ATC Business Case for Collaboration and/or Consolidation: Phase I Results - 1/15/08 (Final) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

About This Presentation

ATC Business Case for Collaboration and/or Consolidation: Phase I Results - 1/15/08 (Final)


ATC Business Case for Collaboration and/or Consolidation: Phase I Results - 1/15/08 (Final) Business Case for Collaboration and/or Consolidation Phase I Results ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:142
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 60
Provided by: SteveZ8


Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: ATC Business Case for Collaboration and/or Consolidation: Phase I Results - 1/15/08 (Final)

ATC Business Case forCollaboration and/or
ConsolidationPhase I Results - 1/15/08 (Final)
Business Case for Collaboration and/or
  • Phase I Results
  • Arizona Technology Council Collaboration and/or
  • Consolidation Case Studies and Best Practices
  • Date January 15, 2008 (Final)
  • Place Phoenix, Arizona
  • Presented By
  • Steven G. Zylstra, Formerly Technomic Growth
  • President and CEO, Arizona Technology Council
  • (T) 602.343.8324 ext. 101, (M) 412.735.9537
  • (E)
  • URL http//
  • Mark Goldstein, President, International
    Research Center
  • (T) 602.470.0389, (M) 602.670.6407

Business Case for Collaboration and/or
Consolidation Project Overview
  • The Arizona Technology Council has undertaken a
    review of considerations for strategic
    alignments, collaboration, and possible
    mergers/consolidation with other Arizona
    technologyfocused organizations
  • Study authors Steven G. Zylstra, formerly
    Technomic Growth Strategies and Pittsburgh
    Technology Council, current President and CEO,
    Arizona Technology Council, and Mark Goldstein,
    International Research Center are familiar with
    both the Arizona technology landscape and the
    nationwide consolidation/collaboration activities
    among past and present technology organizations

Business Case for Consolidation and Collaboration
Phase I Project Detail
  • Identify Business Models - Identify known
    business models similar to those in the Arizona
    technology sector to determine the feasibility of
    a merger or a substantive strategic partnership.
    The Arizona organizations to be explored include
    Arizona Technology Council (ATC), Arizona
    BioIndustry Association (ABA) and Southern
    Arizona Technology Council (UTC)
  • Conduct Research - Conduct primary and secondary
    research to document business models that would
    facilitate consolidation, cooperation, and
    collaboration between the ATC, ABA and SATC,
    including the entire spectrum of interaction from
    simple mutual support on issues to complete
  • Document Results - Prepare PowerPoint for
    presentation to the ATC Sustainability Committee
    documenting results of business model study
    including preliminary recommendations. Define
    the strengths and weakness of each approach,
    especially its impact on the ATC and its members.
  • Present Conclusions - Deliver a PowerPoint
    presentation to ATC Sustainability Committee with
    results of Phase I study.

Business Case for Consolidation and Collaboration
Pending Phase II Project Detail
  • Engage Partner Leadership - Using direction from
    the ATC Sustainability Committee and guidance
    provided by the Phase I study, engage volunteer
    leadership of ABA and SATC to discuss how to
    better leverage the Arizona technology-based
    industry strengths for the good of industry and
    the state.
  • Conduct Survey - Assuming interest by ABA and
    SATC, conduct a detailed survey of the products,
    services and benefits that each of the three
    organizations provide, looking for redundancy or
    duplication. Document at some level of detail,
    the infrastructure and assets that each
    organization brings to the table.
  • Propose Structure - Given the overlay of products
    and services from the above evaluation and
    business model analysis of Phase I, propose
    varying organizational structures that would best
    leverage the strengths and assets of the three
    organizations that delivers results and member
  • Prepare and Deliver Presentation - Present Phase
    II results to ATC Sustainability Committee.

Business Case for Consolidation and Collaboration
Phase I Results
  • The consultants identified and profiled
    nationwide examples of previous
    collaborations/consolidations/mergers involving
    regional technology-focused not-for-profit
    organizations resulting in a series of brief case
    studies, including lessons learned and best
    practices focusing on
  • Who lead effort and what process were utilized?
  • Impetus for collaboration/consolidation/merger?
  • What benefits gained?
  • What structure did the governance or business
    model use in these combined enterprises?
  • What critical issues arose and how were they
  • What was the ultimate outcome and lessons

Regional Technology Association Case Studies
  • Arizona Technology Council (ATC)
  • Pittsburgh Technology Council (PTC)
  • Northeast Ohio Software Association (NEOSA)
  • Utah Technology Council (UTC)
  • Mass Technology Leadership Council (MassTLC)
  • Technology Council of Maryland (TCM)
  • TechColumbus (TC)
  • Minnesota High Tech Association (MHTA)
  • Technology Council of Northwest PA (TCNWPA)

Arizona Technology Council (ATC) Case Study
  • Background
  • The Arizona Innovation Network (AIN) merged with
    the Arizona High Tech Industry Cluster (HTIC) in
    late 90s with effort lead by Steven G. Zylstra,
    HTIC Chairman and Simula executive
  • Rational/Benefits
  • AIN, started in 1984, had out lived its
    usefulness by mid-90s, supplanted by ASPED/GSPED
    technologybased clusters, including software,
    high tech, optics, bioindustry, advanced
    materials, environmental, etc.
  • Process/Issues
  • Both AIN and HTIC Boards agreed the time had come
    and accomplished with no significant issues, but
    process took almost 24 months
  • Outcome/Lessons Learned
  • Consolidation quelled noise in the marketplace
  • New core HTIC membership adds
  • Increased attendance and involvement at HTIC
  • Key AIN sponsors could focus resources
  • Actual event of merger was anticlimactic

