Automation Alley 2006 Technology Industry Report

Transcription

October 18, 2006
Automation Alley’s Second
Annual Technology Industry
Report:
Driving Southeast Michigan Forward
Prepared by: Scott D. Watkins, Consultant
Caroline M. Sallee, Senior Analyst
Foreword by: Patrick L. Anderson, Principal and CEO
Anderson Economic Group, LLC
1555 Watertower Place, Suite 100
East Lansing, Michigan 48823
Tel: (517) 333-6984
Fax: (517) 333-7058
http://www.AndersonEconomicGroup.com
© 2006, Anderson Economic Group, LLC
Permissions for reuse granted given proper citations provided
Foreword
Foreword
Amidst the depressing news about the domestic automobile industry in 2006, it
would be easy to arrive at the conclusion that Southeast Michigan is doomed to
a slow decline, a victim of the “rust belt” syndrome that had persisted since the
1980s. As this report documents, that would be a major mistake. Automation
Alley is home to a diverse technology industry, one with high-paying jobs and
opportunities that would excite even Henry Ford.
Hidden by the recent news of high unemployment, layoffs, and plant closings is
a significant and viable technology industry, one with above-average wages,
high-skilled and high-knowledge jobs, groundbreaking discoveries, and investments by firms from around the world.
This report, the Second Annual Technology Industry Report, commissioned by
Automation Alley, provides hard evidence of the tremendous economic strength
and the technological vitality within Automation Alley. It documents the size
and scope of Automation Alley’s technology industry, using data on employment, payroll, and establishments in the technology industry that had never been
assembled before the initial survey was published in 2005. Using the same definitions and data sources, this report documents again how, even in “bad” times,
there is tremendous vitality here in Automation Alley.
This report is a breakthrough in understanding the underpinnings of our regional
economy. As a society, we have relied too long on an outdated categorization of
private-sector jobs as either manufacturing, service, or agriculture, too often
believing that “technology” magically arrived in our midst from afar. In fact,
“technology” is not a product that can be assembled and sold; technology is a
manner of producing products or providing services.
When we define the technology industry, we look at the manner of producing
the goods and services to see how technology is employed. Intensive use of
advanced production processes and a reliance on knowledge workers define the
technology industry here, much as they do in “Route 128,” “Silicon Valley,” and
other leading technology clusters around the country.
DEFINING
“TECHNOLOGY”
INDUSTRY CLUSTERS
A hallmark of this effort is a rigorous definition of the technology industry,
which is based on recently published research by the U.S. Department of Commerce, Anderson Economic Group, and a handful of others. In our definition,
we identify six specific technology clusters:
• Advanced Automotive
• Advanced Manufacturing
• Chemical and Material
• Information Technology
i
Foreword
• Life Sciences
• Other Technologies
The methodology, sources, and specific sectors are all documented in this
report, its appendices, and in Automation Alley’s First Annual Technology
Industry Report: Driving Southeast Michigan Forward.
KEY FINDINGS IN THIS
REPORT
1.
The technology industry is a significant part of Automation Alley’s economy.
Automation Alley's technology industry is made up of private sector firms in
the following technology clusters: Advanced Automotive, Advanced Manufacturing, Chemical and Material, Information Technology, Life Sciences,
and Other Technologies. In 2004, employment in these clusters accounted
for 15.2 percent of all employment in Automation Alley, and employees in
these clusters took home 23.5 percent of all private sector payroll in the
region.
2.
Automotive still rules in Automation Alley.
Despite the recent struggles of the domestic auto industry, the Advanced
Automotive cluster is the cornerstone of the technology industry in Automation Alley, accounting for 38 percent of all technology jobs in the region in
2004. Indeed, today’s automobile industry is one of the leading technology
producers and users in the global economy—a fact vividly on display
throughout Automation Alley.
3.
Non-automotive technology sectors have proven they can stand on their own
in the face of a declining automotive sector.
Outside of the employment decline in the Advanced Automotive cluster,
Automation Alley's remaining technology clusters had 6,284 more jobs in
2004 than in 1998. This suggests that the diversification of the technology
industry in Automation Alley is strong enough for the industry to continue
growth even as the auto industry struggles.
4.
From 2003 through 2004, Automation Alley added technology jobs in three
of the six technology clusters.
The most recent two years of data (2003 and 2004) show that the Life Sciences, Chemical and Material, and Advanced Manufacturing technology
clusters added employment during a period of overall decline in employment. While the technology industry as a whole saw employment drop by 1.6
percent from 2003 to 2004, Automation Alley's Advanced Manufacturing
cluster grew by 1.1 percent, the Chemical and Material cluster grew by 0.6
percent, and the Life Sciences cluster grew by 2.9 percent.
5.
The Advanced Manufacturing cluster grew from 2003 to 2004, suggesting
that high-tech manufacturing is here to stay.
The 2003 to 2004 expansion of the advanced manufacturing industry (a 1.1
percent increase in employment and average wages up 4.4 percent to
ii
Foreword
$56,054) occurred despite the continuing struggles of the domestic auto
industry. This suggests that advanced manufacturing is essential to numerous
auto and non-auto industries, and that the technology has staying power even
when automotive employment is shrinking.
6.
The universities in Automation Alley continue to increase their enrollment of
science and engineering graduate students, suggesting a strong future workforce for the region’s technology industry.
Universities in Automation Alley saw science and engineering graduate student enrollment reach 10,739 in 2003, the most recent year for which the
data is available. This is up from 9,719 in 2001 and 10,416 in 2002. As the
high-skill, high-wage technology jobs require skilled workers, this is an indication of future growth of the region’s economy.
7.
Universities in Automation Alley spent more than $1 billion on research and
development in 2003.
Research and development (R&D) spending by Automation Alley universities topped $1 billion in 2003, surpassing the $885 million expended on
R&D in 2002, and well above the $645 million spent in 1998. Overall, 73
percent of university R&D expenditures in Michigan came from universities
in Automation Alley.
8.
The largest area of university research in Automation Alley was life sciences,
which accounted for some 60 percent of all university R&D expenditures.
The life sciences were the largest area of university R&D expenditures in
2003. More than $600 million was spent on life sciences R&D, with the largest share of the expenditures made by the University of Michigan ($426 million) and Wayne State University ($170 million). Eastern Michigan
University and Oakland University also contributed to the overall life sciences R&D expenditures in Automation Alley.
9.
Automation Alley’s Life Sciences technology cluster grew by nearly 1,000
jobs from 2003 to 2004, and jobs in the cluster paid an average wage of
$87,174.
The Life Sciences technology cluster represented the fastest growing cluster
from 2003 to 2004, adding nearly 1,000 jobs in private establishments. The
cluster also has the highest wages in the technology industry. Average life
sciences technology wages were $87,174 in 2004, compared to a still impressive $65,701 for the technology industry as a whole.
10.
The majority of life sciences technology jobs in Automation Alley are in the
high-wage scientific research and development sector. Geographically,
Wayne County has the largest life sciences employment, followed by Washtenaw, Oakland, and Macomb counties.
Of the 34,510 total life sciences technology jobs in Automation Alley in
2004, 30,424 were in the scientific research and development sector, which
had an average wage of $92,867. The rest were in pharmaceutical and medi-
iii
Foreword
cine manufacturing or medical equipment and supply manufacturing. Geographically, the Life Sciences technology cluster in 2004 had the most
employees in Wayne County (15,296), followed by Washtenaw (7,831),
Oakland (6,865), and Macomb (3,091).
CONCLUSION
As I wrote last year, the landscape of industry in America is shifting to a “new”
economy that is a lot like the “old” economy, in that those companies, regions,
and people that can produce the best products at reasonable prices will prosper.
The “new” way of producing good products relies on technology for only part
of the equation; the old-fashioned work ethic of employees, and the grit and
determination of entrepreneurs still provide the foundation for success.
The people in Automation Alley have always had the grit; this report confirms
that they also have the technology. Indeed, Automation Alley already has one of
the most intense concentrations of technology industry employment in the
United States, and one that has already weathered significant economic storms
without falling behind.
This region, like every other region, will face challenges to its key industries
and government institutions. Fortunately, the region has a terrific base of technological know-how, as well as skilled workers who earn high wages for highvalue work. That’s a record we can build upon, and one that I hope will help
lead the region’s economic recovery in the years to come.
Patrick L. Anderson is the founder of Anderson Economic Group, LLC, a business consulting firm headquartered in Michigan with clients across the country.
He is the author of more than 100 published works including the book “Business Economics and Finance,” and was the winner of the 2004 Edmund A.
Mennis prize for the best writing in business economics, given by the National
Association for Business Economics. He grew up in North Oakland County, in
the center of Automation Alley.
iv
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
Foreword.................................................................i
Defining “Technology” Industry Clusters ........................ i
Key Findings In This Report ...........................................ii
Conclusion ...................................................................... iv
Introduction............................................................1
Purpose of Report ............................................................ 1
Overview of Report ......................................................... 1
Automation Alley: Regional Overview ........................... 2
Automation Alley’s Technology Industry ....................... 2
Automation Alley’s Technology Clusters ....................... 3
Indicators of Tomorrow’s Technology Today ................ 6
A Closer Look: The Life Sciences Technology Cluster .. 6
Automation Alley: Regional Overview ..................9
Geographic Overview ...................................................... 9
Population Data and Trends .......................................... 10
Workforce Data and Trends .......................................... 10
Additional Demographic Data ....................................... 12
Defining the Technology Industry........................13
The Technology Industry in Automation Alley.....15
Technology in Automation Alley: The Big Picture ...... 15
Technology Industry Clusters ....................................... 16
Advanced Automotive Cluster ...................................... 19
Advanced Manufacturing Cluster ................................. 21
Chemical and Material Cluster ...................................... 23
Information Technology Cluster ................................... 25
Life Sciences Technology Cluster ................................. 28
Other Technologies Cluster ........................................... 30
Indicators of Tomorrow’s Technology Industry ...33
Science and Engineering Graduate Students ................. 33
University Research and Development ......................... 34
Utility Patents ................................................................ 35
Homeland Security and Military Technology ............... 36
TOC
Table of Contents
A Closer Look: The Life Sciences Cluster .......... 38
Life Sciences Technology Cluster by NAICS Sector ... 39
Geographic Clusters ...................................................... 42
University Research and Development ......................... 44
Research Centers In Automation Alley ........................ 45
Employers In Focus ...................................................... 46
Appendix A: Technology Definition
Methodology ..................................................... A-1
Review of Existing Definitions ....................................... 1
Selecting NAICS to Include: First Cut ........................... 2
Selecting NAICS to Include: Second and Third Cuts ..... 2
Finalizing the Definition ................................................. 3
Technology Cluster Classifications ................................ 3
Additional Methodological Notes ................................... 4
Appendix B: Bibliography................................. B-1
Appendix C: Other Definitions of the Technology
Industry ............................................................ C-1
American Electronics Association (AeA) ....................... 1
The Pittsburgh Technology Council ............................... 1
Carnegie Mellon and SSTI .............................................. 2
Daniel Hecker, United States Bureau of Labor Statistics 2
Anderson Economic Group (2001) ................................. 2
Appendix D: Demographic and Socioeconomic
Data ................................................................. D-1
Appendix E: Automation Alley Technology Industry
Data .................................................................. E-1
Data Collection and Estimation ...................................... 1
Data Adjustments ............................................................ 2
Appendix F: Project Team................................. F-1
Patrick L. Anderson ........................................................ 1
Scott D. Watkins ............................................................. 1
Caroline M. Sallee ........................................................... 2
Contributors .................................................................... 2
TOC
Introduction
I. Introduction
PURPOSE OF REPORT
In 2005, we provided the first ever comprehensive assessment of the technology
industry in Automation Alley. The report, Automation Alley’s First Annual
Technology Industry Report: Driving Southeast Michigan Forward, quantified
the size of the industry in terms of employment, establishments, and payroll. It
also assessed areas of the technology industry that signal future advances, such
as R&D spending and patent awards.
This information was assembled to provide businesses, government officials,
educational institutions, and residents in Automation Alley with a deeper understanding of the role technology plays in the region, and to present a benchmark
for measuring changes in the industry over time. With the benchmark established, we are now, one year later, able to update our analysis to identify new
trends in the industry, and to focus further on the strengths of Automation
Alley’s technology industry.
OVERVIEW OF
REPORT
This report opens with an overview of the Automation Alley region, followed
by a discussion of how we define the technology industry, which we see as containing the following clusters:
• Life Sciences
We then look directly at the technology industry in Automation Alley, quantifying its employment, number of private businesses, and payroll. Industry data is
presented for 1998 and 2002 through 2004 to illustrate how the industry, and
each of its clusters, have evolved in recent years.1
The report also assesses activities taking place today that signal future growth of
the technology industry in Automation Alley. This includes quantitative measures such as patent awards, university research and development, and qualitative assessments of items such as workforce development programs and
industry promotion activity.
1. Note that these clusters are composed of NAICS industry sectors that contain only private sector establishments. Our discussion of technology industry payroll, employment, and establishments refers only to private sector activities.
1
Introduction
We conclude the report with a new section highlighting one of Automation
Alley’s technology clusters. This year we take a closer look at the growing Life
Sciences technology cluster, digging deeper into the employment data and discussing some of the life sciences innovations occurring throughout the region.
AUTOMATION ALLEY:
REGIONAL OVERVIEW
Automation Alley is an eight-county area in Southeast Michigan. The Automation Alley counties, as shown in Figure 4, “Automation Alley Regional Map,”
on page 8, are Genesee, Livingston, Macomb, Monroe, Oakland, St. Clair,
Washtenaw, and Wayne. With a population of more than five million, Automation Alley makes up more than half of Michigan’s total population and half of
total employment in the state.
More detailed economic and demographic information for Automation Alley
can be found in “Automation Alley: Regional Overview” on page 9 and in
“Appendix D: Demographic and Socioeconomic Data.”
AUTOMATION
ALLEY’S
TECHNOLOGY
INDUSTRY
In 2004, Automation Alley’s technology industry employed 332,531 people,
representing 15.2 percent of all private sector employment in the region. The
payroll for these employees totaled more than $21.8 billion in 2004—some 23.5
percent of the region’s overall payroll. The higher payroll share is a clear sign
that jobs in Automation Alley’s technology industry typically provide higher
wages than those in the general economy, and present significant opportunity
for future economic growth.
Changes in Recent Economic Cycle. As was expected given economic conditions, technology industry employment in Automation Alley experienced a
slight decrease in the most recent period for which data is available. From 2003
to 2004, there was a decline of 5,000 technology jobs in the region. However,
technology industry employment is above where it was in 2002, signaling that it
has successfully withstood and bounced back from the nationwide recession
that started in 2000, the uncertainty that followed September 11, 2001, and the
continuing troubles in the domestic automobile industry.
In contrast to the employment figures that are still below pre-recession levels,
total technology industry payroll has increased by 14.1 percent, resulting in the
average wage per technology job climbing from $52,904 in 1998 to $65,701 in
2004. This equates to a 3.7 percent annual average increase in wages, and outpaces the 2 percent annual inflation experienced during the same period.2 This
increase, combined with the decrease in overall employment, suggests that the
area is retaining the high-wage, high-skill technology jobs that are likely to
define tomorrow’s economic landscape.
2. Measure of inflation based on GDP price deflator.
2
Introduction
Table 1, “Automation Alley Employment and Payroll by Technology Cluster,
2003 v. 2004,” on page 4, and Figures 1 and 2, on page 5, show the trends in
Automation Alley’s technology industry from 1998 to 2004.
AUTOMATION
ALLEY’S
TECHNOLOGY
CLUSTERS
While overall technology industry employment and payroll were slightly down
from 2003 to 2004, it is notable that half of the industry’s clusters added jobs,
and two saw significant increases in average wages.
More specifically:
• The Advanced Automotive cluster experienced a 1.6 percent decline in employ-
ment from 2003 to 2004, while total payroll declined by 3.5 percent. This led to
a decline in average wages from $63,706 in 2003 to $62,459 in 2004.
• The Advanced Manufacturing cluster experienced a 1.1 percent increase in
employment from 2003 to 2004. Similarly, total payroll increased by 5.5 percent from 2003 to 2004. This led to an increase in average wages from $53,691
in 2003 to $56,054 in 2004.
• Automation Alley’s Chemical and Material cluster experienced some employment growth (0.6 percent), and a more substantial rise of 8.4 percent in payroll from 2003 to 2004, the highest among the technology clusters. This led
to a rise in average wages from $51,112 in 2003 to $55,072 in 2004.
• The Information Technology cluster experienced the largest fall in employ-
ment (3.8 percent), but total payroll fell modestly (by 0.6 percent). As a
result, the average wage in the cluster grew from $60,333 in 2003 to $62,306
in 2004.
• The Life Sciences technology cluster was one of three technology clusters in
Automation Alley that experienced an increase in employment between
2003 and 2004 (2.9 percent). Average wages in the cluster fell slightly from
2003, but are at a still impressive level of $87,174.
• The Other Technologies cluster, which mainly consists of wholesale and service businesses with technology orientations, makes up 20 percent of Automation Alley’s technology industry. Between 2003 and 2004, total
