His experience in both the economic development and consulting worlds gives Sheehy a unique view of the site selection process, which is increasingly automated. The Internet and e-mail are forcing traditional sources of local area expertise to rethink their roles and how they deliver their services to corporate site seekers.

Site Selection: How has the site selection landscape changed since you have been working in the industry?

Richard Sheehy (right): One thing that is dramatically different is because of the economic prosperity we have seen over the last several years, a lot of places are in pretty good shape. Unemployment is down most everywhere, and that creates a different view of economic development that the economic developers have to deal with. There are not as many pressing reasons to want jobs and or growth as there were in the past. That's a big change in that the economic development folks have to get a lot smarter in how they approach their business and sell their constituency; it's a little different story because of that.

SS: Is the corporate community more dependent on outside experts in making site selection decisions, less so or about the same relative to 10 years ago?

RS: I'd say a little less so due to increased ease of access to information in terms of the Internet. But, more specifically, they rely on experts for a little different information. The general information is readily available to anyone, but the site specifics and community attitudes and level of expertise of an area you really still can't get unless you have your feet on the ground in that community. So, it's changed from the consultants' point of view as well as the corporate people, who can do the first pass themselves. They used to rely on consultants to do that. But for sifting through all the data and doing more detailed analysis, they rely about the same on outside experts.

SS: So the consulting community needs to rethink how it delivers services.

RS: Right, both the site selection consultants and the economic developers have to think about how to package that information, what their delivery mechanisms are and how they provide the services.

SS: How would you characterize the current chemistry between the site selection community and the economic development community?

RS: It's somewhat similar to what it has been in the past in that cooperation is needed from both parties. But because of the speed of information transfer getting so hyper, there's a sense of 'We used to want information by phone or fax or overnight mail, and now it has to be e-mailed or accessed on the Web.' It's almost instant delivery, and there's a frustration level in terms of needing immediate information [from economic developers] that creates timing problems. There is cooperation between different entities, but it still comes down to the fact that if we as site consultants can't get the information immediately, we'll go get it ourselves and not deal with the economic developers. We do tend to go back to those people who can give us information we're looking for almost immediately. The sophistication level of timing for economic developers is becoming more critical. It's different information they're providing, but timing is more critical.

SS: What can the economic development community do differently to add more value to the site selection process?

RS: They can really focus on the specific questions a client has at a specific time. Most economic development folks tend to focus on their marketing side too much, and when it gets down to site selection time, it's about specific questions. So being more specific and less general would add more value, because the general information is available to anybody today.

SS: What is your experience in terms of service provider networks and their effectiveness?

RS: In my opinion, some of them are very effective. Most of those are highly organized regional efforts that cover multiple locations or communities or regions, and they have assembled a team that has the specific information that can be transmitted when asked. That is very important, because in site selection, you don't really care in most cases if it's one particular community or another -- you're going to a region. Then you get to the specifics of which site is best in that region. But the county boundaries, municipal boundaries are less important. I often chuckle when I go to a new area and people are very particular about where their boundaries are. Well, when you're there for the first time, you can't see them. So the most effective people I've dealt with are highly organized, regional organizations that have assembled a good team of service providers.

SS: In broad terms, is the site selection industry one that takes a global view or a local one?

RS: The industry is rapidly changing to embrace a world view, because information transfer is getting so much more effective. The market drivers still are very strong, and all the barrier and tariff issues have not gone away completely. So we're heading in that direction, but I don't think it's there yet. In my experience, if you're going to build a big facility with a worldwide impact, you're going to build it in the European market, the North American market or the Asian market. You decide that first, then you go look in those markets. From the local standpoint, you still have to have a global view.

SS: With what tools must corporate real estate executives be equipped when making a major site decision? Ultimately, the corporation decides for itself where to build a plant.

RS: That's right. What they need to know really goes back to their business or a particular project. Taxes and incentives are important to some companies where labor rates and quality of life are important to another. Somebody who is really effective has built up a network of contacts in both the economic development and consultant worlds that they feel comfortable with. One thing that is consistent with almost all site selections is timing, and site seekers are under the gun to get it done as quickly as possible.