Arizona Technology Council (ATC) Case Study
  • Background
  • The Arizona High Tech Industry Cluster (HTIC)
    merged with Arizona Software Internet
    Association ( around 2002, which later
    became known as the Arizona Technology Council
    (ATC) with efforts lead by Ed Denison, President
    and CEO of
  • Rationale/Benefits
  • Follow trend of national peers, was
    CRITA members at this time
  • IT Industry facing major losses with
  • Create critical mass in order to influence
  • Sponsors were reluctant to support multiple
    entitles in weak economy
  • Combine supporters and members for more
  • Process/Issues
  • drove process as part of overview
    consolidation vision
  • Staff/Governance
  • HTIC Executive Assistant outsourced services
    absorbed into operations and budget

Arizona Technology Council (ATC) Case Study
HTIC ? ? ATC (Contd.)
  • Critical Success Factors
  • Significant concerns of several HTIC Board
    members managed and satisfied through
    accommodation and engagement process
  • was seen as a regional comer
    and the place to be
  • Outcome/Lessons Learned
  • Use champions and influencers to lead the
    organizations to come together and court
    considerately, openly and flexibly
  • Too much of a heavy hand further pushing the
    consolidation may have put off some additional
    merger prospects at the time
  • Website http//
  • Contact Steve Zylstra, ATC President and CEO
  • (T) 602.343.8324 ext. 101, (M) 412.735.9537
  • (E)
  • Ron Schott, ATC President and CEO Emeritus
  • (T) 602.343.8324 ext. 109, (M) 602.320.9342
  • (E)

Pittsburgh Technology Council Case Study
  • Background
  • Co-located and co-managed with Catalyst
    Connection, the Doyle Center for Manufacturing
    Technology, and the Pennsylvania NanoMaterials
    Commercialization Center
  • Rationale/Benefits
  • Shared Infrastructure including Finance,
    Accounting, Marketing, IT, HR and Administration
  • Synergistic missions
  • Shared space
  • Shared management
  • Process/Issues
  • Council started in 1983, Catalyst added in
    1988, Doyle Center in 2003, Nano Center in 2005
  • Council 501(c)6 trade association, others
    501(c)3 economic development entities
  • Catalyst started as an educational foundation
    of Council
  • Some PTC members felt Catalyst competed with

Pittsburgh Technology Council Case Study
Megastructure (Contd.)
  • Staff and Governance
  • Separate boards, with almost no overlap
  • Separate legal entities
  • 4 x 4 (16) board meetings and exec. committee
    meetings per year
  • Council 32 FTEs, 5M, Catalyst 34 FTEs, 6.8M,
    Doyle 6 FTEs, 3.5M, Nano, 2 FTEs, 2.3M,
    included in the FTEs are the one-third of shared
  • Critical Success Factors
  • Management assured that there was complete
    synergy and no redundancy between the various
  • Communication between Board leadership
  • Service agreements that clearly spell out
    shared services and whos paying for what

Pittsburgh Technology Council Case Study
Megastructure (Contd.)
  • Outcome/Lessons Learned
  • Significant savings in infrastructure costs due
    to shared services
  • Able to hire much more competent/seasoned staff
    in infrastructure positions
  • Viewed positively by technology/manufacturing
    community for savings
  • Hard to hold together without strong leader
  • Boards start worrying about focus of management
    as number of entities goes up
  • More influence and effectiveness from sheer
  • Websites http//
  • http//
  • http//
  • http//
  • Contact Steven G. Zylstra, Former President and
  • (T) 412.735.9537
  • (E)

Pittsburgh Technology Council Case Study
  • Background
  • The keystone of the success of Pittsburgh
    Technology Council is its fundamental business
    model which is based on its network structure.
  • Provide forums for education and peer-to-peer
  • Train and educate members
  • Increase awareness of best practices
  • Provide valuable networking opportunities for
  • Develop cost- and time-savings services
  • Maintain quality programming applicable to the
  • The preponderance of product and service
    offerings emanate from and support the networks
  • The PTC IT Network is larger than virtually all
    the state or regional IT associations in the U.S.
    and Canada

Pittsburgh Technology Council Case Study
Macrostructure (Contd.)
  • Networks
  • Driven by direct input and feedback from our
  • Advisory Committees
  • Four (4) Industry Network Advisory Committees
  • Six (6) Peer Network Advisory Committees
  • Meet quarterly at the Council Offices
  • Annual Listening Survey
  • Electronic survey conducted each Spring
  • Outreach Process
  • In-person, on-site staff visits with our
  • Goal Minimum of 400 technology members in

Pittsburgh Technology Council Case Study
Macrostructure (Contd.)
  • PTC Network Structure