employment in the cluster fell by 3.7 percent. Average wages, however, rose
from $69,724 to $70,300.
See Table 1, “Automation Alley Employment and Payroll by Technology Cluster, 2003 v. 2004,” on page 4 for a complete look at the cluster by cluster
change. Further data and discussion of the industry as a whole start at “The
Technology Industry in Automation Alley” on page 15. Additional data on the
technology industry is also presented in “Appendix E: Automation Alley Technology Industry Data.”
3
Introduction
TABLE 1. Automation
Alley Employment and Payroll by Technology Cluster, 2003 v. 2004
Employment:
2003
Employment:
2004
Change in
Employment
2003 Total
Payroll
($1,000)
2004 Total
Payroll
($1,000)
Change in
Total
Payroll
Advanced Automotive
129,863
127,832
-1.6%
$8,273,114
$7,984,235
-3.5%
Advanced Manufacturing
32,527
32,876
1.1%
$1,746,405
$1,842,821
5.5%
Chemical and Material
9,031
9,084
0.6%
$461,595
$500,278
8.4%
Information Technology
65,349
62,877
-3.8%
$3,942,715
$3,917,606
-0.6%
Life Sciences
33,532
34,510
2.9%
$3,070,996
$3,008,378
-2.0%
Other Technologies
67,485
65,352
-3.2%
$4,705,342
$4,594,231
-2.4%
Total Technology Industry
337,787
332,531
-1.6%
$22,200,167
$21,847,549
-1.6%
Source: Anderson Economic Group, LLC
Data: U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Patterns
4
Introduction
FIGURE 1.
Technology Industry Employment in Automation Alley, 1998-2004
FIGURE 2.
Average Technology Industry Wages in Automation Alley, 1998-2004
5
Introduction
INDICATORS OF
TOMORROW’S
TECHNOLOGY TODAY
In addition to the technology industry data summarized above, there are other
variables that are important to consider when assessing a region’s technology
economy. These include public sector activities such as research grants, military
programs, and university research. A number of private sector forces, such as
patenting and entrepreneurship, are also important indicators of potential
growth in the technology industry.
Such data, which we present in “Indicators of Tomorrow’s Technology Industry” on page 33, indicates that future growth and diversification are likely for
Automation Alley’s technology industry. The region’s businesses and universities continue to receive patents for new advances, and Automation Alley universities invested more than $1 billion in research and development in 2003 (see
Figure 3).
FIGURE 3.
A CLOSER LOOK: THE
LIFE SCIENCES
TECHNOLOGY
CLUSTER
R&D Expenditures by Automation Alley Universities, ($000)
New to this year’s report (Automation Alley’s Second Annual Technology Industry Report: Driving Southeast Michigan Forward) is the “closer look” section,
in which we profile a specific sector of the technology industry. This year’s
“closer look” focuses on the Life Sciences technology cluster, which includes
private establishments working in scientific research and development, pharmaceutical and medicine manufacturing, and medical equipment and supplies manufacturing. “A Closer Look: The Life Sciences Cluster” begins on page 38.
In this section, we found the Life Sciences technology cluster in Automation
Alley to be alive and well. The majority of the jobs in the cluster are in the sci-
6
Introduction
entific R&D sector, which had a 2004 average wage of $92,867. There is also a
significant assemblage of life sciences jobs and establishments throughout the
region. The largest concentration of life sciences technology is in Wayne
County (15,296 employees in 101 private establishments), followed by Washtenaw (7,831 employees in 92 private establishments), Oakland (6,865 employees in 156 private establishments), and Macomb (3,091employees in 59 private
establishments).
In addition to this private sector activity, Automation Alley is also home to significant research in the life sciences. In 2003, four Automation Alley universities combined for more than $600 million in life sciences R&D expenditures.
The largest share was from the University of Michigan ($426 million) and
Wayne State University ($170 million). Eastern Michigan University and Oakland University also contributed.
7
FIGURE 4. Automation Alley Regional Map
Genesee County
Flint
Blue Water Bridge
69
475
Port Huron
69
St. Clair County
Bishop
Bishop International
International Airport
Airport
69
75
Oakland County
Livingston County
Macomb County
Oakland
Oakland County
County Airport
Airport
94
South Lyon--Howell--Brighton
96
Detroit
275
94
Ann Arbor
Wayne County
696
Detroit-Windsor Tunnel
Ambassador Bridge
Willow
Willow Run
Run Airport
Airport
Washtenaw County
Detroit
Detroit Metro
Metro Airport
Airport
Canada
275
Monroe
Monroe County
Automation
Alley
75
Automation
Alley's HQ
Canada
Crossings
Toledo
475
Data: ESRI
Analysis: Anderson Economic Group
August 2006
280
0
5
10
20 Miles
Automation Alley: Regional Overview
II. Automation Alley: Regional Overview
GEOGRAPHIC
OVERVIEW
Located in Southeast Michigan, Automation Alley encompasses 5,244 square
miles and is home to several large cities including Detroit, Ann Arbor, and
Flint. As shown in Figure 4, “Automation Alley Regional Map,” on page 8, the
area includes eight counties (Genesee, Livingston, Macomb, Monroe, Oakland,
St. Clair, Washtenaw, and Wayne), and borders Ohio to the south, and Ontario,
Canada, to the east.
Major interstates and an extensive road network allow Automation Alley businesses to access markets easily in both the United States and Canada. Major
interstates including I-94, I-75, and I-96 connect Automation Alley with the rest
of the United States. Automation Alley’s largest city, Detroit, is one hour from
Toledo, Ohio, three hours from Cleveland, Ohio, and four hours from Chicago,
Illinois, and Toronto, Ontario. The Ambassador Bridge, Detroit-Windsor Tunnel, and Blue Water Bridge provide convenient access to Canada for travel and
commerce.
Rail and water networks also facilitate trade between Automation Alley and the
rest of North America. The Port of Detroit spans 35 acres along the Detroit
River, providing an international shipping port for businesses in Automation
Alley. According to the Detroit/Wayne County Port Authority, approximately
seven million tons of overseas and Canadian cargo cross at the Port of Detroit
each year. Automation Alley also has an extensive railroad network. In 2002,
more than $22 billion of goods either entering or exiting the United States
passed through Port Huron in St. Clair County, making it the second busiest rail
port in the United States. That same year, the Port of Detroit railroad crossing
saw more than $15 billion worth of cargo enter or exit the United States, making
it the nation’s third busiest rail port.3
Several airports also service the area. Detroit Metropolitan Airport features
three passenger terminals, as well as service for major businesses. In addition to
being the major hub for Northwest Airlines, Detroit Metro Airport is also the
world aviation headquarters for Ford Motor Company and General Motors Corporation. Smaller airports include Willow Run in Wayne County, Bishop International Airport in Genesee County, and the Oakland County International
Airport in Oakland County.
3. U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics, U.S. Port Report by Rail, 2002, obtained at
www.bts.gov/ntda/tbscd/reports/annual02/port/pt_2002_rail.html.
9
POPULATION DATA
AND TRENDS
With a population of more than five million, Automation Alley is home to more
than half of Michigan’s total population. Between 2000 and 2005, Automation
Alley’s population grew at a slightly slower rate than that of Michigan and
below the 1 percent annual increase of the entire United States. See Table 2,
"Automation Alley Population" below.
TABLE 2. Automation
Automation Alley
State of Michigan
United States
Alley Population
1990
2000
2005
Annual Change
2000-2005
5,020,927
5,269,634
5,334,639
0.2%
9,295,297
9,938,444
10,120,860
0.3%
248,709,873
282,192,162
296,410,404
1.0%
Data: U.S. Census Bureau
Population Density. As shown in Figure 5, “Population Density in Automation
Alley,” on page 11, the region includes population-dense urban areas, a significant suburban ring, and sparsely populated rural and agricultural areas. The
main population centers are Greater Detroit, Ann Arbor, and Flint. Population
trends in recent years are bringing more population into areas farther from core
population centers. Such areas include Livingston County, North and Northwest
Oakland County, and North Macomb County.
WORKFORCE DATA
AND TRENDS
Labor Force. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, half of Michi-
gan’s labor force was located in Automation Alley in 2005. Unemployment in
Automation Alley reached 7.4 percent in 2005. This is significantly above the
3.6 percent unemployment rate for the region in 2000.
Unemployment in Recent Economic Climate. The unemployment rate in Michigan and Automation Alley was below that of the United States for almost all of
the years between 1995 and 2000, and briefly declined to as low as 3 percent in
2000. However, unemployment throughout Michigan has been above the
national average in recent years. In 2005, the unemployment rate for Michigan
and Automation Alley fluctuated around 7 percent, while the national unemployment rate fell as low as 4.9 percent. See Figure 6, “Unemployment Rate in
Automation Alley, Michigan and Nation,” on page 12, as well as the more
detailed unemployment data presented in “Appendix D: Demographic and
Socioeconomic Data.”
10
FIGURE 5. Population Density in Automation Alley, 2005
³
Saginaw
G
G ee nn ee ss ee ee C
C oo uu nn tt yy
Flint
§
¨
¦
Blue Water Bridge
69
E
Port Huron
S
S tt .. C
C ll aa ii rr C
C oo uu nn tt yy
§
¨
¦
475
§
¨
¦
94
O
O aa kk ll aa nn dd C
C oo uu nn tt yy
M
M aa cc oo m
m bb C
C oo uu nn tt yy
t
u
24
LL ii vv ii nn gg ss tt oo nn C
C oo uu nn tt yy
[
_
South Lyon--Howell--Brighton
§
¨
¦
Detroit
96
Ann Arbor
W
W aa yy n e C o u n t yy
W
W aa ss hh tt ee nn aa w
w C
C oo uu nn tt yy
Detroit-Windsor Tunnel
EEAmbassador
Bridge
t
u
24
Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County
Canada
Automation
Alley
t
u
Monroe
M
M oo nn rr oo ee C
C oo uu nn tt yy
223
t
u
223
t
u
[
Automation
Alley's HQ
E
Canada
Crossings
23
23
t
u
20
§
¨
¦
80
Data: ESRI
Analysis: Anderson Economic Group
August 2006
1 Dot = 200
2005 Total Population
Toledo
¨
¦
¨
¦§
§
¨
¦ §
75
280
475
0
5
10
20 Miles
FIGURE 6.
Unemployment Rate in Automation Alley, Michigan and Nation
11
Automation Alley
Michigan
Nation
10
9
Unemployment rate (%), seasonally adjuste d
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Jan 90
Jan 91
Jan 92
Jan 93
Jan 94
Jan 95
Jan 96
Jan 97
Jan 98
Jan 99
Jan 00
Jan 01
Jan 02
Jan 03
Jan 04
Jan 05
Jan 06
Months
Analysis: Anderson Economic Group, www.AndersonEconomicGroup.com
Base Data: Bureau of Labor Statistics
ADDITIONAL
DEMOGRAPHIC DATA
Generated Date: 4 August 2006
Further demographic data is available in “Appendix D: Demographic and
Socioeconomic Data”. Data is presented for Automation Alley as a whole, and
for each individual county.
12
Defining the Technology Industry
III. Defining the Technology Industry
To analyze an industry’s size, scope, and role in a regional economy, it is necessary to first define the industry. To do this for the technology industry, we use a
definition composed of specific industrial sectors identified by their North
American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes, which is how the
United States Census reports industry data. The definition used in this report is
consistent with that used in the 2005 report, Automation Alley’s First Annual
Technology Industry Report: Driving Southeast Michigan Forward.
Table 3 below presents our definition of the technology industry, by cluster. The
methodology we employed to define the technology industry is described in
greater detail in “Appendix A: Technology Definition Methodology.”
TABLE 3. Definition
NAICS
of the Technology Industry by Cluster
Industry Title
Advanced Automotive
3361
Motor Vehicle Manufacturing
3362
Motor Vehicle Body & Trailer Manufacturing
3363
Motor Vehicle Parts Manufacturing
3329
Other Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing
3331
Agriculture, Construction, & Mining Machinery Manufacturing
3332
Industrial Machinery Manufacturing
3333
Commercial & Service Industry Machinery Manufacturing
3336
Engine, Turbine & Power Transmission Manufacturing
3339
Other General Purpose Machinery Manufacturing
3345
Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, & Control Instruments Manufacturing
3353
Electrical Equipment Manufacturing
3359
Other Electrical Equipment & Component Manufacturing
3364
Aerospace Product & Parts Manufacturing
3369
Other Transportation Equipment Manufacturing
3241
Petroleum & Coal Products Manufacturing
3251
Basic Chemical Manufacturing
3252
Resin, Synthetic Rubber, Artificial Synthetic Fibers & Filaments Manufacturing
3253
Pesticide, Fertilizer, & Other Agricultural Chemical Manufacturing
3255
Paint, Coating & Adhesive Manufacturing
3256
Soap, Cleaners & Toilet Preparation Manufacturing
3259
Other Chemical Product & Preparation Manufacturing
13
Defining the Technology Industry
TABLE 3. Definition
NAICS
of the Technology Industry by Cluster (Continued)
Industry Title
3341
Computer && Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing
3342
Communications Equipment Manufacturing
3343
Audio & Video Equipment Manufacturing
3344
Semiconductor & Other Electronic Component Manufacturing
3346
Manufacturing & Reproducing Magnetic & Optical Media
5112
Software Publishers
5161
a
Internet Publishing and Broadcasting
5171
Wired Telecommunications Carriers
5172
Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite)
5173
Telecommunications Resellers
5174
Satellite Telecommunications
5179
Other Telecommunications
5181
Internet Service Providers and Web Search Portals
5182
Data Processing, Hosting, and Related Services
5415
Computer Systems Design & Related Services
b
Life Sciences
3254
Pharmaceutical & Medicine Manufacturing
3391
Medical Equipment & Supplies Manufacturing
5417
Scientific R&D Services
Other Technologies
2111
Oil & Gas Extraction
4234c
Professional and Commercial Equipment and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers
5413
Architectural, Engineering & Related Services
a. Year 2002 NAICS 5161, 5171, 5172, 5173, 5174, and 5179 were substituted with year 1997
NAICS 5133 for 1998-2002 data analysis.
b. Year 2002 NAICS 5181 and 5182 were substituted with year 1997 NAICS 5140 for 19982002 data analysis.
c. Year 2002 NAICS 4234 was substituted with year 1997 NAICS 4214 for 1998-2002 data
analysis.
14
The Technology Industry in Automation Alley
IV. The Technology Industry in Automation
Alley
TECHNOLOGY IN
AUTOMATION ALLEY:
THE BIG PICTURE
The most recent industry data shows that Automation Alley was home in 2004
to more than 332,000 technology industry jobs, accounting for 15.5 percent of
all employment in the region. Technology industries account for an even larger
share of total payroll in the region (23.8 percent). This is a clear indication that
technology industry jobs, on average, pay better than jobs in other industries.
See Figure 7 below and Figure 8 on page 16.
Automation Alley also compares quite favorably to Michigan and the United
States in terms of total share of employment and payroll that can be attributed to
the technology industry. Michigan’s technology industry accounts for more than
13 percent of total state employment, and more than 22 percent of all payroll in
the state. Nationally, 9.4 percent of all employment and 15.5 percent of all payroll is in the technology industry.
Technology Industry’s Share of Total Employment in Automation
Alley, 2004
FIGURE 7.
15
FIGURE 8.
Technology Industry’s Share of Total Payroll in Automation Alley,
2004
Table 4 below shows technology industry employment, payroll, and wages in
Automation Alley. While total technology employment in Automation Alley
has declined since 1998, employment and payroll in 2004 remained above the
2002 mark. The wages of Automation Alley’s technology sector workers, however, remain substantially higher than the all-industries average wage, at
$65,701 compared to $42,549.
TABLE 4. Employment,
Payroll, and Establishments - Technology Industry in Automation Alley
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Average Wage
Small
Est.
Large
Est.
Total
Establishments
1998
361,900
$19,146,016
$52,904
7,550
590
8,141
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2002
317,753
$19,513,839
$61,412
7,657
526
8,183
2003
337,787
$22,200,167
$65,722
7,658
536
8,194
2004
332,531
$21,847,549
$65,701
7,632
518
8,150
-1.6%
-1.6%
0.0%
-0.3%
-3.4%
-0.5
Change
from 2003-2004
TECHNOLOGY
INDUSTRY CLUSTERS
As noted earlier, we have defined the technology industry by NAICS industry
codes, which group businesses by their primary activity. In total, we identified
43 four-digit NAICS sectors that represent the technology industry. We then
16
grouped these sectors by business activity and identified six main technology
clusters:
• Life Sciences
The composition of Automation Alley’s technology industry, by cluster, is
shown in Figure 10, “Employment by Technology Cluster in Automation Alley,
2004,” which can be compared with Figure 11, “Employment by Technology
Cluster in Automation Alley, 1998,” to see how the industry mix has changed
over time. You may also see “Appendix E: Automation Alley Technology
Industry Data” for more detailed industry data tables.
Employment Change: 2003 to 2004. Although Automation Alley’s total technol-
ogy employment declined slightly between 2003 and 2004, certain clusters
experienced job growth during this period. Despite a decline in the Advanced
Automotive cluster, the Advanced Manufacturing cluster added 349 jobs
between 2003 and 2004. This is a positive sign that the area’s technology related
manufacturing industry is able to continue growing despite continued decline in
automotive manufacturing. Other clusters that saw employment growth were
the Chemical and Material cluster, which experienced an increase in employment of 0.6 percent (53 jobs) and the Life Sciences cluster which saw employment grow by 2.9 percent (nearly 1,000 jobs).
FIGURE 9.
Change in Employment by Technology Cluster, 2003-2004
17
FIGURE 10.
Employment by Technology Cluster in Automation Alley, 2004
FIGURE 11.
Employment by Technology Cluster in Automation Alley, 1998
18
ADVANCED
AUTOMOTIVE
CLUSTER
Automation Alley’s Advanced Automotive cluster, which includes the industry
sectors shown below in Table 5, is comprised of companies that use and develop
technologies in the manufacturing and development of motor vehicles and
motor vehicle components. This includes automobile manufacturing, truck
trailer manufacturing, other motor vehicle electrical and electronic equipment
manufacturing, motor vehicle brake system manufacturing, and other such businesses. Also included in the cluster are research units that focus on technologies
such as vehicle safety and alternative energy sources.
TABLE 5. The
Advanced Automotive Cluster
NAICS
Industry Title
3361
3362
3363
The Advanced Automotive cluster employed 127,832 people in 2004, accounting for 38 percent of all technology workers in Automation Alley. As documented in Automation Alley’s First Annual Technology Industry Report:
Driving Southeast Michigan Forward, employment in this cluster reached a
high of over 169,000 in 2000. Since that time, however, the domestic automobile industry has struggled, and advanced automotive employment in Automation Alley has declined.
In contrast, total payroll for this cluster has remained relatively stable. Average
wages rose from $53,479 in 1998 to $62,459 in 2004. This longer-term trend
was softened somewhat over 2003 to 2004 (the most recent years for which data
is available), when average wages fell for the first time since 1998. See Table 6
below, and Figure 12 and Figure 13 on page 20, for employment, wage, and
payroll data in this cluster.
Payroll, and Establishments - Advanced Automotive Cluster
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Average
Wage
Small
Est.
Large
Est.
Total
Establishments
1998
163,485
$8,743,020
$53,479
362
200
562
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2002
133,929
$8,156,553
$60,903
345
181
526
2003
129,863
$8,273,114
$63,706
376
188
564
2004
127,832
$7,984,235
$62,459
375
180
555
-1.6%
-3.5%
-2.0%
-0.3%
-4.3%
-1.6%
Change
from 2003-2004
19
FIGURE 12.
Employment in Advanced Automotive Cluster, 1998-2004
FIGURE 13.
Average Wages in Advanced Automotive Cluster, 1998-2004
20
ADVANCED
MANUFACTURING
CLUSTER
Businesses in the Advanced Manufacturing cluster develop and utilize technologies for manufacturing processes not directly involving motor vehicles. This
includes manufacturers of office machines; industrial manufacturing equipment;
air and gas compressors; fluid power cylinders (e.g., hydraulic and pneumatic);
electron tubes (cathode ray tubes); aircraft manufacturing; and process, physical
distribution, and logistics consulting services. See Table 7 below.
TABLE 7. The
Advanced Manufacturing Cluster
NAICS
Industry Title
3329
3331
Agriculture, Construction, & Mining Machinery Manufacturing
3332
3333
3336
Engine, Turbine & Power Transmission Manufacturing
3339
3345
Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, & Control Instruments Manufacturing
3353
3359
3364
3369
The Advanced Manufacturing cluster employed 32,876 people in 2004, 10 percent of all technology employment in Automation Alley. After exhibiting a
