise we’ve gained over four decades of creating places that help to drive growth and innovation.”

 

About Browning

Browning changes skylines and communities by developing, building and managing game-changing commercial real estate projects. With a reputation for executing large transactions and complex projects, the firm’s diversified portfolio includes market-leading industrial, office, mixed-use, healthcare, life science and higher education projects. Established in 1977, Browning is based in Indianapolis. More information can be found at www.browninginv.com.

About 16 Tech

16 Tech is one of the largest talent attraction, retention and development opportunities in Indianapolis’s history. Located on the near west side of Indianapolis, 16 Tech will bring talent together to collaborate and drive cross-sector innovation in advanced industries. The nonprofit 16 Tech Community Corporation oversees the development of the district and ensures benefits of economic growth, new investment and job creation in the 16 Tech District extend to nearby neighborhoods as well as the city, the region and the state.  More information can be found at www.16tech.com.

# # #

Media contacts:

16 Tech – Laura Miller, 317-332-3306, laura@lauramillercommunications.com

Browning – Jen Thomas, 317-441-2487, jen@jtprinc.com 

Central Indiana Corporate Partnership – Lori LeRoy, 317-514-0095, lleroy@biocrossroads.com

Indiana Biosciences Research Institute – Mark Craft, 317-670-2270, mcraft@indianabiosciences.org

IU School of Medicine – Karen Spataro, 317-278-3676, keschbac@iu.edu

This post originally appeared on the Johnson Grossnickle & Associates blog site. To see the post on that site, go to http://info.jgacounsel.com/blo...

Nonprofit organizations do amazing things. Things like curing diseases … feeding people … making art accessible to the masses … helping communities come together and fight injustice. 

Unfortunately, some organizations that do those amazing things wither and die, not because they fail to perform, but because they fail to get their messages out to the people they need to receive them. Whether they’re trying to raise money or engage people in their mission, they fail to connect with the right people.

As you consider that statement, note what I didn’t say: I didn’t say these lost organizations didn’t sendmessages. They probably sent a lot of messages. But they didn’t send them effectively.

Nonprofits find innumerable ways to drop the ball on communicating, but most of those fumbles can be attributed to a few consistent mistakes. Following are a half-dozen of the most common failures, and some quick cures that can help your organization communicate more effectively. 

1. The failure to send a concise message. If you haven’t boiled your message down to its essence, you need to keep boiling. The classic “elevator speech” concept is a good guide, but elevator rides seem to be getting shorter and shorter. Here’s a better guide: Boil that message into an old 140-character Tweet. When you can do that, you’ve got a clear, concise and simple message. 
2. The failure to know what you’re trying to make happen. Sure, you have organizational objectives, but do you know what you’re truly trying to make happen with a particular communication? Ask yourself, “What do I want people to physically do when they get my message?” Pick up the phone? Write a check? Go to my website? Figure out what you want people to literally do and you’ll sharpen your objective. 
3. The failure to define a target audience. Yes, your message is so wonderful it should be received by everyone who ever walked this green earth. Unfortunately, that’s not possible, no matter how much you have to spend on marketing. Zero in on those people who can truly make a difference, identifying them as specifically as possible, and then communicate as directly as possible. 
4. The failure to let the message rise above the data. Yes, measurable results and hard data help you make your case, but more data doesn’t help you make your point more effectively. On the contrary; numbers can be numbing. If your message is obscured by metrics, your audience won’t engage with it. Choose the two or three data points that reinforce your messages, and drop the others. 
5. The failure to focus on benefits. Many nonprofits like to engage in chest-thumping … endless recitations that seem to finish the sentence, “We’re great because …” They highlight awards. They talk about how hard they work. They show off their credentials. Instead, they should highlight their impact. Work on completing this sentence with a few powerful benefits: “With our organization, you get …” 
6. The failure to speak English. The nonprofit world is like any other – it has its own lingo. On top of that, in the last couple of decades, as the nonprofit world sought to “become more business-like,” it unfortunately embraced business-speak. So, now a lot of nonprofit communications mix corporate jargon with nonprofit terms and throw in a big scoop of cliché (“donor pipeline,” “granular,” “move the needle,” “outputs versus outcomes,” and so on), resulting in a language that leaves most people unmoved. Imagine your audience as someone who doesn’t live in the nonprofit world. No one’s going to say, “I didn’t give to them because they didn’t use enough jargon.” But they might say, “I didn’t engage with them because I didn’t understand what they do.” 

Remember: You’re not communicating to impress. You’re not communicating to assert your importance. You’re communicating to send a message that moves audiences to action. And if you fail to do that, eventually, you’ll fail as an organization. 

John Thomas is co-owner of JTPR Inc., an Indianapolis-based public relations firm that works with nonprofit and for-profit organizations to deliver messages that move people to action.  

Sometimes marketing types talk about brands and identity like they’re talking about alchemy. Or top-secret missile codes. Or Col. Sanders’ seven herbs and spices.

We tend to think of it more plainly than that. A brand should simply be a reflection of an organization or product. And as that organization or product evolves, that brand and the way it is communicated – through a graphic identity, a tagline or whatever – should evolve, too.

That’s why you’re seeing a new logo for JTPR. We’ve evolved, and it’s time for the way we present ourselves to evolve, too.

Of course, we started out as Jen Thomas PR, a one-woman show that quite simply got the job done.

We grew into JTPR, a two-JT firm that offered solid, clear-cut skills and expertise.

And now we think of ourselves a little differently. We still offer those same services, but we put an increasing emphasis on the power of the well-chosen word, straightforward counsel and the right action at the right time. It’s what our clients say they expect from us … what we do best.

So now we describe ourselves like this: JTPR gets people talking about things worth talking about in order to move people to action. With expert counsel, the right words and hands-on execution, we help organizations reach the right audiences, say the right things and get the results they want.

This fits nicely with our business plan, which we sum up by saying, “Work with nice people, and have fun doing it.”

When we discussed this vision of our business with our friend (and designer extraordinaire) Lindsey Hadley, she brought back a new logo for JTPR that we think captures wonderfully who we aspire to be: It’s sturdy and solid, with a dash of color and whimsy. It gets the job done with a bit of flair and fun.

That might not be as impressive as alchemy, or as intriguing as missile codes, or as “spicy” as a secret chicken recipe. But it’s who we are. 

 

During our firm’s recent rebrand, we spent a lot of time pondering the right words to describe what we do best.

We settled on Advisors. Writers. Doers.

Since the core of our work involves writing, Writers was a no-brainer.

Advisors was pretty easy, too. At this stage of our careers, we’re confident in our recommendations and the advice we provide clients.

The last word, though, was harder. We ended up with Doers.

We hesitated about that at first, worried that it sounded too tactical, too elementary, too lightweight. “Doers” are often seen as the “lowest rung” on the ladder, and we didn’t want people to think of us as a “low-rung” organization.

On the other hand, one of the reasons we opened our shop is that we wanted to provide advice to our clients and then actually see it through to fruition. To DO the work. We like what we do, and we plan to stay small – just the two of us – so we are, by design, the doers.

Of course, we also believe that serves our clients well. When they choose us, they get veterans doing the work. We’re not cooking up big ideas and handing them off to junior staffers. We’re not promising expertise and delivering rookie execution. We’re following through. Putting our experience to work. Making sure the job gets done.

And when we do need help? We reach out to the best partners and subcontractors in the business – people who we know value good work as much as we do – and continue to be engaged so that the job is done right.

Yep: We’re doers. And we feel good about that.

John and Jen