Pittsburgh Technology Council Case Study
Macrostructure (Contd.)
Northeast Ohio Software Association (NEOSA) Case
  • Background
  • NEOSA merged with Council of Small Enterprises
    (COSE), the pre-eminent small business membership
    organization in northeast Ohio in 2004. The
    Greater Cleveland Partnership (http//www.gcpartne was created in March 2004 by the
    consolidation of Cleveland Tomorrow, the Greater
    Cleveland Growth Association, the Greater
    Cleveland Roundtable and their primary affiliates
    COSE, the Northeast Ohio Technology Coalition
    (NorTech), and the Commission on Economic
    Inclusion. Interview with Jim Cookinham, founder
    and former head of NEOSA, now with COSE.
  • Rationale/Benefits
  • Impetus for merger for NEOSA came from 400K in
    state funding pulled, struggling with membership
    (500 members, 1M budget, 5 FTEs)
  • Catalyst for COSE was worried about lagging
    membership, due to the organization's principal
    value is in providing low cost insurance (17,000
    members, 60 FTEs)
  • Not a merger of equals, but NEOSA had loyal
    members who attended events and are committed to
    their cause and added energy to COSE. COSE had
    services NEOSA didn't offer.

Northeast Ohio Software Association (NEOSA) Case
Study (Contd.)
  • Process/Issues
  • Process started as a discussion about a possible
  • Staff/Governance
  • In order to create enhanced value for its
    members and to enhance member retention, COSE has
    adopted a network strategy similar to the
    Pittsburgh Technology Council (macrostructure)
  • NEOSA is now a network leader within COSE. I has
    grown membership to 700.
  • Ex-Chairman of NEOSA now chairs COSE for next two
    years, NEOSA has 3 dedicated staff, has a Board
    of Advisors with no fiduciary responsibility,
    high visibility for new CEO
  • Critical Success Factor
  • Both parties have been faithful to the
    concept/vision and lived up to expectations

Northeast Ohio Software Association (NEOSA) Case
Study (Contd.)
  • Outcome and Lessons Learned
  • After merger, COSE adopted network structure.
    Besides NEOSA, COSE has added an Arts Network and
    a Home-based Business Network
  • No loss of NEOSA members
  • NEOSA now get less media attention
  • Not as much fun for former NEOSA head
  • No public whining or adverse media attention
  • Key take away, you must decide whether you are
    focused on your membership or on economic
    development. They drive very different
  • Websites http//
  • http//
  • Contact Jim Cookinham, VP Member Networks and
  • (T) 216.592.2295
  • (E)

Utah Technology Council (UTC) Case Study
  • Background
  • UTC was formed in April 2006 by the merger of the
    Utah Information Technology Association (UITA)
    established 1991 and the Utah Life Science
    Association (ULSA) established 1994, after
    working together closely for over a decade.
    Interview with Richard Nelsen, former CEO of
    UITA, CEO of UTC.
  • Rationale/Benefits
  • Following lead of peer organizations around the
  • Encouragement from UITA board members and other
    civic leaders
  • Retirement of ULSA Executive created
  • Several key disgruntled Board members at ULSA
  • Process Issues
  • UITA did focus groups with members in 2002 and
    a bio-study in 2005
  • ULSA did focus groups in 2005
  • UITA believes life science represents the
    future and will exhibit strong growth
  • Sought advice of CEOs at Pittsburgh Technology
    Council and New Jersey Technology Council who
    interacted with a UITA/ULSA task force

Utah Technology Council (UTC) Case Study (Contd.)
  • Staff and Governance
  • Large merged Board (55)
  • Kept UITA executive to run merged UTC
  • Hired a Life Science Director from San Diego to
    head-up bio efforts
  • Formed a Life Science Advisory Council to assure
    appropriate representation and focus
  • Critical Success Factors
  • Principally, the timely departure of ULSA
    executive predicated
  • Key ULSA Board members unsatisfied with status
    quo and drove merger

Utah Technology Council (UTC) Case Study (Contd.)
  • Outcome and Lessons Learned
  • Executive must have thick skin, before and
    after merger
  • The destination was worth the journey and speed
    bumps manageable
  • Life sciences companies more needy, different
  • Seek outside advice and counsel to objectify
    and broaden considerations
  • Buy in important from both boards
  • Website http//
  • Contact Richard Nelson, President and CEO
  • (T) 801.568.3500 ext. 100
  • (E)

Mass Technology Leadership Council (MassTLC)
Case Study
  • Background
  • Formed by the combination of Massachusetts
    Software Council (MSC) and New England Business
    and Technology Association, Inc. (NEBATA) in
    September 2005. Interview with Tom Hopcroft,
    former President of NEBATA and now VP at MassTLC
    and Joyce Plotkin, Former President of MSC and
    now President of MassTLC.
  • Rationale/Benefits
  • Too many tech associations in Boston (8 for
    IT), reduce competition
  • Combining sponsorship requests
  • Elevate combined groups to a higher level (in
    eyes of tech community)
  • Improve governance
  • MSC board wanted growth, decided merger was
    good strategy
  • NEBATA board saw MSC as strategic vehicle for
    IT buyer-seller dialogue