decline in total employment between 1998 to 2003, the Advanced Manufacturing cluster experience employment growth of 1.1 percent from 2003 to 2004.
The total number of advanced manufacturing firms fell from 2003 to 2004
(from 942 to 911), but total payroll nevertheless grew by 5.5 percent during that
period, leading to a rise in the average wage for this cluster from $53,691 to
$56,054. See Table 8, and Figure 14 on page 22 and Figure 15 on page 23 for
more details on employment, payroll, and wages in the Advanced Manufacturing cluster.
21
Payroll, and Establishments - Advanced Manufacturing Cluster
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Average
Wage
Small
Est.
Large
Est.
Total
Establishments
1998
46,886
$2,355,793
$50,245
970
93
1,063
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2002
33,333
$1,791,339
$53,741
827
73
900
2003
32,527
$1,746,405
$53,691
878
64
942
2004
32,876
$1,842,821
$56,054
849
62
911
1.1%
5.5%
4.4%
-3.3%
-3.1%
-3.3%
Change
from 2003-2004
FIGURE 14.
Employment in Advanced Manufacturing Cluster, 1998-2004
22
FIGURE 15.
CHEMICAL AND
MATERIAL CLUSTER
Average Wages in Advanced Manufacturing Cluster, 1998-2004
The Chemical and Material cluster in Automation Alley, defined in Table 9
below, includes businesses engaged in the production of petrochemicals, inorganic chemicals and gases, plastics and resins, paints and varnishes, and explosives.
TABLE 9. The
Chemical and Material Cluster
NAICS
Industry Title
3241
3251
3252
Resin, Synthetic Rubber, & Artificial Synthetic Fibers & Filaments Manufacturing
3253
Pesticide, Fertilizer, & Other Agricultural Chemical Manufacturing
3255
3256
3259
The cluster’s 229 establishments employed more than 9,000 people in 2004,
paying more than an average of $55,000 per year. Employment levels increased
slightly for the second year in a row from 2003 to 2004, as shown in Table 10.
The average wage, however, in this cluster rose by 7.7 percent from 2003 to
2004, rising to $55,072 despite a 3.4 percent drop in number of establishments.
23
See Table 10 on page 24, Table 16 on page 31, and Figure 17 on page 25 for
more details on employment, payroll, and wages in the Chemical and Material
cluster.
Payroll, and Establishments - Chemical and Material Cluster
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Average
Wage
Small
Est.
Large
Est.
Total
Establishments
1998
9,644
$482,564
$50,038
227
22
249
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2002
8,312
$428,288
$51,526
220
20
240
2003
9,031
$461,595
$51,112
213
24
237
2004
9,084
$500,278
$55,072
202
27
229
Change
from 2003-2004
0.6%
8.4%
7.7%
-5.2%
12.5%
-3.4%
FIGURE 16.
Employment in Chemical and Material Cluster, 1998-2004
24
FIGURE 17.
INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY
CLUSTER
Average Wages in Chemical and Material Cluster, 1998-2004
As presented in Table 11 below, the Information Technology cluster is comprised of electronics, computer, and telecommunications businesses. This
includes manufacturers of computers and computer peripheral equipment; radio,
television, and wireless communications equipment; and electronic capacitor,
resistor, and connector devices. Also included are software publishers, wired
and wireless telecommunication providers, Internet service providers, and custom computer programming services.
TABLE 11. The
Information Technology Cluster
NAICS
Industry Title
3341
Computer & Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing
3342
3343
Audio & Video Equipment Manufacturing
3344
3346
5112
Software Publishers
5161
5171
5172
Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite)
5173
5174
25
TABLE 11. The
Information Technology Cluster (Continued)
5179
5181
Internet Service Providers & Web Search Portals
5182
Data Processing, Hosting, & Related Services
5415
Note: To accommodate a change in the U.S. Census Bureau industry classifications, we
used 1997 NAICS 5133 (telecommunications) in place of 2002 NAICS 5161, 5171,
5172, 5173, 5174, and 5179, and 1997 NAICS 5140 (information services and data processing services) was used in place of 2002 NAICS 5181 and 5182 for 1998-2002 data
collection and analysis.
In 2004, 19 percent of all employment in the technology industry in Automation
Alley was in the Information Technology cluster, accounting for more than
62,000 jobs. From 1998 to 2004, the cluster experienced an increase in the number of firms and saw a rise in payroll. While the Information Technology cluster
did experience a decline in employment, the cluster did see a 3.3 percent
increase in average wages (from $60,333 to $62,306), as shown in Table 12
below. The number of information technology establishments also grew by 0.9
percent, for a total increase of 28 firms between 2003 and 2004. See Table 12,
and Figure 18 and Figure 19 on page 27 for more details on employment, payroll, and wages in the Information Technology cluster.
Payroll, and Establishments - Information Technology Cluster
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Average
Wage
Small
Est.
Large
Est.
Total
Establishments
1998
68,338
$3,363,941
$49,225
2,557
148
2,705
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2002
66,999
$3,844,712
$57,385
2,959
144
3,103
2003
65,349
$3,942,715
$60,333
3,057
131
3,188
2004
62,877
$3,917,606
$62,306
3,095
121
3,216
Change
from 2003-2004
-3.8%
-0.6%
3.3%
1.2%
-7.6%
0.9%
26
FIGURE 18.
Employment in Information Technology Cluster, 1998-2004
FIGURE 19.
Average Wages in Information Technology Cluster, 1998-2004
27
LIFE SCIENCES
TECHNOLOGY
CLUSTER
The Life Sciences cluster of Automation Alley’s technology industry, defined in
Table 13 below, includes businesses that develop and use technology in the
manufacturing of life sciences equipment such as ophthalmic goods, surgical
appliances and medical instruments, electromedical and electrotherapeutic
apparatuses, basic organic chemicals, and pharmaceuticals. The cluster also
includes providers of R&D in the physical, engineering, and life sciences. The
cluster focused only on technology industries, and does not include more traditional health care and medical service sectors, such as hospitals and physician
offices.4
TABLE 13. The
Life Sciences Technology Cluster
NAICS
Industry Title
3254
3391
5417
The Life Sciences technology cluster employed 34,510 people in 2004, making
up 10 percent of technology employment in Automation Alley. The jobs in this
cluster paid an average wage of $87,174, the highest of any technology industry
cluster in the region.
The cluster experienced growth in the number of firms, employment, payroll,
and wages from 1998 to 2003. The Life Sciences technology cluster was one of
three to experience jobs growth from 2003 to 2004, growing by 2.9 percent.
Figure 20 on page 29, and Figure 21 on page 30 illustrate these changes. The
cluster also experienced gains in the total number of establishments. In 2003,
there were 452 firms in this cluster; by 2004 this number had grown to 456,
despite a slight drop in the number of large firms (from 34 to 32 firms).
For more information on the Life Sciences technology cluster, please see our
feature section, “A Closer Look: The Life Sciences Cluster” on page 38.
4. In 2004, Anderson Economic Group (AEG) published a report that defined the life sciences
industry in Michigan. In that report, AEG looked at the entire life sciences industry, not just its
technology components. The definition used here differs from that in the earlier report.
28
Payroll, and Establishments - Life Sciences Clustera
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Average
Wage
Small
Est.
Large
Est.
Total
Establishments
1998
26,113
$1,737,532
$66,539
394
28
422
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2002
31,896
$2,740,375
$85,915
413
35
448
2003
33,532
$3,070,996
$91,584
418
34
452
2004
34,510
$3,008,378
$87,174
424
32
456
2.9%
-2.0%
-4.8%
1.4%
-5.9%
0.9%
Change
from 2003-2004
a. NAICS code 5417 includes an estimated portion that accounts for employment in NAICS code 95 that would have
been placed in 5417 for the years 1998-2002, based on the 2003 classifications. Please see Appendix E for a full
description of our methodology.
FIGURE 20.
Employment in Life Sciences Cluster, 1998-2004
29
FIGURE 21.
OTHER
TECHNOLOGIES
CLUSTER
Average Wages in Life Sciences Cluster, 1998-2004
Businesses not classified into a specific technology cluster, but that use,
develop, or support technology, are included in the Other Technologies cluster,
which is presented below in Table 15. Among the types of businesses included
in this cluster are architectural services, engineering services, and geophysical
surveying and mapping services.
TABLE 15. Other
Technologies Cluster
NAICS
Industry Title
2111
4234
Professional & Commercial Equipment & Supplies Merchant Wholesalers
5413
Note: To accommodate a change in the U.S. Census Bureau industry classifications, we used 1997
NAICS 4214 (Professional and Commercial Equipment and Supplies Wholesalers) in place of
2002 NAICS 4234 for 1998-2002 data collection and analysis.
In 1998, employment in the Other Technologies cluster made up 13 percent of
total employment in the technology industry in Automation Alley. By 2004, the
Other Technologies cluster’s share of total employment had grown to 20 percent, employing over 65,000 people. Average wages also grew steadily during
this period, rising from $51,928 per year in 1998 to $69,724 in 2003.
30
Some of the increase in Other Technologies employment was reversed from
2003 to 2004, as employment fell by 3.2 percent (2,133 jobs) in the cluster.
Total payroll also fell (by 2.4 percent) from 2003 to 2004, but did so more
slowly than did employment, leading to a rise in average wage to $70,300 in
2004. These changes are shown below in Table 16, and in Figure 22 below and
Figure 23 on page 32.
Payroll, and Establishments - Other Technologies Cluster
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Average
Wage
Small
Est.
Large
Est.
Total
Establishments
1998
47,434
$2,463,166
$51,928
3,040
98
3,138
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2002
43,287
$2,552,572
$58,969
2,893
71
2,964
2003
67,485
$4,705,342
$69,724
2,716
95
2,811
2004
65,352
$4,594,231
$70,300
2,687
96
2,783
Change
from 2003-2004
-3.2%
-2.4%
0.8%
-1.1%
1.1%
-1.0%
FIGURE 22.
Employment in Other Technologies Cluster, 1998-2004
31
FIGURE 23.
Average Wages in Other Technologies Cluster, 1998-2004
32
Indicators of Tomorrow’s Technology Industry
V. Indicators of Tomorrow’s Technology
Industry
Thus far, we have focused on private sector activities in the technology industry.
This information alone, however, fails to capture the full extent of the technology industry in Automation Alley. There is a broad range of additional technology industry activity occurring in the region, which we illustrate with the
following indicators:
• University Research and Development
• Science and Engineering Graduate Students
• University Patents
• Private Sector Patents
• Homeland Security and Military Technology
This information provides a more rounded view of the technology activities taking place in Automation Alley today, and more importantly, provides a glimpse
at the technologies that may shape the industry in years to come.
SCIENCE AND
ENGINEERING
GRADUATE
STUDENTS
At the foundation of the technology industry is human capital, especially those
trained in the science and engineering fields. As shown in Table 17, Automation
Alley universities enrolled a total of 10,739 science and engineering graduate
students in 2003, 63 percent of the total in the State of Michigan.
This concentration of students is attractive to employers seeking a labor market
rich with talent, provided that the students stay in the area after graduation.5 The
data also demonstrates that Automation Alley’s universities are helping to prepare students for the technology jobs that continue to shape the economy.
5. This is perhaps illustrated best by the recent news that Google plans to move its AdWords division to Ann Arbor.
33
TABLE 17. Science
and Engineering Graduate Student Enrollment in Automation Alley
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Eastern Michigan University
624
607
656
658
701
765
Lawrence Technological University
na
na
na
na
na
233
Oakland University
841
700
772
779
888
868
University of Detroit Mercy
441
408
407
402
415
533
University of Michigan
4,545
4,894
5,006
5,132
5,649
5,905
Wayne State University
2,059
2,277
3,729
2,748
2,763
2,435
Total
8,510
8,886
10,570
9,719
10,416
10,739
Source: National Science Foundation
Note: 2003 was the first year that Lawrence Technological University had enrollment listed. Kettering
University enrollment was not provided.
UNIVERSITY
RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT
Universities throughout Automation Alley also undertake important research
that directly and indirectly impacts the future of Automation Alley’s technology
region. To see this, one need look no further than the TechTown development
near Wayne State University, or the concentration of IT firms near the Ann
Arbor campus of the University of Michigan.
As shown in Table 18, Automation Alley universities have steadily increased
their total R&D expenditures in recent years. From 1998 to 2003, the universities increased their R&D spending by approximately 56 percent. R&D expenditures in the last year alone increased by 14 percent, growing from $885 million
in 2002 to just more than $1 billion in 2003. This accounts for some 73 percent
of all Michigan university R&D expenditures.6
According to the National Science Foundation, the principal area of R&D
expenditures by Automation Alley universities over the six-year period was in
the life sciences industry. In 2003, this category accounted for 60 percent of
total R&D expenditures in Automation Alley. The second area was engineering,
accounting for 19 percent of spending; and third was social sciences, accounting
for 11 percent.7
6. National Science Foundation, Academic Research and Expenditures: Fiscal Year 2003.
7. National Science Foundation, Academic Research and Expenditures: Fiscal Year 2003.
According to the National Science Foundation, funding for the life sciences industry includes
four categories: agricultural, biological, medical, and life sciences that are “not elsewhere classified.” In order to remain consistent with our definition of the life sciences industry and other
data analyzed, agricultural sciences were excluded from our analysis.
34
TABLE 18. R&D
Expenditures at Universities in Automation Alley (in thousands)
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
NA
$1,512
$4,118
$2,992
$3,164
$4,051
Kettering University
$433
$647
$625
$1,161
$1,311
$1,295
$104
$344
$821
$681
$539
$471
Oakland University
$7,272
$6,422
$6,422
$7,397
$6,869
$6,175
University of Detroit Mercy
$1,853
$1,177
$1,767
$1,236
$746
$548
$496,761
$508,619
$551,556
$600,523
$673,724
$780,054
$138,456
$146,832
$156,814
$175,984
$199,007
$213,717
Total
$644,879
$665,553
$722,123
$789,974
$885,360
$1,006,311
Source: National Science Foundation
Among the leading research universities in Automation Alley is Wayne State
University (WSU), which ranks among the top 100 universities in the nation for
R&D expenditures. Located in Detroit’s cultural center, WSU has a number of
high-tech centers and research initiatives.8 At WSU’s Center for Automotive
Research, graduate students have the opportunity to develop innovative technologies for the auto industry. WSU’s Institute for Manufacturing Research (IMR)
combines scientists from a variety of disciplines with local industries to
research new subjects in manufacturing development and has developed several
commercialized products and processes.9 For 2006, IMR’s initiatives include a
focus on material sciences and nanomaterials.10
Wayne State University’s Technology Transfer Office is also responsible for
TechTown, a 47-acre, multi-million dollar research and business technology
park located in downtown Detroit. TechTown is a growing community of entrepreneurs, investors, mentors, service providers and corporate partners, designed
to attract high-tech companies. Since its opening in April 2004, TechTown has
attracted 20 high-tech companies that focus on everything from microelectromechanical systems, to alternative energy sources.11
UTILITY PATENTS
Patents granted to business and universities are another useful indicator of technological innovation. Table 19 on page 36 shows the number of utility patents
(patents issued for inventions that perform useful functions) granted to Automa-
8. The Higher Learning Commission.
9. The Institute for Manufacturing Research Web site, available at: www.imr.wayne.edu.
10.The Institute of Manufacturing Research, Annual Report on Research Activities, FY 2005.
11. TechTown web site, available at: www.techtownwsu.org.
35
tion Alley universities over the five-year period from 2000 to 2004. Of the 629
patents granted to Michigan universities over this five-year period, nearly half
were awarded to Automation Alley universities—the University of Michigan
received 258 and Wayne State University received 41.12
TABLE 19. Utility
Patents Granted to Universities in the Automation Alley Region
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
64
46
40
54
54
7
12
11
5
6
Total
71
58
51
59
60
Source: U.S. Patent Office
Private-Sector Patents. Patents awarded to businesses and individuals are also a
measure of technological development and innovation. During the five-year
period from 2000 to 2004, companies in the region received 11,693 utility patents out of the state total of 16,239. This means that 72 percent of all private patents in Michigan during this five-year period were awarded to businesses and
individuals located within Automation Alley.
HOMELAND
SECURITY AND
MILITARY
TECHNOLOGY
Another source of technological research and innovation in Automation Alley
comes in the form of military facilities. This includes the Detroit Arsenal, which
is home to the U.S. Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command
(TACOM), the U.S. Army Tank Automotive Research Development and Engineering Center (TARDEC), and the National Automotive Center (NAC). The
Arsenal, located in Warren, Michigan, recently expanded its staff to include 400
army personnel and 5,700 civilian workers.
TARDEC is the nation’s laboratory for advanced military automotive technology, and NAC is a Department of Defense (DoD) / U.S. Army focal point for
ground vehicle R&D.13 It has been at the forefront of research for advancements in alternative energy for use by military forces. TARDEC has partnered
with several private companies and universities to develop alternative energy
solutions. Developments range from solar power panels for individuals to alternative fuel solutions for military and commercial vehicles.14
Automation Alley universities also play a role in advancing military technologies. In 2003, Eastern Michigan University’s Coatings Research Institute (CRI)
received $2.1 million from the DoD for an innovative project to protect military
12.The schools included were: Michigan State University, Michigan Technological University,
University of Michigan, Wayne State University, and Western Michigan University.
13.TARDEC Web site, available at: www.tacom.army.mil/tardec.
14. TARDEC press release, April 20, 2006.
36
vehicles from biochemical hazards. Additionally, The U.S. Army Research Laboratory chose to house its $3.2 million Center for Innovative Materials Research
at Lawrence Technological University.15
15. Eastern Michigan University and Lawrence Technological University Web sites; available at:
http://www.emich.edu and http://www.ltu.edu.
37
A Closer Look: The Life Sciences Cluster
VI. A Closer Look: The Life Sciences Cluster
The Life Sciences cluster, as presented earlier on page 28, is a key component
of the technology industry in Automation Alley. In this section, we take a closer
look at the cluster, digging deeper into the employment data and discussing
some of the life science innovations occurring throughout the region.
In 2004, there were more than 34,500 life science technology jobs located in
Automation Alley, accounting for 10.4 percent of all technology industry
employment in the region. More notable is the cluster’s payroll, which at more
than $3 billion, represents 13.8 percent of all technology industry payroll in
Automation Alley. The cluster’s share of payroll to share of employment ratio is
a clear indication that jobs in the Life Sciences cluster, on average, offer salaries
and wages above the technology industry average.
TABLE 20. Life
Sciences Cluster Employment, Payroll, and Establishments (1998-2004)a
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Average
Wage
Small
Est.
Large
Est.
Total
Establishments
1998
26,113
$1,737,532
$66,539
394
28
422
1999
27,836
$1,963,232
$70,528
406
26
432
2000
30,522
$2,140,406
$70,125
399
33
432
2001
29,706
$2,344,756
$78,931
419
33
452
2002
31,896
$2,740,375
$85,915
413
35
448
2003
33,532
$3,070,996
$91,584
418
34
452
2004
34,510
$3,008,378
$87,174
424
32
456
a. NAICS code 5417 includes an estimated portion that accounts for employment in NAICS code 95 that would have
been placed in 5417 for the years 1998-2002, based on the 2003 classifications. Please see Appendix E for a full
description of our methodology.
The cluster also experienced steady growth in recent years, adding an average of
1,400 new jobs a year between 1998 and 2004. More recently, the cluster has
