Is a downtown location truly a benefit for tech workers?
To the editor:
Your coverage of the Cambridge ban on building ("Council approves building freeze" in the January 28-February 3 edition of the Boston Business Journal) addresses the possible suburban flight of Internet and biotech companies but failed to address how commutes to these same companies affect quality of life and companies' ability to hire and retain experienced employees.
It also fails to address the impact of a Kendall Square or downtown Boston location on the long-term survival of new ventures.
As president of a marketing communications agency for emerging technology companies, I urge a non-prime location for new tech companies.
Downtown office rents are the highest, and selecting expensive real estate is not a prudent investment for a fledgling business facing numerous start-up costs. It's also unlikely to please VCs concerned with the return on their investment.
Many new ventures are involved with e-commerce and the Internet. Part of the promise of the 'net is that business can be done from anyplace. An office with downtown skyline view is no more productive than a suburban office park, but it costs much more. Renting the most expensive office space would be a drain on precious capital, and does little for entrepreneurs and employees that have a life outside of work.
With more and more senior professionals living further out in the suburbs, does a downtown location really make sense? Established companies are having difficulties attracting qualified employees as more people understandably say "no" to one hour (or longer - each way) commutes.
There's also the issue of quality of life for employees, and how that could affect a company's ability to stay competitive. In a tight labor market, wouldn't offering a high quality of life be a way to attract the best and brightest talent? How does a downtown location and two hours of daily commute time help workers achieve balance?
It's a tight enough job market - these start-ups are competing for employees with companies offering good jobs closer to home.
After working a 10+ hour day, a long commute is not a positive contribution to balancing work and family life. Who cares if there's a trendy bar or restaurant next to the office when you'd like to get home and have dinner with the spouse and kids?
Don't forget that a reverse commute to the suburbs from the city can be done in a fraction of the time in most cases, so even urban dwellers can get to the office and back home easily, and perhaps still have time to "play" downtown after work.
If employees that live outside the box are being asked to think outside the box, why not complete the equation and let them work outside the box too? Unless all you're hiring are single twentysomethings, a downtown location is merely a centralized inconvenience for everyone. It's counter productive, costly to long-term viability, and warrants careful evaluation.
Jon Boroshok
President
TechMarcom, Inc.
Westford
Click here to tell us what you think