Mass Technology Leadership Council (MassTLC)
Case Study (Contd.)
  • Process/Issues
  • Initiated by two of the executives, one from
    each organization
  • Good synergy, little overlap between the
    organizations products/programs
  • MSC had sellers perspective (vendors), NEBATA
    had buyers perspective (enterprise)
  • Both executives view was to do what was best
    for their organization. Shared a common vision
  • Used a lawyer as a counselor
  • MSC acquired NEBATAs assets and then they
    renamed organization
  • The two boards made the strategic decision to
    merge organizations. Massachusetts non-profit
    law required that one organization be dissolved
    and assets transferred in order to effectuate
    this business result
  • Staff/Governance
  • Eliminated inactive Board members from both
  • Both executives retained a position in new
  • Critical Success Factors
  • Shared vision create companies and jobs
  • Both organizations were fiscally healthy

Mass Technology Leadership Council (MassTLC)
Case Study (Contd.)
  • Outcome/Lessons Learned
  • Merger process was a success because the key
    executives were on the same page
  • Boston Globe tech writer gave merger good
    treatment in media
  • Successful integration
  • Boards were highly supportive
  • Notes Both MSC and NEBATA attempted to merge
    with Massachusetts Innovation and Technology
    Exchange (MITX) and were unsuccessful. Initiated
    by chair of MITX. MSC was three time to the
    altar and then MITX would throw them curve.
  • Website http//
  • Contact Joyce Plotkin, President
  • (T) 617.437.0600 ext. 11
  • (E)

Technology Council of Maryland (TCM) Case Study
  • Background
  • TCM has separate Tech Alliance and MdBio
    Divisions as a result of merger with MdBio
  • Rationale/Benefits
  • MdBio first attempted to create its own
    membership component, but was unsuccessful.
    Amounted to hostile takeover of bio members.
    Finally came to table
  • MdBio was well funded, but would eventfully run
    out of funding
  • Primary motivation was confusion in the
    community as to who spoke for life science
    wanted single voice

Technology Council of Maryland (TCM) Case Study
  • Process and Issues
  • The merger was Board (Chairman) driven, both
    legacy CEOs fought it
  • Chairs of organizations had different vision of
    outcome, not on same page
  • New bylaws created that end up having far too
    much specificity. Done to appease Directors who
    were afraid of loosing identity
  • Went to the alter three times before succeeding
    in merger
  • Staff and Governance
  • New governance structure is extremely cumbersome
    and overly taxing on resources. Now three 501(c)
    3 boards and four governing bodies in the one
    501(c) 6 board with multiple divisions. At least
    30 board meetings per year.
  • Staff was unintentionally set up by board to
    fail. All MdBio staff ultimately left
  • Success Factors
  • Do better planning

Technology Council of Maryland (TCM) Case Study
  • Outcome/Lessons Learned
  • Hire outside consultants during the
    negotiations process, not just after, to serve as
    objective experts and advisors
  • Do lots of advanced planning around
    organization structure, governance and budget
    before attempting integration
  • One year later, things are starting to settle
  • Took personal toll on new executive hired to
    run overall enterprise
  • Website http//
  • Contact Julie Coons, CEO
  • (T) 240.453.6213
  • (E)

TechColumbus (TC) Case Study
  • Background
  • The Columbus Technology Council was created in
    late 2002 through a merger of the Columbus
    Industry and Technology Council (ITC) and
    Columbus Technology Leadership Council (CTLC).
    Then TechColumbus (TC) was formed through the
    merger of the Columbus Technology Council and the
    Business Technology Center (an incubator) with a
    close linkage to Ohio State Universitys Science
    and Technology Corporation (Scitech). Interview
    with Tim Haynes, VP Member Services and Marketing
  • Rationale/Benefits
  • Realized that all organizations shared
    essentially the same end
  • Desired a common advocacy platform
  • All looking for funding from the same sources

TechColumbus (TC) Case Study (Contd.)
  • Process and Issues
  • Process lead by the three Chairs of the Boards
    of the organizations
  • Took too long to integrate
  • Some board members from the past organizations
    thought they were in the dark
  • Staff and Governance
  • Brought in new executive to run TC
  • BTC executive retired
  • Critical Success Factors
  • Leadership - Chairs of the Boards of the three
    organizations committed to merger
  • All three entities fiscally sound at time of

TechColumbus (TC) Case Study (Contd.)
  • Outcome and Lessons Learned
  • Maintained both a 501(c) 3 (state-supported)
    and a 501(c) 6 (member-supported)
  • Though continuing to do events and new business
    formation services, business approach and model
    underwent major change in the impact TC has and
    the momentum its able to generate, as well as
    ability to push more strategic regional
  • New entity now can do more breadth of tech
    and entrepreneurial to mature companies
  • Diverse Board Large and small companies,
    academic, state, legal, accounting, etc.
  • New bylaws
  • Staff of 12, 3M budget
  • Recently got 15M from state for
    entrepreneurial program plus local match funding
  • New executive brought in
  • Small Board 13 now, 9 at merger
  • Merged organization now co-located
  • Website http//
  • Contact Ted Ford, President and CEO
  • (T) 614.487.3700