grown at a more modest rate, with 978 jobs added from 2003 to 2004 (2.9 percent). This however, is still significant growth when compared to the region’s
overall economy, which lost 4,881 private sector jobs from 2003 to 2004 (0.2
percent decline), and the State of Michigan as a whole, which added only
10,693 private sector jobs from 2003 to 2004. In total, more than 9 percent of
the employment increase in Michigan between 2003 and 2004 was in Automation Alley’s Life Sciences technology cluster.
Growth in the cluster has not been limited only to employment. Payroll, and
thus average wages, also grew significantly between 1998 and 2004. In 1998,
the average wage in the cluster was $66,539. By 2004, the average wage had
38
reached $87,174. The data does indicate that this growth in wages leveled off in
recent years—the average wage actually dropped from a high of $91,584 in
2003 to $87,174 in 2004.
LIFE SCIENCES
TECHNOLOGY
CLUSTER BY NAICS
SECTOR
As noted earlier, we define the Life Sciences technology cluster to include:
• Pharmaceutical & Medicine Manufacturing (NAICS 3254)
• Medical Equipment & Supplies Manufacturing (NAICS 3391)
• Scientific R&D Services (NAICS 5417)
As shown in Table 21 on page 40, scientific R&D services is by far the largest
NAICS sector within the Life Sciences technology cluster. In 2004, more than
30,400 of the 34,510 life science technology jobs in Automation Alley were
within the scientific R&D cluster. Additionally, as shown in Figure 24, the sector has added more jobs from 1998 through 2004 than the other life science
technology sectors.
Fortunately, this heavy concentration of scientific R&D jobs is economically
beneficial. The average wage in the sector was $92,867 in 2004, which is 141
percent of the average technology industry wage, and 211 percent of the overall
average wage in Automation Alley. Further, scientific R&D wages have grown
significantly since 1998—their 2004 level was 29 percent above the 1998
level—though the growth has leveled off in recent years, with wages in the sector actually declining somewhat from 2003 to 2004.
From 2002 to 2003, and again from 2003 to 2004, each sector of the Life Sciences technology cluster added jobs in Automation Alley. Over this two-year
period, Automation Alley gained 110 jobs in pharmaceutical and medicine manufacturing, 185 jobs in medical equipment and supplies manufacturing, and
2,319 jobs in scientific R&D.
39
TABLE 21. Employment
in the Life Sciences Technology Cluster, by NAICS Sector (1998-2004)
NAICS Sector
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
3254: Pharma & Med
Manufacturing
1,298
1,290
1,513
1,258
1,406
1,503
1,516
3391: Med Equip &
Supply Manufacturing
2,827
2,863
3,220
3,059
2,385
2,539
2,570
5417: Scientific R&D
Services
21,988
26,683
25,790
25,389
28,105
29,490
30,424
Total Cluster
26,113
27,836
30,522
29,706
31,896
33,532
34,510
TABLE 22. Average
Wages in the Life Sciences Technology Cluster, by NAICS Sector (1998-2004)
NAICS Sector
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
3254: Pharma & Med
Manufacturing
$46,464
$50,538
$46,983
$56,014
$48,554
$45,100
$50,695
3391: Med Equip &
Supply Manufacturing
$34,146
$32,975
$33,131
$34,260
$35,854
$40,007
$41,297
5417: Scientific R&D
Services
$71,889
$76,156
$76,101
$85,449
$92,033
$98,394
$92,867
Total Cluster
$66,539
$70,528
$70,125
$78,931
$85,915
$91,584
$87,174
40
FIGURE 24.
Change in Life Sciences Technology Employment, by NAICS Sector,
1998-2004
Change in Life Sciences Technology Average Wages, by NAICS
Sector, 1998-2004
FIGURE 25.
41
GEOGRAPHIC
CLUSTERS
As shown by the data in Table 23 and Table 24, the Life Sciences technology
cluster is well spread across Automation Alley. This provides a number of
options to life sciences technology firms looking for a location near others in
their industry. For example, Oakland, Washtenaw, and Wayne counties each
have more than 5,000 scientific research and development jobs, and Macomb
County adds another 2,666 scientific R&D jobs. An employer considering a
location in Automation Alley could find a site in any of these counties and be
close to a concentration of similar firms. A more detailed look at the geographic
data on life sciences technology employment in Automation Alley reveals:
• Wayne County leads Automation Alley in the number of life sciences technol-
ogy jobs, with 2004 employment exceeding 16,200. Some 94 percent of this
employment was in the scientific R&D field. The county also has a significant
presence of pharmaceutical and medicine manufacturers (nine establishments
and 358 employees), and medical equipment and supply manufacturers (576
employees at 45 establishments).
• Oakland County has the most diversified concentration of life sciences technology in the region. The county has more than 500 employees in each of the three
NAICS sectors. It leads the region in terms of the number of medical equipment
and supply establishments (71) and pharmaceutical and medicine manufacturers
(9, tied with Wayne County). It’s also near the top in scientific R&D establishments (76 v. 79 for Washtenaw County).
• Washtenaw County also has a diverse life sciences technology industry. It has
more scientific R&D establishments (79), and more medical equipment and
supply manufacturing employees (631 working at 12 establishments) than any
other Automation Alley county. With 7,150 scientific R&D employees, Washtenaw trails only Wayne County in terms of number of jobs in this well-paying
field.
• Macomb and Genesee counties also have notable life sciences technology activity. There are 410 employees working at 34 medical and equipment manufacturing establishments in Macomb County, and another 2,666 employees working
in the county’s 24 scientific R&D establishments. Genesee County also has a
significant assemblage of medical equipment and supply manufacturing, with
280 employees working in 21 establishments.
42
TABLE 23. Life
Sciences Technology Employment, by NAICS Sector, by County
County
Pharama & Med
(NAICS 3254)
Med Equip & Supply
(NAICS 3391)
Scientific R&D
(NAICS 5417)
Total
Genesee
-
280
51
331
Livingston
-
59
20
79
Macomb
15
410
2,666
3,091
Monroe
13
4
38
55
Oakland
1,080
582
5,203
6,865
St. Clair
-
28
-
28
50
631
7,150
7,831
358
576
15,296
16,230
1,516
2,570
30,424
34,510
Washtenaw
Wayne
Automation Alley Total
TABLE 24. Life
Sciences Technology Establishments, by NAICS Sector, by County
County
Pharama & Med
(NAICS 3254)
Med Equip & Supply
(NAICS 3391)
Scientific R&D
(NAICS 5417)
Total
Genesee
-
21
6
27
Livingston
-
7
5
12
Macomb
1
34
24
59
Monroe
1
1
3
5
Oakland
9
71
76
156
St. Clair
-
4
-
4
Washtenaw
1
12
79
92
Wayne
9
45
47
101
21
195
240
456
Automation Alley Total
43
UNIVERSITY
RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT
Research conducted by universities is particularly important in the life sciences
industry because it enables companies and organizations to conduct research
that would otherwise not be supported. Medical technology and developments
make up the majority of the life sciences industry, and developing a product or
process in medicine often takes years of research. Private sector firms do not
have the incentive to invest in such research when the odds of turning a profit
are low. Therefore, the advances made in publicly funded labs are key to
launching future advances in the life sciences.
Given the importance of the research conducted by universities in the life sciences, private sector firms in the life sciences often locate near major centers of
university R&D. Being able to interact with leading researchers and to hire
graduates who have worked on forthcoming technologies in university labs is a
competitive advantage that firms in the Life Sciences technology cluster highly
value.
In 2003, universities located within Automation Alley spent more than $600
million on research and development in the life sciences, up significantly from
the 1999 level of $386 million. Leading the way was the University of Michigan, with nearly $426 million of life sciences R&D expenditures. Wayne State
was second with more than $170 million. In total, Automation Alley’s universities accounted for 82 percent of all life science R&D expenditures among public
universities in Michigan.16
TABLE 25. Expenditures
for R&D in the Life Sciences (in thousands)
University
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
$292
$424
$442
$1,678
$785
$4,118
$4,118
$4,743
$2,812
$3,193
$267,585
$301,790
$320,770
$358,254
$425,759
$114,217
$120,701
$140,180
$159,013
$170,498
Total
$386,212
$427,033
$466,135
$521,757
$600,235
Oakland University
Data: National Science Foundation, Academic Institutional Profiles
16.AEG analysis National Science Foundation Academic Research and Expenditures data from
fiscal year 2003. Reporting universities include: Central Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Ferris
State, Grand Valley State, Michigan State, Michigan Technological, Oakland, Saginaw Valley
State, University of Michigan (all campuses), Wayne State, and Western Michigan.
44
RESEARCH CENTERS
IN AUTOMATION
ALLEY
With universities in Automation Alley being home to more than $600 million in
life sciences R&D expenditures, it is not surprising that the region also has at
least 25 university research centers exclusively for the life sciences, as shown in
Table 26.
TABLE 26. Automation
Alley’s Main University Research Centers
Kettering University
Biomechanics and Bioengineering Laboratory
Orthopaedic Biomechanics Laboratory
Biomedical Engineering Laboratory
Oakland University
Center for Biomedical Research
Eye Research Institute
Orthopaedic Research Laboratories
Human Motion Simulation Laboratory
Life Sciences Initiative (LSI)
Molecular Biophysics Research Laboratory
Nanotechnology Institute for Medicine and the Biological Sciences
The Biological Station
Center for Proteome Studies
Center for Chemical Genomics
Michigan Center for Biological Information (MCBI)
Center for Organogenesis
Center for Human Embryonic Research
Bioengineering Center
Research and Technology Center
Brain Imaging Research Division
Applied Genomics Technology Center (AGTC)
Center for Molecular Medicine and Genetics
Institute for Environmental Health Sciences
Morris J. Hood Jr. Comprehensive Diabetes Research Center
Karmanos Cancer Institute
Kresge Eye Institute
Source: Oakland County Michigan, Emerging Sectors Report, 2006
The majority of these university research centers focus on one of two primary
areas: medical research or biomechanical research. Some of the work being
done in these fields is discussed below.
45
Biomechanical Research. Universities in Automation Alley have a variety of
programs exploring the field of biomechanics (the study of mechanics in the living body). In an effort to support new and relevant research in the biomedical
arena, Kettering University has developed a Biomedical Research and Design
Laboratory (BRDL). The BRDL combines three fields of engineering (mechanical, electrical, and industrial) to provide technical expertise for the design and
development of bioengineering products.17 Additionally, the University of
Michigan has worked in collaboration with Ford, DaimlerChrysler, General
Motors, TARDEC, and others to establish the Human Motion Simulation Laboratory. The laboratory researches human movements for applications in ergonomics (designing equipment for the workplace that reduces strain on
operators).
Medical Research. A significant number of university research centers in Automation Alley are devoted to medical research. With nine research centers and
institutes, Wayne State University is home to one of the nation’s largest medical
schools.18 In Ann Arbor, the University of Michigan’s Nanotechnology Institute
for Medicine and Biological Sciences (M-NIMBS) combines nanoscale
research in the biological and physical sciences. This research has been helpful
in a variety of fields, and recently announced findings that could be used to
make more effective cancer treatments.19 Additionally, Oakland University is
home to the Center for Biomedical Research. This center conducts research in
nine major biomedical fields, ranging from cellular responses to stress to tumor
immunology. The Center has won several awards for their research and has
received four Distinguished Biomedical Science Achievement awards since
2002.20
EMPLOYERS IN
FOCUS
Automation Alley is home to hundreds of businesses in the Life Sciences cluster. The firms below illustrate the intensity and diversity of the life sciences
throughout Automation Alley.
Asterand, PLC (Detroit, Wayne County). Asterand, PLC is a tissue research
company headquartered in TechTown, a technology park adjacent to Wayne
State University in Detroit. The company’s range of products and services
include standard and custom procurement of tissue in frozen, fixed or fresh formats, matching blood, serum and plasma samples, cell lines, human tissue
17.Kettering University, Office for Research and Technology Transfer.
18.Wayne State University is the 5th largest medical school in America. U.S. News and World
Report: America’s Best Graduate Schools, 2007. Report available at: http://www.usnews.com/
usnews/edu/grad/webextras/brief/sb_med_size_brief.php.
19.M-NIMBS Web site, available at: http://nano.med.umich.edu/.
20.Oakland University, Center for Biomedical Research Web site, available at:www2.oakland.edu/cbr/
46
derivatives, protein, slides, tissue microarrays, immunohistochemistry, in-situ
hybridization, functional pharmacology, drug toxicity studies and gene expression profiling. Asterand-supplied tissues have provided researchers around the
world with the necessary samples to aid in the discovery and development of
medicines and treatments for a wide range of diseases and conditions which
include rheumatoid and osteoarthritis, cancer, central nervous system diseases,
cardiovascular diseases, diabetes and respiratory diseases.
Asterand was formed in 2000 by Randal Charlton, who continues to serve as the
firm’s CEO. With offices in Detroit and the United Kingdom, the company currently employs more than 90 professionals and provides services to researchers
all over the world. Although headquartered in Detroit, Asterand is a fully listed
public company on the London Stock Exchange (symbol ATD).
Somanetics Corporation (Troy, Oakland County). Somanetics Corporation develops, manufactures, and markets medical devices throughout the United States,
Japan, Europe, Canada, the Middle East, and Africa. Their INVOS system is the
only commercially available non-invasive patient monitoring system that continually monitors changes in the brain’s blood oxygen levels. Somanetics also
develops and markets the CorRestore system for use in cardiac repair and reconstruction, including heart surgeries called surgical ventricular restoration. The
CorRestore system is unique because it may be used with a specific medical
procedure required for the treatment of patients with congestive heart failure.21
Somanetics, which was founded in 1982, has approximately 50 full-time
employees. The firm’s chief executive is Bruce Barrett, and is publicly traded
under the symbol SMTS.
DavisMade, Inc. (Burton, Genesee County). DavisMade, Inc. manufactures the
“Standing Dani” and other custom-made pediatric mobile prone standers for
children with special needs. The “Standing Dani” may be used indoors or outdoors, and each child is individually assessed to ensure optimal mobility and
comfort. The company was recently featured on ABC’s hit TV show, Extreme
Makeover Home Edition, as they provided a “KidSter Dani” for a five-year-old
child with muscular dystrophy from Medfield, Massachusetts.
DavisMade, Inc. was founded in 1985 by Dan Davis, whose daughter Dani
Davis was diagnosed with cerebral palsy at age one. Davis refined his invention
with assistance from Kettering University and University of Michigan-Dearborn researchers, and a SBIR grant worth $37,360.
RJL Systems, Inc, (Clinton Township, Macomb County). RJL Systems Inc. is a
pioneer of bioelectric impedance sciences, which involves using low levels of
21.This procedure is known as Surgical Ventricular Restoration, or SVR.
47
electrical current to measure body fat, water, and cell mass. RJL designs and
creates instruments and software to assess body composition relating to body
fat, lean body mass, total body water, and intracellular-extracellular volume.
Body composition analysis is important for tracking overall health and fitness,
as well as progress made in therapeutic programs. Equipment manufactured by
RJL Systems, Inc. has applications in research and development and clinics.
RJL products are distributed throughout North America, as well as Central
America, the Caribbean, and Europe.
RJL Systems was founded in 1979 by Rudolph J. Liedtke, the company’s CEO
and Director of R&D. The company has seven employees, and serves customers
throughout the United States, Mexico, Canada, Central America and the Caribbean, and Europe.
Rubicon Genomics (Ann Arbor, Washtenaw County). Rubicon Genomics focuses
on the development of highly sensitive and highly specific non-invasive tests
for cancer and other diseases using its proprietary MethylPlex™ technology.
Rubicon has also discovered and developed a proprietary set of tumor markers
and combinations of tumor markers (patterns) for specific indications. The company is a leader in the development of breakthrough methods for detection and
interpretation of the complex DNA methylation patterns in tumor cells. MethylPlex amplifies and quantifies the exceedingly small amounts of abnormally
methylated DNA that are released by diseased tissue into different body fluids
such as blood and urine.
Rubicon was founded in 2000 by John Langmore M.D. and Vladimir Makarov,
M.D., who have grown the firm to 10 employees and annual revenues exceeding
$2 million. Today, the company is engaged in multiple collaborations directed at
commercializing leading-edge cancer diagnostics.
GlyTag, LLC (Beverly Hills, Oakland County). GlyTag, LLC has developed a
drug targeting system that increases the efficacy of medicines and drugs, while
reducing undesirable side effects on non-problematic cells. So far, drugs tested
with the GlyTag system have resulted in enhanced drug activity and less frequent dosing. They are currently in the pre-clinical testing stage with a new protein called “GlyB4” for treating breast cancer.
Glytag is a small, privately held firm founded in 2004 by Jeffrey A. Loeb,
M.D.O., a leader in the field of growth factor-heparin interactions and inventor
of the GlyTag technology.
48
Appendix A: Technology Definition
Methodology
Our definition of the technology industry is composed of specific industrial sectors. These sectors are identified by North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) codes, which is how the U.S. Census Bureau reports industry
data.1 Because there is not a universally accepted definition of technology, we
employed the following methodology to determine an accurate and concise definition of the technology industry.
Specifically, this methodology involved:
1.
Surveying existing definitions
We reviewed definitions of the technology industry used in relevant industry reports,
analyses, and other materials.
2.
Making a first cut selection
We made a first selection of industry sectors (as defined by NAICS codes) to be
included in the definition. We based our decision at this step on the frequency with
which a sector was cited in other studies. If the sector appeared in the U.S. Department of Commerce definition and one other definition, we included the industry in
our definition.
3.
Conducting an occupational test
If an industry was included in one or two other studies, and met a specific standard
concerning the share of occupations in an industry with a technology focus, it was
included in our definition.
4.
Refining from the 6-digit NAICS codes
We took the selected 6-digit industry sectors back to the 4-digit level. This was done
because estimates of employment and payroll are more available at the 4-digit level.
5.
Breaking down the industry definition into technology subsectors
Based on the definition of each NAICS code, as given by the U.S. Census Bureau,
we classified each 4-digit NAICS code into one of the following technology clusters: Advanced Automotive, Advanced Manufacturing, Chemical and Material,
Information Technology (including telecommunications), Life Sciences, and Other
Technologies.
REVIEW OF EXISTING
DEFINITIONS
In our first step we reviewed past reports and other sources involving the technology industry to determine what industry sectors are most commonly
included when defining technology. We found that each document puts forth its
1. Our definition was done at the NAICS 4-digit level, as this is the most detailed level for which sufficient amounts of data is commonly available at the county level. A NAICS code can be between
2 and 6 digits, with each digit providing an additional level of detail. For example, NAICS code 325
represents chemical manufacturing, NAICS code 3254 represents pharmaceutical and medicine
manufacturing, and 325411 represents medicinal and botanical manufacturing.
A-1
own definition. These definitions vary from focusing solely on information
technology (American Electronics Association), to a definition incorporating
wholesalers of technology equipment (Carnegie Mellon / SSTI).
Of the existing definitions reviewed, which we list in “Appendix B: Bibliography” we identified six to further consult during our definition process. These six