Also, they have to be good at risk assessment from both the technical and subjective view. You can get a lot of information and crunch the numbers, but you still have to be onsite and look at subjective things that can cause a timing problem, such as zoning, incentives approval, and other things, and that's where relationships become involved.

SS: How is the role of incentives in site selection evolving? Are they becoming less important as states cut business taxes anyway?

RS: Incentives are driving two things. One is the financial side of the transaction, which is a big piece of it. But getting back to timing and risk, incentives are defining attitudes in the local areas. For certain big projects, if there are no incentives available for an industry to go to an area, that tells me that either the community doesn't value this type of industry or they haven't thought about it, or they very well might not support it if there is trouble. The financial aspects are always important, but for a U.S. company, the attitude issue is becoming more important. There are a lot of low unemployment areas out there that have a high quality of life, and they are somewhat tired of growth. They basically don't have incentives.

I look at incentives in two pieces: what's on the books now, and what can I get today if I come? Nobody has to say yes or no; I just have to make an application. Secondly, it has to be approved by a public body, which usually means a public hearing and the factors of timing and the risk of not being approved. A lot of areas are trying to take away that risk factor by passing tax breaks. You know what's on the books. In one sense, there isn't as much to negotiate, but you also have less risk in what you're going to get. At the same time, a lot of states are demonstrating their attitudes about what they want, which gives me a better idea of what really is supported in an area. At a time of low unemployment in most places, it's very important to know what communities will support and what they will not.

SS: What is it about working with companies in international markets that you enjoy most?

RS: The site selection process is somewhat different internationally than it is in the United States. In Asia, for instance, the governments play a bigger role in determining where companies go, because in many cases there is government support for certain industries. The first level of site selection is somewhat easier, particularly in Asia. But then it gets more technical. It's harder to assess the particulars when you're used to processes in more developed countries. Pitfalls you can run into are a bigger factor, and an area where we can especially help our clients. It changes the complexion of the service you offer -- it's more technical.

The subjective issues are tough to get a handle on unless you have some people on the ground in those locations. We have 16 offices, nearly half of which are overseas. So when we do projects in China, Japan, Taiwan or Singapore, we have people there that can offer first-hand knowledge, and that's critical.

SS: How is technology changing the site selection industry?

RS: I'd say the Internet is having the biggest impact. It's whether or not the people accessing the information know how to use it, or know what is out there. You find that out by experience, I guess. There are a lot of companies still that don't have a good handle on what's really available out there. They probably are doing things a little more like the old school, but when you use the Internet quite a bit, you come to realize there's a lot of data out there you can manipulate. A big site selection problem in the past was trying to get similar information from similar locations. They all packaged it differently. This way, we can get all the data and package it the way we want, and that saves a lot of time.

Electronic access to and distribution of information is very important. If an area cannot provide information via e-mail or over the Internet, it really disrupts the whole process. It's just not timely. It wasn't that long ago that we relied on fax machines and overnight mail. That's way too slow now. Economic developers will have to become more sophisticated in their use of the Internet in providing information. It's not just the marketing data that they need to distribute. It's the pertinent information that's needed such as information on excess water, sewer and electricity, and some are making some good strides there. There is a fear of them presenting too much information and never getting a call. But if they are worried about that, then they're not really worried about winning; they're just worried about playing the game. If they're concerned about winning [new business], then they're willing to present all the information and be successful doing it.

SS: Will the site selection consultant's role ultimately diminish as corporate real estate executives gain more access to information? Or will consultants evolve into more specialist, value-added roles?

RS: Generally speaking, it probably will diminish. But there's still a trick to assembling and presenting the data in a usable fashion, so that will not go away. But your point about consultants becoming more specialized is where it will really head. We'll have to be more of a niche-type provider of service as opposed to a generalist. The generalist site selection provider I think is going away.     SS