Minnesota High Tech Association (MHTA) Case Study
  • Background
  • MHTA adopted its current name in 1998 with the
    merger of the Minnesota High Technology Council
    (MHTC) and the Minnesota Software Association
    (MSA). No interview, just an email exchange with
    Kate Rubin, President (see below)
  • I was not here when MHTC and MSA joined forces.
    A good idea, but little attention paid to the
    integration. Many say it was MHTC taking over,
    dropping MSA programs. On the other hand, many
    MSA members were sole proprietors who did not pay
    dues, so tell me how that is a real membership
    organization? In fact there were tens if not a
    couple hundred companies in this category. So
    any talk of how the merged organization lost so
    many members is also probably bogus. We have
    since brought back a few MSA programs, let others
    go completely from both MHTC and MSA,
    re-integrated some real company members, and
    clarified the value proposition as it were for
    the new MHTA. Working pretty well right now and
    growing stronger by the day

Minnesota High Tech Association (MHTA) Case
  • References
  • Rick Krueger, former MHTC/MHTA President could
    provide more details, as he was President at the
    time of the merger. Also, perhaps Dee Thibodeau,
    who is a former MHTA board chair, was part of
    MSA, and continues on MHTA board. She is at
  • Website http//
  • Contact Kate Rubin, President
  • (T) 952.230.4562
  • (E)

Technology Council of Northwest PA (TCNWPA)Case
  • Background
  • Successfully merged the Erie Technology
    Management Association (ETMA) into the Tech
    Councils IT Network. Unsuccessful merger with
    the Erie Network Users Group (ENUG) as too techie
    focused and unwilling to pay dues.
  • Rationale/Benefits
  • Eliminate competition
  • Enhance participation
  • Drive membership
  • Process and Issues
  • New Bylaws
  • Staff and Governance
  • Able to add one additional staff member IT
    Network Director
  • Created new IT Steering Committee

Technology Council of Northwest PA (TCNWPA)Case
Study (Contd.)
  • Success Factors
  • Top down merger
  • Utilized a few community leaders that people
    listen to
  • Outcome/Lessons Learned
  • Went from 60 to 85 members
  • Association of Information Technology
    Professionals (AITP) chapters in Northwest PA
    failed because the volunteer driven model
    couldnt sustain them
  • A former AITP group in McKean County has
    approached the Tech Council to have an IT Network
    Chapter in that county
  • Website http//
  • Contact Perry Wood, Chief Executive Officer
  • (T) 814.451.1173
  • (E)

Technology Association of Georgia (TAG) Case
  • Background
  • TAG started through a merger of three SIGs Women
    in Technology (WIT), Southeastern Software
    Association (SSA) and Business Technology
    Alliance (BTA) in 1997-98 and now has 20
    Societies and 6 Affiliates. Interview was with
    Tino Mantella, President.
  • Rationale/Benefits
  • Share infrastructure
  • Process and Issues
  • Merger driven by Chairs of three organizations
  • Staff and Governance
  • Large Board, 55 members
  • Each Society has an Advisory Board
  • Budget 1.3M with a staff of six, contract out

Technology Association of Georgia (TAG) Case
Study (Contd.)
  • Success Factors
  • A TAG staff member attends every Society meeting.
    Staff responsible for between 2 and 8 Societies
  • TAG has reached a critical mass
  • Outcome and Lessons Learned
  • TAG has 3300 members today, more than doubled in
    less than two years, of which approximately 2000
    are company members and the remainder individual
  • Dues range from 900 to 10,500, depending on
    size of company
  • Affiliates trade their member rate for their
    programs to TAG members in order to have TAG
    promote their programs
  • Conduct over 100 meetings a year with an average
    of 55 attendees. Each Society meets on average
  • All but three Societies are pulling their weight
  • All Societies come together quarterly as part of
    the Leadership Council, consisting of the Chair
    of each Society and five members at large
    appointed by the President
  • Website http//
  • Contact Tino Mantella, President
  • (T) 404.817.3333, ext. 7, (E)

Technology Association of Georgia (TAG) Timeline
Virginia Technology Alliance (VTA) Case Study
  • Background
  • Eight regional technology councils formed the
    Virginia Technology Alliance (VTA) in 1998
    including the Northern Virginia Technology
    Council (NVTC). Two other councils were created
    after that and then inducted into the VTA.
    Interview with Josh Levi, Vice President for
    Policy, NVTC and VTA Board Member.
  • Rationale/Benefits
  • Shared interests technology, Virginia's best
  • United support on policy issues
  • Process and Issues
  • Developed bylaws
  • Difficult to define common interests, small
    entities more interested in programs/events and
    larger more in policy/staff/organizational
  • While the mentorship aspect of VTA tends to
    benefit the smaller councils exclusively (one-way
    street), benefits from VTA membership flows to
    all councils and even the larger councils gain
    and benefit from the networking and policy
    advocacy aspects
  • Councils have different expectations of VTA
  • Staff and Governance
  • No staff

Virginia Technology Alliance (VTA) Case Study
  • Success Factors
  • None identified
  • Financial contribution to VTA went from per
    member assessment to organizational tiered
  • Outcome Lessons Learned
  • Annual strategic planning retreat discussion
    goes back and forth whether VTA should be a loose
    alliance or have a strong central governance
  • VTA conducts an annual legislative reception in
    Richmond as their only event
  • Collaborative CFO event in partnership between
    Virginia, Maryland, and DC Tech Councils
  • Produced statewide magazine, failed after two
    issues, some councils publish their own
  • While NVTC is in Virginia, they are also part
    of the Greater Washington region. The Maryland
    and DC Tech Councils are physically located
    closer than many of Virginias Tech Councils
    making it easier for them to collaborate and
    partner with DC Area Tech Councils.
  • Website http//
  • Contact Josh Levi, Director of Policy, NVTC
  • (T) 703.904.7878
  • (E)