were selected based on their use of NAICS codes (as opposed to SIC codes, the
precursor to NAICS) to define the industry, as well as the reputation of the
source and the quality of analytic methods used.
We took the definitions put forth in these six reports and constructed a “technology industry definition matrix,” which we present in “Appendix C: Other Definitions of the Technology Industry.” The appendix also includes a narrative
summary of the six reports.
SELECTING NAICS TO
INCLUDE: FIRST CUT
Upon reviewing the already established definitions of technology, we decided
that the U.S. Department of Commerce, Office of Technology Policy definition
used in the fourth edition of The Dynamics of Technology-Based Economic
Development, would serve as the base for our definition.1 Specifically, if a
NAICS code was used in the U.S. Department of Commerce definition, and at
least one of the other five definitions, it was included in our definition.
NAICS code 5416 (Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services) which met the criteria at this step, was later excluded from our definition.
Our analysis found inconsistencies in the use of “Management Consulting Services” as a classification, which resulted in significantly more employment in
this sector in 2003 than in 2002. It appears likely that a large number of jobs
previously classified as “5613-Employment Services” or as “5511-Management
of Companies & Enterprises” were reclassified under “54161-Management
Consulting Services.” Given that the reclassified employment was significant
(likely about 17,000), and that the reclassified employees appear not to work in
a technology-related occupation, we removed NAICS code 5416 from our definition.
NAICS codes not meeting this criterion were retained for further analysis.
SELECTING NAICS TO
INCLUDE: SECOND
AND THIRD CUTS
If a NAICS code was not included after the first cut, we then further consulted
the definitions of technology used by the AeA, Pittsburgh Technology Council,
and Carnegie-Mellon/SSTI.2 If a remaining NAICS code was not included in
1. We based this decision on the fact that the U.S. Department of Commerce has used the definition on three previous editions of its Dynamics of Technology-Based Economic Development
report; the definition was based in the 1999 BLS definition as presented by Daniel Hecker;
and, as it is a government source, the report is assumed to be unbiased.
A-2
any of these definitions, it was excluded from our definition. If it was included
in all three, it was included in our definition; however, no NAICS codes met this
criterion.
A quantitative analysis was then applied to NAICS codes that were included in
one or two of the definitions presented by AeA, Pittsburgh Technology Council,
and Carnegie-Mellon/SSTI. This involved assessing the occupational makeup
of each industry, and keeping those industries in which more than double the
national average of workers had technology-oriented occupations.1 Table 1 on
page 4 summarizes this analysis for each industry on which we performed an
occupational analysis. Industries that had a 10 percent or greater share of
employment in technology occupations were included in our definition.
FINALIZING THE
DEFINITION
After applying the above criteria we had a list of 186 6-digit NAICS codes.
However, precise industry data is not commonly available at the 6-digit level for
individual counties—the level of geography analyzed in this study. To accommodate this, our definition—as presented in Table 3, “Definition of the Technology Industry by Cluster,” on page 13 of the Introduction to the report—is
comprised of each industry’s 4-digit NAICS code. While this broadens the definition to some extent, it allows far greater precision in estimating industry data
for employment, payroll, and establishments where needed.2
TECHNOLOGY
CLUSTER
CLASSIFICATIONS
Upon completing our industry definition, we identified technology clusters by
classifying each NAICS as involving information technology, advanced manufacturing, advanced automotive, chemical and material, or life sciences. An
“other technologies” classification was used for those not fitting a specified
cluster.
The composition of each cluster is presented in Table 3, “Definition of the Technology Industry by Cluster,” on page 13 of the report.
2. We did not further consult the definitions used by Anderson Economic Group (AEG) in 2001,
or the BLS in 1999, as these definitions are very similar to that used by U.S. Department of
Commerce, Office of Technology Policy in The Dynamics of Technology-Based Economic
Development, fourth edition. This is largely due to the fact that both the 2001 AEG definition
and the BLS definition were based on the 1999 BLS definition.
1. May 2004 occupation data was gathered at the 4-digit NAICS level (most detailed level available) from the BLS Occupational Employment Statistics Survey. At the national level we
found 5 percent of all occupations were classified as Computer and Mathematical; Architecture and Engineering; and Life, Physical, and Social Science.
2. The U.S. Census Bureau does not disclose industry payroll data when doing so would make
apparent an individual business payroll. Industry employment data is also frequently reported
as a range (i.e. 0-19 employees) for more specific NAICS levels. Thus, some estimates were
made based on broader industry trends. See “Data Collection and Estimation” in Appendix E.
A-3
TABLE 1. Occupational
Analysis of Industries Considered for Inclusion in Technology Industry Definition
Total
Industry
Employment
Employment
in Technology
Occupations*
Share of
Employment in
a Technology
Occupation**
2111 - Oil and Gas Extraction
119,200
26,700
22.4%
3334 - Ventilation, Heating, AC, and Commercial
Refrig Equipment Manufacturing
151,650
9,610
6.3%
3335 - Metalworking Machinery Manufacturing
199,230
13,950
7.0%
3359 - Other Electrical Equipment and Component
Manufacturing
137,450
12,060
8.8%
37,700
4,280
11.4%
3399 - Other Miscellaneous Manufacturing
356,330
12,870
3.6%
4234 - Professional and Commercial Equipment and
Supplies Merchant Wholesalers
637,820
111,510
17.5%
5161 - Internet Publishing and Broadcasting
29,250
10,210
34.9%
5171 - Wired Telecommunications Carriers
552,560
102,870
18.6%
5172 - Wireless Telecommunications Carriers
(except Satellite)
192,100
29,100
15.1%
5173 - Telecommunications Resellers
111,800
25,320
22.6%
5174 - Satellite Telecommunications
16,520
2,000
12.1%
128,920
9,250
7.2%
NAICS code - Industry
3369 - Other Transportation Equipment Manufacturing
5175 - Cable and Other Program Distribution
5179 - Other Telecommunications
6114 - Business Schools and Computer and Management
Training
0000 - All United States Industries
7,460
1,760
23.6%
83,780
4,830
5.8%
128,127,360
6,419,460
5.0%
Data: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment Statistics Survey (May 2004)
* Technology occupations are those classified under the OCC Codes for Computer and Mathematical; Architecture and
Engineering; and Life, Physical, and Social Science.
**Industries with a 10 percent or greater share of employment in a technology occupation are included in our definition.
ADDITIONAL
METHODOLOGICAL
NOTES
Our definition was done at the NAICS 4-digit level, as this is the most detailed
level for which sufficient amounts of data are commonly available at the county
level. A NAICS code can be between 2 and 6 digits, with each digit providing
an additional level of detail. For example, NAICS code 325 represents chemical
manufacturing, NAICS code 3254 represents pharmaceutical and medicine
manufacturing, and NAICS code 325411 represents medicinal and botanical
manufacturing.
A-4
Our definition is based on 2002 NAICS codes. The 1998-2002 data used in our
analysis is provided by 1997 NAICS codes. The U.S. Census Bureau introduced
2002 NAICS codes to account for new and emerging industries that could not
be well classified using the 1997 definitions.
A-5
Appendix B: Bibliography
In arriving at a definition of the technology industry, we reviewed a number of
past reports with a range of definitions of the industry. A bibliography of these
reports is presented below.
Anderson, Patrick, Ian Clemens, and Christopher Cotton. Economic Diversification and High-Tech Employment in Oakland County. Anderson Economic Group, 2001.
Anderson, Patrick, and Scott Watkins. The Life Sciences Industry in Michigan:
Employment, Economic, and Fiscal Contributions to the State’s Economy.
Anderson Economic Group, 2004.
Cyberstates 2005. American Electronics Association, 2005.
DeJonge, Alissa. Defining High Tech. CERC, 2001. http://www.cerc.com/
detpages/services951.html.
Feinstein, Abel, and Sean P. McAlinden. Michigan: The High-Technology Automotive State. Center for Automotive Research in the Altarum Institute,
2002.
Hecker, Daniel. “High-Technology Employment: A Broader View”. Monthly
Labor Review, June 1999.
High Technology and the Third Frontier. Ohio Department of Job and Family
Services, Bureau of Labor Market Information, October 2003.
Paytas, Jerry, and Dan Berglund. Technology Industries and Occupations for
NAICS Industry Data. Carnegie Mellon Heinz School Center for Economic Development in conjunction with the State Science & Technology
Institute, February 2004.
State of the Industry Report 2005: The Pittsburgh Region. Pittsburgh Technology Council, 2005.
The Dynamics of Technology-Based Economic Development: State Science
and Technology Indicators, 4th edition. U.S. Department of Commerce,
Office of Technology Policy, March 2004.
B-1
Appendix C: Other Definitions of the
Technology Industry
We reviewed a number of other publications before adopting the definition of
“technology” used in this report. Of the reports listed in “Appendix B: Bibliography” we looked most closely at those that used NAICS codes to identify the
technology industry. We documented these definitions in a matrix, which is presented as Table 1, “Technology Definition Matrix,” on page 3. Also, below you
will find a brief narrative summary of the technology definition used in each of
these reports.1
AMERICAN
ELECTRONICS
ASSOCIATION (AeA)
AeA used 45 NAICS codes to define the technology industry. Its guiding principle was that “to be included in AeA’s core definition of high tech, an industry
had to be a maker/creator of technology, whether it be in the form of products,
communications, or services.”
Industries included in AeA’s definition broadly fall into two categories—hightech manufacturing and high-tech services. AeA did not include a NAICS code
if the high-tech portion did not represent a clear majority. The AeA definition of
high-tech does not include the wholesale and retail trade of high-tech goods.
AeA also leaves out biotechnology because, in their words, “there is no clear
consensus on the definition of the biotechnology industry.”
THE PITTSBURGH
TECHNOLOGY
COUNCIL
The Pittsburgh Technology Council used 126 NAICS codes to define the technology industry in its 2005 “State of the Industry” report. The Pittsburgh Technology Council used three main criteria in determining if an industry qualified
as being technology oriented. These criteria were: research and development
activity; scientists and engineers employed; and specialty technology workers
employed.
The Council looked at the percentage of sales invested in research and development, the number of scientists and engineers employed in industries, and the
number of specialty technology workers who are employed in typically nontechnology industries. Such workers might include information systems personnel, computer programmers, lab personnel, and engineers involved in heavy
industrial processes.
1. North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) was adopted in 1997 to replace the
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system as the industry classification system used by
the statistical agencies of the United States.
C-1
CARNEGIE MELLON
AND SSTI
Carnegie Mellon’s report “Technology Industries and Occupations for NAICS
Industry Data” identifies three major areas of technology: Technology Employers, Primary Technology Generators, and Secondary Technology Generators.
Their work builds on a previous definition of technology industries identified by
their 3-digit Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code. In order to be defined
as technology, an industry must be science and engineering intensive, with a
share of employment in those occupations that exceeds three times the national
average.
Using this methodology, Carnegie Mellon classified industries as Technology
Employers if their share of employment in science- and engineering-intensive
occupations exceeded more than three times the national average (3.3 percent).
To be classified as a Primary Technology Generator, an industry must exceed
the U.S. average for research and development expenditures per employee
($11,297) and the proportion of full-time-equivalent R&D scientists and engineers in the industry workforce (5.9 percent). Secondary Technology Generators
are those industries that meet only one of these two criteria.
DANIEL HECKER,
UNITED STATES
BUREAU OF LABOR
STATISTICS
Economist Daniel Hecker of the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) defined
high-tech industries in his 1999 article “High Technology Employment: A
Broader View.” In the article, Hecker considered industries as high tech if
employment in both research and development and in all technology-oriented
occupations accounted for a proportion of employment that was at least twice
the average for all industries in the Occupational Employment Survey. Therefore, an industry is high tech if it has at least six research and development
workers per 1000 workers and 76 technology-oriented workers per 1000 workers. This definition, which was based on SIC codes, includes high-tech manufacturing, information industries, and technology services.
ANDERSON
ECONOMIC GROUP
(2001)
In our 2001 report “Economic Diversification & High-Tech Employment in
Oakland County” we referred to the definition given by Daniel Hecker of the
BLS in “High Technology Employment: A Broader View.” The article provided
a list of high-tech SIC codes. From this list, and with the relationships defined
by the U.S. Census Bureau, we identified the appropriate NAICS industry
groups to include in a definition of high-tech. This definition was done using
NAICS codes at the 3-digit level. At the time few, if any, other definitions of the
industry existed that were developed using the more accurate NAICS codes.
Most others, including the BLS definition, were done using the older SIC data.
C-2
Table 1. Matrix of Technology Industry Definitions From Selected Sources (continued)
NAICS
211111
324110
324121
324122
324191
324199
325110
325120
325131
325132
325181
325182
325188
325191
325192
325193
325199
325211
325212
325221
325222
325311
325312
325314
325320
325411
325412
325413
325414
325510
325520
325611
325612
325613
325620
325910
325920
325991
325992
325998
332911
332912
Industry
Crude Petroleum and Natural Gas Extraction
Petroleum Refineries
Asphalt Paving Mixture and Block Manufacturing
Asphalt Shingle and Coating Materials Manufacturing
Petroleum Lubricating Oil and Grease Manufacturing
All Other Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing
Petrochemical Manufacturing
Industrial Gas Manufacturing
Inorganic Dye and Pigment Manufacturing
Synthetic Organic Dye and Pigment Manufacturing
Alkalies and Chlorine Manufacturing
Carbon Black Manufacturing
All Other Basic Inorganic Chemical Manufacturing
Gum and Wood Chemical Manufacturing
Cyclic Crude and Intermediate Manufacturing
Ethyl Alcohol Manufacturing
All Other Basic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
Plastics Material and Resin Manufacturing
Synthetic Rubber Manufacturing
Cellulosic Organic Fiber Manufacturing
Noncellulosic Organic Fiber Manufacturing
Nitrogenous Fertilizer Manufacturing
Phosphatic Fertilizer Manufacturing
Fertilizer (Mixing Only) Manufacturing
Pesticide and Other Agricultural Chemical Manufacturing
Medicinal and Botanical Manufacturing
Pharmaceutical Preparation Manufacturing
In-Vitro Diagnostic Substance Manufacturing
Biological Product (except Diagnostic) Manufacturing
Paint and Coating Manufacturing
Adhesive Manufacturing
Soap and Other Detergent Manufacturing
Polish and Other Sanitation Good Manufacturing
Surface Active Agent Manufacturing
Toilet Preparation Manufacturing
Printing Ink Manufacturing
Explosives Manufacturing
Custom Compounding of Purchased Resins
Photographic Film, Paper, Plate, and Chemical Manufacturing
All Other Miscellaneous Chemical Product and Preparation Manufacturing
Industrial Valve Manufacturing
Fluid Power Valve and Hose Fitting Manufacturing
AeA
Definition
Pittsburgh
Anderson Economic
Technology
Group 2001 HighCouncil Definition
Tech Definition
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Carnegie Mellon /
SSTI Definition:
Aggregate
x
U.S. Department of
Commerce, Office of
Technology Policy
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics (1999,
Converted From
SICs)
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
NAICS
332913
332919
332991
332992
332993
332994
332995
332996
332997
332998
332999
333111
333112
333120
333131
333132
333210
333220
333291
333292
333293
333294
333295
333298
333311
333312
333313
333314
333315
333319
333411
333412
333414
333415
333511
333512
333513
333514
333515
333516
333518
333611
Industry
Plumbing Fixture Fitting and Trim Manufacturing
Other Metal Valve and Pipe Fitting Manufacturing
Ball and Roller Bearing Manufacturing
Small Arms Ammunition Manufacturing
Ammunition (except Small Arms) Manufacturing
Small Arms Manufacturing
Other Ordnance and Accessories Manufacturing
Fabricated Pipe and Pipe Fitting Manufacturing
Industrial Pattern Manufacturing
Enameled Iron and Metal Sanitary Ware Manufacturing
All Other Miscellaneous Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing
Farm Machinery and Equipment Manufacturing
Lawn and Garden Tractor and Home Lawn and Garden Equipment Manufacturing
Construction Machinery Manufacturing
Mining Machinery and Equipment Manufacturing
Oil and Gas Field Machinery and Equipment Manufacturing
Sawmill and Woodworking Machinery Manufacturing
Plastics and Rubber Industry Machinery Manufacturing
Paper Industry Machinery Manufacturing
Textile Machinery Manufacturing
Printing Machinery and Equipment Manufacturing
Food Product Machinery Manufacturing
Semiconductor Machinery Manufacturing
All Other Industrial Machinery Manufacturing
Automatic Vending Machine Manufacturing
Commercial Laundry, Drycleaning, and Pressing Machine Manufacturing
Office Machinery Manufacturing
Optical Instrument and Lens Manufacturing
Photographic and Photocopying Equipment Manufacturing
Other Commercial and Service Industry Machinery Manufacturing
Air Purification Equipment Manufacturing
Industrial and Commercial Fan and Blower Manufacturing
Heating Equipment (except Warm Air Furnaces) Manufacturing
Air-Cond and Warm Air Heating Equip and Commercial and Industrial Refrig Equip Mfg
Industrial Mold Manufacturing
Machine Tool (Metal Cutting Types) Manufacturing
Machine Tool (Metal Forming Types) Manufacturing
Special Die and Tool, Die Set, Jig, and Fixture Manufacturing
Cutting Tool and Machine Tool Accessory Manufacturing
Rolling Mill Machinery and Equipment Manufacturing
Other Metalworking Machinery Manufacturing
Turbine and Turbine Generator Set Units Manufacturing
AeA
Definition
Pittsburgh
Anderson Economic
Technology
Tech Definition
Carnegie Mellon /
SSTI Definition:
Aggregate
U.S. Department of
Commerce, Office of
Technology Policy
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Statistics (1999,
Converted From
SICs)
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
NAICS
333612
333613
333618
333911
333912
333913
333921
333922
333923
333924
333991
333992
333993
333994
333995
333996
333997
333999
334111
334112
334113
334119
334210
334220
334290
334310
334411
334412
334413
334414
334415
334416
334417
334418
334419
334510
334511
334512
334513
334514
334515
334516
Industry
Speed Changer, Industrial High-Speed Drive, and Gear Manufacturing
Mechanical Power Transmission Equipment Manufacturing
Other Engine Equipment Manufacturing
Pump and Pumping Equipment Manufacturing
Air and Gas Compressor Manufacturing
Measuring and Dispensing Pump Manufacturing
Elevator and Moving Stairway Manufacturing
Conveyor and Conveying Equipment Manufacturing
Overhead Traveling Crane, Hoist, and Monorail System Manufacturing
Industrial Truck, Tractor, Trailer, and Stacker Machinery Manufacturing
Power-Driven Handtool Manufacturing
Welding and Soldering Equipment Manufacturing
Packaging Machinery Manufacturing
Industrial Process Furnace and Oven Manufacturing
Fluid Power Cylinder and Actuator Manufacturing
Fluid Power Pump and Motor Manufacturing
Scale and Balance (except Laboratory) Manufacturing
All Other Miscellaneous General Purpose Machinery Manufacturing
Electronic Computer Manufacturing
Computer Storage Device Manufacturing
Computer Terminal Manufacturing
Other Computer Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing
Telephone Apparatus Manufacturing
Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Comm Equipment Manufacturing
Other Communications Equipment Manufacturing
Audio and Video Equipment Manufacturing
Electron Tube Manufacturing
Bare Printed Circuit Board Manufacturing