Regional and National Supplementary Examples
  • Arizona Chamber of Commerce
  • BC Technology Industry Association (BCTIA)
  • Advance Colorado Center (ACC)
  • Communitech (Waterloo, ON, Canada)
  • Ottawa Centre for Research and Innovation
  • Baton Rouge Technology Council (BTRC)
  • OCTANe Orange County
  • American Society of Association Executives
  • Internet Security Alliance (ISAlliance)

Regional and National Supplementary Examples
  • The Arizona Chamber of Commerce and the Arizona
    Association of Industries (AAI) merged in late
    2007 forming the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and
    Industry and are developing the Arizona
    Manufacturing Council to continue serving as the
    focused voice for Arizonas manufacturers and
    supporting industries (http//
  • The British Columbia Technology Industry
    Association (BCTIA) was incorporated in 1993,
    joining the Electronic Manufacturers' Association
    of British Columbia (EMABC) and the Information
    Technology Association of Canada, BC Chapter
    (ITAC-BC) (http//

Regional National Supplementary Examples
  • The Advance Colorado Center (ACC) provides common
    headquarters and logistical support for
    non-profit associations and organizations that,
    in turn, provide a variety of services and
    programs to companies, entrepreneurs, and
    individuals in order to stimulate job growth and
    promote a sustainable corporate environment in
    Colorado (http//
  • Colorado Software Internet Association (CSIA)
  • Colorado BioScience Association (CBA)
  • Colorado Association for Manufacturing and
    Technology (CAMT)
  • Colorado Nanotechnology Alliance (CNA)
  • Colorado Photonics Industry Association (CPIA)
  • Connected Organizations for a Responsible
    Economy (CORE)
  • CTEK Venture Centers
  • Colorado Film Commission

Regional National Supplementary Examples
  • Communitech started up in 1997 to support the
    Ontario regions early tech cluster, Key partners
    include the Industrial Research Assistance
    Program (IRAP) program of the National Research
    Council (of Canada), Has a pending London, ON
    area organizational merger (http//www.communitech
  • The Ottawa Centre for Research and Innovation
    (OCRI) brought together 6 non-profit tech orgs to
    create an organization of over 100 staff and 12M
    budget that has now achieved the capability,
    critical mass, and resources to achieve
    significant results (http//
  • The Baton Rouge Technology Council (BRTC) merged
    about two years with the Chamber of Greater Baton
    Rouge, driving economic development in the Baton
    Rouge metropolitan area and serving as the voice
    of the business community (http//

Regional National Supplementary Examples
  • OCTANe Orange County was formed in September 2002
    and has become a fast growing IT and biomedical
    organization serving the Orange County,
    California region (http//
  • The American Society of Association Executives
    (ASAE) merged with the Greater Washington Society
    of Association Executives (GWSAE), the ASAE
    Foundation, and The Center for Association
    Leadership in July 2004 (http//
  • Internet Security Alliance (ISAlliance) agreed to
    provide financial services to the Electronic
    Components, Assemblies Materials Association
    (ECA), Government Electronics Information
    Technology Association (GEIA), JEDEC Solid State
    Technology Association (JEDEC), and
    Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA)
    July 2007 (http//

Council of Regional Information Technology
Associations (CRITA) Recent Member Survey (N25)
Majority of Regional Association Members are Tech
Council of Regional Information Technology
Associations (CRITA) Recent Member Survey (N25)
Major Force in Community Today and in Five Years
Ongoing Need for Regional Tech Associations
ATC Business Case for Collaboration and/or
Consolidation Business Models Summary
  • Loose Alliance VTA, ACC
  • Network Structure (Macrostructure) PTC, COSE,
  • Umbrella Organization (Megastructure) PTC et
    al, TCM
  • Society Model TAG, IEEE
  • Complete Assimilation AIN/HTIC, MassTLC, BCTIA,

ATC Business Case for Collaboration and/or
Consolidation Phase I Conclusions
  • Structure A Network Structure is successful
    nationally and likely most appropriate for a
    ATC/ABA consolidation
  • Geographical Challenges Addressing a large
    geographic area is a challenge everywhere,
    especially in states with multiple major metro
    centers. Phoenix and Tucson have exhibited
    regional cluster growth that would appear
    similarly challenging
  • Merger Recommendations Based on this research
    and the experience of the consultants, a merger
    with SATC or an emerging GTTA would be extremely
    difficult. Certainly ATC should strive to build
    stronger linkages, however loose affiliations
    without mutual expectations and concrete
    deliverables by the parties involved and codified
    through a formal agreement, would most likely
    create more frustration
  • Define Clear Charter Clarifying whether an
    organization is a economic development entity or
    a member-based trade association should guide
    organizational design and is a critical success
  • Plan for Success Careful preplanning of the
    combined governance structure, organizational
    staffing and a pro forma budget is a key to
    assure smooth integration
  • Variables Change of leadership is a common
    variable leading to many mergers
  • KPIs Few organizations had concise or well
    understood metrics about the before and after

ATC Business Case for Collaboration and/or
Consolidation Phase I Conclusions (Contd.)
  • Support Entrepreneurship ATC should become a
    more visible contributor to the entrepreneurial
    scene by considering doing the following
    Initiate a business plan competition (many to
    emulate), create an entrepreneurs network,
    collaborate with Ernst Young to showcase the
    Entrepreneur of the Year winners in TechConnect
    magazine (hand out at event), support local angel
    network(s), consider conducting an angel capital
    fair, partner with TiE-AZ on events and outreach,
    create a partnership with Stealthmode
    Partiers/FastTrac to bring entrepreneurial
    programming to ATC members, and consider creating
    a biannual entrepreneurial boot camp.
  • Bio Integration Biotechnology related
    organizations have successfully merged with
    technology associations in spite of being
    initially skeptical
  • Positive Results Although many mergers were
    more difficult, more complex and took longer that
    expected, few regretted it, and stronger, more
    vital organizations generally resulted
  • Politics with a small p Personalities and
    protection of turf often played a critical role
    in the success of a smooth merger
  • Seek Third Party Advice Hiring consultants or
    seeking experts to help provide objective advice
    before and during the process, was a strong
    recommendation by several councils
  • Rejoin CRITA The Arizona Technology Council
    should again be a participating member of CRITA
    as it represents IT and technology trade
    organizations in an effort to facilitate
    information, visibility, networking and services
    for IT-focused, not-for-profit business
    organizations in the United States and Canada

ATC Business Case for Collaboration and/or
Consolidation Pending Phase II Activity Overview
  • Engage Leadership Engage volunteer and staff
    leadership of ABA and SATC/GTTA in discussions on
    how to better leverage the Arizona
    technology-based industry strengths for the good
    of industry and the state.
  • Conduct Survey Assuming interest by ABA and
    SATC/GTTA, conduct a detailed survey of the
    products, services and benefits that each of the
    three organizations provide, looking for overlap
    or duplication.
  • Inventory Assets Document at some level of
    detail, the infrastructure and assets that each
    organization brings to the table. Given the
    overlay of products and services from the above
    evaluation and business model analysis of Phase
    I, propose an organizational structure (loose to
    formal) that would best leverage the strengths
    and assets of the three organizations to deliver
    results and member satisfaction.

Arizona Organizational Landscape - Background
  • The Arizona Strategic Partnership for Economic
    Development (ASPED) of the late 80s and early
    90s with SRI involvement evolved into the
    Governor's Strategic Partnership for Economic
    Development (GSPED) of industry clusters and
    infrastructure foundations flourishing throughout
    the 90s
  • Several clusters and infrastructure foundations
    operated statewide, though a number of clusters
    had separate Phoenix and Tucson based
    organizations, and several others were only
    active in one metro area or the other
  • The Arizona Partnership for the New Economy
    (APNE) public/private partnership undertook a
    yearlong effort (2000-2001) to assess Arizonas
    current readiness and establish benchmarks for
    measuring progress, as well as to develop
    strategies for correcting any perceived
  • GSPED faded during the APNE timeframe, several
    infrastructure foundations expired, and clusters
    continued to emerge and evolve in partnership
    with regional and statewide economic development
    and government groups

Arizona Organizational Landscape - Today
  • The Arizona Technology Council (ATC -
    http// continues to build
    membership, keep strong events focus, has become
    major public policy player, and publishes the
    statewide technology magazine TechConnect, Steve
    Zylstra was recently recruited from the
    Pittsburgh Technology Council to return to the
    Valley and assume leadership, Various
    collaboration /or consolidation opportunities
    under consideration.
  • Arizona Department of Commerce
    (http// supports various
    groups and initiatives including the Governors
    Council on Innovation Technology (GCIT -
    http//, Unified economic
    development model with recently announced Arizona
    Economic Resource Organization (AERO) going
  • Strong Tri-University system (ASU, U of A, NAU)
    with good legislative investment in
    infrastructure, growing technology licensing and
    spin offs, and developing entrepreneurial
  • TGen, IGC, ASU Biodesign Institute, and U of
    As BIO5 and Phoenix Medical Campus are driving
    Phoenix biotech cluster along with Tucson BIO-SA
    and Flagstaff bio component growth
  • Science Foundation Arizona (SFAz -
    http// launched in 2006, now with
    135M of state funding to be augmented by
    matching funds and made available for grants to
    deepen scientific, engineering and medical
  • Arizona Telecom Information Council (ATIC
    http// continues guiding
    telecom policy development driving broadband
    deployment, convening regional stakeholders,
    facilitating public-private partnerships, and
    providing public news, outreach, and education
  • Greater Arizona eLearning Association (GAZeL -
    http// serves as an alliance
    between eLearning educators, practitioners and
    related businesses to provide vision, share
    research, support learning initiatives, and
    gather resources for the utilization,
    implementation and expansion of eLearning in
    business, government, and education
  • Venture Capital (VC) remains problematic in
    Arizona, especially for early stage companies