Semiconductor and Related Device Manufacturing
Electronic Capacitor Manufacturing
Electronic Resistor Manufacturing
Electronic Coil, Transformer, and Other Inductor Manufacturing
Electronic Connector Manufacturing
Printed Circuit Assembly (Electronic Assembly) Manufacturing
Other Electronic Component Manufacturing
Electromedical and Electrotherapeutic Apparatus Manufacturing
Search, Detection, Navig, Guidance, Aeronauy, and Naut Syst and Instrument Mng
Auto Environmental Control Manufacturing for Residential, Comm, and Appliance Use
Instruments and Mfg for Measuring, Displaying, and Cntrl Ind Process Variables
Totalizing Fluid Meter and Counting Device Manufacturing
Instrument Manufacturing for Measuring and Testing Electricity and Electrical Signals
Analytical Laboratory Instrument Manufacturing
AeA
Definition
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Pittsburgh
Anderson Economic
Technology
Tech Definition
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Carnegie Mellon /
SSTI Definition:
Aggregate
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
U.S. Department of
Commerce, Office of
Technology Policy
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Statistics (1999,
Converted From
SICs)
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
NAICS
334517
334518
334519
334611
334612
334613
335311
335312
335313
335314
335911
335912
335921
335929
335931
335932
335991
335999
336111
336112
336120
336211
336212
336213
336214
336311
336312
336321
336322
336330
336340
336350
336360
336370
336391
336399
336411
336412
336413
336414
336415
336419
Industry
Irradiation Apparatus Manufacturing
Watch, Clock, and Part Manufacturing
Other Measuring and Controlling Device Manufacturing
Software Reproducing
Prerecorded Compact Disc (except Software), Tape, and Record Reproducing
Magnetic and Optical Recording Media Manufacturing
Power, Distribution, and Specialty Transformer Manufacturing
Motor and Generator Manufacturing
Switchgear and Switchboard Apparatus Manufacturing
Relay and Industrial Control Manufacturing
Storage Battery Manufacturing
Primary Battery Manufacturing
Fiber Optic Cable Manufacturing
Other Communication and Energy Wire Manufacturing
Current-Carrying Wiring Device Manufacturing
Noncurrent-Carrying Wiring Device Manufacturing
Carbon and Graphite Product Manufacturing
All Other Miscellaneous Electrical Equipment and Component Manufacturing
Automobile Manufacturing
Light Truck and Utility Vehicle Manufacturing
Heavy Duty Truck Manufacturing
Motor Vehicle Body Manufacturing
Truck Trailer Manufacturing
Motor Home Manufacturing
Travel Trailer and Camper Manufacturing
Carburetor, Piston, Piston Ring, and Valve Manufacturing
Gasoline Engine and Engine Parts Manufacturing
Vehicular Lighting Equipment Manufacturing
Other Motor Vehicle Electrical and Electronic Equipment Manufacturing
Motor Vehicle Steering and Suspension Components (except Spring) Manufacturing
Motor Vehicle Brake System Manufacturing
Motor Vehicle Transmission and Power Train Parts Manufacturing
Motor Vehicle Seating and Interior Trim Manufacturing
Motor Vehicle Metal Stamping
Motor Vehicle Air-Conditioning Manufacturing
All Other Motor Vehicle Parts Manufacturing
Aircraft Manufacturing
Aircraft Engine and Engine Parts Manufacturing
Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing
Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Manufacturing
Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Propulsion and Propulsion Unit Parts Manufacturing
Other Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing
AeA
Definition
x
x
x
Pittsburgh
Anderson Economic
Technology
Tech Definition
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Carnegie Mellon /
SSTI Definition:
Aggregate
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
U.S. Department of
Commerce, Office of
Technology Policy
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Statistics (1999,
Converted From
SICs)
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
NAICS
336611
336612
336992
336999
339111
339112
339113
339114
339115
339116
339932
339991
339999
423410
423420
423430
423440
423450
423460
423490
511110
511120
511130
511140
511191
511199
511210
516110
517110
517211
517212
517310
517410
517510
517910
518111
518112
518210
519110
519120
519190
519191
Industry
Ship Building and Repairing
Boat Building
Military Armored Vehicle, Tank, and Tank Component Manufacturing
All Other Transportation Equipment Manufacturing
Laboratory Apparatus and Furniture Manufacturing
Surgical and Medical Instrument Manufacturing
Surgical Appliance and Supplies Manufacturing
Dental Equipment and Supplies Manufacturing
Ophthalmic Goods Manufacturing
Dental Laboratories
Game, Toy, and Children's Vehicle Manufacturing
Gasket, Packing, and Sealing Device Manufacturing
All Other Miscellaneous Manufacturing
Photographic Equipment and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers
Office Equipment Merchant Wholesalers
Computer and Computer Peripheral Equipment and Software Merchant Wholesalers
Other Commercial Equipment Merchant Wholesalers
Medical, Dental, and Hospital Equipment and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers
Ophthalmic Goods Merchant Wholesalers
Other Professional Equipment and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers
Newspaper Publishers
Periodical Publishers
Book Publishers
Directory and Mailing List Publishers
Greeting Card Publishers
All Other Publishers
Software Publishers
Paging Services
Cellular and Other Wireless Communications
Cable and Other Program Distribution
Internet Service Providers
Web Search Portals
News Syndicates
Libraries and Archives
All Other Information Services
On-Line Information Services
AeA
Definition
Pittsburgh
Anderson Economic
Technology
Tech Definition
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Carnegie Mellon /
SSTI Definition:
Aggregate
U.S. Department of
Commerce, Office of
Technology Policy
Statistics (1999,
Converted From
SICs)
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
NAICS
541310
541320
541330
541340
541350
541360
541370
541380
541410
541420
541430
541490
541511
541512
541513
541519
541611
541612
541613
541614
541618
541620
541690
541710
541720
541910
541921
541922
541930
541940
541990
611420
611710
811212
Industry
Architectural Services
Landscape Architectural Services
Engineering Services
Drafting Services
Building Inspection Services
Geophysical Surveying and Mapping Services
Surveying and Mapping (except Geophysical) Services
Testing Laboratories
Interior Design Services
Industrial Design Services
Graphic Design Services
Other Specialized Design Services
Custom Computer Programming Services
Computer Systems Design Services
Computer Facilities Management Services
Other Computer Related Services
Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services
Human Resources and Executive Search Consulting Services
Marketing Consulting Services
Process, Physical Distribution, and Logistics Consulting Services
Other Management Consulting Services
Environmental Consulting Services
Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services
Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences
Research and Development in the Social Sciences and Humanities
Marketing Research and Public Opinion Polling
Photography Studios, Portrait
Commercial Photography
Translation and Interpretation Services
Veterinary Services
All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Computer Training
Educational Support Services
Computer and Office Machine Repair and Maintenance
AeA
Definition
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Pittsburgh
Anderson Economic
Technology
Tech Definition
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Carnegie Mellon /
SSTI Definition:
Aggregate
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
U.S. Department of
Commerce, Office of
Technology Policy
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Statistics (1999,
Converted From
SICs)
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Appendix D: Demographic and Socioeconomic
Data
The following are included in this appendix:
• Table 1: Total Population by County in Automation Alley, 1990-2005
• Table 2: Labor Force by County in Automation Alley, 2000-2005
D-1
Table 1. Total Population by County in Automation Alley, 1990-2005
Genesee County
Livingston County
Macomb County
Monroe County
Oakland County
St. Clair County
Washtenaw County
Wayne County
Census
1990
2000
430,459
436,141
115,645
156,951
717,400
788,149
133,600
145,945
1,083,592
1,194,156
145,607
164,235
282,937
322,895
2,111,687
2,061,162
2000
437,016
158,496
790,929
146,501
1,196,614
164,724
324,251
2,059,292
Population Estimates as of July 1
2001
2002
2003
438,842
440,653
442,386
163,860
168,980
173,003
800,411
807,977
815,557
147,942
149,225
150,888
1,202,176
1,202,962
1,208,013
166,053
167,367
169,521
328,224
332,395
335,578
2,050,659
2,039,491
2,027,900
2004
443,497
177,271
822,965
152,451
1,212,181
170,967
338,782
2,013,771
2005
443,883
181,517
829,453
153,935
1,214,361
171,426
341,847
1,998,217
Automation Alley
5,020,927
5,269,634
5,277,823
5,298,167
5,309,050
5,322,846
5,331,885
5,334,639
0.4%
0.2%
Michigan
9,295,297
9,938,444
9,956,111
10,002,663
10,039,379
10,078,146
10,104,206
10,120,860
0.6%
0.3%
248,709,873
281,421,906
282,193,477 285,107,923 287,984,799 290,850,005 293,656,842
296,410,404
1.2%
1.0%
United States
Data: U.S. Census Bureau
% Annual Change
1990-2005 2000-2005
0.2%
0.3%
3.1%
2.7%
1.0%
1.0%
0.9%
1.0%
0.8%
0.3%
1.1%
0.8%
1.3%
1.1%
-0.4%
-0.6%
Table 2. Labor Force by County in Automation Alley, 2000-2005
Genesee County
Livingston County
Macomb County
Monroe County
Oakland County
St. Clair County
Washtenaw County
Wayne County
Automation Alley
Michigan
United States
Genesee County
Livingston County
Macomb County
Monroe County
Oakland County
St. Clair County
Washtenaw County
Wayne County
Automation Alley
Michigan
United States
Genesee County
Livingston County
Macomb County
Monroe County
Oakland County
St. Clair County
Washtenaw County
Wayne County
Automation Alley
Michigan
United States
2000
Labor Force Employment Unemployment Unemployment
Rate
214,453
204,846
9,607
4.5%
89,902
87,566
2,336
2.6%
434,968
419,406
15,562
3.6%
77,221
74,761
2,460
3.2%
677,683
658,456
19,227
2.8%
87,273
83,627
3,646
4.2%
185,980
181,558
4,422
2.4%
954,937
914,161
40,776
4.3%
2,722,417
2,624,381
5,157,374
4,967,218
142,583,000 136,891,000
98,036
190,156
5,692,000
3.6%
3.7%
4.0%
2002
Rate
210,463
194,952
15,511
7.4%
91,193
87,185
4,008
4.4%
425,810
399,712
26,098
6.1%
76,353
72,380
3,973
5.2%
652,782
618,532
34,250
5.2%
85,680
79,325
6,355
7.4%
185,153
178,535
6,618
3.6%
926,188
858,321
67,867
7.3%
2,653,622
2,488,942
5,038,821
4,695,148
144,863,000 136,485,000
164,680
314,785
8,378,000
6.2%
6.2%
5.8%
2004
Rate
213,704
195,897
17,807
8.3%
91,678
87,303
4,375
4.8%
422,696
394,481
28,215
6.7%
91,678
87,303
4,375
4.8%
643,206
607,417
35,789
5.6%
84,974
78,448
6,526
7.7%
188,183
180,023
8,160
4.3%
918,630
839,845
78,785
8.6%
2,654,749
2,470,717
5,078,979
4,719,343
147,401,000 139,252,000
Data: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
184,032
359,636
8,149,000
6.9%
7.1%
5.5%
Labor Force
2001
Employment
Genesee County
Livingston County
Macomb County
Monroe County
Oakland County
St. Clair County
Washtenaw County
Wayne County
215,840
90,159
429,788
76,745
663,952
86,437
191,461
947,226
202,882
86,863
407,062
73,315
635,004
80,907
185,848
889,452
Automation Alley
Michigan
United States
2,701,608
5,131,908
143,733,000
2,561,333
4,864,600
136,933,000
Labor Force
2003
Employment
Genesee County
Livingston County
Macomb County
Monroe County
Oakland County
St. Clair County
Washtenaw County
Wayne County
210,561
92,333
425,539
76,952
647,234
86,131
185,149
923,610
193,104
87,879
397,084
72,254
611,425
78,965
177,629
844,173
Automation Alley
Michigan
United States
2,647,509
5,053,506
146,510,000
2,462,513
4,695,148
137,736,000
Labor Force
2005
Employment
Genesee County
Livingston County
Macomb County
Monroe County
Oakland County
St. Clair County
Washtenaw County
Wayne County
214,700
93,500
423,248
78,211
639,985
85,206
191,845
908,193
198,199
88,713
394,518
73,543
603,762
78,476
183,805
829,142
Automation Alley
Michigan
United States
2,634,888
5,097,457
149,320,000
2,450,158
4,753,822
141,730,000
Unemployment Unemployment
Rate
12,958
6.0%
3,296
3.7%
22,726
5.3%
3,430
4.5%
28,948
4.4%
5,530
6.4%
5,613
2.9%
57,774
6.1%
140,275
267,308
6,800,000
5.2%
5.2%
4.7%
Rate
17,457
8.3%
4,454
4.8%
28,455
6.7%
4,698
6.1%
35,809
5.5%
7,166
8.3%
7,520
4.1%
79,437
8.6%
184,996
358,358
8,774,000
7.0%
7.1%
6.0%
Rate
16,501
7.7%
4,787
5.1%
28,730
6.8%
4,668
6.0%
36,223
5.7%
6,730
7.9%
8,040
4.2%
79,051
8.7%
184,730
343,635
7,577,990
7.0%
6.7%
5.1%
Appendix E: Automation Alley Technology
Industry Data
The following are included in this appendix:
• Table 1: Automation Alley Technology Clusters, 4-Digit NAICS Data, 1998
• Table 8: Technology Industry Employment and Payroll Comparison,
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DATA COLLECTION
AND ESTIMATION
Automation Alley, Michigan and United States, 2004
Table 9: Genesee County Technology Clusters, 1998-2004
Table 10: Livingston County Technology Clusters, 1998-2004
Table 11: Macomb County Technology Clusters, 1998-2004
Table 12: Monroe County Technology Clusters, 1998-2004
Table 13: Oakland County Technology Clusters, 1998-2004
Table 14: St. Clair County Technology Clusters, 1998-2004
Table 15: Washtenaw County Technology Clusters, 1998-2004
Table 16: Wayne County Technology Clusters, 1998-2004
Table 17: Employment, Payroll, and Establishments—All Industry in
Automation Alley, 1998-2004
The industry data used in this report is from the U.S. Census Bureau’s County
Business Patterns (CBP) reports for 1998-2004. Employment, Payroll, and
Establishment data was collected for each 4-digit NAICS code included in our
technology industry definition. To accommodate changes in NAICS codes
between 1997 and 2002, we used Census Bureau conversion tables to make
appropriate substitutes.
Industry data was collected for each of the eight counties in Automation Alley.
Where specific data was not disclosed by the Census Bureau for an industry, we
estimated employment and payroll based on the Census Bureau’s indicated
range, similar time-series data, and overall employment within other areas of
the 3-digit NAICS sector. Payroll data was estimated similarly. Often we used
the average wage per job in the broader 3-digit NAICS sector, or in a like industry, and refined our estimate from there.
CBP Data Online. U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Pattern data can be
found online at http://www.census.gov/epcd/cbp.
E-1
DATA ADJUSTMENTS
NAICS 95: Auxiliaries, except Corporate, Subsidiary, and Regional Managing
Offices. From 1998 to 2002 CBP reports classified “Auxiliaries” under NAICS
code 95. Establishments considered to be “Auxiliaries” were those that provided
primary support services in 12 different areas, one of which was Scientific
Research and Development (NAICS 5417), which is part of our life sciences
cluster.1 As a result, 1998-2002 County Business Pattern data for NAICS code
5417 fails to account for Scientific Research and Development employment,
payroll, and establishment that was classified as being an auxiliary.
This changed in 2003 when auxiliaries were coded based on the primary support
function that they provided, so 2003 CBP data on NAICS code 5417 includes
auxiliary employees, payroll, and establishment. As a result, the 1998-2002 data
for NAICS 5417 is not directly comparable to the 2003 data for NAICS 5417.
To account for this reporting change, we adjusted the 1998-2002 data for
NAICS 5417. The employment and establishment figures for the NAICS code
were adjusted using a ratio of actual change to predicted change based on the
realized annual growth rates in employment, payroll, and establishments in the
region’s life sciences cluster from 1998 to 2002. As a result, the total employment, establishment, and payroll data for the years between 1998 and 2002 for
NAICS 5417 do not match that reported in CBP reports.
1. The U.S. Census Bureau notes that auxiliaries usually “service only locations of the same enterprise, and generally do not produce any products nor provide services for the public, other business
firms, or government. They may sell products or provide services, as a secondary activity, to the
public or other business firms.”
Other support functions that were coded 95 prior to 2003 are: 484000 Truck transportation; 493100
Warehouse and storage; 514210 Data processing services; 541100 Legal services; 541200 Accounting, tax preparation, bookkeeping, and payroll services; 541700 Scientific research and development services; 541800 Advertising and related services; 561300 Employment services; 561610
Investigation, guard and armored car services; 561700 Services to buildings and dwellings; 811000
Repair and maintenance.
E-2
Table 1. Automation Alley Technology Clusters, 4-Digit NAICS Data, 1998
Cluster
Advanced Automotive
NAICS
Industry
3361
3362
3363
3329
3331
3332
3333
3336
3339
3345
3353
3359
3364
3369
Agriculture, Construction & Mining Machinery Manufacturing
Engine, Turbine & Power Transmission Equipment Manufacturing
Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, Control Instruments Manufacturing
3241
3251
3252
3253
3255
3256
3259
Resin, Synthetic Rubber, & Artificial Synthetic Fibers Manufacturing
Pesticide, Fertilizer & Other Ag Chemical Manufacturing
3341
3342
3343
3344
3346
5112
5133*
5140*
5415
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small Est.
(<=100)
Large Est.
(>100)
43,699
540
119,246
163,485
$1,948,607
$26,030
$6,768,383
$8,743,020
$44,592
$48,204
$56,760
$53,479
32
25
505
562
14
25
323
362
18
0
182
200
7,441
262
3,618
1,197
4,841
14,452
6,982
2,806
1,292
1,456
2,539
46,886
$280,728
$12,961
$193,315
$55,287
$265,154
$777,372
$379,055
$118,647
$51,121
$79,432
$142,721
$2,355,793
$37,727
$49,469
$53,431
$46,188
$54,773
$53,790
$54,290
$42,283
$39,567
$54,555
$56,212
$50,245
278
14
123
31
34
267
127
105
37
27
20
1,063
263
13
115
27
31
231
118
98
34
24
16
970
15
1
8
4
3
36
9
7
3
3
4
93
1,634
826
1,514
62
2,968
843
1,797
9,644
$76,642
$38,607
$72,380
$2,921
$168,729
$39,382
$83,903
$482,564
$46,905
$46,740
$47,807
$47,113
$56,849
$46,716
$46,691
$50,038
47
23
11
5
58
48
57
249
43
21
10
5
50
46
52
227
4
2
1
0
8
2
5
22
Software Publishers
Telecommunications
Information & Data Processing Services
1,765
775
62
4,216
2,235
3,127
15,430
22,793
17,935
68,338
$72,670
$30,965
$2,959
$144,269
$87,755
$239,423
$795,908
$900,235
$1,089,757
$3,363,941
$41,173
$39,955
$47,726
$34,219
$39,264
$76,566
$51,582
$39,496
$60,761
$49,225
29
25
4
102
18
137
572
425
1,393
2,705
24
21
4
95
14
134
532
369
1,364
2,557
5
4
0
7
4
3
40
56
29
148
3254
3391
5417**
1,298
2,827
21,988
26,113
$60,310
$96,532
$1,580,690
$1,737,532
$46,464
$34,146
$71,889
$66,539
23
241
161
425
19
237
138
394
4
4
22
30
2111
4214*
5413
Professional & Commercial Equipment & Supply Wholesale
57
12,220
35,157
47,434
$2,525
$668,544
$1,792,097
$2,463,166
$44,298
$54,709
$50,974
$51,928
13
792
2,333
3,138
13
775
2,252
3,040
0
17
81
98
361,900
$19,146,016
$52,904
Cluster Total
Cluster Total
Cluster Total
Cluster Total
Life Sciences
Cluster Total
Other Technologies
Cluster Total
1998 Technology Industry Total
8,142
7,550
591
*1997 NAICS 5133 was used in place of 5161, 5171-5174, 5179; 1997 NAICS 5140 was used in place of 5181 and 5182; and 1997 NAICS 4214 was used in place of 4234.
** Includes estimated allocation to NAICS 5417 of employees, payroll, and establishments classified as NAICS 95 prior to 2003. See methodology for details.
8/14/2006
Cluster
Advanced Automotive
NAICS
Industry
3361
3362
3363
3329
3331
3332
3333
3336
3339
3345
3353
3359
3364
3369
3241
3251
3252
3253
3255
3256
3259
3341
3342
3343
3344
3346
5112
5133*
5140*
5415
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small Est.
(<=100)
Large Est.
(>100)
41,164
637
122,354
164,155
$2,675,774
$28,996
$7,321,708
$10,026,478
$65,003
$45,520
$59,840
$61,079
25
30
502
557
10
30
325
365
15
0
177
192
6,697
231
3,421
1,422
4,506
13,989
7,199
2,381
1,345
1,359
1,163
43,713
$265,947
$11,979
$186,164
$69,278
$248,631
$788,943
$402,878
$116,572
$53,634
$80,297
$63,469
$2,287,792
$39,711
$51,857
$54,418
$48,719
$55,178
$56,397
$55,963
$48,959
$39,877
$59,085
$54,574
$52,337
275
13
122
32
35
263
120
104
37
29
21
1,051
264
12
116
26
32
229
108
99
34
25
18
963
11
1
6
6
3
34
12
5
3
4
3
88
1,562
786
1,560
60
3,147
734
1,750
9,599
$76,110
$38,639
$77,072
$2,956
$174,253
$35,081
$84,009
$488,120
$48,726
$49,159
$49,405
$49,267
$55,371
$47,794
$48,005
$50,851
46
22
12
2
60
44
56
242
42
20
10
2
52
42
52
220
4
2
2
0
8
2
4
22
Software Publishers
Telecommunications
1,550
851
40
3,835
2,174
4,514
15,561
23,894
19,515
71,934
$73,967
$30,845
$2,133
$140,369
$90,789
$371,023
$803,855
$1,107,908
$1,131,871
$3,752,760
$47,721
$36,246
$53,325
$36,602
$41,761
$82,194
$51,658
$46,368
$58,000
$52,169
30
24
2
96
15
176
613
455
1,518
2,929
27
22
2
88
11
169
574
402
1,483
2,778
3
2
0
8
4
7
39
53
35
151
3254
3391
5417**
1,290
2,863
23,683
27,836
$65,194
$94,407
$1,803,631
$1,963,232
$50,538
$32,975
$76,156
$70,528
22
234
177
433
18
231
157
406
4
3
20
27
2111
4214*
5413
53
12,136
37,648
49,837
$2,281
$711,951
$1,940,790
$2,655,022
$43,038
$58,664
$51,551
$53,274
14
794
2,336
3,144
14
776
2,247
3,037
0
18
89
107
367,074
$21,173,404
$57,682
Cluster Total
Cluster Total
Cluster Total
Cluster Total
Life Sciences
Cluster Total
Other Technologies
Cluster Total
8,356
7,769
587
8/14/2006
Cluster
Advanced Automotive
NAICS
Industry
3361
3362
3363
3329
3331
3332
3333
3336
3339
3345
3353
3359
3364
3369
3241
3251
3252
3253
3255
3256
3259
3341
3342
3343
3344
3346
5112
5133*
5140*
5415
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small Est.
(<=100)
Large Est.
(>100)
43,174
894
125,281
169,349
$2,929,511
$48,974
$7,595,482
$10,573,967
$67,854
$54,781
$60,628
$62,439
26
29
477
532
11
27
305
343
15
2
172
189
6,856
246
3,752
1,520
4,650
13,348
7,201
2,665
1,390
1,446
1,037
44,111
$271,927
$12,896
$208,612
$75,785
$257,730
$793,490
$482,625
$133,545
$54,953
$92,194
$55,358
$2,439,115
$39,663
$52,423
$55,600
$49,859
$55,426
$59,446
$67,022
$50,111
$39,535
$63,758
$53,383
$55,295
279
14
118
33
36
261
121
99
39
32
21
1,053
266
13
110
26
33
225
111
92
35
28
19
958
13
1
8
7
3
36
10
7
4
4
2
95
1,465
759
1,480
78
3,032
668
1,912
9,394
$72,900
$38,639
$74,745
$3,977
$171,016
$33,004
$92,839
$487,120
$49,761
$50,908
$50,503
$50,987
$56,404
$49,407
$48,556
$51,854
46
24
14
3
56
39
58
240
42
22
13
3
47
37
52
216
4
2
1
0
9
2
6
24
Software Publishers
Telecommunications
1,099
852
21
3,365
1,817
3,116
16,271
20,623
22,917
70,081
$60,262
$41,652
$886
$123,408
$49,611
$333,822
$889,526
$1,062,654
$1,363,112
$3,924,933
$54,833
$48,887
$42,190
$36,674
$27,304
$107,132
$54,669
$51,528
$59,480
$56,006
28
22
1
94
13
166
673
491
1,607
3,095
26
19
1
89
10
158
631
450
1,565
2,949
2
3
0
5
3
8
42
41
42
146
3254
3391
5417**
1,513
3,220
25,790
30,523
$71,085
$106,681
$1,962,640
$2,140,406
$46,983
$33,131
$76,101
$70,125
23
226
181
430
19
221
153
393
4
5
27
36
2111
4214*
5413
52
12,248
39,009
51,309
$2,182
$730,608
$2,191,398
$2,924,188
$41,962
$59,651
$56,177
$56,992
16
787
2,310
3,113
16
768
2,224
3,008
0
19
86
105
374,767
$22,489,729
$60,010
Cluster Total
Cluster Total
Cluster Total
Cluster Total
Life Sciences
Cluster Total
Other Technologies
Cluster Total
8,463
7,867
595
8/14/2006
Cluster
Advanced Automotive
NAICS
Industry
3361
3362
3363
3329
3331
3332
3333
3336
3339
3345
3353
3359
3364
3369
3241
3251
3252
3253
3255
3256
3259
3341
3342
3343
3344
3346
5112
5133*
5140*
5415
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small Est.
(<=100)
Large Est.
(>100)
37,349
1,019
109,943
148,311
$2,277,075
$43,433
$6,417,904
$8,738,412
$60,967
$42,623
$58,375
$58,920
26
31
466
523
9
29
308
346
17
2
158
177
6,421
189
3,489
1,547
4,000
11,849
7,130
2,382
1,340
1,560
1,012
40,919
$254,363
$8,861
$177,302
$73,479
$208,695
$624,215
$342,244
$111,824
$54,813
$99,746
$50,157
$2,005,699
$39,614
$46,884
$50,817
$47,498
$52,174
$52,681
$48,001
$46,945
$40,905
$63,940
$49,562
$49,016
244
12
113
33
34
253
122
98
39
31
20
999
233
11
103
28
31
222
109
92
35
27
18
909
11
1
10
5
3
31
13
6
4
4
2
90
1,511
846
1,403
52
2,601
537
1,793
8,743
$85,434
$45,073
$73,854
$2,759
$118,972
$27,035
$88,123
$441,250
$56,541
$53,278
$52,640
$53,058
$45,741
$50,345
$49,148
$50,469
51
24
16
3
58
36
56
244
47
22
15
3
50
35
51
223
4
2
1
0
8
1
5
21
Software Publishers
Telecommunications
748
927
44
3,284
1,591
3,915
17,299
20,593
23,639
72,040
$40,143
$40,374
$1,934
$126,606
$75,210
$301,637
$930,604
$1,108,459
$1,383,236
$4,008,203
$53,667
$43,553
$43,955
$38,552
$47,272
$77,046
$53,795
$53,827
$58,515
$55,639
29
22
4
87
17
173
746
470
1,629
3,177
27
18
4
83
14
161
703
432
1,586
3,028
2
4
0
4
3
12
43
38
43
149
3254
3391
5417**
1,258
3,059
25,389
29,706
$70,466
$104,800
$2,169,490
$2,344,756
$56,014
$34,260
$85,449
$78,931
24
231
198
453
21
227
171
419
3
4
27
34
2111
4214*
5413
50
12,357
36,777
49,184
$2,147
$753,314
$2,057,385
$2,812,846
$42,940
$60,963
$55,942
$57,190
12
747
2,281
3,040
12
732
2,201
2,945
0
15
80
95
348,903
$20,351,166
$58,329
Cluster Total
Cluster Total
Cluster Total
Cluster Total
Life Sciences
Cluster Total
Other Technologies
Cluster Total
8,436
7,870
566
8/14/2006
Cluster
Advanced Automotive
NAICS
Industry
3361
3362
3363
3329
3331
3332
3333
3336
3339
3345
3353
3359
3364
3369
3241
3251
3252
3253
3255
3256
3259
3341
3342
3343
3344
3346
5112
5133*
5140*
5415
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small Est.
(<=100)
Large Est.
(>100)
37,458
821
95,647
133,926
$2,492,654
$29,238
$5,634,661
$8,156,553
$66,545
$35,613
$58,911
$60,903
23
26
477
526
8
25
312
345
15
1
165
181
5,460
173
2,623
1,350
3,766
10,410
4,336
1,733
1,197
1,520
765
33,333
$229,724
$9,098
$157,945
$73,007
$208,304
$616,128
$228,206
$82,414
$58,259
$84,745
$43,509
$1,791,339
$42,074
$52,590
$60,215
$54,079
$55,312
$59,186
$52,631
$47,556
$48,671
$55,753
$56,875
$53,741
202
13
93
34
36
239
121
86
35
26
15
900
192
12
87
29
33
216
109
83
30
23
13
827
10
1
6
5
3
23
12
3
5
3
2
73
1,345
861
1,310
40
2,361
526
1,869
8,312
$82,232
$47,036
$68,001
$2,099
$112,976
$26,476
$89,468
$428,288
$61,139
$54,630
$51,909
$52,475
$47,851
$50,335
$47,869
$51,526
52
27
17
2
47
37
58
240
49
25
16
2
39
37
52
220
3
2
1
0
8
0
6
20
Software Publishers
Telecommunications
988
599
31
2,517
1,616
3,707
17,007
19,931
20,603
66,999
$45,301
$27,601
$1,355
$95,541
$39,748
$284,073
$968,820
$1,087,445
$1,294,828
$3,844,712
$45,851
$46,078
$43,710
$37,958
$24,597
$76,632
$56,966
$54,560
$62,847
$57,385
20
20
6
72
13
167
679
463
1,663
3,103
18
17
6
70
11
156
633
423
1,625
2,959
2
3
0
2
2
11
46
40
38
144
3254
3391
5417**
1,406
2,385
28,105
31,896
$68,267
$85,512
$2,586,596
$2,740,375
$48,554
$35,854
$92,033
$85,915
21
209
219
449
17
207
189
413
4
2
30
36
2111
4214*
5413
50
11,217
32,020
43,287
$1,997
$697,438
$1,853,137
$2,552,572
$39,940
$62,177
$57,874
$58,969
13
713
2,238
2,964
13
701
2,179
2,893
0
12
59
71
317,753
$19,513,839
$61,412
Total
Total
Total
Total
Life Sciences
Total
Other Technologies
Total
8,182
7,657
525
10/10/2005
Cluster
Advanced Automotive
NAICS
Industry
3361
3362
3363
3329
3331
3332
3333
3336
3339
3345
3353
3359
3364
3369
3241
3251
3252
3253
3255
3256
3259
3341
3342
3343
3344
3346
5112
5161
5171
5172
5173
5174
5179
5181
5182
5415
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small Est.
(<=100)
Large Est.
(>100)
36,232
355
93,276
129,863
$2,356,501.00
$23,090.00
$5,893,523.00
$8,273,114.00
$65,039.22
$65,042.25
$63,183.70
$63,706.48
23
20
521
564
9
20
347
376
14
0
174
188
6,284
278
2,707
829
3,500
9,502
4,143
1,758
1,504
1,472
550
32,527
$275,484.00
$14,927.00
$163,273.00
$42,075.00
$197,192.00
$574,823.00
$217,240.00
$83,506.00
$58,855.00
$83,229.00
$35,801.00
$1,746,405.00
$43,838.96
$53,694.24
$60,315.11
$50,753.92
$56,340.57
$60,494.95
$52,435.43
$47,500.57
$39,132.31
$56,541.44
$65,092.73
$53,690.93
212
13
108
30
35
255
116
80
46
27
20
942
201
12
101
28
32
235
107
76
43
24
19
878
11
1
7
2
3
20
9
4
3
3
1
64
1,167
780
1,756
44
2,532
495
2,257
9,031
$75,526.00
$42,503.00
$81,030.00
$2,206.00
$130,913.00
$25,376.00
$104,041.00
$461,595.00
$64,718.08
$54,491.03
$46,144.65
$50,136.36
$51,703.40
$51,264.64
$46,097.03
$51,112.28
55
26
20
4
45
30
57
237
53
24
17
4
36
30
49
213
2
2
3
0
9
0
8
24
Software Publishers
Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (Except Satellite)
791
686
50
2,054
1,506
8,380
182
13,337
2,685
611
92
58
468
13,954
20,495
65,349
$36,123.00
$44,753.00
$2,241.00
$96,116.00
$34,869.00
$665,457.00
$8,350.00
$743,631.00
$133,878.00
$31,348.00
$7,071.00
$2,713.00
$22,204.00
$780,988.00
$1,332,973.00
$3,942,715.00
$45,667.51
$65,237.61
$44,820.00
$46,794.55
$23,153.39
$79,410.14
$45,879.12
$55,756.99
$49,861.45
$51,306.06
$76,858.70
$46,775.86
$47,444.44
$55,968.75
$65,038.93
$60,333.21
25
17
4
71
17
168
21
417
241
44
12
24
70
382
1675
3188
24
14
4
68
15
155
21
376
238
43
12
24
69
357
1637
3057
1
3
0
3
2
13
0
41
3
1
0
0
1
25
38
131
3254
3391
5417
1,503
2,539
29,490
33,532
$67,786.00
$101,579.00
$2,901,631.00
$3,070,996.00
$45,100.46
$40,007.48
$98,393.73
$91,584.04
22
195
235
452
18
192
208
418
4
3
27
34
2111
4234
5413
51
10,223
57,211
67,485
$2,303.00
$639,043.00
$4,063,996.00
$4,705,342.00
$45,156.86
$62,510.32
$71,035.22
$69,724.26
18
594
2199
2811
18
581
2117
2716
0
13
82
95
337,787
$22,200,167.00
$65,722.38
8194
7658
536
Cluster Total
Cluster Total
Cluster Total
Cluster Total
Life Sciences
Cluster Total
Other Technologies
Cluster Total
8/14/2006
Cluster
Advanced Automotive
NAICS
Industry
3361
3362
3363
3329
3331
3332
3333
3336
3339
3345
3353
3359
3364
3369
3241
3251
3252
3253
3255
3256
3259
3341
3342
3343
3344
3346
5112
5161
5171
5172
5173
5174
5179
5181
5182
5415
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small Est.
(<=100)
Large Est.
(>100)
35,447
359
92,026
127,832
$2,481,376.00
$24,265.00
$5,478,594.00
$7,984,235.00
$70,002.43
$67,590.53
$59,533.11
$62,458.81
24
24
507
555
9
24
342
375
15
0
165
180
6,598
300
3,027
822
3,359
8,875
5,066
1,716
1,222
1,429
462
32,876
$285,150.00
$17,638.00
$166,294.00
$45,867.00
$191,527.00
$563,988.00
$304,007.00
$87,137.00
$66,328.00
$83,936.00
$30,949.00
$1,842,821.00
$43,217.64
$58,793.33
$54,936.90
$55,799.27
$57,019.05
$63,547.94
$60,009.28
$50,779.14
$54,278.23
$58,737.58
$66,989.17
$56,053.69
209
14
106
33
33
241
111
80
41
25
18
911
197
13
98
31
31
224
102
75
40
21
17
849
12
1
8
2
2
17
9
5
1
4
1
62
1,566
712
1,637
42
2,499
425
2,203
9,084
$105,533.00
$40,901.00
$79,228.00
$2,226.00
$141,247.00
$23,399.00
$107,744.00
$500,278.00
$67,390.17
$57,445.22
$48,398.29
$53,000.00
$56,521.41
$55,056.47
$48,907.85
$55,072.44
49
26
22
3
46
32
51
229
46
24
19
3
35
32
43
202
3
2
3
0
11
0
8
27
Software Publishers
728
472
40
2,108
1,339
8,218
478
10,976
2,953
781
74
100
538
12,685
21,387
62,877
$37,247.00
$25,952.00
$1,973.00
$109,279.00
$60,537.00
$621,913.00
$15,944.00
$648,910.00
$166,573.00
$39,014.00
$8,392.00
$7,791.00
$20,826.00
$764,779.00
$1,388,476.00
$3,917,606.00
$51,163.46
$54,983.05
$49,325.00
$51,840.13
$45,210.61
$75,676.93
$33,355.65
$59,120.81
$56,408.06
$49,953.91
$113,405.40
$77,910.00
$38,710.04
$60,290.03
$64,921.49
$62,305.87
27
15
5
63
17
158
23
410
243
55
11
27
64
409
1689
3216
25
13
5
58
16
144
22
377
239
54
11
27
63
386
1655
3095
2
2
0
5
1
14
1
33
4
1
0
0
1
23
34
121
3254
3391
5417
1,516
2,570
30,424
34,510
$76,855.00
$106,133.00
$2,825,390.00
$3,008,378.00
$50,695.91
$41,296.89
$92,867.14
$87,174.09
21
195
240
456
18
191
215
424
3
4
25
32
2111
4234
5413
43
10,129
55,180
65,352
$2,142.00
$636,945.00
$3,955,144.00
$4,594,231.00
$49,813.95
$62,883.30
$71,677.13
$70,299.78
17
627
2139
2783
17
611
2059
2687
0
16
80
96
332,531
$21,847,549.00
$65,700.79
8150
7632
518
Cluster Total
Cluster Total
Cluster Total
Cluster Total
Life Sciences
Cluster Total
Other Technologies
Cluster Total
8/14/2006
Table 8. Technology Industry Employment and Payroll Comparison, Automation Alley, Michigan and United States, 2004
Cluster
Advanced Automotive
NAICS
Industry
3361
3362
3363
3329
3331
3332
3333
3336
3339
3345
3353
3359
3364
3369
3241
3251
3252
3253
3255
3256
3259
3341
3342
3343
3344
3346
5112
5161
5171
5172
5173
5174
5179
5181
5182
5415
Automation Alley
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Employment
United States
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Employment
$2,481,376
$24,265
$5,478,594
$7,984,235
42,077
2,892
159,599
204,568
$3,208,946
$95,490
$8,894,427
$12,198,863
216,793
143,888
689,063
1,049,744
$15,062,941
$5,105,848
$32,112,913
$52,281,702
6598
300
3027
822
3359
8875
5066
1716
1222
1429
462
32,876
285150
17638
166294
45867
191527
563988
304007
87137
66328
83936
30949
$1,842,821
15,269
2,125
7,135
2,179
6,301
19,086
9,194
3,227
3,870
3,493
1,700
73,579
$629,020
$88,737
$360,076
$90,311
$393,257
$1,133,975
$548,731
$139,894
$159,528
$193,087
$67,000
$3,803,616
270,268
172,044
136,323
93,694
87,779
276,533
401,333
138,818
153,928
372,643
40,631
2,143,994
$11,149,388
$7,425,891
$7,239,683
$4,332,371
$4,353,942
$13,074,561
$25,997,765
$5,927,758
$6,525,530
$24,419,208
$1,715,061
$112,161,158
1566
712
1637
42
2499
425
2203
9,084
105533
40901
79228
2226
141247
23399
107744
$500,278
1,737
5,509
2,973
409
3,987
3,519
3,756
21,890
$125,352
$393,969
$174,795
$12,823
$213,004
$250,682
$176,031
$1,346,656
103,927
165,209
93,947
31,916
66,127
107,653
111,871
680,650
$7,776,369
$10,648,103
$5,218,252
$1,561,960
$3,243,384
$4,997,663
$5,463,613
$38,909,344
Software Publishers
728
472
40
2108
1339
8218
478
10976
2953
781
74
100
538
12685
21387
62,877
37247
25952
1973
109279
60537
621913
15944
648910
166573
39014
8392
7791
20826
764779
1388476
$3,917,606
1,029
980
300
3,974
1,400
8,948
539
18,259
4,308
1004
155
105
903
15,810
26,178
83,892
$52,939
$62,000
$10,000
$166,720
$32,200
$668,689
$18,079
$1,089,744
$225,421
$49,103
$11,687
$4,100
$30,032
$940,973
$1,664,162
$5,025,849
125,859
151,193
22,993
373,729
33,232
325,623
37,049
781,411
262,062
46,555
18,379
8,269
60,449
365,919
1,105,098
3,717,820
$8,111,388
$9,712,590
$975,692
$20,159,643
$1,360,831
$34,866,418
$2,545,974
$45,280,444
$13,970,747
$2,211,090
$1,201,014
$582,735
$5,234,185
$21,767,462
$77,657,909
$245,638,122
3254
3391
5417
1516
2570
30424
34,510
76855
106133
2825390
$3,008,378
7,792
7,708
41,134
56,634
$427,474
$381,395
$3,799,182
$4,608,051
246,297
308,798
640,936
1,196,031
$17,682,610
$14,579,822
$51,360,853
$83,623,285
2111
4234
5413
43
10129
55180
65,352
2142
636945
3955144
$4,594,231
988
15,343
67,238
83,569
$58,105
$1,000,645
$4,547,028
$5,605,778
82,879
717,787
1,264,845
2,065,511
$6,564,684
$45,826,855
$75,926,057
$128,317,596
Cluster Total
35,447
359
92,026
127,832
State of Michigan
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Employment
Cluster Total
Cluster Total
Cluster Total
Life Sciences
Cluster Total
Other Technologies
Cluster Total
2004 All Industry Total
Technology Industry as Share of Total Industry
332,531
$21,847,549
524,132
$32,588,813
10,853,750
$660,931,207
2,187,493
$93,076,375
3,895,914
$147,721,534
115,074,924
$4,253,995,732
15.20%
23.47%
13.45%
22.06%
9.43%
15.54%
8/14/2006
TABLE 9. Genesee
County Technology Clusters, 1998-2004
Year: 1998
Employment
Advanced Automotive
Life Sciences
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Average
Wage
$51,333
Total
Establishments
21
Small
Estab.
11
Large
Estab.
20,738
$1,064,559
10
2,368
$120,405
$50,846
34
28
6
180
$6,265
$34,805
12
12
0
3,099
$126,593
$40,850
135
128
7
203
$5,011
$24,684
25
25
0
Other Technologies
2,008
$66,887
$33,310
157
154
3
1998 County Total
28,596
$1,389,720
$48,598
384
358
26
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Year: 1999
Advanced Automotive
Life Sciences
Average
Wage
$55,501
Total
Establishments
20
Small
Estab.
10
Large
Estab.
18,526
$1,028,216
10
2,445
$122,247
$49,998
34
27
7
173
$7,032
$40,647
12
12
0
2,862
$129,392
$45,210
135
129
6
234
$5,849
$24,995
30
30
0
Other Technologies
1,937
$71,396
$36,859
163
159
4
1999 County Total
26,117
$1,364,132
$52,112
394
367
27
Year: 2000
Employment
Advanced Automotive
Life Sciences
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Average
Wage
$62,527
Total
Establishments
20
Small
Estab.
10
Large
Estab.
17,124
$1,070,714
10
2,362
$130,844
$55,395
32
26
6
172
$6,817
$39,633
10
10
0
2,725
$121,621
$44,632
145
140
5
245
$6,239
$25,465
27
27
0
Other Technologies
1,819
$70,292
$38,643
162
159
3
2000 County Total
24,447
$1,406,527
$57,534
396
372
24
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Year: 2001
Advanced Automotive
Life Sciences
15,705
$984,020
2,114
139
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
$62,656
24
14
10
$103,198
$48,846
31
25
6
$5,841
$42,021
11
11
0
2,692
$113,898
$42,310
149
146
3
243
$6,218
$25,588
27
27
0
Other Technologies
1,783
$76,763
$43,053
162
159
3
2001 County Total
22,676
$1,289,938
$56,886
404
382
22
E-11
TABLE 9. Genesee
County Technology Clusters, 1998-2004 (Continued)
Year: 2002
Employment
Advanced Automotive
Life Sciences
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
13,138
$825,449
$63,829
23
11
12
2,136
$103,256
$48,340
26
21
5
146
$5,507
$37,719
12
12
0
2,883
$127,932
$44,375
147
140
7
219
$5,636
$25,735
24
24
0
Other Technologies
1,335
$60,560
$45,363
149
149
0
2002 County Total
19,857
$1,128,340
$56,823
381
357
24
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Year: 2003
Advanced Automotive
Life Sciences
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
15,465
$1,114,960
$72,096
28
14
14
1,668
$88,300
$52,938
31
29
2
129
$4,196
$32,527
12
12
0
1,734
$77,839
$44,890
140
136
4
331
$9,057
$27,363
26
25
1
Other Technologies
1,519
$68,451
$45,063
135
133
2
2003 County Total
20,846
$1,362,803
$65,375
372
349
23
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Year: 2004
Advanced Automotive
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
14,778
1076788
$72,864
30
18
12
2,576
143714
$55,790
26
24
2
120
3635
$30,292
12
12
0
1509
72015
$47,724
145
143
2
Life Sciences
Other Technologies
2004 County Total
331
8866
$26,786
27
26
1
1313
57320
$43,656
135
134
1
20,627
1362338
$66,046
375
357
18
Note: In 2003 the Census stopped classifying auxiliary industries as 95, and instead classified them with a primary industry,
one of which is NAICS 5417, a part of the life sciences cluster. We adjusted for this at the regional level, but not at the county
level, so the above tables may underestimate the size of the life sciences cluster in 1998-2002 based on 2003 classifications.
TABLE 10. Livingston
Year: 1998
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
Advanced Automotive
3,540
$139,242
$39,333
22
12
10
1,124
$43,016
$38,270
45
41
4
E-12
609
$32,281
$53,006
12
10
2
394
$18,517
$46,997
67
67
0
Life Sciences
242
$7,000
$28,925
9
8
1
Other Technologies
671
$29,421
$43,847
86
86
0
6,580
$269,477
$40,954
241
224
17
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
1998 County Total
Year: 1999
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
Advanced Automotive
3,119
$135,798
$43,538
20
10
10
1,076
$43,917
$40,815
46
44
2
642
$36,753
$57,247
12
9
3
463
$23,645
$51,069
81
80
1
Life Sciences
260
$7,378
$28,376
8
7
1
Other Technologies
835
$34,103
$40,842
87
86
1
6,395
$281,594
$44,033
254
236
18
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
1999 County Total
Year: 2000
Advanced Automotive
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
3,777
$170,638
$45,178
22
11
11
940
$49,975
$53,164
45
44
1
645
$39,517
$61,266
12
8
4
515
$27,014
$52,454
80
79
1
Life Sciences
296
$8,395
$28,361
8
7
1
Other Technologies
843
$38,720
$45,931
99
98
1
7,016
$334,259
$47,642
266
247
19
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
2000 County Total
Year: 2001
Advanced Automotive
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
3,531
$154,247
$43,683
22
12
10
999
$47,957
$48,005
45
44
1
679
$42,960
$63,269
13
9
4
529
$29,208
$55,214
85
84
1
74
$1,689
$22,824
10
10
0
Other Technologies
1,146
$53,019
$46,264
102
100
2
2001 County Total
6,958
$329,080
$47,295
277
259
18
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Life Sciences
Year: 2002
Advanced Automotive
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
3,210
$148,733
$46,334
23
13
10
718
$34,108
$47,504
42
42
0
698
$43,419
$62,204
11
7
4
681
$37,927
$55,693
91
89
2
E-13
Life Sciences
82
Other Technologies
$30,475
12
12
0
881
$47,418
$53,823
108
107
1
6,270
$314,104
$50,096
287
270
17
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
2002 County Total
Year: 2003
$2,499
Advanced Automotive
3,248
Average
Wage
$158,629
$48,839
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
29
18
11
719
$33,476
$46,559
41
41
0
735
$44,902
$61,091
13
9
4
593
$38,086
$64,226
90
88
2
77
$3,040
$39,481
12
12
0
Life Sciences
Other Technologies
1,047
$50,569
$48,299
102
101
1
2003 County Total
6,419
$328,702
$51,208
287
269
18
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Year: 2004
Advanced Automotive
3,143
Average
Wage
$151,490
$48,199
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
26
16
10
711
$32,870
$46,231
42
42
0
782
$47,989
$61,367
13
9
4
559
$35,149
$62,878
92
90
2
79
$2,986
$37,797
12
12
0
Life Sciences
Other Technologies
1,062
$58,747
$55,317
100
99
1
2004 County Total
6,336
$329,231
$51,962
285
268
17
TABLE 11. Macomb
Year: 1998
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Advanced Automotive
37,912
$2,212,977
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
$58,371
166
116
50
10,431
$504,192
$48,335
285
266
19
1,761
$111,518
$63,327
24
20
4
4,232
$167,906
$39,675
275
261
14
662
$25,370
$38,323
53
53
0
Life Sciences
Other Technologies
6,292
$310,642
$49,371
448
431
17
1998 County Total
61,290
$3,332,605
$54,374
1,251
1,147
104
E-14
TABLE 11. Macomb
Year: 1999
Employment
Advanced Automotive
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
37,638
$2,384,947
$63,365
161
119
42
8,161
$403,274
$49,414
284
266
18
1,800
$111,331
$61,851
22
18
4
4,430
$186,332
$42,061
286
276
10
Life Sciences
848
$34,797
$41,034
57
57
0
Other Technologies
5,976
$302,104
$50,553
449
435
14
1999 County Total
58,853
$3,422,785
$58,158
1,259
1,171
88
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Year: 2000
Advanced Automotive
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
39,036
$2,520,578
$64,570
145
102
43
7,910
$384,417
$48,598
281
264
17
1,834
$114,123
$62,226
25
20
5
3,970
$180,676
$45,510
311
301
10
Life Sciences
674
$28,005
$41,550
55
55
0
Other Technologies
5,969
$306,499
$51,348
443
432
11
2000 County Total
59,393
$3,534,298
$59,507
1,260
1,174
86
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Year: 2001
Advanced Automotive
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
35,905
$2,026,816
$56,449
141
99
42
7,708
$382,737
$49,654
258
241
17
1,680
$77,283
$46,001
24
19
5
3,855
$180,779
$46,895
321
311
10
Life Sciences
613
$25,469
$41,548
55
55
0
Other Technologies
5,140
$241,706
$47,025
428
420
8
2001 County Total
54,901
$2,934,790
$53,456
1,227
1,145
82