Arizona Organizational Landscape - Arizona
BioIndustry Association (ABA)
  • The Arizona BioIndustry Association (ABA -
    http// is a
    not-for-profit, 501(c)6 trade association that
    was reorganized in 2003 to promote the growth of
    the bioscience industries in Arizona through
    member services, educational programs, business
    networking, public policy, and entrepreneurial
  • ABA is also the state affiliate of the
    Washington D.C.-based national Biotechnology
    Industry Organization (BIO - http//
    and focuses on both biotechnology and medical
  • ABA has approximately 200 members and 21 Board
    members, Recent bylaws revision
  • ABA leadership and staffing were in transition
    in mid-2007, Robert (Bob) Eaton, who led MdBio, a
    bioscience industry support organization in
    Maryland for 10 years, has relocated to Phoenix
    and began his new position as President and CEO
    on 10/1/07. Natascha Hebell Fernando, formerly of
    the Arizona Department of Commerce has recently
    become COO. ATC previously initiated active
    discussions on CC which should be reinvigorated
    under new leadership.
  • ABA is complemented by the closely affiliated
    Bioindustry Association of Southern Arizona
  • (BIO-SA - http// and a growing
    Arizona Nanotechnology Cluster (http//www.aznano.
    org/) collaboration
  • ThirdBiotech (http//
    group recently launched in the Valley to foster
    networking and business deals within the life
    sciences community

Arizona Organizational Landscape - Tucson
Technology Organizations
  • Aerospace, Manufacturing and Information
    Technology (AMIT - http// was
    formed in 2005 through a merger of the Southern
    Arizona Industry and Aerospace Alliance (SAIAA)
    and the Information Technology Association of
    Southern Arizona (ITASA)
  • Southern Arizona Tech Council (SATC -
    http// formed in August 2000 to
    promote and implement high-tech industry economic
    development and competitiveness in Tucson
    Southern Arizona
  • Arizona Optics Industry Association (AOIA -
    http//, Environmental Technology
    Industry Association (ETIC - http//
    m/), and Bioindustry Association of Southern
    Arizona (BIO-SA - http// strong
  • Tucson Regional Economic Opportunities, Inc.
    (TREO - http// is the lead
    economic development agency for the greater
    Tucson area
  • Cluster representatives from Tucson and Arizona
    Clusters have been meeting to discuss business
    development needs and strategies for Southern
    Arizona and plan to rename and repurpose SATC as
    the Greater Tucson Technology Alliance (GTTA) to
    facilitate collaboration of technology industry
    clusters and other business development,
    government and education organizations

Arizona Organizational Landscape - Entrepreneurial
  • The Arizona Internet Professional Association
    (AZIPA http// arose in the late
    90s with Phoenix area meetings and an active
    e-mail discussion list that remains in place
    today. It was complemented by Tech Oasis
    (http// meetings in the
    Phoenix area and Tucson which for a time had
    significant attendance and continue in Tempe
    monthly, but at a lower attendance level. Both
    attract a more technically oriented /or
    entrepreneurial audience.
  • The Indus Entrepreneurs (TiE) have a strong
    regional chapter (http// based in
    Phoenix to inspire, foster and support
    entrepreneurship in Arizona. They hold monthly
    dinner meetings and a popular Annual Venture
    Capital Conference/Panel.
  • The Invest Southwest (http//www.investsouthwest
    .org/) in partnership with is ASU Technopolis
    (http// produces the
    premier capital conference in Arizona annually
    featuring over a dozen Arizona startups and
    attracting several hundred investor attendees.
    The Arizona Technology Council is visible as an
    exhibitor and publicity partner.
  • The Arizona Entrepreneurship Conference
    (http//, now in its
    second year is a day-long series of panels,
    workshops, speakers and networking opportunities
    and has proved popular. The Arizona Technology
    Council is visible as an exhibitor and publicity
  • The Phoenix-area FastTrac Entrepreneurial
    Programs (http// of the
    Kaufman Foundation is produced by Stealthmode
    Partners with a recurring 12 weeks of classes
    with several different focuses and often
    subsidized rates with over 200 graduates to date.
    Stealthmode Partners also hosts monthly
    Entrepreneur Roundtables over dinner and has a
    large rotating base of attendees.

ATC Business Case for Collaboration and/or
Consolidation Potential Next Steps
  • Utilize Feedback Get direction from
    Sustainability Committee on appropriate direction
    for next steps based on Phase I results
  • Conduct Phase II Execute Phase II statement of
    work as modified by above
  • At the discretion of the Sustainability
    Committee, the consultants will execute Phase III
    for preparation of a detailed strategic and
    operational plan for specific targeted
    collaborations and/or consolidations, and if
    necessary, execute Phase IV to repeat the
    assessment and planning process with other
    targeted organizations

ATC Business Case for Collaboration and/or
Consolidation Questions and Answers
  • Thank you for the opportunity to conduct this
  • Presented By
  • Steven G. Zylstra, Arizona Technology Council
  • (T) 602.343.8324 ext. 101, (M) 412.735.9537
  • (E)
  • URL http//
  • Mark Goldstein, International Research Center
  • (T) 602.470.0389, (M) 602.670.6407
  • (E)
  • URL http//
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)