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Year: 2002
Advanced Automotive
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
29,949
$1,789,638
$5,9756
154
106
48
6,633
$354,157
$53,393
239
224
15
1,580
$73,840
$46,734
23
19
4
3,553
$180,641
$50,842
328
319
9
Life Sciences
697
$28,256
$40,926
54
54
0
Other Technologies
3,661
$187,282
$51,156
404
400
4
2002 County Total
46,073
$2,613,814
$56,732
1,202
1,122
80
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Year: 2003
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
E-15
TABLE 11. Macomb
Advanced Automotive
29,357
$1,847,759
$62,941
167
122
45
7,301
1,699
$371,489
$50,882
264
250
14
$79,122
$46,570
27
22
5
3,306
$162,689
$49,210
334
324
10
Life Sciences
2,987
$231,918
$77,642
58
54
4
Other Technologies
13,016
$1,032,217
$79,3037
369
362
7
2003 County Total
57,666
$3,725,194
$64,599
1,219
1,134
85
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Year: 2004
Advanced Automotive
28,630
$1,760,216
7,402
1,527
Life Sciences
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
$61,482
162
120
42
$389,389
$52,606
256
241
15
$77,790
$50,943
25
20
5
3,185
$172,482
$54,154
327
318
9
3,091
$246,845
$79,859
59
55
4
Other Technologies
15,064
$1,122,931
$74,544
353
344
9
2004 County Total
58,899
$3,769,653
$64,002
1,182
1,098
84
TABLE 12. Monroe
Year: 1998
Employment
Advanced Automotive
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
4,126
$257,316
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
$62,364
10
5
5
250
$10,899
$43,596
11
10
1
29
$1,244
$42,896
2
2
0
145
$5,389
$37,166
24
24
0
10
$324
$32,400
3
3
0
Life Sciences
Other Technologies
199
$9,251
$46,487
38
38
0
4,759
$284,423
$59,765
88
82
6
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
1998 County Total
Year: 1999
Advanced Automotive
4,233
$297,954
Average
Wage
$70,388
Total
Establishments
10
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
4
6
E-16
TABLE 12. Monroe
267
$12,147
$45,494
15
14
1
65
$2,622
$40,338
5
5
0
159
$6,631
$41,704
29
29
0
13
$432
$33,230
4
4
0
208
$10,093
$48,524
37
37
0
4,945
$329,879
$66,710
100
93
7
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Life Sciences
Other Technologies
1999 County Total
Year: 2000
Advanced Automotive
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
4,580
$273,763
$59,773
8
3
5
305
$11,930
$39,114
13
12
1
60
$2,415
$40,250
5
5
0
163
$6,976
$42,798
26
26
0
16
$534
$33,375
4
4
0
204
$9,552
$46,824
32
32
0
5,328
$305,170
$57,277
88
82
6
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Life Sciences
Other Technologies
2000 County Total
Year: 2001
Advanced Automotive
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
4,616
$276,960
$60,000
10
6
4
2,27
$9,614
$42,352
11
11
0
71
$2,904
$40,901
5
5
0
137
$5,415
$39,526
30
30
0
18
$650
$36,111
4
4
0
343
$19,563
$57,035
24
23
1
5,185
$315,106
$60,773
84
79
5
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Life Sciences
Other Technologies
2001 County Total
Year: 2002
Advanced Automotive
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
4,012
$240,720
$60,000
8
4
4
201
$11,027
$54,860
14
14
0
59
$2,560
$43,389
4
4
0
122
$4,589
$37,615
25
25
0
11
$400
$36,363
5
5
0
326
$18,505
$56,764
19
18
1
4,731
$277,801
$58,719
75
70
5
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Life Sciences
Other Technologies
2002 County Total
Year: 2003
Advanced Automotive
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
2,895
$148,425
$51,269
8
4
4
201
$9,621
$47,866
15
15
0
68
$3,134
$46,088
5
5
0
E-17
TABLE 12. Monroe
139
Life Sciences
$44,122
28
28
0
32
$1,342
$41,938
6
6
0
400
$23,650
$59,125
21
20
1
3,735
$192,305
$51,487
83
78
5
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Other Technologies
2003 County Total
Year: 2004
$6,133
Advanced Automotive
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
3,028
$148,220
$48,950
9
4
5
215
$10,866
$50,540
16
16
0
123
$5,766
$46,878
6
6
0
141
$6,422
$45,546
25
25
0
Life Sciences
Other Technologies
2004 County Total
55
$2,294
$41,709
5
5
0
431
$25,455
$59,060
23
21
2
3,993
$199,023
$49,843
84
77
7
TABLE 13. Oakland
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Advanced Automotive
26,203
$1,347,329
$51,418
128
86
42
16,302
$816,232
$50,069
338
298
40
Year: 1998
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
1,785
$84,076
$47,101
69
62
7
41,306
$2,158,393
$52,254
1,301
1,217
84
2,182
$97,886
$44,860
134
129
5
Other Technologies
24,710
$1,379,173
$55,814
1,377
1,323
54
1998 County Total
112,488
$5,883,089
$52,300
3,347
3,115
232
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Life Sciences
Year: 1999
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
Advanced Automotive
26,862
$1,343,333
$50,008
144
101
43
15,418
$848,055
$55,004
338
300
38
1,860
$86,926
$46,734
63
58
5
43,139
$2,374,326
$55,039
1,391
1,304
87
2,149
$106,872
$49,731
132
128
4
Life Sciences
E-18
TABLE 13. Oakland
Other Technologies
26,664
$1,530,717
$57,408
1,369
1,311
58
1999 County Total
116,092
$6,290,229
$54,183
3,437
3,202
235
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Year: 2000
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
Advanced Automotive
28,749
$1,678,656
$58,390
144
103
41
15,062
$856,545
$56,867
343
303
40
2003
$99,626
$49,738
62
55
7
41,335
$2,424,119
$58,646
1,454
1,368
86
2,803
$133,279
$47,548
130
123
7
Other Technologies
28,107
$1,709,802
$60,832
1,353
1,290
63
2000 County Total
118,059
$6,902,027
$58,463
3,486
3,242
244
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Life Sciences
Year: 2001
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
Advanced Automotive
21,244
$1,166,116
$54,891
138
102
36
1,3775
$714,338
$51,857
328
291
37
1,747
$85,393
$48,879
64
59
5
42,309
$2,462,756
$58,209
1,485
1,399
86
2,750
$148,239
$53,905
142
134
8
Other Technologies
26,592
$1,627,892
$61,217
1,324
1,269
55
2001 County Total
108,417
$6,204,734
$57,230
3,481
3,254
227
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Life Sciences
Year: 2002
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
Advanced Automotive
22,109
$1,275,266
$57,680
130
101
29
11,921
$682,891
$57,284
290
261
29
1,857
$93,651
$50,431
64
58
6
38,753
$2,336,628
$60,295
1,473
1,393
80
3,612
$228,621
$63,294
141
133
8
Other Technologies
24,170
$1,518,132
$62,811
1,325
1,286
39
2002 County Total
102,422
$6,135,189
$59,901
3,423
3,232
191
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Life Sciences
Year: 2003
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
Advanced Automotive
23,137
$1,314,688
$56,822
150
112
38
12,155
$694,056
$57,100
289
260
29
1,684
$90,424
$53,696
61
56
5
36,255
$2,328,070
$64,214
1,529
1,455
74
6,082
$408,842
$67,222
147
134
13
Other Technologies
32,927
$2,402,158
$72,954
1,271
1,215
56
2003 County Total
112,240
$7,238,238
$64,489
3,447
3,232
215
Life Sciences
E-19
TABLE 13. Oakland
Year: 2004
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
Advanced Automotive
21,091
$1,258,194
$59,655
143
107
36
11,731
$748,399
$63,797
286
262
24
1,529
$90,440
$59,150
59
54
5
34,596
$2,305,198
$66,632
1,550
1,478
72
Life Sciences
6,865
$467,560
$68,108
156
143
13
Other Technologies
30,303
$2,256,105
$74,452
1,241
1,191
50
2004 County Total
106,115
$7,125,896
$67,153
3,435
3,235
200
TABLE 14. St.
Clair County Technology Clusters, 1998-2004
Year: 1998
Employment
Advanced Automotive
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
2,469
$66,604
$26,976
21
13
8
312
$12,222
$39,173
24
24
0
642
$31,744
$49,445
7
5
2
536
$21,806
$40,683
31
30
1
68
$1,806
$26,558
11
11
0
269
$14,854
$55,219
56
56
0
4,296
$149,036
$34,692
150
139
11
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Life Sciences
Other Technologies
1998 County Total
Year: 1999
Advanced Automotive
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
2,968
$93,991
$31,668
20
12
8
372
$16,294
$43,801
28
28
0
642
$30,311
$47,213
10
8
2
547
$22,797
$41,676
36
35
1
56
$1,661
$29,660
11
11
0
463
$16,929
$36,564
54
53
1
5,048
$181,983
$36,051
159
147
12
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Life Sciences
Other Technologies
1999 County Total
Year: 2000
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
E-20
TABLE 14. St.
Clair County Technology Clusters, 1998-2004 (Continued)
Advanced Automotive
3,232
$106,921
$33,081
21
14
7
4,38
$17,940
$40,958
26
25
1
684
$27,674
$40,459
12
10
2
570
$24,209
$42,472
39
38
1
56
$1,540
$27,500
8
8
0
Life Sciences
Other Technologies
343
$13,330
$38,863
57
57
0
4,885
$191,614
$39,225
163
152
11
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
2000 County Total
Year: 2001
Advanced Automotive
2,847
$89,313
Average
Wage
$31,370
Total
Establishments
20
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
14
6
363
$16,312
$44,936
26
25
1
598
$25,918
$43,341
12
10
2
599
$25,629
$42,786
38
37
1
47
$1,282
$27,276
9
9
0
Life Sciences
Other Technologies
243
$9,244
$38.041
49
49
0
4,697
$167,698
$35,703
154
144
10
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
2001 County Total
Year: 2002
Advanced Automotive
2,160
$82,421
Average
Wage
$38,157
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
18
13
5
361
$17,040
$47,202
21
21
0
566
$26,055
$46,033
13
11
2
619
$26,969
$43,569
36
35
1
45
$1,256
$27,911
5
5
0
Life Sciences
Other Technologies
240
$9,972
$41,550
55
55
0
3,991
$163,713
$41,021
148
140
8
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
2002 County Total
Year: 2003
Advanced Automotive
2,328
$86,953
Average
Wage
$37,351
Total
Establishments
18
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
12
6
577
$23,972
$41,546
27
26
1
726
$31,190
$42,961
15
12
3
825
$36,708
$44,495
44
43
1
43
$1,239
$28,814
4
4
0
Life Sciences
Other Technologies
232
$9,388
$40,466
55
55
0
4,731
$189,450
$40,044
163
152
11
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
2003 County Total
Year: 2004
Advanced Automotive
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
2,265
$90,827
$40,100
19
13
6
562
$23,984
$42,676
24
23
1
E-21
TABLE 14. St.
Clair County Technology Clusters, 1998-2004 (Continued)
700
$31,389
$44,841
14
11
3
843
$38,720
$45,931
50
49
1
28
$1,041
$37,179
4
4
0
238
$9,093
$38,206
54
54
0
4,636
$195,054
$42,074
165
154
11
Life Sciences
Other Technologies
2004 County Total
TABLE 15. Washtenaw
Year: 1998
Employment
Advanced Automotive
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
12,830
$769,924
6,041
307
Life Sciences
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
$60,009
24
11
13
$327,514
$54,215
78
70
8
$12,421
$40,459
11
11
0
4,296
$225,346
$52,455
271
262
9
2,414
$131,231
$54,362
73
69
4
Other Technologies
3,482
$178,067
$51,140
304
301
3
1998 County Total
29,370
$1,644,503
$55,993
761
724
37
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Year: 1999
Advanced Automotive
Average
Wage
13,132
$906,650
6,263
$331,283
$52,895
182
$8,268
$45,428
5,410
$314,905
$58,208
Life Sciences
2,430
$139,407
$69,041
Total
Establishments
26
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
12
14
71
61
10
10
10
0
334
324
10
$57,369
79
76
3
Other Technologies
3,773
$196,710
$52,136
306
300
6
1999 County Total
31,190
$1,897,223
$60,828
826
783
43
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Year: 2000
Advanced Automotive
11,744
$763,618
Average
Wage
$65,021
Total
Establishments
20
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
6
14
E-22
TABLE 15. Washtenaw
6,845
$434,462
$63,471
70
60
10
168
$6,970
$41,488
10
10
0
6,603
$449,134
$68,020
353
340
13
Life Sciences
2,360
$132,723
$56,238
85
82
3
Other Technologies
3,783
$209,312
$55,330
303
298
5
2000 County Total
31,503
$1,996,219
$63,366
841
796
45
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Year: 2001
Advanced Automotive
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
10,357
$756,910
$73,081
22
12
10
6,245
$265,206
$42,466
67
56
11
136
$6,726
$49,455
11
11
0
6,835
$401,022
$58,672
357
343
14
Life Sciences
2,363
$148,766
$62,956
90
86
4
Other Technologies
3,976
$224,509
$56,466
294
287
7
2001 County Total
29,912
$1,803,139
$60,281
841
795
46
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Year: 2002
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
Advanced Automotive
7,738
$526,436
$68,032
26
10
16
3,633
$169,828
$46,745
59
49
10
162
$7,637
$47,141
14
14
0
6,071
$362,422
$59,697
339
325
14
Life Sciences
2,589
$171,254
$66,146
94
90
4
Other Technologies
3,840
$215,478
$56,114
265
257
8
2002 County Total
24,033
$1,453,055
$60,461
797
745
52
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Year: 2003
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
Advanced Automotive
6,978
$485,521
$69,579
21
8
13
2,679
$121,415
$45,321
64
58
6
454
$23,535
$51,839
16
15
1
4,978
$311,212
$62,517
338
330
8
Life Sciences
6,633
$600,229
$90,491
99
92
7
Other Technologies
3,881
$236,519
$60,943
253
248
5
2003 County Total
25,603
$1,778,431
$69,462
791
751
40
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Year: 2004
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
Advanced Automotive
6,454
$65,661
$10,174
25
14
11
2,445
$115,515
$47,245
62
56
6
567
$27,892
$49,192
16
13
3
E-23
TABLE 15. Washtenaw
5,196
$316,273
$60,869
340
331
9
Life Sciences
7,831
$581,280
$74,228
92
85
7
Other Technologies
3,784
$241,474
$63,814
258
253
5
2004 County Total
26,277
$1,348,095
$51,303
793
752
41
TABLE 16. Wayne
Year: 1998
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
Advanced Automotive
55,667
$2,885,069
$51,827
170
108
62
10,058
$521,313
$51,830
248
233
15
4,331
$20,3015
$46,874
112
105
7
14,330
$639,991
$44,661
601
568
33
Life Sciences
1,159
$42,172
$36,386
101
99
2
Other Technologies
9,803
$474,871
$48,441
672
651
21
1998 County Total
95,348
$4,766,431
$49,990
1,904
1,764
140
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
57,677
$3,835,589
$66,501
156
97
59
9,711
$510,575
$52,576
235
223
12
Year: 1999
Advanced Automotive
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
4,235
$204,877
$48,377
108
100
8
14,924
$694,732
$46,551
637
601
36
Life Sciences
1,408
$54,776
$38,903
99
96
3
Other Technologies
9,981
$492,970
$49,391
679
656
23
1999 County Total
97,936
$5,793,519
$59,156
1,914
1,773
141
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Advanced Automotive
61,107
$3,989,079
$65,280
152
94
58
10,249
$553,002
$53,956
243
224
19
Year: 2000
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
3,828
$190,338
$49,722
104
98
6
14,200
$691,184
$48,675
687
657
30
1,662
$72,149
$43,410
99
96
3
Life Sciences
E-24
TABLE 16. Wayne
Other Technologies
10,241
$566,681
$55,335
664
642
22
2000 County Total
101,287
$6,062,433
$59,854
1,949
1,811
138
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
54,106
$3,284,030
$60,696
146
87
59
9,488
$466,337
$49,150
233
216
17
Year: 2001
Advanced Automotive
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
3,693
$194,225
$52,592
104
99
5
15,084
$789,496
$52,340
712
678
34
Life Sciences
1,787
$87,104
$48,743
99
97
2
Other Technologies
9,961
$560,150
$56,234
657
638
19
2001 County Total
94,119
$5,381,342
$57,176
1,951
1,815
136
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
51,610
$3,267,890
$63,318
144
87
57
7,730
$419,031
$54,208
209
195
14
Year: 2002
Advanced Automotive
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
3,244
$175,619
$54,136
99
95
4
14,317
$767,604
$53,615
664
633
31
Life Sciences
1,222
$51,991
$42,545
96
93
3
Other Technologies
8,834
$495,225
$56,059
639
621
18
2002 County Total
86,957
$5,177,360
$59,539
1,851
1,724
127
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Year: 2003
Advanced Automotive
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
46,455
$3,116,179
$67,080
143
86
57
7,227
$404,076
$55,912
211
199
12
3,536
$185,092
$52,345
88
82
6
17,519
$981,978
$56,052
685
653
32
Life Sciences
17,347
$1,815,329
$104,648
100
91
9
Other Technologies
14,463
$882,390
$61,010
605
582
23
2003 County Total
106,547
$7,385,044
$69,313
1,832
1,693
139
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
48,443
$3,432,839
$70,863
141
83
58
7,234
$378,084
$52,265
199
185
14
Year: 2004
Advanced Automotive
Average
Wage
Total
Establishments
Small
Estab.
Large
Estab.
3,736
$215,377
$57,649
84
77
7
16,848
$971,347
$57,654
687
661
26
Life Sciences
16,230
$1,142,415
$70,389
101
94
7
Other Technologies
13,157
$823,106
$62,560
619
591
28
E-25
TABLE 16. Wayne
2004 County Total
105,648
$6,963,168
$65,909
1,831
1,691
140
Payroll, and Establishments—All Industry in Automation Alley, 1998-2004
Total
Employment
Total Payroll
(1,000s)
Average
Wage
Small
Est.
Large
Est.
Total
Establishments
1998
2,249,745
$82,039,774
$36,466
120,013
3,351
123,364
1999
2,295,450
$88,836,423
$38,701
120,156
3,512
123,668
2000
2,325,595
$93,507,179
$40,208
120,352
3,583
123,935
2001
2,279,847
$90,738,411
$39,800
120,401
3,476
123,877
2002
2,201,807
$90,172,639
$40,954
120,410
3,269
123,679
2003
2,192,374
$91,060,205
$41,535
120,181
3,343
123,524
2004
2,187,493
$93,076,375
$42,549
120,576
3,349
123,925
E-26
Appendix F: Project Team
This project was managed by Scott D. Watkins, AEG’s Director of Marketing
and Administration, and completed under the direction of Patrick L. Anderson,
Principal and CEO. Mr. Watkins authored the report along with Caroline M.
Sallee, a senior analyst with AEG.
PATRICK L.
ANDERSON
Mr. Anderson, principal and CEO, founded the consulting firm of Anderson
Economic Group in 1996. Since founding the firm, he has successfully directed
projects for state governments, cities, counties, nonprofit organizations, and corporations in over half of the United States.
Prior to founding Anderson Economic Group, Mr. Anderson served as the chief
of staff of the Michigan Department of State, and as a deputy director of the
Michigan Department of Management and Budget, where he was involved in
the largest state privatization project in U.S. history and the landmark 1994
school finance reform constitutional amendment. Prior to his involvement in
state government, Mr. Anderson was an assistant vice president of Alexander
Hamilton Life Insurance, an economist for Manufacturers National Bank of
Detroit, and a graduate fellow with the Central Intelligence Agency in Washington, D.C.
Mr. Anderson has written over 95 articles published in periodicals such as The
Wall Street Journal, The Detroit News, The Detroit Free Press, Crain’s Detroit
Business. His book Business Economics and Finance was published by CRC
Press in August 2004, and his paper on “Pocketbook Issues and the Presidency”
was awarded the Edmund Mennis Award for best contributed paper in 2004 by
the National Association for Business Economics.
He is a graduate of the University of Michigan, where he earned a masters
degree in public policy and a bachelors degree in political science. He has been
a member of the National Association for Business Economics since 1983.
SCOTT D. WATKINS
Mr. Watkins is the director of marketing and administration at Anderson Economic Group. In this role he oversees the firm’s administrative staff and procedures and implements marketing strategies.
He also works as a consultant on projects involving policy analyses, economic
impacts, and market assessments. Among the clients for whom he has worked
are the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, Michigan Retailers Association,
Michigan State University, Wayne State University, and Collier County, Florida.
He was also the author of the 2005 technology industry report for Automation
Alley.
F-1
Prior to joining Anderson Economic Group, Mr. Watkins was an analyst in the
automotive market and planning group at J.D. Power and Associates, and a marketing assistant with Foster, Swift, Collins, and Smith P.C.
Mr. Watkins is a graduate of Michigan State University with a B.A. in marketing from Eli Broad College of Business and a B.A. in international relations
from Michigan State’s James Madison College.
CAROLINE M. SALLEE
Ms. Sallee is a senior analyst at Anderson Economic Group, working in the public policy, economic, and fiscal analysis practice area. Her background is in
applied economics and public finance, and her recent work includes the benchmarking of the Michigan’s business taxes with other states in a project for the
Michigan House of Representatives.
Ms. Sallee holds a masters degree in public policy from the University of Michigan and a bachelor of arts degree in economics and history from Augustana
College in Rock Island, Illinois.
CONTRIBUTORS
Alexander L. Rosaen. Mr. Rosaen is an analyst at Anderson Economic Group,
working in the economic and fiscal impact and policy and regulatory analysis
practice areas. Mr. Rosaen holds a masters in public policy from the Ford
School and the University of Michigan. He also has a masters of science and
bachelors of science in mechanical engineering from the University of Michigan.
Lisa Asmus. Ms. Asmus is an office assistant with Anderson Economic Group.
She conducts economic and market research, collects and analyzes data, and
contributes written analysis for reports. She also performs office management
tasks, including accounts payable, inventory, and quality control. Ms. Asmus is
a graduate of the James Madison College at Michigan State University.
F-2

Automation Alley 2006 Technology Industry Report

Transcription

Similar documents

Case Study

Reimagining Automation - ignio™ Dr. Harrick Vin

Case study

Implementation of effective e-government applications: Challenges

Flotronics Automation is pleased to announce the recent expansion

View Marketing Brochure

MAIF Optimizes Claims Management and Automation

In 2011 - Atlanpole

Virtualization for Better, Faster, More Cost

Tweaks for better Performance